Raziel said:
|
You're missing one key element though, Titus. At the time when Atari was in the midst of their heydey, the term videogame "console" didn't really even exist. The terms "computer game system" and "TV game system" were the standard nomenclature for home videogames at the time. The 2600 and 5800 were, in essence, percieved as home computer systems designed primarily for the purpose of gaming. They were lumped right together with conventional computers simply because people didn't know how else to define them. As a result, people saw that they could afford to buy real computers for much cheaper, and gave up on a type of machine heretofore seen as a shallow toy.
|
Then how can you say Nintendo saved the console industry? You just said it right there, that technically, consoles didn't even exist. Without doing any research and just taking you on your word, which is usually correct anyway, Nintendo started the console gaming system, and cheaper, real home computers revolutionized gaming and saved Atari's royal screw up.
Raziel said:
|
Then Nintendo came along, bringing with it the definition of a "videogame console". They introduced a device that, unlike Atari's hardware, strove to present a pure videogame experience without trying to also be a diet-PC at the same time. Nintendo created the rift between consoles and computers, allowing people to distinguish between the two, saving the industry from Atari's bumbling hands. Witout the introduction of the NES, the console videogames industry would be in a very different place today.
|
Alright, I guess we are simply arguing semantics then, because based on your previous paragraph, we are now saying the exact same thing, but you are taking a different route, or should I say opinion. I say home computers were upgrades to Atari, and NES was basically a brand-spanking new technology that
started console gaming, while you say NES saved Atari's bumbling idiocy.
Either way, NES was great, agreed, but it really isn't any different than the progress of cars throughout history. Ford first built cars, but they didn't sell very a lot because they were intended for the rich. Then, mass production was introduced and manufacturing cars in bulk allowed companies to sell cars for cheaper, hence saving the automobile industry the same way the introduction of cheap home computers opened the door for Nintendo to revolutionize/begin the console gaming industry. Both opened the doors and paved the way to innovative thinking, which enabled other companies (i.e. car companies and NES) to become successful and change the way we looked at cars/games.
Raziel said:
|
I couldn't disagree more. Home computers had much to do with the downfall of the console industry, simply because Atari wasn't willing to build a machine dedicated solely to idea of games. Nintendo took that chance and it saved console videogames as we know them.
|
How could Nintendo save an industry that you said didn't even technically exist? They took one of the ideas from Atari, and because computers made the gaming industry more competitive and upped the scales of quality, NES made a console that changed gaming.
Raziel said:
And again, I can't see how it's fair to admonish Nintendo for doing something that works, and at the same time, Microsoft and Sony will be guilty of should they be given another decade with which to do so. As I've already pointed out, Ratchet & Clank will, by the end of this year, have seen four entries in five years, as will Jak and Daxter. GTA has been releasing sequels and updates consistently since 2001. Final Fantasy has seen a new installment on Sony consoles every single year since 1999. Resident Evil has been pumping out new titles non-stop since 1996. Why do these franchises continue to exist? Because they continue to sell.
On top of that, you can't praise Microsoft too much for releasing a lot of new IPs. It's their first generation. They can't release anything but new stuff.
|
First, that is a good point. Miscrosoft is new and
had to come up with original titles and characters to get that base, true. Second, I'm not knocking on NES for pumping out sequel after sequel, because like I said before, I agree with your policy that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I guess I'm just waiting for the next gaming title that is original to come out from Nintendo that will attract the same future attention some of it's major hits of the past have... I haven't seen that in a while, so I'm a skeptic.
Also, we all
grew up with the Mario and Zelda gaming titles, so we got addicted to the kiddy worlds and gameplay style. As I get older, and the technology gets better, I have more and more desire to play in a realistic gaming atmosphere. I'd like to see Nintendo get away from basing most of their games on the same style of play I loved in the early 90's...
Raziel said:
|
Not seeing the merits of Nintendo's library beyond Zelda and Metroid has nothing to do with them, but entirely to do with your own tastes. If those two franchises are the only thing that keeps your interest, that's not the fault of the developer.
|
Well there is clearly
something wrong with Nintendo, being it is the worst of the 3 major console sellers, by far. PS2 and XBox kill Gamecube in sales, and with the introduction of XBox 360 this year, it's all but a console killer for Gamecube..
Raziel said:
|
Opinions are opinions, but it just strikes me as a little ridiculous to criticize somebody for doing something that works. Give Sony another decade and just see if they're not still riding the GTA-train. Give Microsoft another ten years and watch as Halo 12 continues to sell into the stratosphere. If they could sustain public interest in those franchises for another decade, you can bet your ass that they'll keep making the games. Nintendo has kept their biggest sellers alive for 20 years. That's not something to be condemned for, that's something to be congratulated on.
|
Again, I'm not criticizing them, I agreed with you. I actually am looking forward to seeing the progress of Microsoft over the next 10 years. If I was a betting man, I'd say they will surpass all console sales and original gaming hits by far. Already, XBox sales are catching up to PS2, which was by far a favorite just a few years ago. Microsoft simply has too much money to just burn for it not to be the best, and that makes me happy, because they will only keep raising the bar for everyone else to match.
Oh, and has anyone seen The 40 Year Old Virgin? I only mention it because in it, Steve Carrel had a chair for gaming that broke up the controls into two pieces, one for each hand. Is that the same technology you are talking about that could be standard in gaming controls in the future?