Post by: Smash_Brother on January 19, 2006, 07:47:27 PM
Then, economically speaking, Nintendo made one of the biggest mistakes I've ever seen a company make: convince thousands (likely millions) of players who were interested in buying their console to not buy it. IGN reported that, on the day of WW's unveiling, the greatest shift of players from the GC forums to the Xbox and PS2 forums occurred, with the inquiries about the PS2 and Xbox from posters who had formerly remained on the Nintendo forums doubling and tripling.
IGN is one case of this, but I have no reason to doubt that similar trends were occurring everywhere.
Now, before you get upset about me bashing WW, know that this is not what I'm here to do. I loved WW (though I'll eat my pants if Twilight Princess doesn't outsell it...), I'm only pointing out how much of an effect you can have on your market before your potential customer base has been solidified in its buying decision (ie before your and your competition's products have been released).
Flash forward to the present time.
Nintendo has rented the Kodak Theater for their pre-E3 press release (a picture, if you're curious). Obviously, they're making a big deal about the Rev and everything that comes with it, but no one rents this theater without due cause (it doesn't come cheap).
Prior to their merger with Namco, Nintendo owned a large stake in Bandai. They also owned shares of Namco. The simple bit of speculation I'm offering here is this: what would happen if Nintendo announced that, with a new controlling interest in Bandai/Namco, all next-gen and handheld games from the gaming giant are now Rev/DS exclusive? That includes Tekken, Soul Caliber, Tales, ALL of Shonin Jump and Gundam (there are many more, but those are just some of the biggest titles worth mentioning).
One might argue that it would be detrimental to Bandai/Namco if all their games were restricted to Nintendo hardware and it would...were we not in the middle of a generation change. That's the beauty of the situation: when Nintendo dropped its bomb about Wind Waker, no one had yet been locked into buying a GC so it was a terrible idea to give them incentive not to (I don't care if you liked WW or not, if you can't understand why the game would be a turnoff to the average gamer, I'm not going to try to convince you. Bottom line is that Nintendo could have used their money and money is still money, even from graphics-whores).
They could turn the same situation into their biggest blow to the PS3: revealing that a number of titles which some would have seen as a reason to BUY a PS3 into Rev exclusives, effectively changing the mind of potential buyers and convincing them to buy a Rev. The PS2 didn't win this past generation because it was better hardware or had better exclusives: it won because it was the game console for someone who wanted anything. RPGs? PS2. Sports? PS2. Action? PS2. Adventure? PS2. etc. etc. There were exclusives on the GC and Xbox which made them worth owning, but no one can deny that the PS2 won and won big by simply having the biggest game library.
Right now, Sony is going to do everything they can to push Blu-Ray (Sony's proprietary media format) into the average household. This means that support for the PS2 is probably going to be nearly nonexistent, as every game released for the PS2 instead of the PS3 is one more reason not to bring Blu-Ray into your home. The first round of PS2 games were actually PS1 games which were moved over to the PS2 in the interest of not releasing their game on a fading console. The point is, in this next round of console releases, everything resets back to zero. Releasing games on the PS2 because it has the largest userbase is no longer an issue (and like I said, Sony will do everything it can to push Blu-Ray, just like it is for UMD, and that means pushing all would-be PS2 launches to the PS3).
I know Nintendo has stated something along the lines of not being "in competition" with Sony and MS. Anyone with a simple grasp of economics knows this is impossible. Simply put, when you're competing for the money of your customers, you're competing with EVERY POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVE. Videogames are competing for the money of their customer against any and every possible alternative which their potential buyers might spend their money on: movies, music, cars, drugs, sex, etc. This defeatist attitude of "no competition" is either admission of defeat or it's a facade. I'd like to believe it's the latter. I'd like to believe that Nintendo doesn't feel it's only worthy of patronage when its would-be customers happen to have enough left over in their entertainment budgets for a Revolution game.
So yeah, it's all speculation, but in my defense, I'm speculating based on the facts which are already plain to us.
Nintendo didn't buy stock in Bandai without an intention to make use of that control. Why would they? If it's money return they want, they could invest that money in new companies like they've been doing all along and chance upon the next "Pokemon". I'm sure there's a very good reason they chose to invest in Bandai, I just think it would be great if this was it.
The announcement that many popular franchises previously thought to be PS3 exclusive will instead be Rev exclusive is damaging, but it's 100x more damaging when that announcement is made before anyone has actually made a purchasing decision regarding the PS3 or Rev. It would be identical to the WW announcement, except that it would be beneficial to Nintendo and a detriment to Sony and MS.
It's not going to happen: it's too good to be true. However, I maintain that it would likely be the most incredible move Nintendo could make when it comes to securing 3rd party support for the console and convincing potential buyers that the Rev will be the best choice when it comes time to spend their hard earned $$$.
-SB
Post by: jasonditz on January 19, 2006, 08:02:51 PM
Post by: Hocotate on January 20, 2006, 01:00:49 AM
Post by: Dirk Temporo on January 20, 2006, 02:57:33 AM
Post by: mantidor on January 20, 2006, 03:11:29 AM
Post by: Bill Aurion on January 20, 2006, 03:34:29 AM
Post by: JonLeung on January 20, 2006, 03:54:35 AM
This is probably to keep Baten Kaitos 2 an exclusive to the GCN...even though the original is, as far as I know. Maybe an indicator of your theory?
(Did anything come out of that deal that Nintendo, Sega, and Namco had? That Triforce arcade hardware? Was it used? I'm aware of Nintendo/Sega's F-Zero AX and Nintendo/Namco's Mario Kart Arcade GP but I haven't actually seen those arcade machines around here. Did they use the Triforce?)
OMG NIGHTMARE IN SSB. (As in, the guy from the Soul Calibur games, not a bad dream.)
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 20, 2006, 04:38:22 AM
Nintendo doesn't need to buy anyone. They just need to have that magical 51% of the interest if they want things to happen their way. Claiming full-on ownership of a company comes with a lot of drawbacks, and while I agree that funding smaller developers with innovative ideas is a sound practice, you cannot deny the power and the presence that B/N holds in both the US and more so in Japan.
Quote
Originally posted by: Hocotate
If Nintendo got excusive Bandai/Namco, it would be like Sony getting Squaresoft back in the day. More developers would slowly make the move over to Nintendo (Konami, SE, Capcom). I think Tekken, Soul Calibur, Tales of, and all the Anime franchises would be more then enough to do such a thing.
See, this is what I feel escapes far too many people, especially Nintendo fans.
Like I said in my OP, Sony won because they had all the games. Why did they have all the games? Because after they got enough games, the rest of the developers saw the direction the flow was heading and followed suit for Sony. No one paid these developers or published their games. They just wanted to be on the console with the biggest sales and it's the PS2's gaming library which makes this a reality.
Snatching up all of the Bandai/Namco gaming franchises before the fight has even truly begun would be like pointing all of the potential developers who are undecided squarely in the Rev's direction. If enough of the "big guys" back a console, the little guys will all do the same for fear of being left out in the cold.
Why Nintendo wouldn't do this is beyond me. Unless they like being third for some reason, exclusive games are the only way to win a console war. No one is going to buy a game on the Rev because the Rev version has some moderate controller functionality which the PS3 and 360 versions do not, especially when they don't own a Rev already. They'll buy the Rev for the games they can't get anywhere else, and as the GC has shown us, Nintendo cannot produce enough games on its own to maintain a consistent flow of exclusive titles.
No one has been locked into a buying decision. Because of that, now would be the ideal time for Nintendo to pull this off, immediately changing the minds of millions of people who were previously dedicated PS3 fans.
-SB
Post by: animecyberrat on January 20, 2006, 04:58:11 AM
Nintendo felt the blunt of that loss durring the N64 days and it just carried over into GC, Namco decided to release some games for GC, eveb made a couple excclusives, so I see how Nintendo tried to fix the hurt relationship there, even letting namco develop some of thier own games.
Namco is a big company and they have some of the biggest names in video games, Pac-Man and Tekken are thier prime franchises but they have plenty more. I dont see Namco making games, well not too many anyways, exclusive for Nintendo unless somewhere along the lines Sony treated them as bady as Nintendo previously had. I dont knwo how much stake Nintendo has in either compnay but Im sure it somehow was affectede by the merger. Maybe they now have major stake I dont know but its something to think about.
I think Tekken will do the job, making Tekken Exclusive to Rev will definaltey sway not only PS fans but satsify Fighting game fans who were left out on GC. I speak on thier behalf because PS2 had so many great fighitng games I always felt sick not getting any good ones on GC other than DBZ Budokai and MK DA. Timesplitters could helpa lot too especialy with the controller. Its like the only good thing about the controller so far, its a built in light gun for light gun fans.
I sure hope spmething good comes out of this/ especialy since I defiantely missed out ona lot of game that were ps2 exclusives, Xbox exclusives didnt hurt me much I have a top of the line gaming pc and all the xbox games are on PC and in better versions. Well maybe not TJ and E 3 I cant find that game anywhere!!!
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 20, 2006, 05:03:28 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberratIts like the only good thing about the controller so far, its a built in light gun for light gun fans.
I actually mentioned this to a friend the other day: lightgun games should be a goddamn shoe-in on the Rev because everyone who owns the system technically already owns a lightgun as well. That removes the hardware barrier right there.
-SB
Post by: ThePerm on January 20, 2006, 06:03:24 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 20, 2006, 06:49:50 AM
Bandai has the rights to all of Shonin jump (Naruto, One Piece, etc.) and the entire Gundam franchise. Controlling Bandai is controlling a massive part of the Japanese entertainment market, more so than it would be in the US.
If anything, Nintendo could reestablish control at home with Bandai alone. Namco is just gravy, gravy which no doubt a lot of PS2 users are looking forward to on the PS3 for their key franchises (especially RPGs).
I have to stop this, otherwise I'll get myself hyped up and be crushed with disappointment when E3 rolls around...
-SB
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on January 20, 2006, 07:41:34 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 20, 2006, 08:40:17 AM
Also, I've heard the Rev will indeed have Square support, possibly even for launch.
Lemme see if I can get a link on that...
EDIT: Found it!
-SB
Post by: BlkPaladin on January 20, 2006, 11:08:29 AM
After the merger their portion shrinks not only because it adds investors from Namco but when a company mergers the companies either buys back or emlinates shares to cut debt loss, this is what happened to Sony's stake in Square.
Post by: JonLeung on January 20, 2006, 11:15:01 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Also, I've heard the Rev will indeed have Square support, possibly even for launch.
Lemme see if I can get a link on that...
EDIT: Found it!
-SB
I should've expected; another FF:CC.
While I enjoyed FF:CC more than most people did, I don't really know about these supposed DS and Rev. versions. At least there could be an online component instead of a need-three-friends-with-GBAs thing (or one friend with a GameCube, if you think about it - based on the fact that GBA sales are probably more than four times that of the GameCube)...
I've played all the main FFs from (I)-IX. Even the Japanese ones and the HardType version of IV, even before the recent GBA rerelease, which I'm currently replaying. I haven't played X and above, but I would think that the "main" FFs will often be more successful than the side games.
FF VII is the most overrated game ever, but I won't deny that despite my feelings, some spin-off of that would do well to boost sales of any Nintendo system. There's already spin-offs like FF VII: AC, BC, CC, and DC... so why not FF VII: EC? (And no, that's not rated "eC" for Early Childhood...)
Post by: kirby_killer_dedede on January 20, 2006, 12:47:34 PM
Post by: Artimus on January 20, 2006, 12:59:13 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: kirby_killer_dedede
Actually...I read somewhere that the Kodak Theater is the traditional location of Nintendo's pre-E3 press conference...
It's never been there before. It's usually in one of the E3 conference centers.
Post by: Ceric on January 20, 2006, 02:46:45 PM
Post by: Arbok on January 20, 2006, 03:55:59 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
I remember IGN saying earlier this week (or was it late last week) that Nintendo (in both Japan and (North) America) is publishing Namco's Baten Kaitos 2.
Really? Great news, as I was worried if it would get a US release or not. Thrilled to hear it will.
Post by: jasonditz on January 20, 2006, 05:54:30 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ceric
I'm going to say this to have it out there. Nintendo was a toy company to start with. A little fun factiods is that they were the first to have plastic collectable cards. In fact cards was one of there big things originally. Now they are a Videogame company but that market has a very close tie in with Toys, other forms of games, and all other forms of visual Entertainment in general. So for them it would be good if all those markets were doing well. So it makes since for them to invest at least a portion of there profits into other companies in those related fields to, at the very least, help keep those industries alive and well. So Nintendo having Bandia, which covers a lot of those areas, just to have Bandia makes sense as well.
By the same argument, Nintendo used to own love hotels too, so buying the Playboy corporation would make sense.
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 20, 2006, 06:38:13 PM
Quote
By the same argument, Nintendo used to own love hotels too, so buying the Playboy corporation would make sense.
Well, it's arguably the most predictably solid market around: sales of sex will never decline.
Some interesting articles, note the dates:
Oct. 17th, 2003 Article 1
June 10th, 2004 Article 2
They're moving toward something. That much is clear. They've bought stock, then bought stock again. It looks doubtful that a 51% share would ever be acquirable, but Nintendo gained the stock they have now through Mattel selling theirs at the end of an agreement they had with Bandai.
I think it's entirely possible that they're waiting for more stock to "free up". When that could happen, however, is anyone's guess.
-SB
Post by: BlkPaladin on January 20, 2006, 10:45:30 PM
EDIT: The reason is the company itself keeps some of its stock as reserve and only let that stock go if they need to raise money quickly for a project. Also it is only 51% if there are only two investors but with a company like bandai there are 1000s of investors. And in any vote only those that own a certain percent of the stock are allowed to vote in shareholder meetings, so it eliminates some of the stock held by causual investors. If a company owns 41% of the stock it usually has most of the stock thus there are very few other investors with voting privledges. And depending on the company the average reserve is usally 40% of the stock so in this case the balence is 41% majority, 40% Company, 19% other investors.
EDIT 2: NOTE - That is why its good when a company buys back some of its stock. It increases it reserve, helps prevent hostile take overs by a majority vote, and drives up the remain stock prices actually (in the best case senaio) making money for the company in the long run. (We had a simular discussing a while ago when Nintendo bought its own stocks back.
Post by: kirby_killer_dedede on January 21, 2006, 06:03:57 PM
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 21, 2006, 07:35:42 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: kirby_killer_dedede
SB, you keep referring to 51% as being the necessary amount of a company to be the majority stockholder. You don't need more than half the company to have the most of it. One of the links you posted said that Nintendo was the 9th largeset stockholder in Bandai with only around 4 percent (not sure if that's right, I'm saying this from memory, I saw the links a few hours ago and am too lazy to check again). That would suggeset that the majority stock holder only has around 15-20 percent.
That's a possibility, and while I know 51% is inaccurate (though it would assure total control), it's faster to say 51% and have everyone know what I'm talking about then to have to explain.
Let's say Nintendo owned 25% of Bandai stock. It's safe to assume 20% is held by shareholders who hold percentages too insignificant to vote or to even attend shareholder meetings. That leaves 55% of the stock as "voting" shares. Nintendo would have to work rather hard to "coerce" that 55% into seeing things their way and making some/all game releases Rev/DS exclusive.
Even if Nintendo was the very largest stockholder, it doesn't guarantee anything. Like Bik pointed out, due to the dispersion of the small shareholders, 41% would likely be enough to win every vote unopposed but anything less is uncertain.
-SB
Post by: JonLeung on January 22, 2006, 12:12:40 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on January 22, 2006, 12:21:04 PM
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 23, 2006, 10:10:37 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat
so how much stock does Nintendo own of Bandia and Namco now anyways? Is it enough to influence them any?
From what I've heard, they should be somewhere in the 7th-10th range for the highest shareholder.
However, even being the highest shareholder guarantees nothing unless the other primary holders can be convinced to go their way.
-SB
Post by: jasonditz on January 23, 2006, 01:01:59 PM
I owned some Bandai stock before the merger as well, and I can assure you I wasn't intending to take them over either... as cool as that would be.
Anyhow, Nintendo's always gotten a good amount of support from Bandai, and seems to get quite a few nice exclusives from Namco: with or without any attempts at a silent takeover I would expect the combined company to provide quite a few good titles for the Revolution, and to continue to provide good games for the DS. Hopefully the merger will make it easier to get US localized versions of some of Bandai's DS titles.
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 24, 2006, 04:47:47 AM
Having sway or influence over Banco and its franchises could easily make the difference between success and failure in the upcoming console wars (that's not an exaggeration, either).
-SB
Post by: animecyberrat on January 24, 2006, 04:56:05 AM
Dont get me wrong I love Namco always have even long before I knew what Nintendo was I played Namco games, but I think they can make good games but they dont have to be exclusive to any system because that wont matter people dont buy conosles for Pac-man or even Tekken, Namco doesnt have any MUST HAVE tittlesthat the majorioty cant live without. It would have been nice to get Tekken for GC but I can settle for Soul Caliber II even though it wasnt as much fun.
That being said Nintendo shoudlnt invest too much in Namco anyways because what if something goes wrong and the merger doesnt help and they still go uinder, thats money Ninty loses.
Theres no such thing a s a safe investment tehre those with higher risk and thsoe will less erisk, Namco is high risk due to financial troubles they are having.
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 24, 2006, 07:05:43 AM
Second, Bandai controls some of the most popular franchises in Japan, including Naruto and One Piece. Regardless of whether or not Banco would do anything for them outside of Japan, it would be worth it alone for the fact that it would be a huge chunk of Japanese entertainment properties which would be Nintendo-only.
-SB
Post by: jasonditz on January 24, 2006, 10:17:40 AM
Post by: Ceric on January 24, 2006, 10:22:26 AM
Post by: couchmonkey on January 26, 2006, 04:41:22 AM
Post by: BlkPaladin on January 26, 2006, 05:17:17 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 26, 2006, 05:17:31 AM
-SB
Post by: BlkPaladin on January 26, 2006, 05:20:12 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 26, 2006, 06:24:31 AM
Shonin Jump includes Naruto and One Piece, both of which are HUGE in Japan, and in addition to that, Bandai controls Gundam and Digimon, another two huge hitters. Add in the entire Tales series, Xenosaga (which I hear is concluded), and Namco's other franchises and I think it's safe to say that controlling Banco would probably rival Square, especially in Japan where Shonin Jump and Gundam are huge.
But we've already established that Nintendo is only the 7th-8th largest shareholder, which isn't enough to get anything "done", in terms of exclusive titles.
-SB
Post by: BlkPaladin on January 26, 2006, 01:47:15 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on January 26, 2006, 02:42:43 PM
I just DOUBT that Namco/Bandia exlcusivity will help much because they were excluded from N64 and it didnt make adifference, especialy when Saturn AND Dreamcast had good Namoc/Bandai support. Namco has NEVER been a deciding favtor for anyone, They make good games but if forced to make abuying descion most people will pass on Namco exclusivity for something more worth while. Also regarding Tekken, Sony has a stake int hat franchise so Namco has to keep it on PS until Sony lets them do otherwise. Shonman Jump may be all moighhty in Japan but the game sales dont seam to prove anything.
theres plenty of thier games on GC already an nobody cares. They woudl make tons more money keeping osmething THAT popular multiplatform. Unless somebody PAYS for exclusivity which I doubt Nintendo would go for those games, Soul Caliber or even Tekken are out of the picture the only franchise Nintendo might sway as exclusive woudl be Pac-Man and only cuz he fits into Nintendos systems better than anybody else.
See what your forgetting is popualrity means spit when it comes to sales, a TV show can be hella popular but if the GAME dont sell then the TV shows popularity aint enough to make a bit of difference.
Also I have played some of those Shonam Jumps games and guess what they suck. peopel wont flock to a system with crap games no matter how popular a tie in show or movie is.
Take Power Rangers, that show was beyond popular back in the day and still is pretty big, but the games never sold enough to make adifference and I can tell you what nobody bought a Sega CD cuz it had an exclusive PR game.
Your points are fine but diluted. Also Namco is still in financial trouble and therefore as a company in need of money they definately WILL NOT limit them selves to Nintendo exclusivity because that would be finanialc suicide. They need to remain multi platform to remain alive, but as long as they keep making games thier fans are happy cuz they are on every system out. Namco has been around longer than most in the ondustry and they do make great games, but I neve rknew anyone who bought a system just for a Namco game.
Post by: couchmonkey on January 27, 2006, 05:16:09 AM
Square Enix has said it's supporting all systems, but so far Final Fantasy XI and Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles are the only titles actually mentioned for 360 or Revolution. I'll take Square Enix seriously when true Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, and Dragon Quest sequels are announced on all three consoles.
If Square Enix gave full support to every console, then yes, Bandai/Namco could turn the tide in Nintendo's favour. But I think Square Enix's most popular games will remain exclusive to PS3 unless Nintendo can get the Revolution to outsell it.
Post by: JonLeung on January 27, 2006, 05:23:10 AM
*...or at least the good old days when they were new...*
Post by: couchmonkey on January 27, 2006, 06:03:31 AM
Post by: animecyberrat on January 27, 2006, 05:36:53 PM
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 27, 2006, 07:18:11 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat
I never said namco or Bandia wont help I only said it wont make or break anybody. Nintendo DIDNT HAVE EITHER for N64 and it didnt affect them at all.
First of all, considering that the N64 is the console on which Nintendo lost the majority of its ground to Sony, I'd hardly consider using it as an example.
Second, you're missing the big picture here...
We've already established that this will never happen so it's all theory anyway, but the point is not Banco exclusivity is beneficial to any system, more so than you give it credit. You seem to be hailing Square as some godly force of game sales. While I won't deny that they have a strong presence, it was GTA which made the PS2 the #1 seller that it is today, if anything.
But none of that matters now because we're in a generation shift, which is exactly the POINT here. To reiterate what was stated much earlier, Sony won because the developers were convinced that they were going to be the winner this generation. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you get enough developers to come to you, the rest will follow for fear of being left out, you get the most games and you win.
Banco exclusivity may or may not help the Rev during its lifespan, but it would be just about the best thing in the WORLD for it to be announced right now before developers have chosen "sides". The sight of two huge development companies backing Nintendo would turn a lot of heads. Be it money hats or pressure from stock holdings, being able to say, without a doubt, that a certain franchise will only be available on your console directly equates power in the market, the type of power which shows 3rd parties your willingness to effectively FORCE people to buy your console to play a certain game. It's that same force which will sell more games by other 3rd parties, making your console look like a more attractive choice for game development (exclusive or otherwise).
Now, I don't know what's going to happen when that curtain goes up at the Kodak theater, but I do know THIS: if Nintendo doesn't secure 3rd party backing (and I mean SECURE, not have it for 6 months before it goes to the most-popular console), they're out of the home console market. With the cube, they've already proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are incapable of releasing enough 1st party games to keep the market satisfied. Unless they can convince 3rd parties to come over to the Rev, it's over.
Otherwise, all that's left is to let Sony and MS gradually throw around enough money hats to round up all of the 3rd party exclusives. Nintendo will release a 1st party game once every 3 months and a dozen lousy Mario spinoff titles between those three months while their fanbase slowly erodes until they have 5% of the market like Apple computer.
I don't know if Banco could make or break, but I DO know that it could easily be the catalyst in a chain reaction which would force 3rd party developers to at least CONSIDER developing their games for the Rev, if not exclusively, at least AT ALL which is something Nintendo has suffered from this generation and suffered HORRIBLY. Remember how many game ads would list "PS2, Xbox" and no GC? I can't count the number of times I looked at a game ad in a magazine or on TV, saying, "Hmm, looks alright." only to notice the absence of the GC logo from the list of consoles and frown in disappointment.
And Nintendo needs 3rd party support more than they ever did.
1. They're trying something very new and different which could potentially fail.
2. They have a reputation for being 3rd. No one wants to develop for the console of the 2nd loser.
Like I said, make or break is irrelevant. Either way, it would be a STRONG step in the right direction.
-SB
Post by: Arbok on January 27, 2006, 09:29:47 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat
Namco has NEVER been a deciding favtor for anyone, They make good games but if forced to make abuying descion most people will pass on Namco exclusivity for something more worth while.
Are you telling me that Namco and Nintendo games together wouldn't be a sizeable force? Honestly, IMO, the best games last generation were from those two development houses. You are speaking as if the Namco games would have to go it alone, like they would be the only attraction to the system, but they wouldn't, they would just be another HUGE incentive toward the system.
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 28, 2006, 01:17:29 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ArbokAre you telling me that Namco and Nintendo games together wouldn't be a sizeable force? Honestly, IMO, the best games last generation were from those two development houses. You are speaking as if the Namco games would have to go it alone, like they would be the only attraction to the system, but they wouldn't, they would just be another HUGE incentive toward the system.
That's exactly what seems to elude him: Nintendo didn't lose this gen because of the absence of any particular game. They lost because of a chain reaction of GC support being omitted time and time again. The more companies see GC support vanishing, the fewer games they'll develop for the console. No one wants to go down with the ship.
Even Nintendo did this with the GC.
Banco's support could do a lot of good things for Nintendo, not even their exclusivity, just support, period. The attitude of "Meh, we'll be fine without them." is the same pigheaded BS Nintendo pushed with the cube and look where it got them.
-SB
Post by: animecyberrat on January 28, 2006, 05:09:44 PM
And I was mostly arguig agianst Bandia cuz they have NEVER been a dev to care about. But I do AGREE that IF Namco.Bandia went exclusive to Nintendo it would definatley garner attenion, but a lot of Devs wont care, Namco made PLENTY of games for GC and alot where exclusives and they didnt make them any money and they STILL didnt get any bodies attention either. Bandia games are nil on GC, the oens tehre are dont matter at all cuz nobody knwos about or cares about them.
BUT since were back to pretending or specualtiing now and not trying to argue over silly things that noone can predict anyways ok Ill go this rout. Lets say Nintendo decided to makea financial offer to "BANCO" as you call them, to maek games EXCLUSIVE to REV, lets say they manage to pay enough money to get a full year, of Exclusive content AND they agree NOT to announce ports coming latter, just to ensure eclusivity.
Lets pretend that SOny decided to file lawsuit in regards to Tekken and the other namco games they co published. Namco still dont get Tekken or any ralted properties, and Pokemon still over shadows Digimon.
From a financial stand point and from a realistic dealine stand point its UNLIKELY that any opthere big name games bsides Pac-man and maybe a Naruto game would be developed in that year, and certianly no Tekken and unless Nintendo grows testicles and some backbone and agrees to finance a Namco RPG its unlilkey the exclusivity woudl last for long. UNLESS Nintendo forked over enough cash to own enough stock to CONTROL them, which its still unlieklly because Nintendo is not the kind of company to do bold things like that anymore.
Lets face it they have gotten soft in their old age and I dont see this as realisticaly happening. And even so the Namco games that WOULD make a difference still wont be exclusive or wont be ready for a while and by then Sony or MS could have easiily paid some other dev to make something just as good. Namco may have made great games, but they WERE NOT a force at all due to LOW SALES hence the reason for the MERGER in the FIRST place. Namco is on the verge of bancruptcy if they cant turn things around and this is jsut a way to put that off.
Nintendo would be STUPID to invest in a copmany that has lost as much mney as these 2 have in recent years. Bandia was on verge of mering with SEGA a few years back and if it wasnt for Tamoagichti it would have pahhend aroudn they time DC was gearing up to launch. Bandia is not going to make any difference but Namco and Bandia worklign togetehr woudl HAVE to remain multi consoile to get every last scrap of money they can muster just to say in bussiness. If the merger goes well theres a chance trhey may stick around and things could turna round but forma bussiness stand piont Namco and Nintendo are better off staying separete entetis but staying allies.
Also the pint of a new gen making a new clean slate is sorta nullified by public perception which is still Nintendos shrinakage. Until Nintendo can shake thier loser image they wont be able to pull far enough ahead to sway ANY body to exclusivity with out paying for deals.
Post by: jasonditz on January 28, 2006, 08:26:36 PM
The whole company is sitting at just a hair over a billion dollars, a paltry sum for a company that made THE system selling third party title of the current generation
Plus we could make Mario playable in GTA - Revolution, finally affording him the opportunity to shoot that damned hooker.
Post by: animecyberrat on January 29, 2006, 09:08:38 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 30, 2006, 07:34:01 AM
Quote
BUT since were back to pretending or specualtiing now and not trying to argue over silly things that noone can predict anyways ok Ill go this rout.
I already said we're not. What I DID say was that every last bit of 3rd party support helps as, even if the game is garbage, it will still count toward the final tally of games available for the system and that number is what a lot of consumers will pay attention to when they go to buy a console.
You clearly don't like Namco's franchises. Fair enough, but that voids your opinion on the subject. There's a reason why Soul Caliber 2 reached best-seller status on all three consoles: because, across all three consoles, there are a lot of SC fans.
You also keep insisting that the Japanese market doesn't count and that the licenses Bandai holds are therefore irrelevant. Where is your evidence of this? You can't tell me that franchises like Naruto, One Piece and Gundam are going to do nothing in Japan when they're some of the few franchises which have become so popular that they saturated the US underground markets BEFORE being licensed without laying down some sales figures.
Bottom line:
Would franchises from Banco being brought to the Rev help Nintendo to shed their image as a company who doesn't support 3rd parties and will probably finish 3rd in the console race again? Yes.
Is it likely to happen? No.
Quote
Also the pint of a new gen making a new clean slate is sorta nullified by public perception which is still Nintendos shrinakage. Until Nintendo can shake thier loser image they wont be able to pull far enough ahead to sway ANY body to exclusivity with out paying for deals.
This is why striking now before all the pieces fall into place would be ideal, but again, it's not going to happen.
However, that changes nothing about the simple fact that securing 3rd party support (if not for exclusives, at least at ALL) is the only thing which will save Nintendo's stake in the home console market.
Quote
In the same vein of pointless speculation, nintendo could, for even less money, buy out TakeTwo Interactive, making the GTA series exclusive, not to mention bringing a full complement of 2K sports games to the Revolution (including NFL 2K7, since EA's monopoly on the NFL license would no longer effect 2K if they were a using a first party license).
First, it's not a 1 to 1 purchasing ratio. Just because the company is over $1 bil doesn't mean they'd sell for that amount: they'd sell for MUCH more.
Second, they've refused to sell out because there's no need to do so: they're making money hand over fist and Sony and MS are likely throwing money hats at them like crazy.
That's not the economic climate in which you sell your company because selling the company comes with a number of huge drawbacks like not being in creative control and having your actions governed by another entity. You sell your company when you lack the funds to make your projects succeed to your full potential and when a buyer sees this and understands that they'll benefit from this happening.
-SB
Post by: animecyberrat on January 30, 2006, 06:21:38 PM
Saturn OUT SOLD Playstation in Japan and that didnt do thema damn bit of good. also LOOK up the sales numbers NONE fo the Shonan Jump games have sold worht anything, adn do some basic financial research in to teh companies and youw ill find thatBOTH Namco AND Bandai have recently repoirted LOSSES in recent yers and THATS WHY TEH MEREGER IS EVEN TAKING PLACE. In THIER best interest they would HAVE to remain multi connsoel thast been my ENTIRE arugment and you keep ignoreing that. Nintendo WOULD NOT benefit form investing TOOMUCH money ina company that is likely to go under.
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 30, 2006, 08:29:07 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat
see again yoru taking qutoes form my post adn combingin it wioth qutoes form someoen elses psots, whoa rew you arguing with? I was agreeing with your EXFEPT for Bandia, , ok I DONT care about japane cuz that doesnt affetc ME! I could care less if Rev sells liek hot cakes in japans cuz if it sells worth crap here its worthless to me.
Saturn OUT SOLD Playstation in Japan and that didnt do thema damn bit of good. also LOOK up the sales numbers NONE fo the Shonan Jump games have sold worht anything, adn do some basic financial research in to teh companies and youw ill find thatBOTH Namco AND Bandai have recently repoirted LOSSES in recent yers and THATS WHY TEH MEREGER IS EVEN TAKING PLACE. In THIER best interest they would HAVE to remain multi connsoel thast been my ENTIRE arugment and you keep ignoreing that. Nintendo WOULD NOT benefit form investing TOOMUCH money ina company that is likely to go under.
Links, please.
I've been told in this thread by others that Nintendo invested in Bandai because of the dividends which Bandai returns. It's been a while since I took econ (I got an A, but I promptly forgot everything .7 seconds after I handed in the exam), but why exactly is Nintendo investing in a company which, according to you, is reporting losses?
This has dragged on for a while, and while I don't exactly want to carry it further, I don't think there's been a single informed opinion in this entire thread, including my own. No one has linked any documents reporting actual financial status of either Bandai or Namco, nor sales figures (I looked, I couldn't find them for Shonen Jump games), nor the current holdings of NCL in Bandai.
I maintain that 3rd party support is the only thing which is going to save Nintendo this gen. I'm almost certain that Nintendo higher-ups are looking at the cube vs. the GBA/DS and wondering how much better the GBA/DS would have done had the resources and effort put into the cube instead gone to the GBA/DS (the REAL moneymakers).
This is Nintendo's last chance, and they NEED that 3rd party support: as we've seen with the cube, Nintendo cannot get enough 1st party titles out to their console to allow it to satisfy the gaming needs of their players. Having Banco's support (again, not even exclusive, just support at all) would go leaps and bounds toward showing that Nintendo is willing to make their console truly 3rd party friendly. Development costs and difficulty aside, something else needs to happen in order to garner support. The GC was supposedly the easiest of the three consoles to develop for and look how far THAT got it.
-SB
Post by: jasonditz on January 30, 2006, 09:13:34 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat
nah thanks to Jack Tomposon GTA isnt going to be a very big deal anymore.
Yeah, we all know Jack always gets what he wants.
Post by: Talon on January 31, 2006, 12:01:03 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
This is Nintendo's last chance, and they NEED that 3rd party support: as we've seen with the cube
Firstly being Nintendo's last chance is so full of crap!!! Go to any gaming site and you will see articles that Nintendo's profits are soaring for example
IGN: Nintendo Profits Soar
Nintendo's Q3 profits double on strong sales, currency gains
now even though the gamecube is practically dead the ds and gba are raking in the dollars and alot of dollars at that. You will notice profits were up 36% on the previous year.
I do agree that Nintendo need more 3rd party support especially during their dry season so we have a constant amount of titles comming out for the whole year. However the problem with 3rd party support is that most people who own the gamecube really only bought 3rd party titles that were exclusive or had exclusive content on them. That being said Nintendo owners want exclusive 3rd party support which in the next gen isnt something 3rd parties are really keen on as the development costs are rising thus they need to sell more units thus the need for multi-platform support. Besides how many people out there are willing to pay full price for a crappy port anyway?
I still believe Nintendo's biggest problem is its image, which it will have another chance to wipe the slate clean for the revolution.
But Nintendo is no where near death, they are thriving atm and continue to upstage Microsoft and Sony who are still making losses on their consoles even though their install base is alot smaller (some territories non-existant *cough* Australia *cough*).
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 31, 2006, 04:35:51 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Talon
But Nintendo is no where near death, they are thriving atm and continue to upstage Microsoft and Sony who are still making losses on their consoles even though their install base is alot smaller (some territories non-existant *cough* Australia *cough*).
It's not that they're near death, and it's not that I'm hoping to see them leave the home console market (I've already gone on record as saying if they did so, I'd never buy another home console ever again), but you have to consider the view from the executives within the company.
If you have two product lines made by your company and one is insanely popular, has no REAL competition and is a ridiculous moneymaker, wouldn't it cross your mind to devote more resources to it so that you could make even MORE money from it? Of course you would. Anyone in their right MIND would. If your other product isn't doing as well, is still making money but not the same kind of money as the first product, I'm positive that SOMEONE in the company must have examined the situation and proposed the idea of cannibalizing the resources from the second product in order to afford more advertising and development for the first, more successful product.
There's already been speculation that Nintendo was going to do this, and while I hope this is not the case, it makes a lot of sense from a business standpoint to see to it that you forge ahead with your most successful projects at the cost of the less successful ones.
I think the two products (handheld and console) are separate entities in that they wouldn't need each other to succeed. The GBA/GC link cable was not enough to justify the two systems "needing" each other. I'm sure the DS and the Rev will link up somehow, but again, this will be the exception, not the rule and will be far from necessary when it comes to enjoying one or the other.
If the Rev fails, Nintendo's higher-ups will most likely pull the plug on the home console project entirely. This is why Nintendo needs to do it right this generation and get the necessary support to keep gamers happy throughout the entire life of the console instead of once every 3 months.
-SB
Post by: iMoron on January 31, 2006, 09:15:57 AM
err....
About the need of them publishers needing to go multy platform, I think your analisies are a bit wrong. You see, some of the reasons why there were few ports to the cube were because of them focusing on the platform(s) that would (idealy) get the most sales in... and them redusing the develpment to one or two consoles...
Now... I think it that even more than before there will be some resiliant to do that many multyplatform games, etcept from the big guns. This mostly because the consoles this time around will have more diferences in their architectures (CPU's) which will need more time with each individual console... so there will be some that will think it 2 times before commiting a proyect to several platforms...
Atleast, in a good way, the Revolution is (should be) simple to program for, and cheaper to them developers/publishers. The 360 is said to be somewhat easy to develop for but still the amount of money requaried for big teams will still give the Revolution the advantage. The PS3... will prove to be the "N64 or Saturn" of this era in some respect, producing games for it could prove to finacial gambles to small developers... thoug it might just be a tad more dificult (seven core nigthmare) than the 360 (2 core) to program for, it chould be a chalange...
With that said, I think that saying that "namco and banday" must stay/go multyplatform is somewhat wrong in the sence that it could be the other way around since they need to generate profit... they should focuse on one console or focuse specific proyects to one console instead of utilizing their resorces on all console with most of their proyects at the same time (proyects time frame)...
In a way, multiplatform proyects will not be the most used strategy this time around! There's to much money needed this time... I think there will be loots more mergers, buyouts... and dead development houses thant in the previous generation...
...........................
And... it would be nice if Nintendo could influence "Banco" (bandai-namco) to make a few more games to Nintendo's platforms... that should be as far as they would need to do... influence them.
Post by: ThePerm on January 31, 2006, 09:38:06 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 31, 2006, 01:11:19 PM
As for last gen, I strongly think it was a snowballing problem which Nintendo never got ahold of and not necessarily hardware constraints. It was the image that Nintendo's console is aimed at children which was never addressed by Nintendo. They need to break out of this image any way they can this gen or I predict the exact same problem will happen next gen.
Basically, once developers started believing that their "mature" games wouldn't sell on the GC, other developers took note of this and followed suit, in turn causing even more developers to avoid developing such titles for the cube. This, in turn, caused "mature" games to producer lower sales numbers on the system because the lack of "mature" titles led to a lack of a "mature" audience.
In other words, when that curtain goes up at the Kodak, there better be something behind it that "mature" gamers will want to play and want to play so badly that they'll be willing to buy a Rev for it. Ideally, there should be a whole PILE of "somethings" which will make the people who bought a 360 or were planning to buy a PS3 say, "Oh, sh*t: I picked the wrong one..."
Quote
Originally posted by: iMoron
And... it would be nice if Nintendo could influence "Banco" (bandai-namco) to make a few more games to Nintendo's platforms... that should be as far as they would need to do... influence them.
Yeah, some "influence" is all it should take, considering they DO hold stock in them already.
-SB
Post by: JonLeung on February 09, 2006, 12:18:02 PM
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 09, 2006, 01:11:45 PM
I'd borrow the Mario suit from them and make a video.
The video would open with a clip of bill gates talking at some podium, then someone would shout from offstage, "HE'S GOT A GUN!!!" Cut to a shot of bill from the right side of the stage (at which point it would be an actor who resembles gates from the back) as Mario emerges from stage left with a firearm and blows him away.
Then I'd release it on the internet and entitle it "Mario Shoots a Whore".
And yes, this is the sort of thing I think about regularly.
–S_B
Post by: couchmonkey on February 10, 2006, 10:26:24 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
The video would open with a clip of bill gates talking at some podium, then someone would shout from offstage, "HE'S GOT A GUN!!!" Cut to a shot of bill from the right side of the stage (at which point it would be an actor who resembles gates from the back) as Mario emerges from stage left with a firearm and blows him away.
Then I'd release it on the internet and entitle it "Mario Shoots a Whore".
And yes, this is the sort of thing I think about regularly.
*Slowly backs out the door*
Post by: ThePerm on February 10, 2006, 11:19:12 AM
