Four Player Co-Op 09.30.09: PSP GO, Square Talks Billing, and Kojima Pimps Natal

Posted by Rod Oracheski on 09.30.2009

Can the PSP Go overcome its price and poor pre-launch buzz? Is billing really the next big thing in games? Japanese developers love Natal, but can anyone deliver? Will Home on PSP be more up your alley? Microsoft buying EA: bad idea or worse idea? 411's Todd Vote, Sean Garmer, and Rod Oracheski weigh in on these questions in the latest edition of Four Player Co-Op!

Todd Vote has joined the game.
Sean Garmer has joined the game.
Jacob Lopez has joined the game.
Rod Oracheski has joined the game.

1 - Already under fire for its price point, the PSP Go received another shot this week when the rumoured 'UMD conversion' program, for those upgrading from an existing PSP, was shot down by Sony, who cite legal issues as one of the causes for the idea being abandoned. Does the PSP Go need some good news prior to its launch, and what would it take to bring you around?

Todd Vote

What is Sony doing? Do they remember the last console manufacturer that started alienating their fanbase? I'm not ready to call Sony the next Sega just yet, but continually piss off people who have been loyal to them and their products, they may be headed to the same sort of ill-fate.

I think the PSP Go definitely needs something to generate a positive buzz before the launch. But sadly, I am not a portable gamer, so there isn't much that would bring me around shy of a $100 price tag. (Though there is a God of War game on the PSP…)

Sean Garmer

Yes, of course it does, especially since this was probably one of the biggest selling points for people that already had a PSP. For those casuals that are buying it for looks it probably won't matter as chances are they didn't have a PSP to begin with anyway.

When I saw this at E3 I said it looked cool, mainly because somebody finally figured out how to make a portable machine that fit with the other gadgets we have today. Meaning if I took the thing out it doesn't look or feel like a portable gaming machine. However, as soon as they announced the price of $250 dollars everyone in the room went silent. Just like I said about the PS3, I won't even consider buying one until it comes down in price. I won't pay more than $150 for a portable machine.

I already have a DS though, and I don't see myself buying a PSP anyway. They do need to come up with some kind of deal for US PSP owners though, cause making them re-buy games they already own or giving them no incentive to trade-in those old games is going to lose them some potential PSP Go buyers.

Jacob Lopez

Let me begin by saying that I am a sucker. I have one reserve. In my defense, though, I never bought a UMD-based model, and I am going halfsies with my girlfriend. That said, some good news wouldn't hurt Sony (Price drop please?). I don't know that the unit is meant to get people to re-buy a PSP, which is probably a bad move already. I still think that the system is way too expensive, which was what kept the PS3 from selling for so long.

I think that giving anyone who buys the system a crap-ton of PSN points would be a nice start though.

Rod Oracheski

The PSP Go needed nothing but good news after they announced the price, and it hasn't gotten it. Even the price drops on the consoles are a negative to the pricey handheld - the PS3 is only $50 more and both the Wii and Xbox 360 are $50 less! Then you look at what Apple's doing with the iPod Touch and really start to wonder if that might not be a better way to go.

I like Jacob's idea of throwing in PSN points with the purchase. Buy a PSP Go for $250 and get $25 worth of points, maybe even $30. Serves a double purpose as well, getting those new buyers to check out the store and start downloading games right away.

---

2 - Square-Enix believes the 'next big thing' in gaming is going to be billing. Does the concept of being fleeced out of more money worry you, or are you excited about a future where you buy, for example, the new Final Fantasy game for $60 and get unlimited play time, or pick it up for $40 - but only get 40 hours to finish it up? What genre stands to benefit the most from the idea of 'stepped billing' like this?

Todd Vote

This will never fly for a number of reasons. Who the hell is going to want to pay $40 to basically rent a game? If I am paying anything more than $10, I'm going to want to keep the games forever. What about if 6 months after the initial playthrough I decide I want to spend some more time with this game, but I only have about 2 hours of time left on my glorified rental. What do I do then? Do I pay by the hour? I can't be the only person who peruses his old catalog of games and plays through some again, am I?

In addition to that, what happens if I am sure I can beat a game if the 40 hours they want to sell me, but then I get stuck. And spend the next 26 hours of gametime trying to get past this particularly challenging area, what happens when I run out of time before I finish the game?

Lastly, does anyone else see this changing the way games are made drastically? If developers were ever limited in the length they can make a game, replay value is going to go right out the window, we will be riddled with linear experience after linear experience. This whole idea sounds good in theory. But it'll never work.

But if it did come to pass, I suppose the ole fighting games would benefit most. That would be the most linear genre out there, so it stands to reason they would reap the rewards from this type of system.

Sean Garmer

Maybe Square-Enix should focus on designing new games and not about "billing." The folks from Namco Bandai and Capcom said, they are worried games moving to an all digital media won't sell, mainly because I think people like having physical copies of their games to have for however long they choose. These consoles are very capable of breaking down. Are we going to haul our hard drives everywhere we go in the future? I think not. Plus I don't want to have to buy a new hard drive every three months because it has to start holding entire full games.

This whole billing concept will just make Video games more expensive. Sure video game companies lose money because of used games and time driving the price down, but that's also how many people are able to experience those games. So maybe, when the next installment of it, or the next game from that developer comes out, they will buy it new and at full price. If I have to download a game, that means the game makers are the only ones who control the price point. So it may be longer than normal before we see that 60 dollar title drop down to a manageable level. The billing is a nice idea for anything with a story, RPG, or an Action Adventure title (especially for those that only like to play through the game once and be done with it.) However, most people won't want to do this because it limits the enjoyment of the game, and how much they can play. So ultimately as it stands this needs to be flushed out more, or it is a just going to be a terrible idea from people that want to grab more money from gamers.

Jacob Lopez

Well, they are right about it being "inconceivable" for anyone to want to pay full price for downloadable games, but they shouldn't have to. Being that the game is downloaded, the costs of mass producing discs and shipping to retail, along with all that other stuff should be cut out anyway.

I didn't really read anything definite about a pricing structure, so I don't know how long players would actually get with a game for a given price. What if the games were $3 rentals for a few days? What if paying $20 bucks for Uncharted 2 lets you keep it for as long as it takes you to play through it only once, with no restarting the game then it disables when you finish the game? There are still too many questions that need to be asked, and answered, to make a fair judgment on such an idea.

Rod Oracheski

Here's a great idea that all you game publishers can have for free: CHEAPER GAMES. You know what would sell a ton? Games that don't cost $60 ($70 in Canada) across the board. That goes double for publishers like EA and Activision, who often have multiple releases in the same month. You know why people don't buy both NCAA and Madden every year anymore? Because that costs $120 and we can't afford it these days! I love me some NHL action, but this year when I wrote a review of NHL 10 I had to finish it with a mention that people under a financial crunch should definitely consider last year's game - a $40 savings. If you want to make that money back, plan out some awesome downloadable content ahead of time. If it's good, we'll buy it.

I doubt I'd ever go for a plan that gave me [x] hours of play for [x] dollars. Any time I played that game, I'd feel pressure to rush through so I didn't wind up having to pay extra to finish it up.

---

3 - Motion controls haven't proven all that popular with the 'hardcore' gamer, but when Microsoft held a Natal panel at TGS featuring acclaimed developers, they seemed to see a lot of good in the concept. Kojima, for example, said he saw it as a big step for the industry - as large as the switch from 2D to 3D. While Microsoft recently revealed there are a dozen companies preparing titles for Natal's launch, do you believe any of them can tap into the potential those three prominent developers said they see? If so, who - and in what way? If not, where's the failure come from?

Todd Vote

I think Natal's initial success will be from the quantity of games, not necessarily the quality. You are first going to want to familiarize people with the technology, so I would expect to see some Wii Sports style games initially. If you think Microsoft or anyone is trying to capture the hardcore fan base with Natal, then I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn. This is an attempt to chomp away at Nintendo's lead by saying "hey look at us. We have motion controls and better graphics."

That being said, I do see an unlimited amount of potential with Natal, and I do think we will see some very interesting ideas before it is all said and done. If it is going to fail, it will be due to a lack of support from the fans, and publishers alike. It takes a village and all that.

Sean Garmer

While I see Sony's attempt at motion control as a gimmick (they even use the same type of controllers as the Wii for goodness sakes). Project Natal is a new step for gaming. No controller gaming with better graphics than the Wii, it may make you look stupid, but it could be a big deal. Microsoft is obviously not trying to do this just to take away some Wii Fans, they could blow Nintendo's system away if they do this right. The fact that it let's a person scan their own items into a game is already a step forward. Navigating menus with your hands is cool for doing the netflix and facebook stuff. Voice recognition could be a cool thing for games. Not to mention the third party support for this is already big.

I can already imagine playing Madden on that thing, where you have to actually act like your passing the ball and it registers the way you move your arm on the game. Or in FIFA, I'd love to step up and act like I'm actually taking a shot. Imagine playing Gears of War and having to duck and cover along with Marcus? Or controlling weapons with your hands. Those are some cool things to think about.

Natal can only fail if Microsoft is promising more than Natal can really do, or similar to the Wii, developers never understand how to take a game they already make and put it into Natal correctly. I will say one thing, (I don't think they would) but I really hope I don't have to play real air guitar if they make Rock Band for Natal. The music snobs already say enough about the plastic controllers, imagine what they would say if you weren't holding anything. That's what's fun about Natal though, we get to speculate for a long time until we finally get to see a real game using it.

Jacob Lopez

If I'm not mistaken, a lot of developers were thrilled with the idea of the Wii's controls as well. I think it will be important to see what sort of games are released. I have fun with my motion controls, but I don't know that they are quite accurate enough to suit that "core" gamer. It will take some work, and someone will eventually get it right, but it never happens overnight.

Every new innovation in gaming is usually exploited to hell (bloom lighting, cell-shading etc.) before anyone learns what to do with it, or actually makes it truly enhance the gameplay. I guess what I should say is that we probably won't see something like that come this console generation, but in the next, when developers are able to achieve a way to make it feel natural.

Rod Oracheski

The problem with motion control on the Wii largely centers around the glut of "games" that use it as nothing but a gimmick. I mean how many times does 'hit A' have to be replaced by 'waggle furiously' before developers find something new to do with it? That's not the dream of 'motion control' we all had in mind, is it?

That said, gamers are incredibly eager to adopt new and strange things. Take Guitar Hero, for example. If someone had told you that a plastic guitar would be one of the most popular accessories prior to Guitar Hero hitting shelves, would you have believed them? Look at it now. If someone can make something compelling with Natal, it'll take off in a big way. I'd bet the casual side of it will be cornered by EA, who will likely find a way to port across the EA Sports Active bundle. Getting fit at home is big these days, and having a home fitness program that can actually recognize if you're losing weight just by looking at you? That would catch on. On the hardcore side, I'd wouldn't be surprised if it's something that isn't from a big publisher that catches on. Of the big guys, though, I would bet Activision finds a good use for it in something like Call of Duty - hand motions, things like that.

---

4 - Home is reportedly profitable for Sony, but doesn't seem to have had a great reception amongst gamers. Will Home (lite) on the PSP be different? If no, what can Sony do to make Home more appealing? If yes - why?

Todd Vote

Home lite on the PSP will be met with the same profitability, and same general meh-ness from gamers. There is nothing to do to make it more appealing. First tell me what currently makes it appealing. Go ahead, I'll wait… Yeah, Home has got nothing going for it. It is as pointless as Microsoft's avatars.

Now on the PSP, Home could have a bit more life. If there was a place in Home to play all your music and movies without having to go through 150 different tabs, then it may serve some purpose.

Sean Garmer

People really use Home? I figured no one used that. Well if it works for the PS3, I wouldn't see why it wouldn't work for the PSP. I would think that on a portable system people can get on it more frequently and do more on it, then a PS3 where they have to be at their residence to mess with Home. Home has it's own niche audience and I really don't see what Sony can do to move it away from that. I don't think Sony was expecting everyone that owned a PS3 to latch onto it, it serves its purpose and so will the one on the PSP.

Jacob Lopez

It may be a tough sell -they don't have the super-awesome Phil Harrison to talk it up anymore. I actually don't know what got lost in Home, because it seemed so awesome when Phil showed it off a couple years back. I think there just seemed to be so much more going on in the virtual universe than we ended up getting when it was released.

The problem now is that even if they did add some major upgrades to Home, it would be hard to convince gamers to try it again. My suggestion? Totally scale it up to be a truly Second Life-like experience, then go beyond that, and just call it Home 2.

Rod Oracheski

I can't see Home (or Room, or whatever they wind up calling it) on the PSP catching on with the hardcore gamers unless it does something drastically different than Home on PS3. All the stuff that had potential in Home - streaming movies, group get-togethers, etc... - seems out of reach of the PSP's abilities.

---

Bonus Question - Microsoft was reportedly mulling over an EA buyout. If it happened, what would the fallout be? Things to keep in mind: EA's exclusivity deal with the NFL would almost certainly be voided if they developed for only one platform, EA makes the bulk of its money on multiplatform releases, the EA library of games includes a huge storehouse of original IP

Todd Vote

I talked about this a bit with the Robbins' brothers (editor's note: in reality there's only one Robbins "brother" and it's Drew, the others are imaginary) the other day. Would Microsoft be willing to let EA continue to develop for Sony, and Nintendo? If the answer to that is no, I find it very hard to believe that it would be allowed to happen.

Let's look at the numbers: This move would put a company who holds roughly 35% of the console market being put in charge of a publishing company that controls about 20% of the ENTIRE game publishing market. It just seems like it would be a big set back for the entire industry. As interesting as it would be to watch the fall-out from a journalistic standpoint, I just couldn't see this becoming a reality. Someone, somewhere would step in to stop it from happening.

Sean Garmer

The fallout would be: Start counting down the days till the game industry sees a huge drop in sales, or suddenly everyone and their mom buys a XBOX 360, which would then inch us ever closer to that possible "Universal Gaming system" idea that keeps floating around. If we ever just had one system it would be the death of the industry, period. Gaming thrives on sales and competition, with the competition aspect gone, I don't think we'd see all these great games. Though the lines are being blurred with exclusives going away all the time. The game companies still make lots of money off multi-platform games, like EA does.

Sure Microsoft would gain a huge library of gaming IP's that would be exclusive to them, but it would be at the cost of the entire industry and I think Microsoft knows that. That's why they said "We have no plans to buy EA." I can totally see why an outside company like Disney would want to buy EA, because it could make Disney a crap load more cash, but for Microsoft it would just fragment EA and the everything else too.

Jacob Lopez

Wait, isn't EA the one that's supposed to be doing all the buyouts? Well, it if were to happen, it would definitely change things. Who would make NFL games? Would Sony bring back their series? Would Nintendo have to find a kick-ass third party to do their sports games? Forget sports, what about all the other stuff EA publishes and develops? It would all be limited to PC and Xbox platforms.

Somehow, it seemed that their shares climbed when the rumors came around, I don't know why for sure.

There is also the possibility that some of EA's studios would break up and become independent developers. That could make for an interesting situation as well.

Rod Oracheski

The only way this would be feasible is if Microsoft was leaving the hardware side of things and wanted to be the biggest software publisher for some reason.

If they actually did it though, it could be interesting. The NFL license would revert back to being open to multiple developers, I would think. The NFL would probably be open to licensing it out to a single multi-platform publisher again, but we'd likely see the same 'first-party development okay' conditions that the MLB deal has. Either way, the 360 would be the only console with a yearly Madden release and that would be pretty big for Microsoft. EA could also fire up their MLB game again, as a first-party developer, giving Microsoft a fairly sizable sports title advantage over any other console. FIFA, MLB, NHL, NFL...EA covers it all. Having to develop for only one platform, we might even see some significant strides in each series as well.

Outside of the sports genre, EA has a wealth of IP that would make a buyout attractive: Road Rash, Need for Speed, The Sims, Medal of Honor, Spore, Skate, Mirror's Edge, Battlefield - even the 'Strike' series (Jungle Strike, Desert Strike, etc...) could make a comeback.

I'd say it would never happen, but if Microsoft will shell out for Rare and their IP, anything's possible.

---

That's it for this week. If you have questions you want these suckers volunteers to answer, feel free to drop it in the comments. If you want to take part one week, drop a comment with when and why you should be considered.