http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=15255 Jason Rubin: Console Prices 'Out Of Hand', Hampering Launches Jason Rubin: Console Prices 'Out Of Hand', Hampering Launches In an in-depth new interview posted on Gamasutra today, former Naughty Dog co-founder Jason Rubin has been discussing the state of the game biz, claiming that, with the exception of Nintendo, game console makers "have gotten caught up in the technology", with prices "a little bit out of hand" for the end user, suggesting: "I don’t think it’s about technology. It’s about entertainment." Rubin recalled his own past with technology, saying, "I gave a speech in 2004 called 'Great Graphics: Who Cares?'", though he admitted, "I built Naughty Dog on graphics – Crash looked better than most other games at the time, and that’s what made people look at it." "But," he continued, "it’s more about gameplay now. And I think the console manufacturers, as a whole, with the possible exception of Nintendo, have gotten caught up in the technology, and the prices have gotten a little bit out of hand for the end user, and that hampers the launches." Rubin's concern is a matter of installed bases and maximizing an audience for a game, claiming, "I would much rather have a console that’s 30% weaker and have three times as many of them in the first year sold, so your game reaches a broader audience, and you can be a little bit more aggressive with your budgets up front and things like that. I don’t think it’s about technology. It’s about entertainment. No one that came to this show today [Comic-Con] came here to see the next technological advancement." "They came to see the characters, the art, the style," he continued, "and, if they’re in the game area, the gameplay they love. I think as an industry we need to realize that we’re now fully entertainment, we’re not technology." The full interview with Rubin is now available, with more reflections on the games industry, as well as his new projects Flektor and Iron & The Maiden.

"we're now fully entertainment, not technology". Best quote ever. Seriously this guy knows what he's talking about. The PS2 was weaker than the Xbox by a long shot just like the PS1 was a lot weaker than the N64 but it would be stupid not to own both! Graphics do matter but gameplay trumps it by a ton.

Historically speaking, videogames have thrived because they were inexpensive entertainment/hobby; you could buy the hardware for $100 to $200, there were tons of used and discount games for $10 to $20 (new games were typically $50 or less), the controllers were $20, and you saw all the benefits whether or not you owned a TV made in the past decade.

Microsoft and Sony expect you to spend $400 to $600 for the hardware, $60 for the games, $50 for the controllers, and you don't maximize your gameplay experience until you buy a $1,000 TV and pay $50 per month for online gameplay.

Even though many things about the Wii are uncharacteristically expensive, it looks down right affordable compared to the XBox 360 and PS3.

So graphics sell and gameplay keeps you gaming.

No Fractal, interest sell and gameplay keeps you gaming

Dont be a babling fool, every N fanboy says that graphics dont matter(I wouldnt play a game with stick figures for a fps..) graphcis matter as much as anything else in the game. Without the graphics it would be sticks walking around. So yes graphics and gameplay keep you playing.(If it wasnt for the nice graphics in folklore I wouldnt have kepts playing it)

the WHOLE POINT of consoles is to provide a simple, easy and unexpensive way for people to become gamers, when consoles first became really popular there was already PC games that were 10 more complicated, the NES had Mario bros, the PC had elite.
This wasn't a problem, ot was a feature.

MS enter the arena and continuously try to give console owners a PC experience, something that just doesn't work.

Nintendo have learnt that the roots of a successful console is in the NES, it wasn't too complicated or expensive, it wasnt technically dazzling, it was just fun.

"I built Naughty Dog on graphics – Crash looked better than most other games at the time, and that’s what made people look at it."

People are interested in graphics that's what's he's saying.
Wow! what a good lookin game, that must be fun to play. And I think it's pretty often true. Low budget games are being made with older engine's Postal 3 for example on Source engine. Unreal Tournament will look much better. Gears of War is also a good example.

I don't think graphics keeps you playin. After awhile you get used to the stunning graphics. It doesn't mean graphics don't matter anymore. I think many won't play there last gen, when they have a next gen console.

Have you ever played Wii Sports? Did you enjoy yourself? Was it because the graphics were "absolutely breathtaking"? Wii Sports character models are todays version of the stick figure. The game was still very entertaining.

@leo-j,

I believe the meaning of that is: Gameplay is above Graphics. You don't need PS3/360 graphics to make a game good. If Lair is any indication, if the gameplay is lacking, the graphics won't help any.

Its not that graphics don't matter; visual art style is what really makes/breaks the game. And, you don't need high-end graphics in order to achieve a pleasing art-style that fits the game.

Okami is a perfect example. The original demo for the game showed realistic graphics. However, due to hardware limitations on the PS2, Capcom decided to go with a cell-shaded art style. Look how that turned out.