Home
DUVELLE JONES
XBL -NONE-
PSN -NONE-
WII
-NONE-
STEAM -NONE-
DUVELLE JONES' SPONSOR
POST BY THIS AUTHOR (0)
COMMENTS BY THIS AUTHOR (14)
"I think that the sad thing here was that a few months back Reggie Fils-Aime had this interview with Kotaku's Stephen Totilo entitled "The Trouble With the Never-Satisfied Gamer" ( http://kotaku.com/5920572/the-trouble-with-the-never+satisfied-gamer ). It touched on how the hardcore gaming customer was a prickly customer to serve, and this mentality makes them "insatiable".
For about a few weeks after E3... there where some strong reactions to that. And you know what, maybe that was the point of talk. To air out a large elephant in the room. What do you do when a customer demographic expects the world from you, and you simply can't provide it? No matter what you do and how successful you are with the decreed product?
Reggie points out by the end of it that, in the end, it's the experience that others have with a product that matters. That if you do your best and try your hardest to deliver on that experience, then it's all that you can do.
When I look at the rather large reaction to Bayonetta 2, and I see this immaturity I can't help but look back at that interview and think "Damn, maybe he had a point saying that some gamers are 'insatiable'?"
I happen to agree with you, as excited as I am with the Wii U. That price did give me pause, I doubt that I was the only one... if that stopped anyone from getting the system, that is understandable. If it's something that you can't support, why complain... talk with your wallet.
But seriously, screaming on the internet, making death-threats, and the other forms of mass-vitriol that I have been seeing over the subject is simply uncalled for. It the kind of stuff that would make some people simply not identify themselves as gamers, simply to avoid being associated with this kind of attitude.
And really, is that something that we gamers want? To push others away from our pastime?
"
For about a few weeks after E3... there where some strong reactions to that. And you know what, maybe that was the point of talk. To air out a large elephant in the room. What do you do when a customer demographic expects the world from you, and you simply can't provide it? No matter what you do and how successful you are with the decreed product?
Reggie points out by the end of it that, in the end, it's the experience that others have with a product that matters. That if you do your best and try your hardest to deliver on that experience, then it's all that you can do.
When I look at the rather large reaction to Bayonetta 2, and I see this immaturity I can't help but look back at that interview and think "Damn, maybe he had a point saying that some gamers are 'insatiable'?"
I happen to agree with you, as excited as I am with the Wii U. That price did give me pause, I doubt that I was the only one... if that stopped anyone from getting the system, that is understandable. If it's something that you can't support, why complain... talk with your wallet.
But seriously, screaming on the internet, making death-threats, and the other forms of mass-vitriol that I have been seeing over the subject is simply uncalled for. It the kind of stuff that would make some people simply not identify themselves as gamers, simply to avoid being associated with this kind of attitude.
And really, is that something that we gamers want? To push others away from our pastime?
"
Friday, September 21, 2012
"You know when I read that "Kuchera thinks we missed an opportunity to talk about the difference between Eastern and Western forms of storytelling. That is a great conversation -- one that could go on for years. Kuchera and I could have that conversation, as could a lot of people." It makes me sad....
There is one very interesting discussion, one that I would have liked the industry to be abuzz in. Alas...."
There is one very interesting discussion, one that I would have liked the industry to be abuzz in. Alas...."
Friday, August 24, 2012
"Then I guess I am one of the few that do."
Sunday, July 08, 2012
"Hmmm... we'll see but what I have seen so far doesn't stack up. I get the point of this, if this becomes more of a series into itself... there are likely ways to improve one what we happen to have here. But I think that is more important to look at a game that you are copying and understand how it works on a meta-level, then see how you can separate yourself from it to carve your own existence.
SABR is not doing that at the moment, the best that it seems to come up with is "How can be make Smash follow every known fighting game convention that we can think of?" Granted, characters technically don't have health, but the hit-to-build super bar seem to more or less do that anyway. Movement seems undefined at the moment. Supers are absolute and arbitrary to scoring points (killing characters). It's going to be fun, but frankly being fun is not the point of the complaints, it doesn't seem to do enough to make it escape SSB's shadow because it just not doing enough that makes SABR it's own thing.
I can't call that good for gamers honestly since it's rather clear that they simply don't know what SSB from a technical sense, why things are structured the way that they are in Smash and other games like it, why the meta-game changes under this format, etc. and what ideas that they got to stand out from all of that. It seem to simply address the few things that the competitive scene thinks of as wrong (outside of the Smash competitive scene, and yes there is one). And honestly unless it's a glaring problem like infinite combos, I have always been of the opinion that if you are going to clone something... you might as well innovate along the way. I can't see what SABR is doing that is fundamentally changing an aspect of SSB that is wrong?? (Well, save for the prat-falls... but hell I don't think that the new SSB will be revisiting that.)
We'll see, but honestly... If it doesn't manage to do something that makes it stand out, then I don't think that it will have a long life a head of it. And much like other games that can't stand out from the Street Fighter formula, it will suffer their fate.
Still, I will also say this much... I am keeping an open mind about the game, but I can't say that I am keeping my hopes up with what I have seen. It doesn't bode well."
SABR is not doing that at the moment, the best that it seems to come up with is "How can be make Smash follow every known fighting game convention that we can think of?" Granted, characters technically don't have health, but the hit-to-build super bar seem to more or less do that anyway. Movement seems undefined at the moment. Supers are absolute and arbitrary to scoring points (killing characters). It's going to be fun, but frankly being fun is not the point of the complaints, it doesn't seem to do enough to make it escape SSB's shadow because it just not doing enough that makes SABR it's own thing.
I can't call that good for gamers honestly since it's rather clear that they simply don't know what SSB from a technical sense, why things are structured the way that they are in Smash and other games like it, why the meta-game changes under this format, etc. and what ideas that they got to stand out from all of that. It seem to simply address the few things that the competitive scene thinks of as wrong (outside of the Smash competitive scene, and yes there is one). And honestly unless it's a glaring problem like infinite combos, I have always been of the opinion that if you are going to clone something... you might as well innovate along the way. I can't see what SABR is doing that is fundamentally changing an aspect of SSB that is wrong?? (Well, save for the prat-falls... but hell I don't think that the new SSB will be revisiting that.)
We'll see, but honestly... If it doesn't manage to do something that makes it stand out, then I don't think that it will have a long life a head of it. And much like other games that can't stand out from the Street Fighter formula, it will suffer their fate.
Still, I will also say this much... I am keeping an open mind about the game, but I can't say that I am keeping my hopes up with what I have seen. It doesn't bode well."
Thursday, July 05, 2012
"I think that is why there are making it. Maybe another revision will have one built in, but given there history... I would not bet on it."
Monday, July 02, 2012
"I have one word with you that makes your argument crumble... Sega.
Look at the company for a moment, you want them to go third party, fine... but the cold reality is that it will likely be disastrous. Sega, since withdrawing from making hardware, has been fighting with reliance in the market for years. Their turn into full-on publisher has not been the best of times for the company, in-fact it's been some of the worse.
You want something on PSN/XBLA, fine... but that would not be in the best interest of the company for the same reasons that making games on iOS/Android would. They would have no hope of filling there bottom line without a massive restructuring effort.... and frankly, much like Sega, if that happens they will not be the same and success is not as guaranteed as you seem to think."
Look at the company for a moment, you want them to go third party, fine... but the cold reality is that it will likely be disastrous. Sega, since withdrawing from making hardware, has been fighting with reliance in the market for years. Their turn into full-on publisher has not been the best of times for the company, in-fact it's been some of the worse.
You want something on PSN/XBLA, fine... but that would not be in the best interest of the company for the same reasons that making games on iOS/Android would. They would have no hope of filling there bottom line without a massive restructuring effort.... and frankly, much like Sega, if that happens they will not be the same and success is not as guaranteed as you seem to think."
Friday, June 29, 2012
"That is my big concern with Kickstarter.... as far as games are concerned, there will be alot more failures than successes.
And what happens to a project that has funding dry up? You know, money is spent and used, and the game has yet to release due to being incomplete. I have yet to hear this happen on a Kickstarter project, but it's just a matter of time."
And what happens to a project that has funding dry up? You know, money is spent and used, and the game has yet to release due to being incomplete. I have yet to hear this happen on a Kickstarter project, but it's just a matter of time."
Thursday, June 28, 2012
"You miss the thing that I mentioned, "I don't think that Nintendo can manage that and simple stay the same company that it is." I don't think this is something that Nintendo can simply do since at the margins of iOS apps' simply would not support the kind of resources that Nintendo would simply dump in to development of a game. Neither in terms of talent nor revenue, it's just to big for that and there is another issue.
For the short term, it seems good... build a quick team, develop an iOS/Android game app, put in some marketing muscle and watch to see what happens. But nearly everything Nintendo does is build on the idea that it must sustain the platform that drives it's revenue stream... that is the devices of Wii/Wii-U and DS/3DS, investments of 5+ years at the least. It always comes back to this, and simply put, app development on another platform doesn't directly help that idea. It hinders that idea, since if you can get a small (presumably cheep) game on iOS out of Nintendo? Would you look at 3DS after that?
For the short term, it seems good... build a quick team, develop an iOS/Android game app, put in some marketing muscle and watch to see what happens. But nearly everything Nintendo does is build on the idea that it must sustain the platform that drives it's revenue stream... that is the devices of Wii/Wii-U and DS/3DS, investments of 5+ years at the least. It always comes back to this, and simply put, app development on another platform doesn't directly help that idea. It hinders that idea, since if you can get a small (presumably cheep) game on iOS out of Nintendo? Would you look at 3DS after that?
I don't think there is really a clear answer to that for the way that Nintendo operates. But I don't think that it could ignore how overlooked it's own platform becomes after doing that. What point would a consumer have to getting a 3DS (plus the games) if they can get a game on iOS from Nintendo? It would just destroy the long term plan... Nintendo would not need to control the platform, sure, but that would come at a price in the long term sustainability of their own platform. Unless there is a massive restructuring at the company, I don't think that I could see Nintendo let go of that (but hey, things happen... look at SEGA)."
Sunday, May 13, 2012
"I don't think that Nintendo can manage that and simple stay the same company that it is. I have always been of the opinion that should Nintendo simply move product on any other platform, they will easily become ignoreable... since there would be nothing that really stands out from it's own software offerings compared to the mobile market currently.
And as I mentioned earlier, for Nintendo a change into iOS publisher would be too fundamental to how the company opperates. And worse at that point, they are just another publisher. I don't think that Nintendo is build to survive that, not with mobile's low margins on software, even if they wanted to currently.
And as Daniel points out, when you look solely at gaming.... no, it is not a larger market."
And as I mentioned earlier, for Nintendo a change into iOS publisher would be too fundamental to how the company opperates. And worse at that point, they are just another publisher. I don't think that Nintendo is build to survive that, not with mobile's low margins on software, even if they wanted to currently.
And as Daniel points out, when you look solely at gaming.... no, it is not a larger market."
Tuesday, May 08, 2012
"I would not go that far, Nintendo is like any company. Make a few errors, ruin every standing your business has and you suffer... I am not saying that it would be quick or long but as a business it is a possiblity that should keep Iwata up at night. As much as it does for Kaz, as much as it does for Cook."
Wednesday, May 02, 2012
"That is quite the perspective. Thank you, Daniel for that rather rational analysis. I know that I might be stirring up a hornets nest but I would like to see your take on that "very old discussion", I think that you might might find something that a lot of people have missed.
You seem to have pointed out something that I think few people understand (this might be due to comparing them with Sony and Microsoft, whom are orders-of-magnitude larger) but Nintendo is a rather large company. Moving into iOS isn't something that honestly can support a company of it's current side, even within it's own market place Rovio or Zynga have yet to even approuch that size nor has made that much profit.... not without a massive restructuring effort. I'm not sure that this compares to Sega (around the Dreamcast era) at that point, but they made some massive changes to be third-party... changes that, much like Atari before them, were complete fundamental to the way that the company operates. They have never been the same since.
That is what people are asking of Nintendo when them demand shifting to iOS or going third-party, a change so massive that it would change the company completely. When you look at Sega or Atari, it begs the question... will we like what happens should Nintendo do something that would be so fundamental, could the company itself survive that change and will the company ever be the same? The answer would seem to be no."
You seem to have pointed out something that I think few people understand (this might be due to comparing them with Sony and Microsoft, whom are orders-of-magnitude larger) but Nintendo is a rather large company. Moving into iOS isn't something that honestly can support a company of it's current side, even within it's own market place Rovio or Zynga have yet to even approuch that size nor has made that much profit.... not without a massive restructuring effort. I'm not sure that this compares to Sega (around the Dreamcast era) at that point, but they made some massive changes to be third-party... changes that, much like Atari before them, were complete fundamental to the way that the company operates. They have never been the same since.
That is what people are asking of Nintendo when them demand shifting to iOS or going third-party, a change so massive that it would change the company completely. When you look at Sega or Atari, it begs the question... will we like what happens should Nintendo do something that would be so fundamental, could the company itself survive that change and will the company ever be the same? The answer would seem to be no."
Wednesday, May 02, 2012
That said, you are right... the issues behind this outrage is not as simple as it looks. I would not suprise me if it was something that took years to begin to identify... alas they means it would likely take an equal amount of years (or more) to correct."