SEGAbits Forums
Gaming => General Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: east of eastside on March 01, 2010, 11:17:37 am
-
Disclaimer: This topic is for fun.. :P A challenge of objectivity and analysis. This is not a holy war, :twisted: let's keep emotion out of it.
The whole phat failure issue has remarkably resurrected the who killed DC question. I contend the matter has not been definitively answered and for the sake of reclaiming history I want to make that the goal of this thread. Though this is more about the decline and end of Sega hardware and not just DC.
I'm going to respond to George's quote from the phat failure thread that I pulled out of there so not to twist that matter.
Sony didn't kill the DC, SEGA not having money killed the DC. If anything, Microsoft over flooding the market had more to do with DC's plug being pulled than Sony, since the 'death' note was passed months after Xbox was announced. How would SEGA promote a console they had no money to promote against the Xbox and billions of dollars backing it up.
In saying that, you must recall that Microsoft stated that it entered the game business as a competitive response to the threat of Sony taking over the living room. So, I state in terms of causes, Sony's entrance was the single greatest factor that led to the decline of Sega hardware. Imagine N64 vs Saturn without Sony.. Gamecube vs Dreamcast.. DC2 vs Revolution or whatever.. Sony and MS = mainstream gaming and Sega declining market significance.
To say that Sony killed Sega hardware is in an accuracy, but in terms of cause an effect it was the single great causal factor, all of Sega's internal problems aside. That being said, Sony's entrance and thus Sega's hardware decline was really an inevitable consequence of the growing success of the game industry.
Responses..
-
If SEGA did not have such an easy to pirate console and did not lose all of the support with all of those publishers and did not spend so much money on games like Shenmue, Skies of Arcadia and some other stuff, I still think they would have had a hard time holding up against PlayStation 2 and Xbox having DVD players. It was the only logical step for videogames to progress to, I mean they read CDs, so why not just let me read every disc I have?
IMHO SEGA being a third party is way better for them. They have more creative freedom and more options with how they develop games, but I guess at the same time it is hard to make Sonic games anywhere near the quality they used to be with this, and that is the major issue with SEGA's image.
Of course, at the end of the day I would always prefer just having a SEGA console, but oh well. I will always love SEGA the most, but I like to try other kinds of games out too.
-
The man who owned the company dying killed SEGA. They lost all their funding, which caused a split-up. Then when the Microsoft/EA dickhead canceled the Dreamcast, half the company quit, effectively killing it. Not much of a point to have all these IPs with barely any staff or experienced people.
-
Errrr...
Dreamcast was suppose to be a mainstream console. With games like Space Channel 5, a early casual game that (now) is a really popular genre. It also had its own football franchise, arcade ports a plenty (casual in Japan).
Saturn is more 'hardcore' .
SEGA could have came in 2nd if they had the money Microsoft had with Xbox, but they did not. They were selling at a smaller lost compared to MS, not to mention they had about 10 million units ahead of Nintendo and Microsoft before they launched.
-
If you have a sprained ankle and a fever and you're wrestling your friends in your backyard and a couple 400lb giants step in and squash you, is it the fault of the fever and ankle you got crushed?
The video game industry was a niche industry before Sony and MS showed up and broke the mainstream barriers and took gaming to the mass audiences in a big way. Sega had the adequate resources to continue to be the number two player in a niche industry, but it did not have the resources to fight one, let alone, two consumer electronic giants.
Even if Genesis had thrived a year more in the USA, 32X and Sega CD never existed, Saturn hadn't been bad hardware, and Sega wasn't in financial peril in the DC years, there is no way, no way it would be a 4 horse race today.
Errrr...
Dreamcast was suppose to be a mainstream console. With games like Space Channel 5, a early casual game that (now) is a really popular genre. It also had its own football franchise, arcade ports a plenty (casual in Japan).
Dreamcast was the last console (unless you want to count GC) made under the video games for gamers, niche-industry paradigm. That does not neglect the fact that Pacman, Mario, Sonic, DK, etc broke into mainstream appeal during that era.. If DC tried to have mainstream appeal it was because the market was obviously already turning that way... I would say DC was less mainstream than PS1.. Even it's internet features weren't as mainstream because internet adoption grew greatly after 2000.. DC simply was no where to the degree as mainstream as PS2, Xbox, DVD, GTA, Halo, etc.
Even Moore acknowledges DC's lack of mass appeal:
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6217053.html (http://www.gamespot.com/news/6217053.html)
Peter Moore talks Dreamcast 10 years later
GS: Some of the Dreamcast's best-loved and most memorable games--Shenmue, Jet Grind Radio, Skies of Arcadia, Seaman, Crazy Taxi--were original intellectual properties. Was there too much of an emphasis on these original and unproven franchises?
PM: We really didn't--maybe with the exception of Sonic Adventure--have that game that was aimed at a broad mass market that could really be the "killer app" to drive the hardware.
-
The fact is, Video games died with Space Wars. Nolan Bushnell came in and forced the industry into this stupid fad of 'Casual' games by introducing the ultra mainstream 'Dial Controls'. This in turn lead to even more casualisation and mainstreamification of the industry by leading to things like Buttons and Sticks for controls, until it went to the ultimate depths of using D-Pads for home consoles.
You look at the REAL games that REAL gamers play. There was no mainstream controls, but rather we had the TRUE HARDCORE controls: Switches. Using Switches is the only way to play video games, anything else is just pandering to the mainstream. Not to mention that back then, you couldn't just go down to any mass market "everyone can join" Shop to buy games, no you had to make your own goddamned punch-cards to mod Space Wars!
When games were made for GAMERS not everyone, things were much better. We had unrivaled creativity and freedom to create real ART not just commecial games made for mass consumption. Look at great, true games like Tennis for Two the oscilloscope allowed for a brilliant minimalist and niche interpretation of Tennis, something that would NEVER sell today.
Then of course you look at something like Space Wars, just a genious idea, setting a game in outer-space! But then of course, when Pong came along, and Atari ruined gaming forever with their casual controls and making games so mainstream they actually placed arcade machines in public places, EVERYONE decided to rip-off space wars and make soulless mainstream versions. Gone was the niche aspects like having 2 ships fighting eachother and using switches to control it, and in came casual features like ONE SHIP (!!) and shooting asteroids instead (No doubt to make it more family friends for SOCCER MOMS and GRANDPARENTS to play it :roll: ). It's no coincidence that that one machine that played Space Wars in Stamford University started getting less traffic after Atari's success. Something to think about.
-
If you have a sprained ankle and a fever and you're wrestling your friends in your backyard and a couple 400lb giants step in and squash you, is it the fault of the fever and ankle you got crushed?
The video game industry was a niche industry before Sony and MS showed up and broke the mainstream barriers and took gaming to the mass audiences in a big way. Sega had the adequate resources to continue to be the number two player in a niche industry, but it did not have the resources to fight one, let alone, two consumer electronic giants.
Even if Genesis had thrived a year more in the USA, 32X and Sega CD never existed, Saturn hadn't been bad hardware, and Sega wasn't in financial peril in the DC years, there is no way, no way it would be a 4 horse race today.
Errrr...
Dreamcast was suppose to be a mainstream console. With games like Space Channel 5, a early casual game that (now) is a really popular genre. It also had its own football franchise, arcade ports a plenty (casual in Japan).
Dreamcast was the last console (unless you want to count GC) made under the video games for gamers, niche-industry paradigm. That does not neglect the fact that Pacman, Mario, Sonic, DK, etc broke into mainstream appeal during that era.. If DC tried to have mainstream appeal it was because the market was obviously already turning that way... I would say DC was less mainstream than PS1.. Even it's internet features weren't as mainstream because internet adoption grew greatly after 2000.. DC simply was no where to the degree as mainstream as PS2, Xbox, DVD, GTA, Halo, etc.
Even Moore acknowledges DC's lack of mass appeal:
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6217053.html (http://www.gamespot.com/news/6217053.html)
Peter Moore talks Dreamcast 10 years later
GS: Some of the Dreamcast's best-loved and most memorable games--Shenmue, Jet Grind Radio, Skies of Arcadia, Seaman, Crazy Taxi--were original intellectual properties. Was there too much of an emphasis on these original and unproven franchises?
PM: We really didn't--maybe with the exception of Sonic Adventure--have that game that was aimed at a broad mass market that could really be the "killer app" to drive the hardware.
Sorry but there were a ton of games on Dreamcast designed for the mainstream in mind. Crazy Taxi was huge success for SEGA and most of my friends all know that arcade/dreamcast , even if they don't know many other SEGA games.
Space Channel 5 was designed to be a casual game from the start and even had a 'Hollywood' premiere when it was released.
SEGA had a deal with Fred Durst, who was really mainstream artist at the time, to promote the Dreamcast and games for it to the public.
When was selling 10 million units in under 3 years considered niche?
-
Sorry but there were a ton of games on Dreamcast designed for the mainstream in mind. Crazy Taxi was huge success for SEGA and most of my friends all know that arcade/dreamcast , even if they don't know many other SEGA games.
Space Channel 5 was designed to be a casual game from the start and even had a 'Hollywood' premiere when it was released.
SEGA had a deal with Fred Durst, who was really mainstream artist at the time, to promote the Dreamcast and games for it to the public.
You would have to admit that Crazy Taxi and Space Channel 5 had a tiny fraction of the mainstream awareness that games like Halo and GTA reached.
When was selling 10 million units in under 3 years considered niche?
Well, when you consider that a really mainstream product like ipod did twice that last quarter, it kind of puts it in perspective. 3.3 million annual sales would be dreadful for any console today, you know that Wii did that and more in December.
We are talking in terms of degrees... NES had giant sales and Gameboy did too, but the game industry was still regarded as niche in terms of number of households with game consoles and industry size.. The industry exploded in size in the last decade keep in mind. When I say niche, it is in relative terms, but check this article out for perspective:
http://www.destructoid.com/sony-we-brok ... 6032.phtml (http://www.destructoid.com/sony-we-broke-the-mainstream-barrier-not-nintendo-146032.phtml)
"The most successful console is still the PS2 and it's still going strong," claims Hirai, comparing a console released nine years ago to a console released three years ago. "I think that's the console that really broke the barrier from videogames being just for videogamers into more of a mass market on a global basis. Nintendo's obviously done a great job in following that mass acceptance."
[/color]
I agree with Kaz that the industry had a shift from the games for gamer's era that existed pre-playstation to mass market, wide demographic status of today. I think you would agree with that. The gaming demographic changed significantly from the past getting wider every successive generation after 16bit.. First older and wider with PS1.. Then a lot wider with PS2 and Xbox, and finally, basically games for everybody under Wii.
I know this isn't really compelling but look at how the head of Radical Entertainment describes the industry in a 2004 interview:
"Video game consoles are in one-third of North American households," said Michael. "It is still very much a niche industry.
"The good news is that this industry has everywhere to grow. Video games have not reached the mass market -- there is the potential for them to be as ubiquitous a form of entertainment as television."
Yes, games had a mainstream presence in the DC era and going back to NES and earlier with Pac Man but no where to the degree they have now.
Sony, after all, is arguably responsible for transforming the marketplace from the narrow group of so-called “hardcore gamers” that it once was into a more diverse, more casual group of consumers.
Basically I would agree with this summation as well..
-
I think Microsoft helped ruined the DC.
As on the Sega boards, there was an article that was talking about DC/Xbox using similar codes. I think I even saw that they were supposed to play each other games.
Bungie worked on the DC right? Imagine Halo on the DC... could it make millions like it did with Microsoft? Would Sega be rich with milking the franchise?
-
If SEGA did not have such an easy to pirate console and did not lose all of the support with all of those publishers and did not spend so much money on games like Shenmue, Skies of Arcadia and some other stuff, I still think they would have had a hard time holding up against PlayStation 2 and Xbox having DVD players. It was the only logical step for videogames to progress to, I mean they read CDs, so why not just let me read every disc I have?
IMHO SEGA being a third party is way better for them. They have more creative freedom and more options with how they develop games, but I guess at the same time it is hard to make Sonic games anywhere near the quality they used to be with this, and that is the major issue with SEGA's image.
Of course, at the end of the day I would always prefer just having a SEGA console, but oh well. I will always love SEGA the most, but I like to try other kinds of games out too.
This
/end thread
-
I think Microsoft helped ruined the DC.
As on the Sega boards, there was an article that was talking about DC/Xbox using similar codes. I think I even saw that they were supposed to play each other games.
Bungie worked on the DC right? Imagine Halo on the DC... could it make millions like it did with Microsoft? Would Sega be rich with milking the franchise?
I was just posting on this..
I've read that deals were being made at the time of the Xbox development for it to read Dreamcast games. Still it didn't come to fruition because MS didn't want to give the games online support or something.
Sega and MS were working closely at the time. Maybe Sega's chance back then would have been to co-develop the Xbox.
Then again that would mean that MS would eventually buy Sega and that would suck.
The Xbox was hardly the problem. The Xbox came out to go head-on against the PS2. The Dreamcast was already at the corner in fetal position getting ready to die.
I have no idea what the hell I'm saying.
Point is, if there was no PS2, maybe MS would continue to work with Sega. It would have been all Sega vs. Nintendo again.
Or even if MS would still make the Xbox, the Xbox entered the marked from the zero. Sega would have a much less hard battle getting attention from the public.
The sports licenses didn't kill the DC (even though there really wasn't a good soccer game, NFL and NBA obliterated the related EA franchises at the time. They were the best.).
DVD didn't kill the Dreamcast. The fact that the PS2 could read it did.
I may not know all the figures and quotes that you guys bring up. But I do know that back when the DC was around EVERYBODY talked about how the PS2 would be as real as real life and how excited they were about it and how they didn't want to buy the Dreamcast cause they were gathering money to get it.
Something that a lot of kids were talking back then was how racing games on the PS2 were going to be so real that you would need sunglasses to protect your eyes from the virtual sun.
It may sound stupid but all these kinds of rumors just hyped everyone back then.
So my opinion is that Sony did it. And Sega was afraid. That's why all promotion leaflets tried to compare the DC favorably to the PS2 for example. Not to mention the obvious commercials that trashed Sony.
This is my opinion.. I doubt any of you can change it, but I don't want to get into any discussions and all..
Just thought I should share it here.
-
The Dreamcast was not ready to die, the only people ready to die were SEGA, since they had no money. PS2 or no Xbox; Nintendo alone could have took it out. It wasn't about the competition, it was about not being able to afford keeping up.
Microsoft help SEGA....
Sorry Microsoft does not help, they exploit.
I think DVD was a small hurdle in the begining for DC, but I think people point the finger at the format too much and say "IF IT HAD IT..." if it had a DVD player it would have still been the same thing, only faster. DVD lens cost more money, more lost revenue that SEGA did not have. Sony could afford it, SEGA not so much.
Dreamcast sold 10+ million in its time, Gamecube sold 21 million without a DVD player. I think if SEGA had the money to keep up with production, they could have easily came in at 2nd for the generation, but then again, this would mean they would have to ship non-pirated DCs (which they were for awhile). At least if they could have 'sold' the units at the same rate that they did before. Might be a bit hard.
Saturn, SEGA CD and 32X wasted cash is what basically killed the Dreamcast. If SEGA better planned the SEGA Saturn and skipped the two add-ons, we would not be talking about what went wrong today.
-
"Sorry Microsoft does not help, they exploit."
That's a point of view I'm willing to absorb..
The Saturn wasn't the problem itself. The West marketing however...
Didn't the system succeed in Japan?
But,
Sega could had made profit with the Dreamcast. There were factors that kept it from making it.
The Dreamcast had less than a tenth of the sales the PS2 is still making. All that market was there to be earned. And Sony did it, even if Sega got there way first.
I like to think of the Dreamcast like the last meal of Sega as an hardware manufacture. A vast and delightful last meal.
-
DC's selling wasn't meeting targets after a successful launch to the point that Sega stopped production with millions unsold in the inventory pipeline. If the console was successful the company would have no problem raising capital to keep the company going..
The market had changed on Sega, the writing was on the wall.
The Dreamcast launch was tremendous, and its sales were actually quite healthy for much of its life, but when Sony arrived with the PlayStation 2, things went sour. In order to stay afloat, the price was slashed repeatedly, falling to $99 in 2001. Manufacturing costs were simply too great.
http://retro.ign.com/articles/102/1021947p1.html (http://retro.ign.com/articles/102/1021947p1.html)
In an aggressive and innovative move, Sega has announced an incredible rebate available to the consumer where one can essentially get a Dreamcast for free!
Current Sega Dreamcast Owners
By signing up for SegaNet, consumers will receive a $200 check and a free keyboard (regardless of when they purchased their system).[/color]
Free DC with SegaNet deal, an obvious sign that the consoles wasn't selling and where was the money going to come from?
""Dreamcast is a fabulous product. It just hasn't caught on. Everybody I talked to loves it. It just hasn't caught on to the mass consumer, and that's unfortunate."- Perrin Kaplan, Nintendo of America executive vice president of sales and marketing, as reported by Gamer's Republic
http://www.1up.com/do/feature?pager.off ... Id=3175865 (http://www.1up.com/do/feature?pager.offset=1&cId=3175865)
The Dreamcast was arguably the first casualty of a major shift in the gaming industry, one with even greater scope than the '90s-era transition from bitmaps to polygons. When the Dreamcast died, so too did the concept of videogames as the exclusive province of the hardcore.
When Sega launched the Dreamcast on September 9, 1999, the company focused its sights on the core gaming market with laser precision. Everything about the system's debut was perfectly tuned to be a hit among devoted gamers.
Dreamcast's failure was the result of many factors, but by far the most significant of these was the sheer juggernaut power of the Sony's PlayStation 2.
We were selling 50,000 units a day, then 60,000, then 100,000, but it was just not going to be enough to get the critical mass to take on the launch of PS2. It was a big stakes game. Sega had the option of pouring in more money and going bankrupt, and they decided they wanted to live to fight another day."[/b]
Within Sega, there was always this conversation of, 'We make games really well, but we're not going to be able to compete.' They knew there was room for three consoles, but not four, and they knew Microsoft was coming and couldn't afford to compete with a behemoth like that. So they decided to focus on what they were good at."
Says it all right there.. not the money but the size of the competitors.
-
Not only that, instead of meeting the PS2 with software, DC was not releasing much software at the time, it was worse than the Gamecube's end of life. Sure there was a big game, but it was too far inbetween.
People that bought a PS2 either had a DC or were never going to buy a Dreamcast. Sony had almost no mainstream games really when it was launched and was not considered to be a huge huge success till after Metal Gear Solid 2 and Final Fantasy X arrived.
SEGA was ill prepared, you can't cry about competition.
Saying that Sony killed the Dreamcast when it says they couldn't afford it? No, pricing the DC at a lost (which SEGA of Japan was against) was bad, putting in all the resources into one really big budget title (Shenmue) was bad (moving it from Saturn when it was almost complete etc), and mismanaged money (Saturn, 32x and SEGA CD). If they had all that money, the DC would have finished off the generation in 2nd. Not first, Sony won that one by a mile, but coming in at second most likely would have forced Microsoft out.
-
Microsoft has lost billions of dollars and has had tons and tons of stock holders give up on them demanding they drop the Xbox name. If that does not force them out, nothing would have. It is not like any of SEGA's games on that platform disappearing would have changed much of anything.
What SEGA should have done is not made Jet Set Radio, Skies of Arcadia, Shenmue, games like that. As it has been brought up here, SEGA would just put far too much money into single games. If you split up the production on those you could make like... 40 ChuChu Rocket type games.
But it does not matter, SEGA was pretty much doomed in the console market once they released the 32X. People lost hope in them when the Saturn failed to impress, and even then, once the time the PlayStation 2 came around the "PlayStation" name was just too strong for SEGA to compete with. I cannot even count how many people I know of that still call the Genesis "The SEGA".
The truth is that the medium has always been mainstream. Games becoming more cinematic or more realistic are not the original concepts or styles dying out, it is just a progression of technology. People left, right and center are saying games like Heavy Rain are an entirely new genre and is not similar to anything conceived when really it is just the evolution of point n click games, as was the same with Shenmue. I hear people saying titles like Halo are ruining the industry, but how could it? If you were to look at the general design of the series really hard, you would find it shares ideas of games to come before it in different genres. I mean, I could name concepts in it similar to platformers, RPGs, fighters, racers, rail shooters, even puzzle games. I am certain if it were created 15 years earlier than it was that it would be closer to Mega Man because it is what technology allowed, that is it.
The opposite is true too. Now there are a flux of "Simple" games coming out all of the time, whether it be for Wii, PC, or downloadable platforms, but people complain more! I do not understand what "Gamers" want anymore! They complain about games being too big, they complain about games being too small, why not just shut up and enjoy what you think is fun?
At the end of the day these are just companies trying to get people to buy their products. They may have employees that dislike others from another company or brand, but really all these "Wars" happen to be are nothing more than looking as to what your competitors do and how they fail or succeed, then putting out more products that will hopefully do better than them. Nothing more, nothing less.
-
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4 ... php?page=6 (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4128/the_rise_and_fall_of_the_dreamcast.php?page=6)
In September of 2000, one year after the North America launch, Sega's American executives came to a realization. Despite initial great sales in North America, Sega lacked the marketing dollars to compete with Sony and Nintendo, and it was witnessing Sony's arrival even before it had arrived, with decreased sales going into the fall season.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/31/busin ... gewanted=1 (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/31/business/technology-sega-forsaking-consoles-to-focus-on-game-software.html?pagewanted=1)
''Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft have huge war chests and Sega is unable to compete with them at their game,'' said Charles Bellfield, vice president of communications for Sega of America."
Mr. Bellfield said Dreamcast sales did not meet expectations..
money relative to the competition's.. not money to keep the operations going.. Okawa didn't want to commit money to hardware because he saw it as a hopeless money losing proposition against big budget competitors, in contrast to Sega as a software maker which he did gift 600 million to.It's a simple matter of ROI.
http://bitmob.com/index.php/mobfeed/qaa ... uster.html (http://bitmob.com/index.php/mobfeed/qaa-former-sega-president-on-dreamcasts-failure-pranks-against-sony-his-ouster.html)
BS: When Nakayama was pushed out and when I was pushed out, I think what took place was, Mr. [Isao] Okawa, who then became the chairman of the company -- he was an investment banker from CSK [Holdings Corporation].... I don’t believe he was committed to the hardware. He just believed it should be a software company.
Bitmob: And that was ultimately the Dreamcast’s downfall....
BS: Yeah, the company didn’t put the money into it. The company basically abandoned the system.
Bernie stolar: the company didn't put money into it.. not "the company couldn't get money to put into it." Why? Futile money losing proposition versus the competition.
When you consider the strength of the Playstation 2 hype, the cost of marketing a new platform in the North American Market... When you consider that Microsoft has an announced a $500 million marketing program for the launch of Xbox and that Nintendo has a $5 billion war chest and the overall power behind the Playstation brand. Sega does not have the ability to compete against those companies. -Charles Bellfield
conclusion: competition
-
Saying that Sony killed the Dreamcast when it says they couldn't afford it? ..and mismanaged money (Saturn, 32x and SEGA CD). If they had all that money, the DC would have finished off the generation in 2nd. Not first, Sony won that one by a mile, but coming in at second most likely would have forced Microsoft out.
You are talking about a approx $2 billion dollar company versus a $20 billion and $100 billion dollar company at that time. Even if they had an extra $1 billion back from 32X, Sega CD, and Saturn (not unrelated to PSX's success) they still would not have been able to compete with them in the long run. They couldn't afford it because the competitors were substantially greater.
No, pricing the DC at a lost (which SEGA of Japan was against) was bad
That happened because SOJ put an installed base quota on SOA and they were desperate, the entire reason was to build enough critical mass before the onslaught of PS2. DC was under the shadow of PS2 hype it's entire life..
Sony "killed" is misleading.. Sony the greatest causal factor is more accurate.
Sega would have stayed in the console business if it only had to contend with Nintendo despite their earlier losses, and Saturn would have been a much different story without Playstation.
The truth is that the medium has always been mainstream.
The degree of mainstream awareness and adoption of gaming has changed drastically over the successive generations, from a core niche of dedicated gamers to a broader section of the mass audience. The demographic changes are reflected in the game designs.
NES to DC was the "games for gamers" paradigm. Post Halo is mass audience gaming.
Prior to PS2 to the core of gaming was hardcore, now the core of gaming is mainstream, followed by casual as the next largest segment, and the old hardcore the smallest.
There was once a time video games used to make your palms sweat, people have forgotten that today.
-
All I see is 'lack of money' to compete. Which is exactly what I said. Thanks for backing me up East.
Also, Sony the 'greatest' casual factor? Are you saying that the first 2 years of PS2's life it was bought up by Moms and Dads? You do know that the system did not get that casual following till 4 years after it came out, the first four-ish years was mostly hardcore. Even Sony's president talks about how you should build a hardcore fanbase first, then go after casual gamers. Going to be honest, I don't see many casual gamers going into a store and buying a 300 dollar console to play Syphon Filter or GTAIII.
:|
SEGA was unable, lack of money... doesn't sound like "PS2 being a casual console made the DC die."
-
NES to DC was the "games for gamers" paradigm. Post Halo is mass audience gaming.
Are you serious?!? The NES has sold many many many more units than the whole Halo series ever has combined. Not just that, but the NES has literally more shovelware than any console I can even think of. Probably more than the PC has gotten overall.
Halo games (as you keep pointing out and obviously do not know much about) have multiple gameplay modes, multiple techniques to learn, different vehicles, different weapons, different difficulties etc etc. I do not see how this is less of a "Game" than Super Mario Brothers.
While I would not being to think Super Mario Brothers is a terrible game, if I had to choose between that and Halo... There would be no competition. Halo has more content, and extremely larger amount of gameplay value.
Oh btw, Super Mario Brothers sold like... 5 times more than the whole Halo series combined. I guess that means it is way more mainstream and casual...
-
All I see is 'lack of money' to compete. Which is exactly what I said. Thanks for backing me up East.
Also, Sony the 'greatest' casual factor? Are you saying that the first 2 years of PS2's life it was bought up by Moms and Dads? You do know that the system did not get that casual following till 4 years after it came out, the first four-ish years was mostly hardcore. Even Sony's president talks about how you should build a hardcore fanbase first, then go after casual gamers. Going to be honest, I don't see many casual gamers going into a store and buying a 300 dollar console to play Syphon Filter or GTAIII.
:|
SEGA was unable, lack of money... doesn't sound like "PS2 being a casual console made the DC die."
George, it looks like you wasted some time on that post. He said "causal factor" not "casual factor". Those are two completely different words.
-
All I see is 'lack of money' to compete. Which is exactly what I said. Thanks for backing me up East.
Lack of money to compete against competitors of that size and financial strength, not lack of money to stay in the business with a 10 million unit console lead and compete against Gamecube. That is the distinction I'm getting at.
Also, why is the lack of money totally unrelated for you to PSX dominating Saturn or DC being under the shadow of PS2 since shortly after DC was first announced? Those are real and major factors all stemming from Sony's entrance.
Realize that Okawa had a quota he was willing to support DC if it met, and even with all the radical price drops it didn't meet it. So, he refused to commit the money. Why send $500 million down a hole competing against Sony and MS if it's a lost cause? But he did give $600 million for them to be a software company, so there was money to be used.
It's there if you want to see it.
George, it looks like you wasted some time on that post. He said "causal factor" not "casual factor". Those are two completely different words.
Thanks, Emmett. It's okay, I do use and attack "casual" a lot. :P
-
NES to DC was the "games for gamers" paradigm. Post Halo is mass audience gaming.
Are you serious?!?
It's right there in the quotes if you want to see it:
http://www.1up.com/do/feature?pager.off (http://www.1up.com/do/feature?pager.off)
The Dreamcast was arguably the first casualty of a major shift in the gaming industry, one with even greater scope than the '90s-era transition from bitmaps to polygons. When the Dreamcast died, so too did the concept of videogames as the exclusive province of the hardcore.[/u]
At the end of the 90's there was a transition shift in gaming from hardcore to core mainstream.
http://www.destructoid.com/sony-we-brok ... 6032.phtml (http://www.destructoid.com/sony-we-broke-the-mainstream-barrier-not-nintendo-146032.phtml)
"The most successful console is still the PS2 and it's still going strong," claims Hirai, comparing a console released nine years ago to a console released three years ago. "I think that's the console that really broke the barrier from videogames being just for videogamers into more of a mass market on a global basis. Nintendo's obviously done a great job in following that mass acceptance."
Kaz Hirai saying the samething..
Trying to find the article that says 2000 is the decade of mainstream gaming.
Not sure how old you guys are and how well you remember the earlier eras.. that might be a factor.
When I was 20 and in college 15 years ago in the 16bit era, almost nobody on campus was gaming.. Now it is almost nobody is not gaming.
-
East of Eastside, you are the same age as me. My first console was a Sears-branded Atari 2600.
It seems to me that the real difference is that adults now play video games, where our parents didn't. That's more because we grew up playing them, and the market has changed because of us Gen-X, Y people. It's the same reason we have to sit through GI-Joe and Transformers movies. Adult, 20+ males now play video games, where our parents may have hauled out Pong at a party or something when they were in college.
To draw this out further, maybe the Dreamcast was aimed at teenagers where the PS2 and the XBOX was aimed at the entire household, with the built-in DVD player. Still, I never really thought it was fair that Sega blazed trails, and the other companies always waited to see what SEGA did before their consoles came out on the market. Sega had the first 16-bit system, and while it may have been misguided, SEGA tried to take care of its Genesis user-base by extending its life with the 32X and SEGA CD, rather than ditching it and starting something new right away.
I'm rambling, so I'll stop now. These were my thoughts growing up with SEGA's consoles.
-
I think Emmett is a good example for this.
You see, calling something "Casual" and something "Hardcore" is silly, especially when you (Eastside), are pretty much just making up in your mind what fits and what does not.
Like, would you consider Emmett a hardcore gamer? Well, I certainly do. But did you know that one of if not his most played games on the Xbox 360 is Uno? Yeah, the card game. Does that make him any less hardcore than you?
You never gave a guideline as to what makes up "hardcore gamers games" and "jocks games". You never responded to any of my posts I mentioned specifically to you about Halo and to why they are great games, especially for gamers, so I just assume you cannot think of a response.
Actually, just drop those terms, they are stupid. Tell people you like games and what about them appeals to you instead. Every time you say "Casual" you do it in the way that is as negative as possible in which you literally blame people for ruining the whole damn industry. That is like me saying Aki is a more hardcore member of SEGAbits than Sharky and that he is ruining the forums because he does not post as much.
-
I'm telling you guys, Space Wars was the last 'game for gamers'. Everything after that was just mainstream corporate casual rubbish dumbed down to appeal to the mass market.
-
I'm telling you guys, Space Wars was the last 'game for gamers'. Everything after that was just mainstream corporate casual rubbish dumbed down to appeal to the mass market.
I'm proud of you, brother. you're getting there! :mrgreen:
friends, I just was at the boards of old school Sega fans that I was posting with a decade ago..
I found this gem that I share with you:
http://opa-ages.com/forums/topic/41862- ... -for-2012/ (http://opa-ages.com/forums/topic/41862-sega-sammy-developing-new-console-for-2012/)
We can dream can we? Sega flushing Microsoft and all the Bald Space Marine shit that they stunk up the market with down back to the Personal Cesspool where they belong, is a long hope of mine.
See, now that is oldschool. The other day I caught a post where one of them said that space marines were for 12 year olds that hadn't dropped their ball yet!
The old school Sega fans hated Sony as a pledge of faith. Microsoft was just a lesser of two evils.
Gotta love the old school Sega fan--SEGA!
-
East of Eastside, you are the same age as me. My first console was a Sears-branded Atari 2600.
Emmet, that is cool. Glad to know a fellow old schooler. I certainly played 2600 but NES was actually the first console I owned.
It seems to me that the real difference is that adults now play video games, where our parents didn't. That's more because we grew up playing them, and the market has changed because of us Gen-X, Y people. It's the same reason we have to sit through GI-Joe and Transformers movies. Adult, 20+ males now play video games, where our parents may have hauled out Pong at a party or something when they were in college.
Well for me, the demographics are wider even at the same age.. The old gaming was a geek and nerd niche subculture. Now it is widely mainstream and not stigmatized as nerdy.
GI Joe movie was terrible. Trans 2 was decent.
To draw this out further, maybe the Dreamcast was aimed at teenagers where the PS2 and the XBOX was aimed at the entire household, with the built-in DVD player.
DC = gamer's game console
(Uranus and MadeMan can look at my supporting quotes even though they think I'm insane)
PS2 and Xbox = mainstream
-
I think Emmett is a good example for this.
You see, calling something "Casual" and something "Hardcore" is silly, especially when you (Eastside), are pretty much just making up in your mind what fits and what does not.
Well, Emmet kind of cleared up the "causal vs casual" deal if that's what you are talking about.
If you want to know what I'm talking about it is the old school "hardcore gamer" that belonged to the 80's and 90's geek and nerd gaming niche subculture. A hardcore game is any game made for that gamer. A core mainstream game (like Halo) is made for the new generation of core mainstream gamers.
Like, would you consider Emmett a hardcore gamer? Well, I certainly do. But did you know that one of if not his most played games on the Xbox 360 is Uno? Yeah, the card game. Does that make him any less hardcore than you?
I don't really worry if anyone is less or more hardcore than me. I don't assign a social value to it, I'm only speaking to my personal preference in gaming.
You never gave a guideline as to what makes up "hardcore gamers games" and "jocks games". You never responded to any of my posts I mentioned specifically to you about Halo and to why they are great games, especially for gamers, so I just assume you cannot think of a response.
Did you see the Dewey gamer classification definitions I listed in the the thread with TA? That is what I am referring to. We can talk about this some more..
Actually, just drop those terms, they are stupid. Tell people you like games and what about them appeals to you instead. Every time you say "Casual" you do it in the way that is as negative as possible in which you literally blame people for ruining the whole damn industry. That is like me saying Aki is a more hardcore member of SEGAbits than Sharky and that he is ruining the forums because he does not post as much.
I will drop the labels.. I don't care about them.. They are only descriptors.. Like I said, I said "causal" not "casual". I don't think I used "casual" in this thread did I?
Actually, I was part of the hardcore Sega community 10 years ago. A lot of people here are not Sega fans in the old school sense.. Not at all. Back then all Sega fans hated, absolutely hated Sony. Most of those old school Sega fans think Sega is crap today.
-
I'm telling you guys, Space Wars was the last 'game for gamers'. Everything after that was just mainstream corporate casual rubbish dumbed down to appeal to the mass market.
I'm proud of you, brother. you're getting there! :mrgreen:
Damn right, real games should require punch-cards, not these un-niche, soulless 'Compact Discs' that the kids are raving about.
I will drop the labels.. I don't care about them.. They are only descriptors.. Like I said, I said "causal" not "casual". I don't think I used "casual" in this thread did I?
Actually, I was part of the hardcore Sega community 10 years ago. A lot of people here are not Sega fans in the old school sense.. Not at all. Back then all Sega fans hated, absolutely hated Sony. Most of those old school Sega fans think Sega is crap today.
Okay, let me just be serious again for a moment. I was a Hardcore Sega fan since I was 4 years old playing Master System and Mega Drive games, and talking it up as school. I used to hate Nintendo, then hate Sony as well.
Looking back though, I think that was more down to me being a kid rather than any mark of a true fan. Now I'm still a hardcore sega lover, but I'm not so short-sighted to ignore great games made by competitors. I wish I had been more open minded back in the day and maybe even bought an N64 to complement my Saturn or something. Obviously I still loved the Saturn best, but there were some brilliant games on N64 and PlayStation too.
I would argue that MOST people on this site are also hardcore, long time Sega fans. At a point though, you just realise that hating the competition so unconditionally isn't really a good thing.
-
I'm telling you guys, Space Wars was the last 'game for gamers'. Everything after that was just mainstream corporate casual rubbish dumbed down to appeal to the mass market.
I'm proud of you, brother. you're getting there! :mrgreen:
Damn right, real games should require punch-cards, not these un-niche, soulless 'Compact Discs' that the kids are raving about.
"Back in my day, we used to have REAL gameplay... We didn't have any of this fancy 3D stuff!"
(http://http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/donkeykong/images/thumb/7/74/Cranky.jpg/180px-Cranky.jpg)
Okay, let me just be serious again for a moment. I was a Hardcore Sega fan since I was 4 years old playing Master System and Mega Drive games, and talking it up as school. I used to hate Nintendo, then hate Sony as well.
Looking back though, I think that was more down to me being a kid rather than any mark of a true fan. Now I'm still a hardcore sega lover, but I'm not so short-sighted to ignore great games made by competitors. I wish I had been more open minded back in the day and maybe even bought an N64 to complement my Saturn or something. Obviously I still loved the Saturn best, but there were some brilliant games on N64 and PlayStation too.
I would argue that MOST people on this site are also hardcore, long time Sega fans. At a point though, you just realise that hating the competition so unconditionally isn't really a good thing.
That's not a true characterization at all. I am a strong supporter of PS3.(Back in their days I was a huge supporter of N64, GC and I loved SNES and NES) I've purchased many of the more mainstream and western franchises. I'm not stopping myself from enjoying them.. I just don't enjoy them as much. I want Jet, Shenmue, Panzer, Yakuza, Rez.. I don't want Infamous, Uncharted, Killzone 2, Batman AA, etc. I don't enjoy those games as much.. they're too mainstream generic, cliche, pop culture references, little art value, uninspiring, etc..
Playing that stuff is just game mechanics and story lines and cinema's.. nothing memorable, no vibe, no feeling, no edge. I don't play just for the sake of playing.
The people here are nothing like the old Sega fans. They appreciated Sega Style and were anguished by the vanquishing of it by mainstream gaming.
Imagine a Sega Style game today.. Where are the cutting edge and high end games today, MadeMan? Where are they?
-
Okay, let me just be serious again for a moment. I was a Hardcore Sega fan since I was 4 years old playing Master System and Mega Drive games, and talking it up as school. I used to hate Nintendo, then hate Sony as well.
Looking back though, I think that was more down to me being a kid rather than any mark of a true fan. Now I'm still a hardcore sega lover, but I'm not so short-sighted to ignore great games made by competitors. I wish I had been more open minded back in the day and maybe even bought an N64 to complement my Saturn or something. Obviously I still loved the Saturn best, but there were some brilliant games on N64 and PlayStation too.
I would argue that MOST people on this site are also hardcore, long time Sega fans. At a point though, you just realise that hating the competition so unconditionally isn't really a good thing.
That's not a true characterization at all. I am a strong supporter of PS3.(Back in their days I was a huge supporter of N64, GC and I loved SNES and NES) I've purchased many of the more mainstream and western franchises. I'm not stopping myself from enjoying them.. I just don't enjoy them as much. I want Jet, Shenmue, Panzer, Yakuza, Rez.. I don't want Infamous, Uncharted, Killzone 2, Batman AA, etc. I don't enjoy those games as much.. they're too mainstream generic, cliche, pop culture references, little art value, uninspiring, etc..
Playing that stuff is just game mechanics and story lines and cinema's.. nothing memorable, no vibe, no feeling, no edge. I don't play just for the sake of playing.
The people here are nothing like the old Sega fans. They appreciated Sega Style and were anguished by the vanquishing of it by mainstream gaming.
Imagine a Sega Style game today.. Where are the cutting edge and high end game today, MadeMan? Where are they?
Once again you're moving into your arguments that have no real value, saying stuff like 'Mainstream and uninspiring' etc etc with no real explanation of why or how certain games fall into those categories when others dont. I'm not even going to touch that one, but rather just say I disagree entirely.
Hell, look I would love nothing more than to see Shenmue III, JSR is one of my all time favourite games (my top three games of all time are Shenmue, Shining Force III trilogy and other Sega games that rotate depending on which way the wind is blowing), but I'm not going to forsake other great games just because they aren't specifically made by sega or a sequel to an old favourite.
I love Sega games as much as anybody here, but the whole argument of 'Sega Style' is really a dicey subject. People apply to anything they like, and then deny it when it suits them. Sega has such a wide range of great games, there is no one 'style' of game they make.
-
To be fair, I haven't played Uno in a long time.
-
Once again you're moving into your arguments that have no real value, saying stuff like 'Mainstream and uninspiring' etc etc with no real explanation of why or how certain games fall into those categories when others dont. I'm not even going to touch that one, but rather just say I disagree entirely.
I'm being serious. If you are not going to touch that then you are missing the whole point. What is cutting edge and inspiring about Uncharted 2 or Batman AA or MAG, etc? Maybe your art appreciation isn't there?
It's hard to explain these things.. Take Rez for example.. it is abstract, unique, conceptually challenging to describe.. It expresses more than the some of it's parts.. Shenmue it is an experience. Jet is a feeling.. Sorry, this is hard..
Hell, look I would love nothing more than to see Shenmue III, JSR is one of my all time favourite games (my top three games of all time are Shenmue, Shining Force III trilogy and other Sega games that rotate depending on which way the wind is blowing), but I'm not going to forsake other great games just because they aren't specifically made by sega or a sequel to an old favourite.
You keep saying that.. I'm not forsaking anything.. I buy a game, play it and don't enjoy all that much. Uncharted 2 had awesome graphics, and great play mechanics. Done in two days. Now what? What was special or memorable about it? Nothing. What did I forsake? I don't get it? Am I supposed to say I loved it to make you happy?
I love Sega games as much as anybody here, but the whole argument of 'Sega Style' is really a dicey subject. People apply to anything they like, and then deny it when it suits them. Sega has such a wide range of great games, there is no one 'style' of game they make.
If you don't get Sega Style then you are not a real Sega fan. Then why are you even a fan? Just to be a fan of 4 blue letters and some mascots and franchises?
Sega Style is real.. some people get it..
Look:
http://www.segasammy.co.jp/english/pr/commu/index.html (http://www.segasammy.co.jp/english/pr/commu/index.html)
“encourage consumers by providing entertainment filled with dreams and excitement to people throughout the world”
By providing entertainment filled with dreams and excitement to people throughout the world, we will strive to enrich our society and culture.
We are dedicated to building a relationship of trust with society, realizing an affluent society, and creating culture..
"Providing dreams and excitement through entertainment full of originality."
Dreams, excitement, originality, enriching culture and society...this is Sega Style straight from the source.
Can't argue with reality.
Or am I crazy because I repeat what the CEO of the company puts on the mission statement? Or am I crazy because I say "gamer's game" and "mainstream" when Kaz Harai, the king of the Sony universe, says the exact same thing.
I can find you Peter Moore, Charles Bellfield, Bernie Stolar quotes saying similar things.. You guys are core mainstreams.. You don't get it. Don't blame me.. If you think I'm full of it...then why do you even care what I say? Ignore me then. I'm making things up, who cares?
Modern gaming.. Microsoft, profits through exploitation of all stakeholders. Look at Activision and Bobby Kotick and what is happening there if you think I'm crazy. Modern corporate game 'culture'. Those companies produce commodities not art. The buyers today are marketing puppets not gamers.
Sega Style was part of the damn culture of the company that is dead now and certainly not in the corporate structure of MS, Sony, and even Nintendo now. It's that way when industries are smaller and niche and people are driven more by passion than greed. Go read the story about Infinity Wards founder's firing..
-
Hey Eastside, you bought Sonic and Sega All Stars Racing didn't you?
How's it feel to be a casual mainstream gamer? :afroman:
-
Hey Eastside, you bought Sonic and Sega All Stars Racing didn't you?
How's it feel to be a casual mainstream gamer? :afroman:
Yeah, I've been playing it really trying to feel it out. Yes, it is a casual game. It's not arcadey there's not much of an energy to it. It is solid, clean and really well done for a casual game, but not much character to it.
I have fun with it but not in a way that is deeply satisfying or really addictive. This is the difference between a hardcore and a mainstream or casual game.
It doesn't really have that extra dimension...there's not much to set apart the masters from the above average.
If this were to be hardcore it would have to be 60fps and ramp up the energy to it, but it's not.. It's for everybody and I resent the compromise.. It is still fun but far from greatness, but then you will deny this extra dimension exists.
When is the last time a game made your palms sweat?
-
update: I'm quitting gaming.
bye.
-
update: I'm quitting gaming.
bye.
Again? Come on now... Hope I didn't offend you or anything.
And what about Yakuza 3? :afroman:
As for your question, the last time a game made my palms sweat was when my control pad overheated.
www.instantrimshot.com (http://www.instantrimshot.com)
Now a question of my own!
Would a mainstream gamer have built this?
(http://http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/9517/p1702101321.jpg)
(Yes I've just been looking for an excuse to show that off...)
-
Going by Eastside's logic, Halo 3 is more of a "Gamer's Game" than Yakuza 3. Think about it.
Halo 3 was designed by people who have all been playing games ever since they were tots and they are all at least in their early 30s now even the art directors and music composers are all gamers (true, look it up), Yakuza 3 is designed with half of the staff being cinematic directors.
Halo 3 has no commercialism OR any bald characters in it !!! Yakuza 3 has billboards on every street that are based off of real-life stuff and has tons of bald characters.
Halo 3 is based on places in space designed off of peoples imagination, Yakuza 3 is literally in real parts of the world with realistic mobsters, a cliche that has been done a billion times over. You can argue that being in space is generic somehow, but how many games have spores that turn into plant zombies? HUH? HUH?
See how much sense this makes when your logic is applied? My point still stands, you are just saying something is a specific way when it is just your opinion.
Of course once you play thousands of games by one developer you are going to notice similarities between them that the general set of eyes does not notice, and I am the same way. What you are doing however is just saying you like something and another game is ruining the industry because you do not like it.
-
Hey Eastside, you bought Sonic and Sega All Stars Racing didn't you?
How's it feel to be a casual mainstream gamer? :afroman:
Yeah, I've been playing it really trying to feel it out. Yes, it is a casual game. It's not arcadey there's not much of an energy to it. It is solid, clean and really well done for a casual game, but not much character to it.
I have fun with it but not in a way that is deeply satisfying or really addictive. This is the difference between a hardcore and a mainstream or casual game.
It doesn't really have that extra dimension...there's not much to set apart the masters from the above average.
If this were to be hardcore it would have to be 60fps and ramp up the energy to it, but it's not.. It's for everybody and I resent the compromise.. It is still fun but far from greatness, but then you will deny this extra dimension exists.
When is the last time a game made your palms sweat?
I have to disagree with this. SASAR has a very arcadey vibe. Reminds me of playing Hydro Thunder, Crazy Taxi or Outrun Online Arcade. I really don't understand how you cannot see the energy that SASAR has, the Monkey Ball and JSRF tracks make my palms sweat like crazy (well, I think I have a gland problem, as they sweat when I do a lot of things...)
And 60fps = hardcore? Ramp up the energy? Have you been pulling of triple boosts and been hitting every speed pad? The game goes at dizzying speeds when played right.
-
Talking about mainstream and core gaming makes a lot more sense than casual/hardcore.
Example, is Uno a casual game? Why? Because it is a card game? Ok, is Mahjong casual? Seriously how many people can play Mahjong? Is it hardcore? Wat?
This is my opinion.
Nice stick MadeMan! :D
And what's a gamer's game anyway? It's such a wild thing to say.
-
update: I'm quitting gaming.
bye.
Again? Come on now... Hope I didn't offend you or anything.
And what about Yakuza 3? :afroman:
As for your question, the last time a game made my palms sweat was when my control pad overheated.
http://www.instantrimshot.com (http://www.instantrimshot.com)
Now a question of my own!
Would a mainstream gamer have built this?
(http://http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/9517/p1702101321.jpg)
(Yes I've just been looking for an excuse to show that off...)
I had a nervous breakdown, but I guess I'm back for more... Going down fighting on this whole cause..
Nice stick, my friend. Well, yes, the wood is a little 'mainstreamy', put some graphite panels on it and give it some 'edge.'
-
Going by Eastside's logic, Halo 3 is more of a "Gamer's Game" than Yakuza 3. Think about it.
Halo 3 was designed by people who have all been playing games ever since they were tots and they are all at least in their early 30s now even the art directors and music composers are all gamers (true, look it up), Yakuza 3 is designed with half of the staff being cinematic directors.
Halo 3 has no commercialism OR any bald characters in it !!! Yakuza 3 has billboards on every street that are based off of real-life stuff and has tons of bald characters.
Halo 3 is based on places in space designed off of peoples imagination, Yakuza 3 is literally in real parts of the world with realistic mobsters, a cliche that has been done a billion times over. You can argue that being in space is generic somehow, but how many games have spores that turn into plant zombies? HUH? HUH?
See how much sense this makes when your logic is applied? My point still stands, you are just saying something is a specific way when it is just your opinion.
Of course once you play thousands of games by one developer you are going to notice similarities between them that the general set of eyes does not notice, and I am the same way. What you are doing however is just saying you like something and another game is ruining the industry because you do not like it.
Okay, I'm responding to your post to maintain a spirit of fairness and not be accused of dodging things... Read it all (your post) carefully..
What you are doing however is just saying you like something and another game is ruining the industry because you do not like it.
If I can demonstrate perfect honesty and fairness, I will say, yeah, I'm doing that, but I think there is substance to what I'm saying beyond preference.
What makes Yakuza 3 'gamer's game' and Halo 'mainstream'? Very simply, demographic. Yakuza is going to be played by a very narrow, male, predominantly dedicated gaming demographic. Halo, on the other hand, is very wide demographic game. It's 'gameness' is diluted by commercialism. Yeah, it is just too damn generic for me. I don't play games just for the sake of playing.. It's just mechanics and arbitrary predetermined rewards for babies, who cares? Yakuza 3 has art value, the aesthetic is better, it has a vibe and an art dimension that enhances the experience to me beyond just pointlessly playing a game like some marketing puppet dancing to the hand of his big corporate publishing master.
Don't ask me to explain a lot of this, because I don't really know what I'm saying.
-
MadeMan!
MadeMan!
MadeMan!
MadeMan!
MadeMan!
MadeMan!
*LOOK**LOOK**LOOK**LOOK**LOOK**LOOK**LOOK**LOOK**LOOK*
Mikami quote from Vanquish interview:
"There is a balancing act going on there," he says, referencing God Hand - clearly a project close to his heart. "That was a title I made very freely, but it didn't sell as well. Resident Evil was based more towards the commercial side of things; God Hand was at the other end of the scale.
Look at the distinction the artist Mikami makes: God hand, the artistic game made from his own creative expression, versus Resident Evil designed under influence of commerical parameters.
Notice the artful game 'didn't sell well'.
You see, I am saying something real!
You can not appreciate these things, it's your fault because you're 'mainstreamy'.
You guys don't know art like Yakuza 3 form corporate casual crap and mainstream mud like Halo and Turds of War and all the other crap you core mainsteams playing ruining the beautiful hobby people like me built in the 80's and 90's.
I've definitively won this whole argument, all of you can concede that to me now.
-
I don't know about Halo being mainstream. It was originally conceived by Bungie to be a follow-up to Marathon, on the Macintosh. The Mac gaming community was/is a pretty small niche. Once Microsoft bought Bungie, did that cause it to become commercial and generic, because it had the advertising muscle behind it to suddenly be a flagship launch title?
I also don't know how different it is from it's original conception, but as a Mac gamer at the time, I was excited at the innovation of having a vehicle driver and gunner playing co-op in a 1st person shooter.
-
Yakuza is just a gangster story, so bland and unoriginal. The art is all fake, it is based off of real world stuff, so cliche. Half of the game is text, BORING, I want to play games where you get points in them, because I am a true gamer.
Why should we play mainstream crap like Shenmue, which sold over a million units in America alone? I want to play real games that are designed for gamers, like M&Ms Racing.
This is basically what you are saying, again it is just all your opinion. I do not see why you have to make fun of every game you do not like as if they are made by your worst enemies. They are just games, seriously who gives a fuck? Just play what you like and do not what does not appeal to you.
I mean, this is a forum and I am not a mod, so you are free to say whatever you will, but you obviously do not know what you are talking about if you are just going to pass off whole genres as "Casual" or "Mainstream" which for some reason make them terrible? All you are doing here is saying some titles are destroying the industry and making it sound like some of us are far less intelligent and distinguished than you, which I find extremely unsettling and uncalled for.
I dunno man, you are older than me, but I really need to tell you to just get over it and grow up. I never heard someone whine about such an insignificant thing in my whole life. If the industry was really in such bad shape then why are you still buying games every month? Heck, I know of at least two games coming out next month that are must buys for you on just one console. Seems to me the industry is doing really well!
-
This is basically what you are saying, again it is just all your opinion. I do not see why you have to make fun of every game you do not like as if they are made by your worst enemies. They are just games, seriously who gives a fuck? Just play what you like and do not what does not appeal to you.
That sound reasonable, but in my mind I make the links between the games I don't like kicking the games I do like to the curb. So, I have an axe to grind..
I mean, this is a forum and I am not a mod, so you are free to say whatever you will, but you obviously do not know what you are talking about if you are just going to pass off whole genres as "Casual" or "Mainstream" which for some reason make them terrible? All you are doing here is saying some titles are destroying the industry and making it sound like some of us are far less intelligent and distinguished than you, which I find extremely unsettling and uncalled for.
I dunno man, you are older than me, but I really need to tell you to just get over it and grow up. I never heard someone whine about such an insignificant thing in my whole life. If the industry was really in such bad shape then why are you still buying games every month? Heck, I know of at least two games coming out next month that are must buys for you on just one console. Seems to me the industry is doing really well!
Okay, remember I put the disclaimer: "this thread is just for fun, or something to that effect.." This message board or any other is just a meaningless space to vent and recreate however without taking it seriously. I get things directed at me all the time, that I just let whiz by me cuz I really don't care what Joe internet stranger is telling me..
On the other hand.. As a fair minded, moral individual it does concern me when I am upsetting or provocating some one, because it is never my intention...
I like you and Mademan and the other posters here, so I'm sorry if I've rubbed anyone the wrong way. It is my style.. I'm a lot the same way in real life.. I'm a radical. This might surprise you.. but I'm not a normal person. I'm challenging.. I'm demanding.. However it might be that I come across condescending, but that is not how I'm saying anything. The post I just directed to you was meant to be sarcastic and sardonic and self-deprecating. I'm sorry if you took it in a way that was offending, I didn't intend that.
You see.. I'm really toned down already as I am.. I was allowed to be here on the condition that I toned down. I am frustrated because I feel like I can't be a Sega fan here cuz it is just going to rub everyone the wrong way. It is a sad reflection of the state of gaming that a Sega fan can't be a Sega fan on a Sega board. A decade ago the Sega fans I posted with were like me.. Being a Sega fan really meant something.. they were real psycho's apart from the other gamers. I've found some of these people again and I'm in the process of being approved to join there community and will be shortly moving on to raise hell there.
I get the "far less intelligent and distinguished than you" a lot too. I'm sorry, I have no intention of coming off that way. I'm used to posting on Sega boards of the past that everyone pretty much bashed the holy hell out of each other and they didn't take it too seriously because that is how things were. Those were the 'hardcore' days of the internet and gaming. I think that kind of reflects some of the points I've made about times changing. I am an old school hardcore gaming psycho, you guys are more core mainstreams. I don't get into the who is better than who stuff, we just don't resonate on the same frequency.. and that reflects in the different gaming attitudes and only substantiates what I am saying is real.
I'm the kind of guy with a cause. My goal is too raise the energy and give an edge and then have others vibrate along with me and all the sudden we are kicking ass and making each other more intense and hardcore. Again, that was the old Sega board style. When I said Sega fans 10 years ago were scary, I wasn't exaggerating.. Imagine they used to tell me I was the best of the group (in terms of being mild).
In conclusion, I'm sorry for offending you or anyone.. go back and insert some one who is over the top and bizarre in your recollections of me rather than some one condescending. If we can't have fun and create a good energy for each other and I'm creating negativity for you and others then I should go.
-
I was mad if anything because of how you would state something as fact without really saying why and then ignore points me and some others made. I was not trying to get a negative reaction, and I doubt you were either, it is just your style, I guess.
I mean, when you constantly bash a "Core" and "Mainstream" lifestyle and say how it is these type of people ruining the industry and then point out that people like me and MadeMang are these kind of people... Well, we are going to get annoyed.
I like to think I am pretty hardcore about the game industry in general, but usually for SEGA stuff. While I personally love the Halo series, I am not a general fan of FPSs or even that many games that sell well. I do not really want to go into WHY I think I am an extremely hardcore but open minded gamer, but I think a way I can prove that is that literally just today I recorded every little sound and song from every release of Virtua Racing just because I was in the mood for the game's music and I enjoy the style and how everything is presented.
Same with MadeMang, literally just in this page he said one of his favorite games of all time was the Shining Force III trilogy, you know, with the releases that never actually left Japan? I think it is pretty damn hardcore of him to even bother with something like that, and like he pointed out, he made his own arcade stick, and one before that even. I'd say he is just as deep in the industry as you, but just has a more varied taste, I suppose.
Anyways, my post is getting long so I will PM you some more on this. Like I said, I was not trying to get a negative reaction, I am sorry if I caused any harm or stress.
-
This is just like that episode of The OC.
We should not be talking out opinions as factual data.
For example, I think that Sony was one of the main reasons for Sega leaving hardware and have my reasons to believe in that. Others here are convinced Sega auto-destruct and have data backing their opinions up. In the end we both may be somewhat right, and we traded some thoughts over it all and have a good conversation.
There is no need to generalize and call out the certain something is wrong and destroying the industry.
I think that Heavy Rain is destroying the marketability of other much better titles for example, but other users here really like the game. That's cool..
I think any game at all can be mainstream or core depending on how it is marketed. And do remember that the fact that is has a small demographics doesn't mean it's core (example: Barbie Horse Adventures, unless you play it really hardcorely).
-
Games can attract casual gamers and not be casual at all. I know people that would not play Bayonetta type games and love it, same with Viewtful Joe. The problem here is that you are trying to match people with games, that does not work. People are casual, those people go mostly for 'simple' and 'on the go' type games (aka arcadish, Ninendoish etc), does not mean those games cannot be enjoyed by us, the hardcore consumer.
If you play a lot of games, you are a hardcore gamer, if you buy a Wii for Wiifit you are a non-gamer, you bought the console as a exercise machine. Casual gamers are those people that play a game because their boyfriend or girlfriend bought the game or its on a site like facebook.
-
I had a nervous breakdown, but I guess I'm back for more... Going down fighting on this whole cause..
Nice stick, my friend. Well, yes, the wood is a little 'mainstreamy', put some graphite panels on it and give it some 'edge.'
Woah woah woah... Woah.
That's Tasmanian Oak my friend, have you seen how small and niche Tasmania is? People don't even realise it's part of Australia. So they gotta go down to this little island full of inbreds just to get to the trees, that's hardcore if I've ever heard it. It's not at all mainstreamy and corporate like Graphite it! :afroman: (Jokes)
As Sanus said, I don't appreciate being called not a true Sega fan or being marked as a casual gamer who is apparantly killing the industry (Shining Force III is a good example, you wouldn't believe how much trouble it is just to get those games running in english).
I'm just going to end by saying that while you talk about how much you want to play artsy and niche games, it's crazy that you bash and refuse to play Wii games because that console has a lot of those off beat style games you praise. I even remember you saying Brutal Legend was 'Mainstream' and 'Soulless' which leads me to believe you never played it, or just apply those words to anything that's not Japanese or made by Sega.
-
I am more of a hardcore SEGA fan than you all because I've imported two (With a third one soon) Yakuza games.
Oh and I am purchasing Yakuza 3 again.
That's how hardcore I am.
None of you are true Kazuma Kiryu Simulator fans.
[spoiler:1rri4t4l]Oh MadeMan tracked down Shining Force III I guess that is KINDA hardcore. He got the sequel though so that proves the series is a financial success SO TOO MAINSTREAM![/spoiler:1rri4t4l]
-
I wouldn't say Sony killed the Dreamcast, being niche doesn't necessarily equal failure.
The Neo Geo was niche, and never really a competitor to any of the mainstream consoles other than SNES and maybe Saturn -
but if you consider just now niche Neo Geo's appeal was, it didn't half do bad for itself over it's life span - sure SNK did eventually go bust and get bought over by playmore - they still managed to out-live SEGA in the same market.
So who's fault is it?
It's everyone's fault. Anyone who tries to pin the 'death of sega hardware' on a specific cause is trying too hard.
Did Sony kill the Dreamcast?
They didn't kill the Dreamcast any more than Nintendo killed the Mega CD and 32x, or how Nintendo killed the Master System and Megadrive in Japan or how Sony killed the Saturn outside of Japan.
The only real success SEGA has ever seen is the Saturn in Japan, and the Genesis in America. Through a combination of always being a failure and always being a failure, up against the big boys of the electronics industry, everyone sounded the death knell for SEGA - who many knew back in the day, stood absolutely no chance of ever being a successful console manufacturer.
If a product as mind numbing as a Neo Geo outlives yours, you have a problem.
-
I wouldn't say Sony killed the Dreamcast, being niche doesn't necessarily equal failure.
The Neo Geo was niche, and never really a competitor to any of the mainstream consoles other than SNES and maybe Saturn -
but if you consider just now niche Neo Geo's appeal was, it didn't half do bad for itself over it's life span - sure SNK did eventually go bust and get bought over by playmore - they still managed to out-live SEGA in the same market.
Okay, I feel I should clear this up.
The Neo Geo AES (The console) was a flop, cut and dry. It wasn't necessarily because it was 'niche' so much as it was just retardedly expensive, as were it's games. Sure it was much more powerful than anything else, but it was also too expensive for most people.
NOW, the reason it saw releases all the way up until 2005 or whatever was not due to the console, but rather because the Arcade Machine (MVS) was hugely popular. The MVS and AES were basically the exact same machine, so whenever a new game was made for the popular arcade hardware, it cost them next to nothing to run off a few hundred copies or so of the console game as well (from the same factory too I believe). The games were sold direct by mail order to the few die-hard fans and that was it.
The only reason the console 'survived' as long as it did with new releases was just because it happened to be so similar to the still-popular arcade hardware.
-
But the same could be said for any of SEGA's consoles,
almost all of SEGA's consoles have had an arcade counterpart that was more or less the same - and even they are not as popular as the MVS.
Regardless of MVS and AES, Sega still sucked a dick and there is nothing that will ever change that.
The Neo Geo was a specialized product, it was akin to the Bugati of the gaming world, only in the Neo Geo's case your italian sports car has been swapped out for a Toyota with software problems - but the fan loyalty is still there!
L ater games for Naomi and the Atomiswave as well as Aurora, all run on hardware almost the same as Dreamcast, while slightly more converasion would have been involved than a direct mvs to aes cart swap, the amount of cost and effort involved in porting such games would have been ridiculously small.
-
But the same could be said for any of SEGA's consoles,
almost all of SEGA's consoles have had an arcade counterpart that was more or less the same - and even they are not as popular as the MVS.
Regardless of MVS and AES, Sega still sucked a dick and there is nothing that will ever change that.
I don't think you get what I was saying, the games (The actual cartridges) were 100% identical to the arcade boards. They could run off the arcade machine ROMS and then run off a few hundred cartridges at the same factory. It would have cost them next to nothing, so they could sell them via mail orders (no store would stock Neo Geo games anymore after a few years).
Sega consoles NEVER had that kind of compatibility, nor did they have any ONE board that they were compatible with. You couldn't run off Sega Saturn CDs using the exact same code used to make VF2 arcade boards for example. Remember the cuts to the backgrounds to let the game run on saturn? Not to mention the arcade boards were not CDs, it would have had to be a completely different production run.
Ditto the Dreacast, it was very very similar to the Naomi, but it wasn't an actual Naomi arcade machine like the AES WAS an MVS Machine in a box. And again, the arcade machine used Rom boards (or whatever you call the arcade game format), not 1GB discs that the dreamcast used. Again it would need to be a brand new production run, AND they would need to make concessions and changes to run it on Dreacast (think about how VF3tb didn't look as good as the arcade release for example) because the Naomi machine had more RAM than the Dreamcast did. Not to mention for both of these consoles Sega was moving through boards very quickly, from Model 1 through to Naomi in the space of two console generations. SNK had the Neo Geo MVS machine and stuck with it for many years.
To my knowledge there is no Console/Arcade machine relationship that was as similar as the Neo Geo counterparts, it really was a very unique situation.
-
This conversation is getting to the point that I say
HOLD ON!
Sony didn't kill the Dreamcast.. IT'S STILL ALIVE cause there's like a game or two coming out each year!
-
Okay, here is a post from an IGN DC editor from 9 years ago...
http://boards.ign.com/dreamcast_general ... 2014776/p1 (http://boards.ign.com/dreamcast_general_board/b5015/2014776/p1)
In mulling over this title, however, it occurred to me: Gamers, by and large, just do not exist any more. ...
And finally, gaming has become so huge that it is run by a bunch of people who have no idea why the gamer of old every existed, much less drove this industry to mainstream popularity with its sheer love for all things fun.
Yes, I'm afraid that the term "gamer" applies to less and less hobbyists in our neck of the woods with each passing day. Reason being that people who play games have lost both a sense of what makes games good and the belief that a game they've never heard of can actually be fun..
What we're left with is a bunch of marketing-driven yes-gamers who avoid anything without a Square logo or a 6 month television campaign, while some of gaming's greatest achievements fall by the wayside, and personally, I have had enough.. You guys have been given something awesome in the Dreamcast, and as such, it is high time you got off your cans and started appreciating one of the best console runs ever, before you and the lousy marketing efforts of game publishers run this system right into the ground. The only way you can do this, and even begin to approaching the Thrown of Gaming to beg the elders for forgiveness, is to hang your heads low, and start walking towards your local retailer to right the wrongs of your thankless generation.
Basically, the gist of it is this guy decrying the rise of mainstream gaming and the death of the old gamer and linking it to the death of DC. It's the same theme as what I have spoken here.. it was common place to hear Sega fans talk this way back then.
It's just that it has been so many years now that people today don't realize this industry transition occurred.
-
People have been complaining about 'casuals ruining the industry' as far back as the Sega Saturn, and probably much earlier too.
Eastside, I respect your opinion, but you can't prove a point by posting quotes from articles or whatnot. I could find quotes that say Halo is a work of art, or that Gears of War is the best game ever made, but that doesn't make them facts, same as Mikami saying that God Hand was more artistic than Resident Evil doesn't make it a better game.
As for Dreamcast still being 'alive' because some dude makes a game in his basement, if thats the definition you want to go by, then no console ever made has ever died. People still make games for Atari 2600 after all.
Look at this new NES game for example!
[youtube:3e80ahz9]aSv0P1oTWCo[/youtube:3e80ahz9]
-
http://retro.ign.com/articles/956/956296p1.html (http://retro.ign.com/articles/956/956296p1.html)
another recent editorial saying the same thing:
Editorial: You Failed SEGA
I implore you to consider the legacy of SEGA's business-driven abandonment of games like Jet Set Radio Future. The tanking of the Dreamcast cannot be avenged, but nor should it be forgotten. So, think about the ghost of Panzer Dragoon before you put down that copy of Dead Space and pick up the latest Guitar Hero. And before you curse Activision for ditching games like Brutal Legend, look down and make sure you don't have the blood of Gunvalkyrie on your hands. Because if you do, you lack the righteousness needed to rail against that decision.
Spend smartly. Spend like the possibility of a new Jet Set Radio depends on it.
Mikami saying that God Hand was more artistic than Resident Evil doesn't make it a better game.
Mikami implied how the commercial considerations lower the art expression. That is the point I'm making and is not an argument about which game is better. And it applies to the situation with DC, the fall of old Sega and the rise of mainstream gaming, but nobody here wants to make those connections...
-
I fail to see how art is being hindered because of sales and mass appeal. The newest Super Monkey Ball game has some of the best art in the series to date, and it is easily the most casual release in the series. Brutal Legend has some of the best and most inspired art I ever saw in a game in years (and I am not even a fan of Metal music), and even if you will not admit it, games like Halo have really fantastic art. I think the God of War series is overrated out the ass, but have you seen that new trailer with the giants? Maaaaaaaan that is some awesome art!
I am not sure you are looking hard enough for the games you like and are just mad with what you do come across. Did you ever play games like Raiden IV, for instance? I think that would really appeal to you.