Life After the Video Game Crash

[thepixiesrock]

I felt it holds relevance with all these next generation consoles comming out, and you all talking about them.

 

http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html

[Jumjalum]

Funny article, I didn't read all of it but everything I did read made me chuckle. I wonder if I can get me one of those kitty consoles.

[Bokishi]

Haha this video owns

 

 

http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/top/e306-clip...pede-173469.php

[Jack_Wellington]

Not bad.

[Llyranor]

Hmm, 70 million of the PS2s were sold after the price drop. Interesting, if not expected. What does this mean for the PS3?

[Craigboy2]

I felt it holds relevance with all these next generation consoles comming out, and you all talking about them.

 

http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wow people were running to Nitendo's booth.

[Volourn]

1. I recall this article, or some article just like it awhile back...

 

2. I believe there was a recent article breaking the myth about how 'popular' the Nintendo booth really was...

[Haitoku]

2. I believe there was a recent article breaking the myth about how 'popular' the Nintendo booth really was...

 

Was it the one about how poorly managed the Nintendo booths were?

[Volourn]

I believe that's the one.

[Shadowstrider]

I felt it holds relevance with all these next generation consoles comming out, and you all talking about them.

 

http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That article WAS a pointless waste of time. It's wrought with Vologic and Hadesisms.

 

The PS3 is a huge waste of money. I think anyone whod' followed the system, at all, knew that.

 

Also, the video of people rushing in the morning is sort of misleading. It was undoubtedly taken on the third day, the day when half the retards there realized "oh crap this show won't be going on forever, and I need to see the Wii." So they all race each other to get to the Wii only to realize people with Exhibitor badges are already in line.

 

People ran past the PS3 booth because it was wide open, and they'd already seen it, where the Wii booth was pretty closed off (probably because, as I've said before, no one wants to be seen playing with their Wii) and you had to wait in line just to wait in line some more.

[Volourn]

"It's wrought with Vologic and Hadesisms."

 

Nice troll.

[thepixiesrock]

I felt it holds relevance with all these next generation consoles comming out, and you all talking about them.

 

http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That article WAS a pointless waste of time. It's wrought with Vologic and Hadesisms.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

YOU'RE JUST AFRAID THAT YOU'LL BE OUT OF A JOB!

[Fenghuang]

Hm, and right as gaming comes back I'll be there to reap the rewards with my fancy new degrees and investment capital...

[astr0creep]

I felt it holds relevance with all these next generation consoles comming out, and you all talking about them.

 

http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's it I'm convinced. Knitting FTW!

 

In all honesty his analysis is not without some truth. I found it quite interesting.

But the 80s draught lasted only 3 years? No biggy.

Edited June 6, 2006 by astr0creep

[alanschu]

Well, during those 3 years gaming on the Apple II was still around

[Judge Hades]

People are using Hadesisms?!?!?!

 

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THOSE PEOPLE!

 

It is just sad. Really really sad. :'(

[Azarkon]

I like the way this man thinks, and while I don't think he's entirely correct, he's right about the PS3.

 

And I do agree with a lot of his other articles. Particulary this one: http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/wowworld.html :D

Edited June 7, 2006 by Azarkon

[alanschu]

I quickly ran through the article, and there's some reservations I have with it.

 

He cites ET as a game that couldn't have gone wrong with sales, yet didn't sell at all. He says that Atari "didn't realize that by 1983 the vast majority of 2600s were sitting in closets." He didn't bother mentioning that ET: The Video Game, is typically referred to as one of, if not the, Worst Game(s) ever.

 

They also spent $20 million in licensing the game (astronomical for the time). So optimistic they were of this craptacular game, that the number of cartridges they built was half the total number of consoles sold.

 

Publications such as Electronic Gaming Monthly declared ET to be the worst game of all time.

 

 

 

He also cites that game console don't keep our attention for more than a couple years. Specifically, he mentions that "the gaming experience itself still couldn't keep our interest for more than a few years. Attention waned again, but this time new, fancier systems arrived just in time, offering a new and novel experience thanks to prettier graphics and character animation. And yet those systems (the Sega Genesis and later the SNES), as great as they were, eventually were retired to closets and attics and the sandy carpets of the Pakistani black market." However, he seems to ignore the fact that, possibly, the waning interest in consoles such as the NES came about because of the fact that the SNES and Sega Genesis were coming out. He assumes that both 16-bit consoles came out in response to waning interest, rather than exploring the possibility that the waning interest came about because of the new consoles.

 

 

Next up, he cites that games today are not nearly as revolutionary (and hence not as novel) as previous generations. He's citing diminishing returns on graphical improvement. He may have a point here, but the two screenshots he shows seems to have been picked for the blandest possible picture for Red Faction 2 (why he'd pick Red Faction 2 and not something like Farcry or Half-Life 2 is entirely beyond me).

 

He also credits Red Faction 2 with a time of 2004, when it came out in 2002. The extra two years helps make his argument seem more convincing. It also ignores the fact that a game like Red Faction 2 offered some interesting novel gameplay compared to GoldenEye, such as destructable environments.

 

 

"So consoles are left to butter their bread with the latter, with the immersion-type games, with the Final Fantasies and Grand Theft Autos and F.E.A.R., games that put you in a movie, basically. The competition here, then, is Hollywood. When teens are in the mood for a mobster story, the game industry hopes you'll be in the mood to play The Godfather game rather than watch the movie. The problem is that people can watch the movie version over and over and over again, there is a human element to the story that lets a person enjoy it all over again, 20 years later. Games really don't give you that."

 

I disagree personally. I can replay a quality game just like I can rewatch a quality movie. Having said that, I tend to actually replay games more than I rewatch movies. But maybe that's just me.

 

 

 

Later he goes on to say that movies can be linear and we still enjoy them because of the human element element that allows us to create sympathetic characters. Comments on forums seem to indicate that there are people that find the stories behind video game characters. I felt bad for Dak'kon when I learned he was manipulated by a scheming bastard into essentially becoming a slave....something which I learned about from Dak'kon was a horrible slight upon his people. He was screwed over in a way he couldn't have possibly imagined given the circumstances, and I felt bad for the chap. Forums seem to indicate that other people, while they may not have necessarily felt sympathy, enjoyed it as a story telling device.

 

He also mentions that an advantage movies have is that they're based upon "an art form (drama) with a thousand years of popularity under its belt." Apparently the fact that the acting medium has evolved over a thousand years has escaped him. Relatively speaking, gaming is in its infancy. Compared to earlier generation games though, storywriting and sympathetic characters have significantly increased.

 

 

I'd go on, but my post is already long enough as it is.

[StillLife]

I quickly ran through the article, and there's some reservations I have with it.

 

He cites ET as a game that couldn't have gone wrong with sales, yet didn't sell at all.  He says that Atari "didn't realize that by 1983 the vast majority of 2600s were sitting in closets."  He didn't bother mentioning that ET: The Video Game, is typically referred to as one of, if not the, Worst Game(s) ever.

 

Bear in mind that was long before the Internet, or even the popularity of gaming magazines. It's not like you could hop online and read a review to see if a game sucked back then. You had word of mouth and the game's marketing, and that was basically it. Given the limited number of people who gave a damn about video games at the time, word of mouth wasn't good for much either.

 

I played ET as a tyke on my sisters ATARI - it wasn't all that bad anyway for the time. The whole "ET was teh worst game evar" claim primarily gets tossed around because it became a trendy opinion amongst aged game journalists, who realized how mediocre the game was when contrasted with it's enormous budget and hype. Plus it was one of the progenitors of bland movie license games in a long dynasty of bland movie license games. It was a simple little ATARI game...technology has advanced so far since then, that developers are capable of commiting far greater atrocities today, it's just no one talks about those kinds of games for long anymore.

 

I have noticed that guy tends to gloss over certain facts to make a point in his articles, so I understand what you're getting at. I just thought that was worth pointing out.

 

Next up, he cites that games today are not nearly as revolutionary (and hence not as novel) as previous generations.  He's citing diminishing returns on graphical improvement.  He may have a point here, but the two screenshots he shows seems to have been picked for the blandest possible picture for Red Faction 2 (why he'd pick Red Faction 2 and not something like Farcry or Half-Life 2 is entirely beyond me).

 

Yep, I couldn't help but notice that too. RF 2 looked pretty crappy to begin with. I agree on most of the other stuff you pointed out, except I don't replay single-player games very often, though I do rewatch movies a lot.

Edited June 7, 2006 by StillLife

[Darque]

I disagree personally.  I can replay a quality game just like I can rewatch a quality movie.  Having said that, I tend to actually replay games more than I rewatch movies.  But maybe that's just me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It's not just you.

 

There's a few games I've played enough times they'd break if they were, say, a VHS tape

[Llyranor]

The key word is quality.

[Darque]

The key word is quality.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

True true.

[alanschu]

The funny thing is that the budget for ET, not adjusted for inflation, is greater than the budget for most AAA games today.

 

Adjusted for inflation it would be stupidly high.

 

I played ET way back in the day, and thought that it was a poor game back when I was 5 :D Though my age made me prefer games like Fishing Derby and whatnot. I preferred my Apple II and Frogger though :D

[Kor Qel Droma]

Most of you are too young to remember, but the crash in the eighties sucked big time. Good luck finding replacement thumbsticks for your Coleco Vision joystick.

[alanschu]

Hahahaha.

 

I loved Pit Stop for the Coleco. Nothing like seeing your tire go hot pink when you just know the Pitstop is coming up soon!