A tale of three consoles: ‘It was the best of times, it was the worst of times…’

Games Catalyst: "For years this was a industry based on the simultaneous evolution of gameplay and technology, now we're looking at a time of stagnation for at least one of those qualities."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
pepsilover_20072640d ago

yea i truely beleve since the hd consoles have come around it is almost to expensive to take risk in the industry anymore, that is why it seemed this gen had a lot of good handheld games, because they could still look decent, be inovative and be cheap to produce

femshep2640d ago

not to mention everyone all of a sudden got a greedy urge for money so we get the same rehashed games all the time.....its really sad that gaming has turned into one big competition instead of something people did to relax after school/work and talk about with friends not argue over how many kills one got in a match (hence the reason i play single player games 95% of the time)

death2smoochie2640d ago

Console gaming has always had competition...
goes back to the Atari 2600 vs. Intellivision

pepsilover_20072640d ago

yea it kinda sad, ive seen really good single player games get bad scores and trash just because it doesnt have multiplayer, only multiplayer i can remember playing is good ol' splitscreen

femshep2640d ago


yeah but it was a friendly competition not the blood bath it is today

ps: your an awesome movie

Just_aarix2640d ago

It's nice to have competition but nobody wins when it turns to hate.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2640d ago
snipes1012639d ago

It just seems to be a tech race today, which presents a problem. The more advanced the tech gets, the higher up devlopment costs go. With the economy in the state it is, this makes devlopers less willing to take risks.

Then there's the actual sales to consider. Different, experimental games just do not sell as well as big blockbuster shooters. I think these percived lower sales comes from the fact that games are more popular than ever, however.

Think about it, back in the day, games were made for gamers and gaming in and of itself was a niche hobbyfor a set group of people. Today, the casual market is massive and even if the games that go out on a limb do sell reasonably well to the gamers that have been buying games since the '80s, put that next to a game like COD or Madden which cater to markets that play those games almost exclusively (I know of people whose only game purchases consist of titles like that) and your game looks like a failure.

I think game publishers need to reasses what it actually means to call a game a success. Does it necessarily have to sell millions of copies to be called a success?