mendax.org

In the early days of console gaming, one’s choices were pretty limited. When ATARI wasn’t the main player, it was Intellivision, and thereafter, we had the Nintendo Entertainment System (NES). It wasn’t until SEGA released the Genesis and Nintendo countered with the Super NES that gamers turned on one another, proclaiming war on a field yet untouched by bloodshed. Other players came and went, but it was the generational battles that drew the greatest controversy, with SEGA attempting to march in on Nintendo’s Gameboy turf, and putting their Dreamcast up against Nintendo’s N64.

Naturally, things got more interesting when Japanese powerhouse Sony entered the fray, coming out with the Playstation, a console with no true predecessor, taking on both Nintendo and SEGA. The fight, brutal as any, severely hurt Nintendo, and all but destroyed SEGA, forcing the latter to leave the console hardware industry entirely. While I’m prone to bring up other factors in this whole mess, I’ll steer clear for now, noting only that Sony’s powerful marketing and licensing strategy built an empire upon the ruins of others.

In the last major bout, Nintendo’s Gamecube squared up not only with Sony’s PS2, but also Microsoft’s X-Box, another newcomer to the arena with so much money behind it that only an idiot could have prevented the console from adequate attention; Microsoft’s success was based on many of the strategies used by Sony during the launch of the PS and PS2, with a veritable hype-engine making up for a rather pathetic launch-library of games.

In the months ahead, a new generation of consoles will hit shelves, and the spin-up is already severe. Microsoft’s X-Box 360, with plans to release in November, is so hyped up that stores are expecting shortages, and I’m still wondering what the fuss is about. Considering the cost of the next-generation of consoles, one would expect a solid launch lineup, but instead one sees little more than rehashed sequels with prettier graphics, but no titles that really fit the “must-have” category. Granted, the industry has proven time and again that games matter less than hype when it comes to making sales, but one is still left wondering why one should spend half a grand on a console just for a minor graphical upgrade. More importantly, silly numbers aside, what is the X-Box 360 really offering above the PS3, and vice versa? Where’s the true innovation?

Mark Rein, the VP of Epic Games, recently made a fuss about Nintendo’s crazy controller for their Revolution, which will ultimately lead Nintendo’s assault on the X-Box 360 and the PS3. Rein’s point, if it can be called that, is that the Revolution controller is too gimmicky, and does nothing but herald the onslaught of dozens of crappy games; Mark Rein, whose name alone partially reflects horrible leadership in gaming, appears to be saying that companies will not develop enough good games that happen to make use of the Revolution’s unique controller, but that they will, instead, design games based on the controller itself. Or, maybe, Rein is just annoyed that developers can’t rely purely on the accepted controller technologies in the face of other possible controller options, which other companies are embracing without question, while Epic’s development plans fail to include any such aims.

Admittedly, there will be those companies who make silly or even annoying titles based around the Revolution’s controller, but it’s not like we haven’t seen that before. The key to this controller issue isn’t what companies will undoubtedly do, but rather what companies can do, and that added option is what will set the Revolution apart from its competitors.

While Microsoft and Sony are simply selling a new iteration of their previous systems, Nintendo is being thoroughly innovative, and though that’s failed them in the past, it’s safe to say that Nintendo’s learned their lesson, and has become the opposite of SEGA in the spontaneity scene. For instance, while SEGA was too quick to jump on the broadband bandwagon, taking huge losses as a result, Nintendo has been biding its time, waiting well past Microsoft or Sony to declare an online gaming stategy. While the X-Box jumped on broadband gameplay when the technology was reasonably established and available in homes throughout the United States, Nintendo waited to declare their online strategy when the next-generation online technology was established. While one can’t parallel gaming outside the home to broadband within, one can certainly see where this is going - wireless broadband built-in, free access, etc. Best of all, Nintendo isn’t going the proprietary route, teaming up with GameSpy to have an established online infrastructure.

Of all the next-generation systems, one can finally say that Nintendo is on the right track, from keeping its older gaming libraries available, to using non-proprietary Secure Digital memory as a memory card interface. Even the controller buttons are innovative, using pressure-sensitivity, to do to buttons what the analog stick did for the d-pad. While suggested sales numbers for the three consoles are still in flux, it would not be surprising for Nintento to assert itself once again, rivaling Microsoft and Sony to grab back a huge chunk of the market share.

In the end, the Revolution, with a suggested release date in the second or third quarter of 2006, has what it takes to take back the crown, but only if its hype matches the options for developers. Despite Rein’s remarks, it may be crappy titles themselves that bring the point home - Nintendo is offering something different than Microsoft and Sony, and this difference will allow developers to make more interactive, more innovative games, while Epic continues to develop nothing more than prettier versions of old ones. Bravo, Nintendo. Bravo.

Popularity: 5% [?]