Topic: Rev Predictions

[vudu]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
No one denies that Nintendo is profitable.  But profit doesn't mean squat to a gamer.  Only market share benefits us.

Tell that to a Dreamcast owner.

[JonLeung]

I think the less popular something is, the more rabid its fans get.  Ask an SNK/Neo-Geo fan anything about Metal Slug or the King Of Fighters and see how hysterical they get.

No offense to Dreamcast owners.  Our household actually has a Dreamcast, the only non-Nintendo console since the NES that we have.

[Ian Sane]

"Tell that to a Dreamcast owner."

Well obviously if the company goes broke it's no good.  But Nintendo's profit driven strategy is so obsessive that they're willing to severely damage their brand name and complete ignore future trends just to always make a profit all the time.  They never risk a loss to make more profit later.  They make decisions that will affect their next five years based on profit estimates for the next six months.  Jerking around your fanbase and letting your marketshare consistently shrink isn't that good for business in the longterm.

Basically I'm just looking for a happy medium where as a customer my needs are reasonably addressed and Nintendo is still a successful company at the same time.

[Spak-Spang]

Ian perhaps Nintendo is sticking to their personal values as a company.

Perhaps Nintendo chosing not to follow this future trends, which was really Nintendo refusing to make violent, supposedly mature related themes.  Nintendo instead focused on rich gameplay experiences that can and should be enjoyed by older games, but are still capable of being family friendly as well.  

The only real ball Nintendo dropped was with the Cartridge to CD system format change with the Nintendo 64.  And one can argue whether or not Nintendo made the right choice.  Personally from a gamer point of view I loved the no load times, and the fact that cartridges seemed to be more reliable at the time.  Obviously that hurt Nintendo.

Personally, I believe Nintendo has not been hurting their brand name, but have been trying to protect it as much as possible.  Nintendo is still known as a video gaming company and they are still known for making some of the best games that EVERYONE can enjoy.  While Sony has recently been hurting its name as a gaming console with the PSP, and Microsoft going after the same strategy and market.  

[Ian Sane]

"Perhaps Nintendo chosing not to follow this future trends, which was really Nintendo refusing to make violent, supposedly mature related themes."

That's not what I meant by trends.  I meant the switch from cartridges to CDs and rising popularity of online gaming and currently the approaching standard of HD.  In the first two situations Nintendo showed incredible short sighted thinking in their decisions and have been playing catch-up ever since.  The HD situation is similar as everyone and their mother thinks it's going to become standard stuff in the next few years and Nintendo is commiting themselves to five years without support of that feature.  They're thinking about the profits for the next six months to a year and completely neglecting how horrendously out-of-date and out-of-touch the Rev is going to be within three years.  I'd say in all three situations Nintendo was largely right in that at the time they made the decision it wasn't the right time but they completely neglected that it would become the right time before the console's life expired.

That sort of behaviour has nothing to do with the personal values of the company.  It's just short-sighted penny pinching.

[couchmonkey]

I agree somewhat with you Ian, but what if including the HD feature adds $50 to the cost of the system?

This affects Nintendo's overall strategy to expand the market.  That strategy relies heavily on releasing a system at a mass-market price.  Now this strategy may be risky and unknown, but it's arguably just as forward-thinking, if not more forward-thinking, than adding HDTV to the system.  And don't forget the side-effects of including HDTV: the system may need to be more powerful to allow better graphics than current-generation systems, the textures and graphics in general need to be sharper, requiring larger art teams and possibly a larger disc format.

Of course the problem is that you simply don't like Nintendo's new strategy.  That's fine, but I'd argue the HDTV thing may be good for Nintendo's strategy.  That depends on just how high the costs of going the HD route would be, and I don't know the answer to that question.

[Ian Sane]

"I agree somewhat with you Ian, but what if including the HD feature adds $50 to the cost of the system?"

$50 is pretty cheap all things considering.  I think having your console not be ridiculously out-of-date with the rest of technology within three years is worth $50.  Plus $50 is nothing regarding console prices.  Did cutting the DVD player  to lower the price work well for the Cube?  No.  Everyone assumed that it was cheaper because it was missing a feature.  This would be the same thing.

[vudu]

Okay ... now what if it adds $150 to the cost?

[Spak-Spang]

Ian:  I already addressed the CD and Cartridge thing.  Nintendo did drop the ball on that.

The online gaming, Nintendo really hasn't dropped the ball on yet.  Look at last generation.  The only system that had great online was Xbox, and the number of supporters of Xbox online was what 30% of the market.  Maybe alittle more.  Not really that overwhelming to put that much money into and go into massive debt over.

Now with the new generation Nintendo is gearing up to go online with a system that won't lose them money, and won't cost gamers money.  A better solution than what Microsoft has for the 360.

The fact is, their was really only 2 approaches that hurt Nintendo.  Not going to CDs, and not producing the newly marketed "mature" games.  Sure these mature games helped grow the market in the short term grabbing 20 year old males and such.  But as I said, it goes against Nintendo's values.  

However, that said Nintendo has been working on figuring ways to attract this audience without completely compromising its values.  Examples of that are mature themed games that don't have excessive violence or language.  Geist and Metroid Prime are great examples.

Finally, High Defination Gaming isn't exactly tested as the future.  It adds cost without adding gameplay functions.  (At least CDs dropped cost of games, and added cinemas, voice acting, larger games, ect.)  And in the case of Xbox 360 High Defination is hurting the space available on the DVDs taking up too much space for textures and such.  It may turn out that High Defination Gaming is like online gaming today.  It will be heralded as a big deal, but in actuality 30% of the gamers will experience it, and the rest won't care about it.

[Smash_Brother]

I agree with a lot of what Ian is saying about shortsightedness, but I don't think HD is one of those cases.

HD is still too expensive to say that it will be in the home of the average gamer within 5 years (and I don't think the price is coming down enough, either, especially when you consider that "HD ready" means it still needs an HD tuner which costs extra).

Broadband was a different story because everyone is naturally going to switch to broadband anyway because it offers the customer many features which dialup cannot, like streaming video and downloads at a mere fraction of the time. Plus, broadband is genuinely affordable and didn't cost that much more per month than dialup.

I don't see HD following this same trend because the hardware cost of generating the products haven't seemed to come down much and HD doesn't offer any "new" features to a game except some moderately better graphics. Also, a TV is not something you go out and replace on a whim. I'm going to replace my 32'' sony when and ONLY when it dies and even then, I'm not convinced I'll be replacing it with HD.

The increased cost for an HDTV just doesn't justify the return you get from having it (improved picture is all you get). Combine that with the fact that the economy is getting worse in the US all the time and I don't think you'll see HD saturation until we're nearing the end of the Rev's lifespan anyway.

However, Nintendo's shortsightedness has gotten them into heaps of trouble in the past, including Yamauchi's famous ousting of Square, the decision to not create any 1st party online titles and the near-total lack of 3rd party support this gen (for GC, anyway).

If Nintendo could just do with the home market what they've done with the handheld market, I think we'd see a great deal more 3rd party support as well as more gamers willing to give them a chance. God willing, they won't be shortsighted about the Rev and the support it will need from 3rd parties.

-SB

[couchmonkey]

I do think HD will become a desirable feature in the Rev's lifetime, and I was disappointed by the exclusion originally.  I don't think it will be as big of a deal as cartridges or online gaming were in previous generations, but it may have a negative effect on Nintendo with current gamers.  Then again, Nintendo is offering something the competition can't...I think it will catch plenty of current gamers anyway.

The real problem is capturing the so-called non-gamer market.  If Nintendo is going to do that, saving $50 is absolutely worth it.  To us $50 may not sound like much to add the HD feature, but to non-gamer Joe, $199 vs. $249 may seem pretty significant.  If Nintendo really wants a shot at capturing the mystical non-gamer market the system needs to be as cheap as possible.  In fact, I'd say $99 is ideal, but I know I'm dreaming.

I will add that I personally would like HD support, but if it saves a significant amount of money and helps sell systems, great.  I'm not going to miss it that badly.

[BlkPaladin]

Well that is who they say they are going after. So I'm expecting a lower price (at least $200 but not lower than $150.)

I guess we are going to find out in the next four months about everything we could ever want to know. (Minus the tech detail.)

[Smash_Brother]

Anyone here HAVE an HD TV? (and I mean the tuner as well because that's half the cost)

To speak from personal anecdote, I'm a guy who enjoys throwing his money around from time to time. I've been a hardcore gamer since age 5 and I have a tidy sum in the bank because I've been working since I was 12. I have a PS2, Xbox, GC, two GBAs, a DS, a colbalt flux dancepad, 4 DK bongos and well over 100 games for this generation.

All that considered, I haven't even bought a widescreen TV because I look at those pricetags and I just won't do it. I like to spend on occasion, but the price of those things equates sodomy, especially if you want to buy one from a trustworthy brand. I just don't see the need to replace my TV when it works just fine. The new TV will provide some better graphics and widescreen, but that's not enough to justify the cost.

Also, in today's economy, I don't see people splurging on HD. Our "president" is exporting american jobs to other countries as fast as humanly possible. Gas prices are ridiculous and taxes aren't exactly dropping. This is not the economic climate in which people will be spending $1000+ on a 27'' HDTV when you can get a 36'' regular TV for right around $500, and from a better brand name, too.

Will that change in 5 years? Maybe, but the price hasn't seen THAT much drop in the past few years so I don't see why it would take a sudden dive now.

-SB

[Spak-Spang]

Umm.  The President isn't exporting American jobs.  That is ignorant, he has nothing to do with what independent companies decide to do.  

However, I do agree that right now HD is just not justifiable.  Not all the networks and cable channels are on board yet.  It costs too much to get involved.  And, there are too many other bills to pay.

The price will drop when manufactures stocks from "regular" televisons have been depleted.  I think I remember hearing that it actually costs less to produce HD televisions.  So the price is just because of demand and slight greed.  

However, once the Government forces the switch over to HD format, then the prices will drop drastically so that everyone can jump on board...and so that people can buy 2-3 televisions for all their rooms.

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Anyone here HAVE an HD TV? (and I mean the tuner as well because that's half the cost)

Not to turn this into a political debate, but yes, he did. To make a long story short, he signed bills which not only made it easy but better for American companies to seek labor overseas. If that doesn't classify as exporting US jobs, I don't know what does.

From what I understand, many manufacturers are still making "normal" TVs because they're still selling just fine. Why stop manufacturing when a product hasn't seen a slump in demand yet?

-SB

[JonLeung]

Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Anyone here HAVE an HD TV? (and I mean the tuner as well because that's half the cost)

I have a 57" widescreen HD-capable TV.  Well, I paid a third of it with my brother and father paying for the other two thirds.  We also subscribe to a number of satellite channels via Bell ExpressVu, which include a handful of HD channels.

What bugs me about the HD channels is that they are only of the major networks, and only recently-filmed material makes full use of the HD quality.  Talk shows and live events look great.  Watching any sort of TV show that is more than a couple years old, and the HD-version channel and regular version of the channel creates redundancy.

I was one of the apparently very few that got the component output cables for my GameCube.  I didn't notice the difference at first, but after setting it up so I could toggle between using the cables and not using them, the difference is like night and day when playing colourful games like SSBM or detailed games like SCII.  I guess component output isn't the same as HD, so I'm hoping the Revolution can at least support that.

Most of the time, though, if I were engrossed in a game, I imagine I wouldn't care too much if they were enhanced (be it component output cables, high-definition, etc.) or not.

I am getting picky about screen ratio, though...I'd like to play games in 16:9 at least because the side-bars on my TV are a stupidly annoying grey.  I haven't been able to find settings to make them a less distracting colour like black, and some games' jaggies really become evident if they were made for 4:3 and I stretch them.

And no, I don't watch much TV.  I got my TV specifically for gaming, so I would honestly prefer the Revolution to make as much use of it as possible.  If only it were somehow optional, some extra piece of hardware you could just add on.  But I imagine the textures of a game would be entirely in the software so I guess I have no choice.    I'll still buy a Revolution and enjoy it, though.

[Smash_Brother]

Component is different from HD, and I do think I remember hearing that the Rev will take advantage of it.

I too have the cables, but I've yet to buy a TV which would use it and I don't plan to until mine dies or becomes unwatchable.

Also, swapping TVs around is a royal PITA.

-SB  

[Ceric]

I like to point out when you guys say "cost" I'm assuming Manafacturing cost and 50 bucks is a humongouse manafacturing cost for one feature.  It be like giving you a DS with every Rev at least.

[Magik]

To bad Geist was a mega-flop that didn't help the GC in any way possible.

Geist should have been a REV game since with the controller, it would have fixed a lot of the problems that plagued the game.

[MysticGohan]

Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Anyone here HAVE an HD TV? (and I mean the tuner as well because that's half the cost)

To speak from personal anecdote, I'm a guy who enjoys throwing his money around from time to time. I've been a hardcore gamer since age 5 and I have a tidy sum in the bank because I've been working since I was 12. I have a PS2, Xbox, GC, two GBAs, a DS, a colbalt flux dancepad, 4 DK bongos and well over 100 games for this generation.

All that considered, I haven't even bought a widescreen TV because I look at those pricetags and I just won't do it. I like to spend on occasion, but the price of those things equates sodomy, especially if you want to buy one from a trustworthy brand. I just don't see the need to replace my TV when it works just fine. The new TV will provide some better graphics and widescreen, but that's not enough to justify the cost.

Also, in today's economy, I don't see people splurging on HD. Our "president" is exporting american jobs to other countries as fast as humanly possible. Gas prices are ridiculous and taxes aren't exactly dropping. This is not the economic climate in which people will be spending $1000+ on a 27'' HDTV when you can get a 36'' regular TV for right around $500, and from a better brand name, too.

Will that change in 5 years? Maybe, but the price hasn't seen THAT much drop in the past few years so I don't see why it would take a sudden dive now.

-SB

Yes, I do. a 48" Phillips HDTV with a DirecTV HD Receiver, can do 480p and 1080i, Picture does look dramatically better than on a SDTV.

Atleast the Rev will support 480p, which is great, despite what IGN may say, 480p is still listed as "HD" so meh, I like it that way.

[Nosferat2]

Quote
Originally posted by: vudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
No one denies that Nintendo is profitable.  But profit doesn't mean squat to a gamer.  Only market share benefits us.

Tell that to a Dreamcast owner.

If the Dreamcast had more market share there would be no need to "tell that to a Dreamcast owner."

By that i mean if the Dramcast had more market share it in turn would get more profit and in turn would still be here..

[Nosferat2]

Quote
Originally posted by: Magik
To bad Geist was a mega-flop that didn't help the GC in any way possible.

Geist should have been a REV game since with the controller, it would have fixed a lot of the problems that plagued the game.

Agreed.

[Spak-Spang]

I just got Geist for Christmas and began playing it last week.  The game is an amazingly creative and innovative game.  Too bad it was horribly marketed and not hyped up enough.

I truly believe a sequel could be as good or better than Metroid Prime if handled by the right people.  It is easily the best NEW concept for a first person adventure/shooter.

Nintendo needs to make the sequel and not be afraid of it.  If something like Geist comes out early in the life of the Revolution (Think first year) with full online support then it would be huge.

Most of the problems with Geist were just inexperienced programmers and designers, its still playable and quite enjoyable.

[Smash_Brother]

I loved Geist, and I so rarely used guns to kill anyone that the aiming never gave me issues (I didn't see the problem with it, anyway).

What other game lets you feed poison soup to a room full of guards, peep in women's shower and possess a parrot and then tell its owner to "Die!"?

-SB

[couchmonkey]

Sorry, bit of a cross-posting here, but as I said before, I want to keep my predictions in this thread so I can come back and see how far off I was later:

Predicted launch lineup (within the first 4 weeks of launch):
1. New Miyamoto game
2. SSB: Online
3. Metroid Prime 3
4. Brian Training?

I don't think Mario 128 will be ready in time, but E3 may prove me wrong.