Post by: Djunknown on September 15, 2006, 07:12:34 PM
read with care.
There are some valid points (like the 64, the 'Cube will be D-E-A-D and done for when the Wii launches, while Sony is still getting mileage out of the PS2...), and he covers his bases well by stringing past examples together. However, one must also remember the parable of the DS. The DS is very much alive and well, and won't be knocked off the top spot anytime soon.
Nevertheless, its good to have some sound, sane, and supported (no alliteration intended.) counter-arguments.
Alright, let 'er rip....
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 15, 2006, 07:16:53 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 15, 2006, 07:30:51 PM
Once again he rehashes the same argument about Wii being graphically underpowered and why would you want to play a grahically inferior game. Hey there, could it be that people may want to try out a different way of playing a game even if it isn't a true exclusive? Perhaps he hasn't been paying attention, but there are some WIi games out there that look quite gorgeous even without the graphical horsepower of the 360.
I understand his thinking that we should pay attention to the past, and he is right to a degree, but Wii is doing something those other consoles never did, and that is truly something NEW. This is relatively uncharted territory with really only the NIntendo DS taking a similar approach. Unlike Gamecube, the press is 100% behind Nintendo, and the amount of hype going around about the system is staggering, that is nothing like Gamecube, which had hype but nothing to degree of Wii (Hey that rhymes!).
Post by: Pale on September 15, 2006, 07:34:12 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 15, 2006, 07:42:51 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Pale
Billy is far from full of crap... He's just kind of jaded and knows how to write an article. His points are valid. I think a lot of them just don't bother people (like us) as much.
I find most of his points to be ridiculous especially the lack of 3rd party support and convenientyly forgetting there are more exclusives than Nintendo's games at launch. Then again my opinion was substantially lowered when he said Nintendo fanboys everywhere cheered at the low price, that is about as stupid as you can get. I doubt even those here that don't mind it were "cheering" or even close to it.
Post by: RickPowers on September 15, 2006, 07:56:16 PM
(Can't help but notice that Billy listed Pikmin twice in his part about GameCube launch titles. I think the old man is becoming a "wii" bit addled ... )
Post by: Caterkiller on September 15, 2006, 08:00:57 PM
But now, things don't just seem so much different they are alot different. The press has been eating up Wii since E3, and everytime we turn around there is something negative about the PS3 going down. The difference in graphics, may be alittle bigger this time around, but the PS2 still had the worst graphics of them all, and still came out on top. If Madden and FPS's are more fun on Wii, you can bet your sweet apples that the Wii will sell like crazy.
I really need to pick up my friend from the train station, but my over all point is that Nintendo is seen in a different light now'a days. People use to think this was Nintendo's generation to just gain market share, now many of us believe Nintendo can potentialy be number one this time around. Ok I really need to leave.
Post by: Spak-Spang on September 15, 2006, 08:09:09 PM
Will the classic Virtual console controller work with Gamecube games? I need to know, because I need to buy new Cube controllers.
But also this has baring on Wii players getting Gamecube games. If the Wii Controller works well then old Cube games become new again and better.
Soul Caliber 2, Capcom vs. SNK EO, Smash Brothers Melee, Mortal Kombat. Hell all of the retro games released become better ports as well.
Post by: SixthAngel on September 15, 2006, 08:13:13 PM
This represents my biggest complaint. He just doesn't understand what Nintendo wants to do. The strange control is what Nintendo is pushing as the biggest seller of the system and yet he uses it as a negative. If you see the controls as a negative the Wii is not for you. He then precedes to run through the tried and true HD graphics arguement that I have heard a thousand times and still don't buy (literally).
Post by: trip1eX on September 15, 2006, 08:20:26 PM
Thanks for nothing. Not even any good arguments in there. I was disappointed. I was expecting some good counterpoints about the Wii and I got none.
You don't drive a car looking in the rearview mirror.
The guy is just jaded. I had fun on the GAmecube. IT had over 500 some titles. How many games does someone need? IT's almost as if the guy is asking NIntendo to be an EA and just shovel crap out the door yearly 'cause he needs something to buy.
Post by: Nick DiMola on September 15, 2006, 08:41:54 PM
I thought he had a lot of interesting points and I agree with him being pissed about no HD cables packaged with the Wii (another cost on day 1 for me). But I also agree strongly with Caterkiller, the Wii has alot more going for it than the Cube did from the starting gate. People want a Wii and not so much a PS3, complete opposite of the last generation. Nintendo also seems like they really have it together this time. A bunch of clear differences from the Cube and I'm excited to see how it turns out. If the DS is any indication of the Wii, I think Nintendo is looking REALLY good.
Post by: RickPowers on September 15, 2006, 08:44:27 PM
It was very hard for me to accept this. I struggled with it. What finally brought me around was when my wife became interested in things like Animal Crossing and Nintendogs, and I realized that Wii would be a great way to get my wife interested in different kinds of games, and to play with me rather than reading a book while I play. Because the controls are more natural (and don't rely as much on twitch response), it's possible that my wife could finally find a game like The Legend of Zelda intriguing enough to try.
Post by: Crimm on September 15, 2006, 08:46:05 PM
Just because we have a new control scheme doesn't mean that the Wii will meet a different fate then the GCN. We know that Nintendo fans buy the first party titles, but don't tend to shell out for third parties unless Mother N hypes the game.
If that happens with the Wii, it's doomstown. The games may be cheep to make, but that isn't worth anything if no one buys them.
I think pointing to the DS (which he didn't do, but Nintendo does) is somewhat disingenuous as well. Nintendo had dominated the handheld market for a decade, so many people bought what Nintendo was selling. This isn't an advantage Nintendo has with the Wii, so they can't spend a year getting traction (see: DS, GC). They have to hit the ground running. They haven't proven to me they can do that, because I've been burned twice now. My launch N64 and launch GCN.
They've made these same promises before. I remember their cheers when they showed the GCN, "we've turned a corner" "no more dead times like with the NINTENDO 64." Well, short of "The Mercenaries" (RE4) my GC is quite dusty.
Post by: wandering on September 15, 2006, 09:08:49 PM
Quote
Although there are a number of third party titles slated for launch, if developers take the same port approach they did with the Nintendo DS launch, those games will become the exact same quality the DS third party titles were – crap.
First of all, the people who have played alot of these third party Wii games say they aren't crap. And second of all, the DS has been a hige success, with an incredible games library I can barely keep up with, in spite of the crappy games.
Personally, I don't have many worries when it comes to the Wii. We were all excited about Nintendo's return to form with the GameCube, and that didn't pan out, true. But there were alot of issues then that aren't present now. Also - and I hate to say this, but even if the Wii "fails" like the Cube and N64 did, as long as I get Zeldas, Metroids, and Marios, I'll be happy.
Post by: Arbok on September 15, 2006, 09:15:14 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: wandering
Also - and I hate to say this, but even if the Wii "fails" like the Cube and N64 did, as long as I get Zeldas, Metroids, and Marios, I'll be happy.
I'm almost in the same boat, but replace those three titles with Smash Bros, as that game alone will be more than enough to keep me happy for a long, long time with online play.
Post by: Artimus on September 15, 2006, 09:37:43 PM
First of all, the impression of the 3rd party launch titles is totally misrepresented. The comparison to the DS launch is misleading. The DS had basically no quality 3rd party launch titles but already Wii is expected to have Rayman, Red Steel, Madden, Trauma Center, etc. His assertation that there are no original games being made for it are baffling as well. I look at the list of release dates and the amount of original and exclusive titles is huge, 50% minimum. That doesn't even count games like Rayman which are designed primarily to be on Wii, but have other console counterparts. His comments are just untrue and make little sense.
I'm also getting tired of people blaming Nintendo for delaying their games. People want amazing games and they want them now. Nevermind that if you release games before they're ready you don't get quality. The reason for the drought isn't Nintendo but third parties. Yes that is quite a bit to do with Nintendo's business, but it isn't the fault of their software teams. One company can only make so much quality software! In fact, the only systems to NOT suffer from droughts have been the first place system. NES, SNES, PSX and PS2 are the only ones that didn't have a huge problem in this area (maybe Genesis). The N64 did, the GCN did, the XBOX has, the 360 does right now. Heck, the PSP has had a two year one and the DS had one for 6 months. The idea that this is a Nintendo problem is absurd, it's a non-market leader problem. If Nintendo can greatly increase their market share they'll have a steady stream of games. It's no coincidence that the worst droughts (after launch) came as the N64 and GCN lost more and more market share.
It's also tiring to see his dismissal of the controls. If the controller doesn't prove to be any more advantageous then the Wii will, indeed, fail. That's the risk being taken. But he's totally ignoring that. I mean the very term "controls strangely" is so silly it's hard to respond to. If all the games made for Wii "control silly" then of COURSE the system will fail. Usually if something sucks hard it doesn't do well (except in prostitution and politics). Duh, Billy, duh. And yes, if the third party games like the DS launch games suck then they too will fail. The amusing part is that he uses the DS as an example of crappy third party titles, but then totally ignores the current DS situation. Companies like SEGA, Atlus, Capcom, Konami, Square Enix and EA are having stellar DS sales. Phoenix Wright, Trauma Center, Castlevania, Mana & Final Fantasy are all success stories. Plus there are companies like Ubisoft and Majesco selling a fantastic amount. Far greater than any on Nintendo's past two consoles. PLUS these games are receiving great reviews. And we haven't even had the release of the Square games in North America yet! If anything the DS is an example of new controls proving their worth, and being a driving force in improving Nintendo's third party situation.
I am also terribly confused about Twilight Princess. One week we're being told by IGN that it's not hardcore, the next week Billy is saying it's "beyond" hardcore. Make up your minds mainstream game sites! Seriously, though. Next to Mario, Zelda is the best selling series Nintendo has. Does he really expect a Zelda at launch to NOT sell systems? Absurd. Absolutely absurd. How many systems have that good a system seller on day one? None since 1996. If anything it's even better than Mario because it won't appeal to the casual gamer as much, leaving room for other games that DO appeal that person (WiiSports, Madden). And it also means that younger households will be buying a third party game instead of just Nintendo's. That also leaves Mario for next year when the system has a larger installed base, allowing it to use its broad appeal by itself, when it's more important than the obvious sellout launch. Having Mario and Zelda within one year is perfect, and having Zelda go at launch when there are other less "beyond" hardcore games getting the spotlight is the wiser move. There's also the fact that Mario is, you know, still being made...
I just feel this article is way below the quality of intelligence Billy used to bring to PGC. It honestly reads like a 1UP article, more intent on the opinion than the argument, and I know that's a pretty harsh insult. I think Rick actually said the truth about this: it's just an angry attempt to justify emotions. Billy, much like Ian, doesn't care about Nintendo being successful if it means they won't focus on him. At the same time he wants them to be more traditional and yet he lays out an argument for why that isn't going to work. Basically the only way to please him is for Nintendo to make their games for the 360 and PS3. He doesn't like Nintendo's direction and he's forcing that feeling onto an "analysis" of their upcoming system. It doesn't work. He's valid to feel left out, but that's all it is. His criticisms are focused on half-truths and thoughts.
What it all boils down to is that Billy is afraid Nintendo won't make the games he wants them too, and he's taking his frustration out on the system that is causing those fears.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 15, 2006, 09:41:57 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Mr. Jack
I read VGRev's post and said to myself, Billy isn't full of crap he is just jaded. Scroll down a little more, Pale, you took the words from my mouth.
I thought he had a lot of interesting points and I agree with him being pissed about no HD cables packaged with the Wii (another cost on day 1 for me). But I also agree strongly with Caterkiller, the Wii has alot more going for it than the Cube did from the starting gate. People want a Wii and not so much a PS3, complete opposite of the last generation. Nintendo also seems like they really have it together this time. A bunch of clear differences from the Cube and I'm excited to see how it turns out. If the DS is any indication of the Wii, I think Nintendo is looking REALLY good.
Yeah but I said Wii had more going for it first, before Caterkiller! SO there! The lack of HD Cables is one thing I did agree with, I see no reason why NIntendo couldn't have a sprung a bit more for a the red,blue,green cables, they can't be that much. Oh well I hope they are easy to find UNLIKE Gamecube's. Maybe tomorrow or sometime I'll do a point by point analysis of the article, one thing I did notice was his mentioning of launch titles, I could have sworn Rogue Squadron was a launch title yet he didn't list it (I believe that was considered a big game).
Anyway here is why I think Wii will turn out differently than GameCube:
-As mentioned before, the press is eating it up.
-Solid launch lineup, tons of systems at launch and really a true worldwide launch
-Nintendo's strategy has paid off with Nintendo DS even with stiff competition from Sony (showing that brand is something Sony can no longer rely on)
-Even though I think the price is a tad high, it still has perception of being worth the money, maybe even more so
-For once Nintendo is taking a risk instead of competing head to head against MS or Sony hardware wise
-Going to back to DS, it is proving that non-gamers will try out a gaming system if the right games are for it. Wii appears to be having this (GC didn't have this strategy)
-There is a much larger gap in price this time, before you had 3 competitively priced systems and little to differentiate them besides specific game franchises
-3rd party support is stronger than it was with Gamecube with a launch game lineup having more exclusive 3rd party games (promising games too) than since, well, the NES/SNES days
-Exclusives are starting to turn into multiplatform for PS3/Xbox 360, this could end up benefitting Nintendo
-Sony is having some of the toughest development problems EVER that could haunt them
-Companies can make games for Wii for a vastly cheaper price than the Xbox 360 or PS3. Yet another huge benefit
-Finally the Japanese are some crazy gamers and they can't get enough of Wii!
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 15, 2006, 09:47:22 PM
Post by: Kairon on September 15, 2006, 10:23:50 PM
The articles basically lists Nintendo's failures under Yamauchi and the transition to Iwata period. This is easily rendered irrelevant after seeing the drastic sea change under full-powered-Iwata and Fils-aime, the amazing new direction taken by the DS, the new direction taken by the Wii, AND the downfall of the hardcore gamer in terms of market relevance (see: profitability of Brain Age).
Then it lists some typical negatives about the Wii that aren't invalid, but have the usual mix of arguments why they will or won't happen/matter, and of course the wondering over whether third parties will follow Nintendo's lead where they haven't for the 64 or the GC... well, that last one IS still valid...
I think that we would not be worried at all if we saw serious Third Party variety and exclusives in the future. I mean, looking to the future, what great 3rd party games are there? Heroes, BioHazard Chronicles, and...?
I change my mind.
Billy's article wasn't a complete waste. Most of it I don't care for... but whereas the PS3 and X360 seem to decent variety of AAA-esque third party releases on the horizon... is there still reason to be cautious when we don't have all our ducks lined up? Or... will this be like the DS, where the third-party DS games only came later and Nintendo needs to build up most of the momentum on its own?
Hmm...
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 15, 2006, 11:22:46 PM
Xbox 360 nor PS3 have that many "AAA" exclusives from 3rd parties (they may have a few multiplatform ones though), and that is mainly what were talking about. Besides in order for either MS or Sony to survive they need LOTS of 3rd parties since they don't really have many triple A exclusives from their in house development team.
Post by: IceCold on September 15, 2006, 11:36:58 PM
Post by: Kairon on September 15, 2006, 11:40:12 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 15, 2006, 11:50:50 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
This gets me wondering, who DIDN'T trash the DS when it came out? Seriously?
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
::Raises hand:: I was excited about Nintendo DS ever since it was announced at E3 (still one of my favorite Nintendo press conferences). My only gripe with the system now is that I feel the touch screen is used for things that would be better off controlled with an analog stick (I'm looking at you Mario 3 on 3, what a huge dissapointment you were!).
Post by: NWR_pap64 on September 15, 2006, 11:55:08 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
This gets me wondering, who DIDN'T trash the DS when it came out? Seriously?
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
This is why I think after a week or two people will get over the price of the controllers and the console and just move on.
Nintendo just has this ability to shock and surprise the gaming industry, the media and the fans to the point where anything they do is a bad idea. This happened a lot back in the day, but this seems to be happening often recently, I think right around the time Iwata and Reggie came to Nintendo.
You could say that Nintendo are either the most stubborn people in the world or pure geniuses.
For example, naming the system "The Wii" was seen by everyone as the worst decision ever. Yet Nintendo did such a great job with it that people no longer make rude jokes about it and just want to play it. The Twilight Princess move is one of those decisions no one agrees on, even if logically it will be far more beneficial for Nintendo and the console. And now, we have the Wii with the supposedly free Wii sports.
I'm almost at the point where I will not criticize anything Nintendo does and just wait to see what happens because in the past few months they have proven me wrong like crazy.
Post by: Mario on September 16, 2006, 12:18:15 AM
Post by: King of Twitch on September 16, 2006, 01:10:11 AM
3rd parties will start pouring in once the Wii is seen as a success, it will just take time
>>I dunno about that. Look at the last 4 years.
Capcom 5 - demolished in 7 months
RE4 exclusivity announcement - self-destructed
Soul Calibur 3 - PS3 exclusive after SC2 selling best on Cube
Konami - MGS1 ported courtesy SK, sequels stayed on PS2 and Xbox; disney, disney, disney
Sega - FZero, Dreamcast port, Dreamcast port, Dreamcast port, Dreamcast port, Dreamcast port, Dreamcast port, Dreamcast port
Namco - Pacman, Pacman, Pacman, Pacman
Billy does have a point; Has the Wii suddenly made these comanies less retarded?
Post by: Kairon on September 16, 2006, 01:18:44 AM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 16, 2006, 01:31:36 AM
Post by: ReverendNoahWhateley on September 16, 2006, 02:19:16 AM
Do I just see the world in low-def? I don't get it. Most of the Wii pics I've seen aren't merely adequate. They're fantastic, the equal to most everything being touted by Microsoft and Sony. I know it's a cliche, but Red Steel is gorgeous, and Mario Galaxy's looking more visually-impressive with each new screenshot. Between the rich visuals of Red Steel and Rayman, Ubisoft has even a curmudgeonly American like myself chiming "Vive la France!" I understand that the Wii's raw horsepower is far less virile than that of the 360 or PS3, but to my untrained eye, the advantages of their technical superiority are trifling.
Post by: King of Twitch on September 16, 2006, 02:21:22 AM
Post by: BigJim on September 16, 2006, 03:40:22 AM
N64 had a lot going for it pre-launch and early in its life... "3D done right". The analog stick. The rumble pak that came a bit later. It was exciting hardware and it absolutely got gamers talking. But it still ultimately suffered similarly as the GameCube did. Wii is no guarantee despite the attention it's getting.
I know that the age range here is pretty wide, and the level of attachment is across the board, but to a lifetime Nintendo fan since NES, seeing them fail can royally suck. It's not unlike being a hardcore football fan and having a home team that can't get it together. Or seeing your favorite athlete lose his/her edge. Michael Jordan coming back, knowing that the magic of the glory years would never be reproduced. Or however you want to look at it. To some degree, they become a part of your pride if you are hardcore enough.
Rick had it correct; Nintendo is not the same company anymore. Their changes are leaving the old-school behind. If you're enamored with the "new Nintendo," of course you have nothing to worry about. But don't dismiss those of us that fell for the old Nintendo and still hold more adoration for that company.
Nintendo will obviously do what's best for Nintendo. The old-schoolers are an increasingly rare breed and Nintendo wants to move on. Many of the old schoolers have moved on to PlayStation/Xbox, picking up where Nintendo left them as teenagers, and want more titles suitable for them and their age and tastes. It's a tough pill for some to swallow...
But the perfect excuse to adopt Wii60 or PSWii... IF they can get past the mental block of "rooting for another city's team."
Billy's article is a mixture of partial fact and partial emotion. That's what fanboys often do, including here. He's still Nintendo to the bone, and that was very obvious to me when reading the article. If Nintendo committed to providing old-schoolers enough of the content they desire to keep them satisfied, and NOT just thrown occasional bones, there would be MUCH LESS "doom and gloom" from that crowd and the intarwebs would be a very different place. Sadly, there's no indication that it's forthcoming. But don't ever dismiss 'em. They have just as much of a right to a voice as "new-school" fans.
Post by: Ceric on September 16, 2006, 05:27:45 AM
Post by: ShyGuy on September 16, 2006, 05:58:55 AM
You know what I think these old harcore fans fear? Nintendo will succeed without them. Then they have to face some things about themselves.
Rick Powers is a bigger man for growing as a gamer.
Post by: Artimus on September 16, 2006, 06:25:16 AM
I just don't get it?
Post by: 31 Flavas on September 16, 2006, 07:56:50 AM
QuoteHonestly, i'd say it's more like the "old school" is leaving Nintendo behind. What does "old school" want? Isn't that fun games, games with "gameplay", games with character, etc... And now just because they don't do Hi-Def or DVD you'll pass on the games/system/company? I'd say it's "old-school" that has changed and wants to move on now / wants to dismiss Nintendo.
Originally posted by: BigJim
Rick had it correct; Nintendo is not the same company anymore. Their changes are leaving the old-school behind. If you're enamored with the "new Nintendo," of course you have nothing to worry about. But don't dismiss those of us that fell for the old Nintendo and still hold more adoration for that company.
Post by: Spak-Spang on September 16, 2006, 08:13:40 AM
Look at the DS, it is revisiting the games we fell in love with in the first place, bring very traditional Nintendo gaming values back into focus.
1)Star Fox DS
2)New Super Mario
3)Yoshi's Island 2
On the Wii you have tons of classic traditional games from Nintendo being made and brought over.
1)Super Mario Galaxy appears to be capturing the magic of Super Mario 64
2)Wario Ware Smooth Moves is a more modern game, but its sensibilities are traditional gaming, simple pick up and play mechanics.
3)Excite Truck videos feel like a perfect arcade racer.
Hell even the "non-gamer" games are very traditional in gameplay nature.
The real truth is that games and gamers evolved and things became more complicated, and non being jaded we believe complex gameplay is traditional when in truth it isn't.
Look back at NES and SNES games you could teach ANYONE, how to play those games. Jump to the N64 and Playstation generations and games began to become vastly more complicated to control and play. As more and more features were added it became more and more complicated. Now, Nintendo is making a play to bring gaming more traditional...more back to simple games. That is a good thing.
Post by: trip1eX on September 16, 2006, 09:00:54 AM
Some of you all act like Nintendo has to be #1 for you to feel good in the morning. If so then you need to seek counseling.
I have an iMac. I don't go about whining that Apple isn't number one. I just enjoy my computing experience on it.
I recommend you all do the same or move on.
Not old school? I'm not sure what that means. I think you all forget that your not 8 yr old kids anymore. And it's you that's changing not Nintendo.
Nintendo is releasing Zelda which seems as old school as anything. On top of it they are going back and making an old school type of game in the form of ExciteTruck.
I encourage all you that seem to be sick of Nintendo games to play other games.
Also there's a bit of a conflict in your whining. Some of you all seem depressed 'cause Nintendo hasn't been the #1 console the past 2 generations. ON the other hand you're also whining that they are changing and leaving you behind. ????
I honestly think most of the whiners will whine no matter what. If you don't see that now then you'll figure it out sooner or later.
Post by: TerribleOne on September 16, 2006, 09:37:11 AM
the Wii should had just release at a $350 price tag with more power. admittedly or not you would had still gotten it.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 16, 2006, 10:01:03 AM
In response to terrible, I don't think it is that far off to compare Wii with DS's sucess. Nintendo had some stiff competition from their biggest competitor, Sony, and manage to completely destroy them in Japan and is beginning to pull away in America. PSP is vastly more powerful than Nintendo DS, but guess what? Nintendo managed to attract gamers and non-gamers alike with some fun, innovative and overrall, great games prooving that Sony's brand power isn't nearly as strong as originally thought. PSP had a marketing campaign behind that overshadowed Nintendo DS, even to the point of PSP being displayed out in the open with more accessories, games/UMDs, and more. This is even true to this day, just go into any electronics area and look for yourself. So yeah I don't see how it is so far off to compare Nintendo DS's sucess with Wii, they have a similar strategy, the price gap is close to being the same, along with going against a big brand name.
Post by: Kairon on September 16, 2006, 10:01:20 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
Billy, like Rick, like myself, and like others too (probably Ian?) are all old-school fans and, I think, just want nothing more than to say Nintendo has a fighting chance.
N64 had a lot going for it pre-launch and early in its life... "3D done right". The analog stick. The rumble pak that came a bit later. It was exciting hardware and it absolutely got gamers talking. But it still ultimately suffered similarly as the GameCube did. Wii is no guarantee despite the attention it's getting.
I know that the age range here is pretty wide, and the level of attachment is across the board, but to a lifetime Nintendo fan since NES, seeing them fail can royally suck. It's not unlike being a hardcore football fan and having a home team that can't get it together. Or seeing your favorite athlete lose his/her edge. Michael Jordan coming back, knowing that the magic of the glory years would never be reproduced. Or however you want to look at it. To some degree, they become a part of your pride if you are hardcore enough.
Rick had it correct; Nintendo is not the same company anymore. Their changes are leaving the old-school behind. If you're enamored with the "new Nintendo," of course you have nothing to worry about. But don't dismiss those of us that fell for the old Nintendo and still hold more adoration for that company.
Nintendo will obviously do what's best for Nintendo. The old-schoolers are an increasingly rare breed and Nintendo wants to move on. Many of the old schoolers have moved on to PlayStation/Xbox, picking up where Nintendo left them as teenagers, and want more titles suitable for them and their age and tastes. It's a tough pill for some to swallow...
But the perfect excuse to adopt Wii60 or PSWii... IF they can get past the mental block of "rooting for another city's team."
Billy's article is a mixture of partial fact and partial emotion. That's what fanboys often do, including here. He's still Nintendo to the bone, and that was very obvious to me when reading the article. If Nintendo committed to providing old-schoolers enough of the content they desire to keep them satisfied, and NOT just thrown occasional bones, there would be MUCH LESS "doom and gloom" from that crowd and the intarwebs would be a very different place. Sadly, there's no indication that it's forthcoming. But don't ever dismiss 'em. They have just as much of a right to a voice as "new-school" fans.
I've been a Nintendo-only fanboi since my Mom put a pen and paper in my hand at 3 and made me map the dungeons in Zelda for her. And I can't personally agree with you.
I define "Nintendo fan" completely different than you. You can like Nintendo games, but that doesn't make you a real Nintendo fan in my book, that just means you like the games they tend to make. You can like the NES and SNES and N64 and GC and Wii... but that doesn't make you a Nintendo fan. That just means that you've always seen fit to buy their products.
A Nintendo fan has to discover that their beliefs and their ideals are aligned with the company and spirit that is Nintendo. Not out of will, but because they find that they really believe in the same concepts and tenets by themselves, independently, as well. They have to study the Nintendo Philosophies, they have to be able to feel the thoughts and ideas and emotions that go into Nintendo games that exist beyond the vagaries of "fun." They have to follow the ways that Nintendo thinks, or misthinks, and they have to believe that Nintendo really, at its heart, will try to be a force for good for videogames, even though they can debate endlessly over whether the latest surprise is a mistep or not.
They don't have to believe that the Nintendo way is the only way. They don't even have to LIKE Nintendo games! What they like or don't like is not what makes you a fan, that's what makes you a consumer. You can own huge Sony and XBox (or Sega) libraries for all I care. It's what you FEEL that makes you a fan.
Nintendo has changed, and changed sometimes in big ways. But has Nintendo "left me behind?" Have I "outgrown" them? Have I "given up" on them, or gotten "tired" of this constant never-ending vigilance? Has Nintendo "failed to deliver" one too many times?
No, because every time Nintendo changes, I find that I actually change with them. Not because I want to be, but because as Nintendo grows, so do I. As Nintendo investigates new markets, so too do I consider them for the first time. As Nintendo takes risks, I find those risks the same risks that they must take, that I would take myself. And as Nintendo tries new things, I find myself trying new things too.
And these things don't have to be rationalized, they simply coincide perfectly. And when they go out of sync, I'm no longer a fan.
For instance, I used to have this same relationship with Blizzard but... *poof* I am no longer a Blizzard fan. Just like that, I stopped coinciding with them, I stopped believing in their ideology and their devotion, and I stopped growing with them and agreeing with them. And I was a Blizzard fan ever since I stayed up late at night at age 8 just to sit on a chair beside my uncle and watch him play the first WarCraft. Heck, I was a Blizzard fan even though I couldn't beat WCII and even though I SUCKED at RTS games. I was a Blizzard fan all through the development of WoW. I was such a fan that I would read up on and investigate all the items and instances and gameplay mechanics and details about raid instances I would NEVER enter, about accomplishments I would NEVER achieve, and about situations I would NEVER ever enter on my own.
And then one day, I just wasn't. *shrug* No drama or anything, I just no longer had synergy with the company that I held second only to Nintendo in my heart. I wish them all the best but... I really couldn't be bothered to care about them in any special way anymore.
But you know what? Nintendo has so far been an ever-renewing fandom for me. When I felt that Nintendo was fading on the cube, so too did Iwata feel it and take the actions to correct it. When I was just realizing my doubts about networked play and MMOs, so too did Nintendo share their doubts about online gaming. And when I was growing to love the most niche, small and quirky third-party games, along comes systems that seem tailor made to my life: the DS and Wii.
It's not that Nintendo has always been there for me. It's not that I've always been there for them. It's because Nintendo and I are so often there, together, independently, yet mutually, that makes me a fan. I don't believe Nintendo because I want to. I believe Nintendo because I believed it on my own before they did it.
Like with the Wiimote, I believed in trying to find a tactile way to interact with games before Nintendo even showed me the DS (though the best I could come up with was a "twist" controller).
ARGH. I RAMBLE> AAAARRRRRGGGHHHHHH>>>>..>>>.> I AM NOT COGENT KJJFOIJDAOKDSW#!KJODFJARFDQ
But anyways, I can't understand fans who are afraid of Nintendo leaving them behind. It's not a matter of Nintendo leaving them behind. Either a fan already believes what the company is doing, or they suddenly realize that they're not an innate fan at all. They're just interested and educated consumers.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
P.S. Care for some Kool-aid? It's grape flavored...
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 16, 2006, 10:04:57 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
The thing I don't understand is the idea that Nintendo isn't going to make anymore great games. The DS, again, proves this. The DS is full of titles for new AND old audiences. I already own more games for it than any Nintendo handheld before (and want twice as many). Word from those who played it is that Mario Galaxy is potential the best Mario since Mario 3, or better. Zelda has the potential to be the greatest in the series as well. Then there's Smash Bros. and Metroid. All the major franchises. There is just no proof Nintendo is stopping anything. They are shifting their business model, yes, but they're not changing software priorities, they're expanding then. EAD1 isn't working on English Dictionary for Kids. They've expanded and they have tiny teams working on stuff like WiiSports and WiiMusic while the big teams do their work. If we actually get Mario, Zelda, Metroid and SSBM in the next year then that will be by far the biggest traditional Nintendo year EVER.
I just don't get it?
I am confused too, what exactly do these "old schoolers" want, I'm one and I'm estatic about Wii. It will probaly have one of the most diverse lineups of any Nintendo console around, they'll have casual games, "Hardcore" games, non-games, not to mention potential for some truly unique genres.
Post by: 31 Flavas on September 16, 2006, 10:06:33 AM
QuoteNintendo's next generation console at $350? I'd eventually get it, because I can't get Zelda, Metroid, Mario, and friends else where. But $350, even $300, and of course anything higher and I'd just stick with my DS until the console hit $250/$200.
Originally posted by: TerribleOne
the Wii should had just release at a $350 price tag with more power. admittedly or not you would had still gotten it.
Post by: Kairon on September 16, 2006, 10:12:42 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: TerribleOne
mehh.. u optimistic guys kill me... call it how it is not how it should be.. we cant judge it on how it will turn out to be because nobody knows that yet. the people complaining are just tired of nintendo's track record lately and please note: console market IS NOT handheld market, so stop mention the DS, nobody used the GBA for the GC or vice-versa. like it or not market share affects the games everyone gets. admit it, nobody cares about the green party and whoever wins the election gets to dominate and call the shots. and unfortunately it does seem that sometimes goin the "other way" hurts nintendo(cartriges, smaller discs, no online) and the people who have stuck to nintendo are tired of that.
the Wii should had just release at a $350 price tag with more power. admittedly or not you would had still gotten it.
This is the difference between a Nintendo fan and a Nintendo consumer.
A fan actually doesn't care about market share and doesn't care about if other systems will have a better line-up of games. They believe in Nintendo's ideals and philosophies, and are willing to support that on principle because they truly believe in how gaming as an entire medium can be bettered by the Wiimote, or a touchscreen, or simple dedication to excellence in videogames or whatever else they're buying Nintendo for.
A Nintendo consumer is only interested in Nintendo insofar as they can personally benefit from the games collection that Nintendo will get them. This isn't bad. We all have money concerns and we all want to have actual fun and no long droughts. Some Nintendo fans even don't buy Nintendo consoles until years after launch because they need to be realistic and think like consumers. But that's where a consumer ends: they don't believe in the art of videogames in the way Nintendo does, and they don't believe that Nintendo is trying to improve that art, that medium, the very essence of what makes fun "fun."
Consumers believe that they'll get the most bang for their buck. Fans believe that videogames can be something more than that.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 16, 2006, 10:16:32 AM
Post by: 31 Flavas on September 16, 2006, 10:27:35 AM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 16, 2006, 10:33:06 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: 31 Flavas
"A bussiness perspective"? Give me a break. You're looking at things from the "consumer perspective".
No because I want Nintendo to sell to the most consumers as possible, I want them to price their system at a mass market price in order to reap the rewards. Personally the price of the Wii, controllers etc isn't impacting me that much but I fear it may impact sales. If that isn't looking at things from a business perspective, I don't know what is. Believe it or not consumer sales does dictate how well a business does, so taking a consumers perspective on things is what you SHOULD do if you want to make a sucessful business. I love Nintendo and I want them to continue to grow and expand. Why do you think I thought Reggie bragging about profits was a big deal? Because it could look bad and thus hurt business for Nintendo (even their stocks ended up dropping 3%), so yeah I try to look at things from all angles, business (Since I am a Business Management major) and from a consumers perspective because they do relate.
Post by: BigJim on September 16, 2006, 10:37:06 AM
You in summary say I'm not a real Nintendo fan because real Nintendo fans love whatever they do.
You, as a student of video games, have a wholly and completely different perspective, but still one which doesn't have authority to determine "realness" of other fans.
Post by: TerribleOne on September 16, 2006, 10:44:05 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: 31 FlavasQuoteNintendo's next generation console at $350? I'd eventually get it, because I can't get Zelda, Metroid, Mario, and friends else where. But $350, even $300, and of course anything higher and I'd just stick with my DS until the console hit $250/$200.
Originally posted by: TerribleOne
the Wii should had just release at a $350 price tag with more power. admittedly or not you would had still gotten it.
ok maybe 300... but still people would buy it like hotcakes.. nintendo fans would still get it one way or another and the wiimote would hav a huge sandbox to play in. what's the point in takin a risk if you wont maximize. however i think the problem in the iwata era is that the money driven decisions already made arent that easily justified. (because every decision is money driven.) and the old schoolers see through all the b.s..... I.E. the wiisport-budget title bundle supposedly being the reason it's $250.
those people defendin nintendo no matter what need to differentiate between good intentions vs smart intentions
Post by: Kairon on September 16, 2006, 10:53:04 AM
And I don't believe that everything Nintendo says is gospel. Instead, I believe that Nintendo is a kindred spirit who holds the same values as I do. I don't adopt my view of myself to whatever Nintendo says, I find that Nintendo's views have always been affirmed by my own personal observations.
But I just wanted to express my persional views on the subject. Yeah, with such drastically different definitions we really can't come to terms with it.
*shrug* I'll think on it some more.
Oh, and VG, I pay attention to marketshare too. It's just that as a Nintendo Fan, marketshare in and of itself is infinitely less important than idealism (as a fan, marketshare is only an indicator of how relevant Nintendo's ideas are to the world at large, an indicator of outsider buy-in rates). It only becomes of real import once you act as a consumer and have to determine the correct outlay of money. But as a Nintendo Fan, I'd have to express interest and investigate and digest and explore even the Virtual Boy, even though as a Nintendo Consumer I never bought one.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 16, 2006, 11:00:21 AM
Post by: BigJim on September 16, 2006, 11:03:06 AM
Post by: TerribleOne on September 16, 2006, 11:05:47 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
BigJim, I don't want to believe in Nintendo's position. I didn't want to believe in Blizzard's position. I just do..or did. Now I'm no longer a Blizzard fanboy, I couldn't care about them less... well.. maybe I'd care about them a little less if.... but I am still a Nintendo fan.
And I don't believe that everything Nintendo says is gospel. Instead, I believe that Nintendo is a kindred spirit who holds the same values as I do. I don't adopt my view of myself to whatever Nintendo says, I find that Nintendo's views have always been affirmed by my own personal observations.
Yea i think we understand where you're coming from. but there's a point where the line is drawn b/w "real" nintendo fan and a consumer nintendo fan. this may come as a shock to some... but nintendo cares more about consumers than hardcore fans. thats why they are speakin their oceans and seas and what-not. they are simply trying to say "hey we are trying to get more $" and eventhough we both cheer for nintendo if they succeed, we care about it for different reasons. Nintendo is a company that worries about marketshare and stocks and us consumation-driven fans.
Post by: BigJim on September 16, 2006, 12:18:48 PM
Blue Ocean isn't an ideal. It's PR speak. Nintendo would love Sony's and MS's 100 million "Red Sea" if they could get it.
I don't think many have a problem with blue ocean-speak in itself, but there are gamers that aren't thrilled about Nintendo splitting their attention if they are not big enough to adequately support both the blue ocean AND the red sea.
Subjectively speaking, so far they've shown they're not. People keep mentioning Zelda, Mario, Metroid, and SSBB as proof nobody's being left behind. These 4 games spread out over the course of the next year (and they will be) is still going to mean droughts to many of those players unless there is ample supply of other viable games of similar or better quality (Edit: by Nintendo or 3rd parties) to fill the gaps between them.
I don't think anybody needs to be reminded (then again maybe they do) of GameCube's dust-collecting gaps despite having all of these IPs and 500+ other games.
Nintendo has made it abundantly clear who they are going after and the types of games they want to make to tap the blue ocean. The hardcores will get thrown bones and left in the Red Sea lest they desire to pretend their Wiimote is a dumbbell.
That is what it means (to me) to be left behind. Nobody else *has* to agree with it. It doesn't make opinions any less valid, try as some have in the last year.
Post by: zakkiel on September 16, 2006, 01:20:30 PM
Seriously, the complaints about Nintendo ignoring hardcore gamers are just as silly now that Billy is making them as they were when Ian was. If anything, Nintendo is going to rely more on hardcore gamers, at least early on, then the casual market it keeps talking about.
Edit:
QuoteAnd how many titles of comparable quality are Sony and Microsoft producing in the next year? If your definition of support for the base is Nintendo providing a constant slew of AAA titles, then there never has been such support, at least not in the last decade. Your expectations simply don't mesh with business reality. It doesn't make sense for any one game developer to try and put out more than four such titles a year.
Subjectively speaking, so far they've shown they're not. People keep mentioning Zelda, Mario, Metroid, and SSBB as proof nobody's being left behind. These 4 games spread out over the course of the next year (and they will be) is still going to mean droughts to many of those players unless there is ample supply of other viable games of similar or better quality to fill the gaps between them.
Post by: BigJim on September 16, 2006, 02:04:24 PM
Post by: TerribleOne on September 16, 2006, 02:33:47 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
I didn't mean it had to be only Nintendo-made games. Sorry if you were confused.
yea i was just about 2 say that... Nintendo's not the only company out there who can make us benefit as gamers. but it seems to be like if nintendo is not releasin anythin, the system is collectin dust. so of course us red sea gamers are goin to complain when see um about 75% of nintendo's focus goin the other way after allll the years we hav gone thru. as a consumer i want to see increase marketshare so that third parties giv us games for both sides but mainly because me, myself and I and other red sea gamers will benefit
Post by: Smash_Brother on September 16, 2006, 02:51:29 PM
And he basically ignored the DS a shining example of how Nintendo has learned to overpower "image" and sell a sh*load of consoles and games.
Post by: BigJim on September 16, 2006, 03:34:37 PM
He's talking about the console business (obviously), which != the portable one.
Post by: trip1eX on September 16, 2006, 03:38:56 PM
Post by: zakkiel on September 16, 2006, 04:11:15 PM
QuoteI assumed you were because there's no other excuse for ignoring Red Steel, CoD3, Fire Emblem, or Resident Evil. Whether or not you like them, they are undeniably aimed at the core, and they undeniably have pull with that group. So now I really am confused.
I didn't mean it had to be only Nintendo-made games. Sorry if you were confused.
Post by: Smash_Brother on September 16, 2006, 05:51:24 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
They were always a monopoly and always successful in portables.
He's talking about the console business (obviously), which != the portable one.
Thing is, Nintendo's situation in the portable console market was identical to their situation with the Wii: they're up against a foe which is graphically superior, perceived as "cool" and "mature", yet their drastically weaker console with an innovative new feature struck down a multimedia powerhouse which boasted a whole range of capabilities beyond being a simple gaming machine.
Everyone always said that the only reason Nintendo held onto the handheld console market was the lack of a real competitor and many speculated that Sony would be the competitor who would not only neuter their stranglehold on the handheld console market but stomp Nintendo into submission.
Would the GBA 2 have beat the PSP? Not likely. The DS offered something new, something approachable by people who don't even think about gaming because, in their eyes, it IS an activity reserved for a select few hardcore.
The Wii is everything the DS was and mimics its situation to a tee. Not citing it as an example of how Nintendo has begun to change the market to their favor is foolishness.
Plus, how does he write off Nintendo's overwhelming 3rd party support? You can't simply write off all of the 3rd parties who have not only jumped on Nintendo's bandwagon but also come back to their console after even 2 generations of no Nintendo support.
Post by: RickPowers on September 16, 2006, 06:29:26 PM
Some interesting arguments being made here. Keep it up.
Post by: Deguello on September 16, 2006, 06:31:00 PM
Fact: Nintendo has actually had more competition in the handheld sector than anywhere else. The GameGear, the Sega Nomad, the Wonderswan (SquareSoft support in Japan, pretty huge), The Neo Geo Pocket, the NGage, The Atari Lynx, the GP32, even stuff like the Game.com and the Gizmondo, are all sufficient challengers to the throne. Just because they all got their ass handed to them doesn't mean that there was no competition. It's not Nintendo's fault their competitors were limp and tepid.
Post by: UncleBob on September 16, 2006, 07:10:00 PM
I've read a lot of "I'm an old school gamer, blah, blah, blah."
While I have to say, I *hate* the term "old school", I completly fall into that catagory. Born in 1980 into a home with an Intellivision, I grew up playing video games. Over the years, I've owned every Nintendo console and handheld, the Intellivision, Atari 2600 and 7200, a short-lived Game Gear, and a PlayStation. Over the years, I've spent a lot of time playing PS2, TG16, and a Genesis. A decent little bit of time was spent playing the two XBoxes, a Colecovision, and a SEGA Master System. This isn't to mention the tons of little LED handheld games I had by the case load (really, little plastic cases for action figures loaded with these things).
And I'm totally 100% excited about Wii.
The fact is, you hear a lot about how "Nintendo is teh d00med" because they didn't sell 40 million units or whatever... but the fact is they make money. In fact, I'd almost be willing to bet that Nintendo could keep going happily just making systems that only play their games... They'd still sell. We saw it with the GameCube - hardly anyone purchased it for third party games. But that's a whole different arguement.
All in all, Nintendo has me excited - yet again. Perhaps I'm a blinded fanboy. Hell, I thought Connectivity was awesome and I loved my e-Reader... But, hey, it's more fun being a blinded fanboy than it is to be a jaded fanboy.
Post by: IceCold on September 16, 2006, 07:25:42 PM
QuoteI have become 100% convinced that if Nintendo did such a thing, they would fail miserably, as much as people like Ian or Billy would like to think otherwise. I think I came to this realisation during the HD debate. Think about it; maybe we on this forum would buy it, and a few others, but who else would give a damn about the console if it was similarly priced the the 360 and PS3? I've heard Ian say over and over that they need to have a "traditional" console without the "screwups" of the N64 and the GameCube. His main reasons of why the GameCube failed are, I believe, things like a smaller disc, expensive memory cards, no demo discs and marketing. Really, the only thing that I believe really contributed was the bad marketing. Those other things are trivial, and even if they were fixed, I I doubt it would have saved the GameCube. So, what else did they do wrong with the Cube? Not much, I'd say.. Third party support was a vicious cycle (thid parties give half-assed ports, they don't sell, they stop supporting the GameCube, the marketshare goes down, third party games don't sell, etc) but I really believe Nintendo tried hard to secure more support for their console. See Crystal Chronicles (even the fact that they collaborated with Square was big), Capcom 5, when Nintendo leased their franchises to SEGA and Namco to improve relations, etc. Looking at the GameCube's game lineup, it had some brilliant games that deserved to be the best-selling games in the generation. Yet many of them went ignored, because the Xbox/PlayStation crowd just didn't care about Nintendo.
the Wii should had just release at a $350 price tag with more power. admittedly or not you would had still gotten it.
Taking this into consideration, if Nintendo made a console for "old school" (ugh) gamers, they would be buried. Let's say they went all out with a powerful (yet expensive) console, HD support, traditional controller, costly disc media, a full blown online service, and only hardcore games with sky-high production values. This would be, to put it lightly, a disaster. I have accepted that Nintendo just can't compete with the deep pockets and aggressive marketing of Sony and MS. They can't regain the traditional market. They're just a small videogame company with no other interests, trying to survive among corporate giants. Another traditional console, especially one with a price tag like that, wouldn't have a chance. They just wouldn't have much return in terms of marketshare, third party support, software sales and, in general, profit.. There would be nothing to differentiate between them and the other consoles, and if this happened, it would be a pipe dream to believe that Nintendo could come out on top. Casual gamers would go with the 360 or PS3 every time because of the mindshare that Nintendo doesn't have. Billy or Ian would probably say, at this point, that all they need to differentiate themselves are their usual amazing games. I would beg to differ, though.. Again, look at the GameCube. Nintendo's games, however much better they were than the competition, didn't make much difference in the end.
And that is why Nintendo needed something different. They needed to separate themselves, to innovate, to build momentum by being unique, and to capture the attention of those who wouldn't otherwise care. A $350 console would stop all of this in its tracks. It would be a complete turn-off to many people, especially the ones who don't care about the CPU's power. These are the people whom Nintendo is trying to capture.. They sure as hell won't pay that much for a game console, when they aren't interested in playing videogames anyway. You could argue that $250 is even too much, but Nintendo has this covered. They pack in Wii Sports, so that the hardcore early adopters get it with the system. The launch and the next few shipments will sell out to the early birds, so a lower price is not needed. To top this off, they can use viral marketing through Wii Sports, and get casuals and nongamers interested in the system. Then, after a few months, they cut the price, inviting people to try the console out. It's a great strategy..
And finally, is $350 really worth it for some extra power? I'm more than satisfied with the visuals that the Wii is busting out.. Look at Super Mario Galaxy, for example - that with progressive scan is a treat visually. I would even argue that it looks better than most 360/PS3 games since it's so artistic compared to the bland styles on many of the games on those consoles. I most definitely would not want to pay $100 more for better visuals, especially since they're reaching a plateau. Think about it; the jump from the N64 to the GameCube was huge. The one from this generation to the next is not so much.. In fact, on a SDTV or EDTV, it's a very small jump. Looking at the difference between Wii games and PS3 games, especially on a SDTV, it most certainly isn't worth all that extra money.
Yeah, long post, but it had to be said..
Post by: ShyGuy on September 16, 2006, 07:29:47 PM
Post by: Smash_Brother on September 16, 2006, 07:57:15 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: RickPowers
Arguably, though ... the PSP is failing because it doesn't have sh!t for games.
...which came about because the games made for it didn't sell, leading fewer developers to want to create games for it.
It also came about BECAUSE the PSP was advertised as a multimedia device instead of a gaming console, making developers leery that their games would be competing for market with all manners of movies in addition to games, a fact which is VERY relevant with the PS3 because they're pushing the goddamn thing as a computer and a BluRay player instead of a pure gaming machine.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 16, 2006, 07:58:08 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 16, 2006, 07:59:33 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_BrotherQuote
Originally posted by: RickPowers
Arguably, though ... the PSP is failing because it doesn't have sh!t for games.
...which came about because the games made for it didn't sell, leading fewer developers to want to create games for it.
It also came about BECAUSE the PSP was advertised as a multimedia device instead of a gaming console, making developers leery that their games would be competing for market with all manners of movies in addition to games, a fact which is VERY relevant with the PS3 because they're pushing the goddamn thing as a computer.
At least the PS3 is a GREAT deal, I mean Sony tells me that all the time so it must be true, even if I don't want a Bluray player that may or may not work lol.
Post by: Kairon on September 16, 2006, 09:19:47 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 16, 2006, 10:47:05 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Well, let's not turn this into a graphics thred, but great post Ice Cold. lol.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
I'll turn this into a graphics thread if I want lol. Anyway back to the original editorial, one thing I could not understand is why Billy seemed to be complaining about the web browser. Ok, webTV didn't work out, but still does it hurt to have a web brower included for free? It isn't like we are really paying more for it (unless you wait until after June) unlike some other unnamed system with bonus stuff you really are paying for.
Post by: WuTangTurtle on September 17, 2006, 12:42:12 AM
If you took a screenshot from each game and slabbed them all next to each other it would be hard to name each game.
Plus I think game developers wanted the Wii to be what it is, something that they could easily profit from versus something that could end them up with filing for Chapter 9 (ehm midway).
Post by: Infernal Monkey on September 17, 2006, 12:50:09 AM
Quote
Another launch with a new Mario title absent already makes me nervous. Seriously? Is this the N64 and GameCube all over again?
Yeah because N64 didn't launch with a Mario gam-oh wait.
Quote
With Super Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3: Corruption, Super Smash Bros. Brawl all moving into the 2007 space, you can pretty much see all four of those games getting spread out to fill the entire 2007 year.
That's three! Nintendo is quite obviously doomed forever once again. Whinge whinge wah wah.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 17, 2006, 01:17:16 AM
Post by: BigJim on September 17, 2006, 02:46:10 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: zakkielQuoteI assumed you were because there's no other excuse for ignoring Red Steel, CoD3, Fire Emblem, or Resident Evil. Whether or not you like them, they are undeniably aimed at the core, and they undeniably have pull with that group. So now I really am confused.
I didn't mean it had to be only Nintendo-made games. Sorry if you were confused.
Being aimed at the core doesn't mean they're equal or better quality. Many accounts I'm reading/hearing is that Red Steel is way too early, for example. But the point is not about specific games. Again, GameCube was a dust collector regardless of its 500 releases. It's about maintaining consistent flow of ample high-quality support overall throughout the system life with games that people actually want to buy.
There are people everywhere, including the Penny Arcade guys and even PGC staff that have said they've only gotten a GCN game every several months. Are they satisfied with that? If they're really avid gamers, I doubt it. The problem is not the lack of technically available titles. The problem is has been the lack of the types of games I just italicized above. And if titles in the future are going to split between core games and games for my sister, the problem might continue. And considering they've explained quite clearly that our parents and sisters are their primary target next gen, it sounds like that's the way it's going to be.
Quote
Plus, how does he write off Nintendo's overwhelming 3rd party support? You can't simply write off all of the 3rd parties who have not only jumped on Nintendo's bandwagon but also come back to their console after even 2 generations of no Nintendo support.
I can't speak for Billy, but for me, see previous response.
Quote
Fact: Nintendo has actually had more competition in the handheld sector than anywhere else. The GameGear, the Sega Nomad, the Wonderswan (SquareSoft support in Japan, pretty huge), The Neo Geo Pocket, the NGage, The Atari Lynx, the GP32, even stuff like the Game.com and the Gizmondo, are all sufficient challengers to the throne. Just because they all got their ass handed to them doesn't mean that there was no competition. It's not Nintendo's fault their competitors were limp and tepid.
How much marketshare did any of those challengers obtain at any given point? A monopoly doesn't mean strictly "no competition". Microsoft has legally been found to be a monopoly holder in operating systems. But there are still other operating systems out there.
And, nice post IceCold. Nintendo needed to be different somehow or else they'd be all but ignored next generation.
Post by: Deguello on September 17, 2006, 03:18:19 AM
They do have an effective monopoly on handhelds, but one earned in blood through constant competition, some might say to the expense of their console market.
Post by: BigJim on September 17, 2006, 04:11:47 AM
I'm not disagreeing with how they got there. I know a monopoly is not illegal or unethical in and of itself. But it is a monopoly. Having challengers doesn't mean they're not.
Post by: zakkiel on September 17, 2006, 07:09:36 AM
QuoteWhy yes it is. If you say there will only be w,x,y, and z games for the Wii to assuage the hard core, when in fact there are also a,b,c, and d games, it is very much about the specific games. You're trying to avoid discussing or including them because you know your position isn't tenable. The vast majority of people on this forum are pretty selective in their video-game choices (or they wouldn't be posting here), and RS is repeatedly cropping up in launch lists, and the other three have been tried and proven popular with core gamers.
But the point is not about specific games.
If you're going to ground your argument in the number of games released in the next year, you need to be accurate about those games and demonstrate that the 360 had significantly more in its first year, and that Sony plans to have more. Myself, I don't see what Nintendo could do to get more games out aimed at core gamers, and I the Wiis lineup stacks up pretty darn well with the competition. Especially since its games all offer an experience unique for home consoles.
Post by: trip1eX on September 17, 2006, 08:08:56 AM
The bottom line is did you enjoy your Gamecube experience? (Or were you too busy counting the number of games you couldn't get?
)Did you not enjoy your Gamecube experience so much so that you won't be buying a Wii?
I mean I don't think (again) that a single person here doesn't wish that their platform had every great game known to man and had those games being released week after week. Every single gamer wants that. And you know what? No gamers get that.
So I think folks need to look at the reality and accept it. If you're so concerned about not getting your share of 3rd party titles then buy another console and don't buy Nintendo's. Or buy both. You're sending the wrong message if you bitch, but keep buying Nintendo's products.
Post by: Deguello on September 17, 2006, 08:39:03 AM
And notice I said the myth was that Nintendo had "no competition." They do. they always had competition int he handheld sector. They tend to squash them immediately, but they do.
Post by: Smash_Brother on September 17, 2006, 09:19:58 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim And considering they've explained quite clearly that our parents and sisters are their primary target next gen, it sounds like that's the way it's going to be.
They've said that, but it would take an idiot to not realize that they're already not doing that.
How many "non-games" does the Wii's launch lineup consist of? I see an awful lot of core gamer games in there and I'd only count Wii sports as a semi-casual game.
And again, LOOK at the DS's track record: once the DS proved itself in the marketplace (and there was a time period when many developers refused to create games for it because they didn't know if it would succeed), devs started pumping out games for it.
The progression has been like this: Nintendo system with an innovative new idea launches, people buy it up like crazy, devs start creating piles of games for it.
With this success, you get your Castlevanias, your Final Fantasies, the 3rd party support which the GC lacked in order to maintain a solid release schedule throughout the year.
And for the record, the Xbox suffered from the same stigma: garbage ports released most of the time and every so often a gem (which is what the 360 is REALLY seeing right now).
Post by: BigJim on September 17, 2006, 11:17:44 AM
Quote
Why yes it is. If you say there will only be w,x,y, and z games for the Wii to assuage the hard core, when in fact there are also a,b,c, and d games, it is very much about the specific games.
You don't seem to get the point. Releasing random a, b, c, d core games does not an assuaged core gamer make. By virtue of releasing them it doesn't mean they'll be games anybody wants to buy. (i.e. crappy ports and such.) I've made it as clear as I can that I am talking about flow and quality *of* those core games -- consistent flow of ample high-quality support overall throughout the system life with games that people actually want to buy.
And that is why I said specific games are not the point. I merely sited obvious examples of games we can safely say will be good and sell well. Just because a, b, c, and d might also be good and sell, it says nothing for the flow or quality for the lifetime of the unit. It only means hardcores might have a good first year, IF they are in fact titles that are up to the same standard that people want to buy.
Quote
The bottom line is did you enjoy your Gamecube experience?
For the first 2 years. That is what I want to avoid this next generation.
They distinctly made a left turn in their release lineup after that point. If they can avoid shafting some of us halfway through, I will be as happy as a lark.Quote
Did you not enjoy your Gamecube experience so much so that you won't be buying a Wii?
No. Nintendo's new direction on non-gamers (and Iwata's outright suggestion) has given the nod for hardcore gamers to consider another console. Despite the company's new mission, and Iwata's own suggestion, some people here are still so damn defensive about the idea that some people want more than they're likely to get out of the Wii.
Yes, I'll get a Wii, but it would be desireable to not have to get another console to be fully satisfied. And that is the basis of my discussion here. Just because I say I am an old-school hardcore gamer that wants more of a certain type of content that is contrary to the company's mission statement, others want to go apeshit, like Iwata was lying. They should relax and accept (or at least tolerate) a contrary opinion, as their opinion isn't the only correct one.
Quote
To choose a famous Reggie quote, their troubles are "not my problem." What is Nintendo supposed to do? Help them compete against themselves so that they have competition? The consumers always had a choice in handheld game players and they just chose the Gameboy most of the time.
I don't really understand the point of the handheld topic.
The title of the myth was "Myth: Nintendo has always had a marketshare monopoly on handhelds with no competition." Then it cited a list of competitors as the reason why it wasn't a monopoly. I was just trying to correct it because the definition of a monopoly doesn't entirely exclude competition. They had competition, but they were still a monopoly due to their marketshare dominance. Nobody is demonizing Nintendo for having a monopoly either. They are allowed to have it because it was created and maintained legally as far as anybody knows. More power to them.Quote
They've said that, but it would take an idiot to not realize that they're already not doing that.
What we see now is not necessarily proof of what we'll get later. Non-gamers aren't going to buy it fresh off the assembly line. That'd be like if TV manufacturers made 20" HDTVs before the 50" ones. You go for your core/enthusiast market first and then branch out as your costs/prices come down. Additionally, GameCube's second half was the pits compared to its first half, IMO.
Quote
And for the record, the Xbox suffered from the same stigma: garbage ports released most of the time and every so often a gem
Yeah, more or less. But I would also hope for and expect more out of Nintendo/GameCube. (Is that wrong to expect more from them than Xbox?) It might interest some to know that on GameRankings, 16 GCN games, 38 PS2 games, and 22 Xbox games have scored 90% or greater since 2001. Xbox didn't do so hot either but I think there's room for improvement as far as "AAA" titles go. But we'll see. here's hoping.
Rick, I know you are sitting back and reading this but I'd like to see your input eventually as well. LOL.
Post by: Kairon on September 17, 2006, 11:29:19 AM
It's as simple as hardcore gamers believing that we've got a Gamecube 2 on our hands and/or we've got the more unappealing half of the DS in the Wii.
*shrug*
I'm not sure what the future holds so I'm not going to make any promises, but I'm getting it at launch. If you have doubts as to the worth of your purchase, then you should do what smart gamers have done forever: wait until the Wii has enough appealing games released at the present to be worth your purchase. Do what Iansane so sensibly does and wait for a clear reason (i.e. killer app) you have to own a Wii, or do what smart PS3 owners will be doing and wait until a price drop or larger library makes the Wii look like a worthy deal from the first day you buy it.
Edit: Billy already said he's getting it on day 1. The pull of Zelda TP is just too much for him. He still expresses his reservations and that's perfectly fine, but evidently he still believes that the system is very much worth at least $300 worth of expenditure at launch.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: zakkiel on September 17, 2006, 12:00:05 PM
QuoteWhich flatly contradicts your earlier statement
You don't seem to get the point. Releasing random a, b, c, d core games does not an assuaged core gamer make. By virtue of releasing them it doesn't mean they'll be games anybody wants to buy. (i.e. crappy ports and such.) I've made it as clear as I can that I am talking about flow and quality *of* those core games -- consistent flow of ample high-quality support overall throughout the system life with games that people actually want to buy.
QuoteIt is about the specific games, and whether they're good or not. Oh, there's a another game I should add to the list, while we'er at it: BWii.
any accounts I'm reading/hearing is that Red Steel is way too early, for example. But the point is not about specific games.
You're assuming at least five separate games will be bad with no justification other than apparently some rumor about RS. So, really, there's no point in this conversation, because you're determined to believe that hardcore gamers are being somehow wronged. Some people just need to feel like victims, I guess. I'm done.
Post by: BigJim on September 17, 2006, 12:07:31 PM
I will copy and paste it again.
I've made it as clear as I can that I am talking about flow and quality *of* those core games -- consistent flow of ample high-quality support overall throughout the system life with games that people actually want to buy.
Running down lists of launch, launch window, and scattered 1st year titles proves nothing of *flow*... *quality*... and *consistency* for the *life of the system.*
I could run down a list of a dozen awesome (or what we thought would be awesome) launch and first year games for GameCube and it still would not be hard to find people that thought it crashed and burned 2 years in.... err, except possibly some of those in the bubble of a Nintendo forum.
Post by: Kairon on September 17, 2006, 12:32:16 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
Running down lists of launch, launch window, and scattered 1st year titles proves nothing of *flow*... *quality*... and *consistency* for the *life of the system.*
But that's the best evidence one can ask for with regards to the future. The only better way to determine the future is...well... to know it.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 17, 2006, 12:39:39 PM
Post by: IceCold on September 17, 2006, 12:56:09 PM
Post by: trip1eX on September 17, 2006, 01:21:44 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
I think if you don't trust Nintendo to go all 4-5 years on this thing, then there's not much argument to be made.
It's as simple as hardcore gamers believing that we've got a Gamecube 2 on our hands and/or we've got the more unappealing half of the DS in the Wii.
*shrug*
I'm not sure what the future holds so I'm not going to make any promises, but I'm getting it at launch. If you have doubts as to the worth of your purchase, then you should do what smart gamers have done forever: wait until the Wii has enough appealing games released at the present to be worth your purchase. Do what Iansane so sensibly does and wait for a clear reason (i.e. killer app) you have to own a Wii, or do what smart PS3 owners will be doing and wait until a price drop or larger library makes the Wii look like a worthy deal from the first day you buy it.
Edit: Billy already said he's getting it on day 1. The pull of Zelda TP is just too much for him. He still expresses his reservations and that's perfectly fine, but evidently he still believes that the system is very much worth at least $300 worth of expenditure at launch.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Exactly.
And yeah the Billy guy got treated so badly by Nintendo the last 2 generations he's buying a Wii at launch.
:lol:
What a waste of space that article was.
Post by: BigJim on September 17, 2006, 01:27:48 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KaironQuote
Originally posted by: BigJim
Running down lists of launch, launch window, and scattered 1st year titles proves nothing of *flow*... *quality*... and *consistency* for the *life of the system.*
But that's the best evidence one can ask for with regards to the future. The only better way to determine the future is...well... to know it.
There is a middle ground where I happily sit. I ran out of unchecked Nintendo faith a few years ago.
I don't predict Nintendo's death (at all), nor do I assume a default position that every first year hardcore game are automatic must-haves for everybody and proof positive of a perpetually satifying lifetime of Wii hardcore AAA-game awesomeness until they're not.But I guess that's what makes me an emo. Woe to me. I suffer.
Post by: Artimus on September 17, 2006, 01:55:24 PM
At the same time I am super-hyped for Wii and have had faith since the controller was shown.
Post by: Smash_Brother on September 17, 2006, 02:16:46 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: BigJimWhat we see now is not necessarily proof of what we'll get later. Non-gamers aren't going to buy it fresh off the assembly line. That'd be like if TV manufacturers made 20" HDTVs before the 50" ones. You go for your core/enthusiast market first and then branch out as your costs/prices come down. Additionally, GameCube's second half was the pits compared to its first half, IMO.
If the DS is any indication, they'll be fine.
The DS has had plenty of non-gamer software as well as games aimed purely at the hardcore Nintendo fan. All it takes is to give 3rd parties some incentive and the rest is cake.
Post by: BigJim on September 17, 2006, 02:33:58 PM
Art, for what it's worth I am also very excited about Zelda, Mario, MP3, and Rayman so far. I think they have the best chance of making the wiimote really immersive. I'm not too heavy on those games that make the wiimote out to be a tennis racket, golf club, etc. either. But most of those games probably "aren't made for us" anyway I guess.
It'll be interesting to see how the whole controller issue turns out in a year from now. The DS had a learning curve in philosophy to some degree, and once it clicked it turned out well overall.
Post by: Kairon on September 17, 2006, 07:22:56 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Nick DiMola on September 17, 2006, 07:47:04 PM
Post by: ShyGuy on September 18, 2006, 08:47:23 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on September 18, 2006, 09:26:01 AM
I became a Nintendo fan because I liked what I felt they stood for at the time. Their philosophy was quality. They made the best hardware and the best games and they never rested on their laurels. This commitment to quality meant they didn't take shortcuts and virtually each game was significant. There were no throw away titles for a quick buck or cookie cutter sequels. Looking back my view of Nintendo at the time was a little sensationalized. They didn't quite follow those principles completely but they were still pretty good at it.
I used to see Nintendo's future as simple. Nintendo did well when they were competent and when they screwed sh!t up they did poorly. The Cube was incredibly frustrating to watch as they seemed to screw up pretty much everything they could. The sad part was that whenever they made an iffy decision it was spotted as a potential problem on this board. Forumers could spot problems that Nintendo couldn't? You know how if you're a fan of a sports team you always tend to play armchair GM. Sometimes a team makes a trade and you think it's a poor trade. Being a Nintendo fan on the Cube was like spotting a poor trade and then watching your team fail to make the playoffs... for the next five seasons. It's hard to specify exactly what they needed to do right but it was easy to spot when they did things wrong. I get some flack for contradicting myself but sometimes it's hard to explain exactly what I think would be the right thing to do. I know I would know it if I saw it.
What I wanted Nintendo to do was fix all these little problems. This wasn't going to be easy but I figured that if Nintendo stopped being their own worst enemy they could get their marketshare increasing again (or at least not shrinking) and please their fans better. You don't have to be number one, but you can at least satisfy your userbase. The Genesis and Xbox weren't the market leader but at least their fans were happy. Plus I figured that by being competent then at the very least they could tough it out and if Sony screwed up they would have a chance to grab the ball. Interestingly enough this gen was the perfect time to do that since Sony is totally fumbling.
Some people argued that I was asking for Nintendo to compromise their principles to increase their marketshare. The "Mario shooting hookers" comment came up a lot as if asking Nintendo to make some games that aren't all super-fun-happy-world would require such a drastic change. I figured that Nintendo couldn't increased their marketshare if they compromised their principles so it didn't matter. They could never get ahead by trying to copy the competition. The key was to not screw things up, create a level playing field, and let the superior games give them the advantage.
This non-gamer stuff was something I never saw as a possibility. The idea that Nintendo would target people who don't play games at all was just so odd and unexpected. My thinking was limited entirely to the current game market. This creates the possibility of Nintendo regaining their marketshare and doing so in a way that excludes me. That's not a very comforting thought. In fact it's downright scary. How does one react to that?
The "Nintendo is always awesome" fans have no problem adapting to it obviously. That small group I'm in can't cope quite so easily. I agree with Rick in that Billy doesn't really care for this change. A way to deal with it is to criticize it like he's doing. Predicting failure makes for a better arguement then "I don't like this because it excludes me."
I honestly thought the DS would fail and was really surprised that it didn't. I initially thought the Wii would fail but with Sony charging $600 I don't think that anymore. The best I can wish for I guess is that I actually really like the Wii when I try it.
Post by: Kairon on September 18, 2006, 10:37:23 AM
Would it be accurate to say that if you actually end up not liking the Wii, then none of the existing consoles would actually really satisfy you?
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on September 18, 2006, 10:44:27 AM
Post by: couchmonkey on September 18, 2006, 11:07:59 AM
- Underpowered
I am slightly concerned about the lack of HDTV support. It doesn't matter now, but in three to four years, who knows? As for the general lack of power, I think it's a calculated risk, and judging by the response at E3, the risk has not turned off hardcore gamers. It's also possible that Nintendo will lose the casual gamers due to the power issue but I think E3 went a long way towards calming that fear.
Cause for concern: 6 pucks out of 10
- Launch Lineup
The launch lineup has weakened, which is disappointing, but I think it will do fine. Billy seems to argue that Zelda will only appeal to the hardcore, but I believe Ocarina of Time was extremely popular. Nintendo also has something like six first party games scheduled to come out between January and April. That's awesome!
Cause for concern: 2 pucks out of 10
- Virtual Console needs to include enhanced games
Eh, I don't think this is going to be a huge issue. Certain hardcore gamers are not going to think the games are worth it because they already own them, or because they can emulate them, but I think the target audience will eat the VC up, enhanced or not. (Edit: Though the initial lineup of 30 games is kind of weak).
Cause for concern: 0 pucks out of 10
- Third party ports
Billy tears this argument down before he even gets started. Madden, Red Steel, Rayman, Super Monkey Ball, Trauma Centre 2 and Tony Hawk are all built from the ground up. Yes, it would be bad if the system becomes too "porty", and yes, there are a lot of ports announced, but there are lots of original titles announced too. I'd say more than N64 or GameCube had at this point in their lives.
Cause for concern: 3 pucks out of 10.
- Online
It's coming. Nintendo has already announced three online games (Metroid, BWii, and Mario Strikers) and not only is Wii going online, it's all free, which I personally find way more appealing than Xbox Live.
Cause for concern: 1 puck out of 10.
I see why Billy's worried. Billy and the casual gamers may not totally buy into the crazy controls (although I didn't even notice him mentioning that very much in his article). I'm also a little worried that casuals will be turned off by the whole graphics thing. Overall, though, I'm confident Wii is going to be a success.
Post by: Ian Sane on September 18, 2006, 11:20:19 AM
Yeah, that would be pretty accurate. I've said it countless times that none of the three companies are targeting people that actually like games. They all want to attract someone else to their console.
Post by: Nick DiMola on September 18, 2006, 11:45:20 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"Would it be accurate to say that if you actually end up not liking the Wii, then none of the existing consoles would actually really satisfy you?"
Yeah, that would be pretty accurate. I've said it countless times that none of the three companies are targeting people that actually like games. They all want to attract someone else to their console.
Not to come off as a huge Nintendo fanboy who just follows Nintendo no matter what, but doesn't anybody else see this as a breath of fresh air? I know Nintendo maybe isn't looking to directly appeal to it's fanbase but that doesn't mean they won't still make games that are fun and engaging. I feel like the argument, "They don't care about me anymore" is stupid and childish. We have no idea what will come of this idea as of right now. More than anything I am intrigued to see what happens and to see how it affects Nintendo as a company. I say give Nintendo a chance before you cut them down. They are trying something new and are not the same Nintendo we have seen before. Just my $0.02.
Post by: couchmonkey on September 18, 2006, 11:48:09 AM
Edit - Mr. Jack: I'm totally pumped about Wii, really. I see Nintendo's attempts to get non-gamers involved in gaming as visionary, and I see the Wii itself as a much, much more exciting concept than the competing systems.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 18, 2006, 11:48:35 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on September 18, 2006, 11:53:27 AM
I don't quite get what you mean by "a breath of fresh air". I'm saying that none of the current console makers really gives a damn if people who actually like games buy their console or not.
Post by: Nick DiMola on September 18, 2006, 12:02:39 PM
I think the point I am trying to make is that as a result of companies not appealing to people who actually like games, they need to come up with fresh new ideas. Essentially the need to make games that have never been made before. As a result we get a whole new slew of games that very well maybe more exciting and easy to play. It's a breath of fresh air because gaming has been stagnant for the past 5 years. Since the N64 we have just been getting graphical updates of games we have already played. Hope that clears it up a bit.
Post by: Kairon on September 18, 2006, 12:09:18 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
From everything I read Microsoft actually seems to sincerely care about games for gamers, or at least the guys on the Xbox team do (I don't think Bill Gates cares). That being said, the systems focus so heavily on FPSes, with a dash of other Western games, that I can't get that into them.
Yeah, I can't put my finger down on any specific thing that MS is messing up on or being malicious about, but despite believing that the XBox team members and even J. Allard really are trying to do their best for videogames, I fear Bill Gates.
When MS wins videogames, as they eventually will 30 years down the line, they will reveal their true form, corrupt/fire all their internal nice people, screw us all, and I shall be sad.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 18, 2006, 12:12:59 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KaironQuote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
From everything I read Microsoft actually seems to sincerely care about games for gamers, or at least the guys on the Xbox team do (I don't think Bill Gates cares). That being said, the systems focus so heavily on FPSes, with a dash of other Western games, that I can't get that into them.
Yeah, I can't put my finger down on any specific thing that MS is messing up on or being malicious about, but despite believing that the XBox team members and even J. Allard really are trying to do their best for videogames, I fear Bill Gates.
When MS wins videogames, as they eventually will 30 years down the line, they will reveal their true form, corrupt/fire all their internal nice people, screw us all, and I shall be sad.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Well if my mentor who is lead of franchise development is any indication, they all are really passionate about games and do their best to please the gamer. One pretty big example of this was when I was talking to the project lead of PGR3, they worked their butts off just to include accurate interiors for all the cars. This feature was about to be canned due to the rushed release date, but the team fought like crazy to keep it in for the gamer (even though management was pushing to drop it).
Post by: Ian Sane on September 18, 2006, 12:37:44 PM
Fair enough but I'm not of the attitude that attracting non-gamers was a requirement for innovation, nor was completely rehauling a working control model. I relate the stagnant nature of gaming entirely to the rise of non-gaming companies like Sony and MS while Nintendo's influence has shrunk and Sega is no longer making consoles. If anything attracting the mainstream is the very thing that has caused things to stagnate. In Nintendo's case it was entirely their choice to stagnate. A few years into the Cube's life they suddenly decided that their legacy was based on milking franchises. I don't think it's a coincedence that the Cube pretty much crashed and burned once that "Who are you?" bullsh!t started and virtually nothing resembling an original concept was being churned out of Nintendo's cookie cutter. "We're not selling as well as we wanted to. I KNOW! Let's release some of our most uninspired games ever! Surely that will fix things!"
Contrary to what Nintendo thinks, traditional gamers aren't just interested in the same damn sequels again and again (funny how every Wii or DS game that people point to as a "traditional" game is a sequel). And nobody realized they were bored of gaming as is until Nintendo told them they were. And considering how utterly horrible the last few years of the Cube were if THAT is your only view of what "traditional gaming" has to offer then no WONDER you want someone to completely rehaul everything.
Regarding MS caring, they seem to... for now. They're MS so I don't trust them worth a damn. They always do a good job when they're fighting for the number one spot. Once they get it they turn into the great dictator and use whatever dirty tactics they can to maintain control. I don't trust any company with interests outside of gaming with the market leader position. Sony used to be a gamer's best friend at one point themselves.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 18, 2006, 12:40:48 PM
Post by: IceCold on September 18, 2006, 12:55:13 PM
QuoteYet that didn't stop those DS games from selling through the roof.. And also, you're over-exaggerating there; I See plenty of new "traditional" games for both the Wii and the DS. There certainly are more new IPs on the Wii than there were on the GameCube at this point in its life..
Contrary to what Nintendo thinks, traditional gamers aren't just interested in the same damn sequels again and again (funny how every Wii or DS game that people point to as a "traditional" game is a sequel).
Post by: Deguello on September 18, 2006, 12:55:18 PM
And this false dichotomy has GOT to stop. Nintendo is not abandoning "hardcore gamers" just because Nintendogs and Wii Sports exist. It's really foolish to even think that. And it's even harder to actually abandon "hardcore gamers," because a definition for what those actually are remains elusive. "Non-gamer" is easy; that's somebody who has never played a videogame before. But hard core gamer appears to be much more difficult to pin down. IGN Playstation guy says it's a game that doesn't sell well and has strange concept and controls. Damn, the DS just missed that first one, guess it isn't hardcore, then. Oh, but here we have Billy saying Twilight Princess is hardcore, and it's a sequel, and it weill undoubtedly sell well, it has no strange concept and has regular controls. This is really getting tough.
This ever contorting definition is indicative of clique-ish nonsense that should have stayed in high school. Unless all you "hardcores" can band together and agree on a definition for what that actually is, it's almost safe to say that hardcore gamers actually do not exist. "Nongamers" do however. And their numbers are many. So many in fact, that they always outnumber any one man's definition of hardcore.
For example:
Madden sells about 2-3 milion every year. Are these people not hardcore? Are you going to write them a letter saying so? Will they disagree? More importantly, will they even care?
Pokemon was similarly accused of being more after little kid "non-gamers" than after the hardcore Game Boy onwers market in 1998 (if you can even fathom that). And it goes on to destroy other games. Anybody who claims the FFVII introduced more people to RPGs is lying by omission. Final Fantasy is small potatoes compared to Pokemon, as evidenced with Ruby/Sapphire being the worldwide best-selling game this current generation, yes that's right, even over Final Fantasy X and GTA. Are you going to send them memos saying that they are not hardcore? Again, will they even care?
And speaking of those two, FFVII sold WAY more than previous entries, and unless Final Fantasy fans found a way to clone themselves I'd say they dipped into the non-gamer pool. GTA is an even greater example. GTA II sold peanuts compared to GTA III, unless every Pre-GTA III fan bought ten copies of it. If not, they obviously dipped into the non-gamer pool as well. Are you going to send them letters as well? Will they care what you think?
Some of these fans have always said that Nintendo should either be more like themselves from eras past or be more like their direct competition. Ok, they are doing that. The Playstation built is empire on the backs of non-gamers, the majority chunk of their userbase's fanbase had never played a video game before, much less a Nintendo one. Can you guess what else built its kingdom on non-gamers? That's right, the NES. All of these "Old-schoolers" had to come from somwhere. You guys act like appealing to non-gamers is a new thing when it is actually the standard operating procedure. Just the very fact that things that were not popular before are suddenly popular and vice versa MEANS that there are gamers leaving and non-gamers entering, because in my experience, only two things are bulletproof. Mario and Pokemon, and I better not jinx either of them by saying that.
I mean seriously, does it make you feel cool to act all jaded and discarded all the time? I remember this pity party before the DS launched and it seems that the rest of the world left you "hardcores" behind again. You may have called Nintendo and the Non-gamers raving lunatics before, but now it is you who are on an island, damning the sky for not being more like the sea.
Post by: Nick DiMola on September 18, 2006, 12:58:12 PM
I think traditional game is a term being thrown around here and it means something different to each one of us. I consider a traditional game to be a 2-D platformer because that is what I grew up with during the glory days of the NES. But I guess traditional game could be anything with a standard controller (ie not Wii). I'm not really sure.
"Fair enough but I'm not of the attitude that attracting non-gamers was a requirement for innovation, nor was completely rehauling a working control model"
I agree with what you are saying here Ian, but it also seems that if Nintendo didn't change their mission statement they would be buried very fast by their competitors. Had Nintendo gone into this console war with the same arsenal as the PS3 and 360 it would've looked like last generation only worse. I think Nintendo's change to appeal to a new customer base has refocused the company and that all began with the DS. I think the DS demonstrates how cool new controls can be and how much appealing to non-gamers helps the real gamers. If it weren't for some of the runaway hits such as Nintendogs would so many companies be dying to make games for the DS? I think(hope) the same happens for the Wii.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 18, 2006, 01:02:19 PM
That, AND I'M HARDCORE.
GRRR.
Post by: Kairon on September 18, 2006, 01:16:46 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: JonLeung on September 18, 2006, 01:23:28 PM
Post by: The Omen on September 18, 2006, 01:27:19 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
Rick had it correct; Nintendo is not the same company anymore. Their changes are leaving the old-school behind. If you're enamored with the "new Nintendo," of course you have nothing to worry about. But don't dismiss those of us that fell for the old Nintendo and still hold more adoration for that company.
Honestly, i'd say it's more like the "old school" is leaving Nintendo behind. What does "old school" want? Isn't that fun games, games with "gameplay", games with character, etc... And now just because they don't do Hi-Def or DVD you'll pass on the games/system/company? I'd say it's "old-school" that has changed and wants to move on now / wants to dismiss Nintendo.
I want all the new bells and whistles because that means I'm getting rewarded for my singular support of Nintendo. But I also want them to keep making the games in the style they always have. The old school NES fans like myself don't consider graphics the number 1 priority, but we do want them to at least be comparable with other consoles on the market. We want it all, because we used to have it all. It's hard to accept that Nintendo sees us as the blind loyalists, knows we'll be there to buy everything, and worries more about appealing to non-gamers when we have basically drove their business for 25 years. I understand it...but I don't like it.
Post by: Kairon on September 18, 2006, 01:35:33 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: The Omen
We want it all, because we used to have it all.
Ahhh, nostalgia. The seedbed of delusion.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Ian Sane on September 18, 2006, 01:36:45 PM
Until Nintendo started talking about non-gamers the term "traditional game" didn't exist. Games were games, made for people who like games. Now that Nintendo has introduced the term "non-gamer" and "non-game" some sort of term had to be made up for everything else. I would consider a traditional game as one not designed specifically with attracting non-gamers in mind. It's the sort of game that if Nintendo had never given this non-gamer stuff thought would probably still have been made.
It is true that everyone initially didn't play games and then at some point was introduced to them. That happens with any interest. I think the difference here is that there is a very deliberate effort to attract newcombers using products specifically created for them. In the past it didn't really work that way. Some games like Tetris attracted tons of people who normally didn't play games but they weren't designed specifically for that purpose. The idea was to make a fun game that would sell well and in some cases a game had wide appeal and managed to attract a bigger audience.
One thing that makes it seems so different is that Nintendo is changing so much and has talked so much about their "plan". They talk about making things simpler and less intimidating and redesigning things (like the controller for example) specifically for the purpose of attracting non-gamers. I'm all for inviting new people to play games but not for CHANGING gaming so that people that never cared will be interested. No one in the past was suggesting such a massive change specifically to attract people who don't care about gaming in the first place. This is why some have taken such a defensive stance. Nintendo has told us that what we like is broken and they're going to fix it. If someone told you your favourite band or TV show needed retooling how would you respond?
If Nintendo never said anything specifically about this non-gamer stuff and just did it, maybe no one would complain.
To me the whole thing is like a major sports league complety changing the whole design of their sport to attract a wider audience. Changing a little rule here or there to increase the accessability or excitement of a game isn't that big of a deal. Removing dribbling from basketball to get more people to play however would be considered an extreme. To me that's borderline what Nintendo is doing.
Post by: Kairon on September 18, 2006, 02:54:27 PM
I mean, the mantra of great gameplay has always been easy to learn, difficult to master. Doesn't the drive to simplify interfaces for non-gamers fit into that? It's definitely easier to learn how to swing a tennis racket, and it is DEFINITELY also harder to master. Doesn't this slide right into traditional oldschool Nintendo philosophy?
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Ian Sane on September 18, 2006, 03:05:19 PM
There are lots of games out there that are too complicated for their own damn good. Nintendo however isn't making these games. I find that their games have always had simple interfaces for what are really quite complex games. Fire Emblem is pretty much the only Nintendo game that I think doesn't already have a simple interface. So if Nintendo thought that the games they were already making were too complicated then what do they think isn't? They're overcompensating. Much like how Nintendo makes games that were already easy needlessly easier in re-releases they're making games that were already user-friendly more user-friendly for no reason. Mario Kart isn't complicated so when Nintendo tried to simplify more we got Kirby Air Ride. There's the problem.
Post by: Kairon on September 18, 2006, 03:37:16 PM
The Mantra's first clause refers to how easy it is to control/understand/use the game's basic mechanics. It is in this field that Nintendo's advancedments ala touchscreen and Wiimote have contributed.
The Mantra's second clause refers to depth, how much advancement is available for players to play through into once they've learned how to basically play the game. Not much in a game like Kirby's Air Ride, but let's take a look at some games that have simplified interfaces while deepening gameplay at the same time shall we?
The New Tetris (N64): Very simple instructions: rotate and fit pieces to clear solid lines, D-pad and 3 action buttons (easy to learn), but the block-building added a whole new dimension to it (difficult to master)
Super Mario Bros. 3 (NES): simple goal: reach the end without dying. platformer with 2 buttons and a D-pad, (easy to learn) but with brilliant and challenging level design, platformer puzzles, great power-ups and CHOCK FULL OF SECRETS. (hard to master)
DDR (various): extremely simple concept, step on the arrows in time with the beat. (easy to learn) But, with faster songs, freezes, and complicated step patterns that must be executed in specific manners if you want to avoid tripping... (difficult to master) (don't be fooled, this is a hardcore game at higher levels)
Diablo (PC): extremely easy interface: point and click to attack, and play tetris in your inventory (easy to learn). With randomized dungeons, lewt, sockets, and PvP, this game is definitely hardcore (hard to master)
Hmm... Tetris? Mario? DDR? Maybe even Diablo? These games show how a simple interface doesn't preclude deep gameplay, and when combined lead to great success. For a further discussion of this with specific attention to old platformers versus new ones, read this Gamasutra article.
The thing about Kirby's Air Ride is that Nintendo, being stuck to the traditional controller, lost game depth when they tried for Miyamoto's "one-button" game. But now with a game like Wii Sports Boxing, Nintendo has basically revolutionized the interface to create a ZERO-BUTTON game that ANYONE can pick up, yet has a serious amount of depth, especially if you want to take it out of the fast 3 x 1 minute Player vs Player rounds of Wii Sports and build a hardcore Punch-Out out of the same exact gameplay.
Again, we see how the interface was key in allowing Nintendo to break the lower barriers of traditional control in using simpler interfaces, and still retain enough context and input stream (A developer used that term in E32006!) to create meaningful interactions and deep gameplay.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 18, 2006, 03:37:33 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"I mean, the mantra of great gameplay has always been easy to learn, difficult to master. Doesn't the drive to simplify interfaces for non-gamers fit into that?"
There are lots of games out there that are too complicated for their own damn good. Nintendo however isn't making these games. I find that their games have always had simple interfaces for what are really quite complex games. Fire Emblem is pretty much the only Nintendo game that I think doesn't already have a simple interface. So if Nintendo thought that the games they were already making were too complicated then what do they think isn't? They're overcompensating. Much like how Nintendo makes games that were already easy needlessly easier in re-releases they're making games that were already user-friendly more user-friendly for no reason. Mario Kart isn't complicated so when Nintendo tried to simplify more we got Kirby Air Ride. There's the problem.
Yeah Ian, but there was also Mario Kart, one did not cancel out the other, both games ended up being released. The same is applying to all these "non-games" and "traditional games" we are ending up getting MORE, not less of both.
Post by: trip1eX on September 18, 2006, 03:48:24 PM
He's only hearing the negative part (to him anyway) of Nintendo's message. He's only hearing the non-gamer part. The simple controller part. .....
He doesn't look at the positive. The positive in this case for him would be that only 1 or 2 NIntendo Wii titles that have been shown or announced are directly targeted at non-gamers and that probably 10 are aimed at core gamers. The positive would be (for him again) that there's far more core gamer titles on the DS than non-gamer titles and that there's plenty of titles that use mostly GBA type controls.
He doesn't hear the part where Nintendo says 'we are catering to core gamers' still. (Nintendo btw has always tried to cater to everyone.)
He doesn't hear that the controller is intended to give the core gamer a new experience.
He doesn't hear that while the remote itself is simple looking, when combined with the nunchuk, it is actually quite advanced for the core gamer as well. More advanced, from what I've seen, then a regular controller.
He doesn't see the Wii exclusive Red Steel launch title. An exclusive 3rd party launch title.
So imo Ian has selective hearing.
To me the Wii and DS have most of the same types of games we've always had. I see a new game or two on top of it. I don't think you argue with this either. Count 'em yourself.
And I see a new way to play those games, but it's not a new way in the sense that there's no buttons or d-pad or analog stick still. There is. Again you can't argue that either.
I see the wiimote as the latest evolution of a controller in much the same way that controllers have always evolved. Perhaps the change is a bit more dramatic than before. But really all Nintendo is doing here is replacing one analog stick with the wii pointer functionality. ON top of it they added in gyros with which they've previously experimented with in GBA games.
I think if you look at it that way then it fits in pretty well with staying traditional and yet being an extension or an evolution of the past. Something that Nintendo has always done with controls. And I think if you look more closer at Nintendo's strategy it takes a similar path. Still quite traditional at it's core and yet branching out into a few new directions well.
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on September 18, 2006, 04:28:26 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"I mean, the mantra of great gameplay has always been easy to learn, difficult to master. Doesn't the drive to simplify interfaces for non-gamers fit into that?"
There are lots of games out there that are too complicated for their own damn good. Nintendo however isn't making these games. I find that their games have always had simple interfaces for what are really quite complex games. Fire Emblem is pretty much the only Nintendo game that I think doesn't already have a simple interface. So if Nintendo thought that the games they were already making were too complicated then what do they think isn't? They're overcompensating. Much like how Nintendo makes games that were already easy needlessly easier in re-releases they're making games that were already user-friendly more user-friendly for no reason. Mario Kart isn't complicated so when Nintendo tried to simplify more we got Kirby Air Ride. There's the problem.
But for many non-gamers those games are not user-friendly. And the thing is, if Nintendo can make games that are easy to control, and yet offer deep and enjoyable gameplay, then I really don't see the problem, MP3 looks to be far more user-friendly than previous incarnations, and yet the gameplay looks fantastic.
Post by: Infernal Monkey on September 18, 2006, 10:13:09 PM
Post by: Kairon on September 18, 2006, 10:29:12 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey
Once again Ian pretends Nintendo has to make every game JUST FOR HIM. Ian is very special. <3
Urgh. That's not what Ian said. At least not this time, lol.
This, I feel, exemplifies the position for Iansane and many oldschool gamers who feel uncomfortable with the "blue-er ocean" Nintendo.
Quote
Originally posted by: IanSane
This non-gamer stuff was something I never saw as a possibility. The idea that Nintendo would target people who don't play games at all was just so odd and unexpected. My thinking was limited entirely to the current game market. This creates the possibility of Nintendo regaining their marketshare and doing so in a way that excludes me. That's not a very comforting thought. In fact it's downright scary. How does one react to that?
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Shift Key on September 18, 2006, 10:51:59 PM
Quote
Nintendo has told us that what we like is broken and they're going to fix it. If someone told you your favourite band or TV show needed retooling how would you respond?
Retool? That word is right up there with synergy on the "Top Buzzwords that I Hate" list.
Your view of all this is so very skewed as someone else said. Its quite sad that you see it this way. For starters, it is not broken. You can still play games the way you want. But they bring out a controller that has a new way of producing input for games. They did not remove the old way of doing things, but gave developers the choice. And yet you wish to discourage this as you don't know what to expect.
I saw a gameplay trailer for Metroid Prime 3 and the comments on there by the player about feeling like he was learning how to play games all over again. That really excites me, because much like the quirkier titles that were seen from Nintendo in recent times, such as DKJB and the Wario Ware series, that different games are fun when done right. My only problem that I can see is that not many aside from Nintendo are doing it often enough. But the launch titles such as Red Steel and other games that I really can't be bothered listing off. To quote Tycho, who puts it better than I ever could:
Quote
Personally, I'm excited by the prospect - but I'm not the type of gamer who needs to assert their pwnership over the medium.
So drop the ego trip. Please. Its so easy to tune out to the same old argument when you've heard it a million times before.
As for the hypothetical question, I'd say go for it. For those who know them, I originally heard RX Bandits on a Vegas Records compilation when they were doing their catchy ska tunes, and went looking for some of their later material and found "The Resignation" - possibly one of the best albums I've heard. Sure, there's a risk that you won't like it, but that comes from being a trailblazer of sorts.
And I guess that's what it comes down to. Do you want to get aboard and see where this leads, or are you happy to sit on the fence and comment on something without actually being involved? The industry has stagnated enough over the past few years as is, and this seems to be the only real innovation. I hope everyone gets behind it as there is a lot of opportunity to produce some fun games.
As for the article, I do see it as insightful. Good on Billy for posting how he sees things. He's a well-respected guy in the industry and I hope that everyone takes note of what he says here.
Post by: Strell on September 18, 2006, 10:56:30 PM
'Cuz I've heard this non-game business for a while. And then I look at my DS collection. The last two games I got from Nintendo were Star Fox and New Super Mario Bros.
Sure I've got things like Nintendogs and Brain Age. But I've got a "hardcore" game every step of the way.
So can we PLEASE stop this nonsense argument? The majority of the games in the latest Wii video are "hardcore."
As for the comment about "what would you think about retooling your favorite band?" What an appropriate question to ask at the time. See, my favorite band is Green Day (shut up, I don't care if you like/hate/love them, this is for sake of argument). And for a while, their music didn't exactly have the punch Dookie had. While I loved all the albums (and still do, and think Warning is horribly underrated), the second American Idiot appeared on the scene, it completely destroyed the interim albums between it and Dookie. It not only went back to their roots, but it upped the entire ante ten fold.
Same idea here. I've said it before and I'm saying it again - Nintendo can do nothing right. If they stayed the same this generation and pumped out another Mario/Zelda/Metroid/Pokemon/Pikmin with a traditional controller, everyone would call them stale. And when they try something new, everyone says how it's so crazy that they can't handle it, and how they wish they'd just stay the course.
You can't have it both ways. You can't move forward and backward. Nintendo hasn't done any advancing for a while, and if they had continued down that path, they'd continue to lose marketshare.
Nintendo is tired of moving backward. So they took an entirely different path to try and succeed. And right now, they are running light years beyond what they've done since the SNES.
I think a lot of the dissenters need to shut up and play the Wii before they badmouth it any longer. It's been, now, over a year of nothing but bitching from people on the 'net who think this is too wacky and a gimm*ck.
Just try it out for god's sake. I find it hard to believe that you'd STILL think it sucks when near 100% of the people who actually HAVE played it have LOVED IT.
Post by: Mario on September 18, 2006, 10:57:57 PM
Post by: Deguello on September 18, 2006, 11:03:19 PM
Quote
This creates the possibility of Nintendo regaining their marketshare and doing so in a way that excludes me.
See? Right there. That's pretty crystal clear, IMO. And then he follows up with this turd:
Quote
That's not a very comforting thought. In fact it's downright scary. How does one react to that?
He goes from speaking about himself to asking how others would react to his feeling. And seriously, why is this "scary" to him? I have had to put up with his complaints for years and his ever shifting opinion and suggestions for how Nintendo should gain marketshare and then when they finally look poised to do it, he throws a bitch fit because they are doing it in a way he disapproves of. I mean seriously, it's borderline narcissism. I bet he still thinks the DS is a worthless system with no good games, even though the rest of the people think he is loopy. And I am tired of reading his NASCAR arguments that say the same things over and over and over. It is seriously wearing pretty thin.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 18, 2006, 11:16:04 PM
Post by: BigJim on September 19, 2006, 04:09:47 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Strell
Can someone explain to me how Metroid, Zelda, Warioware, Red Steel, Mario Galaxy, etc. are not games for the non-casual (ugh, I guess hardcore) gamer?
Nobody has. The concern from my end is not the existance of core games, and has never even been the existance of non-games. It's the existance of enough AAA core games so that many of us are not just buying games seasonally or semi-annually, as has been the case for many people on GameCube for a good part of its life (ask even some PGC staff and many will say that's been the case).
What people have tried to do in this thread, and others, is try to knock the argument down at every point and in different ways... including ways that are completely off point. GameCube game sales speak for themselves. Nobody buys 3rd party stuff, for example. Because they were ports and/or they sucked. It can't be defended away. Quality tanked and the sales demonstrate it, despite personal feelings of others here that are to the contrary.
People also cite games like Bwii (which is evidently the GCN game that has 77% on GameRankings) and argue that it's AAA and as universally "Nintendo fan" satisfying as, say, a Metroid or Mario. Not gonna happen.
In addition to citing such examples, they also push the notion that more of these types of games will always be coming out. That is obvious and nobody is arguing that. It's also not the point. It they aren't high caliber games, it doesn't matter to everybody if there are 100 of their type being released per month or 1.
My concerns call on Nintendo, 2nd, and 3rd parties to DO BETTER than GameCube. By which I mean more frequent AAA's as explained in the first paragraph. It's never been any more complicated than that. But I'm sure people will find snippets to argue with here too, manipulate context, or even try to forward-argue that "they are doing better" even though there are no products, sales, or finished games to defend yet.
Quote
my favorite band is Green Day
l0ll3rskates.... j/k.
Post by: Infernal Monkey on September 19, 2006, 04:21:52 AM
Post by: Mario on September 19, 2006, 04:24:17 AM
Post by: BigJim on September 19, 2006, 05:18:16 AM
So freaking what if I want more AAA hardcore games than what we got on GameCube? Who doesn't? Why the arguing? People get worked up just because I don't word every post in a rosey, Nintendo-fun-love happy fanboy context. If I say the GCN was lackadaisical, the reaction is OMFG!!! MURDER, MUST DEFEND MOTHERSHIP!!!!one!!!!
To which I say, pull the stick out already. Every reasoning in the book comes up as to why nothing more can be expected than what we get. It's ridiculous. They can take whatever part of "I want more AAA hardcore games" out of context that they want. I feel no guilt whatsoever, nor do I feel guilt if they get so damned worked up over it. I feel pity. Anyone that thinks nothing more can be done, that the GameCube was Nintendo's A-game, I feel extremely sorry for them.
Nintendo is capable of insane awesomeness. We just haven't seen it in while.
Post by: Mario on September 19, 2006, 05:56:45 AM
Quote
From my standpoint, I was never trying to argue.
I never implied that, I said non-argument.
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on September 19, 2006, 06:13:42 AM
Post by: Khushrenada on September 19, 2006, 07:17:53 AM
Post by: BigJim on September 19, 2006, 07:22:06 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Mario
Nobody's getting worked up, and just because you haven't seen it in a while, doesn't mean everyone else hasn't. Saying "we" includes others with differing opinion who will want to respond and correct their own opinion.Quote
From my standpoint, I was never trying to argue.
I never implied that, I said non-argument.
85% of the REAL market of h@rdcore gamers hasn't seen it, cuz kiddi3 Nintards teh suXXors!!!!11one1!
Yes, I think this thread has seen itself to its end. Yay. We got almost nowhere as usual.
Post by: Kairon on September 19, 2006, 07:52:52 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Deguello
Uhh Karion? That is what Ian said. He says it in the quote you selected.Quote
This creates the possibility of Nintendo regaining their marketshare and doing so in a way that excludes me.
See? Right there. That's pretty crystal clear, IMO. And then he follows up with this turd:Quote
That's not a very comforting thought. In fact it's downright scary. How does one react to that?
He goes from speaking about himself to asking how others would react to his feeling. And seriously, why is this "scary" to him? I have had to put up with his complaints for years and his ever shifting opinion and suggestions for how Nintendo should gain marketshare and then when they finally look poised to do it, he throws a bitch fit because they are doing it in a way he disapproves of. I mean seriously, it's borderline narcissism. I bet he still thinks the DS is a worthless system with no good games, even though the rest of the people think he is loopy. And I am tired of reading his NASCAR arguments that say the same things over and over and over. It is seriously wearing pretty thin.
Urgh. There's a difference between expressing your personal concerns and using those concerns as a springboard to dictate what other entities should do. Hardcore gamers have a RIGHT to be personally worried about the future of their gaming... and that's what Ian and Billy and others are. But that doesn't extend to being irrational, overly defensive and imperial about it, which Ian and Billy, are not in this thread or that article even though they are still very concerned and troubled and not in line with us kool-aid drinking fanbois.
Me myself? I'm worried that Nintendo will give us another Sunshine, another Mario Kart
D, another Wind Waker. I don't know about you guys, but I haven't played a REAL Nintendo game, a REAL piece of magic since Pikmin. ... or maybe that's my Miyamoto bias showing itself. But I, personally, have been concerned about the future of my gaming ever since 2002.~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Ian Sane on September 19, 2006, 08:18:10 AM
No one is suggesting this. Why is there this assumption that without the remote this is what Nintendo would do? Okay actually that probably is what Nintendo would do but that's not what they had to do or what anyone was suggesting they do. If Nintendo had released some killer new games with new concepts with a traditional controller they wouldn't have been called stale.
Any time people mention first party Wii or DS games that are "traditional" it's usually sequel, sequel, spin-off, sequel. Sometimes we get a new game but it's made by an unproven developer that used to make Olsen Twin games. Meanwhile the new first party franchises are stuff like Nintendogs, Brain Age, Electroplankton, and WiiSports. The new stuff is all aimed at non-gamers while all the "traditional" stuff is all sequels. Nintendo thinks that "hardcore" gamers just want the same old sh!t again and again. We DON'T. That stupid attitude is why "Who are you?" was a completely floparoo. Traditional gaming does not mean the same old sh!t again and again even if that's what Nintendo is trying to tell you and seemingly tries to demonstrate. Just because Nintendo's recent "traditional" offerings have been cookie cutter doesn't mean that ALL traditional games are or that Nintendo games even have to be. Nintendo has chosen to be stale because somewhere along the way they thought that all we're interested in are franchises.
That's what I don't like. Yeah I'll get traditional games from Nintendo on the Wii but it will be the same experiences I've had before because Nintendo isn't even trying to make new ones, unless they specifically target non-gamers.
Post by: Kairon on September 19, 2006, 08:18:31 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
Yes, I think this thread has seen itself to its end. Yay. We got almost nowhere as usual.
RAR! I'm a hardcore arguer and I REFUSE to let this thread die. Over my dead freakin' body, more like!
I say we should refocus this argument on the new, revealing REAL concern of hardcore gamers as BigJim discovered:
Put Nintendo aside for a moment, will THIRD PARTIES be back on the Wii to give us core gaming? Why or why not?
...On one hand we have Red Steel at launch
......but we also have tons of friggin' ports, good ports, but ports!
.........but aren't those ports typical of any console launch anyways? (see X360)
...Oh, but we also have a new control method that will attract development
......already we're seeing this because we've woo-ed Arika and Forever Blue from the PS2
.........and we've got Rayman Raving Rabbids primarily for the Wii
............and we've got Trauma Center and Cooking Mama Wii Games from smaller devs too
...............the DS got Ouendan, maybe the Wii will see similar breakout hits from smaller companies
...............that pursue a nintendo console?
..................and of course there's always Heroes from Grasshopper Manufacture and Suda 51
...but a quick comparison shows that third parties are still dominant on PS3 and X360
......the Wii still has lackluster support or just one or two games from Capcom, Namco, Konami
.........Konami just giving us Elebits? That game is sure to bomb and then drive all Konami support
.........away!
............Capcom is giving us Biohazard, but we all saw how that turned out for the GC: ported to PS2
............soon after, and this time we don't even have a (non-existent) Capcom 5!
...............Namco is giving us... uh... children's franchises? DBZ? Super Deformed children's Gundam?
...............Where's the hardcore Soul Caliber love? The hardcore Gundam love?
...but EA seems to have jumped on board impressively, they seem to know a mass market when
...they see it
......they're giving us Madden at launch, Need For Speed, and a near-dedicated studio in Burnaby,
......B.C. Canada to concentrate on controlers
.........they're also including the Wii with Spore, Sims Island, Godfather (?), NFS: Island, and stuff
............but what about final night? What about some ultra EA Boxingzors?
...unless the Wii performs a miracle, we're not getting Grand Theft Auto. That's a BIG THING
...and how about Nintendo fans, will they buy third party games? They need to because Nintendo
...fanbois have great buying power, just see Phoenix Wright, Trauma Center, Cooking Mama, Soul
...Caliber 2 etc., games where Nintendo fans have driven sales of third party games?
......some people's launch plans only include Zelda, isn't that bad?
.........third-party launch titles include games that are EXPECTED to sell well, like Madden, XBox360
.........bestseller Call of Duty 3, exclusive Red Steel, premiere character game Rayman RR, and more
............if Nintendo fans don't lead the charge on these quality third party titles, can we expect the
............other gamers to pick up our slack?
...............has that EVER worked before?
..................is this buying-only-of-zelda proofpositive that third-parties biggest problem on a
..................Nintendo system is Nintendo games that cannibalize their sales?
Now argue. Argue HARDCORE.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: TerribleOne on September 19, 2006, 08:32:02 AM
My question is to whoever is: how many teams of developers does nintendo have.. cuz getting a "system-seller" per generation is really NOT COOL.
Post by: Strell on September 19, 2006, 08:59:21 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"If they stayed the same this generation and pumped out another Mario/Zelda/Metroid/Pokemon/Pikmin with a traditional controller, everyone would call them stale."
No one is suggesting this. Why is there this assumption that without the remote this is what Nintendo would do? Okay actually that probably is what Nintendo would do but that's not what they had to do or what anyone was suggesting they do. If Nintendo had released some killer new games with new concepts with a traditional controller they wouldn't have been called stale.
Any time people mention first party Wii or DS games that are "traditional" it's usually sequel, sequel, spin-off, sequel. Sometimes we get a new game but it's made by an unproven developer that used to make Olsen Twin games. Meanwhile the new first party franchises are stuff like Nintendogs, Brain Age, Electroplankton, and WiiSports. The new stuff is all aimed at non-gamers while all the "traditional" stuff is all sequels. Nintendo thinks that "hardcore" gamers just want the same old sh!t again and again. We DON'T. That stupid attitude is why "Who are you?" was a completely floparoo. Traditional gaming does not mean the same old sh!t again and again even if that's what Nintendo is trying to tell you and seemingly tries to demonstrate. Just because Nintendo's recent "traditional" offerings have been cookie cutter doesn't mean that ALL traditional games are or that Nintendo games even have to be. Nintendo has chosen to be stale because somewhere along the way they thought that all we're interested in are franchises.
That's what I don't like. Yeah I'll get traditional games from Nintendo on the Wii but it will be the same experiences I've had before because Nintendo isn't even trying to make new ones, unless they specifically target non-gamers.
Sigh, here we go again.
No one is saying the controller is required to make new gameplay experiences. On the same token, people like you shouldn't be saying it's unnecessary. There's no way to tell right now in the first year if it's going to give us amazing new experiences. It took a year on the DS, and it will take a year with the Wii. So you need to give it some time instead of being so closeminded about how it's incapable of doing something based on the fact that the first round of games are sequels/semi-sequels.
As for new concepts, they've tried to do so with their franchises. Metroid Prime 2 didn't sell because "it was too much like Prime," despite the fact that there's only two damn games in that franchise in 3D. The waterpack, which was actually really damn cool, eventually got tons of negativity hurled at it. Two racers on Double Dash likewise the same. Mario Party with a microphone was hated from the getgo (I never found out if the game worked well or not, but the point stands). Jungle Beat, despite being an amazing game, was a total flop.
So the innovation and attempts to be as such have been there, whether you like them or admit to them or not.
Do you own Chibi Robo? Odama? Mario DDR? Battalion Wars? Did you buy Viewtiful Joe and RE4 when they were exclusive? Did you get Pikmin 2?
It's no wonder Nintendo doesn't make a partygame Tennis game with new characters, because no one would buy it. And when they secure a few exclusives, no one buys them either. All of those games up there aren't the best in the world, but they are all easily solid games, and easily comparable to PS2 and Xbox games.
So then Nintendo gets a lot of flack tossed their way about how they don't innovate, don't give us anything new, and eventually just throw us Mario Sports. But they have tried, and everyone screams at how they are ruining franchises, how their new additions break the game, etc etc.
Well if you're not going to rent or buy the above, but you'll pay attention to Mario Sports, how is that Nintendo's fault?
Again, only N gets blamed for this to the degree they do, when Playstation has a new Daxter title every 6 months, followed by Daxter Sequel of the Year 2, which is just a Jak sequel. Microsoft sees fit to release new maps to games that are 2-3 years old, or recreate it with Lizardmen, or rerelease it in an LE with a whole 10 minutes of new stuff, or just send tons of patches downt he line.
I mean, I listen to people bitch about wanting Mario 64 2. They don't get it, but Sunshine appears. Then people bitch about how it's not Mario 64 2 AND bitch about how they want another Mario Platformer. So Nintendo offers up Galaxy. BUT PEOPLE BITCH IT'S A SEQUEL.
Wtf. You can't have it all 42 f*cking ways about how it's a sequel, but it's not a sequel you want, but it doesn't innovate, and if it does innovate the innovation sucks, or how it doesn't have this one exact small thing you want so bad, about how you wanted another sequel by now, etc etc etc etc.
It doesn't f*cking work that way. If people would shut up and take a look back at Sunshine, they'd actually see that it is getting dogged mercilessly from the "hardcore" crowd. And for what? 2 basic things - poor camera and some repetitive level structure. But god damn, the last time I played it, it still was amazing. Huge variety of things to do, absolutely incredibly level design, beautiful graphics, and silky controls. I learned how to deal with the camera because, gasp, I've been playing 3D games for several years now, so that doesn't matter. And the level design was more repetitive than I'd like, but it was eons further than all its competitors.
This is the sort of thing I'm talking about. You can't make N fans happy. They hate Wind Waker's graphics, but hate TP's as well. They don't like Chibi Robo because of how simple it looks. They say they love Pikmin, but they don't buy it or support the sequel. They don't get new IPs like Drill Dozer or Batallion Wars, and then whine when Nintendo apparently doesn't care about making new IPs. They refuse to buy Smash Bros because it lacks a certain character. They call Project Hammer and Disaster terrible games without knowing a thing about them, despite the fact that they will definitely be new IPs designed for the hardcore crowd.
There's so many people sitting there talking about how they think Nintendo has forgotten the traditional gamer, when absolutely everything they've done in the last several years has been nothing but pure devotion to that subset of the gaming population. The controller itself is proof of this - it is meant to simply AND immerse. Do you honestly understand how DIFFICULT it is to reach that sort of sweet spot? It hardly EVER happens in ANY industry. And yet STILL people call Nintendo this clueless, oafish company that hasn't gotten a clue, DESPITE doing things like spreading their franchises around, trying to actively solicit exclusives, and worry more about gaming substance than flashiness. They are the one company who has reevaluated themselves AND listened to ALL of their customers AND tried to help ALL of them, but STILL GET TORN APART LEFT AND RIGHT.
As a company, they've heard one thing in the last couple of years, and it's that NO GAME is good enough at this point.
And they got f*cking tired of it.
What else does Nintendo think about their so-called hardcore crowd when they refuse to touch half the traditional games they've brought out? Or refuse to try sequels with innovations to their design?
That group is nothing but a lot of talk and a lot of hot air. And they make up such a small fraction at this point that Nintendo might as well abandon them almost fully. And yet they won't. There's going to be new IPs, there's going to be more third party support, and there's going to be hardcore games coming down the pipeline for a while. And yet people will STILL find a way to spin it against that. That's hardcore muthaf*cking devotion from the big N, who years ago could have just EA'd and Insomniac'd and Naughty Dog'd and Polyphony'd and Bioware'd and Bungie'd it up to the end of time.
You call Mario Baseball a weaksauce sequel and spinoff because you want to tell yourself its an okay excuse on why to avoid those games. But they are incredible games. Huge party games with amazing multiplayer potential, and decent, polished single player.
That's just silly.
For as ungrateful as an audience as many people are, Nintendo could have just as easily made Mario expansion packs for the last 10 years. Or they could drop it all and make nothing but Brain Age.
And yet neither of those things are happening.
This is such a stupid argument I can't believe it's been going on for the last several years.
Post by: Kairon on September 19, 2006, 09:01:38 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: TerribleOne
My question is to whoever is: how many teams of developers does nintendo have.. cuz getting a "system-seller" per generation is really NOT COOL.
First off, here's a decent in-depth examination of Nintendo's American NST development resources, and here's one that looks at Nintendo's fame EAD following a 2005 restructuring of EAD's divisions by Satoru Iwata. Keep in mind this doesn't include other Nintendo-affiliated divisions like Tokyo (which made Donkey Kong Jungle Beat and is now working on Mario Galaxies), Retro (which I would estimate at more than 120 people with two projects underway), smaller entities like Marigul(if they even still exist), or HAL.
You're making the assumption that Nintendo works like other developers. They don't. Nintendo always prototypes and builds internal technical demos and proof-of-concept demos first, then only later creates a team for a game. For example, Zelda: OoT had several small groups of people working on demos before they actually started making the game: one group did a swordfighting demo, another did a horse demo, etc. Only after all these demos had been done well did Nintendo seem to fully commit to making the game. Zelda: OoT officially featured a staff of 200+ people and was 2.5 years in development.
Likewise, Nintendo devoted energy to the 100 Mario's test on the GC that never became a game. But that tech demo (and the Mario 128 experiments which were never a real game) was a testing ground for concepts for games from Pikmin to Excite Truck to Mario Galaxies years later.
Why does Nintendo do this? Because this development process lets them create games that truly excel. These tech demos are the beginning concept and technical sketches that artists make before their one great painting. Davinci made endless studies and concepts and earlier versions before he finally sat down to make his masterpieces. You can't just sit down and paint the Mona Lisa, just like you can't gather 200 random people and just decide without any prior though that you'd make the most critically perfect game ever created (Zelda
oT). There's a lot of homework and trial and error and time and effort and sweat and blood and tears that goes into it even BEFORE that moment.Now, EAD is believed to be 300 or 400+ people strong, and Nintendo has many other internal or close-to-internal groups within it. This is probably one of the largest companies in videogames. But it's evident that if they had to support a console all by themselves, we'd see Nintendo releases much like the N64 without Rare. Making games is seriously hard business, especially when Nintendo quality titles typically take 150+ people to do, when next-gen third party launch titles have anywhere from 80-100 people working full tilt for 1.5 years, and when at E3 developers are conceivably talking of in the future having teams of 400 people just to keep up with the pace of technology and graphics and artistic content. (incidentally, you've stumbled upon one of the major appeals of the blue ocean and long-tail non-gamer strategies: non-gamer games are easier to make and much more profitable: Brain Training sold 3 million copies in Japan alone, but took only 10 people 4 months to create) (you've also stumbled upon one of the reasons that Nintendo doesn't want to push the graphics envelope: great graphics take humongous teams plenty of time... unless you want to use the exact same engine that every other game is using (Unreal 3?) and pay another company licensing fees that cut into your profits.)
Nintendo has all the high quality employees you could ask for Terrible. Probably the only company with more game employees is EA. But they're in the business of making masterpieces, not ports. They're in the business of making great games, not ordinary ones. And with that in mind, I don't think Nintendo's great system sellers will ever come out frequently enough to suit your, or my, wishes.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Ceric on September 19, 2006, 09:01:44 AM
To many super long post throughout this whole thread. Not very interesting...Also Strell I've never seen you use the word burninate.
Post by: Artimus on September 19, 2006, 09:02:59 AM
I hate the presumption that making amazing game is simply a matter of choice. It's so naive.
Post by: Kairon on September 19, 2006, 09:09:12 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ceric
Suck it up. We're hardcore arguers.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Kairon on September 19, 2006, 09:22:17 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
Ian, Nintendo IS releasing killer new games with new concepts. They're using the remote to do so.
I hate the presumption that making amazing game is simply a matter of choice. It's so naive.
Yeah Ian, I also share this criticism. As a Nintendo/Miyamoto fanboi I liked, but felt disappointment with Sunshine, Wind Waker, and Mario Kart: DD. I don't know why some of us look back on these titles with wistful feelings(edit: used to read "glazed eyes"). These games were good, but they LACKED MAGIC. On the GC, I still feel like only the first Pikmin had that Nintendo magic. (or maybe I'm just Miyamoto-biased)
If it was as easy as choosing to make great games, then I wouldn't have been on the verge of falling out of fandom with Nintendo in 2003. Instead, I personally believe that the GC represented Nintendo ideologically stuck, philosophically blocked, stagnating because they had reached a plateua and had no where else to go. We all expected the magic of OoT and Mario 64. Unrealistic? Maybe, but Nintendo themselves also were unsatisfied with what happened instead. This is why I believe that Nintendo pioneered the DS and Wiimote. This is why I believe they took a left turn to revolutionize the industry instead of just cruising along.
Necessary? That's subjective and irrelevant, but you have mentioned before that perhaps Nintendo needed this themself more than anything else, and that I think that that would be true. My only corrolary is that in this case what's good for Nintendo is what's good for a lot of gamers and the industry as a whole. With a static industry, a shrinking Japanese market, a senior heavy demographic in every industrialized country, Nintendo's efforts to improve and inspire themselves will have beneficial effects elsewhere.
And besides, if Nintendo needed the Wiimote only for themselves, only so that they could be inspired again, if we dispensed with everything else and said that Nintendo only needed this new direction so that they could try to deliver the next quantum leap ala Mario 64?
In a way who the Wiimote helps is irrelevant. It seems to have re-energized the creative spirit behind the company, and be damned with where that takes us: an Nintendo that is inspired to achieve is better than one that feels creatively dead and is cowed to play it safe generation after generation.
If it takes a Wiimote for Nintendo to feel confident enough to reach for the stars again, then I as a Nintendo fan can see that only as good news.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Edit: edited "glazed eyes" to wistful feeling to try to avoid misinterpretation, but probably just ended up confusing the issue some more. What exactly are wistful feelings?
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 19, 2006, 09:26:53 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on September 19, 2006, 10:27:07 AM
Chibi Robo - No. Just didn't catch my interest. Average reviews.
Odama - No because reviews and impressions said it wasn't any good.
Mario DDR - Yep.
Battalion Wars - No. Average reviews.
Viewtiful Joe - Yep. I didn't really like it actually though I can see why others did.
Resident Evil 4 - No and I honestly don't know why I haven't played it yet.
Pikmin 2 - F*ck yeah. Best game on the Cube and one of the Nintendo's best ever.
I never said Nintendo chooses to make good games or bad ones but just that they choose if they make sequels or not. On the Cube they often chose to make a sequel or a Mario spinoff. That's the choice I'm talking about. They honestly didn't try too many new concepts out on the Cube and the "Who are you?" ad campaign makes it pretty obvious that they were franchise happy. I do agree though that at the very least the remote has inspired them to try new stuff out, even if I don't feel the controller was required to do that or is even a better design.
And the whole solution was weird to begin with. "We didn't sell enough Cubes. That's because our controller was too intimidating for non-gamers." Huh? How does that make any sense? Do they honestly think THAT was the problem? How are they ever going to improve if they're so utterly clueless about what the real problems were? Aside from online support (which is still goofy since they reportedly haven't given third parties info about it yet) they haven't really addressed the problems with the Cube. Instead they're just doing something weird and different and introducing some new problems like super expensive controllers, no HD support, inferior hardware specs, and an incredibly awful name.
I only felt optimistic about Nintendo's chances when the PS3 price was revealed.
Post by: IceCold on September 19, 2006, 10:39:07 AM
QuoteIan, as I mentioned before, your theory doesn't account for the fact that those traditional DS sequels have sold HUGE. Not to mention that, in Japan especially, it's the "non-games" which gave the DS such a large userbase, assuring that future games would sell well. Their strategy is really working out on the handheld..
Any time people mention first party Wii or DS games that are "traditional" it's usually sequel, sequel, spin-off, sequel. Sometimes we get a new game but it's made by an unproven developer that used to make Olsen Twin games. Meanwhile the new first party franchises are stuff like Nintendogs, Brain Age, Electroplankton, and WiiSports. The new stuff is all aimed at non-gamers while all the "traditional" stuff is all sequels. Nintendo thinks that "hardcore" gamers just want the same old sh!t again and again. We DON'T. That stupid attitude is why "Who are you?" was a completely floparoo. Traditional gaming does not mean the same old sh!t again and again even if that's what Nintendo is trying to tell you and seemingly tries to demonstrate. Just because Nintendo's recent "traditional" offerings have been cookie cutter doesn't mean that ALL traditional games are or that Nintendo games even have to be. Nintendo has chosen to be stale because somewhere along the way they thought that all we're interested in are franchises.
Also, we ARE getting new "traditional" IPs on both the Wii and the DS. On Wii, Red Steel, HEROES, Project HAMMER, Disaster, Elebits, Wing Island, and Excite Truck, to name a few. And this doesn't even include some of the unnamed projects which are confirmed to be new concepts. Maybe you're not interested in any of those, but you can't deny that they're there.. The Wii has many more new IPs than the Cube had at this point in its cycle.
Post by: Kairon on September 19, 2006, 10:40:19 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
And the whole solution was weird to begin with. "We didn't sell enough Cubes. That's because our controller was too intimidating for non-gamers." Huh? How does that make any sense? Do they honestly think THAT was the problem? How are they ever going to improve if they're so utterly clueless about what the real problems were? Aside from online support (which is still goofy since they reportedly haven't given third parties info about it yet) they haven't really addressed the problems with the Cube. Instead they're just doing something weird and different and introducing some new problems like super expensive controllers, no HD support, inferior hardware specs, and an incredibly awful name.
I only felt optimistic about Nintendo's chances when the PS3 price was revealed.
Nintendo's thinking outside the box IanSane. Why fight for diminishing returns over the same consumers when you can gain a new market? Blue Ocean is an appealing strategy to sell more no matter how you look at it.
And you neglect to consider how hardcore online services, HD support, strong hardware specs, etc. are all factors that mean that the XBox sells at $400 ($300 version doesn't count because it ends up costing more to hardcore gamers) and MS is STILL selling them at a loss, so much so that they're trying to rejigger the tech NOT to lower the price to consumers, but to lower losses to THEMSELVES.
You wonder in amazement at the PS3 price. If Nintendo had done all those things that you wish they did, the GameCube 2 would be right up there at $400 or higher. Ian, you neglect to see how by following your advice, Microsoft has a console they're hemmorhaging money on for another 5 years and with which they may actually LOSE ground compared to the XBox and PS3 has a console that is ridiculously priced and ridiculously difficult to manufacture.
Nintendo's dodged a bullet.
But after all that, I still find it strange that you don't like the XBox 360. If I was a regular Hardcore gamer, the XBox 360 would be the perfect console for me (aside from hardware failures), what with GTA 4 coming out on it and excellent FPS, sports, and action titles on it and everything. Plus, while $600 is a ridiculous price, $400 is just fine for a hardcore gamer like me. I'd even appreciate MS' mandate that even XBLA games must be high-definition. MS really seems to have played this next-generation according to all your desires Ian... haven't they?
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: TerribleOne on September 19, 2006, 11:11:27 AM
and i posted the developer question earlier because from a business aspect i dont understand why the system selling nintendo games are rare to find sequels for... mario gets whored but we get no mario 128... the most bought game for cube (smash bros.) comes out at the beginnin of the system's life and never drops a sequel... zelda got delayed like crazy... no pokemon rpg ((um duhh?)... no true starfox 64 sequel and the new I.P.'s were nonexisting... if miyamoto didnt create it... it didnt exist
Post by: Nick DiMola on September 19, 2006, 11:43:45 AM
Very few of us in these forums actually have picked up a Wii controller and experienced the systems. So for 2 seconds stop bitching and wait to see what happens. If Nintendo screws up again all of you whiners can try and find a new company that offers what you want out of a videogaming experience.
Post by: Ian Sane on September 19, 2006, 11:51:29 AM
I personally don't care for the Xbox "brand" because it is very American centric and I'm not that interested in American games. I strongly prefer Japanese games. I'm not totally cool with the X360. I don't like how they have two versions. That just splits the userbase. The wireless controllers, HD AV cable, network cable and headset should be optional and there should be just ONE version that works with all accessories. Their backwards compatibility is a joke. And while I don't like how Nintendo doesn't allow any HD support at all MS isn't doing much better by forcing it. Devs should have the freedom to choose if they want to support HD or not. The only thing you should be forced to do is have the game playable on normal TVs. I think MS also released a console too soon. They should have waited until 2006 to give the Xbox a full five year life cycle.
Post by: RickPowers on September 19, 2006, 12:42:49 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"But after all that, I still find it strange that you don't like the XBox 360. If I was a regular Hardcore gamer, the XBox 360 would be the perfect console for me (aside from hardware failures), what with GTA 4 coming out on it and excellent FPS, sports, and action titles on it and everything. Plus, while $600 is a ridiculous price, $400 is just fine for a hardcore gamer like me. I'd even appreciate MS' mandate that even XBLA games must be high-definition. MS really seems to have played this next-generation according to all your desires Ian... haven't they?"
I personally don't care for the Xbox "brand" because it is very American centric and I'm not that interested in American games. I strongly prefer Japanese games. I'm not totally cool with the X360. I don't like how they have two versions. That just splits the userbase. The wireless controllers, HD AV cable, network cable and headset should be optional and there should be just ONE version that works with all accessories. Their backwards compatibility is a joke. And while I don't like how Nintendo doesn't allow any HD support at all MS isn't doing much better by forcing it. Devs should have the freedom to choose if they want to support HD or not. The only thing you should be forced to do is have the game playable on normal TVs. I think MS also released a console too soon. They should have waited until 2006 to give the Xbox a full five year life cycle.
Boy, I haven't gotten to argue with Ian in a while ... but here goes.
First, the two versions of the Xbox 360 in no way splits the userbase. You are the only person who's even suggested such a thing. Even if they get a Core, they'd still have to get a Memory Card, so it's not a storage issue, which is the only "real" difference between them (I can count on one hand the number of games that require the hard drive to run). But even if it did, why would you care? Are you criticizing the business decision as someone who has knowledge of that, or are you complaining as a gamer who doesn't know which to buy and wants the company to make his decisions for him?
And for the record, even the core version works with all accessories ... and I don't know why you suggested that it doesn't. In fact, the Component cable included with the Core isn't just Component. It has standard Composite as well. That was a brilliant move, because even the "standard AV cable" is HD-Ready when you are. As for the wireless controllers, wasn't it just a short time ago that we were telling Nintendo they should make the Wavebird standard? This isn't a situation where Microsoft released a "standard" console and a cheaper crippled version like Sony is doing. The "Premium" set is pretty much a "Value Pack", the Core system is the standard version. Just like you said, the other accessories are all optional.Nintendo is not disallowing HD support. The console simply can't do it, and it was a conscious choice to focus on creating a similar experience for everyone, as well as keeping costs down. Do I wish that they had been more forward-thinking? Sure, but it is what it is, but don't couch your criticism by suggesting that Wii can do HD and Nintendo just won't let them (if you want to make that argument, talk about Online support). Microsoft's forcing HD support is also a non-issue, since what they're doing it setting a standard (the same thing you argued for at the beginning of the post, to an extent), and by setting that standard, they can allow the Xbox 360 to automatically scale. For the record, I've got an Xbox 360 and a standard-def TV, and it works wonderfully. So again, are you complaining about Microsoft "forcing HD" from a developer's standpoint, or from a consumer confusion standpoint? (In fact, from a business standpoint, I think standardizing Xbox 360 as an HD platform is what killed the PS3. It forced Sony into a game of oneupsmanship in terms of feature set, and now their console is far too overpriced for the mass market. Nintendo was wise to stay out of that particular slap-fight.)
As for Microsoft releasing the console too soon ... Microsoft got a one year head start, had a bunch of killer titles right off the bat, as well as a steady stream of titles since, and is generating boat-loads of money through Xbox Live Marketplace. How did launching early HURT them? Sure, sales suck in Japan, but you know what? Microsoft probably won't succeed in Japan, and they don't need to. Similarly with Nintendo ... they don't need to win over the Xbox or Sony fans to be a success.
It seems like your arguments are based on ignorance (not knowing about the Xbox 360 from personal experience), or emotion. That's fine, but let's not pretend that it's anything other than that.
Post by: Strell on September 19, 2006, 01:01:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
I never said Nintendo chooses to make good games or bad ones but just that they choose if they make sequels or not. On the Cube they often chose to make a sequel or a Mario spinoff. That's the choice I'm talking about. They honestly didn't try too many new concepts out on the Cube and the "Who are you?" ad campaign makes it pretty obvious that they were franchise happy. I do agree though that at the very least the remote has inspired them to try new stuff out, even if I don't feel the controller was required to do that or is even a better design.
And the whole solution was weird to begin with. "We didn't sell enough Cubes. That's because our controller was too intimidating for non-gamers." Huh? How does that make any sense? Do they honestly think THAT was the problem? How are they ever going to improve if they're so utterly clueless about what the real problems were? Aside from online support (which is still goofy since they reportedly haven't given third parties info about it yet) they haven't really addressed the problems with the Cube. Instead they're just doing something weird and different and introducing some new problems like super expensive controllers, no HD support, inferior hardware specs, and an incredibly awful name.
I only felt optimistic about Nintendo's chances when the PS3 price was revealed.
Well the first paragraph only makes sense from the consumer level and not from a business level, and as we've all agreed that Nintendo is a business....
Doesn't change the fact that you sound like you didn't give any of the oddball games any chance though based on reviews. That's like not getting cereal from a grocery store because you don't like one of the stockers working there.
As for the second paragraph, there's just so much wrong there. How is $10 more for a controller far advanced than it's closest competition "super expensive?"
I won't touch the HD argument. The graphics look awesome already.
Inferior hardware specs? See immediate sentence above.
No one cares about the awful name EXCEPT those who don't want the system (i.e., MS/Sony fanboys).
As for their line about "we didn't sell enough Cubes," that is standard PR/market speak. What the hell do you expect them to say? "Gwarsh we shuah f*cked up!" No, they have to deliver a line that still makes it sound like they learned their lesson AND are pledging toward the future.
And finally, standard controllers are awkward. I'd be considered a hardcore gamer, but I hate how FPSes control. HATE it. So I can't measure my joy when I get to actually aim now. I'm great at light gun games, and this is certainly going to satisfy that thurst.
To do the sorts of things with Wii Tennis on a standard controller would require various button presses. To us, it's no big deal. But it's still annoying enough. That one simple motion completely allows for lobs, slices, drop shots, and everything else. AND uses a motion we're all attuned to and can instantly start doing. That IS the definition of making it simpler.
I agree they are making it simpler toward the casual audience. But it also makes it a hell of a lot of fun, and isn't that what the hardcore set wants so badly these days? Fun games?
You're talking in circles. Just stop it and try the Wii out. You have completely dismissed the Wiimote for over a year now and continue to do so by grasping at straws that have nothing to do with the argument at hand.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 19, 2006, 01:26:03 PM
How can a review be a measure of a game's overall worth given the state of today's gaming press?
I thought reviews should be useful for providing insight on components that individual players are personally interested in. BUT IT SEEMS GAME PLAYERS AND GAME REVIEWERS HAVE THE EXACT SAME TASTES. THEREFORE, ANYTHING BELOW 90% ON THOSE STUPID GAME REVIEW STAT SITES ARE AUTOMATIC GARBAGE.
GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO CRITICAL THINKING AND INDIVIDUALITY
BY HIGHLIGHTING THIS SPOILER YOU AGREE TO LOCK THIS THREAD AND TAKE A REVERSE DUMP
Post by: Ian Sane on September 19, 2006, 01:28:59 PM
How is that any different? Nintendo isn't offering the feature.
"It seems like your arguments are based on ignorance (not knowing about the Xbox 360 from personal experience), or emotion."
Ignorance of the Xbox 360 is it. I'm mostly going off of initial info revealed well over a year ago. Splitting the userbase is referencing the hard drive specifically. Any developer that wanted to make specific use of the hard drive can't ensure that every member of the userbase can use it. I don't know if MS even allows this though.
"Doesn't change the fact that you sound like you didn't give any of the oddball games any chance though based on reviews. That's like not getting cereal from a grocery store because you don't like one of the stockers working there."
I see it more like not going to movies that critics sh!t on. I'm not rich and thus don't like spending money on games that several people are telling me are mediocre or poor. And renting Cube games is pretty much not even an option since most rental places have a horrible selection (or literally no Cube games at all). When did avoiding a game because it got lousy reviews suddenly become a bad thing? If these same games were made by someone other than Nintendo you wouldn't give them a chance either.
Post by: ShyGuy on September 19, 2006, 01:45:06 PM
Post by: Kairon on September 19, 2006, 02:36:44 PM
Too bad I don't see what's so great about a lot of their hardcore-esque american style games either. But objectively, they haven't done bad at all. Heck, they've even got 50 dollar new games.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Ian Sane on September 19, 2006, 02:41:10 PM
Okay, I'll agree with that.
Post by: Louieturkey on September 19, 2006, 04:16:22 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
If Xbox could do HD support, Wii probably could. I don't know how well though.
This fact everybody forgets about. Of course, I guess it's not a problem of if the system can output HD, it's a question of did Nintendo put the option into the hardware. Since they most likely did not allow the option in the hardware, the Wii, while powerful enough, does not have the option since it was intentionally left out.
Post by: Mario on September 19, 2006, 04:28:37 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"Do you own Chibi Robo? Odama? Mario DDR? Battalion Wars? Did you buy Viewtiful Joe and RE4 when they were exclusive? Did you get Pikmin 2?"
Chibi Robo - No. Just didn't catch my interest. Average reviews.
Odama - No because reviews and impressions said it wasn't any good.
Mario DDR - Yep.
Battalion Wars - No. Average reviews.
Viewtiful Joe - Yep. I didn't really like it actually though I can see why others did.
Resident Evil 4 - No and I honestly don't know why I haven't played it yet.
Pikmin 2 - F*ck yeah. Best game on the Cube and one of the Nintendo's best ever.
NON-GAMER!
Post by: Nick DiMola on September 19, 2006, 05:08:33 PM
Ian personaly speaking, I read some reviews on this game and they were absolute crap. Me and my fiancee enjoyed this game very much. It was full of personality and a blast to play. To reiterate a point already made, trusting the reviewers of today is crazy. Videogame journalism is a joke and I can't stand the intense bias found in all the major game related sites out there. Word of mouth carries alot more weight for me and the general consensus on Chibi Robo in general was that it was a great game.
Post by: Kairon on September 19, 2006, 05:15:39 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Djunknown on September 19, 2006, 07:02:54 PM
Quote
As for new concepts, they've tried to do so with their franchises. Metroid Prime 2 didn't sell because "it was too much like Prime," despite the fact that there's only two damn games in that franchise in 3D.
I believe Prime bombed at retail for three reasons
1)GTA:SA. GTA fever hit an all time high with record sales.
2)Halo 2: Biggest ad-campaign in recent history and most anticipated seque.l
3)Nintendo was pushing the DS really hard. Understandable, and now justifiable.
Quote
Resident Evil 4 - No and I honestly don't know why I haven't played it yet.
Ian, pick this up when you get a chance. Its a player's choice title, do they have that concept in Canada?
As far as my 2 cents; If Nintendo just released a 'traditional' console, I would have jumped ship (and I guess jump ship from PGC) and not look back. But after revealing the uber-mysterious controller last year, it kept me interested. This time around, I won't be foolish and just buy one console. Billy analyzed the weaknesses in his editorial, so I won't expect the Wii be the end-all console. I won't be jumping the Nintendo boat anytime soon, but I'll be one those Wii60 or PSWii folk.
Post by: Nick DiMola on September 19, 2006, 07:32:57 PM
Without a doubt. There is so much for you to do it's crazy. As with many games, the begininng is tedium but after a short while, mainly after you get out of the living room, all sorts of cool stuff starts to happen, plus a pretty interesting story line. I would advise trying again because you are missing out on one of the most memorable cube games.
Post by: Strell on September 19, 2006, 07:52:35 PM
And then I end up reading it in some sort of crazy Richard Horvitz voice.
"GRAND MASTER BILL-AUGH."
Post by: IceCold on September 19, 2006, 07:56:12 PM
QuoteYeah we do.. Actually, I saw RE4 selling $40 CDN only a month or so after it released (down from $60), and now that it's Player's Choice it's at $30 CDN.. But I remember Ian saying that he wasn't a fan of Resident Evil games.. This one's different, though.
Ian, pick this up when you get a chance. Its a player's choice title, do they have that concept in Canada?
Post by: TerribleOne on September 19, 2006, 08:23:20 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Djunknown
As far as my 2 cents; If Nintendo just released a 'traditional' console, I would have jumped ship (and I guess jump ship from PGC) and not look back. But after revealing the uber-mysterious controller last year, it kept me interested. This time around, I won't be foolish and just buy one console. Billy analyzed the weaknesses in his editorial, so I won't expect the Wii be the end-all console. I won't be jumping the Nintendo boat anytime soon, but I'll be one those Wii60 or PSWii folk.
yea thats how i felt also... i believe after my 360 purchase i've become more patient with nintendo. so now whaterver they want to do in their quirky little world is ok as long as they release what is expected of them..
Post by: trip1eX on September 19, 2006, 09:12:30 PM
Prime 2 bombed I think because the 'Cube was on life support by then. And I don't think the public really really like the first Metroid Prime to tell the truth. Americans much preferred a more traditional fps game like Halo. I was the opposite. I was sick of the same 'ole fps game.
It took me like a year to finish Prime 2. It was a bit too much like the first one. The 1st one tho was a classic. GReat game.
I thoroughly enjoyed my GAmecube experience. I played many many great games. I bought the 'Cube for a dirt cheap $100 with MarioKart
D and a $15 off coupon. I have to say that was a great deal. A total steal. IT's ironic that when the gaming media was calling the 'Cube dead it seemed like the biggest bargain in the world. Cheap price and AAA games you couldn't find elsewhere. I mean by late 2k4 and after it was the time to buy one. By that time you could easily ride out the rest of its lifetime (a couple years) playing nothing but great games for next to nothing. That's why I was always puzzled by the media's recommendations not to buy a 'Cube.
Post by: Svevan on September 19, 2006, 09:53:49 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Mr. Jack
I read some reviews on this game and they were absolute crap. Me and my fiancee enjoyed this game very much. It was full of personality and a blast to play. To reiterate a point already made, trusting the reviewers of today is crazy. Videogame journalism is a joke and I can't stand the intense bias found in all the major game related sites out there.
Cut my heart out with a dull object.
Post by: Deguello on September 20, 2006, 02:27:42 AM
He has become that which he claims others do. He has become the Nintendo he believes existed in 2003.
He releases needless sequels to his own argument.
Post by: Nick DiMola on September 20, 2006, 02:35:22 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: SvevanQuote
Originally posted by: Mr. Jack
I read some reviews on this game and they were absolute crap. Me and my fiancee enjoyed this game very much. It was full of personality and a blast to play. To reiterate a point already made, trusting the reviewers of today is crazy. Videogame journalism is a joke and I can't stand the intense bias found in all the major game related sites out there.
Cut my heart out with a dull object.
Well of course I don't mean PGC :P
Honest to God you guys are the only site on the internet I trust on reviews. I have based many a game purchase on your reviews, something I wouldn't even think of doing for any other game publication, especially Gamespot and IGN. You guys are also particularly great on import reviews, I always check your import reviews before dropping on a ton of cash on an import game. PGC RAWKS!
Post by: couchmonkey on September 20, 2006, 05:35:25 AM
On reviews: Gamerankings has these cool pie charts that show what percentage of reviewers gave the game a score in the 50s, 70s, 80s, etc. If you check out the Battalion Wars pie chart, it shows that more than half of reviewers scored the game 80% or higher. A little more than quarter scored it between 70-80%. It's the few that scored it at 50-70% that brings the average score down to 76%. In other words, you can't just look at the mean average, because as shown in this case, most of the people who played Battalion Wars would definitely recommend the game. (I'd consider 80% or better "recommended").
I also think video game reviews have become wishy-washy. Thanks to the interweb, we now have 100-point scales for game reviews and while I originally thought that was cool, I now realize that it gives people an excuse to ignore good games (it's not a 90), and it gives reviewers an excuse to never give out perfect scores. IGN once answered a letter asking why Metroid Prime's score was lower than Halo's even though Matt thought MP was the better game, and he was forced to admit that the difference between a 9.4 and a 9.6 (or whatever the scores were) is really nonexistant. Let's be honest here: the difference between a 9.7 and a 10 isn't really worth mentioning either.
Post by: Ian Sane on September 20, 2006, 09:13:32 AM
It's not just the high price it's the fact that Cube rental selections are usually really bad. Some places in my area haven't even gotten a new Cube game in since 2003.
Regarding RE4 I'm specifically trying to avoid the Player's Choice version because I hate the yellow stripe.
I'm on the lookout for used copies.
Post by: Kairon on September 20, 2006, 09:17:53 AM
/hides
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: couchmonkey on September 20, 2006, 09:53:32 AM
Post by: Magik on September 20, 2006, 12:52:47 PM
No offense to anybody, but Metroid as an IP is nothing compared to either Halo 2 and Half-Life 2 in terms of popularity.
You don't need to be a genius to realize how retarded it was for Nintendo to release the game between those two games.
Hopefully Nintendo doesn't repeat the same dumb crap with the Wii.
Post by: Ian Sane on September 20, 2006, 02:25:50 PM
That probably didn't help but I think a big factor was the fact that by Christmas 2004 the general public didn't give a sh!t about the Cube. 2004 was pretty much the last year where the Cube had "major" titles coming out on a somewhat regular basis.
Post by: King of Twitch on September 20, 2006, 04:01:12 PM
Post by: Mario on September 20, 2006, 04:34:28 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 20, 2006, 05:24:03 PM
Post by: BiLdItUp1 on September 20, 2006, 05:45:22 PM
--
Does anyone remember what this thread was about? I don't know. This is my take on whatever it was:
The PS2 was the most successful system in the last generation, by and large. I could confidently say that it has been and probably will be for a while the most bought game hardware ever with the largest variety. It is this variety that Nintendo lacked last gen, not just in terms of genre but in terms of games for a genre. How many exclusive platformers did the GC have vs. Sony, just to name an area? FPSs? Roaming games a la GTA? Nintendo last gen abandoned any hopes of even trying to cover these bases by not doing enough to get developers on board. Now, that seems to have changed - but has it? Nintendo fans have been burned so many times in the past that they have a right to be jaded about this stuff. When Nintendo says, 'Oh, this wasn't our fault, we need a new controller', (did they say this?)and doesn't put any focus on making a new franchise or getting third parties to do so, not just in the non-gamer space, but in a traditional genre like racing or FPSs or whatever. At best, they reinvented an old game in Metroid and introduced a new one in Pikmin. I'm not talking about games that cater to fringes. Platforming games, to use the example again, attract a broad segment of gamers; Nintendo only made Sunshine. That isn't variety, and that is part of the problem.
All this seems to be changing with the Wii, but it's too early to tell, and it's too soon to proclaim them saints. If they can deliver on variety, and not just quality, not just in the non-game space, but in the traditional space, then they'll have a very good shot at the number 1 or at least number 2 spot. Disaster and HAMMER are steps in the right direction; so is Red Steel. But right now, I still feel like the Wii is the 'other' console in terms of having a variety of exclusive, traditional games.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 20, 2006, 06:16:59 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 20, 2006, 06:17:07 PM
FIRST IAN, NOW KAIRON?
NEVER PLAYED RE4 YET SPEWS OUT WIND-WACKER-SIZED OCEANS OF TEXT AND OP-ONIONS?
YOUR CREDIBILITIES AS PGC POSTERS HAVE BEEN REVOKED
TOTAL FORUM INVALIDATION ATTACKU!!
I CAN SEE WHO THE NON-GAMERS REALLY ARE.
I GUESS IT ONLY FITS THAT THEY FIND THEIR WAY TO PGC, WEARING DISGUISING SKINS OF HARDCORE NINTENDO FANS.
Post by: WuTangTurtle on September 20, 2006, 07:22:41 PM
Post by: Kairon on September 20, 2006, 07:48:03 PM
This requires copious amounts of research and plenty of caffeine.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: wandering on September 20, 2006, 07:52:56 PM
Quote
I own RE4... but I haven't played it...and my younger bro only got to the village before we dropped it...
/hides
If you want to be a game designer, playing through Resident Evil 4 is a necessity.
Post by: Kairon on September 20, 2006, 07:56:30 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: wandering on September 20, 2006, 08:55:04 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 20, 2006, 09:57:38 PM
Post by: Smoke39 on September 20, 2006, 10:26:32 PM
What're we actually supposed to be talking about here again?
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 20, 2006, 10:53:19 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smoke39
I played it up to Rasputen or whatever his name is, then quit.
What're we actually supposed to be talking about here again?
Lol I THINK it is about that Grand Master guy, but since his arguments were pretty well ripped our minds have wandered hehe
Post by: Deguello on September 21, 2006, 12:25:17 AM
Post by: couchmonkey on September 21, 2006, 06:35:12 AM
The topic at hand was whether or not Wii will continue Nintendo's tradition of failures, and I think the answer is no. There are chinks in the armour, but the biggest weakness - lower-end graphics - is necessary to make the system cheap enough to appeal to the non-gamer audience.
Post by: trip1eX on September 21, 2006, 10:46:31 AM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 21, 2006, 12:08:55 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: trip1eX
SEe I don't think Nintendo has failed except not to be #1 with their console. I think they still remain the largest publisher of games in the world save perhaps EA. I don't think that's exactly failing. PLus they seem to make a profit year and year out have done so for 20 some years. If that's failing then sign me up.
You are probaly right if I remember right I think Nintendo still made profit on GameCube, really the only failure they had was Virtual Boy.
Post by: Nick DiMola on September 21, 2006, 12:13:26 PM
Most underrated system ever. I love my Virtual Boy so much. I think there could've been some awesome games, too bad everybody hated it.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 21, 2006, 12:25:18 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Mr. Jack
"really the onmly failure they had was Virtual Boy."
Most underrated system ever. I love my Virtual Boy so much. I think there could've been some awesome games, too bad everybody hated it.
I'm with yah I loved the Virtual Boy (I bought it when it dropped to 70$ in the stores), it was so unique and the 3D visuals still look amazing even today. Sadly it gave you a headache and was kind of cumbersome to use, which I think hurt it alot.
Post by: Ceric on September 21, 2006, 01:02:16 PM
Post by: IceCold on September 21, 2006, 01:10:56 PM
QuoteYeah - I think they said at E3 '05 that when creating the Revolution (at the time), they had the advantage of looking at it from two perspectives; as the second-largest software publisher and also as the second largest hardware producer..
SEe I don't think Nintendo has failed except not to be #1 with their console. I think they still remain the largest publisher of games in the world save perhaps EA
