You know the drill. Italics is the emailer. Regular text is my wonderful self.
With regards to your newest article, “Going the Wrong Way”.
Your question about the New York Times seems to conflate quality with popularity, I was wondering if that was what you were trying to convey.
He is referring to the comment that I made that it is the New York Times Best Selling List, not the New York Times Best Written List. I point this out to illustrate that best written does not translate to best selling.
Which list does a writer wish to be on? The Best Seller list or on some ‘Best Written’ list? I guarantee you that every writer would prefer to be John Grisham or Stephen King instead of… well… someone who has to work another job to get by.
It is not different from the “Games Industry”. I guarantee you a publisher or even a game developer would prefer to have a best selling game as opposed to a best reviewed game. Best selling means job security, more money, and more say on what they want to do. What good is it to put out products that are ‘best reviewed’ if you still go out of business?
We call them ‘sales charts’ but they are more like ‘customer charts’. We can see which way the customers are going.
Your second question is simple enough to answer. He can complain about sales because he is not responsible for them. He cannot change it without making the issue known.
I confess I do not fully remember my ‘second question’. But if you are involved with the development of a product, you become part of the process that is responsible for its sales.
You then go on to view writing as an industry, which is only half true.
Why is it half true? The last I checked there was clearly a book industry and other areas for ‘writers’ such as writers for TV, movies, and other areas.
“Many gamers still really like the old games, and many think they are superior to the new games.” Replace “many gamers” with “me and a small set of gamers high on nostalgia”.
Beep beep, back up the Truth Mobile! What good would it do for me to inject my personal opinion on the business matters?
Do the old Atari games still sell today? They do. Do old NES, 16-bit, and other such games still sell today? They do. We see them on the Virtual Console, on the GBA, and other areas.
This generation we have witnessed many ‘remakes’ or ‘returns’ to this type of old gaming. Remakes of Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy. Retro sequels such as Megaman 9, Punch-Out!!, Contra 4, New Super Mario Brothers, among others.
All these games come from the era that video described as ‘simplistic’ and ‘bad graphics’. These games still sell today and are being ‘updated’ today. Nintendo’s flagship game for this holiday season, New Super Mario Brothers, has none of the ‘grand story’ he advocates for but comes from those ‘simplistic’ mechanics he didn’t like.
Massive best sellers like Wii Sports, Wii Fit, and Brain Age are very similiar to those ‘old games’ as well.
I don’t think I was out of line for stating that many gamers still like the old games today. Sales data show this is true. Today’s huge best sellers are not coming from ‘grand story’ games as they are coming from those ‘simplistic’ games that do not try to tell a grand story.
I’m actually surprised someone thought that line was off. I thought it was accepted by all by now.
You then move on to your favorite strawman, assuming the people you disagree with hate the Wii.
People disagree with me all the time, but I never said that makes them ‘Wii haters’. What makes people ‘Wii haters’ is truly actual anger coming from them. How could anyone have missed all the “End of gaming” posts and articles about Wii’s games such as Wii Fit? But it is not so much that they attack the Wii as is that they attack the Expanded Audience.
Why am I sensitive to this? It is because I am a member of that Expanded Audience. I’m tired of being called ‘casual’ or ‘stupid’ or ‘retarded’. I mock the hardcore because they keep attacking the new customers for no apparent reason. Then they hold up being ‘hardcore’ as some aristocratic gamer, so sophisticated, so elite. It is absurd.
As you might have reflexively guessed, I am a Narratologist, and the only next-gen console I have is the Wii and a DS. Narratologists want gaming to have a unique take on the story, which is what the video mentions and why I own a Wii. Games are not movies, and many Narratoligists know this. Many games developers, unfortunately, do not.
I still don’t understand why a Narratologist would only own a Wii and DS.
You then engage in a hilarious bit of double standards. You want everyone to treat gaming like a movement, but then in this article it is soley a business.
In YOUR standards, you treat ‘movement’ and ‘business’ as two different things. In MY standards, I treat ‘movement’ and ‘business’ as the same. They are not exclusive.
I haven’t gone into more detail in this, and perhaps I should, but most successful businesses are a ‘movement’. This is why they have mission statements. The mission statement of a business is not ‘make money’. It is to do something. The entrepreneur is practically a head of a movement in what he does or is trying to do.
I differentiate ‘movement’ from ‘industry’ because most talk I hear in the “Games Industry” doesn’t talk about customers. There is lots of chatter about ‘business models’, ‘reducing cost’, but you don’t really hear too much about the customer. When something comes along like digital distribution, which the “Games Industry” really wants, they actively don’t give a damn if customers don’t like it. I keep hearing from those within the “Games Industry” respond to griping customers on the Internet to “Shut up! This is the future. You best get used to it.”
Perhaps a better word than ‘industry’ should have been used. Perhaps ‘milking’ or ‘cheese’.
You hate the 360, PS3, and most current popular games, and yet you say the consumers choice cannot be bad.
I don’t hate the 360 or PS3. In the same way, I don’t hate the PS2, Xbox, or PS1. I also don’t hate the N64 or Gamecube.
Those systems just weren’t for me. They did nothing to interest me. I stopped being a console gamer. DS and Wii brought me back into gaming for the reasons like touch screen and motion control games. These things felt new and fresh to me. They felt interesting. I’m a member of that Expanded Audience, and I would imagine that other Expanded Audience members bought the DS and Wii for similar reasons.
I appreciate games like Halo, Grand Theft Auto, and others like them. I can see why people like them. I’m not making fun of people who like games like Halo. But I am attacking the notion that all games must be like Halo and that something like Halo, or Grand Theft Auto, is the only true standard of gaming. Bullsh*t!
When I read or watch interviews of journalists with Nintendo executives, I just want to throw a chair at the interviewer. It is the same exact questions all the time, almost zombie like. “So Reggie, what games do you have that are like Halo?” “So Iwata, what mature games like ‘Grand Theft Auto’ do you have coming out?” You never, ever, hear a Sony and Microsoft execs asked what games that are coming out that are like Wii Sports or like Wii Fit.
One common response going around after E3 2009 was: “Nintendo should not even bother coming to E3,” because Nintendo was showing off games like NSMB Wii and Wii Sports Resort. My jaw just drops open when I hear these things. I’m not the one who wants to excommunicate Nintendo because they make games that appeal to those outside the ‘hardcore’ crowd .
Now, I am a PC gamer (though not lately since PC gaming has gotten pretty sad). I love Epic’s games such as Unreal Tournament and all. I like Quake. I am a HUGE RTS fan and strategy game fan.
There are Next Gen games I do like. I like the ‘racing’ games on them. I did enjoy Gears of War in co-op. The thing that repels me from the PS3 and 360 is the controller. For reference, the PS1 and N64 controllers also repelled me. I just don’t like those controllers except for some games (like racing).
When I look at many of the 360 and PS3 titles, I see neutered PC games. I can’t understand why someone would want to play FPS games with such an inferior interferace such as the dual sticks when a mouse works so much better. As for RTS or strategy games on those consoles, hah. I, personally, prefer to play my PC games on my PC.
Am I committing a double standard here by preferring the PC gaming side even though the console gaming side sells better? If you see how I interpret the business of the HD twins, the answer will be no. I interpret the entire PlayStation Franchise as “casualizing” (using the hardcore lingo here) PC games. The Xbox franchise, which was a response to the PlayStation’s success, is literally PC games in the living room. All the big games on these systems have roots in PC gaming. Halo was going to be published on the Mac. Fallout 3 is the sequel to games on the PC. Bioshock is reminiscent of PC games of the two System Shocks. The ‘online features’ are features ripped from PC gaming.
One could say that Sony was disrupting PC gaming. In fact, that is likely why Microsoft got into the console business in the first place.
The Xbox and Playstation console series have made PC gaming much easier and more affordable to the masses. This is the reason for games selling so much more on the consoles than on the PC.
So when ‘hardcore’ complain that the Wii appeals to ‘casual gamers’, they don’t realize that the PlayStation and Xbox way was nothing but ‘casualizing’ the PC gaming experience.
I don’t hate Next Gen games. I just hate playing PC games with a console controller (and these controllers really are ridiculous).
When I put on my business hat, consoles disrupting PC gaming was a clever move back in the 90s, but currently they are overshooting customers. Red ink is being spilled everywhere. It is simply unsustainable.
I will tell you what I do hate.
I hate the anti-customer attitude that the “Games Industry” has become. I hate it when people attack customers because their ‘baby’ didn’t sell.
I hate DRM that is currently being marketed as ‘digital distribution’.
I hate it when consoles cost $600 and has features that have nothing to do with gaming.
I hate ‘progress of game consoles’ being equated only to PC gaming.
I hate features that PC gaming invented are being raided and given credit with the Xbox or PlayStation.
I hate consoles not lasting twenty years like our old cartridge friends. I hate consoles not even lasting through the generation they were bought!
I hate the coverage on Nintendo. Every story comes from a position of, “Is Nintendo doomed?” I hate it because it prevents people from realizing what an incredible business that is Nintendo. No other company on Earth has the same profits and employee ratio as Nintendo.
I really hate it when people attack the Expanded Audience. What punks who believe I shouldn’t get to enjoy console gaming! They have two consoles that does everything they want. The third puts out some games for them, yet they demand ALL games must be made for their tastes. WTF is with that? Why must every game console be exactly the same?
“One has to be so drunk on their own ‘vision’ to believe that.” This statement is hilarious in it’s hypocrisy.
Why is it hypocrisy?
You are wrong in your control metaphor as well. Authors and directors appeal to the consumer’s imagination, just as game designer’s do. I can’t cook a fish in Zelda, so don’t say I have control over a game. I only have control over what the developer lets me have control over, and hiding that disconnect under suspension of disbelief is what creates a good story.
I did not say that. This is what Orson Scott Card said.
I used Orson Scott Card as an example because he is very recognizable to gamers (being a sci-fi writer and all), he has written best sellers, he has written for a video game magazine, and he has worked with game developers on several games such as Monkey Island.
Card was a good example to use as he addressed the video’s question head on and he has the experience, in both books and gaming, to answer it.
Narratologists are not confused, we are speaking to a different sector of the market. You are a gameplay purist, but don’t be so arrogant to say everyone plays games for the same reason you do.
Well, where are all these ‘narratology’ best sellers? I suppose you could list ‘Grand Theft Auto’ as one. When I played it, I would just see how long I could run from the cops or explore the city. I ignored the story, and I wouldn’t be surprised if many others did as well. But lets say that most people bought the game for its ‘narrative’.
What other games are bought for its ‘narrative’? Halo? No. Gears of War? No. Call of Duty? No. You could throw in Bioshock, the latter Final Fantasy games, and Fallout 3 I suppose.
I see almost all the best sellers as non-narratology games: Wii Sports, Wii Fit, NSMB, Nintendogs, Brain Age, and so on.
I believe the source of the ‘Narratology’ games is not coming from consumer demand but from massive egos within the “Games Industry”. I’ll even use a Nintendo game as an example: Metroid: Other M. Do Metroid fans, or even non-Metroid fans, want a game that focuses on Samus’s relationship to Adam, a character no one cares about? To this day, I still don’t know if the game is 2d or 3d. But boy, they gush over how amazing the ‘narrative’ is going to be. Well, we’ll see how the game eventually sells. My prediction is that it won’t be too good.
People only skip the window dressing when it breaks the suspension of disbelief in a game. It is still a matter of design, and not inherently evil.
Or maybe because people don’t play games for the narrative?
Everything else in your article is exactly what the Narratologists have been saying.
That was a blog post, not an article. If it was an article, it would be like fifty pages long (no joke!).
Ironically, I haven’t linked the blog and the main site together yet. So there are people on the main site who think I must be dead. Then there are those who read the blog and think my blog posts are the articles.
Anyway, if my blog post was what Narratologists have been saying, why exactly are you emailing me in the first place? I do not understand.
Overall, the quality of your arguments would improve if you examined your premises more, and stopped using the juvenile strawman “I’m gonna say everyone who disagrees with me hates the Wii.”
I don’t think you understand what my premises are. Now, this could be my fault in that I am being unintentionally confusing or not being clear.
It would also help if you maintained some consistency in the divide on your opinion between “games as industry” vs “games as artistic movement”.
I never said ‘games as artistic movement’. By ‘movement’, I referred to the EXPANSION of gaming. Ever since Pong, there was a type of ‘movement’ everyone had to spread gaming as far and as wide as possible and to explore new types of games. This occurred on consoles, on computers, and in the arcades.
‘Movement’ did not mean ‘Console War’. It meant that the consoles were trying to expand and experiment. Now, there were consoles released that were trying to do ‘console war’ and there was some ‘Console War’ right before the console market collapsed in America.
When the NES came around, it was designed for the purpose of picking up the pieces from the crash and expand gaming. In the 16-bit generation, all the consoles began to switch to ‘Console War’, and we have been stuck in ‘Console War’ hell until the DS and Wii. With both, Nintendo ‘surrendered’ to the Console War and restarted the mission of expansion and exploration.
This is what I meant by ‘movement’: to make new customers. By ‘industry’, I mean the focus is to ‘milk current customers’. I don’t like the ‘industry mindset’. I am tired of franchises being milked over and over again, of rising costs for the consumer, and so on.
I prefer the NES Era over the 16-bit Era due to how shocking and surprising each new year was with the NES. Look at the timeline of games from the beginning of the NES to near its end. It is stunning at how much change occurred with those games. I see a similiarity with the Wii in massive changes like from Wii Sports to Wii Sports Resort. 16-bit did this, somewhat, but it was obviously ‘Console War’ which was fighting over the current market instead of expanding to new ones.
And if you find yourself asking why I wrote this, I wrote this for the same reason you do, at least I think so.
Uh, OK!
:)
Malstrom's Articles News 