Post by: Jonnyboy117 on January 13, 2005, 11:03:40 AM
Free NOA!
Post by: Savior on January 13, 2005, 11:07:08 AM
I kid, obviously. I agree completly. I dont think others will though. Problem is Nintendo has this Japan first approach thats slowly starting to cruble. Far too Slowly
Post by: Famicom on January 13, 2005, 11:10:24 AM
Post by: Jonnyboy117 on January 13, 2005, 11:13:09 AM
I truly believe this is a serious problem at NOA. It's not talked about much because most people don't realize what a problem it is. Before posting the editorial, I showed it to several other people who have dealt with NOA, and they were all very happy that someone is finally talking about this issue. If you interact with Nintendo like I do, the problem of NCL dependency is abundantly clear. I tried to provide some examples that everyone could understand, but the issue goes much deeper than Nintendo Power demo discs, etc. It's an entire corporate mentality that seeps into just about everything NOA does. Consequently, I knew when writing this that many readers would not be able to relate to what I wanted to say. I hope you will read the article carefully and trust me when I say that this is a huge problem. One of my main reasons for writing it is so that NOA employees, many of whom read PGC regularly, will see it and be inspired to change the way things work in Redmond, for the better.
Post by: - NintendoFan - on January 13, 2005, 11:34:34 AM
Post by: joshnickerson on January 13, 2005, 11:54:10 AM
Post by: foolish03 on January 13, 2005, 12:03:07 PM
Post by: Ian Sane on January 13, 2005, 12:32:07 PM
There's one big problem though regarding NCL that NOA would have no control over that could seriously affect the American market: the design of the console itself. If NCL designed the Revolution with a wacky controller with no buttons, implemented a substitute for online play that only works in Japan, and designed only gimmick games that appeal to non-gamers the console would be a huge failure in North America and NOA could do nothing about it. It's not like they can realistically have different hardware for the different markets. They could but then we wouldn't get any games from Japan and a Nintendo that relied entirely on domestic games would be screwed. NOA can't even really just go online if NCL doesn't want to because the Japanes games people want online like Mario Kart wouldn't be, or NOA would have to delay the American release to add code that allowed it. NCL's stranglehold over NOA doesn't just affect marketing or American third party support. NCL is in charge of the actual product themselves.
"Freeing NOA" is a great idea but it needs to be taken a step further. NOA needs representives at NCL who have say in major decisions that affect the American market. So if NCL decides that the Revolution is to have N64 graphics the NOA reps can say "sorry that won't work at all in America" and the decision is vetoed.
Post by: Jonnyboy117 on January 13, 2005, 01:05:36 PM
As for having NOA reps at NCL, I think it's a great idea. We know that NCL sends producers over to supervise games like Metroid Prime and others developed in America and Europe. Maybe NOA should do the same with games developed in Japan.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 13, 2005, 01:12:15 PM
At that level yes. The Famicom and NES looked totally different for example. I'm talking about the guts of the machine. If NCL designs a console that has subpar graphics NOA can't make a different model for America with cutting edge graphics.
Post by: ruby_onix on January 13, 2005, 01:40:40 PM
Quote
Some Nintendo fans fear the Americanization of the gaming industry. They see American games as generic, American gamers as having poor taste, and American publishers as being unstoppable juggernauts seeking to condense a talented development pool into one giant sweat shop, pumping out one roster-updated sports game after another. These fears are exaggerated but not unfounded. They are, however, not related to the issue of NOA’s need for independence.
Thank you Jonny. I didn't quite know how to say that.
Ian: You know that you're afraid of the absurd, right?
Post by: Hostile Creation on January 13, 2005, 01:48:14 PM
Post by: matt oz on January 13, 2005, 02:38:15 PM
There are far too many people on this forum who seem unable to distinguish the corporation from the developer.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on January 13, 2005, 02:47:50 PM
(fight the power)
Post by: Kulock on January 13, 2005, 04:51:43 PM
At any rate, I believe the DS was sort of an experiment, a field test for Nintendo. The way the console was designed (Built-in WiFi? For a company that swears online gaming is still far away?), the way it's been marketed... But unfortunately, if NCL is stubborn enough, even the best results could be "not good enough" and they use it as an excuse to not repeat those development and empowerment decisions.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 13, 2005, 05:01:46 PM
The thing that bugs me about that is NCL has never given any sort of excuse for that. "Demo discs? That's a Sony idea so it is terrible and useless!" At least with online they have some lame ass excuse.
Post by: Djunknown on January 13, 2005, 05:08:29 PM
Unless Iwata is a puppet on Yamauchi's strings, what's he got to lose to give NOA some breathing room? Nintendo's marginalized here as it is. The suits can kid themselves and fall back on the old 'we're still profitable' excuse, but something is broke, and it needs fixing.
I remember seeing demo discs for an unoffical 'Cube magazine for the UK in bookstores, but since its PAL, it doesn't do me much good since I don't a have the freeloader or a modded 'Cube.
Also, NoA should try and replace Rare and Silicon Knights to bring out Western games. Western games with the Nintendo touch are great and innovative, we should seem as frequently as the next game with Mario in it.
Post by: BiLdItUp1 on January 13, 2005, 06:02:35 PM
Maybe people who left the company perhaps could give us some firsthand insight, Retro-Studios-style?
Post by: Jonnyboy117 on January 13, 2005, 06:37:16 PM
Post by: xts3 on January 13, 2005, 06:45:11 PM
Huge mistakes they made this round:
1) Once again Inferior storage technology (1.5Gb gc discs, vs DVD5 (4.3GB) and DVD9 (8.5GB) More and more games are starting to use DVD9's Squaresoft's Xenosaga, Metal Gear solid 3 to name only two. You dont want to be BEHIND the technology curve when next generation RPG's and games like Metal gear solid can only be done on Blu-ray discs and Nintendo is using some ridiculously small storage medium limiting the kind of gaming experiences that can be created: Best to have equal storage to competitors then be behind them.
2) They didn't do enough to get games to be devleoped for the gamecube long before the gamecubes release (pre-emptive game development so that you have games when the console is released).
3) Identify all killer apps and games with most sales for their target markets and get them exclusive at the release of your console. Imagine Final fantasy 13 and Metal Gear Solid 4, exclusive for Nintendo revolution!
4) They didn't spend enough money bribing or wooing 3rd parties, lets face it Microsoft is out to kill. Buying RARE was just the start, they are declaring war against all comepetitors with that huge warchest of cash.
5) (Personal gripe) Bad controller design, a controller has to control all games well across all platforms. Fighting games and certain other games are the worst on the gamecube. Keep it simple stupid (PS1 and PS2 controller is godly and Nintendo could have made a better one if not for the crappy button placement).
6) (Personal gripe) They have to stop designing things like controllers around THEIR games only (gamecubes poor button sizes and placement for fighting games).
7) I was forced to buy a bigger memory card because I saved lots when new games came out. And being forced to buy a bigger memory card ticked me off, especially when they were way smaller and cost more then the comeptitions memory cards.
8) Bad online support and NO GOOD LAN or Internet play (ugh!), how I would have loved to play F-Zero GX over the net.
9) Gameboy-to-Gamecube "connectivity" with NO OPTION of using your regular gamecube controllers to play multiplayer, i.e. Zelda 4 swords, Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles. This was the worst idea ever, after saying Nintendo doesn't want people to "pay" they did the most stupid thing with the gameboy connectivity. No one wants to spend an extra $100 for a gameboy advance as a glorified expensive controller.
Now ultimately... the problem ultimately is that their "Nintendo" brand and games are not worth what they once were and this is reflected in the amount of people who own a gamecube. Most people that own a gamecube own multiple platforms now. I'd say they are the hardest of the hardcore gamers for the most part. Owning Both Gamecube, PS2 and Xbox in North america, while japanese gamers are Owning PS2 and Gamecube in Japan. I'd say at least 80% of the people that own a gamecube own either a PS2 and/or Xbox in North America and that is a huge problem because when a game comes out we'd rather have the best version for the best system if its multiplatform.
Post by: Bloodworth on January 13, 2005, 07:16:30 PM
As for fighting games, its the same myth that causes people to put blame on the Metroid Prime controls. They've played certain games with the same type of controls for so long that they can't take a few minutes to adapt. In any case, fighting games have always been best with specific third party controllers.
GameCube's controller is easily the most comfortable and intuitive, and I really hope that by the next generation everyone will abandon the PS1 and PS2's awkward analog placement and multiple shoulder buttons.
/rant
Post by: chlupe on January 13, 2005, 07:25:05 PM
The way NCL treats NOA isn't like an "American division" but more like an "American office". It's as if NOA is just a small office for pushing product along to the American market. It has almost no autonomy, and for all of its understanding of the American market (because hey -- the "A" in NOA stands for "America"), it's not allowed to capitalize on it. Jon, I don't interact with NOA or NCL on any level, I'm just a bummy fan, but I understand the turmoil here. Please, PLEASE make sure the heads over at NOA see this, it's a great wake-up call.
Post by: xts3 on January 13, 2005, 07:32:06 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bloodworth
I'll have to vocally disagree on the controller comments. Nintendo has a MUCH better controller than Sony, but because Sony has the more popular console, multi-platform games are designed around their controller. If GameCube were the market leader you'd see similar sacrifices made since publishers would have been more likely to explore the unique analog shoulder buttons.
As for fighting games, its the same myth that causes people to put blame on the Metroid Prime controls. They've played certain games with the same type of controls for so long that they can't take a few minutes to adapt. In any case, fighting games have always been best with specific third party controllers.
GameCube's controller is easily the most comfortable and intuitive, and I really hope that by the next generation everyone will abandon the PS1 and PS2's awkward analog placement and multiple shoulder buttons.
/rant
The fighting game is not a "myth" the button placement of the PS2 copied the original SNES controller and it was PERFECT as it was. Game cube controller is GOOD but its not GREAT, its too narrowly designed. When you design a controller it has to be good for all genre's of games. I just can't take your comment on fighting games seriously. Once again you're trying to be too narrow and sectarian, Metroid prime DOES have a bad control scheme aiming above your head having to hold the shoulder button IS a bad control design decision. Just because the control scheme for a game is bad doesn't mean the game IS bad or that Nintendo games suck, lets be reasonable here as a multiplatform gamer and a hardcore gamer I speak AS A GAMER WHO LOVES GAMES, not as someone licks Nintendo's boots. I would like to see Nintendo become as great as it once was but it seems they're floundering and losing direction they are not UNDERSTANDING what makes games great, the lower review from all gaming sites for Mario sunshine, Windwaker and Mario kart DD prove this in spades.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on January 13, 2005, 07:33:25 PM
To the editorial writer himself, I can't find anything to disagree with (Unlike that gamespot writer article that I read).
Post by: Procession on January 13, 2005, 07:39:52 PM
The main problem I find with NCL is that they don't seem to realise they're in trouble, especially in the Western markets. When I hear Iwata talk about how the market in Japan is shrinking I can't help but think he should more be talking about how Nintendo's market has shrunk disproportionately to its competitors and talking about what he is doing about it. Nintendo isn't the market leader when it comes to home consoles, and as Steven kent pointed out, their share has almost halved with each generation following the NES. Why not try and win back the gamers who have gone to Sony and then go after non-gamer market, which is much more of a longshot.
Post by: Procession on January 13, 2005, 07:42:15 PM
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on January 13, 2005, 07:45:04 PM
Post by: xts3 on January 13, 2005, 07:45:16 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: VGrevolution
xts you have some good points, but I feel you are letting personal opinion slip in there, especially referencing the GC controller. That is obviously a personal preference, and besides MS has what was considered to be the WORSE controller (though I actually like it lol) yet they succeeded, so I don't consider that a "huge" mistake. The memory card thing never was much of an issue, the majority of games only used a few blocks of them, nothing took up alot of memory except for a few games like HM and AC. So that isn't a huge mistake, should they have been larger memory wise? Perhaps, though I think that problem has been rectified and like I said it never was a make or break thing. Exclusive titles, I'll give you that and all related issues. Storage medium, to a degree, not what I call huge because 1.5 GBs is still alot, especially since you can have multiple disk games. Resident Evil 4 is proof positive you don't need a huge DVD disk to create a fantastic game! It is not even close to the mistake of having N64 use cartridges, now that was a huge mistake!
To the editorial writer himself, I can't find anything to disagree with (Unlike that gamespot writer article that I read).
I agree my comments on the controllers were personal gripes but they shouldn't be ignored, it hampers your enjoyment of a game and makes you purchase the game for the PS2 rather then the gamecube, since fighting games are always about multiplayer. Ultimately I think most are missing the point that the game business is now about who has the most money to control the best game developers which determiens what platform, and the game exclusives for the game console competitors in question. MS, Sony and Nintendo.
Nintendo can't exist as a hardware company and not provide comeptitive hardware. Gaming IS about the hardware as much as it is about the games. This is missing from Nintendo's equation. N64 died BECAUSE of its inferior storage capacity whether anyone wants to admit it or not, even the difficult to develop for playstation 2, everyone was forced to learn it because they could make insane amounts of cash. So difficulty to develop for a platform while important, is not AS important certain aspects of technology that have huge impacts on the quality and amount of content in gaming -- especially storage technology. Storage technology and content are linked hand in hand, FF7, FF8, FF9, FFX, FFX-2, and FF12 would not be the the great entertainment experience it is if it was done on a cartridge not to mention Final fantasy would have probably not had so many sequels if not for the FMV, FFX was primarily all about the FMV and lacked gameplay on a huge scale.
The storage whether you want to admit it or not, should always be equal or better then your competitors to give game companies incentive to develop that killer entertainment with the full motion video sequences that can't be done without financial pain on gamecube discs currently. Tales of Symphonia is one of those games that shows you that FMV heavy games just can't be done properly on the gamecube without frustration for the game developer splitting a game designed for one DVD to multiple proprietary GC discs, there should NEVER be any roadblocks or financial dis-incentive to port a game to a nintendo system but there are huge ones. Resident evil 4 could have been done on one DVD5 or 9 and had more full motion video if it had better media, this is not a point in Nintendo's favor, you guys have to realize it's all about profit and selling games to the most people. Nintendo's installed userbase has to be captured RIGHT AWAY next generation with killer app exclusives that were previously on Sony and Xbox or they are going to get slaughtered by Sony and Microsoft. Gamers follow games, not systems.
Post by: chlupe on January 13, 2005, 08:09:43 PM
Gamers follow systems as much if not more than they follow games. Please tell me, what system sellers came out for the PS2 at launch -- and what system sellers came out for the Dreamcast? Which one died?
Post by: Artimus on January 13, 2005, 08:42:48 PM
Post by: xts3 on January 13, 2005, 08:54:02 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: chlupe
Just for your info XTS, the cutscenes in RE4 are real-time renderings -- not FMVs... As game technology progresses, I believe that the emphasis on Full-Motion video will be less and less -- graphics will get good enough -- perhaps are good enough -- to not need full-motion. If we're fortunate, that means much more space for OTHER things, not wasteful FMVs.
Gamers follow systems as much if not more than they follow games. Please tell me, what system sellers came out for the PS2 at launch -- and what system sellers came out for the Dreamcast? Which one died?
Where was Mario sunshine and Zelda Wind waker at gamecubes launch a year after the PS2 launched? That's right -Nowhere.
Dreamcast's company had a history of hardware flops so there is NO COMPARISON. Comparing Sony a number #1 in the game market and their release of the PS2 to Dreamcast when Sega had a long history of burning their customers too many times to remember is pure stupidity.
Sega CD - Flop, 32X flop, Sega Saturn (during PS1 era) - Flop. Anyone who'd been gaming since the SNES and GENESIS days KNEW dreamcast was going to be a flop because Sega fans had enough after the series of flops I just listed. All those people that bought those items created huge bad-word of mouth for sega and felt ripped off. I dumped Sega systems after the Sega CD debacle and I think a lot of gamers had a lot of hostility because Sega flooded the market with hardware way too fast for software library to catch up, not to mention they had the same problem Nintendo now has, Developer support. Which killed them.
Sony didn't have to worry because 1) Backwards compatability and games like MGS2 and FFX and whatnot where in the pipeline and exclusive, the entire PS1 library was there to hold them over and something the Gamecube didn't have (since I doubt it would have been cost effective) and the Xbox was a newcomer and took a large portion of hte PC game market which broadsided Nintendo because a lot of Xbox'ers are former or still PC gamers fed up with $500 video cards every 6-8 months and the massive invesment in computer hardware while game releases for all genres were decreasing. Xbox lucked out by taking the PC gamers who were sick of high priced video cards away from the PC for an instant market.
I think it came out "just at the right time" just before DVD players took off but if you look at the Xbox and Gamecube market, Xbox has a DVD player but is barely has a bigger installed base then the gamecube. So DVD functionality while important didn't "do it" for the Xbox although I think DVD player functionality is a "long run" feature this is why more Xbox's are probably sold then gamecubes on the whole just because of that feature.
Post by: Hostile Creation on January 13, 2005, 08:56:07 PM
Post by: Bloodworth on January 13, 2005, 09:38:32 PM
The one thing I will concede is that the GameCube D-pad is practically worthless as a quick movement device. However, I'm not sure I know quite what the solution is because you need your main movement device in that prime spot, whether it be an analog stick or a digital pad. The N64 is probably the only controller that had them both in good spots, but because you had to completely reposition yourself on the controller, the D-pad was rarely used and people had the most confusing ordeals when the three-handed beast.
Anyways, thanks for side-tracking us... back to Jonny's great editorial.
Post by: chlupe on January 14, 2005, 06:19:17 AM
Before you start accusing me of being stupid with my comparison, take a look in the freaking mirror. Read my post again.
You stated, gamers follow games, not systems. I made the comparison to illustrate the opposite point (that you're simply helping me make): gamers do follow systems, and not always the games. With the better Dreamcast launch, it still failed, because people followed the PS2 as a system and not for the games. People followed the Cube for its Nintendo name, even though Wind Waker and Mario weren't there yet. The Dreamcast launch had great games, yet people did not latch onto the system.
It is the act of following a system that can allow the games to trickle down.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 14, 2005, 06:38:30 AM
ARRRGH!! That makes NO SENSE! How could they ever come to such a dumb conclusion? Yeah I'm sure the fact that Final Fantasy VII and Metal Gear Solid 2 had very popular demo discs hurt their sales. They're only two incredibly high selling games that completely dwarf any Cube title's sales and had more hype going for them at the time of their release than any Nintendo game has had since 1999. That's like saying that theatrical previews hurt movie sales.
As for the controller stuff I think the Cube controller is crap... yet is still the best controller this gen. That's pretty sad. I feel the PS2 controller is the worst controller for a successful console ever made. The big problem with the Cube controller is that the d-pad is so ridiculously small that it's useless as a d-pad. And now Nintendo may in fact drop the d-pad from their next console likely because it wasn't used enough even though it's THEIR FAULT it wasn't used. Plus the botton arrangement is different than every controller button arrangement since the SNES. Nintendo can't do stuff like that and expect it to become accepted if they're not the market leader. That's just how it is. Personally I think six face buttons like the Saturn controller is the way to go. That allows for both the SNES arrangment and the Cube arrangment. One of Nintendo's biggest problems is a lack of flexibility. They limit both the gamer and the developer. A controller should be flexible enough to work with all genres and should compliment existing design. The Cube controller fails on both these points.
The memory card thing is also a lack of flexibility. It's minor on it's own but when Nintendo has an image of being an inflexible jerk and ripping consumers off selling a tiny memory card for the same price as the competitor's big memory card is only going to hurt them. The whole reason cartridges failed was because they were inflexible for the developer and expensive for the consumer. So why design memory cards to be the same way?
Did the memory card and controller make a big difference regarding the Cube's success? Not on their own but Nintendo had to show people they had improved and having very obvious flaws with two vital pieces of hardware gives the message that one hasn't improved. The Cube just has a mile long list of stupid easily-avoidable crap that Nintendo SHOULD have caught beforehand. Combine them all together and you get one big fat reason to not trust Nintendo and support their consoles.
Post by: Robageejammin on January 14, 2005, 07:16:40 AM
I think you really hit the nail on the head for this one. This really answers a lot of questions and concerns about the ongoing issue. NCL seriously needs to wake up here if they expect any change overseas. Now, this Revolution turns into a very tricky concept. On one hand, I'm all for the idea of a change in videogames and the demise of a super beefed up new console. I really think its a necessity for the survival of genuinity of the gaming industry. Now on the other hand, if this step is being taken purely for the good of the Japanese market, I start to question...Is what's good for the goose really good for the gander? If Nintendo plans to have any success in America, the Revolution and NOA have to work hand in hand. This is the only way something as daring as the Revolution will work. I must say though, I did see some significant changes in the past few years. Reggie might just be the guy we have been waiting for. I mean as far as advertising, I think the flying metal pieces Samus ad was spectacular...especially compared with, well, "Clean is better than dirty".
Anyway, great editorial. Hopefully this leaks out to many gaming enthusiasts.
Post by: Savior on January 14, 2005, 09:50:35 AM
Quote
The one thing I will concede is that the GameCube D-pad is practically worthless as a quick movement device
Exactly had the Wavebird/GCN controlers dpad been bigger, the Wavebird would be heads and shoulders ahead of the other controlers, its not so the controler isnt that better...
Post by: SgtShiversBen on January 14, 2005, 10:04:22 AM
Post by: mantidor on January 14, 2005, 11:59:03 AM
The complains about the GC controllers can be summed up in this phrase: "its not the playstation control". Simply put, people are not willing to make a change, and since the ps1 became more popular in the 64 era is expected that people think that the controller is good, but its not, its confortable only because people are already used to it. Its very similar to what happened with the qwerty set up of keys in typing machines. Although it has already been proven that Dvorjak display( Im not really sure about the name) is superior in terms of time needed to type and overall eficiency, no keyboard company would try to implement it and none of you would be willing to abandon the already familiar qwerty setup. The difference is that in keyboards change would be extreme, but controllers change its really not hard, the problem is people simply dont try to adapt.
how can someone say that the GC controller is unconfortable when its shape seems to came for someone molding clay with his own hands and thus having a very ergonomic design while the ps2 controller have really straight edges that hardly adapt to your hand? well, the answer is simple, you are already used to it.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 14, 2005, 12:43:50 PM
I think it's more "It's too different from the SNES and N64 controllers". That's at least my complaint. It's really comfortable but the d-pad is useless, the z button is thrown on almost randomly, it has less buttons than both competing consoles (and the N64 and saturn controllers so it's going backwards), and it has a button layout that no controller EVER has used before. People who complain about it not being d-pad centric or having four shoulder buttons are retarded but the above complaints are valid even for those who have only used Nintendo controllers.
Post by: Mr. Segali on January 14, 2005, 01:01:55 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
I love this editorial but I can't help but feel if this had been on IGN and not PGC there would've been a "IGN Bashes Nintendo AGAIN" thread in the Gamecube forum.
Heh heh... yeah, I agree. I was thinking the same thing. Even if it was posted on another site, I wouldn't find it anti-Nintendo at all. It was a good editorial all-around and I agree with it 100%.
As far as controller issues go, it's all about balancing comfort with practicality and versitility. I think the PS2 controller tends to be more popular because of it's practical/versatile design (which is pretty much a beefed up SNES controller) with a somewhat comfortable fit. Nintendo has always made the most comfortable controllers handsdown, (save for the NES, hehe); but as of late, it seems they are sacrificing versitility for comfort. The GCN is a dream to hold, but a nightmare to play some games- namely fighting games or games that rely heavily on the d-pad. The PS2 on the otherhand, might not be as comfortable or intuitive with some games, but it RARELY hinders gameplay. I really don't think it has much to do with the PlayStation being more popular in the N64 era...
Post by: ruby_onix on January 14, 2005, 02:06:59 PM
For demo discs, I've known Nintendo's (or rather, NCL's) position on that for a long time. They don't want to give you a demo, because you might actually play that demo, and they want to keep you somewhat gameplay-starved, so that you actually buy games when you want to entertain yourself. Fortunately, I don't think this "starvation" policy extends to Nintendo's actual first party games at all. Nintendo likes selling quality, not built-in obsolescence. But every time I see something like Majora's Mask which is known for being "short" I can't help but worry about it.
I think the problem here is Nintendo's policy of "We never look at what our competition is doing, we only look at ourselves." Any tactic of "starvation" is utterly foolish when you're in the position that Nintendo's in these days (as in, not the market leader). It's just not going to work, at best. At worst, it backfires in your face.
Also, has anyone at Nintendo actually picked up a PlayStation demo disc? Around 75% of the disc is usually "video reel" footage. Oh wait, you can fit all the big E3 videos on one disc? Well, that's why in the other 11 months of the year the discs are filled with videos of smaller niche titles, giving publicity to smaller third-party titles. Nintendo remembers what those were, right? It's really surprising. Nintendo gave out free "demos" far more frequently on VHS than they ever have on DVD (or GameCube discs, which are an even more appropriate delivery system). VHS was more expensive to produce, and all Nintendo needs to ship a GameCube disc is to add a polybag to Nintendo Power. The demo disc issue is a serious no-brainer.
As for the GameCube controller, here's the good and the bad of it, as I see it. I like the fact that the analog stick is the primary input. However the D-pad is in the secondary position, and that just isn't as comfortable as it could be. It's a sign of the times. Accept it and move on. But then, it's suddenly made even worse by the fact that Nintendo picked this time to make THE SMALLEST D-PAD EVAR. It kind of worked on the GBC/GBA. It does not work on the GameCube controller. It's almost a waste of plastic. DID YOU HEAR THAT NINTENDO! I said "wasted money". Look there, I said it again. For shame.
The analog L and R buttons rule. That goes without saying. The Z button is nice. I'd say it was designed and works better than either the R1 or R2 on Sony's controller. But why the heck is there only one of them? Nintendo should have known that people have found uses for more than one set of triggers (ahem, Twin Snakes anyone?), and what would it have hurt to have included a second Z button on the left side? It's a regular button. Those are practically free. At least, they cost less than controller flaws. The only reason that the Z button is there appears to be that it was a hangover from the three-handed N64 controller, and Nintendo liked how it's name sounded. "Z trigger." So cool. Yeah, I've heard Nintendo's official reason for the GameCube's Z trigger. "It's like a 'select' button." WTF? This leads into the "Why don't you have a freaking 'select' button" complaint.
As for the button layout, it was clearly designed to give you left-and-right motion between the A and B buttons. What the heck was wrong with the up-and-down motion used by games like Megaman and almost every other good 2D game since the SNES? Not that there's anything wrong with left-and-right. Some good 2D games used that style too. But if they had just raised the position of the B button, you could have up-and-down with the A & B, and left-and-right with the A & X. Oh wait. No you can't. Because the X button is a kidney. Because apparently Nintendo didn't think just making the A button bigger was enough to convince peple that the A button was the be-all end-all button on a controller. No, they had to make crappy buttons, designed to draw more attention towards the good one.
Nintendo tried not just to ignore the competition with their button layout, but they threw out an entire history of controller experience in order to make something "better". The sad part is, I haven't seen one single example that says that Nintendo's crazy button layout on the GameCube is "better" than the SNES's "standard" layout, or even the N64's. For both of those systems Nintendo put their money where their mouth was, and proved that they knew what they were talking about. The GameCube? Nuh-uh. We're just gonna make this system, claim that it's better, and expect everyone else to define it. If you're gonna make a controller for the third parties, you're supposed to make it as versatile as possible. Not try to push a one-button or two-button revolution, and then not back it up.
Hmm... what's left to say about the controller? The C-stick is pretty much the same as Sony's R3 stick. Playing a dual-analog game on the Cube isn't really a problem, even though the sticks are offset. Analog doesn't seem to suffer as much as the D-pad by being in the "secondary" position.
The ergonomics of the controller are great, and even the "bulky" Wavebird is more comfortable to hold than Sony's controller.
Oh and, Sony's "pressure sensitive" buttons are shite. "Flooring it" in Gran Turismo gives me a sore thumb, the idea of "analog sensitivity" with them is a joke, and they don't have the response time to keep up with me in Megaman Anniversary Collection (while Atomic Planet was "smart" enough to lock out the usage of a Dual Shock 1 with that game).
Edit: Fixed some grammar that was bugging me.
Post by: Hostile Creation on January 14, 2005, 02:43:53 PM
Though I'm not sure I could miss a demo disc with some Zelda demo on it.
Post by: Mr. Segali on January 14, 2005, 03:17:39 PM
Post by: nickmitch on January 14, 2005, 06:00:34 PM
Anyhoo, it was a good read Jonny and I don't like reading all that much.
Post by: Camel on January 14, 2005, 10:40:26 PM
I was thinking along these same lines last week as well. I was in Vegas last week for business related obligations during CES. Since this was my first CES, I thought I'd take the opportunity to go see what Nintendo has going on at their booth. I figured they'd have some exibit or some booth somewhere in the massive show. I look at the Map of exibitors and Nintendo has a location outdoors, in the Central Plaza area. I walk around and cannot find it. I ask at some information area and they direct me to a Van parked outside. A Friggin Van with noone in sight! Granted, it was a Van adorned with Nintendo logos, but still, it was quite lame. Microsoft has its own booth with a small, but visable, X-Box presense - Plus it was in evidence at the Pre-CES Keynote. Sony had a closed door PSP session (though none too impressive). Nintendo has nothing.
I mean they just launched a new handheld, have tons of games to showcase, and they don't have a booth. Come on. With so many Mom and Pop Manufacturers and Distributors having a presence at THE consumer electronics show, I find it unexcusable for a Giant like Nintendo to not even have a presence. I took my DS there, hoping to finally use its multiplayer functionality. What better place to showcase these capabilities? In between Appointments and Meetings, I'd pull my DS out and kill some time with Mario or Metroid. You would not believe the amount of people who'd come up to me and say something along the lines of: "Oh, is that the new Gameboy, I've heard so much about it!" or "Wow, Is that the touchscreen handheld that just came out? My son was wanting one so bad". And then I inform and educate them about how cool the DS and in turn Nintendo is.
I mean, hell, how hard would a booth be? Is this just Arrogance on Nintendo's part to think that they have no need for a booth? I know E3 is around the proverbial corner, but still!
Post by: Domikaze on January 15, 2005, 03:22:47 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Djunknown
As always, a great read.
Also, NoA should try and replace Rare and Silicon Knights to bring out Western games. Western games with the Nintendo touch are great and innovative, we should seem as frequently as the next game with Mario in it.
Well said. I agree completely.
Post by: Myxtika1 Azn on January 16, 2005, 11:16:05 AM
Post by: Azalyn on January 17, 2005, 11:58:17 AM
Although I do believe NOA should be given more juristiction in the USA market, I don't subscribe to the idea of them becoming exactly like what the competition is, one of the things I've always liked is their uniqueness. I seriously don't want to see Nintendo start to heavily capitalize on the "sex sells" mentality for example, if you need something like that to sell a product, then it just shows that you don't have enough faith in the quality of your products. I'd say NOA needs more freedom, but they shouldnt be allowed to go *too* far and end up changing some of the things that make Nintendo special.
Also, someone mentioned how it wouldnt be feasible to make the hardware diffrent in each region... well, I think that would be fairly useless to begin with. Both offices just need to co-operate on a middle ground and compromise, or try to integrate things in a modular way.
For example, many people disagree with Nintendo's philosophy of having adaptors, but I think that's the best approach. Building online-capability INSIDE the system is not a good buisness descision, when only 1-2 percent of the gaming market uses it, it's a much better plan to make an adaptor, therefore reducing the console's price, which keeps your console at a lower price then the competition, and then you can have an "online bundle pack" priced at the same price as a competitor's console, therefore leveling the playfield.
This modular mentality would allow you to have add-ons that wouldnt be popular in japan boxed seperately, and in the USA, you could have optional bundle packs, and so on.
Another related point to the above, I suppose the speculation and rumors about the Revolution controller do seem a little freaky... as little marketshare as fighting and 2D games have, it seems a shame to ditch our roots like that. However I read one interesting idea that states that maybe what they'll create is a kind of an analog stick that may be capable of converting into an input device that would simulate digital input, sort of like you change the configuration, and the stick's movement is restricted to a more confined area of movement, therefore changing it into something like arcade joysticks. Or something else, it's do-able, but would require a lot of testing and concepts to get right.
Another idea that I personally had, is maybe Nintendo could create a special program (not in the software sense) that developers sign up to, so they can create custom input devices. If a developer wants to create a unique game that requires a special input method, they'd sign up and work with Nintendo to quickly create their device, and then bundle it with the game. After all, as much as people complain about first-party controllers, it's not a big deal to just get a third party controller that often costs less then the first-party ones, and end up with exactly what you want. Also, every game that would need that controller thereafter could have a bundle pack, and as that particular controller becomes more widespread, they'd incrementally reduce the amount of bundles initially produced with each game that requires the particular controller. As for people that would say they don't want to spend more cash on extra controllers, well, who knows, maybe it'll be attractively priced. And modularity in input devices wouldnt nessesarily be a bad thing, it's never been possible to create a controller that is 100% optimal for every single game genre. And there would really only have to be a few of these extras to really fill the gaps.
As for demo discs, I definitely think that needs to continue, but you know, I don't know if that's much of a point anymore, Nintendo HAS been experimenting with it, which means the idea has definitely caught their eye, they'll likely do the numbers and maybe soon we'll finally have them with NP. It would definitely motivate me to resubscribe for sure. (the only reason I did it last year was for the zelda disc, I've hardly read any of the mags I got)
Oh, and I know this is a tired point... but people still seem to be saying Nintendo's statements about online aren't true...
Well, I touched on this above to make another point, but yeah... for the small amount of people that play online games, tell me how it's a sane buisness descision to dump a wad of cash into it? I mean Sony's "online plans" are *exactly* the same as Nintendo's, theres no diffrence between the two. Sony gives the message "here's the hardware, do it yourself" and Nintendo gives the same message. Microsoft is losing an insane amount of money that no other company in the world could ever afford to lose by providing the kind of online service that they do, with a pathetic amount of subscribers when you compare it to the amount of total users that own the console. It's just silly. Many before me have likely made this point... but yeah, when Nintendo does online, they'll do it RIGHT.
Anyways, this post is already huge as it is, I had a lot to say... :)
But I have to go for now. Anyways, thanks for reading, and again, great article.
/azalyn
Post by: Ian Sane on January 17, 2005, 12:45:14 PM
There's a big difference.
Sonys says "here's the hardware, make some games and we'll promote the concept, make some first party online titles, bundle the online adapter with the system, and promote the concept every chance we'll get."
Nintendo says "here's the hardware, make some games if you want but be aware that we'll make no online games ourselves and will burry the concept every chance we get."
"Building online-capability INSIDE the system is not a good buisness descision, when only 1-2 percent of the gaming market uses it."
Only 1-2% of the gaming market uses it because it's not built into the system. Having a feature as an add-on ensures that the feature never gets widely accepted by the userbase and thus doesn't get widely used by developers. The only way to make a feature successful is if it's built in and the whole userbase can make use of it. It's like how four player support was possible with the SNES but it didn't take off because you needed an adapter (the PS2 has few four player games for the same reason). However the N64 had four controller ports built in so four player support did take off and became a key selling point for the system.
One thing Nintendo did right with the DS was ensure that everything was available out of the box without any extra adapters. If Nintendo is to do online right (or connectivity right) the same approach had to be taken.
Post by: Azalyn on January 18, 2005, 09:28:05 AM
" or what? I mean give me a break. Just because Nintendo doesn't get on a soapbox to spout nonesense, doesn't mean they don't like online games, they've stated several times that it will be big sometime in the near future, just not *NOW*, and they have stated that they plan to implement it when they can do it *correctly* and not some half-assed approach that will bankrupt them, (like Microsoft's). Not everyone has MS's endless pot of gold to use. Also, the DS's capabilities proove that they're thinking of online, since the DS's projected lifecycle obviously crosses over with their estimation of when online games will be big, and keep in mind that an add-on in a handheld prooves to be a LOT more problematic then an add-on with a home console. Also, they only comment on online when they're asked about it, which is often, not "every chance they get" or whatever...Also, I'm pretty sure if a company was planning a high profile title, that Nintendo would promote them. Sony backed up FFXI because it was assured success, not just because it was an online game. When a game is seen as valuable, thats when companies promote it. Nintendo would only lose money by promoting every single online project that crossed their desk. Before they waste advertising money they need to be sure the project is going to be a hit, and worth the expenditure.
And the idea about built-in V.S. add-on, well, it's all nice and pretty in theory, but in practice the numbers speak diffrently. The vast majority of Xbox owners are NOT Xbox Live customers, it's really only about 1-2% that subscribe, and this is with the most killer deal ever, only a yearly fee, I mean it's practically a steal and yet no one's buying. And keep in mind that in the real world, Microsoft cannot keep this up for long, their strategy is the same as in the software industry, to lure the consumer in, and then lock them into your platform, the stats say that Microsoft is losing money with Xbox Live, and that is incremental as the service grows, due to the fact that more users require more servers and more bandwith and such, the more the service scales, the less the pathetic yearly fee can possibly cover the expenditure, but hey, this is MS, they don't care if they lose a few million or so, as long as they're the leader in five or so years, then they can incrementally change their fee untill it's up to a monthly one. Assuming that such a system can be maintained long-term with good cash-flow is a pipe-dream. And companies that don't have 50+ billion dollars to burn would prefer to stay profitable. When Nintendo sees the numbers start to change, that's when they'll make their move, developers don't nessesarily look at if the system uses an add-on or not, but rather how common the add-on is in the homes of gamers. I mean as odd a comparison as this is, even with four ports, you still have to buy extra controllers, which can cost as much as the BBA, so it's not ridiculous to assume a consumer will buy extra devices after initial purchase, especially if the console+addon together are still priced low compared to the competition's offering. And as I said, if a bundle pack is used at launch, then that will promote growth also. The idea here is to promote online games without compromising your profit or marketshare, not to jump into every single fad that shows up. I mean believe me, I *love* online games, a lot, so this isn't a bias here, I'm simply stating what a cautious buisnessperson does in these situations. Also, supporting Sony's online strategy on one end, and then stating that ethernet needs to be built-in on the other, is somewhat contradictory, hehe. It doesn't matter if Nintendo is the last person to implement online, it matters if when the time comes, the others have lost lots of money in their online plans, and if Nintendo has remained profitable without having to lose anything, and made a perfect transition from offline to online, if that's the case, then Nintendo wins in the end and has the last word. Assuming that being the first to implement something makes one the winner isn't a wise philosophy.
P.S.: I wanted to say something in my other post and I had forgotten, so I'll say it here. About the whol fighting game thing, well, I'm not a classic fighting game fanatic, so I wouldnt really have a previous experience of what it was like "before", although I have extremely huge hands, the d-pad isnt *too* horrible, it does take a little adjusting from what I can tell. Also, a friend of mine who has been playing fighting games since the early SNES days and is an expert in the genre (who also has big hands), told me that it only took him a little while to really get the hang of it, although it was initially diffrent, after some time he was able to pull off all the moves that he could in other games successfully, and with optimal performance. I suppose one controller may be "more suited" to a fighting game, but that doesnt mean it's impossible to adjust to it. After all, I wouldnt say that Sony's controller is that good for games either. Many people say that the best fighting game controller was the Saturn's, with it's six face buttons and such. the four-button thing is carried over from having only four buttons in the SNES days, it's a habit. Learning the layout of another controller just takes a little while, so big deal. Also, if you hate it that much, that's what 3rd party controllers are for. For the person who mentioned SoulCalibur, I'd say get the arcade joystick they released, I'd imagine that would be better for *any* fighting game, and better than *any* controller out there for those kinds of games. Controllers are normally designed for the majority of titles, not the minority, rounding out the design so all games, even the extremely small genres, get a good layout sort of ruins the potential of the majority of titles having a more optimal layout. I'd say the only solution to this is, and has always been, get a 3rd party controller that fits the game genre. Then you'll have even better control.
/azalyn
