Welcome to NAdventures, if we feel that you as an adventures fan will be interested in a game or peripheral, we will give it coverage right here on NAdventures. If you enjoy other genres of games in addition to adventures, then be sure to visit NShooters and NSports in order to get your fill of gaming content. Check out http://hub.ngenres.com for the highlight stories from each genre.

Editorials   Videogames, the Mainstream, and the Little Developer
- By Lander Clinton

For years now Sony, in particular, has been praised for bringing videogames into the mainstream. That is, the old image of 12-year-old boys hiding from natural light to shoot at 2D blobs has been replaced by the image of college kids playing dancing games and games with Hollywood actors in them.

Whatever you think of the current state of videogames, more people ARE thinking about the current state of videogames, and that's a good thing for the industry. Competition is usually good for the consumer- it not only brings down prices, but forces companies who innovate to try even harder to innovate. No body wants to be known only for making licensed games and GTA clones.

In addition to competition, one of the biggest reasons videogames have become accepted is that they cost less on the shelf. When Final Fantasy 3 came out for the SNES it was $80. Same for Shadows of the Empire for N64. Today's games can be $30-$50 new, with older games dropping in some cases to $9.99. People no longer have to save up or wait until holidays to get a game, they can just walk into a store, find something that looks interesting, and buy it, not worrying that it's a major investment.

So why is this heading for a disaster? Competition only lowers prices initially. Most developers will tell you now that game production is getting costlier and costlier. As each company tries to out-do the others with better effects and better celebrities in the game, the price of making the game can not be made up in retail. Several analysts have already speculated that the next generation of games will go back to being $60. I imagine it will take a lot more time for one of those games to come down to $9.99.

Even Nintendo, which is making the Revolution to allow smaller developers to make new games without worrying about cost, is considering releasing two versions of this year's Zelda: a normal one at $50, and a "Collector's Edition" that costs more and may have bonus stuff or a cool box or something.

I don't think the current popularity and acceptance of videogames will ever go away, but higher prices may end up hurting sales. Some companies may end high-production games, but others, like Sony and Microsoft, are the type of companies that would swallow the cost if it meant having the best-looking game. The Playstation 3 is rumored to cost Sony about $500 to make, but they'll probably sell it for $300. Microsoft did the same thing this generation and I don't know what Xbox 360 will cost, but they have yet to turn a profit in the videogame industry.

So which strategy works, having the best image and losing money or having the worst image and making money? This generation I'd have to give it to image over profit. However, if PS3 and Xbox 360 games cost $60 and Revolution games cost $40, hardcore gamers may think there's something wrong with the Revolution (being able to spend a lot of money is a status symbol), but the mainstream gamer who looks for something new to play that day will be tempted to pick up Nintendo.