More on Nintendo and the state of the gaming industry. [games]

More comments from Nintendo.

Hard as it may be for those editors to believe, not everyone outside their circle is prepared to pay a high price for a new console....

I think this is really the bottom-line. You have a very vocal group of dedicated fans who always want to push the state of the art and for many of them, money is no object. There was a time in the past where I tried to buy every available console; let me tell you, that adds up quickly! Sure, I got to play games that I otherwise would have missed out on, but it wasn't very practical.

This article focuses on that M.Soft is jumping the gun and releasing their new console when the original was only out for 4 years. If companies stretch out the release of a new system, there is more money available by consumers to buy games, and less overhead for companies to work on that new machine.

That sounds relatively logical, but there are those who don't really agree with that, and want something bigger, faster, etc. What worries me is that with each generation, the improvements are more subtle and less revolutionary. We will get more polygons, even better shading and lighting effects, but is the typical pre-teen going to appreciate that? And if not, isn't it a waste of resources adding those polygons? Every object has to be designed, and more polys and more features mean more programmers and time. How much money is everyone going to have to invest to keep the minority of die-hard fans happy?

I'm not excluding myself from the die-hard category either, I just want to be a bit practical now and then. And when it comes down to it, I can suffer with the current level of 3D graphics for a bit longer in exchange for something cool and revolutionary. (How about those 3D glasses?)

Harry Potter 3 [movies]

We finally saw the latest Harry Potter movie. Great stuff! Hard to believe that a sequel can keep you that engaged.

Lori said that (perhaps more that the previous movies) it really would help to have read the book beforehand; the movie glossed over some important info. It's kind of a long movie as it is, so I'm sure something had to be cut, but I say go see it anyway.

I never felt that the movie slowed down for a second, and when it was over, Lori had no idea how much time had passed. I don't know that I want to say it's better than the previous ones, but it doesn't slack off in the slightest. It probably helps that you're already familiar with the characters from the prior movies.

The Next Generation of Videogames [games]

News article about Nintendo.

Here's what I thought was the most interesting bit:

...the gaming industry is reaching a dead end as its past formula for success — dazzling consumers with more sophisticated imagery — no longer works.

I've been thinking this myself for a while.

In the past, new generations of consoles were noticably better than the previous ones. In the first, the Atari 2600 and Intellivision had really blocky graphics for the most part, and few screens. The Nintendo NES, SNES, and Sega Genesis had complex games with many screens, even though the graphics were still primarily 2D. Starting with 3DO, and quickly followed by Sega Saturn, Sony Playstation, and Nintendo N64, games were 3D. Everything was 3D, with shading, animation, etc. Each step also meant that gameplay was greatly affected -- more levels meant more complex gameplay. 3D instead of 2D also added complexity, as well as an experience that was new. The jump from 2D Mario to 3D was huge!

The newer consoles all have better graphics than those in the past, but how much have the games changed? Sure, they look better, which is only to be expected, but aside from "more realistic", is that it? And how much more realism do we need in graphics? The current systems are already supporting video standards beyond that which conventional analog TVs are capable.

Manufacturers promised that increased power of new systems will also allow better physics and AI, as well as better graphics. My thought is that this is great if your goal is the ultimate simulator, but let's back up a second -- if you are just adding complexity, it doesn't necessarily mean you're chasing the right solution. This goes for any software. (Solve the problem!) Sure, it's nice to have feature bragging rights, but particularly when it comes to games, sometimes you just want to access it quickly and play.

What I'm getting at is people say they like features, but when it really comes down to it, people shop on price, not just on content. Otherwise, we'd all be driving luxury cars, 6 megapixel cameras, and have top of the line everything. Most of us have "normal" cars, 3mp digital cameras, etc. Only if you are a photography nut will you spend the extra for 6 mp; right now, you can get good 4x6 prints with 3mp at a reasonable price, 4mp is starting to replace 3mp, but the price really jumps to get to 6mp.

If the new games and systems don't offer something tangibly new to the experience, they're not going to be as excited about it. Meanwhile, it's a terrible cost not just for millions of consumers to re-buy a new console, but for companies to get up to speed on the new system. And the average user isn't going to sit there and count polygons -- once the 3D graphics are sufficiently detailed, more detail will only go so far. The bottom line is, the game has to be fun first, cool graphics second. Unless you just want a quick sale followed by disappointment, but that only goes so far before the consumer becomes discouraged from making further purchases.

Sony seems to be the best at handling some of the problems that I see. First, their consoles have lasted for 5 years before the next arrives, giving users time before feeling like they have to upgrade. Second, you don't have to toss out your software -- it runs on the new box. So, it ends up being a pretty good value, so far.

But I think it's the die-hard gaming fans that will jump into any technology just to have the latest thing, and average consumers will buy it now or later, but do not need the ultimate graphics. Being second-best might be just fine, perhaps better than expected. Even if you give people a better system, are they really going to notice that it displays 25 million polygons per second instead of 10 million? I'm sure that if two otherwise identical games & systems are set up side-by-side, most people could tell the difference, but I think we are reaching a point of diminishing returns. Even if you insist that this upcoming generation of gaming consoles will be a significant step, where do you go from there?

Instead, Nintendo is implying that they'll give users something new. Hey, how about 3D shutter-glasses? I'd like to play some 3D games in real 3D! You might not even need a new machine for that.

Learning Blogger [general]

Actually, Blogger is successful in making their system dumbfoundingly simple. Normally, I like to do my own graphics and design, but I have more to learn before I can match the quality of this template, so I think I'll stick with it for now.

The only thing that really bugs me about Blogger is the lack of a category system. So, I'm going to make up my own system by putting a category in the title. That way, at least it'll be searchable.

Unfortunately, my only other option will take up too much time for me to spend on something like that right now.

PhoneTray [software]

PhoneTray
This is a neat, free Caller ID program. I was tired of jumping up and trying to find the cordless phone all the time, and this is a lot more flexible. And the price is right.

First post [general]

Here's my first post to the blog. I think almost by definition the first post should be a really lame test post, so here it is. ;-)

Ok, nothing important to see here, please move along. Then again it might be more interesting than what's on TV.