Topic: Virtual Console Mondays: January 1

[Mario]

Yes it is

[Kairon]

lol

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Yes but they realize they couldn't increase the Wii sales numbers by increasing its appeal right now as it's still supply limited.

So when the Wii sales numbers increase, the appeal of having 1,000+ games for download will stop existing all of a sudden?

Depriving your existing userbase of the chance to give you money because you're holding out for a bigger userbase is the most asinine business practice I've ever heard of.

I did the math: if we continue to get 4 games per week, after four years there will only be 830-850 games on the VC. That's not even scratching the SURFACE of what the combined libraries of the NES, SNES, SGen, N64 and TGFX16 have to offer.

The VC should have so many games that, ideally, just randomly surfing through the list of games will yield even the most shrewd buyer 3-4 games which they MUST buy because they remember them so fondly.

Plus, having a thousand games for download takes the sting off of software droughts far better than waiting to see what comes out each week and being expected to buy garbage like Urban Champion.

[KDR_11k]

So when the Wii sales numbers increase, the appeal of having 1,000+ games for download will stop existing all of a sudden?

No but your ability to make 1000+ games available doesn't disappear, either. By limiting their selection they have successfully made many people buy "B-list" games. If all the A-list titles were available the B-list titles wouldn't be bought but if people already bought the B-list titles that won't stop them from buying A-list titles.

Additionally, most of the games on these platforms were made by companies who aren't on board witht he VC yet and probably wouldn't enjoy jumping into a pool full of A-list titles that will overshadow anything they can provide.

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k No but your ability to make 1000+ games available doesn't disappear, either. By limiting their selection they have successfully made many people buy "B-list" games. If all the A-list titles were available the B-list titles wouldn't be bought but if people already bought the B-list titles that won't stop them from buying A-list titles.

Yes, and that's exactly why many resent the VC right now.

Competition is competition. If a game sucked 20 years ago and no one bought it, it's going to suck now and no one will buy it. To hell with this "island of misfit games" nonsense where every PoS game needs its day in the sun.

Intentionally making the VC suck is a terrible idea, especially right now when the drought is at its worst.

Quote
Additionally, most of the games on these platforms were made by companies who aren't on board witht he VC yet and probably wouldn't enjoy jumping into a pool full of A-list titles that will overshadow anything they can provide.

I think poor reception of the virtual console is more of a factor when it comes to deciding whether or not to release games on it, and right now, the VC is a laughing joke.

What's a more convincing argument? "Don't worry little 3rd parties. We won't release our games to compete with yours...yet." or "The VC sold 500,000 retro games this past month. Where the f*ck were YOU, Capcom?"

In the case of these old games, quantity >>> quality. People will be more inclined to bother with the VC after it has more than just scraps of games lying about.

Besides, by your logic, how long will Nintendo hold out before releasing their heavy-hitting games in the hopes that curmudgeon companies decide to offer something to the VC? A year? Two years?

Like I said, we don't need to offer every last sh*ttacular game its 15 minutes when it comes at the expense of establishing the VC as a decent and worthwhile service for the still many unconvinced Wii owners AND 3rd parties out there.

You have to look at this from a casual/non-gamer perspective: these are the people who might have played these games 10-15 years ago. They'll remember what was good and what sucked from back then too, and if all they see is suckware available for the VC, they're probably going to dismiss it and cease bothering to check the channel (it takes long enough to load the channel as it is...).

These are the people who don't have a "VC Mondays" thread to check each week. When they see so few games available and even fewer worth buying, they're going to stop bothering with the channel and I can hardly blame them. Seriously, who's going to bother going to a video store that carries a few good films but mostly Paulie Shore movies?

So yes, the current state and handling of the VC is god-awful. They need to stop screwing around and BRING THE GAMES before the channel's current worthlessness tarnishes its reputation in the casual/non-gamer circles.

The VC was supposed to be a means of supplying the many retro games of our gaming childhoods which we loved to us in an easily accessible format, not giving sh*tty games a second chance in the hopes of cashing in on our boredom.

If Nintendo wants the VC to have many offerings by 3rd parties, they need to prove to them that it can sell games and they can do that by putting enough games up for it that people will turn to the VC during between Wii game downtimes instead of turning to other consoles and their offerings. If the VC can replace a movie rental and be a way to kill an evening, it will flourish, but that won't happen without a healthy supply of games.

More games can only help the virtual console. Yes, it's more competition, but it's also vastly more reason for users to turn their dollars into Wii points and getting them to take that first step is the hard part. Once those points are sitting there, they'll be more likely to be spent on other 3rd party games.

A more rich and fleshed out VC will bring in more revenue for everyone, I guarantee it.

EDIT: Pap just pointed out to me that Nintendo has already released many A+ titles in Japan. By your logic, they've already killed the chances of 3rd parties in Japan. Why are Europe and the US being inundated with crap?

[KDR_11k]

Competition is competition. If a game sucked 20 years ago and no one bought it, it's going to suck now and no one will buy it.

Not every game that will drown in the flood is necessarily bad. Imagine Square put Dragon Quest 1 and Final Fantasy 1 on the VC while Sega added the entire Phantasy Star series. Which one would sell? Sega and Hudson are throwing their heavy hitters out there because most people who'd open the VC would look for Nintendo games first and then start reading the descriptions of the games they haven't heard of. How many would have bought Bonk in the presence of Super Mario Bros? How many people even know what a Turbografx is?

I think poor reception of the virtual console is more of a factor when it comes to deciding whether or not to release games on it, and right now, the VC is a laughing joke.

I think it offers plenty of titles although it will disappoint if you expect to find a complete list of games for any platform represented. It's not like the sytem is completely devoid of any great games.

The VC was supposed to be a means of supplying the many retro games of our gaming childhoods which we loved to us in an easily accessible format, not giving sh*tty games a second chance in the hopes of cashing in on our boredom.

No, the VC was designed around one purpose: Allowing Nintendo to make money with minimal effort. I'm not saying I like the current situation but I think there are reasons for it.

[Ian Sane]

"Not every game that will drown in the flood is necessarily bad. Imagine Square put Dragon Quest 1 and Final Fantasy 1 on the VC while Sega added the entire Phantasy Star series. Which one would sell? Sega and Hudson are throwing their heavy hitters out there because most people who'd open the VC would look for Nintendo games first and then start reading the descriptions of the games they haven't heard of. How many would have bought Bonk in the presence of Super Mario Bros? How many people even know what a Turbografx is?"

I think the VC is going to attract two types of customers.  Most people are probably only going to download what they're familiar with.  They're going to buy games they played when they were kids or games they've heard good things about.  The other group is the more hardware gamer that is going to do more research and use the VC to try out games they missed.  They'll look up info on the VC games they've never heard of.

Neither group requires Nintendo to be doing things as they are.  For group A it doesn't matter when Phantasy Star or Bonk get released.  If they've never heard of those games they won't try them anyway.  Group B is hardcore enough to do their research and even if Final Fantasy gets released the same week they'll buy Phantasy Star IV because they know it kicks ass, or they'll do research and discover it does.

One thing that is also different is that these games have unlimited shelf life.  In real life if a game comes out at the wrong time and gets overshadowed by a bigger title it can be totally screwed because after a few months or sooner the stores replace it on the shelves with a newer title, unless it's a big hit.  In real stores games have a short period of time to be a hit.  Often an overlooked game remains overlooked because it doesn't return to stores in any meaningful way so even after people have heard it was a great title they missed they can't buy it.  But on the VC there is no problem.  A game is available for purchase indefinitely, thus allowing any title to be a word-of-mouth hit.  So the good games will sell better.

And like smash mentioned it makes no sense for this "plan" to be required in North America but not in Japan.  If you're going to defend NOA for what they're doing then sh!t on NCL because SOMEONE is doing something wrong.  They can't both be right.  We should be b!tching about NCL being such FOOLS for having a good selection of VC titles and thus screwing over third parties.

[capamerica]

I have a good feeling the reason we have a lack of VC games is partly due to the ESRB. Every game has to be rated by them and they don't seem to be rushing games out very fast.

I think they also want to give some games some time in the spot light to get people to try them out. If Super Mario Bros 3 was relesed the same day as Dungeon Explorer no one would touch Dungeon Explorer. I've heard that Dungeon Explorer is actually a pretty good 5 player dungenon craw / RPG style game.

I have a feeling right now Nintendo is just trying to get some games out there so we at least get something every Monday, but I bet come spring we'll be seeing like 10 or so games every Monday. From what I've heard it does take a little time to get the emulators working with some of the games, Dungeon Explorer was delayed for that reason. It was supost to be a christmas title.

I see things getting better by this Spring, but it will take a bit of time, I much rather we start off with a trickle of games then get a huge batch of buggy games that crash mid game or have graphic errors or bad sound. We don't need a batch of Sonic 15th Birthday GBA sytle ROMs on the VC, bad games would only do damage to the VC cause people wouldn't want to risk buying a bad game. They do need to get more of their Big name games out there, but at the same time I don't want to see them launch all their popular games all at once. let them come in one a month or so.


what does JP have that we don't, A Link to the Past, Super Mario World, Donkey Kong Country, Adventure Island and a few JP Only games. We can't do anything about the JP Only games and So what they got ALttP and SMW before us big deal we got the Wii a Month before them. they had to give them somthing. As for why Adventure Island and Donkey Kong Country aren't in the US. I have No idea why but I think DKC might have been pushed back cause we still have the GBA version on the market.

And if you look at what we have coming to us so far for Q1 it looks like alot of good titles are on their way. Thou it looks a bit dry for Japan.

NES:
Dr. Mario
Duck Hunt
Excitebike
Galaga
Hogan's Alley
Ice Climber
Kid Icarus
Kirby's Adventure
Punch-Out!!
Pro Wrestling
Super Mario Bros.: The Lost Levels
Super Mario Bros. 3
Wild Gunman

SNES:
Contra III: The Alien Wars
Donkey Kong Country
Hagane: The Final Conflict
Kirby Super Star
Kirby's Dream Land 3
Pilotwings
Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars
Super Mario World
Super Metroid   
Tin Star
Uniracers

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k Not every game that will drown in the flood is necessarily bad.

But that's no excuse to allow the VC to endure garbage and a miniscule selection of games.

Like I said earlier, if Nintendo is going to hold off on releasing good games in the hopes that not-so-good games will be released first, then we'll be waiting forever for the good games to release.

Quote
I think it offers plenty of titles although it will disappoint if you expect to find a complete list of games for any platform represented. It's not like the sytem is completely devoid of any great games.

The problem is that Nintendo is treating these games like releasing them is akin to releasing new gaming experiences, otherwise why time their releases like this at all?

The VC should be a supplement to Wii game releases, not a crutch, and in the interest of that, they need as many games as possible up on the VC.

Quote
No, the VC was designed around one purpose: Allowing Nintendo to make money with minimal effort. I'm not saying I like the current situation but I think there are reasons for it.

They'd make more money with more games out, though.

More games = more interest = more Wii points being purchased = more Wii points being spent on games which wouldn't have otherwise gotten a chance.

Just like any console, the virtual console needs to garner the interest of potential buyers to convince them to convert money to points in the first place. Typically, this is done in the form of those $20/2000 point cards. The more games out there to potentially entice people, the more games will be bought by people with those leftover points, and that includes games which wouldn't usually be considered otherwise.

In this way the AAA games help the B-list games by inviting people into the door to start with, just like Zelda sold an assload of Wiis so people will then buy other games or the Wii after already having bought it.

Putting money on the VC is the same deal: you need that gateway drug to get people in the door and every additional game added is one more potential gateway which will bring them in.

Quote
One thing that is also different is that these games have unlimited shelf life. In real life if a game comes out at the wrong time and gets overshadowed by a bigger title it can be totally screwed because after a few months or sooner the stores replace it on the shelves with a newer title, unless it's a big hit. In real stores games have a short period of time to be a hit. Often an overlooked game remains overlooked because it doesn't return to stores in any meaningful way so even after people have heard it was a great title they missed they can't buy it. But on the VC there is no problem. A game is available for purchase indefinitely, thus allowing any title to be a word-of-mouth hit. So the good games will sell better.

That's another good point: these games can only sell MORE over time. They never have a reason to be removed from the VC, only that the selection will keep growing and enticing more players to try the VC to start with which in turn increases the chances of other games being downloaded.

After you've beaten all the FF games, Phantasy Star will still be there in three months for you to buy those, too.

[Pale]

I can't believe how many people are bitching about the virtual console.  It's unbelievable.  It has been argued to death why they are timing the releases and there are plenty of good reasons for it.  If you don't understand their angle enough to drop it, I'm not sure what to tell you.

I understand everyone wants to buy their favorite games at launch.  The only way to support that is to make every single one available at launch, and they decided that the benefits of spacing them out were far better than pleasing the hardcore fans.

Here's a summary:

-The marketing benefits of releasing new games every week is huge.  It keeps the service "alive" so to speak.
-Everyone who got a Wii and wanted to try out the VC downloaded some games that they wouldn't have if every game was available at launch.
-Spacing games out makes the store less overwhelming to the purchaser, so they are more apt to throw some dollars at it.

I don't understand how you all can disagree with these points.  If Nintendo did put every game on there up front, maybe they would have sold more now, but the sales wouldn't be as consistent in the long run and the service could "die".

I'm sorry you are all so bummed about this, but give it a rest.

[Ian Sane]

"I have a good feeling the reason we have a lack of VC games is partly due to the ESRB. Every game has to be rated by them and they don't seem to be rushing games out very fast."

That's pretty damn likely actually.  Still Nintendo is submitting Urban Champion to the ESRB prior to Super Mario World.

Pale makes some decent points about spacing releases.  But why do games already re-released on the GBA or as e-Reader titles or in Animal Crossing get released first?  Why is Nintendo giving the SNES and N64 so few releases compared to the NES?  And even if it makes sense to space out the titles why should it be at such a slow rate?  If like ten games came out a week then we're getting somewhere.

Spacing things out seems necessary anyway because of the ESRB, like cap mentioned, and the fact that every game has custom controls and thus it just takes time to release everything.  They can't just do a massive ROM dump.  But the execution of a spaced release isn't any good.  There shouldn't be only one N64 game.  There shouldn't be an overemphasis on lousy NES titles.  The releases could still be staggered but the results could be better.  There shouldn't be any weeks where there are only two titles released and both of them are crap.

I think something on par with the Japanese VC would be good enough.  That's still a staggered release but they're not intentionally holding back major titles.  The difference is only a few titles but LttP, Super Mario World, and DKC are huge titles and that makes a big difference.

[Arbok]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Why is Nintendo giving the SNES and N64 so few releases compared to the NES?

Probably due to the fact NES games are easier to emulate, and much easier to then test for any bugs that might have been introduced on account of it. Something that we know they are doing due to Dungeon Explorer being delayed.

[KDR_11k]

Donkey Kong Country is available in Europe. Has been since the VC launch I think.

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale I understand everyone wants to buy their favorite games at launch.  The only way to support that is to make every single one available at launch, and they decided that the benefits of spacing them out were far better than pleasing the hardcore fans.

Hardcore fans are going to be the ONLY ones pleased by the current method of release schedules. Casual gaming types will log into the VC and browse through what it has to offer, not check each week to see the new and typically awful VC offerings.

Quote
-The marketing benefits of releasing new games every week is huge.  It keeps the service "alive" so to speak.

The service doesn't need to be "alive". Do you know what would happen if every possible game from all of the supported consoles was on the VC right now?

People would be buying a new game every other day because there would be a nigh-endless selection for them to choose from.

Quote
-Everyone who got a Wii and wanted to try out the VC downloaded some games that they wouldn't have if every game was available at launch.

Why is this a good thing? One of the biggest downfalls to the VC is that, without prior advice, you can easily wind up downloading a lemon and regretting it every day after as it sits in your channel menu.

Yeah, you can TRY to find old reviews for these games, but to put it bluntly, they don't all age well. In fact, most DON'T.

Quote
-Spacing games out makes the store less overwhelming to the purchaser, so they are more apt to throw some dollars at it.

A good search engine would make the store far, FAR less overwhelming.

Like one which allows you to find results based on your taste in games by presenting you with a checklist for genres, with the ability to specify by console, date and maybe even a review score. Then, for kicks, offer a "random game" button which brings up a random VC game, like Wikipedia's random entry button. Maybe even a "consideration" button to mark games you're thinking about buying but aren't sure, or just any game which looks interesting.

The VC will eventually have enough games on it to be "overwhelming" at some point so they'd best find a better solution than spacing the games out.

All of the reasons you listed are reasons that will benefit Nintendo, not the potential buyer. It reeks not of wanting to offer people the games they want but whatever games Nintendo feels like selling them.

Quote
I don't understand how you all can disagree with these points.  If Nintendo did put every game on there up front, maybe they would have sold more now, but the sales wouldn't be as consistent in the long run and the service could "die".

Do libraries "die"? Of course not, so why would the VC suffer such a fate?

The current VC isn't a service which is expected to see new content, it's a method of rehashing OLD content, content some of us have already seen. This is an online "library" of games, and as I mentioned earlier, the purpose of a library isn't to receive new content but to retain as much old content as possible so that someone can show up and access that content whenever they need/want to do so.

Not that I'm expecting this, but what would the harm have been if there were 500 VC games at launch instead of the 10 or so we got?

Slap in a decent search engine and the VC becomes an entertainment powerhouse. New Wii owners could go in and start browsing around to find games which look interesting that they might buy later during gaming downtimes. Long time Wii owners, during downtime, could jump into the VC and search the archives of games for something they might find interesting because they never know what they might find.

Why is it even POSSIBLE to know that there's nothing I want to play on the VC right now? The whole point of having access to the game libraries of the past is that no one should ever be able to know there's nothing they want to play because there should be a vast ocean of games to choose from, a virtual library filled with shelves brimming with potential entertainment, and it's all yours for a few bucks and a point and click...or at least it could be.

I understand the ESRB and technical limitations, but that's still no excuse for the pathetic trickle of 4 or fewer games per week, and they're not even very GOOD games most of the time.

At some point, Nintendo plans to start releasing NEW games tailor made for the Wii onto the VC. New, ORIGINAL content, and if that's the case, getting the old games up there in a hurry should take top priority because I can guarantee these old games aren't going to get any love once new, original games which use the Wiimote start showing up.

[IceCold]

Quote
The service doesn't need to be "alive". Do you know what would happen if every possible game from all of the supported consoles was on the VC right now?

People would be buying a new game every other day because there would be a nigh-endless selection for them to choose from.

Exactly. In all your points you somehow overlook the most important negative of having all these VC games available. With so many good, cheap games available, people would spend all their money and time on these games rather than the new Wii games. Above all, Nintendo needs to protect the tie-in ratio of the Wii right now..

Quote
Not that I'm expecting this, but what would the harm have been if there were 500 VC games at launch instead of the 10 or so we got?

That would be the harm..

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold Exactly. In all your points you somehow overlook the most important negative of having all these VC games available. With so many good, cheap games available, people would spend all their money and time on these games rather than the new Wii games. Above all, Nintendo needs to protect the tie-in ratio of the Wii right now.

If the original Wii games can't outperform 20 year old games in terms of sales, then the problem isn't the VC, it's because the new Wii games suck.

Like I said, the VC should be the perfect answer to downtime between Wii games because, guess what? If they have no Wii games to play and there's nothing worthwhile on the VC, they're probably contemplating buying a 360 and that's going to hurt the Wii tie-in ratio far more than buying too many VC games.

Honestly, is anyone here going to blow $50 on NES games instead of spending it on Zelda?

[Pale]

Mental note to not hire SB to make any business decisions for me.  Some people just can't see the other side.

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale Mental note to not hire SB to make any business decisions for me.  Some people just can't see the other side.

The "other side" doesn't see the light of day unless someone can make a solid argument for it.

I'm not trying to be a colossal assh*le (though I realize I'm coming across that way), but I've yet to see anything convincing me that a rich and full VC library wouldn't be vastly superior to the sickly, malnourished library we have now.

1. The Gateway Game
What game will finally convince people to pick up a Wii points card? It could be ANY game, and as such, the more torpedoes in the water, the greater the chances of getting a "hit". The right game WILL lure me into spending $20 to get one of those cards, which in turn will increase my chances of spending those other 1000 points on a game I wouldn't have otherwise bought.

Priority one is to get people to sign up with a CC or buy a points card and the chances of that happening increase with each additional game available for sale.

2. Wii Game Downtime
If you're like me and you just finished Zelda, Red Steel, Rayman, FarCry, CoD3, etc. etc., then you're probably twiddling your thumbs and checking your watch for Wario Ware. In the meantime, I have to admit that the 360 is showing some pretty decent games as of late, and it's tempting. I'd be willing to entertain some VC games to get me through the downtimes, but with a lacking selection, I'm glad my roommate has a 360 with Gears of War so I don't have to buy one instead.

3. Activity Equates Popularity
It would be reassuring to know that I have 1,000+ games available at the push of a button on my Wii menu. If my friends and I have nothing to do that evening, it'll probably be suggested that we log in and find a 4-5 player game to give a try. For $6-10 for entertainment for 5 people, you can't go wrong.

The more games we as consumers buy, the more 3rd parties will be tempted to get their wares on the VC which means in turn that the more games we'll buy, except that there's no danger of these games going off the shelf and into the bargain bin because they're ALWAYS there for us to download and for future Wii owners to download.

I just can't see an advantage for the CONSUMER, nor a longtime advantage for Nintendo, for VC games to be released in a trickle like they are now.

More games = more appeal = more points subscribers = more secondary game sales = more incentive for 3rd parties to add their games = more games...repeat.

If you think I'm wrong, defy my points and pose an alternative economic theory.

However, I'm using the same model which applies to consoles for the virtual console, except instead of the purchase of the console being the barrier to entry, it's the purchase of Wii points, be it by card or online.

If you can give me a solid reason as to why this model doesn't apply to the VC, I'm more than willing to listen.  

[Ian Sane]

"Exactly. In all your points you somehow overlook the most important negative of having all these VC games available. With so many good, cheap games available, people would spend all their money and time on these games rather than the new Wii games. Above all, Nintendo needs to protect the tie-in ratio of the Wii right now.."

What new Wii games?  If anything right now is the time to have more VC games to distract people from the drought of decent titles that will be plagueing the Wii for the next several months.  Nintendo consoles have a poor reputation these days for having weak release schedules.  A Nintendo console means a console with a handful of great games a year and nothing else worth a damn.  Nintendo can't avoid that for now because as a new console the Wii is going to have that kind of release schedule.  But with the VC it can be made better.  If the userbase is playing something else they're not going to be as affected by the drought and thus the Wii can avoid getting the same negative reputation the N64 and Cube had.  And once that reputation is there third parties will avoid the Wii and nothing can "fix" it.

Right now if you've beaten Zelda and no one is over to play WiiSports you're going to be kind of bored with your Wii.  The VC should help make it so that doesn't happen but if the selection is poor then it doesn't do it.  I don't think we should have the entire library available right now (I don't think it's even feasible) but the selection should be such that one should not be bored with their Wii.  A good console always has something else for you to do.  Otherwise it's the standard Nintendo console where you spend months with nothing to play.  There's no excuse for there to be nothing to play when hundreds of games COULD be released for the Wii but aren't.

I've never liked the idea of using the VC to fill up gaps because I figured Nintendo would abuse it.  But here it is clearly needed and they're not doing anything.  A year from now the release schedule should be such that the VC won't need to be used to fill gaps.  If it still is needed then the Wii is just the Gamecube 2 and Nintendo is f*cked anyway.  But for now in the post-launch period gaps in the release schedule are normal and Nintendo might as well use the VC to fill gaps now when it's needed.  Why save Super Metroid for later?  There shouldn't BE A LATER.  If Super Metroid has to be saved for a future date then the Wii is a damn failure.  By the end of the year Wii releases should just be rolling out on a regular basis.

Hell once the Wii release schedule is regular the VC probably won't be as popular because there will be new titles to play.

[Arbok]

Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
1. The Gateway Game
What game will finally convince people to pick up a Wii points card? It could be ANY game, and as such, the more torpedoes in the water, the greater the chances of getting a "hit". The right game WILL lure me into spending $20 to get one of those cards, which in turn will increase my chances of spending those other 1000 points on a game I wouldn't have otherwise bought.

You seem to be tossing together concepts here. What you are talking about is more in favor of the slow roll out then the "toss as much as we can on there" from a business perspective. For example, if I really wanted Super Castlevania, and got a $20 card... then chances are good I would spend the rest on something I wouldn't have gotten had they all been there.

However, if the service was filled with everything, it wouldn't be an issue at all as I could pick up Castlevania, Super Mario RPG, and others. I'd have no reason to bother with the other titles, not more reason, so I don't understand how you can pitch it like this.

Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
2. Wii Game Downtime
If you're like me and you just finished Zelda, Red Steel, Rayman, FarCry, CoD3, etc. etc., then you're probably twiddling your thumbs and checking your watch for Wario Ware. In the meantime, I have to admit that the 360 is showing some pretty decent games as of late, and it's tempting. I'd be willing to entertain some VC games to get me through the downtimes, but with a lacking selection, I'm glad my roommate has a 360 with Gears of War so I don't have to buy one instead.

In the grand scheme of things, not many people have a Wii yet. If come Fall of 2007, when one could hopefully walk into a store and pick one up no problem, and lack of content is still an issue, then it will be a problem.

Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
I just can't see an advantage for the CONSUMER, nor a longtime advantage for Nintendo, for VC games to be released in a trickle like they are now.

More games = more appeal = more points subscribers = more secondary game sales = more incentive for 3rd parties to add their games = more games...repeat.

Counter examples: Gamecube, "No party, except for first party". Due to my site, I had a good relationship with Kirby Fong, a producer for Atari before he moved on to Konami, and he literally said that to me about the Gamecube, and Atari's decision to move the Godzilla franchise from the Gamecube to the Xbox and then finally the PS2. It's foolish to think that third parties aren't cautious of Nintendo's selling power, and to have their titles dumped onto the service is very likely to make them more hesitant to support it. I seem to forget, who was happy that a less than "AAA" title like Red Steel was selling well on the Wii and the message that was sending?

Counter example 2: The sales for the Japanese VC. Just take a look and see how neglected the third party games are. Does that make someone eager to go through the paper work to make this possible, and then hire people to both emulate your titles and test them... or less?

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok
You seem to be tossing together concepts here. What you are talking about is more in favor of the slow roll out then the "toss as much as we can on there" from a business perspective. For example, if I really wanted Super Castlevania, and got a $20 card... then chances are good I would spend the rest on something I wouldn't have gotten had they all been there.

However, if the service was filled with everything, it wouldn't be an issue at all as I could pick up Castlevania, Super Mario RPG, and others. I'd have no reason to bother with the other titles, not more reason, so I don't understand how you can pitch it like this.

What happens when you finish Castlevania, SMRPG, etc. etc. and still have 500 points left over?

All of those B-list games will still be waiting there for you to buy them.

Quote
In the grand scheme of things, not many people have a Wii yet. If come Fall of 2007, when one could hopefully walk into a store and pick one up no problem, and lack of content is still an issue, then it will be a problem.

True, but you have to consider that there will likely still be genre droughts where people don't get the releases of the games they like. The DS has had a plethora of virtual pet sims but since I'm not fond of the genre, it's a drought in my eyes.

The VC isn't the end all answer, but you might be able to track down games of your favorite genre on the VC between their releases on the Wii.

Quote
Counter examples: Gamecube, "No party, except for first party". Due to my site, I had a good relationship with Kirby Fong, a producer for Atari before he moved on to Konami, and he literally said that to me about the Gamecube, and Atari's decision to move the Godzilla franchise from the Gamecube to the Xbox and then finally the PS2. It's foolish to think that third parties aren't cautious of Nintendo's selling power, and to have their titles dumped onto the service is very likely to make them more hesitant to support it. I seem to forget, who was happy that a less than "AAA" title like Red Steel was selling well on the Wii and the message that was sending?

Counter example 2: The sales for the Japanese VC. Just take a look and see how neglected the third party games are. Does that make someone eager to go through the paper work to make this possible, and then hire people to both emulate your titles and test them... or less?

These are valid points, but at this point, the VC needs to be treated like a platform all its own. Just because it's sitting on my Wii doesn't mean I'm inclined to care about it.

The VC is going to be better off showing sales numbers, PERIOD, be they Nintendo or otherwise. Zelda was definitely the flagship Wii title, but that doesn't mean that 3rd parties didn't profit in its wake with excellent tie-in ratios.

Games like Castlevania and SF are just the beginning, but in the VC's case, either Nintendo proves that the concept makes money (with their games if nothing else), or the 3rd parties won't bother to support it anyway.

It's the catch-22 that all consoles/platforms suffer from: you need to create a system seller to bring people to your console, but to continue support, you need 3rd parties, except that 3rd parties are leery of having their sales stolen by the system seller.

Also, I should be clear on one thing: I don't think that Nintendo should necessarily bring all of their AAA titles to the VC, just push assloads of games up there, even going to far as to offer to bring 3rd party games to the console so long as they get a cut in the sales (and they will).

Remember this little gem? THAT should be the VC: games and fun exploding out of it in all directions.

When there's nothing out that I want for the Wii, I should be able to turn to the VC and be looking at an application which offers you the chance to surf through piles of retro games and relive the classics as well as try some of the ones you missed.

But like I said, if this is the rate they keep releasing games, we won't even see a reasonable library in years. 4 games per week X 52 weeks is 208 games a year. That may seem like a lot, but considering how many titles there are when you combine all libraries of the NES, SNES, N64, Genesis and TGFX, it's miniscule.

Not like Nintendo will suddenly change the way they do things, though: they'll likely keep trickling the games out until the end of the Wii's lifespan in the hopes of milking every last crappy game for all it's worth...

[Kairon]

Pipe dreams are nice, but in the end that's all they are.

While everyone's complaining, I'm gonna be playing 5 minutes of Donkey Kong Jr. every night before I go to sleep and cycling in and out my growing library of shiny new TurboGraphX games... I actually beat the first level of Star Soldier! W00T!

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon Pipe dreams are nice, but in the end that's all they are.

Personally, I ain't gonna stay awake at night plotting to kill Nintendo executives if the VC doesn't turn out how I think it should (if they f*ck up SSBB, on the other hand...).

Frankly, it's just about the last of my concerns, despite my vehemence on the subject, as I don't plan to buy many games on it, if any.

[IceCold]

I pretty much agree with everything Arbok said. Great post.

Quote
What happens when you finish Castlevania, SMRPG, etc. etc. and still have 500 points left over?

All of those B-list games will still be waiting there for you to buy them.

That... isn't the point. Arbok just listed two good games, but with everything available, a $20 WiiPoints card would be easily taken up by the good games.

Also, you haven't acknowledged the Japanese VC sales. Third parties got raped there; I think there was only one VC game from a 3rd party in the top 10. It's likely that the games overlooked won't get a second chance, and the lifetime sales will still be horrible. As we all know, the VC is supposed to appeal to the casual and lapsed gamers, those who remember the old 2D days. The "gateway drug" for these people is Super Mario Bros. Sure, you may say that it's been re-released countless times, but they don't care. That is the ultimate hook.

Ian, any drought that is "plagueing" the Wii is automatically negated by the fact that it's still sold out everywhere! SB, realise that you are in the minority in that you've had the time to play all those games, and are now looking for more.

[KDR_11k]

I'm not trying to be a colossal assh*le (though I realize I'm coming across that way), but I've yet to see anything convincing me that a rich and full VC library wouldn't be vastly superior to the sickly, malnourished library we have now.

That's why Nintendo does market research so they have more than speculation to work with. It convinced them but they aren't sharing.