Topic: Factor 5 jumps ship. Swims over to Sony camp.

[KnowsNothing]

Nintendo gained something around 256 million dollars for Rare.  I think that's a fair trade-off for Grabbed by the Ghoulies and a terrible remake of a game we have on the N64.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Ms. Pacman, minus disguise, strikes again.

[Ian Sane]

"Nintendo gained something around 256 million dollars for Rare."

I asked what WE gained, not Nintendo.  Like the "Nintendo is always profitable" arguement if us gamers do not directly benefit then it doesn't matter.

[Truthliesn1seyes]

Ian, your looking at everything black and white.  Nothing is that clear cut.  Just becuase we don't physically see a gain doesn't mean there isn't one.  For example, what if the selling off of Rare for that large sum of money was what lead to Nintendo giving the green light in funding and then purchasing Retro completely?  I'm more than happy with Retro than Rare at this stage of the game.  SK was a big loss but I'm sure in the long run Nintendo will find another developer.  Same with Factor 5.  We can lose some and we can gain some.  Nintendo found gamefreak (I think they are the ones that make pokemon) and they found Retro, both key to Nintendo.  I'm sure they'll be more in the future.  Just becuase you can't see whats taking place doesn't mean things aren't happening for the better.  Its funny how everyone is always quick to rip Nintendo when companies jump to other platforms but very few people actually talk about how Nintendo has improved third party support compared to the N64 generation.  Capcom has done more this generation than in the last one and we all take it for granted it seems.  We even got Square back onto Nintendo even though it wasn't anything big but the fact we got them back is a start.  

Everyone has to remember, Nintendo has to support itself (1 home console, a future home console plus 2 handhelds and a possible future handheld) AND at the same time try and keep third parties happy whereas Sony and MS's primary concern IS 3rd parties alone since they cannot survive without them, they can't rely on themselves to hold them up.  Those are 2 completely different approaches and thus is one of the reasons 3rd parties flock to those other consoles.  They are better appreciated there by Sony and MS plus the consumers.  Sony and MS want them there cuase they NEED them and the publishers don't really have to worry about competing with Nintendo's games, which is what seems to be Nintendo's consumers only consern since thats what they seem to purchase excusively.

[Truthliesn1seyes]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"Nintendo gained something around 256 million dollars for Rare."

I asked what WE gained, not Nintendo.  Like the "Nintendo is always profitable" arguement if us gamers do not directly benefit then it doesn't matter.

The fact that Nintendo exists is our benefit.  Its sad that you fail to see that.  Nintendo making money, keeps Nintendo in the game.  To me, thats all that matters cuase I can always go to other consoles to play thier specific games but I can't go there to play Nintendo games.  I can only speak for myself but if Nintendo weren't making games anymore, then I can say that I'll be a less frequent gamer.

[KnowsNothing]

If Nintendo doesn't gain, WE don't gain.  Who knows what they did with that 256 million dollars?  They could have put it all into advertisment, surely then you would not complain!  Maybe it went towards sweepstakes or giveways or bundles?  Maybe they're using a small protion of it to put orchestrated music into the new Zelda?  Maybe it's funding the new Zelda entireley!  Maybe it went towards developing the DS or the Rev or Nintendo's online plans, or all three?  As unlikely as that may sound, who the hell knows how gamers benefited?  I can't say that we did, you can't say that we didn't.  

Either way, it was 256 million dollars in exchange for funding a second party that produces the gaming equivilent of amoebic dysentery seems good  

[Ian Sane]

"Its funny how everyone is always quick to rip Nintendo when companies jump to other platforms but very few people actually talk about how Nintendo has improved third party support compared to the N64 generation."

I'd say that's argueable.  The N64 didn't have much third party support but aside from Konami I can't think of any third parties that got fed up and left.  Virtually every third party that supported the N64 was on board to support the Cube initially.  Compare this to the Cube where practically every third party that supported the console has left.  Capcom provided us with some good stuff but I really question how excited they are about the Rev.  Their shareholders seem pretty pissed off about the end results of Capcom Cube support.  There was a period where the Cube's third party support killed the N64's but the end result seems to be much worse.  When the Cube was revealed I assumed that third party support was going to get better.  With the Rev I'm prepared for practically no third party support.  Right now I'd say Nintendo's relationship with third parties is the worst it's ever been.  I can't think of any third party that would give better treatment to Nintendo then it would Sony or MS.

[Truthliesn1seyes]

The reason you see so many 3rd parties falling off durin the Gcube era as apposed to the n64 era is becuase there was alot more of them supporting Nintendo right out the gates.  The N64 didn't have much right off of release aside from the "dream team".  Its easy not to see many 3rd parties leaving Nintendo during the N64 era becuase there really wasn't any 3rd party support to begin with.  

Also, you can piss and moan all you want about Nintendo's 3rd party position but when it all comes down to it, blame us, the consumers for not buying 3rd party games.  Thats why 3rd party is weak on Nintendo's system, becuase we, Nintendo fans, as a majority dont support them.  The consumers are more to blame as is Nintendo.  Nintendo can throw all the money in the world at advertisement and getting exclusive 3rd party games, but for what?  Regardless, the consumer doesn't buy them in the amount that it deserves.  Look at RE4, argueably one of the best games produced this current generation and its selling less than it deserves.  Nintendo is doing their job, we the consumers, aren't for one reason or another.

[31 Flavas]

Quote
Originally posted by: Truthliesn1seyes

[...] To me, thats all that matters cuase I can always go to other consoles to play thier specific games but I can't go there to play Nintendo games.  I can only speak for myself but if Nintendo weren't making games anymore, then I can say that I'll be a less frequent gamer.

I suppose too can only speak for myself, but most of my appeal for Nintendo has been that it doesn't try to be the showboat like Microsoft or Sony or Sega. That doesn't mean that I am disrespecting Sega and Sony and Microsoft for always trying to upstage Nintendo or each other.... but I appreciate it and just can't get it elsewhere. Besides trying to smash Nintendo under your technological foot, why not just try to make a game or system that is just fun. Stop showboating with blood, stealth, darkness, killing, GTA, and graphics, cd/dvd/bluray/hddvd, hdd, whatever, and make a fun game / fun system. If it has to be slightly less then a graphical masterpiece or maybe not include online or use a bongo, or for that matter, be a bit K!DDY, or something then so be it.

edit: interesting does the forum software not let me type tiku tiku tiku!  tiku tiku tiku!  kiddey? edit2: guess not. edit3: added a couple more discriptors.

[Ian Sane]

"Also, you can piss and moan all you want about Nintendo's 3rd party position but when it all comes down to it, blame us, the consumers for not buying 3rd party games. Thats why 3rd party is weak on Nintendo's system, becuase we, Nintendo fans, as a majority dont support them."

Bah.  No fans of any other console ever were expected to feel guilty for not buying certain games.  I buy whatever games I want be they first or third party.  I should not feel responsible that certain games didn't sell.  It's Nintendo's fault for not attracting a large enough userbase to accomodate third party sales.

[Truthliesn1seyes]

i just remembered something, Ian Sane, you said you don't remember 3rd parties leaving Nintendo during the N64 era like they are doing now.  Well I explained myself in my previos post in regards to why you notice this but thinking back, Squaresoft left Nintendo before the N64 even came out.  Thats even worse that what companies are doing now where they are at least testing out the Gcube waters and seeing if they can meke a profit of it.  Also, you can argue that Squaresoft leaving Nintendo during the N64 era did 100 times more damage to Nintendo than Rare, SK and Factor 5 leaving right now put together.  Squaresoft leaving Nintendo was the straw that broke the camels back, in other words, it started a tidle wave that in the end knocked Nintendo off its high horse and Nintendo has been struggling to find its footing since then.  

Again, everyone is asking for WAY TOO MUCH from Nintendo.  Nintendo has the most responcibility of all 3 console manufactures.  It has more systems to support, it has to sustain its own success, keep their fanbase coming back and try to catch a few new ones.  Nintendo's high quality is a double edged sword, as a result of them producing triple A games consistently over the yrs, the people that buy their games only look foward to their own games.  To me it seems like you want Nintendo to be Sony or MS yet still be Nintendo.  You can't have it both ways, if Nintendo were to try and emulate Sony and MS they wouldn't be Nintendo anymore.  This constant complaining is only visible with Nintendo fans.  You never hear Sony fans talking bout what Sony needs to do and this and that.  Why don't we here Sony and MS fans complaining why Sony and MS don't produce in house games of the same quality as Nintendo in a consistent basis?  

With each suscesive generation, Nintendo has answered all our complains and what do we do, hit em with more.  

N64 didn't have Square, practically no 3rd party support, and cartridges.  Gcube comes out and what do we have? Squaresoft is back at least showing some support, we have better 3rd party support even though its for nothing, and we moved to discs as apposed to cartridges.  

Gcube had a weak online structure/support and dwindling 3rd party support in the long run.  Now whats Nintendo's plan for Rev?  They are developing a console with developers needs in mind, they are giving us a free and extensive online community, they are giving us Mario kart, Super Smash Bro, Animal Crossing, a realistic Zelda, eventually I'm sure they'll bring pokemon online.  They consistently answer our complaints but no one ever sees this.  What has Sony and MS done to fix the complaints on their system with each successive generation?  Practically nothing, yet you don't hear a peap from their fans.  

Look at the big picture, Nintendo is doing everything it can and more to give us what we want.  Stop looking for more reasons to complain.  

[Deguello]

I think the Rev will have more than adequate support from 3rd parties considering the first 3rd party game known for the Rev is from Square-Enix.

[heinous_anus]

Truthlies, I'd look at it more like "looking for more ways for Nintendo to do better."

What's with this argument that I hear constantly that people like Ian "want Nintendo to be more like Sony or MS"?  That's preposterous, to equate a desire for better 3rd party support with a desire for Nintendo to 'emulate' Sony/MS.  You argue that it's not possible, that we can't "have it both ways"...but it was on the SNES?

Ian is right, and I don't know how you can argue the point - it's Nintendo's responsibility to build a userbase, not our responsibility to buy certain games.

And ruby onix, what the hell is wrong with Matt's postulating?  Jesus, it's the mailbag, of all things.  Just because Matt's opinions make you mad...you gotta call him "whiney?"  He seemed pretty calm and collected in that response - where exactly did he get whiney?

[MrMojoRising]

Truthlies:  I definately agree that Nintendo has been making good changes based upon the criticisms of it's fans.  However (as I'm almost positive Ian will agree), most of the desicions that we criticize are ones that seem like bad decisions before they make them.  Like the no HD support with the Revolution.  That just seems like a bad idea right now.  I'm rather sure that next generation Nintendo will include HD support if it turns out to be as important as Sony and MS want it to be.  They do a good job of fixing things the next time, but they seem to make more mistakes nonetheless.

P.S.  This is somewhat playing devils advocate for me because I do agree that Nintendo trys very hard to give us what we want...but if we didn't complain how will they know what we want

[IceCold]

The $256 million that Nintendo gained from Rare's sale - of course it benefited us! It gave Nintendo more funds to work with, whether it be for marketing (as you always say Ian, more marketing means larger userbase means more third party support for us) or funding for some of their projects (Retro included). This directly benefits us.

And the 64 was the better overall system; it just didn't turn out. You think Nintendo didn't look at every single possibility before choosing between discs or cartridges? Shorter load times etc were obviously a priority for Nintendo rather than the space, and they are a priority for me. I consider those extremely important to my experience. It's just that Square, among many others, needed the space to waste. That was what caused the 3rd party problem, and it has carried over to today. If Nintendo had made a CD based console, there's no telling what would happen, but at the time they really gave it a lot of thought, and in the end, did what was right for them. Yes, this may be inconsiderate to the 3rd parties, but they still could have developed easily for the 64; they just didn't choose to.  

[ruby_onix]

Quote
The $256 million that Nintendo gained from Rare's sale - of course it benefited us! It gave Nintendo more funds to work with, whether it be for marketing (as you always say Ian, more marketing means larger userbase means more third party support for us) or funding for some of their projects (Retro included). This directly benefits us.

The money Nintendo got by selling Rare didn't benefit us. At all. Because the European Union took it, using "NES-era price fixing" as an excuse. I suppose if you want, you can say that the sale of Rare contributed to the success of the NES. Or that the EU will have less of an excuse to raid Nintendo the next time they come into some money.


As for why Factor 5 left, this thread has a better explanation than Matt does. They weren't "scared away" by the Revolution. According to Julian Eggebrecht, they were working on the Xbox360. Then Sony approached them and made them an offer they couldn't refuse. They were more likely scared away from the Xbox360 than they were from the Revolution.


As for Silicon Knights (since they were also mentioned in this thread), Denis Dyack said in a recent interview that Nintendo wasn't telling him what the big "secret" of the Revolution was. I gather from other interviews that Nintendo has just been telling developers to keep making games as usual, as if they were making GameCube games (since the Rev will use the same API), to just expect something without the limitations of the GameCube, and not to worry about "the secret".

Denis then went to visit Matt from IGN, hoping that Matt would tell him what the big "secret" was, since Nintendo wouldn't (little did Denis know, Matt doesn't know anything about the Rev). He came away from the meeting with Matt, and "they" decided that Nintendo is going down the wrong path with the Revolution, that SK and Nintendo are incompatible, and that SK (and any company like it) doesn't have a place in Nintendo's future. As the result of his meeting with Matt, Denis broke off second-party ties with Nintendo, started looking elsewhere, and Nintendo made no effort to stop him.


Now don't get me wrong, I think that all of these things are significant blows to Nintendo, that Nintendo could've done more to stop them, and that they need to do more to replace the things they've lost. But Nintendo is not entirely to blame, nor is the Revolution or DS hardware.

And, just my opinion, for a guy who admits to knowing nothing about the Revolution, Matt needs to stop being so pessimistic and get off it's back.


I gather from other interviews that Nintendo has just been telling developers to keep making games as usual, as if they were making GameCube games...

[KDR_11k]

The EU punished Nintendo for abusing their monopoly status (IIRC they kept the game prices in GB much higher than in mainland Europe and attacked importers for selling games imported from the mainland cheaper). Looking at the game prices here it doesn't surprise me that they're acting illegally. I wonder when the EU will outlaw region protection, they've nuked quite a few anti-customer technologies so far. Force console games to cost as much as PC games, don't allow those companies to exploit us. Region protection has no valid reason for existence.

[Spak-Spang]

You can not connect the EU fees on Nintendo to the selling of Rare.  The EU would have been against Nintendo on that issue even if Nintendo didn't sell Rare...then what?  Nintendo would have still lost that money.  

Nintendo used the Rare money to try and find new smaller development houses to bring fresh ideas.  Nintendo was actually trying to find the next Pokemon.  The next hot developer.

Nintendo actually does really good at building up developers and teaching them about gaming.  Silicon Graphics should be praising Nintendo every single day because without Nintendo Silicon Graphics would still be a no-name developer.  They were a company that knew how to make story games, but not really great playing games...and Nintendo showed them and taught them some tricks of the trade.  Eternal Darkness is as much Nintendo's baby as it is Silicon Graphics.

I think the same was true about Rare and Factor 5.  Nintendo worked very close with them on their projects.  Heck Nintendo allowed Factor 5 to design sound compressions for their systems and such.  However, Factor 5 leaves them because they wanted to branch out.

Well just like Rare I expect the next games from these companies to be below par compared to the games Nintendo helped them with.

I am not worried about the loss of these companies.  I have very limited funds and I only want to play the best games.  To me that is usually high quality Nintendo games, and a few select 3rd party games.

[Galford]

Spang, I assume you mean Silicon Knights, not Silicon Graphics.  
Silicon Graphics makes computer hardware.

[IceCold]

And heinous - Ruby's right. You have to read between the lines in Matt's mailbag - of course he can't outright state some things but he implies them.

[ruby_onix]

Quote
You can not connect the EU fees on Nintendo to the selling of Rare. The EU would have been against Nintendo on that issue even if Nintendo didn't sell Rare...then what? Nintendo would have still lost that money.

1985 - Nintendo breaks a bunch of laws.

September 2002 - Nintendo sells Rare, a European company, for what's apparently guessed to be around £175 million.

October 2002 - The EU fines Nintendo in the amount of £92.1 million, for price fixing.


I think there's a link. And even if there isn't, I think it's close enough to say that this is where most of the money went.

[IceCold]

Yea, but they would have to pay that money anyway... so if they didn't sell Rare it would come out of their own pocket, which would mean less money for funding marketing etc

[KDR_11k]

Ruby: Remember, companies like that love to delay lawsuits. Look how long it took to convict MS. Besides, it probably wasn't 1985 when the offense occurred, it continued for some time and probably included the SNES and N64 as well.