Author: Stephen Carter

There is a massive shift in the gaming industry and it’s happening right now; it’s called crowdfunding. For the small minority who haven’t heard, this basically means that a developer has put out an advert seeking money in order to kick-start their gaming project. Sites like Kickstarter cater for this and many developers often exceed their funding goal with plenty to spare.

But what does this actually mean for the industry? And what does it mean for us as consumers? Well, read on and we’ll explore what effect it is having, and will have, on the gaming industry.

Gamers are in control

Remember all those times you have complained that the same titles are getting shipped out mercilessly, just in different packages? Well now you might be able to have your say on what does and doesn’t get released. Publishers usually quash smaller developers because they think their idea has no merit and is too small for them to bother about. Well not any more. This system results in games being published, even those with big budgets, without a publisher even being involved.

Gamers will get rewarded

We hear all the time how big companies are ever grateful of the customers who buy their games, but what do we really get in return? In comparison to them raking in the big money, it’s pretty much nothing. So, if we put our cash into a game getting developed and produced, we are now get rewarded for doing so. People who put in the right amount of money may end up being part of the production process, being part of the testing procedure or they simply receive a copy of the game before the release date.

Gamers become part of something

How awesome would it be to be able to say, “I funded this game, I brought it to life”? To share an experience with family or friends which you played a part in would be something huge, tied with the above point, those who fund titles could be onto something big in terms of their return.

Creative titles will become more common

The current batch of games we’re seeing is becoming stale, fast. With crowd-funding however we will begin to see people creating titles that are creative, fun and completely free of any sort of regulation by big companies. There will be no conflict of interests or poor marketing because the developer will be in full control of the whole project.

New genres may appear

In a similar light to new creative titles, this type of funding may finally mean we will step away from our obsession with guns and constant f-bombs and see some new genres come to the table. Granted many new games may just be a different spin on existing genres but imagine the endless possibilities smaller companies may actually be able to come up with.

Games will have a guaranteed audience

Think about it; people who put money in a project want to see the end result and will ultimately buy into it once complete. Those who fund a game will buy it and play it when it is released to see how their money has been spent. Similarly, if you raise enough cash to start working on your project then you know there’s an audience out there for it, but if you don’t, then it might not be worth developing.

On the flipside however, if a project does go under then it is very unlikely that investors will see any of their money back – but this is this risk people are seemingly willing to take. For what it unlocks in terms of potential and scope for the future I think this is a completely viable method of seeking capital for gaming projects worldwide. If it means a more fair, unique and open marketplace then I support this 100%.

What about you? Let us know in the comments below, if you please.

Most of you, consciously or unconsciously, will already have formulated an opinion about this piece based upon its title and I don’t blame you. It is a bold statement I agree, but it is one that carries a lot of merit whether or not we choose to admit it or not. I’ll wager that many of you are disagreeing with this title thus far and that’s ok, but prepare to have your minds officially changed by the end of it…

Let us rewind several years before the current batch of consoles arrived in our living rooms, and to some extent, right at the beginning of the PS3’s life cycle. We had no achievements or trophies to brag about, helplessly chase or horde like a hyperactive child who hordes sweets. Consider this for a moment; were our experiences tarnished or worsened because of this? That’s right, no they were not.

Our cherished memories of retro titles is something that we will hold forever and we played them endlessly without any sort of reward in terms of achievements or trophies. Instead, we sufficed with our names at the top of a local leaderboard and personal satisfaction of completing a title on the hardest difficulty.

Now what do we have? An expectancy that a certain tune will sound every time we complete a given action and we seek them aimlessly like zombies who get off on this noise. Has this changed us? You bet it has. Any new game now has these capabilities which we have come to expect, and if someone dares not to include them then there would be hell to pay.

Games that aren’t treated to trophy/achievements are snubbed, regardless of their quality, based on the fact that players will not ‘earn’ anything while playing them. We’ve all done it at some point because, think about it, what is one of the first things we do when we load up a new game? We scour the list of achievements and trophies to see which we can pick up the easiest.

This might seem like a simple thing but it is something that is drawing attention away from the quality of the game and towards the end product. In some cases, it makes us try and play a game as fast as we can just to get all the rewards before friends and colleagues in order to have temporary bragging rights, therefore reducing the experience.

This isn’t even just a problem with new games either, the problem has extended back to older games that get re-released via digital downloads or HD remakes. We can’t even play older games on modern consoles without developers and publishers whetting people’s appetites for achievement gathering.

It simply gives us no incentive to go back and play old games without trophies and achievements, thus ruining the experience all round. I can’t deny the fact that I have even fallen foul to this menace and it has undoubtedly changed my gaming habits forever I fear. So, when it comes to the next batch of consoles and games, I sincerely hope that we return to gaming simply for the entertainment and not have to worry about gathering rewards for completing the simplest of tasks. Although, I highly doubt this will happen.

What do you think?

An air of uncertainty seems to be building in the games industry. We’ve seen Microsoft reveal their Xbox One X, giving us an insight into their plans for the future. But that only brought about more questions than it did answers for many, one such question being how long can we expect our ‘normal’ consoles to last? More pertinently; what are Sony’s plans and can we expect to see a PlayStation 5 any time soon?

My initial reaction to the latter question would be no, but when you think about it a little more it doesn’t seem that farfetched. Inevitably the Xbox One X will unsettle Sony somewhat as, based on specs alone, it’s a much better proposition than its counterpart; the PS4 Pro. Sony were the first to offer their 4K capable version of the latest consoles, with Microsoft taking somewhat of a backseat before showing their hand. Maybe this was a lesson learned from the launch of the Xbox One or a tactical ‘Let’s wait and see what they do’ approach.

Sony find themselves in a tricky situation here as they will want to stand by PS4 Pro and the PS4 itself for as long as possible, giving consumers justification their money was well spent. By the same token though, they will want to compete with Microsoft and give their fans the best experience they can. So do they stick to their guns or look to out-muscle Microsoft by kick starting a new generation of consoles? If you think about it, PS4 will be five years old in 2018 so some people might be getting twitchy thumbs.

It’s a fine balance that needs to be struck by Sony as the appeal of home consoles is to not have to upgrade or buy new hardware for as long as possible without feeling outdated. On the flipside, both Sony and Microsoft seem to think the future of console gaming lies in progressive upgrades rather than new consoles altogether so their next step would need to be a considered one.

All said and done, new shiny hardware is an enticing prospect and there’s always a thrilling buzz surrounding a new console launch which people get caught up in. In order for that to be achieved though this needs to be a launch timed correctly otherwise it could fail before it even launches. The difficulty here being, if PS5 launched in 2018, how much longer would PS4 be supported? New hardware can’t be held back by the limitations of the previous console, but owners of the previous machine can’t suffer from not having a machine that gives them the latest and best titles. Imagine PlayStation owners being told that the Last of Us 2 is coming out but only for PS5 and won’t run on PS4. I don’t think that would go down very well.

But if this meant that Sony stayed in front of the pack, would this be a risk worth taking? They were considered to be the winners of this generation cycle so would their best bet to be at the forefront of the next wave of consoles in order to keep their dominant title? Only they can make that call but the success of a console ultimately lies in the availability of games and their quality so they wouldn’t want multi-platform titles running better on a rival console. Nor would they want their exclusives to be held back due to hardware constraints.

Whichever way you look at it, you can see both pro’s and con’s for both sides of the argument so it’s a debate which will divide the opinions of many. Personally, I don’t think we’ll see PS5 launch next year and I don’t think we’ll see typical console generations anymore. I think we will start to see slightly upgraded versions available every few years, much like the Xbox One X, giving us more power for bigger and better titles.

If Sony are happy that PS4 and the Pro are enough to keep them afloat, then they must be confident in their upcoming catalogue of titles, such as God of War 4, Uncharted: The Lost Legacy and Days Gone to name a few.

What do you think dear reader? Is it time to bring out the PS5, or is it way too early. Let us know in the comments below!

It’s that time of year where most of the gaming headlines are focused on this year’s upcoming E3 event, wondering how Microsoft and Sony will approach their respective conferences. It’s no secret that we’ll already see more on Project Scorpio and Sony are keeping quiet as it stands. As for Nintendo though, their approach is the same as it has been for the last couple of years; we’ll do our own thing.

Nintendo seem to be a law unto themselves lately, keeping a distance from the constant arms race that Microsoft and Sony are engaged in an attempt to outdo one another. Whilst they will have a strong presence at E3, Nintendo have elected again to have a special E3 Nintendo Direct presentation instead. Undoubtedly, this will have many announcements for the Switch including more on Super Mario Odyssey and other familiar franchises.

But whilst the Switch may take up the majority of the conference where will the 3DS fit in, or the recently face lifted 2DS? You see the Switch allows gamers to enjoy their latest titles in various ways; docked or undocked, inside or outside the home. So with that in mind, what does the future hold for Nintendo? Will they look to wind down their record-breaking handheld console in favour of the Switch, or allow both to flourish in their own right?

Nintendo face an interesting problem here as the Switch has proven to be very popular already. Many had questioned its popularity, but it has already flown off the shelves with limited availability in many regions. Granted, the launch line-up was limited but there are already some enticing games on the horizon which Switch owners can look forward to playing. Yet out of the blue with little warning, the new-look 2DS was announced which raises questions for both the 3DS and Switch.

The 2DS now falls in line with the tried and tested design of the 3DS, no longer looking like a doorstop. From the promotional images that have been released, it wouldn’t surprise me if many favoured one of these new units over the 3DS. With 3D gaming being a trend that has well and truly passed, it wouldn’t surprise me if many opted for this version or if Nintendo did start to end production of the 3DS itself.

But even then, does the Switch not offer a more viable option for mobile gaming? With the ability to take your home titles with you whilst you travel, you’re not getting a watered down version of the title to fit the portable platform. Granted, the 3DS/2DS would be more convenient size-wise and potentially have a longer battery life, but wouldn’t you rather have a better experience on a bigger and better screen?

These are questions purely based on the actual units themselves, but when you think about the games line-up it would surely make more sense to opt for the Switch. Personally, I own a Switch and have owned a 2DS and 3DS in the past. Even at this early stage, when the catalogue is relatively small, I would prefer to have a Switch and use that for portable gaming. Why would I need two devices that can offer the same function?

For example when Super Mario Odyssey comes out for the Switch, would you need a Mario game to come out on the handheld platform? I couldn’t see much demand for handheld spin-off, or a port of the Switch title onto the handheld when you could take the Switch with you. Of course, not every 3DS/2DS owner will have or want a Switch but surely Nintendo would want to support their latest console? What’s more, isn’t the idea of the Switch to offer the perfect solution to handheld gaming so you don’t need two devices?

Of course, there’s nothing to say that Nintendo can’t continue their handheld dominance and the Switch be a success at the same time. I think the Switch was a marker for their future however, and expect to see the Switch take priority for the handheld market. I wouldn’t want to feel that I was missing out on something only available on the 3DS/2DS nor would I want ports of Switch games to hold back their release. Granted this would be very unlikely, but Nintendo have got to please both audiences somehow.

I’m sure Nintendo will look to bring some exciting announcements to the table at their Direct showing for E3, some of which may clarify the future for both their console avenues. For all gaming fans, this year’s E3 could be the biggest and most exciting in recent years.