James

[font=franklin gothic medium]*rolls up sleeves* Okay, people. I've been thinking about the situation with this RPG lately and I've made a couple of decisions. First of all, I have deleted the "**** Switch" chapter. Considering that it had two very long posts in it (which I have saved on my computer), I shall keep those posts and put them up in another location. They may go in a "bonus features" thread, or they may even go here in the Underground thread. The point is, I definitely want to save them and have them on display forever - their creators deserve it. Secondly, we are missing about half of our members in this RPG. Several are gone and given the length of time that we've gone without any posting (which I take full responsibility for), I'm sure some people have even forgotten about it. So, for now I'm going to create chapters that may include all characters, but that are written by only the remaining active participants. This may be the best solution. If any original members are still reading this thread, please feel free to express your desire to post here - if you want to post, you certainly may, but I really need to know who is posting and who isn't. My intention is to create a replacement chapter for **** Switch, which will make things less confusing overall, I think. But in any case, I do want to continue this RPG. You will see a shiny new chapter soon. ^_^[/font]

[font=franklin gothic medium]I'm just wondering, what kind of tone would this RPG have? Would it be more light-hearted, or serious? Humorous, etc? I only ask because I personally really like the tone of threads like Project Gamer and Enter the Net. Obviously those threads had serious elements, but the general theme was fairly light-hearted. So I am curious as to what kind of tone you are wanting to strike here.[/font]

[font=franklin gothic medium]Wow, you only posted yesterday? I'm glad that this thread is still alive. ^_^ I've actually been re-reading Enter the Net lately. It's that good. It's not just the obvious stuff, it's the many subtle references to things that we can all relate to. I really love the description of "Teh Castle" and stuff like that. If you are still writing this in the future, I really wonder how the new OtakuBoards site would impact the storyline. That'd be most interesting.[/font]

[QUOTE=Lore]That would be [i]fantastic[/i]. Do you have an idea of what direction you're hoping to go with that? Like, just new stock smilies? Or any kind of smiley that fit the style of the new OB smilies? I could see a set of custom, slightly-larger smilies specific to OB. It would be cool to have something more... professional? than the hodge-podge we have now. (Not that I don't have my favorites. I think everyone does. I just think it would be cool.)[/QUOTE] [font=franklin gothic medium]Well, I know a couple of pixel artists who are extremely skilled with things like icons and smilies. One of them is particularly good with fine detail and animation. So if I'm lucky enough, I might be able to get one (or both) of them to develop a new set of smilies from the ground up. I suppose that my intention would be to have smilies that are slightly anime-themed, although unique to OB. I don't want uniform colours - the colours would be different, for sure. And we'd obviously have animated and non-animated smilies. I'd want uniform dimensions and it's also possible for us to have "non-smilies" (like small icons or objects that you'd use like a smiley but that isn't simply a round face with an expression - like a little sign post or something). Right now I'm just thinking aloud, but this is the direction I'm hoping to go in. I'd much rather have unique smilies that really suit OB and are relevant to us, rather than freely-available stuff that you can find anywhere.[/font]

[font=franklin gothic medium]I am thinking of ditching all of our smilies and having someone develop a custom set specifically for OtakuBoards. Obviously that's a more difficult solution, but it's something I'd like to do. The question is whether or not we get that done on this version or the next. For now though, I'd be happy to have Desbreko clean up the smilies (both their codes and removing smilies that are too big, dimension-wise). Deb, if you are happy to do that, feel free to go ahead with it. At least that way we'll have a slightly cleaner smiley library.[/font]

[font=franklin gothic medium]Er, I could be hallucinating, but I thought this may have been moved to the lounge. I put it here just because the focus is on something being turned into a film, so I thought it would be relevant here. Anyway, my opinion is that it's difficult for directors to do these conversions in a sense. If they just replicate the game, word-for-word, on the screen...you might as well just play the game. So I think they probably feel that they have to beef up the story a little and make some changes. Also, in many games, cut-scenes only take up 40 minutes or an hour or something. Translating that to a two hour (or more) film is not easy without adding things, I'd imagine. But having said that, it's completely true that most game-related movies are awful. I think this is often because the film makers don't really appreciate or respect the source material. Perhaps they think of the game as being some kind of toy that they can easily convert with little effort. So I'm sure that the general attitude toward games needs to change, in order for these films to have any chance of being worth watching.[/font]

[font=franklin gothic medium]The main problem is that smileys have been added over the years by different people. So it's a bit of a mixed bag at the moment. I'd thought of doing something new with smileys, but I wasn't really sure whether or not it was worth spending the time on that at the moment. Perhaps I can talk to Desbreko about it, since he has done such a good job organizing our avatar library.[/font]

[font=franklin gothic medium]Glad you like it! My pumpkins are a bit like roadkill, but hey, as long as they vaguely look like pumpkins, I'm happy. ~_^[/font]

[font=franklin gothic medium]I think they can work, because there are some advantages to knowing someone online. For one thing, you can know their personality before you think about physical attraction. That's one advantage you don't get in the real world. On the other hand, if you go for ages without actually being with the person...then that probably starts to become unhealthy. You develop an attachment to someone who isn't immediately there and it becomes difficult for things to progress (I mean, if you haven't even met the person you can't exactly move in with them or something). I have known people who have initially met online and then formed a real, lasting relationship "in real life". So I know that it can work. But I think it can only work if there's a plan involved - if you actually do intend to be together at some stage. If not...well, I think you probably have to question whether or not it's good for you to be in that situation.[/font]

[font=franklin gothic medium]There are two ways you can do it. You can go to Edit Avatar on the left nav menu and select from our existing library. Just use the pull-down menu to take a look at the categories we have. Alternatively, you can go into the Art Studio forum and use the request sub-forum to ask for someone to make an individual avatar for you. Hope that helps.[/font]

[font=franklin gothic medium]That is an awesome intro image. [i]Very[/i] Shy. ~_^ I haven't made any really good intro images in a while and this one is really no different, but meh. Here it is anyway: [img]http://img495.imageshack.us/img495/8417/futureshock36mx.jpg[/img] It's very basic, just a re-touched image with my own logo on there. My logo normally has a circular stamp effect, but I've changed it in this case, to suit the theme.[/font]

[font=franklin gothic medium]The other problem might be memory. You may be trying to insert avatars that take up too much space (not just dimensions). This is especially a problem with animated images. I recommend taking a look at our size and memory requirements and then finding an avatar that fits within that. Or you can use an avatar from our internal library, if you like. Hope you get it working. ^_^[/font]

[QUOTE=Raiyuu][color=DarkSlateBlue][font=Trebuchet MS] Examples: the first iPod had battery issues [/font][/color][/QUOTE] [font=franklin gothic medium]Funnily enough, the replacement battery was worse than the original. They swapped Lithium-Ion for Lithium-Polymer (or the other way 'round, I forget). The end result was less battery life on the second generation model. I think you'll find that if you get an iPod at all, the latest one is the best way to go...if only because of the extra functionality. But if you are only going to use music, you're better off going for something cheaper.[/font]

[quote name='Lore]Bah! Like you need a [i]party[/i] to dress up for Halloween! [i]Please[/i'], James. Think about that. :p[/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]So...are you suggesting I just sit around drinking coffee at home, dressed up entirely as Willy Wonka? Hm, maybe that's a good idea... I can use my cane to change TV channels, too. :animesmil [/font]

[font=franklin gothic medium]Yeah, I have to update some of our other gradients to match. ^_^[/font]

[font=franklin gothic medium]There are only two real issues with iPods. First, they are overpriced (but so is every Apple product) and secondly, the standard earphones are terrible quality. Unless you're a major audiophile, the latter isn't going to be an issue for you, but the former definitely is. Other than that, there is no problem at all really. If you are concerned about cost, then I'd definitely steer clear of an iPod. Frankly, there are a ton of cheaper alternatives out there that will do the job just fine. They may not all have the comparable quality, but as I said, unless you're a huge audiophile...it's not really going to be a major issue for you. I'd probably go for an iRiver or something like that. I'm not sure how expensive they are, but I've read nothing but good things about 'em. Having said that, the new iPod model supports photo and video, so this is something you may want to consider. But again, unless you're really into those things (unless you're planning to take episodes of TV shows everywhere with you, for example), it's not much of an issue.[/font]

[quote name='AnimeFront']HEY EVERYBODY THIS IS JUST A THREAD TO TELL WHAT YOUR RELIGON IS, I AM TIRED OF EVERY THREAD LIKE THIS GETTING TURNED INTO A FRONTLINE FOR RELIGON VS ANTI RELIGON. SO JUST STATE YOUR RELIGON AND MOVE ON GODDAMNIT. THIS THREAD WILL GET CLOSED IF YOU GUYS CONTINUE TO SPAM IT UP (THAT GOES TO BOTH SIDES OF THIS ARGUMENT)!!!!! Ah now that thats over lets continue shall we.[/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]First of all, all-caps isn't flattering on you. And secondly...I don't really see any "argument" here. As soon as people disagree, people get into this knee-jerk mode where they think all hell has broken loose (pardon the pun). But you know, people are [i]allowed[/i] to disagree. And from what I've seen of this thread, it's been pretty darn pleasant so far. Of course, we'll always get the hot-heads on any side of an issue, but I think most people are just responding to the question. Anyway, my answer is annoyingly vague in a sense. I am not an athiest, nor am I agnostic. An athiest totally denies any kind of god. I don't fall into that category - I don't [i]know[/i] if there is a supreme being, so how can I flat-out deny the possible existence of one? An agnostic doesn't believe that god's existence can be proven. Well, as far as I'm concerned, that's equally as short-sighted as being an athiest - how can anyone form a conclusion about that with 100% certainty? I'm also not religious. I find that just as nonsensical as being an athiest or an agnostic. Once again, it relies on making a judgement or a conclusion without [i]really[/i] knowing. It relies on having an answer and trying to fit the question into place. So what am I? Well, perhaps there is a word for it, I don't know...I'm a human being and I am open to ideas and evidence. No, I can't say that there is a god, because I don't know. And no, I can't say that there [i]isn't[/i] a god, because I also don't know that. My position is simple - I am fine with not knowing. I am fine with the idea that I may never know. So, aside from general philosophical moments, I really don't think about it. I don't know the answer and I probably never will. The only thing is, I am unwilling to force an answer. I think that for me, it would be a mistake...it would not be intellectually honest. I will say, though, that even if I entertain the concept of a god...I simply do not accept any existing human ideas of god. There are many reasons for this, but fundamentally I think it's obvious that we create our gods and not the other way 'round. The mere fact that we have many different religions is a demonstration that there is no clear answer - and when one actually traces the history of various religions, one can actually map out where they changed and how they have been used to guide politics and culture in various societies. So, I view religion as being completely man-made. I do think that religion in general has some great concepts in terms of how we can live our lives and what kind of values we should have - I think that this angle of religion is just fine. But in a factual literal sense, most of it has already been disproven and most of it is quite obviously a creation of minds that were far less advanced than our own today. Despite the fact that I am not religious and not an athiest (perhaps I'm just one big question mark?), this does not mean that I don't have a moral compass or whatever you want to call it. I have my own theories about how morals develop, but I'm aware that morals are largely subjective things. We all have our own ideas about what is acceptable and we all live our lives slightly differently. My morals come from many places and fundamentally, I do my best to assist others and to be a help where possible. I don't do this for some kind of spiritual brownie-point; I do it because I feel that it is the right thing to do. It's right because it creates better relationships and it is constructive (versus being destructive). At least, that's my view on it, in a nutshell. There's so much more I could say and I'm happy to elaborate on my views, but I guess this is basically how I'd describe my attitude toward religion in general. I'm not religious, not atheist and not agnostic. If there's a word to describe "I am a human being who doesn't know whether or not there is a god and is fine with that", then that word would describe me.[/font]

[font=franklin gothic medium]I never participated in the earlier threads, so maybe I'm not very qualified to comment but...what about a theme that involves video game characters in general? You might remember an RPG by Charles called Project Gamer...it was very light-hearted and included video game characters from many types of games. The results of throwing those characters together was pretty funny. Although unfortunately the RPG never really finished. Still, that might be one possible idea. I'd consider it, anyway. ^_^[/font]

[color=#332e1d][font=franklin gothic medium]Well, I thought I'd dig up this thread and contribute to it again. A few people have updated their myOtaku intro images since this thread was last used, so it may be useful to others as well. Due to a change in my layout, my intro images are now a lot larger. I notice others have adopted this approach too. Here is my current intro image: [img]http://img68.echo.cx/img68/5949/comagrey6tr.jpg[/img] Basically, there isn't a lot to explain here. This is a very simple image though - it was edited by me, but the figure isn't drawn by me. In this case I just didn't want to invest the time required to draw my own figure. "COMA GREY" is in between Black and White. If you're a Manson fan and you know what those songs are about, that'll give you an idea of the meaning behind COMA GREY. I only have a few other images that I've actually stored, so I will show you what I have. [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=23960&stc=1[/img] This image is probably one of the more meaningful ones, at least in terms of the thought put into it. At the same time, it's reasonably simple. It's based around the themes that The Golden Age of Grotesque deal with - particularly the "Entartete Kunst" (or degenerate art) exhibitions during the Nazi Germany period. These exhibitions were designed to mock "degenerate" art that was considered un-Germanic by Hitler. The idea with this image is to celebrate that art. The imagery hidden within this picture include various things - including Manson, golden age film and lustmorde paintings. The spade on the right represents a heart being pierced from above - it directly relates to "lustmorde" or "sex murder", which has been a prevalent subject in art during various eras in history. It was particularly popular during the 1920's and 30's and again, the album that this image relates to references it. The lyrics written all over the image also reference lustmorde specifically. Surrounding the spade is a red diamond, which includes a still frame from the Zapruder film (the film of JFK being shot). It is the first frame that actually shows the impact of the bullet - it is therefore pretty obscured and is there primarily because it relates to one of the themes within some of Manson's work (Holy Wood in particular). So yes, it's an image with significant meanings, but graphically it's extremely simple - save for the fact that it's quite multi-layered. [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=23961&stc=1[/img] This is an intro image that I never actually used. It's based on Tim Burton's Corpse Bride. It may not seem very edited, but it's actually been heavily edited - several frames were spliced together, to create this scene. I was going to make it clickable, so that the trailer for the film would appear in the place of this image. [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=23962&stc=1[/img] This was really a pretty random piece for me. I wanted to try something different and I wanted a subject that I'd never used before. So, I chose Madonna. I wanted something that was centered around music, but I also wanted to choose something that would probably be a little unpopular with a lot of people. In other words, I wanted to deliberately focus on a pop star rather than some obscure band. The original image is very different to this one - I'll see if I can find it to put it up later for comparison. In particular, this image utilizes a great deal of brush work, layering and retouching in order to achieve the final result. Photomanipulation isn't something I've been involved in for a long time, so I thought I'd play around with this and see what the result would be. [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=23963&stc=1[/img] And finally...Wonka! What you see here is basically a failed experiment. I was attempting to create something a little unique in the silhouette style I'd been using a while ago, but the result wasn't so good. It just wasn't going in the right direction, so, despite all of my drawing and fiddling, I binned it. It's one of the rare few failed pieces of graphics that I've actually kept lying around, lol. So there you go. [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=24647&stc=1[/img] I thought I'd add this one, since it was done fairly recently. It actually took quite a while to make, because I had to draw the tree and everything from scratch. The tree was originally on some artwork on the Charlie and the Chocolate Factory site...but it was heavily obscured, so I simply re-drew it from the beginning. I think it came out relatively well, at least better than some of my other Wonka images.[/font][/color]

[font=franklin gothic medium]I think the crystal-ish background is my favourite part of this piece. The only thing I really don't like would be the random pixel images you have there (the heart, exclamation mark and cross). In some pieces they are used to good effect, but here they just kind of seem random...and because there is only one of each and they are so small, they seem to get lost in a sea of colour. Perhaps if you had included several of them or if you'd made a defined pattern, I'd be more inclined to like them. *shrug* The rest of the image is nice enough though, especially if you've been out of action for a while in terms of graphics. I like the placement of "New Beginnings" and the curve frames things nicely. I would have to agree with people about the placement of your name, however, some artists prefer to include their name in a very vague way so that it doesn't become a focal point of the piece. If that was your aim then I think it's just fine - it's not always necessary or desirable for the artist to make their name prominent in the image.[/font]

[color=#3D4038][font=trebuchet ms]I am so disappointed; a group of my friends were talking about having a Halloween party this year. And now that the time is arriving, it looks like it isn't going to happen! Ironically, both my sisters are going to Halloween parties this weekend. Bleh. I had been hoping for a party anyway. I was going to dress as Willy Wonka (big surprise there). The only problem is, I've had trouble finding the right top hat...the version I see in the merchandise stores is all soft and weird. It's not [i]real[/i]. I hate that. Why is it so hard to just duplicate the one from the film? Bah. The rest of the costume is pretty easy, sans the wig. But yeah, that is what I was thinking about doing for Halloween this year. If no parties end up cropping up at the last minute, I may have to wait 'till next year. >_>;[/font][/color]

[font=franklin gothic medium]Yeah, as I always say, a few things still need to be changed...but I thought I'd take the opportunity to fix things that I've been frustrated with. The previous header image wasn't quite right - the new one is just a little more balanced I think. I've also edited the category imagery and collapse icons. But as always, more still needs to be done. Whenever I have a free moment I tend to come back and redo various images to keep the site looking correct.[/font]

[quote=warmaster]Are you serious about Xbox not having attracted new gamers? Do you just ignore the fact that every generation of consoles has kids growing up that receive one of *these* as their first console? And, what, they don't ever get Xboxes, cause umm they do... Here in the UK in particular, it seems to me that people are more keen on playing the Xbox than he Gamecube, especially if they've never played games before. And to be clear I was discussing the three home consoles; not handhelds. The DS has likely attracted more new gamers proportionally than Xbox. As far as *actual numbers* of new gamers, I don't know, but it may well be less.[/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]The reason I mention DS while talking about home consoles is just to illustrate Nintendo's overall strategy. Handhelds are relevant there too. In regard to Xbox, I don't doubt that plenty of younger gamers are having their first experience with that system. But that's not where the bulk of Xbox customers are coming from. Microsoft has largely been successful by drawing away consumers from Nintendo (this actually could include younger gamers as well).[/font] [quote=warmaster]Hmm well are you saying that consoles have basically reached full market saturation in the "young adult" demographic, and that the only place left for consoles to conqure is the retirees? [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]I'm really talking about gamers versus non-gamers. The gamer population will continue to increase regardless, but Xbox 360 and PS3 are not really making any major attempts to cater to non-gamers. I'm sure that Xbox Live Arcade will help and I'm sure that having Blu-ray drives in PS3 will also play a role...but none of these features are going to directly impact the software, in terms of generating software that appeals to different users.[/font] [quote=warmaster]As it stands, the system design has still less to do with attracting new customers than marketing does. Here, Nintendo has been doing such a piss-poor job at marketing that I'm not surprised at all that people think my Cube is an Xbox I don't know how they do in Japan, and they may well be kicking arse so hard and winning over so many non-gamers that what I'm saying is just total rubbish. From what you're saying, I would have to assume that's the case ^_^ [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]Oh, of course, marketing plays a role. But I think that's kind of a peripheral issue - what we're really talking about here is the product itself and who it appeals to. Nintendo hasn't been doing so well in Japan with GameCube (though they've obviously been killing Microsoft there), but DS is really where they've been bucking market trends. It is important to look at the DS experience because that can be extrapolated to the home market as well. If Nintendogs hadn't done well and if DS had failed, that would call into question Nintendo's entire strategy. But due to the success of the platform (and the particular demographic achievements), we can make some more accurate comments about where Revolution might be headed.[/font] [quote=warmaster]Well, seeing as it is capable of as much as the GCN controller *and more* I would have to say that it's not any simpler. Sure, if you only use some of the buttons and some of the functionality, it'll be simple, but so is any GCN racing game where you use the joystick and two buttons and that's it. Considering all that the controller is capable of at once, it's a bit strange to say that it is more streamlined. Games that utilize it may have you use only a fraction of the controller's abilities, therefore "streamlining" the interface, but that's something you can do with current-generation controllers as well. [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]It's a much simpler controller, there's simply no two ways about it. For instance, take a keyboard and a mouse. Some games may let me choose to move with either the keyboard or the mouse. So in essence, they can both do the same thing - but one is far more complex than the other. I'd draw that kind of analogy between other controllers and the Revolution controller. Why is it more streamlined? Because it has less buttons and can be used comfortably with only one hand. It also relies on intuitive motion control in a 3D space, rather emphasizing the need to learn and understand an analog stick or multiple buttons. Motion can [i]replace[/i] stick and button commands, while simultaneously being more accurate. Therefore, we can say that the controller is more intuitive/streamlined/simplistic.[/font] [quote=warmaster]Plus, it's not "controller complexity" that's standing in the way of expanding the market. A lot of people use rather complex "entertainment" equipment but don't play games. It's more about marketing than anything else. [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]How can you make such a definitive statement for sure? Unless you've taken surveys with non-gamers, I can't imagine how you can make such a statement. lol First of all, I would say that there is more to it than simply the controller. Of course, it's necessary for companies to create games that appeal to non-gamers as well. Nintendogs is a good example of that. However, the controller is the beginning and end of the interactive experience - that's the point through which you interact with the game. As a result, the controller is an incredibly important piece of the puzzle. Once again, I think it's worth checking out Nintendo's TGS presentation. In their own research, they found that the biggest barrier for non-gamers was the concept of using two hands quickly and nimbly on a controller - removing this psychological barrier was one way that Nintendo could encourage non-gamers to pick up the controller. I have discovered this in my own experience too. My mother, for example, does not want to invest the time to learn to play games on current controllers. As mentioned, she doesn't have 20 years worth of learning about controllers to benefit from (as I have). So current controllers are very intimidating for her, especially because she is not generally familiar with technology. That's why the longest time she ever spent with a game was an hour on Electroplankton. She spent that time with the game because it only required stylus control - and anyone can do that, because it is intuitive and requires no learned-skills. This is in stark contrast to current game controllers.[/font] [quote name='warmaster']No, you've knocked off a great deal of the functionality by losing that second joystick and those buttons, and added more such as pointer control and rotational sensors. [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]I disagree. First of all, it's entirely dependent on the game itself - more button inputs does not necessarily make for more functionality. But moreover, if you can replace those button inputs with intuitive movement, the button inputs therefore become irrelevant. The pointer control and rotational sensors do not add more complexity, because they can be controlled through intuitive movement. More buttons [i]does[/i] had complexity for the end user, because "two hands moving nimbly" is required to achieve the same effect. It is easier to simply wave your hand around in mid-air than to press a million different buttons, for example. You and I would have no problem with this because we are gamers, but non-gamers may have problems with this.[/font] [quote=warmaster]You'd be insane to tell me that games such as Mario Tennis aren't bought by non-gamers due to controller complexity. It's marketing, simple as that. [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]I wouldn't be insane, I'd be basing my information on market research. ~_^ Marketing does play a big role, of course. But why do non-gamers avoid something like Mario Tennis or any other game? It's not just marketing - it's the product itself. My mother might love the concept of Mario Tennis, but there's no way in hell she's going to be able to play that game. Too complex. The fast-paced movement and the necessary input with both hands is far, far too difficult for her to cope with initially. It would take a great investment of time and practice for her to become comfortable with that. She simply isn't willing to make that time investment. This is true of most non-gamers. It's very easy to think that because we are used to these input systems, they should be easy for everyone else too. Unfortunately that just isn't the case.[/font] [quote=warmaster]Believe me, I don't know anyone who has needed years to adjust to Mario Party or Mario Tennis or Pokemon. Learning curves have nothing to do with the controller and everything to do with the control *scheme*. Now, it is maybe simpler to just wave a controller around than use an analog stick, and that's a good thing for people who just can't muster up the coordination to use it as even a four-way all-or-nothing control, but it will still come down to marketing to make the Revolution a hit with *any* demgraphic. [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]That's probably because you were playing the game with other gamers, or people who had played games before. Learning curves have a [i]lot[/i] to do with the controller, in any case. If the controller is too complicated, it's going to take longer to learn your way around it. Simple as that. Of course the implementation of that controller is important as well, but there's only so many hairs we can split in the one discussion. Fundamentally, a more complicated controller/input device is going to have a bigger chance of creating a psychological barrier for potential consumers. That barrier alone is often what's stopping people from getting into the world of video games. Marketing will be important for Revolution, but of [i]more[/i] importance will be the game software itself.[/font] [quote=warmaster]Well, the "sales trend" for DS games might not look the same on a time-to-sales graph, but it's not like it's a better trend, especially if "they sell lower amounts in the first week, but continue to... stay flat.. for several weeks at a time." [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]It [i]is[/i] a better trend, because it results in more overall sales as well as stronger hardware tie-in ratios. Many of the people who are responsible for purchasing these software titles after the first week are the same people who are buying hardware as well. Therefore, the software not only has unusual longevity in the market, but it also directly sells hardware. And that is very important.[/font] [quote=warmaster]When you say DS is doing a lot for the industry, you must really be limiting the industry's scope or something, because while it's doing a lot for Nintendo (well, a lot maybe in comparision to the big fat nothing that the GCN is currently doing, at least from my point of view), Microsoft, Sony, and PC game companies have largely ignored it, especially when you consider the direction they continue to take. [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]No, I'm not limiting anything at all. How do you know that Microsoft, Sony and PC game companies have largely ignored it? How do you work that one out? lol And I don't know how you can say that GameCube is doing nothing for Nintendo. Last I checked, they'd sold through over 18 million hardware units globally with several multi-million seller games for that system. That's certainly a "big" nothing.[/font] [quote=warmaster]When I see an industry-wide trend that appears to have stemmed from the DS, then I'll agree with you that it has done *a lot* for the industry. For the time being, I remain largely unconvinced. [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]I think you're limiting your definitions a bit too much here though. As I said, Nintendo DS has been bucking a downward cycle in the Japanese market. It has also clearly demonstrated that hardware power does not directly translate to market success (ie: PSP). So the market evidence is already there. And that's about as solid as any evidence out there.[/font] [quote=warmaster]Also, don't speak too soon about the PSP. While I personally think the system is rubbish, it has blown the DS out of the water since its release a month-and-a-half ago. You talk a lot about Japan, but Japan's game market has been sagging for the last 5 years. USA and Europe is where gaming will probably continue to expand, and where the DS is not quite trouncing the PSP in sales. [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]I am simply telling you the facts - the sales data suggest that DS is still outselling PSP globally by a ratio of 2:1 and with higher software tie-in ratios as well. I'm not arguing that PSP isn't doing well in its own right, because it's doing just fine. Sales of five million units are nothing to sneeze at. But globally - if you want to make the comparison - DS is killing it. That's simply the reality. lol I have no idea how the future will go, maybe that will change. I'm only telling you what the reality is as of today. I'm sure there will be some specific territories where PSP is likely to fare better (such as the UK), but in terms of large territories you'll find that DS continues to outpace PSP at the present.[/font] [quote=warmaster]But, sales have nothing to do with it. If the DS starts some industry-wide trend, then it'll have changed the industry. As it stands, it's simply keeping Nintendo afloat in a suffering Japanese gaming market and not much else. [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]Sales have a lot to do with it, because sales are the end result. No sales, no success. In any case, what trend does the DS need to start to have "changed the industry"? Do we need to see other companies making touch screen systems or what? I'm not sure how you define that. I don't think it matters, anyway. That stuff is all peripheral to the central issue. DS is doing much more than keeping Nintendo afloat. It's demonstrating that on the one hand, Nintendo is able to create a new market segment beside Game Boy (which is significant). On the other hand, it is carving out a new alternative for Nintendo, third party developers and consumers. It's creating a different road, which may help to literally save game developers who cannot afford the associated costs of next generation software development. As I said earlier, this philosophy is continued through with Revolution. So in that sense, DS and Revolution are intrinsically linked. The fact that DS is doing so well - far more than simply "keeping Nintendo afloat" (which isn't ailing in the first place) - is a demonstration that not only does Nintendo know what it's doing, but it is attempting to apply this philosophy to Revolution. If Nintendo can do that effectively, things could look very different in the next five years, in terms of market demographics and percentage shares. You tell me not to rule out PSP so quickly, so by the same token I tell you not to rule out Nintendo so quickly. ~_^[/font] [quote name='warmaster']I probably won't reply in this thead futher. It's painfully boring [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]Then why respond at all? lol.[/font]

[quote=Warmaster]^_^ If Nintendo has been the only company goingi in the "right direction" the entire time, then how come most "casual gamers" pick up PS2s and not GCNs or DSs? Let's face it, Sony and Microsoft have attracted far, far more new gamers than Nintendo has in the past few years. Nintendo has at best managed to keep its old fans and attract *some* new ones, but nothing compared to the competitors. [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]I don't think anyone was saying that Nintendo has been the only company going in the right direction. But it depends on the perspective - are you talking about the right direction in terms of developers, or in terms of consumers? Or a combination of both? It really depends. Sony has attracted new gamers, Microsoft has not. Most Xbox owners are either multi-console owners or they have simply evolved from Nintendo 64 to Xbox (bypassing GameCube along the way). The biggest example here is DS. All you have to do is look at the demographics data presented at TGS for evidence on how DS is doing exactly what Nintendo said it would (in regard to attracting new gamers and gamers who haven't played in a long time).[/font] [quote=Warmaster]If I were to gamble, I'd say that 360 and PS3 will attract more new gamers than the Revolution will. I may be wrong, but I'd still put money on it ^_^ [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]I think Xbox 360 and PS3 don't have much chance to grow the market. Why? Because it's already about as big as it's going to get - it'll continue to slowly expand, but I don't think we should expect it to do that forever. Eventually the United States and Europe are sure to feel the same kind of decline that Japan is experiencing now. More importantly though, these new consoles do nothing new. They have expanded media functionality, but that isn't going to draw in massive amounts of new consumers. If J Allard thinks that a senior citizen is going to play Xbox 360 just for Xbox Live Arcade...he has another thing coming, lol. That's not to say that these systems won't expand the market at all. They very well may. But Revolution is much more specificially designed for it - Xbox 360 and PS3 are designed to chase existing consumers, they haven't been built with new consumers in mind.[/font] [quote name='Warmaster']Also, the Revolution's controller isn't exactly simplifying things. It is simply adding yet MORE functionality![/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]How do you figure? lol It's adding more functionality in terms of movement...but the design is a dramatic simplification of what currently exists. I don't know how it can be regarded as more complicated than what's on the market today.[/font] [quote=Warmaster] It's not "streamlining" anything ^_^ But that's ok, because I dont know why you'd ever think there's a need to streamline what we currently have been playing with. I'm not sure anyone has really complained about there being too many buttons on the X-Box controller ^_^ [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]Well, this gets to the core of the matter. First of all, you only have to look at the controller to see that it's a dramatically simplified design. Less buttons, no second analog stick and the ability to be controlled with only one hand. Bang, immediately, you've knocked off a great deal of the complexity of current controllers. So the next question is, why would you want to do that? This is where I recommend watching Nintendo's TGS press conference. Mr. Iwata explains it in great detail. Current hardcore gamers don't care about complexity, because we are used to it - we've had years to adjust. But what about your mother or grandmother? They haven't had years to adjust. For them, such controllers are too difficult to play with right away. Revolution is therefore designed to "create a new starting line" for all gamers, in the same way as DS's touch screen. So the point is simple. Hardcore gamers may enjoy the feeling of freshness that comes from the controller. But most importantly, [i]new[/i] gamers will be less intimidated by a simplified and more intuitive game controller. And that will ultimately be the key to drawing in such consumers (provided that the right software is made available, but given what we've seen unfolding with DS so far, we have no reason to really doubt that).[/font] [quote=Warmaster] far as swordplay in the next Zelda, well, it could be really cool, or it could be really dorky and lame. Unless you have force feedback, it still won't be anything like swinging a real sword, so I don't know why it'd be any cooler than using a joystick. Adapting a "sword swinging" system to control Ninja Gaiden... that'd be really tricky wouldn't it? ^_^ [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]Well, this is where two aspects come in. Primarily, I think we just have to wait - we don't even know how the new Zelda will play. Secondly, I think we have to give Nintendo the benefit of the doubt so far - in all of their controller innovations, they have always created games that made the most of those systems. So I don't see any reason to doubt that this will also be true on Revolution. Nintendo's games have always been about ease of play - regardless of the controller. I cannot imagine them creating some kind of clunky and awful control system for a new Zelda on Revolution. That's not to say that it's impossible, but it's very unlikely. Moreover, these concepts do not need to be applied to third party games. Porting Ninja Gaiden over to Revolution wouldn't mean that Team Ninja would suddenly have to make all of these weird mechanics for a game that wasn't designed for them. It would be possible to port the game over without doing any of that, but while still having a fresh feeling. I do not believe that developers will have to re-invent the wheel everytime they make a Revolution game (though it would be nice). Any type of game can be played on this controller and some games will no doubt feel much better as a result (ie: first person shooters).[/font] [quote=Warmaster]We'll see if Revolution changes the industry for the better or not. I honestly have no idea either way. For instance, I don't think the DS has really changed anything about the industry as a whole. It's not as if, if Microsoft makes a handheld, they're definitely going to throw in a touch screen interface. So, we'll see, but for the time being I'd just sit tight and see what Nintendo really has up its sleeve ^_^ [/quote] [font=franklin gothic medium]Well, this just shows me that you need to do a little more reading. ~_^ Nintendo DS has already demonstrated that Nintendo's philosophy in this area is basically working out as they'd suggested it would. Not only has the system sold through more than twice the amount of PSP globally, but the software tie-in ratios are significantly higher. But more importantly, DS is bucking various industry trends right now. As Iwata explained in his TGS speech, a new game in Japan will sell in the first week and then sales will predictably begin to decline week-on-week. So a game's best sales will occur in the first two weeks, before a sharp drop-off. Nintendo DS games (particularly Touch Generation software) are bucking that negative industry trend. They sell lower amounts in the first week, but continue to steadily climb (or stay flat) for several weeks at a time. This is a completely different sales result to industry standards. Also, demographics data has shown that DS software is consistently drawing non-gamers and "ex-gamers" back into the market, which partially explains this sales behavior. Such software has performed particularly well with both women and older people (those above 45 years of age). So, DS has (and is) doing a lot for the industry. Once you know about these things, the picture with Revolution becomes a little clearer, I think. ^_^[/font]

[font=franklin gothic medium]The problem is that there's a white gap between the top of the site and the browser window. I have already asked Justin to address this, so I assume he'll attend to that when he is free. As for the actual design...well, I can't really comment on that. Some people will like it and some won't. ^_^[/font]