 Malik
(6/11/04)
Well, I've got
some further thoughts on some of the news I brought all of you this
week. I can't help but add my own thoughts to the vagueness of
Nintendo's Revolution and the complete lack of anything beyond
questions that Sega brought us with Phantasy Star Universe.
Plus, to round things out this week, I have some further thoughts on
Nintendo's big game of the week. Last of all, the RIAA cannot
shut the hell up, so neither can I.
I'm Malik, and
I'll be your pilot on this journey into the stupidity of our world.
Viva
Revolution?
Why is it whenever
Nintendo promises to bring us something
"revolution"-ary, I feel that familiar cold chill run
up my spine that the only other time I feel is when Square Enix
promises a new Final Fantasy title? Maybe it's because Nintendo has
a serious problem with learning their lessons from past
mistakes...really, Nintendo has made a few mistakes in the past. I'm
as surprised as you.
Nintendo seems to
always have the concept in mind that doing something new is better
than doing something half assed. For example, if Nintendo would have
just made another upgrade for the Gameboy (how many versions are
there now? A Dozen? If you could the color options, maybe 1000?
Sounds right to me), which seems to do quite well for them, we would
have been spared one of the top three worst systems of all time; the
Virtual Boy. How about the Gamecube? I love my GCN, but the idea of
using ultra small DVDs instead of full sized ones still pisses me
off. It's easier to lose these damned thing, and worst of all, it
leads to a smaller DVD player. Nintendo could have done the smart
thing and just gave a full sized DVD player, even with their teh gay
sized discs, but instead we have a player that, besides playing GCN
titles, is worthless. Ever watch a movie on DVD on a real GCN (not
the Panasonic version of the system) or listen to a music CD? I
don't think so. I like the versatility of using my game consoles as
CD players (my real CD player is not hooked up to my surround sound,
so my XBox is required when I want my music to kick some major
ass).
So, Nintendo, once
again going with innovation, decided on a game system that not only
can have a retarded name (DS), a stupid project name (Nitro), and
some really lame concepts (two screens and a touch screen), but is
now going to be bigger than the SP. This in particular gets me
pissed off since portability is the most important feature of my
portable systems, and the SP handled that hurdle like a pro. I won't
even touch the fact that two to three letter names for systems are
really pissing me off about now (DS, SP, QD, PSP)...sorry, I like
the thought of creativity going into every aspect of my creative
outlet (gaming).
Anyway, for those
who wonder why I'm pissed about the touch screen without ever even
playing the DS yet, I'll just say this; if you're playing an action
game (let's say the Metroid for DS that was so well publicized from
E3) and it uses the touch screen (like Metroid), and your hand is
required to use the touch screen, and your hand is not invisible,
you will be blocking out the screen. This means you will, at least
until you move your hand (which is controlling the game, so you
better not remove your hand), you cannot see who is about to blow
your freakin' head off. This is a serious design flaw to someone
like me who has larger than child-sized hands (since Nintendo is
claiming to now be looking for a target audience of a more mature
age group) since it limits my enjoyment of this system. Plus, the
touch screen is not going to make the handheld cheaper or more
sturdy. Like with the Virtual Boy, it will end up serving as a
limitation. The VB had a single color display to keep the cost down,
and this still kept the price somewhat high and was a pain in the
ass (or should I say "eyes"). Plus with the innovations of
the VB design, such as the tripod, it broke down like a Pinto. If
the system itself didn't short out, then the tripod would fall
apart.
So, the reason I'm
going off about this is because Nintendo is getting ready to slowly
tempt us all with the "Revolution". That is their new
secret console that's under development that will incorporate some
new technology so secretive that they will not reveal any of the
details. Supposedly, Nintendo is afraid of their competition
stealing their ideas.
Solution
Nintendo, if
you're going to try something new, please make sure it is fun and
doesn't interfere with the actual enjoyment one should get from
playing the games. At least Nintendo's president, Satoru Iwata, has
said that they are more concerned with substance rather than
flair...
He said the gaming
industry is reaching a dead end as its past formula for success —
dazzling consumers with more sophisticated imagery — no longer
works.
At least Nintendo
seems to hold enjoying their games in a higher light than their
competition, who often times will focus more of the flair, or
technical achievements of their consoles (XBox Live Chat, XBox Live
itself, PS2 Broadband, PS2 Hard Drive, etc). Yet, in the end,
Nintendo still has that habit of making a few minor flaws in their
design that just seem to pull everything down with it. So, I can't
help but feel a cold chill running down my spine as I think
of;
"What we need is
not a next-generation machine but a next-generation way of playing
games," Iwata told reporters at a Tokyo hotel. "We need to
propose a new idea so that the game industry can overcome its
current crisis."
New idea...like
two screens, on a tripod, with no portability (yet it's a portable
console...), and an all red display! Sorry, Nintendo has still not
done something smart enough to live the VB down...yet...please
Nintendo, redeem yourself...please.
Too Little of a
Good Thing
I'm all for having
less information available on a game before it's launched than the
average developer and publisher gives out. In fact, I'm usually more
excited about a game I know next to nothing about, like GTA:SA, than
most games that I know far too much about, like Fable. I'm not
saying I'm not excited about Fable, but lets consider
something;
When Fable was
first announced, every idea and every innovation was quickly
detailed by Lionhead, and especially by Mr. Molyneaux. We knew of
the way that every character would age (NPC and PC) and thus what is
done when you first start the game would affect the world greatly by
the time you neared the end. We also knew of how you could customize
your character almost 100%, including picking your gender. Well, as
time passed, we learned that a lot of character wouldn't directly
age. Although the details are a little sketchy, it sounds like the
NPCs in town will instead just be replaced with similar looking ones
that only differ by being a little older looking, instead of being
the same character with an "aged" personality and
appearance. We also learned that being female is completely out of
the question. These are only a couple of the many features that were
publicized last fall (or earlier) that are no longer going to be in
the final release.
Meanwhile, GTA:SA,
or any previous GTA for that matter, is developed without the gamers
knowing hardly anything except inconsequential things, like the main
character's name, or what decade the game will take place in. So, if
Rockstar decided to add a feature, like giving you the option of
climbing walls, and then removed it while developing the game, this
would not make one feel greatly disappointed. I'm not saying this is
supposed to be in GTA:SA, so don't even think of me having some
details of the game that aren't available or making shit up. I'm
being hypothetical.
So, my point is
that while we don't know enough about a new GTA game to already
formulate strategies and plans ahead of time, we do know enough to
get hyped on the game. Meanwhile, with Fable we know enough to know
that so many cool things have been cut out of what will be the final
release...so many things that a good deal of the geeks originally
hyped about Fable are losing their interest.
Plus, with GTA
games, we know nothing about the release date until they have a
final figure. Meanwhile, Lionhead gave us promises that have failed
several times now. This, once again, has led to us, the general geek
population, losing more interest as we dub the game
"vaporware".
However, my main
point that I was slowing approaching is this; Phantasy Star
Universe. While Fable has taught us, along with Doom 3 and quite a
few other games that have been over-publicized, that too much info
can only kill out hype, what happens when we get too little info? I
don't mean no info, since a lack of any information would still
leave us in surprise when the game is announced. Too little information,
is the most teh gay way one can publicize a project.
With Phantasy
Star Universe, we are told to expect a revolutionary game, with
a new world, and a completely new experience, but we aren't even
told what genre to expect. I mean it will be some sort of a
"RPG", but Phantasy Star Online, Disgaea, Final Fantasy
Crystal Chronicles, Secret of Mana, and Suikoden are all RPGs and a
fan of one of these games could very easily hate all the others.
Sega is only letting one piece of info escape on what type of game
we can expect...something related to Phantasy Star. Nothing else is
known. The movie shown at the web site even asks, "Phantasy
Star Online 2?" and "Phantasy Star V?". With very
little info, we can still get hyped, like when we all saw the title
of the next GTA. I mean, we knew what was coming, and after seeing
the "San Andreas" we could start getting hyped about a
California GTA. However, Sega just went from telling us almost
nothing to telling us even less than nothing...those two questions
can only serve to confuse and harm the potential image of PSU. How
about Sega stops jerking us around and tell us something we can get
hyped about...I mean a fan of PSO and PS1-4 is few and far between.
I have met far too few people who actually liked both styles of PS,
while I know a good deal of people who liked one OR the other. I for
one would give $50 for PSV, but only about $20 (on a day when I feel
hella generous) for a PSO2.
So, why am I going
off about this? Simple; we have gotten the first scent of
information from Sega and Team Sonic about this future title, and
this will leave a large number of geeks drooling and excited.
However, before Sega actually releases any real information, we
geeks are going to start getting bored with the little info we have.
Then Sega will have to make one of two choices; they can either
continue telling us far too little to keep us interested or they
could tell us too many empty promises that cannot be fulfilled
(Fable-style).
On one hand it
leads to the game being under-rated and under hyped, so that when it
is released, if it is good, it will not get quite the following that
it deserves. This will make it less likely to come to the US, since
Japanese developers usually are more hesitant on releasing a RPG
state-side than any other style of game. If it makes it to the US,
assuming also that it will be fun, and it's a classic PS title
(something like a "PSV"), the chance of a sequel making it
stateside is lower. This will just piss me off, since I need my RPG
fix, and I need it often.
On the other hand,
if they start with the empty promises, we're going to be facing the
same bullshit that Fable gave us, but with one of my favorite
series. That is something none of us needs to face...most
importantly, myself. Once a company makes the empty promises, like
Fable did so many times, it will only make the game that much less
enjoyable when it finally comes out. I mean who out there is going
to play Fable, if it actually ever comes out, and not think
something like, "I wish I could see that damned village kid
grow up with all the mental scars I should have left on him",
or a geek of the female persuasion (geeks actually come in more than
one variety...just ask Velveeta) may think "So, I can make this
character to be just like me...then why does he have a penis?",
or "Shouldn't I have been playing this game a year ago...not
quite as cutting edge anymore...". I don't want this type of
feeling to be associated with Phantasy Star...that's the equivalent
of crushing a good deal of my fond memories as a child (PS got me
into RPGs...no one better mess with my personal image of PS!).
Solution
The smartest
solution would have been for Sega to wait a while before releasing
any information at all. Especially since this game is not supposed
to come out until sometime almost a year from now or later. Rockstar
waited until there were only about 6-7 months left before releasing
hints about what we can expect in October. Unfortunately, it's too
late for that now. So, on to plan B; Sega can tell us two simple
things that they have already brought people to ask; "Phantasy
Star Online 2?", "Phantasy Star V?". After that, they
could shut the hell up. It's better to keep an audience in suspense
than to over hype something and watch as they get disappointed
before the game even hits to shelves.
Another part of
this solution; "Phantasy Star Online 2?", NO.
"Phantasy Star V?", YES. PSO is nothing besides a Diablo
clone with less refinement. Let's let Blizzard do what they do best,
and Sega do what Sega/Team Sonic does best (and that's not Sonic in
3D); the games that made them famous...in other words, go back to
their roots. 'Nuff said.
While We're On The
Subject...
....of Nintendo,
and since it's a big week for one of their "innovations",
I feel the urge to bitch again.
Nintendo has
brought us another fun multiplayer experience that just can't be
fully enjoyed due to the dreaded Nintendo buzz-word; Connectivity.
This time we are given The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventure, a
four player Zelda experience on the GCN, that can, like FF:CC, be
enjoyed single player with no problems, but to play multiplayer, you
will need one GBA and one GBA-GCN link cable per player. For some
people this will mean nothing, but for the majority of us, it means
having financial problems stand in the way of enjoying a four player
adventure.
I can easily drag
out a friend or two (plus Velveeta) to get into the action of a four
player game, but it is not as simple of a matter to find four GBAs
and four link cables on the budget that I'm faced with and the
budget of my mostly college aged friends. The thing Nintendo seems
to have forgotten is that the college aged audience usually does not
have the money to throw around on having excessive numbers of GBAs
lying around.
This, in some
ways, ties in to the issue that Nintendo has been trying to overcome
in the recent past, of trying to aim for a more mature audience and,
in general, a larger audience. If you're trying to get a bunch of people
to buy into your product line, you should not force excessive money
issues upon them. In this case, if Nintendo wants to make people
interested in your key product, the GCN, they should not have the
most appealing games require additional purchases to enjoy; in this
case, extra GBAs (which have some use out of the connectivity issue)
and extra link cables (which are almost useless when it comes to
anything besides FF:CC and Four Swords, yet cost an unappealing $20
each).
Solution
To get a larger
share of the geek market, Nintendo needs to stop having it so that
the most anticipated games have the most unusual requirements. A
good multiplayer game should only require one system (with standard
controls) and one copy of the game. Then, when the owner of the game
starts playing with friends, they can see if the console is cool and
then purchase one from their own experiences. With connectivity
based games, it becomes rather difficult to experience the title to
it's fullest before a leap of faith is required in purchasing the
game (or not).
Video games are
one of those products that the best way to attract an audience is to
make it easy to try out and experience. While other forms of media
may require between $5 and $20 to enjoy (like movies, CDs, or
whatever), a game requires a much heftier financial contribution. I
mean, I have no problem laying down $8 to see a movie in the
theater, or $12 to buy a music CD, but when it comes to $50 for a
game or $100-$150 for a console, I want to make sure I'm not going
to end up being bitten in the ass by a bad purchase before I jump
into it. Of course the easiest way to tell if a game is worth it, is
to rely on a friend who has already purchased it. However, this all
goes to crap when the requirements for a game increase, ala
connectivity, and it becomes much harder to try out the game in the
first place.
On top of that, if
one doesn't have a GBA by now, they are most likely not interested
and nothing in the world could change that. So, if I don't have a
GBA (of course I do, but we're being hypothetical) and I do have a
GCN and I want to play Four Swords with some friends, I'm left with
a couple of problems; Firstly, why would I want to lay down about
$100 for a controller when a normal console's controller only costs
$30 for the XBox and it has four player games a-plenty and I could
use the XBox control for more than just two games? Secondly, how do
I convince my friends, who I would want to play Four Swords with, to
purchase about $100 worth of controller just to play one game with
me (two games if I actually thought FF:CC was fun...yes I name FF:CC,
even though it's not a Nintendo game since they dropped mad money in
Square's lap to make it with connectivity...which I sure as hell
didn't think was fun...com'on Square fanboys, flame
me!)? I don't think there are any answers for that. Simply put,
if you don't have a GBA by now, Four Swords will not change your
mind.
Nintendo must
realize that if they want a larger audience (which I know they do
since a large audience equals more money...and who doesn't like more
money coming their way?) that uncalled for requirements in
potentially amazing games is not the answer. Connectivity was a
nifty little idea when it added inconsequential bonuses to a game;
like Tinkle's Radar in Zelda:WW, or the island in Animal Crossing.
Those added to the game (actually, Tinkle's Radar didn't add
anything for me, but in theory it could be fun for some Zelda fans);
games which could still be fully enjoyed without the GBA link.
So, to put it in a
few less words; Nintendo can only reach for a larger audience and
solve their problems of the disappearing fan base by making their
products more accessible. This means cutting any connectivity
requirements, and limiting anything as gimmicky as connectivity to
an add-on, not a requirement...'nuff said.
Maybe The Answer
Is To Ban People From Listening
Ok, it seems RIAA
cannot help themselves from pressuring people to avoid the
product they are trying to sell. For those who haven't paid any
attention to...well, to anything...in the last few years, RIAA, The
Recording Industry Assesociation of America, or something
like that, have decided that any copying of music is wrong. That's
all well and good...for the most part. This does affect the artists
who actually have supported MP3s in stopping them from being able to
share their albums and music, which in turns can lower sales since
many of the more underground artists find the most fanfare by giving
their music away to entice the potential audience and then counting
on sales to follow.
Anyway, RIAA has
done everything from shutting down Napster, who started the
mainstream popularity of P2P file exchange services, to suing
thousands of people. It was bad enough when they'd sue the owner of
a PC for something that was downloaded by a child (they have sued
some people who didn't download songs because they owned the PC on a
given IP address that had downloaded songs...songs downloaded by
children in several cases); that's like me allowing a friend to
barrow my car and then being sued when my friend crashes into
something instead of the driver being sued. Then they resorted to
the tactic of suing individuals who they cannot immediately
recognize. These "John Doe" lawsuits are, 99% of the time,
nothing but a farce that will further clog our legal systems that
are already overloaded with frivolous lawsuits as it was before RIAA
got some big arse bug up their asses.
Now, in the latest
turn, RIAA has started to look into the "threat" of
digital radio. In theory, people can copy songs off of digital radio
and then copy them onto a PC in MP3 format. However, given how a
good deal of MP3s on the Internet sound already (most of them I've
heard have sounded like shit), one could just copy songs off the
standard issue radio, and rip them to MP3...AWWWW SHIT! Now RIAA is
going to try to take away my right to listen to the radio since I
could illegally copy music and distribute it. What next? Maybe the
RIAA could stop sales of CDs since CDs are the primary source of
creating MP3s. True, the artists under the giant umbrella of the
RIAA would all stop making any money from sales, but it could...ummm...make
even less sense than the other actions of the RIAA. How about this;
I could copy songs off my old 8-track or vinyl collections (I
collect shit...what can I say), and make MP3s of this (RIAA: I did
not say I was doing this; I said I "could"), so maybe RIAA
should destroy all media players before we have a chance to enjoy
music. Sometimes I wish they would just shut the hell up...
Solution
Well, they could
shut the hell up, but that's too easy. So, instead they could look
towards the methods used in some other countries. For example, in
many parts of Europe, an additional cost is added to CD-R's and
other blank media to bring back some of the lost revenue of copied
songs and videos. This money goes to the European equivalent of the
RIAA to distribute as required. But, if that makes too much sense,
there are other possibilities;
Like, the RIAA
could just ban artists from making music. I mean that would prevent
those damned commoners from copying music. With no music, then there
could be no illegal distribution. Or, maybe music could be
restricted so that only the economically elite could have access to
music, since we lowly common people cannot be trusted with something
as simple as the radio.
Of course the RIAA
could realize that music sales are not slumping from the illegal
distribution of music as much as the fact that most music is no
longer on par with what was available just a few years ago. To add
to that, the price of CDs don't reflect the actual cost to produce a
CD, and thus the average person is faced with a conflict; should I
waste $15-$20 on a CD that will probably suck or should I just hold
on to my money and get something more enjoyable? Usually, with the
economy being so poor lately, that more enjoyable thing would be
applied to food and shelter. Maybe the RIAA needs to realize that
during an economic recession, less money is going to be spent on frivolous
things like music, and more money will be saved towards staying
alive and meeting basic needs...but that's too simple of a
solution.
Ok, I guess it
either comes down to the highly logical (and improbable) option of
the RIAA shutting the hell up and realizing the situation that
America is under (in terms of income and quality of music/movies),
to banning all entertainment produced in America from all but the
elite upper class (or maybe to just those who work for the RIAA), or
just tacking on some extra fee to blank media and cutting their
losses there. Either way it is looked at, the RIAA needs to take a
step back into reality and stop treating all people throughout the
world as criminals.
Conclusion
Well, I for one am
sick of bitching about some of the same subjects over and over
again, but until the RIAA gets some semblance of reality into their
minds and until Nintendo stops trying to force the most popular game
system (the GBA) down our throats, I guess I'll just have to keep
bitching. Plus, it doesn't help having so much crap come out
of the no longer imaginative minds of Square...Square derived
product lines at Square Enix will keep getting worse, yet the number
of fans will increase...makes me lose all hope for the future of
geeks...sigh... Malik
|
