Jason SmithThe industry wants to be part of the mainstream - they want the money, and they want the respect. Jason Smith details one way the current state of the industry is preventing mainstream acceptance, and how that could be changed.
Issue 26: Casual Friday - The Cost of Gaming
- Thread starter The Escapist Staff
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Original Comment by: sallizar
Excellent article Jason! Comparing it to DVD makes a lot of sense... I can enjoy rewatching TRON for just $20 (on UMD too if I wanted) in anticpation of Kingdom Hearts II, but it would be a pain in the neck to dredge up an Atari 2600 or an Intellivison to play the classic games... Looks like I'm stuck playing TRON 2.0 on my PC then...
Excellent article Jason! Comparing it to DVD makes a lot of sense... I can enjoy rewatching TRON for just $20 (on UMD too if I wanted) in anticpation of Kingdom Hearts II, but it would be a pain in the neck to dredge up an Atari 2600 or an Intellivison to play the classic games... Looks like I'm stuck playing TRON 2.0 on my PC then...
Original Comment by: Patrick Dugan
http://www.kingludic.blogspot.com
Well, you can play FFIV, as well as most other SNES, GBA, Genesis ect. games for free via emulators and ROM downloads. I don't want to sound like I'm condoning illegal behavior, but I am.
http://www.kingludic.blogspot.com
Well, you can play FFIV, as well as most other SNES, GBA, Genesis ect. games for free via emulators and ROM downloads. I don't want to sound like I'm condoning illegal behavior, but I am.
Original Comment by: LaoTse
Good points, keep this stuff coming. It got me thinking about other barriers that keep gaming from becoming mainstream.
Time- To watch Resident Evil the movie takes 2 hours. To beat Resident Evil the game can take up to 20 hours. Most people will not commit as much time to games and they don't. Also price isn't the only main factor, the complexity of games today makes it difficult for many people to enjoy them (non gamers). Think back 20 years, everyone played Pac Man- it was intuitive and still is today. Same for mario.
Interactive Evolution- People watch & listen to movies, they listen to music. With games you both watch, listen, and interact. The interaction element is still evolving with greater creativity in online play and mechanisms for interaction (N Revolution). People don't mechanically watch or listen (with eyes and ears) to music any differently today then their parents did in the past.
Proprietary Tech & Patents- To this day Nintendo still has patents on the "cross" shaped control pad. No one in music has the patent for drums or the guitar for that matter.
Good points, keep this stuff coming. It got me thinking about other barriers that keep gaming from becoming mainstream.
Time- To watch Resident Evil the movie takes 2 hours. To beat Resident Evil the game can take up to 20 hours. Most people will not commit as much time to games and they don't. Also price isn't the only main factor, the complexity of games today makes it difficult for many people to enjoy them (non gamers). Think back 20 years, everyone played Pac Man- it was intuitive and still is today. Same for mario.
Interactive Evolution- People watch & listen to movies, they listen to music. With games you both watch, listen, and interact. The interaction element is still evolving with greater creativity in online play and mechanisms for interaction (N Revolution). People don't mechanically watch or listen (with eyes and ears) to music any differently today then their parents did in the past.
Proprietary Tech & Patents- To this day Nintendo still has patents on the "cross" shaped control pad. No one in music has the patent for drums or the guitar for that matter.
Original Comment by: neven
An excellent article.
Such a universal does exist, however. It?s called a computer.
There is always such a clamor for a ?digital livingroom,? and ?convergence set-top boxes,? that people forget the power of the computer. Everyone?s got one, and they?ll run games.
As to what the future will be, or should be, that?s another point.
But the computer does exist as this device that anyone can use, and that anyone can write for, without paying the hard-ware owner licencing fees.
An excellent article.
Such a universal does exist, however. It?s called a computer.
There is always such a clamor for a ?digital livingroom,? and ?convergence set-top boxes,? that people forget the power of the computer. Everyone?s got one, and they?ll run games.
As to what the future will be, or should be, that?s another point.
But the computer does exist as this device that anyone can use, and that anyone can write for, without paying the hard-ware owner licencing fees.
Well, you can play FFIV, as well as most other SNES, GBA, Genesis ect. games for free via emulators and ROM downloads. I will not proclaim total innocence, but I would much rather be able to play these games and still support the developers of the product. I may have Dragon Warrior IV working on my PSP, but I'd buy it instead if it was even possible (though technically I do have the cartridge in a box somewhere).
It got me thinking about other barriers that keep gaming from becoming mainstream.Yeah, there are certainly others, but I see those as secondary barriers - or even subdivisions in the mainstream. Even other media have different levels of effort needed to appreciate them - it's a lot easier to listen to pop than jazz, for example, or to read Piers Anthony than George R. R. Martin. Both options still exist in the 'mainstream' though, and neither are inherently better than the other. We've also seen a lot of movement in gaming, especially recently, to make products that are shorter or less complex -
Such a universal does exist, however. It?s called a computer.Don't get me wrong, I love my PC, and you'd have to pry it from my cold, dead hands, but a gaming platform for the mainstream it is not. For one, it still has similar obsolescence problem as consoles - getting an older game to run on a modern PC can be impossible without jumping through ridiculous hoops. I have a copy of Starship Titanic sitting next to me I will probably never get to run without building/finding/buying a PC relic, with a copy of Win95, and playing on that. PCs, at least for gaming, are also way too expensive and complex for the average person.
This could change, but I don't see that trend coming any time soon. We're an elitist bunch, we PC gamers, and it would be a lot more difficult to get us to accept 'dumbing it down for the plebes,' so to speak, than a widespread platform - even a proprietary one.
It got me thinking about other barriers that keep gaming from becoming mainstream.Yeah, there are certainly others, but I see those as secondary barriers - or even subdivisions in the mainstream. Even other media have different levels of effort needed to appreciate them - it's a lot easier to listen to pop than jazz, for example, or to read Piers Anthony than George R. R. Martin. Both options still exist in the 'mainstream' though, and neither are inherently better than the other. We've also seen a lot of movement in gaming, especially recently, to make products that are shorter or less complex -
Such a universal does exist, however. It?s called a computer.Don't get me wrong, I love my PC, and you'd have to pry it from my cold, dead hands, but a gaming platform for the mainstream it is not. For one, it still has similar obsolescence problem as consoles - getting an older game to run on a modern PC can be impossible without jumping through ridiculous hoops. I have a copy of Starship Titanic sitting next to me I will probably never get to run without building/finding/buying a PC relic, with a copy of Win95, and playing on that. PCs, at least for gaming, are also way too expensive and complex for the average person.
This could change, but I don't see that trend coming any time soon. We're an elitist bunch, we PC gamers, and it would be a lot more difficult to get us to accept 'dumbing it down for the plebes,' so to speak, than a widespread platform - even a proprietary one.
neven- Yes, the PC is a bit more universal than consoles, as far as what it will play. But, as Jason said, it's just not for the masses.
I don't know about yours, but my mother has a fear of the "Blue Screen of Death" on her PC. I mean Real Fear. I can't even imagine her trying to install a game and adjusting settings. The barrier to entry is too high. Now, my PS2, I can open the box, take out the game and put it in. Done.
Also, there's another problem which became very apparent to me this past Tuesday evening. After dinner, I was lounging on the couch, in my sweats, spending some quality time with Dragon Quest 8, with my feet up on the ottoman. My friend came in from the computer room where he'd been playing Civ 4, rolling his neck and shaking his hands. He looked at me and said, "Ah! I'm so jealous, you look so comfortable!"
One can never discount the comfort of playing a console versus sitting at a PC. I know some of you out there have carpal tunnel and RSI from playing games on a computer.
I don't know about yours, but my mother has a fear of the "Blue Screen of Death" on her PC. I mean Real Fear. I can't even imagine her trying to install a game and adjusting settings. The barrier to entry is too high. Now, my PS2, I can open the box, take out the game and put it in. Done.
Also, there's another problem which became very apparent to me this past Tuesday evening. After dinner, I was lounging on the couch, in my sweats, spending some quality time with Dragon Quest 8, with my feet up on the ottoman. My friend came in from the computer room where he'd been playing Civ 4, rolling his neck and shaking his hands. He looked at me and said, "Ah! I'm so jealous, you look so comfortable!"
One can never discount the comfort of playing a console versus sitting at a PC. I know some of you out there have carpal tunnel and RSI from playing games on a computer.
Original Comment by: Slartibartfast
Julianne:
It's possible to get RSI from pretty much anything. My aunt got it from gardening (just nitpicking here
)
I agree, the PC is a wonderful thing but even people who are "good" with computers can be startlingly naieve. I spend a lot of time in the "gaming" section of a certain hardware forum, and even there you get a lot of conflicting information: people say things like "if your computer locks up when playing a game it's overheating" which is almost a blatant lie - it could be a million things. The reason PC's are so powerful and useful is that they can do so many different things in different ways, which of course means they are incredibly complex. Notice how as gaming consoles have gotten more powerful and more pc-esque, they have become less stable (x360, anyone?). The only reason your NES ever went wonky was the contacts wearing down, not because the power supply was overheating.
Julianne:
It's possible to get RSI from pretty much anything. My aunt got it from gardening (just nitpicking here
)I agree, the PC is a wonderful thing but even people who are "good" with computers can be startlingly naieve. I spend a lot of time in the "gaming" section of a certain hardware forum, and even there you get a lot of conflicting information: people say things like "if your computer locks up when playing a game it's overheating" which is almost a blatant lie - it could be a million things. The reason PC's are so powerful and useful is that they can do so many different things in different ways, which of course means they are incredibly complex. Notice how as gaming consoles have gotten more powerful and more pc-esque, they have become less stable (x360, anyone?). The only reason your NES ever went wonky was the contacts wearing down, not because the power supply was overheating.
Original Comment by: Thomas Crymes
Great article. I just have one problem:
We all enjoy our little games of Pacman every now and again, but it is just nostalgia. Older games are fine and dandy, but ever since we were little we wanted graphics. I know I did. I fantasized about the day when Dragon's Lair would be a game where I could have total control.
Standardizing Video games won't be possible until the technology reaches a point where there is little point in pushing technology further. The lighting and the physics and teh polygons will be at life-like qualities.
Movies have this luxury, because except for minor changes, motion picture technology has remained unchanged for 40 or 50 years. Even the new digital cameras merely ape what the older technology could do.
Add to that the fact that we are just now starting to get real story tellers behind our games.
Even the games of today are going to be considered zoetropes by future standards, but somewhere along the way, we will reach a point where serious story tellers are flocking to make games (no offense meant to current game artists), and at that point the industry will settle and we will have a single format, and there will be rejoicing throughout the land.
Until then, we will have to endure the next console that features real-time physics and lighting... or whatever.
Another person brought up the length of games. People are lazy, and the number of people who want to go back and replay even a 10 hour RPG from 5 years ago will find their time better spent on the 10 hour RPG that was released last week is so small its not even worth counting. I loved Bard's Tale on my Commodore 64. I'll be damned if I'll ever want to play it again. Dungeon mapping is for the young. A quick and simple arcade game from ages past is a different story.
I love playing PGR3 on my 360. Why would I want to go back and play Super Monaco GP on my Sega Genesis, even if I could?
Great article. I just have one problem:
We all enjoy our little games of Pacman every now and again, but it is just nostalgia. Older games are fine and dandy, but ever since we were little we wanted graphics. I know I did. I fantasized about the day when Dragon's Lair would be a game where I could have total control.
Standardizing Video games won't be possible until the technology reaches a point where there is little point in pushing technology further. The lighting and the physics and teh polygons will be at life-like qualities.
Movies have this luxury, because except for minor changes, motion picture technology has remained unchanged for 40 or 50 years. Even the new digital cameras merely ape what the older technology could do.
Add to that the fact that we are just now starting to get real story tellers behind our games.
Even the games of today are going to be considered zoetropes by future standards, but somewhere along the way, we will reach a point where serious story tellers are flocking to make games (no offense meant to current game artists), and at that point the industry will settle and we will have a single format, and there will be rejoicing throughout the land.
Until then, we will have to endure the next console that features real-time physics and lighting... or whatever.
Another person brought up the length of games. People are lazy, and the number of people who want to go back and replay even a 10 hour RPG from 5 years ago will find their time better spent on the 10 hour RPG that was released last week is so small its not even worth counting. I loved Bard's Tale on my Commodore 64. I'll be damned if I'll ever want to play it again. Dungeon mapping is for the young. A quick and simple arcade game from ages past is a different story.
I love playing PGR3 on my 360. Why would I want to go back and play Super Monaco GP on my Sega Genesis, even if I could?
Original Comment by: Slartibartfast
Thomas:
I think you make valid points, but only in terms of certain genres. Racing games benefit immensley from graphical improvements because the point is to be immersive. However, play some Earthworm Jim on a SNES, then try Earthworm Jim 3D on the N64. The first game is a blast, the second is akin to going to the dentist. I agree, we all like pretty graphics, but for me if the gameplay isn't there the visuals do not make up for it. On the flipside, good gameplay can make up for crappy graphics.
Thomas:
I think you make valid points, but only in terms of certain genres. Racing games benefit immensley from graphical improvements because the point is to be immersive. However, play some Earthworm Jim on a SNES, then try Earthworm Jim 3D on the N64. The first game is a blast, the second is akin to going to the dentist. I agree, we all like pretty graphics, but for me if the gameplay isn't there the visuals do not make up for it. On the flipside, good gameplay can make up for crappy graphics.
Original Comment by: Thomas Crymes
I agree with your comments. Good gameplay almost always makes up for crappy graphics. But while you are playing it, isn't some corner of your mind saying, "Man this is good. I wonder how good it would be if I could get identical gameplay with 360 graphics."?
Anyone up for a game of Gunstar Heros?
I agree with your comments. Good gameplay almost always makes up for crappy graphics. But while you are playing it, isn't some corner of your mind saying, "Man this is good. I wonder how good it would be if I could get identical gameplay with 360 graphics."?
Anyone up for a game of Gunstar Heros?
Sure, replaying a game from 5 years ago may not sound great, but what if it was never played in the first place? Some games I would label timeless were released 15+ years ago, and newer generations of gamers simply cannot play them - they don't even have the option. They can still watch Clash of the Titans though - as cheesy and visually unimpressive as it is compared to modern film.
I would also say that gaming technology, with this generation, is probably reaching a visual plateau. Given how the latest games look rendering in realtime, I think we have the visual power available, and are acually suffering more from a lack of tools to make game production cheaper/easier - especially the creation of art assets. Animation techniques even on pre-rendered clusters have yet to get past the Uncanny Valley - that will have to be surmounted before we could possibly need more visual oomph.
I would also say that gaming technology, with this generation, is probably reaching a visual plateau. Given how the latest games look rendering in realtime, I think we have the visual power available, and are acually suffering more from a lack of tools to make game production cheaper/easier - especially the creation of art assets. Animation techniques even on pre-rendered clusters have yet to get past the Uncanny Valley - that will have to be surmounted before we could possibly need more visual oomph.
Original Comment by: neven
I will agree with the above comments about how computers do not seem to engender ease or confidence from certain users.
However, if we?re talking mainstream (and we are), the *smart* thing to do is create a games platform for the PC (Direct X, I am not looking at you)!
Let?s take this example. A decade ago, the internet was going to be huge. If only it could reach the average person. So we had set-top boxes (WebTV) and The Simple Internet For Simple People (AOL).
AOL took over the Time-Warner empire. WebTV fizzled.
In other words, the best path for games to achieve mass market is a PC platform, like AOL: Simple Games For Simple People. (Remember there are far more PCs than consoles.)
System requirements, you say. Hardware problems, you say. Think of Steam, if it had been designed by user-friendly people... It would be brilliant, perfect, like the iPod, only better.
When all things are equal, the PC crushes set-top boxes.
I will agree with the above comments about how computers do not seem to engender ease or confidence from certain users.
However, if we?re talking mainstream (and we are), the *smart* thing to do is create a games platform for the PC (Direct X, I am not looking at you)!
Let?s take this example. A decade ago, the internet was going to be huge. If only it could reach the average person. So we had set-top boxes (WebTV) and The Simple Internet For Simple People (AOL).
AOL took over the Time-Warner empire. WebTV fizzled.
In other words, the best path for games to achieve mass market is a PC platform, like AOL: Simple Games For Simple People. (Remember there are far more PCs than consoles.)
System requirements, you say. Hardware problems, you say. Think of Steam, if it had been designed by user-friendly people... It would be brilliant, perfect, like the iPod, only better.
When all things are equal, the PC crushes set-top boxes.
Original Comment by: Slartibartfast
Thomas:
I do often think about that. I often wish we could get more new 2D games. Gunstar Super Heroes on the GBA is a fantastic looking 2D game (have never played the original, unfortunately) and Castelvania DS is another good example. Street Fighter III: Third Strike also comes to mind. Honestly I like it better when I see a 2d game with bold, beautiful sprites than I do when I come upon *gasp* yet another 3D vista. Yeah, Far Cry was impressive, but nothing is ever going to top the original unreal for me, because at that point it was truely a new experience.
Thomas:
I do often think about that. I often wish we could get more new 2D games. Gunstar Super Heroes on the GBA is a fantastic looking 2D game (have never played the original, unfortunately) and Castelvania DS is another good example. Street Fighter III: Third Strike also comes to mind. Honestly I like it better when I see a 2d game with bold, beautiful sprites than I do when I come upon *gasp* yet another 3D vista. Yeah, Far Cry was impressive, but nothing is ever going to top the original unreal for me, because at that point it was truely a new experience.
Original Comment by: Thomas Crymes
A small place in my heart will fill with warmth if I were to see a kid go back and play an older game given the choice between current gen and older games. Espcecially a game that required a significant time investment. I don't have that kind of optimism.
When I can play a survival horror game and not be able to tell if it was a movie or a video game just by looking at it, then the technology has arrived.
Also, until the people who were avid gamers in the late 80s into the 90s reaches a very mature age, video games will be looked on by the elders in the land as a kids toy. Video games must get established as a legitimate art form. Half-Life was the first game for me that truly merged story and gameplay in an immersive way (although I'm sure someone will challenge me on that). I'm excited to see where everything is going.
A small place in my heart will fill with warmth if I were to see a kid go back and play an older game given the choice between current gen and older games. Espcecially a game that required a significant time investment. I don't have that kind of optimism.
When I can play a survival horror game and not be able to tell if it was a movie or a video game just by looking at it, then the technology has arrived.
Also, until the people who were avid gamers in the late 80s into the 90s reaches a very mature age, video games will be looked on by the elders in the land as a kids toy. Video games must get established as a legitimate art form. Half-Life was the first game for me that truly merged story and gameplay in an immersive way (although I'm sure someone will challenge me on that). I'm excited to see where everything is going.
Jason: Clash of the Titans cheesy? The mechanical owl was NOT cheesy!
One starts to wonder how much "damage" we do to the importance of older games ourselves? We don't even care enough to bother keeping them available for the younger gamers coming along. I had the same thought when I read what you wrote and that got me wondering why. I wonder how much less our hearts would warm to the idea of a "youngster" playing a game older than he if the older games were readily available.
One starts to wonder how much "damage" we do to the importance of older games ourselves? We don't even care enough to bother keeping them available for the younger gamers coming along. I had the same thought when I read what you wrote and that got me wondering why. I wonder how much less our hearts would warm to the idea of a "youngster" playing a game older than he if the older games were readily available.
Original Comment by: Andrea Appel (a.k.a. Alexandra Erenhart)
http://aerenhart.blogspot.com
LOL, what's said in this article is almost the same of what I said in one previous comment...
http://aerenhart.blogspot.com
LOL, what's said in this article is almost the same of what I said in one previous comment...
Original Comment by: chunter
http://www.xanga.com/chunter
Emulation scene aside, I have to admit I think this article is correct.
There have been several attempts to integrate video gaming as described in the article, not just 3DO: Anybody old enough to remember NES clones built into television sets? My neighbors had one! In Japan, Sega liscensed Saturns to be made by/for the other manufacturers that created the parts of their product (JVC, Hitachi, and Yamaha I think...) but that result never made it to the US.
No such product is popular in the Western world, but perhaps you'll recall some of the stuff they can sell in Brazil. Not everybody that plays video games is well-to-do, and as that other segment gets officially recognized, more product will be marketted towards this sector.
We'll know it's begun when those cute TVs with builtin N64's you can play in hotels can be bought over the proverbial counter.
Best wishes
http://www.xanga.com/chunter
Emulation scene aside, I have to admit I think this article is correct.
There have been several attempts to integrate video gaming as described in the article, not just 3DO: Anybody old enough to remember NES clones built into television sets? My neighbors had one! In Japan, Sega liscensed Saturns to be made by/for the other manufacturers that created the parts of their product (JVC, Hitachi, and Yamaha I think...) but that result never made it to the US.
No such product is popular in the Western world, but perhaps you'll recall some of the stuff they can sell in Brazil. Not everybody that plays video games is well-to-do, and as that other segment gets officially recognized, more product will be marketted towards this sector.
We'll know it's begun when those cute TVs with builtin N64's you can play in hotels can be bought over the proverbial counter.
Best wishes
Original Comment by: Funky J
http://www.funkyj.com
Reading this article gave rise to the following questions:
How much was 'going to the films' when it first arrived? How about when it first became popular amongst mass audiences? Is it comparable to where we are with video games?
As to the time factor - how many hours do people spend watching the same movies over and over? I would have seen Starwars (Episode IV) in excess of 30 times... that's over 60 hours of my life used right there.
http://www.funkyj.com
Reading this article gave rise to the following questions:
How much was 'going to the films' when it first arrived? How about when it first became popular amongst mass audiences? Is it comparable to where we are with video games?
As to the time factor - how many hours do people spend watching the same movies over and over? I would have seen Starwars (Episode IV) in excess of 30 times... that's over 60 hours of my life used right there.