17 Years Ago, Nintendo Called The Death Of Exclusive Games, And The Collapse Of The AAA Market

  • 111 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for deactivated-5d6bb9cb2ee20
deactivated-5d6bb9cb2ee20

82724

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 56

User Lists: 0

#101 deactivated-5d6bb9cb2ee20
Member since 2006 • 82724 Posts

@cainetao11: Ah, I missed the 'writing mechanic' bit of your post.

And ultimately, yes, it absolutely is subjective. I am not even arguing about that anymore haha. But it looks like Nintendo has a more widely appealing lineup this time around than it has had in a very long time. Let's see how it all turns out for them.

And I used movie tie ins as the most obvious example. I do miss AA games. They used to be experimental and creative. They did cool shit. AAA games are so homogenized. I actually mentioned this in the OP, and this was also a topic I touched upon while chatting with Blab and Eroica last night.

Avatar image for cainetao11
cainetao11

38026

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 77

User Lists: 1

#102 cainetao11
Member since 2006 • 38026 Posts

@charizard1605 said:

@cainetao11: Ah, I missed the 'writing mechanic' bit of your post.

And ultimately, yes, it absolutely is subjective. I am not even arguing about that anymore haha. But it looks like Nintendo has a more widely appealing lineup this time around than it has had in a very long time. Let's see how it all turns out for them.

And I used movie tie ins as the most obvious example. I do miss AA games. They used to be experimental and creative. They did cool shit. AAA games are so homogenized. I actually mentioned this in the OP, and this was also a topic I touched upon while chatting with Blab and Eroica last night.

Yeah I miss your podcast as I am in class Wed nights. Apologize to you guys.

Avatar image for deactivated-5d6bb9cb2ee20
deactivated-5d6bb9cb2ee20

82724

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 56

User Lists: 0

#103 deactivated-5d6bb9cb2ee20
Member since 2006 • 82724 Posts

@cainetao11: Haha no problem man, studies are more important :P

I don't think this was on the podcast though? It might have just been a separate chat we did. It's a bit blurry now lol

Avatar image for darkangel115
darkangel115

4562

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#104 darkangel115
Member since 2013 • 4562 Posts

@charizard1605 said:

@darkangel115: Well, the Switch is effectively a handheld and not a console, so they did exactly that.

not really. it's supposed to be a hybrid but at the 299 price point it's priced higher then handhelds. the new nintendo 3DS XL is 200.

Avatar image for 93BlackHawk93
93BlackHawk93

8611

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 24

User Lists: 0

#105 93BlackHawk93
Member since 2010 • 8611 Posts
@jcrame10 said:
@charizard1605 said:
@cainetao11 said:

All those guys can eat a bag of diks. I'll take the multiplatform market that is giving me the likes of Witcher 3, Doom, RE7 and soon to come: Mass Effect Andromeda, Prey, RDR2 among a plethora of others over 1,2 fukin switch shit and Arms. Fuk off Nintendo.

You are misunderstanding the point. While Nintendo, naturally, is speaking out against multiplatform games (since their entire business thrives on exclusives), the larger point is of the collapse of the AAA industry (which has happened, we are left with what, four, five major publishers?), the collapse of the mid tier market (also happened, the mid tier doesn't exist anymore), a resultant diminished output of games (again, also happened), and finally, a homogenization of the games that do come out- this is something we can even see in the indie sector, where games will chase either sidescrolling platformers, or roguelikes, or first person horror games, because some other indie game was a success in those genres. Nintendo's specific quotes may have been in context of their systems, but their larger point was right, as history demonstrates.

The question is not 'are multiplats evil?' The question is, is there a way back from this diminished, homogenized software lineup? Multiplats are a symptom, not the problem itself.

you want more A and AA games that were the norm 20 years ago, you end up with the junk shovelware the Wii had....

A/AA games =/= Shovelware.

Avatar image for locopatho
locopatho

24259

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#106 locopatho
Member since 2003 • 24259 Posts

Multiplatform games are vastly better for gamers. Needing to buy a SNES for !EXCLUSIVE! Super Castlevania IV and a Megadrive for !EXCLUSIVE! Castlevania Bloodlines is crap. I only had a SNES, so never got to play Bloodlines til like 15 years later. How is that good for me? Now gamers can play 99% of games on their console of choice, and not get screwed over. Much superior.

I'm a programmer. The idea that an exclusive game has "unique interactions with the hardware" is garbage these days, unless you're talking a special controller or something. That aside they're all just plastic and metal boxes crunching zeros and ones. No one is coding "to the metal" to wring a few extra ounces of performance anymore, that was a very long time ago. There's zero difference in programming a Nintendo console game versus any other system. They all play by the exact same rules. They're all gonna run the same engines. Skyrim will still be a (Gamebryo-derived) Creation Engine game, written in C++, on the Switch. It's sad Nintendo talk such crap on this issue, and worse, that gamers believe it. That there's some "magic power" in Nintendo's way of running standard C++ code. Utter nonsense.

"I think that only Nintendo can provide certain experiences" In the same way only Bungie or Naughty Dog or Epic can only provide certain experiences. The game and it's design is what matters, not the number crunching box running it.

"Large-scale games are done for" is completely false as well. There's tons of open world games and colossal RPGs still being made. The mid tier fell apart sure, that's just competition though. The biggest, best, most popular survive and thrive. Though I enjoyed them, I don't care if Saint's Row and Two Worlds don't get sequels. GTA and Elder Scrolls continue to succeed spectacularly. AAA for quality and scale, indies for creativity and innovation. That works perfectly for me. I don't mourn the lack of "mid tier" games at all.

"The death of the exclusive due to escalating costs- for most third parties it is no longer cost effective to create exclusives" Why the hell would any gamer want the return of this backwards garbage. It's mental. "I'd prefer to need to buy two 400 euro boxes with 5 games each, rather than one 400 euro box with 10 games." WHY? It's begging the billion dollar companies to squeeze more affluent gamers for hundreds extra, while completely locking out poorer gamers from terrific experiences. Will never understand it.

Avatar image for locopatho
locopatho

24259

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#107 locopatho
Member since 2003 • 24259 Posts

@FireEmblem_Man said:

But do you now appreciate the Wii as well? Remember what caused closure of 3rd party publishers

Shit games. What top quality games did Midway, Acclaim or Infogrames make in say, the decade leading up to their closure? I can think of the PS2 Mortal Kombat games as reasonably enjoyable, and oh yeah, that's about it. And MK still gets made, since it's, ya know, a quality game. All we lost was mediocrity to outright garbage. That's competition baby, long may it continue!

Eidos on the other hand have lots of quality games and just got bought out, they didn't "die".

Avatar image for locopatho
locopatho

24259

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#108 locopatho
Member since 2003 • 24259 Posts

@MBirdy88 said:

to this day there is barely a handful of PS4 or PS3 or Xbox one games worth owning a secondary system for, its pathetic.

Only a handful of nutters on message boards (myself very much included) talk about "secondary systems". Most gamers just buy a system and stick with it for the generation. I have Xbox friends, PS friends, and PC friends (no Nintendo friends, for obvious reasons) that play all their games on that one system. Me and one other dude are the only ones with multiple systems. We're a market that genuinely doesn't matter and never did. Megadrive and SNES didn't fight to BOTH be bought by gamers, they were fighting to be the ONE system that most gamers buy.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64037

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#109 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64037 Posts
@locopatho said:

Only a handful of nutters on message boards (myself very much included) talk about "secondary systems". Most gamers just buy a system and stick with it for the generation. I have Xbox friends, PS friends, and PC friends (no Nintendo friends, for obvious reasons) that play all their games on that one system. Me and one other dude are the only ones with multiple systems. We're a market that genuinely doesn't matter and never did. Megadrive and SNES didn't fight to BOTH be bought by gamers, they were fighting to be the ONE system that most gamers buy.

Yeah but that's the benefit of being informed about our purchases. Because "well the market" is not a good counter against any critical thought, the market buys tickets to see Transformers, but an informed movie goer, or a genuine film critic can and should be able to recognize all the ways in which Transformers is a terrible movie. It's lowest common denominator spectacle.

Consoles have their market. They are a mid range powered device in an expensive hobby at a more respectable price with accessibility.

Which is fine, for the casuals. The enthusiasts, there isn't a selling point to these consoles that isn't born out of
-not enough extra income to throw at a PC
-a few at most exclusives being held in such high regard.
-friends

You normalize it, yeah the PC is expensive and requires a bit (read a bit, in an era with google at your disposal, the "impenetrable" nature of PC gaming is borderline idiot proof), and you're getting games at a more ideal state, at a better clip, you can get games at a much cheaper price (bang for your buck for the consumer), you have access to a more creative scene with more independent and middle market titles, and given the lion's share of triple A is multiplat, you're golden.

You get a product that is substantially better than what the consoles are offering, and without their exclusives they are pathetic versions of a PC.

You: Get to a fucking point champ

....sorry, rambling aside, from an enthusiast standpoint, we're not wrong for thinking these consoles are trash for getting 3 games worth a **** over the course of 3 years. Because I'm not even fronting Bloodborne, The Last Guardian, and allegedly Nioh (still haven't tried) are the only games that were worth a ****. Ratchet n Uncharted are enjoyable in their own right, but honestly could have skipped them all the same. In the case of the Xbox, maybe Halo 5? And as good as the mp is, I'd borderline consider it skippable too if I wasn't so into Halo mp. And that's just my needs. The multiplat thing is nice on some level, but we definitely lost something in translation for how the industry is today.

Avatar image for ghosts4ever
Ghosts4ever

24847

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 0

#110 Ghosts4ever
Member since 2015 • 24847 Posts

Throughout decade or more so than multiplat games has been better than exclusive specially first party console exclusives.

Avatar image for locopatho
locopatho

24259

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#111 locopatho
Member since 2003 • 24259 Posts

@jg4xchamp said:

Yeah but that's the benefit of being informed about our purchases. Because "well the market" is not a good counter against any critical thought, the market buys tickets to see Transformers, but an informed movie goer, or a genuine film critic can and should be able to recognize all the ways in which Transformers is a terrible movie. It's lowest common denominator spectacle.

Consoles have their market. They are a mid range powered device in an expensive hobby at a more respectable price with accessibility.

Which is fine, for the casuals. The enthusiasts, there isn't a selling point to these consoles that isn't born out of

-not enough extra income to throw at a PC

-a few at most exclusives being held in such high regard.

-friends

You normalize it, yeah the PC is expensive and requires a bit (read a bit, in an era with google at your disposal, the "impenetrable" nature of PC gaming is borderline idiot proof), and you're getting games at a more ideal state, at a better clip, you can get games at a much cheaper price (bang for your buck for the consumer), you have access to a more creative scene with more independent and middle market titles, and given the lion's share of triple A is multiplat, you're golden.

You get a product that is substantially better than what the consoles are offering, and without their exclusives they are pathetic versions of a PC.

You: Get to a fucking point champ

....sorry, rambling aside, from an enthusiast standpoint, we're not wrong for thinking these consoles are trash for getting 3 games worth a **** over the course of 3 years. Because I'm not even fronting Bloodborne, The Last Guardian, and allegedly Nioh (still haven't tried) are the only games that were worth a ****. Ratchet n Uncharted are enjoyable in their own right, but honestly could have skipped them all the same. In the case of the Xbox, maybe Halo 5? And as good as the mp is, I'd borderline consider it skippable too if I wasn't so into Halo mp. And that's just my needs. The multiplat thing is nice on some level, but we definitely lost something in translation for how the industry is today.

I'm not saying "Trash is OK because it sells". I'm not saying "The market is always right!" I'm just saying it's pointless crucifying consoles for failing at a task they aren't attempting. It's like a vegetarian reviewing every steak house 0/10 because all they serve is dead animals.

I don't deny these consoles are just casual friendly mid power PCs (and yeah, they look about medium settings so I don't care what the raw numbers say) but that's all they're trying to be.

I don't think we've "lost" much of anything, except people's strong emotional attachment to plastic boxes which was always madness (albeit I had it as much as anyone) In rational, logical terms not only does it not matter that most games are multiplat, it's superior.

In the PS2 gen, a PC gamer has to buy a PS2 to play Devil May Cry. That's a system seller exclusive. Awesome, the PC gamer had to pay hundreds for the console, that they may never play anything else on. (OK it's a PS2, there's tons of awesome to play there, but just for argument) In 2017, a new Dark Souls comes out, the PC gamer just buys it and plays it on their native platform. How is that not better? Your Bloodbourne gives the PS4 an "identity" but so what? Personally I wish I could have it on PC where my Souls games live.

The modern PC gamer barely needing consoles at all is a strength, not a weakness. And ditto for console gamers getting tons of PC ports. We've all benefited. More games for everyone, less need for wasting money on redundant platforms.

Avatar image for MirkoS77
MirkoS77

17637

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#112 MirkoS77
Member since 2011 • 17637 Posts

@charizard1605:

“If you are just simply comparing the 3 hardware consoles in terms of functionality, you can make similar games and many people are now trying to introduce multiplatform games. It may be good for game users but when it comes to some kind of unique interactions with the hardware I don’t think multiplatform games are contributing a lot. Whilst I think it is good to have many different titles for the platforms, I think that only Nintendo can provide certain experiences,” said Miaymoto.

This is typical Nintendo arrogance (underlined). Nintendo is nowhere near to being the only developer out their that provides different gaming experiences. Games don't suddenly lose their uniqueness in design due to being multi-platform, their contributions are contingent upon their artistic merits, and multi-platform games are filled with them. I fail to see how embracing a certain economic model (being exclusive vs multi-platform) fundamentally changes that.

Nintendo holds no monopoly in determining uniqueness in software due to their philosophy. Of who are they to claim that their hardware distinctions (and the mechanical implementations they afford) constitutes anymore uniqueness than anyone else? This arrogance, this presumption, this given, indirectly belittles all of the games I've enjoyed greatly throughout the years that've abided by a different philosophy that I and others appreciate. I don't agree that unique hardware is paramount (much less at all necessary) to software differentiation as Nintendo does.

“I’m not sure if it’s the whole world demanding realistic graphics or just a limited number of games players, but some developers are in the mindset that they feel threatened by the world into making realistic looking games right now,” said Miyamoto. “Therefore, they just cannot afford the time to make unique software because they feel the pressure to make realistic games and are obsessed with graphics.”

Yes Miyamoto, all software's entirely boring and cookie-cutter and only Nintendo are the ones creating unique experiences because they see the brilliance of infusing the SAME OLD IP called Mario Kart U with a horn button, or the wonderful "uniqueness" of ruining Star Fox with an entirely unnecessary clusterfuck of a control scheme, and having the swordplay in SS being frustratingly 95% accurate and requiring constant recalibration.

I'm so sick and tired of the incredible degree of hard work by many passionate developers out there in this industry being belittled by a company simply because Nintendo believes that they are the only ones whose philosophy holds real merit and constitutes the sole valid definition in the creation of unique software. This isn't anywhere even remotely near to being accurate.

As for your points Char:

In the last 17 years, we have steadily seen:

The homogenization of AAA gaming- most games follow a template or formula (usually modeled after some obscenely successful game, be it Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed, or Skyrim)

Is this to claim Nintendo doesn't do the same? Mario, or Zelda, or Kart, or Smash.....formulas modeled after obscenely successful games? Nintendo's just as guilty (if not more so) than anyone else. They have been one of the most stagnant developers out there despite what new mechanics they create per entry, and frankly, if they were the only ones in gaming I would do so very, very little.

Commoditization of games hardware, till consoles are generally indistinguishable from one other in hardware and software lineups

The boards have been positively flooded of late with topics of PS4 domination (here and elsewhere on the net) based on the exclusives it has hitting the platform. To insinuate that Xbox and PS4 are even close to being indistinguishable is crazy. Sony is mopping the floor currently in delineation of their product from any other where it matters, and they didn't require some gimmick to be "unique".

The death of the exclusive due to escalating costs- for most third parties it is no longer cost effective to create exclusives, and the only exclusives come from first parties, or first party funded games. This has led to further commoditization of hardware. Some consoles, with minimal exclusives, have found themselves on the wrong end of this commoditization, and have struggled to keep up with the competition.

The commoditization of hardware is the cost that has been paid to afford consumers the AAA games they desire, and the market has spoken.....gamers do desire them. The impact that holds on creativity and the trend towards sticking towards proven properties in order to recoup investment is unfortunate as are the developers that falter, but I for one would rather live with paying such consequences than have it the other way around. It's not as if we don't get new AAA IPs (many incredible), and in addition we have indie games a plenty and places like Steam to compliment.

I've so many games on my hands and in my backlog that I don't even know what to do with them.

The total collapse of mid tier games

What constitutes mid-tier games? Examples?

In other words, even if Nintendo did a whole lot of stupid, asinine shit - and they did so much fucking ridiculous stuff - there is no denying that they had their finger on the pulse of industry trends, and they knew where the industry was headed. On their part, they appear to have done their best to stop it- but the rest of the industry wasn't listening, and the result is today's market- a market with no mid tier games, with most developers bankrupted, with the few who remain being forced to homogenize their output, or chase sequelization or excessive monetization to be guaranteed income, and more.

Is there any actual way back from this? Can the potential success of the Switch, for instance, resurrect a middle tier of game development, and the return of exclusives and unique games? Or are we doomed to a future where most of the game machines and games themselves on the market look largely the same, with the few exceptions that stand out becoming more and more of an endangered species with each passing year?

I've seen Nintendo's vision....low budget efforts like Star Fox Zero, but hey, at least we got their amazing "uniquessness" that no one else can give us with their garbage controls. Yes, it's a wonderful concession to make. We in actuality get the worst of both worlds. Is that what people would be content with in today's market? Just like anything else, Nintendo stubbornly throws a tantrum and fights against a tide of which they cannot win. The market has dictated what it desires, and Nintendo believes they can do so. All the while they suffer.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64037

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#113 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64037 Posts

@locopatho said:

I'm not saying "Trash is OK because it sells". I'm not saying "The market is always right!" I'm just saying it's pointless crucifying consoles for failing at a task they aren't attempting. It's like a vegetarian reviewing every steak house 0/10 because all they serve is dead animals.

I don't deny these consoles are just casual friendly mid power PCs (and yeah, they look about medium settings so I don't care what the raw numbers say) but that's all they're trying to be.

I don't think we've "lost" much of anything, except people's strong emotional attachment to plastic boxes which was always madness (albeit I had it as much as anyone) In rational, logical terms not only does it not matter that most games are multiplat, it's superior.

In the PS2 gen, a PC gamer has to buy a PS2 to play Devil May Cry. That's a system seller exclusive. Awesome, the PC gamer had to pay hundreds for the console, that they may never play anything else on. (OK it's a PS2, there's tons of awesome to play there, but just for argument) In 2017, a new Dark Souls comes out, the PC gamer just buys it and plays it on their native platform. How is that not better? Your Bloodbourne gives the PS4 an "identity" but so what? Personally I wish I could have it on PC where my Souls games live.

The modern PC gamer barely needing consoles at all is a strength, not a weakness. And ditto for console gamers getting tons of PC ports. We've all benefited. More games for everyone, less need for wasting money on redundant platforms.

Eh, we lost games that were better built around the features n limitations of the tech they were made on. Weren't uber focus tested, or made ubiqitiou to the strengths of all interfaces. I certainly think the FPS space has only been worse being built around a gamepad than a mouse and keyboard (it's laughable when anyone tries to argue otherwise), but sure can't say it's all bad when it comes to sheer access to games. As far as improvement of the art form: eh the multiplatform generation has been more stagnant than anything.

That said I don't mind having a place for a secondary, and I'd like my secondary system to get a healthier amount of more interesting games. And the Xbox One out right sucks in that department, the PS4 has been wildly mediocre, and the WiiU be there too, except the other two by comparson make it look like gold.