Topic: Passive/Aggressive, and Sony's arrogant mistake

[The Omen]

I believe Sony is making a big mistake coming releasing the PS3 third(I think the REV will be released earlier).  So that does leave that small window of opportunity for Nintendo to dig into Sony's userbase.  They have to be aggressive.  More agressive then they have ever been.  Here's a few...and a few more things I think can break Sony's stranglehold, besides the late debut.

1.  Whatever the licensing fees are, drop them below Xbox 360.  Immediately.  Announce that fact, and play it up.  They could always raise them if they gain huge market share.  But they won't gain huge market share without this move first.  

2.  Endear themselves to small studios that want to make very basic games in the NES style.  Let them develop on the REV with minimal licensing fees.  This brings about an almost 'homebrew' status to the REV, allowing the games to be sold for less than $20.  This also opens up the freedom of smaller developers who will then flock to the REV, and the hardcore gamer who care less about graphics will love this aspect.

3.  I can't say for sure how many times I've said this in the past on these very forums, but Nintendo must use nostalgia to their advantage.  Of the three, they have easily the most storied gaming history.  A history that folks my age(older gamer), and all ages, remember very well.  I remember when it was want to play Nintendo?, a shorthand for all video games.  Show me the old Zelda commercials with the new Zelda blowing it away in the end.  Show me some old school Mario cartoon.  Actually use bands from that time period to promote it.  Give me the Beastie Boys promoting the Revolution.  Give me Brian Eno music in the commercials.  I want Gary Numan's 'Cars' to play over the new Mario Kart.   These artists sound futuristic, but from the past.  Retro, nostalgic, call it what you will, but everyone loves that feeling.  And Nintendo's the only console maker capable of digging deep into their vaults and pulling out that magic.

4.  Don't take themselves so seriously.  Poke fun at the graphical claims of Sony and the PS2(Toy Story?).  Make a joke about the Xbox being for guys with penis envy.  Use it all! That is how, sometimes unfortunately, you regain the 'cool' factor.  Laughter  is the best way into a potential customers mind.

5.  Offer the REV with two controllers and a game, just like it should be.  Maybe even a bundle to start it off.  How about a Sonic/Mario bundle at launch?  How's that for the ultimate irony?  (better yet, SSB/Shenmue bundle)

6.  Saturate every channel with commercials.  H & G?  Hit it full force!  The Science channel?  Blow it away.  I want to see a damned marketing Revolution!  Saturation bombing works.

7.  Begin two new mature themed franchises.  That doesn't mean blood and guts.  But how about more of a game like Giest, or Eternal Darkness?  The psychological mature games are the best.  A psychological horror RPG would be nice, actually.

8.  Begin a real sports line.  I don't know who would develop these, but they must represent sports as well as all other genres, which brings us to....

9.  RPGs-Any RPG available, make it impossible for that developer to pass up the REV.  I don't care if it's money to entice, or the licensing fees being waived.  Do whatever it takes.  The collaberation with Namco was nice.  Get one with SquareEnix to deliver more than just FF:CC.  Give them the rights to develop Star Tropics or Earthbound.  

10.  Price it higher than normal for a Nintendo console.  Yes, that's right.  Higher.  Price the REV at $299.99, with the game bundle being 349.99.  

There are two reasons for this.  The appearance of a console a lot cheaper than the Xbox 360 smacks of desperation to the people you're looking to convert.  To us, of course, the low price is a much appreciated.  But to the public, who think Nintendo's a joke,(and believe me, a lot do) it does nothing.  The other reason is, you want this to hit like it's a tech heads dream.  It has to be presented as the latest thing you must have.  They got the look right, now price it comparable to the competition so that there's no confusion-this console is here to compete toe to toe.

That is all for now.  But I do believe these things can be achieved if Nintendo really wants to.  Sure, they can sit on their pile of cash, content.  But by being aggressive, they can actually make even more money than they do playing it safe.  There's always risk involved.  But if you ain't risking, you ain't trying.

[IceCold]

I think that this belongs in the Other Systems board. I haven't read it yet, but I'll be sure to come back wherever it is.

[Bill Aurion]

1)  Sounds fine to me...
2)  Sounds like something Ninty would do...
3)  Ninty always plays on nostalgia...It's one of the reasons I love them so much...
4)  No, I don't like this...A reason I like Ninty so much is because they are very humble and stay out of the mudslinging...
5)  I don't like the idea of starting off with a game bundle, personally...
6)  I guess...
7)  Zoonami has a game of some sort in the works, Retro's game could be considered mature, and I fully expect n-Space to be working on a Rev project sometime in the near future...Not to mention anyone else Ninty decides to work with this upcoming gen...
 Mehhhhh, that's what EA is for...And the last thing Ninty needs to do is form competition with an important 3rd party...
9)  Camelot has already started on their own Rev RPG...

Quote
Give them the rights to develop Star Tropics or Earthbound.

NO WAY IN HELL...Earthbound belongs to HAL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH >=O
10) NO...Make the Revolution expensive and you've basically cut out the non-gamer userbase Ninty wishes to unlock...

[The Omen]

Quote
NO WAY IN HELL...Earthbound belongs to HAL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH >=O
10) NO...Make the Revolution expensive and you've basically cut out the non-gamer userbase Ninty wishes to unlock...

Forgot about HAL!  I'll recind that notion.

The problem is they're targeting the non-gamer, who for all intensive purposes are non-gamers for a reason.  Just as some aren't into movies.  Should we make DVDs that appeal to 85 year old women?  I think it's foolish to hold out hope that a generation of people previously uninterested in gaming will help them gain mucho market share.  They need to gain the gamers back, not the non-gamers.  Sure, I see the point as it's jotted on paper, and it looks grand.  In practice?  Won't happen.  

Besides, it's much easier to lure gamers away from one console, or to have them add a Ninty console, than it is to teach an old dog new tricks.

[Bill Aurion]

"Besides, it's much easier to lure gamers away from one console, or to have them add a Ninty console, than it is to teach an old dog new tricks."

I disagree...For Ninty at this point in time, luring gamers away from another console is a lot easier said than done, especially when you don't want to completely change the focus of the company (which I don't want)...Ninty has already shown they have the power to bring new gamers to the market with the DS, and I don't see why they can't further expand that with the Rev...

[The Omen]

Quote
Ninty has already shown they have the power to bring new gamers to the market with the DS, and I don't see why they can't further expand that with the Rev...

I disagree. They brought new games to the market.  But I think the people who bought the DS already knew what they were getting, and who they were getting it from.  Sure, there are the few that'll walk into a store, see Nintendogs, and just have to have it.  But I would venture a guess that 95% of DS owners have previous game playing experience.  Whether it's with  the GB, GC, or PS2 isn't really the point.  

Nintendo must change they're marketing.  They can still have the same business philosophy, more or less, but they need to appear like they 'get it'.  And by get it, I mean cater to those who put the PS2 in 50 million homes.  Bring back those who left after the N64.  After the SNES.  Reach further, but reach with a wider net.

Quote
4) No, I don't like this...A reason I like Ninty so much is because they are very humble and stay out of the mudslinging...

Perhaps I put it too bluntly, but they can clearly take vieled shots at the competition without resorting to "teh xbox is for small cox!111"  Good, self aware, tongue in cheek jest is what I'm referring to.  Nothing overtly malicious.  I don't think Nintendo is humble at all.  I just think they have no idea what's going on around them.  Thinking like they're number 1, and being over confident, even aloof,  to me does not equate to humble.   They've been better about things recently, though.  

[wandering]

1-9: fine.
10: eh, no.

Quote
The problem is they're targeting the non-gamer, who for all intensive purposes are non-gamers for a reason. Just as some aren't into movies. Should we make DVDs that appeal to 85 year old women? I think it's foolish to hold out hope that a generation of people previously uninterested in gaming will help them gain mucho market share. They need to gain the gamers back, not the non-gamers. Sure, I see the point as it's jotted on paper, and it looks grand. In practice? Won't happen.

also, no.

Before Jobs and Wozniak started apple computer, nobody believed computers could ever be sold to the average consumer or become household items. Before Nintendo launched the NES, nobody believed household gaming machines would ever become popular or mainstream. The fact is, when you make things cheaper and easier to use, you get more customers and you draw in people who normally wouldn't be interested in the kind of thing you're selling. The Revolution probably won't be a hot item among grannies, but if 80-year-olds can pick up and play Revolution easily, then the system will sell better.

The Nintendo DS is the example that Nintendo should (and probably will) follow with the Revolution. With the DS, the price is neither too high nor too low. The marketing is cool and proliferous. The graphics are more than serviceable, without being unnecessarily cutting edge. And, of course, the system is inviting and easy to pick up and play (newb friendly, if you will) without sacrificing complex (hardcore, if you will) gameplay styles. In short, the Nintendo DS has a lower cost of entry than its competition. This is because Nintendo has made the DS so that a) you want to own it, b) you don't have to spend time training yourself to play it, and c) you don’t have to save money to get it. The PSP went the other route and tried to make a "tech heads dream", as you put it, and it’s failing.

[The Omen]

Quote
. The PSP went the other route and tried to make a "tech heads dream", as you put it, and it’s failing.

I think it's rather flip to say PSP is failing, and for the reasons you gave.  If it is failing, it's because of name brand appeal.  In which case I give you this...

I can just as easily flip your PSP/DS comparison to the GC/PS2.

Everything you state in this paragraphdidn't work for the GC.

Quote
The Nintendo DS is the example that Nintendo should (and probably will) follow with the Revolution. With the DS, the price is neither too high nor too low. The marketing is cool and proliferous. The graphics are more than serviceable, without being unnecessarily cutting edge. And, of course, the system is inviting and easy to pick up and play (newb friendly, if you will) without sacrificing complex (hardcore, if you will) gameplay styles. In short, the Nintendo DS has a lower cost of entry than its competition. This is because Nintendo has made the DS so that a) you want to own it, b) you don't have to spend time training yourself to play it, and c) you don’t have to save money to get it. The PSP went the other route and tried to make a "tech heads dream", as you put it, and it’s failing.

So what does the lower price mean?  Nothing if you already have the majority of gamers?  Right.  How do you break this trend?  By changing your approach.   You make the REV a tech heads dream, while making the cost slightly lower than the competitors.  Being $100 cheaper than a competitor looks bad to the casual fans...yes casual, you know, like 65% of the market.  Obviously, if this were the PS3, and it was released for $100 cheaper than the REV, it would be great for Sony, because they already have the installed user base.  People flock to them.  When you are strictly releasing a console for Nintendo fans, and the rest of the gamers don't even consider Nintendo a legit console maker, the price does nothing but confirm this.(in their eyes)

Quote
Before Jobs and Wozniak started apple computer, nobody believed computers could ever be sold to the average consumer or become household items. Before Nintendo launched the NES, nobody believed household gaming machines would ever become popular or mainstream. The fact is, when you make things cheaper and easier to use, you get more customers and you draw in people who normally wouldn't be interested in the kind of thing you're selling. The Revolution probably won't be a hot item among grannies, but if 80-year-olds can pick up and play Revolution easily, then the system will sell better.

My point is, no granny will pick up any controller.  I don't care if there's one button.  You think if you gave your grandmother an Atari 2600, she would flourish with it, and become a gamer?  Please, we have to deal with reality here.  Let's say you're correct, and the Rev attracts more elderly gamers, and more women gamers.  To what percentage of the userbase will they make up?  It seems rather obvious to me this target should be secondary to targeting the gamers who already spend 30 hours a week gaming.  Many will want a second console if they buy the 360.  It's these fans they should be attacking, along with this other group you have brought up.

Quote
Before Jobs and Wozniak started apple computer, nobody believed computers could ever be sold to the average consumer or become household items.

That's fine and all.  But Apple almost went out of business 15 years ago.  What's the percentage of PC users vs Mac?  75 to 25%?  (just for the record, I adore Mac.)  But the fact that the Macs are so much more expensive than the PC helps it's image, doesn't it?  They're looked at as high end, even though I could get just as much power and speed in a PC for half the cost.  Price has a lot to do with it.

I am only saying they have to broaden the scope of what's possible.  Gamers raised on Playstation are not as brand connected as we were with the Nintendo/Sega days.  It takes marketing and games, along with the cool factor to catch this demographic, and they'll abandon Sony without a second thought.  Is that too much to ask in order to gain a huge spike in market share?




 

[wandering]

Quote
I think it's rather flip to say PSP is failing, and for the reasons you gave. If it is failing, it's because of name brand appeal.

Playstation has less brand recognition than Nintendo? The PSP is losing (IMO) because it's a somewhat impenetrable system. Not only does it have a ridiculously high price, not only does it not have many worthwhile games, not only does it not have much pick-up-and-play appeal, but it isn't really even marketed as a game system so much as a multimedia conglomeration device. What is the average consumer supposed to think of it?

Quote

I can just as easily flip your PSP/DS comparison to the GC/PS2. Everything you state in this paragraphdidn't work for the GC.

I don't think you can flip the argument because GameCube didn't really appeal to newbs. Sure, the large A button was nice... but, apart from that,  the controller wasn't much less intimidating than the dualshock, the launch games (pikmin, luigi, ssbm) weren't exactly easy to pick up and play, and the console's uncool design and low-key marketing didn't exactly make people eager to try the system out.

Quote
So what does the lower price mean? Nothing if you already have the majority of gamers? Right. How do you break this trend? By changing your approach. You make the REV a tech heads dream, while making the cost slightly lower than the competitors. Being $100 cheaper than a competitor looks bad to the casual fans...yes casual, you know, like 65% of the market.

I actually agree with you that GameCube's ridiculous price cuts made the console look 'cheap' in comparison to the competition. But, a price differential isn't always a bad thing (actually, a cheaper price is almost always a good thing). While the $99 purple lunch box DID feel cheap, the $150 DS feels high end, even though the PSP is $100 more expensive. The trick is to come up with a product that is so different the average consumer will have a hard time even consciously comparing it to the competition. An eight dollar Stephen King book will sell better than a $30 text book. A $200-250 Revolution gaming system could sell better than a $500 Sony mini-computer.

With a game system, you should serve the hardcore, to what extant you can, but you shouldn't focus on them. You should instead focus on, not even the average gamer, but the average consumer. The lowest common denominator. And they don't care about specific specs. They care about image, and affordability, and playability, and games. The DS created a good image for itself, and is affordable, and is ridiculously playable, and has great games. The Revolution should follow it's lead.

Quote
My point is, no granny will pick up any controller. I don't care if there's one button.

I find your lack of faith disturbing. 70+ can handle the touch screen on the DS. I've seen it. And while the DS isn't the hot new thing in today's nursing homes, the fact that pretty much ANYONE can pick up and play it is a good thing, and undoubtedly contributes to its good sales.

Quote
What's the percentage of PC users vs Mac? 75 to 25%?

I Wish! I think it's around 5-7% right now.

Quote
(just for the record, I adore Mac.) But the fact that the Macs are so much more expensive than the PC helps it's image, doesn't it? They're looked at as high end, even though I could get just as much power and speed in a PC for half the cost. Price has a lot to do with it.

I'm fairly sure their image comes from great marketing/hardware design/software design. I believe the high price of their computers is generally listed as the #1 reason otherwise interested parties don't switch from windows.

Quote
It takes marketing and games, along with the cool factor to catch this demographic, and they'll abandon Sony without a second thought. Is that too much to ask in order to gain a huge spike in market share?

No, I agree with you that that's what Nintendo should have good marketing, and 'cool' games, and an all-around general cool factor, this time around. It's just that Nintendo doesn't need to sacrifice affordability, or broad appeal, to do that.

[UncleBob]

>2. Endear themselves to small studios that want to make very basic games in the NES style. Let them develop on the REV with minimal licensing fees. This brings about an almost 'homebrew' status to the REV, allowing the games to be sold for less than $20. This also opens up the freedom of smaller developers who will then flock to the REV, and the hardcore gamer who care less about graphics will love this aspect.

On this note, I'd love to see Nintendo do something to allow/encourage developers to make *new* NES/SNES games for download on the Revolution.

[Spak-Spang]

Ok.  I like some of your ideas.

The Bundle system is interesting...but I don't think you need to put a game anymore with consoles.  Two Controllers is a very good idea, it promotes multiplayer games and really seperates Revolution from the other systems.

Your idea of bringing up the price on the Revolution to meet the other systems is not a good idea.  People have limited funds and the biggest question we have brought up is that the other systems seem too expensive for mass market consumers.  However, if Nintendo wanted to price themselves similar to Microsoft and Sony then I would suggest also including a game and a second controller at the $299.00 price...and let that game be rebated so the gamer can choose the game they want.  Then its the choice of $300 dollars for a system and game of my choice and an extra controller...or $360 dollars for a new system and one game without the extra controller.

Nintendo shouldn't mudsling.  They should just produce the best games possible and release games that aren't inappopriate for age groups, but at the same time appeal to different groups.  For example  Goldeneye for Nintendo 64 was a great FPSer for older gamers, but there wasn't blood or cursing to really make it inappopriate for children.  The same should be said with sports games.

Last, I really hate the idea of bands in games.  Video Game music works better as instrumentals.  Hearing the same annoying songs over and over because it costs licensing money to get name bands is annoying.  Instead keep your composers making brilliant music for games and forget the idea of bands.

[Ian Sane]

"Price it higher than normal for a Nintendo console. Yes, that's right. Higher. Price the REV at $299.99, with the game bundle being 349.99."

If Nintendo is going to do this then they better have comparitive hardware and put HD support in.  Value is important.  If I'm paying more I want to get more.  I think being cheaper is better than being equal in price but having less stuff.  The problem with the Cube's price was execution.  The Cube just wasn't that much cheaper and it didn't have DVD support.  Looking at the rumoured PS3 prices however and the announced the X360 price the Rev could be MUCH cheaper.  Cheap enough that the lower price looks like an advantage and a deal instead of just a few bucks off in exchange for lost features.  Another problem with the Cube is that price cuts came out of desperation and everyone could tell.  The Xbox had the bundle with two games and it creamed the Cube that Christmas.  So Nintendo panics and included one free game (a lame option compared to the Xbox's two free games) and then cut the price when that didn't work.  They should have cut the price before Christmas.  Before Christmas a price cut would have looked like a deal.  After Christmas it looked like they couldn't give the things away because, well, they couldn't.

So if the price difference is more significant and Nintendo times their price drops and promotions better then the lower price could be a good idea.

Nintendo also has to have some graphics that look as good as the competition so that it looks like Sony and MS are ripping people off while Nintendo offers the same performance at a lower price.  The Cube had Super Mario Sunshine looking like a glorified Dreamcast game, a de-emphasis on specs that was unnecessary, and it looked like a damn toy.  The Rev at least looks high tech.  A lower price for a toy doesn't mean squat but a lower price for a fancy piece of electronics sure does.

[couchmonkey]

Price is something that I'm really uncertain about.  Ian talks about "a few bucks", but seriously, the GameCube was $100 USD less than the competition!  I see $100 as a huge line for consumers to cross, carrying much more value than $90, and only slightly less value than $110, or even $130.  Granted, Nintendo didn't maintain that lead, but I don't think GameCube has ever been less than $50 cheaper than the competition.  I expected GameCube to do much better with that price advantage than it did.

Granted, there is an excuse for that: DVD playback was a nice addition for $50-$100.  So perhaps the GameCube could do better this round...with DVD playback being less important and the competition's prices rising, price might make more of a difference this time, but still...if people didn't bite at $100, I'm beginning to wonder if they would at $200.  I can see where Omen is coming from, I also have the feeling that some people see GameCube as the "cheap" system.  Overall, though, I think Nintendo's real image problems have more to do with marketing and the types of games it makes than the price of its console.

[vudu]

Quote
If Nintendo is going to do this then they better have comparitive hardware and put HD support in. Value is important. If I'm paying more I want to get more. I think being cheaper is better than being equal in price but having less stuff. The problem with the Cube's price was execution. The Cube just wasn't that much cheaper and it didn't have DVD support.

The question is, do any of the extra features the PS3 and Xbox 360 tote provide something the average consumer values?  Does the average consumer care about the majority of the multimedia support the Xbox 360 provides?  Does he want to buy an 80 Gig hard drive for his PS3 so he can wire his entire house together?  Does he care about Blue Ray when he doesn't even have an HD TV and won’t see any noticeable difference between Blue Ray and DVD?

If the extra features included in the PS3 and Xbox 360 aren't considered valuable they won't be taken into consideration when purchase.  If I'm gun-ho about turning my living room into a multimedia center than a $400 Xbox 360 might look like a deal compared to a $250 Revolution.  If I'm not, then I'll just compare two video game systems--one's $150 more than the other.  Which one is the better choice for me?

[IceCold]

Sorry about previous post - just looked at title and assumed it was about Sony & as I said, didn't read it. But I have now, and here's my thoughts.

(1) Licensing Fees - definitely drop it as low as possible - Nintendo's not in a position to keep them high.

(2) Small Devs - As the Rev will be apparently very easy to develop for and will cater to the developers with lower budges, I'm expecting this to happen

(3) Nostalgia - Yes, but don't rely on it too heavily. They must also look to the future without bringing it up too much. A Mario commercial with footage from NES which blends into SNES mario, then SM64, then Sunshine, then finally Revolution would be nice though.

(4) Make a joke about the Xbox being for guys with penis envy - Not Nintendo's style at all, and I don't want it to be.

(5) & (10) Bundle & Pricing - I really don't think they should raise the price just to compete with the others. The Gamecube, even though it was actually more powerful than the PS2, didn't have a DVD player and it was perceived to be weaker. If Nintendo advertises the Rev's power as being comparable, then a lower price will only help it. And about the bundle, yea it's a good idea to have a separate bundle with two controllers and SSBR.

(6) Advertising - Full steam ahead.

(7) Mature Games As has been said, Zoonami, Retro are working on these types of games, and I'm sure Nintendo will address this problem further. And Resi 5 also might be ported.

( Sports Line - If Sega Sports doesn't back the Rev, then sure. But they must have unique features not in the EA games, and must be advertised (running trend)

(9) RPGs - Actually, the Rev is doing pretty good in that department. Nintendo attended to the problem from the 64, and on the Gamecube there were quite a few more RPGs. Hopefully, this continues and the Revolution has significantly more than the Gamecube. It's starting off well, with Camelot's RPG, FFCC, and Pokemon announced.

EDIT: And I think that the REV should be priced at $259.99 US, and with that SSBR bundle $299.99 US (like Spak already said)  

[The Omen]

Quote
Last, I really hate the idea of bands in games. Video Game music works better as instrumentals. Hearing the same annoying songs over and over because it costs licensing money to get name bands is annoying. Instead keep your composers making brilliant music for games and forget the idea of bands.

I was implying bands promoting the REV in advertisements.  Not actually laying down the soundtrack to Super Mario Brothers.

Quote
With a game system, you should serve the hardcore, to what extant you can, but you shouldn't focus on them. You should instead focus on, not even the average gamer, but the average consumer. The lowest common denominator. And they don't care about specific specs. They care about image, and affordability, and playability, and games. The DS created a good image for itself, and is affordable, and is ridiculously playable, and has great games. The Revolution should follow it's lead.

I never said focus on the hard core, but ALL gamers.  It's fairly obvious that Sony has profited from the casual gamer more than any other.  Nintendo can draw from that lake of potential customers, because they have no brand allegiance.

Quote
Playstation has less brand recognition than Nintendo?

It did at one time.

Quote
I'm fairly sure their image comes from great marketing/hardware design/software design. I believe the high price of their computers is generally listed as the #1 reason otherwise interested parties don't switch from windows.

Yeah, probably true.  But I best of asked what was the superior machine, they would all say Mac.  And I'm sure being so overpriced has something to do with that perception.

Quote

Your idea of bringing up the price on the Revolution to meet the other systems is not a good idea. People have limited funds and the biggest question we have brought up is that the other systems seem too expensive for mass market consumers. However, if Nintendo wanted to price themselves similar to Microsoft and Sony then I would suggest also including a game and a second controller at the $299.00 price...and let that game be rebated so the gamer can choose the game they want. Then its the choice of $300 dollars for a system and game of my choice and an extra controller...or $360 dollars for a new system and one game without the extra controller.

It's a good idea for the perception of Nintendo consoles being for kids, or a toy.  Even if they move less initially because of the price being 299, I think they gain the perception of being on equal footing.  Much more valuable for Nintendo is perception.  However, Ian is correct.  They have to show that they are equal, and that means showing off their glorious new specs, or at least having some elaborate demo reel advertisement.  Show why the controller is a huge technological progression.  The gamers need to see more than anything else.  

[Famicom]

1. Yep. This should have been done years ago.

2. Would be pretty sweet. Adds another audience entirely to the REV.

3. Nostalgia is nice, but I wouldn't use it for all their titles. Advertising the homebrew games (should they choose to go that route) or the backwards compat would be applicable, but everything else about the system is so...not nostalgic. The controller is supposed to usher in the future of gaming. The system design doesn't look exactly retro either (though it is subject to change).

4. YES. The coming of Reggie really felt like Nintendo planned on lightening up, but it hasn't happened just yet. And am I the only one who remembers those old SNES commercials that totally owned the Genesis? Like the one where they showed all the cartriges released on both systems in a huge line, and the SNES line kept going while the Genesis line stopped? Or the Star Fox commercial that had a very clever response to Sega's slogan at the time (I'm sorry I can't remember either line, it was many years ago)? What happened since then? And Sega launching consoles into mid-air during the Saturn (or was it DC) era didn't exactly hurt them. Am I daydreaming all these? Someone tell me they existed, because it's been so long ago I can't tell if it was real or all a dream.

5. A bundle would be nice. I miss those days.

6. Agreed, mass marketing never hurts.

7. I think at least one is already in the works, if I remember right.

8. If EA and others continue to pull the plug on everything but Madden, then this is a must MUST have.

9. Square-Enix's word of going multiplatform should help a bit, but I hope Nintendo really pushes for more from Namco as well. I hear Korea has a nice budding creative segment for RPGs too, and perhaps Nintendo could tap into that. What would really help is an RPG for the launch, or in the "launch period". Let the people know early that there will be RPGs for this system.

10. I'll disagree on this one. Nintendo will price the console so it'll make them money. Every gen lately that's been the sweet spot of $249. Unless there's a bundle option, I don't see that changing. Being cheaper will help them more now than ever because the competition is way way way higher priced, and not just a difference of $50-100. Even if Nintendo offered a bundle package of their own, you'd still be saving upwards of $200! Considering that the REV will have the most attractive gaming functions of all the systems AND it'll be the cheapest, sounds like a winning combo to me.

[Ian Sane]

"Like the one where they showed all the cartriges released on both systems in a huge line, and the SNES line kept going while the Genesis line stopped?"

Actually I think that was a Sega ad bashing the SNES.  The SNES had just launched so Sega made a big deal about how the Genesis had more games.  Plus since early on an adapter to play SMS games was available they included the entire Sega Master System lineup in the ad.  Actually that format would work well for the Rev in promoting the download service.

[The Omen]

Quote
"Like the one where they showed all the cartriges released on both systems in a huge line, and the SNES line kept going while the Genesis line stopped?"

 I think that was a Sega ad bashing the SNES. The SNES had just launched so Sega made a big deal about how the Genesis had more games. Plus since early on an adapter to play SMS games was available they included the entire Sega Master System lineup in the ad. Actually that format would work well for the Rev in promoting the download service.

Actually, I think that was the Atari 2600 vs Intellivision.  Atari had many more games, and showed it in their ads.  Intellivision responded with the same games shown side by side on each system to show their graphical differences.

The best SNES commercials did in fact take jabs at Sega, like the famous Street Fighter for the SNES, and the mode 7 graphics vs a very linear looking Sonic.  Those were the days.  The fact of the matter is, the SNES ended up out selling the Genesis by a 75-25% clip for the final two years of the generation.  Of course, the final tally was skewed because the Genesis had that 2 year head start, but by the end, it was about 60-40 for Nintendo.

[BigJim]

It's a little disturbing that Sega exposed the "k!ddy" weakness in Nintendo's strategy, and 15 years later they still haven't effectively countered it since they're still considered to be passe by the masses.

Many of the suggestions mentioned in this thread are symptoms of larger problems.

1. More 3rd party support. (a likely result of lowered license fees among other things, and it almost automatically results in more advertising, better genre coverage, and games for everybody and not just "everybody games")

2. Improve advertising. If I ever see another Nintendo character costume in a commercial it'll be too soon. Gaming is a subset of pop culture now. It's not an age thing anymore. It's a CULTURE thing. I think Reggie understands this, so I have more faith in Nintendo this time around as far as marketing is concerned. However, Reggie doesn't make the games. Developer's freedom to create could continue to infringe on the pop culture issue. I'm not saying the marketing department should control game development, but Nintendo can't live in their bubble anymore either if they have any interest in competing.

As for pricing, perceived value is almost as important as actual value. (Remember how many of us were blown away by the DS with Hunters costing $150).  I would say no higher than $249. That's totally subjective though. To me it's a reasonable compromise of technology and value. Throw in a few free months of virtual console downloads. That has tangible value that costs Nintendo very little, and could result is more subscriptions later.

If they bundle a game, make it a demo (like Hunters) that demonstrates the "revolutionary" feature. It doesn't have to be a complete title.  Gamers are going to be screwed with the other systems because they could spend another $100 on top of the system price just to be playable. So including a playable demo adds perceived value. Loading the disc up with some game videos and other stuff would be cool too, but it wouldn't sell more consoles.

[Stimutacs Addict]

hmm.. yes.. nintendo needs to strike. now

[zakkiel]

Anyone have any idea what the range of costs is on a port? My though was that Nintendo might actually subsidize at least some of those costs in return for quality control over the ported product (no need to help EA continue a stream of badly-ported titles). It could also offer a deal with developers where Rev exclusives have no licensing fees at all, and games released on the Rev a few months before other consoles would get dramatically reduced fees. Since Nintendo actually makes money of its hardware and has mega-hit games of its own, this could be a viable strategy. What do you all think? It would make it pretty hard for third-parties to resist the console.

[The Omen]

Quote
Anyone have any idea what the range of costs is on a port? My though was that Nintendo might actually subsidize at least some of those costs in return for quality control over the ported product (no need to help EA continue a stream of badly-ported titles). It could also offer a deal with developers where Rev exclusives have no licensing fees at all, and games released on the Rev a few months before other consoles would get dramatically reduced fees. Since Nintendo actually makes money of its hardware and has mega-hit games of its own, this could be a viable strategy. What do you all think? It would make it pretty hard for third-parties to resist the console.

It is a good idea...and one we've discussed, however.....NOJ would never go for it.  They don't seem to understand first you get the money, then the power, then you get the woman.  Instead, they stop at getting the money.

[jasonditz]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
 The Cube had Super Mario Sunshine looking like a glorified Dreamcast game, a de-emphasis on specs that was unnecessary, and it looked like a damn toy.  The Rev at least looks high tech.  A lower price for a toy doesn't mean squat but a lower price for a fancy piece of electronics sure does.

It's not like Dreamcast graphics are a bad thing... at the same time Mario Sunshine was hitting the market PS2 games were still looking largely inferior to Dreamcast games and the system was being largely panned. It takes awhile to get the most out of hardware, which is what really annoys me about this rush to the next generation, we're just now starting to push the current generation systems to the limit with games like RE4 and Zelda, and they're rushing to start all over again.

[WesDawg]

I wouldn't mind Nintendo jumping into the "mudslinging". They've sorta already started doing it since Reggie took over PR anyway. I think if Ninty pointed out the stupidity of arguments about their games being for children, or the lies about graphics it would at least make people stop and think. Heck, point out to people that the PSP is a gaming machine that no one uses to play games. Make people ask the questions they should be asking. Does this product actually offer me anything I want?