# Report - Video Games At Risk For Another Crash



## Gahars (Oct 5, 2013)

"The Great Crash" (not to be confused with this great Crash) shook the fledgling games industry to its very core. Seemingly overnight, the market shriveled up. Companies collapsed, stores shuttered, and arcades became aren't-cades. It was a dark time, indeed.

Luckily, that could never happen again, right? (Pretend you haven't read the title of this thread when asking that question.)



> The marketing push for next month's Xbox One and PlayStation 4 launches is beginning to ramp up, but not everyone is sold on the new consoles just yet. In a new report prepared by Superdata and released by Digital River, the research firm warned that the market for consoles is already crowded, with 79 percent of gamers already owning a console, and that group having an average of 2.6 consoles each. The report was based in part on a March survey of 1,105 respondents.
> 
> "Industry veterans will remember the crash of 1983, when the games market was saturated with hardware devices," the report states. "Today, the industry runs a similar risk, as [with] a higher-than-ever console installed base, consumers may be resistant to adding more hardware to their living rooms."
> 
> While the report acknowledges there are more gamers now than ever before, it suggests their habits are changing. Specifically, Superdata found gamers increasingly gravitating toward versatile, multi-purpose platforms like PCs and mobile devices. As a result, an increase in the number of gamers won't necessarily translate into an increase in demand for consoles.


GamesIndustry International

The report goes on to note that a majority of the game-playing public do their game-playing on PCs today. This is a far cry from 2008, where the majority relied on consoles for their gaming fix.

So, is this report an accurate foretelling of dangers to come, or merely sensationalist doomsaying?

Yes.


----------



## master801 (Oct 5, 2013)

Well.... Fuck. The game industry is going down.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Oct 5, 2013)

tl;dr PC MASTER RACE LOLOLOLOL


----------



## DinohScene (Oct 5, 2013)

Personally, I blame mobile gaming and android based consoles.

Back in the 70's, Magnavox and Atari where the big names and other copy consoles flooded the market.
Android does the same thing unfortunately.


----------



## Carnivean (Oct 5, 2013)

I love doomsday predicitions, it must be great being paid to spout this bullshit.


----------



## Xexyz (Oct 5, 2013)

The video game industry is bigger now than 1983.


----------



## Gahars (Oct 5, 2013)

Xexyz said:


> The video game industry is bigger now than 1983.


 

But isn't it true that the bigger they are, the harder they fall?

*PonderOverYonder*


----------



## ThatDudeWithTheFood (Oct 5, 2013)

Will wait for Foxi or FAST analysis before panicking.


----------



## Xexyz (Oct 5, 2013)

Gahars said:


> But isn't it true that the bigger they are, the harder they fall?
> 
> *PonderOverYonder*


Where do you get these?


----------



## DinohScene (Oct 5, 2013)

Gahars said:


> But isn't it true that the bigger they are, the harder they fall?
> 
> *PonderOverYonder*


 
Ninty got born out of the last crash.
Time for Gahars to make a console which throws godawful puns at you when you boot it?


----------



## ForteGospel (Oct 5, 2013)

so, according to this article... gamers are moving to PCs and that is going to crash the market? riiiiiiiiiiiiiight...

now about mobile devices... i dont see a gamer owning only a mobile device...

now if third party companies are planning on releasing the same games for the new gen and the old gen at the same time, it is going to slow down the selling of the new consoles


----------



## calmwaters (Oct 5, 2013)

Gamers are moving to PC's? That means that the Xbone can become a true entertainment system since everyone will play games on the PC. But I'm still keeping my old systems just in case the PC game market crashes like the 1983 game crash.

Edit: I'm glad this is actually a thread because I knew something like this would happen. There're just so many things wrong with the industry. Curse you, Android.


----------



## blinkdragonid (Oct 5, 2013)

"1,105 respondents" thats nothing! and i remind you GTA V made 1 billion$ in 3 days.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 5, 2013)

Let's not forget what caused the original Video Game Industry Crash in the first place - inflated prices, lack of software due to a difficult development cycles caused by a multitude of entirely different target devices and an incredibly large selection of devices to choose from, each with an uncertain future.

Today we suffer from none of that - software is released on an almost daily basis, the prices are hardly to be frowned upon_ (at least in comparison to those from the times of the original crash)_ and we only really have three major players, one of which was knocked out before the race even began. I don't think a new crash is coming anytime soon - the industry has taken a turn in the right direction, simplifying developnment and narrowing down the numbers of architectures of interest, not to mention that the sheer number of libraries facilitating development is staggering.


----------



## ThatDudeWithTheFood (Oct 5, 2013)

People concerned about gamers migrating to PC.
GTA 5 makes a billion dollars in a couple of days while being only available on consoles.


----------



## Jiro2 (Oct 5, 2013)

> The report goes on to note that a majority of the game-playing public do their game-playing on PCs today.


 
That's written in a way that has holes you could crash Lavos through.

Does "game playing on PCs" mean the kind of games hardcore gamers think of as PC gaming (GTA, Doom, etc.) or does it refer to such things as Facebook games?
Does "a majority play on PCs" mean that people have moved from consoles to PCs (thus reducing the console gamers and causing a crash), or that new gamers go directly to PC (this not reducing the console gamers and not causing a crash), especially since new gamers who play Facebook games are probably in the second category?
Same question for mobile gamers.
I suspect this is overblown and the article is just ignoring that.  You won't get a crash unless you reduce the number of console gamers, not the percentage of console gamers--you can reduce the percentage just by having more non-gamers play Farmville.


----------



## ken28 (Oct 5, 2013)

kinda goes along with his theorie
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=166018&page=1


----------



## Silverthorn (Oct 5, 2013)

I doubt such a crash will happen.
I quite agree with this report for that matter, and don't think that we should expect a great console sales decrease anytime soon.


----------



## Terenigma (Oct 5, 2013)

The soloution is obvious, become one big massive company that involves all 3 of Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft and blow the mobile gaming out of the water by offering decent prices for games. No nintendo, im not paying £9 pound for a HD port of one of the wii sports. No Microsoft/Sony im not paying £10 for DLC to play a game i already bought and is on the disc.


----------



## Deleted member 473940 (Oct 5, 2013)

That group had an average of 2.6 consoles? Well make that 3.6, cuz they are gonna buy PS4 or Xbox one.. or even both.


----------



## Gahars (Oct 5, 2013)

Terenigma said:


> The soloution is obvious, become one big massive company that involves all 3 of Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft and blow the mobile gaming out of the water by offering decent prices for games. No nintendo, im not paying £9 pound for a HD port of one of the wii sports. No Microsoft/Sony im not paying £10 for DLC to play a game i already bought and is on the disc.


 
How does a monopoly help consumers? What incentive would they have to keep prices low if there's no competition?



Silverthorn said:


> I doubt such a crash will happen.
> I quite agree with this report for that matter, and don't think that we should expect a great console sales decrease anytime soon.


 
Do you agree with this report because it's truly better made, or because it conforms to your biases? Are you ignoring the sad reality and just paying attention to the comfortable lies?



Jiro2 said:


> I suspect this is overblown and the article is just ignoring that. You won't get a crash unless you reduce the number of console gamers, not the percentage of console gamers--you can reduce the percentage just by having more non-gamers play Farmville.


 


> "Industry veterans will remember the crash of 1983, when the games market was saturated with hardware devices," the report states. "Today, the industry runs a similar risk, as [with] a higher-than-ever console installed base, consumers may be resistant to adding more hardware to their living rooms."
> 
> While the report acknowledges there are more gamers now than ever before, it suggests their habits are changing. Specifically, Superdata found gamers increasingly gravitating toward versatile, multi-purpose platforms like PCs and mobile devices. *As a result, an increase in the number of gamers won't necessarily translate into an increase in demand for consoles.*


 
/le  face


----------



## Dork (Oct 5, 2013)

I think a crash will happen. The console is market is being flooded to death.

There are going to be too many consoles this "gen". We got the Xbox One, Playstation 4, Wii U, the Ouya, the Gamestick, Amazon's android console, Mad Catz console, and every iteration of the Steam Box. Not only that, but very few of those consoles have their own unique library of games, they all boil down to multiplat machines. The industry is also being flooded with cheap indie games and horrible AAA games.


----------



## Xexyz (Oct 5, 2013)

I have 2 consoles and 6/10th of a console! YAY!


----------



## stanleyopar2000 (Oct 5, 2013)

ugh..another ANALyist predicting a video game crash...


----------



## kristianity77 (Oct 5, 2013)

I dont think there will be a crash but its obvious that with more choices of where and what to game on, everything is becoming diluted.  And with everything becoming more diluted, especially on the next gen, that will lead to less sales perhaps when costs of producing games keeps on going up and up.  I think there is some substance in that article in that troubling times may well lie ahead.

Back when the 360 and ps3 came out you had 3 choices really.  360, PS3 or Wii.   If you didn't like those options you had a PC.  Then there were two devices to satisfy the handheld market in the PSP and the DS.  

This time round its conceivable that along side the PS4 and Xbox One your going to have more people this time round that are prepared to stick with previous gen right to the last breath purely because its HD, games still look decent enough and there is software everywhere of decent quality.  Then when you think that android consoles are popping up now that I can only see growing (Ive just made a purchase of an iReadygo I5 and I think its the best handheld I've ever owned).  This time round as well you've got mobile phones, the half way house that is the Wii U as well as 3DS, Vita, Nvidia Shield, the upcoming Steam box thingy.  The list never ends.  

All these choices might look great for the consumer, but surely its a nightmare for developers in where and when to deploy resources and budgets etc.  Games like GTA costing millions to develop you'd imagine will start becoming the norm in the next gen as costs spiral, but if sales become more fragmented due to a lot of consumer choice with regards to hardware, will companies break even on their outgoings in a lot of cases.  We'll have to wait and see.


----------



## weatMod (Oct 5, 2013)

Terenigma said:


> The soloution is obvious, become one big massive company that involves all 3 of Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft and blow the mobile gaming out of the water by offering decent prices for games. No nintendo, im not paying £9 pound for a HD port of one of the wii sports. No Microsoft/Sony im not paying £10 for DLC to play a game i already bought and is on the disc.


 
this is the most retarded post, consolidation = lack of competition  and  drives prices up not down , the whole problem is that these huge  companies  have too much control


----------



## Silverthorn (Oct 5, 2013)

Gahars said:


> -snip-


 

I don't disagree with most of the facts presented in the article. Sure, gaming habits are changing, smatphones and PCs are taking a more prominent place on the market, and there's certainly a saturation of consoles in households. 
What I don't believe is that a crash would happen because of it. Console gaming sales might decline, sure, but I expect it will be progressive.
Also, mentioning the cause of the crash of 1983 as just "saturation of hardware devices" is being too inaccurate imo.


----------



## Clydefrosch (Oct 5, 2013)

gosh, its like they werent even around when everyone with a ps2 got a ps3.

how saturated must the iphone market be by now?


----------



## Jiro2 (Oct 5, 2013)

Gahars said:


> *As a result, an increase in the number of gamers won't necessarily translate into an increase in demand for consoles.*


 
A crash is a decrease.  Just not having an increase isn't a decrease.  Increasing the number of gamers, and not increasing the demand for consoles because all those new gamers are playing Farmville or Angry Birds, won't increase the number of console gamers, but it won't decrease it either, so it won't cause a crash.


----------



## TVL (Oct 5, 2013)

Women who shop for shoes; 100% of them have a pair of shoes already... Brace yourselves for the big shoecrash of 2013!

At least according to data gathered from five people that we're involved in a study at Supershoe, all they had to do was add insane lies and wait for traffic to their site to increase... it worked!


----------



## stanleyopar2000 (Oct 5, 2013)

Dark S. said:


> I think a crash will happen. The console is market is being flooded to death.
> 
> There are going to be too many consoles this "gen". We got the Xbox One, Playstation 4, Wii U, the Ouya, the Gamestick, Amazon's android console, Mad Catz console, and every iteration of the Steam Box. Not only that, but very few of those consoles have their own unique library of games, they all boil down to multiplat machines. The industry is also being flooded with cheap indie games and horrible AAA games.



game crash in 83' happened not because the consumer had too many choices...it was because all the numerous choices were all low quality


----------



## TemplarGR (Oct 5, 2013)

stanleyopar2000 said:


> game crash in 83' happened not because the consumer had too many choices...it was because all the numerous choices were all low quality


 
Exactly!

And this is the same reason a crash is likely to happen again, sooner or later. It is obvious to us veteran gamers with decades of gaming experience that there has been a steady decline in game quality for years. Graphics may have improved(though their improvement rate is slowing down), but the gameplay is declining badly.

I don't know if this will happen this gen (PS4) or next gen(PS5). But it will happen, because now that the graphics are in the "good enough" category, there are few things they can improve to force people to pay more money... And designing quality gameplay with lots of content is expensive and difficult, and will raise costs.

Anyway, a new video game crash would be highly beneficial for the industry, it will allow us to get rid of EA, Actiblizzard, Ubisoft, Capcom, SEGA and all other big enterprises that treat their fanbases like dirt and restrict creativity...


----------



## newo (Oct 5, 2013)

Most people are playing thier games on PCs?  What what?  GTA5 sold a billion in 3 days? hmmm...

The next console I build is a 360.  I aint got no money to say up to date.  I still have a huge backlog.


----------



## The Catboy (Oct 5, 2013)

History repeats itself, thus I am not shocked.


----------



## Dork (Oct 5, 2013)

stanleyopar2000 said:


> it was because all the numerous choices were all low quality


-All those android consoles with phone specs
-Indie game oversaturation
-huge budget games that end in disappointment

Looks low quality to me.


----------



## chrisrlink (Oct 5, 2013)

i wonder if the US Gov shutdown has anything to do with it NAH -sarcasm- at any rate the US economy does play a role well time to pack my bags and move to a more economically sound country


----------



## Psionic Roshambo (Oct 5, 2013)

I think there will be a soft crash... Not like it was in the 80's (although to be honest I enjoyed that period of time.... I picked up so many games brand new at stores sometimes for 50 cents a pop... lol)


----------



## FAST6191 (Oct 5, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> Let's not forget what caused the original Video Game Industry Crash in the first place - inflated prices, lack of software due to a difficult development cycles caused by a multitude of entirely different target devices and an incredibly large selection of devices to choose from, each with an uncertain future.



For a moment there I thought your were setting up for an "oh wait", it might even be half possible to turn it to it but if the consoles are being PCs again and software development has become more abstracted then I will hold back. Likewise if we do have diversified income streams (adverts are the order of the day rather than something special, they also do media to a serious degree, merchandising, peripherals) and the odd game can still make a profit then I do not think it will end up quite as toxic as it was before. Toys and entertainment are brutal industries, always have been, but I doubt they are going away any time soon. 

Anyway I saw this when clicking around earlier but did not read too much into it. Going back now I would probably say something like it is clickbait of the better sort as there is a change coming and nobody quite knows what it will be.

On the other hand if devs are not so inclined to curtail their spending and/or they are slow to properly embrace different models then there could be some serious casualties.



weatMod said:


> this is the most retarded post, consolidation = lack of competition  and  drives prices up not down , the whole problem is that these huge  companies  have too much control



Consolidation does not have to mean monopoly as much as unified architecture. I have about 20 different DVD players around here and most are made by different companies, all play DVDs though.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 5, 2013)

chrisrlink said:


> i wonder if the US Gov shutdown has anything to do with it NAH -sarcasm- at any rate the US economy does play a role well time to pack my bags and move to a more economically sound country


 
You can always return the tea you threw into the sea and beg the Queen for forgiveness - a responsible parent welcomes its disobedient sons with open arms when they show repentance.


----------



## BlackWizzard17 (Oct 5, 2013)

Nintendo please sell the wii u as a "toy" and save us all from yet another crash on the gaming history.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 5, 2013)

BlackWizzard17 said:


> Nintendo please sell the wii u as a "toy" and save us all from yet another crash on the gaming history.


 
*>Wii U*
*>Saviour of the Gaming Industry*

Oh-ho-ho! 

So far, the Wii U is shaping up to be the Atari Jaguar of this generation, I think you're overestimating its abilities to influence the crowds.


----------



## chrisrlink (Oct 5, 2013)

idc what happens to us i'm moving to Japan (oh shit don't know a lick of Japanese)


----------



## BlackWizzard17 (Oct 5, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> *>Wii U*
> *>Saviour of the Gaming Industry*
> 
> Oh-ho-ho!
> ...


What I mean is the wii u is great but with all these other consoles like back in the 80s Nintendo didn't really market the NES as a game console but more of some sort off toy to sell has there was a big crash with all these consoles coming in


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 5, 2013)

BlackWizzard17 said:


> What I mean is the wii u is great but with all these other consoles like back in the 80s Nintendo didn't really market the NES as a game console but more of some sort off toy to sell has there was a big crash with all these consoles coming in


 
I know what you're referring to, thing is, the NES was top-of-the-line hardware during its lifespan and truly was an _"Entertainment System"_. The Wii U isn't - these days it takes a bit more than just playing games to be called an _"Entertainment System"_, things the Wii U just doesn't do... while every other system out there does.


----------



## weatMod (Oct 5, 2013)

FAST6191 said:


> For a moment there I thought your were setting up for an "oh wait", it might even be half possible to turn it to it
> 
> 
> Consolidation does not have to mean monopoly as much as unified architecture. I have about 20 different DVD players around here and most are made by different companies, all play DVDs though.


 

monopoly or not more consolidation means less consumer choice and higher prices ,you just said it "most are made by different companies" there is a difference between technical standards like dvd and blu ray and " merging "nintendo ,sony ,microsoft into one corporation" putting them under one umbrella if you will , look at google, and youtube perfect example  YT sucks now that is has been acquired by google ,what the poster said is like saying google MS and apple should all merge so that consumers can have cheaper prices and better products, it runs contrary to any conventional  knowledge as to how markets work


----------



## BlackWizzard17 (Oct 5, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> I know what you're referring to, thing is, the NES was top-of-the-line hardware during its lifespan and truly was an _"Entertainment System"_. The Wii U isn't - these days it takes a bit more than just playing games to be called an _"Entertainment System"_, things the Wii U just doesn't do... while every other system out there does.


Well that may be true but the wii u does everything I want it to do.....play games


----------



## ForteGospel (Oct 5, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> I know what you're referring to, thing is, the NES was top-of-the-line hardware during its lifespan and truly was an _"Entertainment System"_. The Wii U isn't - these days it takes a bit more than just playing games to be called an _"Entertainment System"_, things the Wii U just doesn't do... while every other system out there does.


opinions opinions opinions...


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 5, 2013)

BlackWizzard17 said:


> Well that may be true but the wii u does everything I want it to do.....play games


 
...and once the developers catch up with the specs of the upcoming systems, it will stay far behind with decreasing support, living on first-party life support like the Gamecube has.


ForteGospel said:


> opinions opinions opinions...


Of course it's an opinion - I don't have a crystal ball, I can't see into the future. I can analyze the situation and draw basic conclusions though - it's not selling for a reason.


----------



## Ethevion (Oct 5, 2013)

The market can crash for all I care. Games have been getting too dull with only a few exceptions.


BlackWizzard17 said:


> Well that may be true but the wii u does everything I want it to do.....play games


Wait, there's people on the internet that just want their consoles to play games? Shit, all this time I though I was the only one!


----------



## ForteGospel (Oct 5, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> ...and once the developers catch up with the specs of the upcoming systems, it will stay far behind with decreasing support, living on first-party life support like the Gamecube has.
> 
> Of course it's an opinion - I don't have a crystal ball, I can't see into the future. I can analyze the situation and draw basic conclusions though - it's not selling for a reason.


the only reason you are giving us is "its not fun"


----------



## Dork (Oct 5, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> *>Wii U*
> *>Saviour of the Gaming Industry*
> 
> Oh-ho-ho!
> ...


 
Your not shitposting or anything.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 5, 2013)

ForteGospel said:


> the only reason you are giving us is "its not fun"


A game console is never _"fun"_ in and out of itself, it's a piece of plastic. Games are fun - that's what you buy a gaming platform for, and so far other than the usual Nintendo serving _(which is not enough, as shown by the Gamecube and the Nintendo 64, although many tend to disagree here, mostly due to blind brand loyalty)_ and a couple current generation ports _(which aren't a reason to buy a new system since you can play those games on a system you already own)_ it doesn't have a lot going for it.

Facts are that development is going to shift towards PC/PS4/XBox One this generation since the platforms are structurally similar, and the fact that they're leagues ahead of the Wii U in terms of specs means that many games will simply skip the platform altogether to cut multiplatform development costs. This equals game drought and a scarcity of games will lead the Wii U into the realm of obscurity with only a handful of gamers interested in it for the sake of these _"rare and far between"_ Nintendo exclusive titles.


Dark S. said:


> Your not shitposting or anything.


An opinion I don't share or downright dislike = Shit Post, the GBATemp way.


----------



## Hop2089 (Oct 5, 2013)

PC isn't going to cause the gaming crash, it's the mobile and browser games that will lead to it.  Face it PC can and will always coexist well with consoles, it's the social games that cannot for the most part.  It doesn't help that developers want to make main series in much loved franchises mobile and browser only.

Gamers aren't all moving to PC, too many people don't have the patience needed for it since you'll have issues like games not working after downloading and having to re-download them plus it's too much maintenance to keep a gaming PC in tip top shape for the general population.  Then there's the stereotype of an ideal PC costing too much to build when it is not.

If anyone wants to stop this crash from happening, go after the devs making so many social games, these are what are taking games away from console and PC alike and causing the decline in consoles.


----------



## BlackWizzard17 (Oct 5, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> A game console is never _"fun"_ in and out of itself, it's a piece of plastic. Games are fun - that's what you buy a gaming platform for, and so far other than the usual Nintendo serving _(which is not enough, as shown by the Gamecube and the Nintendo 64, although many tend to disagree here, mostly due to blind brand loyalty)_ and a couple current generation ports _(which aren't a reason to buy a new system since you can play those games on a system you already own)_ it doesn't have a lot going for it.
> 
> Facts are that development is going to shift towards PC/PS4/XBox One this generation since the platforms are structurally similar, and the fact that they're leagues ahead of the Wii U in terms of specs means that many games will simply skip the platform altogether to cut multiplatform development costs. This equals game drought and a scarcity of games will lead the Wii U into the realm of obscurity with only a handful of gamers interested in it for the sake of these _"rare and far between"_ Nintendo exclusive titles.
> 
> An opinion I don't share or downright dislike = Shit Post, the GBATemp way.


A game console is not to be judge buy its build of hardware or what it lacks because that shit does not matter. A game is the amount of imagination you can put into it so is consumers can play it. If you or the devs of a game can't respect that than you guys don't know what a game is. Fuck ps4,xbox0ne and pc for all I care because there still gonna have shitty games and still gonna mess up and there's still gonna be a lot of hacking.it can use Netflix, Hulu, YouTube,play games, connect with friends and a lot of other things. This system has better specs than the ps3 and the ps3 pumped out amazing stuff.Dont hate the console hate the games.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 5, 2013)

Hop2089 said:


> PC isn't going to cause the gaming crash, it's the mobile and browser games that will lead to it. Face it PC can and will always coexist well with consoles, it's the social games that cannot for the most part. It doesn't help that developers want to make main series in much loved franchises mobile and browser only.
> 
> Gamers aren't all moving to PC, too many people don't have the patience needed for it since you'll have issues like games not working after downloading and having to re-download them plus it's too much maintenance to keep a gaming PC in tip top shape for the general population. Then there's the stereotype of an ideal PC costing too much to build when it is not.
> 
> If anyone wants to stop this crash from happening, go after the devs making so many social games, these are what are taking games away from console and PC alike and causing the decline in consoles.


Social, casual _"Facebook-grade"_ games hardly appeal to who we consider _"Gamers"_ - they appeal to casual players who feel like milking a cow while they check their inbox. We're talking about two completely different target audiences which do intermingle with each other, but only to a small degree and do not clash.

Saying that social games threaten full-sized productions is like saying the manufacture of bicycles threatens the manufacture of automobiles - fair enough, both types of vehicles use roads, but one does not replace the other entirely - they co-exist, not clash.


BlackWizzard17 said:


> A game console is not to be judge buy its build of hardware or what it lacks because that shit does not matter. A game is the amount of imagination you can put into it so is consumers can play it. If you or the devs of a game can't respect that than you guys don't know what a game is. Fuck ps4,xbox0ne and pc for all I care because there still gonna have shitty games and still gonna mess up and there's still gonna be a lot of hacking.it can use Netflix, Hulu, YouTube,play games, connect with friends and a lot of other things. This system has better specs than the ps3 and the ps3 pumped out amazing stuff.Dont hate the console hate the games.


Imagination belongs to game developers - they're the ones who craft the games. The system is the canvas they build their creations for, and a bigger, better canvas provides more wiggle room for them and gives them more tools to create more refined products.

I'm not saying that you can't paint a Mona Lisa on a crappy canvas - you can, with enough dedication. A poor artist will not paint a beautiful painting no matter what canvas is used, but a great artist may feel constrained by a bad canvas which does not satisfy the requirements for the artist's creative vision. There are good artists and bad artists, good canvases and bad ones - masterpieces are created when good artists are given tools which allow them to spread their creative wings.


----------



## Gahars (Oct 5, 2013)

BlackWizzard17 said:


> A game console is not to be judge buy its build of hardware or what it lacks because that shit does not matter. A game is the amount of imagination you can put into it so is consumers can play it. If you or the devs of a game can't respect that than you guys don't know what a game is. Fuck ps4,xbox0ne and pc for all I care because there still gonna have shitty games and still gonna mess up and there's still gonna be a lot of hacking.it can use Netflix, Hulu, YouTube,play games, connect with friends and a lot of other things. This system has better specs than the ps3 and the ps3 pumped out amazing stuff.Dont hate the console hate the games.


 

A console's specs determine what sort of games can be made for it. Better specs mean developers have more freedom to bring their imaginations to life. So better specs = better games.

Also, the PS3 was the most powerful console of its hardware generation (unless you want to count the Wii U as last gen, anyway). So the PS3 pumped out amazing games because it was the most powerful. By your own admission, better specs meant better game output. QED, mofo.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Oct 5, 2013)

The market wasn't just saturated with hardware. It had pisspoor games, every console having the exact same game, and poor ports of arcade games. There was literally close to over 20 consoles.

Today? We have what, 3 main consoles, and steambox which nobody will care about? And pc's?


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 5, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> The market wasn't just saturated with hardware. It had pisspoor games, every console having the exact same game, and poor ports of arcade games. There was literally close to over 20 consoles.
> 
> Today? We have what, 3 main consoles, and steambox which nobody will care about? And pc's?


Exactly. The market was saturated with systems which were incompatible with each other - most of'em ended up with a small library of titles, mostly small ones made by a handful of developers so that they could be pushed onto the market as quickly as possible. Both system and game prices were hefty, so buying a computer or a gaming system of any kind became a gamble because nobody knew which one was going to be supported the most. Now we don't have that problem, and even the rise of Android-based platforms does not cause a similar situation as all those systems are cross-compatible for the most part.


----------



## Wisenheimer (Oct 5, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> ...and once the developers catch up with the specs of the upcoming systems, it will stay far behind with decreasing support, living on first-party life support like the Gamecube has.
> 
> Of course it's an opinion - I don't have a crystal ball, I can't see into the future. I can analyze the situation and draw basic conclusions though - it's not selling for a reason.


 
I think the evidence does not support your conclusions.  Most people are not going to go out and spend hundreds of dollars on a new console unless they have a compelling reason.  If you look at the games available on the Wii U, they are only just now starting to create a compelling game library.

As for third party support, that has more to do with the relationships Nintendo builds with third parties and whether those third parties think their games will sell well on their consoles.

If you look at the last three generations of consoles, the ones with the best hardware were not the winners.  The Wii had less graphical prowess than the PS3 and the Xbox and beat both.  The PS2 was markedly less powerful than the gamecube or the xbox, but sold more than double the units of both competitors combined.  The PS1 easily outsold the N64, despite the N64's magnificently better number-crunching power. 

When I look at the gaming experience, for me personally, the Wii U has a lot more going for it.  Most of the best third party games that did not appear on the Wii but only on the other consoles were also obtainable on the much more graphically powerful PC versions.  Neither competitor to the Wii had very man highly-rated exclusives, the Xbox especially.

I should add, I think it is possible for a big video game market collapse, but nothing like was seen in the 1980's.  In the 1980's, there were huge numbers of competing computer architectures along with a ton of consoles and hybrid computer/video game machines.  Atari was the indisputable king, and the crash nearly destroyed it.

These days, there are fewer but more diverse systems.  There only two major commercial OS's, only one which is commonly used for gaming.  There are only three major home console makers, two major handheld console makers, and three major phone OS's used for gaming.  All the companies involved have the economic power to weather a crisis.  Could one or more of them be forced from the home console business?  Absolutely.  Could one or more major gaming studios go under in a crash?  Absolutely.  Will the game industry be decimated?  Absolutely not. 

Android and iOS developers along with PC game manufacturer's will keep churning out piles of shovelware.  The biggest risk is a collapse in the market for really well-designed, artistic games who get buried.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 5, 2013)

Wisenheimer said:


> If you look at the last three generations of consoles, the ones with the best hardware were not the winners. The Wii had less graphical prowess than the PS3 and the Xbox and beat both. The PS2 was markedly less powerful than the gamecube or the xbox, but sold more than double the units of both competitors combined. The PS1 easily outsold the N64, despite the N64's magnificently better number-crunching power.


 
There are good reasons why the results were as you present them. The PS2 was indeed weaker than the Gamecube or the XBox, but it was released much sooner than the two and immediately after the highly-successful PS1. Additionally it doubled as a DVD player - a newly-emerged format which enticed early adopters. The hardware was rugged and well-designed, not to mention that Sony secured killer franchises for their system. The Gamecube was admittedly beefier, but it did not support DVD or any other multimedia functionality at all and the XBox was a moderate success in the area where it was meant to succeed - the US. It wasn't meant to match the PS2 in sales - that was impossible as at the time of the XBox's and Gamecube's release, the PS2 ruled over the market with an immense adoption rate - everybody and their dog had one so developers continued to support it. The Wii U does not have the same playing card in its sleeve.

The PS1 outsold the N64 despite the N64's fantastic number-crunching power because it was far better-designed. It was cheaper, it used CD-based media _(lower production costs and higher profit margin for developers and lower price-per-game for the End User)_, it was compatible with Audio CD's _(replacing a home stero for many non-audiophile users)_ it was not 64-bit _(something entirely new for developers, which is why most N64 games aren't actually using the 64-bit power offered, instead opting for 32-bit doubles)_ like the N64, it did not have a texture size limit like the N64 did _(resulting in developers having to multi-layer textures or resorting to gourad shading)_, it did not limit developers in terms of space _(cartridges offered far less storage than CD's so contemporary solutions such as music streaming or FMV's were not within reach)_ and was generally a more well-thought-out device, which resulted in far superior developer support. What I'm saying here is that the N64 may have been the more _powerful_ system on paper, but it was a _worse_ system due to its various hindrences and short-comings, similarly to the Sega Saturn which failed for similar reasons.


----------



## FAST6191 (Oct 5, 2013)

weatMod said:


> monopoly or not more consolidation means less consumer choice and higher prices ,you just said it "most are made by different companies" there is a difference between technical standards like dvd and blu ray and " merging "nintendo ,sony ,microsoft into one corporation" putting them under one umbrella if you will , look at google, and youtube perfect example  YT sucks now that is has been acquired by google ,what the poster said is like saying google MS and apple should all merge so that consumers can have cheaper prices and better products, it runs contrary to any conventional  knowledge as to how markets work



First I am not sure youtube under google is doing badly, though I have not been bored enough to look up the finances (they were a lossmaker/investment capital burner when youtube was flying solo) so I can not argue. More as a service though youtube seems to be doing quite well for its users (both the consumer types and the creative types).
Equally I am certainly not about to advocate for a monopoly, the post was more after you went down one quite narrow line of logic. Granted I am not about to hire Terenigma to write my business proposals but hey.


----------



## BlackWizzard17 (Oct 5, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> What I'm saying here is that the N64 may have been the more _powerful_ system on paper, but it was a _worse_ system due to its various hindrences and short-comings, similarly to the Sega Saturn which failed for similar reasons.


 
The n64 may have had more power but lacked many other things but that does not mean it was the worst system Because it was different from the other systems and lacked much space for games. It was a really great system and what makes it noticeable is its first party games. This was indeed one of the many greatest systems i have ever played it had great games.





Gahars said:


> A console's specs determine what sort of games can be made for it. Better specs mean developers have more freedom to bring their imaginations to life. So better specs = better games.
> 
> Also, the PS3 was the most powerful console of its hardware generation (unless you want to count the Wii U as last gen, anyway). So the PS3 pumped out amazing games because it was the most powerful. By your own admission, better specs meant better game output. QED, mofo.


Wii U more powerful than my ps3 and computer. Whats stopping good games from coming onto this platform
Your statement is valid about but were not talking about a nes to a ps1 here.


----------



## Hop2089 (Oct 5, 2013)

FAST6191 said:


> First I am not sure youtube under google is doing badly, though I have not been bored enough to look up the finances (they were a lossmaker/investment capital burner when youtube was flying solo) so I can not argue. More as a service though youtube seems to be doing quite well for its users (both the consumer types and the creative types).
> Equally I am certainly not about to advocate for a monopoly, the post was more after you went down one quite narrow line of logic. Granted I am not about to hire Terenigma to write my business proposals but hey.


 
Financially, YT is doing good but it's a mess, the 144p option shouldn't be there, there's also no reason why they shouldn't have disabled buffering of 360p and up videos while pausing, also their flagging system is broken.  Now you have to use FF plugins to get these features back.


----------



## Gahars (Oct 5, 2013)

BlackWizzard17 said:


> Wii U more powerful than my ps3 and computer. Whats stopping good games from coming onto this platform


 
Following your train of thought? Because it's the weakest system of its generation (assuming we're counting the Wii U as next gen, of course) by a country mile. The PS4 and Xbox One far outclass it at pretty much every turn.



BlackWizzard17 said:


> Your statement is valid about but were not talking about a nes to a ps1 here.


 
Compare a Wii U to a decked out PC gaming rig and you might as well be. :^)


----------



## weatMod (Oct 5, 2013)

FAST6191 said:


> First I am not sure youtube under google is doing badly, though I have not been bored enough to look up the finances (they were a lossmaker/investment capital burner when youtube was flying solo) so I can not argue. More as a service though youtube seems to be doing quite well for its users (both the consumer types and the creative types).
> Equally I am certainly not about to advocate for a monopoly, the post was more after you went down one quite narrow line of logic. Granted I am not about to hire Terenigma to write my business proposals but hey.


 
yeah i dont know about YT finances ,i was referring to the consumer /user end experience, it totally sucks everyone hates the changes they have made to the layout , they ruined it
and merging the login from YT and google is awful too, they force you to use real name instead of being able to create a handle like before , they made the inbox so far burried instead of having it right where you can see it , everything about youtube since google got it sucks ,everyone complains and they dont do shit about it, cause they are really the only game in town for now, other similar sites have nearly zero % of users in comparison, the only thing keeping people there is cause everyone else is there

on topic the problem is that the market is over saturated, saturated with crap , too many FPS games and shovelware ,and nintendo direct was a huge ledown too all they seem to make now are side scrollers ,2 1/2 d linear, nonopen world games every game is basically the same format, a 2d side scroller in 3d or a coolie cutter rpg , and other companies just churn out FPS after FPS< 90% of what the industry produced today is just complete shit ,just like atari crash of the 80's

also nintendo isnt helping things by finding these milktoast dweebs with flat affects that they find from god only knows where to give their nintendo direct presentations, i though reggie was a tool but holy shit those guys in the last nintendo direct take the fucking cake, could they have found more boring people , maybe they should have got ben stein to reprise his role from ferris bueller to do it ,would have been more exciting, bueller, bueller


----------



## Wisenheimer (Oct 5, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> There are good reasons why the results were as you present them. The PS2 was indeed weaker than the Gamecube or the XBox, but it was released much sooner than the two and immediately after the highly-successful PS1. Additionally it doubled as a DVD player - a newly-emerged format which enticed early adopters. The hardware was rugged and well-designed, not to mention that Sony secured killer franchises for their system. The Gamecube was admittedly beefier, but it did not support DVD or any other multimedia functionality at all and the XBox was a moderate success in the area where it was meant to succeed - the US. It wasn't meant to match the PS2 in sales - that was impossible as at the time of the XBox's and Gamecube's release, the PS2 ruled over the market with an immense adoption rate - everybody and their dog had one so developers continued to support it. The Wii U does not have the same playing card in its sleeve.
> 
> The PS1 outsold the N64 despite the N64's fantastic number-crunching power because it was far better-designed. It was cheaper, it used CD-based media _(lower production costs and higher profit margin for developers and lower price-per-game for the End User)_, it was compatible with Audio CD's _(replacing a home stero for many non-audiophile users)_ it was not 64-bit _(something entirely new for developers, which is why most N64 games aren't actually using the 64-bit power offered, instead opting for 32-bit doubles)_ like the N64, it did not have a texture size limit like the N64 did _(resulting in developers having to multi-layer textures or resorting to gourad shading)_, it did not limit developers in terms of space _(cartridges offered far less storage than CD's so contemporary solutions such as music streaming or FMV's were not within reach)_ and was generally a more well-thought-out device, which resulted in far superior developer support. What I'm saying here is that the N64 may have been the more _powerful_ system on paper, but it was a _worse_ system due to its various hindrences and short-comings, similarly to the Sega Saturn which failed for similar reasons.


 
The evidence leads me to a completely different conclusion.  For the most part, only "nerds" care about hardware.  Consumers care about things such as experience, branding, and other factors that can be marketed to.  The PS1 did so well largely because it managed to create a whole new market of older gamers that were not interested in Sega Megadrives, Super Nintendos and Atari Jarguars.  The ability to include full motion video and include a bit of CD audio in the PS1 was nice, but I have not seen a lot of evidence that this was a major reason consumers preferred the device. 

The PS2 was successful because it built on the popularity of the PS1 and was able to provide a much larger library of reasonable quality games.  The x-box and the gamecube both had ways to play DVD's, but the evidence shows that consumers, for the most part, would not choose a gaming device based upon that ability.  A version of the gamecube that played DVD's was licensed and it was not a very big seller in the marketplace. 

At the end of the day, the consoles that sell best are the ones that can market to new and existing audiences the best via a variety of methods.  Simply having better hardware is never the primary motivation for most consumers.



Gahars said:


> Following your train of thought? Because it's the weakest system of its generation (assuming we're counting the Wii U as next gen, of course) by a country mile. The PS4 and Xbox One far outclass it at pretty much every turn.
> 
> 
> 
> Compare a Wii U to a decked out PC gaming rig and you might as well be. :^)


 
The PS2, PS1, and Wii were all "the weakest system of its generation" and they are the three best-selling home consoles of all time, _by tens of millions.  _In the last two generations, the weakest competitor hardware-wise has held an easy first place while the strongest two fight for second. 

At the end of the day, if there are compelling games to play on the Wii U like there were on the Wii, the PS2, and the PS1, it will be successful.  Just like the Wii U sold at an amazing rate when it was first introduced, the PS4 and Xbone probably will too.  But it is a marathon, not a mile.  Whichever console has the most appealing games will win and, with the exception of games that are financed and published by the manufacturers, that will be decided by the demographics of the console and whether publishers believe they can profit. 

I have a feeling that the home console as we know it reached its peak with the previous generation and is on the decline.  The only thing that might save it are developing nations' increasing consumer purchasing power.


----------



## FAST6191 (Oct 5, 2013)

As a passive youtube user (I am usually behind some nice greasemonkey scripts but if I am slumming it on another machine then I am not in as much of a hurry to install them as I might be something like adblock) I am quite happy with the experience. About the only thing I miss is being able to kill a stream but as it does not preload much more then that is largely pointless. On changing interfaces I have seen some griping but I see the same wherever I go in life so I am not inclined to place too much stock in things.
144p seems to have reasonable audio too which is great for talking head stuff that does not need video.


----------



## ForteGospel (Oct 5, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> A game console is never _"fun"_ in and out of itself, it's a piece of plastic. Games are fun - that's what you buy a gaming platform for, and so far other than the usual Nintendo serving _(which is not enough, as shown by the Gamecube and the Nintendo 64, although many tend to disagree here, mostly due to blind brand loyalty)_ and a couple current generation ports _(which aren't a reason to buy a new system since you can play those games on a system you already own)_ it doesn't have a lot going for it.
> 
> Facts are that development is going to shift towards PC/PS4/XBox One this generation since the platforms are structurally similar, and the fact that they're leagues ahead of the Wii U in terms of specs means that many games will simply skip the platform altogether to cut multiplatform development costs. This equals game drought and a scarcity of games will lead the Wii U into the realm of obscurity with only a handful of gamers interested in it for the sake of these _"rare and far between"_ Nintendo exclusive titles.
> 
> An opinion I don't share or downright dislike = Shit Post, the GBATemp way.


everyone seems to be ignoring the fact that the major problem with the wii u is not "wii u haz no gaems" only 10 year old boys are saying, as the wii u is the only real next gen console with backwards compatibility.
but the fact that the wii u doesnt offer any new experience that i cant already get in any other console.

now the new ps4/xbox0ne you are adoring IMO are heading right towards the same brickwall.

whats new and exciting about those two consoles that i cant experience on my already purchased ps3/xbox360? all the third parties are going multi platform for both new gen and old gen... and that seems to be the case for atleast two years from now, so why would i get a next gen console at all?

the same i can say about the wii u, why would i get it, if i can play the same games on my ps3/xbox360

next year we will be getting FIFA 15 for ps2, ps3, ps4, xbox360, xbox0ne, wii, wiiu, nds, psp, 3ds, vita, gbc, gba


----------



## mario5555 (Oct 5, 2013)

Gahars said:


> "The Great Crash" (not to be confused with this great Crash) shook the fledgling games industry to its very core. Seemingly overnight, the market shriveled up. Companies collapsed, stores shuttered, and arcades became aren't-cades. It was a dark time, indeed.
> 
> So, is this report an accurate foretelling of dangers to come, or merely sensationalist doomsaying?
> 
> Yes.


 
Cue yearly doom saying from analysts...

Well if they keep saying it, one day it might come true.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Oct 5, 2013)

ForteGospel said:


> everyone seems to be ignoring the fact that the major problem with the wii u is not "wii u haz no gaems" only 10 year old boys are saying, as the wii u is the only real next gen console with backwards compatibility.
> but the fact that the wii u doesnt offer any new experience that i cant already get in any other console.
> 
> now the new ps4/xbox0ne you are adoring IMO are heading right towards the same brickwall.
> ...


 
Probably because you buy a console for it's games...

I mean shit, going by that logic, there was no need for me to buy a PS3 if I had a PS2. I mean, eventually The Last of Us will come to the PS2....right? Guys? Right?!


----------



## Wisenheimer (Oct 5, 2013)

ForteGospel said:


> everyone seems to be ignoring the fact that the major problem with the wii u is not "wii u haz no gaems" only 10 year old boys are saying, as the wii u is the only real next gen console with backwards compatibility.
> but the fact that the wii u doesnt offer any new experience that i cant already get in any other console.
> 
> now the new ps4/xbox0ne you are adoring IMO are heading right towards the same brickwall.
> ...


 
I'm not sure I follow you.  I do agree that, with the sole exception of the Wii Motion controller and Kinetic, consoles really have not added significantly new experiences since the PS2 era, but if you have unique games that are of meaningful quality and can only be played on next generation consoles, gamers will buy them.

Sure, Nintendo has not released anything breathtakingly new, but a lot of people do want to play the next Pikman, Zelda, Metroid, God of War, Halo, et cetera.  You can bet they will not be released on the old consoles.  Nintendo is probably done with releases for the Wii and don't expect Sony and Microsoft to release their exclusives for their old system.


----------



## tbgtbg (Oct 5, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> *>Wii U*
> *>Saviour of the Gaming Industry*
> 
> Oh-ho-ho!
> ...



Wii U already has more worthwhile games than Jag ever did. Not that that's saying much.


----------



## Dork (Oct 5, 2013)

Gahars said:


> The PS4 and Xbox One far outclass it at pretty much every turn.


 
Raw spec wise? Yeah. Will games actually make use of it? No.

The PS4 has an 8-core Jaguar x86 CPU (in reality it's 2 x 4 cores) which is a laptop CPU. x86 is very wasteful in resources, not only that but the PS4's operating system uses 4 of those cores, so only the other 4 will be used for games. The Wii U has a significant amount of eDRAM that makes up for it's RAM, and it's GPGPU is based around it. Wii U uses a PowerPC architecture, which is more efficient, and runs in a low power state. Wii U also has a second ARM CPU for running the OS, etc. So the Expresso CPU is solely for games.

The PS4's CPU is really just a junky thing, where it shines is it's GPU, which is rumored to be significantly more powerful than the Wii U's custom AMD "Latte" GPU (Nintendo has been really quiet about it's GPU, and it's under a heavy NDA) and better than the Xbox One's AMD Radeon. It should be able to run at a higher resolution while rendering more polygons, but we'll have to see. The Xbox One's specs shouldn't be too far off from the PS4's specs, and it's not like Microsoft has ever made stellar hardware.


----------



## Gahars (Oct 5, 2013)

Wisenheimer said:


> The PS2, PS1, and Wii were all "the weakest system of its generation" and they are the three best-selling home consoles of all time, _by tens of millions. _In the last two generations, the weakest competitor hardware-wise has held an easy first place while the strongest two fight for second.


 
People have a bad habit of mixing up correlation and causation when it comes to this topic. While the winning consoles have not been the most powerful, they didn't win just because they were weaker. It's more due to a wide variety of other factors at play, as Foxi mentioned before.

Just being the weakest is in no way a guaranteed victory. After all, if the rule was "The weakest system always wins", then the Genesis and Dreamcast would've been the winners of their respective generations.

Precedent is helpful and all, but many people make the mistake of thinking that it is absolute and unchanging. That's just silly.

/Being serious


----------



## chyyran (Oct 5, 2013)

Spoiler: GLORIOUS PC GAMING MASTER RACE











 
Sarcastic elitism aside, even with so many devices today, I can't help but think we're on the cusp of a golden age in gaming rather than a crash. With the exception of the WiiU, the 2 major consoles use relatively similar hardware to PCs and thus Steam Machines. Android "Gaming Devices" also use a common operating system. Even with so much market saturation, games may be easier to develop multiplatform than ever before. New technologies are being introduced that will further cement the gaming industry. Home consoles will never be the same as before, but instead are now simplified PCs running similar architecture, but still with wealth of features.

A PC by any other name is still a PC. Again, with the exception of the WiiU, both PS4 and Xbox One are pretty much simplified PCs, and so less resources can be spent optimizing for different platforms as in the past, and just focus on the game. This applies to AAA multiplats to the excellent indie games that are spewing out every day. There are now more choices than ever before, but these are excellent choices all around, not pieces of shit like "ET" back in 1983. Unprecedented support for indie games is being given by the big three, and Android is now the go-to OS for things like OUYA, and Shield.

And now Valve is hoping to change the landscape as well with the new controller and SteamOS. While Android is a welcome standard, it's not necessarily best for gaming. If SteamOS becomes the standard for set-top boxes, then that would be awesome.

There are so many good things happening every day. Occulus Rift, Steam Machines, x86 for consoles. With the advent of mobile gaming though, "hardcore gaming*" for lack of a better term, has become a niche, but it's a larger a niche than before mobile. There are more gamers than ever before, and there will be even more, children that will grow up of memories of playing _The Witness_ on their PS4 that they got for Christmas, of ones playing _Super Mario Brothers 3D Land_ and Wind Waker HD on their WiiU, and even more so of ones playing something as simple as _Angry Birds_ on their mom's phones. Even with market saturation, gaming has never been more open.

*Everything from FEZ to Call of Duty, from JRPGs to The Elder Scrolls, and everything in between. Basically games you expect on console and PC, and not mobile-oriented games like Angry Birds or Temple Run, or Facebook games a la Candy Crush/Flash games (as if flash games still exist )

tl;dr gaming lives, indoctrinate children.


----------



## Wisenheimer (Oct 5, 2013)

Gahars said:


> People have a bad habit of mixing up correlation and causation when it comes to this topic. While the winning consoles have not been the most powerful, they didn't want just because they were weaker. It's more due to a wide variety of other factors at play, as Foxi mentioned before.
> 
> Just being the weakest is in no way a guaranteed victory. After all, if the rule was "The weakest system always wins", then the Genesis and Dreamcast would've been the winners of their respective generations.
> 
> ...


 
I think being "weaker" helped the Wii a lot, because it was able to reduce its pricing much more aggressively.  The PS2 and PS1 won in part because they were "out of the gate" before their serious competitors, and as a result, had weaker hardware.  So, there is some causation there, even though it is indirect.  But, as you said, it is hardly a guarantee of victory.

My point was that most consumers do not actually understand nor care about specific specs like processor cores, CPU architecture, polygon fill rate, RAM architecture, et cetera.


----------



## Kouen Hasuki (Oct 5, 2013)

I'm still happy to say that the crash much more hit hard in the USA than in the UK  eh I'm not so worried being mostly PC master race


----------



## Kuragari Ryo (Oct 5, 2013)

I sort of want another crash to happen, if only so the ones who began killing it in the first place will go ruin something else.


----------



## The Milkman (Oct 5, 2013)

Fear not infidels! The glorious GabeN will lead us all through these dark times, and shall bring about a new world. A better world! A PC WORLD!


----------



## pwsincd (Oct 5, 2013)

im not sure wtf is going on anymore , seems hype outweighs the real need for the machines , i have a 13 yr old son that lives and breathes minecraft ( so my thoughts are , that its clear the gameplay far outweighs the visual appeal)  , he has a PS3 and at least 2 dozen games , all gathering dust . Yet he craves a new console for xmas . So you tell me what his urge is ? im fukked if i know anymore , as a parent i want to keep them up to date with his peer pressures , but struggle to explain to him that the urges he has arent out of interest in the console but more the need to keep up with the joneses , he doesnt understand. He just wants , and i unwillingly will comply , we play wiiu much more than ps3 and xbox . So my general thoughts are that the kids these days dont know wtf they want , just feel duty bound to a degree to comply with the current trends .. iits frustrating as a parent (and old school gamer).


----------



## Kirito-kun (Oct 5, 2013)

PC Master Race reporting in.

Honestly, it'll be a good thing if consoles fall. They're the biggest thing holding back game developers forcing them to cater to obsolete hardware and reducing the ability of indie devs to publish due to the high price of SDKs. They use closed-ecosystems, allowing corporations to charge as much as they want without competition. Unlike on PC where you have Steam, Origin, GOG.com, Gamer's Gate, as well as physical distribution all competing with each other. Consoles are solely designed for publishers to make money. The very concept of a dedicated console doesn't make sense anymore. PC hardware is getting cheaper and console hardware is lagging further behind even with the next-get. I await all the console gamers who will likely jump boat if a crash was to actually occur.

Praise Lord GabeN!


----------



## ßleck (Oct 6, 2013)

Ha! A video game crash at this day and age? I don't see any MAJOR reason for that to happen. Go back to your caves you PC sadists and video game haters!


----------



## FAST6191 (Oct 6, 2013)

pwsincd said:


> just feel duty bound to a degree to comply with the current trends



That is not just these days



pwsincd said:


> just feel duty bound to a degree to comply with the current trends


Really? [insert when I were a lad]



Kirito-kun said:


> PC Master Race reporting in.
> 
> Honestly, it'll be a good thing if consoles fall. They're the biggest thing holding back game developers forcing them to cater to obsolete hardware and reducing the ability of indie devs to publish due to the high price of SDKs. They use closed-ecosystems, allowing corporations to charge as much as they want without competition. Unlike on PC where you have Steam, Origin, GOG.com, Gamer's Gate, as well as physical distribution all competing with each other. Consoles are solely designed for publishers to make money. The very concept of a dedicated console doesn't make sense anymore. PC hardware is getting cheaper and console hardware is lagging further behind even with the next-get. I await all the console gamers who will likely jump boat if a crash was to actually occur.
> 
> Praise Lord GabeN!



What OS do you typically run this on?


----------



## pwsincd (Oct 6, 2013)

FAST6191 said:


> That is not just these days
> 
> 
> Really? [insert when I were a lad]


 
Not sure what your referring to , quoting my comment twice , i was referring to my sons thoughts and not mine (to clarify) .


----------



## Kirito-kun (Oct 6, 2013)

FAST6191 said:


> What OS do you typically run this on?


 
Windows, OS X, or a distro of Linux (including Steam OS).

Windows obviously has the widest selection of games. However, all the source engine games as well as most indie games are available for Linux. Once Steam OS takes off, more games will be made available for Linux. OS X also runs a sizeable portion of PC games.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Oct 6, 2013)

Kirito-kun said:


> PC Master Race reporting in.
> 
> Honestly, it'll be a good thing if consoles fall. They're the biggest thing holding back game developers forcing them to cater to obsolete hardware and reducing the ability of indie devs to publish due to the high price of SDKs. They use closed-ecosystems, allowing corporations to charge as much as they want without competition. Unlike on PC where you have Steam, Origin, GOG.com, Gamer's Gate, as well as physical distribution all competing with each other. Consoles are solely designed for publishers to make money. The very concept of a dedicated console doesn't make sense anymore. PC hardware is getting cheaper and console hardware is lagging further behind even with the next-get. I await all the console gamers who will likely jump boat if a crash was to actually occur.
> 
> Praise Lord GabeN!


 
No it isn't. A lot of people will be out of jobs, and the game industry won't make as much money as it does now.


----------



## GreatZimkogway (Oct 6, 2013)

I look forward to it.  Can pull game companies heads out of their asses, indie developers can still do their thing, and I can make my backlog shrink as much as inventory does at work.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Oct 6, 2013)

First off I don't see what PCs or consoles has to do with this. The crash is most likely from a lack of diversity.

I mean companies like Activision which start floating most of their business on singular franchises. Like Call of Duty sells well... but the franchise has been seeing diminishing returns. And eventually that creek will run dry and the company will collapse.

Happens with a lot of publishers, they usually bet all their money on a few franchises and end up doing bad investments in the rest.

That's not to say everyone will be affected, I think the big three console makers will do fine. Microsoft aside (which has never been as huge on development as Sony/Nintendo), they usually have a pretty diverse range of franchises, all of which do reasonably well, and plenty of third parties will survive.

But yes an industry crash will affect PC and console gamers since this is publishers crashing and possibly console developers, so if you have a huge amount of publishers crash then don't expect your PC to be full of games.

Also if a bunch of the games industry starts to crash from investors abandoning ship, you'd think other investors in other companies will jump ship as well. If you see Activision go down, Sony go down, Nintendo go down, Microsoft go down, and EA go down, I don't think you're gonna think "Nah Valve is an EXTRA GREAT company and they'll be fine!" You'll realize video games are dying and we should fucking bolt out of it and start investing in the Betamax or Laserdisc or something.


----------



## thebsharp (Oct 6, 2013)

Much like the movie industry, video game publishers are taking less and less risks, relying on proven franchises. Why should they? Great games that aren't a Madden, FIFA, CoD, Mario, etc often flop commercially. Like Guild said, this won't last in the long run.

Then there's the value aspect. Mobile gaming is changing what people think of as the value of a game. Say what you want about mobile gaming, but it's picking up steam. Most titles are throw-away time-sinks, and all to many of them rely on in-app purchases, but there are some worth-while games. More importantly, though, even these good games are at value prices. The main reasons the "core" gamer rejects mobile gaming are two-fold: a flood of low-quality, in-app purchase heavy games, and poor controls. Somebody, somewhere must notice this... Another Xperia type phone or device that actually catches on would be catastrophic for the handheld market. On the otherside of value (or lack thereof), are companies like Capcom. Capcom is not doing so well right now . As of late, they have a reputation of being very greedy and out of touch with their fanbase. The debacle with all the on disc DLC on Street Fighter X Tekken (20 or so characters), didnt help this image at all. On top of that, their major franchises haven't been doing so well either. Both Ultimate Marvel vs Capcom 3 and Street Fighter X Tekken performed poorly. Similarly, RE6's were on the disappointing side. Capcom plans to load more and more of their games with DLC and plans on publish more FTP games. Capcom is slowly starting to sink. If a major publisher like Capcom is in trouble, everyone should be watching out.

I don't think another video game crash is going to happen anytime soon, but the landscape is changing fast. There will be casualties this gen. More than just THQ, Midway, and a spattering of others from last gen.


----------



## shakirmoledina (Oct 6, 2013)

this thought has just come out
1.) US govt shutting down so the analyst takes the advantage that everything shuts down
2.) Assuming that ppl buy consoles to a certain limit but do sell it off or pass it on
3.) Games are developing at the same degree as previous consoles at that time were hence a console leap isnt a big thing
4.) People's interest in having newer consoles and things is less than their ability to own them

All the above is hogwash
1.) Don't push it, the market is much greater and the companies at that time and later have a wider experience than before
2.) Its never a bad thing to own more consoles for ppl. If you ask me, I had a ps1,2, and now 3 AND also a wii. Sold my ps1 and ps2 and went with the 3. The wii is kinda lying around. DS broke. Dont say ppl dont want or cant buy new consoles
3.) If u have games like ac4, battlefield, ghosts, fifa, watchdogs etc at launch, i dont see a reason u SHOULDN"T go for the newer console when ur old console obviously shows its pushing itself (FC3 stuttering and crysis 3 lower graphics)
4.) Trust me living in Tanzania where the knowledge about gaming and availability of games is much lower than in the us, canada, uk etc. We are never tired of having a newer console as soon as the prev one gets boring.


----------



## Metoroid0 (Oct 6, 2013)

All true gamers know that Mobiles are not for gaming, consoles are and PC's ...I love consoles, they have their own souls and PC is whell..a PC, sure you can play games on it, but its distracting at imes..consoles are symbol of simplicity..at least they where.. and also Prices of consoles are unreal. I mean they are real but not all of us can afford 400 euros console i mean cmon   if nintendo Wii or Xbox 360 are 200 euros than ok, why not, i can do something about that   but whe i see 400 euros i start to think "i will wait couple of years to buy used or new if price drops"


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 6, 2013)

Wisenheimer said:


> I think being "weaker" helped the Wii a lot, because it was able to reduce its pricing much more aggressively. The PS2 and PS1 won in part because they were "out of the gate" before their serious competitors, and as a result, had weaker hardware. So, there is some causation there, even though it is indirect. But, as you said, it is hardly a guarantee of victory.
> 
> My point was that most consumers do not actually understand nor care about specific specs like processor cores, CPU architecture, polygon fill rate, RAM architecture, et cetera.


 
This was never something I implied. What I said was that _insufficient_ specs or a convoluted development environments may _(and usually does, as seen with the N64 or the Sega Saturn examples)_ hinder development. The N64 has 380-odd games not because it's weak but because developing for it is a chore and reaching peak performance is nigh-impossible. This shifts the focus from _"making a video game"_ to _"optimizing a video game to actually work on the intended hardware"_ and that's hardly acceptable.

_"Stronger"_ doesn't mean _"better"_ - there's a number of variables that come into play when it comes to whether a system is good or not - specs, price point, features, built quality and so on. There is such a term as _"over-engineered"_ which can be applied to systems which are _"too beefy for their own good"_ and as such their price was _inflated_ beyond the reach of the consumer, for example the Neo Geo AES _($650? In 1991? You jest.)_, I think this is the phenomenon you're referring to. The specs don't have to be _"the best"_, they have to be _"appropriate for the generation they correspond to"_ - I hope that clarifies what I had to say.


----------



## Malik Hajid (Oct 6, 2013)

Honestly, if the video game industry died, it'd be the greatest thing. Finally, greedy business men that don't play or know what a video game is will stop molesting and ruining the idea of what a game should be, and then indie developers will reign supreme and set everything right. Kickstarter will help them make their money, Steam will put their game out there, and from there, businesses run by people aspiring to make good games will start to spring up.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 6, 2013)

Malik Hajid said:


> Honestly, if the video game industry died, it'd be the greatest thing. Finally, greedy business men that don't play or know what a video game is will stop molesting and ruining the idea of what a game should be, and then indie developers will reign supreme and set everything right. Kickstarter will help them make their money, Steam will put their game out there, and from there, businesses run by people aspiring to make good games will start to spring up.


...just so you know what a market crash is, a Video Game Industry crash would mean that the _consumers_ lose interest in video games and platforms altogether. Nobody would make games because nobody would give a damn. Zero demand effectively leads to zero supply.

...I can't believe that I'm actually explaining that.


----------



## Malik Hajid (Oct 6, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> ...just so you know what a market crash is, a Video Game Industry crash would mean that the _consumers_ lose interest in video games and platforms altogether. Nobody would make games because nobody would give a damn. Zero demand effectively leads to zero supply.
> 
> ...I can't believe that I'm actually explaining that.


 
What I was getting at is, I don't think all those people that own 2.6 consoles would suddenly wake up and say "I'm not going to pump any more money into Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo!" There will never not be demand for video games at this point, but maybe, I dunno, a large percent won't be as willing to pay 60 bucks a game anymore, and companies won't realize they need to make better games to stay afloat, and will be focused on dumping 90% of the budget into cutscenes, one major company will go under and others will close up without thinking, and everything will just snowball from there.

Kind of an unlikely scenario, but much more likely then all gamers suddenly moving on to outdoor sports.


----------



## Blaze163 (Oct 6, 2013)

As I understand it the reason for the '83 crash was the market being flooded with mediocre games with no real quality work to balance it out. While it may be true that there's as much dreck in the modern gaming scene, maybe even more than before, we still have amazing games to balance it out. For every piece of shovelware crap, there's an incredible game like The Last Of Us. Like them or hate them, games that many consider to be 'paint by numbers' like FIFA, Mario and CoD still rake in a buttload of money. Hell, I do get tired of the repetition in the FPS scene, but I'm still playing the Battlefield 4 beta.

I don't think the gaming industry is in any real danger. It has something for every taste these days. Every now and then a big release will come along that I have absolutely no interest in and people ask me 'why are you not playing such and such?' and I can happily respond that I have a huge backlog of amazing titles to work through. GTA Online was disabled for a few days, some of my friends panicked like it was the end of the world. I just cracked on with Valkyria Chronicles and my Uncharted trilogy run.

With the huge library of great games, even if the industry does go through a crash, we'll all have plenty to do while we wait for it to recover, so either way we don't need to worry.


----------



## ForteGospel (Oct 6, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Probably because you buy a console for it's games...
> 
> I mean shit, going by that logic, there was no need for me to buy a PS3 if I had a PS2. I mean, eventually The Last of Us will come to the PS2....right? Guys? Right?!


yes, because thats exactly what i said right? i said that companies will still release ps3 games in 7 years from now right? right? right?

now read up again what you actually quoted and see that i said that 2 years from now, we will still be getting the same releases for both old gen and new gen, unlike the jump from ps2 to ps3, we are still getting the same releases for both ps3 and ps4 from third parties for atleast 2 years.

that is why both new gen consoles are heading towards the same route as the wii u, that is why there wont be many early adopters, thats why sells are going to be slow for all of the three consoles

i cant even see how did you understood that i meant that people should wait for The Last of Us for the ps2


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 6, 2013)

ForteGospel said:


> yes, because thats exactly what i said right? i said that companies will still release ps3 games in 7 years from now right? right? right?


Not literally, but that's what was implied.


> now read up again what you actually quoted and see that i said that 2 years from now, we will still be getting the same releases for both old gen and new gen, unlike the jump from ps2 to ps3, we are still getting the same releases for both ps3 and ps4 from third parties for atleast 2 years.


The previous and current generation systems were subjected to the exact same transition period when games were released for both systems simultaneously. There's a large number of such titles, _"Sonic Unleashed" _or _"LoZ: Twilight Princess"_ for example.

The PS3 and the 360 certainly aren't getting _"all of the next gen titles"_ anyways - what about _"KillZone: Shadowfall"_? What about _"Ryse: Son of Rome"_ or_ "InFamous: Second Son"?_ Those aren't getting current gen releases, and that's just the tip of the iceberg.





> that is why both new gen consoles are heading towards the same route as the wii u, that is why there wont be many early adopters, thats why sells are going to be slow for all of the three consoles


Except the PS4 and the XBox One already have a substantial amout of early adopters despite the fact that they're not even released yet - pre-orders for the first batches of the systems are completely sold out in most stores I've been to, these days people are actually pre-ordering them _a couple months in advance_ so that they can get one fron the _n-th batch_.


> i cant even see how did you understood that i meant that people should wait for The Last of Us for the ps2


You said that games are often released on both the current and next generation systems, which is true, but hardly a rule. What he meant was that _"The Last of Us"_ is a PS3 exclusive for a reason - the PS2 could never push it and no amount of _"waiting"_ would change that.


----------



## DSGamer64 (Oct 6, 2013)

Xexyz said:


> The video game industry is bigger now than 1983.


 

That doesn't mean it is immune to another crash. A lot of what is going to determine how well the gaming industry does is price structuring on next generation games. PC games have held their prices steady over the last several years but the closer games come to the 100 dollar price point the harder it is going to be to justify for people to buy a console when PC games are cheaper and building a system isn't much more expensive then buying a console plus all the fixings to use it. Next generation games need to start innovating and provide gamer's with new experiences and less shooter rehashes, otherwise the market will suffer badly..


----------



## ForteGospel (Oct 6, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> Not literally, but that's what was implied.


 it was implied that there is no reason to get a new gen for atleast 2 years, not 7



> The PS3 and the 360 certainly aren't getting _"all of the next gen titles"_ anyways - what about _"KillZone: Shadowfall"_? What about _"Ryse: Son of Rome"_ or_ "InFamous: Second Son"?_ Those aren't getting current gen releases, and that's just the tip of the iceberg.


 thank you for not reading my whole comment again! atleast twice i wrote *third party* companies, also thank you for giving only first party games as an example, its like saying that you wont be able to play pikmin 3 in any other console except for the wii u, who would have guessed that?


> Except the PS4 and the XBox One already have a substantial amout of early adopters despite the fact that they're not even released yet - pre-orders for the first batches of the systems are completely sold out in most stores I've been to, these days people are actually pre-ordering them _a couple months in advance_ so that they can get one fron the _n-th batch_.


 time will tell and numbers will be released, so right now i am not going to base my own opinion on the stores you been to.



> You said that games are often released on both the current and next generation systems, which is true, but hardly a rule. What he meant was that _"The Last of Us"_ is a PS3 exclusive for a reason - the PS2 could never push it and no amount of _"waiting"_ would change that.


and when did i said that the ps2 could play the last of us any time soon?


----------



## Kirito-kun (Oct 6, 2013)

Metoroid0 said:


> All true gamers know that Mobiles are not for gaming, consoles are and PC's ...I love consoles, they have their own souls and PC is whell..a PC, sure you can play games on it, but its distracting at imes..consoles are symbol of simplicity..at least they where.. and also Prices of consoles are unreal. I mean they are real but not all of us can afford 400 euros console i mean cmon  if nintendo Wii or Xbox 360 are 200 euros than ok, why not, i can do something about that  but whe i see 400 euros i start to think "i will wait couple of years to buy used or new if price drops"


 
Blasphemy! The glory of the master race shall not be disputed! Only by switching to PC gaming can one achieve enlightment!

Consoles have "soul"? All a console is is a low-end PC with 90% of the functionality stripped away.

PC gaming is also vastly cheaper. Games only cost a tenth as much as they do on consoles.

Praise GabeN!


----------



## Metoroid0 (Oct 6, 2013)

Kirito-kun said:


> Blasphemy! The glory of the master race shall not be disputed! Only by switching to PC gaming can one achieve enlightment!
> 
> Consoles have "soul"? All a console is is a low-end PC with 90% of the functionality stripped away.
> 
> ...


 
That maybe true, i get what you are saying by PC = enlightment. I'm all for PC, PC = Good stuff, PC IS a High end console. BUT, for ME consoles have special place in my heart.

And also, you sound like robot in this movie 
I admit, robot does look superior, but it does not understand human soul 



Ah yeah, and also...who said that i buy games


----------



## grossaffe (Oct 6, 2013)

I think if there's any kind of crash, it's not going to be from a lack of overall consumer interest as much as from developers dumping too much money into games and not getting the astronomical returns needed to get their money back.  Already seen a number of developers close their doors because they spent so much money on a game that selling 7 million copies or whatever wasn't enough to recoup the losses.


----------



## Kirito-kun (Oct 6, 2013)

Metoroid0 said:


> Ah yeah, and also...who said that i buy games


 
Well in that case... please note that piracy is vastly easier and more accessible on PC. It is not required to wait for the system to be hacked as PC is always an open platform.

But why pirate games when triple-A games on PC frequently go on sale for under $10?


----------



## Hop2089 (Oct 6, 2013)

Kirito-kun said:


> Well in that case... please note that piracy is vastly easier and more accessible on PC. It is not required to wait for the system to be hacked as PC is always an open platform.
> 
> But why pirate games when triple-A games on PC frequently go on sale for under $10?


 
Because many games have intrusive or detrimental DRM in it.  Starforce and Always online DRM especially.  Bad client services exist too such as Origin and U-Play.


----------



## Videomanman87 (Oct 6, 2013)

I don't think a crash is going to happen in quite the same back.  Back in the 80's there were so much junk and little "gold" o the market.  Anyone and everyone was publishing the worst games imagable just for a quick buck. 

Now while the same could be said might be happening to the mobile market  (lots of junk) the advantage now is ratings and social methods of communication.  In other words people now can find out what is junk and what is good long before they buy.  Back in the 80's you went to the store or ordered from a catalog and had no idea what it looked like or much of anything until you actually got it home and played it.

I am sure there will be a shake up, but a death?  No.  The only way it will get killed is if ALL the publishers don't listen to what gamers want and release junk titles.  Otherwise gamers will know where to get good games and go from there.  Those that don't give what gamers want, will go out of business.  It is simple as that, and that is how a free economy works. 



Kirito-kun said:


> Well in that case... please note that piracy is vastly easier and more accessible on PC. It is not required to wait for the system to be hacked as PC is always an open platform.
> 
> But why pirate games when triple-A games on PC frequently go on sale for under $10?


 
Yes indeed, when games are reasonable most people will just buy rather than mess with complicated and usually hassle laden pirate methods. 

Why hack when you can purchase a game for $2 or $5 on a steam sale.  You just can't beat that.  It is what happened to the music market.  They made the prices reasonable and people would rather pay and have the convience and ease than pirate.  In general those that pirate wouldn't have ever bought anyway.  So to say they are "loosing a sale" isn't really true.  And the pirate might tell say 10 friends that DO buy "hey this is a great game" and they buy hence the publisher makes more with the pirate in question than without.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Oct 7, 2013)

Kirito-kun said:


> Blasphemy! The glory of the master race shall not be disputed! Only by switching to PC gaming can one achieve enlightment!
> 
> Consoles have "soul"? All a console is is a low-end PC with 90% of the functionality stripped away.
> 
> ...


 
AC4, 60 bucks.
CoD Ghosts, 60 bucks.
Skyrim, 60 bucks
Splinter Cell, 60 bucks.

Just to name a few.


----------



## bj4e2 (Oct 7, 2013)

I skimmed through most of the responses and felt the need to chime in.
What I feel is happening or already happening is a major decline in quality that is hurting good quality games, with a giant influx of shovelware on each system, gems are getting harder and harder to find or even create hype. We already have THQ,(that company owned by the baseball player, as well, can't recall the name offhand) that went under and a few companies getting consolidated(Atari)

Games are games, no matter what console they are on, it's a form of entertainment all of us share. I don't see a major collapse happening but more of a plateau that companies are hitting with the quality of gameplay, new ideas, and story. There are just too many sequels and lack of innovation.


----------



## Kirito-kun (Oct 7, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> AC4, 60 bucks.
> CoD Ghosts, 60 bucks.
> Skyrim, 60 bucks
> Splinter Cell, 60 bucks.
> ...


 

Humble Bundle. A bunch of games, often triple-A, being sold at 1/10 of their usually value. Dead Space, Dead Space 3, Burnout Paradise: The Ultimate Box, Crysis 2 Ultimate Edition, Mirror's Edge, Medal of Honor, Battlefield 3, The Sims 3, Populous and Command and Conquer: Red Alert 3 all for $5.

Steam sales. Hundreds of triple-A games which often go on sale for 50% to 75%. Happens twice a year. No additional explanation needed.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Oct 7, 2013)

Kirito-kun said:


> Humble Bundle. A bunch of games, often triple-A, being sold at 1/10 of their usually value. Dead Space, Dead Space 3, Burnout Paradise: The Ultimate Box, Crysis 2 Ultimate Edition, Mirror's Edge, Medal of Honor, Battlefield 3, The Sims 3, Populous and Command and Conquer: Red Alert 3 all for $5.
> 
> Steam sales. Hundreds of triple-A games which often go on sale for 50% to 75%. Happens twice a year. No additional explanation needed.


 
Yes there is because thats only a handful of games. You're just being blind.


----------



## Gahars (Oct 7, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Yes there is because thats only a handful of games. You're just being blind.


 

Are you seriously denying this? Have you just never seen a Steam Sale, or are you being Ruseler the Bamboozler again?

The only downside is that you have to wait a few months to get the good price cuts and super sales, but a little patience sure beats paying an extra %50-75 on major titles (and the smaller scale stuff goes even lower).

Try harder next time.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Oct 7, 2013)

Gahars said:


> Are you seriously denying this? Have you just never seen a Steam Sale, or are you being Ruseler the Bamboozler again?
> 
> The only downside is that you have to wait a few months to get the good price cuts and super sales, but a little patience sure beats paying an extra %50-75 on major titles (and the smaller scale stuff goes even lower).
> 
> Try harder next time.


 
No I'm not denying it, but I'm saying that yes those games do go on sale. But not all of them, and some of them don't even get the biggest price gouge. And waiting for those months, you could just go to a used game shop and get a game used for roughly the same price.

But we're talking about sales here, which isn't fair. That's like me saying that the game shop in the town over from me has monthly sales of up to 80%.


----------



## Gahars (Oct 7, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> No I'm not denying it, but I'm saying that yes those games do go on sale. But not all of them, and some of them don't even get the biggest price gouge.


 
The vast majority of games actually do go on sale. It's the nature of the market - if everyone else discounts their games and you don't, nobody's going to buy your shit. Even EA, of all companies, has been offering some pretty deep discounts for their titles (and that was before the Humble Bundle), and if Literally Hitler Figuratively Himmler EA can do it, so can anyone.

And on "the biggest price gauge," so what? Even the most moderate of price dips tend to be better deals than what you see on consoles.



ShadowSoldier said:


> And waiting for those months, you could just go to a used game shop and get a game used for roughly the same price.


 
Unless the game absolutely tanks, the prices on used games generally don't fall meaningfully for quite some time. Plus, you're buying used, which comes with its own set of risks.

Waiting really isn't that hard. Plus, it's not like you'll be left wanting. With how cheap great games can be, it's quick and easy to build up a backlog that could last for years.



ShadowSoldier said:


> But we're talking about sales here, which isn't fair. That's like me saying that the game shop in the town over from me has monthly sales of up to 80%.


 

Of course it's fair, and of course your example is bogus. We're talking about money spent at the end of the day across the entirety of the platform, not just isolated to certain locations.

On the whole, PC games come cheaper than console counterparts. If you consider the costs that publishers are mostly able to cut on PC (manufacturing, transportation, etc.), it makes perfect sense.[/quote]


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Oct 7, 2013)

Gahars said:


> The vast majority of games actually do go on sale. It's the nature of the market - if everyone else discounts their games and you don't, nobody's going to buy your shit. Even EA, of all companies, has been offering some pretty deep discounts for their titles (and that was before the Humble Bundle), and if Literally Hitler Figuratively Himmler EA can do it, so can anyone.
> 
> And on "the biggest price gauge," so what? Even the most moderate of price dips tend to be better deals than what you see on consoles.
> 
> ...


[/quote]

PC games are cheaper on sales. But if we're talking not about sales, then there really isn't that much of a price difference at all.


----------



## SickPuppy (Oct 7, 2013)

The true test of consoles failing, when the next call of duty is released, keep a close eye on which platform sells better. If the next call of duty fails on consoles then it's all over but the crying.


----------



## Gahars (Oct 7, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> I'm totally right if you arbitrarily exclude significant factors and move the goalposts!


 

Gee whiz, man.


----------



## DSGamer64 (Oct 7, 2013)

PC games are cheaper on sales. But if we're talking not about sales, then there really isn't that much of a price difference at all.[/quote]


Console games are 69.99, PC games are at most 59.99 on Steam. Console games never go on sale, even on the digital marketplace and they never go on sale in physical form, only discounted well beyond their life cycle. PC tools games don't often go on sale at retail, but the majority do on digital. The only games on Steam that are still a ripoff after release despite sales are Call of Duty games.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Oct 7, 2013)

DSGamer64 said:


> Console games are 69.99


 
What the hell kind of games are you buying? Every new game I've bought has always been 60 dollars, tops. Pikmin 3, The Last of Us, GTAV, Call of Duty, Batman...


----------



## FireGrey (Oct 7, 2013)

Video games are at risk to a crash because more people are playing video games on PC rather than console?
That is a heap of baloney (not the good kind)
Wouldn't it just mean that there will be a console market crash?


----------



## wrettcaughn (Oct 7, 2013)

Xexyz said:


> I have 2 consoles and *6/10th* of a console! YAY!


So you own a WiiU then?


----------



## Vipera (Oct 7, 2013)

////


----------



## NEO117 (Oct 7, 2013)

Ok let's see...

- Day 1 On-disc DLC.
- Favor online instead of local multiplayer (Not everyone wants that).
- Restrictions and contracts up the butt, where they can remove features you paid for or even take your games away.
- Homogenization of games.
- Too many "me too" games trying to "Get the Call of Duty audience".
- Casuals are moving to mobile gaming and Facebook gaming (i.e Look at Nintendo with the WiiU).
- Games are 60$ instead of 50$ (For some... That's a deal breaker).
- No real graphic improvement. The only improvement that we can hope for is a real more interactive environment.
- THE CLOUD THE CLOUD THE CLOUD THE CLOUD!!!! WE WON'T LOSE UR SAVES MAN HONEST!  RETROCOMPAT? WUSSAT? ;P
- DRM that hurts the actual consumer and not pirates.
- 6 hour long, repetitive, unfun games.
- HUGE Dev costs... (I wanted to make a game and the minimum was 80k).
- So.. uh... Do you mind like... Going online to prove to us that you're not a pirate or some shit? Mind leaving the 100$ camera on while you're at it? No no, we won't spy on you or anything! Advertisements? That's just a smear campaign man. We'd NEVER do that!
- YOU CAN DO ANYTHING!!! (Except this and this and this and this and this... *time skip* and this).
- 60$ worth of DLC.
- No end-game content or unlockables save for some collectibles that don't really do anything.
- No fun cheat codes that aren't DLC (I'm looking at you Dead Rising), with Saints Row 2/3 being the exception.

And much more. Anyone surprised that people WANT this ship to crash and burn? I'm not.

On PC, you can get rid of all these restrictions and add pretty much anything you want by modding the game or applying a patch... You don't even HAVE to pirate the game to do that.

I wonder why oh why I hear more people going PC this next gen than buying the PS4 or Spyboned?


----------



## Xexyz (Oct 8, 2013)

wrettcaughn said:


> So you own a WiiU then?


no it's a 360


----------



## Taleweaver (Oct 8, 2013)

(note: I barely read any comment...sorry if I repeat things)


			
				article said:
			
		

> ...with 79 percent of gamers already owning a console


Am I the only one who thinks this number is ridiculously LOW? One out of five people who call themselves gamers don't have a console? Really???? If you count previous gens, they're well within the budget of...well, everyone. I don't want to bash board & card gamers, but c'mon...no console?

Don't get me wrong...I do believe there will be a video game crash, but it'll be mostly a crash on the current model (meaning: 60 bucks for a million-dollar development cost that isn't even a fun game). It certainly won't be that people will somehow stop gaming.
And that article is showing exactly the wrong data to back up their claims (more digital purchases and mobile gaming than in 2000? YOU WOULDN'T SAY!!!). The golden age of consoles may be over, but gaming on a pc (especially if you count smartphones, tablets, laptops and handhelds) compensate for that.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Oct 8, 2013)

Taleweaver said:


> (note: I barely read any comment...sorry if I repeat things)
> 
> Am I the only one who thinks this number is ridiculously LOW? One out of five people who call themselves gamers don't have a console? Really???? If you count previous gens, they're well within the budget of...well, everyone. I don't want to bash board & card gamers, but c'mon...no console?
> 
> ...


 

If gamers count non-video game people then do realize the amount of traditional game players is huge. Warhammer, Magic, and roleplaying are still very major things and at least the first two cost MAJOR money, more than video games often.


----------



## Kirito-kun (Oct 10, 2013)

Taleweaver said:


> (note: I barely read any comment...sorry if I repeat things)
> 
> Am I the only one who thinks this number is ridiculously LOW? One out of five people who call themselves gamers don't have a console? Really???? If you count previous gens, they're well within the budget of...well, everyone. I don't want to bash board & card gamers, but c'mon...no console?
> 
> ...


 
The number is low because there are quite a lot of PC-only gamers out there.


----------



## Dunny (Oct 10, 2013)

I've said it before, but articles that cite some sort of gaming "crash" in 1983 just baffle me. I was gaming from before 1983, and at the point in '83 that this crash is supposed to have happened, I was  buying new games every couple of weeks or so and I barely even scratched the surface of the new stuff that was available every month. Just look at the review mags of the time - masses of games flooding out that continued well into the mid-to-late nineties. There was only one major label that actually went bankrupt, and that was through sheer idiocy on the part of the management.

D.


----------

