The Naked Column -
March 30, 2001 - Chris Jones
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed
within this column are those of the participants and the
moderator, and do not necessarily reflect those of the
GIA. There is coarse language and potentially offensive
material afoot.
Parish goes insane, film at 11.
Don't say we didn't warn you.
Xenosaga: I'm not sure they can make a working "sequel", because
Xenogears was such a self-contained game. Think about it - previous events
were mentioned that could be fleshed out, but the final outcome was
described in great detail. What more do we really get out of playing
through the exact details of Emeralda's creation, or the aftermath of the
Elderidge crash?
Beyond that, Xenosaga seems like a blatant up yours to Square's
copyright, in much the same way Richard Stallman called his UNIX variant
GNU: Gnu's Not Unix. Let's see how Square's lawyers like this little jest
of Namco's, shall we?
Onward.
| The curse of the blue
hedgehog |
| ""We believe that Microsoft will be very successful
with Xbox," said Peter Moore, president and chief operating officer
of Sega of America. "
You know what happens when a Sega of America exec says a console is going to
be very successful? IT BOMBS.
Thank you sega for confirming my beliefs about the x-box.
-Neil |
Not every time - look at the Genesis. Of course, back then Sega was offering a vastly technically superior system in comparison to the aging NES. Ironically, the Dreamcast itself was killed by technological obsolescence (people weren't buying it because the PS2 was so much better), but if the X-box is that much superior to the PS2... well, as they say, what goes around comes around.
| Or is it salvation via
hedgehog? |
| Yo Chris,
Even though I really want Microsoft to fail, this letter is in no way
inspired by that. Much.
I was reading some news today and saw Namco say "We'll wait and see" in
regards to the X-Box. However, if many of the big Japanese developers do
this, of course it's gonna fail. It seems that they don't even want to take
a chance on some simple ports of PS2 games or anything.
However, this Sega news is interesting. Here, Sega can help get their games
on a console without turning exclusively to their former enemies.
Interesting. We'll finally be able to see if Sega's games are truly enough
to sell a system (since Microsoft's first-party stuff looks pretty poor so
far).
--The Steve
|
Sega's currently in an enviable position, as it's able to play all sides against the middle. If the X-box, or Nintendo, or even the PS2 comes out on top, so do they. Heck, it's been suggested that Sega may be scheming to have all sides wipe each other out, leaving the floor clear for them to reenter the hardware market. A canny scheme, if true.
| The game behind the man |
| It's a nice coincidence that you've been talking about
famous game producers, since I've been thinking about a subject that
is related to it. A while ago there were some columns about games going
mainstream, and I'd like to return to that topic, if you wouldn't mind.
Anyway, I believe the reason games haven't gone mainstream yet is because they
lack a human side to them. Specifically, they lack a personality that can draw
the casual gamer in and get them to buy a game just because of who's behind
it. Look at other popular forms of entertainment, such as movies, music, or
books. A movie can be made into an instant success (profit-wise, that is) because of a single star actor, or, to a lesser extent, director. Likewise with music, an album by a popular artist will, almost by default, have a respectable measure of success. As for books, just look at how much more biographies of famous people sell than their fantasy or sci-fi brethren. Games, on the other hand, lack this aspect. There is no name that will make casual gamers run out and buy a game.
Sure, we have names that we dedicated gamers recognize. We have our Sakaguchi,
Miyamoto, and Kojima, but we don't have anyone comparable to, let's say, Jim
Carrey or Eminem. Games lack a name, or rather, a personality, that can draw
attention to a project just because of the person behind it. Granted, the aforementioned designers are geniuses in their own right, but it's not so much their words and personalities that interest us as it is their works. Furthermore, they aren't accessible enough to draw the attention of the casual gamer. Only dedicated, knowledgeable gamers recognize the significance of those names. The most attention a casual gamer will pay to them will be befuddlement as all these foreign names roll by in the credits, soon to be forgotten.
So who could fill this void and bring videogames the attention they need to
enter the mainstream. The most likely personalities to fill this void are Victor
Ireland and Hiroshi Yamauchi. These two are the only people who we all pay attention
to whenever they do an speak out, and for good reason. Yamauchi appears senile at times, so one can never be sure what he's going to say, and Working Designs' translation policy makes them one of those love them or hate them companies, with few moderate opinions. But even these two are unlikely to fill that gap. Yamauchi is too far removed from the casual gamer to catch their attention, and some knowledge of the industry is required to understand the significance of his statements. And Working Designs' concentrates too much on a niche audience, and, again, some knowledge of the industry is required to see what makes their translations so controversial. So for now videogames are going to be stuck on a tier just below the most popular forms of entertainment.
George Young
|
I see where you're coming from, but games have one big difference from music, books, or movies - they're much more about the audience than any of those other media. Stephen King or Bob Dylan sell their stuff because they're Stephen King or Bob Dylan, and as you say, hardcore gamers are always happy to see a new Miyamoto game, but let's be honest: at some level we all loved the original Zelda because it was us swinging that sword, killing the dragon and rescuing the princess. If the game had an opening credit sequence proclaiming it to be "a Shigeru Miyamoto joint", the game wouldn't have quite had that same feel to it, would it?
| Outrage |
| I imagine that right now, Parish is breaking into the house of KZ, grabbing
him by the collar and beating him to death with a game cartridge, all the
while screaming "MAYBE YOU'D LIKE WAI WAI RACING BETTER IF IT WAS IMBEDDED
IN YOUR TRACHEA, BASTARD!".
Well, it's fun to think, anyhow.
-AJ |
I don't really think that's JP's style - traditionally he would have just let a comment like that go, let the rage and discontent fester inside for a bit, and then written a cutting expose about people who just don't appreciate the beauty of quirky little handheld racing titles.
Now of course, he'd make a small obscure blog (sans capitals, of course) on his site and move on. I guess this catharsis is better for his emotional well being, tho.
| Think again... maybe |
| Jones Shmones,
It seems that the GIA has realized that an April Fools Day prank might be too predictable
for its faithful readers (mad props to last years Y's collection) and has therefore decided to
fool the world by unleashing its prank a few days early. Hence we are presented with:
"Xenosaga".
Nice try guys, but you could have at least tried to come up with a believable
title.
yours cruelly,
opultaM Forward
|
You overestimate us, sir - this yearly April Fool's day joke has just gotten to be too much of an effort, so we're not doing one this year. That's right, all the news you read this weekend is completely, totally, 100% legit, as far as I know.
And that goes double for the Xenosaga story.
| Drew's topic answered for him |
| Chris,
I know I'm super late for the ZOE impressions topic, but it's Friday, so I
figured I'd work it in with some other stuff I've been thinking about, and
possibly provide a topic for Drew.
Got ZOE (and the almighty MGS2 demo). I feel I would have found ZOE more
enjoyable if a character device more believable than "I don't want to kill,
but they want me to 'cause I'm so good at it" were employed. The dialogue
presented in the cutscenes seemed to clash heavily with the action which I
was in control of during the game, and the clash detracted from my enjoyment
of the game overall.
This disparity between my enjoyment of ZOEs gameplay and it's contrived
characterization and story, and the effect this had on my enjoyment of the
game as a whole got me thinking: Videogames are unique in that they are one
of the few forms of entertainment to attempt to mix interactivity with
storyline. We have games like Ocarina of Time, whose mechanics are so
enjoyable that they could stand alone, and the Final Fantasies, which many
would never consider playing with their storyline elements removed.
Obviously, we'd all like to see the seamless integration of strong play and
story elements, but since this is rarely the case, which takes precedence?
Which element contributes more to how enjoyable a game is overall? I'd like
to hear other reader's thoughts on the subject!
-lowtech
|
I can tell you Drew's answer to that before you even asked him: he's said multiple times that games are an example of something where the whole is more than the sum of its parts. That being the case, there is no one element that contributes completely to a game's success - great gameplay carries a mediocre plot, and vice versa. It's the gestalt, dude.
Closing Comments:
Your topic for tomorrow is this: any and every piece of TGS news. Rant about Xenosaga, condemn Microsoft to the Hades for corrupting Sega, or just get very very excited about something nobody else really cares about. It's good to vent, and
Drew loves to hear from you. No,
really! I'll catch you Monday.
-Chris Jones, all warm and squishy inside
|
