-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Nintendo Revolution will be king
- Thread starter norinrad21
- Start date
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
I stopped taking the article seriously at the second sentence. It's the same old whiny fanboy bs. I will never, ever, understand the stance that Nintendo has some sort of edge because they are only a game company. Why? 1) Becuase the causality is weak at best. It assumes that for whatever reason, Sony and MS cannot make as good a game machine because they have other interests. 2) It ignores the fact that Nintendo is also a licensing company, as well as a game maker, and that if one buys the argument that divided loyalties create weaker game-system experiences, Nintendo has an even bigger problem than MS or Sony. I don't buy point one, but it I did, I think the case sould be made that Nintendo's need to create and maintain licensable properties hurts their game development.
As far as the ultimate thesis of the article? That's what fanboys said about the Cube, too. And they even had Resident Evil as "proof" that Nintendo was going to get it right this time.
Look, Nintendo is carving off their own market. It's a bold move. It's not whether or not they'll be "king" next-gen, it's whether that market is satisfying to each one of us. A personal decision. And whether that market will be successful enough to draw enough development and sales to make the purchase of the system a satisfying one. We'll see. For those who are into Ninendo now-- I think it will be.
As far as the ultimate thesis of the article? That's what fanboys said about the Cube, too. And they even had Resident Evil as "proof" that Nintendo was going to get it right this time.
Look, Nintendo is carving off their own market. It's a bold move. It's not whether or not they'll be "king" next-gen, it's whether that market is satisfying to each one of us. A personal decision. And whether that market will be successful enough to draw enough development and sales to make the purchase of the system a satisfying one. We'll see. For those who are into Ninendo now-- I think it will be.
KeithFranklin
Banned
I still need to understand what is different about the Revolution controller and Xavix.
Not to mention Nintendo is going to have a tough time showing the Revolution games compared to PS3 and 360. Look how people compare the 360 game visuals to a movie (MGS4). Whats it going to be like when Nintendo shows visual from a vastly less powerful console up against 2nd generation 360 games and first generation PS3 games at E3.
Not to mention Nintendo is going to have a tough time showing the Revolution games compared to PS3 and 360. Look how people compare the 360 game visuals to a movie (MGS4). Whats it going to be like when Nintendo shows visual from a vastly less powerful console up against 2nd generation 360 games and first generation PS3 games at E3.
ChronoMagnus
Banned
Holy cow KeithFranklin!!!!!! You know the Revolutions specs already!?!?!?!?! Please enlighten GAF and tell us them!!
The biggest problem i see for Nintendo, is that with the revo., they are releasing a console that is different from how the general public generally views a console. Now if Nintendo was the market leader, i think they would stand a much better chance at introducing a different kind of console.
It's almost like Ninty is damned if they do and damned if they don't. I don't think they are changing their console because they all of a sudden got this great idea for a new way to play games. No, i think Nintendo realized that if they don't do something radically different, they would be all but guaranteeing their exit from the console business. It was a change brought on by desperation much more than inspiration.
I honestly believe that if Nintendo is lucky then they will carve out a niche big enough for them to remain profitable enough to stay in the console business. But their is a good chance that the direction their heading could end up pushing them out of the console business for good.
Like i said before, their between a rock and a hard place cause if they do something different, like they have with the revolution, especially since they are miles away from being the market leader, there's a good chance the public won't follow and if they stay the course they've been on for the last 3 generations then they will continue to lose what little market share they have left.
Nintendo trys to continue to blame the market and the publics dissatisfaction in gaming for their market share woes. But the sad fact is that Nintendo have done this to themselves by not offering the general pulic what they want.
It's almost like Ninty is damned if they do and damned if they don't. I don't think they are changing their console because they all of a sudden got this great idea for a new way to play games. No, i think Nintendo realized that if they don't do something radically different, they would be all but guaranteeing their exit from the console business. It was a change brought on by desperation much more than inspiration.
I honestly believe that if Nintendo is lucky then they will carve out a niche big enough for them to remain profitable enough to stay in the console business. But their is a good chance that the direction their heading could end up pushing them out of the console business for good.
Like i said before, their between a rock and a hard place cause if they do something different, like they have with the revolution, especially since they are miles away from being the market leader, there's a good chance the public won't follow and if they stay the course they've been on for the last 3 generations then they will continue to lose what little market share they have left.
Nintendo trys to continue to blame the market and the publics dissatisfaction in gaming for their market share woes. But the sad fact is that Nintendo have done this to themselves by not offering the general pulic what they want.
shpankey
not an idiot
To be honest, I see this whole Nintendo "going our own way" thing kind of as an act of desperation and frustration. It's an attempt of a former giant trying to regain its lost glory and #1 spot. Having realized they will never be able to beat Sony and MSFT at their game, they are switching up to this weird ass ploy to try to take back their leadership position.
But they refuse to use High Definition, which will bite them in the ass bigtime in 3-4 years; and they make this silly new controller and force it down everyone's throats and tell us it's the new way. They keep telling us "simpler is better" and "graphics aren't everything". But there's a reason games and controllers have slowly became more complex over time... and that's because that is exactly what people WANTED; we want more control, not less; and there's a reason why we keep buying new consoles.. and that's because the graphics get dramatically better... otherwise we would still be content with the console we already had.
IF what Nintendo is saying is true, then why has the games industry continued to expand its user base dramatically, despite more and more complexity? That's because people want the more control that more complex games and controllers allow; that's why new gamers keep coming into the fold, because of that, not despite it. They also want better graphics and sound that the new more powerful systems bring to the table. Otherwise we wouldn't see new consoles every 4-5 years, we would just stay with the consoles that were already out.
Frankly, Grandma and Grandpa are not going to all a sudden become gamers just because they can use a remote control for gaming. I'm sorry, but at best all they may do is watch their grand kids play. They aren't going to become Nintendo fanboys and buy games up all over the place. You are talking about a very frugal demographic. There's a reason no commercials target this group... because they're CHEAP and poor (as a whole). This is only the next step up from targeting the homeless as their userbase.
Meanwhile... they just leave their entire current fanbase just hanging in the wind. With their thumb up their ass. Damn, Nintendo just continually asscocks their fanbase... and they just keep on taking it, with a smile on their face no less... all the while telling other gamers we should join them... "it's great fun".
But they refuse to use High Definition, which will bite them in the ass bigtime in 3-4 years; and they make this silly new controller and force it down everyone's throats and tell us it's the new way. They keep telling us "simpler is better" and "graphics aren't everything". But there's a reason games and controllers have slowly became more complex over time... and that's because that is exactly what people WANTED; we want more control, not less; and there's a reason why we keep buying new consoles.. and that's because the graphics get dramatically better... otherwise we would still be content with the console we already had.
IF what Nintendo is saying is true, then why has the games industry continued to expand its user base dramatically, despite more and more complexity? That's because people want the more control that more complex games and controllers allow; that's why new gamers keep coming into the fold, because of that, not despite it. They also want better graphics and sound that the new more powerful systems bring to the table. Otherwise we wouldn't see new consoles every 4-5 years, we would just stay with the consoles that were already out.
Frankly, Grandma and Grandpa are not going to all a sudden become gamers just because they can use a remote control for gaming. I'm sorry, but at best all they may do is watch their grand kids play. They aren't going to become Nintendo fanboys and buy games up all over the place. You are talking about a very frugal demographic. There's a reason no commercials target this group... because they're CHEAP and poor (as a whole). This is only the next step up from targeting the homeless as their userbase.
Meanwhile... they just leave their entire current fanbase just hanging in the wind. With their thumb up their ass. Damn, Nintendo just continually asscocks their fanbase... and they just keep on taking it, with a smile on their face no less... all the while telling other gamers we should join them... "it's great fun".
MS year head start is going to make so many more dividends than Nintendos waggle wand. If Nintendo was serious about contending for the next generation lead they would have had the Revolution out in 2005 and not potentially be last to the market. Nintendo made a smart move by launching the DS first. They should not be launching last with the Revolution. It should be out now.
Tyrone Slothrop
Banned
Any1 said:
that's how i see it. sort of
i have a hard time figuring out if it really is something new and exciting, or if nintendo just has a good PR department, leaving alot of us as captivated like suckers caught in a pyramid scheme.
im sure its a bit of both: it is something new and really fun, but nintendo is pushing it a bit
Any1 said:
The general public doesn't even play video games. There are only 50 million some-odd console systems in America, and the population of America is six times that. The data Reggie used in his presentation at the Nintendo Gamer's Summit says that only about 30% of American households have a game system, and that number has not grown since the NES came out.
70% of households do not have a game system, the majority of which are not interested in having one. This is the general public.
The general public views a console as something too confusing and something they don't need or really want. If that weren't the case, then why hasn't system penetration increased over the last 15 years? What's going to make the Xbox 360 or the PlayStation 3 any different than the Xbox or PS2 to the eyes of a regular person? The graphics? Well, wouldn't have the graphics of the Xbox, PS2 or GameCube been enough to warrant a purchase when those systems launched? What's the difference now?
The problem with GAF is that a lot of people here assume they know what the "general public" wants and needs, and base their posts off of that view. No. You don't know what the common person wants. The fact that you read and post in this forum reguarly automatically slots you in a special area of the population, the gaming hardcore. If you claim you a casual gamer, you are not. Because you post here and argue with others, you are deeper in the game industry than you know, and most certainly deeper than the 70% of households that haven't housed a game console in 15 years.
Ultimately, any post here is your personal opinion, and you're entitled to it, but don't try to pull this bullshit about "this is what the general public wants" when you are not a part of this group, and have little to no idea about what they want. You'd better have some hard data and/or past trends to back up a broad statement if you do.
If Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft hit their North American target demographics and do extremely well in them, Nintendo will have the marketshare in the end. Apparently, there are only 50 million or so American households that are willing to support gaming as we know it at once. Nintendo's marketshare has been shrinking over the years because Sega, Sony and Microsoft have had a better overall take on how to produce and market a traditional games console than Nintendo has. The numbers over the years show that everyone has been fighting over the same 30-35%. As Sony and Microsoft take more of it, Nintendo gets less of it.
With the Revolution, Nintendo wants to figure out how to get at that other 70% of households that don't have or don't want a game system. That's why they're designing it they way that they are. What Sony and Microsoft have done in the past wasn't enough to increase overall penetration, and Nintendo feels that what they'll be doing in the future isn't going to do it, either. I agree with Nintendo.
Sony and Microsoft are keen to fight over the 30% of households who play games, and using past trends there's no guarantee that the pentration rate for them will increase significantly. Nintendo is targeting the 70% of households who don't play games and the 30% who do. They want everyone in America to own a game system. So does Microsoft and Sony, but the difference with Nintendo is that they are designing the system with that in mind, as opposed to the other two guys who are designing the hardware with performance in mind first.
If Nintendo can cater to that 70% and get enough 360 and PS3 owners to get a Revolution, Nintendo can take the majority of marketshare, and increase the gaming population to boot. That's the biggest if in the history of this industry, though.
We need to see some Revolution games before anyone can make any kind of prediction about anything.
oldschoolpinball
Member
nintendo power=book of mormons
shpankey
not an idiot
I don't have any official numbers, but I call bullshit on this. Common sense can tell you this isn't true. Every year we continue to get new gamers by way of kids. I've never seen a time when kids weren't getting into gaming anew. Every generation a new wave of kids come into the fold as gamers.WindyMan said:
So for your statistic to be true would mean that we would have to have as many people leaving the fold of gaming as there is coming in... and I'm sorry, but that isn't happening. Not many of us are dying because even the oldest gamers are still relatively young. And most gamers I've seen stay gamers for life. Once addicted to gaming, it's near impossible to quit. I see gamers in their late 20's, 30's and even 40's all the time still going strong.
There is no way you can convince me that the gaming population hasn't expanded since the NES. That is some bullshit. I was around then playing games and I can tell you from firsthand experience, gaming wasn't very big back then... it was hard to find other gamers; where nowadays, everyone's a gamer. It doesn't surprise me that it comes from Nintendo's own PR front-man trying to make a bullshit point though.
As for the rest of your point... in Nintendo's effort to tap into the other 70% of people who are non-gamers, they seem to be forgetting the 30% that's already there. So they better be careful otherwise they might not end up with a large percentage from either groups. In their hunt for new gamers, they seem to be forgetting the core that's got them there. I could easily see them ending up with 3% new gamers from the 70% you spoke of, and only 7% of the current 30%... basically a remnant of what they did have, made up of only their old hardcore fanboy gamers. In essence, losing more overall marketshare despite pulling in some new gamers because of their loss in old gamers who defect.
shpankey said:
http://cube.ign.com/articles/665/665952p1.html - (Page two has all the data)
Quick points:
-In terms of raw numbers, yes, the gaming population is increasing. When factoring in expanding population, the numbers are pretty much the same as they were in the NES days in terms of percentage.
-In the NES days, everyone had one system (SMS am cry). Now, a lot of people have two or three systems. 55 million consoles sold overall is a good number, but that doesn't mean 55 million households have a game system. The higher number is misleading, because the same gaming household is buying two or three different systems.
-31 million American households owned an NES. In 15 years, there are only 55 million systems out and about, and like I just pointed out, that's not 55 million households. It's still around 30-35% of America. Why hasn't the percentage grown if people are coming into gaming daily? I don't know, why don't you explain it to me?
KeithFranklin
Banned
ChronoMagnus said:
Yes we know that Nintendo will somehow magically make a console as powerful as Sony and MS in case the size of 3 DVD cases and somehow keep it cool. Not to mention hit a price point of $200. What will they use pixie dust?
shpankey
not an idiot
Well, Nintendo can't even convince all of the 30% of current gamers out there to play games on their system... how the hell are they going to get any of the 70% who never play games to?
Nintendo thinks that the reason all non gamers don't play games is because of their difficulty with the controller; and I don't buy that. I talk to non gamers all the time and never have I heard them say anything like that. They usually think games are a complete waste of time. Some even think they're responsible for all of society's problems; problems with violence and problems with unemployment, etc. etc. are somehow from games. Non of those people will ever get into gaming, no matter what. Then you have a large % of homeless, a large % of senior citizens, a large % of poor, large % of frugal spenders, etc. etc. that will never get into it because of the expense. Then think about all the people who are simply too damn busy to get into games; or the large % of people who will be completely unaware of Nintendo's new system and controller.
So I'm just saying... that %70 is not necessarily ripe for the picking. Those are hard to tap into for a reason... and the reasoning is a lot more complicated and diverse than just having too complex of a controller; and the percentage of people that applies to is probably extremely small. And even then, getting word out to them and getting them to try your system and controller will take some time. Penetration will be slow and cumbersome, imo. By then, it will probably be too late for Nintendo to make any dramatic comeback. And I still feel like Nintendo is going to lose a lot of the current gamers they have with this new simple philosophy. Nintendo seems to be completely forgetting them; and so I see a lot of current Nintendo gamers defecting. They will have to make up for their loss too.
Nintendo thinks that the reason all non gamers don't play games is because of their difficulty with the controller; and I don't buy that. I talk to non gamers all the time and never have I heard them say anything like that. They usually think games are a complete waste of time. Some even think they're responsible for all of society's problems; problems with violence and problems with unemployment, etc. etc. are somehow from games. Non of those people will ever get into gaming, no matter what. Then you have a large % of homeless, a large % of senior citizens, a large % of poor, large % of frugal spenders, etc. etc. that will never get into it because of the expense. Then think about all the people who are simply too damn busy to get into games; or the large % of people who will be completely unaware of Nintendo's new system and controller.
So I'm just saying... that %70 is not necessarily ripe for the picking. Those are hard to tap into for a reason... and the reasoning is a lot more complicated and diverse than just having too complex of a controller; and the percentage of people that applies to is probably extremely small. And even then, getting word out to them and getting them to try your system and controller will take some time. Penetration will be slow and cumbersome, imo. By then, it will probably be too late for Nintendo to make any dramatic comeback. And I still feel like Nintendo is going to lose a lot of the current gamers they have with this new simple philosophy. Nintendo seems to be completely forgetting them; and so I see a lot of current Nintendo gamers defecting. They will have to make up for their loss too.
One thing a lot of people seem to forget is that we who were kids when we 1st played Mario when gaming was for kids only have not only grown up but have kids of our own who we now want to share those same charecters with.
N64 not many of us had children yet. Gamecube was probably the boom where most of our generation was starting to pop outthe little ones. and now for Rev it will have finally come full circle with kids ranging of all ages where the parents were addicted to Zelda , metroid and Mario as kids ourselves.
so it should play into that nastalgia aspect better this gen then ever before just due to timing and our own children.
N64 not many of us had children yet. Gamecube was probably the boom where most of our generation was starting to pop outthe little ones. and now for Rev it will have finally come full circle with kids ranging of all ages where the parents were addicted to Zelda , metroid and Mario as kids ourselves.
so it should play into that nastalgia aspect better this gen then ever before just due to timing and our own children.
shpankey said:
Uh, what? What about those 12 million GameCubes in America? And Sony or Microsoft haven't done a good job of convincing the 70% with traditional means, so why is Nintendo's chance any worse with an untraditional console?
shpankey said:
Controller complexity has little to do with it. Ultimately, the complexity of games is what's to blame. It takes simple games like Katamari Damacy or DDR to get the non-gamer to get into something, and those kinds of games don't take more than a few seconds to pick up and understand how things work. Nintendo is designing the Revolution controller so that every game on their system is like that. You just pick it up and know how things work without much thought about it.
That 70% isn't going to be an easy nut to crack. But Nintendo has the best chance of the three to do it. Saying it's not going to happen without a second thought about it is pretty stupid, if you ask me.
edit: shpankey, stop editing your posts after you post them. It implies to me you're changing your opinion after you read what you've written.
shpankey
not an idiot
I edited it 22 minutes before you posted this, so you were responding to the final version... and I only edit usually to fix spelling and correct grammar and to sometimes add a line or two for clarification. My point always stays the same.WindyMan said:
As for your point in the rest of your post, I simply don't agree. I've made my opinion and you've disagreed. I'll leave it at that. Time will tell.
EDIT: I just edited this to change the part I bolded above (22) which I had incorectly calculated initially as 16.
Musashi Wins!
FLAWLESS VICTOLY!
I really don't care, I'm perfectly willing to support our new REVOLUTION MASTERS if they do something better than past experience shows but I would suggest picking a less hackneyed and interesting article for a launching point next time. Carry on!