Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on October 21, 2005, 11:21:49 AM
but of course certain sites (like gamespot) have decided shipped and sold mean the same thing and have taken to saying Sony has sold 10 million PSP's
The truth howerver is much much less:
From Gamasutra:
According to recent statements from Sony Computer Entertainment Europe, the PSP has sold "over a million units throughout the PAL territories", while chart analyst Media Create gives a figure of 1,910,205 units sold in Japan to date. As ever, figures for North America remain the most obscure, although recent estimates from The NPD Group put the figure at over 2 million units
From Kikizo:
Official numbers are difficult to come by, but a press release from Sony this week, to announce the launch of the PSP Giga Pack, says that just over a million PSPs have been sold in Europe since the handheld's launch on 1 September. Another report says that actual sales in North America are standing at around 2.5 million.
Does this mean that there are millions of PSPs sitting in stock rooms and on store shelves throughout the world? It seems so.
Post by: Artimus on October 21, 2005, 11:31:22 AM
What are the DS's comparable #s?
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on October 21, 2005, 11:38:03 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on October 21, 2005, 12:24:26 PM
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on October 21, 2005, 12:36:02 PM
Quote
Sony seems to always use the shipped numbers. This is nothing new
Maybe not new, but it is rather underhanded, makes it seem like Sony is doing better than they are, in this case much better.
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on October 21, 2005, 12:50:10 PM
Post by: stevey on October 21, 2005, 03:20:18 PM
So that why the psp get more store shelve space than the Nintendo DS. Still is no resone to cut the cube shelve space (come on $2.6/gl)
Post by: nemo_83 on October 21, 2005, 08:11:59 PM
Post by: Artimus on October 21, 2005, 08:42:12 PM
What are the DS's numbers in Europe, Japan and NA?
Post by: ShyGuy on October 21, 2005, 08:49:17 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on October 21, 2005, 10:58:33 PM
Post by: Stimutacs Addict on October 21, 2005, 11:21:33 PM
only thing is, nintendo has probably sold most of the shipped systems.
Post by: Gamebasher on October 22, 2005, 08:47:21 AM
Otherwise, when the big Videogame God comes down here, they will be thrown out of the window just like Sony is about to be!
Ahhh, I just love justice when it hits where it hurts the most!
Nintendo is indeed the King of videogaming, about to reassume it´s former position of No.1!
I would say that it will be Nintendo and Microsoft who will dominate the future of videogaming. Heck, Microsoft even gives Nintendo a helping hand with portable console developement.
Post by: KDR_11k on October 22, 2005, 09:42:54 AM
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on October 22, 2005, 10:13:36 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
If there was any higher being enforcing justice, Microsoft would be nothing but a memory now.
Amen.
Post by: nemo_83 on October 22, 2005, 10:40:02 AM
Post by: nickmitch on October 22, 2005, 03:31:58 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on October 22, 2005, 10:36:22 PM
Post by: nemo_83 on October 23, 2005, 12:06:20 AM
Nintendo should skip the BS and just put traditional functions on these remotes now. There would be no more need for a nunchuck or shell. And in five years Sony would not be able to slap an analog stick on a remote and say they have 1uped Nintendo.
Post by: KnowsNothing on October 23, 2005, 05:36:54 AM
Post by: Gamebasher on October 24, 2005, 07:42:36 AM
However, I very much hope that Reggie has a plan ready, if they try to get some sleazy lawyers to circumvent their copyright on the new controller interface. I really really hope that Nintendo has learned something about past "copyrights" after seeing all of their previous inventions being ruthlessly copied by the others. I really don´t know much about copyright legislation, but if Nintendo has done all in their legal power to make it near impossible for the competition to steal from them again I am indeed very happy for them. They were making a big issue about not showing the new controller for a long time for fear of the copy cats!
Aside from that, I think that more and more people will look over to Nintendo´s DS because Sony´s plan of putting all kinds of non-gaming related media on the PSP will largely fail! Various websites may claim that Sony is selling the PSP in huge numbers, but unable to prove it. While Nintendo can prove they are actually doing so! If anyone is near the 10 million mark here it is Nintendo - NOT Sony!
I think people see the PSP as a nice little handheld with beautifull exterior and everything, but they don´t see as much fun in it´s games as they see in the games over on the DS! I really think that people everywhere see that difference! So Nintendo has hit the jackpot because they know much better what makes people who play games happier!
One of my friends wanting to buy a new handheld for his daughter, just dumped the PSP in favour of DS! He complained to me for weeks on end that there was no games coming out for it worth playing really for longer than a week or so (just like I had already told him there wouldn´t). Which really didn´t warrant shelling out 400 bucks for something which won´t last! He will buy a Pink or Blue DS with Nintendogs tommorow for her! It is twice the fun (if not more) and two times cheaper!
With him being a die-hard Sony fan for years, it comes as a total surprise to me that he made that choice. I never thought he would listen! But I assume he heard enough about the bad sales numbers for the PSP, and the dismal launch line-up, lack of new games, to be convinced that what I said was right! So Sony can brag about their so-called success with the PSP. I just think they are empty (gaming-) barrels making a lot of noise!
Post by: vudu on October 24, 2005, 09:03:34 AM
QuoteHow does Nintendo get sold numbers and Sony doesn't?
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
On one hand Sony doesn't get any numbers outside of shipped, on the other hand 6 and 10 million is a rather large difference.
Post by: Bill Aurion on October 24, 2005, 09:50:43 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on October 24, 2005, 09:53:56 AM
Post by: nemo_83 on October 24, 2005, 08:12:49 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing
Haven't we been through this? Putting regular funtions on the remote would not only ruin what Nintendo's aiming to do, but it would suck too.
I'd rather have an analog stick/trackball button combo than a dpad/a button combo on the revolution remote. Think about how you are going to control the camera in Zelda when you are using the remote to swing the sword. Will we have to endure having to hit a button to switch the functionality of the 3d motion control between camera control and weapon control?
Or will they use the wavebird shell for Zelda?
Post by: Dasmos on October 24, 2005, 09:07:59 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: nemo_83Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing
Haven't we been through this? Putting regular funtions on the remote would not only ruin what Nintendo's aiming to do, but it would suck too.
I'd rather have an analog stick/trackball button combo than a dpad/a button combo on the revolution remote. Think about how you are going to control the camera in Zelda when you are using the remote to swing the sword. Will we have to endure having to hit a button to switch the functionality of the 3d motion control between camera control and weapon control?
Or will they use the wavebird shell for Zelda?
And THAT'S why you don't work for Nintendo.....
Post by: wandering on October 25, 2005, 05:24:11 AM
Post by: Gamebasher on October 25, 2005, 09:00:10 AM
I don´t care! if Sony can still attract developers who assume they will be able to make big sales on games that are hard to develope. That will not continue for long!! With the cost of developement going up all the time, fewer and fewer developers will want to take the risk of investing millions of dollars they may never see a healthy profit from. I see this proved in the many bankruptcies that have already taken place, mergers and what not. I also just read about some developers at Konami who are making games exclusively for Sony PS3, who are stating secretly that they may jump to other platforms because they are tired of how hard it is to develope for the Playstation 2/3 platform! Developers are also human you know, and it isn´t all about money, but also about them avoiding being burned out alltogether for the reasons of iron hard developement cycles!
I think that Nintendo is being 100% right about their way of approaching games and how they brand the super graphics in them unnesscesarry. Gameplay is the most important of it all, as merely looking on cool graphics and limited fun isn´t going to do the job of selling millions of copies to consumers. I have seen Ridge Racer on the PSP, and I am impressed over the graphics there but not over the gameplay. I have seen it all before, and have tired of it! It would last me a week, and then I would get rid of it never wanting to play it again. So it is with nearly all of the PSP games out now. And you can play nearly all of those same games bigger and better on a TV! Which is probably why it isn´t the huge success Sony thought it would become! People have seen it all before.
I read about people who say that the XBOX360 launch games (which they have sampled secretly by courtesy of Microsoft themselves) aren´t as many times better than current xbox games as they were expecting them to be, that they do not at all surpass what can be shown on a nicely tuned PC. They are n other words just slightly better than current XBOX games. To get something that is not even twice as good as what can be seen on the current XBOX, Microsoft will charge people over 400 dollars for the premium version without any games. That makes 600 dollars minimum with two games and counting!
Now, 600 dollars may be affordable to those people who do nothing but play games. But to most of the average consumers this is too much money. It may be more attractive to get a Nintendo Revolution at 200 dollars next year with EVERYTHING included and adding a few hundred dollars more for two great Nintendo games. So they will wait it out.
What I am saying here, is that Microsoft don´t fit the bill! Yes, the XBOX360 may be cool enough to play on, but people will definitely want to see that it is really really worth playing them games coming out on it, before they go and invest that much money in it! Heck, people have Playstations, Xboxes and GameCubes as well as handhelds already stacked up in their rooms so why should they invest that much more money in a 1 1/2 upgrade? I think they simply wait it out until the games get 2 or 3 times better to look at, and until then will keep what they´ve got already. DS or PSP or XBOX or Playstation or GameCubes - whicever it is that they own now. Nintendo has been bashing Microsoft for a lomg time for coming out too early with their next-gen console, and I think we will see that things turn out exactly as I have said: people won´t buy it! At least not in the numbers Microsoft thinks! Sales may be big at the launch day, but will flatten out soon after. So it will probably be the same as with the PSP. If not, I will be surprised. But I think my theory will hold.
So that leaves for me to include the developers and how they will go about it. Well, they will follow the consumers tastes and develope for the gamesystems that are most popular of course. So they will follow closely what happens with Xbox 360 now and then they will decide if it is worth developing for. Nintendo is likely, though, to attract a lot of developers, and which they already has even now, who will want to utilize the fantastic opportunity that lies in front of them thanks to the new controlsystem coming on Nintendo Revolution. I just read a Gamesindustry.biz interview with several japanese developers who are crazy about the Nintendo Revolution and the opportunities for game development that it gives them.
The ease opportunities which the Revolution gives them, along with the ease of developement possible with it too, and the significant drop in costs, will set a new trend which I believe stands to be so big in the end that it will turn other developers away from Sony´s rock hard developement cycles and over to Nintendo as well as Microsoft. Sony apparently thinks they can tell developers that they are the King of it all, and that developers will just have to stay onboard nomatter how hard it is to develope for, and tell us who are the gamers that we will have to work hard to afford the games. It´s absolute nonsense, and contains a level of arrogance which will bring them down if they continue like that!
So no matter how much you may claim that I am not being realistic when I see Nintendo as being very successfull, attracting big numbers of developers and consumers alike, I see it written in the ongoing defacto situation in the videogamemarket! And what I see, is what Nintendo saw first.
Post by: nemo_83 on October 25, 2005, 10:42:38 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: wandering
Actually, I've been a little worried about how camera control will work. But I'm thinking that games that need it will use either the d-pad or the gyro....and I'm thinking further that Nintendo will try to eliminate the need for camera control in a lot of it's games. I've always kind of felt that they came close to that with Ocarina of time - but then kind of took a step backwards with the cube generation.
Targeting was imaginative with the N64 which only had one analog stick, but now they could avoid this. They could allow us to target enemies to attack, but they could also allow us to control the camera so a wizard doesn't hit Link with a fireball while our back is turned. I like the way the camera in the old 2d games was at a three quarters view and they could set the camera like that again with the Revolution version, but everyone enjoys the option of being able to put the camera where they want it, whether that is right in Link's face or a thousand feet away. The more options the better. Targetting allows it not to be a neccessity.
I wonder if they will finally give Link a jump button.
It is less of an issue, but in shooters it would be cool to be able to shoot in one direction and look in another, especially when you are trying to control the game with two remotes. Do you really want to go back to controlling character movement and camera with a dpad?
Post by: Bill Aurion on October 25, 2005, 10:54:25 AM
Link should NEVER EVER EVER EVER have a jump button (EVER)...If a button is ever used to make Link jump it should be through an actual item (Roc's Feather)...
Post by: nemo_83 on October 25, 2005, 11:11:45 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
"I wonder if they will finally give Link a jump button."
Link should NEVER EVER EVER EVER have a jump button (EVER)...If a button is ever used to make Link jump it should be through an actual item (Roc's Feather)...
Explain why you believe he should never have a jump button. Is it because of accessability, tradition, or something else? The auto jump has gotten to me over time. Too many times in WW did Link jump in a straight line, unbending beyond his decision to leap from platforms. The game has entered into 3d. If they are going to require players to aim vertically to hit the bat with an arrow then they should allow us to control Link's jumping.
Post by: Bill Aurion on October 25, 2005, 11:29:07 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on October 25, 2005, 11:30:36 AM
The auto-jump makes the jumping portions less about platforming skills and more about figuring out when to jump and where to jump from.
Post by: vudu on October 25, 2005, 11:36:50 AM
QuoteExactly. If you can't jump from point A to point B it's because you're not supposed to be able to. You never have to try over and over again thinking "maybe if I jumped just a half second later I could make it to that ledge".
The auto-jump makes the jumping portions less about platforming skills and more about figuring out when to jump and where to jump from.
Post by: KnowsNothing on October 25, 2005, 11:42:11 AM
Quote
Too many times in WW did Link jump in a straight line
Because sometimes when I jump I suddently change directions. This one time I accidentally jumped into an old woman.
HILARIOUS SATIRE aside, other people said words with which I agree.
Post by: Artimus on October 25, 2005, 11:47:37 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
I don't want Link jumping because I'm not very good at platformers and if they made it so I have to time these amazing jumps like in the 3D Mario games I would be screwed. Zelda isn't a platformer so I don't want to be forced to have platformer skills to complete it. Zelda is mostly about puzzle solving and exploration and it benefits greatly from not requiring mad gamer skillz to do well in. Zelda requires a brain. If you can figure out what to do you can do it. Even the bosses are largely about figuring out how to beat them instead of endless dodging. Adding platforming would take that benefit away. It's the same reason I don't want Zelda to be a "sword swinging" game.
The auto-jump makes the jumping portions less about platforming skills and more about figuring out when to jump and where to jump from.
Aha. Now we finally get the reason Ian fears change: he's afraid he'll start sucking!
Post by: nickmitch on October 25, 2005, 12:32:49 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on October 25, 2005, 01:16:59 PM
YES
Post by: Bill Aurion on October 25, 2005, 02:07:53 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: TVman
Roc's feather only works in the 2(.5)D Zelda games. The 3D Zeldas should have no such thing.
Well not like there's any indication of it sucking in a 3D game...
Post by: odifiend on October 25, 2005, 06:24:39 PM
I like how Bill is semi-unwilling to compromise. NEVER EVER EVER unless Roc's ___ is used.
King of the Zelda purists
Post by: KDR_11k on October 25, 2005, 09:03:33 PM
I do think the rod should control Link's hand directly, that allows for more creative and less obvious puzzles. Instead of running up to a statue, pressing A and the game telling you "there's a round opening on that statue" or if you have the item in hand "you playe [item] in the opening", you could just stand in front of it, look at it and see the opening. Then you draw some item and try to jam it in there. Or you see exposed gears somewhere. Usually the game would tell you that's a hotspot and suggest that you can jam them with an item, on the Rev there could just be the turning gears, you look at them, grab a stick and try to block the gears with it. The more actions the player can do, the more actions a puzzle can involve.
Post by: IceCold on October 25, 2005, 09:10:03 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on October 26, 2005, 07:49:55 AM
Post by: vudu on October 26, 2005, 09:17:15 AM
Post by: TMW on October 26, 2005, 12:03:25 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Well, the Zelda thread was so long that noone could read it.
I actually read through the entire thing back when it was at 80 pages. That was a fun day.
Post by: stevey on October 26, 2005, 02:06:10 PM
Have you played a 3d zelda before? you uses R for camera control and Dpad up for fpv and use the remote to look around
Post by: UniversalJuan on October 26, 2005, 09:25:46 PM
Post by: Myxtika1 Azn on October 26, 2005, 10:47:21 PM
I would not want Link to have a jump button either just because.
Post by: nitsu niflheim on October 27, 2005, 06:13:38 AM
Post by: nemo_83 on October 27, 2005, 11:55:58 AM
Post by: Myxtika1 Azn on October 27, 2005, 01:09:24 PM
Post by: Pryopizm on October 28, 2005, 05:42:34 PM
Sony today (Thursday) reported its worst half-year ever, saying profits plummeted 72 percent to $184 million. While the primary loser for the company was its consumer electronics division, Sony also noted that its movie business had sustained an operating loss of $57 million compared with last year's profit of $238 million, largely due to its blockbuster hit Spider-Man 2. By contrast, this year's Stealth, a $130-million production starring Jamie Foxx, earned only $31.7 million domestically. The company's only bright light appeared to be its new PlayStation Portable, which has been selling strongly.
It seems as if the PSP is actually selling very well since it's the most profitable item Sony has. Despite its profits plummeting (some blame is due to R&D for the PS3) $184 million in profits alone is still a pretty sizeable chunk of change.
Post by: OptimusPrime on October 29, 2005, 02:55:30 AM
And 184 million isn't impressive if you know that Nintendo's expected profit for this year (with R&D for the revolution) is actually higher (220 million or something) and they only do games.
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on October 29, 2005, 04:25:03 AM
)but they don't mention anything about the R&D for the systems...and heres why:from: Gamesindustry.biz
Electronics giant Sony has seen a 46 per cent slump in its profit for the three months ended September 30th, with the enormous cost of developing the PlayStation 3 console fingered as a key factor in the decline.
Also:
NY TIMES
Sony also reiterated its outlook for a loss of nearly $87 million for the fiscal year ending in March. It would be the company's first annual loss in more than a decade.
So not just a loss for the gaming divsion but also the entire company.
Post by: Pryopizm on October 29, 2005, 07:28:22 AM
But consumer electronics is Sony's bread and butter, and so long as they continue to profit off of it at all, of course they'll continue with it, especially in video games. They'll simply cut their losses elsewhere. Don't be surprised if they sell off their films division. They can't subsist on Spiderman alone. (Also, is it wrong for me to take great joy in Stealth being such a failure? Not because it was a Sony movie, but because it was yet another big, bad, and stupid action flick.)
The big question is what will Nintendo do to market and position the Revolution to take advantage of Sony's weaknesses? And that's not their only hurdle, since both XBox and Playstation own so much of the populace's mindshare.
Post by: King of Twitch on October 29, 2005, 10:25:09 AM
Post by: Ymeegod on October 29, 2005, 01:27:41 PM
? Actually nintendo has used "shipped" numbers as well :0. Love how these fanboys seem to jump down Sony's back when nintendo uses the same damn tactics when it suits them.
Hell I can give you quite a few links to Reggie's interviews where he gives shipped units or you can just google it in for yourself.
Post by: Myxtika1 Azn on October 30, 2005, 09:43:32 AM
Post by: Gamebasher on November 02, 2005, 11:14:14 AM
They will expand their existing userbase, eating their way into the marketshares of the other two consolemakers, and in that way gradually own more and more public mindshare! For instance, families planning to own two of the next-generation consoles buying a Revolution and XBOX360/PS3, will rather quickly be able to see how much greater is the ease of gamecontrol with the Nintendo Revolution thanks to Miyamoto´s ingenious invention of the TV-remote handcontrol. The ease of use will have instant appeal with a lot of people in the families, and will bring people in them together for intense gameplay sessions which will be unrivalled in terms of fun- and entertainment value. The Super Smash Brothers game with the new controller will rock the houses!
This is sure to make the old-school control of the XBOX360 and the PS3 pale in comparison, and the majority of people will favour Nintendo over them! Why bother with handling a big, clumsy controller during- and after each gameplay session, when you can just use a simple remote controller and after the end of the game place it back on top of the tv? People will like this a lot.
Nintendo will henceforth nolonger be viewed as only being for children, since the new gaming revolution will attract more and more adults who will reenter gaming with the Nintendo Revolution changing the overall perception of the company very quickly. The complexity of existing consoles alone, will mean that these people will just love the new machine! Being mostly inactive bystanders for a decade, or so, only either watching by as their kids played or only superficially playing rarely, they will grab the opportunity of the new Nintendo machine to seize the instant opportunity of compensating for the many years of not playing games.
This will cement the status of Nintendo as a company making games to all agegroups - all-access gaming in the words of Reggie himself - and their phenomenal success is assured for all the future! Their marketpenetration is already now starting the show with the DS! This will only get better when the parent machine comes out. Not to mention the online capabilities of both! Only one of the other two consolemakers will survive the nextgeneration console war, and my bet is that this will be Microsoft! So there you have it!
All this talk about there only being room for two consolemakers in the market, is true. Only it won´t be Nintendo bowing it! That is 110% sure. Call me a fanboy or what you like. I love Nintendo not for loves sake alone, but because I can see they make more sense than anybody else does!
Post by: KDR_11k on November 03, 2005, 04:12:47 AM
How?
All this talk about there only being room for two consolemakers in the market, is true. Only it won´t be Nintendo bowing it!
Really?
Post by: Gamebasher on November 03, 2005, 09:25:36 AM
And I do feel I have explained the "how" of it!
It may not go precisely like that, but overall Nintendo should be OK for the future, and more so than now. So I don´t think Iwata has anything to worry about in terms of sales of the Nintendo Revolution!
Post by: King of Twitch on November 03, 2005, 12:42:00 PM
-Besides saying they don't care if consumers buy their competiton's systems, selling off most of their 2nd party studios, launching last, and not caring about 3rd parties cancelling their games?
Post by: KDR_11k on November 04, 2005, 05:12:44 AM
They sold Rare and?
Post by: OptimusPrime on November 04, 2005, 11:40:50 PM
They sold Rare and broke the contract with SK, in the meantime they're expanding Retro, building ties with Kuju, GCSoft and other teams and expanding their japanese 2nd parties nobody knows about....but they're out there!
Post by: Gamebasher on November 05, 2005, 05:38:06 AM
Thank the great videogame God for that! Thank him until you can´t say "thank you" anymore that day, and then go on to start thanking him again untill you drop on the next!
Nintendo saves us all from videogame annihilation!
Post by: KDR_11k on November 05, 2005, 06:14:24 AM
Post by: TMW on November 05, 2005, 08:02:50 AM
That doesn't sound too bad.
Well, except for the endless thanking of Him and prostrating myself. I don't think I could get into a religion like that.
Post by: Gamebasher on November 05, 2005, 09:36:02 AM
But I think you are, with all that negativity you always throw in my face when I state my positivity towards all things Nintendo! And by the way, I think you not only sell acid, you´re also on it no doubt since you are so convinced that I am so wrong about Nintendo! YOU are the one living in a world of illusion, not me!
But that will be seen shortly, of course. And that is where I think I will finally have some peace from your negativity.
There is absolutely nothing wrong about being wonderfully positive about Nintendo´s future, in particular if it is based on fact and not fiction!
I always kind of wonder what you are doing here in a Nintendo Forum, when you are so pessimistic about Nintendo´s future! Me painting too rosy a picture of them for you, huh? Too bad if you think so, because I think you paint one which is too negative!
Post by: KDR_11k on November 05, 2005, 10:31:04 AM
Your writing style is very "praise be!" style, too much proclaimation. Plus you're always claiming that Nintendo winning next gen is a fact whereas it really is nothing but speculation. You think everything will work out the way Nintendo wants, I think that no plan survives contact with the enemy and that this plan in particular won't go perfect. Nintendo did not even deliver a decent performance over the last few years, piling disappointment on disappointment (they kept making games but made so many mistakes business wise and especially when it comes to third party relations) and Fils-Aime has done more talking than acting. Talking about Nintendo being an "and" company is worthless if he can't show anything that has come from this philosophy. The public oppinion is rightfully against Nintendo because while they may deliver many great games themselves they cannot make up for the lack of major third party exclusives and haven't made up for idiotic decisions like the tiny non-volatile media on the GC. Gamers want games and sadly the games are on the PS2.
Post by: ThePerm on November 05, 2005, 10:49:52 AM
Post by: stevey on November 05, 2005, 12:18:58 PM
That's a good idea nintendo need a cult ... I mean religion of the reggielution! Were all you do is pray the Holy Trinity of Miyamoto, reggie, and Iwata ghost and kick the butt of infidel MS $ony fanboy and take their names.
Post by: Gamebasher on November 05, 2005, 12:34:11 PM
Firstly, Hiroshi Yamauchi isn´t with the company anylonger. OK? His old-school hard-line hand of control is gone, but not the sense of direction of the company. This alone means that Nintendo is going in a new direction which is clearly seen in the lightningly fast initiatives by Iwata (he started the day he became President) with fast follow-up to change the old-school Nintendo into a reborn company which will if things go according to plan (and so it seems) will put them back as the marketleader in 2007 and forward. So they CAN show something which is coming from "this philosophy"! And that is what I read in the news daily continues. Nintendo DS, free online (a first for the industry), Revolution with revolutionary control changing consolegaming forever and new as of yet unseen initiatives from Nintendo to be revealed at the end of the year. So it does indeed look rosy, doesn´t it! At the same time they are trying very hard to make it easier to make the games themselves, lowering licensing fees, enabling developers to think in diferent ways towards gamecreation which will significantly lower the
production cost of each game made, thus helping struggling developer companies to gain some much needed ground in the industry awakening hope in the world of consolegaming when it is being dominated by a company which has held dominance for far too long, perhaps flooding the market with games but in the process lowered the overall perception of gameplay quality, and overall morality as goes for paying for the software releases. They entered the market like a hurricane, and left a trail of destruction like a real hurricane does, and now they will leave the same market like a hurricane also does after raging on for only so long.
Don´t believe me? That is your decision. I have heard the rumblings of the market where developers are seeing the New Light being turned on by Nintendo (and to some extent Microsoft) which in contrast makes the old-school Sony style of management and marketing attitudes look less and less compelling to developers. Were it not for Nintendo, there would be no changes in the all-time high- and rising costs of videogame developement! They are a most welcome and fresh influence in the industry. In a way they have always been, but the hard-as-nails perception that they are only for kids has unfairly weghed them down for too long, probably also being the very reason why too many third-parties didn t give them a fair chance. I read about all of these things daily, weekly in the videogame news and I believe that what I read on trustworthy websites like this one, Kikizo.com, IGN.com, Revo-europe.com is to be taken as ample proof that they put action behind their promises! The Revolution is already rolling, and I believe it will continue to roll and take a lot of gamers with it. A lot more than in this generation!
Post by: IceCold on November 05, 2005, 07:01:49 PM
BTW, is it "kill death ratio"?
Post by: KnowsNothing on November 05, 2005, 07:14:44 PM
Is this guy even for real.
Post by: KDR_11k on November 05, 2005, 07:31:48 PM
This alone means that Nintendo is going in a new direction which is clearly seen in the lightningly fast initiatives by Iwata (he started the day he became President) with fast follow-up to change the old-school Nintendo into a reborn company which will if things go according to plan (and so it seems) will put them back as the marketleader in 2007 and forward.
What initiatives were those? Except for that Capcom 5 deal I don't remember any. None of them have panned out.
Nintendo DS, free online (a first for the industry)
*coughPCcoughPS2hackDreamcastwheeze* Sorry.
At the same time they are trying very hard to make it easier to make the games themselves, lowering licensing fees, enabling developers to think in diferent ways towards gamecreation which will significantly lower the production cost of each game made, thus helping struggling developer companies to gain some much needed ground in the industry awakening hope in the world of consolegaming [...]
Nintendo is still pretty anal about who gets their SDKs, asccording to their own site you need to be a big developer to even apply. Contrast this with Microsoft who is signing on independent studios to populate XBox Live Arcade with games (and these games are nowhere near the cost of an "EAwood" title, many simple 2d games and stuff). Why don't I see Nintendo snagging all the indies for the Rev? There's a large industry of independent developers in Japan that trades IP and sometimes breaks into the mainstream (Air, Kanon, Tsuki Hime, just off the top of my mind) with many highly polished and/or innovative games on sale. Nintendo doesn't seem to sign any indies on. Considering that these indies happen to cover the arcade(like) market and that Nintendo seems to be lacking in these genres that would be a major asset.
a company which has held dominance for far too long, perhaps flooding the market with games but in the process lowered the overall perception of gameplay quality, and overall morality as goes for paying for the software releases. They entered the market like a hurricane, and left a trail of destruction like a real hurricane does, and now they will leave the same market like a hurricane also does after raging on for only so long.
I don't see it. Sure, there are many bad games on the PS2 and there's no way Nintendo would allow crap like Aquaman or Charlie's Angels on the Gamecube, right? Oh, wait. If publishers wanted their junk published on the Gamecube Nintendo would rubberstamp 'em OK. There are only two ways, 1. to control the market and not allow bad games to be published or 2. to open up the market and let the customers sort out the bad games. People don't like to be controlled so developers and publishers will gravitate towards markets that follow the latter rule. SCEA has its restrictive policies as well and I think that's the reason so many japanese devs have signed up with MS so they can publish their games in the US without any trouble but western studios don't notice these policies that much so I wouldn't expect them to abandon the PS3.
I have heard the rumblings of the market where developers are seeing the New Light being turned on by Nintendo (and to some extent Microsoft) which in contrast makes the old-school Sony style of management and marketing attitudes look less and less compelling to developers.
Microsoft is a bigger draw for publishers than Nintendo because they offer better conditions.
I believe that what I read on trustworthy websites like [...] IGN.com,
EXCUSE ME?
Lastly, a great console won't sell if it doesn't have a good public perception and lots of marketing. Look at the Dreamcast, even if Sega had continued making it the DC was selling very badly compared to any other current gen console.
EDIT: Because I'd have had my post right below Gamebasher's if it weren't for you meddling kids:
IceCold: Nope, originally it stood for "KronoDisRuptor" with the 11k added because the BFG was already 10k but by now it has become "Dave's rather unique username"
. Plus it fits nicely into the highscore tables of arcade games.
Post by: mantidor on November 06, 2005, 05:44:34 AM
Not true, Merrick said they have a shot at becoming number 1, not to mention, you know, Iwata, this person who happens to be the president of the company. Indeed, is stupid to release revolution saying "We hope to get the second spot".
Post by: Gamebasher on November 07, 2005, 11:57:46 AM
And KDR_11k:
You may wonder why Nintendo do not snag the Indies as you call them. I don´t! Nintendo being tired of bad quality games, won´t take a chance on developers they aren´t sure of! That´s my belief! They know they have to deliver the best of the best quality in order to get ahead in the next generation, therefore they can´t afford to see software on their platform which "may of may not" meet required standards. I have so far not ever seen any software on the GCN which was so bad that it was comparable to rubbish games found on the Playstation 2! I think they (Nintendo) has managed to scare away a lot of the developers who simply do not understand the word "Quality" but only the word "money". There are exceptions, of course, in the way that some games become crap because they don´t get the required amount of developertime for various reasons, mostly economical, but this is not viewed by Nintendo as being their problem. Their "problem" is to get games out on THEIR platform which will as far as possible meet the high standards of their OWN games, so that these third-party games, will at the very least look close to being as attarctive for gamers to buy as their own first-party titles. So that is probably why you don´t see them snagging the indies! They simply do not see them as a "major asset" right now! So they will never give them the stamp of approval.
You may not see Sony leaving anytime soon, but I see it! I see it like it came from several miles away, starting with distant noise, growing more audible at approach, coming head-on until I can see the whole thing up in my face, and it passes me by like a runaway express train headed in the WRONG direction!
But, I never attempted to think Nintendo as a company trying to control people, only influence! and that is what they have been doing for over 20 years and still continue to do!
I don´t think that the whole issue of Sony´s future revolves around policies of any kind. It has to do strictly with developers and how they view developing for the PS platform. As stated in earlier replies, rumblings indicate more of them are growing tired of Sony and the rock-hard developement cycles on it.
Nintendo is al about GAMES, which Reggie said on numerous occasions. Also about business selling them, naturally, but it seems to me that Sony is only interested in the business aspect of it all and less in the games! They seem very hollow to me, looking from outside and inwards, whereas Nintendo are much more complete from that perspective. They are far more mature than Sony, as regards games!
"Microsoft is a bigger draw for publishers than Nintendo because they offer better conditions.
I believe that what I read on trustworthy websites like [...] IGN.com,
EXCUSE ME?
Lastly, a great console won't sell if it doesn't have a good public perception and lots of marketing. Look at the Dreamcast, even if Sega had continued making it the DC was selling very badly compared to any other current gen console."
Microsoft may be more interesting to developers of a certain type, but already now several other developers interviewed are VERY enthusiastic about Nintendo Revolution thanks to the new interface. I think it will only be a question of time before people will be so enthusiastic about the new control that they will only wan´t to play like that. No kiding! First Person Shooters alone will become uber-cool to play and who will wan´t to go back to a constricted joypad, wireless or not, which limits the degree of in-game freedom! Once you drive a Ferrari, you don´t wan´t to go back to a Toyota, do you? just for the purpose of emphasizing the ease of control with Nintendo revolution and the other controllers from Sony/Microsoft! Nintendo´s next console IS a revolution and that´s the end of that. No religious talk! I MEAN this, view it the way you want! I was damning the way RE4 was difficult in the aiming-department, and now my problem is gone forever with the new control!
I agree that they need to market the Revolution aggressively.
By the way, Nintendo themselves will work closely with IGN! So what is wrong with IGN?
Dreamcast online wasn´t free, to my knowledge. It came with a monthly fee. So I still see Nintendo as being first to market with truly subscription-free online gaming!
Post by: KDR_11k on November 08, 2005, 04:38:31 AM
Enthusiasm does not translate to games. Devs may be enthusiastic about the Rev but they can't just make games for it, they only do what their publisher okays (because the publisher controls the money, remember Mikami promising that RE4 will never end up on the PS2?). Those without a publisher usually can't get a console SDK. The general public can be very ignorant if the advertising tells them to buy something else or they run into some idiotic fanboy salesman so the controls themselves won't be a guaranteed selling point. The initial reaction will be "ugh, what's that?" anyway so there'll be convincing needed. They better do a lot of that. With a large lineup of games (and not just Nintendo games, they cannot cover the market alone) the convincing would be a lot easier and people wouldn't consider it a novelty.
IGN is a bunch of self-important idiots that listen only to money, a reliable source is supposed to be unbiased.
Even if DC wasn't free, what about the PS2 or the PC? Or do those not count because they aren't consoles?
Post by: Gamebasher on November 08, 2005, 11:20:19 AM
I think they would prevail, even if they remained a number three in the next generation as well. But that is not to be. I see a big fight between Sony and Microsoft over the marketshares, and the winner will be the one who can ensure the most of games to play of a decent quality, cheap online access with a great service regardless of the low price, and to me that winner is the one with the most of MONEY which is, obviously, Microsoft! Sony is already hurting in several ways financially, so their limelight is starting to fade.
That would leave Sony as the loser, and Nintendo quickly overtaking them for reasons of people who will wan´t to buy a second console for the home which offers something different than XBOX360 (and the PS3 will be just the same as XBOX360) which most of them already will own at that time, so they choose Revolution! and there you have it: Microsoft in the number one spot, Nintendo in the second! Sony as number three! And what Jim Merrick envisioned for 2007 an emerging reality!
Even if all the developers are told by their respective publishers that games are to be made for only the PS3 and the XBOX360, so be it! THEY will SOON understand that they won´t be making as much money on those platforms, as they may think today, for the already stated reasons of a stagnating gamemarket where old-school gameplay is keeping more and more people from playing games since they take too long to complete, are too difficult to complete, or are just too darn complicated to get to grips with for the majority of people today. So the games they are so keen to get out on the two platforms WON´T sell as they are expected to.
Time is of the essence here, and people don´t want to invest as much of it as is required by todays games. Thus the industry has lost it´s goal of constant expansion, as it has come to an insurmountable threshold in time meaning it cannot go any further. THIS is what Miyamoto means when he talks about a stagnation in the market.
I repeat that the majority of the games that such publishers will put out on XBOX360 will be on PS3 and vice versa, but NOT on Revolution which makes it a better choice for people as they wan´t to get a second console which offers something substantially different than the other two. That will help Nintendo to gain recognition with more publishers who are probably right now sitting on the fence waiting to see what happens when the Revolution is lauched to market! But that is not to say that there isn t already publishers who have decided to release games on revolution.
What I am trying to say is that Nintendo has already triumphed. The upcoming consolewar is not with them, it lies between Microsoft and Sony! That is probably why Nintendo say they are in no direct competition with any of them!
So they´ve never had a BETTER reasons to advertise the Nintendo Revolution massively!
In what way is IGN a bunch of "self-important idiots"? I think they do a good amount of Nintendo coverage, and will be running their online service too. So you must be one of the nly people who dislikes them, KDR_11k!
Post by: TMW on November 08, 2005, 11:55:59 AM
Post by: Kairon on November 08, 2005, 12:45:28 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
P.S. And Sony and Microsoft get their exclusive devs through moneyhats. Nintendo can't compete with Bill Gates on that score, which is why innovation and quality built from the ground-up are much more important to Nintendo than outright competing with MS or Sony.
Oh, and Nintendo has a long history with second-parties who have proven underwhelming. Factor 5 churned out possibly the worst game under the Nintendo name with Rogue Squadron 3, Rare has spent the last 4 years making Perfect Dark 0, yes, but also making ...uh... Kameo, which I figure is their next Banjo-Kazooie. Silicon Knights turned out the great-voice-acting but blah-gameplay Eternal Darkness, and Retro studios had to lay off DOZENS upon DOZENS of people and be tutored intensely by Shigeru Miyamoto before they could release Matroid Prime. BTW, Metroid Prime 2 appears to not have been very successful, which shows that Retro still has a lot of work to do.
Post by: Artimus on November 08, 2005, 12:51:41 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
IOh, and Nintendo has a long history with second-parties who have proven underwhelming. Factor 5 churned out possibly the worst game under the Nintendo name with Rogue Squadron 3, Rare has spent the last 4 years making Perfect Dark 0, yes, but also making ...uh... Kameo, which I figure is their next Banjo-Kazooie. Silicon Knights turned out the great-voice-acting but blah-gameplay Eternal Darkness, and Retro studios had to lay off DOZENS upon DOZENS of people and be tutored intensely by Shigeru Miyamoto before they could release Matroid Prime. BTW, Metroid Prime 2 appears to not have been very successful, which shows that Retro still has a lot of work to do.
1. Rogue Squadron is a Lucas Arts title, supported but not totally controlled by Nintendo. It also received decent if not good reviews.
2. Banjo Kazooie sold very well and received strong acclaim from reviewers.
3. Eternal Darkness received RAVES and few others think the gameplay is blah.
4. Metroid Prime was a HUGE success, Metroid Pirme 2 also received rave after rave and sold mediocre, but not horrifically.
5. Sales do not equal quality, and lack of sales does not equal lack of quality.
6. One mediocre game out of three does not make Factor 5 a bad developer.
7. Rare made Battletoads, DKC, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, and several other major selling titles for Nintendo.
8. Nintendo sold rare when they slipped.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 08, 2005, 12:59:34 PM
Factor 5 was never a 2nd party, and all the Rogue Squadron games belong to Lucas Arts, never Nintendo.
Edit: I'm tardy.
Post by: Kairon on November 08, 2005, 04:02:50 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ArtimusQuote
1. Rogue Squadron is a Lucas Arts title, supported but not totally controlled by Nintendo. It also received decent if not good reviews.
2. Banjo Kazooie sold very well and received strong acclaim from reviewers.
3. Eternal Darkness received RAVES and few others think the gameplay is blah.
4. Metroid Prime was a HUGE success, Metroid Pirme 2 also received rave after rave and sold mediocre, but not horrifically.
5. Sales do not equal quality, and lack of sales does not equal lack of quality.
6. One mediocre game out of three does not make Factor 5 a bad developer.
7. Rare made Battletoads, DKC, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, and several other major selling titles for Nintendo.
8. Nintendo sold rare when they slipped.
Argh, I keep forgetting that Factor 5 wasn't second party, lol.
#1 and #6
Well, my personal view is that RS:3 is painful to play. After the beautiful fluke that was RS:2, I was aghast to discover that Factor 5 exhibited serious weaknesses in game design and game control (i.e. the "foot" stages as well as the "speeder bike" stages) and that RS:2 was really the best they had, I found the RS:3 missions disjointed and far less engaging or tightly scripted than RS:2's.
But that's my personal view. To me RS:3 is more like a 7.6 on the IGN scale because of the very undesirable ground stages and the flight stages that added nothing new and indeed, may have been a step down from the mission design of RE:2.
#2
Banjo-Kazooie may have sold well (not an indication of quality, see #6), but it was vastly inferior to Mario 64 all throughout. In fact, Banjo-Kazooie showed that Rare would never catch up to Nintendo in terms of platforming because it exposed a very critical misjudgement on Rare's part: collection. BK was roundly criticized by gamers at the time for the "collection" aspect that it rammed down their throats. Collection was only a superficial aspect of Mario 64, but Rare's BK made it a quickly dated game mechanic. In essence, BK was intensely flawed from a game design perspective as well.
This collection aspect also served to hold back Rare's DK 64 game. Incidentally, the collection aspect was completely gone from Conker's Bad Fur Day, a game I enjoyed infitenitely more.
#3
Eternal Darkness received raves because Nintendo fans couldn't bring themselves to call it what it was: a beautifully cinematized game that had ho-hum gameplay. Given that Silicon Knights praised Miyamoto for teaching them so much in the realm of Gameplay, one wonders exactly how mediocre Eternal Darkness would have been without Miyamoto's intervention.
Beautiful cinematics does not a good game make anyways, tell that to the people who were all hyped up on FF7 and thought they would get the same quality game with FF8. Either way, it appears that Nintendo felt that Silicon Knights wielded too many weaknesses to financially invest in for the next generation.
#4
My analysis of Retro was NOT against Metroid Prime (obviously, it was a success), but pointed at the amount of effort that went into it. Retro had to abandon 4 out of its 5 game projeccts, layoff huge numbers of people, and had to have monthly meetings with Miyamoto. Nintendo basically took Retro and the Metroid project in hand because Retro studios themselves were unable to do it by themselves. AND, my mention of MP2 is not to say that they failed, but that they haven't reached a point where one can call them a dependable quality developer as of yet without Nintendo's constant intervention.
#5
I agree. This is why I still look forward to the next Conker Game and the next Pikmin game. This is also why this next item doesn't matter...
#7
Rare had provided million sellers for the N64, but were they competitive? Looking at Rare's longer-and-longer dev times and BK franchise of questionable quality, Nintendo guessed that they weren't.
#8
Nintendo sold Rare when it became apparent that not only did Rare have a completely opposite game philosophy from Nintendo (tech and conker-esque cinematics first vs. Nintendo's gameplay and gamedesign first), but when it started to look like they were going nowhere with Kameo and however often they tried, their action/platformers (i.e. Star Fox Adventures) seemed to lack something.
I again reiterate, Nintendo has had a long history with interesting but essentially flawed second parties. One wonders whether they're going to completely abandon the concept, or if they're merely going to phase it out with publishing partnerships as with Kuju or N-Space.
Either way, Nintendo has had real difficulty with second parties and small-third-party partnerships, and they cannot rely on this method for delivering content for their systems. ...I guess they'll have to rely on the innovative allure of the controller.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Artimus on November 08, 2005, 04:05:40 PM
Post by: ThePerm on November 08, 2005, 04:33:49 PM
Post by: IceCold on November 08, 2005, 06:43:13 PM
And whatever you say about Eternal Darkness, it was still an excellent game, and deserved to sell a lot more. You make it seem like the gameplay was severely lacking, and I disagree.
Yes, Retro was a mess and all, but you can't deny that it has talent. Once they get their affairs in order, I look forward to seeing what they can bring to the table. So what if MP2 sold badly? Did Pikmin 2 fare any better? The fact that it didn't sell better certainly doesn't show that Rare still has a lot of work to do.
And F-Zero GX...what a crying shame... I'm convinced that the game could have done infinitely better if it weren't for the mistakes that Pro mentioned. It had all the requirements - graphics, gameplay, dazzling speed.. it really had potential.
Post by: Kairon on November 08, 2005, 06:55:10 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
Basically all you're saying is you don't like a few games everyone else does, therefore Nintendo has bad second parties.
No, I'm ALSO correlating my likes and dislikes to Nintendo's actions. I'm proposing a hypothesis that explains Nintendo's past relations with second parties, and overall used this history to explain that second parties have insofar been unable to provide the support that Nintendo needs.
I actually do like a lot of the games I mentioned though, it's just that I don't think I'm blind to their faults. I happen to be an avid A-wing pilot who's still working on perfecting his game against Star Destroyers (I happen to want to relive the moment in Star Wars: ROTJ where an A-Wing crashes through the Super Star Destroyer's Bridge). My brother and I beat all three threads in ED and are inspired by some of SK's conceptual ambitions for the game, I didn't buy GoldenEye but my brother and I played PD for hours on end in both cooperative campaign and with our own individual map settings. I also like the distinctly British characters that PD on the '64 had, and I seriously hope that PD:0 does NOT destroy this atmospheric effect.
Now, it's clear from my previous criticisms that I'm not crazy about these companies. But then again, apparently Nintendo wasn't stock raving mad about them either, and that's why they eventually let these companies go in different directions. So maybe there's something to my likes and dislikes after all?
Anyway, what good is a hypothesis without predictions. Here they are:
Nintendo will keep Retro. I don't think Retro is a perfectly integrated entity yet, but they've received a lot of tender loving care (and money) from Nintendo, and have experience with a key franchise, such that there are a lot of developed resources in Retro that Nintendo is hoping to draw upon without the growing pains which came before Metroid Prime.
We won't be seeing much of N-Space again. Geist had a relatively long development time and it's "possession" feature turned out to be just a redecorated puzzle element. UNLESS N-Space has some amazing concept to do with the Rev Controller, I think Nintendo won't return to this studio for further projects.
GameFreaks, under my criteria, is also not exactly a stellar development house. What with so many handheld pokemon games being so similar, that suggests that this company may have a weakness. BUT, Nintendo will keep this company, because they're a cheap property so it really couldn't hurt to hold onto them AND they're a legacy brand under the Pokemon moniker. Interestingly enough, the company MAY have hidden creative talents that could bring them to more prominence, perhaps Drill Dozer? Either way, let's be fair. The Pokemon handheld games, stagnated as they are, are still heads and shoulders above any pokemon-clone competition.
Kuju is an interesting question. I'm almost ready to write them off because having played through Battalion Wars it turned out very one dimensional and displayed some problems with exactly how the missions were designed/scripted/executed. Also, it lacked key aesthetic elements that I would've expected, such as clear markers between campaigns. I was 3/4th through the game when I realized that I actually WASN'T still in the first campaign. BUT, for a company to have gone from Mary Kate & Ashley to this... oh, and it also impressed me how the model's feet conformed to the terrain. Well, I'd have to say that we don't see Kuju again, unless they're got a great concept under wraps that they can sell Nintendo on.
Everything sounds bad? Not at all! Nintendo actually does have one prominent very successful second-party story. NST. Although NST has been handed port after port, this Metroid Prime Hunters game could really be their break-out role. This studio has shown technical competency and the ability to integrate technology with game design imperatives, and with Metroid Prime Hunters as their first chance to really break lose creatively, NST is shaping up to be the model Nintendo 2nd party... hmmm.... the only second party that was actually created from scratch largely by Nintendo... (Retro was created with a collaborator who later left)
So..I AM saying that I can be critical about the second party games I've criticized in previous posts. BUT the point is NOT that these are bad games, but that the second parties who designed them and who have since split did not win Nintendo over either with these games.
Furthermore, this tendency of Nintendo to be dissatisfied with second parties and collaborators means that second parties has been a largely inadequate strategy for Nintendo to garner executive games. This is probably why in the cube era Nintendo went back to third parties and started farming out franchises to established third party companies like Capcom (Zelda) and to Sega (F-Zero). This strategy ALSO was not as successful as we all would've liked.
Thus, Nintendo developed the Rev to actually stand out so spectacularly from the other consoles in the hopes that perhaps if they couldn't compete with Sony and Nintendo for third parties on a head-to-head, money-hat based strategy, they needed something else to hopefully bring in third party exclusives.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Gamebasher on November 09, 2005, 08:40:07 AM
Your reply is probably one of the best such replies I have ever seen in the ongoing discussion concerning Nintendo!
Post by: KDR_11k on November 10, 2005, 04:46:17 AM
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 10, 2005, 04:52:15 AM
Post by: Kairon on November 10, 2005, 10:03:43 AM
Certainly the two differ from beauraucratic and organizational viewpoints, but generally we can divide Nintendo's development properties into two fields: Those under Miyamoto's direct influence (EAD) and those outside his direct legacy presence (HAL, Intelligent Design, NST, Retro, and smaller groups like GameFreaks, Marigul, etc.). The first cactegory contains most of Nintendo's legacy brands, save a few. The second category contains all of Nintendo's second parties, and even a few of their internal parties as well that have been re-branded as non-EAD entities.
Either way, it may be factually inaccurate to call NST a second party, but I do not think it is misleading in the context of this discussion.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: couchmonkey on November 10, 2005, 01:04:10 PM
But I accept Kairon's definition of a second party as one that's not directly under the influence of Nintendo for the purposes of this discussion.
I disagree with comments on second parties being underwhelming simply because I'm a Rare freak. Nintendo probably did cut Rare loose at the right time given its performance on the Xbox, but at the same time, I believe its performance would have been different if the company had stuck with Nintendo: For starters, Conker never would have been made (at least not in the form it's in for Xbox) and DK Racing might not have been cancelled. I also doubt that Kameo and Perfect Dark would have been held back for the purpose of launching the next-generation system. All of these changes in Rare's strategy contributed to the game delays and I believe were initiated at least in part by the change from Nintendo to Microsoft.
I also feel second parties add some much-needed variety to Nintendo's lineup. Nintendo still has no intention of making "Mature" games, and while I don't believe a game has to have blood and guts in it to be fun for adults, I like to have access to some games with a darker, more violent sensibility.
