26 replies to this topic

[Gregory DG]

With video game arcades closing down in droves, what (if anything) will fill the void in the future? Pool halls? Computer LAN arcades? Multi-game console-to-arcade units? Giant DisneyQuest stlye VR locations? Pizza places? The 5 arcade machines lining the wall at the movie theatre?

Is there even a need for arcades anymore? The discovery of the "next big thing" could very well become wealthy beyond imagination... Let's figure it out! :-)

[Happy_Dude]

Why where arcades fun in the first place ?
Because the games where 1000 times better than what you could play at
home. That sort of thing just isn't feasible today (with the exeption of pinball )

Around here there are a lot of computer LAN arcades springing up, but you'll
only find hardcore gamers in them. Casual gamers just arn't interested in
being slaughtered by people that spend weeks at a time playing there.

Also Laser tag is getting big aswell. It's just as much fun as paintball without
the searing pain Stop working on your hand/eye co-ordination and start
working on your spatial awarness

[SteveW]

Aren't some companies working on monitors that produce 3D without glasses? If an arcade game company could make games with true 3D monitors in their cabinets, it would be something that you couldn't get at home with a game console. It would draw people back into arcades, until the technology became cheap enough to market the monitors at a consumer level.

[JB]

Happy_Dude said:

Why where arcades fun in the first place ?
Because the games where 1000 times better than what you could play at  
home. That sort of thing just isn't feasible today (with the exeption of pinball )

The modern equivalent is multi-screen games and specialty controller games(such as Konami's DDR, MoCap Boxing, and Silent Scope games).
Sure they CAN be ported, but just about everyone admits DDR loses something in the translation and that there's no point to home Silent Scope.

[AtariDude]

Well eventually we might get to see VR in our lifetime but I doubt it. Arcades are slowly disappearing as the home console systems are so good that they are as good as arcades. And being able to play multiplayer games over the Net has its appeal because you can always find someone at your same skill level if you look long enough.

[Gregory DG]

One thing that would be nice would be to have a chance to play a console game before you buy it. I guess there are demo CDs for that, but not having a GC, Xbox, or PS2, are they free?

I dunno. There must be something that will work...

[JB]

Gregory DG said:

One thing that would be nice would be to have a chance to play a console game before you buy it. I guess there are demo CDs for that, but not having a GC, Xbox, or PS2, are they free?

I dunno. There must be something that will work...

Sony sells their's.

PS and XBox both have demo disks in magazines.
Despite a big "NOT FOR RESALE" on the package, many stores sell the demo disk that's supposed to come with a new GameCube.

[Ralph3]

JB said:

Happy_Dude said:

Why where arcades fun in the first place ?
Because the games where 1000 times better than what you could play at  
home. That sort of thing just isn't feasible today (with the exeption of pinball )

The modern equivalent is multi-screen games and specialty controller games(such as Konami's DDR, MoCap Boxing, and Silent Scope games).
Sure they CAN be ported, but just about everyone admits DDR loses something in the translation and that there's no point to home Silent Scope.

Hey JB,
Very true about the games you listed.
DDR-Can't find a well built home pad. I've tried them all and just might actually buy an arcade dance pad from an arcade parts distributor.
MoCap Boxing-It might actually work with the new PS2 Eye Toy coming out this month.
Silent Scope-Can't have a home conversion without the sights moniter.



Everybody else,
I think the home consoles linked up in the same fashion as PC lan partys will start be popping up everywhere any day now. Halo, best game to do this, hands down!

[adams_ale]

I always went to the arcades to play the fighting games from Karate Champ to Double Dragon to Mortal Kombat. I don't go to the arcades any more because I don't have the money to pop quarters for hours on end(I'm a college student). It appears the arcades demise is inevitable and I can't help but sigh with sadness at the thought.

[tyranthraxus]

I feel the fighting game and racers have made an arcade dull as thats pretty much all you see. There needs to be more variety. It seems the
few games that get some attention are gimicky, Dance Dance
Revolution, that full size sking one, there are some others. Problem with
those is that they are HUGE machines and I'm sure cost a pretty penny.

I think what arcade games need are few addicting time wasters, Tetris is
a good example. I look for an arcade game when I'm killing some time so I want a game that is simple to learn yet still is a challenge. Fighting games I hate because of all the complicated moves. It takes too long
to master and I look for a quick fix.

There is only two things that an arcade can do better than home. One is
the deluxe cabinet, I'd love to see a modern Star Wars sit down game!
The other is multiplayer games, hence the survial of racing/fighting
games because split screen is crappy and net play is still small. Some
new types of multiplayer games could succeed but coming up with a
fresh spin is hard. Perhaps some head to head cocktail cabinets would
succeed in a bar setting?

John

[caveman]

The future of arcades? I have to say that right now, it doesn't look good- between the home consoles, the net, and the overall dullness of only fighting games and racers out there in the remaining arcades. The only reason to go to arcades now is if you've got an itch for pinball. The demise was inevitable once the technology became cheap enough, and all you really had to do was find and download an emulator. Who knows.

[AtariDude]

I would have to agree that the best days of the arcades are over and only gimmicky kind of games do well. I think you could eventually reach a point where there are no more arcades anywhere.

By the way, what does everyone think about the re-release of Space Invaders? Do you think there will be enough people who still have an interest in playing this game?

[goatdan]

The death of arcades has been brought about not by the games or the patrons or better home consoles or anything like that.

It has been brought about by the arcades themselves.

Arcades have barely changed at all since the early 1980's. Games that require specialized controllers and stuff like that still do well because they are stuff you can't play at home, but arcade owners keep going out and spending $10,000+ on the new 3D fighting game that is ported to a home system within a few months and not too popular immediately following that.

Instead of getting games that people can't play at home, like your pinball games and DDR games and so on, arcades have been saying, "Pinball costs too much to maintain. A new steering wheel costs ten times that of a joystick. We can make more money if we get a simpler game." I've probably spent $100.00 in arcades over the past two years, and about 95% of that was on specialized games like pinball and so on. Arcade owners haven't caught on.

Arcade owners keep saying, "We need another game like ____ that will revitalize the industry!" but they don't realize that they have passed up countless games like that for the cheap fighters over the past few years. The closest arcade to me that owned a Rush 2049 had people playing it nearly non-stop. That same arcade is filled with unique games like skiing and skateboarding and shooting and pinball (an a couple classics), and it is constantly busy no matter when I go in.

The other arcade around town hasn't got anything new for two years because the owner feels that the new games are too expensive and complicated. I've been there where I'm the only person in the entire store. The owners need a new way to run their stores, and if they do that the profits will follow.

[goatdan]

AtariDude said:

By the way, what does everyone think about the re-release of Space Invaders? Do you think there will be enough people who still have an interest in playing this game?

Space Invaders should do well. It's cost is incredible for arcade owners, and it is a classic, well-known game. I don't think that the hope of selling 10,000 is too far out of line.

If I owned an arcade, I'd jump at it

[Room 34]

Personally I think the fatal stab at arcades happened the day the NES was released. From that point on, the video game options at home were at least as good as what was in the arcades.

The only way arcades could (I say "could," not "can," because I don't think it's going to happen) survive is if they went the way of games in Japan (and to a lesser extent, some of the more recent ones here)... all sorts of crazy control mechanisms that are too big and elaborate to be practical for a home system.

But I think in general, arcades in the U.S. are done, except for the massive ones with gimmicks like Dave & Busters or GameWorks... and the arcades at amusement parks.

[tyranthraxus]

I'm not even close to an arcade expert but wouldn't it be cheaper to
buy an old Space Invaders and Qix than the new $2500+ combo?

[Room 34]

tyranthraxus said:

I'm not even close to an arcade expert but wouldn't it be cheaper to
buy an old Space Invaders and Qix than the new $2500+ combo?

Much cheaper. But there is certain appeal in the combo, and in having a brand-new unit. Plus, with the old ones you have the added challenge of FINDING them in good condition, or else investing time and money to rehab them.

[goatdan]

tyranthraxus said:

I'm not even close to an arcade expert but wouldn't it be cheaper to buy an old Space Invaders and Qix than the new $2500+ combo?

It would probably take around $1200 to get the two old cabinets but...

1) it takes up twice as much space
2) it has super-old coin mechs that tend to get jammed much more than the newer ones
3) The old game will probably have a screen die or will need new controls or whatever in the not-too-far-off future for an arcade or route person. Having a game that you can depend on to keep working and sucking quarters is worth more than the difference

[Megamaniac]

Room 34 said:

Personally I think the fatal stab at arcades happened the day the NES was released. From that point on, the video game options at home were at least as good as what was in the arcades.

Though the NES was a quantum leap, I still felt there was a lag between arcade quality and home machines. Mainly because of hardware limitations (maybe just my perception). The Jag was the 1st system that seemed it "could" have been an equal but of course the titles hurt it. Truly, the Sega Dreamcast was the 1st machine to me that made this cut. Hell, the Sega Crazy Taxi is better than the arcade version, graphically speaking!

[Tempest]

Quote

Truly, the Sega Dreamcast was the 1st machine to me that made this cut. Hell, the Sega Crazy Taxi is better than the arcade version, graphically speaking!

It didn't help that by the time the DC came out arcade machines were running on the same hardware as the home systems for the most part (plus a hard drive here and there).

Tempest

[goatdan]

Tempest said:

Quote

Truly, the Sega Dreamcast was the 1st machine to me that made this cut. Hell, the Sega Crazy Taxi is better than the arcade version, graphically speaking!

It didn't help that by the time the DC came out arcade machines were running on the same hardware as the home systems for the most part (plus a hard drive here and there).

It also didn't help that a new Sega arcade game usually costed at least $15,000 - $25,000 during this time. Sure, they made great games but they weren't that good, especially when Sega would port them a few months after their arcade releases anyway.

[EricBall]

I have to first say that I haven't spent much time in arcades recently. The one at the local mall closed a year or two ago, and I buy my movies on DVD rather than renting a seat at the theater. But when I do stumble across an arcade I try to at least wander around and see whats new.

And, frankly, there is very little which is new. A huge percentage of the games which I see are similar in concept to those I've seen in previous years.

In my mind, the main reason that arcades have stagnated is (believe it or not) 3-D graphics. The problem with 3-D graphics is it is very difficult for the game to stray very far from reality. 2-D graphics could be used to create games which had no basis in reality, but 3-D graphics almost require it.

There are also the economic chicken & egg / catch-22 issues. Since people aren't pumping quarters into arcade machines (like the 4 suits I remember putting probably $20 each into Gauntlet one lunch hour), arcade owners don't have $$ to risk on new machines, especially unique ones. This then means manufacturers only develop machines which retreat proven formulas. People stop playing arcade machines because they can play the same thing on their PC. Arcade owners raise prices on all machines, again driving customers away.

There are still some games and venues which seem to pull in the players and quarters. The Golden Tee golf series does well at bars, and is probably helped by it's distributed leaderboard concept. Theaters and other entertainment venues usually have a few games for people to waste time while waiting.

But I just can't see arcades being as big as they once were. Maybe a retro arcade with classic games would pull in people. But they have to pull out of the economic death spiral they are in now.

[tyranthraxus]

I think that with the CV and 5200 decent home versions started cropping
up. Ms Pac on the 52 is pretty sweet, especially considering its 1983.
The NES started bringing home some of the more graphically challenging
games but still had its share of dissapointments (Double Dragon for me).
But what the NES did better than any previous console was have quality
games that weren't arcade games but seemed like the could be. Mario &
Castlevania for me seemed arcade quality. And that started my own loss
of interest in arcades.

I don't believe a retro arcade would be very profitable unless you had
a lot of side business like say selling pizza or something. You need to
attract the teenage-college age crowd. They might dig a few of the oldies
but if they are only willing to pay 25 cents each how busy do you need
to be to break even? You need some of the deluxe games and maybe
a laser tag area. Those always seem the busiest at the arcades I visit.

Personally if I was investing I would set up a bar-pizza-retrocade by a
movie theatre or a street with alot of clubs & bars or restaurants. You'd
want a location with some night life. Few people head out to the arcade
anymore but there lots of people who might stop in & waste a few bucks
while waiting for a movie or dinner reservations. The beer & pizza will
haul in the others. Put cup holders on your arcade games and then
you might have a business Call it Big Al's Barcade

[ubersaurus]

goatdan said:

The death of arcades has been brought about not by the games or the patrons or better home consoles or anything like that.

It has been brought about by the arcades themselves.

Arcades have barely changed at all since the early 1980's.  Games that require specialized controllers and stuff like that still do well because they are stuff you can't play at home, but arcade owners keep going out and spending $10,000+ on the new 3D fighting game that is ported to a home system within a few months and not too popular immediately following that.

Instead of getting games that people can't play at home, like your pinball games and DDR games and so on, arcades have been saying, "Pinball costs too much to maintain.  A new steering wheel costs ten times that of a joystick.  We can make more money if we get a simpler game."  I've probably spent $100.00 in arcades over the past two years, and about 95% of that was on specialized games like pinball and so on.  Arcade owners haven't caught on.

Arcade owners keep saying, "We need another game like ____ that will revitalize the industry!" but they don't realize that they have passed up countless games like that for the cheap fighters over the past few years.  The closest arcade to me that owned a Rush 2049 had people playing it nearly non-stop.  That same arcade is filled with unique games like skiing and skateboarding and shooting and pinball (an a couple classics), and it is constantly busy no matter when I go in.

The other arcade around town hasn't got anything new for two years because the owner feels that the new games are too expensive and complicated.  I've been there where I'm the only person in the entire store.  The owners need a new way to run their stores, and if they do that the profits will follow.

I was going to say the same thing, but you beat me to it Oddly enough, the arcade around here that does the best doesn't have much in way of gimmick games..it has a racing game, two lightgun games, and a mixture of puzzlers, new fighters, and an ultracade. And between the Ultracade, Puzzle Fighter, and new fighters like CvS2, Samurai Shodown V, and Marvel vs Capcom 2, they've done pretty good business. If it wasn't 40 minutes away from me, I would probably go there every damn day.

[Megamaniac]

What's funny is when was 17 I could not imagine 2 things...NOT going into arcades to play games and NOT playing my Atari 2600. Well, fast forward a number of years and I still play my Atari but damn if I play arcade games. I occassionally walk thru...but I reach for a quarter only if I spot some aging clasic hiding in the corner!