Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Deguello

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 81
TalkBack / Re: Nintendo Demands Take Down of Icon Games's Sales Numbers
« on: January 06, 2012, 01:26:32 PM »
But Nintendo is clearly and unequivocally in business for themselves first and foremost.

Your post is nice, but I have a quibble with this as this is true of every single platform holder.  I have yet to hear a company's stated goal being otherwise.

Also, this thread being on a Nintendo-focused forum tends to create the idea that Nintendo's problems are the only problems that exist.  Other digital platforms have their problems too.  Take Apple, for instance, and their almost usurious 30% royalty rate, even for in-program purchases (this led to trouble with Walmart and Amazon, whom Apple wanted 30% of their retail sales through the app as well).   And that's only if your game isn't free, in which case Apple wants 40% of your game's ad revenue.  I believe this royalty rate is the highest.  But they're willing to forgo these problems because Apple has a lot of phones out there. 

Similarly with Wii, there are just so many out there that if you get a hit you make a lot, and that's worth the risk of not meeting the threshold and not getting your money (which by the way, has less royalties attached, so the dev gets more of their money.)

They were the market leader this gen and everybody stayed away in droves.  Think about that.  Atari 2600, NES, SNES, PS1, PS2 - every single market leading console in the past generations had undoubtedly the strongest third party support and yet the Wii had the WORST.  It's the only market leader in videogame history to have lousy third party support.

I think this says more about third parties this Generation than it does about Nintendo.  Since you lump third parties all together in a big lump, it might interest you to know that this generation saw a lot of blood on the streets as long time and big time publishers bled money and shrunk rapidly.  Considering that they avoided Nintendo's platform, do you think maybe the two events are related? 

TalkBack / Re: Nintendo Demands Take Down of Icon Games's Sales Numbers
« on: January 06, 2012, 12:31:46 PM »
3.  He makes a good point about sales data being non-existent making things very hard for companies.  How can a company make business decisions without knowing how games on the service are doing?  You're going in basically blind.

I'm sure Icon Games knows how well their games are selling.  It's the making public of the data that probably violates their contract.

Ian's history lesson.

Oh Ian, you haven't changed at all while I was gone.  But just so you know it would be Nintendo's business if it explicitly states in their contract that they can't reveal sales data.  Which is why we don't see too many sales numbers from WiiWare games, even the successful ones.

TalkBack / Re: Nintendo Demands Take Down of Icon Games's Sales Numbers
« on: January 06, 2012, 11:34:47 AM »
I believe Apple requires that you sell at least $500 worth of downloads before you get anything.  Funny enough in the comments of some of these articles from the guy from the games shows that's how much money they've from their iPhone games in total, which means these guys are a hard luck case, but not undeservingly so.

Imagine if Walmart, Amazon, etc. told Nintendo they couldn't release any sales figures on games sold at those stores.

Doesn't Walmart refuse to give out sales data to NPD?  That's controlling information that isn't theirs to control.  I'm not saying Nintendo's right, but it isn't entirely out of the ordinary.

I'm honestly surprised these guys bothered to comply with Nintendo's demand to remove the WiiWare sales data.

I'm not.  If it's part of their contract that they don't reveal sales numbers, then they'd get sued into oblivion if they persisted.

I still see this as sour grapes that their game didn't sell as well as World of Goo or much better received games.  They knew the terms of the contract when they signed it, and if they didn't read it then they have no one but themselves to blame.  This appeal to the public shows why it matters who brings up issues like this, because, despite the "long man-hours" it took to create uh... Soccer Bash, quality still counts.  The fact that, say... Cave Story was created by one person and ported to Wiiware by a very small team shows that you can succeed with quality.  I believe this game got a lot of exposure as well.

Still it's pretty much a moot point now, as the Wii is winding down.  Already the 3DS's eShop has no sales threshold.  How about Icon Games go over there?

TalkBack / Re: Most Pirated Wii Games of 2011 Revealed
« on: January 05, 2012, 05:50:21 PM »
I hesitate to to make any assumptions of the number of possible paying customers based on the data of what thieves steal.  That's backwards moon logic.

Those blaming Nintendo for "deserving" to be pirated from obviously forgot the other piracy chestnut in that pirates never had any intention of buying anything they pirate, which is typically used in an argument against DRM.  You can't have it both ways.

Whether or not you agree or disagree with Nintendo's late localization, Nintendo doesn't "deserve" to be stolen from (as nobody does), unless your intention is to teach them never to listen to their hardcore fans pleas again and vindicate Nintendo's initial skittishness at releasing it here.  IF that IS your intention, then please continue cheering on the pirates.  I'm sure Monolith Soft appreciates it.

One thing that amazed me was how often Mario Sports Mix got pirated. Were people really interested in the game?

What this obviously means is that you can't use this data for any effective conclusion.  Pirates gonna pirate and it doesn't matter what it is.

TalkBack / Re: Icon Games Reveals WiiWare Sales Numbers
« on: January 04, 2012, 05:15:03 PM »
This is one of those stories where, whether or not the person has a point, it matters who is complaining.  The fact that this companies games look horrible and that their representative, through some alchemical train of thought, manages to blame Nintendo for poor critical reception of their games (what?) shows that they're just being bitter that their game didn't sell better than Lit or something.

And this is actually a good reason why I like the sales threshold system as it not only encourages the development of good, attention-grabbing, and appealing games, but also there is the quality control aspect that keeps WiiWare stocked with good, or failing that, at least appealing-to-some games.  Unfortunately it leads to stories like this where a developer of a game that failed to garner enough sales doesn't get their royalties.  Considering their lineup, sucks to be them.

But this will probably be a moot point in the future as the 3DS eShop has no sales threshold for anything and this will likely be true of the Wii U as well.

Nintendo Gaming / Re: The Official 3DS System Friend Code Thread
« on: December 31, 2011, 04:05:28 PM »
Thought I'd just pop in and let all you fine folks know my 3DS code is:


.. What you thouhgt I was dead?  HARDLY!  I've just been flat broke and jobless for about a year and a half!  And cripplingly depressed!

But feel free to add me anyway.

Nintendo Gaming / Re: New Wii Zelda
« on: August 18, 2010, 04:02:04 AM »
I get the idea that if Nintendo doesn't totally nail it with voice acting, fans will bitch.  But fans bitched about the Wind Waker's visuals too.  If they don't get the motion controls right in Skyward Sword, fans will bitch.  This is a risk of changing anything or adding anything to the series and I think that sort of risk just has to be taken at certain points or things will stagnate (which will bring out a different form of bitching.)

Recently, video game anthropologists have recently discovered a third way to bitch about video game innovation within game series.  They found that certain peoples decried the changes to a series, not for ruining the series or for being poor, but that the change did not result into an entirely new IP.  Modern anthropologists are puzzled as to the motives of these peoples, as such a position was truly bizarre, even in their times.

By the way, Nintendo has actually used voice acting in an artistic way that added to the game.  The EAD team specifically wanted voice in Starfox 64 because it would allow the game to relay information to the player without them having to read the words at the bottom of the screen.  (Taking their eye off the action.) And this is possibly why there are so many fond memories of Starfox 64's voice acting.  Because in that game, they served the purpose of notification of enemy locations and hints and such.

TalkBack / Re: 3DS Destined for 2011 Release?
« on: August 18, 2010, 03:03:54 AM »
Also, the window around the DS launch in 2004 was clear outside of a GBA port of a 10-year old DKC game, which isn't comparable to a brand new Donkey Kong Country.

That's not true either.  Nintendo was releasing Final Fantasy I and II, Metroid Prime 2, Mario Tennis, and DKC2 (which was more major than ou're masking it out to be) all in the same November.  Nintendo Released the DS in the midst of all of this.

TalkBack / Re: 3DS Destined for 2011 Release?
« on: August 17, 2010, 03:43:55 PM »
How about on the same day as FlingSmash?

When the DS was released it was very close to DKC2 on the GBA, like 5 days apart.

Besides there's nothing tying them to the days of their major game releases.

In fact, here's an old press release for Nintendo's Fall lineup for 2004, and keep in mind that the DS had not been confirmed for 2004. and would only be so later that September.

I'm not saying the 3DS is definitely coming out this year, but their release list from August isn't enough data for it not coming out this year either.

Nintendo Gaming / Re: New Wii Zelda
« on: August 17, 2010, 03:21:11 PM »
You can't release quick cash-in spinoffs like Link's Crossbow Training and then talk about artistic integrity of the Zelda series.  It's already too late.

If this is the metric for what's artistic I'd imagine the list of truly artistic games is quite small, as you can find spinoffs and cash-ins for everything.  But since said spinoff has absolutely nothing to to with this game, it's pretty much immaterial and yes Nintendo can still make creative decisions about a game despite having released another game which subjectively may or may not have creative designs (as it was a software pack-in for a peripheral), so this point is pretty much moot.

I don't think voice acting would lose too many future sales so I think it's an acceptable risk.

Well if it's that unimportant, why bother?  And how come the position is that it wouldn't "lose too many sales?"  If it's going to lose them any sales, why in the world would they ever want to?  Shouldn't they want to sell more?


So because another company (Phillips) made 3 terrible Zelda games

Hey, Zelda's Zelda. All those low-information Zelda fans in 1994 who really didn't follow the whole games scene would think the series went bat****, especially after three straight games of this crap.  Thankfully they died quiet and obscure deaths, but just imagine if Nintendo themselves tried this sort of voice acting 3 times in 7 years, starting with Skyward Sword.  It would absolutely destroy the series.

The reason everyone remembers the CD-I Zelda games for those terrible production values is because they're the ones most easily visible on YouTube (that, as well as the Angry Video Game Nerd's videos), and yet despite how terrible those games were the franchise went on to do Ocarina of Time and still has a huge fanbase.

As far as I know Youtube didn't exist in 1998, and these games remained very, very obscure and almost mythical until the mid-2000s.  Part of the reason that Ocarina of Time did so well was because for all of the fans, that was the next Zelda game after LttP.  Now imagine the three CD-i games were released in between.  How would Ocarina of Time have fared then?  Would interest in Zelda have even survived?

Nintendo Gaming / Re: New Wii Zelda
« on: August 17, 2010, 02:54:42 PM »
I don't think I was saying Nintendo made them.  If anything it was a godsend that the CD-i was a major flop or else those three games'  (THREE) taint might have ruined Zelda forever.  But rather that their example is probably remembered by Nintendo as a rather stark warning that bad voice acting ruins everything, even decidedly mediocre games like the Zelda CD-I games.  Hell what's the one thing anybody remembers about them?  The goofy cutscenes and horrible voices.

BTW, please don't call me an idiot, or infer I am one.

TalkBack / Re: Nintendo Posts Fall Release Date Schedule
« on: August 17, 2010, 02:05:31 PM »
I think Nintendo learned from Wii Music.  Wii Party's release is such that if you were not interested in it you're still fine.  Kirby is the same month and then DKC is a month later.  It isn't like Wii Party gets the big Christmas slot and there is nothing else around and if you don't get it you're **** out of luck for months.

The release schedule looks like Nintendo acknowledges that there are two different audiences here that may not be interested in the same game so you can get Wii Party or DKC Returns or both if you want.  But the important thing is there is something new regardless of which audience you belong to.

My concern with targetting non-gamers was that the non-games would spread Nintendo's resources thin and it would create gaps in the release schedule with Nintendo releasing a non-game in a core game's slot.  I feel at times that has happened.  But this time it isn't.  This is how it should work.  I can take the non-game, pretend it doesn't exist, and the release schedule appears unaffected.

This idea, however appropriate, also works completely against Nintendo's own "take as much time as is needed" approach to game development. Something was inevitably due for release last year and got pushed back in the cycle causing the big hole and they had to get their PR bods to "elevate" Wii Music to "everyone will like it status".

Cultural requirements must meet business demands somewhere otherwise we wind up with last years holiday season. The test really is to see what happens NEXT christmas, as the games that started development in that lull period last year should release around then - if they don't then they haven't learned anything at all.

I hope you're meaning two years ago.  Last Holiday was a smashing success with New Super Mario Bros. Wii. 2008 was the one with Wii Music and Animal Crossing.

Nintendo Gaming / Re: New Wii Zelda
« on: August 17, 2010, 01:59:59 PM »
Zelda and voice acting just don't mix for reasons both internal and external to Nintendo.

As insanolord mentioned, this is just an artistic decision for Nintendo.  It helps that it's economical too, but Zelda games actually have quite long voice credits these days.  The fact that they are limited to "exclamations" and "flavor sounds" is purely a creative decision.

Another reason is that Zelda actually has quite a bad history with voice acting.  I mean just go listen to the CD-I stuff.  That would be enough to turn anybody involved with the creation of future Zelda games away from voice acting forever.

Lastly, is that this is Zelda, one of the most revered game series in the history of games.  The bar is set so high that it could not feasibly be passed in one try, and if they fail badly, fans won't suffer their repeated attempts to get it right.  For an example of this, look at the industrial-strength bitching about the new Metroid's voice acting, which is actually pretty average to above-average as far as games go, but because it's a long revered Nintendo series, anything less than perfection is a stab in the heart.  Hell, look at how many people still kvetch about Mario's voice, 14 years later.

I also second insanolord's immense praise for the Treehouse.  Considering the amazing amount of variety in games they localize, that they can find ways to differentiate by tone, period, mood, and age level is truly magnificent and they are definitely not appreciated enough for it.

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Official Wii Sales Thread
« on: August 15, 2010, 11:39:53 AM »
I agree, though I think we'll be looking at something like the sales of Wii Sports Resort: it'll perform admirably, but nothing exceptional compared to the other Wii ______ games.  I estimate that it'll probably hit around 5-6 million unit worldwide in probably steady but not particularly impressive bursts.

Wii Sports Resort has sold more than 16 million units worldwide.

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Metroid Other M
« on: August 13, 2010, 02:38:24 AM »
We need a dedicated section of the forums for these arguments to make it easier to ignore them.

I'd rather they just not come up at all.  I wish this thread could just be about Metroid rather than whether or not Nintendo needs to make new IPs or something about third party support or whether Nintendo's still "cool" because they made a few games that get labeled "casual."  It's boring and predictable, and really not worth discussing, but will come up at the drop of a hat for absolutely zero reason.

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Metroid Other M
« on: August 13, 2010, 12:14:17 AM »
I think quality is the most important thing.  Who gives two ****s if anyone makes new IP or does anything innovative if the results aren't so hot?  Whenever I say that I would like Nintendo, or any videogame company, to do something there is the assumption that I end the request with "... and make it good."  Otherwise it's all technicalities.

The problem here is we're just relying on your opinion on what's good or not, and considering some of these newer IPs are critical or financial successes, or both, then your individual idea of what "counts" is moot.  Nintendo making that big list of new IPs isn't a "technicality," they're new IPs, just like you asked for.

It's like your boss giving you a 1 cent raise and saying "well you asked for a raise so there you go."

In this instance it's more like your boss giving you a $10 an hour raise, and you still continually demand a raise while refusing to cash your check.

So I look at EAD, IS, Retro or Sakamoto's team and their core game projects and it's all sequels it's like "come on, guys".  This is just kind of stale.

Your opinion here is nice and all, but since these games routinely outsell and even outscore other new IPs, even on competing consoles, it's really immaterial.  You are basically asking them to throw Mario, Zelda, Metroid, and Donkey Kong under a bus and just make new stuff.  And while that's admirable in an artistic sense, it's terrible in terms of keeping your hardcore fans happy, and considering the sales of Mario and Zelda and such, that's a pretty big risk to take in the hopes they'll buy something completely unrelated.  If you're getting tired of Mario and Zelda, fine.  Either try some of Nintendo's newer IP (which you clearly haven't done since you use such blanket statements about them all), or sell your Wii and look elsewhere.  But don't constantly whine about new IP and then ignore it when they provide it.  You don't even give them credit for trying, so you'll never be pleased.

But it's not like you'll see Nintendo give the big Christmas "slot" to some completely brand new IP and push it like they would push a Mario title.

So now it's "new IPs that personally appeal to me and have gigantic marketing campaigns during Christman."  I think we're straying from the original intent of the complaint to get Nintendo to make new IPs in an artistic context and going into some kind of pointless chatter about marketing and other stuff that really shouldn't matter in the context.  Why should it matter if it's got a giant marketing campaign or not?  Are you saying you'll refuse to even acknowledge Nintendo's new IP until they blow $20 million on a marketing campaign directed specifically at you and your general male interest websites and TV channels?  What kind of gamer are you, seriously?

Side note: I suppose we can add Sin and Punishment to the list of new Nintendo IPs.  The first was an import title from 10 years ago, and it's more or less a new title (newer than some of the series being thrown around as exemplars of "new IP"), and it's in the core area, and got some pretty heavy marketing.  But it probably won't be counted either, because it's merely a "new IP with core market appeal with big marketing" and not a "new IP with core market appeal with big marketing during the Q3 holiday period."

Remember when Halo or Gears of War were brand new?

For those playing at home, I'll let you have a guess as to why Halo got such a big marketing push in 2001.  Besides, these are boring stale franchises now, right?  Why compare one big franchise, heavily marketed as the big Christmas title whenevr it rolls around to another just because it's "newer?"

It's because it was the first console game Microsoft published for the Xbox.  Of course it was going to have big marketing, no matter what it was.  And it was going to be an new IP too.

Metroid: Other M is going to be one of the Wii's big releases this year.  Now is that only because it is a familiar franchise?  Would it be one of the major releases if it was the same thing but with a new IP?

I think a big problem with this assessment is that firstly you are basing this complaint track off the sadly misguided notion that Other M was not a Metroid game at inception.  That it was some kind of game about an armored space warrior going through a space station shooting aliens and then Nintendo's IP Synergy StrikeForce rappelled into the dev offices and forced the programmers at gunpoint to shoehorn in a completely unrelated IP like Metroid.

Secondly, is that you think Nintendo having a new IP that's nothing but a cheap knock off of one of their own existing series would be a "good thing."  That's incredibly creatively bankrupt when you're just renaming characters in the same games.

I'll close with an example of when an arbitrarily new IP decision would have cost gamers the #1 fighting game series of all time (as far as sales anyway.)  HAL was working on a fighting game called Dragon King.  It was an interesting mechanic for a fighter that, instead of wearing your opponent's life bar down (though later sequels would include such modes), you merely throw them off the screen or stage.  However, the prospects for this fighting game were pretty bleak considering the original characters were somewhat generic, stock characters.  Despite the intriguing and innovative gameplay, the game really had no market pull and no amount of marketing could sell the concept with a generic IP.  They then decided to use Nintendo's current stable of characters in a unique setting (a fighting game) as a replacement for these generic characters and Smash bros. was the result.  The game sold gangbusters and has been ruling the fighting game genre ever since.

If Nintendo tried to do it with a new IP, it would have assuredly perished quickly and nobody would have ever remembered it, particularly not the "new IP" crowd.

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Metroid Other M
« on: August 12, 2010, 05:06:19 PM »
All second tier titles made by second tier teams.  Pikmin was made by Miyamoto and EAD.

Nintendogs was made by EAD too, and Miyamoto personally.  And please don't go calling companies like Monolith Soft "second tier."  Or the WarioWare guys, who made Rhythm Heaven.  And Drill Dozer was made by the Pokemon team.  Or their games.  I mean Xenoblade may or may not be localized, but it got all 9's from Famitsu.  I'd say that makes it more than "second tier," wouldn't you say?  Maybe you oughta know more about the stuff you blankly dismiss.

Besides the quality of the games is immaterial to the point about new IP.  Which Nintendo has certainly made an abundant amount of since 2002.  Bringing up your personal quality preference just smells of "creative classification." you know like "when I said new IP, I meant new IP that I personally, will find appealing."  Of course your opinion is important to yourself, but you can't just whip it out at the end as some kind of cure-all rebuttal when it wasn't part of your original complaint.  You wanted Nintendo to make new IP.  They have.  Cut.  Print.

And before you go sanctifying Sony for creating new franchises all the time, you might want to consider that the reason Sony does this is that they never really can get a series that's as popular as Mario or Zelda or sometimes even as popular as one of Nintendo's B-series like Endless Ocean.  And watch what happens when they do get a quasi popular one.  they run it into the ground until nobody cares anymore, like what happened with Ratchet and Clank, Jak and Daxter, and Socom.

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Metroid Other M
« on: August 12, 2010, 02:10:12 AM »
It just doesn't sound like they set out to make a great Metroid game but rather they wanted to make something different and then they decided to use the Metroid IP for it.

If Nintendo never re-appropriated a game design into something else we'd never have Donkey Kong.

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Metroid Other M
« on: August 11, 2010, 11:09:23 PM »
How many of these were crazy good sellers?

Why would they have to be?  I thought all Nintendo had to do was try to make new IP.  Now it suddenly has to outsell Mario or something?

And Stratos, Magical Starsign was released in the U.S.   I know, because I have a copy.  Another Code was also released in the U.S. as Trace Memory.

I have zero patience for the Wii's third party situation because it is the market leader and that was until now the formula for attracting the best third party support.

Do you remember that episode of the Simpsons where Homer becomes head of the Stonecutters Society through some old code about a birthmark indicating some kind of "chosen one."  And they were all repulsed and hated the idea of Homer being the leader of their club so they instituted a new club called the No Homers?

Not to inject a tiny bit of politics, but did you ever wonder why all of a sudden Barack Obama's "citizenship" was suddenly being questioned by people who just HATED the idea of a black man being president?

For years it was the third parties who were denying support to Nintendo's consoles on this very issue, and the moment they had to put their money where their mouth was, all of a sudden, excuse after excuse came out, trying to hide the fact that most of them had prematurely chosen the PS3 or the 360 as their bets for the market leader, or their pockets were stuffed with moneyhats the whole time last generation.

I tend to side more with the third parties because of Nintendo's reputation and the extreme unlikeliness that EVERY third party is colluding together to specifically screw the Wii over,

Who said they were all working together?  They could all be equally independently idiotic and all tried a bunch of spinoffs nobody wanted or Wii Sports knockoffs or half-hearted casual games meant to cash in or drum up revenue for risky HD titles.  And WOW!  That's what happened.

even if it means going out of business or that every videogame company in the world except Nintendo are a bunch of idiots.

You know I tend to get my knuckles rapped for continually bringing up Nintendo's quite lucrative existence for the past three years or so vs. their competition and their detractors.  But, here said facts are very useful in determining this particular subject matter.  Just going by profits and revenues, Nintendo is indeed a very smart company, and third parties, generally, have been struggling quite severely, (sans any that have a direct line of revenue for continued existence from a console manufacturer.) and some have almost institutionalized losses over the last 3 years, which would indicate them as less than smart, wouldn't you agree?

I see the Wii's hardware incompatibility with the HD consoles as a much more likely source of the problem.

Are you trying to make my point for me?  Here you indicate that suddenly something other than market leadership is the main factor for third parties' support, when they used to parrot on and on about "userbase this, marketshare that."  Everybody last generation (including you yourself) said that was the #1 thing Nintendo had to fix for the next round.  "Get a higher userbase."  And they did.   And now suddenly it's about a bunch of other factors they didn't care about last generation until suddenly they do this generation.

Nintendo should continue their efforts to meet whatever 3rd parties' wishes are as far as hardware goes, while trying simultaneously to be freshly innovative to retain their advantage over their console competitors (see: motion control, glasses-less 3-D, elimination of loadtimes, etc).  But unless there is some sort of guarantee that third parties will make strong games for the system, they shouldn't go above and beyond what they're already doing as far as this issue is concerned.  Maybe the idea of the Wii2 being considered a smashing success regardless of actual performance before it is released will play in next round.  It worked for the PS3.

It'll be interesting to see if history repeats itself and we see 3rd parties using weak 3rd party Wii software sales as the basis for not taking the Wii 2 seriously,

Nah, historically weak performance doesn't matter as much as you think it does.  If it did, then nobody would have made games for the Xbox 360, because the original Xbox was pretty weak tea for third parties.

Besides, they won't be fooling anybody.  Everybody knows third parties make garbage for the Wii, and that's why their titles sell horribly.  At least, that's the narrative they themselves created.

especially if the PS3 continues to gain traction and Kinect takes off for Microsoft.

Kinect and move won't take off unless Microsoft and Sony fans are the biggest hypocrites in the world, what with 4 years straight of "gimmick!" until their favorite companies announced their versions.  Considering both have had some pretty lackluster previews, I'd say both of these things are pretty niche and probably won't amount to much except crippling losses for both.

I may give the impression that I ride third parties pretty hard, and sometimes I do, but I really don't hate them.  In fact I don't think Nintendo hates them either, or is indifferent to their concerns, but they can be very frustrating to deal with.  I'm sure Nintendo's willing to meet them halfway like they did with 3DS hardware and stuff, but that still means the third parties have to go the other half and develop strong titles.  And as long as they keep making spinoff after excuse after bad port after shovelware, as a gamer, it's really hard to be on their side when it comes to how their games sell on Nintendo's platforms.

I refuse to return to the days when we had to blow into a cartridge to get it to work.

I'd rather blow into my cartridges for 20 years then have my consoles break after 5.

Yes, because CDs are the sole reason for that.   ::)   The more complicated a mechanical system becomes, the more likely that it will break.  That's just how it is.

Actually, yeah the CDs are the cause of it, because they require those complicated mechanical systems, because without them, they're coasters.

It's got all this new stuff but underneath it all it's a GBA with better specs.

How is this different from the Wii?  It's still a GameCube with better specs right?  And you can't even use the comparison to 360 and PS3 because the DS itself had competition with the PSP and it was leagues ahead of the DS in terms of graphical power.

Third party support serves customers and gamers better than anything else.

I can give several examples as to why this can be untrue.  When a bunch of third parties didn't care about quality they flooded the market with cheap crap and caused that big video game crash in the early 80's.  Third parties pledged higher support for the PSP initially, but because the PSP had so many hardware design flaws (chief amongst them being a low battery due in part to a disc-based medium) their support meant little.  Hell, it was one of the big "pros" for the PSP, the assumption of it having higher third party support than some weird gimmicky touchscreen system that uses carts.  And if we can't learn any lessons from the highest selling video game system ever, well...

Maxi, it became about third party support the moment I suggested Nintendo uses some kind of cartridge or card-based system for the Wii2 to cut down moving parts, load times, and power use, banking on the idea that 8 and 16 GB cards will be cheap enough in bulk to house the majority of any game types and that game sizes won't ever need to go above 16GB.  It was basically inevitable from then.

But I'm concerned that if Nintendo went with it while everyone else stuck with discs that it would negatively affect third party support.

Didn't hurt DS.

Doing things their own goofy ass way has never attracted squat.

Ditto.  And the 3DS seems to be pretty goofy as well.  I mean glasses-less 3D?  Come on Nintendo, choose the conventional glasses model like everybody else!

In this case the big advantage is load times but do most devs give a ****?

I don't care what a bunch of corporate suits want (thought you wouldn't either but, oh well.)  I care what would serve customers and gamers better.

It became motion control vs. HD hardware and the devs picked HD.

And the customers picked motion control.  Just like they picked touchscreen.  This is why Nintendo's rich and most third parties are struggling.

Nintendo being Mr. Goofy with excuses about why smaller solid state is better in their mind is not going to accomplish anything.

But it is better for game consoles and gamers to have fast access speeds and more durable consoles as a result of no moving parts.  More storage space isn't going to mean much if you never get close to using it all, and if MS and Sony are going to offer such large storage space as a shooting off point for their Digital Distribution-only approaches, then it becomes a little less clear cut than "More Storage space wins."

Wait, what kind of "durability" do you mean?  Do you mean it being resistant to strikes and extreme temperatures?  Because Solid State wins that hands down.

Or do you mean long life?  Because Solid State actually did have a problem with that early on but now they've got some pretty long life spans.  Not AS long as regular hard drives, but more than long enough to be inside a game machine.

And if we're going by personal experience, I have a WD 1 TB Hard Drive right next to me that worked for precisely 3 days and then stopped working with no error messages or warning.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 81