By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Opinion: Gamers are behind the Game Industry Implosion

Tagged games:

Haven't read Malstrom's post, but gumby_trucker's. It's a problem that has long been in the making. If you aren't fond of "mature" games, then the current video game industry doesn't have much to offer. What is worse is that there are people who are calling for Nintendo to push in the same direction, oblivious to the fact that the industry is heavily gravitating towards the one game formula to rule them all.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Shipments

Around the Network
gumby_trucker said:

Read the whole thing, pretty much agree with all of it once you filter out Maelstrom's usual personal biases.

To those that haven't read the article, the title can be misleading.

He's basically talking about the fact that Nintendo tried to expand the gaming population with Wii, in order to help the industry become larger, more relevant to society, and more stable in the long run.

His logic is sound: most people care about literature and film, and because of that those mediums are able to survive through difficult times. They are perceived as an integral part of our culture. And by 'our culture' I mean the everyday man on the street culture, not a small and highly specialized sub-group that has too limited an income and too narrow a taste to sustain an industry.

In fact, despite the provocative title, developers are equally to blame as us 'hardcore gamers' for basically shunning the casual crowd when we should have been working overtime to gain their trust and appreciation.

3rd parties shat all over the Wii and produced subpar 'casual' products which to the majority of the audience was their first encounter with this medium. Can you blame them if after years of being exposed to so much crap and so little quality that they come to the conclusion that all gaming must be 'meh'?

A soccer mom or a senior couple that got into gaming in recent years did so because they had a few enjoyable experiences with high quality games, but they never took the time to investigate which publishers were more serious about quality and which didn't care. To them a PartyZ game from Ubisoft looks the same as a Brain Age game from Nintendo, when sitting on the shelf at Walmart.

In order for them to make the effort to begin distinguishing between the two they have to care enough in the first place. That's just natural human behavior in any circumstance when you are exposed to something new.
You develop a more refined taste in *a hobby* because you have something to gain from it, not because you just want to lose less. If losing less is the main concern, then you aren't gaining enough to sustain interest in this *hobby* in the first place.

In other words, if you spend $50 on games that are crap more than once or twice, and you have yet to become emotionally invested in gaming, then you stop buying $50 games. Either you quit altogether or you come to the perfectly reasonable conclusion that games aren't worth $50, but maybe $1 or $5.

This is exactly what Iwata was talking about in his GDC speech that was so badly received by developers. A bad game doesn't tarnish the reputation of the developer or even the publisher if it is made with newcomers in mind. It tarnishes the reputation of the entire industry, or worse the entire medium. The fact that developers so easily dismissed Iwata's words is indication that they were (and probably still are) disconnected from reality.

Maelstrom is also right in saying that Nintendo should have done more to cater to newcomers than they did. There should have been more Wii Sports style games of the same level of quality as the first two, especially given the output of third parties which was mostly inexcusable. But as much as you can criticize Nintendo, there is a clear difference between them and the rest of the industry. Nintendo saw the problem, was aware of it, and made real efforts to address it. They made mistakes along the way, but they clearly got the message. The rest of the industry however, not only failed to address the problem, some of them were completely blind to it and some of them actually made it worse by dismissing it.

Personally I also believe Nintendo eventually was swayed by the rest of the industry to distance itself from its original, correct, path. I believe if other players in the industry weren't so stubborn as to pull with all their might in the wrong direction, Nintendo's output this past generation would have been even more in line with their original vision.

So yeah, "hardcore" gamers are to blame for dismissing the "casual gamer".
Developers are to blame for dismissing the "casual game".
Publishers are to blame for severely underestimating the intelligence of the average consumer, who has no preconditioned positive bias towards games.
And "Casual Gamers" (aka the real world) are "to blame" for packing up and taking there money elsewhere.

Great post. Thanks for posting.



RolStoppable said:
Haven't read Malstrom's post, but gumby_trucker's. It's a problem that has long been in the making. If you aren't fond of "mature" games, then the current video game industry doesn't have much to offer. What is worse is that there are people who are calling for Nintendo to push in the same direction, oblivious to the fact that the industry is heavily gravitating towards the one game formula to rule them all.

This is very true, a comment you nailed in back in the Tomb Raider thread. If it isn't an RPG, Sports, or Racing game, everything else seems to either be severely diminished in output or converging to one play style (some hybrid of CoD and Uncharted)

Especially prevalent in Western games. For all the praise those guys get, so much of what they put out just clones each other.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

sensebringer said:

I agree with you about the hyperbole part. But if we read the article with an open mind I think he has some good points. I always asked to myself ¨why more third party developers don´t support the Wii? they don't want to make money?¨. As a great fan of the original playstation and the Nintendo DS I always put gameplay over graphics, but some of my friends would not play on a Nintendo DS or a Wii even if they get it for free because it has ¨crappy graphics¨.

I don't disagree with the idea of having good games on a graphically weaker platform, I'm not for it but I'm not against it. If a weaker platform can create a top game without compromising, and can be backed with ad money, then I am for it. Final Fantasy VII comes to mind. It had horrible graphics, but it had FMV and it was a legendary game to boot.

I agree with you :) But I don't think it will cause any kind of meltdown, the market will adjust itself and if devs have done it for the DS and the PS, it can happen again.

Nothing is going anywheres.

@Rol.

Once again, you're playing the black OR white game...

it can be both, and Nintendo HAS market to conquer in the older teen market, only a fool would deny that.



happydolphin said:

@Rol.

Once again, you're playing the black OR white game...

it can be both, and Nintendo HAS market to conquer in the older teen market, only a fool would deny that.

Show me the money.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Shipments

Around the Network
RolStoppable said:

Show me the money.

In what way.



happydolphin said:
RolStoppable said:

Show me the money.

In what way.

You said there is market to conquer. Only a fool would suggest to pursue a market that doesn't yield profitability.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Shipments

RolStoppable said:
happydolphin said:

In what way.

You said there is market to conquer. Only a fool would suggest to pursue a market that doesn't yield profitability.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4928597

You were right. Not that it was wrong of me to do, but because this is a video game sales forum after all.



I read the article. Sean Malstrom, him and I differ in many ways, mainly in his preference of games. He loved SNES Starfox and Pacman, but hated Starfox 64 and Goldeneye. I am the exact opposite. But in terms of this article, outside of his effusive style I COULD NOT AGREE MORE.

What has become so off-putting about this entire game industry from the past (6) years I have been observing it is the increased level of arrogance and entitlement coming from the creators themselves. To be honest, no one truly gives a damn who Cliff Blezinski is. All these devs and industry puppets like Geoff Keighly runnig their mouths on social media like their word holds weight is laughable!

Every company fought tooth and nail to reject Nintendo's vision in the search of power. Nintendo themselves strayed from their original strategy. New Super Mario Bros. on Wii was lazy. NSMB2 on 3DS was even lazier. There is something intangible when you look at those games in comparison to super mario world and SMB3 it is startling; one pair was made in desperation, the other pair was truly fueled by imagination.

I'm not even trying to be nostalgic here; games these days are not worth the money. Gamers have settled for game breaking glitches and bugs; sacrificing their dollars on cheap cash grab attempts and justify it by claiming "that is just what hardcore gamers do". Nonsense.

I also could not disagree more with the COD dilemma. People buy Call of Duty and ONLY play Call of Duty because all the other games are simply not worth buying, PERIOD. You cannot blame Activision for making one game that hits all the consumer needs effectively. If these other games were appealing, they would be selling too!

I cannot wait to watch the industry die this generation, I would not be saddened in the least. Get these industry heads off their high horses and maybe we can start from scratch. When the dominos fall and people QUICKLY start going bankrupt like THQ we can get pure games without the excess. It is like chemistry, if you want quality product you gotta remove the garbage impurities.



Leatherhat on July 6th, 2012 3pm. Vita sales:"3 mil for COD 2 mil for AC. Maybe more. "  thehusbo on July 6th, 2012 5pm. Vita sales:"5 mil for COD 2.2 mil for AC."

Malstrom rocks, he's like the George Carlin of gaming. Sees the bullshit that others fail to see and tells it like it is, even though it pisses off most people. Though most of the people that get pissed off at him are the very people he insults (those in the game industry, and the self proclaimed hardcore who Malstrom describes as "freaks"), so I guess the backlash is understandable.

I always find his rants interesting, even those that spit fire at my favorite games comany Nintendo, and god knows he's been doing that a lot lately.

While I agree with much of what he says, at the same time, I hope his doomsday theory of the games industry doesn't come to fruition, as a grad student up to my neck in student loans looking to get into the games industry soon :/