-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Media Create Sales 23-29 Jan
- Thread starter neo2046
- Start date
ethelred said:
I'm not suggesting. I don't play armchair CEO. I'm only making logical observations and educated assumptions.
FYI, they're already doing it now and succeeding. GBA blew everthing out of the water last Christmas and the DS is doing pretty well too. The target audience is completely different. Late adpoters and price sensitive shoppers are picking up the heavily discounted GameBoy SPs while gamers who already have a game boy are picking up a DS, or in Japan's case, everyone is buying a DS.
Deku said:
That's fine. That's the GBA, a system which has already demonstrated enormous success and has managed to hold onto that particular market. The DS has not acquired that sort of position yet outside of Japan -- Nintendo is having to fight for every inch of support it's getting here. Announcing a new handheld system in 2006, only two years after the system has been on the market without succeeding at capturing an incredible dominance of the market would be suicide for the DS. It would undermine consumer confidence in it as well as developer confidence.
Yes, I understand that the DS was introduced with the GBA only being three years old. This happened, though, because Nintendo could afford to do it (the GBA had already achieved total and incredible sales), but also because Sony forced the company's hand by announcing a powerful new form of competition into the market.
Nintendo provided a technologically innovative, but risky and experimental system that developers are just now starting to get the hang of creating for, and in the West, consumers are just now coming around to. If the company then, after only its second year (shorter by far than the GBA's lifespan without the necessity caused by new competition entering the previously competition-less market), would then be a death knell for the system. It would be cutting the DS down in its prime.
Like I said, stupidest thing the company could ever do. Anything about any kind of nw handheld system in 2006 is beyond premature. Even late 2007 is questionable as far as good sense goes.
LanceStern
Banned
It would be 100% foolish of Nintendo to release the GBE 2006-2007 time. Like ehtreal said, it's cutting into spectacular DS sales all for what?
I don't think the Gameboy Evolution will be announced anytime soon. (i.e. a long time)
I think the DS-Revolution combination is very profitable venture for nintendo, not to mention the market they've aquired, they shouldn't do anything to jeopardize their current business model or complicate it even more.
Nintendo usually maintains a standard of quality and polish in software, and I don't think they have enough resources to actually support 3 viable platforms while also maintaining that level of quality and supporting it with a healthy flow of game releases.
I think the DS-Revolution combination is very profitable venture for nintendo, not to mention the market they've aquired, they shouldn't do anything to jeopardize their current business model or complicate it even more.
Nintendo usually maintains a standard of quality and polish in software, and I don't think they have enough resources to actually support 3 viable platforms while also maintaining that level of quality and supporting it with a healthy flow of game releases.
LanceStern
Banned
And while I'd like to make assumptions on hardware and software for DS and PSP, it's been so unpredictable (mainly for DS) that I just don't know what to say.
But if I HAVE to:
Metroid Prime Hunters: ~ 1 - 1.5 million (Just in the US)
Super Mario Bros. ~ 2.5 million (Assuming US and Japan release in November)
Animal Crossing ~ 4 million
But if I HAVE to:
Metroid Prime Hunters: ~ 1 - 1.5 million (Just in the US)
Super Mario Bros. ~ 2.5 million (Assuming US and Japan release in November)
Animal Crossing ~ 4 million
LanceStern said:
People thought they were foolish to release the DS as early as they did and it turned out to be just in time and placed GBA in a price range that made is sell even more units than ever.
I take conventional wisdom in GAF with a grain of salt about as large as the moon.
Deku said:
Um, it didn't make the GBA sell more units than ever. The GBA sold less in 2005 than it had sold in the previous years of its life.
And it wasn't too early for a new handheld -- it was the exact necessary time for a new handheld, because a new competitor was entering a market that Nintendo completely controlled. With the #1 home console maker creating a brand new high-tech gaming handheld, Nintendo could not just sit back and rely on a three year old system. It was necessary at that point for the company to create a new system of its own in order to compete.
That is not the case in 2006. The 2006 DS is not the 2004 GBA. The 2004 GBA had already seen a huge library of impressive third party software from developers that had no problems designing for such a straight-forward traditional system. The DS is not a straight-forward traditional system, and as a consequence, it has taken much more time and cultivation for developers to start embracing it and developing for it PROPERLY, and it's taking just as much time and cultivation for consumers in the West to accept the system versus its competitor.
In this context, which is radically unlike the 2004 landscape, it would be insanely stupid to announce a new system. Nintendo is JUST now starting to see the fruits of its time and cultivation with third party developers, and a new handheld announcement would undercut that support. It will viewed as a concession to Sony and as a loss for the DS. Consumers in the West would view it as a sign that, after only two years on the market with results just starting to show, Nintendo isn't serious about sustaining the risky and experimental device.
I can't believe I'm having this argument.
cvxfreak said:
Yeah, but that's even more a reason not to start talking about a new Gameboy in 2006. It shows that the DS is still struggling in the West. Things will start to turn around, because as I said, third parties are just now finally starting to come around to start developing for the system seriously and properly. The West will start seeing the results of that throughout 2006... but for Nintendo to then go and announce a new system while the DS is still struggling like that, it'll strike consumers as a replacement for the "poorly performing system" (that's what the perception will be) and that would ultimately kill support for it.
ethelred said:
Yeah. But for me, I'm all for the unification of the two lines into one for the duration of the DS's lifetime, and then a new Game Boy shortly before it ends (end of 2008?). Unification doesn't necessarily mean dumping one altogether, but GBA is on its way down, especially in Japan, and the DS surely isn't. The GBA has nowhere to go but down really, but the DS has nowhere to go but up.
Or, GBE can arrive before or after Sony releases a new handheld themselves. I'm fine with Nintendo's two handheld offerings either way.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
A few times before I've written on why I think a new Game Boy would be silly anytime soon, but this time I think I'll go whole hog and try not to lose it.
A main reason given for a new Game Boy being sensible in ~2007 is a comparison to the current reality of both GBA and DS doing decently. From that it is extrapolated that DS and newGB could have a similar relationship. I find this to be a flawed way of looking at things, though.
As is, Game Boy Advance is where the publisher goes if they've got a simpler 2D game that won't benefit from the DS's increased power, resolution, extra screen, microphone, touch screen, or wifi; and they want it to reach a larger possible audience. A consumer would pick a GBA over a DS if they wanted something cheap and small. Other than the GBA link port, DS is a pretty clear superset of GBA.
But what would the situation be with a DS as the value console and a newGB as the upscale one? Assuming the newGB is like the GBA and PSP, it would essentially have a subset of DS's capabilities, but with better graphics and sound. Playing DS on newGB wouldn't be feasible. Neither machine would be a clear improvement upon the other. If I'm a publisher with a "simple" game (say an N64/PS1 port), where do I put it? On the DS where there are more input options and an existing userbase, or the newGB where there are graphics capabilities ~3 years more advanced, and maybe a more proper analog control? As a consumer, there would no longer be one basic cheap machine to choose... you'd either pick the basic or the cheap machine.
Before DS's release I thought things like New Super Mario Bros. and Mario Kart DS seemed pretty poor ideas for a company really serious about having three pillars. If DS had stuck to only things that really took advantage of its touch screen, a newGB with a more oldstyle screen/control setup wouldn't really create a conflict. But for better or worse, DS has software of all types, and isn't just the touch screen machine. Since the new features have proved more of a benefit than a detriment to DS, I don't know why Nintendo wouldn't be happy to just continue on with their next machine being an improvement upon the DS, rather than going back to the GBA/PSP way.
As is, the only reason they've needed to try and sustain two handhelds for so long is because competition from Sony forced the DS to market earlier than they would've released a new portable, and dumping support from a 3.5 year old machine to put all the eggs into the basket of the weird new machine would've been stupid. If it weren't for PSP they surely wouldn't have wanted to have only 3.5 years between their handhelds, and without some other external stimulus they won't want to again. Yes, it can be pointed out that the time difference from GB Color to GB Advance was similarly small... but I really think that's another very unique circumstance. GB Color was a crazy late half-update to 9 year old hardware, with many of its games made to still work on the original Game Boy. GBA was just the universe righting itself.
In 2004 and early 2005, talk of a new GB in 2007 was believable as a DS backup plan. In 2006 it's silly. DS made it.
A main reason given for a new Game Boy being sensible in ~2007 is a comparison to the current reality of both GBA and DS doing decently. From that it is extrapolated that DS and newGB could have a similar relationship. I find this to be a flawed way of looking at things, though.
As is, Game Boy Advance is where the publisher goes if they've got a simpler 2D game that won't benefit from the DS's increased power, resolution, extra screen, microphone, touch screen, or wifi; and they want it to reach a larger possible audience. A consumer would pick a GBA over a DS if they wanted something cheap and small. Other than the GBA link port, DS is a pretty clear superset of GBA.
But what would the situation be with a DS as the value console and a newGB as the upscale one? Assuming the newGB is like the GBA and PSP, it would essentially have a subset of DS's capabilities, but with better graphics and sound. Playing DS on newGB wouldn't be feasible. Neither machine would be a clear improvement upon the other. If I'm a publisher with a "simple" game (say an N64/PS1 port), where do I put it? On the DS where there are more input options and an existing userbase, or the newGB where there are graphics capabilities ~3 years more advanced, and maybe a more proper analog control? As a consumer, there would no longer be one basic cheap machine to choose... you'd either pick the basic or the cheap machine.
Before DS's release I thought things like New Super Mario Bros. and Mario Kart DS seemed pretty poor ideas for a company really serious about having three pillars. If DS had stuck to only things that really took advantage of its touch screen, a newGB with a more oldstyle screen/control setup wouldn't really create a conflict. But for better or worse, DS has software of all types, and isn't just the touch screen machine. Since the new features have proved more of a benefit than a detriment to DS, I don't know why Nintendo wouldn't be happy to just continue on with their next machine being an improvement upon the DS, rather than going back to the GBA/PSP way.
As is, the only reason they've needed to try and sustain two handhelds for so long is because competition from Sony forced the DS to market earlier than they would've released a new portable, and dumping support from a 3.5 year old machine to put all the eggs into the basket of the weird new machine would've been stupid. If it weren't for PSP they surely wouldn't have wanted to have only 3.5 years between their handhelds, and without some other external stimulus they won't want to again. Yes, it can be pointed out that the time difference from GB Color to GB Advance was similarly small... but I really think that's another very unique circumstance. GB Color was a crazy late half-update to 9 year old hardware, with many of its games made to still work on the original Game Boy. GBA was just the universe righting itself.
In 2004 and early 2005, talk of a new GB in 2007 was believable as a DS backup plan. In 2006 it's silly. DS made it.
Yeah, I'd say DS' success has killed off the whole Gameboy Evolution concept. The restyling of the DS to match it with Revolution is even more sign of that. It's here for the long-game now.
I'd say it's far more likely we see a DS2 in a few years, than a new Gameboy.
I'd say it's far more likely we see a DS2 in a few years, than a new Gameboy.
fly high ~ayunite~
Member
Ooo another one can't hurt...
First Children
Member
Nintendo has limited resources, supporting at the same time 2 different portables would mean to worsen the software line up for both the platforms. They need to focus all they have on the platform that's more profitable.
Right now they are focusing on the DS, leaving on the GBA a few games that were already in development years or months ago, I think they'll completely switch to the DS a few months from now, then they will try to strengthen the software line up on THIS platform as much as they can.
Right now they are focusing on the DS, leaving on the GBA a few games that were already in development years or months ago, I think they'll completely switch to the DS a few months from now, then they will try to strengthen the software line up on THIS platform as much as they can.
milanbaros
Member?
Does anyone know the tie ratios for the GBA(all versions together) and DS in Japan? The DS must be creeping up on the GBA by now. Is it possible to split the ratios into 1st and 3rd party?
Nintendo also has the Revolution to support as well. Or is this on the backburner already?
I don't see the next game boy for a long time. Unless Nintendo prematurely kills off the DS. Nintendo needs to focus on the Revolution. They need to start treating their console business with the same equality found in their portable gaming lineup. I don't want to see them diverting their attention onto another portable system.
After the success of the DS, I don't know if Nintendo is going to do another traditional system again. If Game Boy Evolution happens, I expect it to be more than just a standard portable gaming system. Perhaps something like that 3D screen neo posted about a week ago.
I don't see the next game boy for a long time. Unless Nintendo prematurely kills off the DS. Nintendo needs to focus on the Revolution. They need to start treating their console business with the same equality found in their portable gaming lineup. I don't want to see them diverting their attention onto another portable system.
After the success of the DS, I don't know if Nintendo is going to do another traditional system again. If Game Boy Evolution happens, I expect it to be more than just a standard portable gaming system. Perhaps something like that 3D screen neo posted about a week ago.
I don't think they have to rely on the Gameboy name anymore anyway.
I think there's a definite rebranding thing going on, with them placing more emphasis on the Nintendo name. So it's going to be more this is your Nintendo handheld, and this is your Nintendo console. Rather than them pushing the name of the device as with Gameboy/Gamecube.
I think there's a definite rebranding thing going on, with them placing more emphasis on the Nintendo name. So it's going to be more this is your Nintendo handheld, and this is your Nintendo console. Rather than them pushing the name of the device as with Gameboy/Gamecube.
Nash said:
Which I find quite sensible. I think Atari was the first to try out a similar strategy with its number-based names (2600, 7800 etc), that put the emphasis on the company name more so than on the product. A similar pattern is followed in the car market -- strong brands tend to have very sober product names, e.g. the Alfa 156, Ferrari 340 etc.
Frankfurter
Member
maxmars said:
The VW Golf strongly disagrees.
First Children
Member
Why put those money and those studios on another platform when they can develop on the DS ? To split their userbase? so that when someone buys a GBE they can't buy DS games because they don't have the console?elostyle said:
They need to put everything they can on one single platform.
Smiles and Cries
Member
GAF is slippin where is or mid-week software goodness?
C 200k