The New Generation of Consoles

I don't think things have really changed that much. I only really played small number of each generation's games, the same ratio now. Except now I also play PC games, which is something I rarely did until the late 90s when we got a system running more than simply Windows 3.1

I probably actually bought fewer games this generation because they were split between three systems, the old Playstation(which continued to get major releases into 2003...), PS2, and the Gamecube.

"So where's the excitement? For the first time, I really have no intention of saving up for the newest in gaming hardware. I couldn't care less. What about you guys?"

I'm excited over the Revolution because of the capability of downloading classic games, which aren't new games, but the feature is certainly.. new and excellent. Otherwise, I don't see much else to look forward to, actually. But then again, that's not terrible, because I never buy consoles at launch, almost always a year after launch(or longer) and that usually gives a system time to get two or three games I might want to play.

I totally agree. Lately things have been far too routine and dull. With the exception of the Nintendo DS, and maybe a couple of games, everything is the same shit, different graphics. The last new game I can remember off hand being awesome and fresh, Resident Evil 4. The gameplay was way different than anything I'd played before. The graphics and sound were superb at the time, although maybe now they don't look so great to some people.

Also the huge cost of consoles is really a turn off. I was never going to pay 300$ for a PS2. And i won't pay 300$ or 400$ for a Xbox 360, and whatever insane price the PS3 is. The Revolution will probably be something like 200$, so I might consider that. But M$ and Sony really are just the same shit different day.

I'm thinking more and more that I might wait to pick up the next gen consoles. Though to be honest, the price really isn't an issue for me. Probably the biggest draw to me to get them is having worked with the 360, I can see first hand what it can do. While it is true that graphics are the biggest improvement, they aren't the only improvement. There are features we are putting together that couldn't possibly work on the current gen systems. Though whether they worth $400 is an entirely different question altogether.
One thing to remember is you are probably going to have about a year to switch over. Beyond that, I doubt you will see hardly any releases for the current generation of systems. So whether or not you want to buy the new systems, at some point you will have to in order to keep playing new games. Of course as you pointed out above that doesn't mean you would have to buy a 360 - hell, I don't even have an xbox.

I'd be perfectly happy if the next Nintendo console focused primarily on SNES-style 2D gaming, while still retaining the option of 3D. The biggest lack though, I think, isn't in hardware, but in innovation. Pikmin is a good example of something new and different. Though I don't personally care for the game and the noise, watching my cousin play Donkey Konga (or whatever it's called) with the bongos reminded me that what Nintendo does is innovate - everyone else just makes games.

Cloral wrote:I'm thinking more and more that I might wait to pick up the next gen consoles. Though to be honest, the price really isn't an issue for me. Probably the biggest draw to me to get them is having worked with the 360, I can see first hand what it can do. While it is true that graphics are the biggest improvement, they aren't the only improvement. There are features we are putting together that couldn't possibly work on the current gen systems. Though whether they worth $400 is an entirely different question altogether.
One thing to remember is you are probably going to have about a year to switch over. Beyond that, I doubt you will see hardly any releases for the current generation of systems. So whether or not you want to buy the new systems, at some point you will have to in order to keep playing new games. Of course as you pointed out above that doesn't mean you would have to buy a 360 - hell, I don't even have an xbox.

What I've decided to do instead of buying up is to buy sideways. That is, since I currently own an xbox, I'm going to get a gameCube and explore its library instead of upgrading to the next gen.

When a next gen system is like $200 I'll get one. Of course, by then, it won't be profitable for the companies involved. This all goes back to why I forsee a recession in the video game world.

But the companies don't make their profits from the consoles. They make it from the licensing. They only charge a lot when the console first comes out because they can. Once the initial surge is gone, they drop the prices so that they can broaden the game buying population. Consoles routinely sell for below cost, but a person often only has to buy 2 or 3 games before this loss is made up. Any games purchased after this become pure profit for the console maker. For instance, I bought both my Gamecube and PS2 for $150. But I have 13 GCN and 15 PS2 games, so both Nintendo and Sony have made a nice profit off of me.

BTW, this is why MS never wanted people to run Linux on the XBOX. If a person buys an XBOX just to run Linux on it, they are getting an underpriced computer and then MS never recoups the money on the games. Not that MS really needs the money, but that is the reasoning behind that.

The Nintendo Gyroscope controller sounds like the only reason to buy a new gen, and even that is extremely sketchy.

Then M$ lost money on me. I bought an Xbox and modded it. I don't own any licensed software although I may buy Ninja Gaiden Black.

Ditto with PS2, I have one real game though, Ace Combat 04 cause I got it cheap. GC however I bought for I think 200$ plus I bought several games including an imported Soul Calibur II since I was such a huge fan of SC I couldn't wait several months for it to be released here.

Ever since 2d games were abandoned, my lust for gaming has waned. I probably have more fun on my GBA SP and DS than I do on my cube, and that's just sad.

I don't know why, but it seems like there's a million more crappy 3d games than there were 2d games.

AtmaWeapon wrote:
I don't know why, but it seems like there's a million more crappy 3d games than there were 2d games.

That's most likely due to the increased volume of software being published for new systems. The market was able to solidly support three consoles this past generation, as opposed to the previous one where Sega's saturn stopped being supported halfway through, and then the Genesis and SNES generation had no viable third console.

I do recall from the 16-bit generation looking over my Nintendo Power magazines and seeing tons of 2D side scrollers, brawlers, fighters etc. that did not look as though they were worth playing. And then even NPs rating system would rate these games at the most in the mediocre level.

AtmaWeapon wrote:I don't know why, but it seems like there's a million more crappy 3d games than there were 2d games.

If you've ever downloaded one of those humongous packs of ROMs you'd be reminded of how many shitty games there were.

There's crappy 3D games and there's crappy 2D games. Each system has it's fair share of s**t. And yes, there are more bad 2D games, but only because 2D has been around longer and doesn't take as much money.

I haven't posted in this thread before because it's hard for me to come up with a convincing argument. A part of me agrees with you, but another part just wants another GTA or Prince of Persia. But I do agree with the idea that games are becoming less 'fresh'. More companies are relying on improving what they've already had a success with, hench there being more series' these days.

There are fresh games, of course, but they're few and far between. Beyond Good & Evil was one, and it failed. Sands of Time was another, and it did amazingly. And, of course, if it does well, it gets a sequel (in this case a rushed, buggy sequel that doesn't live up to the prequels' name, despite what all the reviews say). But it's too late - we've already experienced the feeling of something new, and with the sequel it no longer feels like that. We're just going through the motions now, and I guess that we've run out of things to innovate with.

If you could make a brand new game with no restrictions, what would you do? It's hard to think of anything new or original, isn't it? If I had the opportunity, I'd make a GTA-style game with the acrobatics of Prince of Persia, but even then I'm just taking something old and pretending to make it new by adding a twist to it. It may end up being a good game, but it wouldn't be original. That's what's missing from games these days, and sadly I don't think it's coming back any time soon.

I don't think the problem lies with how we play games. I think it's just that with all the games that have come out in the last 25 years, a lot of the good ideas have been used up. It is just gunna get progressively harder to think up something new and refreshing.

Darth Marsden wrote:There are fresh games, of course, but they're few and far between. Beyond Good & Evil was one, and it failed. Sands of Time was another, and it did amazingly.

Sands of Time did well enough to get a sequel, but it didn't do amazingly well. It's price dropped just like BG&Es did shortly after being released. One thing that helped it do a little better was that it was based on a known franchise.

vegeta1215 wrote:Sands of Time did well enough to get a sequel, but it didn't do amazingly well. It's price dropped just like BG&Es did shortly after being released. One thing that helped it do a little better was that it was based on a known franchise.

theplustwo wrote:Methinks your hindsight glasses are a bit rose-colored. There were TONS of shitty 16 bit games, in fact I'd warrant more of them than there are shitty 3D games, because they are easier to crank out. Just look at the GBA's game library. You don't see Disney bothering to make "That's So Raven!" for the GCN, but they've made two (count 'em) games for the GBA.

If you've ever downloaded one of those humongous packs of ROMs you'd be reminded of how many shitty games there were.

You know, I've actually heard that at least one of the GBA Kim Possible games is a surprisingly solid platformer. I've never played it though. Sometimes ya never know :P