QC's Long Snaps
|
Written by Administrator
|
|
Wednesday, 20 July 2005 |
Regarding the next-gen systems, I keep reading quite a bit of stuff on the internet and all the news sources for games. More specifically- I keep reading how the “experts” think that the Next Gen systems aren’t necessarily “needed” yet. (Such articles that quote Wedbush Morgan Securities and CNN money can be found HERE and HERE). To quote the Wedbush Morgan study:
"Unlike most industry observers, we do not believe that the industry has reached the end of a 'console cycle' that is winding down with slow or even negative growth. Rather, we believe that the current consoles (at least the PS2 and the GameCube) will continue to be the systems of choice for several more years, and expect a transition to the next-generation consoles to occur gradually…”
One question keeps coming to mind when I read the reports from these sources, and that is “are these people making these statements actually gamers who know the industry?”
I would like to offer an informed gamer’s counter-argument. I don’t have much in the way of “official credentials”, other than the fact that I was an early adopter of the Atari 2600, and just about every console system since, and I have been doing game reviews since I got my start doing some war-sim reviews for www.wargamer.com in the early 90s. (I’ve always been about three types of games “good games”, war games, and sports games.”) This is an industry that I have studied and been an active participant and member of since the late 1970s. The same can be said of Bangpow, the other co-founder of this site. We both grew up with this industry, and we’ve seen its triumphs and failures (like the crash of ’84) take place. One thing I feel confident in saying is that bean-counters in suits often have no idea what the average gamer wants or desires.
That said, I agree with a portion of the reports- the gaming industry IS growing. Heck, the gaming CULTURE is growing far beyond many could have expected. What was once considered a nerdish pastime has become the “cool thing” that just about every “kid” from ages 9 to 35 is doing. That’s great for all of us, and the industry has been headed that way for a long time. Its good to see something we all love become a huge part of the culture. However, despite the fact that the industry is growing like a wild-fire, I think many of us can honestly say that though accountants and stuffed-shirts can look at numbers and try to apply known business trends, they surely aren't knowledgeable gamers. I’d go so far as to claim that few of these accounting-centric “experts” really have any clue about the gamers- the very people who drive this industry.
That’s nothing for them to really be ashamed of. Few people under the age of 40 would understand today’s gamer, unless they themselves were active in the gaming culture. But I would think that the gamer should be the key determining factor in gauging the industry- not the accounting. Unfortunately, the gamers themselves often don’t enter into any pie-graphs that accounting firms and CNN Money would like to show.
That’s why I think there’s a huge error in the formula that “experts” seem to be applying to the assumed lack-of-need for the release of Next Gen systems.
The question is, does industry growth and brisk game sales mean that new hardware should be shelved for “several more years”? To me, those are the words of someone who probably has never picked up a controller in their life. These are the words of someone who has no idea how maxxed out the PS2 hardware is for today’s games (and has been for about 2 years now.) Are they aware of the slowdown seen in NCAA 2006, NFL 2K5, and many other games released in 2004/2005? Are they aware that the XBOX isn’t trailing too far behind. The PS2 hardware is ancient. It’s five years old, and Sony intends to stretch a 6th year out of it. The XBOX isn’t too far behind in terms of age either. I’m sure that fact does not go into accounting and growth analysis for the industry (a very NEW industry, I might add.) Are the “experts” aware of the glut of games coming out using the Doom III engine (such as Quake 4 and several others)? Are the experts aware of the extremely high-definition “Hellgate: London” due out later this year on PC, and destined to eventually be a very popular console port? What about the increasingly popular 3D MMORPGs that the current consoles cannot handle if they were made for them, simply because of polygon limitations? These are just some of the MANY examples. How well-researched are these studies in terms of knowing the gamer and knowing their tastes? My guess is that they didn’t even talk to gamers- they just looked at accounting charts and graphs.
The experts also forget console gaming history. The hardware maker that releases first – especially with sports game support at launch- often wins. Look at the 16 bit Genesis (Beating the SNES to market by a year, and beating them in sales.) Look at the original Sony Playstation, and its monstrous sales against the Sega Saturn and the Nintendo 64, - both systems releasing much later than the Playstation, and never catching up. Finally, look at the Playstation 2, which beat the Microsoft XBOX and the Nintendo GameCube to market by a wide margin (a year) and has been reaping the rewards ever since- despite the competition having more tech horsepower.
To me, the time is right for both the XBOX 360 and the PS3 to hit the market. Experts don’t understand that the worlds that the designers need to create for us to play in are being compromised by underpowered systems, and that’s been the case for over a year. Sure, the games sell, because the game culture will feast on whatever is available and playable (within reason- if the game is good.) That said, a balance sheet is no gauge of how many of those gamers are ready for something new, and would like a bigger game world with more realistic gameplay and better graphics. The “Hobbiest” gamer – the habitual early adopters- (and some would say “addicts”) are an ever-growing gamer community. Plus, lets not forget, console makers have finally wised-up to backward compatibility as a rule from system to system, thereby making the consideration of an upgrade less difficult on the gamer.
However, you won’t see that on an accounting spreadsheet report either.
Quietcool72
|
|
Last Updated ( Friday, 13 October 2006 )
|
|
|
Written by Administrator
|
|
Friday, 15 July 2005 |
It’s a well-known fact that one of the best gaming info sites on the web is www.operationsports.com . I’ve always liked the guys over there, and have a great deal of respect for them. Shawn Drotar wrote a really good editorial over there, and I think it’s a must-read titled "Strategery" and "misunderestimation". Shawn talks about the fact that EA smartly makes “arcade football games with “mostly” realistic physics and a “sim” veneer.” He also points out that despite EA’s many football critics (many of whom are on the Operation Sports forum boards, and our own forums as well) that EA is responding to what its main market wants. Statistically speaking, that’s the 18-24 male gamer.
I can’t fault Shawn’s data- or his conclusions- one bit. He’s dead-on. EA is reacting to a what a majority of is gamers want by keeping things more “general” and less “hard core sim”. Its smart business, and they do make quality games that are fun- and sell tons. The EA critic would be wise to take notice of those facts.
However, there’s a catch...
I think what people are starting to get irritated about is a carry-over of EA’s success in marketing to the 18-24 year olds. There’s an entire market that EA is inadvertently creating- and it’s a market they have yet to take advantage of- or react to. There’s a growing number of gamers who view EA’s football games (as they are currently) as a bit too “remedial” for them. These are mostly the people who grew up with Madden, some of whom were once early adopters of the series on Genesis and/or SNES. It goes without saying that these are older gamers above the age of 24. (I put myself in this category at the ripe ol’ age of 32, incidentally). Many of us older guys grew up with Madden/NCAA, and Madden/NCAA grew with us- at least for a while. Eventually, there comes a time when we have played it so much, known the ins and outs of the AI, and grown tired of the “Same-ol small playbooks” that many of us feel alienated. We “grew up” but the games didn’t grow with us. The games just stayed aimed at the 18-24 crowd as we hit age 26….27….. 28….. 29…. Etc… etc…
So I think there’s a growing sense of disconnect with the “Old Guard” Madden gamers and the newer crop who don’t know all the fineries of zone blocking, where to throw against a cover 3, why a quarters defense “should” be an awful run-defense scheme, etc. Of course, many of the younger gamers who simply love Madden are going to think “Well, you old codgers who complain about Madden should just shut up and stop playing then”, however that same kid that would say such a thing will probably end up being on the other side of this argument in 5 years. (No, of course they don’t realize that now… but you watch- it will happen.)
Gone are the days when many of us hang up our controllers at 25 and forget about gaming, particularly sports-gaming. The over-25 sports gamer legion will only grow exponentially as the video game industry further evolves and permeates modern life. EA would be wise to at least acknowledge this fact, and find some way create a product that either addresses multiple needs or splits into an alternate sim product altogether. Plus-something else is happening. The young, 17 year-old bubble-gum chewing kid with fast reflexes is learning the fineries of the vanilla playbooks and vanilla gameplay even faster than the game companies would like to admit. Those kids may tire of the “slow, merely incremental game updates” quicker than us older gamers did. Then you have diminishing returns on excitement and interest, as long as there’s no product (or products) to fill that gap.
However, rather than chastise EA for their rather small targeted age-range of given products, I think that a fine opportunity exists for EA themselves to create other NFL products that would fill the needs created when the Madden/NCAA “experts” get tired of throwing Hail-Mary’s three out of four downs against their buddies. Because of the way this industry is growing and evolving beyond such a set, young age-bracket, I think EA can’t help but eventually take notice of the disconnect between what the “old guard” and the 17-24 year olds expect in a game. (Those 17-24 year olds will eventually be 28, and feel the same way.)
And somewhere in that “need” is the desire for either a more multi-tiered football product of varying levels of simulation, or a secondary product altogether to address what will be an ever-growing legion of people who "grew up" on Madden and want something more. I don’t think it’s a matter of whether or not EA “will” see the need to address this, but rather a matter of when “they” will. As the “Graying of the Gamer” continues, and as the original game culture ages, more “flavors” of a given genre will obviously be needed. We can see it now looking back at Tecmo Super Bowl- which was a huge, awesome game back in 1991. Even to the 17 year old gamer, Tecmo Super Bowl- if played by them now- would be considered something akin to the current “Backyard Football” – a kids product.
Now, I’m not saying EA’s football games are akin to “Backyard Football” by any stretch, but what I am saying is that what we once considered to be an advanced, current football product with Tecmo Super Bowl when we were 17 years old would now be considered something for toddlers- not because of its graphics so much, but more because of its simplicity, lack of competent AI, and small playbooks. In 15 years, the average skill of the average gamer has increased. A 17 year old person playing today’s games is far more adept at mental multitasking, more advanced strategies, handling more buttons/commands, and bigger degrees of difficulty. Even the controllers on the given consoles have evolved to be mult-button monsters to accommodate the expected dexterity (and we still may need a few more buttons.)
As the games have evolved, so have the gamers, and the degree of challenge they can handle. EA wants to make games focused on the 17-24 age statistic, but are they perhaps under-appreciating what skill and knowledge a gamer in that age-range really has? I think they may be doing just that. As today’s gamers continue to evolve and adapt to more challenges, the games would be wise to follow suit.
That’s the tough concept EA will eventually have to address.
”What do we do if gamers continue to adapt, and grow at a faster rate at even younger ages- how do we keep them interested?”
Or, better yet…
“Can we make a product to address this.”
Only time will tell. But Shawn Drotar is right, EA has been very successful catering to the 18-24 age bracket, and nobody has done it better in terms of sales and success. The question is, will the 18-24 year olds always want more simplistic, arcadey gameplay- or have they been playing since around the age of 9, and ready and willing to handle a bit more?
Time will tell.
Quietcool72
|
|
|
Written by Administrator
|
|
Tuesday, 28 June 2005 |
Well, in typical June fashion- not much to report. However, I figured I’d hit the front page with some comments and observations. I came up with 7 of 'em.
1. I think that June is the most boring month in sports video gaming. With the “high” of E3 in May, and no new sports games till July (NCAA), our choices are slim. Oh sure, we can play the baseball games, but football junkies such as myself are left re-playing last year’s football games and trying hard not to exploit the numerous AI holes we’ve found since last August.
2. The Pistons let me down. It’s a good thing for Tim Duncan that he saved his career by showing up in that 7th game. Talk about your disappearing acts. He was starting to resemble Marvin Harrison in the Patriots secondary….in January. One thing is for sure- Ben Wallace is a beast. There was no disappearing act from him, that’s for sure.
3. Terrell Owens is the biggest ass in professional sports. You wonder if he gets thank-you cards from Randy Moss and Maurice Clarrett for making their many team disruptions seem like high-school pranks. Good luck finding a more selfish player than Owens. I guess his current 47 million dollar contract is simply not enough for his mammoth ego. Before the 1977-78 rule change regarding downfield contact, wideouts- even the good ones- were much more humble. I’ll give you two reasons why they were more humble: the secondaries of the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Oakland Raiders. Tatum and Blount tended to make wideouts shut up and not call too much attention to themselves, especially the wideouts who had to go over the middle. Of course, this is all before the NFL turned wideouts into protected girls after the rule changes regarding downfield contact. Ah, if only we could put Owens on a time machine back to ’76. Those were the days.
4. I bet EA bought the NHL license for their games. I can’t see their graphic designers making that kind of mistake on the website with that “exclusive license mistake”. That was too calculated. They either own it, or used that as a planned “feeler” to see how the media would react if they did buy. However, I don’t recall EA ever caring about what fans and the media said about their license grabbing, so it all tends to make me think they already own the NHL license, and are just waiting to officially announce. However- like with so many things- I could be wrong.
5. I was playing a friend of mine at Madden PS2 online last night and I started to wonder if and/or when EA will ever make bump n’ run coverage realistic. The “jams” last way too long, and even middle-grade corners can cause a veritable wrestling match at the line of scrimmage with good wideouts. I mean, if EA wanted to make the game realistic they would tone down the bump n’ run played by 31 of the teams, and allow only the Patriots corners to get away with the current, overly-effective “holding” form of Bump N’ Run found in the past several years’ “Madden” games. Now THAT would be realistic.
6. In the Midway pictures showing “Ron Mexico” at QB, am I the only one who seems to notice that there’s like two offensive linemen shown in the wide-angle view. (Shown HERE) I guess it looks like Midway still went ahead with that “only 3 offensive linemen” junk they were showing a few months back. I know Bangpow and myself tried to warn their PR guy who was over at Operation Sports. He wouldn’t address the questions regarding the number of offensive linemen on the field at that time. Oh well- its not like nobody warned them… a veritable CHORUS of posters chimed in and told him the same thing- “Put 5 offensive linemen on the field, or the game becomes a joke”.
7. Do you think Sony 989 will rename “Road To Sunday” something more accurate? How about “Path To The Budget Bin”.
See you on the virtual playing fields….
Quietcool72
|
|
|
Written by Administrator
|
|
Monday, 20 June 2005 |
You know, there’s few constants in the ever changing world we live in. However, we tend to remember the few “constants” we have, such as death, taxes, credit card bills, and Bill Cowher. Unfortunately, I’m starting to think we should add a new “universal constant” to our gaming lives. It started as a trend, then started to become more than a trend- it became a pervasive, ongoing thing….
And what is this thing I’m talking about, you ask?
It’s the terrible attitude that Japanese software/ hardware developers and designers have towards the American gamer, especially the SPORTS gamer.
Few trends are so easily tracked. For the past several years, E3 and other gaming expos have become a showcase for the blatant arrogance and ignorance of the game industry of the Far East. This poor attitude has been on display for some time, particularly on the part of Nintendo. Every E3 for the past decade has included speeches from people like Nintendo president Satoru Iwata that take shots at the types of games Americans like, while promoting the games NINTENDO thinks the world should be playing, such as “Nintendogs” and “Donkey Konga” that are less “adrenaline intensive” and “long”. Along those same lines, Nintendo’s legendary designer, Shigeru Miyamoto- (of Mario and Zelda fame) jumped into the fray as well with his recent comments HERE about long, immersive games (like many Americans like..)
Miyamoto: "There's not a lot I want to play now, A lot of the games out there are just too long. Of course, there are games, such as 'Halo' or 'Grand Theft Auto,' that are big and expansive. But if you're not interested in spending that time with them, you're not going to play… Rather than thinking we have a new console, let's make epic games, I want (developers) to make more unique products "
Well Shigeru, Nintendo has been trying “unique” for ten years now, and in most cases it hasn’t sold as well as the competition. Many of us remember “Virtual Boy”, the N64 cartridge media, Nintendo’s blatant ignorance to the American trend of online gaming, shoddy 1st party sports games, few games for the 18 and up crowd….
..and now they think long games are overrated?
Sorry Shigeru, but when I shell out fifty bones on a game, I expect to be it to be long and immersive (or at least I HOPE as much.) But folks, lets not be distracted from the core issue. Flat out- its not about online, or about “long games”, or about system specs, or even their attack on photo realistic graphics that their competition (such as XBOX 360 and PS3 is promoting.)
The real issue is that Nintendo and many Japanese game developers simply do not understand the gaming culture in the US, and they don’t understand why we aren’t more like them. Our cultures differ completely- especially when it comes to video games. Generally speaking, American gamers love their action games, as well as long, immersive-yet-realistic games that serve as an alternate reality. Quite often, that’s a very visceral gaming reality- such as “Grand Theft Auto San Andreas” and “Hitman”. We also like our games long- and in some cases- “never ending”- like World of Warcraft and Star Wars Galaxies. As the hardware has caught up to the American gaming culture, Nintendo and others from the Far East have failed to grasp these concepts. Quite simply, they sit back and are very ignorant to our gaming tastes. In Japan, “Cute, Cheery, and Fun” sells. In our culture, we pass on such things in favor of realism.
Nowhere is the culture gap more evident than with sports games. Even Sega- who was once one of the more open-minded publishers of sports games- got to the point where they couldn’t compete with EA, and rather than evolve, they pressured and harassed US-based Visual Concepts to the point where VC was ELATED to get out from under the Sega regime. Sega is effectively out of the sports game business, yet some would argue that Nintendo NEVER was in the sports game business. (Sorry folks, but Mario Golf and Mario Tennis isn’t going to have mass appeal here in the States.) Then, to add insult to injury, the Nintendo controllers haven’t been conducive to sports gaming since the SNES. The controllers since the SNES have gotten far too “gadgety” for their own good. Quite simply, if you are a big-time sports videogamer, you avoid Nintendo. I’m personally concerned that the super-secret Nintendo “Revolution” controller will also be too “gadgety” for its own good. (Personally, when talking controllers, I’d take ergonomics over “being deliberately different” any day.)
But it goes deeper than Nintendo, and deeper than sports games. Our two cultures are just very different. Last week, Gamespot posted an article titled “Japanese Developers Discuss, And Dis, The Next Gen Consoles.” It shows the comments and criticisms of the features of the XBOX 360 and the Sony PS3 that a panel of respected Japanese developers have. It’s a must read that will show just how far apart our cultures are, and how they just don’t get us. For example – here’s my favorite quote from Square-Enix’s Akitoshi Kawatsu- "Some PC users might take good advantage of those kinds of external connections (USB), but it's not something that's commonly practiced by people who come from the [console] gaming culture. For example, playing Famicom (NES) is as simple as just sticking in the game software."
Uh, sorry Akitoshi, but I think you are missing the fact that so many American households have current PCs in them, and many of them have current devices with USB connections. Perhaps I'm missing something? Is there something "intimidating" about plug and play USB device connectors that I don't recognize? The current XBOX has ALWAYS had USB controllers (though altered to make the connector proprietary) Its a simple matter of sticking the device connector in the proper hole... a toddler can figure it out in seconds. PCs have become far more integrated into American culture than they have in the orient. Online gaming is not quite the rage in Japan as it is here. This is especially evident in Nintendo's hardheadedness in regard to online games for the current GameCube.
(And a big factor in it being in a distant 3rd place in sales behind the PS2 and XBOX)
However, not all far-eastern developers are as hardheaded as many of those quoted in the article. Sony has always recognized the culture differences between those of the American gaming audience and the far-eastern one, and catered their catalogues accordingly, yet they surely seem to be a rarity amongst their far-eastern publishing partners. Perhaps Nintendo and those like them who keep trying to push games catered to far-eastern tastes would be wise to look at how Sony does business over here in the States, instead of criticizing the hardware and software that Americans like to purchase.
I simply don't see how alienating American gamers while constantly pushing the games they want us to play will help pull companies like Nintendo ahead of the more culturally-aware Sony and Microsoft. Both Sony and Microsoft also recognize the value of sports games and just how much those games sell their hardware.
Nintendo hasn't quite grasped that, along with many far-eastern developers who are still in denial about the differences between their's and the American Gaming culture.
|
|
|
Written by Administrator
|
|
Tuesday, 08 February 2005 |
The other day I was visiting my local EB Games and conversing with a manager there that I’m friends with. I used to work at an EB store as a manager in the mid-1990s, and one thing I can tell you about working at EB- you get some good, real-time news. Their “daily memos” that print out when a manager logs onto the POS are filled with daily information about the games industry, most of it is so current that it doesn’t hit the online mags or web news sites for a week or two later. Its all confidential stuff, and I really do miss getting the daily, inside scoop on the games industry that I was once privy to. However, I still have some friends that work for the company, and we often chat about what’s going on in the industry. Most of these guys are hobbyists like we are, so they are game fans, just like us. One of the managers I know was talking to me about the state of the sports game industry after the “big deals” made by EA and Take Two. Being the football-centric fellow that I am, I immediately started talking about possible football games (without the NFL license) that I’d like to see made. He re-directed me back to the Take Two deal with Major League Baseball and the players, and that is where our talk got interesting….
Here's the discussion we had (posted from memory only.. don't assume its complete verbatim. I am paraphrasing from my own head!)
EB Manager: “Pretty big deal with the MLB, eh?”
Quietcool72: “Yeah, I suppose. Still, I don’t think it represents the kind of bling that the NFL deal does to EA.”
EB Manager: “Well, true- but it represents some key first-quarter cash that EA will be without for several years.”
Quietcool72: “I suppose so.”
EB Manager: “Think about their investor’s first quarter balance sheet. What other product do they have in the first quarter that generates the kind of money an MLB game rakes in? Pretty much nothing, other than the two “EA BIG” games, the not-very serious ‘Street’ ones. Those games do okay, but nothing like a major sim release. EA’s had repeat, big-business revenue in all quarters up to this point. Now Jan/March is going to be a problem for them starting in 2006- without baseball.”
Quietcool72: “I never thought of it that way, but you are correct.”
EB Manager: “Now- think about the amount of money EA has poured into re-vamping the once-lame “Triple-Play” series into the MVP series that many many people now buy. That investment will be dead after next month’s release of MVP 2005”
Quietcool72: “Yeah, that seems to be the case.”
EB Manager: “I contend that the MLB deal will hurt them more than if ESPN also had an NFL license. Madden has a commanding lead there anyway in terms of sales. But now EA has a soon-to-be dead product on their hands (MVP Baseball) that was very successful in a relatively “down” time of the gaming calendar.”
Quietcool72: “Okay- yeah, I can see that- but what can they do? About as much as Take Two can do about the NFL deal. Nothing.”
EB Manager: “They could sub-lease the rights they each have to one another. EA knows it will still dominate with the Madden fan base, but the extinction of their baseball franchise would really hurt, contrary to what they say. Take two will do well with the Baseball franchise they have, which has always done well, but needs the NFL license so their football series does not collapse. They could possibly “buy” sub leased rights from one another to share the contracts.”
Quietcool72: “That just seems so far-fetched.”
EB Manager: “Is it? You are thinking like a Pittsburgher who's bored with the Pirates' losing for the last 21 years. You don’t realize how big these baseball games are in some markets, and some BIG markets at that.. Take Two bought themselves one hell of a big bargaining chip, especially since very few products- other than baseball- generate big first quarter revenue.” Quietcool72: “Its an interesting notion though. We’ll see if something like that plays out.”
(END)
Now… keep in mind, this is speculation. However, it does pose an interesting possibility I hadn’t thought of before. We’ll see if my friend is any kind of sports game industry prophet as the year goes on, but I figured it’s a notion that would be good fodder for discussion in our forums.
See you on the virtual gridiron.. or the diamonds...or whatever... Quietcool72
Co Founder
Senior Writer
www.consolefootball.com
|
|
| | << Start < Prev 1 2 Next > End >>
| | Results 11 - 20 of 20 |
|
