Topic: Where did all the Gamers Go?

[xts3]

Here's your answer...

Top 10 most OWNED games (on gamespot):

Halo
FFX
GTA:SA
Zelda WW
GTA3
KOTOR
FF7

I only see Zelda as the only most owned game in the top 10 "most owned", I know this doesn't reflect actual sales but I'm sure you could go look up the sales of all those games and they would all be very good.

[ZombieGalford]

Where have all the gamers gone?  I'll just list the games I
bought/played the most for the last two Nintendo systems
and that should explain most of it...

Nintendo 64
Perfect Dark
Oracina of Time
Majora's Mask
Orge Battle 64

GameCube
Metroid Prime series
Resident Evil series
Skies of Arcadia

[KDR_11k]

I'm actually hoping for the Revolution to break all bonds with the previous consoles. People will ask "why should I buy this console over the other?" and with the Rev there's a clear answer. Nintendo had nothing to lose anyway so the Rev is their attempt at garnering interest. What compelling reason is there to buy a Cube? There are great games on it but the other consoles have their great exclusives as well. Innovation? The PS2 is the playground of the more creative devs nowadays. Graphics? Everybody will point at the XBox. On the Rev people will see it is in fact vastly different. Whether that'll make them buy or run away is the big gamble but well received innovation always pays off (GTA, anyone?).

[heinous_anus]

Quote
Originally posted by: PJ gamer10
I'm an Eb employee and it has gotten to the point that I have had verbal arguments with customers because they do not think

the Gamecube is a legitimate platform for games.  They are perceived as a tiku tiku tiku!  system. After RE4 launched me and my

co-worker who is a nother Big N fanatic put it on and let people play it. People couldn't believe the power of the game and the

system. We even sold a few Gamecubes because of it.  Most people however are waiting for the PS2 port. Even with the DS,

people will examine the PSP and say this is better. Im beginning to think that people don't want quality games anymore but

they want an image.

I don't think people want an image.  People are given "an image" or "image 'x'" through advertising, word of mouth, friends, sales clerks, and the emphasized games on any given system.

Bearing in mind that Microsoft has a virtually unlimited pool of cash with which to work, there is little to no logical reason why it should ever outsell the Gamecube...or, for that matter, the PS2 for a given week/month, which I believe it did sometime during December.  Nearly every 3rd party game released on the Xbox can also be found on the PS2, which has a much more vast library of games (think backwards-compatability).  Of the remaining "exclusives," many of the Xbox's best games (Halo, KOTOR, KOTOR II, Doom III, etc.) can be found on the PC.  You're left with games like Halo 2 and Ninja Gaiden to warrant the purchase of the system...again, logically speaking.  And while these are fine games themselves, surely they couldn't alone justify to the common consumer, glancing down the aisle at the massive PS2 display, a $150 purchase?

My point?  Maybe some would, in this circumstance, thinking only in the terms above, buy that system (the Xbox).  But I attest that most wouldn't without another variable, and in advertising and "an image" we have such a variable.  Xbox doesn't have to be a good system; it doesn't have to have the exclusives that Nintendo has, or the broad genre coverage that Sony has.  It only has to have a company behind it that will convince at least part of the general public that it is the better system, bar none.  That is what Microsoft has done.

I saw a San Andreas commercial extraordinarily late on Comedy Central the other night while "studying;" this was like 3 in the morning, mind you, and San Andreas was released in November.  Why am I not seeing constant RE4 ads....all the time?  Does anyone remember how cool Nintendo's commercials used to be, and how frequently you saw them on TV?  Go, go right now on the web looking for the old Dr. Mario commercial.    

I want, as many skeptical Nintendo fans want, to continue playing games well into the future on a console made by the big N.  The real fear here is that Nintendo will either be 1) Sega-matized, which is of course no good, or 2)demoted to "cult" status, putting out pretty much Nintendo-only software on their system.  Neither one of these should happen, but certainly could happen unless Revolution is really that Revolutionary, not just with respect to how we play games, but with respect to how many different companies (and genres) we get to play games from.  

[KDR_11k]

People (everybody, me included) want categories in which to file everything (good, evil, great, mediocre, friendly, hostile, mature, childish, etc). What they can't file confuses them and most will try to ban it. When they encounter a console they decide on a stereotype to assign to it to simplify any decision process. Seeing the PS2, XB and GC not as a complex problem but as a simple, abstract word helps with thinking about them. So some would say the XB "has nothing but Halo", others would file it under "appeals to western gamers", some file the PS2 under "outdated" or "bad hardware", some under "most games!". The GC often gets put into "great games" or "childish". These categories help silence any doubts people might have about their choice (whether they buy one or more consoles) because you'll always have to deal with shortcomings of your choice or the advantages of other choices (e.g. you go with a GC only but cannot play all of those PS2 and XBox games, you buy all three consoles but have trouble keeping track of their libraries and your cash, etc).
The less people know about something the more they go with the mainstream oppinion. Though there's also denial that comes up when someone isn't able to change their choice, e.g. buy another console and needs to bring up his ego by proclaiming that choice would've been disadvantageous... That results in fanboyism. But I'm getting off-topic here.
Basically, the less informed an individual is the more they believe the popular oppinion (hype). That's what "consumer education" (AE: corporate propaganda) is for.
Maybe N could change the "hype" that surrounds them, they don't get much negative comments from actually informed customers so the problem is probably the way they fight the propaganda war.

[xts3]

Quote
Originally posted by: heinous_anus

Quote
Originally posted by: PJ gamer10
I'm an Eb employee and it has gotten to the point that I have had verbal arguments with customers because they do not think

the Gamecube is a legitimate platform for games.  They are perceived as a tiku tiku tiku!  system. After RE4 launched me and my

co-worker who is a nother Big N fanatic put it on and let people play it. People couldn't believe the power of the game and the

system. We even sold a few Gamecubes because of it.  Most people however are waiting for the PS2 port. Even with the DS,

people will examine the PSP and say this is better. Im beginning to think that people don't want quality games anymore but

they want an image.

I don't think people want an image.  People are given "an image" or "image 'x'" through advertising, word of mouth, friends, sales clerks, and the emphasized games on any given system.

Bearing in mind that Microsoft has a virtually unlimited pool of cash with which to work, there is little to no logical reason why it should ever outsell the Gamecube...or, for that matter, the PS2 for a given week/month, which I believe it did sometime during December.  Nearly every 3rd party game released on the Xbox can also be found on the PS2, which has a much more vast library of games (think backwards-compatability).  Of the remaining "exclusives," many of the Xbox's best games (Halo, KOTOR, KOTOR II, Doom III, etc.) can be found on the PC.  You're left with games like Halo 2 and Ninja Gaiden to warrant the purchase of the system...again, logically speaking.  And while these are fine games themselves, surely they couldn't alone justify to the common consumer, glancing down the aisle at the massive PS2 display, a $150 purchase?

My point?  Maybe some would, in this circumstance, thinking only in the terms above, buy that system (the Xbox).  But I attest that most wouldn't without another variable, and in advertising and "an image" we have such a variable.  Xbox doesn't have to be a good system; it doesn't have to have the exclusives that Nintendo has, or the broad genre coverage that Sony has.  It only has to have a company behind it that will convince at least part of the general public that it is the better system, bar none.  That is what Microsoft has done.

I saw a San Andreas commercial extraordinarily late on Comedy Central the other night while "studying;" this was like 3 in the morning, mind you, and San Andreas was released in November.  Why am I not seeing constant RE4 ads....all the time?  Does anyone remember how cool Nintendo's commercials used to be, and how frequently you saw them on TV?  Go, go right now on the web looking for the old Dr. Mario commercial.    

I want, as many skeptical Nintendo fans want, to continue playing games well into the future on a console made by the big N.  The real fear here is that Nintendo will either be 1) Sega-matized, which is of course no good, or 2)demoted to "cult" status, putting out pretty much Nintendo-only software on their system.  Neither one of these should happen, but certainly could happen unless Revolution is really that Revolutionary, not just with respect to how we play games, but with respect to how many different companies (and genres) we get to play games from.

Utlimately I think the problem is Nintendo has lost their game (i.e. the fun we all *used* to have is gone), in short they have lost their 'royal jelly'.    Every single game they have released has disappointed me when it came to the fun I had with previous games.  I dont think this is just a problem with Nintendo but the PS2 has far more fun and totally engrossing games then the Gamecube and Xbox, period.  I thought Maximo: Army of Zin was a better game then Super mario sunshine hands down and thats not even one of the killer apps for the PS2.

Another thing is - Metroid prime 2 : Echoes is a prime example of not having studied what it is that makes a first person game fun, I had to force myself through the game because it just game off as a "me too" clone.   Whether  anyone wants to admit it or not,  Metroid and Halo are exactly the same game with different coats of pain when you consider it minus the graphics,  "point running around with a gun to collect or shoot other objects", the problem is no one is exploring what makes it fun.   in Halo its the action, in Metroid... well its a walking-powerup puzzle-collecting simulator when you fight enemies in prime you don't get a rush like you do in Halo or other PC FPS games like Half life / half-life 2 and thats a huge killer -- the fun is missing and thats what sale of the game should be about.

[KDR_11k]

xts3: Comparing Metroid and Halo is perhaps the most idiotic thing ever. Just because they're both first person, scifi and involve guns doesn't mean they're identical. Halo is a game about strategic squad combat, Metroid is one about exploring and solving puzzles, fighting is more evasion-oriented than attack-oriented. Did you complain about how the 2d Metroids are just Megaman clones?

[couchmonkey]

I think the problem is more that Metroid wasn't "fun" in the first place.  People looking for an adrenaline rush from Metroid are playing the wrong game!  Except for the boss battles, the series has always been built on exploration.  The fun in Metroid theoretically comes from exploring and navigating a huge alien world, and that isn't fun to everyone.  Definitely not as fun to most people as a traditional FPS.  I personally used to dislike the series, but I find the Prime games pretty entertaining.  Exploration in 3D is more exciting to me.

As for whether Nintendo's other games are fun or not, that's a matter of taste.  I still have way more fun with Nintendo's games than with most other developers' games.

[Jhiando]

Where did all the gamers go?  EASY ... the SAME place as the games... ELSEWHERE. You Nintendo die-hard fanatics don't get it yet. Microsoft & Sony aren't winning because of " image " or " coolness". They are winning because they have the games people want to play. They have the type of games most people want to play. Nintendo rules in the I LOVE HALO 2 games realm. Most people don't want to play those games anymore... and those who still do, have a Gamecube. Nintendo finished third place this round and will finish third again next round UNLESS people change their gaming tastes. Considering that the median age of gamers is skewing older, I doubt that will happen. IF Resident Evil 4 were multi-console, the Gamecube version would be in last place like it always is.  

[SgtShiversBen]

So I take it people don't want to play Soul Calibur II?  That's odd, I could have sworn that game did alot better than it's kin on the other consoles.  But honestly, this is the same crap that everyone was saying was going to happen next time.  If it's not first, big deal.  If it is, then horray.  In my opinion it's first.  I don't care about other people's opinions.  Why?  Because it's MY life.  My GameCube made me happy.  So that's all there is to it.  If your XBox or PS2 made you happy, then that's your deal.  Live with it and stop proclaiming to everyone how you're NOT a TEH KITTY!!  

[KDR_11k]

So people went to the other consoles because they have the games? Well, duh. But why do they have the games? Why did Rockstar decide GTA wouldn't sell on the GC? Those games don't come from Microsoft or Sony, they come 50-50 from their perception in the marketplace and the money they shell out.

[couchmonkey]

It's not like Nintendo never has anything for older players either.  In 2002, GameCube brought us Eternal Darkness, Resident Evil 1 and 0, and Metroid Prime.  That's all in addition to third party games like Timesplitters 2, Red Faction, etc.  I will agree that some people have lost interest in Nintendo because of the types of games it makes, though.

[heinous_anus]

While I completely agree that Nintendo has plenty of "older games," particularly the RE series, there should be no reason why games made for the PS2 end up on the Xbox but not the GC.  There are far too many "adult" titles that get released on those two systems but never get released on GC, and that has always confounded me, particularly with the "2nd place" spot historically being neck and neck between MS and Nintendo.

[Rancid Planet]

Yeah the whole Burnout 3 thing really made me go nuts.

[Ymeegod]

"but never get released on GC, and that has always confounded me, particularly with the "2nd place" spot historically being neck and neck between MS and Nintendo. "

How many third party games sell well on the GC?  How many on the Xbox?

Two, why pay more royalities for less sales?-- Nintendo chargers abit more than MS--

[Don'tHate742]

The only reason they don't sell well is because of Nintendo's own compassion for quality. It has been proven that third party games do sell well as along as they meet a Nintendo like standard in gaming. TOS had this as well as Viewtiful Joe. The only reason why Xbox gamers gobble it up is because to them, all-around OK games are better than what they usually get. Third Parties don't like releasing games for Nintendo because compared to Nintendo, there just Ok and not worth a whopping $50. Burnout 3 would of sold really well on Nintendo, probably even better than Xbox. Hell, my brother owns an Xbox and I told him to buy burnout 3. If it were released for the cube, I would of bought it instead.

[Rancid Planet]

While it is true that Nintendo's first party stuff has a tendency to make certain third party games look like the royal turds that they are (cough! EA! cough!) But alas the problem remains.

My suggestion? How about a starightforward advetisement on tv that played towards Nintendo's loyal audience. We're sure to listen right? Right. In the commecial have just a guy sitting in his lounge chair staring at his tv when a guy comes into the room (we get this first person perspective) and as the unsuppecting dude in the chair looks up and the new entrant we hear an overvoice saying "LISTEN! We know they make crap games. You know they make crap games. But just BUY one once in a while would ya?!" and then he just bitch slaps the guy in the chair. Comercial over.

Sounds stupid huh? But what do you want to bet I could get it sold to an ad company?

[Caillan]

The problem with focusing advertising on existing fans is that existing fans already buy the product. Advertising should tell people that something exists. That's why its so important for a low-profile game like Eternal Darkness to have a decent campaign at launch.

[trip1eX]

I think the Cube has a bad image as others have said.  And that's what has hurt it.


The Cube is the Prince of Persia:Sands of Time.  The PS2 and Xbox are both the Prince of Persia: Warrior Within.  That's the image difference.  

Americans want GTA.  Halo.  Big guns.  They need to be badass.  They need to see lots of gore.  They need realism.

I think the Cube's image is closely associated with Nintendo software and Nintendo software just isn't mainstream American gaming anymore for the highschoolers.  There's no fps game.  No realistic racing game.  No rpg without kid characters.  No military tactical game.  No flight combat game.  

If Nintendo spent their game development talents on making a few more WEstern titles such as above they'd do better.  

I don't care if they aren't totally popular tho.  But I do want them to survive as a console maker.

I would love to see some of these types of games from Nintendo tho in addition to their usual great games.

 

[heinous_anus]

Quote
Originally posted by: Don'tHate742
The only reason they don't sell well is because of Nintendo's own compassion for quality. It has been proven that third party games do sell well as along as they meet a Nintendo like standard in gaming. TOS had this as well as Viewtiful Joe. The only reason why Xbox gamers gobble it up is because to them, all-around OK games are better than what they usually get. Third Parties don't like releasing games for Nintendo because compared to Nintendo, there just Ok and not worth a whopping $50. Burnout 3 would of sold really well on Nintendo, probably even better than Xbox. Hell, my brother owns an Xbox and I told him to buy burnout 3. If it were released for the cube, I would of bought it instead.

I could think of a few examples to the contrary - Burnout 3 has already been mentioned, and let's not forget about everything that Rockstar puts out.  The bottom line is that the GC is the only "major" competitor of the 3 that doesn't receive said ports.  If a game goes multiplatform, there needs to be a GC version, I don't care how "crappy" it is.  And is this a pretty recent rule (rule= 3rd parties don't match the "quality" of Nintendo games)?  I remember 3rd parties making tons and tons of games for the SNES, and I think we'd agree that Nintendo-made games for that system were, on the whole, superior to 3rd part products.

[Ymeegod]

Well by your logic, Kirby's Air Ride shouldn't have outsold F-zero GX but it did.  

The fact of the matter is it doesn't matter the quality of the product but the appeal to the casual gamers that determine high sales.  

And like the guy above stated--losing multiplatform games are hurting overall sales for the GC.  During the last 3 months both Xbox/PS2 have launched 10 titles with an avg score of 8 or higher while the GC only had 5 (4 of which have been EA titles).    

What games did GC miss out then?  Brothers in Arms, Mercenaries, World Soccer Winning Eleven 8 International, Major League Baseball 2K5, Project: Snowblind --Those are ones with an 8 or higher avg score and all of them was multiplatform.


 

[Don'tHate742]

heinous_anus - Yeah, it's a pretty recent rule that Nintendo games are just all around better than third party games. During the SNES and NES, even little developers could get a piece of the pie. That produced an incentive to provide quality. Something changed over the ten year course though. Now, when games that sell are based on how "cool" they are or how many ways you can kill some one before they hit the ground, there is little incentive to provide quality. I'm not saying that's how all games are, but if you look at a top ten sales list...there's really nothing new, nothing creative. There's alot more crap today then there was in the day of NES, even though the NES had more games then I wanted to play. I remember picking up a 100 in 1 game. I thought most of it was going to be crap, but I wasn't pleasantly surprized. I wish I had not lost that game, because I could see myself playing it today. It's sad that I want to play old games, because they're better than what I see today. It shouldn't be that way. What i'm trying to say is....If there is a way for small time developers to get back into the game biz....LET ME KNOW!

Nintendo is the only developer trying to produce something for all ages that are quality. They don't always hit the mark, but the fact that they try says something. Other companies do follow the quality rule, but most of today's third parties just release a game to make a heap of money and not because of the passion they have for gaming. In the NES days, developers just wanted to make a decent amount of money, since making games was more important to them than being rich. If they did become rich, they didn't stop making games. The year that Microsoft entered the game, all hell broke loose. Besides one game that was fun, they flooded the market with crap. Paying off developers to make games for their system. What incentive do developers have to make a great game, when no matter what the outcome is they make a profit? Now Sony does it too, but not to a great of extent. Developers see it as a more viable console becuase of the fan base and develope mediocre titles because they know someone out of the millions will buy it. It's all about money these days, and I feel that money mentallity is ruining the game business as a whole. If all the developers were a Nintendo in quality respect (ie Capcom, Konami), then I would probably only stop playing to eat and occasionally use the bathroom....oh ya and sleep (maybe). Sometimes I wish money wasn't a factor......

[Ymeegod]

Capcom = quality?  LoL they do produce some nice gems but at the same time there's alot of Crappy titles too, and Konami's Yu-gi-Oh series is an utter joke yet konami still produces them because it's all about the profit.  Nintendo's pokemon series is another fine example of pushing crap out the door knowing it will sell based on name alone.  

[Rancid Planet]

Yeah I just got into a Konami/Capcom discuusion debate type thing. You know, it really wasn't worth the time.

[09n]

The mature = xbox/PS2 is worse here in the UK because we have a rating system based on age. All the zelda series are 3+ and metroid only just scraped 12+. This means that anyone who's over 20 is immedietly put off. However a lot of my friends haveing seen my nintendo consoles have converted to Gamecube. This was also because they got sick of swear words in GTA and tired of the length of FF.

Nintendo's main problem in my opinion is they are failing to create new games. They rely too much on 1st and 2cd party games and lose the 3rd party. Also they have almost exhausted the Zelda series (did anyone care what wind waker was about?) and it is now failing to attract the comman gamer. Metroid is still good though (except it would be better in 3rd person). Another good example of the failing nintendo is Starfox Armarda. This was fun but had some fundermental flaws. 3-4 hours is two short and the "ace pilots" are actually petty rubbish.

However I'm getting off topic. In short the reason that nintendo is loseing gamers is that they are useing tried and tested methods in a time that exciting, new games will control a market.

Short little point, to those gamers who own more than 1 or 2 consoles shame on you (by one or two I mean PS2 or Xbox and Gamecube) you are wasting money which would help nintendo develop better games.