Topic: Rev in Nov. Wha?

[jasonditz]

Yeah, we all see how bad the DS is doing in Europe.

[Don'tHate742]

Haha...


Anyway, that's from a source other than Nintendo so take it with a grain of salt.

[Spak-Spang]

I would just like to say this is still just rumors...and nothing can be taken as fact.  Even if Nintendo's intial launch plans were November 2006, they could easily change those plans because of Sony's earlier launch.  I expect Nintendo to announce a launch date after definative information about Sony's launch is secured.

I also have doubts that Sony will be able to launch during the time frame they are expecting 1st QTR 2006.  I would be shocked if its released 2nd QTR 2006 personally.  

This is all now a just wait and see.

[Ian Sane]

I really hope Nintendo isn't "following the DS strategy" with the Rev.  The DS launch was a recipe for disaster and it's a sheer miracle that it didn't completely ruin their portable market share.  The DS launch had no killer app, only two games worth playing one of which was a port, and very few games available period.  They then followed that up with a Cube like post-release drought that they still haven't gotten over (though E3 suggests that the lineup will really rock in a few months).  The PSP even launched with more games then the DS had released period at that point.  At the time I really thought that the DS was totally f*cked.  In my opinion it was Sony severely overpricing the PSP that saved Nintendo's skin.  And before someone brings it up I'm talking about the North American launch of course.

Imagine if the Rev launched with that slim of a lineup and then followed it up with a drought.  It would be dead.  There's no way around that.  Nintendo launched first with the DS, had the advantage that they came in the market leader so people were willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, and lucked out in that the competition goofed up.  They're not launching first with the Rev no matter what, even if they beat Sony to the market, and they're launching from last place.  People are writing Nintendo off.  They couldn't do anything even remotely like the DS launch and expect to be taken seriously.

In a way the DS not getting creamed by the PSP is bad thing.  Had they been hurt by their incredibly sh!tty DS launch they might have learned something.  Because things turned out okay they might think the DS launch is a good template to follow.

[couchmonkey]

I agree that Sony is probably BS'ing with the first quarter stuff...I could imagine a Japanese launch in the first quarter, but I think it would be rushed, and I highly doubt they'll finish the North American and European launches in the first half of the year.

If Nintendo isn't far enough in development on its games, moving the Revolution launch up by a few months simply can't be done without sacrificing the quality of the games.  Of course, for all we know, Nintendo has been prepared for this all along.  Long before this E3, it seemed logical to me that Sony might try launch earlier in 2006, what with Microsoft launching this year.  Based on that, if I were Nintendo, I would have prepared to launch well before the holiday season if necessary.

Edit: Ian - I think the difference between the DS launch and the Revolution launch is that Nintendo purposely rushed the DS to get a head-start on Sony.  I'm pretty sure that Nintendo consciously used that strategy, and I don't see think they'll be rushed on Revolution unless they really were planning to launch at the end of 2006 and they change that to compete with Sony.

[jasonditz]

C'mon, Ian, the only "people" writing Nintendo off are you, and you're going to do it irrespective of any evidence to the contrary.

You were predicting the DS as doomed from the start, then despite making all the horrible mistakes you pointed out, any one of which was supposed to be completely fatal, its still doing great. Now you're saying it was just a case on Nintendo getting lucky.

You're going to be doing the same thing with the Rev until the day it launches, and probably for several years afterward. They could launch the thing tomorrow, have insane specs that kill the PS3, costs $99 retail, uses PS2 controllers, and comes only in Gun Metal Grey, and unless it launched with GTA4 and Resident Evil 5, AND promised that they wouldn't release any First Party titles based on existing licenses or rated younger than T for Teen for at least a year you'd still be on about how no one is taking them seriously.  

[Ian Sane]

"C'mon, Ian, the only "people" writing Nintendo off are you"

Bullsh!t.  Everywhere you see "PS3 vs Xbox 360".  Nintendo is barely mentioned in regards to any media coverage or discussion regarding this upcoming generation.  Often third parties even refer to only Sony and MS.  Both Sony and MS don't even consider Nintendo any sort of threat and have said so.  Nintendo is being largely ignored outside of the hardcore gaming crowd.

[PaLaDiN]

"Nintendo is barely mentioned in regards to any media coverage or discussion regarding this upcoming generation."

To be fair, it's because there's nothing to discuss yet.

[SgtShiversBen]

I don't think so.  Alot of people I know (here in Texas) are completely awed at just the fact that the Revolution can play past games since the NES times (they also know that it just might be Nintendo games).  

If it's just PS3 vs 360, then let them.  We're still having fun aren't we?  We're above and beyond that time (when it was SNES vs Genesis, no one counted the Neo Geo) and soon enough they will realize that too that both of the systems look the same.  

Also I find it very ridiculous when people say "Link can SO kick Master Cheif's ass" or vice versa.  It's childish.  This is why Smash Bros was invented so that way you can actually prove that Mario is better than Link, or in my circle of buddies, my Puff dominates the world.

[Don'tHate742]

I think it's just a ploy used by Nintendo to make Sony release the console later in the year.

Think about it....Some "official" source says Nintendo is going the DS route. People over at Sony are having a ball because now they can relax a little bit more. There probably thinking that they should launch later in the year, but still before Nintendo. Sony then announces their launch date, then BAM! Nintendo official states its release which is months before Sony's.

Of course, this could only work if Sony decided to launch Q3-Q4....any earlier and Nintendo could have a tough time keeping there word me thinks.

Nintendo should be planning a Q2 launch....Right after E3 06'

[jasonditz]

So the Hardcore gaming crowd is buying over a million copies of Mario Party ever single year? The Hardcore gaming crowd bought 60 million plus GBAs? The hardcore gaming crowd made the DS one of the holiday's hottest selling and hardest to find gifts, while the mainsteam, blissfully unaware that any alternatives even exist, couldn't even buy up the measely launch allotments of the PSP despite it being plastered all over every news channel for a solid week?

[Arbok]

Quote
Originally posted by: Don'tHate742
Think about it....Some "official" source says Nintendo is going the DS route. People over at Sony are having a ball because now they can relax a little bit more. There probably thinking that they should launch later in the year, but still before Nintendo. Sony then announces their launch date, then BAM! Nintendo official states its release which is months before Sony's.

The problem is that Sony looks to be trying to combat the Xbox360, so I don't think Nintendo's release date will actually have much of a impact on Sony's plans on when to release the PS3.

[couchmonkey]

Arbok: Exactly!  I've been thinking for a few months now that Sony would be stupid to sit on its butt for 12 months while Xbox 360 gobbles up next generation marketshare.  Now Sony is beginning to see Microsoft as a threat: what Nintendo does really doesn't matter to Sony at this point because Microsoft has proven to be the more dangerous competitor this generation and it's also aiming to get a head-start next generation.

[Pittbboi]

Exactly. With Sony and Microsoft both too busy competing with and emulating each other to give a rat's a$$ about what Nintendo is doing, Nintendo is in a prime position to sneak up and bite them both in the rear (and snatching a bit of their market share in the process). However, It won't be able to accomplish this by launching several months dead last. It's bad enough that it's the underdog this upcoming generation, but by launching last it would have to overcome not only its bad reputation with the mass market, but the accumulated hype generated by two other capable consoles. Nintendo can be as different as it wants to be, but it’s needs to keep up with the competition at the same time.

[ThePerm]

hehe sega jumped the gun with genesis..got some early market share...but was completely dominated as soon as supewr nintendo came out

[jasonditz]

There's plenty of room in the market for more than one system... you guys need to get over this idea of winning and losing.

By my way of thinking, Nintendo did great, Sony did decently, and Microsoft did horribly. In the 16-bit generation, Sega and Nintendo both did incredibly well, NEC and Atari did poorly.  

[Pittbboi]

Yes, this generation, Nintendo did well, financially. Nobody's contesting that. The problem is the main party who thinks the Gamecube was a failure is Nintendo itself. Yes, they made money (most profitable system this generation), but none of their other goals were realized.  They didn't capture more of the market, they lost more of it. They didn't gain more third party support, they lost it. These are the reasons the Gamecube is, in Nintendo's eyes, a failure.

Nintendo doesn't want that to happen (again) with the Revolution, and the main problem some of the people have on these boards with that is it's not doing what it needs to do to realize its own goals. Nintendo wants to capture more of the market and more third party support this time around. Well, it's not going to be able to do that (or it's going to be a lot harder to do that), if they launch dead last behind two popular consoles.

[Dirk Temporo]

I come bearing wonderful news. My cousin, a long time PS and PS2 owner, bought a Gamecube. New. Why? For Super Smash Bros. Think about what wonders Super Smash Bros. Online will do!

Also, my best friend, another long time PS and PS2 owner, says that he will get the Revolution before the PS3. Why? PRICE! We ALL know the Rev's price will be lower than PS3, and on a microcosm, it's helping.

As long as they don't release TERRIBLY late, (say 4-5 months or more) they should be fine.

[Stimutacs Addict]

a little off topic, but i've noticed at IGN that the revolution doesnt really stand straight in it's white stand thing.. so im gonna go ahead and call ninty's new marketing slogan: Tilt your world.

booom. i'm done.

[jasonditz]

Did Nintendo really "lose third party support" this generation? I don't recall anywhere near as many quality third party titles for the N64.

They got Square back on board if nothing else... that seems to outweigh anything they might have lost (though even the losses escape me).

[couchmonkey]

I'll agree on that one, jasonditz...Nintendo had much more third party support this generation than last, but as we head to the end of the lifecycle, they seem to be losing most of it again, which does worry me.  Sega sports were lost, Eidos left, Capcom "took away" a bunch of it's exclusives, and multi-platform developers like EA and THQ are favouring Xbox and PS2 more and more.  Can Nintendo re-entice these developers to put games on Revolution?  And if it launches several months late, what will third party publishers do when they have two other consoles to choose from, each with a few million users?

I'm not crazy about Nintendo coming in first, but I am crazy about it not continuing to lose market share, because that costs Nintendo third party support and makes it harder to find Nintendo products.  If Revolution can match the GameCube, I'll be reasonably happy.

[Pittbboi]

They do have slightly better third party support, but that really doesn't make much difference if these third parties only trust Nintendo enough to release their candy cane games on the system (Konami, anyone?)

They did get Square back on board, I'll give them that much. But until Square puts a bona fide RPG on the console, most people won't give FF:CC the time of day (again).

[Ian Sane]

With the Cube third party support kind of went up and down.  Initially there was a bit of spike in third party support for the first few years but it has dropped like a rock since then.  I don't know if things are worse now but they're at least as bad as they were on the N64.  Right now I can't think of any third party that for sure would provide good support on the Rev.  There really isn't any third party that's totally buddy-buddy with Nintendo.  Even Namco is screwing us out of Soul Calibur III.  At the end of the N64's life though it was largely the same thing.  There were no "for sure" supporters of Nintendo.

Nintendo has lost Cube support but it's not like when the N64 ended they had tons of supporters and now they have none.  They pretty much went from none to none.

[vudu]

To be fair, Namco isn't screwing Nintendo out of SC3.  Xbox isn't getting it either.

[jasonditz]

I think we can count on companies like Namco and Capcom and Hudson for support... even if there's no guarentee of a ton of exclusives. Likewise EA , though I don't really care too much for their products, are committed to making most of their major stuff multiplatform. I can't imagine them bailing on Nintendo the way they bailed on Sega at the end (especially the way bailing on Sega later came back to bite them in the ass).

And we know Square's on board for FF:CC if nothing else. The way they've been raving about the rev, it seems likely it might be more than just that... but who knows.

Either way, most of the best Rev titles will undoubtedly be 1st party...