Avinash_Tyagi said: scruffybunny said: Metallicube said: I will never understand all the backlash against malstrom. It seems like people argue against him just for the sake of arguing against him. ... ... I think the backlash is a reaction to the OP and others saying what a genius this guy is ... ... How many analysts saw Wii winning back in 2006 as well as changing the gaming landscape? Because he did.

And that made you a fanboy, I see.

 

I could of sworn vgc slammed the ban hammer on people who use the word fanboy like that.

I mean you basically are calling poor avin a biased retard sheep whose points invalid.

uh no pun intended.

Go ahead be a rude fanboy and then say the other person is the jerk and threaten him too. GG ...

Did I say even say this? "I mean you basically are calling poor avin a biased retard sheep whose points invalid."... I think you just called him that instead.

Thats not fanboy means to me kid, to me it means blind follower, its can be charming to be a fanboy, I am happily a Ridley Scot fanboy because I love his movies, but it can be idiotic to blindly let others form your opinion for you.

lol condescending much champ? Perhaps you should drop the act kiddo and say what you mean youngin'.

You see right through me but I was right about 1 thing and that is you think avin's a sheep.

As far as your ideals work... good for you but this isn't college keep thinking like that and a lot of things get relegated to "stupid" - seriously good luck...

Going to hide behind my clown tears now. =)

The only tragedy here is I'm still awake.

Avinash_Tyagi said: Farmageddon said: Yeah, I'm on the side that thinks he's wrong, or at least mainly wrong.   I mean, he shows that chart and says "This collapse shown above is not due entirely to “less accessibility” or “going away from the basics of gaming”. From someone who participated in this ‘bleed’, it is clear to me that a big reason why is that Nintendo refused to compete with its past." If that's so, then why did those gamers go to the competition? Did the competition have these games? Truth is, as the whole industry went away from some of those classic designs, it was expanding. Maybe people left Nintendo, but they clearly went somewhere else. Somewhere else where there was no catering to the things he claims the lack of is alienating players. So yeah, of course the effect he describes exists. It's just so much far from being as big as he makes it seem. I think he's projecting his personal experience on the entire industry and suspect that's all he does all the time. It was entering new markets and taking advantage of a larger population in the world, it wasn't expanding outside of that, in fact in many ways it was contracting, towards the core audience

As I said, the effect does exist, it's just not as big as he makes it seem.

Also, just to make it clear, I love those old games and do agree many of them are among the bests and all that, I just don't think it's the most relevant thing ever in this case.

I mean, are we perhaps forgetting handhelds here when we talk about the "industry"? Cause, bar this last gen (PSP specially, but DS too on a smaller scale), handhelds have been all about that kind of gaming while consoles "moved forward". And maybe the growth is due to market expansion (as in new markets), population growth and multiplatform owners (not that big IMHO, as it affects mainly the "hardcore", early adopter market), but even then, I believe if you compare the numbers (and there's no way I'm gonnatake the time to do that :P) you'll find out that, if you do have some receding in relative numbers, it won't be nearly as big as he makes it look.

Maybe moving away from the NES era style has alienated part of the NES era. But the PS2 kids couldn't give less of a damn about it, and they're just as valuable as the older, NES-initiated are. So by not cathering so much to that audience, the industry may have lost some of them (many kept on anyway, many would mve away anyway), but that doesn't mean this new style couldn't gather and keep a new generation of gamers interested. Now, obviously, it would be smarter to do both. It just wasn't possible/feasible/affordable/obvious at the time, I think.

And videogames are not any less mainstream now, or last generation, then they were on the NES days, so this whole "contracting towards the core audience", I don't quite agree with it, it's just a matter of looking at PS2 and realising it was pretty mainstream.

Anyway, Nintendo is now going back and revisiting old classics simply because it's a good time now. On N64, it would be too soon to take time out of Mario 64 development to try something like NSMB (and I don't mean these titles specifically, I mean the general idea), they had to prove the 3D vision. And it showed lots of promise, but the hardware was still really weak for some of that. So the GC days were naturally about exploring those new, intriguing elements.

(Just as a last comment, I do realise his point is not about 2D or 3D, but the same point I made there can be applied to lots of other elements/areas/ideas/designs/etc in a similar fashion)

 

Farmageddon said: As I said, the effect does exist, it's just not as big as he makes it seem. Also, just to make it clear, I love those old games and do agree many of them are among the bests and all that, I just don't think it's the most relevant thing ever in this case. I mean, are we perhaps forgetting handhelds here when we talk about the "industry"? Cause, bar this last gen (PSP specially, but DS too on a smaller scale), handhelds have been all about that kind of gaming while consoles "moved forward". And maybe the growth is due to market expansion (as in new markets), population growth and multiplatform owners (not that big IMHO, as it affects mainly the "hardcore", early adopter market), but even then, I believe if you compare the numbers (and there's no way I'm gonnatake the time to do that :P) you'll find out that, if you do have some receding in relative numbers, it won't be nearly as big as he makes it look. Maybe moving away from the NES era style has alienated part of the NES era. But the PS2 kids couldn't give less of a damn about it, and they're just as valuable as the older, NES-initiated are. So by not cathering so much to that audience, the industry may have lost some of them (many kept on anyway, many would mve away anyway), but that doesn't mean this new style couldn't gather and keep a new generation of gamers interested. Now, obviously, it would be smarter to do both. It just wasn't possible/feasible/affordable/obvious at the time, I think. And videogames are not any less mainstream now, or last generation, then they were on the NES days, so this whole "contracting towards the core audience", I don't quite agree with it, it's just a matter of looking at PS2 and realising it was pretty mainstream. Anyway, Nintendo is now going back and revisiting old classics simply because it's a good time now. On N64, it would be too soon to take time out of Mario 64 development to try something like NSMB (and I don't mean these titles specifically, I mean the general idea), they had to prove the 3D vision. And it showed lots of promise, but the hardware was still really weak for some of that. So the GC days were naturally about exploring those new, intriguing elements. (Just as a last comment, I do realise his point is not about 2D or 3D, but the same point I made there can be applied to lots of other elements/areas/ideas/designs/etc in a similar fashion)

Are you sure the receding won't be that big, the Industry collapsed rather rapidly during the Atari crash, even just a few years before people thought the industry was healthy. Depends on who you refer to as the PS2 kids, the core or the more wider audience? Because Nitnendo has already gone after the wider audience with its games. Gaming isn't less mainstream now, because of Wii, but before yeah it was contracting to the core, just because numbers had increased because of population growth and more markets, doesn't indicate expansion, losing the wider audience due to increased costs, higher complexity and boring (to the wider audience) experiences doesn't expand the market, it only drives people away. Thing is, 3D mario was never as popular as 2D Mario, the transition left a lot of people behind

Avinash_Tyagi said: SuperAdrianK said: This thread is moving fast!!!? (honest question) Is malstorm popular... Somewhat, he was one of the few that accurately guessed the market when Analysts like Pachter were expecting Wii to end up in third and for Nintendo to leave the console market

One of the few analysts, you mean, because most common people immediately recognised Wii would succeed as soon as they saw it.

Those in denial were: rival fanboys, a part of hardcore gamers feeling threathened and "analysts" that never played a videogame. BTW, the only time when hardcores' fears really came true was when PC games ported to XB1 had to be crippled (or, worst, lobotomized) due to that console's limits compared to the average PC of its times and SW houses decided that it was "clever" and economic to cripple PC versions too.

 

Alby_da_Wolf said: Avinash_Tyagi said: SuperAdrianK said: This thread is moving fast!!!? (honest question) Is malstorm popular... Somewhat, he was one of the few that accurately guessed the market when Analysts like Pachter were expecting Wii to end up in third and for Nintendo to leave the console market One of the few analysts, you mean, because most common people immediately recognised Wii would succeed as soon as they saw it. Those in denial were: rival fanboys, a part of hardcore gamers feeling threathened and "analysts" that never played a videogame. BTW, the only time when hardcores' fears really came true was when PC games ported to XB1 had to be crippled (or, worst, lobotomized) due to that console's limits compared to the average PC of its times and SW houses decided that it was "clever" and economic to cripple PC versions too.

Actually, this was well before people realized it would succeed, this was back when most were saying PS3 would win, lol Actually if you read some of the stuff back when the then Revolution controller was launched, people were predicting it was the end of Nintendo, and not just analysts, but gamers, it wasn't really until E3 2006 that people started getting behind the Wii

Avinash_Tyagi said: Alby_da_Wolf said: Avinash_Tyagi said: SuperAdrianK said: This thread is moving fast!!!? (honest question) Is malstorm popular... Somewhat, he was one of the few that accurately guessed the market when Analysts like Pachter were expecting Wii to end up in third and for Nintendo to leave the console market One of the few analysts, you mean, because most common people immediately recognised Wii would succeed as soon as they saw it. Those in denial were: rival fanboys, a part of hardcore gamers feeling threathened and "analysts" that never played a videogame. BTW, the only time when hardcores' fears really came true was when PC games ported to XB1 had to be crippled (or, worst, lobotomized) due to that console's limits compared to the average PC of its times and SW houses decided that it was "clever" and economic to cripple PC versions too.   Actually, this was well before people realized it would succeed, this was back when most were saying PS3 would win, lol Actually if you read some of the stuff back when the then Revolution controller was launched, people were predicting it was the end of Nintendo, and not just analysts, but gamers, it wasn't really until E3 2006 that people started getting behind the Wii

 

OK, with people you mean a lot of then existing "old style" gamers, but I'm meaning common people that suddenly got an interest in gaming they never had before just thanks to Wii. THIS latter common people understood how good Wii was before most gamers and analysts. The same happened with DS, it offered both games and a lot of nice and sometimes even useful apps that appealed people that never played videogames before, or felt very little attraction for them.