of course, the issue becomes players using the bowser car to run people the fuck over, blood splattered all over the hood
nintendo ain't gonna do it
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Nintendo Switch Presentation - January 12th
- Thread starter robotrock
- Start date
of course, the issue becomes players using the bowser car to run people the fuck over, blood splattered all over the hood
nintendo ain't gonna do it
I Wanna Be The Guy
U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
That's not an issue. At all. Nintendo doesn't give a fuck about any supposed sqeaky clean image. That's just something people say. Nintendo would kill to have GTA and kill to have a version of GTA V with Nintendo exclusive content like that. They wouldn't be dumb enough to say no. Rockstar could decide to include an extra mission where Mario is fucking Princess Peach and Luigi comes in and beats Mario over the head with a baseball bat in a cutscene. Nintendo still wouldn't say no. Kid friendly image be damned. It's GTA.of course, the issue becomes players using the bowser car to run people the fuck over, blood splattered all over the hood
nintendo ain't gonna do it
Rockstar are the obstacle here. Not Nintendo.
Skittzo0413
Member
of course, the issue becomes players using the bowser car to run people the fuck over, blood splattered all over the hood
nintendo ain't gonna do it
Yeah, like the above poster said, this may have been true (or at least the perception) before Bayonetta, but now you have Bayonetta dressed up like Princess Peach ripping apart angels with massive amounts of blood.
I don't think they'd care about Bowser's car if they let that happen.
I'm playing Kid Icarus right now on New 3DS, it's really a good game, it's just a shame the lack of a second circle pad made the gameplay, especially the landing parts really annoying to play some times, a new Kid Icarus on Switch with finally the right controls and all the goodness which is already into the 3DS version would be awesome, the lack of 3D would be bad though, i think it has the best 3D effect on 3DS with Mario 3D land, but on the other side a Switch version could replace that with awesome graphics quality thanks to the way more powerful hardware
Schnozberry
Member
How much you want to bet on this?
Jon Carter
Member
Think of all the consoles that would sell! It could be dozens!
I Wanna Be The Guy
U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
60,000 rupees and 400 gold coins.
lol
yes nintendo wants gta
no nintendo does not want to damage the mario brand.
mario as a lifelong brand is worth more than 1 port.
I Wanna Be The Guy
U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
A Mario cameo in GTA isn't going to damage the Mario brand.
Glass Rebel
Member
seek help
Hell, Bowser even helps Bayonetta by punishing angels
I Wanna Be The Guy
U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
Scenes where a character fucks someone? Check. Baseball bat beatings/violent shit in general? Check. These are things already in GTA. All I did was insert Nintendo characters in to the game scenario with an extreme example to make a point. Don't be so dramatic.
no way
I think the difference is in scale. bayonetta is as niche as niche could be. bayonetta wears peach's dress and kills a bunch of demons, about 50 people see it and 2 websites report on it.
if nintendo released a switch version of gta with playable mario drinking gasoline and fucking peach raw i'm pretty sure it would make national news and be on every website on the planet. not sure nintendo would be ok with that.
but I do think there's a happy medium! trevor being able to wear a "plumber outfit" overalls with a red shirt underneath as an exclusive to switch would be cool. zelda masks for when the characters need to do heists. stuff like that.
I just hope nintendo realizes how important GTA is. 70 million sales is no joke.
Glass Rebel
Member
these are demonic thoughts my friend
theangrypirate
Member
GTA V just hit 70 million copies sold without Nintendo. Everyone that owns a Nintendo also owns a PS4/Xbone or PC. What possible motivation does Rockstar have to spend R&D porting GTA to Switch? ARM is a different beast than x86. It's just not going to happen. There is no chance they will spend any money porting to a different architecture to a console that will most likely sell like the Wii U. Even if it sells twice as well as the Wii U it still wouldn't be worth it because thats still a pretty low install base and most Nintendo owners Have another device to play non Nintendo games on.
I Wanna Be The Guy
U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
Mario outfits and Nintendo themed vehicles would obviously be the extra Nintendo content if any content were to occur. My example was clearly extreme and not something that would ever happen, but yeah GTA is very important and I think Nintendo would do just about anything to get it.
Reptars Revenge
Member
Show us your browser history haha.
I Wanna Be The Guy
U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
Perhaps, but I was just trying to come up with the most over the top scenario possible.
ShockingAlberto
Member
There's a kernel of a point here before you went too far and it became real dumb.
BronzeWolf
Banned
Nintendo is extremely careful with their IPs.
Just reading that GTA thing hurts
Just reading that GTA thing hurts
MisterHero
Super Member
Nintendo refs in GTA might not be that far off. Of course they'd be strict uses, but lots of kids play GTA too.
ShockingAlberto
Member
Maintaining the Mario IP is like 1000x more valuable to Nintendo than getting GTA on the system. If that scene were a dealbreaker, Nintendo would walk away.
GTA does not come to Nintendo systems because the time spent working on it would not be worth it. They wouldn't lose money, but that time could have been spent on something making more money. That's it. That's the issue. And it will never, ever change.
GTA does not come to Nintendo systems because the time spent working on it would not be worth it. They wouldn't lose money, but that time could have been spent on something making more money. That's it. That's the issue. And it will never, ever change.
KratosEnergyDrink
Member
Funny, but to be honest. Mario IP is much more worth than GTA. Nintendo would never damage it for such GTA nonsense.
Everyone, please be excited, because I'm bringing a huge megaton in this thread :
http://nintendoeverything.com/cube-life-island-survival-hd-heading-to-switch/
Cube Life Island Survival is heading to the Switch ! Yahoo !
http://nintendoeverything.com/cube-life-island-survival-hd-heading-to-switch/
Cube Life Island Survival is heading to the Switch ! Yahoo !
I don't know if that's actually true anymore, believe it or not. At least at this time.
The amount of money Rockstar has made off GTA V sales and online DLC alone is unfathomable.
Sure Trevor isn't going to be popping up at any Olympic closing ceremonies any time soon, but I'm thinking strictly in terms of dollars here.
Skittzo0413
Member
I'll admit I only skimmed through his post and missed the... unpleasant hyperbole, but costumes is essentially what I was talking about. And Mario themed cars/karts.
DecoReturns
Member
I still think Mario is more valuable, its easier for them license and whatnot.
If not, they got Pokemon at least.
We dont know how this system will perform, predicting it will sell like the Wii U this early on is just stupid, especially with how different Nintendo has been handling things. I personally don't really care weather GTAV gets a port, but if they wanted to, they probably could without much issue. Weather this is currently worth doing is another discussion.
Im not much of a tech guy, but I do know that the CPU being ARM shouldn't be an issue for ports, we've had plenty of reports that this is the easiest platform to port to that Nintendo's ever made. They've even had Nvidia create the API for the system. Furthermore, we've also had reports from LCGeek (someone who has been consistently correct with her leaks since the Gamecube) that the CPU performance is actually going to be more powerful than the PS4 and XB1, and that report was likely from an early devkit.
Another thing that annoys me is the assumption that Nintendo platforms will only ever have nintendo fans on them, thus games like GTAV will never sell. If Nintendo gets their way with this system, there will be a wider audience of people on this platform beyond diehard Nintendo fans. That's their goal, they're marketing this to more than just Nintendo fans, so if it is successful to capture the audience that they are targeting (likely gamers aged 18-35 demographic) a game like GTAV should do alright on it.
ShockingAlberto
Member
It is worth far more to Nintendo than GTA.
Nintendo will make some money off a GTA on their system. A decent bit, probably.
They need Mario for more than just games at this point. And those games by themselves probably make more for them than GTA on their system would.
Schnozberry
Member
They aren't going to use a character from GTA to build a theme park, so sell kids cereal, or put on cans of Coca Cola, but I can envision them licensing Mario out to all of those things. The Universal Studios deal sort of proves that.
If you're talking about selling software, then I agree GTA is far more profitable right now. But your Mom already understands Mario. He's universal. You probably don't want to have to explain Trevor to anybody.
Sorry, I was talking about the GTA franchise as a whole vs Mario as a whole, not to Nintendo specifically.
Of course upholding the Mario character and brand is worth more to Nintendo than getting a GTA V port. They should really do both, though
ShockingAlberto
Member
I suspect that, brand vs. brand, Mario is likely worth way more since he is more versatile. GTA could get a movie or a ride. They probably can't get a cereal or a role in a Disney movie.Sorry, I was talking about the GTA franchise as a whole vs Mario as a whole, not to Nintendo specifically.
Of course upholding the Mario character and brand is worth more to Nintendo than getting a GTA V port. They should really do both, though
MisterHero
Super Member
Lol i made a costume reminiscent of Mario's costume fron the SMB movie in GTAOnline.
There doesn't have to be a serious crossover, but at least an acknowledgement that they both exist as neighboring videogame dimensions.
And GTA takes inspiration from Nintendo games anyways. To have them in the same place and not interact is just a weird existential thing to think about.
Imagine if Steven Ogg's voice reacted to finding himself in Mario Kart (within GTA). He doesn't have to curse or be violent. In fact, deflecting his natural responses would be even funnier.
I don't really want it to happen, it's just fun to contemplate.
There doesn't have to be a serious crossover, but at least an acknowledgement that they both exist as neighboring videogame dimensions.
And GTA takes inspiration from Nintendo games anyways. To have them in the same place and not interact is just a weird existential thing to think about.
Imagine if Steven Ogg's voice reacted to finding himself in Mario Kart (within GTA). He doesn't have to curse or be violent. In fact, deflecting his natural responses would be even funnier.
I don't really want it to happen, it's just fun to contemplate.
Herb Alpert
Banned
OMG
If Nintendo gave that much of a fuck about GTA they would've made a system that would actually have a fighting chance of getting GTA.
I mean obviously if R* wants to bring V to Switch, Nintendo would be thrilled I'm sure. But the idea that Nintendo would do anything to get GTA on the platform is laughable.
I mean obviously if R* wants to bring V to Switch, Nintendo would be thrilled I'm sure. But the idea that Nintendo would do anything to get GTA on the platform is laughable.
theangrypirate
Member
You bring up good points but I think we can predict Nintendo Switch sales with better accuracy than you think. Every home console (remember Nintendo themselves are saying this is a home console first and foremost) has sold worse than the previous generation home console. The only exception is the Wii. Its more likely the downward trend will continue than not.
The point I was trying to make was that its not a simple port like going from PS4 -> XBone. The architecture is different and there is a significant amount or work in making the game work when switching from x86 which is PC standard, and ARM, which is phone/tablet standard. Even if the power levels are the same there is still a lot of work to port. This combined with the fact that the GTA sells so good without being on Nintendo makes a really hard case for Rockstar to consider porting it. The extra dev costs will outweigh the potential sales and they won't do it.
Now that we have a lot of the info gaps filled in, price becomes the key. Nintendo's got an interesting concept and they have the unified pipeline to let them get a healthier release schedule, so price is the last barrier to the console being a success.
And if it is successful, sure GTA will want to go on there, if you can fulfill the promise of seamless integration between GTA at home and on the go, that is, if the concept of the Switch itself catches on.
It all comes down to the tools and how well they work. I don't think it's gonna be that hard to port from one to the other. It's nothing like the situation with the Wii U. It'll have a modern architecture and a decent amount of power to back that up. Whether they want to bother with it is a different story altogether.
This argument is silly, you're basically saying that there is a trend of Nintendo systems selling worse and worse every generation, but completely ignoring the circumstances of these generations. You're focusing on the conclusion, and ignoring the cause.
That isn't how things work. Every generation Nintendo has majorly fucked something up with either their console's design, courting 3rd parties, advertising etc which has led to gamers and 3rd parties going elsewhere.
For the N64 it was using cartridges over CDs, making it more expensive to put games on the platform, devs were also more restricted due to the cartridges limitations. This led to key 3rd parties like Square going over to PS One, leaving the N64 with mostly Nintendo titles.
For Gamecube Nintendo finally went with discs, but they decided to go with Mini DVDs, once again restricting devs because of the small size of the disks. The lunchbox design also came off as "kiddy" to many. It also lacked a DVD player like the PS2 which was a big deal at the time.
Wii Captured lightning in a bottle but sacrificed things like Power, storage, HD, building a good online experience and having an all inclusive experience like the PS360, thus it wasn't very attractive for the likes of Rockstar to put GTA on it.
With Wii U Nintendo was arrogant from the Wii and expected to get that Wii audience back and a slice of the PS360 pie. Problem was they wanted the core gamers, but did no work to get them on their platform beyond releasing an HD system. They marketed it to a casual audience that had long left, and expected games like Arkham Knight to sell on it, when they did nothing to make the platform itself attractive to that crowd. This thing was bulky, ugly, and once again "kiddy" looking. Meanwhile, months later, Sony and Microsoft release systems where you can actually discern a jump in graphical power from the first glance, and (Sony at least) directly targeted the audience that would make their platforms successful.
With Switch, Nintendo are showing all the signs that they have learned from their massive failure with the Wii U. Everything about the Switch trailer show that Nintendo are finally listening after generations of being stubborn and out of touch.
Like I said, I'm not a tech guy, but people like Matt are clearly saying that this thing will have no problems getting ports from PS4/XB1/PC titles. If you're going to make a claim like this, please specifically tell me why an x86 title is hard to port over to an ARM based console. Like don't give me general stuff like "the architectures are different", please be specific.
Contrary to your bizarre belief, not everyone owns a PS4/Xbox/gaming PC. I've been happy with the portables, a tablet and a WiiU for years.
Not that GTA will ever be on Switch, but a funny way to do it would be to allow you to buy a NES Mini and play the original Super Mario brothers inside GTA. Game within a game.
theangrypirate
Member
I think a lot of people would look at an ARM based console as a huge misstep when the entire gaming industry (besides mobile) is x86. Also the fact that Nintendo is doing exactly the same thing as the Wii U as far as being behind current gen consoles with respect to power as another bad sign. See below chart:
This is a 30 year trend that is impossible to dismiss.
Fundamental difference between ARM and x86 is ARM is RISC and x86 is CISC.
Complex Instruction Set Computer (CISC) processors, like the x86, have a rich instruction set capable of doing complex things with a single instruction. Such processors often have significant amounts of internal logic that decode machine instructions to sequences of internal operations (microcode).
RISC architectures, in contrast, have a smaller number of more general purpose instructions, that might be executed with significantly fewer transistors, making the silicon cheaper and more power efficient. Like other RISC architectures, ARM cores have a large number of general-purpose registers and many instructions execute in a single cycle. It has simple addressing modes, where all load/store addresses can be determined from register contents and instruction fields.
Still with me? Both architectures are capable. RISC is better suited for low power consumption CISC is better suited for high power computation. RISC is common for phones/tablets CISC is common for PC/Console gaming. There is a lot of work that needs to be done to convert a game from running on a CISC architecture to RISC. Developers need to write code to make things work the same way on the different chips. This takes time and developers are expensive. When EA is making a game for PS4 they don't have to spend a lot of time to make it work on XBONE or PC because the processor they are running on are fundamentally the same. When they decide whether or not to port to Nintendo or Tablet/Phone they have to decide if spending a bunch of time and/or money to make it run on fundamentally different processor is worth how much money they will make off of the sales. With a low install base this will be Wii U all over again, it won't be financially viable to spend money on writing the code to convert the game. Thats about as simple as a way as i can think to explain it.
A trend is not a law. Not only does it completely and conveniently dismisses the Wii as an anomaly, but it also implies that there is an inherent cause in the market and/or within Nintendo that prevents them from breaking it.
People arguing Nintendo can't/won't be more successful because of that trend are essentially saying "well, these things have happened in the past, so they will happen in the future." That's a logical fallacy if I ever saw one. At best, it's lazy reasoning.
What a ridiculous "analysis".
People arguing Nintendo can't/won't be more successful because of that trend are essentially saying "well, these things have happened in the past, so they will happen in the future." That's a logical fallacy if I ever saw one. At best, it's lazy reasoning.
What a ridiculous "analysis".
ARM was a wise choice in part BECAUSE it's what is ubiquitous in mobile. Almost every developer out there is developing on it - including guys who might not be on consoles - and they will be able to hit the ground running Day 1 with Switch.
Nintendo will never get the likes of EA or Rockstar on board because their ecosystem is different than the ecosystem that Sony/MS are trying to build. And that's okay because we don't need a third PS4/Xbone.
If it works Switch can build its own ecosystem. I could see a lot of indies and Japanese developers doing well on it, leaving PS4/Xbone as the AAA platforms.
theangrypirate
Member
Slow down there turbo, nobody said a trend was a law. Looking only at the chart anybody with half a brain can see the sales for a nintendo console over the entire history of their business are worse than the previous generation. The lone exception is the Wii. In statistics/econ you can determine the average slope over all the data points in this chart to predict where the next data point will be. Its called science and if you don't trust thats fine there are plenty of people who don't believe in it. Statistics are math and they have to to with probabilities. This data shows that Nintendo's next console "probably" wont do well. There is still a chance it will be wildly successful like the Wii. I wouldn't bet on it and the people who make money off of these things aren't betting on it either. Thats why Nintendo stocks fell after the announcement.
Except, this is not a normal successor to the WiiU. It's as much a successor to the 3DS. And this time, developers that didn't want to develop for WiiU due to the small userbase might see more appeal. And developers that didn't develop for 3DS due to not being performant enough, might also see the appeal.
theangrypirate
Member
Thats a good point. There are plenty of reasons to be optimistic about the potential of the Switch IMO. Selling gangbusters right out of the gate is essential to getting third party support and third party support is essential to this thing doing well.