styluskramer

Hmmm. I don't think they had 4 controllers for the Xbox, and there were no tears. In any case, it doesn't matter much after they buy the console. It's not Nintendo's (or Intellivision's) problem that a group of kids behave like that and not like they do in ads. True. Some games for Ludum Dare jams (3 days) are really impressive. But to do that steadily, getting 7/10 (or more) game after 7/10 (or more) game is difficult. I think my point is that Tommy cherry-picks facts, and in a way he has his own "reality distortion field". Tommy, explaining that the games are going to be 2D, says "think of Ori and the blind forest" or "think of Cuphead". I know the Amico won't have games like that. I know Tommy is explaining that you don't need 3D graphics to have a freaking beautiful game. Couldn't he choose a more humble example? I don't know, Angry Birds? By dropping names like these (games with developments that span several years and million-dollar budgets) he takes advantage of a halo effect. He makes us think something, when reality is something else.

Really interesting articles. But I don't see how this proves that the Amico has a guaranteed market. Take the first story, for example. To begin with, the author says that the Xbox was the console children used to play. And it was fine. That contradicts the notion that Xbox and PS consoles are too complicated for kids. It literally says "everything was going great, until the Xbox broke". Then he mentions that the nephews continued to play Roblox and Minecraft on their iPads. This shows that, in households above a certain income threshold, the Amico would have competition. Xbox, Apple and Nintendo games (if the mom ends up buying a Switch). We know that the Amico will not have any 3D or online games (for now). What value can it have for someone who plays Roblox (free) and Minecraft ($6.99) on their iPad? Are the kids in that family considered hardcore players? Is Tommy after them, or will he let the big three fight over that market while he looks for the next billion players? The highlight of the story is this: The author literally destroys the romantic image of "couch co-op" (at least with kids). He believed Nintendo's advertising, and reality woke him up in the harshest way (screaming, crying, resentment, and hurt feelings). Sometimes you can't entertain everyone. It doesn't matter how good your game is, how talented your team is. That's part of why mobile games are so popular. They allow that personal space, that freedom to decide what to play and how to play. In the article "The Video Game Industry Can't Go On Like This" there are several statements that undermine Intellivision's pitch. Of course Tommy didn't bring them up, because what matters is "Big Corporations bad". Games are cheaper than ever. That contradicts the notion that games are more expensive than ever. What is it then? Games are becoming more and more expensive to make. That calls into question Intellivision's ability to make good games. There's a link (that Tommy didn't mention) to a story about budgets in game development. It all boils down to one figure: $10,000 per person per month (*not* salaries, see comments in the story) Amico's "funding" initiative gives an estimated $225k per game (for a development time of 6 to 12 months). That's half of what's needed, according to the author. How can Tommy quote an article about gamedevs working conditions , while being proud that his games are made for half the money that the industry standard? Not to mention what kind of games can be devised, created and tested in 9 months. I imagine the quality will suffer, or the health of the developers will. The only reason to cite the article is that big studios are leaving the single-player market. That's what Tommy cares about. Even when the same story says there's an overcrowded market in the indie space. To be clear: the Amico is going to have a lot of successful games, made in record time, for half the money... yeah, I have my doubts.