Not a Revolution: Another Essay
Posted by SugarRay on September 03, 2006

I don’t understand why everybody is all hyped up excited about this “new” generation of video game consoles that is coming out. The corporate cheerleaders are praising them as “revolutionary,” but there is nothing revolutionary about them. Now, before you started throwing things at me via electronic mail (Eat crap nd DIE SRD!! PS3 RULEZ!!!1), allow me to elaborate.

As far as I am concerned, there have only been two real “revolutions” in the video game industry. The first one took place after the infamous “Video Game Crash of 1983,” after the extraordinarily bad E.T. video game for the Atari sent shockwaves through the industry. People stuck to playing Pac Man and Space Invaders in arcades for a while. But in 1985, Nintendo released the original NES, packaged it with two controllers and the truly revolutionary Super Mario Bros. for only two hundred dollars and people started buying video games and home consoles again. The Nintendo Entertainment System became the king of the industry.

The next phase (not revolution) came when Nintendo released the Super Nintendo Entertainment System (the SNES) and Sega released the Sega Genesis, and the Nintendo vs. Sega war was ON! Entire neighborhoods were divided into Nintendo families and Sega families, and they were fiercely loyal to their chosen brand. Video game makers were at their best (and worst) during this time, churning out titles for an ever expanding market. This is the world that most loyal video game players grew up in and have their fondest pixilated memories from.

However, there was nothing revolutionary about either the Super Nintendo or the Sega Genesis. Neither one of them offered backwards compatibility, which was a stupid move in and of itself. Neither offered anything new hardware wise or software wise besides prettier graphics and better sound. This phase was all about the games, which was really the way it should have been.

Next up: the other true revolution. In 1996, Nintendo released the Nintendo 64 along with (again, truly revolutionary) Super Mario 64. You can mark both true revolutions and significant gaming events with a new Nintendo System and a new Super Mario game being released simultaneously. Super Mario 64 made the historic jump from 2D side scrolling to 3D run and jump platforming, which has become a mainstay in the industry.

But Nintendo weren’t the only ones to revolutionize this time around. Sony decided to throw their hats into the mix by releasing the Playstation. The original Playstation is significant because it marked the jump from cartridge based gaming to disc based gaming, which was able to hold much more memory. The Playstation offered games on a high technological level than the Nintendo 64. This time, the true war was between Sony and Nintendo. Some people might try to tell you that Sega had a significant role with the Dreamcast, but those people are wrong. The Dreamcast ultimately led to Sega leaving the hardware side of the industry for good. Now they just focus on making games, and that is a good thing.

The next phase in the industry came in 2000 when Sony released the Playstation 2. While we all love the Playstation 2, you have to admit that it was nothing more than a Playstation that used DVD technology instead of CD. Sure it has better graphics and (debatably) better games than its predecessor, but when you got right down to it, this was not the revolutionary jump.

A year later, Nintendo released the Gamecube and Microsoft jumped into the fray with the big green Xbox. Let me tell you something about these two systems. They really weren’t all that great. The Gamecube didn’t offer much of even a technological jump over the Nintendo 64. Nintendo misstepped big time by not releasing a full fledged Super Mario game with it, the first time in console history they have not done so. Luigi’s Mansion was a cool game for what it was, but should not have taken the place of the run and jump madness in a red hat that should have been. The Xbox was big, bulky, had a controller the size of a canned ham, and was priced twice that of a Gamecube. While it did have the surprisingly good Halo, Microsoft did not offer a solid library of launch titles to go along with its oversized, overpriced, ham-fisted and ugly monster. It took a while for the Xbox to find its niche in the industry, as the leading online gaming console. While it has been a crazy three way war for the past five years, it is undeniable that Sony has ruled it with an iron fist.

And that finally brings us to the present: Three new consoles that offer nothing revolutionary other than slightly better technology than their predecessors. Let’s take a look at each of them, shall we?

Playstation 3 – Sony

The PS3 uses Blue Ray and Blue Tooth technology, neither of which you need to make or play a great game. It has a hard drive, but so do computers. And at six hundred dollars with no must have games being released on or near launch day, I do not see myself standing in line at Babbages to get this thing. As Al Creed has stated, it’s just a PS2 with a new disc drive.

Wii – Nintendo

Besides having an incredibly stupid name, the Wii has an incredibly stupid controller. Who wants to play with a remote control? People have been playing with normal controllers for twenty years and do not want to change. Who cares if Nintendo is releasing its entire back library of games. Most of us already own copies of the games we want to play. Nintendo should have been playing the backwards compatibility card the whole time instead of charging us to play games that we already own. And it doesn’t offer much of technological jump either. There are no must have games on this one, either! As 7th has stated, it is just a Gamecube [or an N64, for that matter] with a wavey stick.

Xbox 360 – Microsoft

It seems all Microsoft did for this one was just tweak the first Xbox slightly, stand it on its side and drop it in a can of whitewash. I wasn’t an Xbox fan the first time around and they aren’t doing much this time to try and win me over. And again, no must have games. Pass.

“But SRD, what is the alternative?”

In Japan they make games for out of date systems for years after new consoles have come out. Why not just focus on making good games with the technology we have instead of pissing everybody off every five years by forcing people to buy new consoles with only slightly better technology in order to play new games. I would gladly pay for a new console that was truly revolutionary, but these are not. I’ll wait until the prices drop and the really good games for them start being churned out. And this time I am only going to buy one. But which one, you ask? That’s a secret. Or maybe I just don't know yet. Whatever! But just because I’m going to wait a year and buy it at lowered prices does not mean I am going to sing its praises or call it revolutionary when it clearly is not. I just want to play new games.

New GOOD games.

Period.

- SRD