Post by: mouse_clicker on December 18, 2003, 06:32:57 PM
EDIT: Eric Josue of Otaku Ezine has posted this editorial on his website, which you can find here.
Dear Game-Revolution and Kaanchy,
I’ve been a faithful reader of Game-Revolution for 7 years now, and I regard you as the best videogame review website on the internet- you’re unbiased, you’re fair, you’re intelligent, and you know what’s relevant to real gamers. And I know this editorial on Nintendo’s future was written out of concern, and I’m not here to bash it as I’m sure many fanboys are. However, that doesn’t mean I haven’t recognized the ignorance in it- indeed, had it been posted on any other website I would have thought it were purely for shock value and the increased traffic it brings.
Quite frankly, though, Nintendo's business practices are perfectly fine, exemplary even- you do realize they've only lost money for one quarter since going public some 40 years ago? Most other companies could never dream of being able to make such a claim. The problem, as I have always said, is the third parties. Nintendo makes the best games in the world- even if you don't care for their style, you have to admit their games are some of the finest made and most polished pieces of software on the planet- it's not a coincidence they have such an incredibly loyal following. This poses a conundrum for 3rd parties- when sitting on a shelf next to a world class Nintendo game, who's going to want to buy a mediocre 3rd party game that's riding more on image than quality? 3rd party games rarely do well on Nintendo consoles as of late because of the simple fact that most owners of Nintendo consoles would rather lay down their hard earned money for the assured quality of a Nintendo game as opposed to taking a gamble on a 3rd party game, which can range from being rare gems to little more than excrement hastily slapped on a disc. This used to not be a problem, back in the NES/SNES/Genesis days, and there's a very good reason for that- the only consoles 3rd parties could develop for were made by extremely talented 1st parties, which forced the 3rd parties to match that level of quality in order to catch the attention of the consumer and convince them to buy their game. Again, it's no coincidence that some of the best 3rd party games ever made were released during those two generations, and the bad ones nearly always floundered- quite the opposite of today.
Then along came Sony- not to disrespect the advancements Sony has made for the industry, and they are improving, but they created a console (the Playstation) completely devoid of a stellar 1st party, or really a good 1st party at all, which meant half-assed crappy games could sell much better than before simply because the consumer didn't have a choice. Conversely, 3rd partiers left Nintendo, whose consoles it was now difficult to garner sales for, requiring at least as much effort as Nintendo put into their own games. When they left Nintendo, all that was left was Nintendo, and, by association, Nintendo fans. Gone were the people who enjoyed a few of Nintendo games but really liked the diversity their consoles offered. Indeed, gone was the diversity altogether, gone to the Playstation. It's truly a testament to Nintendo's quality that their hardcore fans alone could not only support them in such bleak times but turn them an enormous profit as well. When we moved into the next generation, Microsoft released the XBox, which is based on the exact same principle as the PSX/PS2, that without the high quality 1st and 2nd parties, mediocre 3rd parties can thrive.
That's why I truly believe that it's not competition between multiple consoles that brings the best out in developers, but competition between each other on one console, at the very most two if both have extremely good 1st parties. I say this because it forces the 3rd parties to rise to the level of quality of the 1st party to catch the buyer's eye.
Basically, the point I'm trying to make is that Nintendo is doing all they can do- yes, sometimes they make some bad business decisions, but so does every company (especially Microsoft with the XBox- why no fortellings of doom for the console currently in 3rd place worldwide, not to mention losing hundreds of millions of dollars?), and Nintendo makes far less than most. It's the industry that needs to change, not Nintendo. Sony's 1st parties are gradually improving, but both the PS2 and the XBox are making it okay for 3rd parties to shove half-assed games out the door because they actually SELL. Eventually, though, when image and graphics no longer matter, when the difference in graphical ability between consoles is indistinguishable, actual game quality will be what drives sales, and it's then when Nintendo will rise once again.
As for image, that’s a subject Nintendo fans generally feel very strong about- the day Nintendo changes their image, the day Nintendo throws in blood and gore for the sole purpose of getting sales, is the day they’ve lost my business- I’ll turn away and never look back. If such elements are the result of a creative decision, that’s fine, but Nintendo’s always been about creating the best games possible, and it’s not their fault if people don’t recognize that. You forget that there is such a thing as dignity left in this world, and I’d rather Nintendo lag behind with the best games than nab the #1 spot bowing to the public’s demands. It’s no fluke that most of the developers that still do believe in dignity are Japanese. Nintendo's all I could have ever hoped for, multiplied a hundred times, and there are millions out there who agree with me- we’ve carried Nintendo this far, and have been greatly rewarded, and we will continue to carry them until the time comes when the public finally recognizes Nintendo for the incredible effort and heart they’ve poured into this industry for decades. In a world where a game can ride on image alone, Nintendo is holding true to the one mantra they’ve kept for so long, which is to make the best games possible. If that means they’re not the sales leader, so be it, as long as they still make a profit. I’d rather live as a poor man with a clear conscience than as a rich man with none at all.
Post by: Grey Ninja on December 18, 2003, 06:48:05 PM
Post by: Doerr on December 18, 2003, 07:08:41 PM
Post by: ThePerm on December 18, 2003, 07:20:43 PM
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 18, 2003, 09:12:38 PM
If your email is not functioning properly soon, perhaps one of us can send the editorial for you with your email as the reply-to address.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 18, 2003, 09:16:35 PM
Regardless, I hope my email is working again sometime soon.
Post by: Rancid Planet on December 18, 2003, 09:32:49 PM
The article was good too. But I swear if I have to read one more article about how nintendo is selling lots of cubes but they're still not doing good business for not caving into public opinion.
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 18, 2003, 09:37:36 PM
Actually, I've just been informed that I require sleep. If your email is still not working and no one else has done it by then, I'll try to do it for you tomorrow.
Post by: Berto2K on December 18, 2003, 10:03:35 PM
You are gifted, my son.
Post by: Urkel on December 18, 2003, 10:03:46 PM
Quote
That's why I truly believe that it's not competition between multiple consoles that brings the best out in developers, but competition between each other on one console, at the very most two if both have extremely good 1st parties. I say this because it forces the 3rd parties to rise to the level of quality of the 1st party to catch the buyer's eye.
My thoughts exactly.
Anyway, to be fair, I didn't find that editorial to be completely idiotic. I didn't agree with it, but at least it's not nearly as bad as the editorial's written by the mainstream press from journalists who know absolutely nothing about games or the games industry, yet they still somehow think they know exactly what Nintendo should be doing.
Also, I cannot believe he actually brought up the whole "OMG! I CANT BELIEVE NINTENDO SOLD RARE! WTF!!!!". I could understand if this editorial was written, oh, say... A YEAR AGO, but Post-Grabbed by the Ghoulies...
Sigh. I just wish that for ONCE, when these editorial writers bring up online gaming, they would at least acknowledge how costly it's been for Microsoft. Just once. Instead, they just make it sound like Nintendo is ignoring online for no reason whatsoever. All online is ever going to be, for this generation anyway, is a loss-leader. It may get people to buy a certain game, or even a system, but by itself online hasn't proven to a cash cow. For now. Maybe next generation, but not now.
Post by: ghostVi on December 18, 2003, 10:14:55 PM
Post by: Renny on December 18, 2003, 10:45:59 PM
Post by: Mario on December 18, 2003, 11:52:13 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
Basically, the point I'm trying to make is that Nintendo is doing all they can do- yes, sometimes they make some bad business decisions, but so does every company (especially Microsoft with the XBox- why no fortellings of doom for the console currently in 3rd place worldwide, not to mention losing hundreds of millions of dollars?), and Nintendo makes far less than most. It's the industry that needs to change, not Nintendo. Sony's 1st parties are gradually improving, but both the PS2 and the XBox are making it okay for 3rd parties to shove half-assed games out the door because they actually SELL. Eventually, though, when image and graphics no longer matter, when the difference in graphical ability between consoles is indistinguishable, actual game quality will be what drives sales, and it's then when Nintendo will rise once again.
How exactly would you define quality though? I mean, some casual gamers have more fun playing Enter the Matrix than Wind Waker, ive seen it with my own eyes, and yes, they do actually try playing Wind Waker (because i force them), just for some bizzaro reason, they like Enter the Matrix better. Does that make them idiots who cant determine a good game from a bad one? If people enjoy simple (glitchy) games, then let them. Wind Waker and other Nintendo games are just too hard to pick up and play for some, unlike most of the stuff EA, Activision or Joe-Petrol-Station developer churns out. I think this is why Nintendo are re-thinking their philosophy to focuse more on simple games that Joe petrol station worker can enjoy, as well as hardcore gamers, like Wario Ware, which is a perfect example of a game for anyone.
What i think is wrong, is that people are only buying games they know exist. If you had never ever heard of ... say, Skies of Arcadia, and you saw it sitting on the shelf, you would not buy it, why would you? Sony and Microsoft market the hell out of their products, anything they see that's appealing they slap it in a pre-determined ad campaign and bam, the game gets exposure.
Here's an observation. There are more 'hardcore' Nintendo fans on the internet, than Xbox or Playstation fans, just go to any major site, and look in the forums, and you will see the Nintendo section is much more active than the others. Now i ask you to look at sales of multiplatform third party games from a different perspective, Nintendo gamers are usually more informed, since more of them frequent forums (call this a generalisation, whatever, try to prove me otherwise), hence they know by reviews, screenshots, videos, and impressions from their fellow gaming buddies, who share similar tastes to each other, which games are 'quality' games in their perspective, thus the games that we purchase.
The thing is, the average Xbox or Playstation owner doesnt frequent internet forums or anything like that, so they generally have no idea if a game is worth their money or not, they have to rely on the commercials they see, and over the years, their mindset has been set to "realistic games = good" due to the amount of exposure they get. This is why alot of crap sells on Xbox and PS2, because those people just dont know any better.
Supposedly Nintendo have started aggresively advertising in the US, and if they have (i wouldnt know i dont live in the US, therefore dont see many Nintendo ads :\ ), just look at the latest sales. How much better are Nintendo doing now huh? I bet you're all thinking "because they dropped the price you moron", and although that may be a contributing factor, its not the main one. Nintendo ADVERTISED that they dropped the price, and at the same time advertised many of their games to show people that they arent dropping out, and that they are still making great games, which helps counter the "oh gamecube is so cheap now must be chucking a dreamcast" conclusions that certain people have made. Hey, Nintendo dropped the price in Australia too, and it didnt really do much down here, the recent GameCube price cut in Japan also failed to build more momentum for Nintendo in Japan.
What im trying (and failing at?
) to say, is that a large percentage of games sales, are due to the advertising it gets. Word of mouth advertising is part of this(i could go on about this but i wont bore you ), but that doesnt work with every game (its sure working for SSBM and GTA3/VC though). And the actual quality of a game is useless, if nobody knows about it. Maybe advertising is what drives game sales?But, in the end, Nintendo are in a very comfortable position. The fact that they spent less money on advertising than some other gaming companies, most likely is one of the reasons they are so profitable, and the recent losses they made, which were also the first losses they ever made, might have been perhaps because they reserved a large chunk of it for advertising this year? I dont know, perhaps im totally off the mark, but thats just a conclusion i came to. Of course most of their profit comes from their game sales, and the low manufacturing costs of their hardware, but other things most certainly also factor into it.
At least we can all be comfortable with the fact that Nintendo will most likely not go under for a long time, and i dont see them giving up making videogames ever, because there will always be people who buy the games they make, as long as they keep up the quality they have been achieving for the last... well forever, and continue to give us the games we want, Nintendo will live on forever.
Post by: Zeth on December 19, 2003, 01:13:22 AM
Post by: Mario on December 19, 2003, 01:29:28 AM
Give me some examples and i'll tell you how well they sold on each console.
Post by: Ymeegod on December 19, 2003, 02:55:06 AM
Yeah, it's been marketting quite a bit this year, saddly it's a bit late though--it should have been this prior IMO but at least they appear to be going the extra distance (read that nintendo had buggetted 150Million for the last quarter for 2003). So yeah it has plenty of ads.
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 19, 2003, 06:33:50 AM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 19, 2003, 07:45:14 AM
And surprise, Hostile, my email's still not working. If you could, send my editorial to info@game-revolution.com, saying it's from Eric Baker at mrbody54@prodigy.net (I can still recieve email, I just can't connect to my server and see them). Thanks a ton, man.
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 19, 2003, 07:51:18 AM
Okay, I sent it to them and also to you. . . make sure you approve of what I said, etc.
Basically I just told them that your email was down, but that you could still be contacted and I was relaying the message. Best of luck.
Post by: jaz013 on December 19, 2003, 07:53:59 AM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 19, 2003, 08:04:58 AM
And thanks so much, Hostile.
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 19, 2003, 08:21:45 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on December 19, 2003, 09:08:29 AM
"Quite frankly, though, Nintendo's business practices are perfectly fine"
A lot of Nintendo fans point to the fact that Nintendo has until recently always made a profit as proof that Nintendo is doing everything right and will continue to be successful for the long term. I think that their current profitability is a bubble that will eventually pop if they continue in the direction they are going in. Right now they’re surviving mostly due to the support of hardcore fans. But how long are these fans going to support Nintendo if their console is always the “loser” of each generation? How long are they going to put up with a lack of mature or third party games? Until the recent price drop Nintendo had a pretty big problem: traditionally popular games like Mario and Zelda were not selling as well on the Cube as they did on the N64 because the Cube userbase wasn’t high enough and was limiting game sales. That suggests to me that the Nintendo userbase is lowering (or was until the price drop anyway). If Nintendo isn’t progressive I think less and less people are going to support them and eventually the profit bubble is going to burst. If you want to see Nintendo’s business practices as perfectly fine check out the NES and SNES where they not only had profit but also market share and name recognition on par with Kleenex.
“the point I'm trying to make is that Nintendo is doing all they can do- yes, sometimes they make some bad business decisions, but so does every company”
I agree with you that as long as third parties can sell crappy games on other consoles they’ll ignore Nintendo and Nintendo really can’t do anything about that. However I don’t think they’re doing even close to “all they can do”. There are all sorts of stupid little issues that keep third parties from being supportive on the Cube. Stuff like smaller memory cards, smaller disc storage, a controller that sucks for fighting games, higher licensing fees, etc. All of these “problems” are Nintendo’s fault and most of them could have been anticipated and avoided from a mile away. If Nintendo wants to truly bring back third parties they have to fix these issues. They have to give third parties as few excuses as possible for not supporting their console.
“the day Nintendo changes their image, the day Nintendo throws in blood and gore for the sole purpose of getting sales, is the day they’ve lost my business”
Whenever someone talks about Nintendo going in a more mature direction they always bring up some ridiculous idea that somehow that means that Mario has to start killing people and painting the Mushroom Kingdom with blood. That’s a really immature thing to assume or even suggest. Nintendo CAN make games that appeal to the mature audience that have good gameplay and don’t compromise Nintendo’s principles. Look at games like Eternal Darkness or Metroid Prime. I didn’t hear anyone complain that those games compromised Nintendo’s principles. How about Goldeneye which nearly everyone thought was one of the best games ever produced by Nintendo? Nintendo also doesn’t have to make their existing kid friendly games dark and violent. They can make them have more market appeal with them still being kid friendly and still being good games. Not making their most popular franchise into a cartoon is not going ruin Nintendo. Kiddy games are not always good and mature games are not always bad.
As for the online thing well I’ve always felt that Nintendo is being very short sighted about the whole thing. Sure it may not be profitable now but it likely will be later. I can understand them not making a huge MMORPG with huge server costs but something as simple as a peer-to-peer matchmaking service will not bankrupt them and will probably sell more games in the long run. Online is also good for marketing. The Cube looks inferior because the other consoles have it and it doesn’t. Even if someone is never going to play online games the fact that they don’t even have the option if they choose to will make them think twice about getting one. Plus Nintendo can’t just wait until online is profitable to enter the online market. By then it will be too late as Sony and MS will already control the market. I can sort of understand Nintendo not going online with the Cube but they sometimes come across as if they NEVER plan to go online. That would just be a poor business decision.
Post by: Kyosho on December 19, 2003, 09:47:51 AM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 19, 2003, 09:51:45 AM
Quote
posted by mouse_clicker:
As for image, that’s a subject Nintendo fans generally feel very strong about- the day Nintendo changes their image, the day Nintendo throws in blood and gore for the sole purpose of getting sales, is the day they’ve lost my business- I’ll turn away and never look back. If such elements are the result of a creative decision, that’s fine, but Nintendo’s always been about creating the best games possible, and it’s not their fault if people don’t recognize that.
Please read my post a bit better, Ian. I wasn't implying anything near what you thought I was.
"But how long are these fans going to support Nintendo if their console is always the “loser” of each generation?"
Who says Nintendo is the loser? I think you completely missed the point of my editorial- what I was trying to say is that who cares if Nintendo isn't the sales leader? They still sell well enough to keep them going and continue to reward their fans with incredibly good games. Even if Nintendo was slowly fizzling out, they would still be pumping out great games right until the end. Even if they were dead last they would still be pumping out great games, and I would still be proud to call myself a Nintendo fan. But they AREN'T dead last, and they AREN'T fizzling out, and just because the Gamecube doesn't sell as well as the PS2 doesn't mean it's in any sort of trouble at all.
As for the third parties, yes, I agree that Nintendo isn't the most supportive of them, but they HAVE adressed the issue and DO plan to change. And in any case, it's the third parties that are unwilling to change to get sales on Nintendo consoles. Smaller memory cards and smaller discs are NOT what keep third parties away- it's the quality of Nintendo's games and the difficulty it takes to match that. Memory card and disc space are very small obstacles- Factor 5 has released tools allowing developers to fit just as much on a Gamecube disc as on a PS2 or XBox disc, and there's nothing difficult about compressing a save file. It's just that third parties are lazy, and have gotten lazy because they haven't been poked and prodded enough into working hard.
Onto online play- just because Nintendo isn't supporting it now doesn't mean they won't in the future if and when it becomes profitable. They're not supporting it NOW because it ISN'T profitable. And obviously very few people even care enough about online play to pursue it, as is evident by sales of XBox Live and the PS2's online adaptor. Online play isn't going to become incredibly popular and profitable overnight. Really, Ian, I answered most of your points in either my editorial or my posts. I appreciate your concerns, just as I appreciated Kaanchy's, but you're being paranoid. Even if I'm wrong, and Nintendo IS on their way out, at least this line of thinking gives me the peace of mind necessary to truly enjoy their games.
Post by: Kyosho on December 19, 2003, 10:12:39 AM
Quote
" what I was trying to say is that who cares if Nintendo isn't sales leader? They still sell well enough to keep them going and continue to reward their fans with incredibly good games"
So basically you are saying Nintendo does not need to attract or award their non-fans?
Quote
it's the quality of Nintendo's games and the difficulty it takes to match that
eh.. that's kinda opiniated. Imho, it's because
1) most multiplatform owners would rather get the 3rd party game for anythin but the Gamecube
2) Since the end of SNES, nintendo's 3rd party developers have decreased dramatically due to Nintendo not offering enough options to those developers
Online play is becoming the wave of the future. Even though now it isn't that great on consoles, if you jump start on something new, the more variety of people you attract (Look @ EverQuest for PC). Each generation gets more competitive amongst themselves.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 19, 2003, 10:39:00 AM
Quote
So basically you are saying Nintendo does not need to attract or award their non-fans?
Did I say that? No. Don't put words in my mouth. I said that Nintendo has rewared those who have support them for so long, and that reward is in the form of extremely good games, which are for everyone, not just Nintendo fans.
Quote
1) most multiplatform owners would rather get the 3rd party game for anythin but the Gamecube
You're making a completely unfounded blanket statement- don't do that.
Quote
2) Since the end of SNES, nintendo's 3rd party developers have decreased dramatically due to Nintendo not offering enough options to those developers
That's complete and utter crap- I'd people to actually read my post before they try to refute it.
Quote
Online play is becoming the wave of the future. Even though now it isn't that great on consoles, if you jump start on something new, the more variety of people you attract (Look @ EverQuest for PC). Each generation gets more competitive amongst themselves.
Even on the PC, where an internet connection is almost standard, the only online PC games that thrive are the free ones. Everquest has what, some 300,000 users? That's not good even for a PC game- I hardly call that the next big thing. That wave is way out in the middle of the ocean, hardly breaking on shore as many seem to think it is.
Post by: Ian Sane on December 19, 2003, 10:49:14 AM
A lot of fans do and they should. The sales leader gets the best third party support and the largest variety of games. Personally I don't really care if Nintendo is the market leader I just want them to be in a postion where their consoles don't get the worst version of multiplatfrom releases and aren't always the console that gets "left out" when it comes to certain non-exclusive games (like GTA). I want them to get back to the point the mainstream and gaming media isn't constantly bashing them. It's frustrating as hell to miss out on games and have some of your favourite third parties completely ignore your console. People don't like constantly owning the console of each generation that gets the least attention. Therefore I think eventually a lot of them will abandon Nintendo if things don't improve.
"Memory card and disc space are very small obstacles- Factor 5 has released tools allowing developers to fit just as much on a Gamecube disc as on a PS2 or XBox disc, and there's nothing difficult about compressing a save file. It's just that third parties are lazy, and have gotten lazy because they haven't been poked and prodded enough into working hard."
You're making an excuse. There shouldn't be any excuses. A third party shouldn't have to use compression if they don't want to. Lazyness isn't going to hurt Madden sales. Having to buy a whole memory card just for one game is. The problem with having smaller storage and telling third parties to use compression techniques is that it's rather elitist. Realistically why should Nintendo care how much disc space a third party uses? Nintendo's "holier than thou" attitude towards third parties has always hurt them. Having smaller storage just isn't accomidating. A tailor sells a big suit to a fat guy. He doesn't sell him a small suit and tell him to stop being so lazy and lose weight.
Now like you said that's not a reason third parties aren't supporting the Cube. But Nintendo's general dickheadish attitude towards third parties is. Therefore it's important to be as accomidating as possible. That means storage space and licensing fees that match or beat the competition.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 19, 2003, 11:00:16 AM
Quote
A lot of fans do and they should. The sales leader gets the best third party support and the largest variety of games.
I thought you'd say this, but I also thought you'd realise why it as irrelevant- I'm not saying Nintendo SHOULDN'T be the sales leader, but I see it more as a bonus than a necessity, because I have all I could ever need or want from Nintendo with them being in a strong but distance second.
Quote
You're making an excuse. There shouldn't be any excuses. A third party shouldn't have to use compression if they don't want to.
I'm not making an exuse, it's the truth. You shouldn't have to use a popup blocker to surf PGC, but you do. I agree 3rd parties shoudln't need to compress, but that's no excuse not to. It shows how lazy they are. 3rd parties work around the PS2's general bitchiness to program for, so at least there's some motivation- they don't have to do that, but they do. And why? For sales. If they'd put that effort into their Gamecube games, they'd get sales on it as well. That's the whole point I'm trying to make- 3rd parties are too lazy to do anything that doesn't yeild them immediate results. That's why many people think there will be another videogame crash, because the same thing happened with the Atari.
And Nintendo is not a dickhead to 3rd parties- they're not angels, either, but don't exaggerate. They're even supportive of a lot of 3rd parties, like Sega, Namco, Capcom, Konami, and EA. In my humble opinion, that's much better than throwing money hats at them as Microsoft has done.
Post by: Ian Sane on December 19, 2003, 11:12:46 AM
That's not a very good analogy. PGC supports itself by it's ads. Nintendo doesn't support itself by using less storage. I actually find that Nintendo has improved their third party relations but I don't think it's good enough. They seem to be doing the bare minimum when really they should be as accomidating as Sony was when the PSX first launched. They're not as big of dickheads now but they used to be and I think they should being doing more to convince third parties that they've changed. I think we both agree that Nintendo is doing better in this area we just have different opinions on how much better they're doing.
"I'm not saying Nintendo SHOULDN'T be the sales leader, but I see it more as a bonus than a necessity, because I have all I could ever need or want from Nintendo with them being in a strong but distance second."
Well you're just stating what you personally think. I actually am quite content with my Cube too though I see room for improvement. However we're two people and we certainly aren't going to keep Nintendo alive on our own. Out of the general Nintendo userbase I think there's a strong desire for them to do better and that's why I think a lot of people won't stay around forever without some change on Nintendo's part.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 19, 2003, 11:18:14 AM
Quote
Out of the general Nintendo userbase I think there's a strong desire for them to do better
Yes...
Quote
and that's why I think a lot of people won't stay around forever without some change on Nintendo's part.
No. Ask any Nintendo fan if they're content and I almost guarantee you they'll resound an affirmitive. I'm not saying Nintendo couldn't do better, or that I don't want them to do better, just that even if they don't I'll still be incredibly happy, and I think you'll find almost every Nintendo fan agrees with me. Any better Nintendo gets is just icing on the cake.
Post by: Renny on December 19, 2003, 11:18:47 AM
But at the same time, they do need to make a lot more progress. I'm beginning to think ignoring online games is going to hurt them next generation when Sony and MS have established reputations for solid online networks, where Nintendo will have to fight to make it known they have online games too. The same issue they have now with their media: their discs are only limiting to the most FMV-laden games [even F-Zero fit on one disc], but they're still feeling the effect of having lost developers over cartidges last generation.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 19, 2003, 11:21:15 AM
And I don't adress everything in the editorial because not all of it is relavent and some of it doesn't support even the author's own point.
Post by: AJL221893 on December 19, 2003, 02:58:31 PM
So your saying the day Nintendo will come up on top again is when all graphics are so good they can't get any better? So all thats left to compare is gameplay? Makes sense, but that won't be for awhile. And once that does happen, who knows what'll happen next. Virtual reality might be introduced, some 3d type system.
Post by: Kyosho on December 19, 2003, 08:25:00 PM
Quote
You're making a completely unfounded blanket statement- don't do that.
I'm basing my judgements from the sales I have done as well as the opinions of multiconsole owners from other boards, in stores, and console gamers. When was the last time you saw GC's multiplatformed 3rd party game soar in the charts?
Quote
Even on the PC, where an internet connection is almost standard, the only online PC games that thrive are the free ones. Everquest has what, some 300,000 users? That's not good even for a PC game- I hardly call that the next big thing. That wave is way out in the middle of the ocean, hardly breaking on shore as many seem to think it is.
From the statement above, it doesn't appear that you play much PC.
currently 300,000+ users x $12.95 / month equals.... ???
Let's also take in account Verant also has Planetside as well as the upcoming EQ2 coming out in addition to the amount of people who have played EQ and quit etc. EQ is also big internationally as well. I don't know where you get your statistics for this MC, but you're wrong here. MMOFPS in general do not generate much profit because it's a new genre, MMORPG (if successful) has shown to thrive and not even show any signs of slowing down. This is kind of swaying from the online issue, but it's to point out that if you can pioneer and keep afoot, then it WILL become "the next big thing"
Quote
Ask any Nintendo fan if they're content and I almost guarantee you they'll resound an affirmitive. I'm not saying Nintendo couldn't do better, or that I don't want them to do better, just that even if they don't I'll still be incredibly happy, and I think you'll find almost every Nintendo fan agrees with me. Any better Nintendo gets is just icing on the cake.
I'm glad you would be happy, but unlike you I'm one of those Nintendo fans that looks for BOTH 1st party and 3rd party support for their games. It decreases every Nintendo generation. When the next Nintendo system comes out, i'll be even more hesitant in buying, as I'm sure i'm not the only one feeling this way. I get the feeling each generation's "Nintendo fans" lessens.
Quote
And Nintendo is not a dickhead to 3rd parties- they're not angels, either, but don't exaggerate. They're even supportive of a lot of 3rd parties, like Sega, Namco, Capcom, Konami, and EA. In my humble opinion, that's much better than throwing money hats at them as Microsoft has done.
Those are some of the big named companies. In the past, much of the smaller companies have also done well for Nintendo. I'd like to see more support for everyone in general. They also need to cater more to those companies as well such as programming interfaces, the choice of medium, etc.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 19, 2003, 08:43:10 PM
Quote
I'm basing my judgements from the sales I have done as well as the opinions of multiconsole owners from other boards, in stores, and console gamers. When was the last time you saw GC's multiplatformed 3rd party game soar in the charts?
Soul Calibur 2. Viewtiful Joe. And besides that, read my post- I explain why very few 3rd parties support the Gamecube.
Quote
currently 300,000+ users x $12.95 / month equals.... ???
And how much of that goes into supporting the servers, marketing, developing new titles, etc, etc. MMORPG's aren't profitable because not enough people want to play them. Get out of your jaded little gamer world where all your hardcore friends play them, because the overwhelming majority don't.
Quote
I'm glad you would be happy, but unlike you I'm one of those Nintendo fans that looks for BOTH 1st party and 3rd party support for their games.
I don't care about you- I was talking about myself. Concern yourself all you want, burn a hole in your stomach, it's not my problem. I'm going to enjoy my videogames.
Quote
It decreases every Nintendo generation.
Actually, the Gamecube has much better 3rd party support than the N64- hell, Square came back. That alone should say as much.
Quote
I get the feeling each generation's "Nintendo fans" lessens.
Well, the feeling is unfounded, because I'm almost certain the Gamecube as a console is selling better than the N64 ever did.
As for 3rd parties, I already talked about them to Ian- I have nothing new to say.
Also, sorry I'm really pissed off- it's not because of you, it's because I have the crappiest trackball mouse in the world and it take's an hour just to copy a simple sentence to quote.
Post by: Kyosho on December 19, 2003, 09:33:15 PM
Quote
And how much of that goes into supporting the servers, marketing, developing new titles, etc, etc. MMORPG's aren't profitable because not enough people want to play them. Get out of your jaded little gamer world where all your hardcore friends play them, because the overwhelming majority don't.
Please explain why are they still around, evolving, and why are many developers diving into the genre. 300,000 is a small estimate. When I played 4 years ago, it was at 250,000. Since then, servers have been added as well as support. Again, this does not mean NIntendo should make MMORPGs, this is just showing an example of what kinda success online gaming COULD bring.
Quote
don't care about you- I was talking about myself. Concern yourself all you want, burn a hole in your stomach, it's not my problem. I'm going to enjoy my videogames.
Like I said before, good for you. But it sounds like Nintendo is rewarding *you* not all fans
Quote
hell, Square came back
And they decided on a multiplayer hack/slash game over a much needed original RPG.
Lastly, you don't have to quote for me if you don't want to. I just use quoting so I can read what I'm responding to.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 19, 2003, 09:39:09 PM
Quote
Please explain why are they still around, evolving, and why are many developers diving into the genre. 300,000 is a small estimate.
Why is Microsoft still supporting the XBox after losing nearly a billion dollars on it last year? I can't claim to know every nuance of every company.
Quote
ike I said before, good for you. But it sounds like Nintendo is rewarding *you* not most Nintendo fans.
I explained this, too- the "reward" for their loyal fans are great games, which can be enjoted by everyone. Nintendo's not picking favorites, my friend, and I'm sorry I made it sound that way.
Quote
And they decided on a multiplayer hack/slash game over a much needed original RPG.
It IS an original RPG- have you read anything about the game? It's one of the best and most original titles Square has put out in years.
Quote
Lastly, you don't have to quote for me if you don't want to. I just use quoting so I can read what I'm responding to.
I'm the same way- I'd feel really lost if I didn't use quotes.
I just didn't want you think I was pissed off at you. I'm planning on getting at least an optical mouse soon, hopefully wireless as well.
Post by: ThePerm on December 19, 2003, 09:46:55 PM
Post by: Luciferschild on December 20, 2003, 11:39:55 AM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 20, 2003, 04:21:02 PM
Post by: Mario on December 20, 2003, 04:52:12 PM
Quote
I thought you'd say this, but I also thought you'd realise why it as irrelevant- I'm not saying Nintendo SHOULDN'T be the sales leader, but I see it more as a bonus than a necessity, because I have all I could ever need or want from Nintendo with them being in a strong but distance second.
If Nintendo were the sales leader all the third parties would flock to Nintendo and Xbox and Playstation would be left with nothing but their less than steller first party efforts, and i would only have to buy one console.
Quote
Soul Calibur 2. Viewtiful Joe. And besides that, read my post- I explain why very few 3rd parties support the Gamecube.
Except Viewtiful Joe isnt multiplatform and the GC version of SC2 had two obvious advantages over the other versions (Link + Advertising as "Only on Nintendo GameCube")...
Quote
Actually, the Gamecube has much better 3rd party support than the N64- hell, Square came back. That alone should say as much.
Name every game Square has planned for GameCube. Ok i'll answer my own question, Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles. WOW LOOK OUT N64.
Nah, seriously though, GameCube has much more third party support than the N64 ever had, Resident Evil, Metal Gear Solid, Capcom, Super Monkey Ball, Sonic, etc.Quote
Well, the feeling is unfounded, because I'm almost certain the Gamecube as a console is selling better than the N64 ever did.
Well i dont know how much hardware the N64 had sold at this point in it's lifetime, but N64 software sales were much higher than what GameCubes' are now, but GameCube software is still selling, so... we'll just have to wait a few years to judge.
Quote
I explained this, too- the "reward" for their loyal fans are great games, which can be enjoted by everyone. Nintendo's not picking favorites, my friend, and I'm sorry I made it sound that way.
'Everyone' that buys either a new GC or 2 or 3 games that they may not want
*coughzeldabonusdisk*Quote
Mario that was one of the smartest posts I've ever seen in here. Wow.
Thanks
Quote
I mean gore works for some games like say perfect dark. That game had great blood effects and it added to the gameplay, it made it funner.
What new gameplay elements did the blood add though? Did it allow you to use it as a weapon, so when you get wounded you can throw your blood at the enemies eyes? No. It did add to the visual experience, but not the gameplay. I do admit though, a game like Perfect Dark would be a bit strange if there was no blood, and taking blood out, when blood would normally be there, isn't necessary.
And yes, i enjoy quoting too.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 20, 2003, 05:00:33 PM
Quote
If Nintendo were the sales leader all the third parties would flock to Nintendo and Xbox and Playstation would be left with nothing but their less than steller first party efforts, and i would only have to buy one console
Gah, am I typing in French here? What I MEANT was that Nintendo is certainly not doing bad with their current 3rd party support, and they've still creating the great games they have been for decades now. I know it'd be better IF they had more 3rd party support, but what I'm trying to say is they'renot bad off without it.
Quote
Except Viewtiful Joe isnt multiplatform and the GC version of SC2 had two obvious advantages over the other versions (Link + Advertising as "Only on Nintendo GameCube")...
Yeah, I know- I had a brain fart and though "3rd party games" rather than "multiplatform" for a second.
But as for Soul Calibur 2, both the XBox and PS2 versions had their own exclusive characters as well, and to a lot of people Spawn and Heihachi are a lot better than Link.
Quote
Well i dont know how much hardware the N64 had sold at this point in it's lifetime, but N64 software sales were much higher than what GameCubes' are now, but GameCube software is still selling, so... we'll just have to wait a few years to judge.
I'm almost certain you're wrong- I, too, don't know exact figures, but I'd bet money the Gamecube is selling better than the N64 was.
Quote
Everyone that buys either a new GC or 2 or 3 games that they may not want *coughzeldabonusdisk*
Again, people need to read my posts better- I was talking about games like Wind Waker, Metroid Prime, Eternal Darkness, Super Smash Bros. Melee, Pikmin, Mario Kart: Double Dash, Super Mario Sunshine, Animal Crossing, etc, etc.
Post by: Jordan on December 20, 2003, 05:03:07 PM
Post by: Mario on December 20, 2003, 05:18:25 PM
Quote
I'm almost certain you're wrong- I, too, don't know exact figures, but I'd bet money the Gamecube is selling better than the N64 was.
Total Software sales.
Wave Race 64 - 1,706,024
Wave Race Blue Storm - 265,158
Super Mario 64 - 5,943,556
Super Mario Sunshine - 1,201,895
NBA Courtside 64 - 874,745
NBA Courtside 2002 - 122,953
An exception to this rule is SSBM, which has sold 1,855,743 so far in the US, and is still selling amazingly well, and will most likely catch up to SSB's 2,546,810.
That's all i can go by, i cant compare console install bases because i dont know how much N64 sold 2 years into its lifetime. And if we are talking worldwide, im almost certain N64 was selling better than GameCube, since Nintendo Europe seems to have really screwed up with the GC.
Quote
Again, people need to read my posts better- I was talking about games like Wind Waker, Metroid Prime, Eternal Darkness, Super Smash Bros. Melee, Pikmin, Mario Kart: Double Dash, Super Mario Sunshine, Animal Crossing, etc, etc.
Well you didnt provide examples so i jumped on it
.Quote
How come Xbox, got GTA and Gamecube didn't? Gamecube makes to many kiddy games, I'm thinkin of gettin an Xbox, they have Grand Theft Auto, Halo, etc. Y doen't gamecube have any "really good" games like those?
Because Nintendo didn't pay Rockstar a freaking crapload for a 2 year old PS2 port. And the GameCube doesnt 'make' games... bah, there's no point replying to this.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 20, 2003, 05:27:33 PM
Quote
That's all i can go by, i cant compare console install bases because i dont know how much N64 sold 2 years into its lifetime. And if we are talking worldwide, im almost certain N64 was selling better than GameCube, since Nintendo Europe seems to have really screwed up with the GC.
Two things- first, I was talking about consoles sales, not software sales. Second, those games you listed had what I call the "Halo Effect"- basically, those are the only games available to choose from. Just like with Halo and the Xbox's launch, the only good games people could get for the N64 at launch and for a very long time afterwards WERE those games. I think you'll agree the Gamecube has many more great games than the N64 already.
Quote
Well you didnt provide examples so i jumped on it .
I thought it was implied.
QuoteQuote
How come Xbox, got GTA and Gamecube didn't? Gamecube makes to many kiddy games, I'm thinkin of gettin an Xbox, they have Grand Theft Auto, Halo, etc. Y doen't gamecube have any "really good" games like those?
Because Nintendo didn't pay Rockstar a freaking crapload for a 2 year old PS2 port. And the GameCube doesnt 'make' games... bah, there's no point replying to this.
Yeah, I decided that before I replied at all.
Post by: Mario on December 20, 2003, 05:32:53 PM
Quote
I think you'll agree the Gamecube has many more great games than the N64 already.
Hell yeah, the GameCube is by far my favourite console of all time and it's only halfway through it's lifespan. Good times.
Post by: Kyosho on December 20, 2003, 10:13:05 PM
Quote
Hell yeah, the GameCube is by far my favourite console of all time and it's only halfway through it's lifespan. Good times.
Let's just wait for 2004 - appears to be a very important year for Nintendo considering the amount of criticism they are receiving.
Post by: Zeth on December 20, 2003, 11:11:27 PM
Post by: KnowsNothing on December 21, 2003, 04:06:28 AM
And also Mario, you didn't sound as dumb as you think you did.
(if that was confusing, it was a compliment) lol silly me, I forgot there are THREE PAGES (
) of this madness. I can't be arsed into reading them right now, so this post is in reply to the first page only. Huzzah!
Post by: Oldskool on December 21, 2003, 06:50:15 AM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 21, 2003, 07:18:06 AM
Zeth: That didn't make any sense whatsoever.
Post by: Luciferschild on December 21, 2003, 09:20:02 AM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 21, 2003, 10:24:02 AM
Also, my email's back up!! It just started working as mysteriously as it stopped. Again, thank you very much, Hostile, for taking care of the letter while it was down.
Post by: BlkPaladin on December 21, 2003, 12:19:57 PM
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 21, 2003, 12:20:32 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 21, 2003, 12:50:59 PM
Post by: evil intentions on December 21, 2003, 01:41:58 PM
But if you ask me, I spend much more time in the room with the Gamecube, then in any other room. Gamecube doesn't have kiddish games, they just don't have all that blood and gore and crap in the games. I agree with mouse_clicker, in saying that if they ever did add all the blood and gore, that they would lose my business.
I have to admit, that the Xbox and PS2 have some good games, but there are only a few of them that I really enjoy. The reason that they have a lot more games than the Cube is because they don't put all the hard work into their games. The Cube puts all their time and effort into creating the best game they can. That's why I enjoy them so much.
When I was younger, I used to watch my dad playing Mario on N64. I used to love watching how Mario could fly in the air with his winged hat, how he could turn into Iron, how he could save baby penguins and take them all the way to their mommy, and beat penguins in races.
When I was younger I used to always watch my older cousins play Super Nintendo and play Aladin and Mario, and all these great games. I enjoyed them, and didn't care about the graphics at all. (well of course there was nothing better at the time) But even still, I play games on my Super Nintendo and don't even worry about the graphics. I have the time of my life playing with my cousins in Super Mario. We don't even think about the graphics.
If Nintendo would ever change the way they were, they wouldn't be Nintendo anymore. And all you losers out there who think the games are too kidish to play or that they don't have good games like the PS2 and XBOX do, well then you all have problems and I have no idea what you are doing in a Gamecube forum.
Post by: jaz013 on December 21, 2003, 01:45:31 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 21, 2003, 01:54:56 PM
) is because almost by definition we don't care about the content of a videogame, but rather it's quality. Nintendo has never made a game soley off of image, and as a result Nintendo fans have learned not to judge a game base on its image. I don't mean that in an arrogant or superior way, but you honestly cannot be a Nintendo fan if you're worried about how a game looks than how it plays.
Post by: evil intentions on December 21, 2003, 02:41:49 PM
Post by: nolimit19 on December 21, 2003, 06:08:57 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 21, 2003, 06:11:55 PM
Post by: nolimit19 on December 21, 2003, 06:22:12 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 21, 2003, 06:25:37 PM
Post by: nolimit19 on December 21, 2003, 06:38:25 PM
Post by: Mario on December 21, 2003, 09:57:51 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 21, 2003, 09:59:31 PM
Post by: Mario on December 21, 2003, 10:02:36 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 21, 2003, 10:07:43 PM
Post by: Mario on December 21, 2003, 10:15:24 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 21, 2003, 10:23:48 PM
And I think Nintendo's games are vastly improving- didn't you say yourself, Mario, that the Gamecube was your favorite system, and yet you think their games are worse?
Post by: Mario on December 21, 2003, 10:37:44 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 21, 2003, 11:00:06 PM
Post by: Mario on December 21, 2003, 11:27:13 PM
Post by: nolimit19 on December 22, 2003, 05:09:44 AM
System Sales this week Total Sales in 2003
PlayStation 2 116,400 2,645,500
GameCube 53,600 777,600
GameBoy Advance SP 51,900 2,046,700
Xbox 2,600 96,000
same old story in japan. nintendo is whooping xbox, but ps2 is whipping gc.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 22, 2003, 07:08:39 AM
Nolimit: I'm not sure why you're posting sales figures here- that's not what this thread is about.
Post by: Smashman on December 22, 2003, 09:11:53 AM
N64 was OK, and had some memorable games, but Nintendo is really shaping up with GCN and really pumping some quality out, surpassing N64 in each of their franchises. GCN is now tied, with SNES, as my favorite system, and then Sega Genesis, then NES, then the rest!
Post by: Kyosho on December 22, 2003, 10:36:20 AM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 22, 2003, 10:42:37 AM
Also, 12 great games a year is more than almost any console can claim.
Post by: Radical on December 22, 2003, 02:41:39 PM
At SW2k, the next-gen zelda was shown (a short clip) and it was cool- people were saying that you would buy GCN JUST FOR THIS GAME. Then WW came out. Now, while probably everyone here loves it, the idea is that:
If everyone said it was so super cool back then, why change it? Nintendo just alienated non-hardcore fans. I am not disputing whether the game was good or not (WW), im saying that nintendo could of released something that we AND the general public would both RUSH OUT to buy.
This is the same with MANY franchises (ie. SF:A). Also, the lack of an online strategy hurt nintendo. It didn't even have to be that much- just a simple sort of online play on gamespy or something would of been sufficent. I mean there are some people blessing MK
D, but for what? LAN play? It's a joke. I bought my BBA, and I can't use it for a damn thing! What happened to all the nintendo franchises, the KILLER HITS NO OTHER COMPANY COULD COMPETE WITH. If nintendo loses the "prestige" of these franchises (ie. say starfox or mario are not respected and cool anymore, or god forbid zelda) then they will slowly die (they have no one up.) HOWEVER, having TOP QUALITY franchises will make nintendo EASILY DESTROY any other company (its like having 10 killer apps.)Nintendo needs to make GOOD franchises, things that are SO GOOD, PEOPLE WILL PURCHASE A CUBE FOR THAT GAME ALONE. Also, they need to offer some sort of online support, even if it is some crappy free thing like gamespy, or something the equivalent of blizzards "battle.net" server, where they play matchmaker. (costs very little.)
im out
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 22, 2003, 02:48:23 PM
Post by: nolimit19 on December 22, 2003, 02:56:47 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 22, 2003, 03:01:50 PM
Post by: Press Start on December 22, 2003, 03:10:46 PM
I picked this out midway through reading the whole of this dicussion, and from my point of view, it's true. I'm an Xbox owner, i love the damn thing, and despite what some people in here are saying, online is great. I mean if you had the choice to play all your fave GC games online, with Nintendo fans across the world, everyone in here would. The rubbishing of online going on in this topic and others on this forum is simply because the Gamecube doesnt have it yet. HOWEVER...what the Xbox, and PS2 don't have is the Rock solid 1st party quality the Nintendo has. I got GC for that reason only, the Nintendo titles, and a few Sega ones. But mainly Nintendo ones, no matter what system i have, i'm not gonna get the feeling that takes me back to when i used to play games for fun, Nintendos image is more FUN than kiddie to me. Dont have a PS2 only an xbox, so third party titles on GC don't interest me. The GC's sole strength in my humble 17 yrs of gamings opinion...is the fact that it's Nintendo, and that means a cetain type of game, and game quality most people are always gonna buy a nintendo system for. Maybe moreso for older gamers ironically, purely for the sweet nostalgic feeling seeing the nintendo logo on y screen, or seeing Mario gives. Plus the new price drop is extremely attractive, i never bothered getting one before, because the xbox for the most part satifies my gaming needs, but theres always gonna be the hole there, of not having no nintendo style games on it...thus i now have one. A little blindly, the only games i really know are the bigger nintendo ones (Double Dash, Mario Sunshine, Pikmin..err), havent had a nintendo system since SNES, so it's a brand new time of gaming for me cos i know a lot of good stuffs already out there. Still not exacly sure what tho, but i'll find it.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 22, 2003, 03:17:09 PM
Post by: nolimit19 on December 22, 2003, 03:24:56 PM
Post by: Press Start on December 22, 2003, 03:46:57 PM
Post by: joshnickerson on December 22, 2003, 03:59:01 PM
I honestly would like to see what percentage of people on Xbox Live are using the "free subscription" deal and which one are actually PAYING for it.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 22, 2003, 04:28:53 PM
Post by: Kyosho on December 22, 2003, 07:00:25 PM
Quote
Remember, Nintendo has had more experience with online networks than anyone else
please explain
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 22, 2003, 07:08:05 PM
Post by: SpeeDz on December 22, 2003, 07:48:07 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on December 22, 2003, 10:18:25 PM
Post by: nolimit19 on December 23, 2003, 11:26:56 AM
Post by: Shadow Fox on December 23, 2003, 01:26:00 PM
QuoteWell, barring the Virtual Boy, but that was a portable (or marketed as one, anyways)...
Originally posted by: nolimit19
i didnt know they had gone online EVERY generation...
At any rate, mouse_clicker, you definately made a statement in this thread that was very profound, and again something that Nintendo fans (or just hardcore gamers in general) have always noticed about NCL and the 3rd-party situation that mainstream media and gamers are clueless about...
Somebody please spam this thread to every site you can think of...the days of people buying a PS2 or Xbox solely for Madden must end...
-Official Ninja of PGC
Post by: Ian Sane on December 23, 2003, 01:39:08 PM
Well the N64 had one of the best games of all time as a launch title so I thought it was pretty good. I think the Cube's was the worst one ever, for a Nintendo console at least. I mean Luigi's Mansion? There's going to be a six month drought after launch and the big launch game they give us can be beaten in a weekend and has no replay value. Who's the moron who planned that out?
However I agree that a good launch is something Nintendo needs to work on. Personally I think the crappy Cube launch is the main reason why it never really sold well until the price cut. They will have the advantage this time that since they plan on launching with the other consoles they don't have to compete with a year's worth of games. The existing PS2 lineup really hurt the Cube launch. However they have to make sure they have both a variety of titles for launch (multiple genres, "kiddy" and "mature" titles) and have at least one big killer app that can last people through any potential droughts ie: a big Mario launch title. The Xbox had the same drought the Cube had in it's first few months but it didn't matter because it had Halo, which is still one of the big Xbox sellers, to make up for it. Nintendo has to make sure that the next console has something at launch with that type of staying power.
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 23, 2003, 01:44:02 PM
Quote
I mean if you had the choice to play all your fave GC games online, with Nintendo fans across the world, everyone in here would.
If it were free, sure. But only for making fun of the other people on it. That is fun. Otherwise I'll play alone or with my friends, who are much cooler than the rest of the world anyway.
Post by: Mario on December 23, 2003, 01:46:54 PM
Post by: nolimit19 on December 23, 2003, 02:39:17 PM
Post by: Berny on December 23, 2003, 03:36:29 PM
Next round though, things will be very different. First, DVD playing will not be necessary. Ask you neighbor if he has a DVD player. He will have either a PS2, a computer that plays DVDs or, (dare I say it) an ACTUAL DVD player. (OMG!!!
) Also, that fabled generation of consoles in which "graphics don't matter" draws closer every day. Also, Ninty has learned the importance of a good lookin' piece of hardware; if there is an Indigo NES V, I will personally paint black every Indigo NES V that a PGC forum user buys. Finally, Ninty will have an excellent library at launch or so I hope. We've not heard anything of Too Human of late and it is pretty much set in stone that it will not be coming to the GCN, leaving two options: either its been scrapped or it is on NES V. That alone will hook the now vital mature audience. hopefully we'll get one with a Nintendo mascot, too. Mario 64 did wonders for its console. That's about all I have to say on the matter.
Post by: Rich on December 23, 2003, 06:10:30 PM
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 23, 2003, 06:18:42 PM
No offense to any of you, of course
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 23, 2003, 06:37:56 PM
Quote
My philosophy exactly. I don't want to play any game with a bunch of pimply, annoying nerds that live thousands of miles away from me.
As opposed to a bunch of pimply, annoying nerds that are sitting in the same room.
Post by: Ian Sane on December 24, 2003, 06:04:47 AM
You know you could still, I don't know, play the game with your friends in the same room. SSB:M online would still have four player multiplayer but it would also have online multiplayer for those that want to use it. I know I wouldn't mind playing with some of you guys online. I would also use it to play with my close friends more since they're not at my house all the time.
I really hate it when people use "well I'm not interested in online" as a valid excuse for Nintendo not going in that direction. Who cares if you're not interested? Some people are so in the future that option should be there. Just because a game has online support doesn't mean that you have to use it or that it will ruin the game.
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 24, 2003, 06:50:29 AM
Quote
As opposed to a bunch of pimply, annoying nerds that are sitting in the same room.
Exactly. I like to be able to see their pimples and know that they exist while I play with them.
Post by: KnowsNothing on December 24, 2003, 06:57:36 AM
I'd like to play online with anybody BUT you guys because I don't want any of you finding out how bad I suck, 'mkay?
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 24, 2003, 07:04:38 AM
Post by: jaz013 on December 24, 2003, 07:55:06 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
Sad to see even PGC is getting in on the Nintendo's going down wave- am I the only one who actually had the foresight to write something different?
Sadly, bashing is always easier, it doesn't matter if the one you are ramping againts it's in firts or last place. Besides, you can always come with the hipocrital face of "I knew they'll do well, really". Faith, pals, it's all you need (even when I don't take it anymore).
Post by: KnowsNothing on December 24, 2003, 08:17:26 AM
GAMECUBE MORE LIKE GHEYCUBE LOL HRHHRHRH
Post by: Berny on December 24, 2003, 05:11:07 PM
Post by: Kyosho on December 24, 2003, 10:23:24 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 25, 2003, 05:59:08 AM
Post by: Berny on December 25, 2003, 07:48:26 AM
Post by: Shift Key on December 25, 2003, 06:21:19 PM
1. The GCN has done well, but it needs to do more to win back fans.
I consider three games to be the best work that Nintendo has put out. Mario 64 and Zelda: OoT were the best games of the last era, and I also add Metroid Prime to that group from the current era. I consider these games to be great because they pushed Nintendo's franchises to new heights, which are still hard to match. The jump to 3D gaming is certainly memorable, and I spent much of my days playing OoT and SM64. MP is a personal favourite, because I know some people don't consider it as a classic, but compared to Super Metroid, I'd say they did great things with it.
I agree that the third party situation is not as successful, probably better than the N64 days, but that doesn't matter to me. I don't like sports games on consoles. The last one I owned was NBA Live 98 on the N64, so it's not significant to me.
2. Advertising and slight images changes will bring success next time around. I guarantee a launch colour that isn't purple will sell more systems! *shudders*
3. I have Manhunt. I DIDN'T buy it for the violence. I bought it because the reviews painted it as a game where the world is out to kill you, and you need to use anything available to hunt them, such as wits, patiences, opportunity and luck. Those things make it a great game, and the people who want violence can also have that too.
4. Online? No, I don't see this as the next big thing. You might have unlimited broadband access now, but the rest of the world doesn't. Does that mean its cool to be on 512K? Of course not.
Not everyone wants to play RPGs online, despite what Square says. I can see more LAN-style games being developed, so that more players can be active at the same time, like the MK DD LAN feature. My main reason of thinking is that ping times can be minimised when the consoles are directly connected, sharing processing power and information to keep up with the advances in game design. It also would allow for more styles of games to be supported, not just MMORPGs. I'm not going to discuss how it could be used, because I'm not making the games
Quote*raises hand* Because everyone is so damn critical of Nintendo's games! They have a reputation to keep, and every time they do something out of the ordinary, the media and other commentators go crazy, like sharks to a bloody corpse.
why are we singling out Nintendo when their games are still leagues ahead of everybody else's?
Post by: Kyosho on December 25, 2003, 08:58:21 PM
Quote
Kyosoho, have you even LOOKED at those stats you claim are painting Nintendo in a negative light? Do your research before you make a claim like that- sales in general, be they hardware or software, are WAY up. I find it odd you can come in here and disprove my entire 1,000+ word post simply by saying it's wrong, citing no facts, and then muttering something about hypocrites. Do you have any idea what we're even talking about?
Not saying your 1000+ word post is wrong, I am just saying you consider Nintendo's positives higher weight than Nintendo's negatives. Their sales have INCREASED, but for dear sakes, have you looked at why they increased? I bet you one of the reasons (in the US specifically) was due to Nintendo dropping the GCN to 99$ to get rid of inventory. There are probably other reasons such as Mario Kart DD, etc, but the 99$ drop seems to hold much more weight in that regard when I look at the average gamer's reaction.
For those people/media that I'm talkin about, I don't look at their accusations as being wrong. I look at the reasons behind their accusations as they explain what Nintendo is not addressing properly in their image/games.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 25, 2003, 09:36:09 PM
BTW, that price drop is what we in the biz like to call "strategy".
Post by: Kyosho on December 25, 2003, 09:51:08 PM
Quote
Do your research before you make a claim like that- sales in general, be they hardware or software, are WAY up
Nintendo's "strategy" - get rid of inventory
My opinion on the reasons for their "strategy" - Nintendo experiencing poor sales resulting in inventory not moving quick enough.
Further analyzation - System/software sales were far from expected/hoped. Nintendo experiencing heat from the media.
SO yes it's a strategy, that's quite obvious. But I look at the reasons more so behind their strategy for further explanations than just looking at it concretely.
As for the editorial, I had to go back and read it just now because your opinions outside the editorial appear to be largely PRO-nintendo and not much from a neutral perspective. For almost every CON that is said about Nintendo, you attempt to refute it.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 25, 2003, 09:58:41 PM
As for your last paragraph, I have no idea what you're trying to say, that I think Nintendo's perfect? Far from it- I've stated as such in this thread myself. Since you're so good at finding quotes, find some of them.
Post by: Kyosho on December 26, 2003, 08:09:56 AM
Quote
I have no idea what you're trying to say, that I think Nintendo's perfect?
I am saying despite almost every problem people point out, you and others try to refute that argument in favor of Nintendo. Never said you thought Nintendo's perfect. Perhaps it's your optimistic view on the whole situation.
Here are some random quotes you've put up:
Quote
Who says Nintendo is the loser? I think you completely missed the point of my editorial- what I was trying to say is that who cares if Nintendo isn't the sales leader? They still sell well enough to keep them going and continue to reward their fans with incredibly good games
Quote
yes, I agree that Nintendo isn't the most supportive of them, but they HAVE adressed the issue and DO plan to change. And in any case, it's the third parties that are unwilling to change to get sales on Nintendo consoles
Quote
thought you'd say this, but I also thought you'd realise why it as irrelevant- I'm not saying Nintendo SHOULDN'T be the sales leader, but I see it more as a bonus than a necessity, because I have all I could ever need or want from Nintendo with them being in a strong but distance second
Quote
And Nintendo is not a dickhead to 3rd parties- they're not angels, either, but don't exaggerate
Quote
Any better Nintendo gets is just icing on the cake.
It goes on and on.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 26, 2003, 09:13:03 AM
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 26, 2003, 10:28:14 AM
What's that quote I've seen on adult swim? Something like: Fondness of quotation facilitates thought. Or something.
Post by: Shadow Fox on December 26, 2003, 02:37:15 PM
QuoteBe glad you didn't bet- else you'd owe mouse_clicker some serious ducats.
Originally posted by: Kyosho
I bet you one of the reasons (in the US specifically) was due to Nintendo dropping the GCN to 99$ to get rid of inventory.
Nintendo RESTARTED GCN production some TWO MONTHS before a price drop was announced- so obviously Nintendo "cleared inventory" well before then (think July/August).
So not only did they "clear inventory" WITHOUT the price drop, they are also selling MORE GCN's directly from retailers- four times more.
And to think, even at $99, NCL STILL MAKES A PROFIT on every console sold. Now where does that leave Microsoft? I can tell you:
-There is a profit LOSS on every console purchased
-The console is 3rd in sales globally
-Software sales are last from 1st parties
-XboxLive only accounts for 500k+ of some 9.4 million Xbox owners
What Xbox game outsold GTA:VC in the number of preorders sold (a Guinness Book Record previously held by an earlier Zelda- Ocarina of Time)? What Xbox game topped 500k in TWO weeks like Mario Kart in the US (and already has 1 million globally)? Why have only 4 Xbox games sold over a million copies worldwide?
Damn Nintendo's troubles; "The power of "X"" got some serious issues. Keep in mind that while this is a Microsoft product, it runs off of Microsoft Games Studios' budget, and not Bill Gates' or Microsoft Windows'.
Sorry for ranting, but the "downward spiral" of BOTH consoles need to be seen on BOTH sides.
-Official Ninja of PGC
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 26, 2003, 04:37:00 PM
Also, Mario Kart sold 500,000 copies in 2 weeks? Damn, I didn't know that.
Post by: The Omen on December 26, 2003, 04:58:13 PM
Post by: Kyosho on December 26, 2003, 05:56:35 PM
Quote
Nintendo RESTARTED GCN production some TWO MONTHS before a price drop was announced- so obviously Nintendo "cleared inventory" well before then (think July/August).
I heard different from various sources.
MC i really don't know HOW i am confusing you. Perhaps it's because my msg content addresses your latest reply and then some, so you tend to get lost with where I am going. As for the rest, futile effort to debate with fanboys.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 26, 2003, 05:58:32 PM
Post by: nolimit19 on December 26, 2003, 06:09:10 PM
Post by: Kyosho on December 26, 2003, 07:00:02 PM
Quote
that pro nintendo people are bias towards nintendo. and i think that should kind of be a given since we are in a nintendo forum
yeah that pretty much sums up the last 2 posts i made. And yeah it's totally understandable that we are in a Nintendo forum so that should be expected. But i am just hoping that those pro-Nintendo people can also view it from a neutral point of view. I think that one article Johnny wrote was an example of one.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 26, 2003, 07:01:23 PM
Post by: Shadow Fox on December 26, 2003, 11:09:19 PM
QuoteGameCube production began at the start of October
Originally posted by: KyoshoQuote
Nintendo RESTARTED GCN production some TWO MONTHS before a price drop was announced- so obviously Nintendo "cleared inventory" well before then (think July/August).
I heard different from various sources.
GameCube price drop effective 9/25/03
So while it wasn't the two months I mentioned earlier (this is dealing with Japan), it's still painfully obvious that Nintendo wasn't able to forsee GCN production picking up in a mere FIVE DAYS (as a matter of fact, Nintendo still stated "later in the fall" as a to when the production would pick up in the $99 press-release).
As I said, GCN's were selling of their OWN ACCORD, rather than leaning on a price drop the entirety of the "overstock" days.
-Official NInja of PGC
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 27, 2003, 09:48:30 AM
Quote
I think that one article Johnny wrote was an example of one.
Read what Grey Ninja had to say about Johnny's editorial in the TalkBack forum- although I wouldn't be quite so harsh, I do agree with nearly everything he said.
Post by: Kyosho on December 27, 2003, 10:59:13 AM
It could also be a regional thing though. He states "Most of the people I know who went out and bought an Xbox early in the war now come to me and admit that they were wrong." Around my area, females/kids seem to be the proud owners of Gamecubes. Males on the other hand are mostly into PS2. Xbox and Gamecube are pretty even in 2nd. A lot of males who own the Cube complain about the lack of variety and quality of games for the system as it is their only console system. PS2 owners seem to complain about a game, but never about Sony.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on December 27, 2003, 11:32:41 AM
As far as I'm concerned there is no trouble with Nintendo. There doing what they have been doing for years, making games accesible and fun. Nintendo has never been about mature games. As soon as games became mainstream did this "cool mature game fad" come across. Nintendos paying the price for not changing. Nintendos philosophy is not the problem, the markets philosophy is. Now people feel awkward in front of friends if they have mario sunshine, instead of supermegadeath rally sluaghter 2 *with more killing action than before*(obviously made-up i'm just trying to prove a point). I don't want Nintendo to change, niether do many people....but the only way they can compete is if they change or the market changes.
Post by: kaanchy on December 28, 2003, 08:46:49 AM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 28, 2003, 09:22:59 AM
Quote
Now people feel awkward in front of friends if they have mario sunshine, instead of supermegadeath rally sluaghter 2 *with more killing action than before*(obviously made-up i'm just trying to prove a point).
I don't know about that, man- a friend of mine actually lied about peeing on his leg to get some respect, and he got it.
That is, until we realized it was just water.Kaanchy: Glad to see you read it.
How did you find the post, though? Ibdomini/Hostile Creation didn't mention it in his emailing of my editorial.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on December 28, 2003, 10:04:19 PM
If nintendo created another "pokemon" (not in the type of game, but in popularity) but for adults then Nintendo could be back on top. Yes I know I stated the obvious.
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 28, 2003, 10:24:45 PM
Needless to say we're all huge Nintendo fans. Even the ones that aren't give them the respect they deserve.Quote
If nintendo created another "pokemon" (not in the type of game, but in popularity) but for adults then Nintendo could be back on top. Yes I know I stated the obvious.
I suppose so, but I'm not quite sure how exactly that would work. Besides, Pokemon's sales are mindboggling as it is- it amazes me that the games still sell so amazingly well despite Nintendo milking them since their inception.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on December 29, 2003, 02:01:22 AM
The "c h i n p o" in the name is probably the biggest joke most people haven't gotten from that Southpark episode....!!!! HAHAHAHAHAAHHA
Post by: joshnickerson on December 29, 2003, 03:21:24 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666
Uh, it's called "Chinpokomon."
The "c h i n p o" in the name is probably the biggest joke most people haven't gotten from that Southpark episode....!!!! HAHAHAHAHAAHHA
Yeah, you LOVE the "chinpo", don't you, Professional?
Post by: mouse_clicker on March 07, 2004, 04:50:24 PM
Post by: Berny on March 07, 2004, 05:47:32 PM
Also, Ninty's relations with Namco who is giving us 2 exclusive RPGs, Square with one exclusive RPG, Konami with an exclusive MGS which hopefully will lead to more games from them, and Capcom who has given us 2 exclusive games thus far. Capcom worries me though because one project has been scrapped (allegedly) and another is no longer exclusive. Hopefully RE4 will be a seller.
I do think that Nintendo has some problems to work out though, mouse. They REALLY need to shoot for that older audience. And I've said it before, this does NOT mean mindless Vice City games. This means QUALITY mature titles like ED and MGS. I would argue that RE is quality, but there are some who would disagree. I don't think that the mature audience is the only problem, but it certainly is a major concern. How Nintendo will chose to fix whatever problems they have is as much a mystery as their next console.
Post by: mouse_clicker on March 07, 2004, 05:53:55 PM
Edit: Sorry Omen.
Post by: Berny on March 07, 2004, 06:04:21 PM
But on the subject of FPSs (which I frankly avoid due to my serious lack of skill in that category) N-Space is making the very innovative Geist. This game looks ingenious and complicated. It gives FPSs something new that all other FPSs do not have. With other FPSs the only thing you are concerned with is guns. Guns guns guns. With Geist you must be concerned with WHO you are and what that person has access to. It adds, like MP, a puzzle aspect to the genre while staying in the field of FPSs.
And I just remembered another thing. Now that Ninty owns like 75% of Bandai's stock (actually I think it's closer to 45%) they have access to all the mech games in existence as well as all games based on anime shows (again, I exaggerate).
EDIT: I am a moron. ^_^
Post by: The Omen on March 07, 2004, 09:25:02 PM
Quote
Nintendo doesn't have to make the mature titles themselves, though. I think it was IanSane who made the example first- Nintendo is like Disney in that they don't make dark products themselves but own companies that do.
That was me. And hopefully, Retro and SK will be Nintendos Miramax and Dimension(i think) divisions.
Post by: mouse_clicker on March 08, 2004, 02:16:10 AM
Post by: nemo_83 on March 10, 2004, 06:11:18 AM
Post by: Deguello on March 11, 2004, 03:17:34 AM
Post by: mouse_clicker on March 11, 2004, 10:15:50 AM
Post by: The Omen on March 11, 2004, 10:49:49 AM
Post by: Berny on March 11, 2004, 10:50:19 AM
Post by: Chongman on March 13, 2004, 08:58:26 AM
hey guys, don't all jump on nemo just because he disagrees. Albeit, he hasn't always been the wisest pgc member but he still has a right to voice his opinion, though perhaps actualy putting up a legit argument instead of a broad statement might help, nemo.
btw, i did disagree with nemo and I think most media/gaming outlets are full of sewage waste, though not all
Post by: Deguello on March 13, 2004, 06:01:04 PM
Post by: nemo_83 on March 15, 2004, 08:44:30 PM
That sentence says it all. Nintendo is in need of an eye for marketability. I'm not saying that I beieve that Metroid, Zelda, or Mario Sunshine were badly designed games. I'm saying that Nintendo needs to focus their artistic expressions to more mainstreme desires; especially since they continually say that they must make their games easier at the cost of the hardcore fan so that they can attract mainstreme gamers.
Also in the article he mentions Rare, but fails to realize that Rare's worth had dwindled.
On another note I would like to say that I don't have enough time to worry about my gramatical correctness.
Post by: mouse_clicker on March 16, 2004, 02:25:44 AM
And while you may not have to worry about grammatical correctness, we do since we're the ones that have to try and decipher what you're saying. I think no less of one's opinion for such superficial reasons, but if you're too busy to fix a few grammatical and spelling errors, you really shouldn't be posting on a message board at all.
Post by: ___nonjagged___ on March 23, 2004, 07:58:09 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
Since Johnny just wrote a new editorial of his own, I thought mine might get some more discussion regarding Johnny's new ideas. I personally think he misjudged a lot of the things he talked about, and it's getting on my nerves how everyone suddenly thinks they know what the problem is and how to fix it.
I couldnt find the talkback thread on Johnny's topic so Im back in this thread. Well until Bloodyworth's right to lock the thread and bans me or eg. Agent7 etc because of extreme views (hehe).
Here is my attempt at how Nintendo can increase its market share next-gen without compramising its phylosophy of being a gaming-only entertainment entity:
Nintendo would never, not in a billion years even, endorse mindless, monotonous, shoot-to-kill, realistic FPS genres [especially the generic ones that promote US army/marines etc] or even 3rd Person perspective shooters like eg. US Navy Seals.
Sure Nintendo did once endorce Goldeneye 007 where the game reached a pinaccle for its genre on console platforms, though Nintendo has moved on.
Nintendo being the 'animal rights' activists that they are have moved on from Duck Hunt also.
PS: We dont think Mallary from Animal Crossing [aka Animal Forrest] would have been impressed with Duck Hunt on NES.
Nintendo if it did endorce a FPS it would have to be creative or unique as apposed to aggressive or mindless shoot-to-kill derivatives, or US soldiers brainwashing propaganda, thwarting terrorists etc.
M$'s public relations announcing M$ provided Xcox consoles for the Iraq invading US forces while on their break was a genuine disgrace to the console gaming industry.
Note however that not one US journalist/media raised a whimper of an issue about the disgraceful act. Is it because the US journalists/media are imploying all their time and desperate energy to assassinate Nintendo's console orientated image or lack of support for bankrupt US development houses?
Is it against the console 'rule of thumb' laws to not favor FPS genres or ported PC franchises? Is it blasphemy to request non-generic, innovative, creative console gaming experiences? Instead of endless PC-ported gimmicky multiplayer fragging games, [for dumbed-down gamers?].
Also note that the RE franchise and soon to be Killer 7 franchise pretty much covers the violent, shoot-to-kill genre for Nintendo platforms.
Note the Metroid franchise is more about a tranquil investigative experience over brain-dead, shoot-to-kill violence.
Besides, even so, violent offline multiplayer games only create
In general Online gaming does not revolve around creative or artistic titles eg. like the speculated Geist. Online gaming revolves around headless-chickens being fragged down and then respawned in front of a player, over and over and over [which can be fun but hey in the view of others so are "kiddie" games fun].
No one ever really played Dues Ex multiplayer Online? whereas the single player mode was widely regarded as the greatest PC game ever, even by yours truly.
Since Nintendo is more interested in the Arts rather than in the Sports [its possible that Nintendo also wants users to immerse themselves in a constructive alternative imagination though not deny users the opportunity for real-life physical activity to neglect outdoors altogether by becoming couch-potato quarterbacks with the other faceless apponents who never stretch outdoors and deplete their body of required daily exercize]. Im sure consoles of the future will "by-pass" retail shops altogether but thats another topic for a future date. [Imagine
ordering your PS4 console through your Online PS3 console and not even having to pick up a phone let alone visit the local mall etc].
True, NoA want to tap into the Sports market which is popular and lucrative in USA, however Konami, EA and Sega have aligned to exclusive platforms, so theres not much of a quality choice left, especially when Nintendo is only interested in quality franchises by quality/proven publishes.
Way too much funds would need to be invested into the remaining non-exclusive Sports franchises from eg. Midway. Even so, Viacom and M$ have already invested into Midway to prevent Midway from officially being listed as bankrupt and M$ could potentially buyout whatever franchises Midway keep afloat.
Regardless, even if Nintendo was hypathetically Online, its doubtful it would have made any difference whatsoever with the decisions that Konami, EA and Sega made as they already where aligned to specific platforms and are just continuing the relationship.
We all saw how Left Field's basketball franchise turned out, to say that Nintendo did not at least try filling in some areas of Sports genre is ignorance.
We are all well aware Nintendo will not spread its ass cheeks to the Telecommunication "monthly subscriptions" Industry, or the intentionally-cracked CD-ROM or DVD Consortiums, and Nintendo will not officially have its console-only platforms piggy-backed with PC systems to operate with routers etc. Nintendo systems are standalone consoles, not set-top-boxes with USB or Bluetooth ports or Mainstream Data formats. Nintendo systems are proprietory and hence will always have a smaller userbase, regardless of loyalty. When Nintendo design [quite possibly the N5] a console system which can operate Online without routers or monthly subscriptions to ISPs and Closed Server Providers, then Nintendo will gladly officially endorce Online gaming and to claim [cube.ign.com] that Nintendo is unsure of its future is pure arrogant short-sightedness. As 3D0 proved it easy to built a set-top-box platform [although at the time one must admit that competition did assasinate 3D0's image for doing so] and as Sega proved it is easy to take gaming Online, however Nintendo's stance is that they wont rush in, to endorce Online gaming unless there is a technology in place which provides gaming free of monthly subscriptions and free of routers and PC connections. The N5 may actually show us the future of Nintendo. If there is an official endorcing of Online gaming you know that Nintendo found a way to bypass all the middleware and middlemen. The implementation of 802.11 wireless multiplayer gaming for the Nintendo DS is a sample of Nintendo investigating options for the good of gamers.
Thats the difference between Nintendo's platforms and whatever newbie hardware platform manufacturers enter the market, paying liscencing fees for all sorts of non-proprietory components or technologies which make up the set-top-box multi-media media units that offer services to multitude markets, pretending to be one gaming-only market strictly in competiton with Nintendo.
This generation Nintendo's apposing console manufacturers where eg. pushing public campaigns that 'Nintendo is a toy company not willing to embrace the digital age'. [It was clearly evident that this comment was a cry for frustration by M$, as Nintendo at the time invested more into its shares and its future, though now that the public are aware that the Nintendo DS platform is supporting 802.11-based proprietary protocol for wireless communication that is
for free and not monthly subscription based, we can all see why the 'crybaby corporations' such as M$ or Nokia are frustrated at Nintendo being a company for 'the people' and not for the corporates]. This generation Nintendo was persecuted for not having DVD playback and because the simple GCN aesthetics where not black enough for mainstream markets. [Geeze Sega launched with half a dozen black colored consoles, even the DreamCast launched as a new color because Sega overdid black, and being that Nintendo is not a 'newbie' to the industry like the clueless competition, Nintendo wanted to not be generic and express itself as being colorful]. If you the mainstream gamer feel intimidated by a case color other than black, by all means dont buy the colorful console.
Next generation Nintendo will be persecuted for not having DVD burning hardware complemented with Digital Video Editing software. Mind you that M$'s generic cookie-cut templates Digital Video Editing software is no where near enough as advanced as $ony's
SonicFoundry Digital Video Editing software [which will first make its appearance in the PSX Server]. Yes $ony took out a leaf of M$'s book and $ony acquired SonicFoundry in 2003.
Next generation Nintendo's apposing console manufacturers who once jelously persecuted Nintendo will copy Nintendo's idea of fun color hardware aethetics and faceplates by designing consoles which take snap-on faceplates like that of the mobile phone industry and the new Dell laptops.
Nintendo will never ever gain any market share back because whatever innovation Nintendo come up with, the competition generally just hacks it off and incorporates it at a later date.
Now M$ have ATI, IBM and no HDD for their next-gen console. All thats left is a generic wireless controller called WaiveEagle and M$ along with Ken Lobbs [who had intimate knowledge of Nintendo hardware schematics] has pretty much cloned Nintendo's decades of console knowledge & experience. [Unlike when Apple Computers at one stage in the past willingly offered 3rd
Party vendors to clone Apple hardware/architecture rebranded, in the way IBM did with compatible PCs].
Nintendo will never ever gain any market share back because you cant compete against multi-media set-top-boxes which offer diverse services and then pretend that all these services are being used by gaming-only markets. Its not that Nintendo's markets are getting smaller either. Its the competing platforms which are fighting to include every single technology within their set-top-boxes which inturn broadens
the multiple market opportunity.
In responce to EA @ DICE 2004:
...Nintendo failed to have major first-party titles available at the launch of the GCN and added: "I'm sure it's rethinking that after GameCube."
EA neglecting to ponder whether Nintendo had to step up the launch date of the GCN to coincide with certain USA based competition hence the lack of 1st parties [not to mention the platform which
EA favorably endorces had a mediocre lineup of launch titles anyway that looked like PSone titles so we dont know what hes smoking regarding launch lineups] and that considering Nintendo had invested in a proprietory format console which is still uncracked today naturally it took time [as apposed to $ony which simply opted for mainstream DVD format, a format which was already out on the market and easier to launch quicker. No idea whats M$'s excuse for why they missed the boat and took so long to launch? especially when the internal setup is basically a PC pretending to be an efficient Nintendo console].
In responce to EA @ DICE 2004:
...Nintendo's decision to emphasize a cheaper price over "important features" with its GameCube console. "It may be rethinking that [philosophy] after GameCube."
EA is looking at it from their perspective. PSX consoles are pirate friendly. User pays overpriced hardware launch prices but throughout the platform's lifespan the user then saves on software when the PS platforms get cracked within months.
Nintendo users pay considerable less for hardware because its gaming-only-interactive based and will be so for many centuries to come, but users dont save on software prices because software format isnt cracked.
Nintendo out of courtesy [knowing that user will have to pay retail prices for software instead of asian black-market prices] to keep hardware price as low as possible for all users of all creed to afford and there is no onus on the user to save up huge amounts for hardware.
Note the Nintendo DS will make mockery of the N-Gayge launch price.
Its really is amazing how a so-called industry veteran cannot interpret simple decisions or reasons by Nintendo.
Nintendo generally polish their games rather than rush out like Sony's philosophy of constantly turnover rehashes. Capcom now even testify to hate Sony's phylosophy of corporate turnover over creative innovation, and as we can all see EA's identi-kit followups to its majority of its franchises suits $ony's platforms really well.
In the past, Nintendo didnt like $ony's business strategy proposals which where more related to $$$ turnover, than passion to entertain and passion to polish.
Along with other factors such as slow loading, pirate friendly CD-ROM formats and $ony charging the license fee for the format of the CD-ROM component etc. Nintendo opted for concetrating with the gaming-only approach.
The 128bit generation saw Nintendo even build a more efficient and easier to develop for console [even more efficient/easy than the PSX which had erradicated the more dedicated Saturn way of developing] however generally speaking the average gamer only buys say 12 official non-counterfeit games per console generation.
Nintendo has usually half of that hypathetical number of titles covered which leaves the 2nd parties to fill any gaps. 3rd parties have generally in the past been incapable of competing against Nintendo 1st party or 2nd party teams for the most part of history therefore they tend to shy away from Nintendo platforms and flood the pirate friendly platforms with low development royalty fees and in some
cases wavered Online costs which goes a long way for those 3rd parties
struggling from going officially bankrupt.
When consoles have users that generally purchase 12 games during the lifespan of the console then it stands to reason that its more viable to have the console using a universal format which is easily cracked which quadruples the sales of units and distracts/tempts users into purchasing pirate copied software instead of authentic and legally sold software.
The general mainstream masses dont care for polished quality control, because they dont have the time to make comparisments. If they can get their hands on dozens of pirate games each month at 2% of their equivalent retail price, its a no-brainer choice for consumer. Yes, there are those blind debaters that will deny piracy is frevelant but honestly its extremely rare to find a teenager without a chipped console these days
and thats saying a lot, being that these days [compared to 2 decades ago], teenagers are the biggest markets in the console industry.
In my opinion:
Following the Next generation [thats 2 generations away]
Nintendo's apposing console manufacturers will continue jelously persecuting
Nintendo for not having a set-top-box where user can do all their banking or ordering software and having it either downloaded into the set-top-box or delivered to your door etc on and never have to leave the house, well temporarily only for checking their snail-mail box or the local convenience store. Well at least Nintendo is not a spyware company. Never was never will.
Its even possible that M$ will use their set-top-boxes in the future to substitute classrooms in isolated demographics. Dill Gates lookalikes or clones will be bias lecturing distorted American history to eg. isolated agricultural students through the Xcox onto the TV set.
Headsets will be used to communicate to lecturer. M$ will then claim it is superior because it has a better idea than $ony's eyetoy. ...And the media will continue persecuting Nintendo for not being a spyware company cloaked with gimmicks and gadgets, but a gaming-only company, free of servers that monitor its userbase habits.
No matter what, the scummy competition will always find an angle to publicly persecute Nintendo's gaming-only-interactive phylosophy, or just illegitimately attack Nintendo's projects. Soon after Nintendo announced they had researched a viable, non-pirate form of gaming service [called iQue] for the Chinese market, $ony jelously followed up and announced it will then launch the ps2 platform in China but without any research into modifying the console to be
pirate-proof and announcing LOL it is up to Chinese Authority to enforce control on the huge piracy issue in China. $ony, should change their name into $cummy corp, at all cost, with grudge against Nintendo's prosperity.
My only suggestion is for Nintendo to remain in the next-gen and for the following eternal-gens, a gaming-only company that doesnt give a hoot about FPS or Sports markets in USA but give a hoot about artistic/cultural software instead of luke-warm identi-kit rehash followups.
Sure Nintendo will always have a minority userbase but contrary to popular mainstream media belief Nintendo is not in the gaming industry for userbase figures.
Note, its sad that way too many fanboys have been conditioned into focusing on discussing on "how to challenge $ony's market share".
And Nintendo should release 2 forms of its console. Identical components on the inside, different case aesthetics on the outside [because there are newbie markets out there that buy consumeables on the grounds of their image status].
1) Mature pack called anything but "The Duke", possibly "The Emporer's Pack"
-a slightly higher priced than the alternative option
-Wireless controllers standard
-DS PLayer built-in, [GB carts with an adapter can be used in this port]
-SD card adaptor standard
-a proprietory port for a keyboard & mouse [for future interactive gaming software such as Mario Paint 2k5 which is based on user-friendly menus for easy generating character models, texturising models, and then being able to control models and interact with environments in realtime]
-expansion port for BB/Wi-fi/802.11 etc for any user who wants to also use their console as a Standalone Linux Webmin Server without having to have Nintendo consoles hooked up to Routers and PC platforms etc to operate. This can mean that this machine needs to be always-on if user wants their content to be accessed 24/7.
See the console is still a gaming-only console but when Online the hardware supports Linux and Mozilla straight out of the box. Users can simply store their personal web pages on Virtual Webspaces or where the consoles are the means of acting as Web Servers where the content is stored on the actual console. Nintendo users would never have to endure pop-ups again when they securely browse online, as they would have the option of a non-expensive internet browsing machine/Server/Game Console.
The Console will have a simplyfied emergency recovery button [simular to new IBM laptops] because naturally M$ fanboys would eternally find ways of sabataging/hacking Nintendo's Online userbase because the platform will not be on a Closed-Server. PS, LOL, M$ have admitted they are secretly checking all Xcox Live consoles if the HDD's have been modded.
2) Kiddie pack called "Junior Pack"
-Cheaper priced because is streamlined of internal components for Online/Server features. Expansion ports available for upgrade.
-DS Player built-in, [GB carts with an adapter can be used in this port]
-Wireless controller is not inbuilt and is not a packin but available seperate
-snap-on interchangable faceplates simular to mobile phones, new Dell
laptops.
-includes a free GBA or DS game [Console comes in a dozen different case colors and hundreds of Faceplates to chose from. This is most useful for LAN Parties when eg. boring black colored consoles all look the same, with the same boring massive logo].
Post by: CaseyRyback on March 23, 2004, 08:04:55 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
If you had read my post, nemo, you would know that I don't want Nintendo making sacrifices simply to move into the mainstream. I don't want them pumping out games designed purely to get sales- I want them to sell on the fact that they're the best quality games out there.
And while you may not have to worry about grammatical correctness, we do since we're the ones that have to try and decipher what you're saying. I think no less of one's opinion for such superficial reasons, but if you're too busy to fix a few grammatical and spelling errors, you really shouldn't be posting on a message board at all.
SEGA tried to only please its fans and look at the trouble they got in.
Post by: DrZoidberg on March 23, 2004, 08:59:33 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ___nonjagged___Quote
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
Since Johnny just wrote a new editorial of his own, I thought mine might get some more discussion regarding Johnny's new ideas. I personally think he misjudged a lot of the things he talked about, and it's getting on my nerves how everyone suddenly thinks they know what the problem is and how to fix it.
I couldnt find the talkback thread on Johnny's topic so Im back in this thread. Well until Bloodyworth's right to lock the thread and bans me or eg. Agent7 etc because of extreme views (hehe).
Here is my attempt at how Nintendo can increase its market share next-gen without compramising its phylosophy of being a gaming-only entertainment entity:
Nintendo would never, not in a billion years even, endorse mindless, monotonous, shoot-to-kill, realistic FPS genres [especially the generic ones that promote US army/marines etc] or even 3rd Person perspective shooters like eg. US Navy Seals.
Sure Nintendo did once endorce Goldeneye 007 where the game reached a pinaccle for its genre on console platforms, though Nintendo has moved on.
Nintendo being the 'animal rights' activists that they are have moved on from Duck Hunt also.
PS: We dont think Mallary from Animal Crossing [aka Animal Forrest] would have been impressed with Duck Hunt on NES.
Nintendo if it did endorce a FPS it would have to be creative or unique as apposed to aggressive or mindless shoot-to-kill derivatives, or US soldiers brainwashing propaganda, thwarting terrorists etc.
M$'s public relations announcing M$ provided Xcox consoles for the Iraq invading US forces while on their break was a genuine disgrace to the console gaming industry.
Note however that not one US journalist/media raised a whimper of an issue about the disgraceful act. Is it because the US journalists/media are imploying all their time and desperate energy to assassinate Nintendo's console orientated image or lack of support for bankrupt US development houses?
Is it against the console 'rule of thumb' laws to not favor FPS genres or ported PC franchises? Is it blasphemy to request non-generic, innovative, creative console gaming experiences? Instead of endless PC-ported gimmicky multiplayer fragging games, [for dumbed-down gamers?].
Also note that the RE franchise and soon to be Killer 7 franchise pretty much covers the violent, shoot-to-kill genre for Nintendo platforms.
Note the Metroid franchise is more about a tranquil investigative experience over brain-dead, shoot-to-kill violence.
Besides, even so, violent offline multiplayer games only createtension between the party of players whereas 'its good to play together with faceless friends' doesnt quite create negative tension because theyre not even in the same room.
In general Online gaming does not revolve around creative or artistic titles eg. like the speculated Geist. Online gaming revolves around headless-chickens being fragged down and then respawned in front of a player, over and over and over [which can be fun but hey in the view of others so are "kiddie" games fun].
No one ever really played Dues Ex multiplayer Online? whereas the single player mode was widely regarded as the greatest PC game ever, even by yours truly.
Since Nintendo is more interested in the Arts rather than in the Sports [its possible that Nintendo also wants users to immerse themselves in a constructive alternative imagination though not deny users the opportunity for real-life physical activity to neglect outdoors altogether by becoming couch-potato quarterbacks with the other faceless apponents who never stretch outdoors and deplete their body of required daily exercize]. Im sure consoles of the future will "by-pass" retail shops altogether but thats another topic for a future date. [Imagine
ordering your PS4 console through your Online PS3 console and not even having to pick up a phone let alone visit the local mall etc].
True, NoA want to tap into the Sports market which is popular and lucrative in USA, however Konami, EA and Sega have aligned to exclusive platforms, so theres not much of a quality choice left, especially when Nintendo is only interested in quality franchises by quality/proven publishes.
Way too much funds would need to be invested into the remaining non-exclusive Sports franchises from eg. Midway. Even so, Viacom and M$ have already invested into Midway to prevent Midway from officially being listed as bankrupt and M$ could potentially buyout whatever franchises Midway keep afloat.
Regardless, even if Nintendo was hypathetically Online, its doubtful it would have made any difference whatsoever with the decisions that Konami, EA and Sega made as they already where aligned to specific platforms and are just continuing the relationship.
We all saw how Left Field's basketball franchise turned out, to say that Nintendo did not at least try filling in some areas of Sports genre is ignorance.
We are all well aware Nintendo will not spread its ass cheeks to the Telecommunication "monthly subscriptions" Industry, or the intentionally-cracked CD-ROM or DVD Consortiums, and Nintendo will not officially have its console-only platforms piggy-backed with PC systems to operate with routers etc. Nintendo systems are standalone consoles, not set-top-boxes with USB or Bluetooth ports or Mainstream Data formats. Nintendo systems are proprietory and hence will always have a smaller userbase, regardless of loyalty. When Nintendo design [quite possibly the N5] a console system which can operate Online without routers or monthly subscriptions to ISPs and Closed Server Providers, then Nintendo will gladly officially endorce Online gaming and to claim [cube.ign.com] that Nintendo is unsure of its future is pure arrogant short-sightedness. As 3D0 proved it easy to built a set-top-box platform [although at the time one must admit that competition did assasinate 3D0's image for doing so] and as Sega proved it is easy to take gaming Online, however Nintendo's stance is that they wont rush in, to endorce Online gaming unless there is a technology in place which provides gaming free of monthly subscriptions and free of routers and PC connections. The N5 may actually show us the future of Nintendo. If there is an official endorcing of Online gaming you know that Nintendo found a way to bypass all the middleware and middlemen. The implementation of 802.11 wireless multiplayer gaming for the Nintendo DS is a sample of Nintendo investigating options for the good of gamers.
Thats the difference between Nintendo's platforms and whatever newbie hardware platform manufacturers enter the market, paying liscencing fees for all sorts of non-proprietory components or technologies which make up the set-top-box multi-media media units that offer services to multitude markets, pretending to be one gaming-only market strictly in competiton with Nintendo.
This generation Nintendo's apposing console manufacturers where eg. pushing public campaigns that 'Nintendo is a toy company not willing to embrace the digital age'. [It was clearly evident that this comment was a cry for frustration by M$, as Nintendo at the time invested more into its shares and its future, though now that the public are aware that the Nintendo DS platform is supporting 802.11-based proprietary protocol for wireless communication that is
for free and not monthly subscription based, we can all see why the 'crybaby corporations' such as M$ or Nokia are frustrated at Nintendo being a company for 'the people' and not for the corporates]. This generation Nintendo was persecuted for not having DVD playback and because the simple GCN aesthetics where not black enough for mainstream markets. [Geeze Sega launched with half a dozen black colored consoles, even the DreamCast launched as a new color because Sega overdid black, and being that Nintendo is not a 'newbie' to the industry like the clueless competition, Nintendo wanted to not be generic and express itself as being colorful]. If you the mainstream gamer feel intimidated by a case color other than black, by all means dont buy the colorful console.
Next generation Nintendo will be persecuted for not having DVD burning hardware complemented with Digital Video Editing software. Mind you that M$'s generic cookie-cut templates Digital Video Editing software is no where near enough as advanced as $ony's
SonicFoundry Digital Video Editing software [which will first make its appearance in the PSX Server]. Yes $ony took out a leaf of M$'s book and $ony acquired SonicFoundry in 2003.
Next generation Nintendo's apposing console manufacturers who once jelously persecuted Nintendo will copy Nintendo's idea of fun color hardware aethetics and faceplates by designing consoles which take snap-on faceplates like that of the mobile phone industry and the new Dell laptops.
Nintendo will never ever gain any market share back because whatever innovation Nintendo come up with, the competition generally just hacks it off and incorporates it at a later date.
Now M$ have ATI, IBM and no HDD for their next-gen console. All thats left is a generic wireless controller called WaiveEagle and M$ along with Ken Lobbs [who had intimate knowledge of Nintendo hardware schematics] has pretty much cloned Nintendo's decades of console knowledge & experience. [Unlike when Apple Computers at one stage in the past willingly offered 3rd
Party vendors to clone Apple hardware/architecture rebranded, in the way IBM did with compatible PCs].
Nintendo will never ever gain any market share back because you cant compete against multi-media set-top-boxes which offer diverse services and then pretend that all these services are being used by gaming-only markets. Its not that Nintendo's markets are getting smaller either. Its the competing platforms which are fighting to include every single technology within their set-top-boxes which inturn broadens
the multiple market opportunity.
In responce to EA @ DICE 2004:
...Nintendo failed to have major first-party titles available at the launch of the GCN and added: "I'm sure it's rethinking that after GameCube."
EA neglecting to ponder whether Nintendo had to step up the launch date of the GCN to coincide with certain USA based competition hence the lack of 1st parties [not to mention the platform which
EA favorably endorces had a mediocre lineup of launch titles anyway that looked like PSone titles so we dont know what hes smoking regarding launch lineups] and that considering Nintendo had invested in a proprietory format console which is still uncracked today naturally it took time [as apposed to $ony which simply opted for mainstream DVD format, a format which was already out on the market and easier to launch quicker. No idea whats M$'s excuse for why they missed the boat and took so long to launch? especially when the internal setup is basically a PC pretending to be an efficient Nintendo console].
In responce to EA @ DICE 2004:
...Nintendo's decision to emphasize a cheaper price over "important features" with its GameCube console. "It may be rethinking that [philosophy] after GameCube."
EA is looking at it from their perspective. PSX consoles are pirate friendly. User pays overpriced hardware launch prices but throughout the platform's lifespan the user then saves on software when the PS platforms get cracked within months.
Nintendo users pay considerable less for hardware because its gaming-only-interactive based and will be so for many centuries to come, but users dont save on software prices because software format isnt cracked.
Nintendo out of courtesy [knowing that user will have to pay retail prices for software instead of asian black-market prices] to keep hardware price as low as possible for all users of all creed to afford and there is no onus on the user to save up huge amounts for hardware.
Note the Nintendo DS will make mockery of the N-Gayge launch price.
Its really is amazing how a so-called industry veteran cannot interpret simple decisions or reasons by Nintendo.
Nintendo generally polish their games rather than rush out like Sony's philosophy of constantly turnover rehashes. Capcom now even testify to hate Sony's phylosophy of corporate turnover over creative innovation, and as we can all see EA's identi-kit followups to its majority of its franchises suits $ony's platforms really well.
In the past, Nintendo didnt like $ony's business strategy proposals which where more related to $$$ turnover, than passion to entertain and passion to polish.
Along with other factors such as slow loading, pirate friendly CD-ROM formats and $ony charging the license fee for the format of the CD-ROM component etc. Nintendo opted for concetrating with the gaming-only approach.
The 128bit generation saw Nintendo even build a more efficient and easier to develop for console [even more efficient/easy than the PSX which had erradicated the more dedicated Saturn way of developing] however generally speaking the average gamer only buys say 12 official non-counterfeit games per console generation.
Nintendo has usually half of that hypathetical number of titles covered which leaves the 2nd parties to fill any gaps. 3rd parties have generally in the past been incapable of competing against Nintendo 1st party or 2nd party teams for the most part of history therefore they tend to shy away from Nintendo platforms and flood the pirate friendly platforms with low development royalty fees and in some
cases wavered Online costs which goes a long way for those 3rd parties
struggling from going officially bankrupt.
When consoles have users that generally purchase 12 games during the lifespan of the console then it stands to reason that its more viable to have the console using a universal format which is easily cracked which quadruples the sales of units and distracts/tempts users into purchasing pirate copied software instead of authentic and legally sold software.
The general mainstream masses dont care for polished quality control, because they dont have the time to make comparisments. If they can get their hands on dozens of pirate games each month at 2% of their equivalent retail price, its a no-brainer choice for consumer. Yes, there are those blind debaters that will deny piracy is frevelant but honestly its extremely rare to find a teenager without a chipped console these days
and thats saying a lot, being that these days [compared to 2 decades ago], teenagers are the biggest markets in the console industry.
In my opinion:
Following the Next generation [thats 2 generations away]
Nintendo's apposing console manufacturers will continue jelously persecuting
Nintendo for not having a set-top-box where user can do all their banking or ordering software and having it either downloaded into the set-top-box or delivered to your door etc on and never have to leave the house, well temporarily only for checking their snail-mail box or the local convenience store. Well at least Nintendo is not a spyware company. Never was never will.
Its even possible that M$ will use their set-top-boxes in the future to substitute classrooms in isolated demographics. Dill Gates lookalikes or clones will be bias lecturing distorted American history to eg. isolated agricultural students through the Xcox onto the TV set.
Headsets will be used to communicate to lecturer. M$ will then claim it is superior because it has a better idea than $ony's eyetoy. ...And the media will continue persecuting Nintendo for not being a spyware company cloaked with gimmicks and gadgets, but a gaming-only company, free of servers that monitor its userbase habits.
No matter what, the scummy competition will always find an angle to publicly persecute Nintendo's gaming-only-interactive phylosophy, or just illegitimately attack Nintendo's projects. Soon after Nintendo announced they had researched a viable, non-pirate form of gaming service [called iQue] for the Chinese market, $ony jelously followed up and announced it will then launch the ps2 platform in China but without any research into modifying the console to be
pirate-proof and announcing LOL it is up to Chinese Authority to enforce control on the huge piracy issue in China. $ony, should change their name into $cummy corp, at all cost, with grudge against Nintendo's prosperity.
My only suggestion is for Nintendo to remain in the next-gen and for the following eternal-gens, a gaming-only company that doesnt give a hoot about FPS or Sports markets in USA but give a hoot about artistic/cultural software instead of luke-warm identi-kit rehash followups.
Sure Nintendo will always have a minority userbase but contrary to popular mainstream media belief Nintendo is not in the gaming industry for userbase figures.
Note, its sad that way too many fanboys have been conditioned into focusing on discussing on "how to challenge $ony's market share".
And Nintendo should release 2 forms of its console. Identical components on the inside, different case aesthetics on the outside [because there are newbie markets out there that buy consumeables on the grounds of their image status].
1) Mature pack called anything but "The Duke", possibly "The Emporer's Pack"
-a slightly higher priced than the alternative option
-Wireless controllers standard
-DS PLayer built-in, [GB carts with an adapter can be used in this port]
-SD card adaptor standard
-a proprietory port for a keyboard & mouse [for future interactive gaming software such as Mario Paint 2k5 which is based on user-friendly menus for easy generating character models, texturising models, and then being able to control models and interact with environments in realtime]
-expansion port for BB/Wi-fi/802.11 etc for any user who wants to also use their console as a Standalone Linux Webmin Server without having to have Nintendo consoles hooked up to Routers and PC platforms etc to operate. This can mean that this machine needs to be always-on if user wants their content to be accessed 24/7.
See the console is still a gaming-only console but when Online the hardware supports Linux and Mozilla straight out of the box. Users can simply store their personal web pages on Virtual Webspaces or where the consoles are the means of acting as Web Servers where the content is stored on the actual console. Nintendo users would never have to endure pop-ups again when they securely browse online, as they would have the option of a non-expensive internet browsing machine/Server/Game Console.
The Console will have a simplyfied emergency recovery button [simular to new IBM laptops] because naturally M$ fanboys would eternally find ways of sabataging/hacking Nintendo's Online userbase because the platform will not be on a Closed-Server. PS, LOL, M$ have admitted they are secretly checking all Xcox Live consoles if the HDD's have been modded.
2) Kiddie pack called "Junior Pack"
-Cheaper priced because is streamlined of internal components for Online/Server features. Expansion ports available for upgrade.
-DS Player built-in, [GB carts with an adapter can be used in this port]
-Wireless controller is not inbuilt and is not a packin but available seperate
-snap-on interchangable faceplates simular to mobile phones, new Dell
laptops.
-includes a free GBA or DS game [Console comes in a dozen different case colors and hundreds of Faceplates to chose from. This is most useful for LAN Parties when eg. boring black colored consoles all look the same, with the same boring massive logo].
too long didn't read.
Post by: mouse_clicker on March 23, 2004, 09:01:14 PM
Quote
SEGA tried to only please its fans and look at the trouble they got in.
Two things. Firstly, yes, Sega tried only to please it's fan and as a result is considered one of the finest developers ever to grace this industry. In my opinion they are the only company that is as good as Nintendo at making games. Secondly, Sega was absolutely clueless in regards to running a company- the Genesis was really their only popular console, and afterwards they continued to lose more and more money every year. Nintendo is the master of profitability, and this trait alone will insure that they will last for years to come.
Quote
too long didn't read.
Then for god's sake, don't quote it!
Post by: Infernal Monkey on March 23, 2004, 09:05:01 PM
Planet GameCube forums, next year:
______________________________________nonjagged____________________________________
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on March 23, 2004, 10:12:37 PM
Post by: Uncle Rich AiAi on March 23, 2004, 10:30:01 PM
Quit doing it.
Post by: Chongman on March 24, 2004, 05:54:17 AM
I truly enjoyed that read nonjagged, thanks :-)
And I agree with most everything you say, you have some good points but I always though that the whole "two versions of the same console" thing would never work out. It just doesn't seem practical.
I personally think that the day Nintendo becomes strictly a cold heartless corporate giant that that's the day the gaming crash happens.
Post by: Beave on March 25, 2004, 02:40:50 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Radical
At SW2k, the next-gen zelda was shown (a short clip) and it was cool- people were saying that you would buy GCN JUST FOR THIS GAME. Then WW came out. Now, while probably everyone here loves it, the idea is that:
If everyone said it was so super cool back then, why change it? Nintendo just alienated non-hardcore fans. I am not disputing whether the game was good or not (WW), im saying that nintendo could of released something that we AND the general public would both RUSH OUT to buy.
Yeah i agree. I havent bought it yet, i guess i will one day but its just not Zelda
I thought the article at game-revolution was pretty good.
Mouse Clicker, you need to backup your claims with links or evidence. No one will publish it with out any other research on the topic. And no, your brain with years of nintendo knowledge will not do.
Post by: Beave on March 25, 2004, 02:51:31 AM
What exclusive racing sim is on GC?
How many sport games are on GC?
(soccer, rugby league/union, skate boarding, surfing, cricket)
They need more in these categories
Games u can just pick up and play, casual games.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 25, 2004, 04:32:52 AM
Post by: thecubedcanuck on March 25, 2004, 04:52:32 AM
That is pure crap. Again you try to come accross as the be all end all of videogame knowledge.
Gaming has changed, deal with it.
Post by: The Omen on March 25, 2004, 06:37:37 AM
Quote
" For many people "mature games" means just that, games rated "mature". Sad but true. "
That is pure crap. Again you try to come accross as the be all end all of videogame knowledge.
Gaming has changed, deal with it.
He did say 'many people', Cubed. And i agree. I see who buys what games on a daily basis, and sadly teens look for the rating on everything they buy be it music, movies or games. So, i'm not saying no mature toitles are good. I'm saying that having the mature rating on a sh!tty game and having the 'E' rating on an equally sh!tty game, guess which one sells more?
Post by: Ian Sane on March 25, 2004, 06:55:33 AM
I think mature games means more how realistic looking and cool it is. It doesn't have to have an actual 'M' rating. Goldeneye for example was rated 'T' as are the Final Fantasy games and most people consider them to be mature games. 'T' games actually sell better than 'M' games since responsible parents are more tolerant of letting their kids play them. "Mature" has nothing to do with maturity or the rating on the box. It's an image. A "mature" game is a cool game. That's why an 'E' rated sports game is still considered mature. Because it's a cool game.
Nintendo's image isn't hurt because they don't make bloody violent 'M' rated games it's because they don't make very many cool games. Metroid is cool, Mario and Pokemon aren't. Zelda used to be considered cool until they turned it into a cartoon. Zelda can be cool again if they change it back to something more like the N64 games. Realistically Metroid, Zelda, 1080, Wave Race, F-Zero, Pilotwings, and Excitebike all have the potential to be cool if Nintendo markets them well and doesn't "kiddy up" the design.
Post by: Chongman on March 25, 2004, 07:19:40 AM
Ok, that's where I'll draw the line.
Your viewpoints just seem so mainstream...and while I know that's what you're going for, I can't help but disagree.
Yeah, you're right, zelda would have sold a whole of a lot better had it been just like the spaceworld demo, but when you think about it, is that really nintendo? Especially considering something as holy as zelda, did you really expect them to do anything BUT mix it up a little?
These "mature" games as you call em are full of crock. Yes, nintendo needs more sports titles and racing titles, thats a demographic that they have been ignoring for far too long, but that's completely beside the point. If a game is good, then why must it be "mature" also? Why must it be realistic? Why must blood be drawn and the parents cringe? If it's a GOOD GAME ALREADY then why in the world does it need anything else?
If the zelda franchise couldn't handle cell shading, if for some reason it didn't work and made a mockery of the game, if cell shading took away from the zelda feel and if it was done poorly, disastardly, if it were an utter failure would whole heartedly agree with you and so would everyone else out there who bantered around yelling "zelda? more like I am a tremendous clownboat.!"
But the point is the game DIDN'T suck and cell shading actualy worked for it and it was a great game. Now, everyone has disagreements and protests on things that could have been done better, but had it been "mature" would any of these complaints vanish? NO! Because no matter how you see it, "mature" or for "everyone," it was still a GOOD GAME despite the lack of M on the box art. In fact, it was a game of the year canidate, so what does it matter if it weren't "mature" enough for casual gamers?
Casual gamers are the leaches on gaming society. And as non jagged pointed out, nintendo will never appeal to these half breed shmucks because that's not what nintendo does. They don't collate and rehash and make decisions just for sales. They make decisions to make profit, which ensures them a place in the gaming world no matter what, and then they appeal to GAMES, not casual gamers. Not gamers who want a "link vs ganon: the bloodfest to end all time" Why do you complain if these games are good? No, nintendo does not focus on "cool" but they focus on quality. Would you really have it any other way?
Post by: KDR_11k on March 25, 2004, 08:35:09 AM
Nintendo doesn't deliver "mature" games (even the not-rated-M-kind). I have the theory they are just incapable of that. I have complained about EAD's bad texturing before and texturing is the main problem in making "realistic" games. I have doubts EAD could create a realistic game (let aside Miyamoto probably wouldn't like restrictions like "realism").
Come to think of it, is 1080 a "mature" game?
On another note, games rated M rarely sell. Really, that's what was stated in many sales studies. Out of about 40 million sellers only about four were rated M.
Post by: Ian Sane on March 25, 2004, 08:44:04 AM
"Why do you complain if these games are good? No, nintendo does not focus on 'cool' but they focus on quality. Would you really have it any other way?"
Why can't they make games that are cool AND are high quality. Metroid Prime and Goldeneye both fit that mold perfectly. Is making a Zelda game that's also cool (which they did with Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask) going to make the game suck? No. It's still going to be a great game and unlike Wind Waker it will appeal to a wider variety of people.
Post by: thecubedcanuck on March 25, 2004, 08:54:23 AM
That statement is pure lunacy. I have played games since they first game out in home console forum. I am 33 years old, and play nearly everyday. I have played every Zelda game, every mario game, and own all 3 current gen consoles. I didnt like Zelda, I found it very drawn out and boring, in fact I havnt really liked any of the Zelda games, they just arent my cup of tea. I loved every Mario, up until sunshine. I couldnt stand that game, and have tried playing it on many occasions in the hope of changing my own mind, it just didnt happen. My favorite games are usually sports titles. I also really like shooters and racing games (non futuristic). I think GTA3 and Vice city are both better games than Wind Waker. I love Halo, and I love grand turismo.
I spend a lot of money on gaming and I dont base my descisions on what anyone else thinks. I play what I like and I dont play what I dont like, regardless of how good other people think it is. I am both a hardcore gamer and a casual gamer.
A lot of recent nintendo games havent appealed to me, so by your reasoning and non jaggeds (therapy anyone) I must be a schmuck. Did it ever cross your mind that I might just not like the games for what they are? That I just didnt enjoy playing them? If someone likes games with violence in them, why do you automatically assume they are immature casual gamers? I find it hillarious to play violent games, I honestly find it a lot of fun. I played Manhunt the other day for the first time, and loved plastic bagging someone, I thought it was a blast. I am not a lunatic, I can seperate games and movies from reality.
I just enjoyed the game, I had fun playing it. So if you think I am schmuck, so be it. Just be sure to hide the plastic bags
Post by: Chongman on March 25, 2004, 08:58:13 AM
Nope, I was actualy responding to posts a bit prior to yours, sorry if u thought I was bagging on you :-P It was supposed to be directed towards cubed and beave
And I agree with you, nintendo should have gotten a clue by now and realized that something can be both slick and fun to play and those two combined make for one awesome game. What I'm saying though is that priorety wise, quality and polishing comes before sales and appealing to casual gamers.
Post by: Chongman on March 25, 2004, 09:21:32 AM
hey cubed, sorry for the misunderstanding, but did I ever specifically call you a casual gamer? I hope I didn't...because that's not what I was intending to do. If you don't like certain games and you like other genres, that's 100% fine, I never stated otherwise. When I say casual gamers, I mean the adult who every so often buys a sports game for the fun of it and kids who go out and buy games just because it's "cool" (since when did games become cool though? bizarre...) Want a good example? Anyone who bought Enter the Matrix and actualy thought it was a stellar game. It was cool, it was slick, but after about thirty minutes of terrible gameplay, once you got over the kickass yet mundane fighting, you suddenly realize...hey! this is a terrible game!
Nintendo though, as I see from your post, really does nothing for you, so I don't understand why you're here. Nostalgia perhaps? You seem like an xbox gamer, which is perfectly acceptable (that is unless you think xbox is the best soley on its hardware capabilities). GTA and vice city are great games if that's what you're going for, though I personally believe that ever since those games came out the market and the consumer have been dead set on "mature" and slick games over polished quality. Not to say that GTA isn't a fine piece of software, it just seemed to have that influence on the market.
I understand where you're coming from, but understand what I'm saying too. Nintendo hasn't appealed to racers/sports/shooters too much as of late. They can improve on that, no doubt, but it just seems those two genres have never been their forte. Racer/sports and to some degree, shooter fans, sadly, usually make up the "casual gamer" demographic. Even so, that in no way implies that all racer/sports/shooter fans are casual gamers. Rather, it's a pity that the market is flooded with so much crap that fit these genres it's terrible. If nintendo doesn't fill your needs, then why do you own a gc?
Note: Sorry for sounding like an idiot. I can't seem to think very well right now and later on I just might remove this post altogether
Post by: dark_eliment on March 25, 2004, 07:39:14 PM
Post by: The Omen on March 26, 2004, 02:12:00 AM
Quote
On another note, games rated M rarely sell. Really, that's what was stated in many sales studies. Out of about 40 million sellers only about four were rated M.
Thats a misleading stat. There are a lot less 'M' rated games on the market when compared to 'E' and 'T'.
Another point is-even if 'M' titles as a whole don't sell as high, i bet games like 'State of Emergency' sold better than it should have.
The point is they do sell more than they should because people buy violence. I buy violent movies all the time. Games, not as many. But I can discern quality in most cases, whereas a 14 year old may not. And thats the inherent problem with a saturated market...somebody will buy crap. Thats not to say everyone who buys games like these have no taste, or are sick in the head. I'd say the majority of people, like CubedCanuck, like the games. But its the other 10-20% who buy it for no other reason than "Thats hot, yo! You can rip his heart out!"
Post by: Bill Aurion on March 26, 2004, 02:16:38 AM
Post by: DrZoidberg on March 26, 2004, 02:29:51 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: dark_eliment
what else is wrong with nintendo?
you.
more games on all systems need pirates, pirates playing kiss music, then the natural ballance of the universe will be restored.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 26, 2004, 05:30:35 AM
Post by: Edisim on March 28, 2004, 12:57:44 PM
Post by: ib2kool4u912 on March 28, 2004, 12:59:21 PM
And yes, Nintendo Rules.
Post by: mouse_clicker on March 29, 2004, 11:41:42 AM
Post by: Berny on March 29, 2004, 06:58:05 PM
Mouse!I'd give you a star but I forget how to make them. Aw heck, I'll try.
Post by: ThePerm on March 30, 2004, 03:07:37 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on July 04, 2004, 02:13:30 PM
Post by: Berny on July 04, 2004, 02:29:45 PM
Post by: Deguello on July 04, 2004, 04:15:14 PM
Post by: The Omen on July 04, 2004, 05:09:13 PM
Post by: Ian Sane on July 05, 2004, 07:16:42 AM
But wouldn't Nintendo be the console leader then? Seems like bitching wouldn't be needed anymore.
"Its really strange to come back and read my posts on this topic 3 months later. And guess what? They haven't changed!"
Why would three months make a difference? That's not enough time for any significant change.
Post by: The Omen on July 05, 2004, 08:16:39 AM
Quote
"Nintendo could be doing everything right and people would still bitch."
But wouldn't Nintendo be the console leader then? Seems like bitching wouldn't be needed anymore.
Nope. You can do everything right without the masses following. And are you telling me if Nintendo were number 1, nobody would bitch?
Quote
Why would three months make a difference? That's not enough time for any significant change.
I'm quite certain i've changed my opinion on many things in the last 3 months.
Post by: Ian Sane on July 05, 2004, 08:43:00 AM
Well I'm at least saying I wouldn't bitch. I would like to see Nintendo do everything right to see my reaction to it. Of course it's impossible for one company to be completely perfect but seeing them in a situation where they're consistently firing on all cyclinders would be great.
I think a lot of you are confusing bitching with legimately complaining. Nintendo has made a lot of really DUMB decisions this gen and they could have done a much much better job. I think a great deal of the complaints made against them are justified because they really have appeared to be sleepwalking through this gen.
Complaining about your team because they made it to the finals and lost is bitching. Over the last few years Nintendo has been like a team that missed the playoffs. Big difference.
Nintendo has been improving and so far this year has been a very significant improvement over last year both in games released (or set to be released) and in their E3 showing. However they screwed up so much before that they really have to be consistently on fire so naturally every little mistake they make is going to be focused on. They're climbing out of a hole they created and they have a limited time to do it so every slip they make right now is significant.
Post by: The Omen on July 05, 2004, 03:09:45 PM
Post by: nintendogod on July 05, 2004, 03:14:50 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on July 05, 2004, 03:42:21 PM
Nintendogod: The title is in quotation marks, thus signifying I was using the term ironically.
Post by: DrZoidberg on July 05, 2004, 03:52:52 PM
Post by: The Omen on July 05, 2004, 05:10:24 PM
Quote
Final Fantasy isn't trouble and i only read the topic name but there is no trouble with extremely long cutscenes
RIGHT....
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on July 05, 2004, 06:17:09 PM
P.S. I wonder if im gonna get flamed by the FF7 lover who cant spell for his life.
And on topic Nintendo is safe IMO and like said before improving on its showings and I hope Cube gets awesome sales this fall with the awesome line up, and that the DS is a sure hit for Nintendo this fall.
Post by: Mumei on July 09, 2004, 07:44:51 PM
Yes, there profits are still very good, but they aren't nearly what they could be. Nintendo wants to be profitable, right? Then why not give the majority of the people what they want? Would you honestly be that upset if Nintendo actually made a few new franchises that catered to the older gamers? Before I go further, I should comment that it isn't necessarily true that only older games like those games. I have a 14 year old younger brother who is a bit, well, obsessed with games such as Halo or Grand Theft Auto. The problem with Nintendo's thinking is that they still think that younger kids like their games. That isn't as true nowadays. Most kids like the "cooler" games, not the fun, happy, bright-and-colorful games.
And it isn't as though he doesn't like Mario games or anything; he just hates the newer versions of them. He played Super Mario World for hours and hours, and beat every level when he was younger. But the appeal is no longer there, and from what I've seen from my peers and from his friends, those characters don't have the same appeal to the general gaming public. To Nintendo fans, they still have that same appeal and that makes it difficult to understand that some people have lost interest.
Secondly, third-party support has dropped since the peak, and even then it wasn't quite to the standards of other consoles. Very few multiplatform games sell better on Gamecube than on the other systems. Off of the top of my head, I can think of the Godzilla: Destroy All Monsters Melee game, Burnount and Burnout 2, and Soul Calibur, which undeniably had the most copies sold because of Link. Aside from those, most third-party games bomb on the GCN and it is not simply because Nintendo makes so much better games.
Despite my misgivings, I do not expect Nintendo to go away or be bought out. They have around $8 billion in the bank and made about $298 million dollars in profits last year, and expect to make over $600 million this year. But it is concerning, and one day Nintendo's market share could shrink to the point where they are no longer profitable.
Oh and to the last poster's comment about FFVII fans who can't spell for their life... I am an FFVII fan, and I can spell better than 99% of the people online ^_~. Oh, and I don't need the flames about liking FFVII. It isn't even in my top 20; I just like the game. If you don't like Final Fantasy VI, then you can flame me about that. That game is in my top 5 =). And if anyone is wondering, my first system was a SNES, second system was a N64, then a GCN, then a PSX. Oh and Gameboy, Gameboy Pocket, Gameboy Color, Gameboy Advance, and Gameboy Advance SP. I am a Ninty fan, but I think that not recognizing that Nintendo could do a lot of improving is foolhardy.
Post by: mouse_clicker on July 09, 2004, 07:46:23 PM
Post by: Mumei on July 09, 2004, 08:40:28 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
[L=Game-Revolution]Dear Game-Revolution and Kaanchy,
Quite frankly, though, Nintendo's business practices are perfectly fine, exemplary even- you do realize they've only lost money for one quarter since going public some 40 years ago? Most other companies could never dream of being able to make such a claim. The problem, as I have always said, is the third parties. Nintendo makes the best games in the world- even if you don't care for their style, you have to admit their games are some of the finest made and most polished pieces of software on the planet- it's not a coincidence they have such an incredibly loyal following. This poses a conundrum for 3rd parties- when sitting on a shelf next to a world class Nintendo game, who's going to want to buy a mediocre 3rd party game that's riding more on image than quality?
No one wants to buy the mediocre 3rd party game, but there are many, many third-party games that are just as good as any of Nintendo's offerings.
Quote
3rd party games rarely do well on Nintendo consoles as of late because of the simple fact that most owners of Nintendo consoles would rather lay down their hard earned money for the assured quality of a Nintendo game as opposed to taking a gamble on a 3rd party game, which can range from being rare gems to little more than excrement hastily slapped on a disc. This used to not be a problem, back in the NES/SNES/Genesis days, and there's a very good reason for that- the only consoles 3rd parties could develop for were made by extremely talented 1st parties, which forced the 3rd parties to match that level of quality in order to catch the attention of the consumer and convince them to buy their game. Again, it's no coincidence that some of the best 3rd party games ever made were released during those two generations, and the bad ones nearly always floundered- quite the opposite of today. [/quote]
That is no reason for a games like Prince of Persia, Beyond Good and Evil, or Viewtiful Joe to do poorly. Those games are as good as anything Nintendo has to offer and the fact that they sold poorly on the GCN has nothing to do with the idea of it being a gamble. There are countless places to check reviews, talk to other people on forums, etc. where you can find out whether a game is good or not. It is not a gamble at this point to buy a third-party game. And if you are still unsure, you can almost always rent the game.Quote
Then along came Sony- not to disrespect the advancements Sony has made for the industry, and they are improving, but they created a console (the Playstation) completely devoid of a stellar 1st party, or really a good 1st party at all, which meant half-assed crappy games could sell much better than before simply because the consumer didn't have a choice. Conversely, 3rd partiers left Nintendo, whose consoles it was now difficult to garner sales for, requiring at least as much effort as Nintendo put into their own games. When they left Nintendo, all that was left was Nintendo, and, by association, Nintendo fans. Gone were the people who enjoyed a few of Nintendo games but really liked the diversity their consoles offered. Indeed, gone was the diversity altogether, gone to the Playstation. It's truly a testament to Nintendo's quality that their hardcore fans alone could not only support them in such bleak times but turn them an enormous profit as well. When we moved into the next generation, Microsoft released the XBox, which is based on the exact same principle as the PSX/PS2, that without the high quality 1st and 2nd parties, mediocre 3rd parties can thrive.
I can understand not liking some of the PSX's more "mainstream" games, but the PSX definitely has its merits. Have you ever actually played one, or are you going off of hearsay? Go buy and play a game like Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, Star Ocean 2, or Suikoden II and tell me that the third-parties are mediocre.
And I am no fan of the X-Box, but it does have a games that are good; Panzer Dragoon Orta, Ninja Gaiden, Halo (it's alright >_>), The Chronicles of Riddick, etc. Can you explain this stance that the reason that third-parties do poorly on the GCN is because Nintendo is so much better?Quote
That's why I truly believe that it's not competition between multiple consoles that brings the best out in developers, but competition between each other on one console, at the very most two if both have extremely good 1st parties. I say this because it forces the 3rd parties to rise to the level of quality of the 1st party to catch the buyer's eye.
That makes no sense, seeing as how the best third-party developers (eg. Konami or Capcom) regularly match Nintendo's quality.Quote
Basically, the point I'm trying to make is that Nintendo is doing all they can do- yes, sometimes they make some bad business decisions, but so does every company (especially Microsoft with the XBox- why no fortellings of doom for the console currently in 3rd place worldwide, not to mention losing hundreds of millions of dollars?), and Nintendo makes far less than most. It's the industry that needs to change, not Nintendo. Sony's 1st parties are gradually improving, but both the PS2 and the XBox are making it okay for 3rd parties to shove half-assed games out the door because they actually SELL. Eventually, though, when image and graphics no longer matter, when the difference in graphical ability between consoles is indistinguishable, actual game quality will be what drives sales, and it's then when Nintendo will rise once again.
And why should the industry change to accomodate Nintendo's needs? And Microsoft did not expect to make a profit off of the X-Box this generation. They expected to get their foot in the door, create loyal fans, people who would buy an X-Box 2; laying the groundwork for the next generation and for that, they were willing to take a loss in the short-term. Frankly, Microsoft can afford to take the $2 billion dollars in losses that they have accumlated through their gaming divison. That is the reason that there are no foretellings of doom for Microsoft; it was expected for them to take huge losses and everyone knows that they can absorb them for quite some time. Microsoft as a whole is still turning a huge profit, despite the losses that their X-Box division has been causing them.Quote
As for image, that’s a subject Nintendo fans generally feel very strong about- the day Nintendo changes their image, the day Nintendo throws in blood and gore for the sole purpose of getting sales, is the day they’ve lost my business- I’ll turn away and never look back. If such elements are the result of a creative decision, that’s fine, but Nintendo’s always been about creating the best games possible, and it’s not their fault if people don’t recognize that. You forget that there is such a thing as dignity left in this world, and I’d rather Nintendo lag behind with the best games than nab the #1 spot bowing to the public’s demands. It’s no fluke that most of the developers that still do believe in dignity are Japanese. Nintendo's all I could have ever hoped for, multiplied a hundred times, and there are millions out there who agree with me- we’ve carried Nintendo this far, and have been greatly rewarded, and we will continue to carry them until the time comes when the public finally recognizes Nintendo for the incredible effort and heart they’ve poured into this industry for decades. In a world where a game can ride on image alone, Nintendo is holding true to the one mantra they’ve kept for so long, which is to make the best games possible. If that means they’re not the sales leader, so be it, as long as they still make a profit. I’d rather live as a poor man with a clear conscience than as a rich man with none at all.
I've been a Nintendo fan for 12 years, and I can tell you point-blank that most people don't agree with you. Nintendo can and should cater to everyone, not just a set group. Nintendo claims that there games are for everyone, but they don't appeal to everyone. Nintendo really should take the time to create new franchises that target older gamers, and games like Geist show that they do know that they need to get more of the market.
The don't have to turn a Mario game into a bloodfest to make a game that caters to older games; they could just as easily create a new franchise. Also, the new Zelda would likely draw in people who want the darker edge to their games. While we don't know that it will necessarily be "darker" it looks that way for the time being.
Nintendo can do a lot to improve, and there is no excuse for not improving when you know what you should do to improve. You say that you are happy as long as Nintendo is making a profit? So is Nintendo. But they would be much happier if they were making a larger profit. They could be making more money in profits than Sony's Computer Entertainment Division does if they actually aggressively pursued people other than their core audience. They don't have to abandon their core audience to go after other groups as well.
Post by: KDR_11k on July 09, 2004, 10:39:52 PM
The problem is when you're giving the market what the market wants, you become EA. People want the same different, that's the dillemma: Give them a game that differs from their set perception of what the game should be like (i.e. the previous game) and they'll complain, give them the same game with prettier graphics and a few new levels and guns and they'll complain about a lack of change... Hm, no, if you give them new weapons they're already happy, if you change more they start to complain. I.e. the only game that'll satisfy the fans is a game that uses the same gameplay and everything and just adds more guns, vehicles, missions, etc. Only add, never change or remove. Of course, even then some people will complain that you didn't add any major changes (though they would if you did, too). You'll always have complainers and you can only listen to a few (since they contradict each other).
Post by: mouse_clicker on July 10, 2004, 12:01:34 AM
Post by: Mumei on July 10, 2004, 05:28:16 AM
Post by: Chongman on July 10, 2004, 05:32:18 AM
Quote
I can understand not liking some of the PSX's more "mainstream" games, but the PSX definitely has its merits.
it has its merits but it also has its sea of crap. I had a regular PSX back in the day, and man if you didn't pick your games right you got burned over and over again. This has nothing to do with the topic but...the original playstation had far far far far more bad games than good. that's "mainstream" in the sense you're talking about and, and that's just a lot of quickly made, crappy games.
Quote
No one wants to buy the mediocre 3rd party game, but there are many, many third-party games that are just as good as any of Nintendo's offerings.
yes, but not nearly with the reuputation that nintendo maintains. other third parties can make great games, sure, but they still stand the test against nintendo's franchises, and often times, they lose. quality is almost always assured (gah...almost...personally i think nintendo branched out their own departments too much this gen, meaning faster dev time and poorer games). Afterall, what single game out there can evoke the madness that Zelda brings with it. And I don't mean the gamer madness halo2 and gta:sa instigates, but Zelda gives most everyone out there a different pang of long since beat zelda titles and a craving for a new one.
Quote
Nintendo claims that there games are for everyone, but they don't appeal to everyone. Nintendo really should take the time to create new franchises that target older gamers, and games like Geist show that they do know that they need to get more of the market.
grrr.............grrrr..........
I'm sorry...its just that personally, while fpses are fun, I get a much much much more bigger sense of enjoyment of playing wind waker rather than when I play a game like Halo or GTA. I mean...those other games are great great great great games...but when I play a nintendo game its just so much more enjoyable on a deeper level for me...so really, I have no idea what you're talking about. Bah, ignore this part of my post. its just silly opinion =P
Post by: Mumei on July 10, 2004, 09:19:05 AM
Quote
it has its merits but it also has its sea of crap. I had a regular PSX back in the day, and man if you didn't pick your games right you got burned over and over again. This has nothing to do with the topic but...the original playstation had far far far far more bad games than good. that's "mainstream" in the sense you're talking about and, and that's just a lot of quickly made, crappy games.
All systems have their sea of crap. But in the end, there were just as many, or more, games for PSX that were incredible as there were for the Nintendo 64.
Quote
yes, but not nearly with the reuputation that nintendo maintains. other third parties can make great games, sure, but they still stand the test against nintendo's franchises, and often times, they lose. quality is almost always assured (gah...almost...personally i think nintendo branched out their own departments too much this gen, meaning faster dev time and poorer games). Afterall, what single game out there can evoke the madness that Zelda brings with it. And I don't mean the gamer madness halo2 and gta:sa instigates, but Zelda gives most everyone out there a different pang of long since beat zelda titles and a craving for a new one.
If you are smart about buying, you can get third-party games that are just as good as Nintendo's offerings. And I know exactly what you mean about Zelda.... It is one of the franchises that Nintendo has that still gets the average person excited, not just a Nintendo fan.
Quote
grrr.............grrrr..........
I'm sorry...its just that personally, while fpses are fun, I get a much much much more bigger sense of enjoyment of playing wind waker rather than when I play a game like Halo or GTA. I mean...those other games are great great great great games...but when I play a nintendo game its just so much more enjoyable on a deeper level for me...so really, I have no idea what you're talking about. Bah, ignore this part of my post. its just silly opinion =P
You misunderstand; I wasn't suggesting that Nintendo should go off and make a bunch of FPS, I was citing that as an example that they are trying to directly target some of the older buyers as well. And the point of what I just said is not about you. They already have your business and as long as they keep releasing the games that you like, you will likely stay with them. But also having franchises that attract new people, in addition to you, would help them immensely.
And frankly, they need to attract new people. Nintendo sold about 45 million Nintendo 64s, if I recall correctly - someone correct me if I'm wrong on this. And they've sold about 15 or 16 million Gamecubes so far. They hope to sell an additional 20 million, brining the total to 35 or 36 million. A loss of about 9 or 10 million buyers is nothing to scoff at, and it is important that they get people back. You say they are still profiting? Imagine how much they would profit if they had an additional 10 million people buying their console.
Post by: Chongman on July 10, 2004, 10:23:53 AM
Ok...well, lets go bcak to the title of this topic..."the trouble with nintendo"
What I think most people don't realize is that nintendo, just like sony, just like microsoft, is only one company. When you see all these masses of games pouring over ps2 and xbox, it's not sony or microsoft that's creating them, it's third parties!!
of course, you and I both know this. Thats just stupid logic right? Afterall, GTA wasn't created by sony. What I'm getting at though is, when it comes to first party titles, nintendo deffinitely delivers. can you agree with me on that? but all this other stuff, the horde of games on the other platforms that are, indeed, good games, they AREN'T first party. You say nintendo needs to diversify...but what if all sony had was its first party titles? same with microsoft? (if any single console needs to diversify, its xbox...they're missing a very large demographic, meaning while nintendo's games are user friendly and nearly anyone can play them, this is not so with the xbox. but do I hear anyone complaining about that?) If all these companies had were their first and second party games...I'm pretty confident that nintendo would come out on top.
but you're making the assumption that the reason nintendo is struggling this generation is due to the lack of diversity in their first party games. Look, when it comes to diversity in first party games, Nintendo's got it made. It the third party they dont got.
But hey, nintendo KNOWs this. hello...i mean, you can't deny that. You can't deny that they've made a serious effort to diversify, to change up their line up, and get some third party action in there. And it seems to be working...slowly, yes, but I think if nintendo plays its cards right, by the end of the next generation of consoles, they can once again be on even footing with the competition. Of course, they could fix a few things, like the whole expensive royalty fee thing they have goin, but all things come with time.
What I think MC is tryin to say ( i think..since i haven't read his editorial in months...) is that hey, nintendo is gettin there. you really cant complain, they're listening, they're changing, they're improving. its not like they're ignorant to their faults anymore...everyone can complain but what you don't realize is nintendo has actualy started listening as of late. they have first party games down....now all they need is third party stuff to mix it up
oh, and btw, i don't know what you were doin during the last generation, but while ps1 had more games in general for sure, they had faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar more crap games than any other system ever created. again, most if not all of their games, good and bad, were third party, something nintendo lost.
Post by: mouse_clicker on July 10, 2004, 10:39:19 AM
I didn't want to have to explain the point of my article to you again because my article said it well enough. All your complaints about it were completely misconstrued.
Quote
No one wants to buy the mediocre 3rd party game, but there are many, many third-party games that are just as good as any of Nintendo's offerings.
I never said ALL 3rd parties are bad, you simply assumed as much.
Quote
I can understand not liking some of the PSX's more "mainstream" games, but the PSX definitely has its merits. Have you ever actually played one, or are you going off of hearsay? Go buy and play a game like Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, Star Ocean 2, or Suikoden II and tell me that the third-parties are mediocre.
Read the first sentence of the paragraph you quoted:
Quote
Then along came Sony- not to disrespect the advancements Sony has made for the industry, and they are improving, but they created a console (the Playstation) completely devoid of a stellar 1st party, or really a good 1st party at all, which meant half-assed crappy games could sell much better than before simply because the consumer didn't have a choice.
I'm not saying Sony has done no good- on the contrary, they brought the industry onto the disc medium, making it cheaper and easier to produce games. They also gave more control to the 3rd parties, who before were quite restricted, especially by Nintendo. And I do own Symphony of the Night- it's an incredible game. Again, I'm not saying ALL 3rd parties are bad, but you can't deny the incredible amount of them that ARE.
Quote
And I am no fan of the X-Box, but it does have a games that are good; Panzer Dragoon Orta, Ninja Gaiden, Halo (it's alright >_>), The Chronicles of Riddick, etc. Can you explain this stance that the reason that third-parties do poorly on the GCN is because Nintendo is so much better?
Ugh, you're taking a very shallow look at this. Yes, the XBox does have a good games- I never said it DIDN'T. As for explaining myself on why 3rd parties do poorly on the Gamecube, read my article. I flat out TELL you several times, and I've repeated myself enough already.
Quote
I've been a Nintendo fan for 12 years, and I can tell you point-blank that most people don't agree with you. Nintendo can and should cater to everyone, not just a set group. Nintendo claims that there games are for everyone, but they don't appeal to everyone. Nintendo really should take the time to create new franchises that target older gamers, and games like Geist show that they do know that they need to get more of the market.
You see, THIS is why I said you missed the point of my article. I've been a Nintendo fan for 13 years, so I must have seniority. ::rolls eyes:: And I can tell you that there are millions out there who do still love Nintendo.
And Nintendo shouldn't have to cater to anyone but themselves- they make games they think are the best possible, and if people don't like them, too bad. I don't want Nintendo targeting anyone, because when you start making a game with a certain demographic in mind, the creative decisions are overruled by the sales potential, which leaves you with a bad game. Nintendo never said their games would appeal to everyone, they simply said everyone can enjoy their games, they don't exclude anyone. That doesn't mean everyone is going to like Nintendo's games, although many do, it just means everyone has the potential to like them.
Quote
Nintendo can do a lot to improve, and there is no excuse for not improving when you know what you should do to improve. You say that you are happy as long as Nintendo is making a profit? So is Nintendo. But they would be much happier if they were making a larger profit. They could be making more money in profits than Sony's Computer Entertainment Division does if they actually aggressively pursued people other than their core audience. They don't have to abandon their core audience to go after other groups as well.
You REALLY missed everything I was saying- I never said Nintendo couldn't improve, or shouldn't improve, just that if they don't improve I'm still happier than I ever though I'd be, and that's all that really matters. Most of all, I don't want them deciding against ideas they think will make the game better simply because it will hurt the sales. Case in point Crystal Chronicles- since Nintendo was funding the entire thing, Square went all out with the game. They did whatever they wanted because they didn't care if it would sell or not, since it wouldn't hurt them at all either way. That's why they had the balls to not only include but require the GBA connectivity. In the end Crystal Chronicles became one of the best Gamecubes yet, in my and many others' opinions, and it's because the motivation to make the game wasn't sales, it was quality. This is the way Nintendo always has been and hopefully always will be.
Post by: DrZoidberg on July 10, 2004, 11:24:39 AM
Post by: Mumei on July 10, 2004, 11:33:07 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
The point of the article, mumei, was that Nintendo is trying their hardest- yes they are making mistakes, but they're doing just fine. And you know what? Even if they AREN'T doing fine, who cares? Just play the games for godsakes and stop worrying about the sales statistics and the image problems. Gamers have become so "hardcore" now that they follow everything related to the industry and have lost site of the whole point, which is to play games. Now we judge games on their graphical quality, the depth of their story, the variety of the gameplay, the originality of the scenario, but when we were kids all that mattered was if it was FUN or not. Nintendo is still the same Nintendo they were when we were kids, we're just looking at them more critically than ever before. If we'd just learn to enjoy the games, none of this would matter.
You really don't understand why sales matter? They matter because if less and less people buy from Nintendo each generation, that may mean that they will start to take a loss one day. I want to be certain that the console that I choose will have the support of third-parties; Nintendo's offerings are wonderful, but not enough by themselves.
Quote
I never said ALL 3rd parties are bad, you simply assumed as much.
You repeatedly claimed that third-party games don't live up to Nintendo's games or aren't nearly as good and that is why they don't sell. You may not have said they are all bad, but you did give the impression that you considered them inferior.
Quote
I'm not saying Sony has done no good- on the contrary, they brought the industry onto the disc medium, making it cheaper and easier to produce games. They also gave more control to the 3rd parties, who before were quite restricted, especially by Nintendo. And I do own Symphony of the Night- it's an incredible game. Again, I'm not saying ALL 3rd parties are bad, but you can't deny the incredible amount of them that ARE.
Yes, the vast majority, frankly, suck. But I still believe that many of Capcom, Konami, Enix (not necessarily Square...), or Ubi Soft's games are just as good as Nintendo's games. Just because the majority suck doesn't mean you should discount the ones that are incredible.
Quote
Ugh, you're taking a very shallow look at this. Yes, the XBox does have a good games- I never said it DIDN'T. As for explaining myself on why 3rd parties do poorly on the Gamecube, read my article. I flat out TELL you several times, and I've repeated myself enough already.
I read the article. You said that people don't want to take the risk of getting a mediocre third-party game, if I recall correctly. But where's the risk? I haven't bought a poor third-party game in years, and all I do is read a few reviews and talk to friends.
Quote
You see, THIS is why I said you missed the point of my article. I've been a Nintendo fan for 13 years, so I must have seniority. ::rolls eyes:: And I can tell you that there are millions out there who do still love Nintendo.
I think you missed the point of that comment. The point was to make sure I didn't get any BS about bashing Nintendo. I could care less about what you mentioned. I was trying to avoid being flamed - some people believe that if you act as though anything is wrong with Nintendo that you are bashing them.
Yes, there are millions of people who still love Nintendo. I still do, even though they frustrate me at times. But Nintendo has lost the business of millions and millions of people. That is something that is concerning.
Quote
And Nintendo shouldn't have to cater to anyone but themselves- they make games they think are the best possible, and if people don't like them, too bad. I don't want Nintendo targeting anyone, because when you start making a game with a certain demographic in mind, the creative decisions are overruled by the sales potential, which leaves you with a bad game. Nintendo never said their games would appeal to everyone, they simply said everyone can enjoy their games, they don't exclude anyone. That doesn't mean everyone is going to like Nintendo's games, although many do, it just means everyone has the potential to like them.
Actually, Nintendo is a business and should be required to follow the whims of the customer. And what do you mean that you don't want them targeting anyone? They already target the hardcore Nintendo fans; why not branch out and target more people. Nintendo has always had a target audience; why not expand and try to target more people?
Creative decisions don't have to be abandoned, either. I was rather disappointed when they lost Sillicon Knights... I was looking forward to Too Human. Would the fact that that game was targeting a different demographic mean that creative decisions would be abandoned? No, it wouldn't.
Quote
You REALLY missed everything I was saying- I never said Nintendo couldn't improve, or shouldn't improve, just that if they don't improve I'm still happier than I ever though I'd be, and that's all that really matters. Most of all, I don't want them deciding against ideas they think will make the game better simply because it will hurt the sales. Case in point Crystal Chronicles- since Nintendo was funding the entire thing, Square went all out with the game. They did whatever they wanted because they didn't care if it would sell or not, since it wouldn't hurt them at all either way. That's why they had the balls to not only include but require the GBA connectivity. In the end Crystal Chronicles became one of the best Gamecubes yet, in my and many others' opinions, and it's because the motivation to make the game wasn't sales, it was quality. This is the way Nintendo always has been and hopefully always will be.
You are kidding yourself if you think that Nintendo doesn't care about sales and focuses only on quality. Do you know why they focus on the quality? So it will sell. They expected FF:CC to sell much better than it did; they didn't put money into it for it to sell the way it did. And FF:CC isn't even a good example. The game wasn't even that great and honestly was a disappointment. When Square said that they were going to be making a FF for GCN, I wanted a full-fledged RPG, not a game like Crystal Chronicles. I can't believe that they actually called the game "Final Fantasy."
And I don't want them deciding against ideas like that either. That is not what I am saying. I want them to have those same ideas and do thinks that other people want as well. And if you don't think that Nintendo couldn't or shouldn't improve, why are you arguing with the idea that it is a good idea that they branch out and target people besides the ones that already have a GCN? That is all I've been saying >_>.
Post by: mouse_clicker on July 10, 2004, 11:39:46 AM
Post by: Mumei on July 10, 2004, 11:49:13 AM
Quote
I'm done with you, mumei- I'm just rewriting my article. I have a back-to-basics philosophy when it comes to games, which means all I care about is the games. Maybe that's where we're clashing.
Really? Well yes, that might explain something T_T. I am more concerned with sales and things like that. If you don't care about those things, then we aren't going to agree on this =/.
Post by: Ian Sane on July 10, 2004, 12:42:46 PM
C'mon you know better than that. It's worth caring about because if Nintendo goes broke then we don't get any more games from them and the industry is controlled entirely by non-gaming companies.
Post by: Mumei on July 10, 2004, 12:59:51 PM
.
Post by: Deguello on July 10, 2004, 07:07:26 PM
Can anybody here tell when when Nintendo was first arbitrarily and unfairly labeled as "too childish for this market?"
No, not 1997. No, not 1993. 1981. When Nintendo was bringing Donkey Kong over, arcade operators were sure it would flop because the game was too childish and simple, and gamers wanted hardcore violence like MISSILE COMMAND. True story.
Post by: mouse_clicker on July 10, 2004, 07:14:00 PM
Quote
C'mon you know better than that. It's worth caring about because if Nintendo goes broke then we don't get any more games from them and the industry is controlled entirely by non-gaming companies.
Indeed, that wouldn't be good at all- but my point is that, as far as I'm concerned, Nintendo has done more than they needed to in this industry and anything else they do is icing on the cake. If they went out of business tomorrow I'd be very sad but would consider their existence more than justified- they fulfilled their purpose.
Post by: Ian Sane on July 10, 2004, 08:58:51 PM
Well the opinion of arcade operators is not quite as damaging as the opinion of the general gaming public. It's gotten to a point where nearly everyone who isn't a dedicated fan or a kid themselves thinks they're kiddy. When third parties, retail stores, the media, and a large portion of the customers associate you with an inaccurate image that is going to restrict your sales you've got a problem. Nintendo's image should be that of quality like Blizzard has with PC gamers because it's both flattering and ACCURATE. If they have to experiment with some more adult titles, dabble in some unfamiliar genres (FPS, fighting, RPG, sports), and change their marketing all while retaining that same level of quality so be it. As long as the quality doesn't dip there's nothing wrong with a little change. Nintendo should be the hardcore gaming company and should do what they have to to be associated as such.
Post by: mouse_clicker on July 10, 2004, 09:02:43 PM
Post by: odifiend on July 10, 2004, 09:37:08 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
Nintendo's image isn't THEIR fault and they shouldn't have to be the ones to fix it. If the public doesn't come around, their loss.
I agree Nintendo's image isn't entirely their fault but they should be the ones to fix it. I barely ever see any gamecube specific commercials and I would say I watch a good amount of television. Nintendo seems absent in a market they created, not good. When a Gamecube commercial does materialize, often it is incredibly short and ineffective. There is no way they can sway an audience of the circulated that Nintendo is kiddie. More effective advertising is all that is needed.
Your last sentence, Mouse, indicates that you don't understand business. It is money, and not your philosophies and ideals, that make the money go 'round.
Post by: Mumei on July 10, 2004, 09:50:12 PM
One of Nintendo's bigger problems is that they can still get kids into gaming, but at 12 years old, the kids suddenly think that Nintendo isn't "cool" enough for them. And it isn't as though Nintendo's rivals aren't aware of this. One Sony executive said that Nintendo gets the kids when they are 5 and they get them when they are 12, or something to that effect.
Nintendo needs to work on their image so that they can keep those younger customers that they have said are the future of their business.
I don't think Nintendo needs to change everything, but some teams would be better making new, original titles that target new audiences instead of sequels.
Post by: KDR_11k on July 10, 2004, 09:58:40 PM
Post by: Mumei on July 10, 2004, 10:01:39 PM
And at this point, MS and Sony hardly have to do the propaganda; the damage is done =/.
Post by: mouse_clicker on July 10, 2004, 10:25:37 PM
Quote
I agree Nintendo's image isn't entirely their fault but they should be the ones to fix it. I barely ever see any gamecube specific commercials and I would say I watch a good amount of television.
You seem to have public awareness and image confused. People who think Nintendo is kiddy before aren't going to suddenly change their mind simply because there are more commercials on now.
Quote
Your last sentence, Mouse, indicates that you don't understand business. It is money, and not your philosophies and ideals, that make the money go 'round.
I think the last sentence of my original editorial proved that a LOOOOOONG time ago.
No, I don't understand business, but Nintendo understands it well enough to stick around longer than anyone else, and with only one quarterly loss, too. I do understand fun games, though, and Nintendo has never failed to continue delivering in that area. Keep in mind, too, I'm looking at this from a gamer's perspective, and the LAST thing on a gamer's mind should be business, while the FIRST thing should be the games. F*ck the sales statistics, just go enjoy your games.
Post by: odifiend on July 11, 2004, 06:30:19 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: mouse_clickerQuote
I agree Nintendo's image isn't entirely their fault but they should be the ones to fix it. I barely ever see any gamecube specific commercials and I would say I watch a good amount of television.
You seem to have public awareness and image confused. People who think Nintendo is kiddy before aren't going to suddenly change their mind simply because there are more commercials on now.
Public awareness and knowledge of Nintendo's products from Nintendo could break down the image their competitors have set up for them, so I think you're underestimating the power of advertising. Informing the public has broken down racial barriers and is breaking down sexual orientation barriers. Why couldn't it work for something as minor (relative to prejudice) as Nintendo's image problem?
Also, Mouse, while I respect Nintendo for how long they've been around, please note that that quaterly loss was a pretty recent fiscal quarter (most recent if I'm not mistaken) meaning there is a problem now, as opposed to 15- 20 years ago when they ran the market uncontested. Anyone can fail and as you sacastically mentioned with Mumei, seniority has no barring.
Post by: KDR_11k on July 11, 2004, 07:12:27 AM
Post by: Mumei on July 11, 2004, 08:03:19 AM
Quote
Also, Mouse, while I respect Nintendo for how long they've been around, please note that that quaterly loss was a pretty recent fiscal quarter (most recent if I'm not mistaken) meaning there is a problem now, as opposed to 15- 20 years ago when they ran the market uncontested. Anyone can fail and as you sacastically mentioned with Mumei, seniority has no barring.
The quarterly loss took place in the first quarter of 2003. They went on to earn about $298 million dollars, and expected to earn well over $550 million. The only reason they didn't was because they had massive currency related losses due to the yen's surge against the dollar. The previous year, they had earned about $640 million. This year, they expect to earn about $630 million.
How much did they lose in that one quarter? About $28 million. And that took place a little more than a year ago. I think they've recovered fine and that loss was a bit of a wake-up call.
Oh and my comment had nothing to do with seniority, and I already explained what I had meant by it.
Post by: Deguello on July 11, 2004, 01:46:26 PM
Quote Nazi! You are not quoting a Sony exec. You are quoting Peter Moore, as a MS exec, flapping his gums in a cheap shot.
And Ian I would agree that it is the general gaming populace's opinion that Nintendo is "kiddy," but the problem is that the general gaming populace hasn't been heard since 1995. Ever since Forums and message boards popped up where people parrot things they heard from certain loathesome individuals both on- and off-line, the happy constructive general gaming populace's was replaced with people with heavy interest yet low appreciation for videogames bitching about what is wrong with them all the time.
But that wasn't really my point. My point goes to the ludicrous idea of Nintendo's "image problem." They have had this negative image stuck to the since they started in this damn business. It is NOT Nintendo's fault. And them trying to fix it would ba an artificial change that in reality isn't needed or even called for, except by exectuives of OTHER companies.
Such an artificial change would be reminiscient of what happened to Nickelodeon. It used to be a kid's network (actual kids network, they thought of themselves that way) that kids loved and certain teenagers loved and most of those had fond memories of when they became adults. Now they "MTV'd" it up, making it all hip and cool and aimed at a more aged market than kids 3-12. And they've ruined it. Sure it might be more popular, but everybody who used to watch Nickelodeon when they were 11 (i.e. everybody, including me) is just totally repulsed by this new network facade. This wasn't really even called for. They were doing just fine. Why the change?
And if you WANT Nintendo to artificially change the "image" that they DO NOT have a problem with, then I will hunt you down, grill you and feed you to a pack of gophers. Because you will have destroyed something beautiful under the false pretense of making it better.
Post by: mouse_clicker on July 11, 2004, 01:58:24 PM
Quote
Quote Nazi! You are not quoting a Sony exec. You are quoting Peter Moore, as a MS exec, flapping his gums in a cheap shot.
Peter Moore, didn't he used to work at Sega? Hmmmmm......
Post by: Deguello on July 11, 2004, 02:08:54 PM
Post by: Ian Sane on July 11, 2004, 03:07:04 PM
Well that would their own fault wouldn't it.
"And if you WANT Nintendo to artificially change the 'image' that they DO NOT have a problem with, then I will hunt you down, grill you and feed you to a pack of gophers. Because you will have destroyed something beautiful under the false pretense of making it better."
Well I doubt losing sales because of public misperception is something they "do not have a problem with". You're acting like I'm suggesting a complete overhaul of the way Nintendo makes games. I'm suggesting a few changes that aren't really changes anyway. Nintendo HAS made mature games like Perfect Dark and Eternal Darkness and they were great. They've made RPGs in the past that turned out great. They even made a fighting game with Killer Instinct. These examples fit within Nintendo's lineup perfectly. Ensuring that lineup gaps are filled and that all demographics are covered is not going to ruin Nintendo.
Plus a lot of the "image correction" would be with marketing which for us fans wouldn't change anything. Nintendo already is about quality so trying to create a public image of "quality" is not going to ruin Nintendo or even really change anything. Some of you act that if Nintendo didn't make purple the main colour or had decent ads or made a seperate magazine that wasn't written for two year olds and had demo discs that somehow they wouldn't be Nintendo. Here's a wake-up call: today's Nintendo is hardly even the incredibly competent on-the-ball industry leading company they were during the NES and SNES years. If you think they're doing everything peachy now you're a fan of a different Nintendo anyway.
Post by: The Omen on July 11, 2004, 05:41:40 PM
Quote
And frankly, they need to attract new people. Nintendo sold about 45 million Nintendo 64s, if I recall correctly - someone correct me if I'm wrong on this. And they've sold about 15 or 16 million Gamecubes so far. They hope to sell an additional 20 million, brining the total to 35 or 36 million. A loss of about 9 or 10 million buyers is nothing to scoff at, and it is important that they get people back. You say they are still profiting? Imagine how much they would profit if they had an additional 10 million people buying their console
Nope.
You forget that the market is cut 3 (MS,SONY,NIN) Last gen. was PSX and N64. So in comparison, they're doing at least as well as last gen.
Post by: Mumei on July 11, 2004, 05:52:16 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on July 11, 2004, 06:10:58 PM
Don't take anyone too seriously on this board, not even me. I may seem incredibly pissed at times, but I probably had a big grin on my face while typing it. Quote
Here's a wake-up call: today's Nintendo is hardly even the incredibly competent on-the-ball industry leading company they were during the NES and SNES years. If you think they're doing everything peachy now you're a fan of a different Nintendo anyway.
Who the hell cares? You've got some priority issues, Ian. I'm a fan of Nintendo's GAMES- you know, the things gamers play? Nintendo's philosophy towards games is no different than when they entered this business- THAT'S the Nintendo I'm a fan of and THAT Nintendo hasn't changed at all.
Post by: Deguello on July 11, 2004, 06:17:43 PM
Quote
Well I doubt losing sales because of public misperception is something they "do not have a problem with".
I fail to see that as a problem with Nintendo's image. I see that as a problem with public misperception. They DO have a problem with that, but changing their "image" around will accomplish nothing because...
Image is press. I'll say it again because it bears repeating. Image is press. It is not console color. It is not demo discs. It is definitely not ads. It is not Nintendo's magazine, although magazines are a key factor to image, some of them being the press. (Sidetrack: Nintendo Power doesn't say anything different from XBN, OXM, PSM, and OPM. Which begs the question, which is worse? A magazine wholly owned by a company going "Go Company GO?" Or a magazine not owned by a company going "Go Company GO?") Hell there wasn't even an image to speak of until around 1994 or so. And all the things the press ran about video games were usually things like "Do your kids not get enough exercize?" and "Are videogames turning our children into viloent monsters?" that demonized games in the process. oh yeah and there were those Senate hearings
Yet when Sony and later Microsoft entered the market with much fanfare, that fanfare came from the press, and some of it probably paid for if you catch my drift. (I mean Sony has no compunctions with inventing a human being to give their movies good reviews) And I'm usually sure Nintendo doesn't play that kind of press game. (It would surprise me if they did, and even so, they obviously aren't doing it now, because no usual press firm is just glowing with love over Nintendo nowadays.) The press is what makes image, and so Sony and Microsoft get great images, one of whom likes to invents human critics and use employees as people "who just saw A Knight's Tale and it was like totally awesome," and the other... well MSNBC.
Hell, if you read what the press had to say about Microsoft and the Xbox in June 2001, I bet you'd do a double-take. The thing of 2k1's E3 was the GameCube, everybody loved it, while the Xbox had an absolutely terrible showing, with Halo being a glitchy mess. You would think that the Gamecube would be hot stuff now. But around August 2k1, it was as if the press (this includes various magazines) did a complete 180 and starts the Cube bashing by calling it a purple kid's toy lunchbox that will have fluffy super funtime games whereas the Xbox is a man's console that has mature games worth playing because mature people play mature games like Halo. Oh and that the Xbox is 100% All American America. And I think I know how Microsoft was able to to pull that one off, if you catch my drift again. By sheer force of press and repetition Nintendo's public perception went down the tubes. Foolish Nintendo. They thought all you had to do was have great games. And I think that perception is something that cannot be fixed with just a demo disc. They would have to start playing those press games, if you again catch my drift. And I don't think they can. And if they can, I don't think they do. And if they do, I don't think they outbid MS and Sony for Magazine "features."
Cripes this crap I just talked about is happeneing again right now. With the DS and the PSP. You have probably seen the magazines and the press going googoo over this bloated piece of machinery even AS bad press is getting released about it. We never hear about that OR the DS, even though more than twice is known about the DS than the PSP. It's geeting good press and a good image despite that it is sounding very bad right now. And I think I know how thats happening too, if you yet again cacth my drift. And you know... Image is press.
tl;dr Nintendo doesn't have a problem with their image. Their image is fine. They have a problem with public misperception, largely brought upon by the mainstream press. Which Deguello heavy-handedly implied that Nintendo's competitors do dirty tricks involving lots of money to get favorable press, which then leads to a good image.
Post by: Chongman on July 11, 2004, 07:11:23 PM
i thought that was a nice read
Post by: darknight06 on July 11, 2004, 07:39:17 PM
Post by: Mumei on July 12, 2004, 01:57:45 AM
So yes, it is public misperception, but it is partly caused by just apathy from the customer; not reading the magazines or online articles at all and only looking at the way that the console looks.
Post by: Chongman on July 12, 2004, 03:54:59 AM
now I believe you're being too naive
Quote
When Nintendo games come out, they fawn over them in most cases.
actually, no, it seems like that really hasn't happened much this gen. i dont know if that's a personal opinionated statement or fact, but from my perspective, that just doesn't seem true.
Post by: Mumei on July 12, 2004, 07:17:10 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Chongman
now I believe you're being too naiveQuote
When Nintendo games come out, they fawn over them in most cases.
actually, no, it seems like that really hasn't happened much this gen. i dont know if that's a personal opinionated statement or fact, but from my perspective, that just doesn't seem true.
It may be the places I read reviews at then... I usually look at Gamerankings.com and read several reviews... For Nintendo's biggest games (my opinion), Zelda, Mario, and Metroid, they have gotten almost universally good scores. Before the games come out, everyone ****es and whines about them, but after, most places I see score them highly. Most magazines that I read complained about TWW's graphics, yet what is the average score given for that game? 95.0%.
And they complained about Metroid Prime "messing up" the series by being in the first person perspective. What happens when it comes out? The average score given ends up being 96.0%.
They complain and act like Nintendo games are going to be horrible before they come out, but most of the time they are scored highly, even if the review does have complaints in it. As for a few of Nintendo's other games (including second-party games), here is how they fared:
1080 Avalanche - 75.4%
Animal Crossing - 88.5%
Custom Robo - 67.6%
Donkey Konga - 75.0%
Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem - 90.0%
Kirby's Air Ride - 63.9%
Luigi's Mansion - 79.9%
Mario Golf: Toadstool Tour - 81.9%
Mario Kart: Double Dash!! - 87.2%
Mario Party 4 - 72.0%
Mario Party 5 - 71.0%
Metroid Prime - 96.0%
Pac-Man vs. - 80.9%
Pikmin - 86.5%
Pokemon Channel - 57.2% (can you blame them >_>)
Pokemon Colosseum - 77.2%
Star Fox Adventures - 81.2%
Super Mario Sunshine - 92.1%
Super Smash Bros. Melee - 90.7%
The Legend of Zelda Collector's Edition - 93.2%
The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventure - 87.2%
The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker - 95.0%
The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time - 91.2% (Preorder Bonus Disk)
Wario World - 71.4%
WarioWare Inc.: Mega Party Game$ - 78.6%
Wave Race: Blue Storm - 82.0%
I left a few games out, such as F-Zero GX, because they were not actually made by Nintendo or a second-party... Anyway, the average score for Nintendo games is about 81.26%. I don't see how Nintendo games are reviewed poorly.
Post by: Ian Sane on July 12, 2004, 07:19:11 AM
I think with the DS they have done nearly every right so far. Sure the PSP is getting some rather blatant favouritism but the DS bashing is small and usually sounds much weaker than anything said about the Cube. The worst bash I read on the DS is that it has an ugly design. That's pretty minor and if that's the best they can come up with Nintendo did it right. If they can do something similar with the Revolution, where critics have to look really hard for things to complain about, then that will improve their public perception. They'll still be fighting an uphill battle but they'll have made it easier for themselves.
Post by: Mumei on July 12, 2004, 09:36:36 AM
Post by: Deguello on July 12, 2004, 10:48:39 AM
Why did you include Donkey Konga then? Or Wario World?
Post by: Deguello on July 12, 2004, 10:58:14 AM
And THAT I will agree with.
Post by: Syl on July 12, 2004, 11:29:39 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Deguello
"I left a few games out, such as F-Zero GX, because they were not actually made by Nintendo or a second-party... Anyway, the average score for Nintendo games is about 81.26%. I don't see how Nintendo games are reviewed poorly. "
Why did you include Donkey Konga then? Or Wario World?
or the mario party's? Those are all made by hudson.
Post by: Mumei on July 12, 2004, 02:14:38 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Deguello
"I left a few games out, such as F-Zero GX, because they were not actually made by Nintendo or a second-party... Anyway, the average score for Nintendo games is about 81.26%. I don't see how Nintendo games are reviewed poorly. "
Why did you include Donkey Konga then? Or Wario World?
To be perfectly honest, I wasn't entirely sure about them. I included them only because I wasn't 100% sure whether they were actually made by Ninty or a third-party. Sorry >_<. But... the point still stands; they are reviewed highly.
Post by: Mario on February 16, 2006, 03:07:17 AM
I know I touched upon non-gaming games somewhere in this giant xbox thread, did anyone else?
Post by: vudu on February 16, 2006, 07:50:54 AM
Mods, can you set something up where a thread automatically locks after six months of inactivity? We need to stop this mindless bumping.
