Messages

376

TalkBack / Re: European Release Moved Forward for Xenoblade Chronicles

« on: July 10, 2011, 10:27:51 AM »

An online campaign had no influence over this, that is the safe bet. Online campaigns almost never work, and they never have with Nintendo. There is no evidence that this wasn't just a decision on Nintendo's part, maybe to get more sales from kids before school starts or another reason. I would honestly love to see and evidence that a group of people online (who were never gonna buy the game anyways) had any influence.

A quick search:
Earlier this year, Bethesda Softworks moved the release of Brink up a week: http://bethblog.com/index.php/2011/04/11/brink-it-forward-release-date-moved-up-one-week/
Bethesda also moved Hunted: The Demon's Forge up 1 day (only a day, but still moved up): http://news.bigdownload.com/2011/03/24/hunted-the-demons-forge-release-date-moved-up-by-one-day-to-ma/
The European release of Okami on Wii moved up 8 days: http://n4g.com/news/148100/europe-okami-release-date-moved-up

Clearly, I stand corrected...

Nevertheless, I'm still convinced this was done at NOA's request. Simply saying it's not just because other campaigns  haven't seemed to influence Nintendo in the past is hardly valid argument... especially in this case where it's already been translated, and there have already been numerous indications that NOA was always at least considering a release.

Granted, it probably would be naive to think that NOA would suddenly decide release a game they had already decided not to just because of an online campaign... but that's not necessarily what we're talking about here.

We already appear to have a confirmation that NOA already made a North American build of Xenoblade even before Operation Rainfall began. So, it's pretty safe to assume they were always considering it and were likely holding out to see how it did in Europe first. Considering the timing, it's more than reasonable to conclude OR had some kind of impact this choice to move it up.

Operation Rainfall may not have been enough to completely make up their minds, but if they still hadn't completely ruled it out, then I'm sure it at least made them start looking at it seriously enough request NOE to give them more time so NOA can make a final decision and still get it on shelves in time for the holidays.

377

TalkBack / Re: European Release Moved Forward for Xenoblade Chronicles

« on: July 08, 2011, 05:17:23 PM »

I think it's a little foolish to think Operation Rainfall has had any influence on Nintendo whatsoever. Game companies have pushed up release dates before for various reasons.

Really? What's your basis for that claim?

Sometimes games ship and appear in stores early... But their official release dates don't get revised nor do they get special announcements like this.

I challenge you to show me 3 separate examples of when this has happened before. I'm quite confident you can't.

In actuality, this is practically unprecedented... Trust me, it's probably more foolish not to think Operation Rainfall influenced this.

378

TalkBack / Re: European Release Moved Forward for Xenoblade Chronicles

« on: July 08, 2011, 03:23:41 PM »

There's no doubt in my mind that this bump-up is directly related to Operation Rainfall. The movement has gotten NOA's attention, so now they're going to closely observe European sales to determine whether or not to release it here. My bet is NOE is moving it up at NOA's request. That way they'll have extra time to analyze the early sales data and still have enough time to throw together a last minute holiday release if they decide to do so.

So to all of you in Europe, our fate is in your hands! Please buy Xenoblade Chronicles!

379

TalkBack / Re: Xenoblade and The Last Story Coming Stateside?

« on: July 08, 2011, 12:19:19 PM »

I have to point out, that part about "Nintendo of America's continued insistence that the company has no plans to localize those titles" is INACCURATE. What they actually said was they had "no plans to bring [them] ...at this time". Aside from the obvious "at this time" part, there's another key difference between what you reported and they actually said-- "Bringing" and "localizing" are two very different things. All this source actually confirmed was that there was a localization. And NOA never actually said they weren't still localizing.

I hate to have to rain on everyone's parade, but it should be at least noted that localizing doesn't necessarily indicate plans for a release. Especially in a case like this where NOE had already taken care of 99% the job already. Since an English translation has already been done and paid for by NOE, and NOA could easily throw together a NTSC build with very little expense. In fact, would be dumb not their part not to have one already prepared in the event if the games sell well enough in Europe to make them reconsider. It could also be handy to already have one ready for a third party to buy the rights to publish.

There's plenty of reasons to make a localization and just sit on it. So, we shouldn't assume this means anything. Nevertheless, I still am confident we will see a release for Xenoblade unless it's a total bomb in Europe.

380

TalkBack / Re: Nintendo Has 'No Plans' to Release Xenoblade, The Last Story, or Pandora's Tower in North Americ

« on: June 30, 2011, 12:18:10 PM »

and arguably Dragon Quest VI.   Last year, they chose to help with the publishing and marketing of Monster Hunter Tri...  So, I wonder what's changed between now and then?

Both of those games were very successful in Japan. These titles are not.

What are you talking about? I know The Last Story was huge in Japan. And I'm pretty sure Xenoblade and Pandora's Tower did pretty well too.

The real difference between then and now, in the case of Monster Hunter Tri, is that the Wii's lifecycle wasn't as close to the end as it is now... and Capcom still did most of the job anyway. In the case of Dragon Quest VI, it was because DQ IX sold well enough.

381

TalkBack / Re: Nintendo Has 'No Plans' to Release Xenoblade, The Last Story, or Pandora's Tower in North Americ

« on: June 30, 2011, 11:08:57 AM »

Relax people, this isn't as bad as it seems. My suggestion is to keep sending your letters and keep pre-ordering Monado. Even if NOA doesn't reconsider (which they very well still could if the fans don't back down), that still doesn't mean other publishers won't pick them up-- especially in the case of Xenoblade-- the money's already on the table, so someone's going to want to cash it in. I'm convinced Xenoblade is already guaranteed to come stateside from someone, unless people start being stupid and begin cancelling their preorders.

I actually see NOA's statement as a good sign-- I see this as their way of testing us to see if we start backing down. They realize the Amazon preorders aren't guaranteed sales, as people can just cancel their preorders once Xenoblade gets a release date, and this whole movement could just turn out to be smoke and mirrors by a small, yet very organized niche (which actually could be the case).

They wouldn't bother commenting on the matter at all if they weren't taking this serious. We've already made them flinch-- don't get discouraged, keep it up!

382

TalkBack / Re: The Worst of the GBA - Revisited

« on: June 17, 2011, 03:41:08 PM »

If the GBC is its own system the DSi is its own system.


Also "The Game Boy Family of systems"

"If the GBC is its own system the DSi is its own system."-- that's an opinion, not a fact. Where's your factual data to back it up? Here's mine:

Unlike the GB and GBC, DS and DSi share the same processing hardware. Even though there's a couple of DSi exclusive game cards, they're only exclusive because the games depend on the DSi's special add-ons for gameplay, not because of lack of processing ability. That's not the case with GBC exclusive and GB-compatible cartridges. And aside from the rare DSi-exclusive cards, DSi harware depends on the same DS library that the standard DS models depend on. In that regard, they're just as alike the DS Phat to DS Lite-- just a different model of the same hardware that plays the same games.

Secondly, look at a website like GameFAQs, look how they categorize games by system-- GBC is separate from GB, while DSiWare (as well as the rare DSi cards) are grouped with DS-- not a separate category. This is the case with at least 80% of other such websites. I'd say the general consensus clearly seems to be that GBC was its own system, while the DS and DSi are not".


Game Boy/Pocket/Light= 1
Game Boy Color= 2
Game Boy Advance/SP/micro= 3
Nintendo DS/Lite= 4
Nintendo DSi/XL=4.5
Nintendo 3DS=5


"The Game Boy Family of systems"? What's that supposed mean? If you're suggesting GB and GBC are part of the "Game Boy Family" and GBA isn't, you clearly don't know what you're talking about.

383

TalkBack / Re: The Worst of the GBA - Revisited

« on: June 17, 2011, 10:56:58 AM »

Game Boy Advance was their third handheld system (Game Boy Color was their second).

Games forward compatible. Same system.

I'm gonna have to side with TJ Spyke on this one-- GBC had its own unique hardware capabilities, it was definitely its own system and the successor to the original Game Boy hardware.

And WTF is "Games forward compatible" supposed to mean? While most GBC games were also compatible with GB as well, there were still plenty that were GBC-only. And the ones that were compatible with both did so by containing both GB and GBC versions in the same cartridge.

384

TalkBack / Re: This Week in Nintendo Downloads - June 16, 2011

« on: June 16, 2011, 11:26:21 PM »

From what I understand it, Mega Man X2 and X3 used specialized chips that are not currently supported by the Wii emulator, so they would have to do some extra work to get those titles running. If that's true, I don't see them being released any time soon, if at all.

Yeah, that issue had crossed my mind too... But don't get confused-- there isn't any kind of universal 'Wii emulator'. Each VC game is its own application, meaning the emulation is done its own software custom-made for that particular ROM.

The complications that have been holding back games like Starfox and StuntRace-FX are based on the fact that these games relied on those chips sets for most of their graphics.

X2 and 3 on the other hand, mainly used traditional sprites-- only using those chips for minimal special effects, so programming for that is far less complex and isn't  likely to be much of an issue.

385

TalkBack / Re: This Week in Nintendo Downloads

« on: June 16, 2011, 06:06:27 PM »

I would be neat if all possible Mega Man entries came out on the Virtual Console. What's left? 6, 7, Megaman & Bass, X4 and X3?

I think you may have meant X2 instead of X4, since X2 still has yet to come to VC (and X4 was a PSX game).

I wouldn't hold my breath for Megaman & Bass since it never got an English SNES release (only GBA)... If we do get it, it'll be the unreadable Japanese version anyway.

6, 7, X2, X3 are very likely on the horizon...  and possibly Megaman Soccer as well.

386

TalkBack / Re: Disc-Only Version of Wii Play: Motion Available For Club Nintendo Users

« on: June 15, 2011, 10:01:52 AM »

WiiPlay Motion w/ Wiimote+ cost $50
WiiPlay Motion w/o wiimote+ cost $30

spend the extra $10... I think you mean spend the extra $20 and get the extra remote.

Ooops... I was actually thinking save $10 as opposed to buying it and another remote separate... Yet somehow the lines apparently got crossed on the way from my brain to the keyboard. My bad :-P

387

TalkBack / Re: Disc-Only Version of Wii Play: Motion Available For Club Nintendo Users

« on: June 14, 2011, 09:36:49 PM »

Since a Wii Remote Plus costs $39.99 by itself, this is hardly a deal. You might as well just pay the extra $10 and  get the extra remote.

388

TalkBack / Re: My Thoughts: Two Wii U Controllers at Once Possible?

« on: June 10, 2011, 10:33:47 PM »

It's not a processing limitation, it's a limitation on the bandwidth available for streaming the video to the controller.

Exactly... Processing in the tablet wouldn't have anything to do with it in either scenario.

389

TalkBack / Re: My Thoughts: Two Wii U Controllers at Once Possible?

« on: June 10, 2011, 10:11:37 PM »

No, I think they're still working against technical limitations in their streaming graphics technology. I don't have any proof at all, but my hunch is that their current tech CAN stream screen data to two controllers at once... If those two controllers show the exact same image. The controllers they have now probably don't have the cpu guts to do anything but throw exactly what they receive up on the screen, for price, power consumption, but probably performance reasons: any amount of processing would introduce lag.

Wait a minute... Why would any of the processing have to be in the tablets themselves during a multi-tablet scenario but not need it in the single-tablet scenario? The console should be powerful enough to do all the processing and then just send it back to each tablet on individual signals regardless. All the individual tablets would still have to do is display the image from its designated signal just as in the single-tablet scenario. I'm not getting why you'd think multiple tablets would change that.

390

TalkBack / Re: My Thoughts: Two Wii U Controllers at Once Possible?

« on: June 10, 2011, 05:00:57 PM »

Even if they can't get two at once for this gen, technology does keep improving in the meantime. At the very least, ten years from now, we will be playing with four at once on our new 'Aii Wii ahn U' console.




(I wee on you)

391

TalkBack / Re: Why Handhelds Aren't Dead

« on: June 10, 2011, 04:11:45 PM »

Handhelds are clearly not dead... as iPads and smartphones are handhelds too. :-P

But seriously, as far as dedicated gaming handhelds go, they're not dead either... but the market will likely remain forever changed since non-gamers are far less likely to buy a specialized gaming handheld, when a device they already own for more practical purposes can do the same thing without them having to make another major purchase.

There's definitely a reason the 3DS was clearly designed more so towards the hardcore crowd, while the Wii U is still going after the causal crowd on the home console front where the market is still largely untapped.

It is likely a safe bet that gone are the days of the games that brought Nintendo into casual territory in the first place... That may also explain why Brain Age 3 seems to have mysteriously gone MIA-- Nintendo realizes gamers are the ones they need to appeal to on handheld front (unless they're looking to partner up with a cellphone manufacturer).

392

TalkBack / Re: My Thoughts: Two Wii U Controllers at Once Possible?

« on: June 09, 2011, 09:51:49 PM »

I still don't see how Nintendo comes up with the idea for this uScreen controller and doesn't immediately think at minimum 2 player local multi.

If this was any other company I would be surprised.  It seems like such an obvious thing to at least think of and yet we suggest it and their response is "Hey! I never thought of that!"  But because it's Nintendo I'm not surprised.  Nintendo comes across as a very isolated company.  Probably all the higher ups think the same way and outside ideas rarely penetrate their walls.  Thus they miss obvious stuff.

Actually, I'm pretty sure the reason behind it wasn't because they never thought of it-- just the opposite. They did foresee people expecting and wanting multi-screen concepts but knew the technology limitations would make two at a time a challenge-- let alone four.

Nintendo apparently designed the tablet specifically to cater to specialized single player experiences (to win over the 3rd party devs and hardcore gamers the original Wii failed to do) but knew people would automatically want to use the tablets for multiplayer purposes-- especially since it resembled the GBA-GCN concept so closely-- and wouldn't easily understand that they couldn't. Not offering separate tablets in the first place is a much easier way of preventing those unaware of the limitation from automatically buying up multiple tablets only to find out they couldn't use them.

393

TalkBack / Re: My Thoughts: Two Wii U Controllers at Once Possible?

« on: June 09, 2011, 08:49:42 PM »

I'm still not quite sure why this was addressed to me. You begin by explaining the name which I don't recall suggesting I was confused about. Then, you tell me not to get bent out of shape over the name which doesn't have anything to do with the post you quoted. If this is referring to other topics, I've stated several times that I'm okay with the name. I think it's silly but it doesn't change how I view the console. I flat-out liked what I was during E3. None of the conferences blew me away, including Nintendo's and I completely accepted tje WiiU reveal for what it was, a simple console announcement. A stupid sounding name isn't the problem. A lot of things sound stupid the first time you here them. My only worry with the WiiU name was if it would confuse general consumers which include casual gamers. I originally brought it up as a point of discussion, to move the conversation away from "Ugh, the name is stupid" to "The name might actually affect sales and here's why."

I plan on buying WiiU eventually. I don't think Nintendo is changing the name though I think we'll see some minor tweaks to the controller before launch and the console may be a placeholder (nothing major). However, I think the WiiU name put more pressure on Nintendo to market the console as new hardware as opposed to something for the Wii.

Actually, I was telling you not to get bent out of shape over the single uTab issue. The parts about the name were meant as something else entirely...

I was actually trying to explain how their design with the single uTab does make sense when you look at what its real intended purpose apparently was (single-players in the first place). I was using the name breakdown to demonstrate their separate plans for each control method.

Secondly, I was pointing out how the original Wii's name resulted in an initial backlash at first (especially since fans had preconceived notions of the name "Revolution"), but it still did work out and fans quickly forgot about it. In comparison, you're upset because you had the preconceived notion of multi-screens at once and are now claiming it's "literally inexcusable".

Admittedly though, I did go off on a tangent so I can't entirely blame you for getting confused.

394

TalkBack / Re: My Thoughts: Two Wii U Controllers at Once Possible?

« on: June 09, 2011, 03:46:27 PM »

@Chozo - I don't think that's the case. We keep seeing up to 5 people playing WiiU, one with the tablet controller and 4 with Wii remotes. They're clearly pushing local multiplayer. If Nintendo sticks with the single tablet controller per console route, it will be seen as a major oversight by everyone but Nintendo. It's literally inexcusable.

There actually is method to (what at least on the surface may appear to be) their madness:

As I tried to explain even before the unveiling, because the Wii was was an overwhelming success, and since the multiplayer model (party-type games) was the main source of that success, it made the most sense not to significantly change it.

The thing they needed to address this time around was the lack of serious single-player experiences from third parties, who instead flocked to Sony's and Microsoft's condoles since their traditional controllers didn't force them to make special accommodations for each game, and their HD capabilities meant they wouldn't have to take the extra effort having squeeze more from less visual-wise.

 Even though Nintendo found ways to make the uTab appeal to the casual crowd as well, the overall concept seems focused around single player experiences. Since it's far more practical to gather four players in front of a TV for short group sessions than for a single person for several hours, a tablet that can stream away from a TV makes the most sense for that purpose. Nintendo even acknowledged this with the name:

Wii "We" (plural)-- the multiplayer focus
   +
U "You" (singular)-- the single player focus

If I had to guess, I'd say Nintendo's official names for the hardware included in the box will be the following: 1 "U Tablet", 1 "Wii Remote", and the "Wii U console" (as it will be supporting the two controllers).

Focusing multiplayer to use more traditional controllers with buttons and dual analog wouldn't have been practical (plus, I'm not even sure the technology for four-screen streaming is even feasible yet).

Don't get too bent out of shape about it. Even though it seems ridiculous now, people said the same thing when they first revealed name "Wii" five years ago. Just like you, those people were not only looking at it from a hardcore gamer's perspective, but also with the preconceived notion of the name "Revolution"... And look how badly it hurt Nintendo in the end (sarcasm).

Mark my words, this is the exact same situation-- Five years from now you'll barely remember ever being bothered by it...

395

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Wii U Price and Release Date Guess Thread

« on: June 09, 2011, 01:38:53 PM »

$249.99 USD, August 12 2012

396

TalkBack / Re: Iwata Talks About Wii U Pricing

« on: June 09, 2011, 12:07:55 PM »

Fortunately for us, he had the Japanese market in mind when making this statement, where the Wii package excluded a packed-in game and was roughly $50 less at launch* (we paid $50 for the inclusion of Wii Sports). The purpose of bundling Wii Sports was largely to establish the Wii brand with the casual audience (and because most Westerners probably wouldn't bother buying it separately at full price anyhow). Since Wii U has the already established Wii brand, I don't see a need for a bundle this time around.

At this point, I can easily picture them pricing it at $250 worldwide with no game-- making it only $50 more than Wii for Japan, and giving the illusion of having the same price here in the West (which is a much bigger market anyway).

*Since 2006, the value of the Yen has gone up and the Dollar has gone down. Even though Wii launched at 2,500 yen, which converts closer to $300 in terms of today's yen and dollars, they converted closer to $200 by 2006's values.

397

TalkBack / Re: Mario Kart Impressions

« on: June 09, 2011, 10:40:27 AM »

I'm shocked no one has commented at all on all the nifty homages to 3D Hot Rally they've somehow managed to pack-in in a subtle, yet still somewhat obvious manner. I think that's one of the most interesting aspects about this game.

398

TalkBack / Re: My Thoughts: Two Wii U Controllers at Once Possible?

« on: June 08, 2011, 02:38:19 PM »

[As for you, you either just misunderstood what I meant, or simply chose to put words in my mouth in attempts to discredit me (I never said the tablet wouldn't be focus of the new console-- I was saying we needed to keep an open mind and not assume it was the main or only control input and suggested that it could  take the backseat other control methods-- which, depending how you look at it, it apparently will on occasion). As far as overall premise goes, I was 100% right.

I'm still quite confident that you're all kidding yourselves because you want to believe a local multi-player design could work, and not because you realistically think it will.

At this point, I expect this touch screen controller is going to be primarily, if not exclusively, for single player experiences (not counting online), and for giving you an option of playing away from the TV. It'll likely be an auxiliary controller, not the main controller-- which will most likely be another pointer-based controller (which works well for both single player experiences and multi-player parlor games anyway). This touch screen controller will appeal mainly to gamers. I don't see the casual crowd flocking to it, and I don't see Nintendo willing to lose them. Nintendo will be trying to lure in both. That's where this secondary controller comes in... It certainly won't be designed around multi-player.

You say it's kinda silly to assume what will definitely be the center point of the console won't be the main controller... That's assuming its intended purpose was to be a controller. I don't believe that to be the case. If its main intended function was for streaming and we just misinterpreted the leaked reports, then it's not silly at all. In fact, the idea that we'd be expected to have to likely pay $100 for each controller, is a lot sillier.

You were saying...?
 

 Um... whose side are you trying to back up with these quotes? I'm certainly not seeing any inconsistency.
 
It clearly isn't designed around the multiplayer model you were supporting... So how was I wrong there?
 
Secondly, since I was keeping an open mind about the possibility of there also being a new remote, which could have been considered the main control method in that scenario, and since even now, one could still argue that it serves more auxiliary purposes at times, especially since its uses are going to vary... that part was hardly wrong either.
 
Also, if you read it properly, you'll see I never disputed the tablet wouldn't still be the main focus point of the console (the tablet being the main focus of the console never meant it still had to be the main controller-- just the part that set it apart from its predecessor).

No matter how you're to trying to interpret it to make yourself feel right, I know what I said, I know what I meant, and I think it's equally clear to any objective observers.
 
The irony here is the more you keep trying to break my analysis apart, the more you actually seem to be proving it to be accurate in the first place. So, you're really only making yourself look foolish.

Seriously... let it go.

399

TalkBack / Re: My Thoughts: Two Wii U Controllers at Once Possible?

« on: June 08, 2011, 01:33:38 PM »

For the guys who already hate the tablet then classic controller pros will be right up their ally. For me I want 4 of those tablets just to be greedy.

See I was under the impression that we would get new Crystal Cronicle and 4 swords type games with this controller. I'm sure we will, but I want it localy in my living room. I hate playing FPSs and Racing games on split screen now so one tablet for that is just fine. I just feel like 2d local side scrollers like DKC, Mario Bros, Sonic, and 4Swords type games can potentially suffer with out an extra couple tablets. But after processing it a bit more maybe 4Swords and Cronicles will suffer and the others wont. I'm conflicted.

I kept trying to warn people not to get their hopes set on that idea... instead I got attacked.

You never got attacked. It was a civil debate on what people thought would be revealed. You were wrong about most of it and got one aspect of it correct. But the over all image you were trying to paint is more accurate than the individual statements you were making.

Maybe not by you, but I was attacked by some.

No, I was pretty much entirely correct. Pretty much everything you tried to claim as me getting wrong was either twisted into being something it wasn't, or over some irrelevant bit of detail that didn't really relate to the debate at. So, you either just misunderstood what I meant, or simply chose to put words in my mouth in attempts to discredit me (I never said the tablet wouldn't be focus of the new console-- I was saying we needed to keep an open mind and not assume it was the main or only control input and suggested that it could  take the backseat other control methods-- which, depending how you look at it, it apparently will on occasion). As far as overall premise goes, I was 100% right.

400

TalkBack / Re: My Thoughts: Two Wii U Controllers at Once Possible?

« on: June 08, 2011, 01:18:17 PM »

There's still a decent chance that the will still be capable of supporting two 'U Tablets' locally, if a developer chooses support that method

Developers won't be supporting that method if it's impossible to even purchase a second Wii U controller by itself: http://www.maxconsole.net/content.php?46023-Wii-U-Controller-and-Console-must-be-purchased-together

Not necessarily, since friends could still bring over the 'U Tab' that came from their console. If they can, someone likely will at least support the option... they just won't design their game around it.

Perhaps, but the operating system still needs to be designed to allow multiple video streams to multiple controllers. Even if the hardware is capable of it, that doesn't guarantee that it's something developers can implement.

Well if developers can't use it, then I'd classify that as having the same as meaning as 'not being capable of it'. But I wouldn't necessarily expect Nintendo to restrict its use unless it puts some kind of strain on the hardware. Then again, I wouldn't entirely rule out them doing that either...