In case you were somehow unaware, two of the most gigantic franchises in gaming had new releases in the last month, and they are both predictably selling like hotcakes in a cold famine.
Pokemon X and Y released on October 12th and sold approximately 4 million units in its first two days, which rounds out to about $200 million in gross retail exchange. Despite these impressive figures, Nintendo is here absolutely dwarfed by Rockstar, who earlier last month shattered previous records as Grand Theft Auto 5 made 1 billion dollars in total profit in only 3 days.
From a strictly monetary stance, Rockstar has in this sense kicked Nintendo (not to mention every other company) right in the teeth. It's probably true that X and Y will have better long-term sales than GTA 5, given the fervent support of the subculture to which the games appeal and the strong focus on children, who will likely get the game some time in the next few weeks instead of on the release date, but it is nonetheless unlikely that X and Y will surpass GTA 5's sales figures.
But it doesn't matter. Nintendo has won.
Obviously, I do not mean that they have won or will win in a monetary sense, it's unlikely that any games other than Battlefield 4 and Call of Duty: Ghosts will even approach GTA 5 in sales.
But in contribution to the gaming world, in the creation of a satisfying product, in innovation and in game design, Pokemon has taken the day, or at least the month. And here's why.
There are of course, a large number of reasons related to gameplay, series progression, innovation in gameplay while maintaining continuity with the spirit of the series, and similar issues that distinguish X and Y from GTA 5, but these are not the focus of the article. All I think I really need to say on this matter without launching into a review of GTA, is that Pokemon X and Y is a game that can readily make practical use of depth charts, that is still fun for 5 year old children.
What I do think is important, though, is realizing how much extra money Nintendo could have made on X and Y, if they were evil. By evil, of course, I mean willing to endorse the cancer that is micro-transactions. I, like many others, have a tendency to be critical of Nintendo for milking the same franchises over and over again while failing to develop viable new content, but at least they have stuck to their guns against micro-transactions.
Imagine a world in which Nintendo is willing to sell you the original legendary birds from Red and Blue for $5 a piece. Maybe they start selling all the legendaries from previous generations like this, and some time around six months from now they could sell a $40 legendary pack with all of the legendary Pokemon from all the different generations. Maybe they start selling rare candy for $1 any time you want it.
Maybe they sell the holy grail of Pokemon, Mew, for $20. Don't act like it wouldn't work.
My point here is that if EA Games, Ubisoft, Rockstar, or any other company on the market decided to make a game that was the perfect storm for making money on micro-transactions, that game would be Pokemon X and Y. In this generation, at this juncture of gaming history, the wide breadth of content, the long hours required to acquire that content, and the online multiplayer that makes that content finally have some real community prestige in X and Y make it perhaps the single best micro-transaction environment on the market, but there isn't a single one.
Even the demographics of people buying this game are perfect for micro-transactions eccentric 20 somethings who still buy Nintendo games and go to conventions are notorious for making small, seemingly minuscule purchases that pile up quickly, and 5-12 year old kids with a 3DS are already probably good at pestering their parents into giving them money.
But for the sake of the game, and for the sake of the community, Nintendo has foregone this disgusting industry standard, and for that I think they deserve a standing ovation.
Meanwhile, GTA 5's multiplayer option is riddled with micro-transactions Cash and experience are earned at disgustingly disproportionate rates in what is clearly a test of the will against the things you want to play the game. The way it works there is that you can unlock an assault rifle, or house, or bulletproof tires or whatever else you need at a certain level, but you can only acquire those things with egregious amounts of money, which the game gives you at approximately the same rate a dead cow gives you oil. Into this model strides the micro-transaction, willing and able (for a fee) to help you acquire the content you've spent long hours unlocking.
Are you fucking kidding me?
Pokemon X and Y comes without micro-transactions on a cheaper system for a cheaper price with a better community and a better gaming experience that is free once it is purchased.
In contrast, GTA 5 and it's much-touted multiplayer come with micro-transactions on consoles that are much more expensive over online services that cost additional money to players who have spent $20 more for a game with a shorter and less satisfying single-player campaign.
There are, of course, those who will point out that GTA 5's single-player campaign does not feature micro-transactions, that this is a boon to the game, that the budget for the multiplayer on a console game is bigger than it is on a handheld game, that I should be thankful that there are no micro-transactions in the single player game, and that if I like Pokemon so much better I should just go play it instead.
I'll give you that last one.
But the argument here isn't an argument. I just paid sixty dollars FOR A GAME! If there wasn't room in the budget to implement multiplayer without incurring the dread-wrath of the micro-transaction, then perhaps they should have cut multiplayer in what many will (wrongly) call the most expansive single player game to come out this year (like Skyrim did) and then maybe they could have used the same funds to hire some decent writers and put a damn cross-hair on the screen.
I am grateful that Nintendo did not implement micro-transactions, and that Rockstar did not implement them in the single player experience (yet), but I shouldn't have to be grateful that a game isn't taking more money out of my pocket when I've already bought it!
It's not, or at least it shouldn't be, a credit to a game that micro-transactions don't interfere with the main game, any more than it's really a credit to a person to say that he or she does not walk around punching people in the face.
If adding multiplayer to a game raises the budget and the cost enough that micro-transactions must be implemented, that's a time when perhaps we should re-evaluate how necessary online multiplayer is to a game like this, not a time where developers double-down and we pay the price, literally.
And again, I should never, never, never, never, never, never, NEVER have to be thankful that a game doesn't feature micro-transactions, and when GTA V takes 3 days to make a tenth of the GDP of some countries, I stop accepting any arguments about the necessity of more money. If you can't make $1,000,000,000 in 3 days into a viable business model, you don't belong in business.
So, good job Nintendo.
Pokemon X and Y released on October 12th and sold approximately 4 million units in its first two days, which rounds out to about $200 million in gross retail exchange. Despite these impressive figures, Nintendo is here absolutely dwarfed by Rockstar, who earlier last month shattered previous records as Grand Theft Auto 5 made 1 billion dollars in total profit in only 3 days.
From a strictly monetary stance, Rockstar has in this sense kicked Nintendo (not to mention every other company) right in the teeth. It's probably true that X and Y will have better long-term sales than GTA 5, given the fervent support of the subculture to which the games appeal and the strong focus on children, who will likely get the game some time in the next few weeks instead of on the release date, but it is nonetheless unlikely that X and Y will surpass GTA 5's sales figures.
But it doesn't matter. Nintendo has won.
Obviously, I do not mean that they have won or will win in a monetary sense, it's unlikely that any games other than Battlefield 4 and Call of Duty: Ghosts will even approach GTA 5 in sales.
But in contribution to the gaming world, in the creation of a satisfying product, in innovation and in game design, Pokemon has taken the day, or at least the month. And here's why.
There are of course, a large number of reasons related to gameplay, series progression, innovation in gameplay while maintaining continuity with the spirit of the series, and similar issues that distinguish X and Y from GTA 5, but these are not the focus of the article. All I think I really need to say on this matter without launching into a review of GTA, is that Pokemon X and Y is a game that can readily make practical use of depth charts, that is still fun for 5 year old children.
What I do think is important, though, is realizing how much extra money Nintendo could have made on X and Y, if they were evil. By evil, of course, I mean willing to endorse the cancer that is micro-transactions. I, like many others, have a tendency to be critical of Nintendo for milking the same franchises over and over again while failing to develop viable new content, but at least they have stuck to their guns against micro-transactions.
Imagine a world in which Nintendo is willing to sell you the original legendary birds from Red and Blue for $5 a piece. Maybe they start selling all the legendaries from previous generations like this, and some time around six months from now they could sell a $40 legendary pack with all of the legendary Pokemon from all the different generations. Maybe they start selling rare candy for $1 any time you want it.
Maybe they sell the holy grail of Pokemon, Mew, for $20. Don't act like it wouldn't work.
My point here is that if EA Games, Ubisoft, Rockstar, or any other company on the market decided to make a game that was the perfect storm for making money on micro-transactions, that game would be Pokemon X and Y. In this generation, at this juncture of gaming history, the wide breadth of content, the long hours required to acquire that content, and the online multiplayer that makes that content finally have some real community prestige in X and Y make it perhaps the single best micro-transaction environment on the market, but there isn't a single one.
Even the demographics of people buying this game are perfect for micro-transactions eccentric 20 somethings who still buy Nintendo games and go to conventions are notorious for making small, seemingly minuscule purchases that pile up quickly, and 5-12 year old kids with a 3DS are already probably good at pestering their parents into giving them money.
But for the sake of the game, and for the sake of the community, Nintendo has foregone this disgusting industry standard, and for that I think they deserve a standing ovation.
Meanwhile, GTA 5's multiplayer option is riddled with micro-transactions Cash and experience are earned at disgustingly disproportionate rates in what is clearly a test of the will against the things you want to play the game. The way it works there is that you can unlock an assault rifle, or house, or bulletproof tires or whatever else you need at a certain level, but you can only acquire those things with egregious amounts of money, which the game gives you at approximately the same rate a dead cow gives you oil. Into this model strides the micro-transaction, willing and able (for a fee) to help you acquire the content you've spent long hours unlocking.
Are you fucking kidding me?
Pokemon X and Y comes without micro-transactions on a cheaper system for a cheaper price with a better community and a better gaming experience that is free once it is purchased.
In contrast, GTA 5 and it's much-touted multiplayer come with micro-transactions on consoles that are much more expensive over online services that cost additional money to players who have spent $20 more for a game with a shorter and less satisfying single-player campaign.
There are, of course, those who will point out that GTA 5's single-player campaign does not feature micro-transactions, that this is a boon to the game, that the budget for the multiplayer on a console game is bigger than it is on a handheld game, that I should be thankful that there are no micro-transactions in the single player game, and that if I like Pokemon so much better I should just go play it instead.
I'll give you that last one.
But the argument here isn't an argument. I just paid sixty dollars FOR A GAME! If there wasn't room in the budget to implement multiplayer without incurring the dread-wrath of the micro-transaction, then perhaps they should have cut multiplayer in what many will (wrongly) call the most expansive single player game to come out this year (like Skyrim did) and then maybe they could have used the same funds to hire some decent writers and put a damn cross-hair on the screen.
I am grateful that Nintendo did not implement micro-transactions, and that Rockstar did not implement them in the single player experience (yet), but I shouldn't have to be grateful that a game isn't taking more money out of my pocket when I've already bought it!
It's not, or at least it shouldn't be, a credit to a game that micro-transactions don't interfere with the main game, any more than it's really a credit to a person to say that he or she does not walk around punching people in the face.
If adding multiplayer to a game raises the budget and the cost enough that micro-transactions must be implemented, that's a time when perhaps we should re-evaluate how necessary online multiplayer is to a game like this, not a time where developers double-down and we pay the price, literally.
And again, I should never, never, never, never, never, never, NEVER have to be thankful that a game doesn't feature micro-transactions, and when GTA V takes 3 days to make a tenth of the GDP of some countries, I stop accepting any arguments about the necessity of more money. If you can't make $1,000,000,000 in 3 days into a viable business model, you don't belong in business.
So, good job Nintendo.
No comments:
Post a Comment