Post by: Gamebasher on August 20, 2004, 07:28:18 AM
that while there is a number of unmissable must-have games coming for GCN, they are mostly first-party, and second-party releases, and that if you leave out Namco, Capcom and SEGA there is almost no other releases on the Gamecube for the rest of the year.
He continues by saying that this has been the Nintendo situation since the N64 days and he labels it a problem which stems from Nintendo apparently still being stuck in the days of the SNES where is was the undisputed videogame leader.
He feels that Nintendo thinks that developers should feel privileged to develop games for it´s gamemachines, whether it be out of ignorance or arrogance. He has something to back up his claims though, having recently spoken to a major (unnamed) third-party developer who was approached by a Nintendo representative who wanted them to start developing for the Nintendo Revolution. But they scoffed, wanting the rep to give him a reason why! He was given what is probably the lamest reply you could ever give to anybody approaching a developer for support of your gaming platform and that was the end of that. A frighteningly arrogant response, which, if true, wont do them any good. The letter and response can be viewed
Here
You can now judge for yourselves, if you think it has any substance. IGN is the biggest in the Gaming Media, so I would say they know what they talk about, and that it gives reason to worry about the future for thirdparty gamesupport on Nintendo platforms, nomatter how advanced the gameinterface!!
Is Nintendo ignorant or arrogant? Or are they fully aware of the whole situation, and doing nothing about it because they don´t care? Has this anything to do with the many times below-average games, being released by the third-parties, that simply don´t sell on the GCN for lack of ability to compete with the better offerings, from first- and second parties? And, finally, do any of you think that this situation could dramatically affect the entire market in the future, for good or for worse?
If you look at the situation over at the PS2 and XBOX platforms, there is quite a few good games on offer there, but even more junk games than good ones (just take a look at the Reviews and the scores for each of most games!). Is the ratio of good vs. bad games on either of the three platforms the same? And if so is Nintendo doing themselves an ill-favor by allegedly not granting enough support for those third-parties which could fill their gamelibrary with all sorts of games and help attract even more gamers to GCN thus once again creating more attention for Nintendo?
No fanboy rants, please!
I think that even all the fanboys in the world couldn´t save Nintendo, if they are really treating the all-important third-parties this way!
Post by: Deguello on August 20, 2004, 07:45:04 AM
Also The language with which the "Third party head" used is not very appropriate for a CEO or President of a Company, and even if they used that language, that response is totally taken out of context Bill 'O Reilly-style.
This reeks of fabrication.
Post by: joshnickerson on August 20, 2004, 08:07:43 AM
"You can't spell 'IGNorant"... without IGN."
Post by: CHEN on August 20, 2004, 08:11:20 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on August 20, 2004, 08:17:07 AM
Now I don't know how accurate that rumour is though Nintendo has traditionally had a reputation of bullying third parties and there's been no indication that they've changed or at least changed enough for third parties to care. Hell they've screwed up some of their third party support because of things we can see. If a game is online it's not on the Cube or it is but the Cube gets a hacked up version that's missing a lot of features. Sports games are almost always worst on the Cube because the memory card is too small. The Cube controller reaks for fighting games and, surprise, fighting games on the Cube are rare. Those are examples that we can see that are the result of ignorance. Nintendo designs the console for themselves and doesn't take into account how others will use it and loses some support because of it. It's the N64 situation though in a much smaller scale.
Nintendo's third party problems basically stem from that fact that it's 2004 and Nintendo acts like it's 1994. They assume third parties want to support them. A more accurate assumption would be to assume that NO ONE wants to support them. That's not completely accurate but that sort of thinking would encourage them to improve third party relations more. It also relates to ignorance of the buying public. Nintendo thinks people will buy their console just for them and third party games are a bonus. That's for the most part not the case and they would do better if they regarded third party support as more important. Basically Nintendo has to give third parties an incentive to support them. Their strategy where they work with third parties is a good idea but it's not widespread enough and they need some more incentives that will attract everyone.
Post by: Deguello on August 20, 2004, 08:50:44 AM
Second Place, please. Video Games do not only exist in North America.
Post by: Bill Aurion on August 20, 2004, 08:53:58 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on August 20, 2004, 08:58:19 AM
Fine second world wide. But to American third parties it is in last place.
Post by: odifiend on August 20, 2004, 08:59:23 AM
Post by: Deguello on August 20, 2004, 09:10:58 AM
Eh, they are just sore their generic World War II-themed Stealth Squad-based Tactical Squad-tactics based Tactical-base squad games don't sell too well in Japan, so they blame the most Japanese thing that isn't Sony.
Post by: odifiend on August 20, 2004, 09:31:56 AM
There are third companies who play ludicrous blame games (Acclaim, Midway, Eidos, etc...), but for the most part I lot of them are justified in dropping support. Even the third parties that support the cube mentioned by IGN, Namco, Sega and Capcom, are taking back promised exclusives. Tales of Symphonia, Monkey Ball, 2 of the Capcom 5 (might be capcom 4 now).
Is it Nintendo's fault, probably not. My guess is that conversation took place between an executive who was wearing a moneyhat from M$ and Nintendo wasn't willing to offer one. But they should give companies major price breaks to keep exclusives (Nintendo could be trying this already) because exclusives do make the difference.
EDIT: It seems I bad mouthed Midway too soon... Mortal Kombat: Deception cometh. What a deception that was! Ba bum bum. I'll sit down now.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on August 20, 2004, 10:38:41 AM
Really. I mean wha
Post by: Syl on August 20, 2004, 11:38:27 AM
Nintendo Games are the best on the system, they sell the most, they're obviously the reason to own it.
So why buy something that isn't as good?
That said, Just about every gamecube exclusive game has been downright amazing, and they sadly don't have the sales to show it. So why bother when you can make more money elsewhere?
Post by: Ian Sane on August 20, 2004, 11:58:35 AM
Nintendo Games are the best on the system, they sell the most, they're obviously the reason to own it.
So why buy something that isn't as good?"
I've never bought that arguement. Third party games sold huge on the NES and SNES and continue to sell huge on the GBA. The reason Cube third party games sell like crap is because ALL Cube games sell like crap because the console itself has sold like crap. If the Revolution is a closer competitor to the PS3 third party games will sell on it.
Post by: couchmonkey on August 20, 2004, 12:36:19 PM
IGN probably has a point. These guys talk to developers and publishers all the time and I do not. So while I take Matt C's opinions with a grain of salt, I will give him the benefit of the doubt. I bet Nintendo is less welcoming to third parties than it could be. I can see why too, I mean Nintendo made it through the N64 generation with a tiny fraction of the third party support the GameCube has, so the company probably doesn't think it's a problem (even though it is). Sony on the other hand built its console on third party games like Crash Bandicoot and Final Fantasy: it is working towards more independence, but ultimately still relies on third parties. Microsoft has had many timed exclusives because it's willing to give bags full of money to the third parties. Obviously both of those companies care about third party support a lot, maybe Nintendo doesn't so much.
I don't think it's entirely Nintendo turning away the developers, though. I think some of the developers give the Gamecube unfair treatment. You know what I mean: they put out a bunch of crappy ports and then complain that they aren't selling well enough. Still, many developers have legitimate complaints. There's no reason that Sega's sports titles shouldn't sell on the GameCube other than Nintendo fans just don't buy many sports games.
I think Ian Sane is about right: the sales are poor because the Cube doesn't have very many consoles out there. Of course, one of the keys to selling consoles is to have strong third party support. During the first half of 2002, when the Cube had virtually nothing to play, Mirosoft was promoting Wreckless and Bloodwake, and the store shelves consistently had 25-50% more Xbox games than GameCube games. I think that had a big impact on the Cube's sales and on people's attitude towards it: during launch, it seemed to me that both consoles had a lot of hype, with Xbox edging out GameCube by a bit, but the hype for GameCube seemed to die way down until Christmas of 2002, while Xbox kept on going.
So I think Nintendo needs to work on attracting third parties, and also needs to take a leading role in making it's consoles marketable to a larger age range. At least if it wants to sell more consoles. I don't really care what Nintendo does as long as it keeps making the games I need to play.
Post by: Bartman3010 on August 20, 2004, 12:36:26 PM
Maybe its the 3rd party developers THEMESELVES doing the crap.
Post by: Berny on August 20, 2004, 02:39:12 PM
Quote
Maybe its the 3rd party developers THEMESELVES doing the crap.
Yep.
Post by: Syl on August 20, 2004, 02:39:50 PM
Quote
I've never bought that arguement. Third party games sold huge on the NES and SNES and continue to sell huge on the GBA. The reason Cube third party games sell like crap is because ALL Cube games sell like crap because the console itself has sold like crap. If the Revolution is a closer competitor to the PS3 third party games will sell on it.
All cube games sell like crap? Look at sales charts, nintendo first party games are easily up there with the biggest of the big from any system. Nintendo is the one of the top publishers for a reason (2 or 3 last i checked after EA, of course), its cause their games sell, insanely well, despite anything that says differently.
The Snes and Genesis were completely different than the tri-console market we have these days, back then exclusives weren't nearly as hyped, ports lesser so, and more importantly, both consoles' big sellers were first party titles. Sony and Xbox don't have first party titles that sell that well, so they have to whore out 3rd parties to make up those sales.
Not all cube games sell like crap, if they did, then there wouldn't be any of them. First parties sell damn well, and games more geared to the cubes audience also sell quite well. (Sega's Sonic Titles each broke over 500,000 monkeyballs did as well)
Its mainly the crappy third party games that sell like crap, noone wants to buy something horrible when they KNOW a nintendo game is going to be great. On the other consoles, the same is true, but not as much, if a game says Sony, Konami, or Square theres no guarantee its going to be amazing, or even if it says Ubisoft or THQ, so people buy more on impulse compared to the "safety zone" of Nintendo first party games.
And hell, nintendo games sell the best on GBA as well, (pokemon sells more than any other game, without fail) but theres no competition so theres not really anywhere for the 3rd party to do poorly on. (and thats a whole nother type of demographic)
Post by: Draygaia on August 20, 2004, 05:09:09 PM
Its only a matter of time till Nintendo just crumbles in consoles and just sticks to handhelds. Atleast all the obstacles they have on consoles isn't on a handheld such as free online. Somehow in the back of my mind I still have the feeling of as long as there are home consoles Nintendo will be there.
Post by: Uncle Rich AiAi on August 20, 2004, 05:47:47 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: odifiend
I've heard the box generally sells better in Europe and Australia and I know it sells better in North America. Not to downplay the buying power of Japan, but I have doubts that they can make up the difference of 3 other regions.
I think Xbox may be #1 in Australia. I'm not sure, but it wouldn't surprise me.
Post by: Infernal Monkey on August 20, 2004, 06:50:34 PM
Acclaim: WHY SHOULD WE? LAUGH MY ASS OFF.
*Acclaim guy rolls around the floor screaming due to lack of ass*
Nintendo: So... um, no BMX XXX-2?
Post by: Deguello on August 20, 2004, 08:47:54 PM
Does Nintendo have 3rd party problems? YES. Are they fixable without instantly becoming the market leader or subsidizing failure like Microsoft? Not sure. Does Matt's secondhand anecdote of an alleged event with an unnamed "head of development" at an unnamed 3rd party to an unnamed Nintendo "representative" reflect Nintendo's attitude toward third parties, given that all third parties act this way toward Nintendo and that 3rd parties and videogames in general only exist in America? NO
But the damage is done, right Matt? Man when that Mature Zelda showed up, it was like he ran out of stuff to compalin about. So I guess he resorted to making sh!t up.
Post by: Chongman on August 20, 2004, 09:01:34 PM
just shuttup and enjoy your games.
I wish ninty was in first too, but sheesh, it's been a pretty good generation for gc gamers as a whole and its going to get a whole lot better in the next 6 months. So just chill out and play your games.
Post by: KDR_11k on August 20, 2004, 09:09:36 PM
What sells best on every given system? Well, what the owners bought the system for! On the PS2 that's sports games and GTA, for the XBox that's... um... Halo? Sorry, don't have the numbers for that but I'd guess mostly FPS and related genres. And on the Cube Nintendo's games and games like them sell well. Maybe Sega's too, since I'd say it attracted Sega fans, too.
Third parties develop for the PS2 since it has the largest market. Obviously the PS2 audience wants other games than the XBox or Gamecube audience. Since the taste of XBox owners isn't THAT different from the PS2 owners', the games still sell a bit on the XBox. To sell a game on the GC you'd have to go for the audience, i.e. deliver a game that's very similar in style to those that Nintedo delivers. It's no gurantee for sales (VJ, anyone? Maybe the people who bought a Cube bought it only for games labelled "Nintendo" or "Sega"?), but I think it's the only way. roblem is that if a game appeals to the GC crowd it usually won't appeal to the PS2 and XB crowd, so going for that is only smart if you're making an exclusive, anyway.
Nintendo tried to "expand" its audience, but that's doomed to failure. Most undecided people go by word by mouth, but this word of mouth is spread by the initial owners of a system and their preferrences. The moment Nintendo got labelled kiddie was the moment their demographic was determined. Even if you try selling lots of "against the grain" games, you can't change the grain since the majority of existing owners already has this preferrence and future owners will mostly be influenced by existing owners.
Keep in mind that your oppinion and preferrences bear absolutely no weight on this discussion. The sole fact that you are on a games related message board shows that you belong to the small "gamer" crowd that exists on any system and will probably buy most good games even if they don't appeal to the core demographic of the system. The majority didn't read up anything before buying a system, they went with what their "hardcore" (actually average, but even without reaching pro level most gamers call themselves hardcore) friends told them.The majority doesn't bother with games beyond what appears on the screen, they won't play online, in leagues or participate in discussions on a scale that goes beyond their closest friends (i.e. online message boards).
As long as the primary selling point of Nintendo consoles remain Nintendo games third parties will have a hard time on the system.
Post by: ruby_onix on August 20, 2004, 11:30:14 PM
I think Nintendo has made some pretty major changes to try and become more "third party friendly", but of course, there are always a few small hints about ideas and attitudes that Nintendo still refuses to give up.
That's about as far into it as I want to go into this right now.
I hate how IGN does this kinda crap. They go into a big hissy-fit, get all their fanbase all riled up, then ignore all the worthless opinions of their nobody-fanbase. I refuse to participate.
Post by: joshnickerson on August 21, 2004, 04:13:32 AM
Post by: Infernal Monkey on August 21, 2004, 04:21:26 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Chongman
just shuttup and enjoy your games.
The Internet would be pretty quiet if everybody followed your advice.
Post by: Shift Key on August 21, 2004, 05:22:16 AM
Quoteblol no skins 7.9
IGN is the biggest in the Gaming Media, so I would say they know what they talk about,
i'll take double dash for the daily double thanks alex
Post by: KDR_11k on August 21, 2004, 05:33:58 AM
Post by: Chongman on August 21, 2004, 06:34:05 AM
Quote
The Internet would be pretty quiet if everybody followed your advice.
yup, but then again, the internet would be a much happier place :-P
Post by: Syl on August 21, 2004, 07:16:35 AM
cause the tricks that he does are ever so clever
look at him now, dissapearing that cow
where's that cow, heading right now
taking a bow, its magical trevor
everyone can see that the trick is clever.
look at him there with his leathery leathery whip
Its made from magic, and with a little flick
Yeah Yeah yeaaah the cow is back
Yeah Yeah yeaaah. the cow is back.
back back, back from its magical journey!
what did you see? In a parallel dimension
saw beans lots of beans lots of beans lots of beans
saw beans lots of beans lots of beans lots of beans oh yeah
everyone loves magical trevor....
IGN seems to be in love with pikmin 2, which i can't wait for. I WANT MY PIKMIN!
I really don't see the majority of the issue with IGN. I've generally found them to have good exclusives and such, though they aren't nearly as good as they used to be.
Thats why i love stuff like Gametab, keeps me up to date with absolutely everything. I can't wait for him to get more stuff implemented. Still, this has gotten off topic enough, lets go back to bitching about how 3rd parties don't want to make stuff for cube.
Post by: BlkPaladin on August 22, 2004, 09:50:35 AM
Post by: Bloodworth on August 22, 2004, 10:35:01 AM
Quote
The Cube has become the N64. Not enough new games to keep yourself busy.
Excuse me? I have over fifty games, and there are a ton of games that I haven't beaten yet, and I'm about to go nuts because I don't feel like I can possibly keep up with everything coming out.
Post by: Bill Aurion on August 22, 2004, 10:37:36 AM
Post by: The Omen on August 22, 2004, 10:56:22 AM
Post by: Bill Aurion on August 22, 2004, 11:35:01 AM
Wario Ware GC
Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes
Pokemon Colosseum
Bomberman Jetters
Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures
Tales of Symphonia
Makes me think you don't know what you are talking about...
Post by: Syl on August 22, 2004, 11:45:35 AM
There hasn't been many games this year for *ANY* of the consoles, so its no different.
Post by: CHEN on August 22, 2004, 01:04:27 PM
We'll know soon enough.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on August 22, 2004, 04:02:38 PM
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on August 22, 2004, 04:35:33 PM
Post by: Bill Aurion on August 22, 2004, 07:18:19 PM
Post by: xts3 on August 23, 2004, 12:16:55 AM
Quote
I've never bought that arguement. Third party games sold huge on the NES and SNES and continue to sell huge on the GBA. The reason Cube third party games sell like crap is because ALL Cube games sell like crap because the console itself has sold like crap. If the Revolution is a closer competitor to the PS3 third party games will sell on it.
NES and SNES were the only game in town (in regards to quantity and quality) you are also forgetting many genres of video games were 'really new' for most people in that era. Consider the genres that have existed since the SNES/PS1 not much has changed except graphics since the NES days (action beat-em up, RPG's, driving, etc).
Post by: Ymeegod on August 25, 2004, 06:49:11 AM
When's the last good rally game? Or what about another other sport? Did GC get EA's Fight Night 2004--nope. Both of the other consoles sure as hell did.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Post by: Bill Aurion on August 25, 2004, 09:21:14 AM
Oh please...All of those games are far above average titles...
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on August 25, 2004, 12:07:30 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on August 25, 2004, 09:40:08 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on August 25, 2004, 09:56:35 PM
Post by: Dasmos on August 26, 2004, 01:10:57 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: farfelQuote
Originally posted by: Bill AurionFinal Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles
Wario Ware GC
Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes
Pokemon Colosseum
Bomberman Jetters
Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures
Tales of Symphonia
Makes me think you don't know what you are talking about...
I meant GOOD games from January to August 2004. Of those you list only 2 look good enough to buy.
I agree with Bill i would buy all of those games(with exception of Pokemon colosseum)
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
If third party support stinks ATM, but how many of you honestly buy third party games? (me? Half of my games are third party) q]
I own very little 3rd party games on GC, only NFS:U, James Bond:Nightfire and Timesplitters 2
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on August 26, 2004, 01:21:17 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on August 26, 2004, 04:08:05 AM
Post by: Rob91883 on August 26, 2004, 09:52:02 AM
"Fine second world wide. But to American third parties it is in last place."
Most game developers just don’t give the gamecube a chance be it from any region of the world. I don't think it's just the western developers ignoring the game cube, it's just the "little" support they get is largely from Japanese game developers. .
Post by: CHEN on August 26, 2004, 11:55:10 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Rob91883
Most game developers just don’t give the gamecube a chance be it from any region of the world. I don't think it's just the western developers ignoring the game cube, it's just the "little" support they get is largely from Japanese game developers. .
Which is a-okay by me.
Post by: BlkPaladin on August 27, 2004, 07:41:09 AM
Oh in the end since I didn't want to cough up the money for a new game I ended up playing Pikmin agian. And as for the list up above there is only one game I really don't already own or have immediate plans on buying.
Post by: KDR_11k on August 27, 2004, 09:08:07 AM
Post by: Mumei on September 04, 2004, 03:17:54 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Deguello
"No one will pay EXTRA to support a console that's in LAST PLACE and that traditionally has the lowest selling third party games. "
Second Place, please. Video Games do not only exist in North America.
According to most recent sales figures released by Microsoft and Nintendo, the consoles are at 15.5 and 15.25 million respectively. Gamecube is extremely close to the X-Box, and it is possible that the lead has switched, but as of the most recent information they are in 3rd place worldwide.
Post by: Chongman on September 04, 2004, 04:52:08 PM
You sure? This is worldwide?
Wow, microsoft has sold quite a few xboxes in the US then...just goes to show we like corporate whores.
Somehow I dont think that's worldwide...but thats probably just my insecurity talking and you're probably right.
Post by: Zach on September 04, 2004, 05:04:56 PM
Of course the 3rd party developers do not look at how profitable the system is for Nintendo, they see how many systems have been sold. After all the more systems there are out, the more games the developer can sell. Also the 3rd party developer looks at how well other 3rd party games sell on a system, and how the company (nintendo) treates 3rd Parties.
In other words, in terms of 3rd parties games, nintendo is screwed. For this generation anyway.
Doesnt matter to me, 3rd parties are not why I bought my GC in the first place. I bought it for nintendo's great 1st party games.
Post by: KDR_11k on September 04, 2004, 08:19:30 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Zach
Doesnt matter to me, 3rd parties are not why I bought my GC in the first place. I bought it for nintendo's great 1st party games.
Which is EXACTLY why Nintendo is screwed in terms of third-party support.
Post by: Mario on September 04, 2004, 09:29:49 PM
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on September 05, 2004, 05:00:22 AM
Post by: Zach on September 05, 2004, 09:33:36 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11kQuote
Originally posted by: Zach
Doesnt matter to me, 3rd parties are not why I bought my GC in the first place. I bought it for nintendo's great 1st party games.
Which is EXACTLY why Nintendo is screwed in terms of third-party support.
Let me rephrase that. I bought my cube for the great first party games such as Zelda and Mario. But I also buy 3rd party games if they look good. (Super Monkey ball was one of the first games I got) In that respect it would be a shame to lose the third parties, But I would still buy a revelution without them.
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on September 05, 2004, 10:02:50 AM
Post by: Polemistis on September 05, 2004, 10:26:55 AM
Could Ninty possibly be dropping 3rd party developers due to the Revolution being so different then Zenon/X-Box2 and PS3 that a 3rd party developer can't release it's game across all 3 platforms?
Post by: joeamis on September 05, 2004, 06:28:42 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles
Wario Ware GC
Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes
Pokemon Colosseum
Bomberman Jetters
Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures
Tales of Symphonia
FFCC: only good for multiplayer (and gba requirements)
WWGC: single player ver nothing to write home about, and just about all the games already appeared in the gba ver.
MGSTS: new graphics, new moves, new cutscenes, etc... not worth 40 bucks
PC: no thanks, I was done with Pokemon after I beat Pokemon Blue, nothing very new now.
BJ: eh okay I might be interested, if there weren't so many better games to play.
LoZ4S: single player ver not so great, and I don't like playing Zelda more than once every year.
ToS: okay now you're talking =)
the future looks much better though
Post by: BlkPaladin on September 07, 2004, 10:58:58 AM
Post by: Gamebasher on September 07, 2004, 11:19:44 AM
Maybe Nintendo´s recent expansion of their studioes will mean that we will get more first-party titles, so that we can sustain ourselves on those adding perhaps just a few other titles alltogether.
In any event, the way I see it Nintendo Revolution will be to videogame control, what the Nintendo 64 was to gaming perspective, and if they have enough compelling first- and second party titles on sale at launch they may become the winning player in the next generation, rendering the third party problem near obsolete. Making people so enchanted by the sheer magic of the new system, that they´ll be content with what they got to play on it (better be a lot, Nintendo!!!).
So, either those third parties just jump on the band wagon and join the revolution, or they join the train from yesterday on the other two platforms and see where that will take them. My bet is on the revolution! So it´s up to people to decide, Nintendo is Nintendo and wont change very much. Otherwise they´re nolonger Nintendo!!
Post by: MaleficentOgre on September 09, 2004, 10:17:35 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on September 10, 2004, 08:04:44 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on September 10, 2004, 08:30:37 AM
Agreed. I wouldn't buy it if it was too different. With videogames new ideas have to complement existing ones. If an idea is so unique that it's something completely different it will bomb. The current three consoles for the most part, some controller issues aside, could play at least 95% of all the console games ever made. Aside from oddball stuff like DDR or light gun games with the out of the box controllers for the three big systems everything from Pong to Pikmin 2 could be played on them.
If you introduce something weird then that can't play any games before it, it will bomb. People like the traditional game designs that go back to Pong. That's why the Virtual Boy failed. Sure it caused headaches and whatnot but the real problem was that games people loved in the past couldn't be played on the VB and VB games couldn't be played on traditional TV consoles. So Nintendo can't release some weird motion sensor only system and expect it to succeed because you can't play the old Zelda or Mario games on it. The only games that would work for it are games designed specifically for it.
The DS does innovation right because you can play traditional games on it AND you can play unfamiliar touchscreen or dual screen games as well. Nintendo has to do the same thing with the Revolution.
Post by: Gamebasher on September 11, 2004, 10:44:20 AM
So now we will wait and see if Nintendo will make it backwards compatible. Otherwise, I´m afraid, we will be looking at a new Dreamcast syndrome, that´s going to be a lot like the China Syndrome in the movie of the same name (READ: Third party exodus!)...
Hope and pray to The Videogame God (He´s my Dad!) that Nintendo won´t screw up that bad!!
Damn them if they do, because then it´s only SONY and Microsoft who are left, and that isn´t how it should be. Ninty´s the best at games. Period.
But, will they (Nintendo) ever learn from the third party issue, or will they remain stuck in the past? Only time will tell.
Post by: BlkPaladin on September 12, 2004, 05:42:49 AM
The DS isn't that different then the GBA SP. And they said look to the DS to see a glimpse in the future for the Revolution. Lets see: carts, cheak; Backwards compatible, check; Nintendo Philosopy, check; plays games and not anything you put in it, check; in addition to the new interface the standard one, check.
My bet the revolution will be and interest shape that you put next to a TV to hook up and plays games with a control that tries something new in addition to already stanard fair. As for the backwards compatiblity its seems almost certin judging from the Gameboy series (Heck the DS is backwards compatible and its not even suppose to be in that line of consoles.), it will be there.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 12, 2004, 12:37:47 PM
You think about the potential GameCube library, look at the ACTUAL GameCube library, and think to yourself,
WTF??? Why doesn't.........!!? (fill in your own blanks)
Post by: Chongman on September 12, 2004, 03:54:47 PM
Wireless
Global
Lan
Post by: Infernal Monkey on September 12, 2004, 09:26:15 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 12, 2004, 09:43:36 PM
Consume publishers.
Post by: MaleficentOgre on September 12, 2004, 09:50:29 PM
Post by: MaleficentOgre on September 12, 2004, 09:51:52 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on September 12, 2004, 10:01:47 PM
Post by: Uncle Rich AiAi on September 13, 2004, 12:17:29 AM
Oh man. My idea is so awesome!
Post by: ruby_onix on September 13, 2004, 01:27:42 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Uncle Rich AiAi
The Nintendo Revolution should be the shape of a Reggie figurine. When you turn it on, Reggie's eyes will light up red and it will say "If you don't play with me, I will kick your ass!"
Oh man. My idea is so awesome!
It's perverted on too many levels. Nintendo would never go for it.
It is a good idea though. Microsoft might steal it.
Post by: Infernal Monkey on September 13, 2004, 03:17:57 AM
And nuuuh-uuuh, Nintendo TOTALLY killed Acclaim off. Acclaim were all "here's Turok Evolution" and Nintendo were all "oh yeah? WHACKICKASSURPRISE" which caused Dave Mirra to get angry at nudity.
Post by: Urkel on September 14, 2004, 10:18:19 PM
In other words, Nintendo probably isn't going to make it so that the Revolution's controller hooks up to your nostrils, and gameplay is controlled by sneezing.
Besides, didn't Rick Powers hint at the Revolution being backwards compatible?
Rick Powers = Infallible
