Topic: Rev Predictions

[BlkPaladin]

In the most part developers make what the publishers tell them to because they get financing throught the publisher. If the developer wants to make a game for a certain console they have to throw the dice and hope they can find a publisher who like the idea enough to publish it on the developers terms.

A way Nintendo may be able to alleviate this is offer an alternative distribution channel that they have control over. Such as their online service. But to do that they would have to offer bigger flash memory and an easy way to store the games on a computer or it will  not be used.

But a good and interesting thing to note is that the publishers seem to be more positive about the Revolution than they were orginally about the DS. And currently the DS is enjoy some good times.

[Spak-Spang]

Ian:  The DS seems to be getting much better support than the PSP from the start.  This isn't just because they feel they can move software, but because several developers wanted to try a game out for the DS.  I am sure the same will happen here for the Revolution.  You make it sound like Publishers are the last say in developing games.  They aren't.  They are the last say in publishing games.  If a developer takes a risk and makes a great game (or is inspired to create a game because of the Revolution) there will be a publisher that comes along and releases the game if its good.  And look at the crap that publishers actually think is good.  

The Gamecube isn't getting games because if you multiplatform in this generation that many people have 2 systems, or only the most popular, it doesn't become worth releasing 3 copies that will only sell well on 2 systems.  You should of just released it on 2 systems or better yet 1 from the start...perhaps 2 later.  The Gamecube had already shown signs that only great Nintendo games would sell on the system, and medocre third party games won't.  The Revolution corrects this problem because Nintendo offers a significantly different play style and gaming device.  If you have an idea for a Revolution game you are going to HAVE to make it on the Revolution.  

And Nintendo is helping developers with this by creating a system that is cheaper and easier to program for than the other 2 systems.  I believe just like the DS is getting new types of games and new EXCLUSIVE games Nintendo Revolution will do the same.  

[Spak-Spang]

BlkPaladin:  Or Nintendo could offer to sell Developer Published games via their online Website getting partial cut of the profits.  Simply the game could be only available on Nintendo's website and the developer just really needs to pay for pressing of disks which they can determine by preorders.

Nintendo could advertise upcoming games via the online hub on the revolution, and allow game demos to get people excited.  

[Ian Sane]

"Ian: The DS seems to be getting much better support than the PSP from the start."

The DS is also the followup to the GBA, which owned virtually 100% of the portable marketshare.  Nintendo already had all the third parties on board.  The only possible change that could have happened was third parties leaving the DS.  In terms of portable marketshare and third party Nintendo has had nowhere to go but down since Pokemon came out.

I do think that Nintendo offering to publish games is a good idea.  It makes you wonder why they pretty much abandoned the second party concept on the Cube.  Sadly downloading won't work but I don't think download only games would have enough mainstream popularity to get the kind of sales that would encourage other third parties to support the Rev.  But Nintendo filling in their release schedule with Nintendo-published third party games would help console sales.  Every good exclusive game helps and Nintendo could find a hidden gem from an smaller dev.  Killer apps can come from anywhere.

[wandering]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
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.

Cheaper medium for games, you say? The rev's got that.

Marketing-friendly glitz, you say? The rev's got that too...and that's exactly how the Rev will win this round. Sure, the ps3 and the 360 have better specs and HD support...and no one cares, because graphics have gotten to the point where people just don't care about them, and most people don't own HDTVs. The features of the ps3 and 360 are in the realm of the theoretical. The features of the Revolution, meanwhile, are instantly palpable: a unique controller that will draw in people like moths to the flame; a machine that isn't noisy, loud, large or obnoxious; a huge back catalogue of games that everybody likes; and a price point that's actually affordable. The revolution is glitzier, showier, and more attention-grabbing than the competition.

....which is not how it was in the N64 era. The difference between the N64 and the Playstation was that the N64's features were buried and the playstation's were highly visable. Sure, the N64 had no loading times, better graphics, and better specs - but the playstation had fmvs. Sure, the N64 had the better controller - but the playstation had the better lookingcontroller. The situation is completley reversed this time around.

Call me a blind Nintendo fanboy, but I'm predicting the Rev will be first this upcoming gen.  

[Spak-Spang]

Ian:  If you all you need is a successful previous system then Nintendo should have never lost marketshare.  You could look at history and predict that Nintendo's DS system should have failed just like the Nintendo 64 supposedly did.

A more powerful system was launching right along side it with a more powerful storage unit, and a better launch lineup of games.

Every media source was heralding Sony's entry into the market as big.  Nintendo was about to loss dominance in the handheld market and become solely a software company.

We heard this prediction alot.  Nintendo really didn't even hype up the DS that much.  But we see what really happened.  The public took to a cheaper more innovative console that wasn't as sexy, sleak, or software realized at the time.  

I believe this is because innovation and cost are important to developers, publishers, and consumers.  Developers didn't want to create something for a handheld that basically they could create better for a console system.  Publishers didn't want to spend the more expensive development costs for the PSP, and Consumers didn't feel it neccessary or worth their money to speed over $200 for a handheld, that didn't do anything special.

I truly believe the Revolution will be like this when it is launched.  A cheaper system that may not have the complete bells and whistles as the competition, but what it lacks won't be missed THAT much.  HD really isn't that nice, and I barely tell the difference, its not enough for $100 extra dollars.  Then you have developers that are going to just want to play around with the machine and develop something fun and unique.  So far we have heard excitment from all the publishers and all the developers.  They want this thing to succeed, and they want to develop something for it.

The same excitement level was announced about the Xbox or PS3, except for mentioning its power.  Big deal.

I guess I just have a more positive outlook on this entire system and launch, I fully believe in the product and what Nintendo is trying to do this next generation.

[OptimusPrime]

Maybe this is a nice addition. According to a study of the American DFC Intelligence among, investors are more intrested in companies creating innovative games then the same old same old. No one noticed how in the last six months Nintendo's stock went up 15 percent and EA's went down 17% (togheter with huge drops in profits).
Investors see the effect (or better, groundbreaking succes) of Nintendogs and Animal Crossing and al those other "non-games" Nintendo has been releasing and ackowledge that Nintendo is on to something, that there is indeed a huge "non-gamer" market ready to be hooked up to the traditional gamemarket and are willing to invest in the risk.
Publishers may have the last say in game publishing because they hold the money... they get their money from investors and if investors want to see more innovative, easy to control games that have proven to attract new audiences then publishers are going to let developers make those games. Biggest winner: Nintendo, because it's their handheld and upcoming console that holds the easy to use control-method and the DS allready captured a part of those "non-gamers".

There is change happening in the financial climat and in a indirect way Nintendo is responsible and maybe was even aiming to create such a shift in thinking.

[couchmonkey]

Quote
Originally posted by: wandering

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Marketing-friendly glitz, you say? The rev's got that too...and that's exactly how the Rev will win this round. Sure, the ps3 and the 360 have better specs and HD support...and no one cares, because graphics have gotten to the point where people just don't care about them, and most people don't own HDTVs. The features of the ps3 and 360 are in the realm of the theoretical. The features of the Revolution, meanwhile, are instantly palpable: a unique controller that will draw in people like moths to the flame; a machine that isn't noisy, loud, large or obnoxious; a huge back catalogue of games that everybody likes; and a price point that's actually affordable. The revolution is glitzier, showier, and more attention-grabbing than the competition.

Eh, I agree on the controller and the back catalogue of games, but I don't think that quietness factors in that well.  Unless Nintendo is going to make ads showing how quiet Revolution is compared to the other two, and let's be honest: an ad like that would be completely missing the point.  It's a nice addition, but it's hardly "glitzy".  

A low price isn't all that glitzy either.  A low price is generally a good thing, but as iPod proves with it's $30 skins and other ridiculously overpriced accessories, a high price doesn't always hurt.  Don't get me wrong, I think Nintendo is making the right choice with pricing since it's aiming to grab up a new, non-gaming audience.  However, I think a big chunk of the gaming audience will  think "lower price = lower quality" - which is supported by the fact that the system is less powerful than the others.


I posted this in another thread, but I want all my predictions in one place so I can look at them for laughs later:

Baseless sales predictions:

End of 2006:
Xbox 360: 10 million
PS3: 7 million
Rev: 2 million (depends on how many are available since it will probably launch at year's end, and therefore will probably sell out).

End of 2007:
PS3: 20 million
Xbox 360: 19.5 million (emphasis on a very close race with Sony just edging MS out)
Revolution: 14 million

Other crazy predictions:

System will launch in North America in Sept. 2006 (Now that we have more info, November is more likely, but I'm willing to admit my mistakes).

We'll see game footage before Nintendo's E3 conference (In retrospect, this is probably wrong too ).

[JonLeung]

I want to see Revolution footage now, and I think everyone would.

So I'd predict that there will be something shown before E3, but they'll save major stuff for E3 itself.

I hope to be able to get to E3 by applying as media personnel, if VGMaps.com can cut it...  At least I have a better looking site and in a sense, IGN sponsorship...kinda.  I would really like to feel the awe of something new being revealed at E3 if I was actually there.  But that's just my personal opinion.

Obviously if I can't get to E3, I'd be, like, GIMME MORE INFO!  NOW!

I also predict that while it won't be this E3, Sony or Microsoft will eventually come up with something similar to the remote control if it is successful.  If it was shown at something like E3 I wonder if it'd be booed for being a rip-off.

[Spak-Spang]

Why show footage now.  Any information right now gets people excited.  They can just make announcements until E3 and keep excitement level up for those that are studying the market.

Everyone is going to need to experience the system, and the best unveiling of screenshoots, actual games, and more is when you can allow the public or media to fully experience the system.

Otherwise, a screenshot compared to the HD screenshot of the Xbox360 will look bad.  However, the Revolution isn't just about graphics its about the feel and experience of playing games in a new way.  

Nintendo is playing it pretty smart by waiting.  Right now, Nintendo is going to be able to have an E3 that is going to be huge and really blow the competition out of the water, just because nobody knows what to expect.

[JonLeung]

I guess for the most part I agree with you, Spak, but how much does E3 matter to casual and non-gamers?

And that matters to Nintendo if that's the market they're after.

So while footage might not mean much now, a big E3 still doesn't mean much more to those people.

[BlkPaladin]

E3 is still important to the non-gamer just in a non-direct way. The non-gamer gets their gaming news from a rather bad source the news paper and nightly news. And AP and other news groups write up a common report and these are regurgetated by these news sources.

[Ceric]

Let's face it.  That was a long read. But besides that Game Console releases and tech releases in general aren't interesting for what people consider "non-gamers".  That being said the release is for the gamers.  The marketing is for the non.  I have more to say but later.

[iMoron]

...!!???

Hey... here are my predictions... and it will look like this marked wise:

The Revolution will do like the PS1 and the PS2, start slow and gain big momentum with a great amount of games.

The PS3 will do like the N64 and the GameCube, look promising but sony's mistakes and arrogance will diminish it.

The XBox360 will do like the Saturn and the Dreamcast, it will blead green untill its death... and go software only...


Now... take that!

A prediction without numbers!!!

[jasonditz]

My prediction is that by E3 2007 we still won't have a clear winner, and it's just a question of who finds their "killer app" first.

[Spak-Spang]

My new prediction is.  Nintendo Revolution will be better than sex...and safer too.

[Hostile Creation]

I think it'd be cool if Nintendo anonymously released a video online, some next-gen game (I guess it'd have to be a new franchise, or at least be vague enough that no one would recognize it), and let it hype itself crazy before they're like "Yeah it's us."

[nickmitch]

It would be cool if they got people people saying, "0M6!! T3H Halo 3?!?!!!1" or "Behold! teh PS3 is teh superior grafix!"

[nemo_83]

I have an awfully outrageous prediction; Halo Revolution.  the end.

[animecyberrat]

yeah it was mention above by someone but I forgot who anyways Nows a good time to be a Nintendo investro considering their stocks went from 109 a share to 120 a share in a matter of like two months. I wish I had the money to invest right now cuz I sure have high hopes once Revolution comes around. Not to mention it would be nice to get in on those dividends come Christmas time.



Looking at that I predict Revolution will rake int hordse of cash and Sony will eventualy cave in or consolidate further and Microsoft will just keep eating the costs untill Linux or Macintosh replaces Windows as the standard.  

[JonLeung]

From what I hear, investors have always liked Nintendo.  They've often been profitable, and usually moreso than the competition, I gather.

Nintendo sells approximately as many GBAs as Sony sells PS2s, or maybe more.  Now I don't have exact numbers, but if Nintendo profits from every GBA sale (they should, considering the technology was dated even back in 2001) and a PS2 sale is at a loss, or at least less profitable (consider that it's being sold for about twice-thrice as much but probably costs multiple times more to produce than a GBA) then Nintendo is already ahead.  Even if my reasoning is wrong or inaccurate, remember, that's just the GBA.  Add in the DS sales (higher than the PSPs, and again cheaper to produce) and GameCube sales (lower than the Xbox's, yes, but not by a lot, plus again, it's cheaper to make), not to mention that most of the software bestsellers on any of those systems are Nintendo's own, and it's ridiculous for anyone to think that Nintendo is getting out of the game business soon.  They're the most dedicated to it.

That being said, they'll continue with the cost-cutting measures.  We already suspect the specs aren't as high as the competition's and the graphics won't be in HD.  I would love for the Revolution to have a comparable storage medium, but I'm guessing it's just going to be a variation on DVDs...  But their faults are covered up with the always-exclusive Nintendo franchises, and hopefully they'll come up with more for those gamers who don't identify with Mario, Link, Samus, etc.

[kirby_killer_dedede]

Yeah.  Release a video on some Xbox message board, get them all hyped up and then at E3 be all "PWN."

[BlkPaladin]

This site had an article two years ago that was about a financial study done by an outside source who sells their information to investors etc. It seems that even though Gamecube (just gamecube) was in third place Nintendo was making more profit off sales of Gamecubes, games, and accessories than Sony made off of their consoles, etc. (If I remember correct it was a third more profit. And that was only the Gamecube. Factor in the Gameboy and DS profit Nintendo is a very profitable company and the only time they were in the "red" was in sales growth one year they still made a profit but less then the year before.

[animecyberrat]

true all that not to mention the insane Pokemon merchandising and such. I did look into investing into Nintendo but they want way to much for initial investment for me at this time, so I will probably go with Proctor and Gamble next since I already got the right mutual fund now I need to get some stocks in big companies that arent going away. I so want to own sharess of Nintendo though, not just cuz tehy are profiatable but also cuz then I have an excuse for pushing people to buy thier products.  

[Ian Sane]

No one denies that Nintendo is profitable.  But profit doesn't mean squat to a gamer.  Only market share benefits us.  I get nothing if Nintendo makes more profit.  Hell with the Cube we lost the online feature because of profit.  Market share attracts more third parties and gets stores to have better selections.  Market share makes a better console for us.

And how long is Nintendo going to remain profitable as they continue to weaken their own brand name.  If they keep driving people away each gen eventually they would reach a point where they can't be profitable anymore.  Their profitability relies a lot on us not getting fed up with their underachievment.