Topic: The Planet GameCube 2004 Louie Awards Talkback Thread

[mouse_clicker]

If you're interested in online gaming it's kind of assumed you just don't sit tight with what you have. If you don't go out and get an online capable console/PC that shows you're not interested enough in online gaming to really pursue it. If you can't afford another console or a better computer, then the point is kind of moot because you wouldn't be playing online games period. Seriously, you're arguing semantics, and people only do that when they can't think of a better case- perhaps none of those polls individually prove my point, but together form a very strong statement, that being most gamers don't play games online. How could you draw any other conclusion? Could you honestly deduce from those polls that most people DO play/want to play online games? I agree that shouldn't be the only evidence used to form such a conclusion, but it's not the only evidence I've used to form such a conclusion, just more.  

If you look at Shin Gallon's answers below, you can see that the polls are worded well enough to form a fairly accurate (as accurate a GameFAQs poll can be) portrayal of interest in online gaming.

[Shin Gallon]

For what it's worth, here's my answers:

Q 1: A year from now how much gameplay time will I spend online?
A 1: Zero. Monthly fees for games = I don't play online.

Q 2: How much time do you play on now?
A 2: Zero. See above.

Q 3: Have you ever paid to play an online game?
A 3: No, and I never will.

Q 4: How important is online play when you consider buying your next console?
A 4: Not important at all, I have no interest in online games.

Q 5: How important is online play when you consider buying games?
A 5: Not important at all, I have no interest in online games.

Q 6: What percentage of the games you currently play are online?
A 6: None.

Q 7: How often do you play games online?
A 7: Never.

Q 8: Have you played a console game online yet?
A 8: I tried, it sucked. it lagged like crazy, and every other player online was a total jerk. If I wanted to listen to childish insults I'd go back to high school.

[Jonnyboy117]

Quote
Originally posted by: Shin Gallon
I think the "Import game of the year" award should go to a game that didn't get a domestic release. Yes, Viewtiful Joe is awsome, but it got released here, so giving it the award doesn't really make sense to me.

Best Import Game is the best game for importing.  If it helps you understand the third-place finisher was Soul Calibur II.  That and VJ were certainly the most heavily imported GameCube titles this year, and for good reason.  It has to do with them coming out way before the domestic release and being largely in English.  So they're obviously good imports...

Quote
And why the total omission of Final Fantasy Tactics Advanced?

It was nominated in several categories but didn't get many votes.  Some people did vote for it as most disappointing game, as well, which I think points to some underlying problems with it.  I thought it was pretty underwhelming and not even as good as the PSone game or its more direct competition, Tactics Ogre on GBA.

[odifiend]

To your first comment, I'll just say next gen I will be watching.

Quote
If you can't afford another console or a better computer, then the point is kind of moot because you wouldn't be playing online games period.

WTF are you talking about.  Firstly, commenting on my economic status is close to unacceptable.  A computer that plays computer games well is in the 1300-2000 dollar range and my parents would put me on the street if I blew $200 on another console with college coming up.  A small monthly fee however is managable (I already have broadband at home and in college i'll have even better broadband).
I'm not arguing semantics- you said something to the effect of "Bill were not alone, look at all these other people who don't want online gaming," by taking the poll, I proved that it does not always give an accurate reading, proving your first statement is erroneous.

Quote
How could you draw any other conclusion?

Here's one for you- nothing can be determined from the poll.  Take a Statistics course and you'll understand.

Quote
Could you honestly deduce from those polls that most people DO play/want to play online games?

Nope, but obviously since we're having this argument, you couldn't effectively prove the reverse.

P.S.  It is obvious that Shin will never pay for online service- that's all that is there.  Does that mean he isn't interested? I'm thinking no...

[Shin Gallon]

Actually, the monthly fees are just a small part of it. If I felt I'd enjoy online gaming I'd pay the fees for at least a little while, assuming I enjoyed the game enough. It's just that, with online games, they're dependent on the other players not being collosal pricks, and sadly, that's just not going to happen, since 99.9999999999999999999% of all the people online are complete jerks.
Online gaming literally interests me less than sports games, and sports games interest me about as much as smashing my forehead with a hammer (that is to say, not at all).

[mouse_clicker]

I never made a comment on your economic status specifically, odifiend- I said, in general, if you can only afford one console then online gaming is obviously not your primary concern, especially because it can get expensive to play games online. I don't have too much money to buy games, so on the whole I don't want to spend a lot of it online when I could be buying more  offlinegames. THAT was my point. Beyond that, you assume I'm making an extremist statement- I'm not saying NOBODY wants to play games online, just that MOST don't. I've provided evidence of this before, namely in the very poor sales of XBox Live and Sony's online adaptor, and these polls go a very long way towards proving the same point. Read my last post again, because I said that very same thing- the polls are not conclusive in of themselves, no, and certainly not individually, but together they are strong support for my case.

Quote
Here's one for you- nothing can be determined from the poll. Take a Statistics course and you'll understand.

Why should I take a class? How is asking the general opinion of the public not indicative of the general opinion of the public? Explain that to me, don't say I should take some class.

Quote
Nope, but obviously since we're having this argument, you couldn't effectively prove the reverse.

I essentially HAVE proven the reverse- keep in mind I'm not claiming that NOBODY wants to play online games, just that most don't. How can those polls possibly lead you to the opposite conclusion, that most people DO want to play games online? If you're not led to such a conclusion from the polls, why do you think Nintendo should invest the time and money to take the Gamecube online? Tell me this: what evidence do you have that enough people want to play games online to justify Nintendo creating an online system? As far as I'm concerned, until you can answer that question, Nintendo has every reason to stay out of online gaming. It will become popular eventually, but not yet.  

[odifiend]

Honestly I don't want or need huge online communities, I just want a match system akin to EA sports titles or warp pipe.  It sounds minimal and it would increase the lastability of great, mainly-offline games.  I concede for various reasons but mostly because this would be never ending and it is straying from relevence.

Quote
what evidence do you have that enough people want to play games online to justify Nintendo creating an online system? As far as I'm concerned, until you can answer that question, Nintendo has every reason to stay out of online gaming

Touche, M_C, touche.  But just to save face, I will guess that even Nintendo truly doesn't know the answer.  It would be a huge gamble for them so they don't feel it is worth it, but these are the people who perfected and made standard portable gaming.  They overcame battery life and size, so if anyone can...

Now for your Stat question.  

Quote
How is asking the general opinion of the public not indicative of the general opinion of the public?

According to statistics, to preform an accurate prediction of a population, a random sample from that population must be tested. Therefore the people involved must be obtained randomly.  People who always log on to GameFaqs are by no means random.  That right there would void the credence of that poll.
Even if that most important factor was ignored, you have to take into account that it was 1) a voluntary response sample.  Often only people who feel strongly participate, skewing readings. 2) Such a sample (voluntary) is prone to undercoverage (not getting enough feedback to qualify it as random [not really a problem here that's already out]).
So according to statistics, because the GameFaqs polls defied the Great Holy laws of Stat by having a nonrandom sample, that sample was not an accurate depiction of the general public making it useless.

Don't worry I hate Statistics, too.  They really suck.  In fact forget I told you to take the course because I wouldn't even wish it on my worst enemy.

[mouse_clicker]

Quote
Honestly I don't want or need huge online communities, I just want a match system akin to EA sports titles or warp pipe. It sounds minimal and it would increase the lastability of great, mainly-offline games. I concede for various reasons but mostly because this would be never ending and it is straying from relevence.

I completely agree! I think Nintendo should take an approach much like Sony- not as in depth as MS, but still encouraging of 3rd parties.

Quote
I will guess that even Nintendo truly doesn't know the answer.

I would tend to agree with that myself, although there's no way to know for sure. I think Nintendo could afford at least a test, either towards the end of this generation or at the beginning of next generation. I do think Nintendo ingenuitive enough to find a way to make online gaming profitable.

[CaseyRyback]

Quote
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
I never made a comment on your economic status specifically, odifiend- I said, in general, if you can only afford one console then online gaming is obviously not your primary concern, especially because it can get expensive to play games online. I don't have too much money to buy games, so on the whole I don't want to spend a lot of it online when I could be buying more  offlinegames. THAT was my point. Beyond that, you assume I'm making an extremist statement- I'm not saying NOBODY wants to play games online, just that MOST don't. I've provided evidence of this before, namely in the very poor sales of XBox Live and Sony's online adaptor, and these polls go a very long way towards proving the same point. Read my last post again, because I said that very same thing- the polls are not conclusive in of themselves, no, and certainly not individually, but together they are strong support for my case.

Quote
Here's one for you- nothing can be determined from the poll. Take a Statistics course and you'll understand.

Why should I take a class? How is asking the general opinion of the public not indicative of the general opinion of the public? Explain that to me, don't say I should take some class.

Quote
Nope, but obviously since we're having this argument, you couldn't effectively prove the reverse.

I essentially HAVE proven the reverse- keep in mind I'm not claiming that NOBODY wants to play online games, just that most don't. How can those polls possibly lead you to the opposite conclusion, that most people DO want to play games online? If you're not led to such a conclusion from the polls, why do you think Nintendo should invest the time and money to take the Gamecube online? Tell me this: what evidence do you have that enough people want to play games online to justify Nintendo creating an online system? As far as I'm concerned, until you can answer that question, Nintendo has every reason to stay out of online gaming. It will become popular eventually, but not yet.

How is Xbox Live not sucessful? They provide a product for online play when less than 25% of people have BB in America and worldwide sales are 13.7 million. I would say 1 out of 14 people playing online is a large amount. Also you said SONY has not done weel with its adaptor, and it has not done as well as live but still most online games shoot for the BroadBand capable households.

When I buy a game to play online it actually saves money instead of making me spend more. Most people who play online games do not play a wide variety but seem to concentrate on one for a period of time. I spent my whole year addicted to Rainbow Six 3: Raven Shield and probably played for about 2 hours a day on average until november. People who pay to play online MMO's have the same mentality in that they focus on that one title because it is so involving that the 15 dollars a month sustains them from having to purchase other games to pass the time.

MC you also bring up these polls, and could the response from these polls be mainly from peopel not having the capability? My friend would love to play online but will not because he has dial up and his father will not allow him to upgrade. When he comes over we spend a lot of time trading off in Rainbow Six because he can not play at home and really likes to play online.

If online gaming was not financially sucessful would EA have spent 2 billion on its online infastructure? Would Xbox live not be making Microsoft a lot of money that helps with the hit they take on the system?

Online gaming may not make Nintendo much money but what it would do, would help 3rd parties sell more of their games which helps make more exclusive games and helps systems sell overall. With that money in the bank Nintendo could sell a lot more systems by spending a little to help 3rd parties not cancel GCN games or give them similar options available on all other games.

[Mario]

Quote
I would tend to agree with that myself, although there's no way to know for sure. I think Nintendo could afford at least a test, either towards the end of this generation or at the beginning of next generation.

I'd rather Sony and Microsoft keep doing all the testing for them, it's free for Nintendo that way.

Quote
How is Xbox Live not sucessful?

Uh, because it hasn't made any profit? What's more important, marketshare or mindshare?

Anyway. I agree with most of them, except i wouldn't give Ubi Soft developer of the year, and my biggest disappointment of the year wasn't "no online gaming", but that's just me. Im glad F-Zero GX was mentioned, although it didn't win, it was up against Zelda, so that's okay. Huzzah.

[odifiend]

Quote: originally posted by Mario

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would tend to agree with that myself, although there's no way to know for sure. I think Nintendo could afford at least a test, either towards the end of this generation or at the beginning of next generation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I'd rather Sony and Microsoft keep doing all the testing for them, it's free for Nintendo that way.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mario, it is not exactly free if any of their fans wanted to be online right this second and deserted them for another console.  That is money lost, ergo not free.

[Bill Aurion]

Considering online gaming isn't profitable, how is that money lost?  Wasting money on the concept is where the money is lost...

[Mario]

Quote
Mario, it is not exactly free if any of their fans wanted to be online right this second and deserted them for another console. That is money lost, ergo not free.

While Microsoft and Sony pour money into their online structues, Nintendo can sit back and observe what happens without losing a cent, that's what i meant... please don't turn this into another online debate.

[Caliban]

I just read the awards, and they were very great choices. I specially loved the quotes section, more specifically Bloodworth's quote from Dennis Dyack, that quote gave me a very big grin.

[KDR_11k]

I'm glad there are no big dissappointments that affect me. Even though I have the ability, I don't play online...
What stung me though was how few titles got all those awards. As if some scope was pretty narrow... But then again there aren't that many super-great-twenty-eight-A titles this year...

[Jonnyboy117]

As I said before, many were nominated, but a handful of games really stood out and grabbed a lot of awards.  Other games and nominations that got votes but didn't reach 1st or 2nd place:

Zelda bonus disc
Relatively dull E3 Expo
New Metroid games
Beyond Good & Evil
Final Fantasy Tactics Advance
Soul Calibur II
Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow
Atsumare! Made in Wario
Wario World
Enter the Matrix
Pac-Man vs.
Mario Kart: Double Dash
Prince of Persia
Fire Emblem

...and that's not even all of them.  I agree that Fire Emblem was probably one of the best GBA titles released last year, and it was nominated for GotY GBA, but not a single person voted for it.  We aren't going to fudge around the results just so more games can be represented.

[mouse_clicker]

Personally, I completely agree with Ubi Soft being Developer of the Year. Up until recently nobody really cared about Ubi Soft- they made Rayman, and published here and there, but very few people looked beyond that. And that all at once they release Splinter Cell, Prince of Persia, Beyond Good and Evil, and XIII. I still like Nintendo better, but we all expected good things out of them- Ubi Soft came out of nowhere to blow us all away, which I thought was very impressive.

[nickmitch]

I personally think it was their new logo that made their games so great. i'm not sure why though. Maybe some T.V. would help...

[odifiend]

Lol... I just read the goals and I would buy a PGC three screen system.  You can duu it!

[Bloodworth]

Hey, mouseclicker, et al: Take your online arguing somewhere else.  We don't need you spamming every thread that mentions online gaming with the same arguments over and over again.  

[odifiend]

Mr. Bloodworth, sir, we did eventually stop by ourselves and I'll take most of the responsiblity for the spam.  My apologies.

[mouse_clicker]

Besides the fact it wasn't an argument, Bloodworth, you'll notice I did end it... 12 posts ago. You would have seen as much had you read on a little further. :/

[Ian Sane]

Overall those awards pretty much reflect my own feelings.  I don't quite like Mario & Luigi that much and I would pick Ikaruga as the sleeper hit.  Otherwise the games that won awards all deserved it in my opinion.  I also would have picked E3 as biggest disappointment since it really failed to blow my socks off and focused way too much of connectivity stuff like Pac-Man Vs.  No online is disappointing but it's not like I was expecting them to go online.  I did expect to see some cool stuff at E3 and I was for the most part let down.

Sorry to continue this online stuff but there was a point made I really feel needs to be commented on.

" If you're interested in online gaming it's kind of assumed you just don't sit tight with what you have. If you don't go out and get an online capable console/PC that shows you're not interested enough in online gaming to really pursue it."

The thing is I have a PC and don't play many online games (or even games period) on it.  That's not because I'm not interested in online games I'm just not interested in PC games as a whole.  I don't have a PS2 or Xbox and don't plan on buying them anytime soon, at least not for their online games.  I don't want to play SOCOM or Crimson Skies I want to play online Nintendo games.  I want to play Mario Kart, Wave Race, 1080, Mario Party and F-Zero online.  Obviously I would never be able to play those games on a non-Nintendo console.  It's not so much that I want to play online games on the Gamecube I want to play online NINTENDO games and I can't do that unless Nintendo gives me that option.  That's why I want Nintendo to go online.  So I can play THEIR games with people across the world.

[Pale]

The only online game i was is a mmo pokemon game.  :-/  If that came I don't know if i would ever buy another game.

[Berto2K]

I am glad to hear that you guys are possibly thinking of redesing the site some.  It is easy on the eyes and very navigatable, but after a while it has gotten stale.  Can only hope for great things to come.