Games companies that managed to recover from failed consoles

Discuss and discover all the great games of yesteryear!

Moderators: NickThorpe, Darran@Retro Gamer

User avatar
Matt_B
Posts: 5168
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 9:30 am
Location: 5 minutes from the beach, 30 seconds from the pub

Re: Games companies that managed to recover from failed cons

Post by Matt_B » Sun Jun 29, 2014 8:07 am

The idea of "serious gaming" seems like a bit of an oxymoron to me. At the end of the day, unless perhaps you're playing competition-grade Starcraft, it's just a recreational activity; it makes no difference in the grand scheme of things whether you're playing a vastly complex simulation or honing your skills at jumping on mushrooms. The choice is really just about what floats your boat, and gives the most fun for the time you've got.

So, let's try and not get all elitist about it, and see the hype about consoles - and indeed PCs used exclusively for gaming - not being toys for what it is.

User avatar
Antiriad2097
Posts: 26543
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 7:48 pm
Location: http://s11.zetaboards.com/RetroLeague/
Contact:

Re: Games companies that managed to recover from failed cons

Post by Antiriad2097 » Sun Jun 29, 2014 9:17 am

See also: Footballs.
The Retro League - Where skill isn't an obstacle
Retrocanteen, home of the unfairly banned
Tom_Baker wrote:I just finished watching a film about Stockholm syndrome. It started out terrible but by the end I really liked it.

User avatar
shiftytigger
Posts: 2965
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 4:53 pm
Location: East London

Re: Games companies that managed to recover from failed cons

Post by shiftytigger » Sun Jun 29, 2014 10:26 am

I think Nintendo always seem to be aimed at the younger market because of their 'mascots' for one. Sony absolutely dominated the console market with what appear more adult oriented games , whereas Nintendo have bright primary colours and squeaky voiced protagonists. Both work alongside each other quite well and that is quite happily the way it has been. My son is interested in a Wii U for all of maybe 2 games in total, favouring instead the PS3 at the moment so we wont be getting a Wii U in the foreseeable future.

I personally have found the gamecube quite capable of giving some great games , but without DVD playback it was kind of limited in appeal to some - once again lagging behind Sonys behemoth. I have very few ps2 titles remaining in my collection that arent retro compilations.

I simply didnt find many games on PS2 that I enjoyed enough. My Gamecube collection is large though , because once you dig through the apparently childish exterior Nintendo have some great games. And never underestimate a Mario game either.
Image

User avatar
outdated_gamer
Posts: 2597
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 5:14 pm

Re: Games companies that managed to recover from failed cons

Post by outdated_gamer » Sun Jun 29, 2014 2:37 pm

^ I think most of those who aren't gaming since yesterday acknowledge that the Mario games (and Nintendo games in general) are well designed and fun games that anyone can enjoy. Though, there's also those who acknowledge this but also feel that the games aren't that interesting anymore. Maybe even that they have "outgrown" them. As for me - I stick to the classics. :wink:

User avatar
shiftytigger
Posts: 2965
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 4:53 pm
Location: East London

Re: Games companies that managed to recover from failed cons

Post by shiftytigger » Sun Jun 29, 2014 7:16 pm

Not sure everyone would agree that Mario games are that good. I know quite a few who claim to be serious gamers (pretty much taken as read that they have the latest C.O.D game in mind when they say this) and say that nintendo games are for little kids. I just nod politely and move away as they are also the same kind of people that talk about 'banging some bird' , football , t!ts and how the radio is playing a tuuuuunnnnnneeee.

I like games on most platforms and play quite a lot but not sure of the qualification for being a serious gamer. If I play mario sunshine with a frown would that count? If you want someone who is serious about games , then Im not your man. Im not serious about most things but I do get a lot of enjoyment from games, sometimes those games may have a serious theme.

Either way , serious gamers such as those mentioned think they may have outgrown the games but probably never tried them. Good for them, they can get on with playing armies and swearing at the kids playing the game.
Image

User avatar
outdated_gamer
Posts: 2597
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 5:14 pm

Re: Games companies that managed to recover from failed cons

Post by outdated_gamer » Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:16 pm

^ Don't really see what CoD and Mario have in common. A better comparison would be Mirror's Edge, as a more "sophisticated" platformer aimed at older audiences. I hope these "serious" gamer friends of yours know of the existence of this game... :wink:

There's certainly nothing wrong with enjoying games aimed at younger audiences. Although seen as a "kid's game" it does not change the fact that I had more enjoyment with Banjo-Kazooie than with many "mature" games.

User avatar
shiftytigger
Posts: 2965
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 4:53 pm
Location: East London

Re: Games companies that managed to recover from failed cons

Post by shiftytigger » Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:45 pm

What they have in common is the fact that those serious gamers mentioned take a look at mario and dismiss without even trying.

None of them would touch Mirrors edge as its old and not a serious army based shooter. Show them Mario and they laugh like its a childrens toy.

Conversely I find the prospect of playing army games quite sensationally dull and their attitude typical of people I cant stand.

To me , ill try anything but newer bog standard yearly update games hold no interest , or very little at best. Mirrors edge is in my to play pile but cant see me getting there any time soon.

I think the point was clear enough first time though.
Image

User avatar
Antiriad2097
Posts: 26543
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 7:48 pm
Location: http://s11.zetaboards.com/RetroLeague/
Contact:

Re: Games companies that managed to recover from failed cons

Post by Antiriad2097 » Mon Jun 30, 2014 9:06 pm

I'd play Mirror's Edge sooner rather than later. The main game visuals still look OK (I never cared for the cut scene art style), but the mechanics are dating fast. Things like Assassin's Creed have pegged the flow of scrambling around an open world far better than Mirror's Edge, which feels slightly clunky and very channelled. I could so often not go where I wanted despite my character seemingly having the skill and abilities to do so when it suited her. I really wanted to like it and had been saving it, but when I eventually got there I found it a bit hollow, not quite delivering on its promises.
The Retro League - Where skill isn't an obstacle
Retrocanteen, home of the unfairly banned
Tom_Baker wrote:I just finished watching a film about Stockholm syndrome. It started out terrible but by the end I really liked it.

User avatar
outdated_gamer
Posts: 2597
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 5:14 pm

Re: Games companies that managed to recover from failed cons

Post by outdated_gamer » Mon Jun 30, 2014 9:38 pm

shiftytigger wrote:What they have in common is the fact that those serious gamers mentioned take a look at mario and dismiss without even trying.

None of them would touch Mirrors edge as its old and not a serious army based shooter. Show them Mario and they laugh like its a childrens toy.
I'd hardly call CoD a "serious army shooter" since it's pretty much a "Michael Bay" action movie turned into a game. :wink:

Now if they were talking about ArmA, they'd have some ground. But I guess things like serious team-based gameplay and military authenticy are foreign terms to them. :wink:

User avatar
crusto
Posts: 5586
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:18 am
Location: Birmingham

Re: Games companies that managed to recover from failed cons

Post by crusto » Mon Jun 30, 2014 9:46 pm

Antiriad2097 wrote:I'd play Mirror's Edge sooner rather than later. The main game visuals still look OK (I never cared for the cut scene art style), but the mechanics are dating fast. Things like Assassin's Creed have pegged the flow of scrambling around an open world far better than Mirror's Edge, which feels slightly clunky and very channelled. I could so often not go where I wanted despite my character seemingly having the skill and abilities to do so when it suited her. I really wanted to like it and had been saving it, but when I eventually got there I found it a bit hollow, not quite delivering on its promises.
I too thought mirrors edge was censored! I liked the idea of it, but found it a massive chore to play and ultimately got very bored of mis timing jumps etc due to clunky controls.
Image

Eat your nans pants

User avatar
3703
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 4:14 am

Re: Games companies that managed to recover from failed cons

Post by 3703 » Tue Jul 01, 2014 3:10 am

The industry is so young, there haven't been a ton of examples as yet. But exposed form suggests if you're well-run your "failures" won't fail as such. The Gamecube amassed a sustainable installed base as did the N64 before it. That said, the Wii didn't recapture the market Nintendo lost to Sony. It created another one. One which has largely eroded this generation - or rather, Nintendo walked away from it.

User avatar
outdated_gamer
Posts: 2597
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 5:14 pm

Re: Games companies that managed to recover from failed cons

Post by outdated_gamer » Tue Jul 01, 2014 2:58 pm

3703 wrote:Nintendo walked away from it.
I don't really agree with this. It's the "casuals" who abandoned Nintendo, not vice-versa. The Wii U is pretty much a continuation of the Wii formula - more emphasis on unique controller than hardware muscle, relatively low price, low wattage/power consumption, semi portablity, ect. The games are also pretty much what one would expect from Nintendo to put out, with high "family-friendy" value. The reason why many Wii owners didn't migrate over is probably the perception that it's a more "traditional" games system, the percieved relatively high price and the failure of the controller to excite consumers in the same manner as the Wii controller managed to do so. Changing trends and perceptions might have also played a certain role here.

User avatar
Gordon Bennett
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:22 am
Location: London

Re: Games companies that managed to recover from failed cons

Post by Gordon Bennett » Sat Jul 05, 2014 10:18 am

SpockIOM wrote:One flop I remember was Nokia's venture into the video game market with the N-gage. It looked the part and was convenient as it still functioned as a mobile phone. The problems were the price (twice as much as the GBA plus phone contract/credit) meaning relatively poor sales, and the limited selection of games - I guess that mobile phone technology was moving too fast (and to an extent was still inadequate) at the time for it to be a viable prospect.
I absolutely adore my N-Gage. Perhaps that may be in part because I was fortunate enough to buy mine at a clearance price without a contract, which certainly helped to accept it as a gaming handheld in its own right.

What convinced me to pick one up was reading that the game library isn't nearly as limited as it appears. While the selection of N-Gage exclusive games is on the small side, it is entirely compatible with hundreds of inexpensive Java and Symbian mobile phone games from its generation. Plus, unlike the other phones that run those games, it has a functional D-pad and set of buttons to use, making many otherwise frustrating games easy and comfortable to control.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests