Archive for November, 2005
I’ve been thinking about doing this for a while now, to allow you a place to start your own discussions instead of always having to read my ramblings. So head on over and check it out. I just put them up, you could be the first to post!
I don’t agree. I only dislike sequels as far as they take away resources from new original content that could have been created instead. But that only applies to sequels I personally don’t like! For example, I see Ridge Racer 6 and think that yeah, what a waste of money. They could have made the next Frequency or something else instead of this derivative stuff. But then I see PGR2 or Burnout Revenge and I’m like Bring it on! I want more!
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. And so some people will like the sequel to game Ridge Racer, while others will like the sequels to Burnout. If consumers keep buying the games, companies will continue to make them. So if you want to see fewer sequels, buy fewer sequels.
Me, I’m gonna get the next Champions of Norrath game, and I don’t care how derivative people say it is. I like the series. I just hope it’s on the PlayStation 3 (PS3).
Interested in the Nintendo Revolution? Then 1up.com has an article for you. They talk about several things, including the new controller and whether or not it’ll be used as a gimick. And whether Revolution games will be shorter than other games:
Revolution seems more geared towards family fun, so games of epic scope seem less necessary. There is concern about games being too gimmicky and not having long-term replay value beyond the initial concept, but I have confidence that many games will be addictive and provide long-term enjoyment with friends. There will be must-have games, as well as some duds. I think the games produced by Nintendo will be worth the price of admission. If long-term play becomes an issue, they could always make a game where you perform daily exercises with the pointer and watch your character get bulked up over time.
Developers also think that gamers will buy the Revolution in addition to the PS3 or Xbox 360, but that there will be a smaller installed base. This could cause problems:
I do have concerns as a developer. If the Revolution doesn’t offer a large enough install base, it will be a tough sell for companies to focus their development efforts on a single platform. At The Behemoth, we are a small team and can only make one game at a time. It’s great because we have tons of creative freedom and make the games we want to make. We serve a niche audience but we still have to watch our bottom line. The question arises as to whether we want to make a really cool, unique game for a very large potential audience, or if we want to make something for a niche platform with a much smaller but dedicated audience. If we come up with a game idea specifically for the Revolution that is just too fun to pass up, I’m sure we’ll do it. The other scenario is the Revolution will get a port of a game that works on the other consoles as well.
But on the issue of HD the developers are split. Tom Fulp from The Behemoth says “I don’t consider lack of HD support to be too big a deal at the moment. I’ve always been more of a frame-rate nut myself; I like my frame-rates fast and smooth.” But Randy Pitchford of Gearbox says “I’m an HDTV user, so for me this is a big deal. I don’t think it’s going to be a big deal in the market when the Revolution launches, but it’s going to be a much bigger deal in 2008 or 2009.” I agree with Randy!
Nintendo, known for games featuring characters such as Mario, Donkey Kong and Pokemon, is expected to report a decline in revenue for the full year as GameCube console and software sales taper off and as it is hurt by a price cut for its DS portable game machine, which it launched about a year ago.
Bad third party support. No online play. No DVD player. Gosh, I hope Nintendo learns a lesson as it designs the Revolution. Give people what they want!