Author Topic: What microsoft thinks of the virtual console. (Read 14645 times)

IceCold · « **Reply #25 on:** February 07, 2006, 02:19:52 PM »

As ruby said in another thread; Nintendo doesn't want people to make "new old" games for the download service..

Smash_Brother · « **Reply #26 on:** February 07, 2006, 04:45:55 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: PaleI don't think a 6 man team could make something in 6 months that made me not want to play Smash Bros. Revolution.

One of the most enjoyable games I ever played was the four player PDA "minigame" on the Alien Hominid game disc. They had like a hundred levels of four player puzzle action where all four players had to work their way through increasingly difficult levels.

It was VASTLY more fun than the main game. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a few 6 man games out there like that.

-SB

KDR_11k · « **Reply #27 on:** February 07, 2006, 07:05:27 PM »

Yeah and since they replaced the GC version of AH with an XBox one here I could get only two players since I'd have to buy it for PS2.

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #28 on:** February 07, 2006, 07:43:47 PM »

"hey Moore, your Live Arcade service sucks!"

[Moore] ABSOLUTELY PHENOMENAL.

Talon · « **Reply #29 on:** February 07, 2006, 09:40:27 PM »

I find it interesting that

Quote
Quoted by:J.Allard
We're going to take on... The open-source model, if you will, for gaming."
GamesIndustry.biz

yet its so against the rest of microsofts policies regarding there software (ie Windows)!!

Opening up the live arcade in such a way without the proper quality control measures in place could have a negative impact on the industry let alone the live service. If anyone can put up games whats to stop a malicious attack on the live service hidden inside a game? The only other reservations im having with internet services like live is that developers can take advantage of it to push out games prematurely that can be later patched.

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #30 on:** February 07, 2006, 09:48:18 PM »

Sup DOA4 patch.

animecyberrat · « **Reply #31 on:** February 08, 2006, 10:59:52 AM »

Yeah Sega also has stated that tehy are NOT going to releases thier Genesis etc games for Rerv BECAUISE they are looking into Xbox live arcade and other means of re-realesing them, like that Game Fly ammong other things.

Sega DID however make acouplce games for the SNES also but I forgot which ones they were Ill have to dig that up.

As for Tengen well they hardly matter anyways, they are a subsidiary of Willams/Midway and those are the games MS is defending yet they likely will be available for REV.

and BITE YOUR TONGUE MISTER, Joust, Pac-man AND Gauntlet are STILL top notch HIGH QUALITY GAMES. They even rival many of Nintendos classics, but that doesnt make them suprerior but they are still good enough on thier own. And besides Midways Arcade Treaures is STILL a GC game which is STILL compatible with REV so theres no need to have those games for DL. And we now know Midways is supporting REV. So I pray for the day that MS has to eat thier own words.

Talon · « **Reply #32 on:** February 08, 2006, 03:42:33 PM »

Just think if SEGA-Sammy struck a deal with my post is a train wreck and put all its old retro titles up on LIVE then potentially we could live through the Nintendo-SEGA Battles again!!

Ah the feeling of nostalgia!

Personally I thinkSEGA-Sammy would be stupid not to sell all their old retro titles on both consoles it would be such a big cash cow for them. Although I dont know how much the big N would charge SEGA-Sammy to utilize its virtual console service.

darknight06 · « **Reply #33 on:** February 08, 2006, 04:17:51 PM »

Pac-Man yes, Gauntlet and especially Joust, no.

TheYoungerPlumber · « **Reply #34 on:** February 09, 2006, 01:22:17 AM »

I'm sorry...why would Sega put Sonic 3 on Real Arcade, PC (through DirectX), all three current gen systems, and Gametap, and not consider Nintendo's virtual console? I hardly think Nintendo could take a stance of "either us or MS," and if they did they'd be hurting themselves. I suppose Nintendo may take a bigger cut than MS, but I can't imagine they're making tons off of GameTap either.

wandering · « **Reply #35 on:** February 09, 2006, 03:06:51 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale
Nintendo's 'simple' games should still have significantly more budget and programmer skill behind them than some of the indie games they would get on a service like that. If Nintendo were to be truly worried about these 5 dollar indie games hurting their sales, there is a bigger issue here. The right mentality would be to think that they would be increasing their systems library at a minimal cost to themselves and promoting the industry as a whole. I don't think a 6 man team could make something in 6 months that made me not want to play Smash Bros. Revolution.

well....trouble or no, I think that's the position Nintendo is in right now. There's millions of dollars differnce between the 5$ geometry wars and the 60$ Perfect Dark Zero. But there's much less differnce between the $5 Geometry wars and the $20 Brain Training.

...I don't think Nintendo is ripping anyone off, though, because the unique experiences they're offering and going to be offering through the touch screen and revmote are worth the extra money. But once you open up the possibility of ultra-cheap new virtual console games, suddenly that $50 fishing game doesn't look so hot compared to the $5 one that utlizes the novelty of fishing with the revmote just as well.

Quote
Originally posted by: IanSane
Anytime anyone brings this up I point to Superman 64. Nintendo used to officially "approve" of every game on their systems yet they had no problem letting that turd though. They probably cared during the NES days since they had rules over how many games a third party could release per year. But in recent times it's clear Nintendo will take anything they can get.

Superman 64 is one game among thousands. For a better comparison, look at the recent Charlie and the Chocolate Facory game, and compare it to E.T. for the Atari. Opening up development will create a situation where the majority of games released are crap.. just look at Newgrounds.

Quote
Originally posted by: TheYoungerPlumber
I hardly think Nintendo could take a stance of "either us or MS," and if they did they'd be hurting themselves. I suppose Nintendo may take a bigger cut than MS, but I can't imagine they're making tons off of GameTap either.

Nintendo might not be taking a stance of "either us or them"....but MS might be. And MS has tons of cash, and Nintendo doesn't. And MS is desperate for good games for their download service, and Nintendo isn't.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #36 on:** February 09, 2006, 06:20:10 AM »

"Opening up development will create a situation where the majority of games released are crap"

I agree with that but I don't think anyone is actually suggesting that. What I'm thinking is small devs that don't have publishers releasing games through the download service using the standard third party licencing model Nintendo invented. And I think it would benefit Nintendo to offer lower licencing fees for third parties that exclusively make download games. That allows for the creation of "indie" games but at the same time has some creative control.

And the funny thing about E.T. is that Atari made it so even if third parties had never made anything for the 2600 that game still would have been released. A lot of people point to the open development of third party games as a major factor regarding the videogame crash yet E.T. and the 2600 port of Pac-Man are widely credited as playing a huge part in the crash and both of them were first party titles.

Ages · « **Reply #37 on:** February 09, 2006, 10:59:32 AM »

"..I don't think Nintendo is ripping anyone off, though, because the unique experiences they're offering and going to be offering through the touch screen and revmote are worth the extra money. But once you open up the possibility of ultra-cheap new virtual console games, suddenly that $50 fishing game doesn't look so hot compared to the $5 one that utlizes the novelty of fishing with the revmote just as well"

I'd imagine any studio using the revmote for anything other than pressing buttons would have to go through the rigors of a typical development house. I figure (probably wrongly) that indie developers wouldnt have the resources to fully integrate the revmote into their games. If they did, they would definetely demand more than a mere $5 for their efforts

Smash_Brother · « **Reply #38 on:** February 09, 2006, 11:13:40 AM »

Quote
Superman 64 is one game among thousands. For a better comparison, look at the recent Charlie and the Chocolate Facory game, and compare it to E.T. for the Atari. Opening up development will create a situation where the majority of games released are crap.. just look at Newgrounds.

Since when does quality matter when you have quantity?

I'm sure that roughly 75% of the games on the PS2 are pure and utter garbage, yet saying the PS2 has "X,000" games is persuasive no matter how badly those games suck.

A lot of developers will develop for the console with the most games simply because they see it as the safest financial decision when it comes to developing for only one console.

Nintendo could use that edge...

–SB

JonLeung · « **Reply #39 on:** February 09, 2006, 12:25:10 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother

A lot of developers will develop for the console with the most games simply because they see it as the safest financial decision when it comes to developing for only one console.

Playing devil's advocate here, but doesn't developing for a single console and choosing the one with the most games mean that it will get lost in the flood of all the other games? You could also make the case that by developing for the one with the least games, your title would stand out more and be picked up by a greater percentage of that console's gamers.

If one in twenty people bought a game out of 1000 total users of that console, and one in fifty people bought a game out of 2000 total users, the first case is more sales. 5% of 1000 people (50 sales) is larger than 2% of 2000 people (40 sales).

Smash_Brother · « **Reply #40 on:** February 09, 2006, 01:21:42 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
Playing devil's advocate here, but doesn't developing for a single console and choosing the one with the most games mean that it will get lost in the flood of all the other games? You could also make the case that by developing for the one with the least games, your title would stand out more and be picked up by a greater percentage of that console's gamers.

If one in twenty people bought a game out of 1000 total users of that console, and one in fifty people bought a game out of 2000 total users, the first case is more sales. 5% of 1000 people (50 sales) is larger than 2% of 2000 people (40 sales).

I know what you're saying, but it worked for Sony in obscene ways (almost literally).

The more games, the more people will buy your console because it has more games. The more consoles sold, the more developers will feel safe developing for it. Of course, you have to kickstart one to get the other moving.

I guess I technically have it backwards: developers made games for the PS2 because it had the most consoles sold which in turn gave it the most games, which does dilute the number of games likely to sell (because there are so many out there) but my guess is that, after enough players are out there who have the console, there are enough to "go around", so to speak.

In any case, more games = better for the console, regardless of quality. That's not to say that quality games are unnecessary, but having a plethora of titles available is one more selling point to lure customers to your platform when it comes time to make a choice between you or your competition.

–SB

Ian Sane · « **Reply #41 on:** February 09, 2006, 01:40:38 PM »

"Playing devil's advocate here, but doesn't developing for a single console and choosing the one with the most games mean that it will get lost in the flood of all the other games? You could also make the case that by developing for the one with the least games, your title would stand out more and be picked up by a greater percentage of that console's gamers."

This idea makes tons of sense but third parties rarely use it because they get distracted by the big userbase. One company that does use this strategy is Tecmo. All Team Ninja games were exclusive to the Xbox and it paid off big time. On the Xbox there was no Virtua Fighter or Tekken so DOA stood out as the premier fighting game because there wasn't really anything else. On the PS2 there's Devil May Cry and Shinobi. On the Xbox there is only Ninja Gaiden so it stands out more. Tecmo was also one of the only major Japanese devs on the Xbox so their games sold way better in Japan than anything else. DOA is a major franchise now and it wasn't on the Dreamcast or Playstation 2 because it had competition from other popular fighting games.

Smash_Brother · « **Reply #42 on:** February 09, 2006, 04:27:04 PM »

Indisputable proof that, sometimes, beggars CAN be choosers!

ThePerm · « **Reply #43 on:** February 10, 2006, 05:16:15 AM »

its better to be a big fish in a small pond then an average size fish in an ocean.

Acclaim used to be a decent company, around the n64 era they supported Nintendo hevilly and profited heavily, however towards the end of the generation..they didnt anticipate N64 would come to an end. Following alot o f other devlopers they blamed Nintendo. The next generation came and there were no exclusives from Acclaim. They became a generic multiplatform company. I could argue that if they released Turok 4 eclusively for gamecube they would have had alot more time to work on it(instead of splitting the time between consoles),getting great reviews, and Nintendo fans would have bought it up. It would have sold great and Acclaim wouldnt be out of business(or whatever the hell its doing now that the names been bought).

Revolution is a chance for smaller developers to become big developers by taking advantage of a pond with plenty of food. Even if Nintendo sold only like 8 million consoles. If your game is good the majority of t hose people will buy it.
Multi-console development is an illusion that leads to bankruptcy.

Smash_Brother · « **Reply #44 on:** February 10, 2006, 05:32:46 AM »

Turok Evolution was so bad it defied description. Minute-thirty loading times on the GC?!

As for the discussion, you'd think that developers would notice the trend of multi-console games doing horribly because the development resources are spread across three consoles, but that's seldom what winds up happening. You have the rarities like Prince of Persia (the first one, anyway) and SCII, but you also have Sonic Heroes, Turok Evolution and countless others which go down in flames when the developer tries to push them to three consoles instead of wisely focusing on one.

Don't even get me started about Akklaim, who tried to be the "shock-jock" of the gaming industry with their asshattery time and time again ("Name your baby Turok!", advertise Akklaim on your gravestone, etc.).

I was so glad to see them burn...

Ian Sane · « **Reply #45 on:** February 10, 2006, 06:16:01 AM »

Acclaim is a good example. Midway is pretty similar too. They were a big deal on the N64 so games like the Rush series were big hits. This last gen they went multiplatform and they're a pretty minor dev right now. On the Playstation you have to compete with companies like Square Enix, Capcom, Rockstar and Konami. Those are big names. You have to be the BEST to stick out on the Playstation. On a "smaller" console you just have to be good.

EA is the biggest third party in the world but they actually didn't get where they were from being multiplatform. During the 16-bit days EA favoured the Genesis despite the fact that most devs favoured the SNES. EA stood out more as a result and it helped them become a big name.

King of Twitch · « **Reply #46 on:** February 10, 2006, 09:21:56 AM »

Capcom 5 :: Never forget

JonLeung · « **Reply #47 on:** February 10, 2006, 09:54:08 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: MJRx9000
Capcom 5 :: Never forget

What were those 5 exclusives again?

Resident Evil 4...oh, wait, that's also on the PS2 but with more content and will also be for the PC...
Viewtiful Joe...oh, wait, that's also on the PS2 but with another character...
Killer7...oh, wait, that's also on the PS2...
Dead Phoenix...oh, wait, that's totally dead...
P.N.03... okay, that's exclusive, and while I liked it, it was repetitive and I could see how many people would be less forgiving than I was...

Sheesh. They should've lumped Mega Man: Network Transmission in there. Because at least that was exclusive, as far as I know. Like P.N.03, though, I think my enjoyment of it isn't shared by many.

Capcom's weird that way. I generally like their games, even if they made "Mega Man XZ 9 & Bass: Battle & Power Fighters" and "Super Street Fighter IV Turbo EX: Hyper Fighting Grand Master Challenge Alpha 4 Max Upper (And A Little Higher) Versus SNK Versus Every Comic Character That Ever Existed: Fourth Impact", but I wonder about their ties with Nintendo sometimes.

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #48 on:** February 10, 2006, 12:38:00 PM »

i have 5 out of 6 =D

RE4... better realized on GameCube. (extras don't make up for technical shortcomings which degrade the immersion factor)
VJ... better realized on GameCube. (an extra character that doesn't speak english doesn't make up for technical annoyances on what seems to be a straighforward game, graphics- and sound-wise)
Killer7... better realized on GameCube. (more technical annoyances like VJ/RE, plus it feels nicer on the GC controller)
P.N.03... Love it. Focusing on defensive movements rather than constant, too-common-in-our-industry offense (same reason I stopped caring for fighting games) was refreshing.
Dead Phoenix... what I had the last time I ate at a Chinese restaurant.
Mega Man Network Transmission... THIS GAME FLAT-OUT ROCKS.

nitsu niflheim · « **Reply #49 on:** February 11, 2006, 03:51:00 AM »

I going to say this, Microsoft said that the old Nintendo games don't hold up, then please tell me why so many Japanese buyers bought so many copies of the Famicom Classic games on the GBA? Nintendo took a risk, and it paid off. It will again because of just old NES games on the GBA, a whole multitude of games will be availabel on the REV.

News:

Author Topic: What microsoft thinks of the virtual console. (Read 14645 times)