Exclusives Are Dead - Can Nintendo Save Us?
I’ve always argued with Chris Slate about Nintendo’s philosophy on game development and that just designing a system that costs less to develop for isn’t really the ideal answer to what ails this industry. However, I think that path of thought might help to alleviate the issue that I’m bringing up today. It seems that more and more companies are releasing the same title on every possible system and blaming the rising costs of development for that course of action. Granted, it does make sense to port games from a revenue basis as the overall cost of porting generally is considerably less with each successive port. Thus, the more versions of a game you make, the cheaper it is for an individual SKU and the greater the possible return on investment (ROI). Still, the downside is that the game generally ends up running best on the one lead platform and fails to be fully optimized or utilize the additional benefits/innovations of the other consoles.
So, here’s a thought: what if all three console manufacturers (and not just Nintendo) developed systems with innovation, rather than processing power, in mind. What if these systems did provide a noticeable increase in graphics, sound, etc. but it wasn’t in such a major way? What if they all cost less than $199? And what if it costs a 2/3s less to develop for them then it would the 360 and PS3? In this “dream world” would we tend to see more interesting game ideas and overall uniqueness? Above all that, wouldn’t there inherently tend to be more exclusives on each system since publishers wouldn’t have as much risk, financially speaking?
It’s just that I miss the days of console personalities. I definitely know I’ve talked about this before but it seems appropriate to bring up again. There was a time when each individual console had a certain “special” feel to it. If you owned a Saturn, you were a certain type of gamer or a Neo-Geo, etc. The consoles catered to different types of gaming personalities and I loved that. People would generally only own one system so there was always that friendly rivalry about who was able to play what. The Genesis would get some sort of exclusive and then Nintendo would try to one-up Sega with an even better SNES exclusive. We had some really good console wars on our hands. Now, it doesn’t seem to matter what console you get aside from the first party-specific stuff. Every system now seems to get every game and that’s just boring. Now, gamers (which now tend to own multiple systems, ironically) have to worry about stupid things such as if online gaming (X360), graphics quality (PS3) or gameplay innovation (Revolution) is the most important. What if they make the wrong choice? Isn’t it hard enough to just worry about what games one should buy, given how many there are?
I don’t know. Maybe it’s just me, but I do truly miss the older days of gaming and the unique rivalries that console manufacturers had. They all fought hard to get those third party exclusives. Now all they seem to do is tout performance specs, online superiority or ease of development. If I’m a Microsoft fan, I want that company to be out there constantly trying to beat out Sony and Nintendo with a constant barrage of amazing exclusives. Show me why I must have an Xbox 360 and no other system. The same should be said of Sony and Nintendo. Earn my loyalty… don’t expect it.
At least for right now, Japan seems to be the last bastion of exclusive content but that certainly won’t last much longer. I see an eventual future where the only thing that separates console A from console B are a couple of first party titles and some minor hardware features and that is just plain depressing. Maybe Nintendo will come in strong and change all that. Maybe for that one reason, alone, they deserve all of our support. What do you think?


4 Comments:
At 1:50 PM,
Josher said…
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
At 2:22 PM,
Josher said…
You've made alot of really interesting points. I'm also disheartened when I see games stretched all platforms. Especially when it's cross generation. Next generation graphics aren't that much of a leap in my opinion and developers should be trying to expand gaming through gameplay using nex gen's processing powers (tips hat to Hideo Kojima). When a game comes out for the 360 and the Xbox, you're basically playing a pretty Xbox game because the gameplay isn't innovative or new. I admire Nintendo for pushing innovation but I'm just not sold on content. Plus, Hideo Kojima is talking about how MGS4 is aiming to instill his nex gen games with enhanced gameplay using the extra processing power that wasn't capable on current consoles. So I wouldn't put all my chips on Nintendo until I see the games. Those are what really matter. Oh! And developers need to learn that expaning your game across all platforms doesn't necessarily increase profits. Look at Gun for example. When a game comes out for multiple consoles that has little to no buzz or consumer interest, that's just more money wasted on a game that won't sell. I admit that as a gamer, I'm sometimes overwhelmed with the industry. I have all current gen consoles and will play their catalog of games and wait to jump into next gen. It's just too much money to just pick a console. Like alot of gamers out there, I'm very hesitant. I miss the good old days too. When it was just Nintendo VS Sega and Sony VS Nintendo. I agree that the market is starting to get cluttered........I hope we're not going the way of the arcades!
At 9:05 PM,
Anonymous said…
I not only tend to agree with you, but believe we're right on the cusp of one of the most (if not the most) serious moments in videogame history. I feel like the fate of the world rests on Nintendo's shoulders here.
Nintendo is like the main character in an old-school J-RPG who always manages to survive vicious attacks by the skin of their teeth. You know...they're the underdog: the guys that don't necessarily have the best techniques or biggest muscles- but the strongest spirit.
The analogy I'm drawing here is that, although gaming will continue if Nintendo goes the way of Sega or Atari, the world will be a darker place for it. And considering just how many more kids are being weaned on videogames these days than ever before, Nintendo needs to exist.
I think the spirit of the video game creator matters as much as the end product itself. How inspired are games these days? When was the last time you saw a game with the power of a Miyazaki film? Besides the Lunar remakes, only franchise Nintendo games really come to mind. These games speak to the heart in a way no military simulation can.
So like Vampire Hunter D or Naruto, just when you think Nintendo's going down, they give a ferocious kiai and remind us what this industry is about: complimenting the imagination thru games, not distracting or dulling it. A company can't be nice or picky or take gambles and still survive in this market. Yet Nintendo somehow does, and for that we might as well call them ninjas.
At 3:42 PM,
Andy said…
Interesting, might it mean that neither PS3 or 360 will pull away as a clear winner in sales? Maybe if things start off that way the companies will respond and try to lock up exclusive deals with companies or licenses? Maybe EA will be making tons of cross-platform games but Konami or Square-enix will choose sides?
As for me I'm just hoping that the PS3 games look better than the 360 games, I wasn't that impressed with the in store demos.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home