A Video Game Company and the other Companies Who Know Very Little

By William Hook, at Wikimedia Commons
By William Hook, at Wikimedia Commons

Below I have posted an article for people to read as it relates to at least one the currently well-known companies in the video game industry. It clearly defines, in my opinion, the problem with other companies making video games in an industry meant for fun.

But first,

1) What company’s product do you like? Which product is not user friendly?

2) What product do you use that you wish was more user friendly?

Below I have posted an article for people to read as it relates to at least one the currently well-known companies in the video game industry. It clearly defines, in my opinion, the problem with other companies making video games in an industry meant for fun.

But first,

1) What company’s product do you like? Which product is not user friendly?

2) What product do you use that you wish was more user friendly?

It is not fair for me to ask someone about what they like that is user-friendly versus without defining just what I believe user-friendly means. Merriam-Webster’s dictionary can define user-friendly as “easy to learn, use, understand, or deal with”, at http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/user-friendly.

I believe user-friendly is just an act of being well meaning enough to account for many different things. In video games, the objective of any company should be to make money from your well thought product.

Is it necessary though to drop basic decency, as a respectful company, in my opinion, to make more money? While companies, overall, have their moments and can be conglomerates that are cold and callous, in my opinion, it is also clear they offer a product and service to drive consumer excitement.

I believe, in video games, media companies like Microsoft and Sony, that are not part of that industry, present a product for the masses with moneymaking, in mind, only. This mindset drives a stronger internal drive in those companies than the actual consumer wants or needs, but this is only an opinion.

Below are two reasons for my feelings on these companies:

1) Media companies, like Microsoft and Sony, consider only the product to make money rather than consumer resources, in getting those products

In an article, at IGN.com,Gamers Without Internet Can Stick With Xbox 360, Says Microsoft, at http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/06/12/gamers-without-internet-can-stick-with-xbox-360-says-microsoft. Microsoft tells users who cannot receive an internet connection to stay with their previous video game console, Microsoft’s Xbox 360, rather than purchase Microsoft’s new video game console, Xbox One.

Why are they saying this? How much of an install base does Microsoft’s Xbox One have at this point? This is the main reason why companies, like a Sony or Microsoft, should not be in the video game industry as game developers and console producers, and in my opinion, should not get support from either consumers or video game developers.

If a company like Microsoft could get Sega, Nintendo or another video game company in front of them, they could shield Microsoft but support the company’s bottom line.

Microsoft, Apple or Sony can be the industries big financiers funding the industry forward. The true video game minds, from the public perspective, can develop the product and games for many circumstances; they can understand the video game industry better and can receive the rewards of developing a product all consumers can enjoy.

2) Media companies like, Microsoft or Sony, have no real future for an industry they are not a part of, solely

I actually enjoy some of Sony’s products. Sony is the one company, I believe, that can do the research and come into the video game industry to make major in roads and lead the industry into a bright future.

However, they do have many flaws and are a media company. Specifically, at the Score Online.com, in Six Problems with Today’s Disastrous Playstation 4 Briefing, found at http://www.thescoreonline.com/six-problems-with-todays-playstation-4-briefing/.

The article talks about Sony introducing its new video game console, at a briefing on February 20, 2013, the Sony Playstation 4, to the public and the problems in relation to this introduction.

By not setting a release date for their new console, in this briefing, telling the public what the intention of the console will be five to ten years or even actually showing the console, Sony will reveal the Playstation 4 with the intention of wetting fans appetites, in my opinion, seeing the money and not consumers’ needs.

If Sony does not have an exact release date for their new video game console, it will make it hard for some consumers to save money for that console. If issues like whether or not the new Playstation 4 will get used games, slightly less in cost then a new game at $60 or more, are not brought up it will make it difficult for consumers to consider whether a video game console, like Playstation 4, is the right fit for them.

In the same way, during the Electronic Entertainment Expo, Sony talks about and even shows their new video game console.

A huge question should be why should it matter? Whether it is at the Electronic Entertainment Expo or a briefing, the stage you introduce your product on, is in the public.

if your purpose is to give clear details in an introduction of your product to that public?

Whether it is a briefing or the Electronic Entertainment Expo, details on a product should be clear once it is brought to the market, period. Sony, in my opinion, intends to present a product to the market but in the end, the success of that product and the future of that product is murky.

Sony would create, for the Playstation 3, a product known as the Playstation Move. Information on the Playstation Move found here at http://us.playstation.com/ps3/playstation-move/. It is a control scheme, similar to Nintendo’s Wii Remote motion control scheme, for the Playstation 3 video game console.

In my personal experience, a Playstation representative would come to a local Gamestop, a video game store, and show the Playstation Move to the public. Now, that should be a good thing.

In this case, in my opinion, in that demonstration the Playstation Move was a copy cat of Nintendo’s Wii Remote concept. In fact, I felt Sony would abandon that concept if it were to fail, immediately. Playstation 3 has its own control scheme.

Why mimic a concept another company develops. I felt there was no plan for the actual Playstation Move but it was a demonstration. It was something Sony made, at the time, to work on Playstation 3.

As it easy it came to the store it could be taken out of the store. On that day, Sony, in my opinion, was the media company that just rather tries things and if it works, it does. If the concept does not work, what happens?

If Playsation 4 is not successful, in Sony’s eyes? Is it just going to be taken off of the market? Thankfully, Playstation Move is coming to Playstation 4 and currently Playstation 4 is not a failure.

I just feel if Sony were to work with Nintendo, Sega or even SNK and create a video game company driven consoles, they would be more successful. They are just not a video game company.

Video game history is video game history. Sony and Microsoft do justice to video game market by keeping the excitement in video games alive with Nintendo, personal computers and other devices. They do not do it justice by following their own plans and driving their products first instead considering the consumers.

Update 12/31/2014

There is so much happening in this particular article, at http://gimmegimmegames.com/2014/12/xbox-one-199-target-select-3ds-xl-systems-99/. The latest technology released at a breakneck price, $199, from Microsoft, and $99 from Nintendo.

In one sense, you get newer technology for a discount price. In another sense, the price cut in the technology says something about the companies, and their production. This is worrisome, progressive, and sad again. It points out the flaws in all of these companies. The idea of getting this technology should be to hit the ground running, producing content to excite and advance the industry, but leave room for imagination, exploration, and success at the start.

If ever the games’ industry needs a change this, indicates this should come sooner, than later. Nintendo can produce, and lead, along with five older cooperating companies, and new companies to produce a single platform format, with quirks added by each company. For example, create a Wii Next, PS Next, and Xbox Next, with a platform standard. Nintendo can add something like a Gamepad to their console, but it can be a universal device on other consoles should you purchase.

All of these consoles can get the same software, but the in fair race the hardware that fades will disappear, as long as all of these companies have input on all the console’s specifications, and models.

If the software becomes king, with a PC push in performance, the industry might advance, in a cleaner way, without sales like this happening until the downward decline of a console’s life.

Do this in a way to earn money for all of these companies; it will create a more stable industry and a more potent future. If you really look at it, there is a reason the Nintendo portable console has a price cut. However, what is Microsoft’s excuse?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s