Author Topic: why dosnt nintendo... (Read 10632 times)

Flames_of_chaos · « **Reply #25 on:** April 24, 2003, 07:36:46 PM »

Yea thts true, and gray ninja how would of the gamers polled online if they didnt have online, its just a non purpose poll. Statistics prove way more than polls.

joeamis · « **Reply #26 on:** April 24, 2003, 07:39:58 PM »

quote:
I definitely don't think any more than 10% would go online. Sadly the audience that supports the Gamecube does not have the budget for an online monthly fee, even if those games were online. Even if more than 10% went online with their Gamecube, it still wouldn't be profitable for Nintendo.

who said anything about a monthly fee???!!!
nintendo runs their online access just like sony, not the Msoft (pun intended...the M being soft and all)
-that means no monthly fees...

HAIL THE CUBE!

WesDawg · « **Reply #27 on:** April 24, 2003, 08:01:47 PM »

I read this interview today that I hadn't read before:

GameDaily

Nothing new really, but interesting. I hadn't heard them mention their push for new unique titles and online games in the same breath before. It's also kinda nice to know, they're all for people developing things like Gamespy, they're just not gonna do it yet. Hopefully other developers will decide to try some new innovative stuff with online and the Cube. Stuff that even Shiggy don't think of.

Grey Ninja · « **Reply #28 on:** April 24, 2003, 08:12:07 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Lord_die_seis
Yea thts true, and gray ninja how would of the gamers polled online if they didnt have online, its just a non purpose poll. Statistics prove way more than polls.

Yes, I realize that it's just a small sample of what gamers would like you to think, but show me something better and I'll take it. But my gut feelings tell me that it would yield a similar result. But unless you make a gaming census, nobody is ever really going to know the truth. Small samples such as this are the best that we have.

egman · « **Reply #29 on:** April 25, 2003, 05:30:17 AM »

I have not figured out what the big fuss over online is. Frankly, MS really took a big risk with it. If they really wanted to take on Sony with this online thing, then the internet growth needs to be there. Unfortunately, growth in this sector has been laging. They need casual consumers jumping on the band wagon--hardcore gamers and technophiles will not surfice for the numbers they need.

Online would be nice from Nintendo, but I think they are doing the right thing. Many posters have already stated that Nintendo can't blow their resources like that because they do not have other sectors to cover that cost. I think they are also being very perceptive about the money issue. How many people are going to pay for the service? There's no way to predict that with what we know about online gaming because the PC online market is made up of hardcore gamers who would be more willing to pay by default, and X-box live has not gone into subscription mode yet. How many people will stay on Live when they have to pay a monthly fee for live and possibly an extra monthly fee for the games?

Grey Ninja is right that we should keep in mind that with LAN play you can play online with Gamespy tunnel. It may not be as graceful and convient as X-box live, but it's still there for small amount of gamers who want to go online. Most people buying Mario Kart or F-Zero will be content with the traditional multiplayer. That's really been the appeal of these games. Personally, I think Mario Kart would feel strange with online multiplay rather than having a real person next to me to talk smack to or to sabotage their their first place by playing a trick on them.

Mario Menace · « **Reply #30 on:** April 25, 2003, 05:42:49 AM »

Well about the only thing negative I can say about Nintendo is that they are NOT risk takers. Nintendo are unabashed capitalists and are not going to do anything that dosen't make money. Why do you think they didn't release the GBA with a light in the first place? Because at the time they thought it added too much cost and the system wouldn't be as profitable. Plus it ate the battery life. Why do you think Nintendo went with cartridge instead of cd rom on the 64 (a huge mistake in my opinion)? Because they were uncertain how the medium would be embraced and they were fearful of piracy issues.

Get this in your heads folks....Nintendo will never ever sacrifice profit for innovation. That's not to say Nintendo hasn't been innovative over the years because they have. I'm just saying that more so than any other company, when a new idea comes to the table Nintendo really asks themselves how profitable is this going to be.

Until there is a significant mainstream mass market for console online gaming, Nintendo is not interested. 10% may seem like a big number, but believe me if you really knew the cost on what MS spent to get their online service up and running you'll realize that they are losing money there just like they're losing money on the Xbox itself. How do you think Nintendo would feel if Zelda only sold to 10% of the Gcube owners out there?

No without a doubt, Nintendo is more interested in BOTTOM lines than headlines.

Ninja X · « **Reply #31 on:** April 25, 2003, 07:25:15 AM »

While I think simple online services should be setup in my opinion, Nintendo does have their reasons. Whether they are using past experiences with the SNES or possibly money issues, Nintendo does have their reasons.
10% of Xbox owners being hooked up to Xbox Live is not much at all. It just goes to show you that no matter how hard Microsoft pushed the Xbox Live service, they could only get a tenth to sign up. If Nintendo dared try to rival Microsoft and only got a tenth of their audience to sign up, they'd lose some major cash.
I still want simple online services for Mario Kart, F-Zero, and Mario Party though...

Grey Ninja · « **Reply #32 on:** April 25, 2003, 07:49:37 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario Menace
Well about the only thing negative I can say about Nintendo is that they are NOT risk takers. Nintendo are unabashed capitalists and are not going to do anything that dosen't make money. Why do you think they didn't release the GBA with a light in the first place? Because at the time they thought it added too much cost and the system wouldn't be as profitable. Plus it ate the battery life. Why do you think Nintendo went with cartridge instead of cd rom on the 64 (a huge mistake in my opinion)? Because they were uncertain how the medium would be embraced and they were fearful of piracy issues.

The GBA didn't ship with a light because they didn't want to make a Game Gear, where a handheld system became tied to a power outlet. When the technology became available, they shipped an improved version.

They went with the cartridges on the N64 for reasons of durability and loading time. Looking back, I still support Nintendo's usage of the cartridges, as the CDs for PSX took forever to load, and drove me nuts. Besides, both the SNES and the GBA did just fine with cartridge based media. The problem was that the N64 was a beast to program for, so developers jumped ship.

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario Menace
Get this in your heads folks....Nintendo will never ever sacrifice profit for innovation. That's not to say Nintendo hasn't been innovative over the years because they have. I'm just saying that more so than any other company, when a new idea comes to the table Nintendo really asks themselves how profitable is this going to be.

Nintendo leads the industry in innovation. Most developers have a strict timetable and inflexibility in regards to changing the game design midway through the game. Nintendo gives complete freedom to their development teams, and games are delayed if neccessary. Nintendo has become infamous for missing deadlines for the sake of a polished product.

Nintendo is very willing to spend money on innovation, as that's where they make their future. If they are able to come up with something nobody else has, then that translates directly to higher sales. You speak as if innovation != profit, when in reality, they are one and the same, and Nintendo realizes this. Jumping on the bandwagon with a bunch of online games though is hardly innovative.

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario Menace

No without a doubt, Nintendo is more interested in BOTTOM lines than headlines.

Correct.

The Doc · « **Reply #33 on:** April 25, 2003, 08:57:52 AM »

Why doesn't Nintendo deploy a huge online plan such as Microsoft did? First of all, there is no market for online gaming for next generation consoles (Microsoft is losing a lot of money on Xbox Live!) Second, a big percentage of gamers out there do not wish to have nor care about online gaming as it is not in the mainstream as of let. However, I do see Nintendo intergrating LAN funtions in to their 1st party software, as well as 3rd party devolpers deploying LAN functions in to their software as well. LAN games with a bunch of your friends are just as fun as online play, if not even more fun then online play.

The Doc

kennyb27 · « **Reply #34 on:** April 25, 2003, 12:39:44 PM »

Quote
who said anything about a monthly fee???!!! nintendo runs their online access just like sony, not the Msoft (pun intended...the M being soft and all)
-that means no monthly fees...

First off, Nintendo does not have a set online plan. As of right now, the only game that is online on the Nintendo Gamecube is Phantasy Star Online Ep 1 & 2 and that game requires a monthly fee. Also, Microsoft's online plan costs $50 a year for the service (no monthly fee) and if there is a monthly fee its the game's publisher who deals it out (link). Also, Sony's online plan does require monthly fees (link). And in answer to your question, I was guessing monthly costs would be used simply because of server upkeep and because there is a monthly fee for the only online game (PSO).

Armed · « **Reply #35 on:** April 25, 2003, 02:57:41 PM »

Online for consoles...Not for me I leave that to my P.C. Now LAN for consoles that's the way to go, it's just alot better to me than online because to see my friends faces when i beat them with Smash Bro. or any multiplayer games is priceless, hehehe.

But if there was online capabilities for Gamecube the only thing i would really care about is downloading extra levels or other extras they decide to put in the game, nothing more.

dmcollin · « **Reply #36 on:** April 25, 2003, 03:12:01 PM »

I would like it if nintendo allowed downloadable content along with tools or converters such that maps and levels could be user created. If you look at the most popular online games (cs, ut, bf1942) they all benefit from people making levels. I am sure nintendo and 3rd party people could give out the tools so that a program like worldcraft could be used to make new timesplitters levels and maybe mario kart tracks.
But i agree with nintendo, that if they were alone to setup and run servers themselves that it is too expensive. I would love to see a mario kart server program such that someone could setup their own server for multiplayer action.

News:

Author Topic: why dosnt nintendo... (Read 10632 times)