Next-Gen Wars
by Adam, 02.22.06
Let the battle begin!
I hope this writing will jump-start a decent set of editorials from our respective staff talking about the next generation of consoles (no, no, Nvidia and Ati, don't get up, we're just fine). The reason being of course that the banner on the homepage declaring our intrepid team of game screeders are going to "weigh in" on the pros and cons of the next generation, has been an albatross around our necks. No one, up until now, has done so, ergo without further ado here is my opinion on the subject.
These days American gamers avoid one thing like the plague, and that is Nintendo. Deep down everyone knows that if not for the big N and its green clad mascot, gaming would've been confined to Pong , but since Nintendo's refusal to leave cartridge gaming in the days of the N64, no one has forgiven it. I believe that the Revolution will change all of that. Nintendo, per its recent union with Reggie Fils-Aime has adopted an 'innovate or die' creed. Of course, Nintendo has always been at the forefront of developing gameplay styles in its own first-party titles that push the envelope in terms of innovation and ease of use. But, you didn't know that did you? I apologize. To be fair, no one has quite realized that nothing Sony or Microsoft has can put a pound to the clout of Zelda, Mario, Metroid, Animal Crossing, Star Fox, and Donkey Kong. All of which are first party titles. None of which are bloody, or full of language and sex. Nintendo is built on full and pure talent, and it has shown that it can overcome gamer fickleness without the allure of "edge".
Nintendo's first overt strike for creativity and innovation came in the form of the DS, which many thought would be a gimmicky child's toy. Indeed, however the DS' worst and most gaul-less titles have been ones that don't fully realize its touch screen capabilities. The Revolution's distinctive and somewhat off-putting controller has been bandied as a new type of controller for gameplay, and it centers around motion sensors used to direct the player's actions. The Metroid Prime demo shown using the controller's functions was awe-inspiring to say the least. For an FPS, the controller provided all the precision of mouse aiming using only the player's hand movements to direct exactly what Samus was to look at, and ultimately as her tales go, shoot. People have blasted the Revolution's controller as yet another utterly gimmicky and uninspired piece of child's plaything from Nintendo ( I'm looking at you Mark Rein!). But if the DS is any indication that won't be the case at all, and even better is the fact that Nintendo is now packing a solid online strategy.
I'll be the first to say that the DS' online chops are very healthy and Satoru Iwata's announcement of a partnership with Gamespy for the Revolution's upcoming online campaign has only sweetened the deal. Needless to say I'm excited by the Revolution, but that doesn't mean I don't have my problems with Nintendo. They've been very reticent about anything but the controller, the look of the console, and the complete backwards capability of the Revolution. Frankly, I'm not that excited about being able to play every single Nintendo game from the past. Mainly because Nintendo has a tendency for rereleasing games on the GBA, GCN, and soon the DS. At some point its going to flood itself with past glory and fail in the console race. Also, there's been no word about the graphics capabilities of the Revolution. First Iwata announced at E3 that when you see the graphics of the Revolution, "You will say, Wow!". And then we hear from him that Nintendo isn't especially focusing on the graphics for the console. We all know that graphics aren't what drives a game to greatness, but they sure are nice, and if Nintendo keeps the same engine from the Gamecube, albeit with a few tweaks, that's really going to piss me off.
I really want Nintendo to succeed because nobody does it better, but if they plan to than they need three things. The first is a good online strategy, as the Gamecube's is limited to Phantasy Star Online, which I can't find anywhere. Gamespy is reliable and if they partner with Nintendo for some sort of online service along the lines of XBOX Live (an actual service to gamer's as opposed to a strung together developer system), then Nintendo should do well. Imagine Super Smash Brother's online! Second, the company needs to put more first party titles into new properties that appeal to mature gamers. It will do nothing more than give Nintendo a more well-rounded and considerate rapport with all gamers. Nintendo did poorly with Geist, but that was a step in the right direction, and it doesn't have to be better than Zelda, just enough to be ranked with Nintendo's stable of kid-friendly characters. Perhaps Metroid will someday occupy that position as it continues to present itself in darker and darker issues.
The third thing essential to Nintendo's success is that it must gain more support from third party developers. In a sense this is the only real hurdle for Nintendo, and this is mainly because of the controller. It's just not conventional and multiplatform games are going to require more design concepts for the controller's specific specs. In to save that will be the Shell controller which Nintendo has wisely designed for more traditional gaming. So what else? The Big N's relations with developers are already strained due to some pretty impersonal development negotiations, and it needs to realize that it can't get by in the business end of things just on Zelda. The Gamecube's utter lack of online is also a huge drawback. Support from big names like EA and Midway is dwindling, and other support from developers like Rockstar and Pandemic is non existent. That's not the worst part. Where has Lucas Arts been for the past three years? My guess is that after its Rogue Squadron trilogy it felt released from any obligations to the company. However, I must give a rousing ovation to Activision and Ubisoft, who have stood by Nintendo with every release (minus the Rainbow Six expansions, understandably), despite the online hindrances. We may be seeing a case of hubris here in Nintendo's dealings with developers, and if that's the case, then let it go Nintendo. Let it go! You are the best first party out there, don't take that and use it to shirk other, and unfortunately more popular, talent around the gaming community. It won't hurt to do a little business, everyone knows that you're about games, and games only. Most important Rock On!
Microsoft is the one company that has continued to impress me on all fronts. I started out as an anti-proponent of the beefy console, mainly because I'm a fan of Macs and the original controller was a nightmare. The XBOX controller type S is still a nightmare in a few ways (cough* black and white keys *cough) but it's more serviceable than either the Gamecube or the PS2's controllers, in some respects. The thing about Microsoft that really draws me to them is their recent push for more creativity and family oriented projects. The main way they have done this is through XBOX Live's new, more community based presentation. Now every 360 owner who subscribes to XBOX Live has their own personal identity in their Gamer Card. The 360 has given a new, softer, more innovative dimension to the normally hardcore pro-shooter black box. It almost seems like it's a complete turnaround for the company, everything seems more inviting now that Microsoft has taken a more community based approach to gaming. The vehicle for this is the aforementioned Gamer Card which informs all subscribers as to your achievements and propensities as a gamer. Think of it as a more streamlined matchmaking system for all games using online multiplayer. You will know what sort of a person your taking on or working with, and what their skill level is. Naturally, bragging rights and gamer notoriety will ensue. And then there's the XBOX Live Arcade which is more of an immediate use for community gaming. This is all done through downloadable games from the XBOX Live Marketplace. At this point in the 360's life-span, I would definitely term the Arcade as a success, mainly because Geometry Wars is one of the titles available in the Marketplace, and it's a good deal better than many of the launch titles that have been released thus far.
Microsoft still has a little bit of that "look how hip and arty we are" attitude from E3 2005, but on the whole their revamped market strategy appeals to me much more than their hardcore attitude of old. But what about the hardware? There are a few hitches in this department. Most notably the fact that the 360 will not support HD-DVD games after all. This is a big problem for Next-gen games because many developers are wanting to focus more on larger, more grand experiences. Indeed, some titles such as Elder Scrolls IV and Saint's Row are reported to ship on as many as four discs. Another problem is that since the 360 was released, after a mere four years no less, Microsoft has completely cut first party games from the XBOX's docket. If Sony has taught us anything, it's that a new console without support for the old does not a safe and reliable system life make. The XBOX will just have to ride it out with third-party releases which seem to show no sign of slowing down.
On that front Microsoft is doing better than most. It's just locked an amazing deal with Square-Enix, and an exclusive deal from Mistwalker Studios. The latter is Hironobu Sakaguchi's (the creator of Final Fantasy), own company for RPG's and whether or not it will challenge Square's dominance and popularity has yet to be seen. But this finally means that XBOX has some serious RPG metal under the hood, exclusive mind you, that's the key. It's also getting Sqeenix's fantastic Final Fantasy XI, plus it seems future Final Fantasy games, whether or not in the series or just variations on the online experience is debatable. XBOX has also netted Resident Evil 5 from Capcom which is great for the normally Nintendo and Sony only series.
However, don't for a moment think that Microsoft is lacking in the first party section. Seriously, have you seen Gears of War and Ninety Nine Nights? Drool man, solid drool. The furiously touted Halo 3 is also on the docket but I'm not very excited as Halo has done nothing for me but introduce some of the seediest people ever into my home. Out of my own conservative fury and sense of humor, I wish that someone at Microsoft would invent a language filter for the headsets. I'm sorry America but the fact that you can't say anything in an online match without the f-bomb functioning as the operative adjective makes us one of the most uncouth and obnoxious cultures ever. Just learn to talk well, without all of the ineloquence of a typical online game.
On the whole, the 360 has been my Next-gen console of choice, mainly because of its focus on the attitude and fraternity of gamers, its plenty powerful too, and it's definitely got a huge amount of potential. My hope is that it lasts longer than the XBOX has in its primary run. Good job, Microsoft, keep it up.
Okay, here goes... You! Sony! Where the hell have you been man with my info? You owe me big! Heck, you owe everybody! You owe everybody an explanation for any lack of an online strategy! Which at this point is floated only by SOCOM. You ain't been treatin' us well lately. You're burning your gaming community and at some point the advantage you gained by Nintendo sticking to cartridges is going to disappear. GTA ain't just for PS2 anymore and come high next-gen noon I doubt you'll have the exclusive clout of that series. You owe us answers. Where's the hard-drive? Where's the consideration for all of this "disc read error" malarky? When I ask you why the hard-drive support is cut, I don't want "Hey, gamer, buy this new slimmer, more capable, PS2." When I ask what the pricing of the PS3 is going to look like, I don't want to hear how awesome and "totally worth it" the Cell Processor will be. The only thing I've seen that's confirmed real time is the MSG4 trailer, and frankly, the level of superiority it has over all of the XBOX 360 games I've seen is minimal. You are keeping us in the cold and rumors abound of 70 dollar price points for games as being "reasonable". Hell no Sony! That and this whole Blu-ray can of worms you can't wait to open. The PS3 sure sounds great, the Killzone trailer makes me weak in the knees. But only because I loved the first game. And the supposed, well, what else is there? All you've shown is a bunch of boring charts and graphs on the Cell processor, and what you claim to be real-time trailers, but we can't really be sure. Why? Because you won't elucidate on anything that the gamer's want to know! You've become too focused on the PS3 being a multimedia device and everything that matters to gamer's has been chucked aside.
What, you may ask? How about not being able to get a straight answer on the horrible controller (those are nubs, not sticks I swear!), or the obnoxious Spider-man font? Okay, so Spider-man's choice of penmanship really isn't a big deal, but not knowing how much it's going to set us back just to play MSG4 when it comes out is. Seriously, all you say is that, it's going to cost a lot. Not the best way to get support, from the regular, working gamer. I mean, I buy a lot of games but I'm going to stop buying new games if you expect me to pony up seventy bucks a pop (the sixty for 360 games is pushing it). At the forefront of this maelstrom of concealment and reticence is what looks to be like a total lack of any plans for online. Multiplayer or otherwise. Message from Microsoft: "prepare to die, if you refuse to adapt". That would of course be the wording if I was writing the letter.
It would be safe to say that I'm very unhappy with Sony right now. I own a PS2, but only because of Ratchet and Clank, and the fact that it gets third party games that don't appear on my Gamecube. And just because I don't have the vocal cords to argue with 95 million units, I would say that this is the case with many. It's a relationship built on convenience, not love. Sony just doesn't make any effort to mediate our problems. I've already mentioned online, disc read error, and the hard-drive cock-up, but I want to know what Sony has specifically done to make gaming better for us. It's an issue that I hope will be contested by a future next-gen editorial.
As for the games, well Sony is lucky because its initial PS1 blitzkrieg has netted it the support of just about every third-party developer on the map, with the exception of Valve and Epic. The first-party is a tad amusing because Sony's stable of internal developers in the U.S. is very small. They recently acquired Guerilla games, the developer of Killzone, but for them and SCEE Cambridge, Naughty Dog, and Zipper, well that's it. Even Insomniac is an independent studio. Sony is fortunate to have such a loyal development community, but I believe it's purely business. I won't accuse Sony of price gauging, because my PSP does work for the most part, and I got it for free, however when I get to PS3 I wonder what Sony's ultimate goal is in proliferating the Playstation family. Are they seeing an appreciative gaming community or dollar signs. I just want to know what they are doing to better gaming. But they won't say, and until they do their on my black list.
To conclude, every major player has done certain things immensely well in their respective areas. What they've improved upon is much different. Nintendo still needs the trust of more developers. And Sony needs to answer gamer's questions and address their seriously hampered online issues. Microsoft has been first out of the gate and has significantly changed my view of them in the past twelve months. What they are pushing for in gaming seems to be the proper direction. It's creative and communal, and technologically sound as well. However, I don't enjoy running into the Halo 3 wall at every turn, particularly when Bungie hasn't even released a trailer yet.
However to return to our initial querie: "Which makes the violence more pretty?" The answer is quite simple: PC will. Thanks to the dueling powers of Nvidia and Ati! If I stick to PC only, then about seven thousand bi-annually invested dollars from now we should have reached the next console generation where I believe that Nintendo will have returned to grace and Microsoft will be the reigning power in America. Sony, if it continues its present support of the game community will be stuck in no-man's land. Online, is now the premier realm of battle for the consoles, as it is rapidly growing in popularity. My own personal opinion is that perhaps someday Nintendo and Microsoft will fuse in some sort of fraternal online powerhouse, or even fuse altogether. The Revolution and the 360 seem to be kindred spirits. Both built for different gamer's tastes but equally impressive. Nintendo will reveal more at E3 I'm sure and Reggie Fils-Aime announced that the system will release around Thanksgiving. We'll see then how it will play out, no pun intended. 360 has great momentum to build on and a much appreciated philosophy to purvey. Sony needs to stop focusing on numbers and talk to us.