Topic: Revolution in

[wandering]

Eh- the only thing that matters is the holidays. All Revolution launching last means is that it'll be the freshest, latest greatest thing on people's minds when they're doing their holiday shopping.

With that said - there's no gaurantee that the REV will launch last. Remember that it could still launch in summer (July  and August are summer months, you know) and the PS3 could still launch later (there's actually a rumor that it'll be delayed into 2007).

Quote
Originally posted by: IaSane
They got REAL lucky with the DS and they absolutely cannot think the same thing could happen with the Rev because it won't.

See, now, I think the only reason you say that is because you aren't satisfied with the DS personally. I don't see the Ds's success luck - I see it as Nintendo looking at Sony's strategy with the PSP, and coming up with a good strategy to counter, and having that strategy work. An expensive, unproven new gaming system doesn't get phenominal sales just because of blind luck.  

[Caillan]

Quote
See, now, I think the only reason you say that is because you aren't satisfied with the DS personally.

I think he's saying that because even though Sony screwed up, they now have a portion of the handheld market which they didn't before. A portion which Nintendo has lost. The DS is currently strong but it spent a long period with nothing and Sony could have been hitting hard then instead of screwing around with UMD. Nintendo will not be launching the Revolution early, as they have with the DS. We know they're on the back foot because they previously said that they'd be the first to launch, but that's gone out the window now. Of course this means they cannot have a 6-month period without any really good releases. Even if the PS3 ends up launching later, the 360 will still be almost a year ahead.

He didn't say that because he isn't satisfied with the DS personally, he said it because the DS did not have a good launch. And because the Revolution needs one.  

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: Caillan

I think he's saying that because even though Sony screwed up, they now have a portion of the handheld market which they didn't before. A portion which Nintendo has lost.

I don't know, but when you control 90% of the portable market, there's no where to go but down.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[NotSoStu]

Let's face it: The DS launch was extremely weak. I'd rather wait for quality games then have crap right now. (I'm looking at you, EA!)

That said, the casual gamer market just doesn't give a scheisse about Nintendo anymore. Nintendo needs to show everybody that this controller is worth waiting for. And they've done a very bad job of it so far. They've only shown demos of it in use to a select portion of the media. Even I - Somebody who has never owned a console not made by Nintendo - am considering buying an X360 (If PD0 is any good).

It's just a really bad situation that Nintendo is in. And they need to get out of it. How? Simple. Prove to everybody that this controller will not be a "g-i-m-m-i-c-k" (to quote PSP fanboys), but something amazing. Something that'll make you wonder how you ever lived without it. And the best way to do that would be to make tech demos for the public to watch. Hell, I'd be happy just watching Metroid Prime Echoes be played with the controller, frankly.  

[Ian Sane]

"I don't see the Ds's success luck - I see it as Nintendo looking at Sony's strategy with the PSP, and coming up with a good strategy to counter, and having that strategy work. "

What strategy was this?  Having only a PORT as the sole first party launch game?  Having less games several months in than the PSP had AT LAUNCH?  The first six months or so of the DS were the absolute SH!TS.  Easily the worst six months for a new Nintendo system ever with the exception of the Virtual Boy.  That's not a strategy, that's a fluke.  They have since deserved their lead but those first six months were scary.  That "strategy" would never work for the Rev.  They're on thin ice in the console market and can't afford to have a weak launch or to have games people have to "get" in order to like.  There has to be no excuses or apologies.  It has to seem almost perfect.

It's doable if they've had something really special planned for the remote from the get-go.  If it's a "real" idea and not just some last minute "we need to be innovative, think of something" idea then they should be fine.

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: Stu L Tissimus
Let's face it: The DS launch was extremely weak. I'd rather wait for quality games then have crap right now. (I'm looking at you, EA!)

That said, the casual gamer market just doesn't give a scheisse about Nintendo anymore. Nintendo needs to show everybody that this controller is worth waiting for. And they've done a very bad job of it so far. They've only shown demos of it in use to a select portion of the media. Even I - Somebody who has never owned a console not made by Nintendo - am considering buying an X360 (If PD0 is any good).

It's just a really bad situation that Nintendo is in. And they need to get out of it. How? Simple. Prove to everybody that this controller will not be a "g-i-m-m-i-c-k" (to quote PSP fanboys), but something amazing. Something that'll make you wonder how you ever lived without it. And the best way to do that would be to make tech demos for the public to watch. Hell, I'd be happy just watching Metroid Prime Echoes be played with the controller, frankly.

The real pickle is...

What if, in order to convince people that the Controller was really something that was a must-have, they needed more development time and launched late so they were really solid when they came on the scene?

Put another way, what if the DS launched after the PSP, but with a better line-up? Or what if Nintendo had delayed the DS an entire year, launching it an entire year after the PSP with Mario KartS?

This issue  doesn't have stable ground to determine where the optimum point is between early launch vs. solid launch. The Saturn and Dreamcast launched early and failed. The PSX launched a year or more before the N64 and had horrible games for two years, but it succeeded. The DS launched early with a weak line-up but the sense is that it is holding it's own versus the PSP rather admirably.

Heck, maybe this whole "launch obsession" is a moot point. It's follow-through that matters. The GC had a drought, the N64 had no third parties. Sega just fell flat on its face. The PSP is sort of faltering now not because of anything to do with its launch, but because Sony's idea of follow-through is to compete head-to-head with ipod video and concentrate more on media than on games.

Maybe launch, important as it is, simply pales in comparison to what comes after the launch: sustainability?

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Artimus]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
What strategy was this?  Having only a PORT as the sole first party launch game?  Having less games several months in than the PSP had AT LAUNCH?  The first six months or so of the DS were the absolute SH!TS.  Easily the worst six months for a new Nintendo system ever with the exception of the Virtual Boy.  That's not a strategy, that's a fluke.  They have since deserved their lead but those first six months were scary.  That "strategy" would never work for the Rev.  They're on thin ice in the console market and can't afford to have a weak launch or to have games people have to "get" in order to like.  There has to be no excuses or apologies.  It has to seem almost perfect.

Wrong. If there was no PSP the DS would've launched in June like the GBA had with Kirby and Meteos as well as the previously released games. The strategy was releasing it before those games were ready to counter-act the PSP. And it DID work. The system outsold the PSP in both Japan and North America and has continued to do so. Did it fall behind a bit in the winter? Yes. But it's come back, and that early launch has helped it basically win Japan.

You say they made a mistake and let Sony take the handheld market. You really think if Nintendo had waited to launch the DS in June the PSP would have sold worse? Surely not. They cannot just make games be done, it wasn't a choice not to finish more games for the DS launch. It wasn't like "Oh we could but who cares?" It wasn't a matter of money or effort. The choice was to launch with fewer games ahead of the PSP or more games after. They chose fewer and earlier, and it's worked. Plain and simple.

EDIT: I should've read Kairon's post before making this one. But 'our' point still stands!

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

What sorta worked for PS2, sorta worked for DS.

[Ian Sane]

"What sorta worked for PS2, sorta worked for DS."

By the time the Cube and Xbox came out the PS2 had major games like Gran Turismo 3, Devil May Cry and Metal Gear Solid 2 (and of course GTA3 though no one really knew how big of a hit that would end up being).  So yeah they launched earlier but they had some really major titles released in time to combat the competition and they had more games released than both consoles combined.  The DS had less games in total than the whole PSP launch and they didn't have any of their killer games released by then.  They basically had the same crummy launch lineup and WarioWare Touched.  That's not even close to the PS2 lineup in late 2001.  It was a fluke.  They should have got creamed but didn't because Sony overcharged and concentrated too much on movies.  Maybe launching early was their strategy but the execution of it was HORRIBLE and they would be murdered if they did something like that with the Rev.

Plus it's so obvious that there was initially no plans from NCL for the DS to launch in North America in 2004 because the lineup was absolutely horrible.  NOA rushed the thing to release to get it out for Christmas.  The "strategy" was more of a backpeddle to compensate for NCL living in a box and completely ignoring North America in their plans.

[Hostile Creation]

Ian, the DS wasn't spectacular to start because it didn't need to be.  They needed to focus on fighting the PSP in Japan, not in the states where it wasn't even out yet.  DS was selling well without anything other than a port.  Now they have tons of quality games out and will continue to be several steps ahead of the PSP.  No reason to complain, it wasn't a fluke that DS succeeded.  It was cool enough on its own to sell.  Lots of gamers really loved the mini-games on Mario (I know my mother has played that more than any other game I've gotten, Meteos and such are too intense for her).  DS has succeeded and that's all there is to it.  Has-beens are irrelevant, because what has happened won't change.

[Artimus]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"What sorta worked for PS2, sorta worked for DS."

By the time the Cube and Xbox came out the PS2 had major games like Gran Turismo 3, Devil May Cry and Metal Gear Solid 2 (and of course GTA3 though no one really knew how big of a hit that would end up being).  So yeah they launched earlier but they had some really major titles released in time to combat the competition and they had more games released than both consoles combined.  The DS had less games in total than the whole PSP launch and they didn't have any of their killer games released by then.  They basically had the same crummy launch lineup and WarioWare Touched.  That's not even close to the PS2 lineup in late 2001.  It was a fluke.  They should have got creamed but didn't because Sony overcharged and concentrated too much on movies.  Maybe launching early was their strategy but the execution of it was HORRIBLE and they would be murdered if they did something like that with the Rev.

Plus it's so obvious that there was initially no plans from NCL for the DS to launch in North America in 2004 because the lineup was absolutely horrible.  NOA rushed the thing to release to get it out for Christmas.  The "strategy" was more of a backpeddle to compensate for NCL living in a box and completely ignoring North America in their plans.

Hardly...Those games were developed in Japanese and had to be converted to English. You act as if NCL has some evil ahtred of making customers happy and does all they could. The DS game were not all ready for the launch time chosen. But they chose it to counter-act the PSP and it WORKED. The DS is ahead and shows no signs of stopping. You cnanot deny this. Yet you insist on saying it was a fluke, when what happened is exactly what they attempted to make happen.

[Ian Sane]

"Yet you insist on saying it was a fluke, when what happened is exactly what they attempted to make happen."

Just because the end result was the same doesn't mean it was a good plan.  Sometimes sh!tty plans work out due to good luck just like how sometimes great plans fail because of bad luck.

Regardless of what was planned and what wasn't and whether or not it worked the DS launch "strategy" WILL NOT work for the Rev.  No way could a last place console succeed with a sh!tty launch followed by a big game drought.  So it's important that Nintendo knows that and doesn't think they can do the same thing and have it work.

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"Yet you insist on saying it was a fluke, when what happened is exactly what they attempted to make happen."

Just because the end result was the same doesn't mean it was a good plan.  Sometimes sh!tty plans work out due to good luck just like how sometimes great plans fail because of bad luck.

Regardless of what was planned and what wasn't and whether or not it worked the DS launch "strategy" WILL NOT work for the Rev.  No way could a last place console succeed with a sh!tty launch followed by a big game drought.  So it's important that Nintendo knows that and doesn't think they can do the same thing and have it work.

But what if they could launch the Rev 3-6 months before the PS3? Would that make up for a less-quality line-up or is a weak line-up a bad idea anyway you slice it? I mean, the PSX had an immensely weak line-up until sometime around the N64 came out.

ANYWAYS, this is all really moot. I doubt anyone believes that Nintendo will willingly compromise their line-up with the REV to beat Sony to the market. And I also doubt that Nintendo can make killer apps appear out of thin air with a wave of their *ahem* magic wand.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Artimus]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"Yet you insist on saying it was a fluke, when what happened is exactly what they attempted to make happen."

Just because the end result was the same doesn't mean it was a good plan.  Sometimes sh!tty plans work out due to good luck just like how sometimes great plans fail because of bad luck.

Regardless of what was planned and what wasn't and whether or not it worked the DS launch "strategy" WILL NOT work for the Rev.  No way could a last place console succeed with a sh!tty launch followed by a big game drought.  So it's important that Nintendo knows that and doesn't think they can do the same thing and have it work.

...you make no sense?

They had two options and the one they went with worked! Do you think the other option would've worked better? Their plan worked, that's all there is to it.

And why on earth would you assume that's what they're doing with the Rev!? This enitre thread is devoted to the fact they'll be launching next summer or later. If they were repeating the same mistake they'd be launching before Sony did regardless of games. There is no indication of this.

[Avinash_Tyagi]

Well as far as the DS vs. PSP goes, the DS launching first was necessary, whether or not it had a great lineup, because Nintendo was defending its own territory, it needed to take as much wind out of the PSP as early as possible,  the DS was also able to sell on name and GBA backlibrary, so launching even with a bad lineup was the right choice, and now its looking more and more likely that the PSP will end up as a movie player with gaming capabilities at best and at worst get phased out entirely by devices like the Ipod video, but its very unlikely it'll be able to take the handheld gaming crown from Nintendo (its cost to develop and its game sales are eventually going to result in more and more devs abandoning it).

[wandering]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
The first six months or so of the DS were the absolute SH!TS.  Easily the worst six months for a new Nintendo system ever with the exception of the Virtual Boy.

I completley disagree with this statement.

....VB Mario Tennis was way better than any of the DS's launch games.

Quote
Just because the end result was the same doesn't mean it was a good plan.  Sometimes sh!tty plans work out due to good luck just like how sometimes great plans fail because of bad luck.

I think saying the DS got lucky is like looking at a man who, upon checking the weather and seeing a sunny forcast, and looking outside and seeing nary a cloud in the sky, decides to go to work without an umbrella... and saying " he just got lucky and missed getting wet by a fluke".

With that said, I actually agree with you that Nintendo needs to a much better job with the Revolution, because the compeition is steeper. And I agree that having a good launch line-up would be very good idea.

...although, perhaps, not entirely necessary... because, on the other other hand, history has shown that having a good launch lineup is not strictly necessary for success. As other people have pointed out, both the PS2 and the DS had mediocre launch lineups and both succeeded entirely on strength of concept.

Regardless, Nintendo is probably in better position to have a slam-dunk launch with the REV because, unlike the DS, which was rushed, Nintendo's been preparing for the REV for a long time. So I'm not really worried.

Quote
They should have got creamed but didn't because Sony overcharged and concentrated too much on movies.

...Sony did the same thing with the PS2....

Quote
Maybe launching early was their strategy but the execution of it was HORRIBLE and they would be murdered if they did something like that with the Rev.

I disagree. Somewhat mediocre launch lineup aside, they did a boatload of things right: from executing off a killer advertising campaingn, to getting lots of demo units in stores, to beautifying the system after it's initial showing, to getting good third party support from the very beginning, etc.