Nintendo took a simple approach to console making this generation. They did not spend the big R&D bucks to push out a top of the line console like Microsoft and Sony. Instead they made a simple system upgrade that would make them a profit from the start, and introduced a motion control scheme (which has since been adapted in one form or another by competitors) that coupled along with a lower starting price point allowed it to rise to the top of the sales chart on the backs of the casual gamer. Everybody has heard stories about people's non-gaming mothers, fathers, family members, and friends who jumped on the system for fun titles that bore a lot of nostalgia, or were really fun at a party they were just at.
Personally I have no interest in a Wii as they have not produced a library of games that interest me, nor do I seem old enough to have fond memories of the Nintendo classics such as Mario, Zelda, Metroid, so on, and so forth. At the same time, I can not deny how the Wii has grown the gaming populace even if they are casual who only have Wii Sports. It still brings main stream attention to gaming that is not coming from the controversy of the next M rated game.
The Wii's impact even prompted Microsoft and Sony to come out with the Kinect and Move add-ons. for motion control. Will I ever adapt? Highly unlikely as I still enjoy sitting down on a couch with a controller full of buttons in my hand, and not having to exert myself while playing a game (though it is a fun change of pace).
 | |
| The Big O! |
The split I find the most interesting is that between console gamers and pc gamers. This is one that I feel could get very heated when dealing with the PC Elitists as I like to refer to them. At times it feels like when talking to them that feel like console gaming is an abomination, and tainting of the purity that is gaming (see FPS, Dragon Age II, and the list goes on). I sit in a very interesting place as I own a gaming PC (when it works right), as well as a PS3 and 360. Hell, I cut my teeth playing Goldeneye on the N64 so I fall heavily towards being a console gamer, but there are times where I would not care to play a game on anything but a PC (Crysis 2).
I see things from both sides I like to think. The perception for the console gamer is that PC gaming is an expensive hobby that costs a substantial enough start up fee (say $600-$800) along with upgrades every two to three years to match the new games coming out. For some that would be a headache to deal with. I have even noted a few complaining out this console generations tendency to ship a game in a buggy state, and then patch it to working order which is something trickled down from PC gaming. They prefer to pop a game disc in, and know that it works right then and there without dealing with bugs that cause a crash to desktop, or tweaking graphical settings to get a suitable frame rate.
For the PC gamers the argument can be made that consoles end up being more expensive over the long haul with their five year average life span (which has lengthened this time around) like our buddy Phobia over at Simulation Generation. A game like Crysis 2 is supposed to be a graphical feast, and it is something that I would not be able to get the most of out without PC. Of course PC users also have an edge in control over there game when it comes to first person shooters, real time strategy games, and RPGs like Dragon Age (though DAII was given a modified action scheme for consoles).
It is a tough argument to pick sides on, and it will be very interesting to see how things will play out with more PC games getting a console port treatment (such as PC games saying Press Start). Personally, if it came down to it I would rather give up a gaming PC than my consoles.
Please weigh-in with your responses here on the blog, or hit me up at curseofspin@gmail.com. Also, don't forget to the blog on twitter!
No comments:
Post a Comment