Titusfied said:
That isnt entirely true. The video game industry was not in a steep decline directly because of Ataris weak attempts to make better games, there were numerous reasons behind the sales slumps. Aside from the shortage of quality games, there was extremely aggressive marketing of cheaper home computers, combined with an overall weak economy during the mid-80s. Like any introduction of a new and improved technology, there will be relapses in old technology, hence Ataris sales dropping significantly. Now couple this with a poor economy and you suddenly get the claim that Atari royally screwed up the video gaming industry and Nintendo revitalized it. Truth is, it was a matter of various outside constraints that caused this thinking to arise.
Again, this can be directly correlated to the computer industry. I know we are talking about consoles, but in essence, they should be included in this argument. During the time when Atari was floundering around, computer prices became extremely cheaper, and gave consumers the option to connect to a TV, which obviously offered better quality graphics, color, and sound. It was because of this insurgent of quality to the gaming industry, that Atari became sloppy and started releasing potentially huge hits way too early, and it showed in the final product. Perfect example was the E.T. game that was released and sold terribly.
|
You're missing one key element though, Titus. At the time when Atari was in the midst of their heydey, the term videogame "console" didn't really even exist. The terms "computer game system" and "TV game system" were the standard nomenclature for home videogames at the time. The 2600 and 5800 were, in essence, percieved as home computer systems designed primarily for the purpose of gaming. They were lumped right together with conventional computers simply because people didn't know how else to define them. As a result, people saw that they could afford to buy
real computers for much cheaper, and gave up on a type of machine heretofore seen as a shallow toy.
Then Nintendo came along, bringing with it the definition of a "videogame console". They introduced a device that, unlike Atari's hardware, strove to present a pure videogame experience without trying to also be a diet-PC at the same time. Nintendo
created the rift between consoles and computers, allowing people to distinguish between the two, saving the industry from Atari's bumbling hands. Witout the introduction of the NES, the console videogames industry would be in a
very different place today.
Quote:
|
Now, I cant argue that Nintendo didnt up the bar in the console gaming industry, but that wasnt because Atari sucked and Nintendo was God. Nintendo simply saw what had happened to Atari because of computers introducing much higher quality, and like any good business, they adapted and evolved their platform to be competitive. If anyone is going to get the credit for saving the console gaming industry, it has to be home computers. Then again, they were also more than half the downfall for the slump in the console gaming industry.
|
I couldn't disagree more. Home computers had much to do with the downfall of the console industry, simply because Atari wasn't willing to build a machine dedicated solely to idea of games. Nintendo took that chance and it saved console videogames as we know them.
Quote:
Now, I cant speak for S2 and SYG, but I think their thinking was that basically all of Nintendos success is based off of their first generation gaming titles. I agree with you when you said, If it aint broke, dont fix it, but at the same token, it appears as though the old saying You cant teach and old dog new tricks applies to Nintendo as well. I mean, at least Halos success is based off an original idea based in the 21st century, and not some mid-1980s idea that was a hit. Microsoft, to me, seems to be able to keep coming up with great gaming ideas, while Nintendo is literally functioning on one leg, made up of Zelda and Metroid
At least that is the only reason I bought and still own a Gamecube at the present moment. Online gaming was revolutionized by Microsoft, and their games just keep getting better and better. [/End of Microsoft Crusade] 
|
And again, I can't see how it's fair to admonish Nintendo for doing something that works, and at the same time, Microsoft and Sony will be guilty of should they be given another decade with which to do so. As I've already pointed out, Ratchet & Clank will, by the end of this year, have seen four entries in five years, as will Jak and Daxter. GTA has been releasing sequels and updates consistently since 2001. Final Fantasy has seen a new installment on Sony consoles every single year since 1999. Resident Evil has been pumping out new titles non-stop since 1996. Why do these franchises continue to exist? Because they continue to sell.
On top of that, you can't praise Microsoft
too much for releasing a lot of new IPs. It's their first generation. They can't release
anything but new stuff.
And it's not as though Nintendo just sits on their hands and rebuilds the same game over and over again. You can't claim that they don't make new stuff, because that would indicate you haven't
played a lot of the great new games they create. The Pikmin games are
fantastic, Donkey Kong: Jungle Beat is one of a kind, Animal Crossing is a must-own, Paper Mario, F-Zero GX and a large number of great 3rd-party titles like Eternal Darkness, Resident Evil 4, Viewtiful Joe and Baten Kaitos were introduced via Nintendo's console.
Not seeing the merits of Nintendo's library beyond Zelda and Metroid has nothing to do with them, but entirely to do with your own tastes. If those two franchises are the only thing that keeps your interest, that's not the fault of the developer. It's the same way with me and my PS2. I play it, I love it, but I don't own much beyond the three LOK games, the Ratchet games, Silent Hill, Metal Gear Solid and Devil May Cry. A
lot of the Sony library just doesn't do much for me, and in particular, I'm not a giant fan of the controller. Does that mean it's Sony's fault for not catering to my desires? No.
Opinions are opinions, but it just strikes me as a little ridiculous to criticize somebody for doing something that works. Give Sony another decade and just see if they're not still riding the GTA-train. Give Microsoft another ten years and watch as Halo 12 continues to sell into the stratosphere. If they could sustain public interest in those franchises for another decade, you can bet your ass that they'll keep making the games. Nintendo has kept their biggest sellers alive for 20 years. That's not something to be condemned for, that's something to be congratulated on.