Topic: Will the gamecube 2/revolution succeed?

[mT3]

Hey guys, i was just thinking. Does it reallly matter how revolutionary the next nintendo console is going to be? Xbox and Playstation have already established a large user/fan base. all these people are eagerly awaiting either the ps3 or xbox 2. Do you think they will stop and say, "hey what about the nintendo revolution, im gunna check it out". firstly i'd think they'd make an assumption - next nintendo console will be like the nintendo gamecube. and as they see the gamecube- tiku tiku tiku!  and worthless. A lot of my friends at school are saying, "yeah im gunna get the ps3" "yeah im gunna get an xbox 2" and if i say, yyeah nintendo revolution should be good, they say "omg gamecube sucks" - meh so arrogant and dull they are.

I'd just like to see your thoughts on how nintendo will draw users to their new console.  

[mT3]

sorry i accidently posted the same topic twice, just ignore the other one.

[Hemmorrhoid]

until the systems have been unveiled I dont think I can really make up my mind about this question
all I know is that if Nintendo keep up their quality, Revolution and PS3 will be the systems ill buy

[raptorspike]

considering we have rumored titles like Bloodrayne 3 and Starcraft: Ghost, it may actually succeed. That is assuming they don't go screw the games up (for example, compare the GC and PS2/XBX versions of Bloodrayne)

[meldavid]

As long as they release a Zelda game for the Revolution, then I'm definitely getting one.  

[mT3]

Meldavid are u the same meldavid on the hyperactive forums?

[meldavid]

Yep! Hai!

*waves*

Those forums are dead now.

[mT3]

Why what happend to them? all of a sudden the site is down.

[mjbd]

I think we will have a very good idea of how good revolution is going to do once we know what Nintendo considers to be revolutionary.   If its so differant that games from PS3 and Xbox2 cannot be ported over, then I think its in trouble.  There is always that chance that it will be so much better that the system will have all exclusives.  Hopefully revolutionary is more in line with the FX chip on the SNES and the N64's jump to 3D, and not playing every game with a set of bongo's.  Not that I dont like Donkey Konga, but I wouldnt want to play alll games that way.

[PaLaDiN]

If you're talking in terms of sales and userbase, I doubt very much that revolution will succeed.

And just like the GC, I'll continue not to care.

[mT3]

ok.. thats nice.... but anyway, i just dont fully trust in nintendo. I have this doubt and think that they are the only ones that think its REVOLUTIONARY. It will be so stupid and embarrasing for them, if its something crap. like  mjbd said, something like playing congos on everygame isnt a revolution. when they reveal it at e3 i was to be shocked, jaw dropped and F*&#@$@ excited.

[MysticGohan24]

congos? don't you mean Bongos?

[mT3]

LOL rofl yeah sorry i mean bongos

[Ian Sane]

What do you mean exactly by succeed?  Be number one?  I think that's something to reach for but it's not realistic in this short of time frame.  The Revolution, barring any disaster on the part of Sony, will not be number one but it can start down the path that will allow a future Nintendo console to be number one.

I would consider "success" for the Revolution as being able to increase Nintendo's market share.  They've lost market share with each new console since the NES and that going to be a big problem in the future.  So I think if the Revolution bucked the trend and actually improved Nintendo's presence in the industry it would be a success financially.  From a gamer perspective I would consider success as better games, more games, more variety, more genres, more options etc.  Even if the Revolution isn't number one as long as we've got a lot of different games to play and don't feel we're missing out on something major then it's successful.

Will the Revolution acomplish these things?  It's too early to say though I am worried about the new feature being useless and limiting the console.  I think however success is possible, but it's up to Nintendo.  They have to prove the doubters wrong.  They have to change any policies they have that don't work.  They have to improve marketing.  They have to open their eyes to what's going on and stop being such stubborn jerks all the time.  Nintendo gets screwed a lot but a huge chunk of their problems are because of their own stupidity.  The Revolution can succeed if Nintendo does all they can and strives to be number one.  Will it succeed?  We'll see at E3 but with Nintendo acting as they are right now I'd say no.

[ProduceMan]

I see the Revolution being a success because its not trying to compete directly with Sony and Microsoft's systems.  Nintendo has a different idea of what videogames should or could be, and while that may not cater to the hardcore gamers who spend hours a day on X-Box Live, I do think they have a very good chance at attracting an audience who has never played a videogame other than Tetris.  

Look at the success of Nintendo's DS.  I know sorority girls and 50 year professionals who play DS because it has intuitive control and some extremely fun, creative games in its library.  I see the Revolution aiming for the same broad appeal, but with an even more intuitive and design inspiring form of control than the DS's touch screen.  

You must also not forget the huge price difference between the Revolution and its "competitors."  The Revolution will be less than half the price of XBox360 and PS3 making it much more appealing to casual gamers and as a second system for the more hardcore.  

Finally, the Virtual System will definitely be an appeal for every nostalgic person who enjoyed the 8-bit and 16-bit era.  If the success of the the rereleases on GBA or the popularity of emulating is any indication, then this could be a huge market.  

The Gamecube has failed because it offered nothing that the XBox couldn't already do better.  Your only incentive to own one was Nintendo's own titles (which had some slouches and some masterpieces this generation) and the Resident Evil games.  With the Revolution, and to a lesser extent the DS, Nintendo is attempting to broaded the idea of what constitutes a video game with the hopes of broadening their audience in the process.  

I do think the lack of HDTV support could hurt it down the line.  Afterall, isn't broadcast TV supposed to change over by 2009?  Still, as the old saying goes, "its not what's on the outside, but on the inside that counts."  In the end, the winner will be the one that inspires the best games.

[MaryJane]

Yes

[Ceric]

Actually it was suppose to switch by either 2000 to 2001.  If the hardware, receiver boxes up to the sets themselves, haven't penetrated enough by 2009 I'm sure it will be extended again.

[Dirk Temporo]

ProduceMan, I'm going to choke you with a fork.

[thejeek]

I hope so. I hope it's succesful enough to keep Nintendo in the games business, I'm not so bothered about market-share or popularity.

I really doubt though that it will be a runaway success - I think it risks being perceived as not powerful enough by the hardcore and too weird by the casual - but who knows - there's always a chance.

From my point of view it'll be a success if it has fun games that are different from the cars, guns and sports obsessed dull pants that the other lot offer (and why bloody sports for heavens sake? you could just go outside and play if that's your bag, but I digress...)

However, it could just end up being a dumping ground for bad ideas, badly executed with lack of effort on the developers' part glossed over with lipservice to the controller and excuses based on the low spec of the hardware :-(

[IceCold]

ProduceMan

...is really ThePerm!

[darknight06]

"Afterall, isn't broadcast TV supposed to change over by 2009? "

OK, let's get this cleared up.  Broadcast TV is supposed to change to digital TV by 2009, not completely go mandatory HD.  Most broadcasters even by that time wouldn't have nearly the money to actually foot the bill to even think about HD, let alone actually set their channel up that way.  The most you'll need to have by that time is a box to accept digital broadcast, that's it nothing else.

[BigJim]

I'll go you one further, the digital switch over only extends to over the air (OTA) broadcasts. It doesn't apply to satellite/cable. Those providers can still support analog for customers past Feb. 2009.  

[trip1eX]

I think it's obvious by now what Nintendo is doing to draw users to their console.  They are differentiating.  They said they didn't do that as much as they should have with the Gamecube in terms of the hardware.

And so far the biggest difference with the Revolution is the remote controller.  Games will play differently on the Rev.  That's how they will attract users to the console.

Not to mention the lower price, no memory card needed, built-in wi-fi, virtual console, it's quiet, it's small, you don't need an hdtv to take full advantage of what you're paying for, and last, but not least the remaining secret or secrets Nintendo has yet to unveil about the Revolution.

Of course it's about the games too.  This is all for not without good games.  I think Nintendo makes great ones.  And I think Nintendo will also go the DS route and release games that are geared towards different audiences.  And really some of those 'games' won't be games in the traditional sense.    

[WesDawg]

I know I sorta buy into Nintendo hype, but I think the Rev has potential to totally take over the market next gen. Not by winning over those kids who called the GC tiku tiku tiku! , but just by expanding the market. I can easily see people in their mid 20's, early 30's picking it up simply for the nostalgia factor of old games. X360 and the PS3 are trying to sell themselves on this same point right now, but the general consumer seems oblivious to it. I've heard people excited about the VC who know very little about gaming though.

Secondly, I think they'll release a lot of crazy, interesting, and fun games for the system. I think probably it will have to start with Nintendo and a few select 3rd parties releasing some killer apps that make really good use of the controller. Nintendo's usually come through on doing that. If its killer enough, one great game can propel a system to the top. One great app that appeals to older gamers and a second one for younger ones, and I think they have the potential to dominate in just a few years. GC, while I absolutely love mine, didn't seem to provide that to the casual user base.

So that's what I'd say went "wrong" with the Cube. There was never a game that the public latched on to like they have with GoldenEye, Halo, or ever Super Mario Bros. back in the day.

[Smash_Brother]

The people who bought Pepsi's new and bizarre drinks are not the same people who would buy cola, and yet it doesn't matter because Pepsi won the softdrink war.

The people who bought Apple's iPod are not the same people who would buy a Mac, and yet it doesn't matter because Apple won the MP3 player war.

The people who will buy Bob Ross' painting game are not the same people who would buy a gaming console, and yet it won't matter. Can you guess why?