Post by: Zach on December 31, 2005, 01:18:03 PM
So post all of your rev predictions here so we can discuss them, release dates, launch titles, 3rd parties, what Ninty will do with the controller, anything you want.
I am thinking, a summer release of June-July, June 9th would make it the best birthday EVAR for me. As for games, there will definately be something that shows off the rev controller, and what it can do. Infact I would not put it past Miyamoto to come up with some game that manages to use the motion sensor ONLY. Along with that there should be some a spectacular mario title at launch (I think it is agreed that Luigi's Mansion, while a good game, was not worthy of being the big launch title for the GC). Anyway, something created by Miyamoto is a NECCESSITY (yes I am stating the obvious for discussion purposes). Along with the Nintendo games, there deifinately needs to be some strong 3rd party support, and if they cant get that for a summer release, they might as well push the rev to a holiday release.
Well I think that is all, I probably forgot something I wanted to say though.
Post by: Strell on December 31, 2005, 01:22:21 PM
I already got DC launch, let's go for a two-fer.
Post by: bmfrosty on December 31, 2005, 01:51:57 PM
Two Price Points.
Cheap includes:
The System
1 Controller
the GCN Shell
The Nun-chuk
demo disc
Not as Cheap includes:
Everything in cheap
A shell more suited for emulation (like the GCN on the left, but like the N64 on the right, but with start AND select)
A $20 gift card for buying roms
Super Mario 128 or Super Mario 64-2
I'd price cheap at $130 and not as cheap at $170 or $180.
Post by: Kairon on December 31, 2005, 02:25:08 PM
$179.99
Console
Stand
1 Controller + analog add-on
NES Mario Bros./Duck Hunt preloaded
Demo Disc
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Magik on December 31, 2005, 04:29:50 PM
When that is over with, most highschool/college/university students will be looking for summer jobs or are in summer school.
How about the casual/non-gamer? Their attention will be on other summer related activities such as holidays.
The REV also losses its appeal as a holiday-must-have item by the time the holidays come by.
If they for some reason decide on a May-June release, I hope for their sake they come out guns blazing with multiple titles that show what the REV can do. No average games that make minimal use of the controller. I'm talking about AAA titles that will blow everybody's mind. No more Luigi's-crap-Mansion.
Post by: darknight06 on December 31, 2005, 04:48:38 PM
Post by: ShyGuy on December 31, 2005, 05:27:20 PM
early fall launch
bundled with shell and nunchuka
Squeenix game for launch
Wacky attachment by Sega within 6 months
Post by: Spinnzilla on December 31, 2005, 05:36:56 PM
Post by: stevey on December 31, 2005, 05:57:20 PM
Post by: Ceric on January 01, 2006, 05:46:22 AM
Nintendo will not do the multiple system bundle thing. It sounds like a good idea ...but its not.
Instead maybe some accessory packages.
Just a side note. I remember the NES being $200 at some point as a bundle. Which is a lot more expensive when you account for inflation from the 1980's.
3rd party will swear exclusiveness for certian titles and then when they are successes break the exclusiveness.
Feel the Magic: Revolution (You know you'd love it)
After the overwhelming complaints. Rev controller will have a built in battery and charger station. (Though it would be cool if they used the technology that let it just be near the Rev to recharge)
Thats all for now this was done on a PDA. It took a while.
Post by: Magik on January 01, 2006, 07:56:10 AM
Nintendo also needs to price those attachments well. The public does not like paying top dollar for attachments that will be used infrequently. ie. Konga Drums and microphone for the GC.
Post by: Ceric on January 01, 2006, 08:28:55 AM
Post by: Zach on January 01, 2006, 09:22:38 AM
Post by: animecyberrat on January 01, 2006, 01:12:18 PM
I also thik Nintendo will bunlde rev with a mario game just because that will attract alarger userbase right away and make it easier for them to draw people in and then latter on they will sell it seperatley, tahst what tehy did the 2 generations the DOMINATED the industry and if they learn form the past they will see that.
Also they will most likely have Metroid Prime 3 and Smash Bros online for launch otherwise they piss the fans off and lose userbase. I think the system will sell for 150 for the core unit and 170 for a bunlde unit and 200 for the maxed out unit with everything, this way they cover their bases and offer somethign for everybody.
but the bunldes besdies Mario at launch will fo coarse be latter on.
Post by: Magik on January 01, 2006, 03:24:28 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ceric
Magik: I'm assuming you mean "infrequently". Just to clear it up. and your right. I mean I know I'm one of the few proud owners of the Dance pads, Network adapter, Progressive scan cables, Gameboy Player, and soon the Microphone. When I can justify it I'm going to complete my set with the Kongos. (I do have the Wavebird and a Redant which lets me play my Cube on a Computer monitor. If the Cube can hook up to it I can do it.) So I am definetly in the minority about the peripheral thing.
Yes, I meant to use 'infrequently'. Thanks for the correction.
Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat
I predict that Nintendo will be the number 1 selling company again and SOny will finaly go under and have to reformat into what they used to be to stay alive and MS will just stick it out just to be pricks.
I also thik Nintendo will bunlde rev with a mario game just because that will attract alarger userbase right away and make it easier for them to draw people in and then latter on they will sell it seperatley, tahst what tehy did the 2 generations the DOMINATED the industry and if they learn form the past they will see that.
Also they will most likely have Metroid Prime 3 and Smash Bros online for launch otherwise they piss the fans off and lose userbase. I think the system will sell for 150 for the core unit and 170 for a bunlde unit and 200 for the maxed out unit with everything, this way they cover their bases and offer somethign for everybody.
but the bunldes besdies Mario at launch will fo coarse be latter on.
Sony nor MS will not go under. People have said this before the PS2 and Xbox came out and look at things now. PS2 is the #1 selling and known console in the world and the Xbox even has sold more than the GC.
A Mario game bundled at launch will not attract a larger userbase than what it currently is. I don't know where you're getting this. Face it, Mario is not as large as he was during the last two generations.
There will NOT be multiple system bundles. This type of move is complete moronic just like it was when the 360 did it. If Nintendo wants to maximize sales during launch, they need to keep it simple.
What is up with everybody and the idea of throwing all the top franchises at ONCE?? Top franchises should be spread out so each title gets the spotlight on them and allows a consistent flow of top franchise releases with 3rd party games backing them up. The GC suffered from inconsistent releases and it hurt them in the long run.
Throwing MP3 and SSB at once will just put the focus on SSB and MP3 will be ignored because the popularity for SSB is A LOT larger than MP3.
They MUST have games at launch that show what the REV is all about and show the innovation that they claim the controller can bring. If they aren't able to do that, they are going to find it even harder to convince people to take the REV seriously.
Nintendo absolutely must play it smart with the launch and its first year. If they do it right, things will be looking A LOT better than it did with the GC.
Post by: BlkPaladin on January 01, 2006, 05:15:05 PM
Microsoft will not go out. They didn't make a profit with the Xbox, even though selling quite a few consoles. They over expended themselves to make a position for themselves in the market. Those expenducures may not be needed this generation meaning they will more than like make back some of the money (total money over the five years of Xbox) the Xbox lost. (aka making a profit on the 360.) The question is at what cost. With the rising prices of game developement for games that are not optimized for HD. The publishers have already started to take steps to keep games profitable by raising game prices $5-to-$10 (depending on the title) to make the average price $60.00 a game. This adjuctment was made off of projections and the price may be readjucted again.
Nintendo can gain the most this time around. And they are taking steps to help them make up ground. Nintendo is also great at making a profit so I have little doubt they will turn an enormous profit this generation with just the Revolution. And will be a contender even if they continue in third place.
Post by: Dirk Temporo on January 01, 2006, 05:42:10 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat
I predict that Nintendo will be the number 1 selling company again and SOny will finaly go under and have to reformat into what they used to be to stay alive and MS will just stick it out just to be pricks.
You're joking, right?
Post by: animecyberrat on January 01, 2006, 06:26:53 PM
You have to hear me talk I cant get my tone across on the net so I always come off serious when if heard ina conversation would be more funny...
or maybe not differetn peopel ahve different sense of humor.
Post by: jasonditz on January 01, 2006, 06:26:57 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ceric
Definetly $200.
Nintendo will not do the multiple system bundle thing. It sounds like a good idea ...but its not.
Instead maybe some accessory packages.
Just a side note. I remember the NES being $200 at some point as a bundle. Which is a lot more expensive when you account for inflation from the 1980's.
Yeah, but the NES offered multiple bundles at any given time.
Post by: animecyberrat on January 02, 2006, 03:23:06 AM
N64 had 2 launch games and was slow picking up, Gc had a few more and offered decent variety but the lack of Mario hurt a lot. Its kinda catch 22 for Nintenod, not enough good games at launch peolple will complain, too many good games and soemthgns gonna get lost in the mix. But I dont think know, I think that only when theres too many games to chose form do teh good ones get lost, we are talking launch period, theres not going to be more than maybe ten games at launch, if that, so everygame will stand out. Its after teh launch when more games start coming that the good ones have to stand out more to sell.
Post by: Ceric on January 02, 2006, 05:00:58 AM
Post by: Ceric on January 02, 2006, 05:04:08 AM
That's right. You heard it here first. Using complicated cooling features and the heat from the Triforce of Processors it will keep your tea or Coffee, we're equal oppurtunity, warm.
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on January 02, 2006, 05:13:30 AM
Post by: jasonditz on January 02, 2006, 06:43:14 AM
The problem wasn't launch... the problem was:
Multi-quarter gaps without a decent title coming out
Multi-month gaps without a single title coming out
No decent original RPGs until several years into the system's life
Coming into holiday seasons without a "must buy" title
Sticking your best titles in the worst months for retail sales
Post by: JonLeung on January 02, 2006, 08:41:57 AM
I got my GameCube on launch day, and only with Rogue Leader. I got SSBM shortly after it came out, but for a few months that was it. I rent games often, but my own library was just two games. I bought Resident Evil as an impulse purchase (which turned me into a late RE fan, actually). For the first year the must-have games were way too few, I could see how many people moved on when they had two other console alternatives and the PC to go to.
While I don't see confirmed games like the next SSB, the next Mario game, and Metroid Prime 3 coming out all at once, especially on the very launch day of the Revolution, I think it's important for them to all come within the first year. Ideally, with enough solid third-party games for the months in between.
Post by: jasonditz on January 02, 2006, 10:32:58 AM
Post by: Zach on January 02, 2006, 01:05:48 PM
Post by: Magik on January 03, 2006, 03:31:55 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
I agree, the first year is a big one.
I got my GameCube on launch day, and only with Rogue Leader. I got SSBM shortly after it came out, but for a few months that was it. I rent games often, but my own library was just two games. I bought Resident Evil as an impulse purchase (which turned me into a late RE fan, actually). For the first year the must-have games were way too few, I could see how many people moved on when they had two other console alternatives and the PC to go to.
While I don't see confirmed games like the next SSB, the next Mario game, and Metroid Prime 3 coming out all at once, especially on the very launch day of the Revolution, I think it's important for them to all come within the first year. Ideally, with enough solid third-party games for the months in between.
The first year will be absolutely important for the REV because I believe it will make or break the system. If Nintendo can't sell the idea to the consumer, than it's going to be even harder to sell once both the 360 and PS3 really get into gear with their major titles such as Halo 3 and UT07.
Having the big franchise titles spread out keeps releases consistent and at least keeps a solid momentum with the system for a longer period of time rather than having 3 big titles at once and the momentum dying down.
Post by: Magik on January 03, 2006, 03:40:44 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: jasonditz
Actually the Gamecube sold quite well at launch... I didn't get it until a couple of months later and it was sold out virtually everywhere then... I had to wait at Circuit City one afternoon for a shipment to come in.
The problem wasn't launch... the problem was:
Multi-quarter gaps without a decent title coming out
Multi-month gaps without a single title coming out
No decent original RPGs until several years into the system's life
Coming into holiday seasons without a "must buy" title
Sticking your best titles in the worst months for retail sales
It definitely sold very well at launch, but Nintendo didn't capitlize on it for various reasons. You came out with some good points. Here's one more:
Missing crucial genres in the first year such as FPS and RPGs - Nintendo had NO answer at all to Halo 1 or any FPS on the PS2 for a very long time. FPS' were becoming the big genre with a large fanbase and Nintendo missed out on that completely. The only solid FPS I can think of on the GC was the Timpsplitter series but that was multi-console.
Missing RPGs was just as bad. The RPG fanbase was a very big loss. By the time the GC got any RPGs, such as Tales of Symphonia or Baiten Kaitos, they were ignored or forgotten because they barely got any promotion at all. By the time I found out about Tales or Baiten, it was already released.
The REV must have every genre covered in the first year. It is so important that they have to because the GC suffered greatly because of it. I just hope Nintendo realizes this.
Post by: Ceric on January 03, 2006, 04:56:26 AM
Also did anybody realize it took a while for an actual honest to god suppose to be cards game to come out. I mean it took Yu-Gi-Oh most of the systems life to get on honest to god version on the Gamecube and that is a franchise that could have actually benefitted from the GBA to GCN link.
And no Pokemon doesn't count either because well... They should have just made it a different game because it wasn't actually Pokemon like on the Gameboy. They dropped the ball big time on that one.
P.S.- Also Sky of Arcadia and PSO. I love PSO but it's not really an RPG and eventually went to cards too and well Sky of Arcadia... Yeah that was just bad... and a port. Sorry about the rantage I just had to get it out.
P.S.S- After re-reading this I realized that the new IP, there probably should be 2, should be a FPS and a "Traditional" RPG franchise. Some will argue that Zelda is an RPG. Lets face it deep down it's an action title. It's a beast of it's own and shares in a way more with Metroid than a traditional RPG. What it does it does well and uniquely. Both of these need to be unique and not use any of Nintendo's characters except maybe for a cameo. It should also try to stay away from the style that is deemed Nintendo artisticly, except for maybe a homage level (Like the 8-bit one in Baten Kaitos).
P.S.S.S- So I'm not totally off topic I also predict that the Rev will use the same digital hookup for the Progressive scan cables as the Gamecube therefore meaning I won't have to buy a new set of cables.
Post by: Spak-Spang on January 03, 2006, 08:21:28 AM
1)Revolution will be out world wide by November 2006.
2)PS3 will be out world wide by Novevember 2006, however quanitities will be limited.
3)Price Point $200-249. This is a hard one to pin down, I am hoping for the 200 but my gut tells me $249.
4)Launch lineup includes: Mario, Smash Brothers, and Metroid Prime 3
5)Only Smash Brothers and Metroid will be online enabled for Nintendo Launch games.
6)Xbox 360 will finally be garnering support and decent hardware numbers when the PS3 and Revolution are launched and these launches will completely destory the lead and energy Microsoft had from the early launch.
The System wars will go down as such.
Japan:
PS3
Nintendo Revolution
Xbox 360 far below.
US
Xbox 360
Nintendo Revolution
PS3
(Actually the Revolution and PS3 will be so closely tied in units sold that it will be hard to determine winner. However the media will preceive Sony as the winner.)
World Wide Numbers will not support the claim but the Media and Microsoft will claim they won the overall worldwide console battle for the coming generation.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 03, 2006, 08:45:34 AM
I predict the Rev will launch in September. November is too late. Nintendo needs to have as smooth as a transition from Cube-to-Rev as possible. The transition from N64-to-Cube was poor and Nintendo paid for it. It won't be perfect but a few months can make a big difference. Nintendo has launched in September before and it's still close enough to the end of the year to be a big Christmas item. And unlike something like May or June it gives ample time to get the launch lineup ready.
The Rev will probably come with all the required accessories like the shell and probably the nunchuk. I think there's still a question about whether every controller will come with those accessories but I think the console will. Nintendo set precedence for including everything with the DS. They've made a big deal about having everything "out of the box".
The success of the console itself is based largely on the launch lineup. Nintendo has to make a fantastic first impression. Nintendo has too negative of an image to make only an okay first impression and get away with it. They've got to blow everyone away.
To do so they need a killer app that really sells the system to everybody. And I mean everybody. Both non-gamers and existing gamers alike. They can't have the two groups be seperated because they'll never be able to successfully please both groups. They'll either neglect one or give each a half-assed effort. They have to combine the two groups together. And to do that they need the ultimate killer app that appeals to both groups and makes both groups like the same thing. It should successfully demonstrate the controller too and really sell the concept.
That's going to be hard to do this non-gamer stuff is Nintendo's big plan and they should never have gone with it if they don't have a chance of pulling it off. I think this killer app has to be something new. I like Mario and he's an important franchise to have and his games will always sell well. But he's not a killer app anymore. If he was, if ANY of Nintendo's franchises were, then the Cube wouldn't have underperformed like it did. Mario is too old. Newer gamers don't identify with him because they've been raised on the Playstation. They need their own games to identify with. It's ironic thought that their old franchises were going to sell Cubes when the Xbox grew from nothing and was beating Nintendo about a year in based on the success of a brand new franchise. That right there was proof that new franchises are needed.
The followup to the killer app is imporant as well. There has to be, well, games. None of this six month drought stuff.
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on January 03, 2006, 08:53:30 AM
$200-250
1 Console
2 controllers
2 shells
2 nun-chuck attachments
1 preloaded nes game (SMB 1 or 3)
1 bundled game (mario 128)
1 controller dock for recharging
Post by: Kairon on January 03, 2006, 11:23:10 AM
Problem is that it is because of a dearth of 3rd parties that it takes place. Nintendo is a big company, but they can only make so many games! lol.
Hopefully stronger efforts by Nintendo to sign on third parties as well as the inherent interest in the revolutions capabilities, PLUS the hopefully all it's cracked up to be zero-learning-curve and shorter, cheaper dev times, plus some unexpected sparkling innovationy games that have huge replay value (Music games, like Samba de Amigo, or lifestyle games like Mario Paint)... hopefully these factors can combine to give Nintendo the ability to get more games in less time in the crucial and vulnerable early months of the console launch.
So basically, this drought thing has to go, and we need third parties to kill it for us.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Ian Sane on January 03, 2006, 12:35:12 PM
On the Cube though Nintendo didn't seem to notice it was a problem, or at least they didn't while the drought was going on. The flagship title was short and had minimal replay value. They also didn't make much of an effort to get third parties dev kits in time for the Cube launch and as a result a lot of of the early Cube third party games were really crappy PS2 ports. They even had the gall to release a press release right in the middle of the drought bragging about how many games they had available. It was like propaganda out of 1984 (the book not the year). I recall that press release raising the hairs on the neck of pretty much everyone on the forum.
These days Nintendo is a little more on the ball. At the very least they have since acknowledged that that was a goof up. And even though they don't seem to quite "get" the third party concept at least now they know it's somewhat important. In early 2002 it was like Nintendo didn't think third party support was even remotely worth putting any effort into. With the Cube Nintendo was totally clueless. Their attitude was like "it's Nintendo so everyone will love it!" With the Rev they at least know the issues. Now their method of fixing these issues might be completely insane but at the very least they know something needs to be fixed. Nintendo WILL make an effort to avoid a drought, they just might suck at it.
Post by: kirby_killer_dedede on January 03, 2006, 12:57:20 PM
Post by: Magik on January 03, 2006, 01:00:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Nintendo WILL make an effort to avoid a drought, they just might suck at it.
All the Mario spinoffs could be an indication.
Post by: SaimDusan.I on January 03, 2006, 02:21:14 PM
Post by: BigJim on January 03, 2006, 02:38:34 PM
They're designing it to be an industry shaker. "Shakers" don't usually realize their success (or potential success) in the early adoption days. The ipod is one obvious example of this. They didn't really take off until Christmas '04, and it was out for well over a year by that point.
The first year will be all about the early adopters and building awareness for the newbies. It probably won't see sales much different than GameCube at that point. The second year will be the year of momentum and will be more telling of the system's long term success, I think. This is true for most new products, but should be especially true with Rev considering Nintendo's goals for it. It'll live or die on year 2, IMHO.
Post by: Magik on January 03, 2006, 04:16:24 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: SaimDusan.I
You know what I think the Rev should have? Nintendogs 2. Think about it, it'll really boost the Revolutions sales.
Nintendogs won't boost REV sales like it did with the DS. Two totally different markets.
Quote
I believe the Rev's second year will be just as important as it's first year.
They're designing it to be an industry shaker. "Shakers" don't usually realize their success (or potential success) in the early adoption days. The ipod is one obvious example of this. They didn't really take off until Christmas '04, and it was out for well over a year by that point.
The first year will be all about the early adopters and building awareness for the newbies. It probably won't see sales much different than GameCube at that point. The second year will be the year of momentum and will be more telling of the system's long term success, I think. This is true for most new products, but should be especially true with Rev considering Nintendo's goals for it. It'll live or die on year 2, IMHO.
I can agree with that.
I still believe it'll be the first year because if the message can't get across to the consumers than, I don't think it'll ever considering how jaded a lot of people are towards Nintendo.
Post by: denjet78 on January 03, 2006, 11:12:29 PM
1. That the Revolution will come out when it comes out.
2. That it will have great games that I will have a lot of fun playing.
3. That 3rd parties as well as Sony and MS can bite me and that while everyone else is trying to look and act cool by running over hookers in hi-def I'll just be having the greatest time of my life waving around a funny looking remote.
Other than that everything else here is speculative garbage. First year doesn't matter. Remember the Playstation's first year? Launch doesn't matter. Again PS2 anyone, and I don't CARE about the lack of competition because we ALL know it still would have sold like that on hype alone. Argue with me if you like but come on! There are people who still think it's the most powerful console of this generation. Now that's some good brainwashing!
As for 3rd parties, there's nothing Nintendo can do about them anyway. They all think they're all too high and mighty while at the same time releasing titles that they say are perfect for the Gamecube on the XBox and PS2. Can you say hypocrate? Sure, I knew you could.
People say "throw money at it!", but how much and for how long? Besides, it's not just money changing hands here. Sony and MS are also cutting deals in ways that Nintendo never can. Do you really think Square originally jumped ship because of the money that Sony was offering them, or do you think the movie deal, something that Square had been wainting to do for a long time, had anything to do with it? Face it, Sony and MS have resources that completely outstrip Nintendo's any day. They tried to play to their strengths this generation, by letting 3rd parties develop internal franchises in hopes of garnering support, but all anyone could do was complain about how they wanted new or 3rd party franchises. Well, that's what Nintendo was TRYING to give you! Build up ties by working together on games.
In the end, Nintendo should just be swallowed up by some larger entity so that all of you will SHUT THE HELL UP for a while and just enjoy playing games. And when that entity achieves its goal of getting a set-top-box or a controlled internet network or whatever else the hell they're really after instead of video games into peoples livingrooms and dismatle Nintendo and the rest of their video games division because it's no longer needed, you can rest assured that you got a few more good years of gaming out of Nintendo at the cost of quite possibly a lifetime.
Post by: Magik on January 04, 2006, 03:31:38 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: denjet78
Well, I predict:
1. That the Revolution will come out when it comes out.
2. That it will have great games that I will have a lot of fun playing.
3. That 3rd parties as well as Sony and MS can bite me and that while everyone else is trying to look and act cool by running over hookers in hi-def I'll just be having the greatest time of my life waving around a funny looking remote.
Other than that everything else here is speculative garbage. First year doesn't matter. Remember the Playstation's first year? Launch doesn't matter. Again PS2 anyone, and I don't CARE about the lack of competition because we ALL know it still would have sold like that on hype alone. Argue with me if you like but come on! There are people who still think it's the most powerful console of this generation. Now that's some good brainwashing!
As for 3rd parties, there's nothing Nintendo can do about them anyway. They all think they're all too high and mighty while at the same time releasing titles that they say are perfect for the Gamecube on the XBox and PS2. Can you say hypocrate? Sure, I knew you could.
People say "throw money at it!", but how much and for how long? Besides, it's not just money changing hands here. Sony and MS are also cutting deals in ways that Nintendo never can. Do you really think Square originally jumped ship because of the money that Sony was offering them, or do you think the movie deal, something that Square had been wainting to do for a long time, had anything to do with it? Face it, Sony and MS have resources that completely outstrip Nintendo's any day. They tried to play to their strengths this generation, by letting 3rd parties develop internal franchises in hopes of garnering support, but all anyone could do was complain about how they wanted new or 3rd party franchises. Well, that's what Nintendo was TRYING to give you! Build up ties by working together on games.
In the end, Nintendo should just be swallowed up by some larger entity so that all of you will SHUT THE HELL UP for a while and just enjoy playing games. And when that entity achieves its goal of getting a set-top-box or a controlled internet network or whatever else the hell they're really after instead of video games into peoples livingrooms and dismatle Nintendo and the rest of their video games division because it's no longer needed, you can rest assured that you got a few more good years of gaming out of Nintendo at the cost of quite possibly a lifetime.
The first year does matter. Look at the GC. It did terribly in its first year and look how it turned out. Barely selling 20 million consoles, that's a drop of about 20 million from the 40 million N64's. The Playstation and the REV are different. The Playstation was still following the traditional console where as the REV is a completely different console because of the controller. As I said before, if they can't sell the concept to the consumer early on, they probably will not care for it later on.
3rd parties thinking they're high and mighty? You can say the same thing with Nintendo and their belief that they can survive on 1st/2nd party games alone and 3rd parties are useless.
Square joined Sony because the Playstation offered them things they wanted such as using CD's instead of cartridges. They also, like most developers got sick and tired of Nintendo's money grabbing policies with their ridiculous licensing fees.
If Nintendo wanted to shut us up, all they needed to do was stop being so damn stubborn and stop making stupid decisions.
Post by: Ceric on January 04, 2006, 04:00:53 AM
ok Prediction:
$250 Full Package
No Rev game included
Tutorial built into snazzy new interface
2 "Downloads" from a set list
Unfortunately it will come with RCA hookups like every other Nintendo console except the VB, maybe even the same connector but rumor has it this will be wireless.
May be able to get the USB Wi-Fi adapter for the cheap with the purchase of a new System
Rev will actually be smaller then it is now
That whole outer case will be able to be replaced for skinning
The system will have a mysterious "Exp" port that will never be used outside of Japan
Post by: denjet78 on January 04, 2006, 04:59:44 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Magik
The first year does matter. Look at the GC. It did terribly in its first year and look how it turned out. Barely selling 20 million consoles, that's a drop of about 20 million from the 40 million N64's. The Playstation and the REV are different. The Playstation was still following the traditional console where as the REV is a completely different console because of the controller. As I said before, if they can't sell the concept to the consumer early on, they probably will not care for it later on.
3rd parties thinking they're high and mighty? You can say the same thing with Nintendo and their belief that they can survive on 1st/2nd party games alone and 3rd parties are useless.
Square joined Sony because the Playstation offered them things they wanted such as using CD's instead of cartridges. They also, like most developers got sick and tired of Nintendo's money grabbing policies with their ridiculous licensing fees.
If Nintendo wanted to shut us up, all they needed to do was stop being so damn stubborn and stop making stupid decisions.
I point out to you again, look at the Playstation. No one thought that it was going to be any real kind of competition once the N64 came out, which was more than a year after it was released... I think. I can't remember exactly right now. But for sure it wasn't supposed to be the industry leader that it is today. The XBox had a MUCH bigger push and a much bigger first year than the PSX did. Nintendo sold MORE N64s on the consoles launch DAY than Sony did in the PSXs first year. Care to tell me again how the first year is so important? Or is that only related to Nintendo and everyone else is exempt? Obviously Sony proved that a consoles first year means nothing. And by the way, no one cared about the fact that the N64 was cartrage based at first. NO ONE. Because it was assumed that it was going to be the market leader. Sony had to PAY developers to make games for their console. Tell me again how great CD is.
And Nintendo can survive on 1st party software alone. They've done it for 2 generations if you haven't noticed. Could Sony do that? Could MS do that? Could ANYONE else in this industry almost single handedly support a console and still make more profit than anyone else in the industry? Sick and tired of Nintendo's money grubbing policies? Well how about Sony and MS subsidizing hardware that developers then have to eat the cost of developing games for? You heard that right, when Sony and MS sell their consoles at a loss they're forcing the developers to eat the cost of developing for said hardware while at the same time maintaining a software pricing structure that gamers will still accept. Why haven't game prices gone up? Because consoles prices haven't gone up. I don't know about you but who's going to pay $100 for a game when the console only costs $300? Yet that's what Sony and MS have been FORCING 3rd parties to do. They have to keep their games prices down because the hardware is so cheap. Basically they're forcing advancements without a care in the world as to how it affects anyone else. Besides, it sounds like you want Nintendo to put their own games on the back burner and push 3rd party software. WHY? They're in this industry to make money, not friends. They are a SOFTWARE MAKER, that's their whole business! And because of that they're always going to be at odds with 3rd parties. You can't say the same thing about Sony and MS.
Then you counter Square with the CD issue. And you actually think that's the WHOLE reason they jumped ship? I'm not even going to go into all the nuances of what really happened because you already seem to think that you know. I mean, because without CD it just wasn't possible to make any good games at all. Games like Super Mario 64 or OOT or MM. CD was absolutely and completely necessary, wasn't it.
You know what, Nintendo might be money grubbing, just like every other company out there by the way, but at least they do it with one thing in mind: GAMES. If they screw up with the games, they're dead. They don't have any other industry to fall back on. You can't say that about Sony or MS and the way they treat games, you can see it.
---
Anyway, I'm annoyed right now and I need to take my medication because I'm twitching. I'm sorry if I sound angry but it's really annoying when Nintendo get's all the flack and everyone else can get away with murder just because they do it under the guise of pushing gaming forward when in actuallity it's done nothing but fall backwards.
Post by: Magik on January 04, 2006, 08:23:42 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: denjet78
I point out to you again, look at the Playstation. No one thought that it was going to be any real kind of competition once the N64 came out, which was more than a year after it was released... I think. I can't remember exactly right now. But for sure it wasn't supposed to be the industry leader that it is today. The XBox had a MUCH bigger push and a much bigger first year than the PSX did. Nintendo sold MORE N64s on the consoles launch DAY than Sony did in the PSXs first year. Care to tell me again how the first year is so important? Or is that only related to Nintendo and everyone else is exempt? Obviously Sony proved that a consoles first year means nothing. And by the way, no one cared about the fact that the N64 was cartrage based at first. NO ONE. Because it was assumed that it was going to be the market leader. Sony had to PAY developers to make games for their console. Tell me again how great CD is.
And Nintendo can survive on 1st party software alone. They've done it for 2 generations if you haven't noticed. Could Sony do that? Could MS do that? Could ANYONE else in this industry almost single handedly support a console and still make more profit than anyone else in the industry? Sick and tired of Nintendo's money grubbing policies? Well how about Sony and MS subsidizing hardware that developers then have to eat the cost of developing games for? You heard that right, when Sony and MS sell their consoles at a loss they're forcing the developers to eat the cost of developing for said hardware while at the same time maintaining a software pricing structure that gamers will still accept. Why haven't game prices gone up? Because consoles prices haven't gone up. I don't know about you but who's going to pay $100 for a game when the console only costs $300? Yet that's what Sony and MS have been FORCING 3rd parties to do. They have to keep their games prices down because the hardware is so cheap. Basically they're forcing advancements without a care in the world as to how it affects anyone else. Besides, it sounds like you want Nintendo to put their own games on the back burner and push 3rd party software. WHY? They're in this industry to make money, not friends. They are a SOFTWARE MAKER, that's their whole business! And because of that they're always going to be at odds with 3rd parties. You can't say the same thing about Sony and MS.
Then you counter Square with the CD issue. And you actually think that's the WHOLE reason they jumped ship? I'm not even going to go into all the nuances of what really happened because you already seem to think that you know. I mean, because without CD it just wasn't possible to make any good games at all. Games like Super Mario 64 or OOT or MM. CD was absolutely and completely necessary, wasn't it.
You know what, Nintendo might be money grubbing, just like every other company out there by the way, but at least they do it with one thing in mind: GAMES. If they screw up with the games, they're dead. They don't have any other industry to fall back on. You can't say that about Sony or MS and the way they treat games, you can see it.
---
Anyway, I'm annoyed right now and I need to take my medication because I'm twitching. I'm sorry if I sound angry but it's really annoying when Nintendo get's all the flack and everyone else can get away with murder just because they do it under the guise of pushing gaming forward when in actuallity it's done nothing but fall backwards.
The REV's first year is important because the system is completely different from the rest of the competition, which makes it a harder sell since it goes against what has been the norm for the last 20 odd years. People are not going to switch from the way they have been playing consoles for the last 20 years to something new in an instant. And let's not forget how distorted Nintendo's image is right now. The media doesn't take them seriously anymore and the stigma of being a 'tiku tiku tiku! ' system, which is not entirely true, has become associated with Nintendo. Coupled with the fact that they do not really have the age group of 16-25 on their side and casuals/non-gamers thinking it's Sony or MS that is the top consoles will make it even harder for people to buy the REV.
By the time the first year is done, the PS3 will have launched, and the 360 will have had a whole year with more games and more shipments. They hype for the PS3 will be huge and the 360 will still be strong and it's quite possible that they will overshadow the REV if it can't make any breakthroughs.
As for the CD, it obviously gave a lot more space for developers to use, which was one of the main reasons why Square jumped ship, and it was a lot cheaper to manufactur. Who said anything about requiring CD's to make great games? CD's gave developers more freedom and it was the next evolution for console media. CD's with FF7 was the catalyst that allowed the Playstation to become the leader.
Sure, Nintendo has survived the last two generations on 1st/2nd party games, but can they do it again when their userbase is getting cut in half each generation and their image is in the gutter and popularity on the decline?
When did I say I wanted Nintendo to but their 1st party games on the backburner? I would like to see a balance between 1st/2nd and 3rd party games to be honest.
Post by: JonLeung on January 04, 2006, 08:49:20 AM
Once they have a Revolution, even if it was meant for the classics, they have the ability to play Revolution games, and will actually take the time to look at the Revolution section in the game/electronics stores.
If someone was satisfied with their Xbox or PS2, they wouldn't need to look at the GameCube section. Sure, it has a lot of exclusive games, not like, say, the Xboxes which nearly all are also available for the PC, but if casual gamers don't feel like they're missing anything, and don't have the ability to play GCN games anyway, why would they look at the GCN section, especially if they're not hearing about it as much?
This retro library is one of the Aces in Nintendo's hand. It's a service that the competition doesn't have. Sure, the others have backwards compatibility but not on this level, and not as convenient. It should sound even better than when DVDs were new and people were buying a PS2 for its DVD-playing ability. Well, ideally, anyway.
So the download service will get it into more homes because of this feature alone, including quite a lot in the hands of older gamers.
I predict that Nintendo will make a big deal about the "virtual console" and heavily at launch - very heavily, perhaps, and they really should. It will be a big point whenever people make comparisons between the three consoles and Nintendo will remind us again and again, especially between major Revolution game releases. They will hold off on releasing some games to maintain interest by putting them out over time. I don't foresee all of their games at once, and even if they do for some nutso reason, perhaps some third-party developers had been sitting on the fence and if it does become successful (which I predict it will) then they'll want a piece of the action, so games might come later anyway.
Post by: Magik on January 04, 2006, 09:04:49 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
But simply because of the download service, I'm sure 20-30-year-olds who remember the NES (or even those slightly younger who remember the Super NES), if Nintendo can get the word out about it, people will buy it JUST for those old games. At first.
Once they have a Revolution, even if it was meant for the classics, they have the ability to play Revolution games, and will actually take the time to look at the Revolution section in the game/electronics stores.
If someone was satisfied with their Xbox or PS2, they wouldn't need to look at the GameCube section. Sure, it has a lot of exclusive games, not like, say, the Xboxes which nearly all are also available for the PC, but if casual gamers don't feel like they're missing anything, and don't have the ability to play GCN games anyway, why would they look at the GCN section, especially if they're not hearing about it as much?
This retro library is one of the Aces in Nintendo's hand. It's a service that the competition doesn't have. Sure, the others have backwards compatibility but not on this level, and not as convenient. It should sound even better than when DVDs were new and people were buying a PS2 for its DVD-playing ability. Well, ideally, anyway.
So the download service will get it into more homes because of this feature alone, including quite a lot in the hands of older gamers.
I predict that Nintendo will make a big deal about the "virtual console" and heavily at launch - very heavily, perhaps, and they really should. It will be a big point whenever people make comparisons between the three consoles and Nintendo will remind us again and again, especially between major Revolution game releases. They will hold off on releasing some games to maintain interest by putting them out over time. I don't foresee all of their games at once, and even if they do for some nutso reason, perhaps some third-party developers had been sitting on the fence and if it does become successful (which I predict it will) then they'll want a piece of the action, so games might come later anyway.
I think they will make a very big deal about the 'virtual console' especially if they can get SEGA on board. I just hope they don't make it so big that it overshadows everything else about the REV.
There are definitely a lot of people would be interested in the 'virtual console', but I think there are more people interested in new games than old games.
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on January 04, 2006, 09:09:08 AM
Quote
ok Prediction:
$250 Full Package
No Rev game included
Tutorial built into snazzy new interface
2 "Downloads" from a set list
Unfortunately it will come with RCA hookups like every other Nintendo console except the VB, maybe even the same connector but rumor has it this will be wireless.
May be able to get the USB Wi-Fi adapter for the cheap with the purchase of a new System
Rev will actually be smaller then it is now
That whole outer case will be able to be replaced for skinning
The system will have a mysterious "Exp" port that will never be used outside of Japan
Too weak an offering to be believable.
I really think Ninty is going to try and copy the NES with their release of the REV and therefore include pretty much everything that is needed for immediate family fun with the system which means at least one game and two controllers with all the attachments.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 04, 2006, 09:25:21 AM
The virtual console is an important selling point but can't be focused on in such a way that a Nintendo detractor is going to think the Rev is just another excuse for Nintendo to re-release Super Mario Bros.
Post by: JonLeung on January 04, 2006, 09:26:19 AM
Quote
There are definitely a lot of people would be interested in the 'virtual console', but I think there are more people interested in new games than old games.
Hmmm, true. But it would still definitely be a selling point to gamers in a demographic Nintendo needs, and will get back those gamers with any sense of nostalgia who may have become disenfranchised with them lately. If it has a much lower price point than the competition it would definitely be worth considering as a second console.
And as I said, once it's in the homes already, people will look at the Nintendo section of the game store and consider the new games since they now have the means to play them. The classics are doing "Trojan horse penetration".
It'll work for that demographic, anyway. They'll hopefully have other marketing strategies and solid new games for those less interested in the past, I definitely agree with you there.
Post by: Magik on January 04, 2006, 10:25:10 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeungQuote
There are definitely a lot of people would be interested in the 'virtual console', but I think there are more people interested in new games than old games.
Hmmm, true. But it would still definitely be a selling point to gamers in a demographic Nintendo needs, and will get back those gamers with any sense of nostalgia who may have become disenfranchised with them lately. If it has a much lower price point than the competition it would definitely be worth considering as a second console.
And as I said, once it's in the homes already, people will look at the Nintendo section of the game store and consider the new games since they now have the means to play them. The classics are doing "Trojan horse penetration".
It'll work for that demographic, anyway. They'll hopefully have other marketing strategies and solid new games for those less interested in the past, I definitely agree with you there.
I've been thinking about the REV being a 2nd console, can this actually work considering how expensive the 360 is, and how PS3 will be? In Canada, the Xbox 360 is 399.99 and 499.99 for the Core and Premium respectiviely. Now add a game or two and a second controller and we're looking at just under $600 or $700 before tax. Can people really afford to pick up a 2nd console after spending so much on the first?
I know the REV will be cheaper than the PS3 and 360, but cheap is subjective from person to person. I dont' consider $249.99 CDN ($199.99US) cheap. I see it as not as expensive as the rest, but still expensive.
Thoughts?
Post by: JonLeung on January 04, 2006, 10:33:39 AM
I remember when the Sega Saturn was like over $500. Multi-hundred dollar things are scary, especially considering how there's a greater difference (even if mostly just perceived) between American and Canadian dollars as prices get into higher ranges.
Perhaps if the difference in prices between consoles is enough, people will get a Revolution as a FIRST console because they'll have to wait a while for the prices of the other two to drop low enough to afford. Or at least while they're still saving up their money for any console they might have more exposure to the Revolution before deciding on a purchase. To bounce off your point that to get it as a second console people have already put down to much money, well, if the Revolution is different enough that people find it worth saving for, it shouldn't be too much of a problem - most people are capable of saving up for something if they really want it, and the low price point only helps.
Post by: Nosferat2 on January 04, 2006, 10:45:54 AM
P.S.S- After re-reading this I realized that the new IP, there probably should be 2, should be a FPS and a "Traditional" RPG franchise. Some will argue that Zelda is an RPG. Lets face it deep down it's an action title. It's a beast of it's own and shares in a way more with Metroid than a traditional RPG. What it does it does well and uniquely. Both of these need to be unique and not use any of Nintendo's characters except maybe for a cameo. It should also try to stay away from the style that is deemed Nintendo artisticly, except for maybe a homage level (Like the 8-bit one in Baten Kaitos).
Preach on man! Preach on!
Post by: Ian Sane on January 04, 2006, 10:50:43 AM
I've felt the "second console" plan was flawed period regardless of price because even now people typically don't own more than one console. It's a little more frequent online with hardcore gamers but the average household only has one console per generation tops. As you point out though the added cost of these new consoles is just going to make that even more rare. Anything over $100 is NEVER cheap. Something can be a good value but people only have so much money. $5000 for a brand new car would be a pretty sweet deal. But nonetheless I couldn't afford it. Sometimes an amount is just too high regardless of value. Paying over $1000 to get a Rev and another console is expensive. The Rev can be cheap by console standards but it will never truly be cheap.
Plus I've always felt the competitive nature of console owners would prevent a console that tries to be number two from being very popular. Ever since the terms "console war" was invented console owners have always had a lot of pride in what console they own. They want to pick the "winner" or for their console to become the winner. It's silly but it's reality and whining about how stupid or immature that is won't help Nintendo a damn bit. Well if one console maker admits they're not even trying to win then anyone with that "win" mentality (ie: the majority) isn't even going to buy that console. Nintendo can set a simple goal for themselves to just sell more consoles than last time or improve their market share or become number two and that's fine. But the gaming public has to think they're trying to win and can win or they won't give a crap.
Being the "second console" isn't a bad thing to be but it's not something to intentionally strive for.
Post by: Magik on January 04, 2006, 11:32:28 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
I'm Canadian too and I pretty much expect a $249.99 CDN price. Sure, anything over $200 looks pricey but I've always been expecting mid-$200 prices for new Nintendo consoles.
I remember when the Sega Saturn was like over $500. Multi-hundred dollar things are scary, especially considering how there's a greater difference (even if mostly just perceived) between American and Canadian dollars as prices get into higher ranges.
Perhaps if the difference in prices between consoles is enough, people will get a Revolution as a FIRST console because they'll have to wait a while for the prices of the other two to drop low enough to afford. Or at least while they're still saving up their money for any console they might have more exposure to the Revolution before deciding on a purchase. To bounce off your point that to get it as a second console people have already put down to much money, well, if the Revolution is different enough that people find it worth saving for, it shouldn't be too much of a problem - most people are capable of saving up for something if they really want it, and the low price point only helps.
To me, anything over $200 is pricey. And once you start adding other stuff, like games, memory cards and controllers... it's definitely becoming expensive.
It's going to take a lot of convincing for casual/non-gamers to pick up the REV first considering Nintendo's image is pretty distorted at the moment. A fully packed bundle would be a good way to start things.
Nintendo's going to really need to beef up their marketing and advertisement to convince people to pick up the REV.
Post by: JonLeung on January 04, 2006, 12:20:03 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Being the "second console" isn't a bad thing to be but it's not something to intentionally strive for.
I think there's confusion between second console and second-best (or second-most popular) console. 'Cause by that logic, anyone who's going to have more than one console and if one of those is an Xbox 360 then it's already decided what their first console is. But it may not be their main one. Second =/= secondary. At least not totally.
Instead of calling it a "second console" they should (and probably will) promote it as a console everybody should have, regardless of if they already own the competition's console(s). More like "the competition doesn't matter at all to us". That would make it sound like they're going for first place, which I'm sure they are, even if it's technically a lot of people's second console that they pick up.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 04, 2006, 12:29:41 PM
Nintendo has used that "the competition doesn't matter" routine before and anyone capable of speech knows that's secret code for "we're going to get our ass kicked." It's a loser statement like "just do your best", "good try", and "the important thing is to have fun." A Rev owner should have confidence in their console and therefore Nintendo needs to sound confident. This is why when Reggie talks it gets everyone excited but when Iwata talks everyone gets worried. Reggie's all "we're going to make a big comeback and kick some ass!" while Iwata is all "gosh I hope someone buys our console."
Post by: kirby_killer_dedede on January 04, 2006, 12:46:21 PM
Post by: KnowsNothing on January 04, 2006, 12:58:48 PM
Quote
Nintendo has used that "the competition doesn't matter" routine before and anyone capable of speech knows that's secret code for "we're going to get our ass kicked." It's a loser statement like "just do your best", "good try", and "the important thing is to have fun."
That's a really stupid statement, but I'm sure you did your best.
Post by: kram821 on January 04, 2006, 12:59:45 PM
price: $349.99
items: Revoultion, 2 controlers, 2 anolge sticks, 2 controler shells, RCA cables, power cords, demo disk.
colors: white, black red, NES, SNES, N64
Relese date: as soon as humanly possible, cause I can't wait any more (happy thoughts, happy thoughts, happy thoughts).
Post by: kirby_killer_dedede on January 04, 2006, 01:29:34 PM
Post by: Ian Sane on January 04, 2006, 01:34:18 PM
I appreciate your sportsmanship. The important thing is I had fun typing it.
Post by: KnowsNothing on January 04, 2006, 01:36:30 PM
Post by: kirby_killer_dedede on January 04, 2006, 01:38:48 PM
Post by: IceCold on January 04, 2006, 04:17:01 PM
Then again, Nintendo is saying it should be a second system for those other gamers who migrated to Sony and Microsoft. Nintendo is trying to create a whole new audience in non-gamers. As has been said, it's risky but if it works, it has great potential... the non-gamers could get interested in other types of games, and also, there will be more third party support is the userbase is strong regardless of the demographic.
Post by: BigJim on January 04, 2006, 05:39:41 PM
They're going to launch a year after 360, and possibly head to head with PS3 if that is delayed (which some developers seem to think will happen). They're not going to be number one, whether they shot for it or not. Their relevance in the console market is questionable. Why fight a battle you're not going to win? Even from a business standpoint it's simply inefficient.
The train is already on the track. They're aiming to be different. The fate was sealed with the controller. Even though they're all making games, Nintendo's track is going in a different direction.
Didn't Reggie's speech mention that there is a 25% platform crossover? That's in a market where they are all essentially competing on the same level. GameCube somewhat competed as a second console, at least in price, but that wasn't until the price dropped later in the cycle and the system's fate was already determined.
Nintendo is banking on 360 and PS3 being too similar for most people to want/need both. If their assumption is correct, the crossover potential is Nintendo's to own.
If Nintendo proactively markets Revolution as a secondary alternative (whatever terminology they use), raises the crossover penetration modestly (even just to 30%), keeps the price low, continues to sell to their built-in fan base, AND bring in the new players, they have a fighting chance of increasing their market share while the other guys keep dogging it out. They'd probably still end up in 3rd place, but with more marketshare and mindshare. Hopefully they'll have sold the concept of the controller, which helps them in the fight of 2011 if the others copy it.
A lot of steps there, but it's possible.
Re: 1st year. As I mentioned I think the 2nd year will be just as important as the first, considering the distinct part of Nintendo's strategy to grow the market with new players. The first year will be all about early adopters and the built-in fan base. They're the ones that would have bought it anyway. The newbies aren't going to pick it up fresh off the assembly line. Those buyers need time. The crossover buyers need time too. Year 2 will be about riding momentum that year 1 begins to execute.
Of course, EVERYTHING hinges on this darn controller. It's either genius or insane.
Post by: JonLeung on January 05, 2006, 04:01:34 AM
Hardcore gamers who read about all this stuff on the 'net would see a press release about it but they're likely the types who would know of the Revolution's library and upcoming releases and other info that should sway them in any direction.
Post by: Spak-Spang on January 05, 2006, 04:21:11 AM
Nintendo has already done the hardest part of marketing, by making there product look different than the competition (because it is different.)
Now all Nintendo has to do is get a marketshare large enough that publishers and developers see it as a worthy platform to develop for. And Nintendo is already taking large steps towards that as well.
1)A cheaper priced console looks cheap only in comparison that it does everything the competition does. The Revolution does some things that the competition can never do, so the cheaper price makes it more bargain than cheap.
2)Cheaper and easier to develop games means that publishers and developers can spend the money to make and exclusive.
3)They will choose Nintendo to make exclusives because it is so different and literally can make special games the other consoles can't.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 05, 2006, 06:39:13 AM
A cheaper console also looks cheap in comparison if it's obvious that tradeoffs were made. Nintendo has already compromised the Rev with the lack of HD. If the Rev can do what the competition can do plus more then it's a bargain. If it's just different then it's not. The tradeoff to get that low price has to be insignificant so that the general public doesn't notice. It can't be an obvious missing feature or a noticable difference in graphics quality. More than once in stores I heard a salesman pitching the three consoles to someone and the customer immediately assumed that the lower Cube price was just because there was no DVD player. They immediately "discovered" that the Cube wasn't a deal at all.
"They will choose Nintendo to make exclusives because it is so different and literally can make special games the other consoles can't."
This gets brought up a lot and Nintendo has always promoted it as a big advantage. It's a pipe dream. Publishers control what games go where and they don't care about creativity or the ability to make special games. All they care about is money and if cliche generic games on the PS3 have higher potential sales than creative original games on the Rev they're going to concentrate on cliche generic games. Nintendo has focused a lot of developers. They made a big deal about how easy the Cube was to develop for and how connectivity allowed for original content that couldn't be done on the other consoles and none of that made a difference. Making a developer-friendly console only benefits Nintendo's internal teams.
Publishers are who you have to win over. That's how the Playstation beat the N64. It offered a cheaper medium that provided more storage space. It offered marketing-friendly glitz like FMV and Redbook audio. It offered lower licencing fees and just in general more freedom regarding what games can and can't be released. THAT is how you win third parties over. Publishers felt they could make more money by switching consoles.
So having cheaper games is a good strategy provided there's higher value. If a third party has to compromise their game to get the lower cost it won't help. But providing something different that encourages creativity isn't going to attract support in any significant way. The analog stick is now the standard but it didn't attract support worth crap on the N64. It wasn't publisher-friendly so it didn't help.
Post by: JonLeung on January 05, 2006, 07:05:08 AM
At least the Revolution really is quite different that developers will consider taking a chance with it. Ideally, anyway.
Post by: couchmonkey on January 05, 2006, 07:14:08 AM
I agree that, by and large, publishers are more in the driver's seat than developers. However, I do think developers have some influence, particularly in companies that do both the development and the publishing.
I think that Nintendo will get some free, exclusive support out of the Revolution even if it doesn't do so well, because there will be respected developers with enough influence to get their publishers to agree to release a new Revolution game. However, I agree that the amount of games made this way will be pretty limited unless Nintendo gets a huge market share. And one of the most important ways to do that is to persuade third party publishers to release games on the system.
So I guess what I'm saying is I agree that Nintendo needs to persuade publishers, but I don't think the situation is totally helpless without doing that. I think in a worst-case scenario there will still be N64-like third party support. We'll get the Revolution equivalents of games like Space Station Silicon Valley, Rocket: Robot on Wheels, and Tetrisphere.
Post by: Magik on January 05, 2006, 08:11:23 AM
Post by: Spak-Spang on January 05, 2006, 01:07:29 PM
DS against PSP proves that it is not just power that people look for. The PSP had alot of hype and was the product awarded and herald by tech magizines and such around America but it isn't doing very well against the DS, because the DS offers unique games that PSP can't offer, and the price is affordable.
Price can be too expensive. The Xbox 360 is boardline too expensive right now. The Revolution may not do HD, but it is a bargain for next generation games.
Throw in the idea you can pay 100 to 200 dollars more for an HD version of basically this generation game console. Or a Nintendo Revolution that can (with the shell) do normal gaming, but can also create completely new experiences with the Revolution controller, then you see how people will view Nintendo as a bargain and as something special.
Also we are moving into a direction with several mega publishers controlling several developers. You might say developers will have no say now on what they create. However, that isn't neccessarily true with the big name developers. If a big name designer from Capcom or Konami or Square wants to create a Revolution game, they are going to create it, and it will be published. Look at little Treasure they are still able to pick and choose platforms they support. You would figure they would only release for the biggest since they are so small.
I think people put too much stock in HD, and do not put enough stock in innovative products or the perception innovative products have with the people. Something that appears cool and innovative can instantly gain recognition and support and that can grow. But something that is basically the same will only garner the same support it had previous, and smaller growth.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 05, 2006, 01:38:13 PM
I agree. That will happen. That's just not enough to get serious support. It will be like Kojima makes a quirky game that no one actually buys and that's it. That's what happened on the Cube. You get a few neat third party games here and there, some of which are great and some of which aren't, but you never get serious support from a company. It's just pet projects. What Nintendo's goal should be is to have some third parties regard the Rev as their main console in that most of their games are made for it. That's REAL third party support, not just multiplatform ports and a few exclusives. The only way to get that is to be publisher friendly. Being developer friendly will get some support but not enough to properly address the problem. A developer friendly approach certainly wouldn't improve beyond the Cube's third party support.
Post by: Kairon on January 05, 2006, 02:05:56 PM
I mean, you can have low licensing fees, low dev costs (which is a boon to publishers, remember!), and easy money in the virtual console, but that doesn't matter one fig if publishers can't find any customers to sell the game to.
We're right back at this basic concept: userbase.
Hmmm... what's Nintendo's answer to the user-base question? Cheap almost-impulse price, secondary console mentality, out-of-the-gate mind-blowing unique features, retro-gamer appeal, and the potentially huge non-gamer appeal.
Here's hoping that Nintendo can replicate their DS success with the Rev.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: BlkPaladin on January 05, 2006, 02:13:09 PM
A way Nintendo may be able to alleviate this is offer an alternative distribution channel that they have control over. Such as their online service. But to do that they would have to offer bigger flash memory and an easy way to store the games on a computer or it will not be used.
But a good and interesting thing to note is that the publishers seem to be more positive about the Revolution than they were orginally about the DS. And currently the DS is enjoy some good times.
Post by: Spak-Spang on January 05, 2006, 03:59:53 PM
The Gamecube isn't getting games because if you multiplatform in this generation that many people have 2 systems, or only the most popular, it doesn't become worth releasing 3 copies that will only sell well on 2 systems. You should of just released it on 2 systems or better yet 1 from the start...perhaps 2 later. The Gamecube had already shown signs that only great Nintendo games would sell on the system, and medocre third party games won't. The Revolution corrects this problem because Nintendo offers a significantly different play style and gaming device. If you have an idea for a Revolution game you are going to HAVE to make it on the Revolution.
And Nintendo is helping developers with this by creating a system that is cheaper and easier to program for than the other 2 systems. I believe just like the DS is getting new types of games and new EXCLUSIVE games Nintendo Revolution will do the same.
Post by: Spak-Spang on January 05, 2006, 04:05:01 PM
Nintendo could advertise upcoming games via the online hub on the revolution, and allow game demos to get people excited.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 05, 2006, 06:07:06 PM
The DS is also the followup to the GBA, which owned virtually 100% of the portable marketshare. Nintendo already had all the third parties on board. The only possible change that could have happened was third parties leaving the DS. In terms of portable marketshare and third party Nintendo has had nowhere to go but down since Pokemon came out.
I do think that Nintendo offering to publish games is a good idea. It makes you wonder why they pretty much abandoned the second party concept on the Cube. Sadly downloading won't work but I don't think download only games would have enough mainstream popularity to get the kind of sales that would encourage other third parties to support the Rev. But Nintendo filling in their release schedule with Nintendo-published third party games would help console sales. Every good exclusive game helps and Nintendo could find a hidden gem from an smaller dev. Killer apps can come from anywhere.
Post by: wandering on January 05, 2006, 07:53:30 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Publishers are who you have to win over. That's how the Playstation beat the N64. It offered a cheaper medium that provided more storage space. It offered marketing-friendly glitz like FMV and Redbook audio. It offered lower licencing fees and just in general more freedom regarding what games can and can't be released. THAT is how you win third parties over. Publishers felt they could make more money by switching consoles.
Cheaper medium for games, you say? The rev's got that.
Marketing-friendly glitz, you say? The rev's got that too...and that's exactly how the Rev will win this round. Sure, the ps3 and the 360 have better specs and HD support...and no one cares, because graphics have gotten to the point where people just don't care about them, and most people don't own HDTVs. The features of the ps3 and 360 are in the realm of the theoretical. The features of the Revolution, meanwhile, are instantly palpable: a unique controller that will draw in people like moths to the flame; a machine that isn't noisy, loud, large or obnoxious; a huge back catalogue of games that everybody likes; and a price point that's actually affordable. The revolution is glitzier, showier, and more attention-grabbing than the competition.
....which is not how it was in the N64 era. The difference between the N64 and the Playstation was that the N64's features were buried and the playstation's were highly visable. Sure, the N64 had no loading times, better graphics, and better specs - but the playstation had fmvs. Sure, the N64 had the better controller - but the playstation had the better lookingcontroller. The situation is completley reversed this time around.
Call me a blind Nintendo fanboy, but I'm predicting the Rev will be first this upcoming gen.
Post by: Spak-Spang on January 06, 2006, 04:22:04 AM
A more powerful system was launching right along side it with a more powerful storage unit, and a better launch lineup of games.
Every media source was heralding Sony's entry into the market as big. Nintendo was about to loss dominance in the handheld market and become solely a software company.
We heard this prediction alot. Nintendo really didn't even hype up the DS that much. But we see what really happened. The public took to a cheaper more innovative console that wasn't as sexy, sleak, or software realized at the time.
I believe this is because innovation and cost are important to developers, publishers, and consumers. Developers didn't want to create something for a handheld that basically they could create better for a console system. Publishers didn't want to spend the more expensive development costs for the PSP, and Consumers didn't feel it neccessary or worth their money to speed over $200 for a handheld, that didn't do anything special.
I truly believe the Revolution will be like this when it is launched. A cheaper system that may not have the complete bells and whistles as the competition, but what it lacks won't be missed THAT much. HD really isn't that nice, and I barely tell the difference, its not enough for $100 extra dollars. Then you have developers that are going to just want to play around with the machine and develop something fun and unique. So far we have heard excitment from all the publishers and all the developers. They want this thing to succeed, and they want to develop something for it.
The same excitement level was announced about the Xbox or PS3, except for mentioning its power. Big deal.
I guess I just have a more positive outlook on this entire system and launch, I fully believe in the product and what Nintendo is trying to do this next generation.
Post by: OptimusPrime on January 06, 2006, 04:31:38 AM
Investors see the effect (or better, groundbreaking succes) of Nintendogs and Animal Crossing and al those other "non-games" Nintendo has been releasing and ackowledge that Nintendo is on to something, that there is indeed a huge "non-gamer" market ready to be hooked up to the traditional gamemarket and are willing to invest in the risk.
Publishers may have the last say in game publishing because they hold the money... they get their money from investors and if investors want to see more innovative, easy to control games that have proven to attract new audiences then publishers are going to let developers make those games. Biggest winner: Nintendo, because it's their handheld and upcoming console that holds the easy to use control-method and the DS allready captured a part of those "non-gamers".
There is change happening in the financial climat and in a indirect way Nintendo is responsible and maybe was even aiming to create such a shift in thinking.
Post by: couchmonkey on January 06, 2006, 04:55:56 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: wanderingQuote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Marketing-friendly glitz, you say? The rev's got that too...and that's exactly how the Rev will win this round. Sure, the ps3 and the 360 have better specs and HD support...and no one cares, because graphics have gotten to the point where people just don't care about them, and most people don't own HDTVs. The features of the ps3 and 360 are in the realm of the theoretical. The features of the Revolution, meanwhile, are instantly palpable: a unique controller that will draw in people like moths to the flame; a machine that isn't noisy, loud, large or obnoxious; a huge back catalogue of games that everybody likes; and a price point that's actually affordable. The revolution is glitzier, showier, and more attention-grabbing than the competition.
Eh, I agree on the controller and the back catalogue of games, but I don't think that quietness factors in that well. Unless Nintendo is going to make ads showing how quiet Revolution is compared to the other two, and let's be honest: an ad like that would be completely missing the point. It's a nice addition, but it's hardly "glitzy".
A low price isn't all that glitzy either. A low price is generally a good thing, but as iPod proves with it's $30 skins and other ridiculously overpriced accessories, a high price doesn't always hurt. Don't get me wrong, I think Nintendo is making the right choice with pricing since it's aiming to grab up a new, non-gaming audience. However, I think a big chunk of the gaming audience will think "lower price = lower quality" - which is supported by the fact that the system is less powerful than the others.
I posted this in another thread, but I want all my predictions in one place so I can look at them for laughs later:
Baseless sales predictions:
End of 2006:
Xbox 360: 10 million
PS3: 7 million
Rev: 2 million (depends on how many are available since it will probably launch at year's end, and therefore will probably sell out).
End of 2007:
PS3: 20 million
Xbox 360: 19.5 million (emphasis on a very close race with Sony just edging MS out)
Revolution: 14 million
Other crazy predictions:
System will launch in North America in Sept. 2006 (Now that we have more info, November is more likely, but I'm willing to admit my mistakes).
We'll see game footage before Nintendo's E3 conference (In retrospect, this is probably wrong too).
Post by: JonLeung on January 06, 2006, 08:12:16 AM
So I'd predict that there will be something shown before E3, but they'll save major stuff for E3 itself.
I hope to be able to get to E3 by applying as media personnel, if VGMaps.com can cut it...
At least I have a better looking site and in a sense, IGN sponsorship...kinda. I would really like to feel the awe of something new being revealed at E3 if I was actually there. But that's just my personal opinion.Obviously if I can't get to E3, I'd be, like, GIMME MORE INFO! NOW!
I also predict that while it won't be this E3, Sony or Microsoft will eventually come up with something similar to the remote control if it is successful. If it was shown at something like E3 I wonder if it'd be booed for being a rip-off.
Post by: Spak-Spang on January 06, 2006, 08:40:10 AM
Everyone is going to need to experience the system, and the best unveiling of screenshoots, actual games, and more is when you can allow the public or media to fully experience the system.
Otherwise, a screenshot compared to the HD screenshot of the Xbox360 will look bad. However, the Revolution isn't just about graphics its about the feel and experience of playing games in a new way.
Nintendo is playing it pretty smart by waiting. Right now, Nintendo is going to be able to have an E3 that is going to be huge and really blow the competition out of the water, just because nobody knows what to expect.
Post by: JonLeung on January 06, 2006, 09:12:21 AM
And that matters to Nintendo if that's the market they're after.
So while footage might not mean much now, a big E3 still doesn't mean much more to those people.
Post by: BlkPaladin on January 06, 2006, 10:23:31 AM
Post by: Ceric on January 06, 2006, 12:41:29 PM
Post by: iMoron on January 06, 2006, 05:38:07 PM
Hey... here are my predictions... and it will look like this marked wise:
The Revolution will do like the PS1 and the PS2, start slow and gain big momentum with a great amount of games.
The PS3 will do like the N64 and the GameCube, look promising but sony's mistakes and arrogance will diminish it.
The XBox360 will do like the Saturn and the Dreamcast, it will blead green untill its death... and go software only...
Now... take that!
A prediction without numbers!!!
Post by: jasonditz on January 06, 2006, 07:48:34 PM
Post by: Spak-Spang on January 13, 2006, 10:19:40 AM
Post by: Hostile Creation on January 13, 2006, 02:54:43 PM
Post by: nickmitch on January 13, 2006, 06:31:04 PM
Post by: nemo_83 on January 13, 2006, 10:57:55 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on January 15, 2006, 02:04:18 PM
Looking at that I predict Revolution will rake int hordse of cash and Sony will eventualy cave in or consolidate further and Microsoft will just keep eating the costs untill Linux or Macintosh replaces Windows as the standard.
Post by: JonLeung on January 16, 2006, 08:28:56 AM
Nintendo sells approximately as many GBAs as Sony sells PS2s, or maybe more. Now I don't have exact numbers, but if Nintendo profits from every GBA sale (they should, considering the technology was dated even back in 2001) and a PS2 sale is at a loss, or at least less profitable (consider that it's being sold for about twice-thrice as much but probably costs multiple times more to produce than a GBA) then Nintendo is already ahead. Even if my reasoning is wrong or inaccurate, remember, that's just the GBA. Add in the DS sales (higher than the PSPs, and again cheaper to produce) and GameCube sales (lower than the Xbox's, yes, but not by a lot, plus again, it's cheaper to make), not to mention that most of the software bestsellers on any of those systems are Nintendo's own, and it's ridiculous for anyone to think that Nintendo is getting out of the game business soon. They're the most dedicated to it.
That being said, they'll continue with the cost-cutting measures. We already suspect the specs aren't as high as the competition's and the graphics won't be in HD. I would love for the Revolution to have a comparable storage medium, but I'm guessing it's just going to be a variation on DVDs... But their faults are covered up with the always-exclusive Nintendo franchises, and hopefully they'll come up with more for those gamers who don't identify with Mario, Link, Samus, etc.
Post by: kirby_killer_dedede on January 16, 2006, 08:36:35 AM
Post by: BlkPaladin on January 16, 2006, 02:15:05 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on January 16, 2006, 02:28:21 PM
Post by: Ian Sane on January 17, 2006, 06:52:02 AM
And how long is Nintendo going to remain profitable as they continue to weaken their own brand name. If they keep driving people away each gen eventually they would reach a point where they can't be profitable anymore. Their profitability relies a lot on us not getting fed up with their underachievment.
Post by: vudu on January 17, 2006, 08:48:07 AM
QuoteTell that to a Dreamcast owner.
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
No one denies that Nintendo is profitable. But profit doesn't mean squat to a gamer. Only market share benefits us.
Post by: JonLeung on January 17, 2006, 09:21:18 AM
No offense to Dreamcast owners. Our household actually has a Dreamcast, the only non-Nintendo console since the NES that we have.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 17, 2006, 09:57:56 AM
Well obviously if the company goes broke it's no good. But Nintendo's profit driven strategy is so obsessive that they're willing to severely damage their brand name and complete ignore future trends just to always make a profit all the time. They never risk a loss to make more profit later. They make decisions that will affect their next five years based on profit estimates for the next six months. Jerking around your fanbase and letting your marketshare consistently shrink isn't that good for business in the longterm.
Basically I'm just looking for a happy medium where as a customer my needs are reasonably addressed and Nintendo is still a successful company at the same time.
Post by: Spak-Spang on January 17, 2006, 10:13:56 AM
Perhaps Nintendo chosing not to follow this future trends, which was really Nintendo refusing to make violent, supposedly mature related themes. Nintendo instead focused on rich gameplay experiences that can and should be enjoyed by older games, but are still capable of being family friendly as well.
The only real ball Nintendo dropped was with the Cartridge to CD system format change with the Nintendo 64. And one can argue whether or not Nintendo made the right choice. Personally from a gamer point of view I loved the no load times, and the fact that cartridges seemed to be more reliable at the time. Obviously that hurt Nintendo.
Personally, I believe Nintendo has not been hurting their brand name, but have been trying to protect it as much as possible. Nintendo is still known as a video gaming company and they are still known for making some of the best games that EVERYONE can enjoy. While Sony has recently been hurting its name as a gaming console with the PSP, and Microsoft going after the same strategy and market.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 17, 2006, 11:23:08 AM
That's not what I meant by trends. I meant the switch from cartridges to CDs and rising popularity of online gaming and currently the approaching standard of HD. In the first two situations Nintendo showed incredible short sighted thinking in their decisions and have been playing catch-up ever since. The HD situation is similar as everyone and their mother thinks it's going to become standard stuff in the next few years and Nintendo is commiting themselves to five years without support of that feature. They're thinking about the profits for the next six months to a year and completely neglecting how horrendously out-of-date and out-of-touch the Rev is going to be within three years. I'd say in all three situations Nintendo was largely right in that at the time they made the decision it wasn't the right time but they completely neglected that it would become the right time before the console's life expired.
That sort of behaviour has nothing to do with the personal values of the company. It's just short-sighted penny pinching.
Post by: couchmonkey on January 25, 2006, 06:41:20 AM
This affects Nintendo's overall strategy to expand the market. That strategy relies heavily on releasing a system at a mass-market price. Now this strategy may be risky and unknown, but it's arguably just as forward-thinking, if not more forward-thinking, than adding HDTV to the system. And don't forget the side-effects of including HDTV: the system may need to be more powerful to allow better graphics than current-generation systems, the textures and graphics in general need to be sharper, requiring larger art teams and possibly a larger disc format.
Of course the problem is that you simply don't like Nintendo's new strategy. That's fine, but I'd argue the HDTV thing may be good for Nintendo's strategy. That depends on just how high the costs of going the HD route would be, and I don't know the answer to that question.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 25, 2006, 07:44:17 AM
$50 is pretty cheap all things considering. I think having your console not be ridiculously out-of-date with the rest of technology within three years is worth $50. Plus $50 is nothing regarding console prices. Did cutting the DVD player to lower the price work well for the Cube? No. Everyone assumed that it was cheaper because it was missing a feature. This would be the same thing.
Post by: vudu on January 25, 2006, 08:00:56 AM
Post by: Spak-Spang on January 25, 2006, 10:06:37 AM
The online gaming, Nintendo really hasn't dropped the ball on yet. Look at last generation. The only system that had great online was Xbox, and the number of supporters of Xbox online was what 30% of the market. Maybe alittle more. Not really that overwhelming to put that much money into and go into massive debt over.
Now with the new generation Nintendo is gearing up to go online with a system that won't lose them money, and won't cost gamers money. A better solution than what Microsoft has for the 360.
The fact is, their was really only 2 approaches that hurt Nintendo. Not going to CDs, and not producing the newly marketed "mature" games. Sure these mature games helped grow the market in the short term grabbing 20 year old males and such. But as I said, it goes against Nintendo's values.
However, that said Nintendo has been working on figuring ways to attract this audience without completely compromising its values. Examples of that are mature themed games that don't have excessive violence or language. Geist and Metroid Prime are great examples.
Finally, High Defination Gaming isn't exactly tested as the future. It adds cost without adding gameplay functions. (At least CDs dropped cost of games, and added cinemas, voice acting, larger games, ect.) And in the case of Xbox 360 High Defination is hurting the space available on the DVDs taking up too much space for textures and such. It may turn out that High Defination Gaming is like online gaming today. It will be heralded as a big deal, but in actuality 30% of the gamers will experience it, and the rest won't care about it.
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 25, 2006, 11:42:29 AM
HD is still too expensive to say that it will be in the home of the average gamer within 5 years (and I don't think the price is coming down enough, either, especially when you consider that "HD ready" means it still needs an HD tuner which costs extra).
Broadband was a different story because everyone is naturally going to switch to broadband anyway because it offers the customer many features which dialup cannot, like streaming video and downloads at a mere fraction of the time. Plus, broadband is genuinely affordable and didn't cost that much more per month than dialup.
I don't see HD following this same trend because the hardware cost of generating the products haven't seemed to come down much and HD doesn't offer any "new" features to a game except some moderately better graphics. Also, a TV is not something you go out and replace on a whim. I'm going to replace my 32'' sony when and ONLY when it dies and even then, I'm not convinced I'll be replacing it with HD.
The increased cost for an HDTV just doesn't justify the return you get from having it (improved picture is all you get). Combine that with the fact that the economy is getting worse in the US all the time and I don't think you'll see HD saturation until we're nearing the end of the Rev's lifespan anyway.
However, Nintendo's shortsightedness has gotten them into heaps of trouble in the past, including Yamauchi's famous ousting of Square, the decision to not create any 1st party online titles and the near-total lack of 3rd party support this gen (for GC, anyway).
If Nintendo could just do with the home market what they've done with the handheld market, I think we'd see a great deal more 3rd party support as well as more gamers willing to give them a chance. God willing, they won't be shortsighted about the Rev and the support it will need from 3rd parties.
-SB
Post by: couchmonkey on January 26, 2006, 04:38:27 AM
The real problem is capturing the so-called non-gamer market. If Nintendo is going to do that, saving $50 is absolutely worth it. To us $50 may not sound like much to add the HD feature, but to non-gamer Joe, $199 vs. $249 may seem pretty significant. If Nintendo really wants a shot at capturing the mystical non-gamer market the system needs to be as cheap as possible. In fact, I'd say $99 is ideal, but I know I'm dreaming.
I will add that I personally would like HD support, but if it saves a significant amount of money and helps sell systems, great. I'm not going to miss it that badly.
Post by: BlkPaladin on January 26, 2006, 05:14:47 AM
I guess we are going to find out in the next four months about everything we could ever want to know. (Minus the tech detail.)
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 26, 2006, 06:19:20 AM
To speak from personal anecdote, I'm a guy who enjoys throwing his money around from time to time. I've been a hardcore gamer since age 5 and I have a tidy sum in the bank because I've been working since I was 12. I have a PS2, Xbox, GC, two GBAs, a DS, a colbalt flux dancepad, 4 DK bongos and well over 100 games for this generation.
All that considered, I haven't even bought a widescreen TV because I look at those pricetags and I just won't do it. I like to spend on occasion, but the price of those things equates sodomy, especially if you want to buy one from a trustworthy brand. I just don't see the need to replace my TV when it works just fine. The new TV will provide some better graphics and widescreen, but that's not enough to justify the cost.
Also, in today's economy, I don't see people splurging on HD. Our "president" is exporting american jobs to other countries as fast as humanly possible. Gas prices are ridiculous and taxes aren't exactly dropping. This is not the economic climate in which people will be spending $1000+ on a 27'' HDTV when you can get a 36'' regular TV for right around $500, and from a better brand name, too.
Will that change in 5 years? Maybe, but the price hasn't seen THAT much drop in the past few years so I don't see why it would take a sudden dive now.
-SB
Post by: Spak-Spang on January 26, 2006, 08:13:05 AM
However, I do agree that right now HD is just not justifiable. Not all the networks and cable channels are on board yet. It costs too much to get involved. And, there are too many other bills to pay.
The price will drop when manufactures stocks from "regular" televisons have been depleted. I think I remember hearing that it actually costs less to produce HD televisions. So the price is just because of demand and slight greed.
However, once the Government forces the switch over to HD format, then the prices will drop drastically so that everyone can jump on board...and so that people can buy 2-3 televisions for all their rooms.
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 26, 2006, 08:21:57 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Anyone here HAVE an HD TV? (and I mean the tuner as well because that's half the cost)
Not to turn this into a political debate, but yes, he did. To make a long story short, he signed bills which not only made it easy but better for American companies to seek labor overseas. If that doesn't classify as exporting US jobs, I don't know what does.
From what I understand, many manufacturers are still making "normal" TVs because they're still selling just fine. Why stop manufacturing when a product hasn't seen a slump in demand yet?
-SB
Post by: JonLeung on January 26, 2006, 08:30:54 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Anyone here HAVE an HD TV? (and I mean the tuner as well because that's half the cost)
I have a 57" widescreen HD-capable TV. Well, I paid a third of it with my brother and father paying for the other two thirds. We also subscribe to a number of satellite channels via Bell ExpressVu, which include a handful of HD channels.
What bugs me about the HD channels is that they are only of the major networks, and only recently-filmed material makes full use of the HD quality. Talk shows and live events look great. Watching any sort of TV show that is more than a couple years old, and the HD-version channel and regular version of the channel creates redundancy.
I was one of the apparently very few that got the component output cables for my GameCube. I didn't notice the difference at first, but after setting it up so I could toggle between using the cables and not using them, the difference is like night and day when playing colourful games like SSBM or detailed games like SCII. I guess component output isn't the same as HD, so I'm hoping the Revolution can at least support that.
Most of the time, though, if I were engrossed in a game, I imagine I wouldn't care too much if they were enhanced (be it component output cables, high-definition, etc.) or not.
I am getting picky about screen ratio, though...I'd like to play games in 16:9 at least because the side-bars on my TV are a stupidly annoying grey. I haven't been able to find settings to make them a less distracting colour like black, and some games' jaggies really become evident if they were made for 4:3 and I stretch them.
And no, I don't watch much TV. I got my TV specifically for gaming, so I would honestly prefer the Revolution to make as much use of it as possible. If only it were somehow optional, some extra piece of hardware you could just add on. But I imagine the textures of a game would be entirely in the software so I guess I have no choice.
I'll still buy a Revolution and enjoy it, though.
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 26, 2006, 08:47:03 AM
I too have the cables, but I've yet to buy a TV which would use it and I don't plan to until mine dies or becomes unwatchable.
Also, swapping TVs around is a royal PITA.
-SB
Post by: Ceric on January 26, 2006, 09:31:59 AM
Post by: Magik on January 26, 2006, 10:03:04 AM
Geist should have been a REV game since with the controller, it would have fixed a lot of the problems that plagued the game.
Post by: MysticGohan on January 26, 2006, 10:16:29 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Anyone here HAVE an HD TV? (and I mean the tuner as well because that's half the cost)
To speak from personal anecdote, I'm a guy who enjoys throwing his money around from time to time. I've been a hardcore gamer since age 5 and I have a tidy sum in the bank because I've been working since I was 12. I have a PS2, Xbox, GC, two GBAs, a DS, a colbalt flux dancepad, 4 DK bongos and well over 100 games for this generation.
All that considered, I haven't even bought a widescreen TV because I look at those pricetags and I just won't do it. I like to spend on occasion, but the price of those things equates sodomy, especially if you want to buy one from a trustworthy brand. I just don't see the need to replace my TV when it works just fine. The new TV will provide some better graphics and widescreen, but that's not enough to justify the cost.
Also, in today's economy, I don't see people splurging on HD. Our "president" is exporting american jobs to other countries as fast as humanly possible. Gas prices are ridiculous and taxes aren't exactly dropping. This is not the economic climate in which people will be spending $1000+ on a 27'' HDTV when you can get a 36'' regular TV for right around $500, and from a better brand name, too.
Will that change in 5 years? Maybe, but the price hasn't seen THAT much drop in the past few years so I don't see why it would take a sudden dive now.
-SB
Yes, I do. a 48" Phillips HDTV with a DirecTV HD Receiver, can do 480p and 1080i, Picture does look dramatically better than on a SDTV.
Atleast the Rev will support 480p, which is great, despite what IGN may say, 480p is still listed as "HD" so meh, I like it that way.
Post by: Nosferat2 on January 26, 2006, 11:19:42 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: vuduQuoteTell that to a Dreamcast owner.
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
No one denies that Nintendo is profitable. But profit doesn't mean squat to a gamer. Only market share benefits us.
If the Dreamcast had more market share there would be no need to "tell that to a Dreamcast owner."
By that i mean if the Dramcast had more market share it in turn would get more profit and in turn would still be here..
Post by: Nosferat2 on January 26, 2006, 11:22:08 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Magik
To bad Geist was a mega-flop that didn't help the GC in any way possible.
Geist should have been a REV game since with the controller, it would have fixed a lot of the problems that plagued the game.
Agreed.
Post by: Spak-Spang on January 27, 2006, 06:34:12 AM
I truly believe a sequel could be as good or better than Metroid Prime if handled by the right people. It is easily the best NEW concept for a first person adventure/shooter.
Nintendo needs to make the sequel and not be afraid of it. If something like Geist comes out early in the life of the Revolution (Think first year) with full online support then it would be huge.
Most of the problems with Geist were just inexperienced programmers and designers, its still playable and quite enjoyable.
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 27, 2006, 08:38:30 PM
What other game lets you feed poison soup to a room full of guards, peep in women's shower and possess a parrot and then tell its owner to "Die!"?
-SB
Post by: couchmonkey on February 06, 2006, 05:37:13 AM
Predicted launch lineup (within the first 4 weeks of launch):
1. New Miyamoto game
2. SSB: Online
3. Metroid Prime 3
4. Brian Training?
I don't think Mario 128 will be ready in time, but E3 may prove me wrong.
Post by: KDR_11k on February 06, 2006, 07:06:48 AM
Post by: couchmonkey on February 06, 2006, 09:55:30 AM
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 06, 2006, 10:02:41 AM
Post by: JonLeung on February 06, 2006, 12:22:46 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
I don't think Mario 128 will be ready in time, but E3 may prove me wrong.
There's been talk of another Mario adventure game (Mario remakes, RPGs, vs. Donkey Kong, etc. aside) in what seems like forever (shortly after Sunshine, I believe), so it's possible that Miyamoto's just been hiding it until an opportunity like this E3 comes along.
Post by: couchmonkey on February 07, 2006, 04:41:19 AM
Edit: digging up an old thread, but I want to see how my predictions turn out.
My previous prediction said the system would launch in September in North America. I now think that late October or November is more likely. I think Nintendo will not launch in Europe or Australia this year, either.
Post by: wandering on February 07, 2006, 07:28:05 AM
Post by: couchmonkey on October 17, 2006, 10:49:31 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
Baseless sales predictions:
End of 2006:
Xbox 360: 10 million
PS3: 7 million
Rev: 2 million (depends on how many are available since it will probably launch at year's end, and therefore will probably sell out).
Woah, WAY off-base on the PS3 there.
Xbox 360 is in line with Microsoft's predictions, I wonder if I just copied what they said, or if I came up with that on my own.Quote
End of 2007:
PS3: 20 million
Xbox 360: 19.5 million (emphasis on a very close race with Sony just edging MS out)
Revolution: 14 million
This could still happen, but now I predict PS3 will do worse and 360 will do a tiny bit better. My Wii estimate is maybe slightly low, but I don't think it's that far off, actually.
Quote
Other crazy predictions:
System will launch in North America in Sept. 2006 (Now that we have more info, November is more likely, but I'm willing to admit my mistakes).
We'll see game footage before Nintendo's E3 conference (In retrospect, this is probably wrong too
Ooh, it's embarassing how wrong this is!
Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
Predicted launch lineup (within the first 4 weeks of launch):
1. New Miyamoto game
2. SSB: Online
3. Metroid Prime 3
4. Brian Training?
I don't think Mario 128 will be ready in time, but E3 may prove me wrong.
Ha ha ha, totally wrong. They tried for Prime 3 and Brain Training was a smart guess, but the only thing I actually got right was Mario Galaxy not being ready.
BONUS: New prediction... If Nintendo gets more than 40% of the marketshare, it will take at least three years for first-party games to become Player's Choice titles. --I promise not to bug anyone about this in the Steven Kent's drunk friend thread anymore.
Post by: Ceric on October 17, 2006, 11:36:04 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ceric
Wow. You know on the subject of people thinking the PS2 is the strongest this gen. Most people think the Gamecube is the weakest. It doesn't get to me as much when it someone I consider uninformed in the area of Hardware. But when it's one my Computer/Electrical Engineering friends that sort of bothers me. I correct them and go on. The funny part is I keep seeing games that were originally GCN titles showing up on the 360 and hearing rumors the reason is that the original Xbox was just not powerful enough to do the game how it was planned on the GCN. Everyone will admit that the Xbox was the handsdown raw power house this generation. Nintendo just makes smart choices on there hardware in comparison. Know what to dedicate to hardware and what not too is very important. I have Karoake Revolution Party for my GCN (That was a hard find, ironically enough I finally found Cubivore on the same day. The three year search is now over, so far that game rocks. Someone needs to go over and Kick Atlus around because this isn't the only game of there's I want and they limitted the release.), from the screens I've seen of the PS2 version it looks a lot better on the GCN and the sound is just great and they didn't sack any songs. Go Ogg Vorbis.
ok Prediction:
$250 Full PackageGot
No Rev game includedGot for Japan but not here
Tutorial built into snazzy new interfaceUndetermined
2 "Downloads" from a set listUndetermined
Unfortunately it will come with RCA hookups like every other Nintendo console except the VB, maybe even the same connector but rumor has it this will be wireless.I'm fairly sure thats right minus the Wireless
May be able to get the USB Wi-Fi adapter for the cheap with the purchase of a new SystemTBD
Rev will actually be smaller then it is nowGot, at least I think it shrunk from the prototype at the time
That whole outer case will be able to be replaced for skinningSadly no
The system will have a mysterious "Exp" port that will never be used outside of JapanI'm putting this at TBD
Post by: BigJim on October 17, 2006, 02:33:48 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
I believe the Rev's second year will be just as important as it's first year.
They're designing it to be an industry shaker. "Shakers" don't usually realize their success (or potential success) in the early adoption days. The ipod is one obvious example of this. They didn't really take off until Christmas '04, and it was out for well over a year by that point.
The first year will be all about the early adopters and building awareness for the newbies. It probably won't see sales much different than GameCube at that point. The second year will be the year of momentum and will be more telling of the system's long term success, I think. This is true for most new products, but should be especially true with Rev considering Nintendo's goals for it. It'll live or die on year 2, IMHO.
Quote
Most reasons people mention why Nintendo shouldn't aim to be the second console are mostly emotional and ego.
They're going to launch a year after 360, and possibly head to head with PS3 if that is delayed (which some developers seem to think will happen). They're not going to be number one, whether they shot for it or not. Their relevance in the console market is questionable. Why fight a battle you're not going to win? Even from a business standpoint it's simply inefficient.
The train is already on the track. They're aiming to be different. The fate was sealed with the controller. Even though they're all making games, Nintendo's track is going in a different direction.
Didn't Reggie's speech mention that there is a 25% platform crossover? That's in a market where they are all essentially competing on the same level. GameCube somewhat competed as a second console, at least in price, but that wasn't until the price dropped later in the cycle and the system's fate was already determined.
Nintendo is banking on 360 and PS3 being too similar for most people to want/need both. If their assumption is correct, the crossover potential is Nintendo's to own.
If Nintendo proactively markets Revolution as a secondary alternative (whatever terminology they use), raises the crossover penetration modestly (even just to 30%), keeps the price low, continues to sell to their built-in fan base, AND bring in the new players, they have a fighting chance of increasing their market share while the other guys keep dogging it out. They'd probably still end up in 3rd place, but with more marketshare and mindshare. Hopefully they'll have sold the concept of the controller, which helps them in the fight of 2011 if the others copy it.
A lot of steps there, but it's possible.
Re: 1st year. As I mentioned I think the 2nd year will be just as important as the first, considering the distinct part of Nintendo's strategy to grow the market with new players. The first year will be all about early adopters and the built-in fan base. They're the ones that would have bought it anyway. The newbies aren't going to pick it up fresh off the assembly line. Those buyers need time. The crossover buyers need time too. Year 2 will be about riding momentum that year 1 begins to execute.
Of course, EVERYTHING hinges on this darn controller. It's either genius or insane.
I pretty much still stand by those, "predictions" or not
I made sales/marketshare predictions in another thread, though.
Post by: Kairon on October 17, 2006, 02:45:52 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ceric
ok Prediction:
$250 Full PackageGot
No Rev game includedNOT GOT, the Japan package is $215, so if this was counted, your $250 price would be invalid, which would come out to the same count anyways
Tutorial built into snazzy new interfaceUndetermined
2 "Downloads" from a set listUndetermined
Unfortunately it will come with RCA hookups like every other Nintendo console except the VB, maybe even the same connector but rumor has it this will be wireless.I'm fairly sure thats right minus the Wireless
May be able to get the USB Wi-Fi adapter for the cheap with the purchase of a new SystemTBD
Rev will actually be smaller then it is nowNOT GOT, the Wii has actually grown a bit beyond the three DVD case target, but yes, it is still very small
That whole outer case will be able to be replaced for skinningSadly no
The system will have a mysterious "Exp" port that will never be used outside of JapanNOT GOT, the Wii may be the first Nintendo home console without mysterious unused expansion ports, and no, USB ports do not count
All in all, you made 10 predictions (counting the wireless rumor that you didn't really commit to as your own prediction, but let's include that since you included it yourself).
Of these ten predictions...
2 were GOT.
5 were NOT GOT.
3 were TBD.
Quote
Originally posted by: Nosferat2Quote
Originally posted by: vuduQuoteTell that to a Dreamcast owner.
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
No one denies that Nintendo is profitable. But profit doesn't mean squat to a gamer. Only market share benefits us.
If the Dreamcast had more market share there would be no need to "tell that to a Dreamcast owner."
By that i mean if the Dramcast had more market share it in turn would get more profit and in turn would still be here...
Sort of makes it an interesting factoid that the XBox 360 is tracking behind the Dreamcast for installed base... if marketshare mattered so much, why is the DC dead and the X360 alive and kicking?
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: IceCold on October 17, 2006, 03:52:18 PM
QuoteSee wandering? That's where I remember it from.. That's you, in January! Before E3 even. You're looking pretty smart now, aren't you?
Call me a blind Nintendo fanboy, but I'm predicting the Rev will be first this upcoming gen
Post by: Ceric on October 17, 2006, 05:30:09 PM
Tell me how long you've spent with the Wii in person physically holding it Kairon before you declare that it doesn't have an Expansion port.
Also point me to the article that states that the Wii has gotten bigger since the Prototypes at the time go on.
For goodness sake there was not reason to be rude about the whole thing.
Post by: Kairon on October 17, 2006, 07:16:30 PM
Anyways, I merely said that it's sorta misleading to claim two predictions true when they're mutually exlusive. Decide: are you evaluating your predictions based on the US, or Japan?
And we've all seen the breakdown of the Wii's ports in multiple angles and in multiple hands-on videos. The whole reason that the "front flap" contained "holoprojectors OMG" is that it was the last mystery flap. The back just had 2 USBs, a power port, a proprietary video/audio port, and the sensor bar port. And there's the GC flap, and no secret bottom power flap or whatnot. You can even watch the IGN Weekly where Massamassina handles the Wii for like 10 entire minutes showing us every single orifice. Likely, future mysterious expansion slots were cut for price reasons.
And as per your request:
IGN's Nintendo Wii Faq improves on the vague size reports that Nintendo's Wii page to peg the exact dimensions at 157 mm x 215.4 mm x 44 mm, which comes out to about 1487 cm cubed.
In contrast, according to Supermediastore.com, a standard industry dvd case sits at 135 mm x 192 mm x 14 mm. tripling that last 14 mm figure for the thickness of three stacked dvd cases, we come to about 1088.64 cm cubed.
The Wii is longer, wider, and has more...volume, than three dvd cases stacked on each other, which is what the Wii's prototypes were based on. It is, however, not as thick.
Now, I'm working off the assumption that the Revolution prototype they had at E3 2005 was the size of 3 DVD cases stacked on top of each other, which was the size they were aiming for. Besides, the 2005 E3 Revolution Prototype was just an empty case. I think that's a relatively safe assumption to make. If you're going to make an empty case for your prototype, why not not make it at your targetted size?
But seriously, I'm just correcting you is all! Predicting the future is tough business, and you should be proud that you even got two right. That's a 20% success rate. I'd think that even a 15% success rate at predicting the future out of infinite possibilities would be the paragon of human prescience!
I mean... none of my predictions came right...
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: wandering on October 23, 2006, 12:08:39 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
Heh, I thought it would be released on Canadian Thanksgiving, but Turkish Delight Weekend has long since gone!QuoteSee wandering? That's where I remember it from.. That's you, in January! Before E3 even. You're looking pretty smart now, aren't you?
Call me a blind Nintendo fanboy, but I'm predicting the Rev will be first this upcoming gen
Or else I'm looking like a blind Nintendo fanboy.
But I agree with my past self about the Wii controller being to the Wii what fmvs were to the psx. *High-fives past self*
Post by: Griffin on October 23, 2006, 01:13:01 AM
Post by: JonLeung on October 23, 2006, 04:49:46 AM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on October 23, 2006, 05:21:56 AM
FMVs did not improve the gameplay experience.
*maybe they gave you something nice to look at after dredging through mucky grafix and gameplay. Here's your reward for SWIMMING IN MUD! A POSTER THAT DEPICTS A BAR OF SOAP!
