VG247 Forum » The VG247 forum

1. monkeygourmet
   Member

   I'm becoming more and more confused and upset between my idea of future technology and how it can help us, and large corporate ideals regarding the 'best way' technology is to be applied...

   There are many facets to this story, but I'll briefly focus on the gaming side of things...

   After E3 2012, my feelings of separation between the games I enjoy and the services that supply them have become more and more apparent.

   My brief history regarding gaming is as such:

   ALL GAMING CONSOLES I CAN POSSIBLY AFFORD!!! :)

   This is including MS, Nintendo, PS, and all the retro consoles and Pc's from Comodore 64 to Atari ST (my fav)...

   Anyway, the main problem I have is this weird 'snowball' effect feeling of marketing and advertising that seems to be prevalent within newer releases and future gaming technology.

   My beef...:

   We seem to be accelerating towards some kind of media enabled, always online gaming structure that absolutely no one I personally know wants to be involved in...

   No one wants DRM, online only, DLC or any other bullshit marketing structure that enables companies to have ultimate control over a medium that is supposed to ensure freedom of thought and escapism...

   Likewise for movies and tv shows (I have just bought and stocked a media center because I cannot access everything I want to watch on Netflix)...

   Now, looking at the start of this problem from my perspective is the perception of the average gamer. Especially before the 'casual' revolution...

   Gamers used to be labeled as 'lazy', 'loners', 'male!', 'nerds', etc...

   Plus many more negative names... But, in actual fact, gamers I knew were;

   Family members, Musical Artists, Programmers, Children, Girlfriends and partners (shock horror), Artists.. Etc...

   So.............

   Gaming to me has always encompassed this enclusive possibilities.

   But, now apparently, we want;

   Always on internet connection
   DRM protection (that pirates will always get around)
   Social games (that will sucker in new paying players)
   A focus on 'social' connecting (that no one actually wants)

   Now,

   The problem is the combination of pure genius from certain developers being absolutely steamrolled by the collective bullshit being enforced from Corporate collectives....

   I was so looking forward to the Wii U... Until I saw that god awful presentation by the company elites at NIntendo E3... Now I just feel sick regarding the next gen.

   I only hope Sony and MS really pump some power into their upcoming systems and relax their focus on media streaming etc.... But that is not looking likely.

   Anyway, my real question is...

   Are we making a collective choice regarding the future of our technological advancements or are we quickly advancing towards a corporate goal of media control...

   Posted 11 months ago #

2. freedoms_stain
   Moderator

   I'm going to make the same choice I made last gen. PC as primary, see how the consoles go and then make a decision.

   I had a PS2 from launch, in its 1st year I had like 2 or 3 games for it, realistically I could have waited a year (or more) and got one when there were actually a decent number of games to choose from. I got an N64 fairly early on and never had a massive number of games for it because they just didn't appeal to me vs what was available on Playstation at the time.

   I pretty much see any console hardware launch like this now. Better to wait and see what's worth my time instead of holding on to an expensive ornament for a year to find out if it was actually worth buying. PC has a constant stream of titles available and upgrading hardware doesn't have an impact on that flow unlike consoles where we start to see this slowdown of new ideas as one generation fizzles out then we have to wait while production trickles up to a heavier flow on the new hardware.

   Posted 11 months ago #

3. DSB
   Member

   Put briefly: Same shit, different day.

   Few executives have any kind of relationship with the people making their stuff, or the people they mean to sell to.

   That has defined the corporate-public relationship, and the corporate-creative relationship for the better part of a century if you ask me.

   The music industry has all but imploded because of it. The games industry may still be pulling some good numbers, but once the market peaks, which it likely will within the next 50 years, I think the smarter businesses will prevail, and the guys with their heads up their own ass, will go the way of the music executive ditto.

   For such a young industry, I think games are heading in entirely the right direction. It took a long while for musicians to break free, but indie is a serious platform at this point, and I think crowdfunding is getting a massive boost from an industry run by mostly lazy publishers, who can't even pretend to care as much as an independent studio.

   Posted 11 months ago #

4. OlderGamer
   Moderator

   I agree 100% with Freedom here.

   PC is the best choice for a primary platform. Wait on consoles, see how things sort out and what each brings to the table. By waiting you get a lower price, the bugs are worked out, the game selection is stronger, and all of the while your still playing new games and old favs on a PC.

   I also agree with DSBs on "Put briefly: Same shit, different day."

   That sums it up pretty nice. Esp where consoles are concerned. Your going to play what they want, how they want you to, paying the price they want it to be. Your choices are play in that sandbox or not. The platform holders have all of the power.

   PC indies really bring a new dynamic to the equation. And not just the smallest of indies either. Devs come in all sizes on PC, and can find a niche for themself. On PC smaller dev studios can thrive(look at Runic games, Torchlight). I really feel like as console gens move forward only the biggest studios pushing the biggest franchises will survive.

   Thats great if all you want are CoD, Gears, etc. But what if you want something different? Take a look at Dungeon Deffenders. that is a very cool little game. But 90% of its sales have come on PC. Yet the game is on PS3 and xb360. And with the cut the console guys get from each sale and DLC, it really isn't worth it for them to get supporting their game. On the PC it thrives and the DLC flow is way ahead of its console release. I was reading that Trendy isn't going to be able to continue to support the game with DLC on console.

   Next gen is just going to get worse from that type of perspective. More franchise releases. More expensive hardware and games, while a significant focus on "services".

   Long story short, game on PC. Let the next gen sort itself out. Buy a console after it has been out two or three years.

   Posted 11 months ago #

5. DSB
   Member

   I'm not sure that Runic Games are the best example, considering that they sold to a publisher within a year of releasing Torchlight.

   I think companies like Riot Games and CCP are examples of developers going their own way and showing publishers a thing or two.

   Ultimately an independent developer has a lot more freedom to seek new business models, and build those around games that don't have to be sliced and diced until they fit a certain demographic. Which it usually only does on paper anyway.

   Of course, indies of a certain size usually depend on either venture capital, or publishing deals (Obsidian and Insomniac being case and point) so it's never truly black and white.

   Ultimately though, I think it must be more creatively rewarding to make those decisions for yourself, as a developer.

   Posted 11 months ago #

6. back_up
   Member

   is PS3

   Posted 11 months ago #

7. fearmonkey
   Member

   @monkeygourmet - I think MS and Sony releasing moderately improved consoles has always been a possibility since the Wii came out and took off. I think Epic and Ubisoft has been banging the next gen drums to get MS and Sony dancing to the beat, because they were probably planning on moderate upgrades, especially MS. I think Square released their demo for the same reasons.

   If MS and Sony did this, developers would start again focusing attention on the PC and that helps MS to a degree but does nothing for Sony. This would be a mistake. Move didn't do that well, Kinect did very well, but the enthusiasm for the product is declining game-wise. That scenario would be the best thing that could happen for PC gaming.

   I have always bought one console at launch, then maybe the others later. I bought a Playstation, Dreamcast, Xbox, PS2, and a 360. I never bought a PS3 as it was very expensive and it wasn't graphically superior to the 360, and i didn't care about blu-ray.

   I find myself wondering if I may choose what Freedom and Oldergamer are talking about, focusing on PC, and then seeing what is the best console after both have been out. It depends on how hyped Sony and MS can get me, Nintendo's Wii-u launch was extremely disappointing to me, and I don't see myself buying it this christmas.

   If these are true next gen machines, I'll probably give in and get one. If they are moderate improvements, I'll wait and stick to PC for awhile. I want to be excited by the next gen, I hope MS and Sony do not disappoint.

   Posted 11 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.