fuck yeah ken you tell em !

Well, when I say releasing I do mean through some kind of distribution model that hosts it, markets it, etc. On the 360 that'd be LIVE, on the PS3 that'd be PSN, and on the PC that'd primarily be Steam. Naturally you can always release it yourself through your own website or whatever, but the odds of it actually taking off are a million to one unless you've already got a dedicated base (which will still only get you so far). Even with PC distribution models like Steam, the vast majority of small-scale releases seem to flop — including ones close to home such as Zero Gear.

I'm not going to assert anything as I don't have the numbers, but I'd imagine if you were to release an indie game on the PC and on consoles the console releases would far outsell the PC version. Out of curiosity, what indie PC successes have there been in recent times beyond Minecraft?

By XBOX Live you mean "Arcade" right? XBLA uses a porfolio management approach, so your title first needs to be greenlit to even get the chance to be on the platform. Then you need to make sure you can check off all the criteria that your game needs to satisfy to pass the certification process. I heard numbers as high as 30.000 British Pounds that you can calculate for the testing etc. If you make it, there are two new XBLA releases each week. Nearly half of all XBLA titles sell less than 25000 copies. If you're on the dashboard you do great, if you're not well then you don't. PSN sales are waaaaay less, not even talking about WiiWare. So obviously this is still better than HAVING TO ink a deal with a publisher like back in the days, but it isn't all unicorns and rainbows for digital distribution on consoles, I just wanted to point that out.

Quote

I'm not going to assert anything as I don't have the numbers, but I'd imagine if you were to release an indie game on the PC and on consoles the console releases would far outsell the PC version. Out of curiosity, what indie PC successes have there been in recent times beyond Minecraft?

Define "success". To me a success is a break-even plus x, if you talk "Minecraft 4 millions on the bank before beta" kind of success I won't be able to give you many examples (the closest thing would probably be Garry's mod) but in turn let me ask you which indie game has mirrored this level of success on consoles?

Oh absolutely, I'm not saying console distribution is some kind of holy grail or anything. I was more pointing out that whereas consoles used to be a completely closed arena and you needed to be on the PC if you wanted to get something out as an individual or a small team, now it's very much possible on consoles. It won't necessarily be any more fruitful on consoles (although I still think it's likely console sales are likely to do better), but the opportunities are all there. The PC is no longer the exclusive domain of budding developers.

I can't think of any Minecraft-type successes because that's on a level all of its own, having literally become a phenomenon. But I would imagine things like Braid, Limbo, Flower, and Fat Princess have done well on consoles but would have had trouble getting far on the PC. My gut feeling, anyway.

Really I love both the PC and consoles and both have opportunities. I just found Ken's implication that the PC was the only place breeding up-and-coming developers a bit of an outdated notion.

Quote from Taylor

Perhaps use a sarcastic example that is about innovation rather than aesthetics, as that is the actual topic, and try again. An example might be a recurring gameplay feature you dislike, though this would require you to have some basic knowledge of the source material.

Less serious face, taylor. Come on, you can manage at least once. I even added the spinning eyes to emphasise I was being a plonker on purpose.

I knew you were joking, that’s why I deconstructed the context.

I interpreted the emoticon entirely the opposite way though.

Quote from Thrik

Weird, I always thought of the Japanese as pretty much the origin of most things that make good games today. The influence that even single series like Mario and Zelda have had is immeasurable. Anyway, gaming history is too vast and complicated to attribute specific things to any one region — the UK alone is a massive player thanks to Grand Theft Auto's innovation, for example.

Zelda and Mario are two. But let’s not forget the influence of Super Metroid, Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, Sonic, Jet Set Radio, Streets of Rage, Devil May Cry, Ninja Gaiden, Guilty Gear, Metal Gear Solid, Outrun, Fire Emblem, Herzog Zwei, Gun Valkyrie, Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, Super Mario Kart, and so on. There is no way anyone who knows their history can discredit consoles and/or the Japanese of innovation, and the idea that this is all ‘relatively safe to ignore’ or from ‘a few standouts’ is just insultingly wrong.

The Japanese were just a quick example I thought would just prove a point. There are also plenty of western console games showing innovation, as well as a few decades worth of arcade games that were inspirations, and roots, to so much.

Anyway, the discussion between yourselves (Thirk/Frie) is all I wanted to see voiced.

Quote from Taylor

I knew you were joking, that’s why I deconstructed the context.I interpreted the emoticon entirely the opposite way though.

Zelda and Mario are two. But let’s not forget the influence of Super Metroid, Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, Sonic, Jet Set Radio, Streets of Rage, Devil May Cry, Ninja Gaiden, Guilty Gear, Metal Gear Solid, Outrun, Fire Emblem, Herzog Zwei, Gun Valkyrie, Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, Super Mario Kart, and so on. There is no way anyone who knows their history can discredit consoles and/or the Japanese of innovation, and the idea that this is all ‘relatively safe to ignore’ or from ‘a few standouts’ is just insultingly wrong.

The Japanese were just a quick example I thought would just prove a point. There are also plenty of western console games showing innovation, as well as a few decades worth of arcade games that were inspirations, and roots, to so much.

Anyway, the discussion between yourselves (Thirk/Frie) is all I wanted to see voiced.

I wasn't being serious. Though I haven't played a Japanese game and really gotten into it in a really super long time. Maybe the Trauma Center series. I've got Trauma Team on the Wii and play a few missions every once in a while, although the super lame additional "styles" they introduced with the House style doctor and the crime scene investigator suck. YET ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF TERRIBLE JAPANESE "INNOVATION"

Edit: By the way, neither Mario nor Zelda are innovative.

Quote

Getting a console game published through the online stores isn't that hard for any team or individual producing quality games

It is definitely difficult enough to cull out a huge segment of potential developers. The only online store that you might be able to make the case for being pretty open is XBLIG (or whatever it is called) which is still pretty limited in terms of what you can charge or do with the game system.

I think a good standard for "will a lot of crazy and sometimes legendary stuff get made by unknowns for this platform" is wether or not a high-school developer can get a game onto it. Someone without a company, resources, or business sense but with a lot of time and passion. I don't really feel like that fits consoles right now, there are too many hurdles for that type of developer to get something on PSN, XBLA or Wii Ware. There could be an argument that XBLIG is a place for exactly that kind of developer, but I don't know that much about it.

I do know though that the PC / Web and Apple App Store are bursting at the seams with those kinds of developers.

Quote from Jetsetlemming

I wasn't being serious. Though I haven't played a Japanese game and really gotten into it in a really super long time. Maybe the Trauma Center series. I've got Trauma Team on the Wii and play a few missions every once in a while, although the super lame additional "styles" they introduced with the House style doctor and the crime scene investigator suck. YET ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF TERRIBLE JAPANESE "INNOVATION"Edit: By the way, neither Mario nor Zelda are innovative.

I think what you said was more than slightly representative of what you felt.

Zelda and Mario both brought a lot of firsts to their respective genres.

Quote from Taylor

I think what you said was more than slightly representative of what you felt.

Zelda and Mario both brought a lot of firsts to their respective genres.

For reals: I legit respect some Japanese developers, probably Kojima at the forefront of that, as well as the guy that directed Resident Evil 4 (I can't remember his name right now). I don't hold their Japanese-ness against them. But in general the Japanese market rarely produces something that really gets me excited, compared to some of the indie stuff I've seen lately, or eastern European games.

What firsts did Mario and Zelda bring to platforming and top-down action games?

Quote from Warby

hey nobody said consoles suck or japanese people didnt bring anything to the table in that ken levine article !1) he just says: "i love the pc and here is why:"

2) and than i was like: shit yeah man i agree with that !

3)*post of mapcore to share the love*

PS: mario and zelda respectively birthed the "jump and run" and "action adventure" genres as we know them today ! creating a genre is pretty much the holy grail of innovation if you ask me !

I can think of games that predate both Mario and Zelda though, like Pitfall for platforming. Sure, there's a big difference in quality going from Pitfall to Mario, similar to the gap between Robotron and Smash TV, but that doesn't mean Smash TV invented the twin stick shooter.

Originally I was gonna use Commander Keen to make this point but discovered on wiki that Command Keen episode 1 actually came out five years after Super Mario Bros

It doesn't matter who does things first -- it only matters who does things the best.

That said -- I think Ken is right. PC is a democratic platform. No publisher would ever green-light the Super Columbine game because it's not marketable and it's so controversial (and it's really poorly designed to boot / it's sooo ugly) -- but do you agree that people should be allowed to make controversial things, and distribute them freely, even if they suck?

That's PC. No dev-kit, no license, no cert, no demands -- just games. And those games are so much cheaper too...

I wouldn't even call it democratic, more like anarchy

Quote from Jetsetlemming

I can think of games that predate both Mario and Zelda though, like Pitfall for platforming. Sure, there's a big difference in quality going from Pitfall to Mario, similar to the gap between Robotron and Smash TV, but that doesn't mean Smash TV invented the twin stick shooter.

Originally I was gonna use Commander Keen to make this point but discovered on wiki that Command Keen episode 1 actually came out five years after Super Mario Bros

Commander Keen resulted from ID Software's failed attempt to port Super Mario to PC. Well, technically they succeeded but Nintendo didn't see any merit in weakening their own platform by making their hit title available on the PC. See the irony in this?

Quote from FrieChamp

I can think of games that predate both Mario and Zelda though, like Pitfall for platforming. Sure, there's a big difference in quality going from Pitfall to Mario, similar to the gap between Robotron and Smash TV, but that doesn't mean Smash TV invented the twin stick shooter.

Originally I was gonna use Commander Keen to make this point but discovered on wiki that Command Keen episode 1 actually came out five years after Super Mario Bros

Commander Keen resulted from ID Software's failed attempt to port Super Mario to PC. Well, technically they succeeded but Nintendo didn't see any merit in weakening their own platform by making their hit title available on the PC. See the irony in this?

Yep, someone here knows his shit!

They did tried to contact Nintendo back in the days, and Nintendo answered with a big no. So they went forward and created their own stuff, starting with Commander Keen.

Quote from Warby

hey nobody said consoles suck or japanese people didnt bring anything to the table in that ken levine article !

Well, no. Not directly.

Quote from Jetsetlemming

I can think of games that predate both Mario and Zelda though, like Pitfall for platforming. Sure, there's a big difference in quality going from Pitfall to Mario, similar to the gap between Robotron and Smash TV, but that doesn't mean Smash TV invented the twin stick shooter.Originally I was gonna use Commander Keen to make this point but discovered on wiki that Command Keen episode 1 actually came out five years after Super Mario Bros

You're right that Super Mario Bros didn't create the platformer genre, but innovation isn't restricted to birthing genres. For some of the games I listed maybe the devil is in the details, but it's certainly there. Pitfall is a rather weird example because it's very primitive compared to Super Mario Bros anyway. Donkey Kong, which predates Pitfall, would perhaps be a better reference but is strictly speaking a Mario game anyway.

Growing when collecting mushrooms for a 2-hit health system, having different abilities based on your size, interacting with blocks by hitting them (strictly speaking this was first in the arcade game nobody has ever seen), being able to run to create different jumps, defeating enemies by jumping on them, and it's level design in general are simple examples off the top of my head. There would be more if this was expanded to Super Mario World where he gained more objects to interact with, suits to wear and the ability to hold stuff (leading to more combinations). Either way,the Mario series contains a lot of ideas.

Some serious sadness in this thread.

When someones gotta lay down why Zelda or Mario is relevant, some shits wrong. Like, gamastura comments section shits wrong.

Quote from Erratic

Some serious sadness in this thread.When someones gotta lay down why Zelda or Mario is relevant, some shits wrong. Like, gamastura comments section shits wrong.

There's differences between relevant, innovative, and birthing a genre.

I would argue that Mario 64 and Zelda OoT are innovative. But not the firsts in their respective series.

Wait, how did this conversation turn from the current state of the industry in relation to budding developers/modders for PC and/or console to the invention/innovation/birthing/relevance of a genre like 25 years ago?

From this passing comment in the article?

Quote

The PC is the place where great game developers are born, even—and maybe especially—where great console game developers are born.

Which is immediately followed by:

Quote

Halo, Mass Effect, Call of Duty…PC developers first.

I don't see any reference to Zelda, Mario, or Nintendo at all.

I think it's safe to say that the relationship between PC and console game developers in 1985 isn't really comparable with the developers today.

point is, you use a computer even to develop console games. or said in another way, a console is just a standardized computer made so it's easier to develop for the same system (+marketing).