More evidence HD gaming has been unsustainable?

[JesusSaves]

Super Mario Galaxy 2 is much more casual than any big name Nintendo franchise game other than Animal Crossing and Kirby. It is designed to appeal to a larger audience than previous Mario games, whether or not it is your definition of a casual game, it is much more casual and less challenging than previous Mario games.

[steer]

[QUOTE=JesusSaves]Super Mario Galaxy 2 is much more casual than any big name Nintendo franchise game other than Animal Crossing and Kirby. It is designed to appeal to a larger audience than previous Mario games, whether or not it is your definition of a casual game, it is much more casual and less challenging than previous Mario games.[/QUOTE]

Uhh, no.

Ok - Mario 2 Japan is much harder - Super Mario 1 is harder, even as short as it is. Maybe Super 3 is a little harder, not much, if at all.

Mario World is certainly easier, Mario 64 is probably easier....

I will give you a 'whatever'

[Leo1]

I have to agree with everyone here, Super Mario Galaxy 2 in no way easy (This coming from someone that has played and fully beat, including the Japanese SMB2, every SMB platformer) or represents an attempt to turn the franchise into a casual one.

In fact if I remember some of your earlier post correctly, I highly doubt you've ever even played SMG2, let alone gone through the first run of stars.

Why would they need to dumb it down anyways? The series has always crossed over and appealed to both diehard gamers that have been playing games for years and those relatively new to gaming that just play the occasional game.

They've certainly tried to make it more accessible through the inclusion of the Cosmic Guide feature (Similar to the Super Guide in NSMBWii). But that has hardly dumbed down the game and is a welcomed feature for those that lack the patience to get through some areas. It's there if you want it's assistence, and if you don't, it's just as easily ignored.

That's not "casualizing" (Is that a word?) a game, that's just smart game development.

[N64Dude1]

You just proved my point JesusSaves,at least until you said SMG 2 was meant for a larger audience.

Technically all Mario games are meant to bring people into gaming,all of them having vague but enticing plots to those who read,all of them are fairly easy at the beginning and progress into being harder [with the exception The Lost Levels and Super Mario Sunshine. The former being ridiculously hard from the start,the latter never truly getting more difficult] which entices little kids who already sort of enjoy playing little tid bits of video games.For core gamers all of them are well designed and full of power-ups.

Or in a nutshell all Mario games are all-around games. That doesn't make them casual

Kirby is not casual,just because it's easy doesn't mean it's casual. It's a very niche series that only appeals to a certain fanbase that enjoyed the first.

[Orion1]

[QUOTE=JesusSaves][QUOTE=Orion Pimpdaddy]
Galaxy 2 was easy?  Well, not if you play all the way through the extra levels and get 242 stars.  Then it becomes harder than Ghosts n Goblins.  I died hundreds of times trying to beat one world (Luigi's Purple Coin Chaos):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNkGgeP_7O4

Then there's the world called "The Perfect Run."  It's a nightmare.  Just read the message board on this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIJWYFCutL0

Then there's the Cosmic Clone Wall Jumpers, an utter nightmare:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qc-8Fzg93H8&feature=related

[/QUOTE]

I collected all of the normal stars with relative ease. Luigi's purple coin run took me 5 or so tries I think? Cosmic Clone Wall Jumpers wasn't much harder than a normal cosmic clone level. And since I didn't bother wasting my day with the green ones, I never made it to the Grandmaster Galaxy. I wasted one of my days playing through the game, and I wasn't going to waste another collecting the green stars. It was easy for me, whether it was for you or not.

[/QUOTE]

You complain that it's too easy, but refuse to play the hard levels.  That doesn't make sense to me.  Those hard levels were put there for the hardcore players.

[JesusSaves]

What hard levels? Do you mean the green stars? I'm not getting them because the game was too boring to continue. Why should I waste my time getting them?

[steer]

.....And LIVE prices increas.....

http://kotaku.com/5625516/xbox-live-price-increase-coming-november-1

 Starting on November 1, a year Gold subscription to Xbox Live will run $59.99, versus the current price of $49.99. One month subscriptions will jump from $7.99 to $9.99, while three month subs will rise from $19.99 to $24.99.

[Atarifever1]

[QUOTE=steer].....And LIVE prices increas.....

http://kotaku.com/5625516/xbox-live-price-increase-coming-november-1

 Starting on November 1, a year Gold subscription to Xbox Live will run $59.99, versus the current price of $49.99. One month subscriptions will jump from $7.99 to $9.99, while three month subs will rise from $19.99 to $24.99.
[/QUOTE]

The only increase here in Canada is a $1 increase to the monthly rate, but no increase at 3 or 12 months.  Better yet, the price at one month in the U.S. and Canada is finally being brought to pairity (to reflect the fact that our money has been at that level for ages).  It only took Microsoft 5 years to price like Nintendo and Sony (i.e. to recognize when our currency is worth the same as yours).  Still, as a general rule, I prefer paying less to paying more, so in the event I buy a one month subscription some time, I won't like this. 

[Leo1]

[QUOTE=steer].....And LIVE prices increas.....

http://kotaku.com/5625516/xbox-live-price-increase-coming-november-1

 Starting on November 1, a year Gold subscription to Xbox Live will run $59.99, versus the current price of $49.99. One month subscriptions will jump from $7.99 to $9.99, while three month subs will rise from $19.99 to $24.99.
[/QUOTE]

Who cares, no one pays the MSRP for Live subscriptions anyways except fools.

They're easily available from a wide range of sources online for prices around $30-35.

[steer]

http://www.next-gen.biz/features/dice-the-end-of-fifty-million-dollar-games

But Cerny asked, “Are these games stories that you couldn’t tell without fifty million dollars? By and large all we have done is competed to raise the visual bar and been rewarded for it, and costs will rise until these economics no longer make sense... There is no intrinsic value to a fifty million dollar game.”

Cerny argued that we had reached the point where the economics no longer make sense, offering statistics showing that under sixty games sold over one million copies, and less than half that selling more than two million. “The economics of the fifty million dollar game are looking shaky, but the twenty million dollar game looks quite healthy.”




Read the whole thing - interesting analogy to how the demise of arcades was tied to the quarter, and over saturation of the market…basic cost/reward type of thinking.

Looks like the industry is stating to realize these days cannot and will not last - HD gaming has been unsustainable. One wonders how long it will take digital gaming to become oversaturated, it probably already IS - especially by the big boys like EA, And nothing drives per game sales revenue down like iOS….

Its time for the market correction fellows - spread the word and get off of subscription gaming, and we can see some real progress, and a revival of good ‘old fashioned’ console gaming without all the PC extras sucking money out post purchase…that’s right - I said ‘purchase’ - what a novel idea….

Start making games that fit the retail mold devs, instead of recasting the mold, it ain’t that tough to figure out….honestly - it does not have to be this way - all the hire and fire cycles, it's depressing.

Also, lol at the commonly held idea that software that does not sell a million being 'bombs' - remember the 'wii owners don't buy games myth'? Well, less than 60 games selling a million in a year - I bet Nintendo 1rst party alone has 12-15 of them....