Topic: Reggie Says Revolution will be "under $300"

[GoldenPhoenix]

Not including the nunchuck attachment? That would be suicide for Nintendo, since there will be some games that require an analog stick to further immerse the player. I still believe not only will the nunchuck be included but also the shell. Unlike others I would be happy if the 300$ price point was legit, in that it indicates the Revolution isn't as skimpy hardware wise as the rumours have stated.

[The Omen]

Quote
SM 64 wasn't a pack-in so you probably got a bundle of some sort.

Yeah, you're right.  It was a Toy's R Us bundle, as I recall.  Got it a week early too!

I think the 'under 300' remark is a safe statement.  The true price probably isn't set yet, so $300 is the number he can most safely say the Rev will not eclipse.  I'd expect 229.99, with Mario and free trial of the download service.

[Bloodworth]

I read that as "No way it's over $300".

[trip1eX]

GAmes aren't harder nowadays, but they are harder to get into.  BAck in the day it was one button and one joystick.  Today it's 2 joysticks, a dpad and 13 buttons.  

Also I don't think it was just kids playing games 25 years ago.  I remember my Dad playing Atari 2600 games like football and combat with us kids.  btw, I can't picture him being able to do the same thing if the football game was today's Madden.  

A game like Super Mario Bros might have been hard for some to complete, but it was easy to get into.  

So that's why NIntendo is releasing the new controller.  They are hoping it's a more intuitive and natural way to operate a today's more complex games.  A more inviting way.  They want to eliminate this learning curve that has crept up in the last 20 years.  And they want to provide a new experience.

[Nephilim]

I wouldnt mind playing a extra 50-100 for better tech, dont know why ppl are so obsessed with 200bucks

[mantidor]

because is affordable? if the Rev launches at $300 theres no way I could get one at launch, I couldnt care less about the "perception" of the console as a toy. Besides, the Rev looks like anything except a toy.

[BigJim]

"Under $300 (USD)" can't be taken literally.  It's just vague talk for "undercut the competition" because they never discuss specific future product pricing before they report relevant company financials. i.e. They won't talk in-depth about next fiscal year before they report this fiscal year's end results.

Nintendo said under $250 USD for the N64, and it came out at $200 USD. For GameCube, Nintendo would only say that it'd be "competitive" until they reported their financials, which took place a few weeks after E3. At which point they announced $200 USD... again undercutting the competition considerably.

We again probably won't hear anything solid until they report their financials, but I'm still betting on $200 USD.  

[Infernal Monkey]

They could release it for $100 US, but bump game prices up to $80 US like what the rest of the world has to pay for games. Would that make America happy?

[Artimus]

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey
They could release it for $100 US, but bump game prices up to $80 US like what the rest of the world has to pay for games. Would that make America happy?

Funny.

[couchmonkey]

Okay, for pricing, $300 is too much, but as others have said, Nintendo is just keeping it's price from the competition - under $300 is pretty much a given since that's what the base 360 costs.  If you want to go crazy conspiracy about it, there are still elements of the system to be revealed, perhaps they add $100 or so to the cost.  I doubt it, though.

On the topic of "niche" markets: people love to point out that adults are now playing games, but how many of those adults were already videogame players as children?  I'm guessing at least 80%.  The market is basically only expanding because new gamers are being born - and it has lost some older gamers (my dad).  I think the Revolution has a good chance of selling to people like my sister, or maybe my dad: former gamers or ultra-casual gamers who would never spend $400 to own a complicated "mainstream" system like Xbox 360 or PS3.

That's also why I think Nintendo will ultimately launch around $200 US: it knows that the system has to be cheap to sell to the non-gamers it wants to capture.

[Pryopizm]

I think the marketing should be like Dove's and have pictures of "real" (i.e. largish) women in lingerie playing the Revolution.  That should spread out the demographic quite a bit.

[Ian Sane]

I'm wondering if when Nintendo says the industry is niche what they subconsciously really mean is that Nintendo is niche.  Nintendo has always greatly overestimated their position in the industry.  With the Cube they seemed completely oblivious to the fact that the N64 was a flop and that "well we're Nintendo" wasn't going to be enough by itself to sell consoles.  Many times they have made decisions where it seems like they thought they were still the market leader and could get away with things that no one in their current position could get away with.

So it's not unbelievable that they would view their own situation as something that applies to the entire industry.  Nintendo is niche.  They've fallen into a rut of making games staring Nintendo franchise characters for Nintendo fans.  There's a core group of people that eat up everything they release and few outside that group care about them at all.  That is the very definition of niche.  Nintendo also talks about how people are bored with today's gaming or aren't buying as many games.  Here in North America at least gaming is still huge.  I think it's more that people are bored with Nintendo's games and aren't buying as many of their games.  After all they don't have nearly as many Cube million sellers as they had N64 ones.  The industry as a whole doesn't really have to expand to new groups as much as Nintendo themselves do, since right now they don't really appeal to anyone but diehard fans.

The industry as a whole has more mass appeal then it ever has while Nintendo has never had less mass appeal as they do right now.  They're the ones who are niche.  It is their arrogant nature that assumes that their situation represents the industry as a whole.

Though it's odd that at the same time both Nintendo and the rest of the industry have become more generic and sequel reliant yet their popularity with the general public have gone in completely opposite directions.

[denjet78]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
I'm wondering if when Nintendo says the industry is niche what they subconsciously really mean is that Nintendo is niche.  Nintendo has always greatly overestimated their position in the industry.  With the Cube they seemed completely oblivious to the fact that the N64 was a flop and that "well we're Nintendo" wasn't going to be enough by itself to sell consoles.  Many times they have made decisions where it seems like they thought they were still the market leader and could get away with things that no one in their current position could get away with.

So it's not unbelievable that they would view their own situation as something that applies to the entire industry.  Nintendo is niche.  They've fallen into a rut of making games staring Nintendo franchise characters for Nintendo fans.  There's a core group of people that eat up everything they release and few outside that group care about them at all.  That is the very definition of niche.  Nintendo also talks about how people are bored with today's gaming or aren't buying as many games.  Here in North America at least gaming is still huge.  I think it's more that people are bored with Nintendo's games and aren't buying as many of their games.  After all they don't have nearly as many Cube million sellers as they had N64 ones.  The industry as a whole doesn't really have to expand to new groups as much as Nintendo themselves do, since right now they don't really appeal to anyone but diehard fans.

The industry as a whole has more mass appeal then it ever has while Nintendo has never had less mass appeal as they do right now.  They're the ones who are niche.  It is their arrogant nature that assumes that their situation represents the industry as a whole.

Though it's odd that at the same time both Nintendo and the rest of the industry have become more generic and sequel reliant yet their popularity with the general public have gone in completely opposite directions.

What is wrong with you? If you don't think the industry is on the wrong track I give you Shadow the Hedgehog. A Sonic spinoff with guns. And you're going to tell me that isn't the bastardization of one of gamings greatest franchises?

The day Mario starts poping hookers is the day I stop playing games forever. But apparently that's what you want. Afterall, that's how Sony and MS got to where they are: By feeding on gamers insecurities that they themselves created in the first place.

Something is SERIOUSELY wrong with gaming. Admit that first and then you can try and come up with a way to fix it. Sony and MS sure aren't.

Unless all you really care about is sales. So it doesn't matter how bad games get just as long as they still sell? Now that is a way messed up perspective. From the way you keep replying to these posts that's exactly what you seem to be saying.

Am I wrong?

Then prove it.

[GoldenPhoenix]

I don't recall N64 being a flop, sure it didn't sell as many as PS1 but it still did quite well when it came to game sales. Not only that but it kicked off digital sticks on controllers, if it wasn't for Nintendo being, what Ian calls "Niche" then we would probaly still be playing games with a digital pad.

[Ian Sane]

"What is wrong with you? If you don't think the industry is on the wrong track I give you Shadow the Hedgehog. A Sonic spinoff with guns. And you're going to tell me that isn't the bastardization of one of gamings greatest franchises?"

I never said the industry isn't on the wrong track, just that it isn't niche.

And I'm pretty f*cking tired of the arguement that for Nintendo to gain market share in any way means they have to bastardize their franchises and add blood and all that other stuff.  That's a weak arguement and no one suggests that Nintendo should do that.  So stop using it.  Nintendo's market share problems are directly the result of them being clueless dolts who screw routine stuff up, their inability to market anything, their generally dickheaded attitude towards pretty much any other company, and their inability (or perhaps refusal) to provide any decent variety in their own games beyond endless franchise spinoffs that only appeal to the core Nintendo group.

[KDR_11k]

Also, I'd like to know whether or not they're actually going to use displacement mapping.

Displacement mapping has no place in games since it requires a VERY highpoly basemesh to be applied to and could just as well be baked into the mesh, giving much better results. Use normalmapping and its various tricks instead.

Game difficulty has dropped like a rock.

Not only that, we've become better. As a kid I never managed to beat Super Mario Land. Now I breeze through it in half an hour without dying more than maybe twice.

[Pryopizm]

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Also, I'd like to know whether or not they're actually going to use displacement mapping.

Displacement mapping has no place in games since it requires a VERY highpoly basemesh to be applied to and could just as well be baked into the mesh, giving much better results. Use normalmapping and its various tricks instead.

Alright, talk down to me here.  Because, from my understanding, displacement mapping only requires a low poly base which is then expanded to about 3 bazillion polys, which are then remodeled, then they're put into the oven and shrinky-dinked into a managebable, but highly detailed low polygon count model.

Sounds like a little bit of RAM would be able to handle that quite well.  But, while I normally don't really care about Nintendo's odd little patents, this one has burrowed into my brain due to the developers' speakings of supposedly low tech specs.

[GoldenPhoenix]

::Is confused by what displacement mapping is::

[GoldenPhoenix]

Regardless of my confusion on displacement mapping, I feel we will all be fairly impressed by the graphical output of the Revolution.  

[Infernal Monkey]

Quote
Nintendo is niche. They've fallen into a rut of making games staring Nintendo franchise characters for Nintendo fans. There's a core group of people that eat up everything they release and few outside that group care about them at all. That is the very definition of niche.

Mario Party 7 and Super Mario Strikers were two of the top selling games across all formats last month. This is certainly all thanks to the small legion of Nintendo fanboys!

[Ian Sane]

"Mario Party 7 and Super Mario Strikers were two of the top selling games across all formats last month. This is certainly all thanks to the small legion of Nintendo fanboys!"

Well I didn't say the legion was small.  The franchise games still sell but how relevant are they to anyone outside Nintendo's fans?  The only people I ever hear talk about Nintendo franchise games these days aside from Zelda are Nintendo fans or hardcore game nuts who try out everything.  Certainly not many people are buying a Nintendo console to play Mario spinoffs.  I justify my reasoning for Nintendo to make new franchises by the simple fact that the Cube sold like crap and its top games were mostly franchise titles.  So thus the old franchises don't sell systems like the killer apps of a console should.  Meanwhile the Xbox rose from nothing based on the success of Halo which was a brand new franchise and the GTA was the hot franchise this gen when before it was mostly just a cult series that no one guessed would become as huge as it did.  If Mario still sells consoles then why did Super Mario Sunshine fail to sell Cubes like Nintendo wanted it to?  How come the franchise dominated Cube lost to the previously unknown Xbox?

Remember that the Playstation has dominated for almost ten years now.  There are people who have played games for years that have never played a Nintendo game.  The familiarity isn't there.  Mario is old and young gamers don't identify with him.  Nintendo's huge portable resurgance was the result of Pokemon which was brand new and a whole new group of gamers identified with it.

[Infernal Monkey]

Well I dunno, more people in America bought a GameCube last month than an Xbox (or Xbox 360), while two Mario whore-out games topped the sales charts. Obviously people are buying the system for these games!

(While good stuff like F-Zero GX continues to fail)

[Ian Sane]

"Well I dunno, more people in America bought a GameCube last month than an Xbox (or Xbox 360), while two Mario whore-out games topped the sales charts. Obviously people are buying the system for these games!"

Wow.  The Cube beat a console that is more or less discontinued and a console that is suffering severe shortages.

Obviously the franchises still sell systems to a degree but not at the level Nintendo expects out of them.  Nintendo needs something with the selling power of GTA3 or Halo or if you go last gen Super Mario 64 or Goldeneye.  Nothing on the Cube was a huge runaway success.  So logically something beyond the familiar franchises has to emerge because those alone aren't cutting it.  Nintendo wants the Rev to sell better than the Cube.  If the existing franchises were only able to sell the Cube as much as it did, where a brand new entry to the console market outsold it, how can they sell more Revs?  Who that didn't buy a Cube for Mario is going to suddenly buy a Rev for Mario?

Nintendo's plan for the Cube didn't work.  They got creamed and performed lower than their own expectations.  Thus they should rethink the plan.  A major part of the Cube plan was emphasis on the franchises.  The whole "Who are you?" campaign was built around the familiar franchises.  That marketing campaign didn't work.  The emphasis on franchises didn't work.  Thus it makes no sense to continue to rely so much on franchises the next time around.  The franchises should still be there but they shouldn't rely so much on them like they did before.  The only way Mario will sell Revs is if the new controller allows for a Super Mario 64 calibur reinventing of the franchise.

[Infernal Monkey]

Quote
Obviously the franchises still sell systems to a degree but not at the level Nintendo expects out of them.

Quote
while two Mario whore-out games topped the sales charts.

[Mario]

Quote
Well I didn't say the legion was small.  The franchise games still sell but how relevant are they to anyone outside Nintendo's fans?

Considering Mario sports games sell more than 3/4ths of thier sales a year after release / Players Choice, i'd say they are more relevant to other people than Nintendo fans.

Let's have a look at the top selling GC games last month...

1. Mario Party 7 342,206
2. Super Mario Strikers 310,427
3. Super Mario Sunshine 140,716
4. Mario Superstar Baseball 125,198
5. Pokemon XD: Gale of Darkness 109,258
6. Super Smash Bros. Melee 107,552
7. Mario Kart: Double Dash!! 97,006
8. Animal Crossing 96,304
9. Luigi's Mansion 67,635
10. Mario Golf: Toadstool Tour 62,998

Whoops, those games must have accidently been bought by parents when their son clearly asked for a car radio, right?

Mario games are what kept the GameCube alive, if Mario didn't sell 20 million GameCubes, what did?