Post by: Ian Sane on April 28, 2004, 10:54:15 AM
One of Nintendo’s biggest problems is variety. Most Nintendo games have a similar feel to them. It’s great if you’re a Nintendo fan but if you’re not there’s not much there to interest you. Plus Nintendo themselves have traditionally not been able to fill in all of the genre gaps on their own. They rely on third parties to supply sports, RPGs or fighting games. Unfortunately they have the problem they can’t get decent third party support without a larger userbase and they can’t get the userbase without third party support.
What Nintendo needs is for another developer to exclusively support the N5 and fill in the gaps. I think Sega would be the ideal fit. They have a good track record of making great games and they have popular series to fill in the gaps. They have their own sports line, several RPGs (Phantasy Star, Shining Force, Skies of Arcadia), Virtua Fighter to fill the fighting gap, and they make more “mature” content than Nintendo does. The only problem is that buying them would be really expensive and not realistically feasible. So how else does Nintendo get exclusive Sega support for the N5?
Nintendo should in exchange for N5 exclusivity grant Sega complete freedom with the N5 as if Sega was a console maker again. That means that Nintendo provides Sega with the same knowledge of the console as they do for their own first party teams. That means that Sega gets input in the design of the controller and other parts of the console. That means that Sega can release whatever they want and not have to pay licensing fees to Nintendo. Essentially the N5 has two first party developers and the amount of exclusive content doubles. Plus Sega provides all of the online games. All Nintendo has to do is make the console able to go online. Sega creates the online games which sets the example for third parties to make online games and Nintendo themselves don’t have to take the risk.
Now there is one pretty big risk to the whole thing. Nintendo makes a lot of money from licensing fees for third party games. With Sega being given free reign that means that there’s going to be a lot of Sega releases on the N5 that Nintendo won’t make any money from. However I think the risk is justified. The idea is that by having exclusive Sega support it will attract a larger userbase which should translate to better sales for Nintendo’s first party games and more third party support which means more licensing fees.
Let’s face it. With exclusive support from both Nintendo and Sega the N5 would be a huge smash with hardcore gamers. Virtually anyone who supported the Cube or Dreamcast would buy it in a second. I don’t think it would beat the PS3 but it would be able to be a strong number two for sure. It would attract a lot of the pre-Playstation era gamers who remember the wars between Nintendo and Sega. The videogame press would eat the system up which would create good hype. I think one thing that hurt the Cube was that a lot of the gaming press were down on it. That wouldn’t be a problem here. Plus the sheer amount of killer apps would ensure success. Nintendo would probably still be able to make a profit and would have a good foothold for the next gen when they likely wouldn’t need Sega’s exclusivity again.
I’m assuming the deal wouldn’t extend to the Gameboy which doesn’t need exclusive Sega support. That would be ideal since Nintendo would still get licensing fees and Sega would be given more freedom to experiment around with the N-Gage. Sega would also be free to release PC and arcade games.
Realistically I don’t think Nintendo would ever go for this since the idea of allowing another company to make money without paying a fee to Nintendo would turn them off. It’s too bad because I think this idea could work really well.
Post by: vudu on April 28, 2004, 11:06:36 AM
also, correct me if i'm wrong, but i don't believe any of the ea sports games were published on dreamcast because of sega's own sports games. the return of them might cause ea to pull its sports lineup from the n5. needless to say, that's a very bad thing.
it's a nifty idea, but i think outright purchasing sega would make a little more sense. any idea how much that would cost?
Post by: Ian Sane on April 28, 2004, 11:15:01 AM
No. I'm hoping that Nintendo can make their money off of first party sales and third party licensing fees from other third party games. The idea is that Sega's exclusive support helps drives systems sales which then drive software sales for Nintendo and third party games.
"also, correct me if i'm wrong, but i don't believe any of the ea sports games were published on dreamcast because of sega's own sports games. the return of them might cause ea to pull its sports lineup from the n5."
Well right now Sega's sports games are multiplatform and they haven't affected EA's sales so I don't think EA would have any good reason to back out. Plus they don't care about Microsoft's or Sony's first party sports games so it's kind of weird for them to be against Sega's. I did think of this but I'm hoping EA knows that they don't have to worry about Sega.
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 28, 2004, 11:37:07 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on April 28, 2004, 11:50:45 AM
Of course. But how specifically do they do that? I don't expect Nintendo to provide the variety themselves but I do expect the variety to be there, if that makes sense. Technically it's different than Nintendo providing it all itself. That's why I think this plan would work. Sega and Nintendo combined provide the variety.
Post by: vudu on April 28, 2004, 11:56:34 AM
Quotethe fact that ea didn't publish any sports games on dreamcast seems to be a good reason as to why they wouldn't publish them on the n5 if sega spots was exclusive.
right now Sega's sports games are multiplatform and they haven't affected EA's sales so I don't think EA would have any good reason to back out.
Quoteif nintendo can't get third party developers to do it, it is nintendo's responsibility.
Yes, lack of variety is a problem, but it's not Nintendo's responsibility to fill that gap with their own games.
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 28, 2004, 11:58:39 AM
Quote
if nintendo can't get third party developers to do it, it is nintendo's responsibility.
No it's not, it's Nintendo's responsibility to get back those 3rd parties. Don't speak idly of providing the immense diversity present on the NES, SNES, PSX, and PS2, because it's much more of a task than you could ever imagine, and no one developer could ever hope to fulfill that position by themselves. Remember, Nintendo is just one company- people expect them to revolutionize every genre with every release and have blockbuster sales with every game, and that's just not possible. I think the main reason a lot of people here are dissapointed with Nintendo lately is because they had their expectations set WAY too high (I don't even see the need for expectations- they do far more bad than good, if they do any good at all). Get realistic, people.
Post by: vudu on April 28, 2004, 12:08:35 PM
i'm not suggesting nintendo should make sports games (other than the occasional f-zero and maybe a sequel to punch out). i'm just suggesting that if you can only accomplish something in one of two ways, and one of the ways isn't working, you're not left with much choice.
EDIT: in fact, i would like to stress that i think it's best for nintendo to stick with what it does best--make great action/adventure/platform games. but i do agree that nintendo does need to get better third party support to round out its library, and ian sane's suggestion isn't a bad idea, in theory.
Post by: Ian Sane on April 28, 2004, 01:04:20 PM
Well if Nintendo persuades the smaller third parties and the American publishers to support the N5 then they don't even need to do any sort of big deal with Sega. The idea was to do the big deal first to get people buying N5s which would then attract the third parties.
"I think the main reason a lot of people here are dissapointed with Nintendo lately is because they had their expectations set WAY too high"
Realistically I didn't expect the Cube to beat the PS2 or anything like that but I did expect it to do better because it has the potential to. What bugged me was that Nintendo made a lot of dumb mistakes that a lot of us spotted a mile away and to me it didn't seem like they tried hard enough. Nintendo could crash and burn like Sega did but it wouldn't bother me if it looked like they made a huge effort and gave it their all. The N64 didn't really disappoint me too much because Nintendo gave it their all despite being held back by a major hardware mistake. With the Cube they didn't appear to give it their all. With the N5 all I need to see to be satisfied is for Nintendo to put in 110% and try as hard as they can to make it the best console it can be. It could last for only two years and Nintendo could go broke but as long as they did all they could I would be satisfied.
I think that's why so many people were happy with the Dreamcast. Sega failed but they tried as hard as they could and went out guns blazing. The Dreamcast was made to succeed or die trying.
Post by: The Omen on April 28, 2004, 04:53:11 PM
On the N5, nobody at my art school even mentions it when talking about next gen. PS3 is going to be 1000x more powerful then the PS2(yeah, right) and Xbox 2 is going to be 10,000x more powerful(LOL) . Thats all I hear, yet people dont even consider the N5. Thats not good. GC gets mocked by teachers, but there is some good support from the students. But it seems the N5 will have an self inflicted uphill battle.
Post by: Darc Requiem on April 28, 2004, 05:15:21 PM
I had an idea that I thought that Nintendo would use. They won't do it but I was thinking that Nintendo shoud charge damn near nothing as far as licensing fees. MS charges about $7 per game sold, Sony and Nintendo are in the $9-10 per game range. Of course this excludes deals done to garner major support but my logic is this. Nintendo sells a boatload of games, their problem is that their userbase has been strinking rapidly since the SNES. I think Nintendo should charge $3-$5 as there licensing fee per game. Exclusive titles would get a $3 licensing fee and with other games getting a $4 to $5 dollar licensing fee. Sony would be hesitant to match this, MS would match it most likely match it but it would cause them to hemorrhage even more money. I've observed Sony. Now that they are on top, they are slow to equal the oppositions policy. In fact the are bordering on 80s Nintendo arrogance. Nintendo sells the most first party titles and would be least affected by the initial negatives of lower licensing fees and benenfit most from the rewards. They'd garner more third party support which would lead to a larger userbase. With a larger user base Nintendo would sell more games and at the $30+ dollars per unit sold they'd make more money in the long run.
Sorry about babbling.
Darc Requiem
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 28, 2004, 05:20:32 PM
Quote
On the N5, nobody at my art school even mentions it when talking about next gen. PS3 is going to be 1000x more powerful then the PS2(yeah, right) and Xbox 2 is going to be 10,000x more powerful(LOL) . Thats all I hear, yet people dont even consider the N5. Thats not good. GC gets mocked by teachers, but there is some good support from the students. But it seems the N5 will have an self inflicted uphill battle.
Omen, no offense, because I like you a lot and respect your opinion more than almost anyone else's on this board, but I am sick and tired of people spouting off "my friend said this" and "my friend said that"- your friends don't mean jack squat. I don't care if your classmates think bartlett pears cure diarrhea, much less what they think about the next generation of consoles. I've always been perplexed as to why people felt the need to relay the opinions of their friends and acquaintances about anything. It holds absolutely no bearing at all in the real world, so why waste your time on it? I'm probably overreacting a lot, and like I said, Omen, you're one of my favorite people here, but I honestly couldn't care less about what the people at your school think about videogames, and it's certainly not going to make any difference to me. That's just always something that's really grated on my nerves. I'm sorry if I offended you.
Post by: Ian Sane on April 28, 2004, 05:53:30 PM
Another idea regarding licensing fees would be to not charge a fixed amount like $5 but rather a percentage of the MSRP. That way it makes it easier for third parties to release budget titles and we don't have situations like Capcom charging full price for Playstation RE ports. Plus then more titles can be $40 which would encourage sales and would be an ideal price for brand new original games that need to provide an extra incentive to get people to try them out over established franchises.
Post by: Zeks on April 28, 2004, 05:59:21 PM
Im not saying its all over for the Big N but, unless they really 'do something' wether its new marketing, buy up Square, w/e, or the industry crashes, IMO they will have missed their chance at being #1. And it will only get smaller, to a point, hence Mac's 10%-12% market of PCs. Dont get this mixed up with "Nintendood is D00mEd' or anything, Im just saying they got a shot and if they miss, chances are theyre gonna stay where they are or even less.
Post by: Uncle Rich AiAi on April 28, 2004, 06:53:50 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Nintendo should in exchange for N5 exclusivity grant Sega complete freedom with the N5 as if Sega was a console maker again. That means that Nintendo provides Sega with the same knowledge of the console as they do for their own first party teams. That means that Sega gets input in the design of the controller and other parts of the console. That means that Sega can release whatever they want and not have to pay licensing fees to Nintendo. Essentially the N5 has two first party developers and the amount of exclusive content doubles.
Ian - you came up with another interesting idea. But as we know, fat chance of that happening. Although I would love for it to happen.
Sega!While Sega would fill the genre gaps, and would bring the hardcore Sega fanboys aboard, it would be big risk for Nintendo to make. I don't think Sega are as well known and/or popular with today's casual gamer, as they were in the early 90s during the Genesis/Megadrive days. I'm sure some casual gamers view Sega as a failure b/c they dropped out of the hardware business. Most Sega games have not been selling as well as they should. That is partly Sega's fault for not marketing probably and releasing games on a console that does not suit its gamers *cough*xbox*cough*, a lot of their games are sadly ignored. Again, that's a big risk for Nintendo and from a business point of view, I cannot see it happening. I'm not sure how Nintendo would feel about giving Sega input into the designs of the controller and the hardware and no licensing fees.
Post by: Syl on April 29, 2004, 02:05:17 AM
nintendo wouldn't be making any money.
It seems like a purely one-sided deal for sega. Sega gets all the benefits, nintendo gets none. Nintendo wants to make money, so I know something like this isn't going to happen.
Post by: The Omen on April 29, 2004, 07:00:33 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on April 29, 2004, 07:38:12 AM
How does Nintendo get no benefits? Having exclusive support from a major third party seems like a pretty big benefit to me. It should sell more consoles and increase market share. That's a benefit and directly relates to Nintendo's own game sales. Higher userbase = higher game sales.
The problem with Nintendo is that profit is their sole focus. They can't stand to ever lose money. But market share and public image are important too. If those things become worse then eventually Nintendo won't be able to get people to buy their consoles and thus won't make a profit. They have to learn to take a bit of hit in the present in order to make more profit in the future.
If the N5 follows the same pattern the N64 and Gamecube went Nintendo's market share is going to shrink even more and their public image is going to become worse. If they don't do something big to shake things up I can't see very many people buying their sixth or seventh console. Hell without something big I don't even see the N5 selling all that well.
Post by: vudu on April 29, 2004, 10:09:22 AM
Sega's Explosive E3 Announcement
Quoteif this (while extremely unlikely) turns out to be an exclusive partnership between nintendo and sega i'm convinced ian sane works for nintendo. that, or he's a witch.
Sega will surprise the gaming world with an announcement from their booth at E3. ... Sega is calling it an "Explosive Announcement Event". ... Many people have speculated that Sega will announce Shenmue III exclusively for the Xbox, but the sheer magnitude of this event seems to point to something bigger.
Post by: Ian Sane on April 29, 2004, 10:43:24 AM
"i'm convinced ian sane works for nintendo."
No I don't but if they did use this idea and it worked I would be pretty cheesed if they didn't offer me a job. It could be in the f*cking mailroom, I don't care.
Now someone should post a link to this thread and the annoucement news blurb in the Gamefaqs boards and in an hour it should be a full scale rumour of megat0n proportions.
Post by: Zeks on April 29, 2004, 11:52:13 AM
.
Post by: Ian Sane on April 29, 2004, 12:02:09 PM
They don't have to even be number 1. They just have to be a strong presence in the industry that people take seriously. The Sega Genesis finished second to the SNES in the end but it didn't matter because it was a strong competitor and Sega had a strong name brand. People knew when they bought a videogame console, even if they did virtually no research, that Nintendo and Sega were the brands to look into. Right now a lot of people don't even think of the Cube when they consider buying a console. It just doesn't have that strong name brand. Nintendo needs to be in a situation that when they go to EB to buy a console they see an N5 and think "hey Nintendo. They make good consoles." It's like when to go to buy a DVD player you're more likely to buy something by Panasonic, Sony, or Toshiba because you're familiar with the name and associate it with quality even if that DVD player isn't the best choice to go with.
Post by: Zeks on April 29, 2004, 12:07:04 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 29, 2004, 12:39:36 PM
Quote
Many people have speculated that Sega will announce Shenmue III exclusively for the Xbox, but the sheer magnitude of this event seems to point to something bigger
On the polar opposite side of things, if this little bit of speculation is true, I'd say Sega's the one that's doomed if they don't partner up with Nintendo.
Post by: vudu on April 29, 2004, 12:43:56 PM
Post by: Ian Sane on April 29, 2004, 12:47:05 PM
Oh man. FOUR consoles? That would ensure at least one console maker would die and odds are it wouldn't be Sony or Microsoft. It would totally kill MS in Japan though.
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on April 29, 2004, 01:16:57 PM
Post by: Rich on April 29, 2004, 02:24:27 PM
Post by: vudu on April 29, 2004, 02:57:15 PM
Quotethat's the funniest thing i've ever read. i'm not sure why.
*Update* A Sega rep has informed us that the next machine will be of platinum color.
Post by: The Omen on April 29, 2004, 04:12:41 PM
Post by: vudu on April 29, 2004, 04:38:34 PM
Post by: Ian Sane on April 29, 2004, 05:30:14 PM
Post by: Darc Requiem on April 29, 2004, 08:43:23 PM
BTW Sorry about yelling. Psst...Nintendo buy Sega....Psst..Psst Do it now.
Darc Requiem
Post by: Uncle Rich AiAi on April 30, 2004, 12:08:23 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1
SEGA to make a new console for next gen wars?
ROFLMAO
Anyone who believes this deserves to be shot.
Post by: kirby_killer_dedede on April 30, 2004, 03:14:30 AM
I'm pro NintEGA.
Post by: Ocarina Blue on April 30, 2004, 03:47:39 AM
What I would find to be the most interesting affect from a merger like this would be what it does to Nintendo's image: instead of being the 'kiddy' company, Nintendo would be the 'old-school' company, and immediately seal almost all hardcore gamers. I doubt it would really help Nintendo's public image among the casual gamers, but it would be at least a nice change
Post by: Ian Sane on April 30, 2004, 07:31:31 AM
Sega must drive a hard bargain then. Nintendo would essentially allow them to make games for FREE. What sort of developer wouldn't be willing to exchange exclusive support for that? Hell they would probably release every game on the N5 even without a deal in place just because it would so easy for them to make a profit.
"I think a fusion between Nintendo and SEGA is in order."
The problem with that is that the two companies are actually pretty different. Sega and Nintendo make different kinds of games and Sega loves online gaming while Nintendo hates it. Those two different philosophies would not gel. Plus when two companies merge often one of them is in charge. So you would either have Nintendo in charge in which case online still would not be part of their future plans or you would have Sega in charge who has proven to have no real clue how to sell a console. By remaining as two independant companies they compliment their strengths and weaknesses. If they merge then they're just Nintendo or Sega but with more exisiting game properties to make use of.
Post by: Rich on April 30, 2004, 12:55:35 PM
Post by: Bill Aurion on April 30, 2004, 01:49:45 PM
Post by: Draygaia on April 30, 2004, 02:13:12 PM
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on April 30, 2004, 03:25:13 PM
You don't have to believe it but these stories just keep popping up
Gamedreamz.com
Now SEGA is gonna go exclusive to one console and leave there brand/logo on front of the console like the 'Dolby Digital' logo!?
Something tells me it is with Microsoft, but I really hope that it is with Nintendo, that is if its true.
Post by: KDR_11k on April 30, 2004, 08:55:49 PM
Post by: Uncle Rich AiAi on April 30, 2004, 09:00:49 PM
Why? B/c then we won't have to worry about Sega games being scattered across all 3 consoles and can just buy the one console they will develop exclusive for. No more worries about which system the next big Sega game will come on.
EDIT: read KDR's post. MS slipped my mind. If Sega alliance is w/ MS, that could be a deathwish.
Post by: Ian Sane on April 30, 2004, 11:31:22 PM
Was that Sonic Adventure 2? Anyhoo I don't think being Xbox exclusive would be that terrible for Sega. The problem with their current Xbox lineup is that it's all hardcore niche titles which naturally aren't going to sell as well as their big guns like Sonic or Virtua Fighter. How well did Sonic Heroes sell on the Xbox? I imagine it outsold all of their other titles. I think if all of Sega's games were on the Xbox they would be able to sell some of their more mainstream titles and they would attract all of the Sega fans to one console. I imagine a big reason their Xbox games aren't doing so well is because their fanbase is split over multiple consoles and probably a lot of those fans have chosen the Cube or PS2 because they have the more popular Sega franchises.
Still I would consider the Xbox the worst choice of the three for Sega to go with. The Xbox audience is by far the most '"casual" of the three. Sega would do better with either Nintendo or Sony.
Post by: Syl on May 01, 2004, 04:37:02 AM
Just like I prefer every nintendo game on a single console. I wish getting all the Sega games i wanted was that easy.
Post by: KDR_11k on May 02, 2004, 01:39:38 AM
Post by: BigJim on May 02, 2004, 06:21:12 AM
Still, I don't think it's as big as its being made out to be.
