Post by: NotSoStu on August 27, 2005, 06:28:52 PM
Why do I think this? It's quite simple, actually, but to understand this we have to look to the past. Note that this has a lot of computer-related lingo, so watch out...
*hops in time-travelling Delorean, sets it to January 2000*
Playstation 2 is the first next-generation console released, and developers flock to it seeing themselves having the success other developers had with the original PlayStation. Developers had a lot of trouble developing for it, since the SDK was unlike any others, and the CPU architecture was not directly related to any other architectures. However, they eventually learnt how to develop for it, since it was the only next-gen console out at the time (excluding the flop/bundle of joy known as DreamCast).
*sets Back to the Future car to Q3/Q4 2001*
So by now, developers have PS2 development down. They are now comfortable with the PS2's SDK, and even though it's difficult to work with, they don't want to change. So now, Microsoft has already announced its' entry into the console market, the Xbox... Which is just a computer with a 733MHz Celeron and an upgraded nVidia GeForce 3. For non-computer-hardware-savvy people, this is basically a run-of-the-mill computer. Hence, any company that had developed games for a PC using the DirectX programming libraries was already at home on the Xbox, and its' SDK.
And then, there's the odd man out... Nintendo's GameCube. It's running on an IBM "Gecko" chip, which is a custom PowerPC chip. PPC is the type of CPU that is used in Apple's Mac (well, until recently, but more on that later). And one thing that's a trade-off when you get a Mac is this: Unfortunately, barely anybody develops Mac games. No game developers have any real experience with the PPC architecture yet. Well, except for one of the major Mac games companies, Bungie... But I think we all know how they turned out. Because of this, even though it had a very easy-to-learn SDK, Nintendo's GCN hasn't really done so well in the third-party department.
*goes back to the present time*
Okay, now we're back in late 2005. So let's go through the systems again, by time of introduction. Microsoft's X360 is, again, a computer, but now resembles a Mac computer more than an x86 computer (anything that runs Windows is an x86 box). It's running on three custom PowerPC variants and an ATi video card based on the R500 core. This situation will be very similar to that of the Playstation 2: The first one out gets the most support. The SDK is reportedly very different from that of the original Xbox. Unlike the PS2 situation, however, the X360's development environment (the program in which code is written and compiled) is based off of Visual Studio 2005, giving it at least some recognizability to PC and Xbox developers. John Carmack, the creator of the Doom series, says that he as a PC developer is extremely satisfied with X360's development environment.
Next up, we have everybody here's favorite future console, Nintendo's Revolution. We don't have much in the way of solid information specifications-wise, but we know this: Nintendo has said that Revolution development will be similar, if not exactly the same as the Gamecube's SDK. We also know that Gamecube games will be playable inside a Revolution. And lastly, we know that IBM will be manufacturing the CPU. From this, I think it is logical to believe that Revolution will feature a processor that is very similar to that of the Gamecube. Meaning that Revolution will most likely have a PowerPC variant at its' heart. We also know that the video card will be using ATi's RN520 core. (ATi bought the company that made the GCN's graphics core, which in turn was made up of a bunch of guys from Silicon Graphics who developed the N64's graphics chip.) Of course, the main thing Revolution has going for it is the controller, but we don't know anything about that yet, excluding the fact that it will be backwards-compatible with the controllers of previous consoles... Meaning that the controller won't require third-party developers to make some cockamaney control scheme for Revolution if they are porting games from X360 or Revolution.
And lastly, the Playstation 3. Ah, Sony, always trying to do some crazy stuff with your hardware. Specifically, this time, with their Cell processor. The Cell CPU is, in a few words, a PPC CPU with seven much less powerful "mini-CPUs" attached to it, each of which can be assigned with a specific task - For instance, calculating physics. In the PC world, programmers have a known grudge against developing for just two CPUs running in tandem (dual-core). Now just imagine how much devs are going to love developing for 8 CPUs. Developers have never liked Sony's SDKs, and the reason they put up with them is because they were the only available way to develop for the only available next-generation console. But that's not all! Sony's making the same mistake Nintendo made in the Nintendo 64 era: Their storage medium is too expensive. Sony is using their Blu-Ray storage medium instead of DVDs, and Blu-Ray is pretty expensive. Also, lastly, Sony hired nVidia to make their RSX graphics chip.
So let's compare the three.
X360:
-SDK: "XNA". Somewhat similar to Xbox/PC development
-CPU: Xenon. Which is just 3 custom PPCs. Architecture is new to Xbox/PC developers. Multi-threading (>1 CPU) is optional, but it's a pain to programmers.
-GPU: ATi R500. ATi is oneo f the big players in the PC graphics industry, and the R500 core is their next big upgrade. Hasn't been unveiled yet.
-Storage: DVD9. More expensive than DVD, much less expensive than Blu-ray.
Revolution
-SDK: "???". Exactly the same as the GameCube.
-CPU: IBM Broadway. It's a PPC, and that's all we know. Meaning it will be familiar to anybody that develops for PPC - which is in all next-gen consoles. We don't know if it'll have more than one core.
-GPU: ATi Hollywood. Uses RN520 core, which will probably be similar to X360's R500.
-Storage: DVD. Cheapest of the three.
PS3:
-SDK: "???". Entirely new. Has a history of being hard to develop for.
-CPU: The Cell. Based on PPC, but will require extremely annoying multi-threaded programs.
-GPU: nVidia RSX. No real details on it yet.
-Storage: Blu-Ray. Expensive but holds more.
So what can we deduct from this? It's quite simple - Revolution and X360 seem to share a lot in common. I would not be surprised if many third-party developers released their games for both X360 and Revolution, since their innards are so similar. And PS3, with such a high learning curve and higher cost, will probably be left in the dust.
Just my two cents.
Post by: Mario on August 27, 2005, 06:45:50 PM
I just hope the Revolution has strong third party support FROM THE BEGINNING. It needs it right away, and perhaps the points you've outlined will lead to that. The situation with the GC was, it wasn't selling because it had no strong third party support, and the reason it had no strong third party support was because it wasn't selling. Revolution must have strong third party support and make a big bang from the word go, so third parties don't hesitate and the same situation doesn't happen again.
Post by: NotSoStu on August 27, 2005, 07:39:11 PM
) Good point. However, I actually don't think it'll take too much trouble to change Nintendo's... Ahem, "tiku" image. GCN, as you said, had a horrible start - I mean, I love it and all, but the console itself looks "tiku" and the launch games didn't help that. The industrial design of Revolution (Well, the one we were shown at E3) shows they're trying to move away from the whole "kiddiness" thing. If the launch titles are of the same variety as GCN, but also includes a game or two that mainstream gamers ("lol blood secks n gunz maek a gud gaem") would like, they could really improve that image. They'd have to make sure that they don't get rid of the Nintendo charm in the process. A game like Geist is a good example of a more adult-oriented game that still has its' Nintendo imprint on it. (Yeah, I know n-Space developed it, but Nintendo gave them a lot of help.) A darker game like Metroid Prime at launch time would mean extremely good things for the image.
And as for third-party support from the beginning? Well, from what I've been seeing, third parties like it a lot already. For instance, I mean, hell, even Hideo Kojima likes it, and the only Nintendo work I think he's ever done is MGS:TTS and the original Metal Gear for NES. Something that would be a surefire way to get third-party support would be to show off the controller to big names like Konami and Square... Which, I should mention, are both signed on for Revolution development already, even with a history of ignoring Nintendo.
Post by: Renny on August 27, 2005, 08:06:26 PM
Post by: IceCold on August 27, 2005, 09:37:10 PM
Post by: MarioAllStar on August 27, 2005, 09:54:55 PM
Post by: King of Twitch on August 27, 2005, 10:37:26 PM
There's no way Revolution will have more support than PS3, it's like saying in 2004 the PSP will have more support than the DS. With an extra 6 months and the steam of the PS1 and PS2 era, PS3 will have several million in the bank; with 360's year lead, extra Christmas season to itself, and 6 months of Halo 3 on the shelves, it could have several million more than that.
Post by: KDR_11k on August 28, 2005, 01:08:03 AM
From your X360 summary:
Multi-threading (>1 CPU) is optional
Yes, just like more than two colors and one button are optional. If you want to make a game that has a chance competing in the market you're going to use that multithreading. You can use the Cell without the SPEs as well but the program will run like ass.
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on August 28, 2005, 06:58:59 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on August 28, 2005, 07:27:54 AM
Post by: stevey on August 28, 2005, 02:37:49 PM
proof of mac suckeg. nintendo goes mac and lose all of it market share and top places.
Post by: KnowsNothing on August 28, 2005, 02:39:28 PM
Post by: Kazeneko on August 28, 2005, 06:37:40 PM
QuoteI find it even more amazing, that there's no mention of Metal Gear for the Nintendo Entertainment System/Famicom?! I'd bet good money, that before Metal Gear Solid, they were the best selling editions of the series.
Originally posted by: Lord_die_seis
Actually if you looked at Kojima's billboard of project history which was at E3 or whatever he completely denies the existance of the xbox version of MGS2:Substance. http://media.ps3.ign.com/media/714/714044/img_2793830.html and thats your proof.
Post by: KDR_11k on August 29, 2005, 01:03:25 AM
Wasn't the N64 a MIPS-based system, like the PSP?
Post by: Gamebasher on August 29, 2005, 06:04:03 AM
Because they won´t and all the while they´re busy talking about how great their consoles are, and how many new gamers they are going to attract (Microsoft must be on drugs thinking they can get 250 million gamers with their underpowered piece of hardware with features mostly useless to the developers and only a few great first party titles) and what only God knows what other bs they are going to come up with. They are already losing money on consoles sold at a lower price than what they cost to manufacture which is eroding their capitol (and I DON´T care how many loans or how much goodwill they may otherwise have for also SUCH will come to a dead end for them one day), and stock market value, until the big day where it all becomes too obvious to the shareholders who will then jump ship and crash the same companies like THAT! These people will not con ME anymore, I know how the financial world works and they wont be able to go on in that way.
But they would like YOU to believe just that, which is probably the only resaon why companies like Sony are still in the videogame business. I have discussed this with PGC Forum members before, and some did indeed agree with me that Sony was able to pour out huge sums of money into advertising, which made average gamers swallow it! and buy away (average Joe gamer). The issue of cheap games from counterfeit gaming traders is another thing which kept them going. They DID NOT make gaming cool - Nintendo´s Mario and SEGA´s Sonic did!
And that is what has me perplexed: how can somebody think that a company like Sony can go on and on investing such huge amounts of money in advertising all the time, not rake in a healthy profit on it´s consoles and yet claim they can go and on? I do recall that Moodys Investors Service downgraded their stocks some time ago and haven´t heard anything about it since. So, the old Man With the Axe is stalking them, and next gen could well be where they will pay for all the damage they´ve done in the videogame industry, yet sought to let people not know about in various ways.
Don´t believe me? Then you may have forgotten that bankruptcies with gaming companies are happening all the time, and that factors (in that order!) like ongoing market stagnation (too many gamers feel they either don´t have the time to play through a game to the end or they feel they are too expensive causing drops in sales), Piracy (they will then be prone to offers coming from counterfeit game traders eaning that the games companies will rake in less money for their products) and rising advertisement costs (which must be raked back in through other means, but can´t if being too small or too overlooked because of the first two factors).
THESE types of current market forces combined apply a considerable pressure on each and every games company out there and many can´t stay affloat and so will exit developement. This leaves the playground to bigger and fewer companies who CAN stay affloat, and who gobble up the remains of others and grow increasingly big and powerfull...and so are in a position to dictate the gaming agenda! I see them (EA, EIDOS, UBISOFT, CODEMASTERS, NAMCO, KONAMI etc.) as standing with the choice of ruining the whole games market entirely or saving it. Their choice of quality i their games or lack of same will be the catalyst which will show us where things will go. To hell or to heaven. From what I have read here on the PGC Forums about the hardware inside XBOX360 and PS3 I deduct that the developers thinking they will be fine with those, are in for a rude awakening when they discover that narrowed profit margins in an already struggling market has a lot to do with complicated hardware!
Nintendo however seems to be the only ones who have any healthy console system, which will make it easier on the third party developers. I do know that Nintendo tries all the time to make the games so wonderfull to play for the gamer and so comfortable to develope for the developers that they will eventually succeed! So, yes, Revolution could have more support than PS3. If not in the beginning, they will soon get it, as many companies wont be able to go on looking on reduced profits coming from skyrocketing developement- and marketing costs!
Keep going Nintendo - you ARE the true King of videogaming!
Post by: Terranigma Freak on August 29, 2005, 06:16:56 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on August 29, 2005, 07:35:17 AM
I want to see Nintendo get the best third party support but I know it's not going to happen with the Rev. What I want to see is the Rev have better third party support than the Cube and to have support increase as the console ages instead of shrink. Nintendo loses market share each gen. They have to start gaining market share each gen first before talk of beating Sony is to be even remotely realistic. Baby steps first.
Can Nintendo go up for a change? Sure. But we need to know more about the Rev first before any accurate predictions are made.
Post by: Stimutacs Addict on August 29, 2005, 07:56:46 AM
of course, we might not see the REv at all.. nintendo has never had a strong TGS showing.
Post by: Bill Aurion on August 29, 2005, 08:31:48 AM
Amazing and Realtime, by Sony? Ahaha...
Post by: Spak-Spang on August 29, 2005, 08:45:36 AM
1)Somehow Xbox 360 is able to penetrate in Japan causing the early launch to really have full impact on this next generation. As of right now, if it Xbox 360 just grabs the US market, then we have the same situation as this generation.
2)The price point alienates several gamers, and scares off publishers once sales aren't meeting expectations and development costs are higher.
The big problem Nintendo has is that my second mistake listed helps Microsoft as well. The actual best thing for Nintendo is for the 1st mistake not to happen and the 2nd to happen. That would mean the Japanese market would fall back into Nintendo's hand...and with that market comes more 3rd party support.
Also it is important to note that Nintendo has loyalists. People assumed that to be true about Sony, but when Xbox came out many Sony supporters jumped shipped. We don't know if Microsoft has loyalists yet, because a second system has never been released. Nintendo loyalists may be decreasing each generation, but the fact that they exist at all is a huge plus for Nintendo...and if the Revolution is something truly unique it may wake up that Nintendo loyalist that went for Xbox or PS2 this generation because they wanted to play the games available.
Another thing to remember is with each generation a sort of slate cleansing happens. Yes people are going to remember who was first place last generation, but that image can change instantly. And good marketing and games can drastically change perception. If Nintendo markets itself correctly they can kill that negative "I LOVE HALO 2" perception they have. Specially, with a few launch games that really drive that point home.
Post by: vudu on August 29, 2005, 09:34:36 AM
QuoteNot exactly true. Publishers don't give a rat's ass about market share. They don't even care how many copies of their game gets sold.
Well you're not crazy, but you're naive. Developers don't decide what game goes where. Publishers do that and all that matters to them is market share or potential market share.
All they should care about is profit. If they can sell 100,000 copies of a game at $15 profit each, they'll take that in a heartbeat over 250,000 copies at $5 each. So if Nintendo can lower development costs enough (compared to PS3 and X360), it will be more than worth it to publish games on their platform.
BTW, no way will Revolution have more third-party support than PS3. I'll be happy if 75% of the games worth playing make it over.
Post by: Ian Sane on August 29, 2005, 10:19:13 AM
That's true but it will depend on certain factors and on the difference between sales figures. 100,000 to 250,000 isn't a bad difference but 100,000 and 1,000,000 sure as hell is. If there's a huge difference in potential sales then a publisher would still make more money on the PS3. Plus this only works if the Rev actually is cheaper to make games for. Nintendo is infamous for having higher licencing fees than the competition. Nintendo regards third parties more as suckers to exploit for easy cash then as partners. When Nintendo wants to lower development costs they mean THEIR development costs. They traditionally don't give a sh!t about anyone else.
It's not a bad idea but it would require Nintendo to completely change their way of dealing with third parties. That's something they should do but I really doubt they ever will.
Post by: KDR_11k on August 29, 2005, 10:30:42 AM
Sure, they'll have an impact. As does throwing pebbles at a concrete wall.
Terranigma Freak: That's what they say every single f###ing generation. "Oh, no, games are getting more expensive to make, we must increase the prices next gen!". Only MS seems to be willing to do that, though. The reality of the market is that 50 is already too much for many people and sales will only go down from higher prices.
Sony's arrogance could very well lead to reduced (probably not severely, though) third party support as their demands often increase costs and when it comes to money managers suddently start to understand.
but when Xbox came out many Sony supporters jumped shipped.
The N64 lost much more to the PS1 than the PS2 to the XBox. You can only be sure Sony lost its loyalists when 100% of the userbase jumps ship, otherwise you could argue that the remaining users are the loyalists and the rest just want games regardless of who makes them.
So if Nintendo can lower development costs enough (compared to PS3 and X360), it will be more than worth it to publish games on their platform.
Yes but that's impossible unless they just have a lower-specced system with less detailled graphics. The API is the smallest problem as that'll be abstracted away after a few months.
Post by: vudu on August 29, 2005, 10:44:58 AM
Quote. Hasn't it been argeed upon that the Revolution won't support HD? Won't that mean less detailed graphics (although not noticable on standard def televisions)? Granted, that probably won't mean anything for multiplatform games, but ones that are developed solely for Revolution should be able to get away with a smaller budget.
[Lowering developing costs is] impossible unless they just have a lower-specced system with less detailled graphics.
Post by: pudu on August 29, 2005, 10:52:39 AM
Quote
So if Nintendo can lower development costs enough (compared to PS3 and X360), it will be more than worth it to publish games on their platform.
Yes but that's impossible unless they just have a lower-specced system with less detailled graphics. The API is the smallest problem as that'll be abstracted away after a few months.
From the art side of things to make the visuals will be equally hard on each platform because they use the same programs. For some things smoothing out the visualls and adding certain details isn't all that hard. But if Sony's and Microsoft's consoles are vastly more powerful then Nintendo's and there just isn't the same amount of detail to be modeled and textures to be created then that could lower development cost but not a ton. Think about the new tech. of normal maps. To make a good normal map you must create a high-poly character first and use it for the maps on the low poly character. This process won't change regardless of the platform. Also, there will be more time spent on ports where if it originated on, say PS3, it could take a lot of extra time to strip away enough detail to make it run on the Revolution (all hypothetical of coarse, we yet to know the difference in power).
I think perhaps the biggest issue this next gen for developement costs will be the architecture of the CPU's. No amount of supplied tools from Microsoft and Sony will be enough to truely ease the programmers herendous task of learning to program for multi-core CPUs. If Nintendo goes multi-core then these same problems will plaigue all next-gen consoles and drive up development costs and time. On the other hand, if Nintendo goes for a powerful single-core CPU and maybe a PPU (pipe dream I know but I can wish) this would truely ease development.
Post by: stevey on August 29, 2005, 12:59:03 PM
Post by: MarioAllStar on August 29, 2005, 01:14:31 PM
Post by: NotSoStu on August 29, 2005, 07:49:37 PM
Pudu: Consoles tend to follow the PC market, and as such I'd be surprised if Revolution wasn't dual-core. Then again, Nintendo does have a mind of its' own...
Vudu: Frankly, HD means nothing at the moment. All it means is that the TVs have a higher resolution... Meaning it's clearer looking to you. But it doesn't degrade the graphics quality in terms of effects and things - All the lighting effects and high-end textures will all look the same on 1080p and 480p. And if Revolution's GPU has good anti-aliasing, then frankly, we shouldn't worry about HD anyway. It'll make stuff smoother, not sharper, and that can be much better in a lot of cases.
As for development prices and console prices, at this point I think that we should just wait till TGS and see if Revolution is unveiled, and iff PS3's details are unveiled. If PS3 is above $400, then I think it's safe to say that it'll lose market share.
Post by: KDR_11k on August 29, 2005, 10:56:36 PM
Not much. Definitely not enough to have a noticeable influence on development budgets.
And guys, just ignore stevey, that guy loves to post blatant lies.
Post by: Gamebasher on August 30, 2005, 07:57:40 AM
If average Joe Gamer can´t buy his controllers from third parties and thus save some bucks, he may scoff and walk over to the competition. Already they are leaving gamers out with the the two different launch systems, at different prices. So I think Nintendo has a good chance after all, because of these huge mistakes from Bill. Games is one thing, but the price of the hardware is another more expensive matter which may be crucial to many who are to chose which next-gen platform to buy. Games will mostly be the same on either Sony or Microsofts platforms, so Nintendo HAS got a fair chance of making it this next-gen IF their games rock that much on Rev for the reason that one of the other two may be already losing out!
Post by: Ian Sane on August 30, 2005, 08:16:34 AM
Nintendo beating MS this round is a realistic goal and I would be estatic if they pulled it off.
Post by: couchmonkey on August 30, 2005, 08:55:44 AM
It may result in more third party support if homebrewed games can be counted as third party support and if Nintendo encourages a lot of homebrewing (unlikely, unfortunately). I would like that, although it runs the risk of giving us 500 games that are complete crap even compared to the average THQ title, and just a 100 or so good ones.
I do see Nintendo's cheaper development stance as possibly attracting third parties if Nintendo can demonstrate that cheap games still sell. Even then, I don't think it's going to put Nintendo in first place.
Post by: stevey on August 30, 2005, 11:17:52 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Stu L Tissimus
Stevey: o_O. Half of your comment is unreadable. And how does Linux belong in there? (First, it's going up in use very quickly, and second, it's an OS, not a console.... o_O)
sorry if it's a little unreadable what I'm get at is that sony and ms are reating the past failer of other system like, neo geo and noe geo cd is be repeaed by the core 360 and 360 and, like the psp is repeating last 5 handheld that when up againt the gameboy but failed becase high price low # of game big size and small battery life; and it going to blow up in there face like atiri when them made lot of crappy(same) game and system and lead the the near demis of games. I ment the linxus (sp?) that crappy hand heald from atiri and not linux.
Quote
Originally posted by: kdr_11k
And guys, just ignore stevey, that guy loves to post blatant lies.
no I don't. you love point out my mistake dont you.
Post by: ChaNoKin on August 30, 2005, 12:01:15 PM
Post by: Gamebasher on September 01, 2005, 11:04:07 AM
Post by: WuTangTurtle on September 01, 2005, 07:42:50 PM
Post by: anubis6789 on September 01, 2005, 10:17:22 PM
Post by: Gamebasher on September 02, 2005, 06:38:44 AM
Just wait ´till they launch the Revolution... It´s going to be so good!
Post by: KDR_11k on September 03, 2005, 02:06:54 AM
Post by: WuTangTurtle on September 03, 2005, 09:59:16 PM
Post by: WesDawg on September 06, 2005, 12:36:08 PM
In the end, publishers put games on whatever console has the largest userbase or whichever will garner them the most sales. Even when the Cube and the XBox were tied for sales in the US though, games went XBox only, not because of the userbase, but because Cube owners weren't buying those games. Whether that means we're pickier buyers, to obsessed with Ninty to notice other companies games, or just teh I LOVE HALO 2s I'm not sure. Seems like one killer exclusive game can really put a console on top though. Something that everyone wants to own. FF did it fo the PS1. Halo did it for the XBox (actually I think you could argue that most of the XBox's 3rd party support came from Microsoft buying exclusives though). One killer game gives you a large userbase, and suddenly everyone is flocking to develop for your system. Ninty, despite putting out some real classic games, didn't have that this time around.
Post by: Gamebasher on September 07, 2005, 08:37:04 AM
Post by: Artimus on September 07, 2005, 09:43:20 AM
Post by: Don'tHate742 on September 07, 2005, 10:12:52 AM
Post by: jasonditz on September 07, 2005, 10:26:17 AM
Post by: cubist on September 08, 2005, 06:22:42 PM
Post by: NotSoStu on September 09, 2005, 07:36:04 PM
I'm wondering, anybody know if PGC has articles from before the GCN was announced? (I know they used to have a different name....) I'd like to see if everything was as hush-hush about the Dolphin as it is with the Revolution now. Or perhaps this is some evil marketing scheme? Making everybody wonder. Even PS2/Xbox fanboys that I'm aqcuainted with are at least interested in what the Revolution will be... Take that, Microsoft viral marketing!
Post by: BigJim on September 09, 2005, 07:50:31 PM
Post by: wandering on September 09, 2005, 08:38:45 PM
For the most part it was just as hush-hush.
Two things were different, that I can remember: 1) when GameCube was revealed in Nov 00, Nintendo revealed everything at once: the official name, the console design, the games, the controller. And, 2) the name of the console (then StarCube), and the controller design were unofficially leaked before the unveiling.
Post by: IceCold on September 10, 2005, 08:15:30 AM
Post by: NotSoStu on September 10, 2005, 04:20:49 PM
And as for a "killer game," GCN most certainly had some (namely Metroid Prime). But what Nintendo really needs are killer <I>launch</I> games. Xbox wouldn't have done so well if they didn't have Halo at launch - I think we can all agree with that. PS2 didn't really have any truly "killer" launch titles, but they had such a large head-start that Xbox and GCN's launch titles had to compare with about a year's worth of PS2 titles. And GCN's launch titles were, I have to say, not great choices. The only real killer game was probably SSBM. People I know would look at Luigi's Mansion and say, "Dude, no Mario? That's gay."
What we need is a balanced launch with two or three games that would sell very well, and then make sure that there's no drought of quality games in the coming months. Seems Nintendo's learnt half of its' lesson - The DS went on sale with a killer app, SM64DS. But then there were barely any good games until Warioware, then until Kirby, and we're only starting to see a flood of good games (AWDS and Nintendogs!) now, nearly 10 months after the DS's launch. They can't let that happen to Revolution.
Just my two cents. (I swear, that should be my catch phrase.)
Post by: SgtShiversBen on September 10, 2005, 07:09:12 PM
I say this because I went through it one day and found out that we've been lied to ever since then. Horray...take this charming quote:
"We are planning to expand our software widely on GameCube because it's not a mask Rom based console. One reason we didn't publish a lot of software on Nintendo 64 was because of its choice of media." - Yoshiki Okamoto (3/29/01)
Post by: zakkiel on September 10, 2005, 07:13:36 PM
Nintendo needs a best-selling FPS franchise. It needs to be high-quality, innovative, and have a mature storyline and presentation. Nintendo's very good at the first two, but they can't seem to do that last bit to save their lives. If Nintendo were a restaurant, their meals would all be excellently prepared, delicious, nutritious, and entirely vegetarian, on the assumption that making it vegetarian will allow everyone to enjoy it. Problem is, meat eaters crave meat for its own sake, and most of the market eats meat.
Post by: wandering on September 10, 2005, 07:34:18 PM
Nintendo DOES produce good "mature" titles: through second and third parties. To ask for something more (a first party bloodbath of a game, for example).....that's not what Nintendo is interested in making. Further, to suggest that a title needs to be dark or bloody to be popular....look at the success of Nintendogs. Or Ocarina of Time. Or Mario 64.
There's this vegetarian chinese retuarant where I used to live. They offer a wide array of delicious and original dishes. And they're always packed.
Post by: BigJim on September 11, 2005, 03:52:11 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Stu L Tissimus
I was looking at the archives, and they didn't answer the question I was looking for, so if anybody knows: Was some of the software for the 'Cube known to exist before they officially unveiled the console? Did developers have press releases with them saying "hay guyz we r maeking teh gaems 4 teh nex nitendo consul lol!11," or was all the third-party software only unveiled after the StarCube was unveiled?
Nope, I don't believe any software was known before SpaceWorld 2000 when the first demo videos were shown, as well as the first view of the hardware in 5 colors.
Check out the events archives for the SW2K stuff. Memory lane.
Post by: Bill Aurion on September 11, 2005, 06:37:04 AM
Post by: zakkiel on September 11, 2005, 07:54:41 AM
QuoteAll good games. And yet, Nintendo lost the N64 battle with these games, and Xbox rose from nowhere to second place on the basis of one first-person shooter. Which isn't a gore fest by any stretch of the imagination. I'm not interested in gorefests. I don't understand the appeal. A movie like "A Beautiful Mind" is not exactly a gorefest, and yet it is by no stretch of the imagination a family movie.
Nintendo DOES produce good "mature" titles: through second and third parties. To ask for something more (a first party bloodbath of a game, for example).....that's not what Nintendo is interested in making. Further, to suggest that a title needs to be dark or bloody to be popular....look at the success of Nintendogs. Or Ocarina of Time. Or Mario 64.
QuoteTragically, Nintendo is mostly empty every night, and will remain so until it "caves in" as you say and starts offering a more rounded menu.
There's this vegetarian chinese retuarant where I used to live. They offer a wide array of delicious and original dishes. And they're always packed.
Post by: wandering on September 11, 2005, 09:04:57 AM
Nor is it by any stretch of the imagination a particularly GOOD movie.....
And note further that Lord of the Rings, a movie that nearly everyone can enjoy, did much better at the box office that year.
I don't have a problem with Nintendo coming out with more second and third party mature games like Eternal Darkness, RE4, and Geist (I like more adult games too!). But I do have a problem with people saying Nintendo should make first-party mature games. Then they wouldn't be Nintendo....they'd be some kind of souless EA-like company who makes games solely based on what it thinks will make the most money.
"Everybody" games do sell and do have broad appeal. The N64 didn't 'fail' because it launched with Mario instead of Goldeneye....it 'failed' becasue it didn't have third party support, and it didn't have that because of a bunch of other stupid decisions Nintendo made. And GameCube 'failed' because it never really aquired a killer app...NOT because the games they produced at launch were 'tiku tiku tiku! ', but becasue the games were neither particularly amazing nor easy to get into.
"Tragically, Nintendo is mostly empty every night, and will remain so until it "caves in" as you say and starts offering a more rounded menu."
Companies who spend all of their time trying to please everybody invariably wind up pleasing nobody. Nintendo needs to convice people that what Nintendo offers is worth getting into, and they can do that without changing what makes Nintendo... Nintendo.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on September 11, 2005, 10:33:11 AM
Do you have any examples that prove that point? I have many examples that disprove it....but you first.
As for Nintendo staying Nintendo....sure, we would never want Nintendo to change what they are, instead we'd like them to change what they produce. Instead of making games that appeal to all audiences, they should make many games that appeal to different groups of people. Even though what Nintendo produces is fun, people know what they want, and for most, it isn't Nintendo's type of fun. Making games that seem "cool" to certian groups is alot easier than making a game that seems "cool" to everyone.....I hope that makes sense to you.
Post by: wandering on September 11, 2005, 12:18:24 PM
How's about Wolfgang Peterson's TROY film? It was like 3 hours long and somewhat artsy, so as to appeal to critics... yet they also loaded it with poular actors and replaced Gabriel Yared's beautiful score that he worked on for a year with a more 'commercial' hack job, so as to appeal to the masses. At the end of the day, the movie was widely panned by both critics and average moviegoers.
"Instead of making games that appeal to all audiences, they should make many games that appeal to different groups of people."
I actually agree with this, partly. Revolution should definitely have a wide variety of games. It's just that I think in order to acheive that, Nintendo should change, not the kind of games that they produce personally, but rather their level of 3rd part support.
Variety is no problem for the DS: the system offers everything from simple pet simulators, to complex RPGs, to bloody action games. This is because the system has great 3rd party support. Which is because the system is poular. Which is becasue of low cost and innovative features. And since Revolution is also supposed to be inexpensive and innovative.....I'm not too worried about game variety.
Post by: stevey on September 11, 2005, 01:49:31 PM
People eat meat because it healty and tasted ten time better than grass and not because it teh mature and 99% of people eat meat so vegetarian food will let no one enjoy it because there no flavore. I not a redneck in nature thing eat other thing that how it work get used to it
Post by: KnowsNothing on September 11, 2005, 02:26:31 PM
Post by: zakkiel on September 11, 2005, 05:12:02 PM
QuoteLike Sony, for example. They definitely bombed hardcore.
Companies who spend all of their time trying to please everybody invariably wind up pleasing nobody.
QuoteAlso note: if Nintendo made a game with the visual maturity of LotR, I would be well satisfied. And didn't you just say that movies that products that aim to please everyone will please no one? How is that different from "a movie everyone can enjoy"?
And note further that Lord of the Rings, a movie that nearly everyone can enjoy, did much better at the box office that year.
QuoteMore third-party result will mean that Nintendo has more copies of games that everyone else has. I'm all for this, but I don't see it producing a lot of mature titles. Here's why: Nintendo's image is driven by their first-person titles. If Nintendo has an image of being actively hostile to anything with a T or higher on the box, then people go elsewhere for those games and those mature titles that do come out (RE, ED) horribly undersell and the producers go elsewhere. That's what happened this generation.
It's just that I think in order to acheive that, Nintendo should change, not the kind of games that they produce personally, but rather their level of 3rd part support.
Troy bombed because the many elements is used all sucked. The action was bad, the actors were wooden, and the music was bad (people have better taste in music than commonly supposed). I'm definitely not suggesting that Nintendo create a wide variety of bad games. And A Beautiful Mind was a great movie. It's not one of my favorites, but it definitely earned its acclaim.
What I value about Nintendo is its dedication to quality, innovation, and solid engineering, not its dedication to an E rating. Yes, a Nintendo that produced the occasional Halo or KotOR or Fable would be different. And I would celebrate that. It would mean they had embraced a broader form of entertainment.
Post by: IceCold on September 11, 2005, 06:09:47 PM
QuoteEh? That's why he picked that movie as an example, because it is good.
A movie like "A Beautiful Mind" is not exactly a gorefest, and yet it is by no stretch of the imagination a family movie."
Nor is it by any stretch of the imagination a particularly GOOD movie.....
But I'm with you concerning Nintendo. I would prefer making deals with 3rd parties (or getting Retro to do one) to get quality mature titles and then ramming them down everyone's throats by advertising them rather than Nintendo itself making them. Even if the ones by Nintendo would be better, I still wouldn't want it to happen.
Post by: wandering on September 11, 2005, 07:52:38 PM
Quote
Also note: if Nintendo made a game with the visual maturity of LotR, I would be well satisfied.
Twilight. Princess.
Quote
And didn't you just say that movies that products that aim to please everyone will please no one? How is that different from "a movie everyone can enjoy"?
Erm.... Okay, here's the difference. When making art, the artist's intention is often to introduce his audience to things that he enjoys. If an artist enjoys watching paint dry for hours at a time, he probably wouldn't make a film of paint drying for several hours....but he might make a film that explores paint-drying in some kind of witty and fun way that his audience can appreciate. This is pandering, in a sense, but not in a bad way.
The flip side of this is someone (or more likely, several someones, who form a committee of some sort) who tries to predict what is popular/well-liked and then tries to mass-produce that thing and make as much money off of it as possible. The result of this sort of thinking is things like summer buddy action comedies, MTV, and EA games. This is bad.
It's the difference between labouring over a great movie that a wide array of people can enjoy, and painting a movie by the numbers in an attempt to acquire the most amount of money possible based on the latest statistical reports of what is popular. It's the difference between Finding Nemo and Shark Tale. It's the difference between Sony and Nintendo.
Quote
Here's why: Nintendo's image is driven by their first-person titles.
Nintendo's image is driven by Nintendo. Nintendo can take many steps to create a more 'mature' image of its console than it has in the past, without sacrificing what kind of games they want to make personally. They can do this by making a more adult looking console (done), and building better relationships with 3rd parties (apparently being done), and working with second parties to create exclusive mature titles (hopefully being done).
Quote
What I value about Nintendo is its dedication to quality, innovation, and solid engineering, not its dedication to an E rating. Yes, a Nintendo that produced the occasional Halo or KotOR or Fable would be different. And I would celebrate that. It would mean they had embraced a broader form of entertainment.
I wouldn't mind this IF THAT'S WHAT THEY WANTED TO DO. And maybe it is. Another Code isn’t 'I LOVE HALO 2'. OOT had blood. Miyamoto worked on Eternal Darkness. If Nintendo wanted to create a Touchstone-like first party mature games division, I wouldn't necessarily object. But what I do object to is people constantly calling for Nintendo to cave into every market pressure, every trend. 'Who cares if Wind Waker is artistic? It's teh I LOVE HALO 2!' 'Nintendo should put voice acting in Twilight Princess!' 'Nintendo needs to go online RIGHT NOW!!' 'Nintendo games should have more blood and less bright colors!'
Maybe, while we're at, Nintendo should have produced a generic Space Invaders clone instead of a cartoony jumping game involving an Italian carpenter and a gorilla back in '81.
.......sigh. I feel like we're arguing over a lot of nothing, in any case. I want variety; I want more mature games (and by mature I don't mean GTA or any of the other junk passing off as mature these days). I just don't want Nintendo to sell out, that's all.
P.S. A Beautiful Mind was generic paint-by-the-numbers, warmed-over, academy pandering, that didn't offer a particularly accurate view of either John Nash or Schizophrenia. Just my two cents.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on September 12, 2005, 06:43:46 AM
However, the other type of mature, the better one, is in fact an interesting genre. This type mature can be very psychological, and deal with very traumatizing and emotional issues. It doesn't have to be dark to be mature, and a good example of this is the Lion King (which was very mature for the audience it was aiming towards). A game that deals with death, self-sacrifice, and moments of bittersweetness is something I'd like Nintendo to consider. With it's ability to produce quality and it's dedication to innovation, they could make a masterpiece. Somthing akin to a light-hearted yet more disturbing Eternal Darkness could really hit the spot.
Post by: Artimus on September 12, 2005, 07:07:26 AM
1. Choose are art style that is bright and colourful, but ARTISTIC, instead of just bright cartoony stuff, choose something with some art behind it, people raved the graphics of games like Yoshi's Island (and Wind Waker upon playing!) because they weren't childish, they were artistic
2. Don't dumb it down! I used to play 'adult' baseball games when I was ten years old, and I had zero control problems, or heck, include an easy and a complicated control mode, just because it's Mario doesn't mean it can't have an indepth control scheme
3. Improve the voices! Make Peach sound like a woman not an eleven year old, give the characters real lines instead of pointless catch phrases, and make their voices a bit more realistic and less painfully fake
Imagine what a different game these three changes would make. None of these would compromise Mario as a family figure, none of these would make in inaccessable to younger players or dull for older players, and it'd greatly improve the game for everyone!
One thing I'd like to see them do for all games is just notch up the graphics a bit. Games like Wind Waker, Twilight Princess and even back to Smash Bros. all show Nintendo is capable of being on par with anyone. I don't mean realism, I mean quality. Why are the textures so horrific in Mario Sunshine and the polygons so rough?
Essentially Nintendo needs to stop dumbing down games, as kids can figure out reasonable controls just fine, and put a lot more into their damn presentation. Nintendo has about the worst presentation of any quality game maker out there.
Post by: Bill Aurion on September 12, 2005, 08:36:32 AM
Um, the polygons are NOT rough...and the texture issue is an issue with all GC games, because the system doesn't have much RAM...
Essentially Nintendo needs to stop dumbing down games, as kids can figure out reasonable controls just fine, and put a lot more into their damn presentation.
Ok, first of all you say Ninty DUMBS DOWN their games, in the sense that you want them to complicate controls to make them more fun...Irony? I think so...
Post by: Ian Sane on September 12, 2005, 09:45:21 AM
I think the ideal solution is use the style from SSBM for all Nintendo games. That game actually made Mario look COOL. He had stiches in his jeans and there was like shading and stuff. In EAD's games everything is super bright and happy. Some more shadows and some darker tones in certain areas would go a long way. Compare Super Mario Sunshine to Donkey Kong Country. Both are family friendly and cartoony except DKC has more detail while SMS looks like Blue's Clues. Just having less primary colours would make Mario look more like the "everyone" game it's supposed to be than the "kids" game that it is misinterpreted as.
Post by: Deguello on September 12, 2005, 11:09:13 AM
Aww wook. I smiwey fwower in the gumdwop hills in wowwipop lane... Awwww.
Post by: Ian Sane on September 12, 2005, 11:19:27 AM
What about Yoshi's Story?
I always felt Yoshi's Island was more arty. The design was to make it look like a colouring book. I didn't find it childish at the time. I feel Super Mario Sunshine is much worse. Yoshi's Island when it came out had like the greatest graphics anyone had every seen and all sorts of state-of-the-art effects. Super Mario Sunshine looked dated the day it was released. That makes a big difference. With Yoshi's Island it looked like Nintendo was trying to make the best looking game possible. With Super Mario Sunshine it looked like Nintendo skimped on the details to make it more kid-friendly.
Plus compare Yoshi's voice in the SNES version to the GBA version. Which one sounds more childish? Hell this applies to any SNES-to-GBA port. The GBA ports are way more childish with cutesy voices and dumbed down difficulties.
Post by: Deguello on September 12, 2005, 11:28:17 AM
Post by: Stimutacs Addict on September 12, 2005, 11:50:28 AM
Post by: Bill Aurion on September 12, 2005, 12:36:43 PM
Post by: Ian Sane on September 12, 2005, 12:53:38 PM
All I know is that when Yoshi made a "yeah-uh" sound he was cool and ever since he started saying "Yoshi" in a dorky voice he's been childish.
Post by: ShyGuy on September 12, 2005, 01:30:12 PM
Post by: Artimus on September 12, 2005, 01:39:04 PM
Quote
Ok, first of all you say Ninty DUMBS DOWN their games, in the sense that you want them to complicate controls to make them more fun...Irony? I think so...
Hardly. They do dumb down their games. They make simplistic controls which are often less intuitive. Simplistic isn't as good as intuitive. There is not reason you can't design a control scheme that is both in-depth for older players yet simple enough to use for younger players. Most other baseball games have them. Mario Golf 64 is a good example of this. At the time the control scheme allowed for the very basic press-a-button use for younger players. But an older player could choice ball point, fade/draw characters, etc. By time Toadstool Tour (a game I own AND enjoy) came around a better system had been developed in the analog swing. It's simple for little kids but allows a more intuitive control. In fact it's easier to use well than the timed button press, but you can still master it.
Another good example is the SSBM Mario vs. the Mario Sunshine Mario. Why not use the same textures on his clothes? They're still cartoony, but they give the world a texture. Nintendo are bad at textures! Not all GCN games suffer from bad textures. Because SMS had HORRIBLE textures.
If Nintendo just change a bunch of little things, and upped the presentation, their games would play better, be loved just as much by current fans, and take less flak.
Post by: Bill Aurion on September 12, 2005, 02:59:54 PM
Wait, what? No...And Mario Baseball wasn't devved by Nintendo, so this argument just fell into the toilet until you can find a Nintendo-devved game that has "unintuitive control"...
Another good example is the SSBM Mario vs. the Mario Sunshine Mario. Why not use the same textures on his clothes? They're still cartoony, but they give the world a texture. Nintendo are bad at textures! Not all GCN games suffer from bad textures. Because SMS had HORRIBLE textures.
I like how you completely ignored the perfectly rendered water and eye-dropping draw distance...Want to know how they got those? By making some sacrifices in the texture area (where the system is already weak due to low RAM)...Comparing a fighting game to a resource-hungry platformer like Mario Sunshine isn't going to get you anywhere...
Post by: ThePerm on September 12, 2005, 03:36:39 PM
thats besides the point because your all stupid fucks and can all go to hell!!!!
good thing no one is reading this
Post by: ThePerm on September 12, 2005, 03:42:18 PM
Post by: Artimus on September 12, 2005, 04:25:29 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
"They make simplistic controls which are often less intuitive."
Wait, what? No...And Mario Baseball wasn't devved by Nintendo, so this argument just fell into the toilet until you can find a Nintendo-devved game that has "unintuitive control"...
So a game with Mario, published by Nintendo, essentially their flagship mascott, isn't open to criticism because they didn't actually develop it internally? Bull crap. It's a Nintendo game, regardless of who developed it, and it's their job to make sure it's good.
Another good example is the SSBM Mario vs. the Mario Sunshine Mario. Why not use the same textures on his clothes? They're still cartoony, but they give the world a texture. Nintendo are bad at textures! Not all GCN games suffer from bad textures. Because SMS had HORRIBLE textures.
I like how you completely ignored the perfectly rendered water and eye-dropping draw distance...Want to know how they got those? By making some sacrifices in the texture area (where the system is already weak due to low RAM)...Comparing a fighting game to a resource-hungry platformer like Mario Sunshine isn't going to get you anywhere...
I love the draw distance, and I've never once criticized the water. But blaming RAM (which as pointed out isn't even that valid) is foolish and simply making excuses. And how is SSBM not resource-hungry when it's got a ton of characters on-screen like it does during some battles?
SMS doesn't have bad graphics, it has sloppy graphics. The water is so amazing so why can't the rest be decent? The game also forgoes details. Look at a film like, say, Spirited Away. Compare it to something like a Saturday morning cartoon. Both animated. But one is supremely more impressive. Why? Every detail is given effort. I'm not saying SMS is ugly or badly done graphically, I'm saying if Nintendo upped their presentation they could keep their exact same games with the same age-appeal but avoid a lot of the criticism and improve their image. Basically they could please almost everyone.
Post by: Hostile Creation on September 12, 2005, 04:38:45 PM
Post by: zakkiel on September 12, 2005, 05:32:06 PM
QuoteYou're probably right. Most of the attitudes you really object to I don't hold. I think there are couple points worth clearing up, though. First: you believe that Nintendo is doing kid games because that is where its artistic sensibilities lead it. Nintendo has tons of artists, and the odds are good that many of them would love to pursue a mature game and are held back by Nintendo corporate calculations of exactly the kind you don't want directing game content. The sort of calculations that have Nintendo putting Mario in some ridiculous percentage of all the games it releases, or churning out a Mario Party every year, or making 50% of WW filler. And Twilight Princess is not close to the maturity of LoTR - compare the enemies in the shots with the Uruk-Hai, for example.
I feel like we're arguing over a lot of nothing, in any case.
QuoteThey worked with second parties to create mature titles last generation. We lost the second parties. They promised better relationships with 3rd parties last generation. We lost still more third-party support. I'm pleased they've at least changed the appearance of the console itself, but I never believed this counted for nearly as much as commonly supposed.
They can do this by making a more adult looking console (done), and building better relationships with 3rd parties (apparently being done), and working with second parties to create exclusive mature titles (hopefully being done)
Post by: wandering on September 12, 2005, 08:26:47 PM
Quote
First: you believe that Nintendo is doing kid games because that is where its artistic sensibilities lead it. Nintendo has tons of artists, and the odds are good that many of them would love to pursue a mature game and are held back by Nintendo corporate calculations of exactly the kind you don't want directing game content.
Perhaps.
I do sometimes treat Nintendo like they're an artist instead of a company.... but I think that's how they tend to act. Sure, there are (stupid) corporate decisions: Nintendo's whored out mario like crazy, rushed Wind Waker, etc. But other decisions (like the decision to make Wind Waker cel-shaded, or the decision to set Sunshine on a tropical island), felt like they were motivated primarily by the artists, and they represented directions that they, from an artistic and creative standpoint, wanted to explore. I find it hard to beleive that Nintendo's top brass ordered Wind Waker to be more tiku tiku tiku! because they felt it would make more money that way.
I also find it hard to fault Nintendo for not producing Halo-like games where you shoot at things with pistols and such. I'm sure there are some artists at Nintendo who would be interested in that sort of thing....but it's hard to take a 20-year corporate philosophy and separate that out and simply say Nintendo is suppressing various game types for profit-motivated reasons. What types of games Nintendo creates is undoubtedly engrained in everyone who works there...and to expect that Nintendo could simply shift their policy and start pumping out games like Halo or MGS is somewhat ludicrous.
With that said, I wouldn't at all mind seeing more games like Another Code coming from Nintendo. I haven't played it, but from what I gather there's a complex back story, an older protagonist, mature themes, etc. Nintendo should make more games like that (if they want to). I think we can both agree on that.
Quote
And Twilight Princess is not close to the maturity of LoTR - compare the enemies in the shots with the Uruk-Hai, for example.
mmm- maybe. But I'm afraid you might be confusing maturity with photo-realism. One of the things I love about Nintendo is that they seem to be one of the few companies that intuitively understands that when you try to make a game photo-realistic, you wind up with something that lies in the uncanny valley. Miyamoto had a great quote about this, where he described a hypothetical game where a detailed photorealistic hand passes through a bottle, and thus counteracts all of the detail and realism.
Stylized graphics are good. I can't for the time when other companies follow Nintendo's lead and leave behind gee-whiz photorealism for more stylized, artistic (dare I say impressionist?) visuals.
Quote
They worked with second parties to create mature titles last generation. We lost the second parties. They promised better relationships with 3rd parties last generation. We lost still more third-party support.
Maybe I'm fooling myself, but I think Nintendo will do things better next time round. The DS is proof that the philosophies they're espousing, about creating cheaper and more innovative systems, can work in the real world. And comments from developers lead me to believe that 3rd party support for the REV will be good.
As far as Nintendo's strategy of getting mature games through 2nd parties, sure it didn't work well this time around, but Nintendo just didn't have the userbase to support niche mature titles like Eternal Darkness. I'd like to think that will change this time around. I'm counting on Nintendo coming out with good launch games, an innovative console, and an affordable price.....if they do that, a larger and more diverse userbase should follow.
Post by: zakkiel on September 13, 2005, 07:15:58 AM
QuoteI'm a huge fan of impressionistic, highly-charged visuals, though more in landscapes than characters (in some ways, I'm really a Victorian romantic at heart). I love the WoW look, outside of the ridiculous gnome environments. But the emotional impact of a visual system can be achieved in subtle deviations or simply by using exotic or unusual formations (the skies in HL2 are good examples of this). I don't think there's anything superior in either approach, but one is clearly more suited to hard sci-fi and the other to very soft fantasy.
One of the things I love about Nintendo is that they seem to be one of the few companies that intuitively understands that when you try to make a game photo-realistic, you wind up with something that lies in the uncanny valley.
I tend to doubt the application of the uncanny valley to CG. Again, take HL2, with has highly sympathetic characters which are also as photorealistic as possible.
QuoteI'm an even bigger fan of realistic physics, which are just starting to come into their own. If a hand passes through a bottle, it's going to be jaring even if both are cell-shaded.
Miyamoto had a great quote about this, where he described a hypothetical game where a detailed photorealistic hand passes through a bottle, and thus counteracts all of the detail and realism.
Post by: IceCold on September 13, 2005, 06:18:13 PM
QuoteI have no doubt that the support will be better on the Rev, especially in the RPG & "mature" department. But I seriously doubt that it will be like the DS with tonnes of 3rd parties jumping on board. You have to remember that the GBA was the king of the portable market for a long, long time, and it sold millions of units. 3rd parties aren't just going to ditch its successor. However, the Rev isn't the marketshare leader. That honour goes to Sony, and however hard the PS3 is to develop for, the games will flow in its direction.
Maybe I'm fooling myself, but I think Nintendo will do things better next time round. The DS is proof that the philosophies they're espousing, about creating cheaper and more innovative systems, can work in the real world. And comments from developers lead me to believe that 3rd party support for the REV will be good.
Post by: wandering on September 13, 2005, 08:09:54 PM
Quote
I'm a huge fan of impressionistic, highly-charged visuals, though more in landscapes than characters (in some ways, I'm really a Victorian romantic at heart).
The thing I love about Nintendo is that they really are impressionists at heart. Take, for example, Hyrule Market town in OOT. If you look at the individual details, everything is rudimentary and simplistic…yet, when you go there, you feel like you’re in a bustling, vibrant town regardless.
Anyway, I find it interesting that you like stylised landscapes but prefer photo real characters…. I think I'm the opposite. I can enjoy photo-real fantasy landscapes, but, when it comes to humans, it's easier for me to sympathise with them when they're slightly stylised (compare, for example the impressive yet creepy people in Final Fantasy: TSW to the more likeable humans in the Incredibles).
Quote
But the emotional impact of a visual system can be achieved in subtle deviations or simply by using exotic or unusual formations (the skies in HL2 are good examples of this). I don't think there's anything superior in either approach, but one is clearly more suited to hard sci-fi and the other to very soft fantasy.
Probably right... I'll concede to the virtue of visual variety. Good artists can achieve a lot with all kinds of different visuals.
The one thing I’ll add though, is that, while Nintendo always seems to have an eye on what’s important, other developers tend to focus on the wrong things. When developing a game, most devs these days seem to put priority on creating the most photorealistic and technically impressive graphics possible, without first asking themselves what they’re trying to communicate with their game’s visuals. When creating a character, they might focus on getting all of the small visual details right without regard for what’s actually important: namely, what’s going on in the character’s head, and how their eyes should move, and what expressions should come over their face, etc.
While there are exceptions (and HL2 may well be one of them), for the most part it feels like we’re being shovelled the same generic crap in terms of visuals (and gameplay).
Quote
I tend to doubt the application of the uncanny valley to CG. Again, take HL2, with has highly sympathetic characters which are also as photorealistic as possible.
hm - You might be right.
I haven't played HL2, but from what I've seen, the characters don't bug me as much as in other games (though they still look a little 'off').
And Leon from Re4 didn't bug me at all.
Then of course, in the world of movies, there's Gollum, who is incredible.
So, yeah, the uncanny valley may not apply to CG. The problem is, there are so many PS3 games bug the heck out of me. Take a look at Fight Night Round 3, for example. It's like a friggen wax museum.
...Actually, I think that's true of most games from this generation and next.
I miss the good old N64 days....
Post by: wandering on September 13, 2005, 08:36:26 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold:
But I seriously doubt that it will be like the DS with tonnes of 3rd parties jumping on board. You have to remember that the GBA was the king of the portable market for a long, long time, and it sold millions of units. 3rd parties aren't just going to ditch its successor. However, the Rev isn't the marketshare leader.
The DS became popular, IMO, because of its affordability and innovative features. The fact is, as important as name recognition can be, overall product quality trumps everything. The PSP could've snagged first place easily if it was a better overall product.
Of course, analysts now point to Nintendo's handheld name recognition as carrying them through.... but remember, back before the DS was released, they were saying that the PSP was a sure thing and the DS wasn't. They said that PlayStation had better name recognition than Nintendo (without the Gameboy branding); they pointed to the PSP's better graphics and sexiness; they noted that, since both PlayStation and Nintendo were going 'high-end', the gameboy's younger fanbase would be a non-issue and further gaurantee the PSP's success; etc.
The DS, in fact, beat the odds...mainly because it's, you know, more fun to play with.
I'm fairly sure that even developers weren't sure which system would come out on top, and support for the 2 systems seemed like it would be equal early on. AFAIK, the DS didn't snag first place becasue of third party support, third party support came because the DS snagged first place.
Post by: IceCold on September 13, 2005, 09:15:45 PM
QuoteNot really... From the getgo you could tell that the DS would have overwhelming 3rd party support like the GBA before it. Countless titles were stated to be in development when it was revealed, and 3rd parties didn't just jump on board because of how well it's doing in Japan.
AFAIK, the DS didn't snag first place becasue of third party support, third party support came because the DS snagged first place.
And the DS didn't really "beat the odds". The obvious bias towards the PSP on the parts of the analysts from the beginning made it look that way, but really, it was expected to sell.
Finally, the DS didn't beat the PSP, as you say. It is beating it now and will in the future with all the mouth-watering games for it, but during the DS drought, the PSP beat itself.
Of course, the "usuals" bought one at launch, but a ridiculous PRICE, a mainly s/port title launch, a myopic emphasis on multimedia abilities, and more UMDs on the shelves than games did not help it to carry on selling after launch. That along with the excellent DS advertising really killed it. And then there was (is) the drought where in 3 months or something only Coded Arms was released.
So up until now, the DS didn't cause the PSP to fail. The DS, of course, had a few great titles, but there were long droughts and not much variety. If Sony capitalized on this and did not make so many mistakes, it would be a different story. But now, and in the future, the DS is really beating the PSP with its upcoming software.
Post by: The Omen on September 14, 2005, 08:37:22 AM
Quote
The DS became popular, IMO, because of its affordability and innovative features. The fact is, as important as name recognition can be, overall product quality trumps everything. The PSP could've snagged first place easily if it was a better overall product.
Name recognition is a lot more meaningful than you think. People equate portable gaming with Nintendo. End of story. Since the DS is a natural extension of the GB line, it automatically has a built in user base. Add in the backward compatibility with the GBA, and you have millions of built in users. It's hard to release a new product to compete with one that has been successful for 18 years. The DS being a high quality , technically advanced product doesn't hurt, but the name is this initial surge in sales.
Post by: Ian Sane on September 14, 2005, 09:19:10 AM
I view the DS' success a lot like the Playstation's success. One guy screwed up, the other didn't as much so he won out.
Post by: wandering on September 14, 2005, 09:19:37 AM
Quote
The DS being a high quality , technically advanced product doesn't hurt, but the name is this initial surge in sales.
Well... I agree that if, say, Cingular created/released the DS instead of Nintendo, the system probably wouldn't have sold as well.
But, if Sony had created the DS, and Nintendo had created the PSP, I think the DS still would've sold better.
Post by: NotSoStu on September 15, 2005, 06:41:06 PM
Post by: couchmonkey on September 16, 2005, 05:51:27 AM
Edit: Hey Bill, I read your post on Iwataton about the new, traditional controller add-on that they're making. Now I believe third party support could easily be equal to or greater than the previous system, especially if the remote controller catches on.
I'm much more optimistic now.
Post by: Bill Aurion on September 16, 2005, 05:54:10 AM
Post by: zakkiel on September 16, 2005, 08:02:00 AM
edit: Once again, Nintendo is a step or two ahead of me. Is that two triggers I spy on the analog extension?
Post by: wandering on September 17, 2005, 12:08:58 AM
3rd party support will be through the roof. hopefully
Is that two triggers I spy on the analog extension?"
Yes indeedy
Post by: Gamebasher on September 21, 2005, 09:31:35 AM
Loved to hear THE TRUTH about PSP being told, after hearing all the commercial bs about the "untold wonders of the PSP". Annoying, but something which I started to ignore after the first wave. I don´t care how much money the spend on advertising it everywhere. It´s just empty barrels to me. To me, what matters is the games, and their gameplay. If there is no great gameplay, there is no fun, and so there is no value! And then the visuals mean nothing! You simply can´t get anything out great visuals, apart from admiring them, but then you might as well sit and glare at a tv-screen, rather than a small 4:3 screen. On the bigger screen you would surely enjoy that a lot more. So what is now the true value of the little black beast they have unleashed?
One of my friends, who is a Ps2 owner, complained that there isn´t any great games available for the PSP, and I told him to go and get a DS instead, since there is some quite fun and innovative titles on offer. But he scoffed at my proposal, and instead started to talk about the Perfect Dark game coming out on XBOX360, and told me how much he was going to love to play it and all that. I said he could do that, but to never buy a PSP, as he would simply tire of it. Yesterday, he started to agree with me, and haven´t bought a PSP yet. I think he will find the XBOX360 far more interesting. Maybe one day I will even get him to buy a DS!
But, it is interesting to see how slowly, still steadily, Nintendo´s strategy of innovative and genrebusting games is starting to pay off, and how efforts by the competition pales in comparison. They are really correct, over at Nintendo, when saying that the market will die, if people do not find games interesting anymore. Really no wonder people have started to tire of the samey type of games that have flooded the markets for years. For, when something keeps being the same, it becomes more and more boring so that in this way the perceived value of it drops significantly and people´s willingness to pay for it fades too. More and more people therefore will see that Nintendo´s approach is the right one. Nomatter how much they think Nintendo is only for children.
I am just gratefull that we still have Nintendo around. They will never stop to surprise us, never stop to renew games, and therefore they will never stop experiencing successes in terms of videogame sales. With Revolution, or whatever it will be called, I think they could, like Jim Merrick said, become the market leader (- again!). Simply because they will get so many new people to play their new games, and on top of that keep most of their existing fans, if not all, and that should weigh in substantially in the salescharts and positions of every Nintendo game listed in it!
I want Nintendo to be the market leader. Do you know why?
Because with them as market leader, we would see THEM calling the shots on HOW games should be made, not SONY and their way of doing it, and this would likely do us all a giant favour by saving the day for all of the developers who simply can´t stay afloat anymore amidst huge multi-million dollar gaming projects for PS3 or XBOX 360 ( it´s much much cheaper on the Revolution, and they should give it a chance as I think it would pay off!) and STOP! the ongoing implosion of the market alltogether! No more ominious mergers that tell of grave troubles for developers, even the big ones, who can´t stand on their own feet. No more trouble. But a reversal of direction for the whole industry, because that is where it is going to have to go, if we are to have any games to play in 10 years time!
Go for it Nintendo!
Post by: Don'tHate742 on September 21, 2005, 10:32:15 AM
Post by: NotSoStu on September 21, 2005, 11:16:59 AM
And Gamebasher, if you want your friend to get a DS, tell him that there's a good possibility of Rare developing Perfect Dark DS. "What?," he'll say. "Rareware belongs to Microsoft now... They don't develop for Nintendo anymore," he'll say. Well, just point him in the direction of the Rare website's Join Us section. They're looking for programmers for DS, as well as 3D artists for DS. Also, it was rumored that at E3 2k4, Rare already had a very basic version of Perfect Dark up and running on the DS hardware.
Post by: Arbok on September 21, 2005, 11:37:38 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Stu L Tissimus
Don't Hate's correct. Frankly, both handhelds have had an extremely bad start.
And Gamebasher, if you want your friend to get a DS, tell him that there's a good possibility of Rare developing Perfect Dark DS.
Or just let him play Duel Strike for 20 minutes and see what happens...
Post by: NotSoStu on September 22, 2005, 03:30:52 AM
Post by: Gamebasher on September 23, 2005, 06:47:38 AM
Still, he is such a die-hard Sony fan, that I really think that the only way to ever get him to play on DS will be by giving him one for free! I think people like him suffer from a disease called "fear of not being cool in the allseeing eyes of my Sony friends" ! I guess it would take them just suddenly going out and buying a DS, before he would ever do the same thing. Only then would he suddenly speak in positive terms about Nintendo and DS. Maybe I should tell him that Rare once belonged to Nintendo and that the previous Perfect Dark game was launched on the N64!! Wonder what he will say then!
Post by: NobleXenon54 on October 01, 2005, 03:37:33 AM
Quote
There have been rumors recently, particularly among a network of German, Dutch, and Japanese websites, that the PlayStation 3 is losing developer support. A Dutch website has been quoted as saying that the PlayStation 3's developer support is dropping faster than the Nintendo GameCube's did. Several developers have outright stated a preference for Microsoft's new console, the Xbox 360.
While this may sound alarming to some, it seems similar to the debacle when the PlayStation 2 came out; at the time of its release, it was criticized for being notoriously difficult to design for, yet it became the most popular console in this last generation of systems. Will the PlayStation 3 be a reenactment of this, or is Sony on the way out of the number 1 slot in the video game industry? Only time will tell.
Sega Cancels Condemned For PS3
Altus Cancels Unidentified Games.
Post by: Bill Aurion on October 01, 2005, 05:36:12 AM
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on October 01, 2005, 05:51:35 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on October 01, 2005, 06:12:26 AM
Post by: wandering on October 01, 2005, 06:24:52 AM
Oh. Wait.
Post by: stevey on October 01, 2005, 08:32:11 AM
Post by: Artimus on October 01, 2005, 08:51:35 AM
Post by: Galford on October 01, 2005, 08:54:46 AM
Just curious...
Post by: Artimus on October 01, 2005, 09:06:46 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on October 01, 2005, 11:35:00 PM
