Independent Amico Discussion Thread

[+Swami]

10 minutes ago, mr_me said:

No, not around it but across it.  No different than any dpad.  If you go around you'll hit other directions you don't want. 

Okay. Thanks for the clarification. I just got the Intellivision and jzintv going a few months ago. It’s odd that people say it’s not like a dpad, because that how I use a dpad, just sliding my thumb around on it, except for four way games where I have to lift my finger off to change direction so I don’t hit the diagonals.

[MrBeefy]

2 hours ago, mr_me said:

Some parents are very busy and overworked.  One less thing to worry about will help.

What is going on in your kids life is hardly that 'one less thing'.

[bojay1997]

10 minutes ago, MrBeefy said:

What is going on in your kids life is hardly that 'one less thing'.

Exactly, as a parent myself, I find the whole idea that I shouldn't be aware of what my kids are doing and should rely on a company to do it for me to be silly.  Sure, having a walled garden adds a little bit of additional assurance, but I don't know any parents in my immediate circle that would rely on an outside company to make choices about what is or isn't appropriate for consumption by their children.  I mean, I'm frankly more concerned about violence than sex even though I think the research is clear that violent video games don't lead to real world violence or bad outcomes in adulthood and may actually have the opposite effect.  

[mr_me]

I suppose it's possible more parental controls could help you more understand what's going on in your kids lives but not necessarily.  How about, get an Amico spend less time in admin and more time playing with your kids.

[NinjaWarrior]

I wish I could just come down to L.A

 

Would love to play the Amico

 

I'm all the way up in Citrus Heights 

[Tavi]

3 hours ago, JeffVav said:

I still feel the parental control concern is a red herring. Parental controls restrict mature content once it's found its way on the machine. A credit card restricts it from getting onto the machine. 
 

The only people who'd need to worry about parental controls are mature gamers who share the machine, not game-illiterate parents buying a machine solely to entertain the kids. 

You are skipping over one feature of parental control that I suspect will be very practical and of interest to some parents, the ability to limit play time on the console.

While TV and gaming is almost expected to entertain children in lieu of parenting attention, the ability to set limits like 'Only X amount of hours a day' or 'Console turns off after 9PM' can be a useful feature to help make sure the kid(s) also spends time doing their homework, chores, eating, attending to personal hygiene (bathing, brushing teeth), and the like.

Some young kids (Heck, some adults do at that) lack an ability to self regulate time between work and play. Given the choice I imagine many would rather spend the entire day playing games and doing nothing else.

[AtariSociety]

48 minutes ago, NinjaWarrior said:

I wish I could just come down to L.A

 

Would love to play the Amico

 

I'm all the way up in Citrus Heights 

How about the SF office.  Closer to you.

 

TJ

 

[MrBeefy]

4 hours ago, JeffVav said:

Can I just say that my wife, currently in the middle of replaying Witcher 3, was quite offended to learn that "moms" was being used as the placeholder term for the archetype of tech/game-illiterate parent?

I pointed/joked about that in one of the threads that we are suggesting women can't game because they can't comprehend or handle all the buttons lol.

[MrBeefy]

1 hour ago, mr_me said:

I suppose it's possible more parental controls could help you more understand what's going on in your kids lives but not necessarily.  How about, get an Amico spend less time in admin and more time playing with your kids.

You could skip the Amico and still play more/spend more time with your kids.

 

People act like parental controls are a job. Parenting IS the job.

 

If you spend more time admin than with your kids you are doing something wrong. If you need a video game console to parent for you, you are doing something wrong. 

 

Amico, I am sure will be a great way to spend family time together. So will reading books, going outside, playing cards, fixing stuff, etc. etc. Point is while nothing wrong with the E to E10+ rating and it will be great to have a family friendly option, it is not the savior of parenting. So I wish people wouldn't act like it is (not saying you are specifically). On the flip side I don't like hearing complaints about the rating of the games either because there have been TONS of great games that have been in that rating range.

[1001lives]

I think the whole discussion is more about how EVERYTHING on the system will be E to E10+ rated, which is what keeps it in the safe zone, so parents don't even have to think about it. Similarly to how parents don't have to worry about bringing their children to Disney.

[MrBeefy]

1 hour ago, Tavi said:

You are skipping over one feature of parental control that I suspect will be very practical and of interest to some parents, the ability to limit play time on the console.

While TV and gaming is almost expected to entertain children in lieu of parenting attention, the ability to set limits like 'Only X amount of hours a day' or 'Console turns off after 9PM' can be a useful feature to help make sure the kid(s) also spends time doing their homework, chores, eating, attending to personal hygiene (bathing, brushing teeth), and the like.

Some young kids (Heck, some adults do at that) lack an ability to self regulate time between work and play. Given the choice I imagine many would rather spend the entire day playing games and doing nothing else.

That is a neat idea. For those of you who have kids try an experiment tonight and tomorrow. Pull the power cord out of your kids console at the time you want them to be done playing. Don't put it back in until the next day after they've done their chores and homework. (Hopefully you shouldn't need to do that, but hey doesn't require more than simply unplugging.) 🤷‍♂️

 

Also who thinks the kids aren't going to find a way to deactivate that? 😋

[MrBeefy]

4 minutes ago, 1001lives said:

I think the whole discussion is more about how EVERYTHING on the system will be E to E10+ rated, which is what keeps it in the safe zone, so parents don't even have to think about it. Similarly to how parents don't have to worry about bringing their children to Disney.

You saying there is not one creepy person at Disney? Are you saying I should feel safe leaving my young child alone at Disney? I won't keep going and don't worry about answering I get what you are trying to say. BUT once again the point is you still have to parent when you go to Disney. 😝

[fiudr]

15 hours ago, SegaSnatcher said:

I'm being serious when I ask this, but have you considered selling on the QVC channel?  That seems like a great place to get the interest of the Moms out there.

QVC is a great idea and would certainly find the right target audience. But, be warned - QVC reviews can be brutal! I've bought a few things from them for gifts over the years, and by reading the reviews, it's clear that people are not very forgiving with issues. Lots of pretty brutal reviews for products, and not all of them are merited (some certainly are) - some just don't understand how to use the product. And as regular customers they have no issues expecting refunds if the item isn't exactly what they envisioned.

 

But I imagine QVC would certainly do lots of "selling" since that's what they do - they can hype up anything.

 

 

[fiudr]

8 hours ago, ColecoJoe said:

A guide is there to guide but it's not necessarily needed. You go to system, click on parental controls and then it asks you to download the app from where you select the various options available to you. Most of us don't need manuals for things but we sometimes do or we sometimes like to read them to see if there's anything we missed. Nothing wrong with having a guide

 

 

I don't know your age but many VCRs back in the day had a flashing --:-- in the display at all times because the owners couldn't take the time to figure out how to set the clock, even though it was usually a simple process that took 30 seconds and was easily explained in the manual. People are bad at figuring out tech, regardless of how easy it is. Smart phones seem to be the exception but most people only know how to go the play store and click install, they have no idea how to go to Android settings and enable/disable anything.

 

 

[+Swami]

53 minutes ago, MrBeefy said:

That is a neat idea. For those of you who have kids try an experiment tonight and tomorrow. Pull the power cord out of your kids console at the time you want them to be done playing. Don't put it back in until the next day after they've done their chores and homework. (Hopefully you shouldn't need to do that, but hey doesn't require more than simply unplugging.) 🤷‍♂️

 

Also who thinks the kids aren't going to find a way to deactivate that? 😋

I found these interesting articles. I think it partially describes parents who want the violent games to be an impossibility, at least for the console. There are also the authoritative or warm parents who simply don't want to support a console that plays games above E10+, probably for the two reasons we cannot talk about here. I'm not a parent, but I'm interested in seeing what's outside the  forum about it. I see all sorts of weird things and don't know what to think. I saw an 8 year old boy kick his grandmother from watching power rangers, for instance. I've also had several friends who say: if I don't let [my 12 year old son, etc.] play GTA5, he's just going to do it at his friends house...

 

I also know regarding clinically anxious people, not being anxious is not an easy thing. I'm not even sure it's possible for some people. It's not like there's a sterilization program for people with highly functional personality disorders. I can't say I can say something is a black and white answer. I wouldn't say the Amico is saying it is the final answer, either.

 

https://www.scarymommy.com/why-i-let-my-kids-play-violent-video-games/

 

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151007125742.htm

 

[fiudr]

There's one point I have not yet seen anybody mention yet. My girlfriend and I were discussing this the other night when we were talking about the Amico.

 

Tommy regularly mentions the 6% gamers/93% non-gamers statistics - that the vast majority of people play games on their phones, but don't own systems. And that this must mean that the 93% that don't own systems are therefore likely to be interested in a simpler/cheaper system for gaming. But one thing that doesn't get mentioned is that a very large portion of the people playing games on their phones are likely doing it only because it's convenient, free, and available on a device that is already in their pockets anyways. Most people own smartphones these days that are capable of playing games. My $100 ($60 at Christmas) Samsung Tracfone plays lots of games pretty decently, and the Amazon fire HD tablets handle games well and are around $100-$150 usually. People own phones out of modern necessity to do other things (text/communicate/buy tickets/look stuff up, scan items in stores for price checkups, track their daily schedules, work, watch videos, listen to music, and a thousand other activities).

 

They game on them too, because it's convenient. Not that they have some huge desire to game. They play games on their phones because it's a great way to kill 20-30 minutes while waiting in the doctor's office, or while standing in line in Wal-Mart, or while waiting outside, or killing the last half of their break at work, or a hundred other things that require you to basically sit there and do nothing waiting. So firing up a quick time-killer on the phone makes it better.

 

That doesn't mean these same people have the time to come home and sit in front of the TV at night after work or during their busy weekends and make gaming something they will be focusing on for the next hour or two. Nor does it mean they have the desire to spend $200+ to buy into a system to play games. Most of the games people play on their phones are the free versions, either ad-supported so it's free, or they play the first few levels that are free, then when you need to pay to unlock the full game, they move onto another free game. My girlfriend never pays for phone games, yet she is always playing something on her phone because they're just the free versions, which is good enough for her.

 

So I think the reasoning is flawed that just because everyone plays time-killing games on their phone must mean they would buy into a new gaming system just because it offers similar-style gaming. I think that's a stretch.

 

I am hoping this system does very well for itself. I'm definitely very interested. But just because the average non-gamer kills 20 minutes on their phone a day gaming on their break at work to amuse themselves (and not have to look up and interact with co-workers), doesn't mean they like gaming enough to come home and make an evening out of it on a new system. My girlfriend's mom plays games on her tablet on the couch, and I can guarantee she has zero interest in playing games on her TV. People have very busy schedules these days. That 20 minutes a day of gaming on their phones is likely the only time all week they have to do something fun.

 

 

 

[fiudr]

1 hour ago, MrBeefy said:

You saying there is not one creepy person at Disney? Are you saying I should feel safe leaving my young child alone at Disney? I won't keep going and don't worry about answering I get what you are trying to say. BUT once again the point is you still have to parent when you go to Disney. 😝

That's not what he said. He meant the entertainment Disney offers is family-safe. He obviously was not referring to the safety of being left alone around strangers.

 

[MrBeefy]

Like everything its a blend. When you look at social psychology studies on the BoBo doll there are learned behaviors and mimicking. It mainly comes down to parenting. Are you talking to the kids about what they are playing? Do they know that's not how life works? If you watch a movie that has a graphic scene do you talk about it? I hated the Netflix show 13 reasons why. It glorified suicide and if a parent didn't watch it with them and discuss it, it could make things worse for a teen contemplating such things.

 

There is no you play call of duty therefore you are going to shoot something up or whatever. It is usually a blend of things. Hell you could even parent 100% and still have problems with your children. BUT the more you are involved the less chances you are going to have in problems or easier to learn from them or help them when they need it.

 

You would be surprised as to how many teens would rather talk to a stranger than their parents about what is going on in their life. I'm sure I sound authoritarian with the power cord comments but it really takes a blend of listening compromises, and knowing when this is what you are doing amd why. Things break down when things are usually too extreme or too lax.

 

That is why saying Amico is the answer or Switch is the video game devil just aren't accurate. And that isn't a knock on Amico or that Switch is better. It just is not the black and white that sometimes is pushed.

[MrBeefy]

3 minutes ago, fiudr said:

There's one point I have not yet seen anybody mention yet. My girlfriend and I were discussing this the other night when we were talking about the Amico.

 

Tommy regularly mentions the 6% gamers/93% non-gamers statistics - that the vast majority of people play games on their phones, but don't own systems. And that this must mean that the 93% that don't own systems are therefore likely to be interested in a simpler/cheaper system for gaming. But one thing that doesn't get mentioned is that a very large portion of the people playing games on their phones are likely doing it only because it's convenient, free, and available on a device that is already in their pockets anyways. Most people own smartphones these days that are capable of playing games. My $100 ($60 at Christmas) Samsung Tracfone plays lots of games pretty decently, and the Amazon fire HD tablets handle games well and are around $100-$150 usually. People own phones out of modern necessity to do other things (text/communicate/buy tickets/look stuff up, scan items in stores for price checkups, track their daily schedules, work, watch videos, listen to music, and a thousand other activities).

 

They game on them too, because it's convenient. Not that they have some huge desire to game. They play games on their phones because it's a great way to kill 20-30 minutes while waiting in the doctor's office, or while standing in line in Wal-Mart, or while waiting outside, or killing the last half of their break at work, or a hundred other things that require you to basically sit there and do nothing waiting. So firing up a quick time-killer on the phone makes it better.

 

That doesn't mean these same people have the time to come home and sit in front of the TV at night after work or during their busy weekends and make gaming something they will be focusing on for the next hour or two. Nor does it mean they have the desire to spend $200+ to buy into a system to play games. Most of the games people play on their phones are the free versions, either ad-supported so it's free, or they play the first few levels that are free, then when you need to pay to unlock the full game, they move onto another free game. My girlfriend never pays for phone games, yet she is always playing something on her phone because they're just the free versions, which is good enough for her.

 

So I think the reasoning is flawed that just because everyone plays time-killing games on their phone must mean they would buy into a new gaming system just because it offers similar-style gaming. I think that's a stretch.

 

I am hoping this system does very well for itself. I'm definitely very interested. But just because the average non-gamer kills 20 minutes on their phone a day gaming on their break at work to amuse themselves (and not have to look up and interact with co-workers), doesn't mean they like gaming enough to come home and make an evening out of it on a new system. My girlfriend's mom plays games on her tablet on the couch, and I can guarantee she has zero interest in playing games on her TV. People have very busy schedules these days. That 20 minutes a day of gaming on their phones is likely the only time all week they have to do something fun.

I think there are two issues here. I've wondered how well a non-mobile system for a crowd who play mobile would fare due to that convenience or lack there of. 

 

Then as far as the time thing goes In will say having more arcade like games would help with the time issue. As i get older i find it much easier to play an arcade like game. I use to be a huge Rpg mark, but i have a hard time with follow through due to time issues. It looks like Amico is going more arcade route experiences and that will help with time crunched schedules.

[fiudr]

25 minutes ago, MrBeefy said:

I think there are two issues here. I've wondered how well a non-mobile system for a crowd who play mobile would fare due to that convenience or lack there of. 

 

Then as far as the time thing goes In will say having more arcade like games would help with the time issue. As i get older i find it much easier to play an arcade like game. I use to be a huge Rpg mark, but i have a hard time with follow through due to time issues. It looks like Amico is going more arcade route experiences and that will help with time crunched schedules.

I definitely think the "arcade-style"/party-game style games will help a lot, because as you said, as people get older, things get more hectic and it's harder and harder to get into long campaigns. It's hard enough to even follow new seasons of my favorite shows because that's a time commitment. Short jump-in/jump-out games like phone games make it easy to have a little fun without a big time commitment.

I just wonder if the market is there to buy into a new system just because they use their phone games as a time-killer.

Will there be a desire to buy into a $200+ system to play those kinds of games on a TV (thus hogging the TV so nobody else can use it) when they can play that style of game for free on their phones? Yes they're unique to the Amico, but will non-gamers care enough to spend money on a system to play them?

 

 

Edited February 11, 2020 by fiudr

[+Swami]

13 minutes ago, fiudr said:

I definitely think the "arcade-style"/party-game style games will help a lot, because as you said, as people get older, things get more hectic and it's harder and harder to get into long campaigns. It's hard enough to even follow new seasons of my favorite shows because that's a time commitment. Short jump-in/jump-out games like phone games make it easy to have a little fun without a big time commitment.

I just wonder if the market is there to buy into a new system just because they use their phone games as a time-killer.

Will there be a desire to buy into a $200+ system to play those kinds of games on a TV (thus hogging the TV so nobody else can use it) when they can play that style of game for free on their phones? Yes they're unique to the Amico, but will non-gamers care enough to spend money on a system to play them?

 

 

I assume the idea is to tug them in that direction by making the experience as adjacent as possible to what they enjoy. I don't think you can say 7% of Americans have time to play video games at home and the other 93% don't. I don't think he actually expects to sell 3 billion consoles. Maybe 1% of that and betting on a minimum of 0.1% conversion of them.

[MrBeefy]

14 minutes ago, fiudr said:

I definitely think the "arcade-style"/party-game style games will help a lot, because as you said, as people get older, things get more hectic and it's harder and harder to get into long campaigns. It's hard enough to even follow new seasons of my favorite shows because that's a time commitment. Short jump-in/jump-out games like phone games make it easy to have a little fun without a big time commitment.

I just wonder if the market is there to buy into a new system just because they use their phone games as a time-killer.

 

That was part of the 'discussion' of the 'paywall'. Will the group who are use to dealing with ads and free games willing to pay over $200 to play games without the ads, only at home, with more co-op options?

 

I can see it being a mixed bag. 

[MrBeefy]

35 minutes ago, Swami said:

I assume the idea is to tug them in that direction by making the experience as adjacent as possible to what they enjoy. I don't think you can say 7% of Americans have time to play video games at home and the other 93% don't. I don't think he actually expects to sell 3 billion consoles. Maybe 1% of that and betting on a minimum of 0.1% conversion of them.

I think you're right about the adjacent. Its kind of funny how gaming started with arcade experiences. While you can still find many of those in the indy/casual realm, modern gaming typically doesn't focus on that.

[Tavi]

3 hours ago, MrBeefy said:

That is a neat idea. For those of you who have kids try an experiment tonight and tomorrow. Pull the power cord out of your kids console at the time you want them to be done playing. Don't put it back in until the next day after they've done their chores and homework. (Hopefully you shouldn't need to do that, but hey doesn't require more than simply unplugging.) 🤷‍♂️

 

Also who thinks the kids aren't going to find a way to deactivate that? 😋

I am thinking there are a lot more kids that can figure out how to plug a console cord back into a wall socket then can hack a console password.

Plus, depending on how it is handled, say if they include something like a countdown that pops up occasionally in the corner of the screen 'You have XX minutes of playtime left' it would ease the kid into it and be a little less traumatizing then having someone just shut the console off abruptly and tell you your time is up.

You can always yell, argue and plead with a parent, but it is considerably less effective doing it with a console. I imagine kids understand that so there would be less direct conflict when the programmed time limit is reached.

[mr_me]

3 hours ago, fiudr said:

... But one thing that doesn't get mentioned is that a very large portion of the people playing games on their phones are likely doing it only because it's convenient, free, and available on a device that is already in their pockets anyways. ...

 

2 hours ago, MrBeefy said:

That was part of the 'discussion' of the 'paywall'. Will the group who are use to dealing with ads and free games willing to pay over $200 to play games without the ads, only at home, with more co-op options?

 

I can see it being a mixed bag. 

According to Amico research, more money is spent on mobile games than games for playstation, xbox, switch combined.