Gaming Forums => General Gaming => Topic started by: xts3 on January 11, 2005, 11:23:41 PM
Title: Did Nintendo prove Pirate proof system doesn't equal sales?
Post by: xts3 on January 11, 2005, 11:23:41 PM
Did Nintendo prove Pirate proof system doesn't equal sales? I was thinking about this because its fairly niche and difficult to pirate gamecube games and yet they are the most resistant to piracy and yet they have the least sales. So isn't this an argument that piracy doesn't really matter that much on consoles since if you look at the sales figures for many 3rd party games that were good, they well ... suck and this is on a system that is "pirate proof" because it doesn't use commodity hardware and media you can buy at your local Wal mart / retailer.
Title: RE: Did Nintendo prove Pirate proof system doesn't equal sales?
Post by: Pale on January 12, 2005, 03:39:32 AM
... ah go ahead and download more mp3s...just spare us the silly arguments... =P
Title: RE: Did Nintendo prove Pirate proof system doesn't equal sales?
Post by: odifiend on January 12, 2005, 05:58:27 AM
xts3, that logic is pretty dang flawed. GCN games have the "least" sales only because of a smaller fan base comparitive to the PS2 and while Xbox is beating the cube by some units I don't know if they get that many more sales. You do know software is where the money is, correct? Piracy proof ensures that everyone who is genuinely interested in the game is forced to buy or rent it by legal means- ensuring that a developer is paid somewhere along the line. Piracy of PS2 games is not that popular but I know people who can and do do it on my college campus. Bittorrent makes it so easy too. Basically if the casual gamer did know about shady sites on the internet I think PS2 and Xbox would be in more trouble. Computer and internet knowledge is always increasing so I don't mind Nintendo keeping the pirate free format if it means they get what they are due.
Title: RE: Did Nintendo prove Pirate proof system doesn't equal sales?
Post by: Ian Sane on January 12, 2005, 06:44:53 AM
The Cube's failure is due to many factors but good piracy protection is not one of them. People don't buy Cubes because they're not interested in the games it offers or at least they think they aren't as Nintendo's poor marketing has created a lot of consumer ignorance. The lack of ease of piracy might have lost some sales but it's not something Nintendo should focus on. Third parties LIKE a console that's hard to pirate. The Cube being "pirate proof" is one of the things it did right.
If the Revolution has good third party support, a varied game library, a good price, good marketing, and good piracy protection it will be much more successful than the Cube was. I consider piracy protection an essential part of a quality console.
Title: RE:Did Nintendo prove Pirate proof system doesn't equal sales?
Post by: xts3 on January 12, 2005, 11:06:31 AM
Quote Originally posted by: odifiend xts3, that logic is pretty dang flawed. GCN games have the "least" sales only because of a smaller fan base comparitive to the PS2 and while Xbox is beating the cube by some units I don't know if they get that many more sales. You do know software is where the money is, correct? Piracy proof ensures that everyone who is genuinely interested in the game is forced to buy or rent it by legal means- ensuring that a developer is paid somewhere along the line. Piracy of PS2 games is not that popular but I know people who can and do do it on my college campus. Bittorrent makes it so easy too. Basically if the casual gamer did know about shady sites on the internet I think PS2 and Xbox would be in more trouble. Computer and internet knowledge is always increasing so I don't mind Nintendo keeping the pirate free format if it means they get what they are due.
Yeah but developers don't get paid for game rentals and neither do publishers, they sell games to rental places like blockbuster and that's it, they dont see any royalties or profit sharing from Rental places. I've also asked around to game developers and theres no way smaller developers can live off selling games to places that rent them. So any finished game on a rental IS a lost sale for the developer of the game. So all they have to go on is sales and with the price of games sitting at $50-60 I dont see it getting any better. Also the GC's proprietary discs are not technologically superior in storage to Xbox or PS2. I think I would have had a lot more anime cutscenes in Tales of Symphonia if not for the small 1.5Gb GC discs.
Title: RE:Did Nintendo prove Pirate proof system doesn't equal sales?
Post by: xts3 on January 12, 2005, 11:08:13 AM
Quote Originally posted by: Ian Sane The Cube's failure is due to many factors but good piracy protection is not one of them. People don't buy Cubes because they're not interested in the games it offers or at least they think they aren't as Nintendo's poor marketing has created a lot of consumer ignorance. The lack of ease of piracy might have lost some sales but it's not something Nintendo should focus on. Third parties LIKE a console that's hard to pirate. The Cube being "pirate proof" is one of the things it did right.
If the Revolution has good third party support, a varied game library, a good price, good marketing, and good piracy protection it will be much more successful than the Cube was. I consider piracy protection an essential part of a quality console.
It was never marketing that killed Nintendo, it was the lack of 3rd party killer apps like GTA, MGS, FFX, Halo, etc and a decent game library that covers the most important genres: Fighting games, RPG's, FPS, Racing, Sports. The gamecube has nothing except Nintendo's own first party titles to really support the GC, Eternal darkness flopped and I'm sure Starfox adventures didn't sell as well as expected as well as tonnes of other titles like Viewtiful joe.
Title: RE:Did Nintendo prove Pirate proof system doesn't equal sales?
Post by: The Omen on January 12, 2005, 04:42:08 PM
Viewtiful Joe sold very well. Eternal Darkness had NO marketing, so that conflicts with your argument right there.
Bottom line is, marketing for exclusive games blows. Market share is smaller. Hence, less sales.
Title: RE: Did Nintendo prove Pirate proof system doesn't equal sales?
Post by: Uglydot on January 12, 2005, 07:49:20 PM
Nintendo has for some time made a killing in the video game industry as far as CASH goes, and CASH speaks. MS lost. Sony makes money, but last I read(which is a while ago) Nintendo lead in profit. So I'd say it worked fine. For them.
Title: RE: Did Nintendo prove Pirate proof system doesn't equal sales?
Post by: odifiend on January 13, 2005, 03:00:31 AM
Developers get paid more from the sale to a game rental place then a piracy. Also many times rentals will spark interest in their game and the consumer will buy...
Title: RE:Did Nintendo prove Pirate proof system doesn't equal sales?
Post by: xts3 on January 14, 2005, 01:30:01 AM
Quote Originally posted by: odifiend Developers get paid more from the sale to a game rental place then a piracy. Also many times rentals will spark interest in their game and the consumer will buy...
I don't really get the logic, if I can finish a game in a single rental why do I want to buy it unless it's a game like Halo that you want to buy for the online/multiplayer component? i.e. metroid prime and prime 2 and many single player games one can rent and finish and be done with them at a fraction of the cost of buying the game, how many other people do this I think is substantial and non-trivial.
Title: RE: Did Nintendo prove Pirate proof system doesn't equal sales?
Post by: odifiend on January 14, 2005, 03:21:27 AM
I get what you are saying but I'm saying no matter how you look at it rental is better for a developper than outright piracy- 1 sale > 0 - there is no denying that. Yes, people can rent and beat the game but even that could be helpful for the developer when the sequel comes around. On good or long games, it is rare that people have the time to knock it out in 5 days. I actually rented perfect dark about 3 times before I was like screw let me blow 60 bucks. OoT I rented first and bought after. Since Nintendo doesn't have demo discs renting can be a good thing.
Title: RE: Did Nintendo prove Pirate proof system doesn't equal sales?
Post by: Pale on January 14, 2005, 07:42:21 AM
You all realize that rental places are required to pay much more than retail for a game right? At least they do for movies... A rent legal dvd can run the rental places 70-100 dollars.
Title: RE: Did Nintendo prove Pirate proof system doesn't equal sales?
Post by: odifiend on January 14, 2005, 01:12:45 PM
I figured that but I wasn't sure. Thanks for the info, PZ.
Title: RE: Did Nintendo prove Pirate proof system doesn't equal sales?
Post by: Procession on January 17, 2005, 09:54:44 PM
I seem to recall reading the Cube has a lower attach rate than the PS2 and Xbox. :/
Title: RE: Did Nintendo prove Pirate proof system doesn't equal sales?
Post by: KDR_11k on January 18, 2005, 07:27:46 AM
I seem to recall that the Gamecube has less games than the PS2 or XBox.
