Gaming Forums > Nintendo Gaming

Rumor: Just Sniffing Around

<< < (5/6) > >>

BlkPaladin:
If they are hosted on Sega's seavers they could since they have to recop the maintainance and running fees for their servers. The free thing is for Nintendo's games on their eventual servers.

Cru_Jones83:
How come everyone thinks that they understand the industry fully?


Quote
I know but when if it does become profitable is Nintendo going to be able to keep up with MS and Sony who are making sure to get a foothold in the online market? Sometimes you have to be willing to take a loss in the present to get some profits in the future. Nintendo not only is not making any online games themselves (or at least not announced any) but they're making it hard for third parties to make online Gamecube games as well. Besides most online games are connected point-to-point so there's not server maintenance like with an online RPG. Simple online multiplayer games like Mario Kart Online could easily be done without major server costs.
--- End quote ---


I wasn't aware that you have a better economic understanding of the industry than Nintendo itself Ian Sane.  I mean, they just work at Nintendo and get paid to analyze what is profitable... but I mean you... you're a fan, so that must make you more knowledgeable.  You did say one important thing, you said:


Quote
Sometimes you have to be willing to take a loss in the present to get some profits in the future.
--- End quote ---


Again though, do you not think that the Nintendo analysts thought about both long term and short term goals?  I mean, they aren't stupid.  They went to school, studied this for a minimum of 4 years.  I am in first year business and one of the first things you learn is that both the long-term and short-term markets must be analyzed.  If I am learning this in 1st year, I am almost positive it is reinforced in the remaining 3  years and would not be something that analysts at a company like Nintendo would overlook.


Quote
Nintendo's online games will be like the PS2.
--- End quote ---


Wow, I had NO IDEA that Mingesium was actually a Nintendo employee who decided that their online plan would be unveiled on the PGC forums.  Either that, or he just doesn't know what he is talking about because Nintendo hasn't announced what their online strategy.


Quote
The only games that require a monthly charge would be the MMORPGs like Final Fantasy and Everquest. The online games are peer to peer.
--- End quote ---


I had no idea that Phantasy Star Online supported thousands of players all playing in a persistant world at the same time.  My copy of the game must be broken because I have to pay my $8.95/mo but it just doesn't seem to have the amount of players that MMORPG's are known for.  

Sorry about some of the sarcasm, but I have a proposal.  With the introduction of the new forums why doesn't everyone stop pretending that they have their Masters in Business Administration or that they KNOW that Nintendo's strategy is going to be this or that.  

By the way, sorry for picking on you guys (Ian Sane and Mingesium) you guys are NOT the only people on these boards that do this, it was just your posts that made me fed up with this kind of behaviour.

[/Rant]

Ian Sane:
"I wasn't aware that you have a better economic understanding of the industry than Nintendo itself Ian Sane. I mean, they just work at Nintendo and get paid to analyze what is profitable... but I mean you... you're a fan, so that must make you more knowledgeable."

Well I did know the N64 cartridge thing would bite them in the ass and I was only like 13 at the time so sometimes I'm more knowledgeable.

No I'm not a market analyst and I don't work in the industry so it is in general safe to assume Nintendo knows more than me.  But Nintendo is also stubborn as hell at the best of times and often refuses to change with the times.  Hell they don't even release demo discs even though Sony has proven that such a thing is worthwhile.  My problem isn't so much that Nintendo themselves doesn't appear to have any intentions of making online games but rather that they have no intentions of letting third parties do so as well.  Being a restrictive jerk with third parties has bitten them in the ass before so I think it's fair to assume that such actions may do so again.  It's one thing to say "we won't go online" and another to say "NO ONE will go online".  It makes no difference to Nintendo if third parties crash and burn with their online ventures.  Therefore throwing away a foothold in the online market when they don't even have to take a risk themselves doesn't make sense.  I don't have to be a market analyst to know that.

BlkPaladin:
Nintendo hasn't changed much in the 20 or more years they have been in gaming because they always have had one person in charge of all of the decisions. And the company usally reflects the overall attitude of that man. Yamauchi  has just recently steped. So we are going to see a change in Nintendo's image. But we are not going to see an extreme turn around in a few months. Not to mention the man that has replaced him has less power that Yamauchi did, and now the major decisions are now in a handfull of people. We may see a change starting this E3.

Mingesium:
Nintendo said


Quote
No royalties will be charged from developers and publishers for utilizing online capabilities of the console.
--- End quote ---


So they aren't going to create a XBox live type service. All the cost for an online game would be on the publisher. They might change their mind, but I don't see Nintendo spending all that money on an online service.

PSO is still a MMORPG just a very limited one. Games like racing or shooters would not require a monthly fee since it would be peer to peer.

So unless Nintendo changes its mind and creates a close network, GameCube's online plans should be similiar to PS2

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version