Post by: couchmonkey on September 26, 2006, 09:01:01 AM
The guy is basically explaining reasons why Wii will/will not fail, all based on the whole "disruptive marketing" thing. This quote made the fanboy in me happy:
Quote
The sustaining business model for the console video game market is more horsepower and prettier graphics. Nintendo wants to disrupt this. Iwata said, “The time when horsepower alone made the important difference is over.” With the DS successfully disrupting the handheld market, what will the PSP’s successor become? A PSP with better graphics and more horsepower is not the answer. So Sony is at a loss as their business model got smashed. If Nintendo succeeds with the Wii, not only will the Wii outsell its competitors, but Microsoft and Sony would be paralyzed as ‘more horsepower and prettier pictures’ will not be the answer to the next generation of consoles.
He's right, what will PSP "2" be like? More power and graphics are meaningless versus the DS, since it's already weaker than the ordinary PSP.
He also goes into the reasons why Wii could fail. Essentially he says it needs to deliver useful/fun products that do something that current consoles cannot, and it needs to do so before publishers and consumers start rejecting Wii.
Post by: Nick DiMola on September 26, 2006, 02:23:08 PM
I agree that this is true, and I also think that the window in which this needs to happen is larger than people realize. It took a good year or so until the DS hit full stride, up till then there was not a single compelling reason to own the system. If the Wii, within a year or perhaps a little more, can capture the American audience, they are golden. They need to play up the Wii/DS combo as well in someway. Everyone who owns a DS should want to own a Wii due to some cross compatibility, or because of series that are unique to these two systems. Nintendo has done a great job creating Wii excitement pre launch, lets hope they can keep that momentum going post launch and through the Wii's life span.
Post by: mantidor on September 26, 2006, 06:01:10 PM
"Nintendo’s business strategy was still relying on technological competition. What is striking is that around that time, when everyone sang praise of Mario 64, Miyamoto admitted the game was a failure to the Tamagotchi craze. Here was Mario 64, made with cutting edge 3d technology, outsold by a pet raising game made with dot matrix graphics. These would be the seeds for the later Nintendogs but also of making titles for the mass consumer."
Yeah, its lovely for our fanboy egos to see these "disruptive" games selling millions, but do we seriously would have prefered tamagotchi than Mario 64!? Sure, I know, Nintendo and their "promises", and how they want to catter all markets, they are making games for both types of gamers and blah, blah blah, but the truth is that these games are the priorities, and the traditional games we so obssesively cherish and love will be of less importance, the more "hardcore" or "non gamer unfriendly", the less importance it will get, or it will get raped and made "mainstream" (mainly I fear for my beloved Metroid after Hunters), and that simply sucks, I can't cheer the company for doing that, I really can't.
Post by: Kairon on September 26, 2006, 06:20:18 PM
But I personally trust in Nintendo. It's in their blood to make epic Mario/Zelda/etc. games. It's in their nature, and it's gonne take at least another generation of game makers to change that, if it changes at all.
Thus, I personally pooh-pooh the negatives of this situation by pointing at hardcore DS titles (Mario, Castlevania, strategy, action and etc. titles) and also point at decidedly traditional Wii titles (Heroes, Mario Galaxy, Retro Studios' next project, light gun games, most unknown third party stuff)and anticipate a renaissance of more casual-esque games:
-adventure games traditionally have a 50/50 male/female audience split, so here's hoping for Phoenix Wright and Sam & Max for the Wii, as well as the next "Indigo Prophecy" or whatev'
-Mario Party IS up to 6 isn't it? They were actually all good, but no matter: Mario party Wii will be the first Mario Party game I buy since the original
-I'm hoping that we also see a comeback for puzzle titles, another non-gamer haven that will benefit from simpler interfaces, less focus on graphics, cheaper development and wider audiences (anyone remember that SNES jigsaw puzzle game by Atlus? Anyone? ... I want THAT remade! It was AWESOME!)
-more Animal Crossing and Harvest Moon... key word being ANIMAL CROSSING!!!
-PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE MARIO PAINT!!! ... or at least Bob Ross...
... hmm ... you know, Mario itself as an "everyone game" is almost like a nongamer game with exceptionally high production values...
But yeah, that's just my point of view.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: IceCold on September 26, 2006, 07:23:29 PM
The figure for the resources needed to develop Brain Training, for example, was ridiculously small. It was a separate team, and it didn't detract from the other projects at all. Then, as we all know, it went on to sell millions, which means more profit for Nintendo. With that, they can invest in smaller developers, or create a new studio, or whatever. The point is, they still make just as many traditional games, and the quality of those games is still exceptional. For the Wii, there are even many original traditional games - again, moreso than the GameCube.
About Metroid Hunters - Nintendo just wanted to show off the WiFi connection as well as how an FPS would control on the DS. They put in the Metroid name to garner more sales. But we knew this right from the beginning with the demo disc - how could you expect it to turn out otherwise? Further proof that no one should have considered it a "real" Metroid was that N-Sider was developing it and not Retro.. After reading the latest impressions and seeing the videos, Metroid Prime 3 is well on its way to being even better than Prime 1 and 2.
The only thing I would be worried about, if I were you, would be Miyamoto's new IP, which will probably cater to nongamers. I won't mind; I'll still pick it up on Day 1 and I'll still enjoy it just like Nintendogs, but you "traditional" advocates won't be too pleased, I'd imagine.
EDIT: And yes, that article was really good - I've nearly finished reading it, and it was well worth it. I might add some more when I'm done.
Post by: Kairon on September 26, 2006, 07:45:01 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
About Metroid Hunters ... N-Sider was developing it and not Retro
My respect for N-Sider.com sky rockets with this revelation that they also program games for Nintendo on the side.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Arbok on September 26, 2006, 08:04:11 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KaironQuote
Originally posted by: IceCold
About Metroid Hunters ... N-Sider was developing it and not Retro
My respect for N-Sider.com sky rockets with this revelation that they also program games for Nintendo on the side.
I think he meant NST:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_Software_Technology_Corporation
Post by: IceCold on September 26, 2006, 09:19:10 PM
I seem to be having minor dyslexia recently.. Although I did catch you with your "Final Night" thing.
Post by: Kairon on September 26, 2006, 09:20:38 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: WuTangTurtle on September 26, 2006, 11:50:07 PM
And about worrying about Miyamoto's new IP I wouldn't worry about it at all. I have to say i did question Pikmin, and there is not a day that goes by that i wish someone would have kicked me square in the nuts for thinking that.
Post by: BigJim on September 27, 2006, 12:47:55 AM
Actually it's not a bad article. It makes good educational points about disruption. But the author also overstates it in some cases, and the article is, at its heart, hypocritical.
I've said before that the only real significant difference I've seen between Nintendo fans and others is that Nintendo incorporates more "business" into their PR, thus many Nintendo fans think they're analytically smarter. But they're still Nintendo fans and still see things through their Indigo-colored shades.
The article's closing has me scratching my noggin:
"The victor of the seventh generation of consoles will have nothing to do with technology or brand. It will be entirely about the business model. The better we understand the business models used, the clearer we can see where this generation is headed."
First, business models have largely always been a deciding factor, even for the prior generations. Nothing is changing here.
Secondly, it seems a bit out of place to declare that there would be a "victor" after all the effort explaining why they're basically not competing, according to decision makers. Nintendo can win without the others losing.
Thirdly, and what is really odd, is that this article demonstrates the same kind of "emotionalism" it criticizes of others. After explaining Nintendo's business model in great detail, he states that a victor will be declared based on everybody's business model... But the only real acknowledgments of Sony's or MS's models are to mention money being thrown around, the "rug being pulled out from under them", Nintendo "smashing their models", and otherwise negative connotations being attributed to them. It's an obvious implication of "I support Nintendo's model" despite the fascade of "understanding will make it clear" or whatever he tried to say with that odd closing statement.
So while I credit the article for what IS fact and its explanations of market disruption, it's just as guilty of the fanboy emotionalism disguised as "business reason" that it rails against.
Post by: Deguello on September 27, 2006, 02:40:25 AM
As for the "victor while not competing" complaint it is quite simple. What this writer propose that Nintendo "wins" by changing the rules of the race, not by running faster. I believe it was Rick who said that Nintendo should watch Sony and MS run down the hundred meter dash and look quizzically at them while saying "hey guys, the hurdles are over there."
For an exmaple of this, check out the sorporate statements concerning the DS vs. PSP. When Nintendo debuted the DS, they went out of their way to to say that they weren't competing with the PSP, and even now they only bring up the PSP when they need to say how much more they are selling better than it. Sony however was all "the baton has been passed, handhelds will be lifted out of the gaming ghetto," then when the DS launched and spanked it they were all "we aren't competing with Nintendo, it would be unfair to say that." When mid-2005 rolled around and it looked like the PSP was picking up steam, they went on an offensive saying "The DS knows its place among children with Pokemon" or "DS is sparkling innovations, PSP isn't" or something like that. Now that the DS is totally killing it everywhere, Sony is commenting how Nintendo is losing its core audience to the PSP and is making it up with children (huh? I thought that was Nintendo's core audience to begin with) and the elderly and girls and women and basically people who aren't a small section of the 15-29 Game market demographic. Where was Nintendo in all this, other than the occasional mentioning of their sales compared to their alleged competition, they just sat back and let the Pokébucks roll in.
In all this, Sony looks like a desperate man running a foot race that he doesn't even realize he is running by himself, simply because he can't decide what market he is in. And this is why Nintendo's claims of "not competing" are actually true at points. Sony originally released the PSP as some sort of Ipod-killer, by their own admission. Well, the Ipod's still standing, so then they pimped the movies. Oh dear, the UMD Movies flopped. So all they have left are games, and those aren't doing too well. Meanwhile, Nintendo changed the rules by having Nintendogs sell 8 million+ copies, which makes it a more popular game than HALO. They changed the rules by having Brain Age basically conquer Japan. And all this WITH the hardcore and semi-hardcore franchises and new games that bolster their lineup. So Sony is stuck which a GTA PS2 port as their top selling game in America and a Capcom PS2 port in Japan. And things aren't looking to rosy at the moment for them.
This is how Nintendo "wins by not competing," BigJim.
Post by: couchmonkey on September 27, 2006, 05:34:49 AM
Now we have DS, and as he points out in his article, there are far, far more new games being released by Nintendo on DS than on Gameboy. The end result? Nintendogs and Brain Age. Just as few people would have guessed that GTA would be the biggest game of this home console generation, I think hardly any of us would have guessed that a pet sim and a few quizzes would rule the handheld market.
For the guys like Mantidor and Ian this is not good news at first. But once the markets that aren't resistant to the disruptive product buy into it, the overall game lineup grows and grows, because publishers see that this system is where the money is. How can you ignore DS once it becomes the home of new Mega Man, Castlevania, Star Fox and Final Fantasy games? How will you ignore Wii if the same thing happens to it?
I do admit that the guy is clearly on Nintendo's side, and he fails to look at the business strategies of Sony and Microsoft. I think the point of the article was more to defend and explain Nintendo's strategy than to discuss all of the strategies. I also think he'd argue that Microsoft and Sony's strategies are pretty much the same as always: further refinement of past success, be that high definition graphics, or a supercharged Xbox Live experience.
Post by: JonLeung on September 27, 2006, 05:45:23 AM
Now I just want the Wii to be successful and prove such a disruption, otherwise it's all for naught. Not that I doubt the Wii. I just think that most people won't believe in a change in the industry until they see it for themselves.
Post by: BigJim on September 27, 2006, 09:00:46 AM
Quote
BigJim, saying that "If Nintendo's business model succeeds it will be nice" is not even on the same level of "emotionalism" as the "OH MY GOD NINTENDO IS ABANDONING US HARDCORE GAMERS BECAUSE ZELDA ISN'T HARDCORE NO WAIT IT IS HARDCORE" articles.
I don't recall such specific over-the-top references being sited in the article. And he defended Nintendo for several pages, glossed over the competition with negative connotations, and disguised his N* support as "business reason" while accusing others against Nintendo's decisions of similar behavior. It's not a neutral article. I think it's very much emotionalism.
Quote
As for the "victor while not competing" complaint it is quite simple. What this writer propose that Nintendo "wins" by changing the rules of the race, not by running faster. I believe it was Rick who said that Nintendo should watch Sony and MS run down the hundred meter dash and look quizzically at them while saying "hey guys, the hurdles are over there."
And what I proposed is that Nintendo can make their own track if they want, and win their own race if they want, but it doesn't mean everybody else is off in the ditch and therefore "loses" just because one company wants to be the Susan Lucci of gaming and create its own industry and hopes to present itself with an award. If Nintendo wants to do that, it's their perogative and more power to them, but it doesn't mean they're the only winner by default in the end. Because frankly, I think there's a good chance of all 3 of them doing well this time around in their own ways, and that'll be a first. 'Tis all.
Post by: couchmonkey on September 27, 2006, 09:12:53 AM
1. It keeps copying Nintendo. This may be too little too late, but at least it shows Sony knows that it's own system is not entirely on the right track.
2. Recent price drop in Japan. Good choice.
3. News that the guy who developed God of War is putting his PSP game on hold to create a simple, low-budget PS3 game along the lines of Twisted Metal or Bomberman. I think Sony needs to show that PS3 doesn't have to be all about zillion dollar graphics.
Oops, I mean, PS3 is great, viva la PS3!!
Post by: ThePerm on September 27, 2006, 11:48:55 AM
Post by: mantidor on September 27, 2006, 08:00:46 PM
)."mantidor, are you seriously telling me that they are focusing more on nongamers than gamers after what we've seen so far?"
I'll say I was wrong only if Metroid Dread turns out real.
Corruption looks like complete GENERIC TRASH! (there I said it >_< ) you know how I always say I try to remain optimistic, Im excited about the game and all that, but Ill just vent here, I am terribly worried about that game, and I have this bad hunch that Nintendo is trying to push it as "the halo killer", its really not a matter of NST or Retro, they are good developers and have proven they have potential, but Nintendo has the last say and they will push the game in the direction they see fit, (like that HORRIBLE model for Samus in echoes, which is just a small example). I can only hope the delay wasn't to add online as everyone is saying. I would love nothing more than to be dead wrong, but Nintendo has given me more letdowns than good news with this new direction of theirs, Ive come to expect the worst from them.
And Im not that worried about Miyamoto's new IP, I don't care that much for him now oh BLASPHEMY!, I see everyone falling on me with pitchforks and torches to beat me to death!
Its funny how most of the more traditional offerings are coming from third parties, Im already seeing myself buying more third party titles than Nintendo games,which is actually nice.
Post by: Kairon on September 27, 2006, 08:14:51 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor
And Im not that worried about Miyamoto's new IP, I don't care that much for him now oh BLASPHEMY!, I see everyone falling on me with pitchforks and torches to beat me to death!
MONSTER!I can't live in a world where men like you exist! *Falls on his own pitchfork*
Hmm... so... would you be more of a XBox360 type consumer Mantidor? Personally, I would be an XBox 360 consumer if I didn't hate Microsoft so much and if I happened to be interested in those sorts of traditional (FPS, Racing, etc.) games.
If you can't even be interested in Nintendo enough to enjoy the idea of getting Zelda this fall, then Mario next year, and also Smash Bros. and Metroid in that year with multiple other AAA traditional titles... are you looking for "innovations" the likes of which can be found in Gears of War, Heavenly Sword, White Knight, God of War 2, and other such traditional-esque titles instead? (all titles on other systems I'm never gonna buy, but have to say I'm curious about anyways)
Oh, and I can out blaspheme you any day of the week. Pikmin 2? I got bored.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 27, 2006, 08:52:28 PM
On the other stuff like the same old whining about Nintendo and "hardcore" gamers, I just have to say there are more "hardcore" games coming out for Wii than there were on N64 or GC there is just now MORE to choose from since there are also the "casual" games. Once again the same old whining and bi*ching about Nintendo's games looking like crap (or trash like one TP hater has stated) without even playing them is getting old FAST, so please grow up and learn to open your minds a little before automatically condemning a game or having severe doubts based on a freaken demo of the game that you haven't even played.
Post by: IceCold on September 27, 2006, 08:59:41 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 27, 2006, 09:16:26 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
Yeah mantidor, if you don't care about Miyamoto anymore and you think all the first party titles are trash, then I think it's time you moved on.. And Metroid Dread is a small negative compared to the rest of the DS successes.
Well I think that will be my last time replying to Mantidor, he has some good opinions here and there, but he is getting into the trap of crying wolf all the time, which gets quite tiring. Anytime an individual develops a super pessimistic attitude (especially towards the bigger Nintendo franchises) based upon little known information, and a demo he has never played, his (and others) credibility goes down the tubes with me, it is silly in my opinion to be so closed minded when you hardly know anything about a game (especially a Nintendo one!). Wii will have plenty of traditional games, probaly more so than either GC or N64.
Already we have:
-Mario Galaxy
-Metroid Prime Corruption (hey even if it does turn out to be similar to Halo, isn't that still a traditional game?)
-Legend of Zelda: TP
-Paper Mario
Potential traditional games that I would be amazed to NOT see on Wii:
-Star Fox
-Mario Kart
-Definately another Zelda built from the ground up with Wii
What did Nintendo have for the N64 in the way of "traditional games"?
Mario 64 (Wasn't really that traditional for the time, so it shows that term is relative)
Star Fox
Mario Kart
Legend of Zelda: OOT
Paper Mario
Legend of Zelda: MM (Not a traditional game by any means but I'll let it count)
Not that much difference and that does not count potential "hardcore" new franchises like Day of Disastor.
GC had:
Wind Waker
Mario Sunshine (which fanboys ripped for being too traditional, go figure)
Mario Kart DD
Metroid Prime 1
Metroid Prime 2
Paper Mario
I'm probaly forgetting one or two but still that list is equal to what Wii will have.
SNES:
SMW1
SMW2 aka Yoshi's Island
Star Fox
Super Metroid
Legend of Zelda LTTP
Mario Kart
Super Mario RPG (I am reluctant to add this since Square helped out)
Once again I am probaly forgetting a couple but still around what Wii will have. In conclusion what we are seeing with Nintendo is not necessarily less traditional or hardcore games, but more variety OVERALL. Nintendo has grown quite a bit thanks to the sucess of DS and GBA (profits from GC and N64 didn't hurt either). Yeah they are marketing things alittle differently but we will still see just as many traditional Nintendo franchises as we see "quirky" or "new" franchises. Nintendo finally has the resources to do MORE than just the traditional games, and they are utilizing that to expand their market while maintaining their core fans. Also we have to realize that at one time ALL Nintendo's so called "tradtional" games were new, and not so traditional, so why should Nintendo not try to innovate more?
Post by: mantidor on September 27, 2006, 09:48:53 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KaironQuote
Originally posted by: mantidor
And Im not that worried about Miyamoto's new IP, I don't care that much for him now oh BLASPHEMY!, I see everyone falling on me with pitchforks and torches to beat me to death!
If you can't even be interested in Nintendo enough to enjoy the idea of getting Zelda this fall, then Mario next year, and also Smash Bros. and Metroid in that year with multiple other AAA traditional titles... are you looking for "innovations" the likes of which can be found in Gears of War, Heavenly Sword, White Knight, God of War 2, and other such traditional-esque titles instead? (all titles on other systems I'm never gonna buy, but have to say I'm curious about anyways)
Oh my, did that come out wrong from what Im seeing. My previous post rant was exclusively Metroid related, Im happy that at least Zelda GC hasn't been canceled (it sucks I have to withdraw from the internet for almost a month just to avoid spoilers), Mario Galaxy looks great, smash looks awesome as well, and of course, Im thrilled about what Intelligent Systems will do with the console (not Super Paper Mario though, it was a horible mistake to announce it as a GC title, now Im more in a "wait and see" aproach than just plain excited as I was). The 360 has nothing that catches my attention, not at that price point anyway.
I like the console, I really do. I would prefer Nintendo to have a diferent priority of course, but the games are coming anyway. Its just that Ill rather have Pikmin 3 than wiisports, any day.
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Oh, and I can out blaspheme you any day of the week. Pikmin 2? I got bored.
This is something that makes me cringe really, Pikmin is so damn awesome, yet when asked about the future of the games Miyamoto said something along the lines "it fits perfectly for the console but we are not doing anything about it, because it didn't sell well so expect more lame nintendogs-like games from me than awesome games like this one" yeah I added the last part but you know its true you know it!. Its perfectly understandable, it makes total sense and such decisions are practically expected, but it still sucks big time.
Post by: Kairon on September 27, 2006, 10:13:57 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Smoke39 on September 27, 2006, 10:55:56 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 27, 2006, 11:19:06 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Well, I LURVED the first Pikmin, so I'd still vastly prefer Pikmin 3 over Nintendogs Wii... but WiiSports? Nah. I'm actually looking forward to WiiSports on its own merits, lol.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Was it really announced that Pikmin ended with 2? If so that is pretty sad, even if I did not care for the series, but I did respect it for being so unique. On the up side of things the Wii has so much potential to make games like Pikmin so sucessful like the DS has with so many quirky, innovative games. You just have to be patient, like every single Nintendo system previous to Wii it takes time for games to be announced (I don't believe Pikmin was announced until after GC launch) Anyway I wouldn't be surprised to see Miyamoto or Nintendo bring out a game in the spirit of the Pikmin series.
Post by: Ceric on September 28, 2006, 05:27:03 AM
Post by: Luigi Dude on September 28, 2006, 07:28:24 AM
Post by: couchmonkey on September 28, 2006, 08:03:47 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on September 28, 2006, 08:40:26 AM
I don't like that kind of attitude. That's an EA sell-out corporate kind of attitude.
"Metroid Prime Corruption (hey even if it does turn out to be similar to Halo, isn't that still a traditional game?)"
Obviously a Metroid fan wants a real Metroid game. Though I think Metroid Prime 3 is looking to be a real Metroid game.
"Mario 64 (Wasn't really that traditional for the time, so it shows that term is relative)"
I think you're using "traditional" in a far too literal meaning. "Traditional game" means a game designed for people who like games and made up the traditional gaming market (ie: the entire gaming market) up to this point. It is nothing to do with how new or old the concept of the game is. It's merely the opposite of "non-game" which would be a game designed for people who don't like games and make up the new group of people Nintendo is trying to target. It's really just a politically correct term because when you say something like "real game" people jump all over you.
And when anyone says they want "traditional games" obviously that means GOOD games. Don't point at dribble or generic EA bullsh!t and say "well that's a traditional game". That's not directed at anyone specifically but there are a lot of misinterpretations about what the "traditional group" wants. Any time anyone says they want something they always mean they want it to be of good quality. This goes for third party support, new concepts, sequels, real Pokemon RPGs, and mature games as well. It goes for every game. No one wants crap.
Post by: mantidor on September 28, 2006, 08:52:53 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smoke39
What's freaking you out about MP3, Mant? The only thing that sort of concerns me is that they seem to be slowly getting rid of the strong feeling of solitude from the other Metroid games. Oh yeah, and one of my pet peeves about the Prime series: they go to all the trouble of making you feel like you're in Samus' suit an' all, but then disembody you for silly cutscenes. Half-Life-style cutscenes are totally the way to go in this kinda game, imo.
I admit they are baseless concerns because most of the game hasn't been shown. Its the mood of the game mostly... very un-metroidish, so far there aren't any creepy creatures lurking in lonely corridors, is bunch of pirates fights with some federation soldiers in the mix, thats including the extended trailer with a bunch of footage that wasn't in playable form. Lots of robots, a weird purple female character, more robots and space pirates and federation soldiers... bah, Im sure Ill get the game even if it becames more of a military shooter, but Ill be sad if that happens.
oh and I never meant that pikmin wasn't going to get a sequel, but that is not a priority to Nintendo in the near future.
Post by: King of Twitch on September 28, 2006, 11:02:04 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on September 28, 2006, 11:33:16 AM
Is there any logical reason to do this? Metroid turning first person was the result of bringing a 2D franchise into 3D. Pikmin already is 3D. Plus with this idea you could only play as one Pikmin. That kind of goes against the whole reason Pikmin is fun in the first place.
Post by: Kairon on September 28, 2006, 11:39:21 AM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 28, 2006, 12:13:22 PM
One concern towards Nintendo that I do think holds some water is that their games are not as polished as they were in the NES-N64 generation. Liked them or not, but delays back in the N64 were meant to create the best game possible when it came to Nintendo's games. As much as I loved SMS and LoZ:WW I felt they could have benefited greatly from a delay or two, and I believe the Nintendo of old would have, but as it turned out both games came off as unpolished, mainly LoZ:WW because of some of the lame dungeons along with the scavenger hunt at the end. This is one reason why I am excited about TP, is because it has had enough time in production (even excluding the time needed for the Wii version) to churn out a polished game.
Post by: wandering on September 28, 2006, 12:44:46 PM
Quote
And then the guy acts like he wishes he made some horrible fad game crap instead because it sold better.
Donkey Kong was a fad....
Quote
"Traditional game" means a game designed for people who like games and made up the traditional gaming market (ie: the entire gaming market) up to this point.
Donkey Kong wasn't designed for people who like games....
Quote
I admit they are baseless concerns because most of the game hasn't been shown. Its the mood of the game mostly... very un-metroidish, so far there aren't any creepy creatures lurking in lonely corridors, is bunch of pirates fights with some federation soldiers in the mix, thats including the extended trailer with a bunch of footage that wasn't in playable form. Lots of robots, a weird purple female character, more robots and space pirates and federation soldiers... bah, Im sure Ill get the game even if it becames more of a military shooter, but Ill be sad if that happens.
Well, remember they're trying to sell the game. You can't show people 30 minutes of moody exploration or whatever.
Quote
I am terribly worried about that game, and I have this bad hunch that Nintendo is trying to push it as "the halo killer", its really not a matter of NST or Retro, they are good developers and have proven they have potential, but Nintendo has the last say and they will push the game in the direction they see fit
Ugg, what? You trust Retro, but not Nintendo? Nintendo is going to push the game towards generic trash? The same Nintendo that is responsible for the Metroid "feel" Retro tries so hard to emulate? The same Nintendo that made Prime first-person, when Retro wanted it in third? You've really lost that much faith in the company?
Post by: Ian Sane on September 28, 2006, 01:09:02 PM
But has maintained it's status as a classic game for over 20 years. No one with taste ever consider Tamagotchi to be even "good" and no one gives a sh!t about it anymore.
"Donkey Kong wasn't designed for people who like games...."
Donkey Kong was designed to make use of unsold Radarscope cabinets. I would never consider it a non-game because it's quite clearly designed for the same group of people that liked playing other arcade games of the time. It was also an incredibly advanced game for it's time which goes against the non-game approach of simplifying things for people who find gaming as is too "intimidating". The non-game design is largely based on the idea of not only targetting people who don't play games but by doing so with a game that gamers might not be interested in. The whole plan very blatantly revolves around the idea of making two different types of product for two different groups. That is quite different then making a game that just happens to have wide appeal. The concept, or at least the parts of it I don't like, is quite recent and ties in with Iwata becoming the head of Nintendo.
Post by: odifiend on September 28, 2006, 02:53:50 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"Donkey Kong wasn't designed for people who like games...."
Donkey Kong was designed to make use of unsold Radarscope cabinets. I would never consider it a non-game because it's quite clearly designed for the same group of people that liked playing other arcade games of the time. It was also an incredibly advanced game for it's time which goes against the non-game approach of simplifying things for people who find gaming as is too "intimidating". The non-game design is largely based on the idea of not only targetting people who don't play games but by doing so with a game that gamers might not be interested in. The whole plan very blatantly revolves around the idea of making two different types of product for two different groups. That is quite different then making a game that just happens to have wide appeal. The concept, or at least the parts of it I don't like, is quite recent and ties in with Iwata becoming the head of Nintendo.
This game/ non-game crap is so ridiculous. Donkey Kong, I suppose was designed for REAL gamers who like games like Pacman, Space Invaders, and Pong? (read everyone) Donkey Kong has one more input than Pacman - jump. Conceptually, dodging hazards and climbing up ladders is not complicated, games like this have been played since before the new era, in the form of snakes and ladders.
Technology is always getting bigger, faster, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Nintendo is practical and stopping what has been natural when dealing with technology. Instead of saying, "now we can do this according to physics, we can make this look more realistic, and the player can control individual cells on the characters body," they've stepped back and done an assessment of how fun that really would be. Nintendo wants to return to the time of the arcade - where everything is new and fun, where copied game ideas aren't rewarded, and where simplicity can be genius. This talk of non-games and games, if you start at square one, is a paradox. The original games where non games. Have an aneurism and let this objection die.
It seems clear to me that Nintendo's stance is still for the 'gamer' which Nintendo would argue is everyone. They have done this in every generation, they are just using new language to achieve the same goal.
Did you know the definition for insanity is doing what you've always done and expecting different results?
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 28, 2006, 04:11:26 PM
Post by: trip1eX on September 28, 2006, 04:27:47 PM
But to really bust things open he wants the non-gamer/casual gamer/former gamer crowd.
YOu shouldn't just look at potential success with non-gamers as Nintendo only making non-gamer games. I mean those gamers will look for other stuff to play too. And cash made in the non-gamer market will probably it's way into core games the way MS makes cash in Windows/OFfice and loses it on the Xbox/360.
Post by: SixthAngel on September 28, 2006, 07:43:17 PM
The competitors bussiness models are not described because they are slight modifications of the industry standard model (improved graphics) and the article is about the new Wii model. Sony and Microsofts overall plan to take over the living room is not part of the model to make the respective systems successful. Bluray is not in pushing the PS3 but the PS3 with its games is instead pushing bluray. While business models always play a role in the winner this time each model is not a slight modification of the previous. A Nintendo coup or a giant jump in marketshare would force the other companies to change or automatically label themselves as behind the competition the next gen.
Everyone who is complaining about nongamers should just think about this. When Germany took over Poland did they leave their home country behind and live in Poland? No. Think of Nintendo as nazi Germany, just without the genocide.
Post by: mantidor on September 28, 2006, 08:10:11 PM
Post by: wandering on September 28, 2006, 08:42:38 PM
Quote
Everyone who is complaining about nongamers should just think about this. When Germany took over Poland did they leave their home country behind and live in Poland?
And look how well that worked out for Germany!
Post by: BigJim on September 28, 2006, 09:22:16 PM
But there was no surprise. Just pointing out the moderate dose of hypocracy.
Post by: couchmonkey on September 29, 2006, 07:01:54 AM
I'd say Sony's current business model is:
- sell Blu-ray with Playstation 3
- sell Playstation 3 with graphics and the "cool" factor - lots of ultra-slick trailers and pretty pictures
- sell Playstation 3 with a large lineup of popular third party games
- offer free online
The problem is, third-party games and support are being withdrawn from PS3 all the time. Square Enix just said that it doesn't want to support any one console too much. That's horrible news for PS3 - the SE fans make up a large and very "hardcore" base for the company. Wii is seeing opposite announcements. The other problem is that Blu-ray is making PS3 an expensive proposition for consumers - PS3 is a bargain if you're thinking of it as a Blu-ray player, but PS3 is supposed to be the trojan horse for Blu-ray, not the other way around. The demand for PS3 is high (but waning), the demand for Blu-ray is mostly unknown.
Free online has been promised, but my impression is that the company has yet to explain how it's going to deliver that.
The only thing Sony has done right is the graphics. Maybe also the cool factor, certainly PS3 is carrying over the PS2 cool factor, but we're starting to see that cool factor crumble on PSP, the nut that plays games.
Microsoft's business model:
- reduce fixed hardware costs by making the hard drive optional
- buy lots of exclusive games (same as Xbox business model)
- improve graphics, HD era, blah blah
- encourage distribution of cheap third party games through Xbox Live
- expand the Xbox Live experience in general
The only outright flaw that I see in Microsoft's business model is that making the hard drive optional may be reducing the effectiveness of the Xbox Live initiatives and also annoys developers by not allowing them to rely on the drive.
The Xbox live initiatives, especially the distribution of indie third party games, have promise. With WOW showing just how much people love online gaming, and with Live Arcade bulking up 360's lineup, Live is looking good.
Securing third party exclusives seems smart, but Microsoft already tried this on Xbox, yet PS2 spanked Xbox soundly. Remember when Dead to Rights, Splinter Cell and Wreckless: The Yakuza missions were exclusives? The exclusives are getting bigger and bolder (PETER F'IN JACKSON, GUYS!) but that just means Microsoft is bleeding more money away in order to buy marketshare.
Most importantly, Xbox 360 sales so far this year aren't that impressive. That could still turn around at Christmas time, but so far I think 360 is failing to live up to Microsoft's hopes of a Playstation 2-like head start.
Post by: Ian Sane on September 29, 2006, 07:50:16 AM
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on September 29, 2006, 07:57:39 AM
Post by: couchmonkey on September 29, 2006, 09:54:06 AM
The theory is that current "non-games" will be the new games, and the games we love are going to fade into the past. He argues that games like Pac Man were seen as "non-games" back in the early days of gaming, compared to text games like Adventure or Zork. Similarly, the newer Final Fantasy games have sometimes been cast as "non-games" by those of us who grew up with Super Mario Bros. and Mega Man. But you can bet kids who grew up with Final Fantasy and Metal Gear Solid consider them real games.
The new type of game, according to this guy, is the socialization game. With games like WoW, Dance Dance Revolution, and Guitar Hero, the content of the game is technically other people as much as it is gameplay. Put Nintendogs in bark mode and start comparing your Brain Ages with each other.
It's pretty far-out stuff, but if he's right, then Nintendo really is on the cutting edge of the next trend in gaming. Of course, if Nintendo has to change, we don't want anything to do with it, right? That's okay, because we won't want anything to do with video games in general since they'll have changed across the board five years from now. Scary theory, eh?
Post by: Kairon on September 29, 2006, 10:12:43 AM
Neopets is.
NEOPETS
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Ian Sane on September 29, 2006, 10:14:56 AM
That pretty much is exactly what I'm scared of. Having an interest of your's yanked away from under your feet is pretty annoying when you're only in your 20s. This happened to me with music about ten years ago, with TV during the whole reality/game show trend (thankfully TV has come back recently) and North American pro wrestling about five years ago.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 29, 2006, 11:09:29 AM
