Why has there been no crash like in 1983

General and high profile video game topics.
SpiceWare1
Posts: 57
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby SpiceWare1 » January 12th, 2015, 4:26 pm

That was when home computers first became affordable.  Most of my friends and I put away our consoles and starting gaming on our new home computers instead.

As for why that's not a factor now, technology costs have dropped tremendously since then - it's no longer an either-or decision.  As an example, my first computer was a Vic 20 which I got in 1981.  Paid $374 ($299 for Vic, $75 for Datasette), which is about the same as $1000 today.  That $1000 could easily pay for a console and a computer, and you'd still have money left over for to buy a few games.

Vexer1
Posts: 883
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby Vexer1 » January 12th, 2015, 4:26 pm

Gleebergloben- I think there are plenty of quality titles today and I believe the smartphone market is most at risk of losing revenue since those games can be made by pretty much anyone and like with Atari they're suffering from the "way too much garbage" syndrome, titles like Angry Birds lost considerable popularity after they were milked to death.

Jon- I'm not the biggest Sony fan myself, but it's sounds kind of silly to complain about games taking "too much time".


ptdebate1
Posts: 909
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby ptdebate1 » January 12th, 2015, 4:38 pm

[QUOTE=Jon]For me there has been another crash. In the late 90s the whole industry went to ****, with Sony's hideous Playstation taking the lead, DISGUSTING. Games now were incredibly tedious and took way too much time. Instant gratification turned into months of playing some crap games with so many "interesting" features its impossible to get a grasp on what was going on. Disillusionment set it, and now it's 2015.[/QUOTE]

This makes zero sense to me. Ridge Racer, Crash Bandicoot, Spyro the Dragon, and the Tekken games--all major titles born on the PS1--epitomized instant fun. 

As for "games that take way too much time," perhaps you should blame Starcraft because it inaugurated a trend of complex, strategic competitive play? Creative developers who saw that new technology would allow them to do more than gratify the pleasure centers of the human brain and actually challenge players to think, plan, and commit?

Even that would be overlooking the fact that there are still plenty of fast, fun, and simple games capitalizing on the more basic elements of play. For these kinds of games, I would steer you towards an iOS device and/or the Wii U and 3DS.

Jon1
Posts: 378
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby Jon1 » January 12th, 2015, 4:51 pm

Vexer, it's the main reason me and my friends don't play anything after the N64. I have one friend who still buys into the crap, and is always playing the new GTA or Madden or whatever, I don't know. I could care less. My biggest gripe is that they stopped making fast paced games completely. Basically when the PS1 era started for whatever reason they stopped making 2d games and just interesting fast paced games in general that you'd see during the early 90s. It died, and it's a joke. Why can't those genres stand side by side with the newer stuff? I remember in 95 the industry seemed to be at an all time high, and it was a great time. It's been a joke since then.

Vexer1
Posts: 883
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby Vexer1 » January 12th, 2015, 6:20 pm

Jon- Just because your friend likes games that you don't does not mean he is "buying into crap", that's nonsense.

2-D games were still made during the PS1 era and were pretty good(Symphony of the Night being one shining example)

I do not believe the industry is a "joke" in the least, I think that's utter nonsense.

With the success of Shovel Knight it seems like the genre is indeed doing a fine job of standing side-by-side with AAA games.


scotland171
Posts: 816
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby scotland171 » January 12th, 2015, 6:20 pm

What a great conversation, thanks to all. 

* The low entry barrier leading to a glut of poor quality games on mobile is a concern, but its been that way for some time now.  I think the difference is that a bad mobile game is bought with a trivial amount of money, not $40 in 1982, which was a lot of money back then.   In fact, a legion of low cost games of various quality can be a good thing, as maybe Sut and his Speccy will agree to.

* Seems like big software developers churn through young programmers quickly, and not value them.  This choice may have impacted gaming, but the industry as a whole is still thriving.  Many industries have treated the creative staff the same as blue collar staff, and done quite well.  Sad but true.

* While the value of the industry did plummet from 1983 to 1985, how much was basically a panic? In other words, self inflicted by marketplace fear?

* While too many choices of hardware is cited as a cause of the crash, the choices were very few.  There were only a few consoles, and while there were many family computers, most used some form of BASIC. 

* The consoles were still cheaper than the family computers by a large margin.  In 1983 or so, a Colecovision would run $150-$200, the same price as a Commodore 64.  Except the C64 did very little on its own.  A floppy disk drive was another $150-$200, and even a datassette was about $35.   Many of us started with the cassette drive, and then got the floppy as soon as possible. The difference was once you had that C64 and a disk drive, the days of being burned by a $40 E.T. cartridge were behind you.   In addition, consoles only play games, while learning about computers was the S.T.E.M. push of its day.  For awhile, that seemed very important.

What's interesting as well as the form post-crash video games took.   

What turned out to be the fad were not consoles but the family computers and the kids needed to learn about computers.  Kids still just wanted to play games, not learn programming, and with a little marketing savvy, a lockout chip, and values of family and fun, Nintendo rose to a brand making position of legendary proportion.


ptdebate1
Posts: 909
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby ptdebate1 » January 12th, 2015, 6:27 pm

Why can't those genres stand side by side with the newer stuff? I'm gonna pull a Vexer and just start listing things.


PAAppleyard1
Posts: 19
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby PAAppleyard1 » January 12th, 2015, 6:58 pm

I kind of feel like line Jon does. Except for the fact that for local multi player the Wii U is really starting to win me over. Having only bought 2600 and Megadrive games recently Toads Tresures tracker makes me think that it's possible to still have short playable fun games on a modern console.

Jon1
Posts: 378
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby Jon1 » January 13th, 2015, 4:34 pm

It seemed like right when 2d was hitting it's stride and becoming a real treat, it just disappeared and all that progress was forgotten to make way for headache inducing 3d. Think of the shmup genre, you had amazing progress in the early to mid 90s, the graphics capabilities became unbelievable, and it all became an afterthought. Then you had everything dumped on the Dreamcast, which never had the cleanest 2d graphics. There were amazing 2d demos made for systems like the Jaguar and everything just got discontinued. No more systems were even welcoming of the genre. Certainly not any sort of progress. All during a time when 3d was going through tremendous growing pains. To make matters worse, there was this myth that 2d wasn't cool and that everything had to be 3d. I'm not saying I wasn't enamored with the upcoming 3d technology, but cmon, they didn't even make 2d Super Mario games anymore even though every one in history was a huge seller. I've posted early demos of unreleased shmups from the early 90s with unbelievable graphics, a quantum leap from where it had been. And really, there wasn't a single game released with graphics of that quality. 2d became a Dreamcast thing. What a joke.

bronZfonZ1
Posts: 58
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby bronZfonZ1 » January 13th, 2015, 6:52 pm

Two things:

The number of game developers and potential game developers today has grown exponentially.  It's no longer a club of a select few who know how to rasterize graphics efficiently in Assembly language.  Any literate human being with a modern computer can learn and do game development with a lot of available free tools.  The present-day pool of game developers, whether professional, amateur, or independent, is huge.

The business environments and relationships between console/PC hardware/mobile developers, manufacturers, game publishers, game developers, retailers, game journalists, and customers are so robust that it's practically impossible for the market to ever crash save for a global economic crash or the mutual destruction of the world.  There are professionals in the industry with world-class skills in psychology, marketing, and data analysis who know exactly how to extract money from customers.


Return to “Video Games General”