Gamespy's #1 prediction for 2005: Nintendo will become cool again!

dark10x said:
Clover? They must have created a whole bunch of games that I missed out on or something. What have they released besides Viewtiful Joe?
Tecnically, they've only released Viewtiful Joe 2 (and the PS2 port of VJ1). To be fair though, you should say they house the main people resonsible for...

-Goof Troop
-Resident Evil
-Resident Evil 2
-Dino Crisis
-Resident Evil Code: Veronica
-Tech Romancer (hear that MAF?)
-Dino Crisis 2
-Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Ages/Seasons
-Devil May Cry
-Steel Batallion
-PN03
-Viewtiful Joe
-Resident Evil 4

...that's not a bad list there. :)
 
Doom_Bringer said:
Did you include the worldwide sales for AC4?
Did AC4 move over 3.5 million copies before any budget rerelease?


Doom_Bringer said:
Anyway, Final Fantasy XI was multiplatform (PC & PS2) how much did that sell?
It's currently pushing Square's fastest growing profit area (PlayOnline). I'd say FFXI is a sign of things to come, the next online FF or DQ will hit Xenon too (and probably Revolution also).


SolidSnakex said:
Is Kamiya under Clover, or is he still in Capcoms other divisions?
Not only Kamiya, but also Inaba (Steel Batallion), Yamashita (Zelda Oracles) and eventually Mikami too (after RE4 wraps up) among others. Clover really is an all-star team, basically the only really notable directors/producers left at Capcom (now that Okamoto's left to form Gme Republic) are Inafune at Studio 2 and Tanaka at Studio 1.
 
Well, here's how I take it.

The weapon through the head thing might refer to Zelda. Maybe it was a hint about a company that has to do with Zelda.

Who makes the GBA Zelda games? Maybe that Capcom studio is being absorbed into Nintendo?

thus ends my ideas. I've stooped to your level.
 
jarrod said:
Not only Kamiya, but also Inaba (Steel Batallion), Yamashita (Zelda Oracles) and eventually Mikami too (after RE4 wraps up).

That'd definetly go a long way in changing Nintendo's image if this is the team that's going to be defecting. They've basically been the people keeping Capcom afloat this gen.
 
Chrono said:
uh, Nintendo is one of the most profitable video game companies around dude.

It's pathetic to see these people devote their time to hating Nintendo with a passion and constantly delude themselves with the 'NINTENDO IZ D00M3D' bullshit. Most of them either are too cheap to buy a gamecube and want Nintendo games on their system, or assholes who hate the fact that others love nintendo games while they don't, or morons who just hate nintendo games and think their genitals will grow bigger if mario is off the market. STFU already. Nintendo isn't going anywhere.
Who has gotten rich as a GC 3rd party? Do tell. PEACE.
 
Pimpwerx said:
Who has gotten rich as a GC 3rd party? Do tell. PEACE.

I was replying to your 'NINTENDO HAS BEEN BLEEDING FOR YEARS' comment. Looking at how successful some gamecube games are, there's nothing preventing a 3rd party developer from making a GOOD game with good marketing that sells just as well as Nintendo games.( We'll see how RE4 performs). If they can't compete they should just stick to competing with developers on their own level on the playstation3 and xenon.
 
.:RaZieL:. said:
Well i hope Square comes back to Nintendo and make games exclusively for REV.
I'd love to see a new Nintendo era where they are more popular then SONY.
Just look at the PS2, don't get me wrong i own one and love it, but since it's the most
popular console it has been loaded with crap, I just hate it when i see a kid who really likes
games but doesn't know the quality games from the crap ones spend all his saving on
utter crap.

You do realize that the only difference if Nintendo was more popular than SONY would be that now the NINTENDO system has more crap than the competition?

I hope you realize this. Quite literally nothing would change except the brand on top.


On subject: Nintendo has zero chance of becomming cool again next year. The only way they can become cool again is through Revolution, and who knows how that'll turn out.
 
Thsi isn't abotu how Nintendo can survive. They're profitable, they have tons of money in the bank, they'll survive. This is about how they can thrive again.

I think Nintendo is seriously washed up as a console maker if they don't follow some of this advice, particularly the bottom-line part. They have two competitors hungrier than they are, who are willing to slim down margins or lose money one year to make a bunch the next (or, in MS's case, lose money for 5 years to make money the following 5). Nintendo need to look at a whole-generation strategy, not just year-by-year.
 
trippingmartian said:
They make games for PlayStation 1 and N-Gage.

But they didn't make games for the Dreamcast which was a more viable console (at the time) than the N-Gage ever will be. So what's your point? I believe that if the sales of their games for the GCN don't start improving significantly by the end of this generation then EA will either leave them in the dust or drastically reduce support.
 
Speevy said:
EA will make games for the N-Gage after the N-Gage no longer exists.

But they didn't make games for the Dreamcast which was a more viable console (at the time) than the N-Gage ever will be. So what's your point? I believe that if the sales of their games for the GCN don't start improving significantly by the end of this generation then EA will either leave them in the dust or drastically reduce support.

This is one thing that enrages me about EA which goes to show what a crap company they are, they contributed to the DC's demise by not devving for it but they make games for NGage??? EA = the industry's worst and most useless mainstream company bar none.
 
JC10001 said:
But they didn't make games for the Dreamcast which was a more viable console (at the time) than the N-Gage ever will be. So what's your point? I believe that if the sales of their games for the GCN don't start improving significantly by the end of this generation then EA will either leave them in the dust or drastically reduce support.

I'm not sure now with some of the stuff Nintendo has been doing lately (namely the characters in NBA Street V.3.) I think Nintendo knows the score and are acting accordingly while there is still time in this generation to convince EA that Nintendo is serious about wanting their support.
 
JC10001 said:
But they didn't make games for the Dreamcast which was a more viable console (at the time) than the N-Gage ever will be. So what's your point? I believe that if the sales of their games for the GCN don't start improving significantly by the end of this generation then EA will either leave them in the dust or drastically reduce support.
I don't know, I think they'll at least support it initially, unless the writing is really, really on the wall for the console before it even launches (then again, it was for the N-Gage). I think the EA that opted not to support the DC is different from the EA today.

Plus, Nintendo's been getting cozy with them lately (Mario and friends in NBA Street, for example) and vice versa (EA displaying the GC logo at the end of commercials).
 
Chrono said:
I was replying to your 'NINTENDO HAS BEEN BLEEDING FOR YEARS' comment. Looking at how successful some gamecube games are, there's nothing preventing a 3rd party developer from making a GOOD game with good marketing that sells just as well as Nintendo games.( We'll see how RE4 performs). If they can't compete they should just stick to competing with developers on their own level on the playstation3 and xenon.


He said Nintendo has been "bleeding marketshare" which is completely accurate.

In 15 years, they've gone from 90% to what, 10%? And bleeding is probably the right verb, because it's happened fairly steadily over that time.
 
jarrod said:
Did AC4 move over 3.5 million copies before any budget rerelease?

Erm... AC4 has done abour 1.5m in the US, 450k Japan, and maybe 500k in Europe or so. 2.5m total.

As you say, Soul Calibur 2 has sold huge amounts, mainly due to being multi-platform though....
 
Ignatz Mouse said:
He said Nintendo has been "bleeding marketshare" which is completely accurate.

In 15 years, they've gone from 90% to what, 10%? And bleeding is probably the right verb, because it's happened fairly steadily over that time.
So what? They're still profitable. They're not a 'sinking ship' as he said and 3rd parties won't be thinking how Nintendo USED to be great when Nintendo is offering them deals on the revolution. They'll be looking at Nintendo’s profit and the chances of them profiting too on revolution just like Nintendo.
 
Ignatz Mouse said:
He said Nintendo has been "bleeding marketshare" which is completely accurate.

In 15 years, they've gone from 90% to what, 10%? And bleeding is probably the right verb, because it's happened fairly steadily over that time.


10% of what??

What are we including?
 
ge-man said:
I'm not sure now with some of the stuff Nintendo has been doing lately (namely the characters in NBA Street V.3.) I think Nintendo knows the score and are acting accordingly while there is still time in this generation to convince EA that Nintendo is serious about wanting their support.

The fact that they are letting EA use them at all is a red flag IMO. Something is definitely up. I wouldn't be surprised if there was an ultimatum given to Nintendo. You know... something along the lines of "if things don't shape up quick don't expect a lot of support next gen". It was a smart move by Nintendo (one of the few smart moves they've made lately) because there's really nothing else they can do to help improve the sales of those games so they've got to try it.
 
Whoa, whoa--

10% of consoles (I'm guessing-- I don't follow closely)

And his point, which I agree with, is that you have to do some convincing or some serious deals to attect thrid parties with that small a marketshare.

How profitable they are themselves doesn't enter into it.
 
JC10001 said:
The fact that they are letting EA use them at all is a red flag IMO. Something is definitely up. I wouldn't be surprised if there was an ultimatum given to Nintendo. You know... something along the lines of "if things don't shape up quick don't expect a lot of support next gen". It was a smart move by Nintendo (one of the few smart moves they've made lately) because there's really nothing else they can do to help improve the sales of those games so they've got to try it.

That's a good point, but it's not like EA had been doing awful on the GC before these recent developments. The whole situation is very mysterious.
 
JC10001 said:
The fact that they are letting EA use them at all is a red flag IMO. Something is definitely up. I wouldn't be surprised if there was an ultimatum given to Nintendo. You know... something along the lines of "if things don't shape up quick don't expect a lot of support next gen". It was a smart move by Nintendo (one of the few smart moves they've made lately) because there's really nothing else they can do to help improve the sales of those games so they've got to try it.

Didn't EA state in an article several months ago that Nintendo is needed next generation? (with needed I mean that they provide us with another console)
 
Ignatz Mouse said:
In 15 years, they've gone from 90% to what, 10%?
For consoles, it's actually closer to...

NES: 90%
SNES: 65%
N64: 30%
GC: 15%

...though it oviously varies by region (N64 was closer to 40% in the US, GC is 20% in Japan, etc). Looking at raw marketshare is a little disingenoius too as it ignores rapid market expansion.


Broshnat said:
Erm... AC4 has done abour 1.5m in the US, 450k Japan, and maybe 500k in Europe or so. 2.5m total.
Most of those US sales came from the Greatest Hits rerelease though... I'd imagine the game was lucky to break 1.5M before budget release. Likewise, I expect SC2 is probably past 4 million worldwide by now after it's budget release across consoles.
 
jarrod said:
For consoles, it's actually closer to...

NES: 90%
SNES: 65%
N64: 30%
GC: 15%

...though it oviously varies by region (N64 was closer to 40% in the US, GC is 20% in Japan, etc). Looking at raw marketshare is a little disingenoius too as it ignores rapid market expansion.

Thanks for the breakdown.

Market expansion doesn't come into the original argument, regarding 3rd parties. They'll develop where they will sell the most. And contrary to somebody above, it's not because there's less quality competition on other platforms, it's numbers, period.

Again, this isn't "Nintendo is DOOMED" talk, it's about the difficulty attracting 3rd parties.

Would anybody but a rabid Nintendo apologist argue that Nintendo is well-positioned for the next round of console wars, particularly from a third-party standpoint?
 
Ignatz Mouse said:
Would anybody but a rabid Nintendo apologist argue that Nintendo is well-positioned for the next round of console wars, particularly from a third-party standpoint?

It depends on what direction they want to take. Some have suggested (including myself) that they should embrace a niche route. They are more than equipped to go in that direction. If they want to go head to head with MS and Sony, they won't do much better than now unless something drastic occurs.
 
ge-man said:
It depends on what direction they want to take. Some have suggested (including myself) that they should embrace a niche route. They are more than equipped to go in that direction. If they want to go head to head with MS and Sony, they won't do much better than now unless something drastic occurs.


Agreed. And I think they could pull off the niche route.

I just scanned and realized how far off topic this all is. Regarding the original rumor, I suspect it *is* a Sony->Nintendo defection, despite my comments. I think Nintendo may have started to see the wisdom in grabbing exclusinves, RE aside.
 
What Johnny Nighttrain is saying makes sense.
As development costs increase, the software houses will close down and their talent will be swallowed up by the big dogs. EA, Ubisoft, Take Two etc have been doing this in the west, and I fully expect smaller fish like Capcom and Namco to belong to bigger fish like SCE and Nintendo in the future. It's kind of like the music and movie industry all over again. Even indies will belong to the big companies in some way or another.
 
Ignatz Mouse said:
Market expansion doesn't come into the original argument, regarding 3rd parties. They'll develop where they will sell the most. And contrary to somebody above, it's not because there's less quality competition on other platforms, it's numbers, period.
Similarly though, 3rd parties don't just look at raw marketshare either. Tecmo's top notch Xbox support is a testament to that.... there's far more factors at play here, and yes 1st party competition is, believe it or not, one of them.


Ignatz Mouse said:
Would anybody but a rabid Nintendo apologist argue that Nintendo is well-positioned for the next round of console wars, particularly from a third-party standpoint?
Define "well-positioned" though. I'd say they're probably better-positioned than they were following N64. I agree generally though, they're going to have a pretty tough time of things. Nintendo's been getting better about courting key publishers, but honestly they haven't done enough. Grudges like the Rockstar thing need to be gotten over quick.
 
Ignatz Mouse said:
Would anybody but a rabid Nintendo apologist argue that Nintendo is well-positioned for the next round of console wars, particularly from a third-party standpoint?
Nothing to lose / Everything to gain = a pretty good position in some people's eyes.
 
I'm pretty sure I'd get an easily identifiable weapon through the head. (Perhaps that's a hint.)
Shuriken? I don't want to believe Team Ninja would be switching to Sony's (or Nintendo's) camp....but then again *here's where early damage control starts* Does MS really need them? NG and DOAU both sold around 60k in Japan, doesn't seem that they'll be like Xenon's killer franchises over there, DOAU didn't do too spectacular in US neither (under 100k?).
 
bloke said:
NG and DOAU both sold around 60k in Japan, doesn't seem that they'll be like Xenon's killer franchises over there
60k is quite a lot of software units to move for the Xbox in Japan, though. In fact, Team Ninja probably is responsible for a nice-sized chunk of Xbox console sales.
 
Jonnyram said:
Nothing to lose / Everything to gain = a pretty good position in some people's eyes.


I laughed.

OK, I mean *besides* that.

Jarrod-- I don't think they're as well positioned as they were after the N64, but I can see the argument.

-- And yes, marketshare isn't everything. But it's a barrier.

-- First party competition isn't any different than any other competition. When you boil it down, it's a matter of "How many can I sell into the existing marketplace?" The only reason to consider Nintendo's software as competition is because the console doesn't have enough broad-based penetration to appeal to people likely to buy anything but Nintendo's software. The argument that they have to compete w/Nintendo is backwards-- more like the console is skewed heavily toward fans of Nintendo's software. That's Nintendo's bind-- making the console appeal to people who aren't getting it for Mario, Samus, Link.

For everyone, the above paragraph contains generalizations and sweeping comments. Please breathe twice before replying if it upsets you, I am not trolling here.
 
SantaCruZer said:
So basicly that means bad news for Sony.

What about Konami support on the Revolution? Konami was totally up Sony's ass this generation. Will it continue, or will they start to support Rev and Xenon?

Konami is meh in my book. I don't buy many Konami games for my PS2, I won't for the Revolution.
 
its got to be something with MS cause since the xbox's announcement they have basically been trying to buy every and any known gaming company.
 
I'd imagine that, yeah, it amounts to MS purchasing a fairly popular japanese dev. It could be overinflated though, as in "MS buys Mist Walker, OMG"

Oh, and Nintendo is the new SNK.
 
Just notice that

1/ Gamesy is a western website.

2/ No western website would have a valuable indsight about what is happening in japanese studios.

3/ Gamespy knows something about a developper.

1+2+3 : the defect if it happens is about a western (most likely US) dev.
 
human5892 said:
60k is quite a lot of software units to move for the Xbox in Japan, though. In fact, Team Ninja probably is responsible for a nice-sized chunk of Xbox console sales.
Relatively speaking yes, but I'm sure for Xenon MS wants 600k (or bigger) sellers and not 60k ones. And atm I don't feel that TN can provide that. If people at MS start thinking like that and decide to stop sending money hats in Tecmos direction, well...
While we're off-topic, isn't TXB dumbest board on the net http://forum.teamxbox.com/showthread.php?p=4702063 :lol
 
Ignatz Mouse said:
Would anybody but a rabid Nintendo apologist argue that Nintendo is well-positioned for the next round of console wars, particularly from a third-party standpoint?

No. But things can maybe change. There is still some time left. :)

Ignatz Mouse said:
The only reason to consider Nintendo's software as competition is because the console doesn't have enough broad-based penetration to appeal to people likely to buy anything but Nintendo's software. The argument that they have to compete w/Nintendo is backwards-- more like the console is skewed heavily toward fans of Nintendo's software. That's Nintendo's bind-- making the console appeal to people who aren't getting it for Mario, Samus, Link.

For everyone, the above paragraph contains generalizations and sweeping comments. Please breathe twice before replying if it upsets you, I am not trolling here.

Fair point. This is why we are seeing Mario in DDR, Mario et al in NBA Street and Super Punch-Out in Fight Night R2.
 
TXB User said:
Rockstar leans toward the most popoluar console, even if it sucks, and with XBox going more mainstream and the early release of Xenon I expect it to be the most popoluar console.

But will it suck????
 
GamerDiva said:
Nothing would be more entertaining than a Miyamoto defection from Nintendo to Microsoft or Sony. The GAF servers would be down for days. :lol

I think mass suicides would be more like it, no kidding.
 
Everyone will be watching Nintendo's Revolution unveiling very closely I think. That's going to be the measure of what Nintendo has become. We have to remember, that after Gamecube and GBA were finalised, the system of management at the company has changed, their practices have changed. They are a company in transition.

So I have this feeling that if Revolution is something of genius, that will display a change for the better. If it's something wacky, like we all know it could be -- I think Nintendo will still succeed enough to keep doing it, but they'll be looked on differently than Sony and Microsoft. I think that could be their plan too - to build an offshoot - their own market.

Either way: Nintendo can become cool again. Most people don't give a shit who makes the box that they play games on. They go where the hype hits off hardest. PS2 had it with PlayStation momentum and umpteen exclusive games including Tekken, Metal Gear, Final Fantasy, Gran Turismo, Grand Theft Auto etc. Xbox had it because they were the daring new-comer, with the most powerful machine to boot... Nintendo?

They made a lot of right moves, but not enough. In terms of raw hardware power and in some kind of metaphorical sense -- they were somewhat in the middle. Between a rock and a hard place, with a little purple console that didn't have as many functions as the others nor deliver enough in time. Making matters worse, Nintendo Europe has been completely impotent in responding to the great deals Microsoft and Sony have put in place. I wouldn't be surprised if the same was true of NOA. When they have responded, it's always been far too late.

But thinking hypothetically for a moment: if Nintendo sharpen their relations with western developers and become more efficient out here, they can only improve. They have made leaps and strides with the likes of SEGA, Namco, Capcom, etc. All three were non-existant or irrelevant on Nintendo 64. So they need to replicate that over here. As for this EA dropping them next generation... yeah right. Have Nintendo and EA ever been this close before ever? The whole dynamic changes with every cycle -- we can't rule out that they'll have a very powerful machine ready. This is also the first time any company has indicated they intend to make their hardware more enjoyable for gamers in ways other than upping raw horse power. If the idea they are talking about is compelling enough, that could change a lot too.

I think people look at Gamecube's hardware sales, compare them with N64's and see the business as a failure. But I think the console is both a victim of circumstance (namely Microsoft's entry) and Nintendo's remaining business failings from the Yamauchi era. With the new management of recent years in place, and Nintendo's more outgoing nature, I personally think they're really about to turn a corner. I think people forget how shit the N64 and the sporadic releases from the "Dream Team" actually was.

This under-dog status could serve them well. They could come out of left field and surprise a shit load of people. If the hardware is a good idea, attractive to developers and consumers, and they expand the amount of great games on their machines -- all they have to do then, is put out the hype.
 
If developmental costs will be higher next generation then why go multiplatform? Wouldn't the cost being even HIGHER to develop for other consoles, not to meantion losing money when putting them on other consoles besides Sony?
 
Top Bottom