Topic: Rev Predictions

[Magik]

Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung

Quote
There are definitely a lot of people would be interested in the 'virtual console', but I think there are more people interested in new games than old games.

Hmmm, true.  But it would still definitely be a selling point to gamers in a demographic Nintendo needs, and will get back those gamers with any sense of nostalgia who may have become disenfranchised with them lately.  If it has a much lower price point than the competition it would definitely be worth considering as a second console.

And as I said, once it's in the homes already, people will look at the Nintendo section of the game store and consider the new games since they now have the means to play them.  The classics are doing "Trojan horse penetration".

It'll work for that demographic, anyway.  They'll hopefully have other marketing strategies and solid new games for those less interested in the past, I definitely agree with you there.

I've been thinking about the REV being a 2nd console, can this actually work considering how expensive the 360 is, and how PS3 will be?  In Canada, the Xbox 360 is 399.99 and 499.99 for the Core and Premium respectiviely.  Now add a game or two and a second controller and we're looking at just under $600 or $700 before tax.  Can people really afford to pick up a 2nd console after spending so much on the first?

I know the REV will be cheaper than the PS3 and 360, but cheap is subjective from person to person.  I dont' consider $249.99 CDN ($199.99US) cheap.  I see it as not as expensive as the rest, but still expensive.

Thoughts?  

[JonLeung]

I'm Canadian too and I pretty much expect a $249.99 CDN price.  Sure, anything over $200 looks pricey but I've always been expecting mid-$200 prices for new Nintendo consoles.

I remember when the Sega Saturn was like over $500.  Multi-hundred dollar things are scary, especially considering how there's a greater difference (even if mostly just perceived) between American and Canadian dollars as prices get into higher ranges.

Perhaps if the difference in prices between consoles is enough, people will get a Revolution as a FIRST console because they'll have to wait a while for the prices of the other two to drop low enough to afford.  Or at least while they're still saving up their money for any console they might have more exposure to the Revolution before deciding on a purchase.  To bounce off your point that to get it as a second console people have already put down to much money, well, if the Revolution is different enough that people find it worth saving for, it shouldn't be too much of a problem - most people are capable of saving up for something if they really want it, and the low price point only helps.

[Nosferat2]

[P.S.-  Also Sky of Arcadia and PSO.  I love PSO but it's not really an RPG and eventually went to cards too and well Sky of Arcadia... Yeah that was just bad... and a port.  Sorry about the rantage I just had to get it out.

P.S.S- After re-reading this I realized that the new IP, there probably should be 2, should be a FPS and a "Traditional" RPG franchise.  Some will argue that Zelda is an RPG.  Lets face it deep down it's an action title.  It's a beast of it's own and shares in a way more with Metroid than a traditional RPG.  What it does it does well and uniquely.  Both of these need to be unique and not use any of Nintendo's characters except maybe for a cameo.  It should also try to stay away from the style that is deemed Nintendo artisticly, except for maybe a homage level (Like the 8-bit one in Baten Kaitos).



Preach on man! Preach on!

[Ian Sane]

"I've been thinking about the REV being a 2nd console, can this actually work considering how expensive the 360 is, and how PS3 will be? In Canada, the Xbox 360 is 399.99 and 499.99 for the Core and Premium respectiviely. Now add a game or two and a second controller and we're looking at just under $600 or $700 before tax. Can people really afford to pick up a 2nd console after spending so much on the first?"

I've felt the "second console" plan was flawed period regardless of price because even now people typically don't own more than one console.  It's a little more frequent online with hardcore gamers but the average household only has one console per generation tops.  As you point out though the added cost of these new consoles is just going to make that even more rare.  Anything over $100 is NEVER cheap.  Something can be a good value but people only have so much money.  $5000 for a brand new car would be a pretty sweet deal.  But nonetheless I couldn't afford it.  Sometimes an amount is just too high regardless of value.  Paying over $1000 to get a Rev and another console is expensive.  The Rev can be cheap by console standards but it will never truly be cheap.

Plus I've always felt the competitive nature of console owners would prevent a console that tries to be number two from being very popular.  Ever since the terms "console war" was invented console owners have always had a lot of pride in what console they own.  They want to pick the "winner" or for their console to become the winner.  It's silly but it's reality and whining about how stupid or immature that is won't help Nintendo a damn bit.  Well if one console maker admits they're not even trying to win then anyone with that "win" mentality (ie: the majority) isn't even going to buy that console.  Nintendo can set a simple goal for themselves to just sell more consoles than last time or improve their market share or become number two and that's fine.  But the gaming public has to think they're trying to win and can win or they won't give a crap.

Being the "second console" isn't a bad thing to be but it's not something to intentionally strive for.

[Magik]

Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
I'm Canadian too and I pretty much expect a $249.99 CDN price.  Sure, anything over $200 looks pricey but I've always been expecting mid-$200 prices for new Nintendo consoles.

I remember when the Sega Saturn was like over $500.  Multi-hundred dollar things are scary, especially considering how there's a greater difference (even if mostly just perceived) between American and Canadian dollars as prices get into higher ranges.

Perhaps if the difference in prices between consoles is enough, people will get a Revolution as a FIRST console because they'll have to wait a while for the prices of the other two to drop low enough to afford.  Or at least while they're still saving up their money for any console they might have more exposure to the Revolution before deciding on a purchase.  To bounce off your point that to get it as a second console people have already put down to much money, well, if the Revolution is different enough that people find it worth saving for, it shouldn't be too much of a problem - most people are capable of saving up for something if they really want it, and the low price point only helps.

To me, anything over $200 is pricey.  And once you start adding other stuff, like games, memory cards and controllers... it's definitely becoming expensive.

It's going to take a lot of convincing for casual/non-gamers to pick up the REV first considering Nintendo's image is pretty distorted at the moment.  A fully packed bundle would be a good way to start things.

Nintendo's going to really need to beef up their marketing and advertisement to convince people to pick up the REV.  

[JonLeung]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Being the "second console" isn't a bad thing to be but it's not something to intentionally strive for.

I think there's confusion between second console and second-best (or second-most popular) console.  'Cause by that logic, anyone who's going to have more than one console and if one of those is an Xbox 360 then it's already decided what their first console is.  But it may not be their main one.  Second =/= secondary.  At least not totally.

Instead of calling it a "second console" they should (and probably will) promote it as a console everybody should have, regardless of if they already own the competition's console(s).  More like "the competition doesn't matter at all to us".  That would make it sound like they're going for first place, which I'm sure they are, even if it's technically a lot of people's second console that they pick up.
 

[Ian Sane]

"Instead of calling it a 'second console' they should (and probably will) promote it as a console everybody should have, regardless of if they already own the competition's console(s). More like 'the competition doesn't matter at all to us'. That would make it sound like they're going for first place, which I'm sure they are, even if it's technically a lot of people's second console that they pick up."

Nintendo has used that "the competition doesn't matter" routine before and anyone capable of speech knows that's secret code for "we're going to get our ass kicked."  It's a loser statement like "just do your best", "good try", and "the important thing is to have fun."  A Rev owner should have confidence in their console and therefore Nintendo needs to sound confident.  This is why when Reggie talks it gets everyone excited but when Iwata talks everyone gets worried.  Reggie's all "we're going to make a big comeback and kick some ass!" while Iwata is all "gosh I hope someone buys our console."

[kirby_killer_dedede]

Haha, yeah, Iwata's the one who said he didn't expect anyone to applaud when they unveiled their magnificent new device at E3 (which turned out to be the DS and was unvelied 5 months before E3).

[KnowsNothing]

Quote
Nintendo has used that "the competition doesn't matter" routine before and anyone capable of speech knows that's secret code for "we're going to get our ass kicked."  It's a loser statement like "just do your best", "good try", and "the important thing is to have fun."

That's a really stupid statement, but I'm sure you did your best.

[kram821]

heres my predicton.


price: $349.99
items: Revoultion, 2 controlers, 2 anolge sticks, 2 controler shells, RCA cables, power cords, demo disk.
colors: white, black red, NES, SNES, N64
Relese date: as soon as humanly possible, cause I can't wait any more (happy thoughts, happy thoughts, happy thoughts).

[kirby_killer_dedede]

Except the Rev was recently confirmed to be $299 or less.

[Ian Sane]

"That's a really stupid statement, but I'm sure you did your best."

I appreciate your sportsmanship.  The important thing is I had fun typing it.

[KnowsNothing]

I'm glad you feel good about yourself, because that's all that really matters.  

[kirby_killer_dedede]

Only you can decide your future Ian.  Don't let KN get you down.  I'm sure you'll make a fine acrobat.

[IceCold]

I don't like the idea Rev playing second fiddle at all.. That's the thing that worries me about this "second system" stuff; if many people buy the Rev as a second system, multiplatform sales will just be horribly low. As it is, developers are definitely going to make games with the 360 and PS3 & HD in mind, then scale them back quickly to port them on the Rev. It's bad enough that the Cube getting the worst ports gives it a bad image... So if this happens, a lot of support will dry up. But again, if the userbase is high enough, it won't really matter, as the Rev will get a significant amount of exclusives.

Then again, Nintendo is saying it should be a second system for those other gamers who migrated to Sony and Microsoft. Nintendo is trying to create a whole new audience in non-gamers. As has been said, it's risky but if it works, it has great potential... the non-gamers could get interested in other types of games, and also, there will be more third party support is the userbase is strong regardless of the demographic.

[BigJim]

Most reasons people mention why Nintendo shouldn't aim to be the second console are mostly emotional and ego.

They're going to launch a year after 360, and possibly head to head with PS3 if that is delayed (which some developers seem to think will happen). They're not going to be number one, whether they shot for it or not. Their relevance in the console market is questionable. Why fight a battle you're not going to win? Even from a business standpoint it's simply inefficient.

The train is already on the track. They're aiming to be different. The fate was sealed with the controller. Even though they're all making games, Nintendo's track is going in a different direction.

Didn't Reggie's speech mention that there is a 25% platform crossover? That's in a market where they are all essentially competing on the same level. GameCube somewhat competed as a second console, at least in price, but that wasn't until the price dropped later in the cycle and the system's fate was already determined.

Nintendo is banking on 360 and PS3 being too similar for most people to want/need both. If their assumption is correct, the crossover potential is Nintendo's to own.

If Nintendo proactively markets Revolution as a secondary alternative (whatever terminology they use), raises the crossover penetration modestly (even just to 30%), keeps the price low, continues to sell to their built-in fan base, AND bring in the new players, they have a fighting chance of increasing their market share while the other guys keep dogging it out. They'd probably still end up in 3rd place, but with more marketshare and mindshare. Hopefully they'll have sold the concept of the controller, which helps them in the fight of 2011 if the others copy it.

A lot of steps there, but it's possible.

Re: 1st year. As I mentioned I think the 2nd year will be just as important as the first, considering the distinct part of Nintendo's strategy to grow the market with new players. The first year will be all about early adopters and the built-in fan base. They're the ones that would have bought it anyway. The newbies aren't going to pick it up fresh off the assembly line. Those buyers need time. The crossover buyers need time too. Year 2 will be about riding momentum that year 1 begins to execute.

Of course, EVERYTHING hinges on this darn controller. It's either genius or insane.  

[JonLeung]

But like I said, whether people confuse "second" and "secondary", I don't think Nintendo would actually use such terminology in any advertising material that would reach casual or non-gamers.

Hardcore gamers who read about all this stuff on the 'net would see a press release about it but they're likely the types who would know of the Revolution's library and upcoming releases and other info that should sway them in any direction.

[Spak-Spang]

People may be confusing secondary with second.  But developers won't.

Nintendo has already done the hardest part of marketing, by making there product look different than the competition (because it is different.)  

Now all Nintendo has to do is get a marketshare large enough that publishers and developers see it as a worthy platform to develop for.  And Nintendo is already taking large steps towards that as well.

1)A cheaper priced console looks cheap only in comparison that it does everything the competition does.  The Revolution does some things that the competition can never do, so the cheaper price makes it more bargain than cheap.

2)Cheaper and easier to develop games means that publishers and developers can spend the money to make and exclusive.

3)They will choose Nintendo to make exclusives because it is so different and literally can make special games the other consoles can't.

[Ian Sane]

"A cheaper priced console looks cheap only in comparison that it does everything the competition does. The Revolution does some things that the competition can never do, so the cheaper price makes it more bargain than cheap."

A cheaper console also looks cheap in comparison if it's obvious that tradeoffs were made.  Nintendo has already compromised the Rev with the lack of HD.  If the Rev can do what the competition can do plus more then it's a bargain.  If it's just different then it's not.  The tradeoff to get that low price has to be insignificant so that the general public doesn't notice.  It can't be an obvious missing feature or a noticable difference in graphics quality.  More than once in stores I heard a salesman pitching the three consoles to someone and the customer immediately assumed that the lower Cube price was just because there was no DVD player.  They immediately "discovered" that the Cube wasn't a deal at all.

"They will choose Nintendo to make exclusives because it is so different and literally can make special games the other consoles can't."

This gets brought up a lot and Nintendo has always promoted it as a big advantage.  It's a pipe dream.  Publishers control what games go where and they don't care about creativity or the ability to make special games.  All they care about is money and if cliche generic games on the PS3 have higher potential sales than creative original games on the Rev they're going to concentrate on cliche generic games.  Nintendo has focused a lot of developers.  They made a big deal about how easy the Cube was to develop for and how connectivity allowed for original content that couldn't be done on the other consoles and none of that made a difference.  Making a developer-friendly console only benefits Nintendo's internal teams.

Publishers are who you have to win over.  That's how the Playstation beat the N64.  It offered a cheaper medium that provided more storage space.  It offered marketing-friendly glitz like FMV and Redbook audio.  It offered lower licencing fees and just in general more freedom regarding what games can and can't be released.  THAT is how you win third parties over.  Publishers felt they could make more money by switching consoles.

So having cheaper games is a good strategy provided there's higher value.  If a third party has to compromise their game to get the lower cost it won't help.  But providing something different that encourages creativity isn't going to attract support in any significant way.  The analog stick is now the standard but it didn't attract support worth crap on the N64.  It wasn't publisher-friendly so it didn't help.

[JonLeung]

I must agree with Ian about the money vs. creativity angle.  It's unfortunately true.  Which is why it's nice to hear all these nice things about the Revolution from the mouths of developers, but until we see some games, and unless they become successful (including on a profit level), creativity doesn't amount to much.  Developers said some nice things about the GameCube too.  Some Ex-Square guy saying it's the second coming of the Super NES?  Sounds great, right?  How many RPGs did the GCN get?

At least the Revolution really is quite different that developers will consider taking a chance with it.  Ideally, anyway.

[couchmonkey]

Ian, I agree and disagree with your comments on third parties.

I agree that, by and large, publishers are more in the driver's seat than developers.  However, I do think developers have some influence, particularly in companies that do both the development and the publishing.

I think that Nintendo will get some free, exclusive support out of the Revolution even if it doesn't do so well, because there will be respected developers with enough influence to get their publishers to agree to release a new Revolution game.  However, I agree that the amount of games made this way will be pretty limited unless Nintendo gets a huge market share.  And one of the most important ways to do that is to persuade third party publishers to release games on the system.

So I guess what I'm saying is I agree that Nintendo needs to persuade publishers, but I don't think the situation is totally helpless without doing that.  I think in a worst-case scenario there will still be N64-like third party support.  We'll get the Revolution equivalents of games like Space Station Silicon Valley, Rocket: Robot on Wheels, and Tetrisphere.

[Magik]

I hope for Nintendo's sake that they are correct that they are substantially cheaper to develop for instead of the PS3 and 360.  Taking a look at: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6130901.html?q=Development%20cost, you can see the average development cost for the Cube and PS2 is only a difference of 6 million yen, which isn't really a lot.

[Spak-Spang]

I disagree with those comments Ian completely.

DS against PSP proves that it is not just power that people look for.  The PSP had alot of hype and was the product awarded and herald by tech magizines and such around America but it isn't doing very well against the DS, because the DS offers unique games that PSP can't offer, and the price is affordable.

Price can be too expensive.  The Xbox 360 is boardline too expensive right now.  The Revolution may not do HD, but it is a bargain for next generation games.

Throw in the idea you can pay 100 to 200 dollars more for an HD version of basically this generation game console.  Or a Nintendo Revolution that can (with the shell) do normal gaming, but can also create completely new experiences with the Revolution controller, then you see how people will view Nintendo as a bargain and as something special.

Also we are moving into a direction with several mega publishers controlling several developers.  You might say developers will have no say now on what they create.  However, that isn't neccessarily true with the big name developers.  If a big name designer from Capcom or Konami or Square wants to create a Revolution game, they are going to create it, and it will be published.  Look at little Treasure they are still able to pick and choose platforms they support.  You would figure they would only release for the biggest since they are so small.  

I think people put too much stock in HD, and do not put enough stock in innovative products or the perception innovative products have with the people.  Something that appears cool and innovative can instantly gain recognition and support and that can grow.  But something that is basically the same will only garner the same support it had previous, and smaller growth.

[Ian Sane]

"You might say developers will have no say now on what they create. However, that isn't neccessarily true with the big name developers. If a big name designer from Capcom or Konami or Square wants to create a Revolution game, they are going to create it, and it will be published. Look at little Treasure they are still able to pick and choose platforms they support. You would figure they would only release for the biggest since they are so small."

I agree.  That will happen.  That's just not enough to get serious support.  It will be like Kojima makes a quirky game that no one actually buys and that's it.  That's what happened on the Cube.  You get a few neat third party games here and there, some of which are great and some of which aren't, but you never get serious support from a company.  It's just pet projects.  What Nintendo's goal should be is to have some third parties regard the Rev as their main console in that most of their games are made for it.  That's REAL third party support, not just multiplatform ports and a few exclusives.  The only way to get that is to be publisher friendly.  Being developer friendly will get some support but not enough to properly address the problem.  A developer friendly approach certainly wouldn't improve beyond the Cube's third party support.

[Kairon]

And almost disappointingly this all boils down to moving systems. How do you build a user-base and become publisher friendly?

I mean, you can have low licensing fees, low dev costs (which is a boon to publishers, remember!), and easy money in the virtual console, but that doesn't matter one fig if publishers can't find any customers to sell the game to.

We're right back at this basic concept: userbase.

Hmmm... what's Nintendo's answer to the user-base question? Cheap almost-impulse price, secondary console mentality, out-of-the-gate mind-blowing unique features, retro-gamer appeal, and the potentially huge non-gamer appeal.

Here's hoping that Nintendo can replicate their DS success with the Rev.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com