Topic: GameCube’s Mid-Term Report Card

[revolg_98]

I think the Gamecube would be alot better if they kept Rare.  Its cancelled games were why I bought the system.
I think they made Zelda and Luigi's Mansion kiddy games.  As for sports, make less they're all the same anyway

[Bill Aurion]

Quote
Originally posted by: revolg_98
I think the Gamecube would be alot better if they kept Rare.

Sadly, it wouldn't...They have only put out one title so far, and it was a bomb(Grabbed by the Ghoulies)...Though I am the biggest Rare fan in the world it's easy to see that they've lost their flame, leaving Ninty no choice but to jettison the dead weight for some pocket change...


"I think they made Zelda and Luigi's Mansion kiddy games."

*sigh*  Are you too "cool" to play those games?  Pathetic...  

[odifiend]

The thing about the recent Rare is you think you're a fan, then you realize that their recent games were merely cheap rips of Nintendo games or Rare's old games and feel you can live without them.  The only thing Rare actually brought to the table were delays, slight rehashes and Perfect Dark and Conker.  Perfect Dark was my favorite FPS evar! and had the potential to be Nintendo's Halo killer and conker was so funny it was worth playing through the same platforming action over again.
When I heard that Nintendo had given up Rare I was so livid because they pointed to lack of Rare sales even though Rare had yet to release a GCN game.  Still SF:A was released and that game was such a disappointment for me (it was in development for something like 5 years and that's the best they could come up with- a zelda without real puzzles or a real story) it almost warranted Rare's sale, since they can't make a good game even with an ample amount of time.  Also you have to remember the reason you like Rare is really the developers behind the games.  Most of these developers have already left for Free Radical and other companies, so the Rare that Microsoft has is not really Rare.
Rare was dysfunctional and holding on to them would only waste Nintendo's resources.

[Bill Aurion]

SFA:  Though it wasn't great, it was definitely a decent adventure game...The thing is, it should've stayed as Dinosaur Planet...Though it wouldn't have sold nearly as much...

My favorite title, by far, is Banjo-Kazooie...The best collect-a-thon ever! ^_^

[odifiend]

I guess it was, but it seemed to me that Nintendo had to "bail" Rare out by slapping the Star Fox name on it, which shouldn't ever happen with your second party.  You take them under your wing cuz they'll help you.
I liked the humor in Banjo-Kazooie but I never could become a fan of the series, maybe deep down I just think eyeballs on everything is unnerving.

[KDR_11k]

Bungie had to change the Halo level design to dumb it down for console. The PC version was originally meant to be a really deep, tactical affair with emphasis on LAn and online team play, the XB version was simplified to make it more of an action game. Gearbox obviousely took the final console version, not the PC version as the basis for their port.

[NWR_Lindy]

mouse_clicker: I just think that's a classic line..."Online isn't profitable.  Get over it."  It kind of captured a moment in a time, a freeze-frame of American innocence perhaps lost forever....or not.  Either way it's funny, that's why I put it in my sig.  After all, this was the INTERWEB DRAMA thread.

TimeSplitters 2 is a hot game.  I actually think some of the multiplayer is better than HALO, especially when you get some Bots going.  HALO has a much higher "coolness" factor though...its very obvious that TS2 was designed by the Goldeneye team because the two games play almost identically.  TS2 is great but its just under that top tier of first-person shooters.

silks

[Bill Aurion]

"Coolness" factor is just an obscure illusion made up by nerds wanting to fit in...I will underline this clearly...

It doesn't matter if you are playing Mario, Metal Gear, or Vice City...Playing a videogame will not make you cool...period...

In fact, if you even think about the "coolness" factor in a game before buying it, then you must be pretty insecure about your social life...

(not directed to any specific person, of course)  

[SearanoX]

KDR_11k:  Games evolve.  Just because it used to be a huge third person game with an emphasis on teamplay, games still evolve.  Look at the old ALPHA Ocarina of Time.  The game was vastly different, and many gameplay elements were different (there was manual jumping, for instance), the core gameplay remained releatively unchanged.  That's what Halo did.  Play the PC version with 16 people over the internet on, say, Capture the Flag (with people you know, it's even better), and tell me that it isn't a blast.  There is tons of teamplay and interaction, especially if you know what you're doing.

As for it being dumbed down, I doubt it.  People will use this term far too often.  Console games don't have to be simple, or, more specifically, dumbed down.  Look at Final Fantasy.  Were it made for the PC, would it be any more advanced than it is right now?  What about Splinter Cell?  If it were made exclusively for the PC, would it be better?  I doubt it.

You're also not making a whole lot of sense.  LAN and online team play?  What's not action-oriented about that?  They only thing they actually did was make the game more focused on single player.  

In addition, look at the more recent things on the PC, before it was ported to the XBox.  There is a video advertising the game (and the GeForce 2 GTS), where the game looks remarkably similar.  The Marines and Covenant look the same, the single player story is mentioned, and there are many vehicles and weapons featured that are in the XBox version.  In fact, the only thing different seems to be the graphics, which feature pixel shaders and bump maps.    

The way the game looked and played was nearly exactly the same as on the XBox version as it was on the PC version.  That they "dumbed it down" for the XBox is complete BS.  I can say with certainty that the game was close to being 65% complete before it was brought to the XBox.  The only features added were auto-aim, better graphics, XBox LAN play, etc..  In fact, it's obvious that some of the later levels were rushed, because they reused areas from earlier in the game.  This shows that Microsoft didn't dumb the game down, not in the least.  They simply wanted it as a launch title that would sell the system.  That's why the earlier levels are generally better - they had more time spent improving the graphics and such than actually finishing the single-player portion.    

Really, to say that the game was dumbed down was just stupid.  Games evolve over time, and that's just what Halo did.  You can't expect the first screenshots of the Mac version to be representative of what the final game will be like.

EDIT:  In fact, here's the video for you.  Quicktime is required.

 

[CaseyRyback]

Quote
Originally posted by: Silks
mouse_clicker: I just think that's a classic line..."Online isn't profitable.  Get over it."  It kind of captured a moment in a time, a freeze-frame of American innocence perhaps lost forever....or not.  Either way it's funny, that's why I put it in my sig.  After all, this was the INTERWEB DRAMA thread.

TimeSplitters 2 is a hot game.  I actually think some of the multiplayer is better than HALO, especially when you get some Bots going.  HALO has a much higher "coolness" factor though...its very obvious that TS2 was designed by the Goldeneye team because the two games play almost identically.  TS2 is great but its just under that top tier of first-person shooters.

silks

yea, it is funny because Sony makes tons of money off of online games, yet certain people here  always make the argument it is not profitable. Would a Zelda MMO not make money?  

Also I agree because coolness seems to sell games. Coolness sells games because you want to tell your friends about them and word of mouth spreads.

[Kyosho]

It'd be interesting to see a Zelda MMO.  But new MMORPGs are coming out pretty soon like EQ2 and WoW.  Competition in the MMO is becoming fierce.  As for Sony making a lot of money off online, I do know their PC department including Verant Interactive are making a lot.  Not sure consolewise though

[CaseyRyback]

yea PSO did okay and Everquest did not do too well, but I think that people would cough up the dough to play a Zelda MMO if done right.  

[KDR_11k]

MMOs are in a bad phase right now. It's gold-rush time, everybody wants to make the next big MMO game and rake in the big money, what they don't realize is that only one or two out of the hundreds of games can break even - and you can bet one of them is made by Sony Online Entertainment.

[Jale]

I dont see how a Zelda MMO would work. Link is a lone wolf sort of character and it wouldn't fit with the series.

[odifiend]

I have to agree with Jale here.  Why are you guys always talking about a Zelda MMO?  There are much better franchise matches for this.  The best one I can think of now is Pokemon.  (I know that one made those seeking coolness happy)

[revolg_98]

No I own both WW and LM.  Luigi's Mansion just didn't seem like a nintendo game.  Zelda looked neater then I thought it would.  There was just to much waving and not much to do in the game for me.  In Ocarina when you were going from place to place there was stuff to fight.  Both those games endings sucked to.  In WW they just waved some more and Luigi just laughed.  Whatever happened to good endings that were worth playing for?  

[CaseyRyback]

Quote
Originally posted by: odifiend
I have to agree with Jale here.  Why are you guys always talking about a Zelda MMO?  There are much better franchise matches for this.  The best one I can think of now is Pokemon.  (I know that one made those seeking coolness happy)

Yea pokemon would work well also, but you have so many towns and people and different things to do in  Zelda that I could see it work.

[SearanoX]

So, KDR, not responding in the face of too much information?

I figured as much.

[Jale]

Pokemon is the ultimate Nintendo MMO. It is completly perfect for that medium. OF course there would be no clear storyline like in the other games but in terms of fights it would rock. I used to be a fan of the Pokemon series, but no longer. However if a Pokemon MMO is made I would probably shell out and buy it.

[mouse_clicker]

I have to say, I would play an MMO Pokemon game in an instant- it's almost as if the series were made to be online. If and when this whole online thing starts turning a profit, I hope Nintendo sees Pokemon in the same light.

[odifiend]

The other great thing about pokemon is its user base.  If any game could get people online profitibly, it is pokemon.  The game has been in the Almanac ever year a version is released as the top seller (well two top sellers ).  The genius of Nintendo's business sometimes is startling- getting families with siblings or losers with no friends to buy both copies of essentially the same game.  Simply genius.  Now if they just got rid of the TV show, every person alive, would own a pokemon game.  Hell I'd be willing to say if from out of the blue, Nintendo announced now that, "hey we're copying M$ and setting up an expensive infrastructure, that we expect no revenue from, but with a PokeMMO as the flagship," they could break even.
Pokemon MMO = Perfect Pokehook for getting customers to start paying for online services.
P.S. the "new" pokemon versions Fire Red and whatever Green are so uncool it is not even funny.  Nintendo should allow trade ins or discounts for the Red and Blue since they're the same game with the ability to connect with Ruby and Sapphire.  

[Ness_the_Mess]

Hi.  I am an old member.  Not ANCIENT, but old.  I haven't posted in forever.  My name is Matthew Peters-Fransen.  I am 16, male, and live in Winnipeg, Canada.

I AM A NINTENDO LOYALIST.

Allright, so I'm canadian and you'll expect me to be a loyalist (please laugh, I don't have many jokes in me).  But you know what?  I don't care.  Call me a fanboy.  Whatever.  At the end of the day, Nintendo is a family company that makes quality games and never ceases to make me smile.  Super Mario RPG.  Earthbound.  Marios 1 to 19287.  A Link to the Past.  Ocarina of Time.  Pokemon (YES, POKEMON.  I'm a strait adolescant male who can admit that it is an incredible game).  Wind Waker.  These, and many others, are favourites of mine that will be with me forever.  Nintendo made them all.  I love Nintendo (NO - not in that way).

I can whole-heartedly agree that the Gamecube deserves a C grade.  While it has brought us some fun games, some good times, on the whole, it's the pits.  Yes, I want to play SNES all day - so shoot me.  What I cannot agree with is that it is because of a lack of an online plan.  Sure, I'd like one.  Do I need one?  Will I pay 15 bucks a month to play online a couple hours?  Nope.  From a buiz-ness standpoint?  I don't know.  I'm sure Nintendo does.  I'm sure Microsoft is honest when they release financial reports saying that they're losing some money off it.  Is it worth biting someone's head off?  I don't think so.

It's funny to come back here, and see some of my ideas come back.  Ideas that made me leave (because it seemed that at the time the members of this site weren't pleased with me).  One was the lower quality of the news delivery at this site.  When it all comes down to it though, this is NOT a large site.  It is allowed to be inferior, as it does not have 'insiders' paying them a total of a couple tens of thousands (or more, I don't really know).  Leave it be.  I'm glad that the people who write here love Nintendo enough to devote their free time to it.  Cuto's.

Flaming is ugly.  I realise that this situation elevated because of the raw emotion involved in seeing a loved company (that, honestly, delivers much of our entertainment) bashed.  Nevertheless, letting ourselves begin to insult eachother because we can't CONTROLL these emotions is bordering in plain silly.  Allright, so I claim to be a pacifist - but I believe we can all agree that cussing at eachother is not the best way to get our point across.  It just makes people ignore you (I actually wrote an essay on evangelism/scaring people with your point).

Back to relevance, I trust Nintendo.  Trust can be painfull sometimes, as it is now - Nintendo just simply isn't delivering as much as they have in the past.  I do not believe, however, that they are failing at all.  The past year they outsold M$ in consoles.  Number 2 is better than many people thought N was doing.  Shigesato Itoi's lack of a 3D sequal to Earthbound is especially annoying to me (but that is getting a bit off topic).  Still, through it all, I believe Nintendo isn't doing all that bad.  They're picking up momentum.  They have their 'mystery machine' being revieled soon.  They claim to be releasing their console in Japan next year (along with Sony, M$ has just sort of grunted and said 'yeah, um, ok').  Zelda this year.  Metroid this year.  Mario 128 definitely a possibility.  Pokemon Colloseum.  I'm sure there are more great titles, and surely at this E3 we will get a tiny peak at N5.  It is still exciting.  Nintendo still has billions of dollars.  Miyamoto is still around, and we should cherish that as long as he is - you can't expect him never to retire.

Have your console of choice.  Play online games.  At the end of the day, it's good to play together, online, offline, or single player.  Nintendo will always rule in my books, whether I'm stubborn or not.

Good day to you.

[NWR_Lindy]

You're a little late...this thread is all love now.  It's like we've all come through this experience and burst out the other side with a big group hug.

A Zelda MMO wouldn't really fit, but a Pokemon MMO would rule.  Actually, what would be ideal would be an MMO with the play mechanics of Pokemon in the guise of Fire Emblem.  Instead of Pokemon creatures have dragons or something.  That'd go over big.  Mix Pokemon with traditional AD&D RPGs.

silks

[KDR_11k]

Searanox: Somehow missed your post. Might be due to me relying way too much on the "what's new" cookie.
The dumbing down cannot be seen in a video. The PC version was supposed to have a more complex gameplay and heavier emphasis on teamplay than the XB version. I didn't pull that out of my rear end, that's what was said in a preview in a PC Games magazine (they said they played both versions, so...). Don't ask me which issue, that's too long ago, I don't remember anymore. Anyway, that's GAMEPLAY, it has zero to do with graphics (which are of course similar, the XBox is identical to the PCs of that time period). I cannot play Halo online to try anything out, the game's not on my "worth my money" list and thus not in my posession.

[SearanoX]

Ahh, that explains the lack of a response...

I see where you're coming from, but the fact is that judging from the video, we can not only see that the graphics have been relatively finalized, we can also see that the single player mode seems to be the biggest thing.  After all, the Marines are being hyped up (and rightfully so), and many of the things mentioned pertain to the final game's plot.  

I'm not saying that the game underwent absolutely no changes, but when it was brought to the XBox, I have a very good feeling that the gameplay was nearly finalized at that time.  Think about it - the game was really only in development on the XBox for about a year - definetly not enough time to build the game nearly from the ground-up, especially in the way that they did it.  Like I said, much of the time was also spent making graphics alterations, as well as optimization for the console (control scheme, framerate, etc.).  Then, there's the issues of play testing, marketing, etc. that would take up a good couple more months.

I'll agree that the game was somewhat more multiplayer-oriented when it was first on the PC/Mac, but the way you made it sound was that Microsoft completely ruined the game and turned it from something beautiful into another FPS clone - definetly not the case.  In fact, if anything, Halo is one of the most original FPS games ever - it's the first I've seen with a plot that is actually worth caring about, it has tons of strategy, the AI is the next step up from Half-Life's, the vehicles are a great addition, heck it's even spawned several ripoffs.  It may have changed, but for something to still be so revolutionary even after it was "dumbed down" just doesn't make much sense to me.