The great video game 'crumple' of 201x?

A large part of movie box office sale are from people who just want to go to the movies to see anything. It is the social aspect of going to the movies that gets a lot of people there, not what is actually playing. The amount of people who go to the game store to go pick up a new game without a specific one in mind is a considerably smaller market than that of movies.
So while the are somewhat similar on the production end, the consumption end is quite different.


On a side note, I could never wrap my head around:
A: "want to go see a movie?"
B: "what's on?"
A: "I don't know."

Quote:

---

The amount of people who go to the game store to go pick up a new game without a specific one in mind is a considerably smaller market than that of movies.

---

I go to two different Gamestops at least once a week to talk to my two favorite girls :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VeloZer0

A large part of movie box office sale are from people who just want to go to the movies to see anything. It is the social aspect of going to the movies that gets a lot of people there, not what is actually playing. The amount of people who go to the game store to go pick up a new game without a specific one in mind is a considerably smaller market than that of movies.
So while the are somewhat similar on the production end, the consumption end is quite different.


On a side note, I could never wrap my head around:
A: "want to go see a movie?"
B: "what's on?"
A: "I don't know."

---

Oh, fo' sho. I would never pay to go see some movie I didn't know about and planned on seeing.

I can see the argument about the PS3 and 360 being somewhat protected by the fact they've already got a big base of people who know what they like and will continue to support it. But depending on the level of investment into Move and Natal, will it be enough?

I mean, by this point in a console cycle we'd be expecting the next ones to be on the horizon - but instead we have motion control. Are new consoles further away? (I would wager so, seeing as these two still feel so young and there's clearly still a lot of potential in them) But if they are, these things are pretty likely to be sidelines; they require the consoles themselves to work, and they have nowhere NEAR the clout the Wii does as a brand name. They've obviously seen pretty huge investment, but I can't help thinking of the 32x.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF

I can see the argument about the PS3 and 360 being somewhat protected by the fact they've already got a big base of people who know what they like and will continue to support it. But depending on the level of investment into Move and Natal, will it be enough?

I mean, by this point in a console cycle we'd be expecting the next ones to be on the horizon - but instead we have motion control. Are new consoles further away? (I would wager so, seeing as these two still feel so young and there's clearly still a lot of potential in them) But if they are, these things are pretty likely to be sidelines; they require the consoles themselves to work, and they have nowhere NEAR the clout the Wii does as a brand name. They've obviously seen pretty huge investment, but I can't help thinking of the 32x.

---

That's what I'm thinking, I mean it's so much money to launch a new product, the amount of marketing they're going to have to do to push these things out there, especially if they want to actually compete with the Wii, on top of having retailers stock these things in their already crowded space.

I remember when they announced the Wii/PS3/360 for E3... I felt it was too soon then and I would totally feel it's too soon now. This generation had so many hiccups, they owe us at least a couple more years in it.

GTA: V will rise above motion control and single handedly save the gaming industry. EA will still be a pain in the ass.

(This feels like one of those “In the year 2000” things, except I’m not funny).

I don't think we will have a gaming slouch. Cause even despite the motion controls which is awesome for games like Mario Kart. Smash Bros Brawl didn't require motion control. Mario Galaxy and New Super Mario Bros used it minimally. Metroid Prime incorporated it well. No More Heroes used it well. The Conduit controlled well, though the rest was meh. Muramasa didn't require motion controls. Monster Hunter Tri is one of Wii's biggest games and came with a Classic Controller.

I could keep going on with some more games I enjoy on my Wii, but essentially my point is that while there is plenty of crap and shovel ware that captures the casual friendly market... there are still those good games that use it minimally, correctly, or not at all.

Don't get me wrong, I love my PS3(A WHOLE LOT), but since Monster Hunter Tri, Mario Galaxy 2 coming, Sin and Punishment 2, Arc Rise Fantasia, Metroid Other M... I don't really have a PS3 title on my (personal) radar, it's dominated by Wii games, that I know will use Motion Control correctly(Or not at all).

THE JACKEL

All this looks like to me is some guy seeing a way to make a prediction, throw some history in, make some conjectures, and then wait to see if he can say "I told you all!" in the future.

Oh, and there's the added bonus of giving people an opportunity to piss. A lot.

What did you think industry analysis was? :D

It'll most likely be something like the second option. It fails, nobody cares, big deal.

Although I do agree that it's retarded to go back to less buttons, like some sort of devolution of gaming.

Sorry, but I just don't buy the doomsaying about a new crash of any significance. A few points

I. There's not an overflow of consoles right now. Around the '83 crash there were tons of consoles. There not only was no quality control (like what Nintendo did with the NES quality seal thing), but different manufacturers constantly made knock offs that could interchangeable play games of other consoles and the like. Consumers didn't know what to buy and didn't care. Now the worst you can do is be confused by Wii vs 360 vs PS3 or the 53 versions of the DS Nintendo has out.

II. Gaming is less of a niche market now. I think it could be sustained entirely by the mid-to-core players without the casuals feeding money at all. The hardcore crowd of '83 was a small group of nerds compared to the fairly mainstream gamer averaging 35 years-old today. If shovelware saturation drives away the casuals it will make little difference except put a tad less money into the pockets of the developers.

Conclusion
Casuals are good. They add dollars to the development of "serious" games for the core players. Developers can sell tons of copies of games that cost next to nothing to make to the casuals. If the casuals bail on gaming the budgets might be tighter, but the focus will also be tighter. Knowing that the core gamers are the ones keeping the industry afloat, developers will start zeroing in on those gamers even more than they do now and be more reticent to throw a few bucks at the next "Carnival Adventures" game that gets pitched to them.

^ I agree with nearly everything you're saying (as usual), in fact this is exactly what I'm hoping will happen, but you have to admit the casuals is the only source of income right now for Nintendo. I don't think they could go back to building up that Nintendo class of products while coaxing EA, Activision and Ubisoft to make all the same games they are on Playstation and XBox on their system. Hell, it would take them to make another console. You could argue they may be getting ready for it now with new Golden Sun, Metroid, Pokemon, etc. but... I don't know.

What makes you think casual money is going to develop 'hardcore' products? If I was raking in money from a new market why on earth would I re-invest it into my old market with a much lower ROI. More likely money coming in for casual is being re-invested into casual. If what you said was true the Wii would have a 'hardcore' line up that put the others to shame.

I don't see this casual money helping hardcore gamers at all. The only benefit I can see is increasing sales of consoles to lower the per unit cost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

^ I agree with nearly everything you're saying (as usual), in fact this is exactly what I'm hoping will happen, but you have to admit the casuals is the only source of income right now for Nintendo. I don't think they could go back to building up that Nintendo class of products while coaxing EA, Activision and Ubisoft to make all the same games they are on Playstation and XBox on their system. Hell, it would take them to make another console. You could argue they may be getting ready for it now with new Golden Sun, Metroid, Pokemon, etc. but... I don't know.

---

I highly disagree with their only income being casuals. I would hardly consider myself casual, and I certainly give a lot of money to Nintendo. Secondly, the people buying every iteration of the DS (I own original DS, Lite, and DSi) are certainly not casual gamers either. There are also some rare but very awesome other games, like Monster Hunter Tri, or Muramasa: The Demon Blade, which are exceptional games, for any console.

When it boils down to it, casual really only make them money on the system. Very few, to literally no one, is buying most of this trash. I know many casual gaming people that own Wii's, that buy 1, maybe 2 games a year.

THE JACKEL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ljkkjlcm9

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

^ I agree with nearly everything you're saying (as usual), in fact this is exactly what I'm hoping will happen, but you have to admit the casuals is the only source of income right now for Nintendo. I don't think they could go back to building up that Nintendo class of products while coaxing EA, Activision and Ubisoft to make all the same games they are on Playstation and XBox on their system. Hell, it would take them to make another console. You could argue they may be getting ready for it now with new Golden Sun, Metroid, Pokemon, etc. but... I don't know.

---

I highly disagree with their only income being casuals. I would hardly consider myself casual, and I certainly give a lot of money to Nintendo. Secondly, the people buying every iteration of the DS (I own original DS, Lite, and DSi) are certainly not casual gamers either. There are also some rare but very awesome other games, like Monster Hunter Tri, or Muramasa: The Demon Blade, which are exceptional games, for any console.

When it boils down to it, casual really only make them money on the system. Very few, to literally no one, is buying most of this trash. I know many casual gaming people that own Wii's, that buy 1, maybe 2 games a year.

THE JACKAL

---

I don't think Bolivar meant that casuals are literally Nintendo's only source of income, but on the Wii they might as well be. If the casual market were to disappear then they'd be left without a lot of license fees for the shovelware crap a lot of casuals are prone to buying (and which don't need to sell much to make a high return), almost no one buying the next iteration of Wii Fit or Sports, and without the install base of hardcore gamers required to support the system alone. Throw in a lack of interest in providing more hardcore titles among third parties (especially given the relative inability of any of the ones that are there to sell) and I really think that the best Nintendo could hope for if the casual market imploded is that the Wii would end up stuck in the same boat the Gamecube was at the end of the last gen; Nintendo being the only one supporting it with any titles even marginally worth playing.