Topic: A new rumor about the Revolution

[Zach]

I have to agree with Ian on this one d@mn . If I am going to download the old games, I want them in their original form, not some updated version for the revmote.  Part of that is because I am a relatively new gamer ( compared to some of you here), my first system was the SNES, but I didnt really get into video games untill the N64, so I am really looking forward to getting some of the games that I missed out on, the way they were originally meant to be played.

[Kairon]

Why recompile the NES game kernel just to use the remote? Especially after Nintendo went to all the trouble of showing us that the remote turned on its side IS a NES controller?

Now...I'm more interested in NEW games that require you to hold the remote sideways like a NES controller AND at the same time use the gyroscope feature... don't ask me why though, lol, it sounds ridiculous when you can just plug in the shell.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Kairon]

In all of our wonderful out-of-thin-air predictions, let's not forget that fact that the N64 launched at 200 bucks (or very quickly dropped to $200), as did the GC. 200 Dollars does not a great track record make.

If the REV launches at 200 bucks, it won't solicit anything but a shrug from me. MS will just drop their console price a hundred bucks by then easy: all the early adopters will have picked one up, and where MS goes Sony will have to follow.

My thinking is that, slightly modified from my earlier post, the sweet spot will be $179, somewhere in that region. Hypothetical sweet spot of course, I haven't factored in hardware costs and supply issues. But if I did not have any problems otherwise, I'd be aiming at a $179 launch.

Then again, I don't work in the industry and I'm probably completely off my rocker.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Avinash_Tyagi]

No $199 would be fine, see the 360 system (the one with the HD) is going to release at $399 and probably won't drop until the PS3 comes out...probably to $350 (possibly $299) it doesn't have a reason to drop before that, in fact if the PS3 is priced high enough it won't drop at all, meaning the Rev coming in at $199 will be at least $100 dollars less than its competitors at launch, heck if prices are still high it could come in at $250 and look like a bargain when compared to the other systems.

[IceCold]

Well, I think Kairon's talking about the "basic" 360 bundle - it's $299.99 US and could well go down to $250 US by the time the Rev comes out.

[zakkiel]

The $299 version might as well not exist for early adopters, which are the people that will be buying it in the window before the PS3 launch. And if I remember right, Kairon, the GC and N64 both sold like hotcakes at launch. The problem certainly wasn't price. And now with the competition going to $400, Nintendo can easily go to $250. And I for one would gladly take an extra $50 worth of power in the system.

[Avinash_Tyagi]

Meh the core system is junk...I don't think Nintendo should even take it into account.

In fact I perused 3 gamestops and a Funcoland yesterday on the issue of the core system VS. the full system, basically only 3 core systems had been preordered in total, the core system really isn't an issue.

[Kairon]

Well if the core system isn't an issue, I guess we'll have to take a look at what happens after the early adopter launch period. Ignoring the entire issue of how many games will be available and of what quantity, I'm still unconvinced that $199 is a price point that traditional non-gamers will be interested in. Remember, the Rev is being sold as an impulse buy in addition to a revolutionary experience. My interpretation of that is that one can easily and impulsively spend 100-150 dollars total on an assortment of items, but for one item nearing 200 dollars, the resistance will start to manifest. The revolution will need to be cheap enough to manufacture such that it will be able to hit those lower price points after the early adopters have all got their babies.

Either way, the hardware will need to be manufactured in sufficient quantity to meet demand at and ater launch, and whether the supply can keep up with demand, or whether the demand exists, will probably be as much or more of an issue than 20 or 30 dollars difference in pricing.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Spak-Spang]

Ok.  $200 is a pretty sweet spot for a home console unit.  There is a reason Nintendo has stuck to that price range, because it is easy to make a powerful system that can make a profit for that price, and it is below the acceptable price point for a new console by about $50.  It allows you to buy a system and a game pretty easily.

Both the Nintendo 64 and the Gamecube sold really well in initial sales at that price.

Dropping the price lower WILL appeal to some people.  People are always budgeting, and only the very image conscious or the hardcore do not budget their money.  

In fact, if Nintendo is trying to become the 2nd console in your home as well as a console for new gamers and Nintendo fans then keeping the price as low as possible is key.  I would love $99 but that won't happen.  Perhaps $179 is a good deal, but still unlikely.  $200 is key.

I don't care what people think about supposed value or image...(the Gamecube did not fail because people thought it was inferior.)

[Ian Sane]

"I'm still unconvinced that $199 is a price point that traditional non-gamers will be interested in."

Traditional non-gamers?  What the hell are those?

I don't think the core X360 is going to be an issue but it does reveal a big hole in Nintendo's plans.  It's practically fact that the Rev is going to be the "weakest" console in terms of hardware.  The rumours have been out for months, IGN has pretty much confirmed it, and Nintendo has made no effort at all to say otherwise.  The plan seems to be to have hardware that's "good enough" but not exceptional in order to have a lower priced console and to make development cheaper.

Trading off hardware for a lower price was a pretty decent strategy when Nintendo has trying to beat the PS3 to the market.  The PS3 is really expensive so the lower price could give Nintendo a bit of an edge.  But it's now widely assumed that the Rev will launch last.  Launching last with the weakest hardware is pretty lame.  People typically expect the newest consoles to be the most powerful.  The price is supposed to make up for it but if Nintendo launches last the price of the competing consoles is a big question mark.  What if MS can get their "superior" hardware to the same price point by the Rev launch?  What if the PS3 has had a cut by then?  The price has to be significantly lower or having "inferior" hardware is just going to be a big blotch on the Rev's image.  Realistically the Rev could seem OVERPRICED if the more powerful X360 is selling for a similar amount of money by the time the Rev launches.  It's probably too late to change something like that now but if Nintendo's not careful they could be launching against consoles with more games available, better graphics, and comparable prices for better hardware.

[The Omen]

The biggest problem is going to be the appearence of a weak system.  If you have already assured everyone it's the weakest of the three, and have priced it well below them as well, you are going to be garnering snickers of sarcasm from those who care for such things, like anyone between 16 and 24 years old, as they goose step past the Rev and buy the $400 X360.  Do I care for those nitwits? No, I hope they get bludgeoned to death with a Sidewinder.  But this is a business, and frankly, I gather the dividends as the consumer if Nintendo improves it's place in the market, because I get a better choice of games.  They can't appear to be the cheap console, because the gaming public thinks cheap means poorly made, or less features....of course, if they pimp the hell out of the new controls, and it catches on, all this could be moot.  But we won't know until the Rev release just how much people are willing to invest in a updated control scheme.  And yes, I understand "But you can just use teh shell!11!", but if I want to use a normal controller, chances are I would have already purchased a system that features one.

[Kairon]

LOL. Maybe we should just leave out the traditional, and just say "non-gamer," you're right.

Anyways, if the REV was a regular console then I'd agree with your negatives Ian. But that's just the thing ain't it? Nintendo's coming at this from a different angle. They want their console to offer new gaming interactions such that even if you own a PS3 or X360, you still need it. They want the REV to be able to capture the imaginations of people who saw the appeal of dancing on DDR mats, but never picked up a controller. They want it to be priced low enough such that it's a convenient second choice for gamers, and an impulse buy for nongamers. And for all of these goals, a low price is not only desirable but necessary: the rev can't be a second console or a "non-gamer's" impulse buy if it costs a lot, regardless of it's level of technology.

Nintendo is saying that the big challenge for videogame consoles today is not offering the fastest technology, but capturing an additional 5, 10, 20 million people who never seemed to be interested before.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Kairon]

I don't care how many polys or characters or shaders or textures the PS3 or X360 can push, neither of them have the Revolution Controller. Supposed "cheapness" is not an issue if the Revolution offers something the other two cannot.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Ian Sane]

"Anyways, if the REV was a regular console then I'd agree with your negatives Ian. But that's just the thing ain't it? Nintendo's coming at this from a different angle."

I know.  But I think the Rev has to compete as a "regular" console as well since this non-gamer market is largely unproven and if it blows up in their face Nintendo needs to be able to survive on the existing gaming market for the next five years.  Relying on the uniqueness of the Rev is Nintendo putting all their eggs in one basket.  I think they need to make sure the Rev is competitive with the other consoles with or without the nifty remote controller.

Plus my interest in Nintendo's success is entirely based on how it helps me.  I'm not interested so much in profit for example because marketshare is what gets me better third party support.  It's the same with non-gamers.  The Rev being incredibly popular with non-gamers doesn't make a difference to me because that would just attract more non-gamer stuff.  I want Nintendo to popular with the traditional market as well (or period) so that it attracts more games targetted towards me.

[Avinash_Tyagi]

I think what will be Key is what happens when ninty demos the REV software, if it comes out looking great with awesome gameplay then you can expect people to buy it even if its the weakest of the three, remember the graphics will be better than the current stuff so it doesn't have to be the best, just good enogh that people can't really tell a big difference.  And if the revo control comes out looking great for the games controls you know people are going to want to buy it and develop for it.

I don't think we will see a lot of third party early on...a couple of games here and there at first, but if the demos shown before the release are great, then devs will sign on and within a year of the release the third party titles will start rolling out.

but yeah the key is the software demos, probably around E3, that'll probably also factor into how much ninty can charge for the system at launch.

[Kairon]

I don't think the non-gamer market is wholly unproven, especially when this is based on new methods of interaction with the game and with others. DDR introduced a new and more natural way to interact with a game and when it did that, almost my entire extended family was caught up in the craze, adults and kids alike. Animal Crossing in Japan purportedly led to entire families playing the game where the mother would play in the daytime and the child would get home, take his turn at play, and discover mail from his mom. Heck, Pokemon, for some strange reason, got my uncle (who was almost exclusively a PC gamer) completely addicted for awhile! He bought a GBC just for that! And let's not forget the ultimate in non-gamer appeal: Tetris.

Yet, yes, it is a risk and one that Nintendo can't rely solely upon, and obviously isn't relying solely upon. When Nintendo talks about FPS' with their Rev controller, you know that a lot of what they're enabling is new ways to tackle traditional genres as well.

Now, as regards your approach to the Nintendo question, it's perfectly fine to say that your only interest in the matter is in how it benefits you as a single consumer. I, personally, have found that my gaming perspective is so aligned with Nintendo's that whatever Nintendo believes in, I tend to support naturally as well. This is, after all, what makes me a Nintendo Fanboy: I think I'm someone whose interests are in such alignment with Nintendo's that it seems like I'm merely parroting what they say when instead I find myself only doing so after some deep soul-searching and critical thinking... or at least I flatter myself so.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[ThePerm]

i  was  demonstrating m y spikey controller to  my  art class  and  alot of people  said the  reason  why  they  dont  play games is because the  controllers are too complicated nowadays.

[Spak-Spang]

Traditional nongamers  "adults 30 and over"  and "women"

If the system is something that is engaging, but too expensive it still will not be enough to bring in new buyers...but if the system is engaging and cheap then new gamers will come.  

Women are playing more and more internet games, because they are engaging, simple, and CHEAP.  Nintendo can't ignore any of those elements when bringing new software and hardware to these potential gamers.

[Rancid Planet]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane


But I think the Rev has to compete as a "regular" console as well since this non-gamer market is largely unproven and if it blows up in their face Nintendo needs to be able to survive on the existing gaming market for the next five years.  Relying on the uniqueness of the Rev is Nintendo putting all their eggs in one basket.  I think they need to make sure the Rev is competitive with the other consoles with or without the nifty remote controller.

All true. And here is where my concern begins.

We all know how lousy Nintendo are at marketing. And yes they have made great strides lately and are really pushing their software and such better than I've seen in years. But compared to MS and Sony, they still suck on it hard and long I'm afraid. And not just when it comes to simple advertising of games. MS and Sony are much better at getting simple points across and making themselves look uber cool in all that they do. Nintendo is so weak in this arena it's not funny...at all.

When the Rev launches, and shortly beforehand I imagine, Nintendo will begin whatever qualifies at NCL as a "marketing blitz" to go after it's targeted audience. And like I agreed earlier, Nintendo need to both aim at the non-gamer crowd and the already a-gamer crowd at the same time or else risk putting all their eggs in one basket as Ian said.

Can we REALLY count on Nintendo doing BOTH at the same time? I'm worried about that to say the least. If Nintendo were to focus almost exclusively on the non-gamer sect and then Uh-OH it turns out to be what we call in econ class a "TEH TURD MARKET" then what? Fall back on the legions of hardcore Nintendo fans who will surely be supporting the system already? Well, that crowd is shrinking. And Nintendo can no longer simply assume that they have this magical built in fanbase of diehards. They do, but as I said they need to compete here and the diehard Nintendo gamers are a dying breed.

Of course this is all a moot point if the non-gamer crowd latches on to the Rev with both hands and one spare foot but the cause for concern on this matter is justified I feel.  

[MrMojoRising]

Nintendo should focus more on the gamer population earlier and get them excited and have some word of mouth carry over into their all out "media blitz" where they try to reach all of the non-gamers closer to launch.  If they can get gamers excited early they are less likely to lost interest as quickly as non-gamers probably would.

[BigJim]

My belief has been that the non-gamer IS an unproven market, and not a reliable one either. I still believe that.

However, building a new audience may or may not be tougher than stealing Sony's. If a gamer buys the smoke that Sony is blowing up their chimney, they've probably already made up their minds to get a PS3. Be it reputation, personal experience, assumption that they'll be the winner again, or any combination of the 3. And the fact that they're not even beating Sony to market to steal the thunder, forget it.

We know that Nintendo was successful in re-creating the market with NES. And we know that Sony was able to grow the market again with the PS, which many people scoffed at at first. I was one of those people that thought Nintendo and Sega would blow them away. A slight miscalculation.

I don't think they can reclaim the top spot in one generation, but Nintendo CAN improve their base to get it started. They need to wake up. The sleeping giant routine put them into this tight spot. They have to be aggressive. I really do believe this will be a sink or swim console for Nintendo that can go either way. They have more than enough resources to make it swim, but by god they just need to wake the hell up and paddle.    

[Stimutacs Addict]

lets think about my friends in teh dorms. we dont have the cash to throw around (freshmen year); few have jobs, and everyone directs funds towards cigarettes (weaklings), booze, and, unfortunately, drugss. if xbox360 doesn't capture some of the college casuals this christmas, Nintendo will have an opportunity to strike. I've heard people excited about the new controller and downloading old games (emus are nice, Tv's w/ controller are betteer). At a low price point and using wireless LAN (i'm pretty sure it doesnt do that, though that would be awesome), ninty can sweep through the dorms in no time.

btw, how many n64 titles do you think we're going to get? how many titles qualify?

[ThePerm]

also  as  far a  gfx go  playstation  had  butt  ugly  graphics and ti  was  still  number  1

[Spak-Spang]

You know everyone is talking about perception of inferiority with the price.

But reality, to those that uber power and graphics matter they will ALREADY know that the Revolution is inferior and that the game console is riding more on concept than power.

The other companies also will be getting the same information out through advertisements and such.  Game stores with well intentioned but not greatly informed sales-representatives will also be informing and influencing opinions in this regard.

A great way to battle this perception is to admit it like Nintendo is doing, and aggressively price it at a market value that admits its is not the almighty but PS3, but is a concept system that is extremely well for such a big REVOLUTIONARY concept in gaming.  

You are really telling me that someone that is wanting a system for power and graphics alone is going to see the Revolution concept and change their mind about not buying it?  NO OF COURSE NOT.

Also, someone that knows that it is inferior graphics and power may be more willing to pick it up and try the console if it is priced at $99-$150...specially if the new concepts in gameplay intrigue him.  Raising the price to $250 will not make him think, huh this is probably not as underpowered as I thought.  He will probably say, DAMN, it cost alot of money to create this new concept.  

The arguement about perceived value I think is mute, because we are at an age where most buyers are educated buyers and it is very easy to find the facts you need.

[ThePerm]

what  if t he games  are cheaper  too? Sony  and MS's super high  price  strategy could  backfire.