It won't, according to Reggie. He cites the already-released Zelda: Twilight Princess as the first reason, Metroid Prime 3 coming out in early 2007 as a second reason, and Super Mario Galaxy arriving after that as a third reason.
While that isn't really a direct assurance that Metroid or Mario won't be further delayed, Reg does have this exchange with Croal:
Newsweek: So are you willing to make a "Read my lips" pledge right here?
Reggie: I thought I just did.
We all know what happened the last time a president said that phrase. Here's hoping Nintendo's Wii blockbusters will keep us entertained through both halves of 2007.
QuoteThat's what I thought too - I clicked this thread expecting that someone bumped it from earlier. As it stands, I really think that Metroid Prime will be pushed back a bit. I was also sure that SSBB would be a holiday 2007 game, but it's now looking like it'll be a 2008 game..
I'm kinda saddened to see this posted as new News on NWR. I read that article a couple of days ago, and it was said the interview was conducted in October. Things can change in that time period.
Quote
So the X360 could gain a lot of ground while Nintendo twiddles their thumbs with no games available.
QuoteExactly. I'd also like to add that third parties look at the number of software sold (especially third party software) rather than the install base. Most of the time the market leader sells the most software, but if the race is close this time around, the tie-in ration will be really important. Nintendo consoles have historically had a great tie in ratio, since they focus almost purely on the games. Even the GameCube had a ratio of 12.. Something like the PSP, on the other hand, with all of its multimedia functions, is a horrible prospect to third parties. What does a big userbase mean if they never buy any games?
Originally posted by: Rize
jason, it goes to the console where devs can make the most profit. with the wii. nintendo has changed the rules a bit because the wii should generally be far cheaper to develop for. there's no HD and no mega powerful GPU to deal with. with that kind of edge, the wii should attract serious third party support even if it does sell less units than the other guys. if it is a strong second, third party support should be great. if it's first, it'll naturally be through the roof because they'll have the base combined with inexpensive development. as long as nintendo doesn't shoot themselves in the foot by making their license fee too high that is...
Quote
Originally posted by: IceColdQuoteExactly. I'd also like to add that third parties look at the number of software sold (especially third party software) rather than the install base. Most of the time the market leader sells the most software, but if the race is close this time around, the tie-in ration will be really important. Nintendo consoles have historically had a great tie in ratio, since they focus almost purely on the games. Even the GameCube had a ratio of 12.. Something like the PSP, on the other hand, with all of its multimedia functions, is a horrible prospect to third parties. What does a big userbase mean if they never buy any games?
Originally posted by: Rize
jason, it goes to the console where devs can make the most profit. with the wii. nintendo has changed the rules a bit because the wii should generally be far cheaper to develop for. there's no HD and no mega powerful GPU to deal with. with that kind of edge, the wii should attract serious third party support even if it does sell less units than the other guys. if it is a strong second, third party support should be great. if it's first, it'll naturally be through the roof because they'll have the base combined with inexpensive development. as long as nintendo doesn't shoot themselves in the foot by making their license fee too high that is...
The ratio may actually be lower this time around for Nintendo, with their Internet browser, weather channel, Virtual Console games and whatnot, but third parties have the chance of making a lot of money with the Wii.
Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
Microsoft is trying to take steps to solve this problem of theirs (Viva Pinata, Blue Dragon) but they just aren't effective enough. It's kind of like Nintendo with the GameCube.
Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold Regarding the third-party tie in ratio, the DS was built from the ground up by Nintendo. Even though the GBA was the console leader, third parties were reluctant at best to support the DS. If there aren't quality games by third parties, how do you expect them to sell? Now that the DS is such an explosive phenomenon, third parties are finally starting to back it, and over the next year we're sure to get some third-party games that will sell very well. With the Wii, I'm glad to see that Nintendo is giving third parties much more of a chance by staggering their releases. Red Steel sold very well, despite it not being the best of games. We're seeing that, contrary to the DS, developers are more willing to jump onto the bandwagon earlier. I expect that at E3 we will be amazed by the new third party games that will be shown by developers who now believe in the Wii. The launch has showed that Wii owners are willing to buy games, now all we need is a few exclusive third party ones.
QuoteThat's a very good point. If they release, say, Super Mario Galaxy while Wiis are still hard to find, it would be a lot of potential wasted. That game will sell many systems, so they'll need it a bit later on in the game.
Originally posted by: jasonditz
There's only one satisfactory argument I think on this and it's that you can't release a system selling game when there are no systems to sell. That's the only reason I could see for intentionally delaying a hot title.
Once Wiis are readily available, I think you really need to do everything possible to convince people to buy them.
