Your place for discussion about RPGs, gaming, music, movies, anime, computers, sports, and any other stuff we care to talk about...
PSP Go phone, this would be interesting...
- Because playing them is not enough, we have to bitch about them daily, too. We had a Gameplay forum, but it got replaced by GameFAQs.
If it doesn't have a memory card reader / optical reader for games, it'll always be regulated to small, quick-play, very casual games. That's a big portion of the handheld gaming genres you're missing
I was there on that fateful day, were you?
By "interesting" I think you mean "completely terrible".
I will eat my non-existant hat if Android becomes a viable gaming platform in the next 10 years. I would be shocked if Sony hitched their wagon to the platform.
I will eat my non-existant hat if Android becomes a viable gaming platform in the next 10 years. I would be shocked if Sony hitched their wagon to the platform.
What does a game's method of delivery have to do with a genre's suitability for a platform? Broadband is at this point ubiqitous and even the largest DS games wouldn't take more than a few minutes to download over a 3G connection, let alone over wired internet.Zeus wrote:If it doesn't have a memory card reader / optical reader for games, it'll always be regulated to small, quick-play, very casual games.
Despite how bad of an idea this sounds, it could actually be fairly successful in Japan where the mobile games sector of the videogame industry is very large. Will it be successful? I think it is too bulky to be successful outside of Japan. In Japan, they have huge phones (take a look at the Sharp line-up), over here, not so much. In addition, Sony Ericsson is a slipping brand; I cannot see it going anywhere beyond a niche audience, but wouldn't be surprised at success for it in Japan; the PSP branding will help it in Japan too.
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
Two things:Andrew, Killer Bee wrote:What does a game's method of delivery have to do with a genre's suitability for a platform? Broadband is at this point ubiqitous and even the largest DS games wouldn't take more than a few minutes to download over a 3G connection, let alone over wired internet.Zeus wrote:If it doesn't have a memory card reader / optical reader for games, it'll always be regulated to small, quick-play, very casual games.
1) Perception: It will then be viewed as a phone instead of a gaming machine. As a phone first, games are expected/assumed to be quick, casual gaming nothing hardcore. Metal Gear? Any RPG? Fuggetabouddit. Look at the games even available for the PSP Minis or DSiWare, they don't even approach the quality or depth of the retail releases. Sony's trying very, very hard to make retail games available for d'load day 1 for the same price, but that sure as shit ain't workin', either. It's failing just as miserably as the 360 full retail downloads and those are often more expensive than going retail price.
2) Value: VERY few people want to pay more than $4 for a downloadable game, any game. Look at the vast majority of Apple App Crap. First, how many are even over that threshold? A fraction of a percent? Second, for those that are over that price, what are their sales? Negligible? Hell, most of the games sold on phones are $1 now (why do you think the vast majority of the Xbox Indie stuff is $1 now? The majority of the masses have spoken, repeatedly. And what are they saying? "We prefer and will pay more for a physical copy". Simply put, FAR greater value proposition with a physical copy, you can't charge the same price and expect it to sell. Valve seems to get it, why can't anyone else?
All this combined leads to a major difference (at least here in North America; might be different for you Aussies) between a phone and a games machine. For those of us who want games with any level of depth, phones are pretty much out. Puzzle games are pretty much all I see anyone play on those things (I may not have a cell myself, but everyone I know has either an iPhone or Crackberry). I luvs my puzzle games but I want to play Pac Pix or Retro Game Challenge or Bowser's Inside Story or Castlevania, too. There's nothing even remotely close to that on the phones
Remember the simple rule: anything that does everything doesn't do any thing well. I want my dedicated games machine, dammit. And the method of game delivery has a lot to do with it.
I was there on that fateful day, were you?
I think your bias for products you can hold in your hands is showing, Zeus!
DSiWare & minis have largely failed because both Nintendo and Sony are incompetent in the online space. Consider XBLA—there are a bunch of XBLA titles that are not "small, quick-play, very casual games." And you bring up Valve—at this point I think online distribution is the dominant paradigm on the PC, and the PC's milieu is basically the complete opposite of casual.
I think the mobile platform itself makes the argument for casual games, rather than the means of distribution for that platform.
On the iPhone: it is definitely the case that most of the successful games are light. Consider the development time of a heavy game, though, and then the fact that the iPhone SDK has only existed for a touch over two years. Give it time.
DSiWare & minis have largely failed because both Nintendo and Sony are incompetent in the online space. Consider XBLA—there are a bunch of XBLA titles that are not "small, quick-play, very casual games." And you bring up Valve—at this point I think online distribution is the dominant paradigm on the PC, and the PC's milieu is basically the complete opposite of casual.
I think the mobile platform itself makes the argument for casual games, rather than the means of distribution for that platform.
On the iPhone: it is definitely the case that most of the successful games are light. Consider the development time of a heavy game, though, and then the fact that the iPhone SDK has only existed for a touch over two years. Give it time.
Downloadable on the consoles/PCs is far different than on the handhelds. Apples and oranges, you can't compare them. But since you do bring it up, how often do you see the big-budget games sell anything in downloadable format other than on PC? Sure, you hear about the $15 games selling well (and they sell even better when they're $10) but what about the $60 or $40? Or even older $25 games? They sell nothing because a) they're cheaper or same price in stores and b) you don't get the same value. This is not an opinion of mine, there is tons of studies/articles that I've posted here that support this theory. Conscious or not, people are always making a value-proposition analysis and to most, above a certain price it just ain't worth it. Just ask the Penny Arcade guys what it's like to price a downloadable game above $15.
And since we're on the XBLA games, what have you noticed is similar to nearly every single one of those popular downloadable games? They're all SNES-level games (with updated graphics), which is exactly the type of game that's dominant on the handheld platforms. Your 10-12 hour game (usually action or puzzle or a mixture) that you can jump in and out if you need to. How many RPGs are downloadable? Any other than the console re-releases on the VC or PSOne Classics? Regardless of hardware format, you just don't have more in-depth games that are downloadable, aside from on Steam. And a huge key to that success is pricing.
The sole reason Steam took off as well as it did is because of the deals you get. Why did so many people buy Left 4 Dead 2? Because it was $37 at launch instead of the $55 asking price at stores (I'm talking Cdn prices here). That $18 savings is significant enough to make people jump all over it. And when do they sell the most? When they have deals. How many times do people jump on the games at full price? Sure you get some but Valve ain't stupid, they know the real numbers are in the deals (I love Valve, BTW; what they've done with Steam is brilliant). Even though they control a large portion of the distribution, they're not trying to completely control the market the way Sony and Microshaft (and to a lesser extent, Nintendo) are. They're not saying "you want this, you pay the price I want you to pay for it" and are trying to force the consumers to accept the market they want to create (the spat between Valve and M$ over the L4D add-on scenarios is proof of that). They actually look at trends and do studies and say "you know, we could sell 100,000 at $55 or we could sell 350,000 at $37 if we can get people and their friends to buy together" and make a very attractive offer to their customers. Hell, if I played PC games (I don't), I would probably buy on Steam over retail a lot of the time. Why? Because they make it worth my while.
Handhelds in general cater more to casual, drop-in, drop-out games. Even the retail releases support that. But at least we still get a decent slate of ones that aren't. Make them downloadable only and you eliminate any of the games that have depth to them because of the fact that $15 seems to be the magic price point. So, when budgeting a game, you have to budget accordingly which means certain types of games are a no-go. Forget about the Metroidvania games, they'll only appear on your consoles. RPGs? If you're lucky you'll get more of them. It'll be nothing but simple action and puzzle games, much like you see dominating the Apps store.
And since we're on the XBLA games, what have you noticed is similar to nearly every single one of those popular downloadable games? They're all SNES-level games (with updated graphics), which is exactly the type of game that's dominant on the handheld platforms. Your 10-12 hour game (usually action or puzzle or a mixture) that you can jump in and out if you need to. How many RPGs are downloadable? Any other than the console re-releases on the VC or PSOne Classics? Regardless of hardware format, you just don't have more in-depth games that are downloadable, aside from on Steam. And a huge key to that success is pricing.
The sole reason Steam took off as well as it did is because of the deals you get. Why did so many people buy Left 4 Dead 2? Because it was $37 at launch instead of the $55 asking price at stores (I'm talking Cdn prices here). That $18 savings is significant enough to make people jump all over it. And when do they sell the most? When they have deals. How many times do people jump on the games at full price? Sure you get some but Valve ain't stupid, they know the real numbers are in the deals (I love Valve, BTW; what they've done with Steam is brilliant). Even though they control a large portion of the distribution, they're not trying to completely control the market the way Sony and Microshaft (and to a lesser extent, Nintendo) are. They're not saying "you want this, you pay the price I want you to pay for it" and are trying to force the consumers to accept the market they want to create (the spat between Valve and M$ over the L4D add-on scenarios is proof of that). They actually look at trends and do studies and say "you know, we could sell 100,000 at $55 or we could sell 350,000 at $37 if we can get people and their friends to buy together" and make a very attractive offer to their customers. Hell, if I played PC games (I don't), I would probably buy on Steam over retail a lot of the time. Why? Because they make it worth my while.
Handhelds in general cater more to casual, drop-in, drop-out games. Even the retail releases support that. But at least we still get a decent slate of ones that aren't. Make them downloadable only and you eliminate any of the games that have depth to them because of the fact that $15 seems to be the magic price point. So, when budgeting a game, you have to budget accordingly which means certain types of games are a no-go. Forget about the Metroidvania games, they'll only appear on your consoles. RPGs? If you're lucky you'll get more of them. It'll be nothing but simple action and puzzle games, much like you see dominating the Apps store.
I was there on that fateful day, were you?
Still has a lot of potential to take the handheld gaming markets by storm. I thumb my nose at the naysayers. Android will do to Nintendo's handhelds what they are currently doing to the iPhone. It's only a matter of time. The phone is going to be the central platform for everything handheld, and the handheld gaming device is the last thing to take over.
However, Sony needs to realize that it's not going to monopolize the Android gaming market; they are just the first ones to dive into it. This first step will be followed by other vendors adopting a similar gamepad on phones with those same games on the Android market. And no, it will not be limited to casual games. However, the next big step into their foray is to have some big time developers on board. But, if Sony is already on that ship, then they will already have a big crew behind the effort.
Furthermore, it doesn't HAVE to be a phone. Who said that Android is a phone-only OS? Some vendors will create cheaper non-phone hardware, like Apple has done with the iPod Touch. Plays the same games as the phone version without any porting. But, putting it on a phone is the first step.
Nintendo had a good 25 years of their handheld gaming monopoly, but past about time to smash it with a wrecking ball. Closed hardware monopolies need to be replaced with open standards.
(Also, Zeus, you don't like downloadable media, but everybody else does.)
However, Sony needs to realize that it's not going to monopolize the Android gaming market; they are just the first ones to dive into it. This first step will be followed by other vendors adopting a similar gamepad on phones with those same games on the Android market. And no, it will not be limited to casual games. However, the next big step into their foray is to have some big time developers on board. But, if Sony is already on that ship, then they will already have a big crew behind the effort.
Furthermore, it doesn't HAVE to be a phone. Who said that Android is a phone-only OS? Some vendors will create cheaper non-phone hardware, like Apple has done with the iPod Touch. Plays the same games as the phone version without any porting. But, putting it on a phone is the first step.
Nintendo had a good 25 years of their handheld gaming monopoly, but past about time to smash it with a wrecking ball. Closed hardware monopolies need to be replaced with open standards.
(Also, Zeus, you don't like downloadable media, but everybody else does.)
Rosalina: But you didn't.
Robert: But I DON'T.
Rosalina: You sure that's right?
Robert: I was going to HAVE told you they'd come?
Rosalina: No.
Robert: The subjunctive?
Rosalina: That's not the subjunctive.
Robert: I don't think the syntax has been invented yet.
Rosalina: It would have had to have had been.
Robert: Had to have...had...been? That can't be right.
Robert: But I DON'T.
Rosalina: You sure that's right?
Robert: I was going to HAVE told you they'd come?
Rosalina: No.
Robert: The subjunctive?
Rosalina: That's not the subjunctive.
Robert: I don't think the syntax has been invented yet.
Rosalina: It would have had to have had been.
Robert: Had to have...had...been? That can't be right.
Sine, this is a Sony Ericsson gaming phone; and significantly less grand than what you seem to think it will be.
For the record, Sony Ericsson is only partially owned by Sony; and is a failing company, Sony won't be putting much effort behind this sinkhole. This PSP phone seems more like a gamble on helping to save the company, rather than a calculated strategy for the Android platform's future.
This is aside the point as to whether or not it is a cool idea.
For the record, Sony Ericsson is only partially owned by Sony; and is a failing company, Sony won't be putting much effort behind this sinkhole. This PSP phone seems more like a gamble on helping to save the company, rather than a calculated strategy for the Android platform's future.
This is aside the point as to whether or not it is a cool idea.
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
Well, that's a damn shame, but let's hope it's a catalyst for other vendors to start the trend. However, something like this really needs some developer backing.
Rosalina: But you didn't.
Robert: But I DON'T.
Rosalina: You sure that's right?
Robert: I was going to HAVE told you they'd come?
Rosalina: No.
Robert: The subjunctive?
Rosalina: That's not the subjunctive.
Robert: I don't think the syntax has been invented yet.
Rosalina: It would have had to have had been.
Robert: Had to have...had...been? That can't be right.
Robert: But I DON'T.
Rosalina: You sure that's right?
Robert: I was going to HAVE told you they'd come?
Rosalina: No.
Robert: The subjunctive?
Rosalina: That's not the subjunctive.
Robert: I don't think the syntax has been invented yet.
Rosalina: It would have had to have had been.
Robert: Had to have...had...been? That can't be right.
Take my personal views out of it and look at the sales and trends. That's just how it is, at least right nowSineSwiper wrote:(Also, Zeus, you don't like downloadable media, but everybody else does.)
I was there on that fateful day, were you?