Topic: NIntendo wants your thoughts!!!

[joeamis]

Yes, thats the point I've been trying to make:

Posted on Mon May 03, 2004 8:58 PM          

it may not be profitable in terms of making money directly off it but when it comes down to it, it really is profitable in other ways.

1. it's profitable in the eyes of developers/publishers, they want to make online games so either you provide them with the system in place or you disregard their wishes and turn them away from your business.

2. alot of people play games online casually and religiously, alot of people want it and alot of people expect it. When you provide your customers with what they want, they support you more. When you say to your customers, well we can't rake in dough from providing you with what you want- they support you less and respect the company less which plays a big role in their future purchases.  
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm a diehard Nintendo fan but when Nintendo says we won't do it because we won't profit off it, it just makes me lose respect for Nintendo.  And I would feel this way no matter what it was they say they can't profit off of.  Nintendo was the first company to sell consoles at a loss so that they could get their name out and have recognition, they didn't use to just make decisions on what is profitable- they used to give the consumers what they want, what they could afford.  To me online support is very much like selling consoles at a loss, it's not to make profit... it's to get their name out, get recognition, and provide the consumer with what they want and what they can afford.

p.s. - alot of Cube owners over on the IGN boards are very upset with GC not having any online support, and alot of them are saying they're probably gonna buy an xbox because of it.

[MysticGohan24]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"it's a shame most of the complaints and suggestions people have are completely unfeasible and incredibly selfish."

No kidding.  There's been some "I want more BLOOD in Nintendo games" requests and even suggestions to go back to cartridges!  Plus some guys have talked about third party games as if Nintendo makes every game on the system.  Though I assume these sorts of "uninformed" responses are common with any sort of attempt to get feedback.  I imagine Nintendo is smart enough to disregard the opinions of people who clearly have NO CLUE what they're talking about.  "I WUNT KNOW MOOR POKENOM!!11"  Yeah I'm sure Nintendo's going to do that.

One thing I think Nintendo should try is holding focus groups specifically with people that don't own any Nintendo systems and own a PS2 or Xbox instead.  If you're posting on Nintendo's web site odds are you're going to keep buying Nintendo consoles anyway.  The complaints from non-owners might be useful particularly if they used to own a Nintendo console and switched.

I never wanted that

Nintendo has done well for me for sometime. All I want is more great RPG's like GS, ToS, Baten Kaitos. That would be great. Nintendo's image is getting better, they just need to perfect it. I like the new GBA commercials, now that's hitting it.

Let's hope they can be as cleaver with GC.

[Ian Sane]

Ah, the old "online isn't profitable" argument.  I've heard it.  Nintendo has been preaching that for years and if I thought it was a convincing argument I wouldn't be telling them on their official forum to go online.

Yes online gaming isn't profitable now but I think it's pretty likely it's going to be profitable (or at least at a break-even point) sometime in the future.  So when should Nintendo go online?  They can't just wait until it is profitable and then say "okay, here's our online plan" when Sony and MS have had working plans for YEARS and have a complete hold of the online gaming market.  If you don't take a risk with something new then you'll always be playing catch-up.

Plus "it's not profitable" isn't a good reason for most gamers.  That's an excuse for investors, not customers.  Sony and MS have it so there's no reason in the eyes of a gamer why Nintendo shouldn't have it too.  Nintendo is supposed to be an innovative, progressive, risk-taking, cutting edge developer.  They're not supposed to be a conservative developer living in the past.  I didn't become a Nintendo fan because they played it safe.  I became a fan because they pushed the envelope and led the industry into the future.  I became a fan of the developer that made Super Mario 64 and set the standard for 3D gaming.

Nintendo is like that kid in school who sucks at sports because of his allergies.  As real as their excuse is you can't expect gamers to tolerate it.  If all of the competition wasn't into it I'd cut them some slack but they have to match features or no one's going to give a sh!t.

[Ocarina Blue]

Bloodworth snared the online argument. Direct profit has SFA to do with it.

I was going to post my thoughts but found they had 'technical difficulties'.... whatever that means. Hopefully the massive response they've expierenced will tell them something.

[UniversalJuan]

I swear if I hear one more person whine about how Nintendo is just so off base about online gaming, I may go insane....again.

Now would I like to see Nintendo online? Well sure, why the hell not? I mean the sheer thought of Mario Tennis online is enough to make me forget about the rest of my life and get used to just being found on Nintendo's servers and nowhere else but I digress. Am I, however, going to think Nintendo is nuts for not having an online plan? Hells no. Nintendo has played this little game before (See: multiple times) and have fallen on their faces. I can clearly be understanding of them wanting to tread lightly into it this time.

For those who like to think Nintendo going online will magically make like half their problems go away (Seriously, read some of your posts. A few of you sound like this I swear.) you're more or less going to be dead wrong. 3rd parties aren't shying away because of a lack of an online scheme, though I do give you that that is a factor some 3rd parties may consider, of note here's your random out of nowhere thought of the day though. If 3rd parties want to bend over backward to put all this online stuff in so much....why the heck do we get crappy ports which, I believe, would require less work than putting in online, a good and/or enhanced port I mean. There's something to ponder over.

Am I trying to come across as "Nintendo is almighty and can do no wrong!" Straight answer? Of course not! Am I, however, trying to come across as "Give Nintendo a freaking break they aren't perfect"? I would hope so. I'm willing to bet money when Nintendo can either turn a profit or take minimal losses on online gaming they'll jump in and the wait will eb so worth it everyone will smack themselves for bitching so much, on both sides of the table for that matter cause face it, us pro-Nintendo's decisioners bitch right back just as much as anti-Nintendo decisioners. And then of course both sides will move on to the next topic to bitch about on the place where we love to bitch, heck it's the forum's slogan , and we all know what that is....should Mario grab a fireball thrower instead of a fire flower all roll around the Mushroom Kingdom randomly picking off people for no reason  for the sake of getting some "gratification" from Peach

(Note: The linked feature is quite the good read)

Edit: Edited link for Shifty's pleasure lol. Thanks for pointing that out.    

[Shift Key]

Can you edit that link (look at the first part of it) ? I clicked it and got the Microsoft website, which REALLY threw me!

[mouse_clicker]

Quote
I think Nintendo does need to provide online tools to third parties whether or not they think it's profitable for them to take their own games online. The big players like EA and Ubisoft see online as the "next 3D", and whether or not you agree, if Nintendo doesn't provide some basic support, eventually these companies are going to see dropping sales and will reconsider bringing out versions for Nintendo systems.

I completely agree- even if Nintendo doesn't see the profit in online gaming right now, a lot of other developers do, and it sertainly wouldn't hurt if Nintendo encouraged them to support the Gamecube online.

Quote
I would say that Bill bashed Gamefaqs alot more than I may have and he's on your side of the argument.

I get the distinct impression that Bill was playing along with your comment. It doesn't really matter if he wasn't, though- you were downplaying people who go to GameFAQs because its polls don't support your case.

Quote
p.s. - alot of Cube owners over on the IGN boards are very upset with GC not having any online support, and alot of them are saying they're probably gonna buy an xbox because of it.

THat's exactly what I'm talking about, joe- the opinions of a few internet geeks over at IGN don't mean ANYTHING. It's the overall public, the huge majority of gamers who don't post on message boards, and right now they're saying they don't care about online gaming!

Quote
Yes online gaming isn't profitable now but I think it's pretty likely it's going to be profitable (or at least at a break-even point) sometime in the future.

No one is saying it won't be profitable in the future, it's just not profitable now- that much is obvious.

Quote
So when should Nintendo go online? They can't just wait until it is profitable and then say "okay, here's our online plan" when Sony and MS have had working plans for YEARS and have a complete hold of the online gaming market. If you don't take a risk with something new then you'll always be playing catch-up.

Nintendo would only have to play catch up if the online wave hits this generation, which we know it won't. Next generation user bases start over again at 0, as do online communities. A consumer judges the online potential of a console by looking at its selection of internet enabled games, which means Nintendo simply needs to work off the experience of Sony and MS (ie replicating their good ideas and avoiding their bad ones) and get a comparable amount of 3rd party support for their console. Developers aren't going to look at the online user base of LAST generation because that means nothing THIS generation.

Quote
Plus "it's not profitable" isn't a good reason for most gamers. That's an excuse for investors, not customers.

Let's look at the facts, Ian- just about all gamers have absolutely no clue what to do when it comes to running a business. Gamers don't need the reason because the vast majority of them don't care enough to want one anyway. Why should Nintendo go out of their way and drop millions of dollars into what is, at this point, a niche gaming market?

Quote
Sony and MS have it so there's no reason in the eyes of a gamer why Nintendo shouldn't have it too.

Except most people don't care about that- you seem to forget this little fact a lot, Ian.

Nintendo is supposed to be an innovative, progressive, risk-taking, cutting edge developer. They're not supposed to be a conservative developer living in the past.

There's difference between taking a risk and being stupid. Do you honestly think Nintendo has ignored online gaming completely? When they say it's not profitable, I'm inclined to believe they've done their homework more than a message board rat, and not just because they have droves of evidence to support them while you don't.

Quote
I didn't become a Nintendo fan because they played it safe. I became a fan because they pushed the envelope and led the industry into the future. I became a fan of the developer that made Super Mario 64 and set the standard for 3D gaming.

I became a Nintendo fan because I loved their games, and I still do. If you don't, I think your problems with Nintendo run much deeper than mere lack of online play or Nintendo's seeming ignorance to the future, or whatever crap you'd like to make up.

Quote
For those who like to think Nintendo going online will magically make like half their problems go away (Seriously, read some of your posts. A few of you sound like this I swear.) you're more or less going to be dead wrong.

Exactly. Very well said, Juan.

[joeamis]

I could respond to all of your comments but I got a final to take, so here's just a snippet:

Quote
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker

Quote
I think Nintendo does need to provide online tools to third parties whether or not they think it's profitable for them to take their own games online. The big players like EA and Ubisoft see online as the "next 3D", and whether or not you agree, if Nintendo doesn't provide some basic support, eventually these companies are going to see dropping sales and will reconsider bringing out versions for Nintendo systems.

I completely agree- even if Nintendo doesn't see the profit in online gaming right now, a lot of other developers do, and it sertainly wouldn't hurt if Nintendo encouraged them to support the Gamecube online.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You were all against this in all your previous posts, and now you change your mind to align yourself with Bloodworth's view?  Note, they can't just encourage other developers to have more than 3 online games come out for their system, they have to either put a network in place like Microsoft or put some titles of their own online like Sony.  No developer is going to take the risk of putting games online for the GC just because Nintendo encourages them to, especially since publishers are cancelling regular games for GC at an alarming rate.  (Sega being the only exception, and when they realized ok were the only ones, they ported the game over to xbox live)

Quote
I would say that Bill bashed Gamefaqs alot more than I may have and he's on your side of the argument.

I get the distinct impression that Bill was playing along with your comment. It doesn't really matter if he wasn't, though- you were downplaying people who go to GameFAQs because its polls don't support your case.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(I get the impression he wasn't becaues everything else he stated was against my argument)
I downplayed them for a legitimate reason... here's what I posted just before, which makes perfect logical sense, but you seem to blatantly ignore alot of what I post:

The people who vote on the Gamefaqs polls are those that visit the site often, the people who visit the site often are those who need help every step of the way. People who have that much trouble playing games are less likely to appeal to online games because they don't have enough technical know how for them, and the competition online is a step up from what they're used to, therefor its not appealing. People who do not goto gamefaqs often are very unlikely to vote in the polls, they could care less, they want to get their games faq info they need and get right back to the game they were playing.

Quote
So when should Nintendo go online? They can't just wait until it is profitable and then say "okay, here's our online plan" when Sony and MS have had working plans for YEARS and have a complete hold of the online gaming market. If you don't take a risk with something new then you'll always be playing catch-up.

Developers aren't going to look at the online user base of LAST generation because that means nothing THIS generation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually it means alot, without prior experience in something you have no idea what the future will hold.  If Nintendo didn't look back and see cartridges were a bad decision for the N64, they would still be using cartridges today.

Quote
Plus "it's not profitable" isn't a good reason for most gamers. That's an excuse for investors, not customers.

Let's look at the facts, Ian- just about all gamers have absolutely no clue what to do when it comes to running a business. Gamers don't need the reason because the vast majority of them don't care enough to want one anyway. Why should Nintendo go out of their way and drop millions of dollars into what is, at this point, a niche gaming market?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
online games are the fastest growing part of the market.

Nintendo is supposed to be an innovative, progressive, risk-taking, cutting edge developer. They're not supposed to be a conservative developer living in the past.

There's difference between taking a risk and being stupid. Do you honestly think Nintendo has ignored online gaming completely? When they say it's not profitable, I'm inclined to believe they've done their homework more than a message board rat, and not just because they have droves of evidence to support them while you don't.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
theres no use for insults, Ian's not a message board rat.

[ghostVi]

That's a very interesting read UniversalJuan, thanks!

[Ian Sane]

"Nintendo would only have to play catch up if the online wave hits this generation, which we know it won't. Next generation user bases start over again at 0, as do online communities."

Agreed.  I've never said that Nintendo should go online with the Cube now.  I've said they should have gone online with the Cube but it's too late now.  Yes it's safe to say that online gaming isn't going to become standard this gen.  But it could take off next gen so Nintendo should have an online plan for the N5.  Now I hope they will but I get pretty worried every time I read an interview with a higher-up at NCL like Iwata.  When NCL execs talk about online it's as if they NEVER plan to go online.  They're always bashing it as if it's not worth looking into.  I would feel more at ease if they said something a little more reassuring like saying outright "yes we're working on an online gaming service but we're likely going to wait until the next console to implement it."  Instead we get all this anti-online propaganda.

"For those who like to think Nintendo going online will magically make like half their problems go away you're more or less going to be dead wrong."

I don't think it will solve all of Nintendo's problems.  For the most part I want it because I want to play Nintendo games with guys on the forum.  However I think it's part of a bigger problem.  Lack of online support is another reason to not buy a Gamecube (or ARTNBAG) and that's been the fundamental issue with the Cube.  Nintendo has given the public tons of excuses to not buy a Gamecube.  A lot of it is minor stuff like not offering the option for third party component cables and not having a DVD player and having smaller memory cards but it all adds up and makes the Cube look unappealing and inferior.  Online support is another feature that the PS2 and Xbox have and the Cube doesn't.  Therefore someone somewhere is going to buy one of the other consoles over the Cube because of this issue.  It's like if I went to buy a DVD player and there were three models of a similar price.  One model didn't have progressive scan.  I don't have a TV that can play progressive scan but if the prices were similar I would have bought one of the models that supported it just in case.  Let's say a guy doesn't know anything about games and he's buying a console and asks the guy at EB to explain the differences between the three options.  The clerk says that the Xbox has Xbox Live and that the PS2 has all of these online games like THUG and SOCOM and that the Cube has only two online titles that require a monthly fee.  Even if this guy has no immediate plans of playing online odds are he's going to see that as a fault with the Cube and that's going to affect his decision.  Missing features can easily make someone lose interest.  I remember I was at EB and a guy immediately decided to not buy a Cube the second he found out it didn't have a DVD player because the other consoles could thus do more".

The N5 needs to have very few ARTNBAG's.  

[Kyosho]

"Let's look at the facts, Ian- just about all gamers have absolutely no clue what to do when it comes to running a business. Gamers don't need the reason because the vast majority of them don't care enough to want one anyway. Why should Nintendo go out of their way and drop millions of dollars into what is, at this point, a niche gaming market?"

I'm sure you know how to run a business.  Anyhow, they should definitely research more into the issue.  The cartridge incident was the epitome of Nintendo's lack of anticipating the future appropriately.

"I became a Nintendo fan because I loved their games, and I still do. If you don't, I think your problems with Nintendo run much deeper than mere lack of online play or Nintendo's seeming ignorance to the future, or whatever crap you'd like to make up."

I wouldn't say it's all crap.  Being how you're young, it's quite obvious your taste for games will differ from other people that have been through Ninty since its conception.  I've played nintendo since early 80s, and it made me expect MORe from Nintendo.  The SNES days were definitely one of the more captivating Nintendo periods for me personally.  But it's obvious you would think otherwise.  There are undeniably problems with Nintendo whether it be their philosophy or games... you already admitted that.  SO what are you trying to say here? You seem to be changing opinions left and right and dont have a very consistent view on things.

[Bill Aurion]

"I've played nintendo since early 80s, and it made me expect MORe from Nintendo."

I've been a Nintendo addict since I was 3 years old (1989) and I don't...If anything, I would have expected the older gamers to be more tolerant of what Nintendo has been doing...

[KDR_11k]

I like this quote from the N-Sider article:
"It is just a matter of time. When the people are ready for it, we have the Network in place."
- Hiroshi Yamauchi (on online gaming)

I think they knew online wouldn't reach critical mass this generation and played this whole anti-online stuff to reduce the damage caused by the lack of an online plan (which would still be less than the cost of a network, apparently). Sure we can argue about whether or not online is good but face it, it's a feature. It expands the possibilities of game design. Give Miyamoto online to play with and you might have the "killer app" everybody's waiting for.

[Kyosho]

Tolerance really has nothing to do with age.  I'd have to say I've been pretty tolerant by telling myself Nintendo would improve in this generation after their mediocre N64 generation.  After all, I bought the previous 3 systems on release day, and the Cube a year after it came out.  Granted it's only looking ever slightly better.  I just hope next generation is at least backwards compatible.

Back to an earlier topic,  having online is not going to solve all its problems.  But it will lessen the impact of some problems.  Having features definitely is a plus whether or not there is a loss of profit involved initially.

[mouse_clicker]

Quote
theres no use for insults, Ian's not a message board rat.

It's not name calling- I use the term the same way I would mallrat, meaning someone who spends a lot of time on a message board. We ALL fit into the category, myself more than anyone else here.

Quote
Yes it's safe to say that online gaming isn't going to become standard this gen. But it could take off next gen so Nintendo should have an online plan for the N5.

I completely agree- I think Nintendo should definitely research how to make online gaming profitable and have a system set up to their liking (and to our liking) for next generation.

Quote
Now I hope they will but I get pretty worried every time I read an interview with a higher-up at NCL like Iwata. When NCL execs talk about online it's as if they NEVER plan to go online. They're always bashing it as if it's not worth looking into. I would feel more at ease if they said something a little more reassuring like saying outright "yes we're working on an online gaming service but we're likely going to wait until the next console to implement it." Instead we get all this anti-online propaganda.

I have a feeling you hearing what you want to hear rather than what's actually being said. I haven't heard any "ant-online propaganda" or bashing, as you put it- I've just heard that online gaming isn't profitable this generation and they don't feel they should pursue it right now, which is entirely acceptable. I haven't heard Nintendo rail on online gaming at all, in fact.

As for actually saying they're setting up an online system for next generation now, that's a bad idea plain and simple- you don't make promises like that years in advance, because people expect you to act upon them, and if you don't follow through exactly how they want you to people become dissapointed.

Quote
Being how you're young, it's quite obvious your taste for games will differ from other people that have been through Ninty since its conception. I've played nintendo since early 80s, and it made me expect MORe from Nintendo. The SNES days were definitely one of the more captivating Nintendo periods for me personally. But it's obvious you would think otherwise.

Oh god, I'm so tired of this age stuff. Just because I'm younger than you doesn't mean ANYTHING, and the fact that you're assuming it does shows you obviously aren't grasping what I'm trying to get across. Get back to me when you can see beyond age, Kyosho.  

[Bill Aurion]

"We ALL fit into the category, myself more than anyone else here."

I'm catching up to you, if not even...

[Kyosho]

I thought I made it clear above that you don't present a clear cut single sided view on the issue.  This isn't the first incident that this has happened in this thread or in past threads ...

As per the age, by no means do I not listen/respect your opinion.  I am just saying that there will be obvious differences in opinions regarding certain issues and those tend to be *scratch out "age"* experience related.


Joeamis: "You were all against this in all your previous posts, and now you change your mind to align yourself with Bloodworth's view? "

[foolish03]

I dont play many games online, but I definitely see the positive side to it.  There are plenty of games in my library I've beaten and lost all interest in afterwards.  Online play could greatly increase the replay value of so many titles,  Especially nintendo titles.  Even if they only had downloadable content, I'd have a lot less dusty titles in my game collection.  It may not be profitable now, but wait a couple more years and see what its doing.  I disagree with whichever one of you said its a niche genre or whatever.  Xbox and ps2 have already lifted online gaming out of the shadows.  Expect it to hit the mainstream come these next generation consoles.  

[Smadte]

Hahah. Love that first post: "Well Im not quite sure on the games or what to make in them..actually Id like to see The hero of time back, I loved OoT And I think the GCN has great controlls keep them, and I like the small disk Idea keep that, but Id like to see a Cd player in the Next Councel, I will get more when I think of some! lol!"

[mouse_clicker]

Quote
Joeamis: "You were all against this in all your previous posts, and now you change your mind to align yourself with Bloodworth's view? "

Ugh, THIS is why I get into so many fights with people on this board, because you guys DON'T read my posts all the way through, and even if you do you obviously don't understand them. Not once did I EVER say online gaming is bad, or would never be profitable. ALL I'm saying is that it's not profitable RIGHT NOW and hence Nintendo has no reason to pursue it at all RIGHT NOW. I apologize I didn't make that painfully clear in all of my other posts, I kind of assumed you would have understood it. I have not changed my opinion on the subject at all- it's been the same for months now, and, you'll actually see me agreeing with Bloodworth in several other threads on the same issue. In fact, you can find me quoted in one such thread from quite a while back as saying "Online gaming is the wave of the future, but that wave is in the middle of the ocean right now, not crashing on shore as many people believe." You guys are criticizing Nintendo for ignoring online gaming this generation, and say they won't support it next generation, when you have absolutely no proof to support either.

As for age, drop it, Kyosho- up until a couple years ago I listened exclusively to classical music, far from the norm for my age. You quite simply can't make an accurate judgement about someone based on how old they are, you can only assume, which will often leave you in a very sticky situation, as it is now. You can't claim to know my tastes in gaming with the knowledge of my birthdate alone, you can only guess, and that's obviously proven to be untrustworthy. Here's a tip for the future- judge a person's stance on something by what they say and do, not how old they are. You shouldn't have even considered my age when entering this debate.    

Quote
I'm catching up to you, if not even...  

You might have already passed me, but I doubt it.

[The Omen]

Quote


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
p.s. - alot of Cube owners over on the IGN boards are very upset with GC not having any online support, and alot of them are saying they're probably gonna buy an xbox because of it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



THat's exactly what I'm talking about, joe- the opinions of a few internet geeks over at IGN don't mean ANYTHING. It's the overall public, the huge majority of gamers who don't post on message boards, and right now they're saying they don't care about online gaming!

The overall public, the majority of gamers, increasingly don't care about Nintendo.
If you polled every gamer, and gave them the choice of having an Online option, I'd have to say they would vote that way convincingly.   The problem is, the question always comes out "Do you want your games online?".  A slight difference in wording.  

[Mannypon]

also, alot of heads will say they want online but how many of them would actually support the feature?  Alot of people are flaky like that, they just want things cuase its somethin else to consume.

[joeamis]

Quote
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker

Quote
Joeamis: "You were all against this in all your previous posts, and now you change your mind to align yourself with Bloodworth's view? "

Ugh, THIS is why I get into so many fights with people on this board, because you guys DON'T read my posts all the way through, and even if you do you obviously don't understand them. Not once did I EVER say online gaming is bad, or would never be profitable. ALL I'm saying is that it's not profitable RIGHT NOW and hence Nintendo has no reason to pursue it at all RIGHT NOW. I apologize I didn't make that painfully clear in all of my other posts, I kind of assumed you would have understood it. I have not changed my opinion on the subject at all- it's been the same for months now, and, you'll actually see me agreeing with Bloodworth in several other threads on the same issue. In fact, you can find me quoted in one such thread from quite a while back as saying "Online gaming is the wave of the future, but that wave is in the middle of the ocean right now, not crashing on shore as many people believe." You guys are criticizing Nintendo for ignoring online gaming this generation, and say they won't support it next generation, when you have absolutely no proof to support either.

You said Nintendo should not make online games right now nor make any network system in place right now.  But then you said, "I completely agree- even if Nintendo doesn't see the profit in online gaming right now, a lot of other developers do, and it sertainly wouldn't hurt if Nintendo encouraged them to support the Gamecube online."

The only way to encourage developers to make online GC games, is to have a reliable network in place and/or release online games themselves.  Simply saying we'd like to see this online or if you make an online game we will pay you money, is not going to work.  Even if someone did it because Nintendo threw them some dough, overall their loses will be greater.

who ever said they won't support it next generation?

[Rich]

Mouse, Kyosho has a point when regarding age, Someone who is 15 is going to experience the SNES differently then someone who is 7. Don't get me wrong, I respect your opinion despite your age, I'm only a year older then you, but, I wasn't as involved with Nintendo when I was 7 as I was when I turned 13. I wasn't checking news sites everyday to see whats happening in the industry, something which Kyosho could have been doing. He could probaby remember playing more games then I can because he was older, I'd bet the same goes for you as well. So I think that there may be a difference of opinions because of the differences in your age.  

[Perfect Cell]

Bah They closed it already... Just when i got my password back ( I dont post there at all. Terrible forum really) So i couldnt post my thoughts Boo

Its cool though that Nintendo is at least trying to listen to its fans, that itself is something ive been harking for a long while.

Personally Nintendo needs to change too many things to get  the ship in the right direction, so i wont post them here.  Id do belive Online gaming has a legitimate future. It lacks the Killer App (Might change with Halo 2) I also belive Nintendos games while excelent lack that certain thing that made their Super NES counterparts special. Something that even Nintendo has admitted. Anyways Im happy this is certainly good news.


"also, alot of heads will say they want online but how many of them would actually support the feature? Alot of people are flaky like that, they just want things cuase its somethin else to consume. "

Alot of people are supporting Online now. You just have to look at Nintendos competitors. look at how popular Socom is