Topic: GCN-GBA Connectivity: who cares?

[NWR_Lindy]

I can't believe Nintendo actually thinks GCN-GBA connectivity will be a system selling point.  Their logic is absurd.  OK Nintendo, let me get this straight: you don't give us online play for ANYTHING, but you'll make up for it by allowing us to play 8-bit Metroid and the part of a Pac-Man ghost on our GBA?

Am I missing something here?  Am I the only one that sees GCN-GBA connectivity as a gimmick that nobody will care about in the long run?

silks

[John Squire]

I agree.. though, the Pacman idea is actually pretty interesting.  Regardless, if Nintendo really wanted the GBA to help GC sales, it should pack in the gba player with all new GC's instead of a price cut.  It's as easy as that.  

[DRJ]

I for one actually like the connectivity idea. It was very nice in Wind Waker. The bonuses for Metroid Prime were not as good.  The Pac-Man game looks nice. You play Ghosts in 3D on the TV while the Pac-Man guy plays on the GBA. What I dont like are the games that are going to require it. Like FF:CC. It should be an addon, a nice thing to have if you want it, but it should not be a requirement to even play the game at all.

[Bill Aurion]

I happen to like what is being done to increase the connectivity between the two systems, esp in the new Pacman game.  If you don't have a GBA then you don't need to play games like FF:CC

[Dethroned Emperor]

I guess bill kinda answered my question about crystal chronicles, since I don't have a GBA. I tend to agree with silks tho, I'm not overly impressed by the emphasis on GCN-GBA connectivity.  

[Nephilim]

but with FFCC
I bet ya there will be secrets that u need to unlock using a GBA like Zelda:WW
which annoys me, I guess iv gotta keep looking for a cheap gba in a news paper still

[Mingesium]

I don't see what is wrong with Nintendo experimenting with GCN/GBA linkup. They tried online gaming, but haven't found a successful business model for it. Do you know how many people own GBAs? If Nintendo can get more of those people to get GC, they would be in good shape. Games like Pac-Man, Four Swords GC, and Final Fantasy CC, look like fun. With fun games and the gba player, Nintendo is on the right track.

[NWR_Lindy]

Don't get me wrong, GCN-GBA connectivity is COOL, it's NEAT, but nobody is going to buy either system because of it (even though Nintendo seems to think so, the way they're pushing it).  Furthermore, if it disappeared entirely I seriously doubt anybody would care.

And having a game that strictly requires a GBA to play it is retarded.  I mean, if I happened to have a Gamecube and GBA I might buy the link cable just for kicks, but if I only have a GBA I'm not going to buy a Gamecube just to play that lame Pac-Man game (or even Crystal Chronicles for that matter...if I really wanted a Final Fantasy game I'd buy a PS2 and play any of the 10 FF games that have been released on that platform).

But what do I know, right?  I'm just the target gamer that Nintendo is trying to attract.

silks

[Ian Sane]

Personally I think when used correctly the GC/GBA connectivity is a great feature.  The problem is that Nintendo thinks it's a system selling feature and a replacement for online gaming when in reality it's just a cool feature to add some nifty stuff to games.  Stuff like the Tingle Tuner is great.  It's an optional little bonus for people who own both consoles.  It's when you start getting into stuff that requires the GBA then you've got a problem.

One thing I don't like is that Nintendo is associating the connectivity with multiplayer.  Now I think the idea of a Zelda game where you when you go underground the cave is on the GBA is really cool.  However when I have to have FOUR people with FOUR GBAs playing as well the game instantly switches from a must-have title to a novelty title that the average person isn't going to have the hardware to play.  Plus when a game becomes dependant on multiplayer it starts to become a glorified mini-game.  There's a reason why The Four Swords came with A Link to the Past.  It's not an advanced enough title to justify being it's own game.  However as a mini-game it works fine.  Now with this GBA connectivity stuff Nintendo is expecting us to buy mini-games that have huge hardware requirements.  Not only that but they're pushing these overly-expensive glorified mini-games as some of the big titles for the year.

Another thing that bugs me is that these GBA/GC title don't even need the connectivity requirements.  Seriously what is the point of making the Four Swords a connectivity title?  Why not just make a four player Zelda game?  That would be great and with four controllers being the only requirement it would sell huge.  And why does Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles need to use GBAs?  If the game is a CO-OP title then having "secret stats" and stuff doesn't make any sense anyway.  It's like Nintendo is making games solely for the purpose of having titles that use the GBA connectivity instead of just making great games and adding connectivity if it's appropriate.  There's a difference between making a game and saying "wouldn't it be cool to add this GBA connectivity feature?" and sitting down and making a game with the feature in mind.  The hardware should be dependant on the idea, the idea shouldn't revolve around the hardware.

Plus when you really think about it all of these great GBA/GC ideas that require a seperate screen would work perfectly ONLINE.

[Grey Ninja]

Just for a LITTLE bit, can we stop bashing Nintendo, and just enjoy the slew of new games that they are showing us?  Please?

[Zeth]

I'm definitely not getting any of the games that you need to have both a GBA and Gamecube to play. They look dumb to me anyway.

[Mingesium]

Making the games online would probable make it less fun. I big part of the fun is interacting with the person next to you. In Pac-man, the people who are ghost need to communicate to find Pac-Man. You could do the same online, but it wouldn't have the same impact.

Final Fantasy doesn't require the GBA to play it. You can use 4 controllers, but you would want the GBA to see what items you want to switch. You can't press start and switch items in a co-op game.

[NWR_Lindy]

Ian Sane:  I totally agree.  Couldn't have said it better.

Grey Ninja: I don't mean to bash Nintendo, but man they're disappointing me lately.  Actually, they've been disappointing me for years, to the point where I don't expect much more from their consoles than the 10 franchises they rehash every generation.

silks

[Hostile Creation]

They're going for innovation, not money.  Mainly I think they're practicing for the next system and stuff.

[Zeth]

Quote
They're going for innovation, not money.

You are funny

[NWR_Lindy]

What do you mean they're not going for money?  Why do you think they always brag about how much more software they're selling than everybody else?  Don't believe the hype, Nintendo cares more about money than they do about dominating the industry.  Just ask Rick Powers, he'll give you an eyeful.

And where's the innovation lately?

Another Zelda game
Another Mario Kart game
Another Metroid Prime game
Another Mario Golf game
Another F-Zero game
Another StarFox game
Another Mario game
Another Pokemon game

I wouldn't call that "innovation", "evolution" maybe but not innovation.  I mean, it's not like they're incorporating wildly new play styles into any of these games, they're just improving what was already there.  Now Animal Crossing, that was innovative.  But when i think innovation I think of stuff like Hideo Kojima's game "Boktai", in which a built-in solar panel uses sunlight to affect gameplay.  That's innovation to me.  Stuff that nobody has ever thought of before.

As for LAN play, X-Box had the ability to do that right out of the gate.  Nintendo is playing catch-up on that one.  So no innovation there either.

Heck man, all I want Nintendo to do is break out of their predictable mold for once, do something aggressive.

As for practicing for the next system, that's some pretty expensive practice.

silks

[GoHuskers]

Silks, I couldn't agree with you more. It's also nice to see someone who doesn't blindly worship everything Nintendo does not get bashed for once. As for this GCN-GBA connectivity thing I personally think it's a really cool idea and could be used for some good things, but I don't like it as a neccesity. Like Ian Sane said instead of having a multiplayer Zelda game that requires four GBA's and the link cable thing just to play a remake of a GBA game on your TV screen why not have a 4 player Zelda game for the GCN? It's my predicion that the 4 sword thing won't sell very well. To most people it's just not very attractive to sit around playing a 4 player GBA game. I'd much rather just play SSBM or Mario Kart Double Dash. Now I think it would be a good idea to include it as an extra bonus like the tingle tuner, but not as a neccisity. Of course this is just one man's humble opinion.

[Hostile Creation]

Well first of all, your comment about innovation is idiotic and unintelligent.  Only a fool would think that innovation relies completely on a different concept entirely.  That is a pathway for originality, but only one.  I know quite well that you can pour new ideas into used concepts, thereby making them better and more interesting.  As for the other systems, it's not as if the they're showing splendid new franchises (new GTA game, Halo and Halflife 2, Doom 3, Jak and Dexter 2, Ratchett and Clank 2, etc.).  As for that solar panel thing, that sounds ridiculously annoying, and it seems like it'd be full of flaws.  If not, that seems like a very good idea.  Besides, I don't know why you're complaining about innovation if the games are fun (not to say they aren't innovative).  Innovation is only worth so much, and that says a lot coming from me.

As for LAN, that's not an Xbox original.  I think computers have had that for a while.  In that case, Nintendo was being innovative, it was trying to make the game more fun.  You may not have realized it yet, but video games are for fun.  Really, I'm not lying.  And believe it or not, innovation is not the key source of fun.

Well, that's just my take on it.  I don't want to sound like a blind, Nintendo fanboy.  I just want to make a point.  I too buy games based on how innovative and interesting they seem, but that's only a factor.  I don't think you should chase that factor and pretend it's the most important aspect of a game.  As a factor, however, I've found that Nintendo is the most innovative video game company ever to exist, now and then.

No, I don't think it's a selling point, but you must admit it appears to be innovative  

[manunited4eva22]

LAN gaming has been around since Doom Deathmatch, that is certainly not anything new. Nor is online new, as it was around at the same time.

[Smadte]

I don't see how ANYbody can get excited about some SNES quality multiplayer game on GC. Tetra's Trackers and 4 swords GC are absolutely the most stupid game ideas I've seen for a next gen console by a long shot. I'm extremely dissapointed with Nintendo's line-up, and I've never been before.  

[Hostile Creation]

Why, because of the graphics?  Just wondering, but don't get the impression that  I give a damn about your opinion.

Well perhaps not so harsh, because I'm not too interested in them either, but that's a rather petty reason.

[Smadte]

Quote
Why, because of the graphics? Just wondering, but don't get the impression that I give a damn about your opinion.

Quote
~~"Those of us that can laugh at ourselves will never cease to be amused."~~

[Hostile Creation]

The first comment was mean, and I'm sorry.  However, if that was supposed to make a point, I missed it.  You see, I'm making fun of you

[Smadte]

I just hope you're as amused as I am at the comment you made, that's all.  

[SatansNemesis]

IGN just anounced in the last hour that they are going to pack GC and GBA player together at no extra charge! I wish there was a way that current owners gould get the same deal. I know it would never happen, but we can always wish, cant we?