Playing it Safe! Who is doing the least this generation?

[ThaMaskedGamer]

Waco posted a good article from IGN about what is wrong with Nintendo. A lot of people agreed with the article. The funny thing is, a lot of stuff in that article, are things I and others who were labeled haters have been saying all along about Nintendo <b>and Sony</b>.

As much as the article commented on Nintendo milking their franchises for decades. Sony is off to an even faster pace. This is the second iteration of the playstation, and already you have how many FinalFantasy games, Ace Combat, Armored Cores, Silent Hills, etc etc etc. At this pace, they will far out do what Nintendo has done over the years with their franchises.

Now, some people like Gadfly, defended Nintendo by basically saying no one else has done anything aside from play it safe. Sorry, but I don't think so. Microsoft seems to not be taking a page out of the Sony and Nintendo playbook. And they aren't playing it safe, not nearly.

Look at RPGs. RPGs are the last genre to develop on any new system because they take the longest to develop and are not as popular as other genres. So you can't have expected MS to field more RPGs than Sony or really very many at all. But, what have they done? Fable, KOTOR, Arx Fatalis, Morrowind, Baldur's Gate, and several others. But going forward, did Bioware redo KOTOR? No! They could have, but instead of standing still they are moving forward with Jade Empire. Now, the publisher got someone else to do KOTOR2, but that is the publisher, and after all the game was great and deserved a sequel. If that was Sony or Nintendo, Bioware would have been coerced into doing a sequel. MS let Bioware do what it wanted to do. MS tried to branch out with TrueFantasyLive, apparently it stunk, but at least they tried to reach the Japanese. That was a risk. And we have more RPGs coming. Now, Sony is doing a lot of RPGs, but what is Nintendo doing?

Look at the racing genre? How can you say MGP2 wasn't a gamble, that is not playing it safe, developing a simulation motorcycle racer with very articulated controls built around LIVE, something that wasn't popular then(online racing). PGR was pretty safe, but how about Rallisport Challenge, MS developed their own RallyRacer, not exactly a cash cow genre, then they allowed and welcomed competiton from Colin. Now after PGR and Rallisport, MS has now gone in a totally different direction with Forza Motorsport. Has Sony or Nintendo released 3 first party exclusive different racers. Nevermind what MS did for online gaming and online racing.

But back to Sony and Nintendo. Where are the new franchises? I think Killzone is the only real attempt by Sony to do a new franchise in a popular genre. Yeah, I know they have a gazillion niche games, and thats cool. But, where are the new racers, the new 3rd person and 1st person shooters, etc? I mean, instead of new, Sony went old school and tried to revive stuff like Contra.

Some are saying MS is in the same boat for doing a few sequels. But they aren't. First of all, gamers expect a few sequels and would be pissed to not get a few sequels. But a few sequels is not the same thing as 10 sequels. I can tell you right now, that Halo3 is the last Halo game I want to see. I don't want to see another PGR. I think TeamNinja did themselves a disservice with DOA Ultimate, and people sniffed that out. But they should do a Ninja Gaiden again. But, MS is younger at this than Ninty and Sony, and yet they are creating new exclusive games at a faster clip. And pretty soon, if things continue at this pace, there will be no doubt as to who the best first party developer is. I mean this year upcoming you have MechAssault2(another worthy sequel), Forza, Jade Empire, CloseCombat, and these are all games coming 1st QTR 2005 from MS, only one is a sequel. How is that playing it safe?

I don't know. It just seems to me, that a lot revelations are starting to be uncovered about how people really feel about the systems and certain franchises, this late in the game. I mean, damn, I grew up playing Nintendo, and i use to love Nintendo. But all along i've been saying I just can't play Mario, Zelda, Star Fox etc any more. I'm labeled a Nintendo basher, now a lot of people are saying the same things I've been saying. You can ditto that about Medal of Honor, Silent Hill, MetalGear. I mean, I use to say MetalGear wasn't great, and I would get killed. Now, everybody is starting to say MetalGear2 sucked.

MS seems to be avoiding a lot of the stuff that hung Nintendo up and that will hang up Sony if they continue what they are doing next generation. MS is embracing technology, embracing online gaming, changing up franchises, and really using fan feedback. I mean, I swear they were listening to me on this site(even though they probably weren't). About 6 months ago, I posted why hasn't MS made a real simulation racer and why is MS letting Ubisoft create all of these military shooters without releasing their own. Then BAM! out of nowhere they announce Forza and Close Combat. They are reading the pulse of their audience. And they are doing anything but playing it safe. Playing it safe is not gambling on building your own online gaming service broadband only, at the birth of online gaming, when you are new into the console business. Playing it safe is saying broadband gaming isn't popular yet, online gaming isn't popular yet, digital TVs aren't popular yet. Nintendo still doesn't get it, they are still playing it safe. And Sony, well they are playing it close to the vest, we will see how much they change soon. Obviously, they can't change much with their hardware limitations, but once PS3 specs come out, we will see what they are all about.

[Deathstroke]

The one thing that throws your whole analysis out of whack is that you attribute third party games to the hardware makers. Now really, do you actually believe MS or Sony have much say in the type of game a third party decides to make for their console?

[Pandarbock]

Playing it safe is saying broadband gaming isn't popular yet, online gaming isn't popular yet, digital TVs aren't popular yet. Nintendo still doesn't get it, they are still playing it safe.

I guess by this line you are going off the assumption that nintendo pulling the component cable out off the newer gamecube unit and then stating that only %1 of the consumer was using them somehow means they are saying digital tv's aren't popular and they are playing it safe? Well in a sense you are right but regardless of what the website said, the component out was pulled for one reason and one reason only, to cut production costs. The reason the cable didn't sells was you could and still only can buy the cable from nintendos website if people wanted them they would have a harder time getting them then say the readily avalible xbox ones. So yeah nintendo is full of it there but if you think it affected progressive scan support from the cube entirely you are wrong. All nintendo first party games are still to be pscan compatible and it is up too 3rd parties what they chose to do as it has always been previously. Granted I know the beloved xbox supports 480p at the very least on basically all its titles and more on some of them here is a list of my games to give you an idea of pscan comaptibility.

Of 67 titles 41 are pscan comaptible 15 being 1st party and 26 being 2nd and 3rd party and look great on my component to vga modded cable (yeah that is basically straight vga into my monitor not some crappy line doubler).

* = progressive scan compatible
x = not progressive scan compatible
? = I haven't tried it out yet


* Animal Crossing
x Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance
* Baten Kaitos: Eternal Wings and the Lost Ocean
* Beach Spikers
* Billy Hatcher and the Giant Egg
x BloodRayne
x Black & Bruised
x Dave Mirra Freestyle BMX 2
* Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem
x Extreme-G 3
* F-Zero GX
* Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles
x Freekstyle
* Gladius
x Goblin Commander: Unleash the Horde
* Godzilla: Destroy All Monsters Melee
x I-Ninja
* Ikaruga
* Legend of Zelda Collector's Edition, The
* Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, The
* Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker
x Lost Kingdoms
x Lost Kingdoms II
* Luigi's Mansion
* Mario Golf: Toadstool Tour
* Mario Kart: Double Dash
* Metal Arms: Glitch in the System
* Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes
* Metroid Prime
* Metroid Prime 2: Echoes
* Mystic Heroes
* P.N. 03
x Pac-Man Fever
x Pac-Man World 2
* Pac-Man vs.
* Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door
* Phantasy Star Online Episode I & II
* Pikmin
* Pikmin 2
x Resident Evil
x Resident Evil 0
? Resident Evil Code: Veronica X
x Second Sight
* Simpsons, The: Hit & Run
* Smuggler's Run: Warzones
? Sonic Mega Collection
* Soul Calibur II
* Sphinx and the Cursed Mummy
* SSX 3
x SSX Tricky
* Star Fox Adventures
* Star Wars Rogue Squadron III: Rebel Strike
* Star Wars: Rogue Leader- Rogue Squadron 2
x Summoner: A Goddess Reborn
* Super Mario Sunshine
x Super Monkey Ball
* Super Monkey Ball 2
* Super Smash Bros. Melee
x Swingerz Golf
x Tak and the Power of Juju
x Tales of Symphonia
x TimeSplitters 2
x Turok: Evolution
* Vexx
* Viewtiful Joe
* Wave Race: Blue Storm
x XGRA: Extreme-G Racing Association

[trebor]

I'm M$'s huckleberry pie.

Ya know that's really great that you love M$ so incredibly much, and that you think they "aren't" playing it safe. But that is a bit of a biased fanboy point of view.

I'd think all three companies have had their share of "playing it safe" AND of "going out on a limb" or whatever you want to say.

Sony putting two controller ports in the PS2 was definitely "playing it safe" if not "completely cheap and lame". But on the other hand, the Eyetoy is a unique and different kind of gadget - definitely NOT playing it safe.

Nintendo not embracing online play is certainly "playing it safe", meanwhile creating a controller that is a set of bongos isn't so much "playing it safe".

And your dear M$, putting a bunch of PC components into a box, porting over countless PC titles and cramming basically 3 genres down your throats is NOT playing it safe. Meanwhile, XboxLive is definitely the best thing they've done for the industry.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

The one thing that throws your whole analysis out of whack is that you attribute third party games to the hardware makers. Now really, do you actually believe MS or Sony have much say in the type of game a third party decides to make for their console?

Definitely. MS had a big hand in selecting 3rd party projects and helping them get "off the ground" and i'm sure MS wooed a lot of developers based on projects MS wanted to see on the XBOX, especially when it comes to PC projects. I mean I'm sure MS really wooed Epic with Unreal, ID with Doom3, that kinda stuff, Bethesda and Bioware. I think the close relation ship MS has with a lot of these developers was groomed. And I think the same can be said of Sony also, in a good way. I mean Square and TakeTwo for instance. Whether it is throwing money for exclusive deals or whatever, I don't think a lot of these alliances formed by accident. The only company that hasn't been successful in forming these kinds of relationships has been Nintendo. The one biggie they tried was Capcom and that hasn't gone so well.

A lot of the relationships for MS came because of a natural PC connection, it will be interesting to see, if those developers stay loyal to MS next time around. I think they will.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

I guess by this line you are going off the assumption that nintendo pulling the component cable out off the newer gamecube unit and then stating that only %1 of the consumer was using them somehow means they are saying digital tv's aren't popular and they are playing it safe? Well in a sense you are right but regardless of what the website said, the component out was pulled for one reason and one reason only, to cut production costs. The reason the cable didn't sells was you could and still only can buy the cable from nintendos website if people wanted them they would have a harder time getting them then say the readily avalible xbox ones. So yeah nintendo is full of it there but if you think it affected progressive scan support from the cube entirely you are wrong. All nintendo first party games are still to be pscan compatible and it is up too 3rd parties what they chose to do as it has always been previously. Granted I know the beloved xbox supports 480p at the very least on basically all its titles and more on some of them here is a list of my games to give you an idea of pscan comaptibility.

Of 67 titles 41 are pscan comaptible 15 being 1st party and 26 being 2nd and 3rd party and look great on my component to vga modded cable (yeah that is basically straight vga into my monitor not some crappy line doubler).

* = progressive scan compatible
x = not progressive scan compatible
? = I haven't tried it out yet


* Animal Crossing
x Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance
* Baten Kaitos: Eternal Wings and the Lost Ocean
* Beach Spikers
* Billy Hatcher and the Giant Egg
x BloodRayne
x Black & Bruised
x Dave Mirra Freestyle BMX 2
* Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem
x Extreme-G 3
* F-Zero GX
* Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles
x Freekstyle
* Gladius
x Goblin Commander: Unleash the Horde
* Godzilla: Destroy All Monsters Melee
x I-Ninja
* Ikaruga
* Legend of Zelda Collector's Edition, The
* Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, The
* Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker
x Lost Kingdoms
x Lost Kingdoms II
* Luigi's Mansion
* Mario Golf: Toadstool Tour
* Mario Kart: Double Dash
* Metal Arms: Glitch in the System
* Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes
* Metroid Prime
* Metroid Prime 2: Echoes
* Mystic Heroes
* P.N. 03
x Pac-Man Fever
x Pac-Man World 2
* Pac-Man vs.
* Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door
* Phantasy Star Online Episode I & II
* Pikmin
* Pikmin 2
x Resident Evil
x Resident Evil 0
? Resident Evil Code: Veronica X
x Second Sight
* Simpsons, The: Hit & Run
* Smuggler's Run: Warzones
? Sonic Mega Collection
* Soul Calibur II
* Sphinx and the Cursed Mummy
* SSX 3
x SSX Tricky
* Star Fox Adventures
* Star Wars Rogue Squadron III: Rebel Strike
* Star Wars: Rogue Leader- Rogue Squadron 2
x Summoner: A Goddess Reborn
* Super Mario Sunshine
x Super Monkey Ball
* Super Monkey Ball 2
* Super Smash Bros. Melee
x Swingerz Golf
x Tak and the Power of Juju
x Tales of Symphonia
x TimeSplitters 2
x Turok: Evolution
* Vexx
* Viewtiful Joe
* Wave Race: Blue Storm
x XGRA: Extreme-G Racing Association


Actually it was more directed at Sony. In regards to supporting digital formats, Sony really deserves more criticism than Nintendo. Sony is at the heart of digital audio and video, I mean they made a lot of the leading consumer products, home theatre stuff. They had the projections and estimates about when this stuff would take off, and obviously when they made the PS2 they made a conscious decision to not support it. And that was playing it cheap and safe in my book. You can't sell HDTVs, Dolby Receivers etc, and then not support it on your PS2 cause the technology isn't there yet in the mainstream. They are supposed to be pushing it into the mainstream faster, and the PS2 could have and would have done that. "Hey play games in digital audio and video on your new Sony Digital TV, with our PS2 that supports it." Instead, it was MS who doesn't make these consumer electronics devices, pimping the technology. Hey play XBOX on your Sony DTV!

[ThaMaskedGamer]

Ya know that's really great that you love M$ so incredibly much, and that you think they "aren't" playing it safe. But that is a bit of a biased fanboy point of view.

I'd think all three companies have had their share of "playing it safe" AND of "going out on a limb" or whatever you want to say.

Sony putting two controller ports in the PS2 was definitely "playing it safe" if not "completely cheap and lame". But on the other hand, the Eyetoy is a unique and different kind of gadget - definitely NOT playing it safe.

Nintendo not embracing online play is certainly "playing it safe", meanwhile creating a controller that is a set of bongos isn't so much "playing it safe".

And your dear M$, putting a bunch of PC components into a box, porting over countless PC titles and cramming basically 3 genres down your throats is NOT playing it safe. Meanwhile, XboxLive is definitely the best thing they've done for the industry.


Yeah there are a lot of examples of each company playing it safe, but I just think, in my opinion MS definitely laid the most on the line and sacrificed the most. I mean they crammed the XBOX with all kinds of things a console had never seen, and ATE THE DAMN cost. They built out online, not knowing if the people would come. And you guys say MS only gave us three genres. That is wrong, they have only been successful in three genres. But they tried, unsuccessfully, to give us platformers, adventure games, sports games, etc., they turned out bad, but MS tried. Show me the failed Nintendo simulation racers and first person shooters etc.

As far as the PC components. Yes, that was playing it safe, in a way. I mean the XBOX with cheap components was still technically amazing and still costing a fortune to mass produce. They were eating a major loss on each unit sold. Now imagine if they had designed something proprietary with the same processing capability it would have taken longer to get into the market and cost even more. MS did what they had to do, so in that sense they played it safe. But, ironically, it turned out great. The only people who complain about the guts of the XBOX are people who aren't XBOX users.

[Gadfly2317]

Now, some people like Gadfly, defended Nintendo by basically saying no one else has done anything aside from play it safe. Sorry, but I don't think so. Microsoft seems to not be taking a page out of the Sony and Nintendo playbook. And they aren't playing it safe, not nearly.


If you are going to reference me, maybe you could actually get right what I said. I criticized an article for singling out Nintendo for playing it safe, while ignoring all the other ways others were doing the same thing. I found the article hypocritical, biased, and inacurate, and I went on to list a number of things Nintendo has done that are NOT safe.

Trebor is basically accurate in saying that each company has done things both safe, and not safe.

Truthfully, though, I don't think much of this concept of "playing it safe." There's "playing it smart" but every move these companies make is to try and succeed, and so in a sense everything is TRYING to "play it safe." releasing a sequel may or may not be "safe" (see sales of Viewtiful Joe 2) or it may be brilliantly safe (see Halo 2). Releasing something new may or may not be the "safe" thing to do. Basically, everything is safe. Nothing is safe. It's bascially a meaningless freaking concept.

MS was the new comer. You cite how they loaded up the console with expensive extras like a hard drive and ate the cost. You call that "not playing it safe." But "safety" had nothing to do with it. They were a newcomer to the market, they had DEEP pockets, and they thought that all that extra power would garner them a big user base, and that they could gain a big share of the market that way. Yet people kept buying Ps2's. I think MS believed they were playing it safe, that more power and extras would bring in the consumers. Clearly their plan was to offset the costs of the system by drawing in large numbers of users and making money off a subscription based online service. They played it safe, but did they play it smart? I don't think anyone could argue that things turned out the way MS projected and hoped.

In the long run, it may work. There seems to be momentum with Xbox, and if it continues the way its going, Xbox could unseat Sony as the console leader next gen.

[Deathstroke]

Definitely. MS had a big hand in selecting 3rd party projects and helping them get "off the ground" and i'm sure MS wooed a lot of developers based on projects MS wanted to see on the XBOX, especially when it comes to PC projects. I mean I'm sure MS really wooed Epic with Unreal, ID with Doom3, that kinda stuff, Bethesda and Bioware. I think the close relation ship MS has with a lot of these developers was groomed. And I think the same can be said of Sony also, in a good way. I mean Square and TakeTwo for instance. Whether it is throwing money for exclusive deals or whatever, I don't think a lot of these alliances formed by accident. The only company that hasn't been successful in forming these kinds of relationships has been Nintendo. The one biggie they tried was Capcom and that hasn't gone so well.

See, everything you just said defeats your argument about MS not playing it safe. How is it not playing it safe to go after those big PC franchises? It isn't much of a stretch to say that MS wanted to pad the X-box userbase by converting as many PC gamers as they could. You are living proof of one such conversion. However, the thing here is that while MS may have gone after these developers, they had little say in what those developers made for the X-box. Aside from ponying up money for some exclusivity rights, MS does not dictate what type of game a third party will make for their system. That's why you get all those FPS's on X-box. Everybody seems to be chasing after Halo's success. Hardly any one of these third parties have graced the X-box with an exclusive platformer or games in other genres that don't do well on X-box. And in the end, they are all playing it safe.

[Horngreen]

Simply put, with Sony having 100 million units in the hands of gamers they should never have to play it safe but still they do.

[Pandarbock]

Actually I think the IGN article should have been titled "Nintendo stop whoring out your franchises and give us something new" because it is really that and not the idea of playing it safe that the guy goes on about. :D

[Glockstar]

Now you know I'm in total agreement with you, TMG, in thinking that MS is the company that's done the most for the console industry, and, relatively speaking, the're the ones gambling the most - but some of your facts are kinda goofy. Like slade said:

The one thing that throws your whole analysis out of whack is that you attribute third party games to the hardware makers. Now really, do you actually believe MS or Sony have much say in the type of game a third party decides to make for their console?

Sorry, TMG, I gotta agree with him.

My contribution to this thread is merely a presentment of facts.

And here are the games that Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft have published over the course of this generation (in a somewhat chronological order):

Sony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nintendo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Microsoft
Launch.........................................Lau nch..........................................Launc h
Fantavision..............................Luigi's Mansion...................................Amped
989 Sports NFL GameDay 2001..Wave Race Blue Storm......................Azurik
989 NCAA GameBreaker 2001..Super Smash Bros Melee..................Fuzion Frenzy
989 NHL Faceoff 2001.................Pikmin....................... .......................Halo
989 NBA Shootout 2001...............2002........................... .................NFL Fever 2002
989 NCAA Final Four 2001........Eternal Darkness.................Oddworld Munches Oddysee
989 Formula One 2001.............Disney's Magical Mirror..............Project Gotham Racing
2001........................................Super Mario Sunshine....................Blood Wake
ATV Offroad Fury.......................Starfox Adventures..............................2002
Dark Cloud.................................Animal Crossing.........................NBA Inside Drive 2002
Coolboarders 2001.......................Mario Party 4..............................Nightcaster
Twisted Metal Black.......................Cubivore.............. ...................Rallisport Challenge
Gran Turismo 3..........................Metroid Prime..............................NFL Fever 2003
Extermination.................................2003 .....................................Quantum Redshift
Ico...........................................Zeld a: Wind Waker..........................Sneakers
Kinetica......................................Wari o World....................................Blinx
Frequency..............................Mario Golf Toadstool Tour...................Mechassault
Jak & Daxter................................F-Zero GX.....................................Whacked
989 NFL GameDay 2002..............Kirby Air Ride................................Kakuto Chojin
2002......................................Mario Kart Double Dash.................NBA Inside Drive 2003
Drakan: The Ancient Gates..........Mario Party 5.....................................2003
989 World Tour Soccer 2002.......1080 Avalanche............................Kung-Fu Chaos
Disney's Monsters, Inc. .............Pokemon Channel.............................Tao-Feng
Wipout Fusion.............................Pac-Man Vs.............................MLB Inside Pitch 2003
Jet X20............................................200 4.........................................Brute Force
SOCOM..................................Pokemon Colisseum......................Midtown Madness 3
Hot Shots Golf 3................Wario Ware Inc. Mega Party Game..........NFL Fever 2004
Wild Arms 3..............................Custom Robo..................................Voodoo Vince
Sly Cooper...........................Zelda: Four Swords Adventures...............Music Mixer
Disney's Treasure Planet...............Pikmin 2..................................Crimson Skies: HRTR
Ratchet & Clank.........................Donkey Konga.......................Grabbed By The Ghoulies
ATV Offroad Fury 2...................Paper Mario: TTYD...............................Top Spin
989 NFL GameDay 2003...........Mario Power Tennis..............................Amped 2
989 NCAA GameBreaker 2003.....Metroid Prime 2...............................Links 2004
989 NHL Faceoff 2003.................Mario Party 6.........................Project Gotham Racing 2
989 NBA Shootout 2003.............................................. .......................NHL Rivals 2004
989 NCAA Final Four 2003.............................................. .............NBA Inside Drive 2004
2003.............................................. .................................................. ........2004
The Getaway........................................... ....................................Rallisport Challenge 2
War of the Monsters.......................................... ...................................Sudeki
Dark Cloud 2................................................. .......................................Fable
989 World Tour Soccer 2003.............................................. .......Kingdom Under Fire: TC
Primal............................................ .................................................. .....Blinx 2
My Street............................................ .................................................. Halo 2
Amplitude
Downhill Domination
Arc The Lad: TOTS
Jak 2
Ratchet & Clank: GC
SOCOM II
Eyetoy: Play
989 MLB 2004
989 NFL GameDay 2004
989 NCAA GameBreaker 2004
989 NBA Shootout 2004
989 NCAA Final Four 2004
2004
Jet Li's Rise To Honor
Eyetoy: Groove
Siren
Syphon Filter: TOS
Hot Shots Golf Fore!
Sly 2
Jak 3
Ratchet & Clank: UYA
Killzone
ATV Offroad Fury 3
Eyetoy: Antigrav
989 MLB 2005
989 World Tour Soccer 2005
989 Athens 2004
989 Gretzky's NHL 2005

[AOE Enforcer]

If you are going to reference me, maybe you could actually get right what I said. I criticized an article for singling out Nintendo for playing it safe, while ignoring all the other ways others were doing the same thing. I found the article hypocritical, biased, and inacurate, and I went on to list a number of things Nintendo has done that are NOT safe.

Trebor is basically accurate in saying that each company has done things both safe, and not safe.

Truthfully, though, I don't think much of this concept of "playing it safe." There's "playing it smart" but every move these companies make is to try and succeed, and so in a sense everything is TRYING to "play it safe." releasing a sequel may or may not be "safe" (see sales of Viewtiful Joe 2) or it may be brilliantly safe (see Halo 2). Releasing something new may or may not be the "safe" thing to do. Basically, everything is safe. Nothing is safe. It's bascially a meaningless freaking concept.

MS was the new comer. You cite how they loaded up the console with expensive extras like a hard drive and ate the cost. You call that "not playing it safe." But "safety" had nothing to do with it. They were a newcomer to the market, they had DEEP pockets, and they thought that all that extra power would garner them a big user base, and that they could gain a big share of the market that way. Yet people kept buying Ps2's. I think MS believed they were playing it safe, that more power and extras would bring in the consumers. Clearly their plan was to offset the costs of the system by drawing in large numbers of users and making money off a subscription based online service. They played it safe, but did they play it smart? I don't think anyone could argue that things turned out the way MS projected and hoped.

In the long run, it may work. There seems to be momentum with Xbox, and if it continues the way its going, Xbox could unseat Sony as the console leader next gen.

I think one of the biggest "upsets" that may or may not happen in the next generation of consoles is where Rockstar takes the GTA license and to what system they "pledge allegiance." Though they will more than likely release future GTA games on both Xbox 2 and PS3, we may see a shift to Xbox version being released before the PS3 version. Why? Rockstar has made it very clear that they will continue to make the GTA titles for the PC and Xbox. Being that the architecture of a PC and the Xbox (well, development tools-wise) is very similar, they can knock out both of these versions quite easily. This is already evident with the upcoming release of the PC and Xbox versions of San Andreas.

I have noticed the "momentum" with the Xbox as you mention Gadfly. Not only from a consumer standpoint but from a developer standpoint. If Microsoft can keep the hits coming through 2005, they could be in a very good position with the Xbox 2, especially given that a pre-PS3 launch is all but assured. Notable games scheduled for release in 2005:

February: Forza Motorsport, Unreal Championship 2
March: Doom 3, Jade Empire, Conker-Live & Reloaded
August: Grand Theft Auto San Andreas

These are just the title I know of off the top of my head. Not to mention ports of great PC games like Far Cry, Painkiller, etc.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

If you are going to reference me, maybe you could actually get right what I said. I criticized an article for singling out Nintendo for playing it safe, while ignoring all the other ways others were doing the same thing. I found the article hypocritical, biased, and inacurate, and I went on to list a number of things Nintendo has done that are NOT safe.

Trebor is basically accurate in saying that each company has done things both safe, and not safe.

Truthfully, though, I don't think much of this concept of "playing it safe." There's "playing it smart" but every move these companies make is to try and succeed, and so in a sense everything is TRYING to "play it safe." releasing a sequel may or may not be "safe" (see sales of Viewtiful Joe 2) or it may be brilliantly safe (see Halo 2). Releasing something new may or may not be the "safe" thing to do. Basically, everything is safe. Nothing is safe. It's bascially a meaningless freaking concept.

MS was the new comer. You cite how they loaded up the console with expensive extras like a hard drive and ate the cost. You call that "not playing it safe." But "safety" had nothing to do with it. They were a newcomer to the market, they had DEEP pockets, and they thought that all that extra power would garner them a big user base, and that they could gain a big share of the market that way. Yet people kept buying Ps2's. I think MS believed they were playing it safe, that more power and extras would bring in the consumers. Clearly their plan was to offset the costs of the system by drawing in large numbers of users and making money off a subscription based online service. They played it safe, but did they play it smart? I don't think anyone could argue that things turned out the way MS projected and hoped.

In the long run, it may work. There seems to be momentum with Xbox, and if it continues the way its going, Xbox could unseat Sony as the console leader next gen.


Well, you are right about one thing. People have different perspectives as to what "playing it safe" really is or really means. Obviously ours both differ.

Another thing, I think MS is right where they expected to be. They had projections of how many XBOX units they thought they'd sell, it was very modest. In fact, after last year, they were only slightly behind their projected numbers, but I think they are probably right on track after this years pace. And yes, they are gaining momentum. I think MS would be very happy with their performance, to basically gain the second spot in two regions, and unseat a giant in the industry, they would have to be happy with that, not knowing what to expect going in, and watching Sega die. You gotta start somewhere and the XBOX brand is synonymous with hardcore console gaming. People expect more from XBOX than PS2 and GC, and that is incredible for a newcomer to come in, and have the industry expect the best games from it. It also speaks poorly of the established competitors.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

See, everything you just said defeats your argument about MS not playing it safe. How is it not playing it safe to go after those big PC franchises? It isn't much of a stretch to say that MS wanted to pad the X-box userbase by converting as many PC gamers as they could. You are living proof of one such conversion. However, the thing here is that while MS may have gone after these developers, they had little say in what those developers made for the X-box. Aside from ponying up money for some exclusivity rights, MS does not dictate what type of game a third party will make for their system. That's why you get all those FPS's on X-box. Everybody seems to be chasing after Halo's success. Hardly any one of these third parties have graced the X-box with an exclusive platformer or games in other genres that don't do well on X-box. And in the end, they are all playing it safe.

No, nothing I said defeats my argument. Going after PC franchises, is a risky move when you offering those franchises to a market use to, well, traditional console games. I mean, already MS is cutting themselves off from a big portion of the traditional console market, and that is children. Children basically can't play the better XBOX games, they are just too difficult, i've seen it first hand. Now, 13 yr old and up yeah, some of them can play. But, five, six, seven yr olds can't play KOTOR. They can't play Splinter Cell. MS move here was to gamble on the adult male gamer and go after the PC gamer. And if you don't think that is risk, you need to revisit some of our old threads on this site. "FPS can't work on consoles, online gaming can't work on consoles, you can't do RTS on consoles, western RPGS on consoles suck, etc etc etc."

You think MS had little say in what developers they went after? I think MS' "say" is in what developers they <i>chose</i> to support. I'm sure there were many developers and projects they looked at andpassed on! What ever support, be it monetary or technical, they chose that developer based on the project. I mean the evidence is visible based on press clippings, recent press clippings. MS chooses to drop their sports lineup, bye bye TopSpin, Amped etc. MS chooses to NOT publish Psychonauts. MS chooses to not publish Oddworld Wrath, the list goes on and on.

MS doesn't dictate what games is on their system. Right and wrong, obviously if a third party has the $$$ to make an XBOX, MS is very cool with that. But, as in the examples above, if you don't have your own money, then you gotta go to big daddy and ask for it, and big daddy can float you for a few years, but if you ain't bringing the money back, then big daddy will cut you off. As MS has done this year. They let all those developers go and their franchises.

Far as exclusive 3rd party titles only being FPS, well I think if you've got a game like Splinter Cell, it is a sure bet. But if you have a game like Whacked, it isn't a sure bet. But, when it comes to platformers, the formula for success is very tricky, so I think MS' strategy was to just keep trying different franchises until one stuck. And they tried really hard to get that genre going with all kinds of games for platformers. And now it looks like they are giving it up, aside from RARE. And I think its a good move. I mean, to me, that genre, there is no real play book on how to satisfy those gamers. When I look at Oddworld, it is better than any platformer on Nintendo and Playstation from my perspective, yet it bombed? That was the best one MS did, even I liked it, and it bombed. So, what can you do if your MS? I guess buy RARE, lets see if that works.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

I think one of the biggest "upsets" that may or may not happen in the next generation of consoles is where Rockstar takes the GTA license and to what system they "pledge allegiance." Though they will more than likely release future GTA games on both Xbox 2 and PS3, we may see a shift to Xbox version being released before the PS3 version. Why? Rockstar has made it very clear that they will continue to make the GTA titles for the PC and Xbox. Being that the architecture of a PC and the Xbox (well, development tools-wise) is very similar, they can knock out both of these versions quite easily. This is already evident with the upcoming release of the PC and Xbox versions of San Andreas.

I have noticed the "momentum" with the Xbox as you mention Gadfly. Not only from a consumer standpoint but from a developer standpoint. If Microsoft can keep the hits coming through 2005, they could be in a very good position with the Xbox 2, especially given that a pre-PS3 launch is all but assured. Notable games scheduled for release in 2005:

February: Forza Motorsport, Unreal Championship 2
March: Doom 3, Jade Empire, Conker-Live & Reloaded
August: Grand Theft Auto San Andreas

These are just the title I know of off the top of my head. Not to mention ports of great PC games like Far Cry, Painkiller, etc.

I just wonder how soon before these games get "old." But, then i'm not into the heads of people who play the GTA series. Aside from the settings, theme, era, etc., I don't really see much changing or more importantly improving with the series. And from a technical standpoint, Rockstar has to get better. Their shyat looks bad, even from a PS2 perspective. I mean, once people do get tired of the GTA franchise, it is not the same as people getting tired of Halo. I mean, bungie has technical talent, they have had hit franchises on the MAC and the PC. They can parlay their talent into another game, and I hope they do so after they finish Halo3. But, Rockstar? WTF are they going to do after GTA gets old? State of Emergency2, MaxPayne7? And, their technical prowess, I mean they have a lot to learn, these new system may be too much for them. They got lucky with a good gameplay mechanic, but their programming talents suck from a technical point of view.