Gaming: Where we are and where we're going

Well fellow nerds, here it is. The big one. The post to end them all (not really). Here we talk about the future of gaming. Where are we headed and where we're going. What's going to shape the future of this great American pastime. (And in case you don't believe me when I say that this is the big one, wrap your brain around this: I've been working on this post since literally right after my last post went up)

First of all, I want to state that once again, this is my opinion, and there are plenty of folks to ask. If you want to read other opinions besides mine, try IGN, and G4TV, specifically the Grandfather of Gaming himself, Adam Sessler. Needless to say, I have endless amounts of respect for this man, and value his every opinion.

But this is my blog! So for right now, you're listening to my opinion. And trust me when I say this, we're gonna talk about EVERY gaming method, so grab a snack and get reading.

First off, I want to talk about an always hot gaming topic, PC gaming! Now I know what so many people are saying "PC gaming is dead". Truth is, however, not only is PC gaming NOT dead, it's not even showing signs of dying.

Why is PC gaming thriving? One word, MMOs. For you see, excluding very RARE exceptions, MMOs are just something that appearantly people can't seem to master on the console. I mean, between games like World of Warcraft, Dungeons and Dragons online, City of Heroes/Villians, the upcoming DC Universe MMO, and the numerous different MMO both currently being played, and on in the works. Another thing keeping PC gaming alive? FPS. A lot of people would argue (and I'd probably be inclined to agree) that the best method to playing FPS is on a PC. Some people are such purists on the subject that they refuse to play them any other way.

But now we have to flip things around. While it IS true that PC gaming is not dead, and isn't really dying, one has to ask, is PC gaming the future of gaming? Well, one guy (Chris Taylor, I believe his name is) was on Attack of the Show recently, and he's probably the self-proclaimed poster boy for PC gaming. However, I find that I have to disagree.

Why? On paper, PC gaming seems like it should be the most versitile, widely adopted form of gaming. I mean, just about everyone has a computer. In fact, unless you're reading this at a library or a friend's house (in which case I'd have to wonder why you're not doing stuff with said freind), you own a computer. So on paper, that makes sense right? So why isn't that happening? Well the obvious answer is the fact that, most computers weren't built to handle both every day things, PLUS serving as a gaming console. I mean, my old computer only had one game on it. The Sims 2. But becuase I so frequently saved and downloaded things to it, that game barely ran, and if/when it did, it was at a snail's pace. So imagine someone trying to play a game like Battlefield Bad Company 2, on that machine.

But there are solutions. And that's PCs specifically tailored to gaming. They come in both laptop and desktop formation. So you're thinking then "So are PC's now good contenders to console gaming?", and the answer there is still no. The problem being there is price. Odds are, to get a system that's even worth half its weight, you're gonna be paying upwadrds of $700. And most of us scrape together just to get console games. I mean, I own a Wii and an XBox 360, now the Wii was a birthday gift, but I had to trade in a lot of things I owned (including several WIi/Gamecube games, my NIntendo DS and a few games for it, and my Nintendo 64 and all its games), just to get the bastard. And after all that, I STILL had to pay a pretty hefty amount just to afford the system, which ran me about $250. Now imagine someone like me trying to get a special computer, without having ANYTHING they can turn in to help get it. Sounds damn near impossible without months of saving, doesn't it?

Now I know what you're thinking (or at least someone out there is thinking) "You can build a computer for half that price!". WEll sure, if I knew how to build one. I mean, let's be honest, putting together computers, or rather even just basic computer maintenance, is not common knowledge by any means. Truth be told, Im afraid to let just about anyone open up my computer, simply because I'm afraid either me or someone else is gonna screw it up. And yeah, you can learn, but does anyone really want to put all that time and effort just to play games?

So needless to say, PC gaming has a very select audiance, and while that audiance is being maintained, it's not really a setup that finds itself rapidly expanding, so I can't really say that PC gaming is the future of gaming.

So lets move on to another seemingly dying breed of gaming, Arcade gaming. A lot of people claim that arcade gaming is far past dying. It's dead and rotting. However, to this I also say, false. I would argue that Arcade gaming isn't dying, but simply transforming. Notice how in a lot of downloaded games (ironically enough, from the X-Box Live ARCADE), are often describe as being "acrade style" such and such. This is part of the transformation. Arcade gaming is no longer a method of gaming, as in you go to the arcade, play for an afternoon, then go home, but rather it's becoming more of a genre. Meaning games done in the Arcade style (Shank, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, ect.), are now the new Arcade. So you can still compete for the high score, and compete to make it through some of the most challenging, yet enjoyable, games known to mankind.

This transformation also makes Arcade gaiming more versitile as well. No longer does one have to drive to an arcade, wasting half their paycheck putting quarters into a machine. Nope! You can do it at home, and still get the same satisfaction. And with online play as well, one can get the same arcade multiplayer experience, without even having to see each other! (Though seriously guys, get out of your own nerd cave every once in a while and go play games in the same room. I know it's a foriegn concept, but trust me you'll enjoy it). But with all that versitility, I STILL can't say Arcade gaming is the future of gaming either.

So maybe our future lies in portable gaming, or handheld gaming! But first of all, let's look at the contenders in the handheld division.

Well, right now, you have Nintendo with their 3DS, and Sony, with their most recent invention, the PSP Go. But before we get to them, what about the missing party, Microsoft? Do they plan on jumping into the mix? Well there have been rumors for years now, dating back to about the time the 360 was a year old, about a Microsoft portable device. And it was interesting becuase a lot of people had really convincing pictures of what the device would look like. The problem? There were TOO MANY reports. I mean, google it. Google Microsoft portable device, and you'll find several really well done, but varying pictures. The names even vary from X Box 180 to X Box 720. But I have to tell you, none of these consoles exist. Microsoft may have considered something like this, but no, they don't exist.

Now the question is, is Microsoft gonna throw their hat into the handheld gaming realm. Personally, I think not. I mean, I think the reason they don't have one is simply because they're a little smarter than that. I mean, Nintendo has reigned king of Handheld for an enternity, and Microsoft knows better than to waste money trying to change that. Now Microsoft HAS released their own smartphone to compete with tech rival Apple (Microsoft has a lot of rivals, huh?), and they've stated that this IS their portable device, as far as their concerned. Now whether this statement means they believe the phone to be an actual competitor in the Handheld gaming realm, or rather meaning that this is the closest to a handheld system we're getting out of them, I was unable to decipher.

Regardless, the reigning champion of handheld has always been Nintendo, and that doesn't look like it's about to change any time soon. Recently, Sony released their newest version of the PSP, the PSP Go. Now, where do I begin...

First of all, WHY ALL OF THESE USELESS REMAKES OF THE PSP? I mean, you knew Nintendo was doing something big in handheld, don't you think it would be a better idea to release a NEW handheld system that addresses the issues of the original PSP?? I mean, most people have been pratically BEGGING for a second joystick on the system. Does the PSP Go have that? No. It has your standard, one control stick, which if you've ever played a Playstation ANYTHING, you know that the dual joystick is what helped it when it's first two console wars (PS1 vs. Nintendo 64 vs. Sega Genisis/Saturn, and the PS2 vs. Gamecube vs. X Box vs. Dreamcast (poor, poor Dreamcast)). So when you try to put a lot of favorites on the PSP, naturally their gameplay is going to DEMAND TWO JOYSTICKS, even if its for something just as simple as camera control (which, I might add, is one thing that has ruined what otherwise would have been really good PSP games). Secondly, why did you think the replacement of physical UMD's was going to be a good idea? I mean, some games (I.E. Birth By Sleep, one of the most highly anticipated PSP games), is not playabe on the download-only PSP Go. SO yeah, if you were a PSP Go owner who was looking forward to play Birth By Sleep, then I guess it sucks to be you, huh? AND ON TOP OF THAT, you're asking to retain your original versatility of having pictures, music, and video on your memory, but now you wanna add FULL ON GAMES too??? I mean, the 360 can get away with that becuase it's capable of having 250 gigs worth of memory. The PSP Go, does not. The PSP go isnt even capable of half that. And then my biggest problem with the device is, WHY DID IT DEBUT AT DAMN NEAR THE SAME PRICE AS THE PS3??? I mean, really??? PSP Go, at its debut, was only $50 cheaper than the PS3. FOR WHAT PURPOSE? I mean, at least in the PS3's defence, it does do quite a bit, on top of playing it's average at best games, so I could at least justify it's price. BUt the GO is not capable of a lot of things the PS3 could do. So long story short, if you're gonna buy a PSP, don't buy a Go. Or if you're just looking for handheld, turn to Nintendo.

And speaking of Nintendo, they're coming out with what has the potential to be the greatest handheld system known to mankind, the 3DS. And no, it's not just the 3D aspect. What's more impressive is the titles that we never believed would be on a portable console. I mean, I flipped out when they were not only able to port Super Mario 64 to the DS, but ADD more too it. But the fact that they're porting games like Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time and Starfox 64 is simply mindblowing. I mean, if you just simply imagine what those games looked like, the fact that they can be ported onto a handheld system is simply incredible, ON TOP OF being able to play in
3D. Of course, ON TOP OF THAT (as if all that wasn't enough), you have a whole library of orignial games, made by both Nintendo and other developers. I mean, after all, DS stands for Developer's System, so if they're able to fully utilize what the 3DS is capable of, you have a system with ENDLESS amounts of potential.

Of course, there is the price. Now they haven't announced an offical North America price (or release date, for that matter), but rumor has it that the 3DS is going to run you about $300, simply becuase that's about the price equivilancy of how much it costs in Japan. First of all, I do have to state that prices are not always directly transfered over from Japan, meaning that this system could actually have a much cheaper release price. However, if it does come out for $300, I DO think it will hurt how much it sells on it's release date. I mean, after all, this handheld system costs MORE than the Wii does right now, which is a first. But even though I won't be getting it on it's release date, I definitely think it'll be worth that price at some point, once a bit of it's potential is achieved. Regardless of the price, however, one can pretty much guess who's gonna win the handheld war.

But, even with the 3DS and all it's heavenly capabilities, would I call it the future of gaming? Or handheld gaming in general? To this, again, I say no. And why is that, you may ask? Simply becuase time has proven this to us again, and again, and again. Every handheld system looks more impressive than the last, but they never seem to stack up to their console counterparts, and I think the 3DS will befall the same fate. Impressive? No doubt. But even it can't compare to consoles.

So now I wanna discuss, very briefly, about iPods, iPads, and smartphones. Honestly, I'm just going to put it out there, no, they're not the future of gaming. Truth be told, they're kind of like counting flash games online as the future of gaming. They're cool devices, but hardly gamer worthy.

So before we jump into console gaming, I want to discuss how you console err.. game. While we still have CDs (and in some rare cases, cartridges), there's also been a noticible increase in downloadable games. So this begs the question, are we gonna see downloading replace CDs? My bet goes to no. I do believe downloads are here to stay, but mostly for what they do now. Rereleasing old games, new indie games, and add ons to your favorite CD games.

So now we come to the big one. Console games. So first we have to identify, who are the major competitors in the console wars. Right now, Microsoft and Nintendo. Why not Sony you ask? Simply becuase, it seems like with every turn, Sony is playing catch up. The only real advantage the PS3 has that some other console doesn't is that it plays Blue Ray. That's it. Good PS3 exclusives are few and far between (even so much so that Final Fantasy, a game that for the LONGEST time was Sony exclusive, is now on the 360), and most of the good PS3 games can be played on the 360 as well. Now all of this probably wouldn't have kept it out of competition had it not tripped up so bad early on. I mean, numerous bugs, zero backwards compatibility, and the ability to do everything BUT play games, kept it from taking off, and unfortunately, it's a little too late for them to really catch up.

So who is going to win between Microsoft and Nintendo? It's a little early for me to say. Yeah it's true that the Wii has sold nearly twice the amount that the 360 has sold, but at the same time, at kick off, the Wii was really popular. But (and while it really does pain me to say this), the Wii's popularity has severely decreased since it's launch, do to problematic controls with some games, and very little decent 3rd party support. Not to mention the small variety of good games for it. There aren't many FPS, RPGs, or anything of that sort on the Wii. But a lot of kid friendly games.

However, Nintendo does have the advantage of 1) being the cheapest console available, and 2) unlike the PS3, it's not too late for itself. If it can build up its library to include a lot more, hardcore gamer oriented games like a lot of fans have been ASKING for, and show everyone that you can utilize your online ability, then you might be a legit contender. However Nintendo, at this rate, it's only a matter of time before Microsoft takes over.

Now we talked about motion control last time, but more so in the respect of "will it put any one company on top?". But is it the future of gaming? Are we going to be throwing our entire bodies into the games we play? Nope. Personally, I think motion controls are just a fad. Nintendo decided to try something new after the dismal sales of the Gamecube, and it caught on, so Microsoft and Sony decided to follow suit. Now does that mean we're going to go back to traditional controllers? I suppose only time will tell, but that does bring me to my last topic.

New consles. When, if ever, are we going to see them again? And I know what you're thinking: No new consoles??? You're CRAZY!!! But some experts have questioned whether or not there is a need to ever come up with a new console? I mean, just look at the 360. That thing has been around for 5 years now, and rather than coming up with something new, the 360 has just continued to evolve. With so many new games coming out on these systems, and downloads to back games up, allowing them massive replay value, it'll be a long time before we see new consoles, however, I do believe that we will see new consoles. Each of the big 3 will have to try something new at some point, and in this order: Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft. Sony really should retry with a brand new system. Drop the price of the PS3 until you come out with a new idea, and try and capture the magic that won you the last two console wars. And Nintendo has a little life in them too, and the power to win this console war, but it is Microsoft with the most lasting power. But even they will have to create something new at some point.

So now that we've covered all this, I'm sure you wanna know.... what IS the future of gaming? And that's simple. The future of gaming, are the gamers. I know I know, it's cheesy, but its true. Notice how, regardless of what comes through this industry, if the fans don't go for it, it doesn't stick. Gaming is easily the most fan influenced industry out there. So if there is a major backlash against something, just give it time, and it will die out. So we decide what does, and does not, stay in this industry. So we are the future of gaming.

My Perscription: Get out there and wave your gamer flag proud!!!
Dr. Buck