Topic: whats the big deal about virtual console?

[Arbok]

Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi
And this leads back to what I said about Microsoft and Sony understanding the importance of having all their bases covered.

Given the price point of the two, I think they are doing anything but "covering their bases" to most consumers. They have made the two systems extreme luxury purchases, much more so than any mainstream console before them. Having features and genres covered doesn't help much if you forgo entire economic classes with both console prices and increased software prices. Not to mention added fees for online play with the 360.

Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi
I mean, geez, some of you are actually trying to convince me that online gaming appealing to only a certain demographic of faithful gamers as a valid excuse to not support it.

Nintendo is supporting online abilities at no additional cost to the consumer. I never questioned the idea to support it, I think its importance is overstated was my point, simply the idea of throwing a lot of money at it to quickly improve the service, which I don't see having the fiscal benefit that you do it would seem.  

[LunaticFringe]

Pittboi for President


Amen brother, amen...


I agree with everything he has pretty much said.  His "negativity" only shows how he cares for the company.  He wants whats best for Nintendo as we all do.  I do have to agree with him, I think Nintendo could make small changesthat would significantly increase its online appeal.  

If any company can make people care about online it's Nintendo, no doubt.

Step One:  SSB:B with online support...

[Pittbboi]

Quote
Maybe you should consider a PS3 since you are more interested in its titles

Ugh, for the last time I DON'T want a PS3. The PS3 is the biggest mistake Sony's ever made, and I'm really having a hard seeing the PS3 continue to sell after the initial support wears off (oh, and it most definitely will). It's only that initial support that I'm envious of. And Nintendo's solution to this lack of good initial support seems to be folding their arms and yelling "there will be no dought!" repeatedly when all signs point to one, instead of working with what they have.

Lately it seems being a Nintendo fan requires an arc-load of patience, and it's getting frustrated. I want to hear less "it's coming" and more "it's here!"

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi
And this leads back to what I said about Microsoft and Sony understanding the importance of having all their bases covered.

Given the price point of the two, I think they are doing anything but "covering their bases" to most consumers. They have made the two systems extreme luxury purchases, much more so than any mainstream console before them. Having features and genres covered doesn't help much if you forgo entire economic classes with both console prices and increased software prices. Not to mention added fees for online play with the 360.

QFT. BTW, stop the darned passive-aggressive hate. Pittboi isn't flaming, he's being civil, and he's also being very intelligent. (Doesn 't mean he's right though! )

But anyways, its ridiculous to say that we're discarding the hardcore gamer. Nintendo is still trying to cater to the hardcore gamer, It's just that they are cutting back on the package they offer because they realize that their priorities lie elsewhere. Hardcore gamers still get Zelda, Metroid, Fire Emblem, retro games, and new IPs like Disaster from Nintendo. It's just that extras, like robust online networking and old school controls and high end graphics aren't part of the deal. This makes a lot of sense given Nintendo's adjusted priorities, and given their "second console" stance.

I still believe in that second console stance actually. I truly believe that the most hardcore of hardcore gamers should NOT consider a Wii as their first purchase. They should concern themselves with the PS3 or X360. I'm fine with that. Nintendo's fine with that. The Wii isn't competing remember? The Wii is a second console. Buy the Wii second. "Hardcore gamers" are not Nintendo's #1 priority, so rightfully the Wii shouldn't be hardcore gamer's #1 priority either. The Wii should be their #2 priority.

...uh... but this is weird. "Hardcore gamer" is a strange label. I sometimes consider myself one, especially looking at my gaming expenditures, but the fact is that while I think like a hardcore gamer, I PLAY like a casual, lapsed, or nintendo one. Oh well... I try not to take these labels too seriously. After all, I own purely Nintendo consoles, despite my ready love and or defense of the much maligned Halo and GTA franchises (which Nintendo fans everywhere CONTINUE to undervalue immensely). I guess even the Nintendo fanboi labels, which I so dearly cling to, doesn't readily apply.

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com  

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi
Lately it seems being a Nintendo fan requires an arc-load of patience, and it's getting frustrated. I want to hear less "it's coming" and more "it's here!"

Lately? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ... *ahem*

Anyways, do you really not think that Sony could simply be saved by the hard work of third parties who, despite the PS3's utter failure as a console, deliver good games on it much like they did with the PS2 before? I, for one, am NOT ready to discount games such as Heavenly Sword, MGS4 and FFXIII, nor the work of so many hard working, earnest, but exploited third parties slaving away to make PS3 titles work... nor the amazing God of War Franchise and Ico team either.

Quote
Originally posted by: LunaticFringe
Step One: SSB:B with online support...

Second step: Animal Crossing Online! ... or do Hardcore gamers not care about that?

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
 

[Arbok]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
BTW, stop the darned passive-aggressive hate.

It's unavoidable with me in almost any debate, regardless of topic... although more so when dealing with Smash Bros, which thankfull this topic doesn't...

[Kairon]

Well...since you brought it uuuuuup... j/k

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[UncleBob]

*yawn*

[MorningStar]

Oh my god, is that a nipple? If it is, I just noticed it...

[segagamer12]

wow. this topic is getting interesting. ill come back latter gotta got o store now but keep it going.

EDIT:
Ok Im back.  So wow, how the crap did we go from taling about the virtual console to Sony is better than Nintendo!?


pittboi, I commened you for taking a stand for your view that much is good. But not everthing Nintendo does is going to be in your best interest. I am confused though, do you have a problem with the Virtual Console all together or just Nintendos entire approach to online?

I agree wholeheartedly that they need to take it more seriously, and I think they are on the right track to do that. I had my doubts at first but seeing that they gave us a pretty easy to use web browser, which Live does NOT have, and they have allowed the only features worth browsing the net on a console anywas to work then its fine by me.

BUT I disagree entyirely with what has been stated about VC, the whole point is to attract gamers who have not played Nintendo games since NES or SNES days, and to attract the Sega fans to the system. It is also a way to experience old games that otherwise would be difficult to find.

Without getting into moral or legal implications of ROMS, lets got hat route a second, even if you WANTED to download ROMS for Turbo Graphix, where are you going to find them? or the emulators?

Now getting into the legal areas that are NOT grey, ei backup rights etc.

It IS illegal to run an emulator on yor PC of a Nintendo system as THEY own the intellectualy property right sot the BIOS of the system and they hold patents toe hte sysetsm iner workings. Therefore to run an EMULATOR that will play NES games, at least in the US, is STILL illegal and this was settled. I am not very good at finding links so I wont bother but you can look it up if you dont beleive me.

Now I am not saying that you specifically were for or against roms, I just wanted to make that point to whoever was for roms.

Now Someone compared it to Itunes a while back, well heres my reply to that, with Itunes you HAVE the right and means to rip songs off of Cds you legally obtained and then copy them to you I-pod.

With Wii you DO NOT have the right to rip ROMS from your NES carts and copy them to your Wii even if the carts were legally obtained. The ROMS supporters all seam to have one thing in common, and thats they have nor egards for other peoples property, they think its OK and therefore do not consider it steeling no matter what evidence a person prvides to the contrary.

So if you are OK with steeling download the roms and emulators and be happy and stop trying to convince people who aren't ok with it to do it.

Even if the Virtual Console games are "overpriced" which I do not think they are, then you have other options available to you. If you would rather pay for the cart and hook upt he real system then DO THAT. If you have the old systems then get on ebay and and buy the games you want, but considering NEs carts cost $5.15 to mail out Priority Mail, which is a full our of work for the vast majority, it still cost more to get those NES games that way.

I am a video game collector and have a website where I sell used video games and have worked in used video game stores and have freinds who own used video games stores, and I have enough experience to say that VC is not overpriced condisdering the convienece factor and how easy to find games it is. So right now the good games arent all out yet, the y will be eventually. Besides which there already are some GREAT games out even now worth getting that are easier to find and less costly on VC than thier respective systems.

[Arbok]

Quote
Originally posted by: segagamer12
wow. this topic is getting interesting. ill come back latter gotta got o store now but keep it going

Seems the man nipple diversion has caught segagamer12's attention...

[segagamer12]

did you read the edit?

[GoldenPhoenix]

Well at you, Pittbboi have some sense in the way of Sony's PS3 . For me personally I will probaly end up getting a PS3 down the line, just not yet.  

[RampanT]

Quote

And this leads back to what I said about Microsoft and Sony understanding the importance of having all their bases covered. I mean, geez, some of you are actually trying to convince me that online gaming appealing to only a certain demographic of faithful gamers is valid excuse to not support it. That honestly troubles me. It's one thing to not make hardcore gamers your primary focus, but this smacks of trying to cast them aside completely. "Online gaming is not something to focus on, only the hardcore gamers want it." When did hardcore gamers stop mattering?  And heck, I don't even consider myself a hardcore gamer. Just one that would like to see Nintendo work its magic with online.

I'm not sure why some people have it in for Pittbboi. As far as I can see, all of the points he has made are valid. The criticism is constructive and fair. Nintendo has done many great things with the Wii - but it's approach to online gaming as a whole is a complete joke. I was thoroughly disappointed with the online aspects of Mario Kart DS. What a total waste of an opportunity. A game like Wii Sports could also have been an online classic. Nintendo's stubborn view on security with regard to the friend codes etc just makes the whole experience incredibly frustrating.

Forget the sodding Weather Channel, forget the News Channel - they are a total waste of effort. They should be concentrating their efforts in providing a stable and usable online platform for games. This is no longer something reserved for 'hardcore gamers' - this is something that is very much the norm. Yes, your Grandmother is not going to be interested in online gaming with the Wii she purchased - but a huge portion of the market is. Nintendo have had YEARS to conceive an appropriate online gaming structure - and there has been 2 consoles from Microsoft in that time that have set a decent example on how to make it work.

[Hocotate]

Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi
I barely play WiiSports and I don't like mini-game games unless I'm with a group of people and vodka shots are creatively incorperated into the gameplay. And I barely tolerate first person shooters (though I can be drawn in by some). I love RPGs and Action and Fighting games so when I'm done with Zelda what's going to be there for the type of gamer I am? Not much, it seems (and FF:CC doesn't count. That game sucked balls).

I don't like this, I don't like that... why did you buy a Wii then?

Quote
Yeah, I think it's funny, too, because so far Sony's been the example of what NOT to do, and yet their online IS better.

We are talking about the VC, dowloading games.... Show me how the PS3 is offering more/better games for download on the PS3? Just the fact that you cannot play PSX games without a PSP is enough to count it worse than the VC.

Quote
In no way was I trying to imply that Sony has it in the bag

Then don't down talk Nintendo and use Sony as an exapmle of doing it right (when they are clearly not).

Quote
One thing I will credit MS and Sony with is that they seem to better understand the importance of having all your bases covered

MS understands the importance of having their bases covered? .......Japan? The X360's titles are still very niche, much like the original Xbox. And the PS3 doesn't have much of anything right now. The truth is Nintendo's competition isn't doing any better than they are. The 360 suffered a drought, and the PS3 will definately as well.

Quote
To believe that is to think that only Nintendo made great games for past consoles, and that certainly isn't true.

No. You will notice how Nintendo games sell better than 3rd party games, look at the sales.... Some say one of the reasons why the GCN lacked support was because of how "When you release on a Nintendo console, you're greatest competition is Nintendo itself." You want Nintendo to release everything at once and drown out 3rd parties.

Quote
I won't deny that I am very critical of the Wii right now, but I have given them their credit. And I'm not going to lick Nintendo's behind, which seems to be what most have to do around here to be considered a "fan."

I understand that you are trying not to be viewed apon as a fanboy but if you truely are a Nintendo fan, why the constant negativity? I know you are trying to be like Ian (you said this yourself), but even he knows when Nintendo is doing things right and to give praise where it is due. If Nintendo's decisions bother you this much then maybe you should look into another console.    

[Pittbboi]

Ok, this entire post isn't worth a drop of response. You can find the answer to all your questions in everything I've posted thus far. Seriously, whoever you are, if you don't have something better to say...

[Pittbboi]

Quote
I am confused though, do you have a problem with the Virtual Console all together or just Nintendos entire approach to online?

I don't have problem with the virtual console all together. I have always said that the virtual console has the potential to cream Xbox Live and PS3's service. I just don't think Nintendo's taking full advantage of it. Heck, if everyone is honest with themselves for just a second most will admit that we all thought the VC would be more than it ended up being. The virtual console's potential won't be realized until Nintendo gets the majority of their games online, and at this rate that's going to be a few years. Nintendo needs to be able to say "Your favorite games from the past? On the virtual console. now." for it to be a major draw. This handful of titles per week thing they're doing just doesn't cut it. Honestly, by the end of 2007 the virtual console needs to be fully realized. Nintendo needs to get on the ball.

That, and as smooth and slick the interface is, I don't see it remaining organized once WiiConnect becomes bogged down with loads of content. They really need to focus on making it an adequate service because it definitely has the potential.

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok It's unavoidable with me in almost any debate, regardless of topic... although more so when dealing with Smash Bros

The game or me...or both?

[Hocotate]

Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi
Ok, this entire post isn't worth a drop of response. You can find the answer to all your questions in everything I've posted thus far. Seriously, whoever you are, if you don't have something better to say...

Just proving you wrong is all, your failure to a response shows it I have read your previous posts, and while you have some adequate points, the majority of your views are contradicting and flawed.

You place too much importance in online, if it means that much to you then the 360 is a nice console. Nintendo will give us free online, the system is still very young and the online aspects of the console will flourish soon. I'm sick of you whining about wanting everything now, your a Nintendo fan, by now you should know patience :p The DS took some time but look at it's dominance now! I feel the Wii will be similar in that regard. The Wii has been doing wonders and is a great console, I feel you expect a bit too much from video games and prioritize online gaming. The X360 is the console for you friend.

[Pittbboi]

Quote
Just proving you wrong is all, your failure to a response shows it

My failure to respond only proves that I was pissed drunk from bringing in the new year, but if you want a better explaination for why I don't take you seriously...

Quote
I don't like this, I don't like that... why did you buy a Wii then?

Because I like Nintendo? Seriously, this point is absolutely ridiculous. Are you really trying to suggest that if I don't like mini-game games and first-person shooters then I shouldn't own a Wii? Are you really saying that, as a Nintendo consumer, I should just accept what meager scraps they give and not expect better and more varied games from them? And if I do I should just give up on Nintendo because it's not going to happen? Are you really trying to say that I'm wrong for expecting the online service that Nintendo promised us we'd have right out of the box? You don't have to agree with me, but I have a right to want these things, and these are things Nintendo needs to provide is they want to keep their promise of making a console that's for everybody.

Quote
We are talking about the VC, dowloading games.... Show me how the PS3 is offering more/better games for download on the PS3? Just the fact that you cannot play PSX games without a PSP is enough to count it worse than the VC

It's not about which games PS3 is offering online, because whether or not you like them is completely subjective and will just lead to a pointless argument. And it's not that that i'm trying to argue all of their online content is great, anyway. What Sony's online plan has over the VC right now (I say right now because this can change if Nintendo wakes up) is content, a variety of old and new content.

Quote

MS understands the importance of having their bases covered? .......Japan? The X360's titles are still very niche, much like the original Xbox. And the PS3 doesn't have much of anything right now. The truth is Nintendo's competition isn't doing any better than they are. The 360 suffered a drought, and the PS3 will definately as well.

What does Japan have to do with this? I meant they have all their basses covered in regards to content, not markets. And besides, Japan not taking to the Xbox isn't because they haven't tried. Hello? Blue Dragon? As far as games go, Xbox360 pretty much has all its bases covered. Sure, when it launched it was first-person shooter fest, but quicker than it seems like the Wii is going to be MS made sure that every genre was covered on their system by decent games.

Quote

No. You will notice how Nintendo games sell better than 3rd party games, look at the sales.... Some say one of the reasons why the GCN lacked support was because of how "When you release on a Nintendo console, you're greatest competition is Nintendo itself." You want Nintendo to release everything at once and drown out 3rd parties.

Duh Nintendo games sell better, their back library is filled with great games. But once again you've misunderstood me. When you're competing with Nintendo in a contemporary market then it makes sense for Nintendo to give 3rd parties breathing room. But we're talking about the virtual console here. OLD games. Old games that are going to appeal to people who have already played them or always wanted to play them. There's no competition there. As great as Nintendo is, I don't think anybody is not going to buy their favorite 3rd party games because Nintendo games are present.

Quote
I understand that you are trying not to be viewed apon as a fanboy but if you truely are a Nintendo fan, why the constant negativity? I know you are trying to be like Ian (you said this yourself), but even he knows when Nintendo is doing things right and to give praise where it is due. If Nintendo's decisions bother you this much then maybe you should look into another console.

Um, Not trying to be like Ian. I've just been following these forums for years and in that time I've seen this place become a sea of Nintendo-can-do-no-wrong-ism, and more realistic and fair opinions like most of those of Ian's get drowned out by sheer numbers. I've had something to say for a long time now, and I'm saying it. I have that right (especially now that I have a Wii and it's becoming more and more apparent that it's not going to be an everybody console for a good long while to come). And if you read my posts I do credit Nintendo with some things. I credit them with the skill and potential and heart to do even better than they're doing now. Good things come to those who wait, yes, but in the past Nintendo has used that adage as an excuse to not deliver without actually saying they're not going to deliver. Gamecube online, anyone?

Ugh, I'm too hung over for this...

[Artimus]

"What Sony's online plan has over the VC right now (I say right now because this can change if Nintendo wakes up) is content, a variety of old and new content."

Ummm...what content? They have hardly any PSX games available for download (and they're not even for the PS3, they're for the PSP). What else is available?

"Old games that are going to appeal to people who have already played them or always wanted to play them. There's no competition there."

I don't think you understand the consumer well. A large part (majority?) of video game console owners have not owned older systems. A huge portion just started gaming in the late 1990s. These people are going to use the virtual console to play games which, despite being old, are new to them. I'm sure this Christmas saw a ton of young children playing Super Mario Bros. for the first time. I have owned every Nintendo console and yet I've downloaded two games so far, neither of which I'd played before. A lot of the VC sales will be classics people love and want to play again, but just as many (or more) will be new experiences for the buyers. Mario, Zelda, Sonic, etc. will always be bought because they're loved, but so many games weren't played. The Genesis and Turbo Grafix games alone provide the staunchest Nintendo fan new games.

So, there is absolutely competition. People have a set amount of money they're willing to spend at a time. If you have classic games that people say good things about but you've never personally played, you're more likely to buy it if there aren't 50 games you have played available. Not to mention by releasing games slowly over time Nintendo keeps VC Mondays exciting and people always have something to look forward to. At 3 games a week that's still over 150 games a year, and some weeks see twice that many! If the VC averages 300 games a year that's 1200 games in four years. You'd be hard pressed to find 1200 amazing games from the available systems. It just makes no sense for Nintendo to release all their games at once as they'll only hurt the sales of those games and third party games. If you have a big super Monday announcement of Super Mario RPG you'll sell more copies than if you release it the same day as FFIV, VI, Secret of Mana, Secret of Evermore, Breath of Fire 1 & 2 and Chrono Trigger.

Now, days like today are stupid. Crappy games like Tennis are way overpriced and you'd be an idiot to buy it (unless you were collecting them all). Among the three console makers there's no reason every week can't have at least one amazing game, as well as 2-4 great or good ones. But the selection right now is solid (if a bit skimpy on the SNES/N64 side). There are many games worth buying and if you've bought them all and beat them all already, as well as played and beat all the worthwhile launch titles, then you play a LOT of video games and that's your own doing. There are thousands of hours of playtime for the Wii already and it's certainly one of the richest launches ever.

I can't help but feel your complaint amounts to nothing more than your personal favorites not being available yet.

[SixthAngel]

Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi


Because I like Nintendo? Seriously, this point is absolutely ridiculous. Are you really trying to suggest that if I don't like mini-game games and first-person shooters then I shouldn't own a Wii? Are you really saying that, as a Nintendo consumer, I should just accept what meager scraps they give and not expect better and more varied games from them? And if I do I should just give up on Nintendo because it's not going to happen? Are you really trying to say that I'm wrong for expecting the online service that Nintendo promised us we'd have right out of the box? You don't have to agree with me, but I have a right to want these things, and these are things Nintendo needs to provide is they want to keep their promise of making a console that's for everybody.

What did they promised out of the box that you didn't get?  They never promised games would have online play at launch.  The system has only been out for a MONTH and already has a great variety of games.  If you want a years worth of games at purchase don't get a system at launch.  You knew what you were getting into when you bought it at launch.  If you didn't like the offerings it had at the time do you expect us to feel bad when you still got it?

Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi

What does Japan have to do with this? I meant they have all their basses covered in regards to content, not markets. And besides, Japan not taking to the Xbox isn't because they haven't tried. Hello? Blue Dragon? As far as games go, Xbox360 pretty much has all its bases covered. Sure, when it launched it was first-person shooter fest, but quicker than it seems like the Wii is going to be MS made sure that every genre was covered on their system by decent games.

He brings up Japan because xbox doesn't have many games at all that appeal to the market.  Blue Dragon is one game and it isn't even in the US yet to give us a jrpg.  That does not make all their bases covered even in the US.  For someone that likes rpgs and hates fps you think waaaay to much of the 360's lineup.

Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi
Duh Nintendo games sell better, their back library is filled with great games. But once again you've misunderstood me. When you're competing with Nintendo in a contemporary market then it makes sense for Nintendo to give 3rd parties breathing room. But we're talking about the virtual console here. OLD games. Old games that are going to appeal to people who have already played them or always wanted to play them. There's no competition there. As great as Nintendo is, I don't think anybody is not going to buy their favorite 3rd party games because Nintendo games are present.

They will also appeal to people who have never heard of them before, such as gamers that started on the playstation or anyone else new, which is a lot of people.

To say there is no competition there is a joke.  If there were 300 games out for vc right now only a small amount of games would get any sales (mostly nintendo) and even those sales would be relatively small.  Why would a company like square release any games for the vc when the returns are going to be hardly worth it especially compared to the compilation discs/gba releases?  By spacing and releasing games they all get attention and third parties are encouraged to release more games and better games because it is seen as an actual revenue source.

I really am confused how you say ps3 or even xbox live has better content then the vc.  You say it is subjective but what are these games that people would rather have then Zelda and SMB?  UNO?  

[Strell]

Here's the basic deal:

The VC's method of entry is being done to try and maximize profits for third parties.  Nintendo would crush them with their own IPs in about 2 seconds flat.  If they can prove to other third parties that their games will sell, then they will get more games down the line.  Which is to say that XXobscureGameYouCan'tLiveWithout from NowDefunctCompany will actually appear.

This is all entirely a calculated business decision, and at no time is it a failure that is contradictory to earlier comments Nintendo made.  They have only said it was available.  They never once said they'd have a huge library up front.

If you disagree with this - that it is a business decision through and through - then you're never going to be happy with it.  

Besides, if I picked up a Wii and on day one - or some time reasonably close - they DID have a huge library of titles to download, I can guarantee you I'd take a huge chunk of change purely at VC downloads instead of Wii games.  Doing that is counterproductive to Nintendo's plans as well, 'cuz they need to prove games can sell even with a whacky new controller.  I wouldn't even have thought to try out Monkey Ball, Rayman, or Elebits, 'cuz I'd be too happy with Super Mario World, Ninja Gaiden, Chrono Trigger, etc etc.

They've got to balance the games out to 1) get more on there from third parties, and 2) to ensure they don't directly compete with Wii games.  I don't think scenario 2 is going to be very likely, but it could have been.

If you don't like this, you can complain about it, but don't pretend that you have it figured out better than Nintendo, who has a lot of people working on just these sorts of things to maximize their profits.  

[Pittbboi]

Quote
I don't think you understand the consumer well. A large part (majority?) of video game console owners have not owned older systems. A huge portion just started gaming in the late 1990s. These people are going to use the virtual console to play games which, despite being old, are new to them. I'm sure this Christmas saw a ton of young children playing Super Mario Bros. for the first time. I have owned every Nintendo console and yet I've downloaded two games so far, neither of which I'd played before. A lot of the VC sales will be classics people love and want to play again, but just as many (or more) will be new experiences for the buyers. Mario, Zelda, Sonic, etc. will always be bought because they're loved, but so many games weren't played. The Genesis and Turbo Grafix games alone provide the staunchest Nintendo fan new games.

Then we have a fundamental disagreement. I think the virtual console in its current form appeals almost exclusively to people who know these games, be they current or ex gamers. I don't think young kids who weren't around/too young to remember when Mario MEANT good gaming fired up their Wii (if they had one) on Christmas opened the virtual console and went, "Holy F'in Sh*T Batman! It's Super Mario!" These are good games to you are I, because we remember the time when these games were new, gorgeous, innovative and the talk of the town (Well, I'm 20, so I wasn't that old then, but I still had an NES ). To most people who don't know these games, from what I've seen, they think these games are old, blocky, and too hard to play.

Quote
At 3 games a week that's still over 150 games a year, and some weeks see twice that many! If the VC averages 300 games a year that's 1200 games in four years. You'd be hard pressed to find 1200 amazing games from the available systems. It just makes no sense for Nintendo to release all their games at once as they'll only hurt the sales of those games and third party games

Who says that people have to bulk buy? You're right, if every game is available at one time, it would cost a pretty penny to buy all the games you want right then and there. But who's actually going to do that? I know that I would pick some games that I want to play right then (all of which wouldn't be Nintendo games), and then come back later. The one thing that having all of your titles on the system at once has over slowly releasing them is that you'l havel options. Right now you don't have options, you can only take what they give you. Even if a friend recommends a game or there has always been one you wanted to play, you hve to WAIT until it's available. And with all the SNES games there were and the rate at which Nintendo is releasing them, who knows when that'd be.

There no advantage for the consumer for slowly releasing these games the way Nintendo has. The only advantage that I can see is Nintendo possibly squeezing more cash out of the impatient "well, it's not what I want, but I need to get something" gamer.

Quote

If you disagree with this - that it is a business decision through and through - then you're never going to be happy with it.

Of course it's a business decision, but business decision doesn't exactly mean good decision. Nintendo's remained pofitable all this time, but it hasn't kept their market share from not slipping every generation (but this one, hopefully)

[Strell]

Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi
Of course it's a business decision, but business decision doesn't exactly mean good decision. Nintendo's remained pofitable all this time, but it hasn't kept their market share from not slipping every generation (but this one, hopefully)

I really don't think the VC is ever going to honestly be calculated as a reason for or against a system when it comes to the average consumer.  They are more interested in the controller, not the fact that they can now download Urban Champion.  In that respect I don't think anyone - save for the hardcore gamers who made their decisions long ago - will give a sh*t about what the VC does or doesn't have.  At best a consumer at the store will be told "oh it can download old games."  But that is not a make or break scenario, and it never will be.  Again, the people who care and know about it made their decisions LONG ago as to which console they want, and downloadable content is really more or less a bonus at that point.  

As for the business decision being good or bad, there's no way for us to tell.  Someone upset or whining about it doesn't mean it is bad.  All it means is that they are upset and/or whining about it.  Unless Nintendo released figures that said just how much they've sold of everything, we'll never know if it was a good idea or not.  And something tells me only Nintendo has access to those figures and isn't going to let them out.  But we'll know if it was a bad idea down the line if we start seeing sales or something.