(Disclaimer, I love retro games and collecting for older consoles. This is not from a consumer/collector stand-point, this is from a marketing and resource allocation standpoint).
We should be focusing on current gen, not last gen.
Hey everyone, happy gamer here and today I had an epiphany. First I noticed that of the 3 main console manufacturers, Nintendo is the most current and with it and Sony and Microsoft are living in the past. Here's why; 2 months after the release of the Wii U, Nintendo stopped making games for the Wii and focused all their attention on the Wii U. Sony and Microsoft on the other hand, are still making games for the PS3/XBOX360 over a year after the release of the PS4/XBOX ONE. Sony and Microsoft are lagging behind Nintendo. They'll never be able to remain competitive if they focus so much effort on last gen consoles. But then I realized, they aren't the worst offenders. The worst offender is the game console known as the PC.
Here's a little background. Videogame consoles come out in generations; pong consoles were the first generation, Atari2600 was the second generation, NES was 3rd generation, so on and so forth. Well, the PC came out around the 2nd generation. It was a good console for the time. Well, when everyone else realized how technology was changing, they released brand new consoles to keep ahead of the competition, the PC made add-ons. Yeah, they took the same old PC and made an "upgrade" accessory. It gave you better gameplay, and they eventually came per-installed, but at the end of the day, it was still just a PC. Just like the 32X and SegaCD.
Now one would think that PC would eventually learn it's lesson and release the PC2 right? I mean Sega eventually wised up and stopped supporting the genesis and it's add-ons in favor of the Saturn. Wrong. Instead of releasing a PC2, PC just kept making add-ons to replace the old ones. And you know what, THEY'VE BEEN DOING IT FOR 30 YEARS!!! GAMING ON THE PC IS STUCK IN THE 1980's BECAUSE THE PC MAKERS THINK THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH RELEASING ADD-ONS INSTEAD OF JUST RELEASING A SECOND CONSOLE! Really, with all the effort you put into making add-ons, just release the PC2 already.
But you know what, I don't really blame the makers of the PC. They said "hey, instead of making an entirely new console, lets make an add-on to extend the life of our current console." It could extend the life long enough while they work on the next PC console. It was just supposed to be a band-aid. However, unlike the Sega gamers and the Genesis add-ons, PC gamers ate it up. They said "hey this is pretty awesome. If I install this on my PC I can keep it for 3 more years, and then I can just put the next add-on on? Most definitely." It's not the PC executives, it's the PC fans. They settle for mediocrity. They will accept the add-on bandage instead of the next-generation release medical treatment. Sure, they can get a PC with all the current add-ons, but they're just going to have to be replaced in a few years.
But here's the truly sad thing, they are stuck in an abusive relationship with the add-ons and their gaming habits. Since new add-ons are constantly coming out, there's no guarantee that a game will work properly with your set of add-ons. Unlike every other console where a game is developed to work specifically with that console, PC games are developed with the intent of working with a certain set of add-ons. PC gamers aren't guaranteed to get the best possible gaming experience out of their PC unless they have specific add-ons. So many games say "for PC," but then there's a list of the type of add-ons that are required. It's very confusing. When you buy a Wii U game, you know it will work on your Wii U. When you buy a PS4 game you know it will work on your PS4. When you buy an XBOX ONE game, you know it will work on your XBOX ONE. When you buy a PC game, you better make sure that you have the proper set of add-ons otherwise it's not going to work.
There's even more to it than just games working with the add-ons, there's also add-ons working with the add-ons. When a PC gamer gets a new add-on, he has to jump through all sorts of hoops to "install" the add-on. He has to make sure that the drivers for the add-on works with the drivers for all the other add-ons. While you can buy a PC with all the current add-ons, soon there will be a new add-on on the market, and you either have to figure out how to make the new add-on work with the old ones, or get an entirely new PC. With every other console, they just release a new console. Plug it in, connect it to the TV, and it's ready to go. No drivers, no compatibility, just simple plug and play.
Now if you're in the gaming world, you've probably heard people say "PC master race." I feel sorry for them. They have fallen into Stockholm Syndrome with the abusive PC console. PC showers them with cheap games and "options," but it's just a sad attempt to milk every last drop out of the 30 year old PC before releasing the PC2. PC gamers, you don't have to stand for this. Leave the 2nd generation and join us in the 8th generation.
Well, this has been Happy Gamer, signing off, and I hope you enjoyed my satire.
Friday, February 13, 2015
Saturday, January 17, 2015
Nintendo Make More Amiibo and Stop Scalpers
If it's in limited supply, eventually it will get scalped.
OK, so if you don't know what Amiibo are by now, let me fill you in. They are little 3 inch figures that hold game data and special bonuses for Nintendo games that you scan in through your Wii U gamepad or New 3DS. Here is an example of some of them.
They are pretty awesome if you ask me. Well here's a little issue with them. They are selling out everywhere. This is good news for Nintendo because that means that they are printing money and they don't have to worry about excess inventory they need to get rid of. Even the pre-orders are selling out. So many companies would love to have success like that. Here's the problem though, they are being sold out everywhere, and some figures like villager are being discontinued. What does this mean, eBay scalpers charging big bucks for them.
Now I don't have a problem with eBay scalpers. They are businessmen, and while it does suck that people buy things up just to flip them for a profit and now you can't enjoy it, I don't blame them. I'm not a scalper myself, but I do sell things on eBay that I buy at garage sales to sell for a higher price. I'm more of a picker. But I can give a scalper's perspective, so Nintendo, listen up. There is only 1 type of environment where scalpers and resellers can exist, and that's in markets with a limited supply and a demand that exceeds the supply. Scalpers look at a product, see that there is a demand for that product, see that there is a limited supply that will likely be less than that demand, buy at the current sales price, and then sell for a higher price once the item is sold out. And this hurts you somewhat. I'll make up a little example below.
Lets say that I am an apple farmer. I have 1000 apples to sell, and I sell them for $1 each. Some people say "hey these apples are pretty good" and word gets around. After I sell 200 apples, I have $200 and sales just keep coming in. Some people notice this and buy apples 15 at a time. At the end of the day, I sell out of apples and have to turn away a crowd of people. However, I now have $1000 in my pocket. As I drive away, I see some of the people that bought 15 apples selling them for $2 each, and people are buying them. They're making money off of my work, but they bought the apples fair and square. I got what I was asking for, but I could have made even more. I have some more apples back on the farm, but I said tomorrow was orange day.
OK, so the next day, I bring 2000 oranges to the market. Knowing how good the apples were, people start buying oranges up by the basket full. I'm selling them for $1 each. Well, after an hour I have sold all my oranges and now have $2000. As I drive away, I see them again, this time selling my oranges for $3 each. Again, they didn't steal them from me, they bought them, I have the money to prove it, but I still can't help but feel I'm missing out on something.
At this point, I have 2 ideas of what I can do. I can either continue with this business model of bringing a certain number of fruit to the market and let the resellers get my potential profit, or I can invite people back to the farm and sell them the other fruit on an as needed basis for $1.10 each after I sell my initial inventory. I personally would sell the initial inventory and invite people back to the farm to get more for $0.10 extra, and right now you're letting resellers get your profit.
Here is what I propose you do. You have your in store inventory. You ship the 1000 or so units to each store and charge the $13 you currently charge. Once that inventory is done, it's done, or whatever the current set-up is. At the same time, you have a section Nintendo.com where you can buy any amiibo figure (even the discontinued ones) for $20 each. Why $7 extra, because that's the price for security in availability. You produce them on an as needed basis and ship them directly to the consumer. No middlemen so extra cash in your pocket. You essentially destroy the scalper market because there's no way they can compete. These aren't 20 year old NES cartridges. These are 2 month old figures. You still have the molds. These things print money, it would be financially irresponsible to NOT do this. Now I know you might be worried about the deals you have with gamestop and target with the exclusives. Well, the $13 version is exclusive and exactly the same as the $20 version except one is through you and one is through the vender. Given the option between $13 and $20 of the same product, people will chose the $13 version. Your vendors are happy. However, given the option between $20 and $100 for the exact same product, people will chose the $20 version, which means your fans are happy and you get paid instead of scalpers.
While I still have your attention, please make more gamecube adapters and controllers for smash bros wii u. This is more than just a special edition art book or figure to sit on one's shelf. This is a whole different and to many prefered way to play smash bros. These are also at the mercy of scalpers. You sold them separately for like $15, and scalpers are asking $50 for them. These are also printing money. Take advantage of the opportunity. You have infinite supply theoretically, but you're only releasing some of it. Well, this has been Happy Gamer, signing off, and Nintendo, if something is printing money and you have an infinite supply, release as much as you can even if it's for a slightly higher price.
OK, so if you don't know what Amiibo are by now, let me fill you in. They are little 3 inch figures that hold game data and special bonuses for Nintendo games that you scan in through your Wii U gamepad or New 3DS. Here is an example of some of them.
They are pretty awesome if you ask me. Well here's a little issue with them. They are selling out everywhere. This is good news for Nintendo because that means that they are printing money and they don't have to worry about excess inventory they need to get rid of. Even the pre-orders are selling out. So many companies would love to have success like that. Here's the problem though, they are being sold out everywhere, and some figures like villager are being discontinued. What does this mean, eBay scalpers charging big bucks for them.
Now I don't have a problem with eBay scalpers. They are businessmen, and while it does suck that people buy things up just to flip them for a profit and now you can't enjoy it, I don't blame them. I'm not a scalper myself, but I do sell things on eBay that I buy at garage sales to sell for a higher price. I'm more of a picker. But I can give a scalper's perspective, so Nintendo, listen up. There is only 1 type of environment where scalpers and resellers can exist, and that's in markets with a limited supply and a demand that exceeds the supply. Scalpers look at a product, see that there is a demand for that product, see that there is a limited supply that will likely be less than that demand, buy at the current sales price, and then sell for a higher price once the item is sold out. And this hurts you somewhat. I'll make up a little example below.
Lets say that I am an apple farmer. I have 1000 apples to sell, and I sell them for $1 each. Some people say "hey these apples are pretty good" and word gets around. After I sell 200 apples, I have $200 and sales just keep coming in. Some people notice this and buy apples 15 at a time. At the end of the day, I sell out of apples and have to turn away a crowd of people. However, I now have $1000 in my pocket. As I drive away, I see some of the people that bought 15 apples selling them for $2 each, and people are buying them. They're making money off of my work, but they bought the apples fair and square. I got what I was asking for, but I could have made even more. I have some more apples back on the farm, but I said tomorrow was orange day.
OK, so the next day, I bring 2000 oranges to the market. Knowing how good the apples were, people start buying oranges up by the basket full. I'm selling them for $1 each. Well, after an hour I have sold all my oranges and now have $2000. As I drive away, I see them again, this time selling my oranges for $3 each. Again, they didn't steal them from me, they bought them, I have the money to prove it, but I still can't help but feel I'm missing out on something.
At this point, I have 2 ideas of what I can do. I can either continue with this business model of bringing a certain number of fruit to the market and let the resellers get my potential profit, or I can invite people back to the farm and sell them the other fruit on an as needed basis for $1.10 each after I sell my initial inventory. I personally would sell the initial inventory and invite people back to the farm to get more for $0.10 extra, and right now you're letting resellers get your profit.
Here is what I propose you do. You have your in store inventory. You ship the 1000 or so units to each store and charge the $13 you currently charge. Once that inventory is done, it's done, or whatever the current set-up is. At the same time, you have a section Nintendo.com where you can buy any amiibo figure (even the discontinued ones) for $20 each. Why $7 extra, because that's the price for security in availability. You produce them on an as needed basis and ship them directly to the consumer. No middlemen so extra cash in your pocket. You essentially destroy the scalper market because there's no way they can compete. These aren't 20 year old NES cartridges. These are 2 month old figures. You still have the molds. These things print money, it would be financially irresponsible to NOT do this. Now I know you might be worried about the deals you have with gamestop and target with the exclusives. Well, the $13 version is exclusive and exactly the same as the $20 version except one is through you and one is through the vender. Given the option between $13 and $20 of the same product, people will chose the $13 version. Your vendors are happy. However, given the option between $20 and $100 for the exact same product, people will chose the $20 version, which means your fans are happy and you get paid instead of scalpers.
While I still have your attention, please make more gamecube adapters and controllers for smash bros wii u. This is more than just a special edition art book or figure to sit on one's shelf. This is a whole different and to many prefered way to play smash bros. These are also at the mercy of scalpers. You sold them separately for like $15, and scalpers are asking $50 for them. These are also printing money. Take advantage of the opportunity. You have infinite supply theoretically, but you're only releasing some of it. Well, this has been Happy Gamer, signing off, and Nintendo, if something is printing money and you have an infinite supply, release as much as you can even if it's for a slightly higher price.
Saturday, November 15, 2014
Connecting my PS2 via component cables
I love my PS2, but it just doesn't look good on HDTVs with composite video. Well, component fixes that problem.
OK, so I'm a BIG old school gamer, and probably even bigger PS2 gamer. I love the PS2. What Sony did with it is just amazing. Right now I'm working on getting a complete collection of North American PS2 games. But I run into this one issue, the PS2 and other old school videogame consoles look terrible on HDTVs. Old school videogame consoles were designed for old school CRT tube TVs and output either with f-jack coaxial cable or yellow white red composite cable. These are great for old TVs that only accept composite or f-jack, but they look terrible on HDTVs. This is because new HDTVs (which use 720i-1080p) upscale this content so that it can at least be visible on the display. I don't know all the specifics about how standard def content is upscaled to "high def" with TVs and why it looks so bad, but it does. It just does. When I have my PS2 or any old school game console connected to an HDTV, the edges are jagged, the colors suck, there's small vertical lines, and it just looks horrible. It makes me want to just play it on an old CRT TV, which I do most of the time. I have an oldschool set-up with a 27 inch CRT and an HD set-up.
However, I'm currently at college and all I have with me is an HDTV. I don't have the space to enjoy the luxury of a CRT (didn't think you'd hear anyone say that now did you.) I have one of my PS2s and it would get the job done, but I just couldn't overlook the upscaling artifacts. I've been considering buying a component cable for my PS2, and I've just been waiting to get enough swagbucks for the amazon gift cards, and after months of searching and wining, I earned enough to buy a component cable.
Today the cable arrived in the mail. After opening up the package and pulling out the cable, I disconnected the crappy composite cable from the TV and PS2 and connected the component cable. I have a feeling this is aftermarket because it fits more snugly in the port than the official Sony composite cable, but whatever. I've had good experiences with aftermarket cables before. Back home I have my other PS2 and gamecube connected with an aftermarket universal cable, and before I had an HDTV, my xbox360 as well. It worked so long as you didn't try to run 2 consoles at a time. So if this worked, I was happy. Well, it didn't work. I was a bit confused. I tried disconnecting and reconnecting the cable thinking something wasn't connecting properly. I checked to make sure everything was plugged into the right port, and they were. I thought, "maybe the cable and it's snug fit broke the connections," so I reconnected the composite and it worked fine. I wasn't sure if there was something wrong with my fat PS2 and it didn't want to output component, if there was something wrong with my TV since it does get a little weird when it comes to recognizing video inputs, or if my cable was just bad.
Well after a minute of swagbucks searches, I found out that I had to change the video settings in my PS2 through the systems boot menu. To do this, turn on your PS2 without a game in it and go to "systems configuration," then scroll down to "component video out," and change from "RGB" to "Y Cb/Pb Cr/Pr." The official PS2 help forum says that Y Cb/Pb Cr/Pr is the default, but mime was set to RGB. Whatever, if yours is set to RGB, connect your PS2 to your TV via composite, go into the system settings and follow the steps to change to component. After that, turn off your PS2, connect via component cable, and enjoy glorious component video output.
Here is where I would do a comparison between composite and component, but I'm going to save this for when I do a full episode with this. But here's the thing, it's night and day. Before with composite, there was horrible upscaling artifacts. The easiest way to see it was with "strait lines" with letters. I use quotes because those lines were more zig-zags in the shape of letters. It was pretty bad. When I connected it via component, it was gone. The edges are crisp. The colors are vibrant. There is no upscaling because it's already outputting in sub-HD. It's not in standard def upscaling. I don't know the exact video resolution, but I'm going to guess it's like 720i or 480p, but it's not the 360i or 480i standard def that is output with composite.
Now before I end this, this will not magically make the graphics of your PS2 on par with the PS3. You can still count the polygons in many games. The frame rate is still 30 FPS or whatever it is. The PS2 only has so much computing power. However, it will significantly improve the video quality. The PS2 can natively output video in sub-HD component video quality. It's just that the video is downgraded in the PS2 to output in composite standard def and then that is either native in you standard def TV or upscaled in your HDTV. By outputing through component, you're removing the downgrading and upscaling and getting the best possible video output from your PS2. It's like if you take a 10 megapixel picture, compress it to a 5 megapixel picture to send it via email, and then enlarge it to the dimensions of a 10 megapixel picture. At 5 megapixel dimensions, the picture looks fine, but when you enlarge it, it doesn't. However, if you just send the 10 megapixel picture, it doesn't suffer any of the compression artifacts. This is essentially what is happening with the PS2. The PS2 takes a 10 megapixel picture, and can either display it in it's 10 megapixel natural state, or it can compress it to 5 megapixels through composite, then the TV either takes it as natural in the case of CRT or upscales it with HDTVs. Well that's enough rambling for now. This has been Happy Gamer, signing off, and don't settle for composite when you can have component
.
OK, so I'm a BIG old school gamer, and probably even bigger PS2 gamer. I love the PS2. What Sony did with it is just amazing. Right now I'm working on getting a complete collection of North American PS2 games. But I run into this one issue, the PS2 and other old school videogame consoles look terrible on HDTVs. Old school videogame consoles were designed for old school CRT tube TVs and output either with f-jack coaxial cable or yellow white red composite cable. These are great for old TVs that only accept composite or f-jack, but they look terrible on HDTVs. This is because new HDTVs (which use 720i-1080p) upscale this content so that it can at least be visible on the display. I don't know all the specifics about how standard def content is upscaled to "high def" with TVs and why it looks so bad, but it does. It just does. When I have my PS2 or any old school game console connected to an HDTV, the edges are jagged, the colors suck, there's small vertical lines, and it just looks horrible. It makes me want to just play it on an old CRT TV, which I do most of the time. I have an oldschool set-up with a 27 inch CRT and an HD set-up.
However, I'm currently at college and all I have with me is an HDTV. I don't have the space to enjoy the luxury of a CRT (didn't think you'd hear anyone say that now did you.) I have one of my PS2s and it would get the job done, but I just couldn't overlook the upscaling artifacts. I've been considering buying a component cable for my PS2, and I've just been waiting to get enough swagbucks for the amazon gift cards, and after months of searching and wining, I earned enough to buy a component cable.
Today the cable arrived in the mail. After opening up the package and pulling out the cable, I disconnected the crappy composite cable from the TV and PS2 and connected the component cable. I have a feeling this is aftermarket because it fits more snugly in the port than the official Sony composite cable, but whatever. I've had good experiences with aftermarket cables before. Back home I have my other PS2 and gamecube connected with an aftermarket universal cable, and before I had an HDTV, my xbox360 as well. It worked so long as you didn't try to run 2 consoles at a time. So if this worked, I was happy. Well, it didn't work. I was a bit confused. I tried disconnecting and reconnecting the cable thinking something wasn't connecting properly. I checked to make sure everything was plugged into the right port, and they were. I thought, "maybe the cable and it's snug fit broke the connections," so I reconnected the composite and it worked fine. I wasn't sure if there was something wrong with my fat PS2 and it didn't want to output component, if there was something wrong with my TV since it does get a little weird when it comes to recognizing video inputs, or if my cable was just bad.
Well after a minute of swagbucks searches, I found out that I had to change the video settings in my PS2 through the systems boot menu. To do this, turn on your PS2 without a game in it and go to "systems configuration," then scroll down to "component video out," and change from "RGB" to "Y Cb/Pb Cr/Pr." The official PS2 help forum says that Y Cb/Pb Cr/Pr is the default, but mime was set to RGB. Whatever, if yours is set to RGB, connect your PS2 to your TV via composite, go into the system settings and follow the steps to change to component. After that, turn off your PS2, connect via component cable, and enjoy glorious component video output.
Here is where I would do a comparison between composite and component, but I'm going to save this for when I do a full episode with this. But here's the thing, it's night and day. Before with composite, there was horrible upscaling artifacts. The easiest way to see it was with "strait lines" with letters. I use quotes because those lines were more zig-zags in the shape of letters. It was pretty bad. When I connected it via component, it was gone. The edges are crisp. The colors are vibrant. There is no upscaling because it's already outputting in sub-HD. It's not in standard def upscaling. I don't know the exact video resolution, but I'm going to guess it's like 720i or 480p, but it's not the 360i or 480i standard def that is output with composite.
Now before I end this, this will not magically make the graphics of your PS2 on par with the PS3. You can still count the polygons in many games. The frame rate is still 30 FPS or whatever it is. The PS2 only has so much computing power. However, it will significantly improve the video quality. The PS2 can natively output video in sub-HD component video quality. It's just that the video is downgraded in the PS2 to output in composite standard def and then that is either native in you standard def TV or upscaled in your HDTV. By outputing through component, you're removing the downgrading and upscaling and getting the best possible video output from your PS2. It's like if you take a 10 megapixel picture, compress it to a 5 megapixel picture to send it via email, and then enlarge it to the dimensions of a 10 megapixel picture. At 5 megapixel dimensions, the picture looks fine, but when you enlarge it, it doesn't. However, if you just send the 10 megapixel picture, it doesn't suffer any of the compression artifacts. This is essentially what is happening with the PS2. The PS2 takes a 10 megapixel picture, and can either display it in it's 10 megapixel natural state, or it can compress it to 5 megapixels through composite, then the TV either takes it as natural in the case of CRT or upscales it with HDTVs. Well that's enough rambling for now. This has been Happy Gamer, signing off, and don't settle for composite when you can have component
.
Monday, October 6, 2014
Kinect Bundles are Still a Thing? Well not Anymore on Amazon
I've not been a supporter of the kinect. You can read about it twice here and here. Anyways, Microsoft released a kinectless xbox one bundle about 4 months ago. I gotta say, I don't think anyone missed it. No games were really developed for kinect. No games were showcased with kinect features. After releasing the kinectless xbox one, there were some commercials that still showcased kinect, but those lasted a couple weeks and then were forgotten. In fact, until I read this article, I essentially forgot kinect 2.0 existed. And you know what, that's a good thing.
First, I want to talk about what this means for the kinect. You're dead. No one wants you. Amazon doesn't think you're worth their warehouse space, and they stock some stupid things. You'll be sitting alone in a corner along with the unsold kinect 1.0, and playstation eyes and move. Accept your fate and die in the ditch.
OK so now that I've rightfully added insult to injury, what does it mean that I, the most obsessive videogame collector and trivia aficionado I know, say I forgot the kinect bundles existed? I, a gamer who said "I will not buy an xbox one so long as I need to buy a kinect," forgot that the kinect is a thing. Well, it means Microsoft is doing something right. They really alienated consumers with the launch debacle; always online DRM, no used games, and mandatory kinect purchase and use. Well, that's blown over. Now instead of being points of distaste and not buying it, it's a memory of "boy you screwed up." Not being required to have gold to do everything except buy things and play offline is good as well, making it more competitive. I know some people are upset that Microsoft didn't stick to their guns, like Adam Sessler, but it was a goose egg, and best to just get rid of it. So...yeah, Microsoft, good job at making us forget about how you screwed up. It'll be a while before you get my money, but only because you haven't given me any system seller games. Sure, fanboys will continue to bring up the launch failure, I'm sure BlackBusterCritic is still bring it up, but fanboys will be fanboys.
I know it was short, but honestly I don't have much else to say, and I'm pretty tired. Well this has been happy gamer signing off, and if you make a goose egg, get rid of it and pretend it didn't happen, because we'll forget.
First, I want to talk about what this means for the kinect. You're dead. No one wants you. Amazon doesn't think you're worth their warehouse space, and they stock some stupid things. You'll be sitting alone in a corner along with the unsold kinect 1.0, and playstation eyes and move. Accept your fate and die in the ditch.
OK so now that I've rightfully added insult to injury, what does it mean that I, the most obsessive videogame collector and trivia aficionado I know, say I forgot the kinect bundles existed? I, a gamer who said "I will not buy an xbox one so long as I need to buy a kinect," forgot that the kinect is a thing. Well, it means Microsoft is doing something right. They really alienated consumers with the launch debacle; always online DRM, no used games, and mandatory kinect purchase and use. Well, that's blown over. Now instead of being points of distaste and not buying it, it's a memory of "boy you screwed up." Not being required to have gold to do everything except buy things and play offline is good as well, making it more competitive. I know some people are upset that Microsoft didn't stick to their guns, like Adam Sessler, but it was a goose egg, and best to just get rid of it. So...yeah, Microsoft, good job at making us forget about how you screwed up. It'll be a while before you get my money, but only because you haven't given me any system seller games. Sure, fanboys will continue to bring up the launch failure, I'm sure BlackBusterCritic is still bring it up, but fanboys will be fanboys.
I know it was short, but honestly I don't have much else to say, and I'm pretty tired. Well this has been happy gamer signing off, and if you make a goose egg, get rid of it and pretend it didn't happen, because we'll forget.
Saturday, October 4, 2014
Nintendo's history with DLC
Alright, so it's no secret that Nintendo hasn't been to friendly to modern gaming practices, namely online support and DLC. Lots of people complain about online support for good reasons, and it's been mixed with the DLC. Some people applaud Nintendo for not being DLC happy in the 7th gen, others complain about how it drove away 3rd parties. I'm not here to review DLC on Nintendo consoles and handhelds, but rather to give you a history that most people kind of forget, along with a little theory.
OK, so back in the days of the Wii, PS3, and 360, with the advent of internet connected consoles and digital game stores for consoles, there was this thing called Downloadable Content, or DLC for short. This was extra content for a game that was already released, and would extend the life of that game. Things such as new multi-player maps, new characters, new levels, new stories, new other things that weren't included with the original release because it wasn't made at the time, or because the developers wanted more money. Why DLC exists is the topic for another rambling though. Anyways, the PS3 and 360 embraced the concept of DLC. They added sections to their online stores specifically for DLC. However, Nintendo didn't allow DLC on their Wii. With Nintendo games, you couldn't download the extra content, you either had to have it on the game disc or release a second edition. Again, people were mixed about that decision. Well, here's my theory as to why Nintendo didn't do DLC on the Wii.
Many people may think that the first time DLC was really implemented was with the 7th generation of gaming (PS360Wii). While that is when it was really breaking through, Nintendo actually did a form of DLC on the 6th generation, the gamecube and GameBoy Advance. "What? Really? They had DLC on 2 non-internet connected devices?" In a matter of speaking. They did a sort of DLC with the e-reader add-on for the GBA. With certain games, users could connect a GBA with an e-reader to the other game via a link cable, scan special e-reader cards that they bought, and use them to unlock content. Granted, it's not EXACTLY DLC, but the concept of expanding a game through a secondary purchase and downloading the expansion into the game was present in the 6th generation.
"So what does that have to do with Nintendo not having DLC on the Wii?" Well here's the thing, while rather revolutionary, it didn't go over very well. For starters, the e-reader kind of sucked. I have one and I get read error after read error. It's a very finicky device. The next aspect is that it was kind of expensive. I don't remember how expensive the actual e-reader was, but it definitely cost some money. Plus, if you were doing it for GBA e-reader support, you had to have a second GBA, something not everyone had. The other thing is that it wasn't widely adapted. I know I didn't have an e-reader until after the life of the GBA that I found at a garage sale. I didn't know anyone that had an e-reader. It just wasn't well received. There also wasn't a lot of games that supported e-reader. The most notable one is Animal Crossing. Some other games had it, but not many. The somewaht commercial failure of the e-reader and it's "DLC" I think put a bad taste in Nintendo's mouth. But it's only a theory.
Man, I should do a review of the e-reader some day. But not today. Well this has been Happy Gamer signing off, and Nintendo had DLC before the others.
OK, so back in the days of the Wii, PS3, and 360, with the advent of internet connected consoles and digital game stores for consoles, there was this thing called Downloadable Content, or DLC for short. This was extra content for a game that was already released, and would extend the life of that game. Things such as new multi-player maps, new characters, new levels, new stories, new other things that weren't included with the original release because it wasn't made at the time, or because the developers wanted more money. Why DLC exists is the topic for another rambling though. Anyways, the PS3 and 360 embraced the concept of DLC. They added sections to their online stores specifically for DLC. However, Nintendo didn't allow DLC on their Wii. With Nintendo games, you couldn't download the extra content, you either had to have it on the game disc or release a second edition. Again, people were mixed about that decision. Well, here's my theory as to why Nintendo didn't do DLC on the Wii.
Many people may think that the first time DLC was really implemented was with the 7th generation of gaming (PS360Wii). While that is when it was really breaking through, Nintendo actually did a form of DLC on the 6th generation, the gamecube and GameBoy Advance. "What? Really? They had DLC on 2 non-internet connected devices?" In a matter of speaking. They did a sort of DLC with the e-reader add-on for the GBA. With certain games, users could connect a GBA with an e-reader to the other game via a link cable, scan special e-reader cards that they bought, and use them to unlock content. Granted, it's not EXACTLY DLC, but the concept of expanding a game through a secondary purchase and downloading the expansion into the game was present in the 6th generation.
"So what does that have to do with Nintendo not having DLC on the Wii?" Well here's the thing, while rather revolutionary, it didn't go over very well. For starters, the e-reader kind of sucked. I have one and I get read error after read error. It's a very finicky device. The next aspect is that it was kind of expensive. I don't remember how expensive the actual e-reader was, but it definitely cost some money. Plus, if you were doing it for GBA e-reader support, you had to have a second GBA, something not everyone had. The other thing is that it wasn't widely adapted. I know I didn't have an e-reader until after the life of the GBA that I found at a garage sale. I didn't know anyone that had an e-reader. It just wasn't well received. There also wasn't a lot of games that supported e-reader. The most notable one is Animal Crossing. Some other games had it, but not many. The somewaht commercial failure of the e-reader and it's "DLC" I think put a bad taste in Nintendo's mouth. But it's only a theory.
Man, I should do a review of the e-reader some day. But not today. Well this has been Happy Gamer signing off, and Nintendo had DLC before the others.
Saturday, September 13, 2014
Shut-up About Specs/Price and Just Play Games
We all know the old talking points; "PC master race with my 60 fps at 1080p," and "yeah but that's because you dropped $2000 on a gaming rig that will last a year, whereas my $400 console will last me 8 years." "But you got little resolution, mine looks superior." "But yours costs so much more." "Well I have Steam sales." "Well I have used games." Back and forth back and forth. SHUT UP!!!!!!
Really, I am sick and tired of people battling over specs and price when it comes to PC and console gaming. As I said it before and I'll say it again, EVERY PLATFORM HAS IT'S POSITIVES AND NEGATIVES! (except steam machine :P, that sucks and everyone knows it). So yeah, I'm sick and tired of the constant battle between PC master racers and console gamers who argue with them. PC gaming is expensive, get over it. I have a $600 laptop that can't do gaming well, and it's cheaper than the consoles on the market. I could mess with the settings, or I could build a budget rig, but I have better things to do with my time then try to make my games work. If I wanted to get the convenience of a console, I would have to buy some super expensive per-built rig. I don't care if you enjoy building PCs, I don't and many console gamers don't either, that's why they're console gamers. PC gaming is also almost exclusively digital, and I don't care if digital is the future and physical media is a thing of the past, I like my wall of games not my hard drive of games, PC or console.
Console also has it's draw backs as well. We don't have steam sales, which are nice if you like digital games. We don't have as large of an indi scene, except for maybe on the Wii U from what I've heard. We aren't running at the best technology has to offer. We don't have the options of mouse and keyboard or controller. We have our drawbacks and you have yours. But when you compare PC gaming to console gaming, you're comparing apples and oranges. PC gaming and console gaming are inherently different. All this bickering over PC vs console is an apple saying "I'm better than the orange because I'm sweet and you're sour," then the orange saying "I'm better than the apple because I'm sour and you're sweet." They're both fruit but they are inherently different and one should base the comparison of the 2 based on the inherent differences.
So what should we base our bickering on smart guy? Duh, who has the better games. One of the best things about Nintendo is that they have great exclusives. Whenever I see a flame war between PC and console gamers over specs and price, there's always 1 or 2 Nintendo gamers that are like "I have Mario, I have Smash Bros, I have fun games." That's what I like about Nintendo consoles. You don't see anyone going "he he, Wii U underpowered, I'm so much better than you." Well you did at the beginning when Nintendo was dropping the ball on the 3rd party releases, but now with all the exclusives, people can still be "well Wii U is underpowered my PS4/XBOX ONE/PC is so superior," but all the Nintendo gamer has to do is hold up a copy of Smash Bros and say "no, this is why I'm better than you." There are exclusives out there on PS4, XBOX ONE, and PC (well I think there are some on PS4 and XBOX ONE, not sure yet really). But yeah, how about instead of fighting over specs, we fight over who has the best games. I mean, Yoshi Story 2 and Kirby's Canvas Curse 2 are the reason I bought my Wii U, and I'll probably buy Donkey Kong Tropic Freeze, Mario 3D World, and a bunch of the other exclusives on Wii U, because that's why I bought my Wii U, the games. I don't play graphics, I play games. I'll take Conker's Bad Fur Day played on a fuzzy CRT over some uber realistic war shooter at 4K 60FPS at max settings any day. Well this has been Happy Gamer, signing off, and fight over games, not graphics.
Oh and before I go, I'm not a PC gamer, but my brother is. He plays his steam games on his laptop that's about as good as mine when it comes to gaming. He's fidgeted with it to make the games work on his laptop. Like any brother, I like to have a little light hearten fun at his expense, and he the same for me. Nothing serious, just like the story I'm about to share. One day I'm looking over his shoulder as he's playing some real time strategy brawler and the settings are rather crap. I throw the PC master race talking points at him since they aren't being fulfilled. I'm like "Oh so this is what glorious PC gaming looks like, is this 1080p 60fps? My our PS3 looks better than that. Why are you wasting your time if you can't get an experience that's better than a last gen console?" I'm just being a smart ass and trying to get some kind of response. He's just like "Dude shut up, I PC game because I don't have a TV at school, all my friends are on steam, and there's a bunch of games on here I can't get on console (like the one I'm playing at the moment)." Now why can't we all have reasons like that?
Really, I am sick and tired of people battling over specs and price when it comes to PC and console gaming. As I said it before and I'll say it again, EVERY PLATFORM HAS IT'S POSITIVES AND NEGATIVES! (except steam machine :P, that sucks and everyone knows it). So yeah, I'm sick and tired of the constant battle between PC master racers and console gamers who argue with them. PC gaming is expensive, get over it. I have a $600 laptop that can't do gaming well, and it's cheaper than the consoles on the market. I could mess with the settings, or I could build a budget rig, but I have better things to do with my time then try to make my games work. If I wanted to get the convenience of a console, I would have to buy some super expensive per-built rig. I don't care if you enjoy building PCs, I don't and many console gamers don't either, that's why they're console gamers. PC gaming is also almost exclusively digital, and I don't care if digital is the future and physical media is a thing of the past, I like my wall of games not my hard drive of games, PC or console.
Console also has it's draw backs as well. We don't have steam sales, which are nice if you like digital games. We don't have as large of an indi scene, except for maybe on the Wii U from what I've heard. We aren't running at the best technology has to offer. We don't have the options of mouse and keyboard or controller. We have our drawbacks and you have yours. But when you compare PC gaming to console gaming, you're comparing apples and oranges. PC gaming and console gaming are inherently different. All this bickering over PC vs console is an apple saying "I'm better than the orange because I'm sweet and you're sour," then the orange saying "I'm better than the apple because I'm sour and you're sweet." They're both fruit but they are inherently different and one should base the comparison of the 2 based on the inherent differences.
So what should we base our bickering on smart guy? Duh, who has the better games. One of the best things about Nintendo is that they have great exclusives. Whenever I see a flame war between PC and console gamers over specs and price, there's always 1 or 2 Nintendo gamers that are like "I have Mario, I have Smash Bros, I have fun games." That's what I like about Nintendo consoles. You don't see anyone going "he he, Wii U underpowered, I'm so much better than you." Well you did at the beginning when Nintendo was dropping the ball on the 3rd party releases, but now with all the exclusives, people can still be "well Wii U is underpowered my PS4/XBOX ONE/PC is so superior," but all the Nintendo gamer has to do is hold up a copy of Smash Bros and say "no, this is why I'm better than you." There are exclusives out there on PS4, XBOX ONE, and PC (well I think there are some on PS4 and XBOX ONE, not sure yet really). But yeah, how about instead of fighting over specs, we fight over who has the best games. I mean, Yoshi Story 2 and Kirby's Canvas Curse 2 are the reason I bought my Wii U, and I'll probably buy Donkey Kong Tropic Freeze, Mario 3D World, and a bunch of the other exclusives on Wii U, because that's why I bought my Wii U, the games. I don't play graphics, I play games. I'll take Conker's Bad Fur Day played on a fuzzy CRT over some uber realistic war shooter at 4K 60FPS at max settings any day. Well this has been Happy Gamer, signing off, and fight over games, not graphics.
Oh and before I go, I'm not a PC gamer, but my brother is. He plays his steam games on his laptop that's about as good as mine when it comes to gaming. He's fidgeted with it to make the games work on his laptop. Like any brother, I like to have a little light hearten fun at his expense, and he the same for me. Nothing serious, just like the story I'm about to share. One day I'm looking over his shoulder as he's playing some real time strategy brawler and the settings are rather crap. I throw the PC master race talking points at him since they aren't being fulfilled. I'm like "Oh so this is what glorious PC gaming looks like, is this 1080p 60fps? My our PS3 looks better than that. Why are you wasting your time if you can't get an experience that's better than a last gen console?" I'm just being a smart ass and trying to get some kind of response. He's just like "Dude shut up, I PC game because I don't have a TV at school, all my friends are on steam, and there's a bunch of games on here I can't get on console (like the one I'm playing at the moment)." Now why can't we all have reasons like that?
Thursday, August 14, 2014
Emulation is NOT "console game disc playable on your PC."
OK, so I saw this on Did You Know Gaming yesterday.
"The disc has a windows .EXE file that can be play on a computer." By the language of the image, it sounds like you'd be able to pop the disc into your PC and play Pikmin, or something, on your PC. Well, as a fan of gaming, I decided to try it out. I have computers that have disc trays that can hold mini-discs. I have a Vista computer and a Windows 7 computer. Given the time the game was released and how technology advances, I figured that one or the other would work.
So I dig out my copy of Pikmin and plop it into my Windows 7 computer. My computer had some trouble reading the disc, as is to be expected, but then it didn't recognize it as "being there" and said "please insert a disc." Well, my computer was running a little hot since it was on for a while, so I decided I'll try it the next day when it cooled down.
I try it again today, it didn't work. "Please insert disc." I thought, "OK, maybe 7 is to advanced, I'll try Vista." I turn on the Vista computer and put the Pikmin disc into the disc tray. I opened up my computer, and same thing, "Please insert a disc." I'm thinking, "what gives, do I need to use XP? Well the XP computer is so screwed up we use it as a night stand, it can't even run Solitare let alone an actual game like Pikmin."
So I looked into the source of the DYKG post. Read it for yourself and see what you make of it.
"Source" that tell you about it.
"Notes" that give the how to.
Now I'm not going to act like I know everything there is to know about game programing, computers, and emulation, but reading how to do it sounds a lot like running the rom in an emulator. OK, it's not an emulator by traditional definitions, but you basically need to take the data from the disc, get a program to run the data, and then make some changes to the data so you can run it. To me, that sounds an awful lot like an emulator. This is not what I took away from the post; I interpreted it to mean "pop your copy of Pikmin into your computer and run the debug menu," not "rip the data for a copy of Pikmin, get a program that will play the data, and then make some changes to the data." Ug.
Well this has been Happy Gamer signing off, and DYKG, if you're reading this, do not include rom hacks of a game rom that needs an emulator as a bit of gaming trivia. The .EXE file thing might be good bit of trivia, but don't word it in a way that sounds like "put the disc in a computer and it'll run." Phase it like "if you look into the Pikmin rom, you'll find a windows .EXE file of a debug mode."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)