Nintendo Revolution pimp slaps HDTV junkies

[theoakwoody]

I only have one statement to make. When has Nintendo ever looked worse then their competition? The Nes looked worse than the SMS but since then Nintendo has trumped everyone in the graphics department. Snes vs Genesis, N64 vs PSX, Gamecube vs Xbox. So the GCN doesn't look better than the Xbox but it looks just as good and thats with a lot less impressive specs. I think that because the Revolution is coming out a year after the 360 that its specs will be more impressive because the components will be cheaper by the time the Revolution rolls around. For once the Playstation will have the most impressive specs.

I think that Iwata was trying to make the point that the emphasis shouldn't be so much on the pretty graphics but on the quality of the entire product. Even though most people probably buy games based on the pictures on the back of the case there are still many people out there, like some people around here, that prefer substance over polygon counts and light effects.

[Push Upstairs]

I don't consider myself insecure because I don't read comic books or watch Saturday-morning TV, nor do I consider myself insecure because I prefer mature imagery to cutesy-cartoon imagery.

The gamers who played the original LoZ are in their 20s and 30s, and they're excited about the mature look of Twilight Princess, and why not? It's about time the series grew up along with its fans.

-- Z.

Thank you.

This issue you have touched upon is both the reason i look forward to the new Zelda game and one of main beefs i have towards Nintendo.

Again, thank you for posting that.

[lendelin]

Reading the informed discussion between goatdan and Ed Oscuro makes my head spin. Geez, I'm so glad I have no idea about programming and its effect on memory, except for the most obvious aspects. :)

About the actual topic:

HDTV will be a selling point; not in Europe, and I don't know about the state of art of HDTV in Japan, but certainly in the US which is the most important game market in the meantime. HDTV will be widespread during the lifecycle of the next-gen consoles. Even today progressive scan and 480p and 720p are already selling points to go for the Xbox version of multi-platform games of gamers who have two or three consoles.

Iwata remarks are necessary PR for N. They have to attack the advanatges of the competitors and using them to promote their own advantages; however, they don't make sense, and they are against the most obvious current trend which was always the trend of new consoles in the past including all Nintendo consoles.

Surprising is this sentence by Iwata:


Game consoles are not an essential product in life, so we want to make ours as compact, thin, and as inexpensive as we can so that it won't be viewed with hostility by family members.

Average sized consoles are viewed with hostility by family members? Never heard of that. Never experienced that a family member tries to attack a console with a gun or a Ninja sword.

The emphasis by N is on small size and less power because the new system will be a console/portable hybrid; and they have to prepare the public (casual gamers, frequent ones, and a devoted fanbase) for that step by step.

[GarrettCRW]

I don't consider myself insecure because I don't read comic books or watch Saturday-morning TV, nor do I consider myself insecure because I prefer mature imagery to cutesy-cartoon imagery.
Uh huh.


The gamers who played the original LoZ are in their 20s and 30s, and they're excited about the mature look of Twilight Princess, and why not? It's about time the series grew up along with its fans.

-- Z.

Gee, I've been a devotee of Zelda since '87, and the series "growing up" isn't what I'm concerned with (partly because I played Ocarina of Time)-I'm concerned with playing a good game with a good story. Games don't need mature graphics to appeal to all ages. Ocarina had touches of the happy-go-lucky side of Japanese animation design with a story geared for everyone. And, excuse the hyperbole, but that game was the bomb.

Of course, since you don't watch kids' cartoons, I'm sure you're not familiar with something as cartoony as the Looney Tunes or its modern day revival/spin-off, Tiny Toon Adventures. The former was originally designed for adults, it should be noted, but converted to kiddie fare in the '50s by moronic local and national TV execs. The latter is a kids' show loaded with humor that its' "intended" audience likely never got until years later (though it attracted a number of adult viewers at the time). Some of us are quite capable of judging the maturity of a game or cartoon based on more than its appearance. Which, I might add, is about all we really have with Twilight Princess.

[kainemaxwell]

I think that Iwata was trying to make the point that the emphasis shouldn't be so much on the pretty graphics but on the quality of the entire product. Even though most people probably buy games based on the pictures on the back of the case there are still many people out there, like some people around here, that prefer substance over polygon counts and light effects.
Definitly a statement I can agree with and be nice other people in the public went by that too instead of pretty pictures and bells and whistles in their games.

[Bluteg]

Secondly, I'd like to see a corporate cashcow MTV sponsered DVD game that uses less space than a CD-ROM game, outside of multi-disc games (i.e. Panzer Dragoon RPG). That's roughly 700 MB versus 4.7 GB or so. Good luck naming one.

There I fixed it for you. ;)

[zmweasel]

I don't consider myself insecure because I don't read comic books or watch Saturday-morning TV, nor do I consider myself insecure because I prefer mature imagery to cutesy-cartoon imagery.
Uh huh.

I don't understand your sarcasm here. What about my statement troubles you? Are you being defensive (as I note that your sig references the G.I. Joe cartoon/comic franchise)? I'm honestly curious.


Gee, I've been a devotee of Zelda since '87, and the series "growing up" isn't what I'm concerned with (partly because I played Ocarina of Time)-I'm concerned with playing a good game with a good story. Games don't need mature graphics to appeal to all ages. Ocarina had touches of the happy-go-lucky side of Japanese animation design with a story geared for everyone. And, excuse the hyperbole, but that game was the bomb.

After the public reaction to The Wind Waker, Nintendo was obviously and rightly concerned with the perception of LoZ as yet another Nintendo kiddie franchise.

Do you recall the April Fool's gag about Wind Waker being remade with more realistic graphics? A *lot* of people fell for it, because they desperately wanted it to be true. Does that lead you to believe the majority of Zelda fans are "insecure," or that they want the series' aesthetics to be more mature?


Of course, since you don't watch kids' cartoons, I'm sure you're not familiar with something as cartoony as the Looney Tunes or its modern day revival/spin-off, Tiny Toon Adventures. The former was originally designed for adults, it should be noted, but converted to kiddie fare in the '50s by moronic local and national TV execs. The latter is a kids' show loaded with humor that its' "intended" audience likely never got until years later (though it attracted a number of adult viewers at the time). Some of us are quite capable of judging the maturity of a game or cartoon based on more than its appearance. Which, I might add, is about all we really have with Twilight Princess.

I'm familiar with both of the cartoons you mention, as well as The Tick and other animation with adult-oriented subtext. But the aesthetic approach of The Wind Waker wasn't in the style of Looney Tunes or The Simpsons; it was in the style of a sugary-sweet children's cartoon. It didn't have an anarchic edge to make it accessible by--and enjoyable for--adults.

-- Z.

[GarrettCRW]

I don't understand your sarcasm here. What about my statement troubles you? Are you being defensive (as I note that your sig references the G.I. Joe cartoon/comic franchise)? I'm honestly curious.
I'm quite secure. Mainly because of the principle of IDGAF. That and Joe's first season story editor-Steve Gerber. (He made the show all edumacated.)


Do you recall the April Fool's gag about Wind Waker being remade with more realistic graphics? A *lot* of people fell for it, because they desperately wanted it to be true. Does that lead you to believe the majority of Zelda fans are "insecure," or that they want the series' aesthetics to be more mature?
A lot of dumb people. I loved Wind Waker's style. And given the emergence of cel-shaded graphics after WW's release, I'd say the technique was accepted by at least a few programmers here and there.


it was in the style of a sugary-sweet children's cartoon. It didn't have an anarchic edge to make it accessible by--and enjoyable for--adults.

-- Z.
A lot of Japanese animation looks sugary sweet.....and is edited to shreds because of our archaic broadcast standards. The world of Wind Waker is unique amongst the Zelda games because it appears to reflect how the world looks to a child-bright and colorful. So it's no shocker that this Link is probably the youngest of the Links we've seen. But that doesn't mean that because the graphics are cartoonish, the game has no depth.

You'll notice that the WW April Fool's hoax did nothing to the guts of the game-just its graphics. Total insecurity, kids. I bet they can't bear to admit they like "Feed the Kitty" or "The Ugly Duckling" in public without prefacing their love with a comment about the saccharine sweet look and feel of those shorts.

[Ed Oscuro]

Ouch, just lost my post. Here we go again!


They were ISOs, actually, which are nearly an identical size as the real file...
As you note later on, I didn't start out by saying what I was looking for - can a small game be a real blockbuster? It won't be game of the year, but it can possibly make money. However, the fact that some small games can make money doesn't mean the industry is healthy, which is an issue I'm trying to bring up. I don't think that rehashes of Sonic Adventure and Marvel vs. Capcom are taking the industry anywhere good; they don't let developers work their new ideas. I don't want these games to leave the scene; I want it to be possible for more niche titles to be released like these, and I want more NEW small titles to be released and make money. Anybody know about Sengoku Turb? I'd like to see space for new small games that don't necessarily have a big brand backing them make money. The guys talking up Steam and downloadable game modules from Bioware are on the right track here.

I also did poorly with the argument - obviously few games fill a whole DVD-ROM disc; however, DVD-ROM's very existance means that to compete in the blockbuster scene - basically any really ambitious game, with of course the many exceptions (as noted, as noted) - you have to use multiple CD-ROMs.

I noted earlier that I wasn't being an effective communicator. God, I really wish I had done better - you have no idea how much. I try to have high standards for myself, and when I fight you guys without being clear or with unsupported statements, I'm not contributing my share...I also really don't want to lose any more good will over simple misunderstandings.

On the other hand, I look up to you guys to help correct me when I'm wrong...

You let me down with that Ninja Gaiden figure, and it seems you ignored that correction, a significant correction. The Ninja Gaiden ISO is 3.19 GB. In the end, is this such a big deal? I would like to think not, but having the feeling that my compatriots on the Forum are doing their share in research does mean something to me! Ninja Gaiden is one of the "blockbuster" games, however, so it's a bit important we get that one right. I don't think you'll find many new titles that gamers drool over that aren't about this size - exceptions aside.



That's not a crazy claim at all - did you read the panelist's comments from the recent GDA sessions? When we say "have to rise," we mean "or our game doesn't make money." That game development costs on traditional consoles are rising was specifically stated as a reason BY AN ACTUAL GAME DEVELOPER. You're not an actual game developer, sorry.
Ed, I have _nothing_ to prove to you, but you sitting here and claiming these things about me that are simply not true isn't getting you anywhere, and it makes the rest of your argument sound a lot crazier.
Ah, I've forgotten what I wrote here. It doesn't matter LOL Did you have a rebuttal for whatever it was I wrote? In any case, I apologize for attacking your credentials - but when you respond to a point with an "I am hurt and offended" post, I get the feeling that you simply don't have facts to back up what you're saying, or that you don't care as much as I do in finding out the truth. This probably isn't right. I am honestly afraid of puffing myself up for no reason, so think of that as well - you do me no harm by hitting me with a correction, at all!



How do you raise the bar in terms of graphics? Subdivide everything into more polygons? No, developers tend to agree that polygons are less important than texturing (though this isn't to say that polygon counts aren't ballooning as well). Take a look at DOOM III. Nicer texturing, not polygons.
Well, two things here. In my obscure way, I to say that, though procedural approaches are getting more feasible every year, for the most part just about all content (textures) must be defined in ever-greater detail, rather than automatically generated by the program.


Doom III is a great example because if I recall correctly (this is from memory, so I very well could be off) it takes up less than 2 GB of space. And it is perhaps one of the most graphically intense games ever made.
You're spot-on with the number, as my install of DOOM III is currently hanging (after a patch, no less) at 1.97 GB. Yet DOOM III, unfortunately, isn't quite like other console games. DOOM III for the PC comes on three CD-ROM discs for the PC; all together the three ISOs (I checked the actual discs and a torrent) are 1551.43 MB. id wisely decided not to lose people who don't have a DVD-ROM drive. DOOM III doesn't have the variety that some of the other games on DVD have, however - not enough different background props, for one.

id didn't just use three discs instead of two because the files are just barely too big to store on two CDs (about 75 MB too big). They also did because, as awful as regular PC load times are, they didn't want to waste time stitching together PAK files. Instead of cutting data, they went with another disc.

Now, the Xbox version weights in at 2889.77 MB. That's no typo.

2889.77 MB for a dedicated console.
1551.43 MB for a version programmed to be compatible with most current Windows PC configurations.

The Xbox version has its data reconfigured. Textures are put into a format to allow them to be read directly into video RAM; they wouldn't be compatible with an ATI chip or another nvidia GPU unless they were run through the blender.

At this point I'm starting to feel foolish again. Did I really argue that even the Xbox version is compressed - only very slightly - over the original, uncompressed game assets used in development?

Well, the problem is that we're looking at a port of a game that went from three CDs - much less than a DVD - to a DVD. They added features, too. This isn't much like a Splinter Cell game, is it? Or Half-Life 2, for that matter.

Half-Life 2 is GIGANTIC. An illegally downloadable copy of the game reports to me that it's 2918.42 MB in size; this however has been RAR'd into multiple pieces. Installed on my PC, the GCF files related just to Half-Life 2 and the Source engine are 3.28 GB; the Half-Life 2 directory (SteamApps\email@address\half-life 2\) is another 422 MB, including 44 MB of saves.

We are talking far more data than a CD-ROM can hold. Valve used the DVD to hold tons and tons of data - it really boggles the mind how much this is. Probably a good 1/1000 the amount of data a person's mind can theoretically hold, if not more.

Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory comes on a single DVD-ROM for the PC, if you desire (there might be a CD-ROM version as well). 4.18 GB. The console versions push the limits of their storage formats - meaning things were cut. 1.77 GB for the GameCube version, though this one has RAR files in it. The PS2 version is 4099.0 MB, reasonably close to the edge of the format's capacity. The Xbox version is 4668.30 MB - right against the boundary of what can be done. This is more representative of what you'll find late in this generation as even the DVD is shown to have limits.


But the bottom line is that isn't where most of the space goes too. It goes into sound and cut scenes.
Lots goes into sound, yes, but don't underestimate the amount that goes into geometry and models (static or physics props, to use the HL2 classification, along with dynamic models).


...almost every Dreamcast game was 30% smaller than the space allowed.
The Dreamcast never fails to amaze me for having failed to be pushed properly, or to attain the attention it deserved. Nobody put that system through its paces like many companies are the latecomers to the current generation (the PS2, Xbox, and GameCube).


You brought up Sonic Adventure, a Dreamcast game that easily fit onto a CD that was ported to the GameCube. Sonic Adventure 2 (the same type of game, and it fit on a single CD) enjoyed tremendous success on the GameCube, selling over 1 million copies. Yet, the game was at the core no more than 700 MB big. Doesn't that alone defeat your entire argument?
Well, I wasn't the one who brought up Sonic Adventure in the first place - it seemed to me another irrelevant game. Perhaps wrongly, as you've shown me that it performed well. This is, as I mentioned, a misunderstanding - I mean to say that I really don't think Sonic Adventure - either game (SA 2 Battle showed up first on the system) - is the pinnacle of modern gaming.

Here's a quote from the GameSpot review:


Sonic Adventure 2 is the pinnacle of graphical achievement on the Dreamcast, but the game has been ported to the GameCube with few improvements. The texture clarity has been bumped up a bit, and the frame rates are pegged at 60fps, but that's where the improvements end.
Is this really the end we're looking for? Sure, the game is small, but it's also a bit of a slap in the face from Sega who was really just looking to sell as many copies of the game as possible.


I indicated where I got all of my inforamtion from and the fact that I wasn't sure if it was correct because I wasn't going to bother trying to get it


[quote]Finally, it's pretty indicative of a very selective attention span if you're arguing that ports of 1 GB and poker games are at all indicative of today's blockbuster titles. Just look at that. Sonic Adventure and poker aren't exactly pushing the limits of today's hardware, so why have they even entered this conversation?
As I pointed out above, Sonic Adventure 2 especially (although 1 did very well too) was a hit for the GameCube. This wasn't an argument about if games were pushing the hardware the most, but if a smaller game could be successful. Sonic Adventure (and Heroes) is the perfect example of how flawed your argument is.
Speaking of selective attention spans, it's pretty ironic that I felt able to chide anybody for having them given that I didn't bother mentioning I was talking about games that help game developers ;) Looks like I didn't do very well there. The other games, however, I still feel shouldn't really enter the conversation.



Higher storage capacity is part of an overall content quality increase or bloat that's starving developers to death. Even if they fill that whole disc, you've got what - some pessimistic estimates say only 1 out of four (or was it five) games are profitable. Insane.
Only one in four games are profitable, yes, but not every game fills the disc.
Yeah. I personally feel there's good reason to believe that estimate's a bit too pessimistic, but hey. Most all of these games don't fill their format and many don't come too close - but all are far beyond a single CD-ROM's storage capacity, or Dreamcast GD-ROM, for that matter.

It's probably foolish to try to argue that it was the arrival of the DVD and not the appearance of multi-disc groundbreaking titles (Metal Gear Solid is one) that pushes developers to create bigger games, since this masks the real underlying dynamic - developers compete for your dollar, and sheer volume of content makes a real impact. Thus the need to make more content, be it on multiple CD-ROMs, DVDs or otherwise.

Again, wrote a bit too much, but I hope that helps explain things a bit and hopefully restores some good faith to the discussion.

[Ed Oscuro]

Secondly, I'd like to see a corporate cashcow MTV sponsered DVD game that uses less space than a CD-ROM game, outside of multi-disc games (i.e. Panzer Dragoon RPG). That's roughly 700 MB versus 4.7 GB or so. Good luck naming one.

There I fixed it for you. ;)
I really don't appreciate your continual forced misreading of my stance on corporations. In any case, I've noted just above this post that I worded that very poorly, so sue me. Ask for those many minutes of your life back, I'm guilty as charged LOL I'm for more Steam-esque (just without the Valve agreement) content distribution, if that's what it takes to return profits to the developers and make the creation of fairy tales a good business once again. The publishers I could care less about; they've been a necessary evil thus far but it's getting to be the time, at nobody's particular fault, that the current system is stifling innovation.

[Mayhem]

Regarding LoZ and the whole "kiddie Wind Waker" issue... to me, "maturity" in a game comes from its angle, approach, story telling, plot and level of sophistication in engaging the player. Not just because it looks realistic, has blood, gore and swearing in it.

Doesn't mean I won't buy a game with those in, but they aren't really what I consider a "mature" game to contain.

If a game has adult issues in it (love, hate, abandonment, conflict etc) then goes far higher up the appreciation ladder than rampant flesh, the F word and blood all over place. Which is what seems to be what many developers feel is "mature" at the moment to engage the 14-20 market.

Btw my copy of Splinter Cell: CT for Gamecube is on 2 discs. Is this normal?

[ddockery]

Alright, I got tired of trying to follow this crap on page 3, so after this I'm done with this thread, as if anyone cares. Yes, DVD's hold more data. Yes, filling the whole DVD will take more development time than filling a CD would. However, I'm having a hell of a hard time finding proof that Sony or MS is holding a gun to developers' heads and making them FILL the damn disc. If dev companies feel they NEED to do this, then their design philosophy is flawed. I have never, ever heard anyone say "You HAVE to buy this game, it takes up 6GB!!! OMG!!" or "WOW, this game takes 200 hours, that's awesome." Myself, and many of my frineds, have very little time for gaming. When we do, we want to PLAY a game. Not watch a friggin CGI movie for an hour to play for 10 minutes. For the most part, those damn movies are what take up most of the space. The best game I've played in ages is Lumines. It fits on a damn UMD, and wouldn't need much if any more space on another system. I can't believe thios discusion has gone on for as long as it has. Just because the industry took this turn doesn't mean you have to do it to be successful.

[goatdan]

Cutting and pasting again...


As you note later on, I didn't start out by saying what I was looking for - can a small game be a real blockbuster? It won't be game of the year, but it can possibly make money.

See, that would be another interesting point that could be debated, and I would be more inclined to agree with the fact that larger games have more potential to be blockbusters, but that wasn't where the conversation started.


I don't think that rehashes of Sonic Adventure and Marvel vs. Capcom are taking the industry anywhere good; they don't let developers work their new ideas.

Well, it totally depends on what game we're making that is small. Super Monkey Ball was a game that we really hadn't seen anything like it since perhaps Marble Madness, and it was a very small game.

Small games don't necessarily push the limits of the system to the max, but they can be -- especially with small budgets and low expectations -- the best place to fin new ideas being exploited. And using the term small is a little misleading, as games like Super Monkey Ball have just as much playability and playtime in them as larger games do, but we both already know that...


I don't want these games to leave the scene; I want it to be possible for more niche titles to be released like these, and I want more NEW small titles to be released and make money.

I agree. This is the exact reason I've got all these contacts within the game industry -- because the Dreamcast games that the GOAT Store have done are regarded as full releases to them and they are interested that we can have a game sell less than 10,000 copies and have both us and the developers still make money (although thanks to production errors and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, we have yet to make money :( ). The whole idea is that if you could try out more unique ideas at a low budget, and if even one in one hundred break through to sell 100,000 titles, you're doing really well.

I've actually had some notable companies look at the business plan who were interested in possibly trying to port a few things cheaply. It won't happen with us because of reasons that are out of my hands, but I expect to see something like this start to become more common in the future.


You let me down with that Ninja Gaiden figure, and it seems you ignored that correction, a significant correction. The Ninja Gaiden ISO is 3.19 GB. In the end, is this such a big deal? I would like to think not, but having the feeling that my compatriots on the Forum are doing their share in research does mean something to me! Ninja Gaiden is one of the "blockbuster" games, however, so it's a bit important we get that one right. I don't think you'll find many new titles that gamers drool over that aren't about this size - exceptions aside.

Like I said, I didn't verify any of the games that I was looking at, only naming off what I saw. Ninja Gaiden popped up at whatever size I mentioned before. It probably wasn't even Ninja Gaiden.


Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory comes on a single DVD-ROM for the PC, if you desire (there might be a CD-ROM version as well). 4.18 GB. The console versions push the limits of their storage formats - meaning things were cut. 1.77 GB for the GameCube version, though this one has RAR files in it. The PS2 version is 4099.0 MB, reasonably close to the edge of the format's capacity. The Xbox version is 4668.30 MB - right against the boundary of what can be done. This is more representative of what you'll find late in this generation as even the DVD is shown to have limits.

I was never arguing that games like those above aren't very large, although arguing if they are truly pushing the limits of game design (Doom III and Half Life 2 I snipped) is another question. All of these are very good games, but when it comes down to it they are all very similar. On one hand, it is a good example of games that really do fill the space. On the other, it isn't a good example of developers being creative to fill the space.



...almost every Dreamcast game was 30% smaller than the space allowed.
The Dreamcast never fails to amaze me for having failed to be pushed properly, or to attain the attention it deserved. Nobody put that system through its paces like many companies are the latecomers to the current generation (the PS2, Xbox, and GameCube).

It also didn't last long enough to really have people do lots of tricks with it. Games like Headhunter for it though (Euro import only) look better than their PS2 counterparts. Headhunter is a 2 disc affair though. Certain games -- Soul Calibur, the NFL and NBA series, Dead or Alive 2 come to mind -- did really push some nice graphics.


Well, I wasn't the one who brought up Sonic Adventure in the first place - it seemed to me another irrelevant game. Perhaps wrongly, as you've shown me that it performed well. This is, as I mentioned, a misunderstanding - I mean to say that I really don't think Sonic Adventure - either game (SA 2 Battle showed up first on the system) - is the pinnacle of modern gaming.

Sonic Heroes was actually the one I brought up, and then you replied with Sonic Adventure just being a port, when Heroes was the new one. After you mentioned Sonic Adventure was when I realized what a perfect example it is. It may not be the pinnacle of modern gaming, but I think that it is definitely a good platformer, and packs a decent amount of gameplay in it for its size.


It's probably foolish to try to argue that it was the arrival of the DVD and not the appearance of multi-disc groundbreaking titles (Metal Gear Solid is one) that pushes developers to create bigger games, since this masks the real underlying dynamic - developers compete for your dollar, and sheer volume of content makes a real impact. Thus the need to make more content, be it on multiple CD-ROMs, DVDs or otherwise.

Yes, but not every huge game is a blockbuster. A great case-in-point would be Shenmue for the Dreamcast, as it took up three GD Roms and had tons and tons of content. But Sonic Adventure outsold it on the Dreamcast by a rate of more than 2 to 1.

I think that larger games have the potential to be a larger hit, but just having a big game doesn't necessarily equate having a hit on your hands. And having a smaller game definitely doesn't equate a game losing money.

[goatdan]

Just because the industry took this turn doesn't mean you have to do it to be successful.

Ah, this reminds me that I wanted to clarify my original point that did get lost somewhere on page 3 I think...

If the original comments from Iwata are true, and the Revolution supports high def sets but doesn't require game companies to make their games also appear in high def, it gives companies the option of not doing it. Perhaps that company is bringing out a game at launch and they don't think many people will set them up for high def right away.

If so, it gives the developers the option, and that might be a good plan for Nintendo.

[zmweasel]

I'm quite secure. Mainly because of the principle of IDGAF. That and Joe's first season story editor-Steve Gerber. (He made the show all edumacated.)

I'm a fan of Christy Marx myself -- I was probably the only pro reviewer to enjoy The Legend of Alon D'ar, largely because of Marx's involvement -- but that doesn't change the fact that G.I. Joe is very much a children's entertainment.


A lot of dumb people. I loved Wind Waker's style. And given the emergence of cel-shaded graphics after WW's release, I'd say the technique was accepted by at least a few programmers here and there.

There's nothing "dumb" about a group of adult gamers desiring mature aesthetics from their games. It reflects the maturing of the game industry as a whole--a trend that Nintendo has famously been late to recognize.

As for the cel-shading technique, it was around well before Wind Waker (you apparently never played Jet Grind Radio), and its adoption by other games had little to do with its use in WW. If anything, the mixed reaction to WW caused other developers to think twice about implementing the technique and alienating a swath of potential customers.


A lot of Japanese animation looks sugary sweet.....and is edited to shreds because of our archaic broadcast standards.

True, but those cartoons are edited because they're intended for viewing by American children, not adults, and certain elements of Japanese culture aren't considered appropriate for that age group.

Also, WW wasn't edited for American consumption. It was sickly-sweet from the start.


The world of Wind Waker is unique amongst the Zelda games because it appears to reflect how the world looks to a child-bright and colorful. So it's no shocker that this Link is probably the youngest of the Links we've seen. But that doesn't mean that because the graphics are cartoonish, the game has no depth.

No one's arguing that WW lacks in depth (although it wasn't as good a game as OoT). It's the cartoony aesthetics that were the problem for many, regardless of the creative decisions that led to their use. Most teen and adult gamers weren't enthused about playing as a prepubescent Link in a candy-colored world, but they're very enthused about TP's grown-up Link in a muted, moody world.

-- Z.

[GarrettCRW]

As for the cel-shading technique, it was around well before Wind Waker (you apparently never played Jet Grind Radio),
Yes, I did, for I am not a fanboy as you so incorrectly assume. The point is, the technique didn't hit the big time until Wind Waker.


No one's arguing that WW lacks in depth (although it wasn't as good a game as OoT). It's the cartoony aesthetics that were the problem for many, regardless of the creative decisions that led to their use. Most teen and adult gamers weren't enthused about playing as a prepubescent Link in a candy-colored world, but they're very enthused about TP's grown-up Link in a muted, moody world.
And my point has just been proven. It had nothing to do with the artistic reasons behind the look-only the attitudes of the people playing the game.

Game, set, match.

[SirDrexl]

Those Xbox sizes have definitely been cut down, probably to make them easier to distribute and download. (I had a modded Xbox and saw the game sizes.) I know that Oddworld is over 3 gigabytes, but a lot of that was cutscenes. They probably also took out some or all of the music from the games. I read that was a popular way to get Dreamcast games to fit on a CD.

I found it interesting that GTA III is only about 900 MB, and Vice City is about 1.1 GB. Why weren't they just on one disc?

Here is a link to another forum with a list of game sizes: http://forums.xbox-scene.com/index.php?act=ST&f=16&t=52889&st=0

[neuropolitique]

Let's see if I can sum up this thread for those, like me, without the energy to read to entire thing.

Nintendo sucks.

Nuh uh!

Uh huh!

Nuh uh!

Uh huh!

Yer dumb!

You are!

No, you are!

You are!

Hah! You just proved my point!

Nuh uh!

Uh huh!

ad infinitum.

[Ed Oscuro]

All of these [DOOM III, Half-Life 2, Splinter Cell] are very good games, but when it comes down to it they are all very similar. On one hand, it is a good example of games that really do fill the space. On the other, it isn't a good example of developers being creative to fill the space.
I wouldn't say that. Splinter Cell and HL2 are about as different games as you can get, but they share a couple features that make them wildly popular with the hardcore PC gamer type crowd: believable worlds and a cinematic presentation. HL2 was, at the beginning, just like a movie for me; I've never felt that way before while playing a simple game. Of course, it'd be lame of me to argue that cinematic action games are the end-all of gaming, and I won't. However, games like these really push games closer to movies, and I'd say that the use of space is no worse than you'd find elsewhere. All space-fill, as you've said, amounts to sound and game content (maps, models in addition to textures). That's pretty much the way it's always been.


Yes, but not every huge game is a blockbuster. A great case-in-point would be Shenmue for the Dreamcast, as it took up three GD Roms and had tons and tons of content. But Sonic Adventure outsold it on the Dreamcast by a rate of more than 2 to 1.
Which title was more innovative? Shenmue...whether or not we like it, traditional development houses are just as reliant on brand-names as ever (not the whole reason Shenmue was a flop, however - it was just too obtuse a game design for many), and I think that to survive a lot of dev houses are going to need to turn to partnerships with the devil...er, Hollywood and other licenses, unless alternate distribution channels can be created. A development house can't simply put out wacky games by themselves. Sega managed to make money off a number of games, but they are their own publisher - and even so their console games business has been faltering for years now.

No, I don't think the sky is falling...but when I go in stores and see the games hyped up in the print rags not selling, I die just a little bit more inside.

Why? I think that a lot of the new games, where you have massive amounts of content, are much harder to do right than smaller games simply because the focus switches to more content. Heh, I've been collecting my thoughts in public over the course of the last day - my apologies. But that's one of the things that Greg was really referring to. The games at the top of the charts - the ones that really can make a developer - are all big games, and right now that's action games. This isn't saying that small games can't sell, but where has that gotten Sega? Even so, making the bigger games is an increasinly impossible task.

[zmweasel]

Yes, I did, for I am not a fanboy as you so incorrectly assume. The point is, the technique didn't hit the big time until Wind Waker.

You didn't claim your "point" until this post. Neither have I assumed you to be a fanboy of anything (except the children's cartoon/comic G.I. Joe, and that from your sig as opposed to the content of your posts).

Was WW the most high-profile game at the time of its release to use the cel-shading technique? Yes. Was that technique appropriate for this particular game? In retrospect, no.


And my point has just been proven. It had nothing to do with the artistic reasons behind the look-only the attitudes of the people playing the game.

Game, set, match.

There's nothing wrong with the "attitude" of a grown man who wants to play a video game that doesn't look and feel like a sickly-sweet child's cartoon.

Many Zelda fans read and understood the developers' stated reasons for going with the preteen Link and cel-shaded graphics, but disagreed with those reasons regardless--much like the 20- and 30-something fans of Star Wars revolted against George Lucas for pandering to (retarded?) children with his prequel trilogy.

-- Z.

[slownerveaction]

As someone with an interest in how the "HD era" will play out on consoles, I was expecting this thread to be an interesting debate on the feasibility and economics of that transition for game developers and Nintendo's possible reasoning for skeptisicm about the change.

Instead I got pages and pages about how the Wind Waker is TEH KIDDIE! and posters resorting to ad hominems.

:roll:

[zmweasel]

As someone with an interest in how the "HD era" will play out on consoles, I was expecting this thread to be an interesting debate on the feasibility and economics of that transition for game developers and Nintendo's possible reasoning for skeptisicm about the change.

Instead I got pages and pages about how the Wind Waker is TEH KIDDIE! and posters resorting to ad hominems.

:roll:

As was pointed out to me by a friend last year when I was taking these forums much too seriously, DP isn't a site for intelligent, provocative conversations about the video game industry; it's a site for collectors to brag and swap and learn lots of cool info and revel in their collector-ness. I try to keep that in mind.

(Also: you were hoping for interesting debate in a thread with the phrase "pimp slap" in its header?)

-- Z.

[GarrettCRW]

There's nothing wrong with the "attitude" of a grown man who wants to play a video game that doesn't look and feel like a sickly-sweet child's cartoon.
Perhaps, but then what do I know? Seeing as how the comment you made about me (that you've so nicely edited out of your post), I don't think you exactly value my opinion.



Many Zelda fans read and understood the developers' stated reasons for going with the preteen Link and cel-shaded graphics, but disagreed with those reasons regardless--much like the 20- and 30-something fans of Star Wars revolted against George Lucas for pandering to (retarded?) children with his prequel trilogy.

-- Z.
So George does something you disagree with, and the kids he's aiming at (who are inherently different from the kids he was aiming at in 1977) may be mentally disabled? Real smooth.

Not everyone agrees with your narrow view of what's mature or stylistically appropriate for a "mature" game. Of course, since you apparently think nil of our opinions on the message board, why are you even here?

[goatdan]

I wouldn't say that. Splinter Cell and HL2 are about as different games as you can get, but they share a couple features that make them wildly popular with the hardcore PC gamer type crowd: believable worlds and a cinematic presentation. HL2 was, at the beginning, just like a movie for me; I've never felt that way before while playing a simple game. Of course, it'd be lame of me to argue that cinematic action games are the end-all of gaming, and I won't. However, games like these really push games closer to movies, and I'd say that the use of space is no worse than you'd find elsewhere. All space-fill, as you've said, amounts to sound and game content (maps, models in addition to textures). That's pretty much the way it's always been.

I apologize. What I meant by Splinter Cell and Half Life being similiar is that they are really just expansion / innovation on existing genres, not the introduction of any new genres, which I assume is what you are referring to when we are talking about a change in the ability for developers to put creativity into games.


Which title was more innovative? Shenmue...whether or not we like it, traditional development houses are just as reliant on brand-names as ever (not the whole reason Shenmue was a flop, however - it was just too obtuse a game design for many), and I think that to survive a lot of dev houses are going to need to turn to partnerships with the devil...er, Hollywood and other licenses, unless alternate distribution channels can be created. A development house can't simply put out wacky games by themselves. Sega managed to make money off a number of games, but they are their own publisher - and even so their console games business has been faltering for years now.

You could actually debate which one was more innovative. While Shenmue really did a lot of things that were new really well, Sonic Adventure was the first time that a 3D platformer was built around speed. Shenmue was a game that tried to build an entirely functioning 3D world. It worked to a point, but obviously didn't in other ways.

And really, we shouldn't mistake innovation with crappy game design (and I'm not saying Shenmue, but just in general). A good idea needs to be a good idea.

And there are ways other than the Steam channels in which developers could make smaller games that would be profitable. It comes down to how producers (and console companies) handle them, and what the expectations are for those games.


No, I don't think the sky is falling...but when I go in stores and see the games hyped up in the print rags not selling, I die just a little bit more inside.

Did you intend to say this? That you're sad when the games that magazines hype the most (usually things like Halo 2 and Grand Theft Auto 3) aren't selling?


The games at the top of the charts - the ones that really can make a developer - are all big games, and right now that's action games. This isn't saying that small games can't sell, but where has that gotten Sega? Even so, making the bigger games is an increasinly impossible task.

Sega isn't making millions, but their smaller games like Super Monkey Ball have all been doing very well. I agree that a HUGE action game with tons of cut scenes and millions of dollars in development is the most likely unknown franchise to score a major hit right now, but you never know where they will come from. The game industry isn't in perfect shape, and more opportunities for smaller projects to succeed (as Nintendo *may* be providing by not forcing HD display) have the potential to help.

[slownerveaction]

As was pointed out to me by a friend last year when I was taking these forums much too seriously, DP isn't a site for intelligent, provocative conversations about the video game industry; it's a site for collectors to brag and swap and learn lots of cool info and revel in their collector-ness. I try to keep that in mind.

(Also: you were hoping for interesting debate in a thread with the phrase "pimp slap" in its header?)

-- Z.

America has had a love affair with the word 'pimp' for years. It's a fantastic addition to the lexicon!

And I can't argue that the best discussions on here are about collecting and history, as opposed to current industry talk. Still -- talking about the Wind Waker's graphical style is sooooo 2002 GameFAQs. (In this humble gamer's opinion, it's a style that comes off as a lot better as a whole in the game than in individual screenshots or videos anyway.)

[zmweasel]

Perhaps, but then what do I know? Seeing as how the comment you made about me (that you've so nicely edited out of your post), I don't think you exactly value my opinion.

I felt the comment (which related to your fandom of G.I. Joe as an indication of issues with immaturity and/or intellectual laziness) was too harsh and unrelated to the topic at hand, so I removed it.

I'm intrigued by your opinion, and I agree with many of your points. I just don't agree that adults who dislike childish images or childish things are "insecure." It's the simple process of growing up.


So George does something you disagree with, and the kids he's aiming at (who are inherently different from the kids he was aiming at in 1977) may be mentally disabled? Real smooth.

By putting so many fart jokes and kiddie-pandering moments into Ep I, Lucas (I see you're on a first-name basis with him) did something that the healthy majority of Star Wars fans--the ones who've been lining his pockets for 20 years--disagreed with. He responded to the outcry by toning down the cutesiness and ratcheting up the intensity of Eps II and III, in a manner somewhat similar to the WW/TP situation. (If only he would've hired a good writer and director, too....)

-- Z.

[slownerveaction]

Sega isn't making millions, but their smaller games like Super Monkey Ball have all been doing very well

Super Monkey Ball is probably the most profitable game Sega has put out this generation, besides Dreamcast ports and Sonic whoring. It's certainly done better than something like Blood Will Tell, which pretty much flopped and probably cost a lot more to develop.

[Hep038]

After reading through all 4 pages @_@ . One thing kept popping into my head. I think it was last week that people were posting screen shots of the PS2 RES 4 vs the GC RES 4 and saying how the PS2 version was unplayable. Even though I assume that the game play is the same, I am guess that the reason PS2 was unplayable was because the graphics were not as sharp as the game cube.

Man I love DP. LOL

[goatdan]

Sega isn't making millions, but their smaller games like Super Monkey Ball have all been doing very well

Super Monkey Ball is probably the most profitable game Sega has put out this generation, besides Dreamcast ports and Sonic whoring. It's certainly done better than something like Blood Will Tell, which pretty much flopped and probably cost a lot more to develop.

That's my point.

I'm guessing Headhunter: Redemption was another game that cost a lot to develop that didn't recoup its costs. It had a ton of content though (and a live orchestra!)

The point was that you can make money off smaller games, and larger games aren't a guarantee. Sega is the epitome of that right now.

[zmweasel]

After reading through all 4 pages @_@ . One thing kept popping into my head. I think it was last week that people were posting screen shots of the PS2 RES 4 vs the GC RES 4 and saying how the PS2 version was unplayable. Even though I assume that the game play is the same, I am guess that the reason PS2 was unplayable was because the graphics were not as sharp as the game cube.

Not so much the graphics themselves as the lowered, wonky frame-rate (which might be addressed before release).

-- Z.

[slownerveaction]

That's my point.

I'm guessing Headhunter: Redemption was another game that cost a lot to develop that didn't recoup its costs. It had a ton of content though (and a live orchestra!)

The point was that you can make money off smaller games, and larger games aren't a guarantee. Sega is the epitome of that right now.

Yep. I'm a big fan of the idea of smaller budgeted games with modest concepts. There's a lot more room for innovation without huge financial risks or by-committee planning ruining things.

[le geek]

I would like to comment on a number of issues that have been brought up so far:


1. HDTV's are still too damn expensive for me!

Checked out BestBuy looks like HD sets are going down in price, saw one for 570... There's a 1080i compatible on for cheaper but it's still 4:3...

So if next gen consoles and such push the prices down all the better....

[Kroogah]

intelligent, provocative conversations about the video game industry

We may have discovered a new oxymoron here.

[Ed Oscuro]

No, I don't think the sky is falling...but when I go in stores and see the games hyped up in the print rags not selling, I die just a little bit more inside.
Did you intend to say this? That you're sad when the games that magazines hype the most (usually things like Halo 2 and Grand Theft Auto 3) aren't selling?
I mean various things, as usual.

I feel bad that the smartest developers around today - Warren Spector and Greg Costikyan, to name two - have so much trouble realizing their visions. Deus Ex 2, as you might remember, recieved a lot of criticism and generally failed to achieve the incredible status of the original; and I know a number of people who weren't impressed with Jade Empire - and you have other games with very famous names working on them. Partly this is becoming jaded about hype, but I also get the feeling that the stuff that I like to get into is becoming harder to do. I have a feeling that the PS3 and other consoles are going to make it just that much harder for indie/small games to do well; the increase from DVD-ROM to next gen formats will be roughly on the same order of magnitude as from CD-ROM to DVD-ROM.

[zmweasel]

intelligent, provocative conversations about the video game industry

We may have discovered a new oxymoron here.

Check out Game Developer magazine, or go to Game Developers Conference, or listen in on a panel discussion at Classic Gaming Expo, or read Chris Crawford's website, to find intelligent analysis and criticism of video games. You'll have to hunt for it, but it's out there. Just don't expect to find it in the DP forums.

-- Z.

[calthaer]

Check out Game Developer magazine, or go to Game Developers Conference, or listen in on a panel discussion at Classic Gaming Expo, or read Chris Crawford's website, to find intelligent analysis and criticism of video games. You'll have to hunt for it, but it's out there. Just don't expect to find it in the DP forums.

We give you all the credit.

[zmweasel]

Thank you for proving my point.

-- Z.

[calthaer]

Like deserves like.

[Wavelflack]

You'll notice that the WW April Fool's hoax did nothing to the guts of the game-just its graphics. Total insecurity, kids. I bet they can't bear to admit they like "Feed the Kitty" or "The Ugly Duckling" in public without prefacing their love with a comment about the saccharine sweet look and feel of those shorts.

I love reading these forays into pop psychology.
:)

[zmweasel]

Like deserves like.

I agreed with the healthy majority of your initial post; it was only your final sweeping statement that prompted my rebuttal. Unfortunately, rather than defend your point of view, you chose to make snide remarks instead. Perhaps because opinion was against you, with both lendelin and goatdan--two of the forum's most intelligent posters--backing me up. Perhaps because you're still angry at me for our past clashes (and I offer an overdue apology to you for that misdirected hostility on my part). In either case, it's disappointing.

-- Z.

[FantasiaWHT]

[quote=goatdan]and you have other games with very famous names working on them.

Yeah! like "Arthur MacLean Presents Mercury"!

hehe sorry couldn't resist.

Wanted to address an earlier point about size of games...

When was the last time you actually saw the size of a game used in marketing?

In the 8 and 16-bit eras, it was somewhat common, especially in the RPGs. IIRC, Phantasy Stars 1, 2, and 4 were all the largest games ever made by that point. Big splashes on the game boxes with things like "8 mega-bit game cartridge!" (forgot what the actual numbers were)

But I've never really seen anything since then.

[calthaer]

Like deserves like.Perhaps because you're still angry at me for our past clashes (and I offer an overdue apology to you for that misdirected hostility on my part). In either case, it's disappointing.

You seem to think that I'm the only one making snide comments here - or wasn't that pot-shot at the entire forum crew "snide?" I frankly never care at all what your opinion is, but your condescending way of expressing it is what the real disappointment is.

You are being answered in kind.

[zmweasel]

You seem to think that I'm the only one making snide comments here - or wasn't that pot-shot at the entire forum crew "snide?" I frankly never care at all what your opinion is, but your condescending way of expressing it is what the real disappointment is.

I simply pointed out--as was pointed out to me last year by a wiser forum participant than I--that this is a site for collectors to discuss the hobby of video game collecting, not a site to find or expect insightful conversations about the latest trends and developments in the video game industry. That's not a dig at anyone moderating or participating in these forums, yourself included.

-- Z.

[calthaer]

That's not a dig at anyone moderating or participating in these forums, yourself included.

Then the apology is all mine. I had no idea that you had no idea of how you come across, and I believe your statement of intent.

[zmweasel]

I had no idea that you would take offense at such a simple statement. Do you disagree that the DP forums are collector-oriented, or that someone looking for detailed discussions about the state of the video game industry (barring the potential collectibility of recent and upcoming releases) should look elsewhere?

-- Z.

[calthaer]

Thank you for proving my point.

-- Z.

Your original post stated that the DP forums were not the place for thoughtful, intelligent commentary on the game industry. You are trying to say that you did not intend to say (and that it was not your "point") that the DP forums were the antithesis - a place for unintelligent or thoughtless comments (which would obvisously be made by people who were the same). You are saying that you merely meant to say that DP is "collector-centric." If that's the case, then what was this quoted post about?

Furthermore, why are you wasting your time trying to post what you obviously consider thoughtful, intelligent comments on the game industry on a forum that is so obviously not intended for it?

[goatdan]

Your original post stated that the DP forums were not the place for thoughtful, intelligent commentary on the game industry. You are trying to say that you did not intend to say (and that it was not your "point") that the DP forums were the antithesis - a place for unintelligent or thoughtless comments (which would obvisously be made by people who were the same). You are saying that you merely meant to say that DP is "collector-centric." If that's the case, then what was this quoted post about?

What Zach was saying was that DP is not a place to go to if you are looking to get deep analysis of games and stuff like that. Game Developer Magazine is an excellent source for that type of material. The posts on these message boards aren't going to have replies talking about which game better utilized RAM, if the point system for a game works well or not, which console could display certain graphics better and so on. They concern things like, "is this game fun?" "is this game collectable?" and things like that.

And that is fine, and in many ways much more fun than a deep intellectual conversation about how to better utilize RAM or how points are scored. If these boards were a place where that sort of conversation was discussed and only that sort of thing was discussed, I wouldn't find it to interesting to be here.

In the case of the Zelda graphics, it is teetering on the brink of a more in-depth conversation than what we usually have, but it is interesting because it is something everyone can weigh in on. Zach's notion that the graphics for Wind Waker hurt the sales of the game (which I as well as others do agree with) can be directly compared against things like you mentioned (cel shaded graphics being used more often since then).

It isn't that the boards are, as you put it the antithesis -- "a place for unintelligent or thoughtless comments (which would obvisously be made by people who were the same)," but a place for people to go who don't want to talk about the details of the mechanics as much as they want to talk about the fun that they have had playing the games, or collecting the games. You can most definitely have intelligent and thoughtful comments on collecting, it is just a different focus than trying to figure out the details. I doubt many people on here would care about a detailed view on if the newest Zelda has the best control scheme possible for the GameCube, but a lot of us are sure interested in whether it is fun to play or not.

Does that make more sense now, coming from a third party? I'm just trying to help here, because I know exactly where Zach is coming from and I have a lot of respect from you too, and I don't want this fight to continue.

[zmweasel]

Your original post stated that the DP forums were not the place for thoughtful, intelligent commentary on the game industry. You are trying to say that you did not intend to say (and that it was not your "point") that the DP forums were the antithesis - a place for unintelligent or thoughtless comments (which would obvisously be made by people who were the same). You are saying that you merely meant to say that DP is "collector-centric." If that's the case, then what was this quoted post about?

My earlier post stated:


"As was pointed out to me by a friend last year, when I was taking these forums much too seriously, DP isn't a site for intelligent, provocative conversations about the video game industry; it's a site for collectors to brag and swap and learn lots of cool info and revel in their collector-ness."

That's more or less the DP site's mission statement, and I'm baffled and saddened that you've interpreted it as an insult to yourself and the other forum participants.

Later on, I posted, in response to a comment about "intelligent, provocative conversations about the video game industry" being an oxymoron (and why aren't you upset with that poster?):

"Check out Game Developer magazine, or go to Game Developers Conference, or listen in on a panel discussion at Classic Gaming Expo, or read Chris Crawford's website, to find intelligent analysis and criticism of video games. You'll have to hunt for it, but it's out there. Just don't expect to find it in the DP forums."

Again, that's not an insult in any way--simply a comment that the DP forums don't provide that type of content. But you misinterpreted it as an insult, and responded thusly:

"We give you all the credit."

To which I responded with dismay:

"Thank you for proving my point."

In other words, your post was neither intelligent nor provocative--just nasty (and, I presume, "retribution" for my having jumped into the thread to nitpick your graphics/gameplay comment).


Furthermore, why are you wasting your time trying to post what you obviously consider thoughtful, intelligent comments on the game industry on a forum that is so obviously not intended for it?

I don't label my contributions to the forum. You may describe them as you like, or ignore them as you prefer.

-- Z.

[theoakwoody]

Why do these forum discussions turn into a public dispute? Like what you say is going to change the other person's mind. And don't tell me to ignore your posts if I don't like it because sometimes there are interesting factoids hidden amongst the garbage posts. Its just annoying when people start quoting a quote of a quote of a quote.

[Wavelflack]

Sometimes you have you include an enormous train of quotes because "forum types" (not just here) seem to have a very limited memory of the discussion at hand, and can't be bothered to refer back to previous pages, etc. If I spend the time typing up 10 bulleted points of rebuttal, I would like to make sure that the original statements are there for easy reference to the reader.

As for your original question ("public dispute"), I personally enjoy reading spirited debate. I've never understood why so many moderators and forum members on so many boards insist on locking threads when they start to pick up pace. You can complain about argumentativeness in "fanboys" (ugh), but I would gladly take a bickering thread over 40 people all agreeing with each other. Even if no salient points are made, you still get to witness the skill (or lack thereof) of the participants in debate.