Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2017 14:13:28 GMT -5
(regarding SotD:) You have to look at the bigger picture. Maybe Shadows of the Damned alone isn't that big a deal, but it set the pattern that its successors followed over the next two years. A casual western perspective of Grasshopper becomes this: "one weird political thriller, five wacky action games with sexy ladies". On the other hand, if Kurayami had come out instead, the perspective would instead be "one weird political thriller, a duology of wacky action games, one Kafka adaptation". I can't say for sure what games would and wouldn't have come out if SotD didn't, but the very presence of a SINGLE "serious" Suda-directed game besides killer7 in the eye of the casual western public would have changed much discussion on the company. Just to give a concrete example, almost every review for The Silver Case's 2016 rerelease said that it's "not like a typical Suda51 game", because it doesn't have over-the-top violence action. This is egregious because only two games Suda has ever directed have been action games (four counting very obscure anime spinoff games), but he's directed six visual novels. To be clear, I'm not saying that the company's actual game output would have necessarily changed that much, but that people would have much less misinformation and misconceptions about their work, which would in turn lead to much more popularity and success for their newer stuff. The only reason the general public cares about Travis Strikes Again is because it's No More Heroes; their other recent stuff is very overlooked and barely discussed anywhere, except for Let It Die because that one's free. That makes sense. Yeah, it's always a blessing and a curse to be known for something. My experience with Suda's oeuvre is pretty limited, but he definitely seems to have an offbeat sense of humor mixed with sexual perversion. Also, has Silver Case REALLY been out for a year at this point? JFC. Been sitting on my shelf this whole time, untouched... |
|
|
|
Post by X-pert74 on Nov 16, 2017 16:57:37 GMT -5
Shadows of the Damned ended up being directed by Massimo Guarini, who has gone on to make games like Murasaki Baby and the recently released Last Day of June (which I still need to get).
|
|
|
|
Post by 🧀Son of Suzy Creamcheese🧀 on Nov 16, 2017 18:19:41 GMT -5
I mean was there anyone in the 90s who was say playing Quake on the PC and Zelda on the N64? Probably not many. Exactly because the two were very different people played both. |
|
|
|
Post by X-pert74 on Nov 16, 2017 18:34:46 GMT -5
There were also quite a few FPSes that got console versions, like Doom and Wolfenstein and Quake and Duke Nukem 3D and Star Wars: Dark Forces and other stuff
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2017 18:38:16 GMT -5
I didn't have a PC in the 90s, so it was nice to be able to experience stuff like Doom, Dark Forces, and Crusader: No Remorse through their console ports. I'd go so far as to say the PS1 port of Diablo is actually easier to play now than the PC original.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Alien on Nov 18, 2017 7:07:34 GMT -5
What if the Great Crash of 1983 never happened?
What if Sega made a Sonic game for Saturn's launch instead of making retarded mascots like Bug! and Clockwork Knight?
|
|
|
|
Post by Gendo Ikari on Nov 18, 2017 10:16:05 GMT -5
I think if Microsoft never entered the console gaming market, Western PC developers like Bethesda and Bioware would have still migrated over to consoles, but it probably would have happened at a slightly later point in time. Japanese companies might have felt less pressure to conform to Western norms though, which might have resulted in more games that maintained their own identity, but at the same time were slower to pick up on the innovations of their Western counterparts. There also might have been fewer Japanese companies that felt the need to abandon gaming for a focus on pachinko, or felt the need to make super otaku-pandering games. I see it as an over-optimistic view that is also centered on the hardware and not on the games. If the games market expanded in the west, even with no western consoles, there would have been an increasing demand for western games and so, when that segment of the market started to bring more money than the Japanese one, the confrontation may have happened anyway. Also, lack of a western console may have rather caused a stronger push towards developing on PC in the west. There's also the more realistic scenario spunning from no Microsoft joining the fray in 2001: an almost complete monopoly of Sony, with Nintendo taking the scraps. Now have fun with that! Even with the success of the Wii half a decade later, without an Xbox 360 to confront, the overconfindent Sony of those years would have still had plenty of space all for itself, leading to a worse PS4 era than the one we are getting. I like the idea in the OP of some other big company entering the market later; the example of Apple is good, imagine if they launched a console, say, in mid-to-late 2006, on the trail of the launch of the first generation of iPhones. Many alternate scenarios assume that companies may have counted on better marketing and management than the ones they got at some points in time, on top of more money. So I wonder how the PC Engine / Turbografx may have fared, had it got more marketing muscle and the west got better games, starting from a localization of Rondo of Blood back in the day. Also interesting to think whether an attempt to bring the Sharp X68000 in the west could have worked and carved a significant niche there, or it would have still lost to Commodore and Sinclair systems. Another one: what if the talks between Nintendo and Atari in the early 1980s went through, and the latter became the producer and distributor of the Famicom? Since the north american market crash happened only months later, would Nintendo have been dragged down this way? Or would, some time later, an Atari Family Computer single-handedly save the company and let it be on a top spot still today? What if the Great Crash of 1983 never happened? That would need the situation of the market to be radically different than it was just before it happened, with less smaller producers trying to jump on the bandwagon, no overproduction (Atari's policies in this sense were crazy) more attention to quality of games (no E.T. or VCS 2600 version of Pac-Man)... That said, beside the above possibility of Atari being the producer of the Famicom, Mattel and Coleco may have stayed as competitors, leading to the birth of other valid western consoles; alternatively, other Japanese companies may seek American partners as well - Mattel Genesis, anyone? Sony would still enter the market and shake it up years later, however. |
|
|
|
Post by toei on Nov 18, 2017 12:22:15 GMT -5
What if the CD-i had caught on so massively that all other videogame companies had gone bankrupt? Would we still have videogames today?
What if Tom Kalinske had been by hired by NEC instead of Sega?
|
|
|
|
Post by condroid on Nov 18, 2017 13:34:50 GMT -5
Many alternate scenarios assume that companies may have counted on better marketing and management than the ones they got at some points in time, on top of more money. So I wonder how the PC Engine / Turbografx may have fared, had it got more marketing muscle and the west got better games, starting from a localization of Rondo of Blood back in the day. Also interesting to think whether an attempt to bring the Sharp X68000 in the west could have worked and carved a significant niche there, or it would have still lost to Commodore and Sinclair systems. I think NEC's biggest mistake was to not release the PC Engine in Europe in 1989, supported by a decent marketing campaign. The European console market was there for the taking and NEC would have had almost no competition (unlike the US where Nintendo was king). Despite having no official release, the PC Engine already had a lot of mind share (mostly through gaming mags) and was a popular import system at that time. The X68000 was a very niche system in Japan. Had Sharp released it in the West, it would have shared the fate of similar machines like the Archimedes or high-end Amigas: very interesting as a somewhat affordable workstation but way too expensive for most consumers and thus ultimately fail to gain significant market share. |
|
cacao
Junior Member
Posts: 69
|
Post by cacao on Nov 18, 2017 17:22:56 GMT -5
What if the Great Crash of 1983 never happened? I don't know how this would affect Nintendo. On the one hand, it doesn't necessarily mean no NES/Famicom. This concept had already been a goal of Nintendo's and it was a bit of a gamble. They actually had trouble pushing the NES into the North American market at first because retailers were wary of trying to sell games. Nintendo had to resort to strategies like offering to take back and refund any games shops didn't sell. It also helped that Nintendo was behind some of the more massively profitable arcade games like Donkey Kong, which obviously would have lured in at least some buyers even if the NES had been garbage. On the other hand, it definitely helped that past establishing that games could be profitable again they didn't have much competition. I think it's possible we'd still see a Famicom/NES, though probably with very different games. Without the crash, Nintendo wouldn't have as much of a reason to create its quality program (with the Seal of Approval and the like). TDepending on how tired consumers are of bad games, that could still work... but it's hard to imagine giving Nintendo as much leverage as it did in reality when dealing with third parties. That would need the situation of the market to be radically different than it was just before it happened, with less smaller producers trying to jump on the bandwagon, no overproduction (Atari's policies in this sense were crazy) more attention to quality of games (no E.T. or VCS 2600 version of Pac-Man)... That said, beside the above possibility of Atari being the producer of the Famicom, Mattel and Coleco may have stayed as competitors, leading to the birth of other valid western consoles; alternatively, other Japanese companies may seek American partners as well - Mattel Genesis, anyone? Sony would still enter the market and shake it up years later, however. I could be 100% wrong but I recall something about larger toy companies in the US trying to get on board with distributing the NES and even offering to buy the rights to sell it in the American market. I can see how letting another company take on more of the risk (and use a name more familiar to American games) could have resulted in something like this. |
|
|
|
Post by X-pert74 on Nov 18, 2017 17:41:01 GMT -5
What if the Great Crash of 1983 never happened? I don't know how this would affect Nintendo. On the one hand, it doesn't necessarily mean no NES/Famicom. This concept had already been a goal of Nintendo's and it was a bit of a gamble. They actually had trouble pushing the NES into the North American market at first because retailers were wary of trying to sell games. Nintendo had to resort to strategies like offering to take back and refund any games shops didn't sell. It also helped that Nintendo was behind some of the more massively profitable arcade games like Donkey Kong, which obviously would have lured in at least some buyers even if the NES had been garbage. On the other hand, it definitely helped that past establishing that games could be profitable again they didn't have much competition. I think it's possible we'd still see a Famicom/NES, though probably with very different games. Without the crash, Nintendo wouldn't have as much of a reason to create its quality program (with the Seal of Approval and the like). TDepending on how tired consumers are of bad games, that could still work... but it's hard to imagine giving Nintendo as much leverage as it did in reality when dealing with third parties. That would need the situation of the market to be radically different than it was just before it happened, with less smaller producers trying to jump on the bandwagon, no overproduction (Atari's policies in this sense were crazy) more attention to quality of games (no E.T. or VCS 2600 version of Pac-Man)... That said, beside the above possibility of Atari being the producer of the Famicom, Mattel and Coleco may have stayed as competitors, leading to the birth of other valid western consoles; alternatively, other Japanese companies may seek American partners as well - Mattel Genesis, anyone? Sony would still enter the market and shake it up years later, however. I could be 100% wrong but I recall something about larger toy companies in the US trying to get on board with distributing the NES and even offering to buy the rights to sell it in the American market. I can see how letting another company take on more of the risk (and use a name more familiar to American games) could have resulted in something like this. That's interesting to think about. I also wonder if Nintendo might not have leaned as heavily toward pushing a family-friendly image outside of Japan, were the crash not to have happened. |
|
|
|
Post by spanky on Nov 18, 2017 18:51:02 GMT -5
What if Sega made a Sonic game for Saturn's launch instead of making retarded mascots like Bug! and Clockwork Knight? I always have this fascination with lousy console launches and wonder if the fate of the system would be much better had there been a real killer app at launch. It probably doesn't matter that much in the long run...after all, didn't the PS2 have a crappy launch? A lot of games...but none of them were really great. Tekken Tag kinda ruled I guess. I played the hell out of that. I think the Saturn launch was supposed to be carried by the (somewhat underwhelming) ports of Daytona and VF, but a new Sonic game would have probably done them wonders. Especially in the west where the system got NO traction. I also think about the Gamecube...I mean, Luigi's Mansion was supposed to sell the system? I guess they had that Star Wars game and Smash...but Halo came off as a MUCH bigger deal at the time. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2017 19:08:24 GMT -5
DOA2 Hardcore was pretty good.
|
|
|
|
Post by GamerL on Nov 18, 2017 20:19:19 GMT -5
What if Sega made a Sonic game for Saturn's launch instead of making retarded mascots like Bug! and Clockwork Knight? I always have this fascination with lousy console launches and wonder if the fate of the system would be much better had there been a real killer app at launch. It probably doesn't matter that much in the long run...after all, didn't the PS2 have a crappy launch? A lot of games...but none of them were really great. Tekken Tag kinda ruled I guess. I played the hell out of that. I think the Saturn launch was supposed to be carried by the (somewhat underwhelming) ports of Daytona and VF, but a new Sonic game would have probably done them wonders. Especially in the west where the system got NO traction. I also think about the Gamecube...I mean, Luigi's Mansion was supposed to sell the system? I guess they had that Star Wars game and Smash...but Halo came off as a MUCH bigger deal at the time. Haha, I'm playing Luigi's Mansion at the moment. It's a pretty good game but definitely an odd pick for a launch title. DOA2 Hardcore was pretty good. It's the worst version of DOA2 though, both the Dreamcast and Xbox versions are better. Funnily enough the first PS2 game I played was Ready 2 Rumble Boxing Round 2.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2017 21:09:55 GMT -5
How is it worse? It has more content than DOA2 on DC. The Xbox version was also four years away when the PS2 launched, so that's not exactly relevant.
|
|
