[thatmariolover]

This gaming generation is different from every other; or so everyone keeps saying. But I personally don’t buy it at all. Looking at the past console eras I feel these consoles themselves are probably less changed from their direct predecessors than any other generation of consoles. The graphical leap from NES to SNES might not be completely apparent to most people, but Nintendo multiplied their processing power by almost 100 every way around. From the number of sprites they could have on the screen at once to the color pallet they had at their disposal, the jump was huge.

Look at the next jump, from SNES to N64; it was still a huge leap. From 2D to 3D – even the PSX was a massive jump. But that jump put the wrong idea into the head of almost everybody in the Industry – even Nintendo. The N64 was advertised as the most powerful system available – and affordable too. Everybody saw the leaps in graphical capability as exponentially and expected it to continue; until the PS2, Xbox, and Gamecube came out. Then I think the console makers started to understand what they were getting themselves into and what was happening.

Microsoft may be an exception because of their relatively recent venture into the console entertainment market. Then again, they're generally fairly shrewd about their business practices. I think Sony and Nintendo on the other hand realized full well what was expected of them and what kinds of limitations they were going to run into. From every rumor available Sony’s apparently decided to deliver another huge jump no matter what the cost to the company or consumer; maybe I’ll get a PS3 when the time comes if it’s reasonable – but what happens the generation after this one? Nintendo on the other hand decided not to change the hardware so much as offer a decent jump in graphics and combine it with new concepts for the way we should be expecting games to change. Two to three times as powerful as the Gamecube isn’t something to be shrugged at. And for the price point that so many groups and industry analysts are expecting it seems more than reasonable.

I don’t want my point lost before I’m done so here it is. I’ve been coming to Game Tavern in some form or another almost since the very beginning to see most of us really grow in terms of our concepts and understanding of the gaming industry. Most of us were massively opinionated fan-boys (or girls) of one persuasion or another (myself included) when we first came here. But through tons of debates and arguments our enthusiasm for the gaming industry was tempered. And most of us seemed to really come to an understanding that graphics didn’t make a game before, and they’re not going to make a game now. They can help you be immersed in the world you’re in and I can understand that – because I like amazing graphics as much as the next guy.

So many people think that Nintendo’s going to lose out on this next generation. But Nintendo knows how to choose their fights and I think they have a real chance to succeed. They’ve chosen to not compete on a playing field that they know they can’t win on. Nintendo’s playing a different game and if they can convince other people to play with them then they've already won - because they've got no competition. I am a Nintendo fan - and maybe I don't come from the perspective of some of you. But I think that most of you are being naive if you are willing to believe Nintendo is dead without seeing its lifeless corpse in the cold earth.