|
A very interesting read. Personally, I do not agree with Miyamoto's detractors and I really think he hit the core issue right on it's head in this section
"In his view, it is the urge to imitate cinema - not his own unwillingness to compromise - that impedes the industry's evolution. "Videogames do not have any competitive edge over movies as an entertainment form. We have to pursue something that movies cannot do." Just what that is, however, is hard for him to articulate. "The most important thing is for games to be fun," he says. "I cannot tell you exactly what that means. It is something you feel, I think."
I can really see where he is coming from with that idea. It's like the gulf between the theater and video that has closed considerably in the last few years. Why would I want to the theater when I can get something close to it at home? And in the case with the games, I would I want to play a game about the movie when I can just watch the movie without having to add the extra effort of actually thinking my way through that game?
I also disagree with how the critics seem to think that being grittier with content will attract more users. Violent or sexual graphics and situations will still appeal to the juvenille.
If I had to pick a game the seems to point the way to mass the accpetance of gaming, it would be The Sims. The Sims have sold millions to a wide range of age groups without tyring to imitate the movies or trying to explicitly push adult subject matter. Essentially, it offers that "experince" that Miyamoto says that could only be had with a video game.
This is not to deny that something like GTA isn't hitting a nerve. Obviously something's going on, but I think we have to look at the numbers more carefully see to how far this style of game is really reaching the people.
|