Sun 22 Jul 2007
11:47 am
If the words of Dave Perry are to be believed, the overwhelming success of Nintendo's Wii is more comparable to a fleeting love affair than a long-lasting relationship. He is of the opinion that eye candy is the big draw for the vast majority of gamers. According to Perry, once one of the competing consoles has a killer app like Halo, "they'll drop their Wii controllers" and the party will be over.
Such a trend can already be observed in the handheld market. In terms of worldwide sales, the outstanding visuals of the PSP have been a recipe for success. The technically inferior DS has struggled to capture even a small fraction of the user base.
Hold on a sec. I think Perry's absurdity caused my neurotransmitters to act up.
First, let us consider the source. Perry is a has-been famous and important game developer, most notable for Earthworm Jim and its sequel. The founder of Shiny Entertainment has since devoted his efforts to forgettable unique PC games and such licensed drivel gems as Enter the Matrix.
I know that strikethrough sarcasm grows old quickly, so I'll cut to the chase: he's not exactly up there on the Miyamoto-Kojima-Nomura tier. He is the video game equivalent of Paula Abdul. In short, he had a few hits a long time ago and is now relegated to spouting worthless advice to any feeble-minded soul who will take him seriously. His current projects most likely consist of games based on Evan Almighty and Glitter.
The last time I checked, people play games because they want to have fun. Attractive visuals are certainly beneficial, but that's just a small piece of the puzzle. Even a casual glimpse at gaming history shows that the most powerful console of any given generation rarely boasts the largest user base. Rather, such a distinction is usually reserved for consoles with the best variety and quantity of games. A wide array of options gives the consumer more ways to have fun, and at the end of the day, that's all that matters.
Leave a Reply
July 23rd, 2007 at 11:29 am
Wait, isn’t the DS spanking the PSP every which way in worldwide sales? Numbers I found estimated the PSP isn’t even close to DS sales. Am I crazy?
Let me correct what this guy was trying to say: The DS and Wii are selling well because they are interactive. Nintendo is selling systems that exemplify the reason we play videogames: to interact. And the people interacting are a much more diversified user base than with other systems.
It doesn’t hurt that the Wii is always out of stock and thusly causing people to want one. Some other reasons people are buying the Wii: it’s cheap; it’s fun for the whole family (how many mothers are going to sit down and frag on the PS3?); it’s interactive and health nuts can feel less guilty about playing a game where they move around; the games are simply and easy for kids through adults; and it’s kid friendly, which Halo is definitely not! I’m not an analyst or an expert, but get a grip.
And yeah right, so 6-year-old kids everywhere are going to frag enemies rather than play the Wii? You are talking about a totally different demographic man. THERE ARE competing games and people are still buying the Wii. Gears of War on the 360 can damn well compete in terms of your logic, but comparing the Wii to an FPS game with great graphics is like comparing a pickle to remote control (i.e. you can’t do it!). The Wii will continue to sell as long as it has some fun games and is cheap. The Gamecube did the exact same thing. It had party games that everyone could play.
BTW, the term “good visuals” and “good graphics” are hard to quantify because many people consider 3D good and 2D bad, which is lame, lame, lame. There is good and bad in each.
BTW2: if eye candy is the draw, then yeah, let’s pick the system with the least capability in that area. It can’t even output HD. Eye candy is already on the PS3 and 360, the Wii is mediocre at best…
July 23rd, 2007 at 1:11 pm
I was only being sarcastic about the DS/PSP thing. For the future, I should probably make that more apparent. (You’re not the only one who thought I was being serious, so it’s clearly my bad.)
All your points are awesome, and I think any rational person would have no choice but to agree. Personally, his rant sounds like nothing more than a desperate attempt at relevance.
July 24th, 2007 at 4:18 am
“Let me correct what this guy was trying to say: The DS and Wii are selling well because they are interactive. Nintendo is selling systems that exemplify the reason we play videogames: to interact. And the people interacting are a much more diversified user base than with other systems.”
Wait… what? Your use of the word “interactive” is curious at best, Andrew. How is a controller less interactive than any other input device? A differnet means of interaction doesn’t make something more or less interactive.
The touch screen is also not really why the DS is successful. Most people don’t care about the touch screen, they just like that it has fun, appealing 2D games that are entertaining to play and easy to get into. Some of the best selling games on the system barely even use the touch screen.
July 24th, 2007 at 4:19 am
Also, Andrew M, you are out of your goddamned mind if you think Sacrifice, Messiah, and MDK are forgettable. MDK is fantastic, and Sacrifice was almost universally praised as one of the best games of its kind and Messiah… might not have been great, but it had a lot of brilliant ideas and a great sense of humor and is the furthest thing from forgettable.
Perry only ever designed one bad game, and that’s Enter the Matrix.
You also totally misconstrue what Perry said. He absolutely did not imply it’s all about graphics. He said the Wii’s approach input is a step in the right direction, and while it may not be ultimate solution, it does in some ways make games more approachable, while increasingly complicated control pads are a mistake. But he said good graphics bring in gamers. And they do. Why else would any company bother to spend so much money to make their games look good?
July 24th, 2007 at 7:53 am
I thought he was saying that the PSP is owning the DS, so I misunderstood the point of view.
Travis: well by interactive I meant the way in which the wii controller is able to make one more step towards being part of the game. The same way playing Time Crisis with the guncon is more interactive than using a regular controller. The next step of course would be to physically be part of the game somehow. At least for the Wii, it’s the reason I see so many outside the typical demographic playing this thing. As for the DS, I know there are a ton of reasons it is selling well — good support of 2D, fun games for all demographics, but I think the stylus has atleast a little bit to do with its popularity, no? Atleast for a lot of the puzzle games I’ve been reviewing, it helps to have stylus support (works great for RPGs as well).
July 24th, 2007 at 2:37 pm
“Travis: well by interactive I meant the way in which the wii controller is able to make one more step towards being part of the game.”
Did you mean “immersive”, then?
As for the DS, I like the system a lot, but it’s despite the goofy design, not because of it.
I think Perry’s point was very good, frankly. They did not sacrifice graphics for control. They had the control worked out and they sacrificed graphics in favor of selling the system at a mark-up previously unheard of in the industry. It’s not like the controller wouldn’t work if it was attached to a system that was actually worth $250. I think ultimately that will hurt them more than if they gave people their money’s worth with the actual hardware. People like pretty game. It’s not the only thing, but it’s pretty much a fact of the industry.
July 24th, 2007 at 3:45 pm
Immersive is a better term. I’m not sure though that it will hurt them in the long run. It’s just a different set of people (or the same buying all console) who will own the Wii and Nintendo will always have its brand to sell. No one else is going to offer a new Smash or Mario Kart, etc. And no console so far has offered party games quite as fun and accessible as Nintendo… so the graphics aren’t 720p, etc. — I really don’t see that hurting them at all…
As for design, I actually think the PSP is much less user friendly than the DS…
July 24th, 2007 at 7:00 pm
Okay, where to begin…
First of all, I played Messiah and I played Sacrifice. “Forgettable” is not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, I would rank them as being above average. They were not, in my opinion, memorable. The first Earthworm Jim, on the other hand, is a top-shelf game. Once again, that is my opinion. Everyone is entitled to hold an opinion on any subject. Common sense dictates that there will be times when opinions clash. The fact that we disagree on the subject does not make me “out of [my] goddamned mind,” as you so succinctly put it.
Secondly, I did not misconstrue anything. The story began Perry’s point that graphics are the main draw, and I did not take his opinion out of context in any fashion. Granted, I glossed over his PS3 analysis; I did this because his thoughts on the subject brought nothing new to the table. High price? No killer app? Unless I’m mistaken, just about every pundit from every publication that so much as mildly reports on the video game industry has been repeating the mantra ad nauseam. It’s not an original thought and it’s far from newsworthy, so I chose to let it be.
In hindsight, should I have? I don’t think so. Maybe you do. If so, that’s your personal opinion.
As for Andrew (sweet name, by the way), you’re completely right about the user-friendly nature of the DS versus the PSP. I’ve been amazed at how quickly a PSP battery will drain after a relatively short dormant period. And if you just purchased a game requiring a firmware update? Hope you have a DS handy to keep you occupied…
July 25th, 2007 at 4:10 pm
Generally memorable just means something that sticks out as unique in some way. I mean there are a lot of memorable games that aren’t even good just because they dared to be different, or they’re funny or unique. You could raise a lot of complaints about Messiah. It was buggy, wrought with filler, and frustrating due to gameplay that allows for dead-ends. But I’d never think that it wasn’t memorable because to this day there’s really nothing else like it and it sticks out in my mind vividly.
It’s a curious choice of words, but you’ve since explained to me that you only consider a few games per generation memorable, leaving me feeling like the ass. Alzheimer’s is no laughing matter especially at such a young age :p