Post by: The Omen on April 13, 2004, 06:21:18 PM
Post by: Berny on April 13, 2004, 06:27:36 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 13, 2004, 06:28:45 PM
Quote
Theres how many must have first party games released each year by Nintendo? 4? 5?
That's $200-250 right there- do YOU have a quarter of a thousand dollars to just throw away at games? Most of us don't.
Aside from that, I largely agree with you- a lot of Nintendo fans are really stick up snobs who only want the best, which I can understand, but not at the cost of quality that isn't entirely perfect, or isn't made by a company you've expected perfection from.
Post by: Perfect Cell on April 13, 2004, 06:28:48 PM
Post by: Ian Sane on April 13, 2004, 06:34:41 PM
The problem is there just isn't a big enough userbase on the Cube to buy all of the titles released. THAT is Nintendo's fault. They didn't convince enough people to buy Cubes within the first year. I and virtually no one else on the forum have done anything "wrong". There just aren't enough of us.
"Buying what you know is good, or will be good, and little else...well that sounds pretty damn casual to me."
Actually it's the exact opposite of casual. It's what an informed consumer does. If there's a game that I'm unsure about I take the risk... by renting it. And most of the time it's not worth buying. With Skies of Arcadia Legends and Ikaruga it was.
Post by: The Omen on April 13, 2004, 06:37:35 PM
Quote
That's $200-250 right there- do YOU have a quarter of a thousand dollars to just throw away at games? Most of us don't.
While I agree that its a pain in the ass to budget, people must not realize that those games will be out the next year, and the year after that. And buying it a year late would still be considered a sale. I buy just about 6-8 games a year, I guess, and often times I'll pass over a game, like SMS , for instance, knowing that i'll buy it some other time. I bought RE instead of SMS, and was fine with that. I didn't even get ED until February 03. Full price though.
Post by: Mario on April 13, 2004, 06:38:36 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 13, 2004, 06:40:17 PM
Quote
While I agree that its a pain in the ass to budget, people must not realize that those games will be out the next year, and the year after that.
Hm, that's a good point- I didn't think of that.
Post by: Berny on April 13, 2004, 06:42:05 PM
Post by: The Omen on April 13, 2004, 06:44:32 PM
Quote
There's nothing I hate more than when someone writes something from the point of view that I did or didn't do something and that's why something happened. I DID buy ED and I loved it so how the hell can I be blamed for low sales?
Oh, so I should just interview every GC owner? No, we go with a generalization,a majority, and obviously, this wasn't targeted to you. So why take it that way? Pat yourself on the back, and stop acting like everything put into print , which includes the word you, means you specifically.
Quote
Isn't it sales of the first month that really count though? That's what it seems everyone looks at when they want to look at the success of a game.
Yes, because thats what the PR department for the likes of EA and Capcom, and Nintendo tell us. You think Pink Floyd was bitching about Dark side of the moon because it was still on the charts 15 years later? Its all money, and that first month sh!t is for hype purposes.
Post by: Ian Sane on April 13, 2004, 06:49:37 PM
Third parties don't take that into account though. Usually they declare a game a low seller after only a few months. I got Ikaruga nearly a year after it came out but I doubt Atari has even noticed that sale. Plus I buy a lot of games used which don't count towards total sales. Again that's just being a smart consumer. Why pay more money if I don't have to? In fact if I don't buy a game when it's first released if I buy it later I almost always will get it used.
Maybe third parties should do more than just look at sales figures. A game can gain a strong cult fanbase months after it's released that can result in stronger sales for a sequel. ED2 for example would likely sell much better than the first game because it's gained a strong reputation on the internet. It's not going to sell huge but it would likely make a profit. Ebay would be good for research too. If a game is selling for really high amounts because it's become rare it may be worthwhile to re-release. Skies of Arcadia recieved no advertising and was largely ignored when it was released yet it remains highly praised and there are a fair bit of gamers who want to buy it but can't.
Post by: yellowfellow on April 13, 2004, 06:54:15 PM
Quote
Oh, so I should just interview every GC owner? No, we go with a generalization,a majority, and obviously, this wasn't targeted to you. So why take it that way? Pat yourself on the back, and stop acting like everything put into print , which includes the word you, means you specifically.
if you want to go with a majority then you should probably talk about how GCN owners are to blame because they are too involved with pre-school and going potty and the like...
Post by: The Omen on April 13, 2004, 06:57:27 PM
Post by: The_GameCube_Dude on April 13, 2004, 07:19:30 PM
I believe that it's Nintendo's fault for the most part, because only hardcore Nintendo fans own a GameCube, the people who have support Ninetndo for sometime, and those people are the ones who only buy Nintendo's own games.
Nintendo need to be promoting the GameCube to wider auidence, casual gamers, like Sony has been doing, through advertising (there's a stradegy Nintendo, advertise.......). It's up to Nintendo themselves to create a wider auidence on thier consoles.
I don't think you can blame Nintendo fans, it's Nintendo's role to make sure third party games work sell on thier systems, or third party games on a Nintendo console will become non-existant.
I support the third parties and the GCN titles they produce, I own Beyond Good and Evil, Prince of Persia, RE and RE0 and a lot more 3rd party games, but for the most part, my GameCube collection consisits of Nintendo games cause they are the best!! hehehe....
Post by: Mannypon on April 13, 2004, 07:31:01 PM
Post by: the_zombie_luke on April 13, 2004, 07:39:51 PM
Edit:This thread title is so condescending and insulting. For your information, the majority of my games are third party, and GameCube owners aren't different from anyone else. If you put out Soul Caliber 2's and REmake caliber games, they will be successful. Sure, many great third party games were ignored, but Sony is in a similar position. Some PS2 owners gravitate toward Madden and GTA, while ICO and Mark of Kri were ignored. So was Sly Cooper. In that case, Sony is in the opposite position, but still one where good games are not selling, so maybe I should say that PS2 owners are multiplatform elitists.
Post by: Infernal Monkey on April 13, 2004, 07:52:57 PM
Plus it's becoming harder and harder to buy third party games on GC in Australia. Finding Harvest Moon or Puyo Pop Fever in a store is like trying to find Blinx in Mario Sunshine.
Post by: DrkStarTTD on April 13, 2004, 07:53:05 PM
Post by: ThePerm on April 13, 2004, 09:22:25 PM
Post by: Darc Requiem on April 13, 2004, 10:02:27 PM
Darc Requiem
Post by: DrZoidberg on April 13, 2004, 11:04:13 PM
Post by: Catbus Is Taken on April 13, 2004, 11:07:43 PM
QuoteI know this post is sh!t.
Originally posted by: The Omen
As much as I would like to believe that Nintendo fans are this knowledgable group of gaming elite, i'm finding the opposite to be true. I just don't get why some of these games don't sell on the GC. Now, i'm barring obvious games like Hitman 2, Baldurs Gate and the like, in which Nintendo were given shoddy ports late. But games that are released on all 3 consoles at the same time. Like BG&E. I know it didn't sell well on any of the 3, but why wouldn't we Nintendo fans embrace it? It's just about as close to a Nintendo title as there is, yet we ignored it. Hell, even F-zero didn't sell all that well. Prince of persia, again what a typical Ninty fan supposedly likes. And don't give me we know whats sh!t ands whats not. Obviously, you don't. And also don't give me the "First party titles are so good, they overshadow all 3rd party games." Theres how many must have first party games released each year by Nintendo? 4? 5? And thats being generous. Eternal Darkness deserved so much more than selling, what, 200k? RE sold well, but Zero didn't. The only games that have sold great, as expected , were probably Metroid Prime, WW, SMS, and SSMB:M. There are many opinions on this, but I think we think we're the gaming elitists, the fore fathers of gaming. Nintendo created all, and we will dismiss any game released thats deemed beneath us. So before we bitch about losing 3rd parties, and even 2nd parties now, look at your library of games, and realize you're not open to try new types of games. You can't be, because theres simply not enough exclusive content to make up your entire collection. There must be some games that appeal to you other than Nintendos, right? Or maybe PS2 fans are the real fans, and we are the little niche Nintendo market. PS2 fans often buy what we consider crap, but back 15 years ago, without all these online and Mag. reviews, we had to buy what interested us, just by reading the box and the Nintendo Power pamphlet. And we couldn't trade them in, they were ours forever. That made you finish the game, actually experience the game to its fullest instead of trading it in in 2 weeks. Some of the best games I bought were games I took a chance on, and WON me over. Were they perfect? Nope, some were even below average. But I enjoyed the game anyway, because it wasnt so easy to dismiss. You actually grew with the game. Now, it appears the PS2 userbase has the right idea. Buying games you want, no matter how crappy somebody else thinks they are, is being the real gamer, not the casual gamer. Buying what you know is good, or will be good, and little else...well that sounds pretty damn casual to me.
Post by: KDR_11k on April 13, 2004, 11:54:37 PM
I was very reluctant to get Eternal Darkness, after all I got the cube because I had enough of those "run around in dark rooms and kill everything that moves" games (which was also the reason I chose SMS over TS2 or RE when buying my GC) and I didn't like the genre in general. The screenshots were repelling. I got it because it was cheap and while I don't regret that purchase I wouldn't call ED one of the more important (i.e. best) games of this generation.
Whenever I see a game it triggers an association or feeling (dunno what to call it). The association triggered by most third party (and "mature" games in general) is a negative one. This association is usually stronger than any oppinion I build via reviews and usually determines whether I buy a game or not. BG&E triggered this in a negative way, meaning that whenever I think about buying it, my subconscience tells me not to and I look for something else. Pretty much every game (even first party ones) that came out lately got a "negative", took me some willpower to get Harvest Moon after my mother wanted to buy me a game (and boy, do I hate NoE's QA for letting this game pass). This association seems to be caused by the way a game is presented prior to release, for example Killer 7 is "positive" while Too Human is "negative".
On the other hand, Nintendo's quality seems to fall. After playing through Metroid Zero Mission (four hours on first try! I needed 16 in Prime to get to the boss and about eight in Super to get to Ridley!) I felt this game wasn't only missing something but did some things really wrong. The bosses didn't seem to be designed with Super Missiles in mind, hell, I killed Ridley by barely moving and blasting him with everything I had! The power bombs I didn't even get. The best games on GC seem to be third party ones. Viewtiful Joe, Soul Calibur II, ...
Post by: foolish03 on April 14, 2004, 06:24:25 AM
Post by: manunited4eva22 on April 14, 2004, 06:54:44 AM
P.S. I have 6 nintendo titles.
Post by: thecubedcanuck on April 14, 2004, 07:17:24 AM
Post by: The Omen on April 14, 2004, 07:28:21 AM
Quote
Edit:This thread title is so condescending and insulting. For your information, the majority of my games are third party, and GameCube owners aren't different from anyone else. If you put out Soul Caliber 2's and REmake caliber games, they will be successful. Sure, many great third party games were ignored, but Sony is in a similar position. Some PS2 owners gravitate toward Madden and GTA, while ICO and Mark of Kri were ignored. So was Sly Cooper. In that case, Sony is in the opposite position, but still one where good games are not selling, so maybe I should say that PS2 owners are multiplatform elitists.
Boo-Hoo. Cry me a F'N river then. As I said earlier in this thread , if it isn't about you, so be it. Do not act like every 'you' in a paragraph means you specifically. Using YOU is easier than naming names, or doing a 5 year research plan, thats how it works. YOU means the general public, not YOU, the overreactive fanboy.
Post by: The Omen on April 14, 2004, 07:32:44 AM
Quote
Edit:This thread title is so condescending and insulting. For your information, the majority of my games are third party, and GameCube owners aren't different from anyone else. If you put out Soul Caliber 2's and REmake caliber games, they will be successful. Sure, many great third party games were ignored, but Sony is in a similar position. Some PS2 owners gravitate toward Madden and GTA, while ICO and Mark of Kri were ignored. So was Sly Cooper. In that case, Sony is in the opposite position, but still one where good games are not selling, so maybe I should say that PS2 owners are multiplatform elitists.
Boo-Hoo. Cry me a F'N river then. As I said earlier in this thread , if it isn't about you, so be it. Do not act like every 'you' in a paragraph means you specifically. Using YOU is easier than naming names, or doing a 5 year research plan, thats how it works. YOU the general public, not YOU.
ThePerm, I am older than alot of you, but I assure you I was in the same position as you, owning The NES the SNES and 64. TLOZ was the first 39.99 game, and my mother was disgusted. I had to get a friggin paper route to buy the games I wanted. Bottom line is, I still bought 6-8 games a years, even back then. Its really not a inconceivable number.
Post by: the_zombie_luke on April 14, 2004, 08:10:17 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: The OmenQuote
Edit:This thread title is so condescending and insulting. For your information, the majority of my games are third party, and GameCube owners aren't different from anyone else. If you put out Soul Caliber 2's and REmake caliber games, they will be successful. Sure, many great third party games were ignored, but Sony is in a similar position. Some PS2 owners gravitate toward Madden and GTA, while ICO and Mark of Kri were ignored. So was Sly Cooper. In that case, Sony is in the opposite position, but still one where good games are not selling, so maybe I should say that PS2 owners are multiplatform elitists.
Boo-Hoo. Cry me a F'N river then. As I said earlier in this thread , if it isn't about you, so be it. Do not act like every 'you' in a paragraph means you specifically. Using YOU is easier than naming names, or doing a 5 year research plan, thats how it works. YOU means the general public, not YOU, the overreactive fanboy.
You should have said as much in the title then. You could have said GameCube owners or Nintendo fans in the title. Even though you attacked me as a fanboy, you dodged what everyone has been telling you, and what I have told you. Microsoft and Sony created a market for third parties on their system, and Nintendo did not with the GameCube. If you're placing blame on Nintendo's customers, and not the suits who run it, you need to get a clue.
Post by: Rhoq on April 14, 2004, 08:17:11 AM
15 years, many of us were pre-teens/adolescents (and some weren’t even born yet). I was 12 years old. I had whatever games interested me. A lot of them sucked…but I didn’t care. Do you know why I didn’t care? Because I didn’t waste my money on those games, my parents did. Back then it was all about who owned the most games. Not who got the most out their gaming experience.
As an adult gamer, my tastes have changed. Now I do care what games I have. I am not going to waste my time or money on a game that has received a countless number of poor reviews. If I am the slightest bit interested in a title, I always wait for a review. I try to stick with games that receive at least a 7/10 rating, but try to stick with 8/10 and higher. If a game that I am interested in scores below an average rating of 7, I know there is a good reason why and I make the decision not to waste my money on a game that has turned out to be a disappointment to so many reviewers. I use the reviews as a way to research games. Once I am done with my analysis, I reach a verdict. The verdict is either one of 3 decisions…1. MUST HAVE, 2. STILL INTERESTED AND WILL PURCHASE EVENTUALLY or 3. PASS – NO LONGER INTERESTED
If you look at my collection, most of the games I own this generation are considered by many to be “Must Have” titles. I have tried my best to avoid crap, but I had opted not to listen to reviews on a couple of titles and as a result Legends Of Wrestling and Wolverine’s Revenge were traded-in shortly after purchasing. Adult gamers think differently than teenagers and children. We don’t care about how many games we have in our collections (I have too many, LOL). All we care about is getting the most satisfying experience for our money and time spent playing. I admit without any shame I am a “casual gamer”. I don’t have the time to be anything but a casual gamer. As it right now, I haven’t had the time to play games since the weekend Metal Gear Solid was released.
I refuse to waste my money on a game just because it comes in a cool-looking package. A game could come in a plain white cover with black-text for all I care as long as the content of the title is worth the purchase. I will admit that there have been a few occasions over the last year that I fell victim to the hype-machine and have bought games based on their hype alone. Metroid Prime, The Wind Waker, Enter The Matrix, Soul Calibur II and Metal Gear Solid were all purchase based on hype. With the exception of The Matrix (which despites it’s many flaws isn’t so bad), all of these games delivered what many people claimed they would.
From what I have seen from browsing different GameCube forums, many ‘Cube owners are over the age of 18. I know that I can’t be the only one with this mentality. I don’t deny that sometimes taking a chance on a game you know nothing about can be a good thing, I would just rather do my research first, so I don’t end-up being disappointed later.
Post by: The Omen on April 14, 2004, 08:20:10 AM
By the way, I am a Nintendo fanboy, so don't take the fanboy term as an insult.
RHOQ, why read reviews? They're just opinions, right? I don't listen to reviews for movies, and I don't for games. I read about the games, but I will not buy based on anothers opinion. I buy what I want . If it gets high reviews, thats fine, but even if it got mediocre reviews, if I want it, I buy it. I believe a lot of people do what you do, but isn't a 6 rating above average? There is tons of games we're missing just because of sh!t like that.
Post by: the_zombie_luke on April 14, 2004, 08:28:33 AM
And by the way, I'm evaluating my Nintendo fanboy status. Four Swords Adventures and Wind Waker 2 will either make me jump ship or stay aboard.
Post by: the_zombie_luke on April 14, 2004, 08:31:19 AM
"RHOQ, why read reviews? They're just opinions, right? I don't listen to reviews for movies, and I don't for games. I read about the games, but I will not buy based on anothers opinion. I buy what I want . If it gets high reviews, thats fine, but even if it got mediocre reviews, if I want it, I buy it. I believe a lot of people do what you do, but isn't a 6 rating above average? There is tons of games we're missing just because of sh!t like that."
I agree with that. Reviews can help weed out obvious bad games, but they can be misleading. I remember Lost Kingdoms 2 got average reviews, and I said, "Who cares? I want to play it!" It became my favorite game of the generation!
Post by: Ian Sane on April 14, 2004, 08:47:06 AM
The reason the userbase was huge was because of Nintendo. They had good support from third parties, they released some KILLER first party games, they had great marketing, and they knew EXACTLY what the gaming public wanted and gave it to them. They also busted their ass to make it a success. Nintendo didn't do this with the Cube. They half-assed it from the start and never even put a quarter of the effort into it that they did with their previous consoles. And sure enough the userbase is smaller and the games aren't selling that well. Note that this issue is completely non-existant with the GBA which Nintendo has dedicated much more effort towards.
It's Nintendo's fault. It's not the responsibility of consumers to make something successful. People buy what they like and Nintendo has to make sure that people want to buy their console and thus buy Cube games.
Post by: theRPGFreak on April 14, 2004, 08:52:45 AM
Post by: Rhoq on April 14, 2004, 09:02:55 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: The Omen
RHOQ, why read reviews? They're just opinions, right? I don't listen to reviews for movies, and I don't for games. I read about the games, but I will not buy based on anothers opinion. I buy what I want . If it gets high reviews, thats fine, but even if it got mediocre reviews, if I want it, I buy it. I believe a lot of people do what you do, but isn't a 6 rating above average? There is tons of games we're missing just because of sh!t like that.
I understand your POV, I really do. BUT – I still find reviews to be helpful. Trust me, I go straight to the break-down of Pros and Cons. I couldn’t care less about the bullsh*t written in the body of the review. I also make sure that I read at least 5 different reviews from “professional sources” and 2 “reader reviews” (if they are available) before making my final decision. If I read about the same issues that hinder the game from being enjoyable in every review then I am not going to buy the game. Many games suffer from camera and collision detection problems. Those types of problems are important to me.
As far as ratings are concerned, I agree 6 is supposedly better than average, but I would think that the goal for any game would be to have it score a “perfect 10”. I figure by limiting my choices to games scoring at least a 7 and higher, I could avoid some crappy titles.
Am I missing out on some great games? Probably so, I wouldn’t doubt that I am. Perhaps I feel more secure knowing that I have done a bit of research before committing to a purchase. With new titles for the GameCube becoming fewer and farther between, I have 2 choices before the must-have Summer & Fall titles are released…Play the games I already do have (but hardly any time to play) or take a chance and buy a game or two that I am interested in. Knowing me, I will probably buy more games that I won’t have anytime to play. I will make a blind purchase though and see what results I end up with
Post by: couchmonkey on April 14, 2004, 09:54:24 AM
On the one hand, it's not the hardcore Nintendo fan's fault if third party games aren't selling well. As many of us here have pointed out, we own these games, there just aren't enough of Nintendo fanatics, enough time, and enough money to make every single good game a top 10 hit.
On the other hand, Nintendo has made some dumb decisions, but it's not just sitting on it's arse when it comes to expanding the user base. In my opinion, Nintendo has had a consistently better lineup of games than the Xbox for the past 20 months, and the GameCube is also much cheaper. Nintendo may not be doing every little thing it could to win the fight, but I think it's also fighting an astounding amount of apathy from consumers towards a product that's superior to the Xbox and on par with the PS2 - in my opinion.
Post by: Bill Aurion on April 14, 2004, 10:04:15 AM
Eh? But anyways, I'm particularly picky about the games I buy, since I have a pretty small budget set aside for them...This leads me to buy the higher quality first-party titles...Very rarely do I purchase a third-party game, and only if I'm very impressed with the title...(Soul Calibur II, REmake, etc...)
Post by: theRPGFreak on April 14, 2004, 10:18:41 AM
I agree with Bill. Sure we may know that the games are good (like Prince of Persia) but we only have so much time and money to enjoy them all. The reason that these games sell well as they do on the other consoles, is because the other systems dont have that many big hits like GC does.
Post by: thecubedcanuck on April 14, 2004, 10:22:24 AM
LMAO, this couldnt be any further from the truth.
Post by: ThePerm on April 14, 2004, 11:55:51 AM
Post by: nolimit19 on April 14, 2004, 12:07:13 PM
also....ps2 has about 10 times the user base as the cube. so that explains why more games sell better on it. the xbox on the other hand (at least from what i have seen) has a bunch of so-so selling games. for instance the xbox will have 10 games that sell 500,000 copies and hte cube will have one game that sells 4 million copies and hte remaining 9 games will split the 1 million in sales. those arent exact numbers of any actual game, but just an example. it doesnt mean the one cube game is better than the 10 xbox games, it just means that nintendo fans have a similar taste in games.
Post by: KDR_11k on April 14, 2004, 12:27:55 PM
Consoles need a better way to distribute demos. Hell, I have bought Stratosphere (review score: 13%!) because I liked the demo. Also, console game prices need to be lowered (in Europe) to PC game levels, currently PC gamers laugh at console gamers for paying that much for their games.
More budget games would be nice as well. Why do games have to cost full price until the retailer decides it won't sell, no matter what and throws it for twenty Euros into the clearance bin?
Post by: The Omen on April 14, 2004, 01:04:10 PM
Post by: Bill Aurion on April 14, 2004, 01:06:49 PM
Post by: Kyosho on April 14, 2004, 01:39:38 PM
Post by: SLIVER on April 14, 2004, 01:44:52 PM
WE SHOULD ALL EMAIL NINTENDO AND TELL THEM THAT WE WON'T BUY THE N5 UNLESS THE STRAIGHTEN UP I FOR ONE AM SICK OF THEIR SH*T.
Head fo Nintendo: " Our products should be Fun and Innotiative" "OH yeah we are ALL GAE"
Post by: Draygaia on April 14, 2004, 01:48:45 PM
Post by: CHEN on April 14, 2004, 01:51:35 PM
Post by: XchrononetX on April 14, 2004, 02:30:45 PM
There is an overall lack of knowledge as to whether the group was truly talented or not because it goes all to opinion, and my opinion states the ED was GOOD, not GREAT. The game had many flaws, both in gameplay, and the implementation of the oh so experimental "sanity system". This caused more problems than it did mess with my mind as it was clearly intended to do. Give me Resident Evil any day!
MGS remake, I have yet to play, and although it is said that they have implemented elements from MGS2 Son's of Liberty as well as updated graphics, it was still the same game. A remake of ANY game that was conceived during the Playstation era won't sell good simply because that means that everyone and their MOTHER has already played said title. Also, remakes have never really been excepted well in the United States so GOD KNOWS!
Overall, the quality of SK is debatable, and it is still yet unknown who had the stronger footing in this decision. I mean, seriously, they may have been second party, but you have no idea what type of stock Nintendo had in them, which means that they may not have had a choice. Nobody knows, and yet you people are acting like this is dooms day! Honestly, Zelda, Mario and Metroid are enough for me to at LEAST have a future Nintendo console, although I happen to own both the Cube and the PS2. Personally, I don't see how this could be interperated as a bad thing at all, because you should be happy for other players who don't happen to have the finances to own the system that you own as well as the console that they have, yet share similar interests in game types.
Seriously, people, you have to stop freaking out, because if you do EVERY time Nintendo, or any company for that matter, makes a mistake, you WILL have an epileptic seizure. Honestly, I expected more from a Nintendo community, as it does not represent the mass audience, and yet I get less. My faith in Nintendo hasn't waned, but my faith in it's fans has.
Post by: kennyb27 on April 14, 2004, 02:42:37 PM
QuoteActually, I'll pass on DK64. It was a terrible game.
Rare was proven talent, that made MANY AAA titles, as will as took older Nintendo franchises and translated them into 3-D flawlessly (DK64 anyone?).
QuoteOne of the reasons everyone loved SK is because of the potential in the developer. Eternal Darkness had an incredible story and Metal Gear Solid was remade with incredible detail. The president Denis Dyack was an incredible guy who actually listened to his fans (as shown by his visiting of these and many other online boards and his openness to interviews).
Overall, the quality of SK is debatable, and it is still yet unknown who had the stronger footing in this decision. I mean, seriously, they may have been second party, but you have no idea what type of stock Nintendo had in them, which means that they may not have had a choice.
On a side note to KDR: GameRankings is heavily based on IGN's users' wishlists and IGN's news. Now, I'm not saying you can't trust it. You just can't trust it completely.
Post by: The Omen on April 14, 2004, 03:39:53 PM
Quote
I'm sorry, I'm sorry, but I just HAD to sign up just to reply to this braindead topic. As you might have noticed just by my prelude sentence, I'm clearly dissatisfied with the opinions of the majority of this board.
Its so braindead, that you decided to post a book into this thread? I didnt start this topic for you, so if you're dissatisfied, who really cares? FYI- I didn't start it just because of the SK disgrace, but because of everything I see thats wrong witrh Nintendo, its fans and the industry in general.. and i'm one of the biggest NIN fanboys, in terms of loyalty, you'll find.
