Mr. Lemming
Member
RevenantKioku said:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
System Fandom -- Why, again?
- Thread starter DDayton
- Start date
I started to dislike Nintendo in the middle of the N64 generation, aside OOT and MM and Paper Mario they released a lot of rehashed material. This generation was like an extention of the 2nd half of the N64 era, and worse. I'd like to see them change in the near future or be eradicated as far as consoles go.
Microsoft's been in the arena for a much shorter time than sony and already have a better first party output, and they seem to care a lot about their Developers (DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS!). They have an excellent suite of tools and provided some nice and very welcome changes this generation.
Sony is hit and miss. It seems as if they are nonchalant with a lot of developers and games but their eurpoean and Cali studios are great. I love the Eyetoy and the karaoke games. They're really perhepiral minded, but to a fault. The HDD is barely supported and is a really bad addon, their online strategy and lineup is not as good as their competitor's, and their first party titles have really been nothing to gloat about as of late. They're very marketshare-minded and it shows.
Microsoft's been in the arena for a much shorter time than sony and already have a better first party output, and they seem to care a lot about their Developers (DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS!). They have an excellent suite of tools and provided some nice and very welcome changes this generation.
Sony is hit and miss. It seems as if they are nonchalant with a lot of developers and games but their eurpoean and Cali studios are great. I love the Eyetoy and the karaoke games. They're really perhepiral minded, but to a fault. The HDD is barely supported and is a really bad addon, their online strategy and lineup is not as good as their competitor's, and their first party titles have really been nothing to gloat about as of late. They're very marketshare-minded and it shows.
seismologist
Banned
DopeyFish said:
You really think MS is gonna let Bungie do something other than Halo sequels?
SolidSnakex
Member
DavidDayton said:
Sony and MS. Nintendo's main (and I think only way) of making money is through gaming, so they've gotta keep up what they're doing. Sony and MS still have other ways of making money, and if they aren't developing their own console anymore, there's a chance they won't put as much focus into gaming anymore.
TekunoRobby
Tag of Excellence
Bungie: Hey we've got a new product to show you, it's a brand new type of gaming experience and it really pushes the boundaries between reality and fiction with our amazing new graphics engine. The best part? It's already done so all you have to do is publush it!seismologist said:
Microsoft: You remember what we said would happen to your women and children the last time we had a meeting?
Bungie: Yes, *sob* *sob* We'll continue working on Halo 3.
Reggie said it best @ E3 to me. Sony wants to capture every one of our entertainment dollars and stamp their name all over it. Microsoft wants their operating system to control everything so that they can somehow make money on someone elses work. Nintendo, surely, wants a big chunk of our money, but their goals aren't as widespread or controlling as the other two...and in the video games market they remain about *gasp* video games.
Sony took what Sega did, amplified it to make Nintendo *look* inferior, relied heavily on image/marketting, made some lucky moves (at the right time against Nintendo's bad moves) and popularized gaming into the mainstream. Microsoft is poorly trying to carbon copy what Sony has done...which to me, is boring. Nintendo...is Nintendo, their goal is to stay afloat amoung two behemoths at the sacrifice of their image...which is what this is all about.
How many people have access to online gaming...I still don't? How many people, who can get to broadband access, are willing to even pay for it? It's all about image...really has little to to do with the whole picture it's just bragging rights...like NASA & Reagan's Star Wars during the "cold war"...big wastes of money, mean little to nothing to the big picture and for what "look what we can do...we're America, bow down, we can go into outer space, wooo, worship us"! Online gaming will someday be more widespread accessable and therefore be more neccessary, but right now it's just a PR spin pissing contest...I realize I'm in the minority of this argument here, but think outside the box...there's TONS more gamers out there then those of us in the minority who go to gaming forums/websites dailey...sure WE know about online gaming and some of us experience it, but that's like a minority inside a minority. Those gamers who aren't into gaming as much as us either don't know much about online gaming, can't get access to it, can't afford it, or simply don't care about it at this point.
The point of this is to display an example of image...Nintendo has a poor image partly 'cos they're not doing what the other guys are (online)...it's hurting their mindshare, it's even effecting their sales...but it's not killing them or hurting their bottom line as alot of people seem to suggest. It would probably hurt them more to get into online gaming 'cos of the capital they would have to invest into it...and for what...to reach a minoity within a minority? Their image has been broken for a while now, before GAMECUBE even came out...this isn't going to help it even if they had done it sooner...in fact I can hear the naysayers spinning it now saying how Nintendo is too small to lose that much money on online gaming bla bla bla. It seems no matter what Nintendo does they're criticized...they're criticized for doing a new type of innovative game and they're criticized for making the same kind of "rehash" game. I don't think there's any other company in any other business sector as highly criticized as Nintendo by their fans/naysayers...it only goes to show that once in each one of our geeky lil' hearts Nintendo had touched us...and it's like some of us want it to return to the way it was and others just want Nintendo to go third party so they don't have to buy another system to play their games. How come people can't just accept the fact that neither are gonna happen for a long time!?! Nintendo won't be going third party, nor will they be "on top" like they once were...they're somewhere in the middle, why is that so hard to accept?
Sony took what Sega did, amplified it to make Nintendo *look* inferior, relied heavily on image/marketting, made some lucky moves (at the right time against Nintendo's bad moves) and popularized gaming into the mainstream. Microsoft is poorly trying to carbon copy what Sony has done...which to me, is boring. Nintendo...is Nintendo, their goal is to stay afloat amoung two behemoths at the sacrifice of their image...which is what this is all about.
How many people have access to online gaming...I still don't? How many people, who can get to broadband access, are willing to even pay for it? It's all about image...really has little to to do with the whole picture it's just bragging rights...like NASA & Reagan's Star Wars during the "cold war"...big wastes of money, mean little to nothing to the big picture and for what "look what we can do...we're America, bow down, we can go into outer space, wooo, worship us"! Online gaming will someday be more widespread accessable and therefore be more neccessary, but right now it's just a PR spin pissing contest...I realize I'm in the minority of this argument here, but think outside the box...there's TONS more gamers out there then those of us in the minority who go to gaming forums/websites dailey...sure WE know about online gaming and some of us experience it, but that's like a minority inside a minority. Those gamers who aren't into gaming as much as us either don't know much about online gaming, can't get access to it, can't afford it, or simply don't care about it at this point.
The point of this is to display an example of image...Nintendo has a poor image partly 'cos they're not doing what the other guys are (online)...it's hurting their mindshare, it's even effecting their sales...but it's not killing them or hurting their bottom line as alot of people seem to suggest. It would probably hurt them more to get into online gaming 'cos of the capital they would have to invest into it...and for what...to reach a minoity within a minority? Their image has been broken for a while now, before GAMECUBE even came out...this isn't going to help it even if they had done it sooner...in fact I can hear the naysayers spinning it now saying how Nintendo is too small to lose that much money on online gaming bla bla bla. It seems no matter what Nintendo does they're criticized...they're criticized for doing a new type of innovative game and they're criticized for making the same kind of "rehash" game. I don't think there's any other company in any other business sector as highly criticized as Nintendo by their fans/naysayers...it only goes to show that once in each one of our geeky lil' hearts Nintendo had touched us...and it's like some of us want it to return to the way it was and others just want Nintendo to go third party so they don't have to buy another system to play their games. How come people can't just accept the fact that neither are gonna happen for a long time!?! Nintendo won't be going third party, nor will they be "on top" like they once were...they're somewhere in the middle, why is that so hard to accept?
Musashi Wins!
FLAWLESS VICTOLY!
DrGAKMAN said:
OH TEH NOBILITY!!! I SALUTE THEE!
It's too bad it doesn't translate into more compelling games since they are ALL ABOUT THE GAMES!
DrGAKMAN said:
I don't understand this frame of thinking.
Who gives a shit if there are people out there don't understand online gaming? As a gamer I could care less.
Point is, Sony and M$ are taking a risk and pleasing gamers and critics by going online, while Nintendo is in the background appearing stubborn. That's what hurting their image.
No one complains about Halo2 and GT4 having online play. No one would complain if there was online play in Metroid Prime 2 or Pikmin 2.
Going online could only be seen as a positive from a gamers point of view.
SolidSnakex
Member
DrGAKMAN said:
This is what Nintendo was trying to convince people with when the GC was launching this gen, and as it's been shown in sales, people don't believe them. They want money just as much as Sony and MS does. They don't care about games anymore than Sony or MS do. Sony and MS take shots about not caring about gaming because they're giving people more for their money. Is it really so bad that for 50 dollars more than a GC you can go out and get a system that can play both PSone and PS2 games, has a DC player, network adapter and an extra game? That's all Sony and MS are doing. It's what the majority want. They're doing this but it doesn't mean they don't care about games.
What really annoys people about Sony and MS is exactly that though, they care more about what the mainstream thinks than what "hardcores" think. This gives some the idea that they don't care about games then. They still do, they just care about different games.
I'd say proof that they care about games is because they're willing to go into something like online gaming, which right now really isn't all that profitable. But it's what some gamers want and Sony and MS are willing to give it to them even if it means they're going to take a financial hit.
Insertia said:
So Nintendo officially adding online to Mario Kart would've helped their image? Maybe to the minority within the minority. And maybe even to a lesser of an extent to those who still can't get/afford online gaming. But I think, while it might be nice to boast about having something the "big boys" also have, it makes little difference. They still can't change the image that GAMECUBE is a toy-like purple box that plays PokeMon games to the mainstream. Adding online won't help them in that effect...so I think there's no point in adding it 'cos the only possitives would be pissing contest "look what I can do" bragging rights & maybe making some gamers with a taste for online gaming happy. To me, the negatives/non-possitives greatly outweigh the possitives:
-money to set up the network
-more delays due to adding online features
-testing, troubleshooting, cheaters, problems with network games
-problems with pirates using the broadband adaptor to copy games (it is a problem with GAMECUBE, but not so much since they didn't make that many broadband adaptors to begin with)
-not being able to reach people 'cos of inaccessibility to broadband
-even if they can get access to it, alot of people still can't afford it
Yeah it would be "cool" to have online gaming now, but at what costs? I'd rather wait until it's more easily accessible & affordable as a Nintendo gamer or even if I were running Nintendo myself. And really...will adding online to a couple of games make 3RD party developers flock back to Nintendo, will it suddenly make Nintendo cool, will it change the fact that the industry and the consumer made up in their mind what GAMECUBE was before it even launched??? No!
And that was my point...sure online is important, to a minority within a minority...but, the big picture is it's just a PR ploy the competition uses to make Nintendo's image look bad 'cos they're not doing it. But you know, Nintendo did make it available otherwise we wouldn't have PSO or Warp Pipe for online gaming for GAMECUBE...so if people *really* feel they need it...it's there with some games...but even these cheap routes still aren't attractive/popular enough to make Nintendo stand up and say: "we gotta do this NOW" or else they'd be making an effort to.
I'd say Nintendo is stupid/stubborn if they take the same approach to online gaming next generation (where I think it'll make more sense to) as they did with this generation...but right now it'd be too wasteful/late to try anything now.
The topic is "console fandom" and I was merely using online gaming as a point to show that image means alot to this market. Image has been used since the Sega day to attract console fans and thus console fandom. Sony & MS *look* "cooler" or "better" than Nintendo not just 'cos they're doing online while Nintendo appears to sit idley by...but, again will Nintendo going online with GAMECUBE suddenly turn things around? No...it'll just be a waste of time/money/resources just for the sake of saving a bit of image...pfft, Nintendo doesn't play that game...they're a business first and right now it's just not worth it...so they sacrifice image for a bit, waaaa...they don't *look* "cool" waaa...you know what, they never really have looked "cool" to the mainstream, even when they were "on top" so what, big deal. If you want Nintendo games and could give two shits about being "cool" or who has a good image, go for Nintendo...if you buy games/systems 'cos it's the "cool" thing to do then go for Sony...or if you want a basic carbon copy of Sony minus Japanese games plus Tom Clansey & Halo games then go for X-BOX. That's how I break down the console "wars". Two guys measuring their penis's and another guy in the corner who could care less about being "cool" or not. Nintendo, I CHOOSE YOU!
Late Stage Marxist
Member
Same reason I bought a Fender guitar. I genuinely believe their products and services are superior to their competitors'. Is there something wrong with brand loyalty? I don't think so.
As you said, it's too late for the Gamecube! Adding online play at this stage in the game isn't going to do a damn thing for Nintendo, that's true, but if they had really approached it seriously a couple of years ago things could have been different. Online play is certainly not a make or break addition here, but it is one of the many things that the competition has over Nintendo. You can't deny that it may very well have aided them. However, there just isn't any point in trying for it now...it's too late.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
Four player games and fast loading times for everyone!DavidDayton said:
Online now is like having a disc system add-on in 1992. A bit too early and costly. I think it will be next gen or the one after until it really grabs hold of the market. What Nintendo has to do is find a way to offer it the way Iwata says he wants to- at no additional cost to Nintendo or the consumer. They've been toying around with forms of online gaming for a while, I wonder if they'll find what they're looking for in the Revolution.
SolidSnakex said:
It sorta annoys me that gaming has become mainstreamized/Hollywoodized/popularized thanks mainly to Playstationization, but I can't stop/change it. I was into games way before it became "cool" to be into games. I realize that to most people Sony is THE choice for games 'cos not only does it get the best support and has the most games, but 'cos it has alot of exclussive games as well.
What bothers me is that people have to say that MS is somehow in the same league as Sony (when they're not even close) and completly ignore Nintendo 'cos of one factor...image. It's like image means everything. If this were a contest or an actual "war" Sony would be unstopable and there would be little to no point in competing if your goal is to beat them. But it isn't even a true contest anymore, it's all about image. X-BOX is barely ahead of Nintendo in most regions and is WAY behind Sony, but yet they're consided in solid (right behind Sony) 2ND while Nintendo is seen as the (dead last, struggling, about to drop out of the race) 3RD...and why? Image! When in actuality that's so far from the truth. And why does MS have that much better an image and Nintendo has such a poor image? MS aimed to be a carbon copy of the current leader while Nintendo aimed for something different. Nintendo's lil' purple toy (this isn't my opinion, but it IS the opinion of most of the mainstream consumer) looked like a joke compared to the competition...it isn't about the games, it's about image.
Nowhere do I say PS2 or X-BOX don't have good games or Nintendo has better games...and nowhere do I say Nintendo's competition cares less about games...it's just obvious that Nintendo's competition cares alot more about being "cool" and their perception than Nintendo does. Maybe that's why I like Nintendo so much, they don't care about appeasing the masses and this goes back me being into gaming before is was a cool thing to be into...it's like Nintendo was the same back then as it is right now. Sure I'd like them to be more accepted and have a better image, but not at the sacrifice of them copying what the competition does and losing money to the point where they're not even around anymore.
If this is an image war then sobeit...Nintendo has lost it and it's all over for them. But there's more to it then that, this is a business and at that Nintendo is in first place at making money in gaming. But why can't the Nintendo fans and the Nintendo haters just accept that Nintendo is (in this console "war") somewhere in the middle? They're not "on top", but they're also not about to die off either. They're successful, they may not look it, but the poor image won't stop it from being true. Why does it matter so much who's in first, second or third? Bragging rights? It doesn't make one better than another 'cos every person has different tastes and opinions...why does it have to be this grande pissing contest? Why can't people just be happy with what they got? Nintendo isn't gonna get back "on top" any time soon...nor are they gonna die off...get over it.
Well if Reggie and the rest of the marketing guys are going to continue forward with what they have right now, Nintendo's going to be heading for a cooler image, most definitely. I bet that Revolution, when it's released, will have a sleek design that "everyone" will think is cool looking (they've done it before). I'm also willing to bet that Nintendo's going to have more games to stun people, maybe a Sonic & Mario platformer game which would benefit both Sega and Nintendo greatly. Perhaps a Super Smash Bros. 3 featuring Sega franchise characters. Metroid will definitely be back, and I think Zelda, if it does go back to being cel-shaded, will have a more grown-up look about it (new Zelda's art in a cel-shaded game would be awesome). They'll need to get that "HOLY CRAP, I NEED THIS NEW NINTENDO GAME" fan back like they had during the Nintendo 64 days in the US, and in the SNES days in Japan. They wont do it with Super Mario Sunshine 2 or The Wind Waker 2, as good as both may be.
trippingmartian said:
Brand loyalty is great and probably a big reason why I'm only for Nintendo. People think I'm crazy, but I only buy Armitron watches, Reebok shoes...I love COKE and hate Pepsi...Most all of my electronics are Panasonic or Philips/Magnavox...I've been a proud user/supporter of peoplepc & DirecTV for years...Cartoon Network & Vh1 Classic are my two favorite channels and I have a loyalty to Blockbuster since they came to this area years & years ago and I work there today...FunCoLand & Suncoast are my favorite places to shop in the mall...I mean I have TONS of brand loyalty...I'm crazy like that.
SolidSnakex
Member
"X-BOX is barely ahead of Nintendo in most regions and is WAY behind Sony, but yet they're consided in solid (right behind Sony) 2ND while Nintendo is seen as the (dead last, struggling, about to drop out of the race) 3RD...and why?"
I don't think MS is a solid 2nd. But I guess the reason some people put them there is because they show no signs of changing that position and Nintendo shows no signs of taking it. MS is increasing their system sales over the GC each month now, the Xbox is actually increasing in sales monthly while the GC is decreasing (which wouldn't be bad if the decrease didn't have them going under 100k).
"Sure I'd like them to be more accepted and have a better image, but not at the sacrifice of them copying what the competition does and losing money to the point where they're not even around anymore."
They could do that without either of those happening. But they won't because they're too proud to admit that they're wrong. And by going online now for example, they'd be admitting that they were wrong. Ofcourse sometimes they have no choice but to do exactly that, when they chose carts over CD's.
Nintendo could fix their image by making more adult oriented games. This wouldn't mean that they could no longer make the Pikmin's or Animal Crossings, they could. But they'd also have games that appeal to gamers who don't want those games. This is the difference between them and the other companies, they don't try to expand on their existing fanbase anymore. They're just sticking with it. Sony's expanding on their fanbase and MS is steadily building theirs.
I don't think MS is a solid 2nd. But I guess the reason some people put them there is because they show no signs of changing that position and Nintendo shows no signs of taking it. MS is increasing their system sales over the GC each month now, the Xbox is actually increasing in sales monthly while the GC is decreasing (which wouldn't be bad if the decrease didn't have them going under 100k).
"Sure I'd like them to be more accepted and have a better image, but not at the sacrifice of them copying what the competition does and losing money to the point where they're not even around anymore."
They could do that without either of those happening. But they won't because they're too proud to admit that they're wrong. And by going online now for example, they'd be admitting that they were wrong. Ofcourse sometimes they have no choice but to do exactly that, when they chose carts over CD's.
Nintendo could fix their image by making more adult oriented games. This wouldn't mean that they could no longer make the Pikmin's or Animal Crossings, they could. But they'd also have games that appeal to gamers who don't want those games. This is the difference between them and the other companies, they don't try to expand on their existing fanbase anymore. They're just sticking with it. Sony's expanding on their fanbase and MS is steadily building theirs.
For me it's not the fact that it's the weakest, but the fact that it could be so much stronger. The hardware design of PS2 is really fucked up. And that's what makes most PS2 and multiplatform games look ugly: Low res textures and bad image quality (aliasing, shimmering).Schafer said:
I seriously hate the "PS2 look" many current games have.
AniHawk said:
Exactly. Nintendo no longer does that. With several exception, Nintendo has largely been trying to force their ideas or 'innovations' down gamers throat. They've failed.
Last gen with N64, Nintendo did more to cater to gamers wants. They gave us Goldeneye, Mario 64, OoT, and Mario Kart. It may not seem like it now, but at the time those were some pretty amazing titles that were considered must haves by pretty much everyone. With Gamecube they are no longer accommodating to gamers, just their fans. Sorry, but Donkey Konga, Pikmin, and Animal Crossing, as good as they may be, won't attract anyone that doesn't already own a Cube.
SolidSnakex
Member
segasonic said:
Hate the developers, not the system.
Gakman, even if you somewhere have a point, you suffer from console fandom like the casuals. The thing is, Sony is not in lead relying all on it's big genitals. If i was a "cool" that care for my image i would Sony or Microsoft of course. If i'm a hardcore and really go for games, i would choose Sony again. When you are mainstream, i mean really mainstream, maybe it's because you succeeded in pleasing both casuals and hardcores... exactly what Nintendo does not seem to be able to do.
You should see videogames from a pure egoistic and frigid stand point: You are a gamer with tastes and Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo are there to please you. Your money VS the entertainment it gives you. Care not about anything else. No console fandom but maybe game fandom or elements of a game fandom (being closer to your tastes).
Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft don't give a shit about you. They want your cash. They want the money and they will never care for you. And no Nintendo isn't on a different blablablabla... they are around a fucking table right now thinking on how to get your fucking wallet and that's all. If they want your money, they better give you what you want. And only buy quality and what's really worth it.
This is somewhere my definition of a mature gamer. No console or compagny fandom.
Carefully spend his money - Makes the gaming world better.
Console wars, my Nintendo, your Sony, my cool, my image ---- who gives a shit really?
You should see videogames from a pure egoistic and frigid stand point: You are a gamer with tastes and Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo are there to please you. Your money VS the entertainment it gives you. Care not about anything else. No console fandom but maybe game fandom or elements of a game fandom (being closer to your tastes).
Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft don't give a shit about you. They want your cash. They want the money and they will never care for you. And no Nintendo isn't on a different blablablabla... they are around a fucking table right now thinking on how to get your fucking wallet and that's all. If they want your money, they better give you what you want. And only buy quality and what's really worth it.
This is somewhere my definition of a mature gamer. No console or compagny fandom.
Carefully spend his money - Makes the gaming world better.
Console wars, my Nintendo, your Sony, my cool, my image ---- who gives a shit really?
SolidSnakex:
"I don't think MS is a solid 2nd. But I guess the reason some people put them there is because they show no signs of changing that position and Nintendo shows no signs of taking it. MS is increasing their system sales over the GC each month now, the Xbox is actually increasing in sales monthly while the GC is decreasing (which wouldn't be bad if the decrease didn't have them going under 100k)."
You don't think they're a solid "right behind Sony" 2ND 'cos you're more realistic than most people. Most people however see them as 2ND 'cos they have a better image than 3RD place Nintendo. You're right about the "no signs of changing" in regard to MS's possition...with all their money/power/influence coupled with their better image people don't see them falling to Nintendo...and then add Halo 2 to the mix and yeah most people won't change that perception in their minds. But the reality is that Nintendo HAS been changing their advertising approach for the better, and while they don't anything Halo 2 or GTA:SA sized to go into the holiday season with I think they have a VERY strong lineup of games throughout the next year that shows that they have the stamina to finnish out the GAMECUBE's lifecycle a hell of alot better than they did with N64. It could be argued, with Xenon most likely coming next year, that X-BOX will dwindle in sales, marketshare and maybe even mindshare fairly quickly next year when it's all said and done as Xenon approaches which leaves Nintendo wide open for a strong finnish with their healthy lineup next year going into next generation. Ony time will tell there.
Solidsnakex:
"Nintendo could fix their image by making more adult oriented games. This wouldn't mean that they could no longer make the Pikmin's or Animal Crossings, they could. But they'd also have games that appeal to gamers who don't want those games. This is the difference between them and the other companies, they don't try to expand on their existing fanbase anymore. They're just sticking with it. Sony's expanding on their fanbase and MS is steadily building theirs."
Realistic Mature Zelda, Odama (not a strong game, but definatly not something "kiddie"), Resident Evil 4 exclussive, Advance Wars (more grown up flavor then most of their past "new" franchise efforts), Fire Emblem, Geist and who the hell knows what their new Tokyo studio is cooking up or what they've got for "Revolution". I just disagree with you there. They've taken their sweet time in getting there, but they're getting there and it'll start to stick...all conveiniantly next year...I think they're aiming for a STRONG finnish so that they can show gamers what to expect going into the next generation. They said themselves that this is the 4TH system they've managed on the back half of a console's cycle. This sorta goes with the above "strategy" against the X-BOX to Xenon transition battle plan they may be cooking up and may be their overall strategy...
AniHawk:
"Well if Reggie and the rest of the marketing guys are going to continue forward with what they have right now, Nintendo's going to be heading for a cooler image, most definitely. I bet that Revolution, when it's released, will have a sleek design that "everyone" will think is cool looking (they've done it before). I'm also willing to bet that Nintendo's going to have more games to stun people..."
I agree with this "stun" battle plan. Nintendo's E3 2003 pre-show...sucked to most people. Those same people were stunned by the 2004 show though. Nintendo's advertising for some games (Mario Sunshine) were horrid. They're advertising now, is almost stunning...it makes you think, is this the same Nintendo? Zelda's move to cel-shading really turned alot of people off. The "show stopper" of their 2004 pre-show wasn't the cel shaded WW2 we all expected...but instead a jaw dropping realistic Zelda. Iwata said only about a dozen people would clap for the Nintendo DS when it's unveiled. When it was finally unveiled everyone at the pre-show clapped and howled and there were about a dozen breath taking gasps. When people presented some dissatisfaction with the Nintendo DS's shell design...Nintendo presented a new sexy one. I'm sure there's other examples of this. People are *expecting* Nintendo to say/do/be one thing, but more recently they've been coming out and doing something else. And this is healing their bad image scars.
I think most people are expecting Nintendo's "Revolution" to be gimmicky, underpowered, look like a toy, have the same approach as GAMECUBE and be another kiddie game machine...but when it's unveiled I think people are gonna be shocked by a nice looking, powerful machine with games they DO want to play. I can see the stories now: "Nintendo's "Revolution" was unveiled today, and while most were expecting it to be the weakest of the three next generation machines and have a silly shell design with pastel colors we're surprized to say that this is a serious looking console every bit as capable as the "big boys"...could this be the industry veteran's Cinderella story?" This may have not been part of their plans initially, but they'll certainly use it to their advantage going into next years E3 and beyond I believe.
EDIT: spelling
"I don't think MS is a solid 2nd. But I guess the reason some people put them there is because they show no signs of changing that position and Nintendo shows no signs of taking it. MS is increasing their system sales over the GC each month now, the Xbox is actually increasing in sales monthly while the GC is decreasing (which wouldn't be bad if the decrease didn't have them going under 100k)."
You don't think they're a solid "right behind Sony" 2ND 'cos you're more realistic than most people. Most people however see them as 2ND 'cos they have a better image than 3RD place Nintendo. You're right about the "no signs of changing" in regard to MS's possition...with all their money/power/influence coupled with their better image people don't see them falling to Nintendo...and then add Halo 2 to the mix and yeah most people won't change that perception in their minds. But the reality is that Nintendo HAS been changing their advertising approach for the better, and while they don't anything Halo 2 or GTA:SA sized to go into the holiday season with I think they have a VERY strong lineup of games throughout the next year that shows that they have the stamina to finnish out the GAMECUBE's lifecycle a hell of alot better than they did with N64. It could be argued, with Xenon most likely coming next year, that X-BOX will dwindle in sales, marketshare and maybe even mindshare fairly quickly next year when it's all said and done as Xenon approaches which leaves Nintendo wide open for a strong finnish with their healthy lineup next year going into next generation. Ony time will tell there.
Solidsnakex:
"Nintendo could fix their image by making more adult oriented games. This wouldn't mean that they could no longer make the Pikmin's or Animal Crossings, they could. But they'd also have games that appeal to gamers who don't want those games. This is the difference between them and the other companies, they don't try to expand on their existing fanbase anymore. They're just sticking with it. Sony's expanding on their fanbase and MS is steadily building theirs."
Realistic Mature Zelda, Odama (not a strong game, but definatly not something "kiddie"), Resident Evil 4 exclussive, Advance Wars (more grown up flavor then most of their past "new" franchise efforts), Fire Emblem, Geist and who the hell knows what their new Tokyo studio is cooking up or what they've got for "Revolution". I just disagree with you there. They've taken their sweet time in getting there, but they're getting there and it'll start to stick...all conveiniantly next year...I think they're aiming for a STRONG finnish so that they can show gamers what to expect going into the next generation. They said themselves that this is the 4TH system they've managed on the back half of a console's cycle. This sorta goes with the above "strategy" against the X-BOX to Xenon transition battle plan they may be cooking up and may be their overall strategy...
AniHawk:
"Well if Reggie and the rest of the marketing guys are going to continue forward with what they have right now, Nintendo's going to be heading for a cooler image, most definitely. I bet that Revolution, when it's released, will have a sleek design that "everyone" will think is cool looking (they've done it before). I'm also willing to bet that Nintendo's going to have more games to stun people..."
I agree with this "stun" battle plan. Nintendo's E3 2003 pre-show...sucked to most people. Those same people were stunned by the 2004 show though. Nintendo's advertising for some games (Mario Sunshine) were horrid. They're advertising now, is almost stunning...it makes you think, is this the same Nintendo? Zelda's move to cel-shading really turned alot of people off. The "show stopper" of their 2004 pre-show wasn't the cel shaded WW2 we all expected...but instead a jaw dropping realistic Zelda. Iwata said only about a dozen people would clap for the Nintendo DS when it's unveiled. When it was finally unveiled everyone at the pre-show clapped and howled and there were about a dozen breath taking gasps. When people presented some dissatisfaction with the Nintendo DS's shell design...Nintendo presented a new sexy one. I'm sure there's other examples of this. People are *expecting* Nintendo to say/do/be one thing, but more recently they've been coming out and doing something else. And this is healing their bad image scars.
I think most people are expecting Nintendo's "Revolution" to be gimmicky, underpowered, look like a toy, have the same approach as GAMECUBE and be another kiddie game machine...but when it's unveiled I think people are gonna be shocked by a nice looking, powerful machine with games they DO want to play. I can see the stories now: "Nintendo's "Revolution" was unveiled today, and while most were expecting it to be the weakest of the three next generation machines and have a silly shell design with pastel colors we're surprized to say that this is a serious looking console every bit as capable as the "big boys"...could this be the industry veteran's Cinderella story?" This may have not been part of their plans initially, but they'll certainly use it to their advantage going into next years E3 and beyond I believe.
EDIT: spelling
Insertia said:
Well at least they're finally trying to turn things around. The new Zelda perhaps the best sign of that. Another good one would be that we haven't seen the new Mario game which has been in development since 2002 or earlier (meaning I think 'Super Mario 128' will be a Revolution launch title). They redesigned the Game Boy Advance and Nintendo DS. Fixing what a lot of people saw as mistakes for both (GBA was too dark, DS looked like a toy). They brought back Metroid, and brought over Fire Emblem after over a decade (two of the few "mature" looking Nintendo games). These are all good moves I've seen them do amidst their attempts with The Wind Waker and Super Mario Sunshine (which is not to say they're bad games, just not what people would have wanted from those franchises).
Hopefully Nintendo can continue with this trend into the future. Hopefully for their sake, they can try to make a couple new franchises as well to capture the spark which got GTA, Pokemon and GoldenEye going.
SolidSnakex
Member
"Realistic Mature Zelda, Odama (not a strong game, but definatly not something "kiddie"), Resident Evil 4 exclussive, Advance Wars (more grown up flavor then most of their past "new" franchise efforts), Fire Emblem, Geist and who the hell knows what their new Tokyo studio is cooking up or what they've got for "Revolution"."
How many of those do you seriously think will appeal to gamers who haven't bought a GC yet? Going off what we know so far, Zelda and RE4 are the only ones I can see doing that. Where's their sports games? Racing games? Hardcore action epics? They don't have any and those are the ones the mainstream want. I'm not saying they aren't trying because they are, they just aren't tapping into what the mainstream really want. The gamers that they don't yet have any real support from. They're doing better but they've still got a long way to go before they start knocking down their image problem and getting the mainstream to care about them.
How many of those do you seriously think will appeal to gamers who haven't bought a GC yet? Going off what we know so far, Zelda and RE4 are the only ones I can see doing that. Where's their sports games? Racing games? Hardcore action epics? They don't have any and those are the ones the mainstream want. I'm not saying they aren't trying because they are, they just aren't tapping into what the mainstream really want. The gamers that they don't yet have any real support from. They're doing better but they've still got a long way to go before they start knocking down their image problem and getting the mainstream to care about them.
SolidSnakex said:
The problem is that they DID have sports games, racing games, and hardcore action games in the first year the system was out. It's just that since they had that kiddie image, everyone went with the new Xbox or the good ol' PS2 instead, leaving the GC in the middle with no one to care about Sega Sports, EA, or Left Field.
I meant to mention the new Zelda as it looks like Nintendo's way of showing that their going to get back on track and start giving 'Joe' gamers what he wants. (which is what M$ and Sony are doing)
They really turned a lot of heads with Wind Waker, and kind of alienated the audience with it's childish look (not the cel-shading, just the art style).
They really turned a lot of heads with Wind Waker, and kind of alienated the audience with it's childish look (not the cel-shading, just the art style).
AniHawk said:
It's been a fucking while they have the kiddie image. In the N64 times they were perceived like that too. And before that, the whole videogame image was "it's entertainement for kids". I don't exactly remember what hapenned but pushing some sports games at launch for the GC could have helped them alot.
Solidsnakex:
"How many of those do you seriously think will appeal to gamers who haven't bought a GC yet? Going off what we know so far, Zelda and RE4 are the only ones I can see doing that. Where's their sports games? Racing games? Hardcore action epics? They don't have any and those are the ones the mainstream want. I'm not saying they aren't trying because they are, they just aren't tapping into what the mainstream really want. The gamers that they don't yet have any real support from. They're doing better but they've still got a long way to go before they start knocking down their image problem and getting the mainstream to care about them."
The other games I listed beyond RE4 & Zelda, you're right, aren't gonna appeal too too much...but they're definatly a good complimentary line-up of mature or "less kiddie" games than people are expecting from Nintendo to go along with those. And I DO see potential in Advance Wars & Fire Emblem 'cos of the strategy, anime & RPG appeal they'll bring with them...certainly "less kiddie" than what Nintendo has done in the past. I also agree that the sports & racing genre's are seriously lacking on GAMECUBE to their own admittance (smaller disc's, no online, poor memory card storage, etc.), but I believe these are issues that can't and seriously won't be addressed until next generation 'cos it's too late for it now. Does Nintendo pour wasted resources/money/time into these kind of games knowing that it's not going to help GAMECUBE this late in the game, or do they put that into "Revolution" to make sure it has better footing on such things starting next generation? They don't make sports/racing games themselves and what outside sports/racing developer is actually gonna make a top-teir racing game for Nintendo now, when GAMECUBE is not known for such games...sure it might be a good investment to build on in the future, but more likely it would be wasted on GAMECUBE and instead would make a better launch/near launch game for "Revolution". The top-selling sports/racing franchises come from EA now anyways so it's good that Nintendo kept them on for GAMECUBE. "Harcore action epics"? I think you're clutching there...
I agree, they still haven't "tapped" the mainstream gamer...I don't think they really ever have starting with how Genisis had way better sports (and thusly) mainstream support than SNES had. I think Nintendo realized (going into GAMECUBE) that the lack of RPG's (and Japanese support) hurt them and they really made strides in rebuilding burnt bridges there. I see them continuing to do this with more western game companies in the future. It's a slow process as you said and it'll take time, but I think a part of Nintendo's strategy in getting the "mainstream" gamer is by pouring it all into "Revolution" where they'll be "starting over" with the competition...at least that's what I would do in regards to western & sports games 'cos really it's just sorta too late for GAMECUBE now.
"How many of those do you seriously think will appeal to gamers who haven't bought a GC yet? Going off what we know so far, Zelda and RE4 are the only ones I can see doing that. Where's their sports games? Racing games? Hardcore action epics? They don't have any and those are the ones the mainstream want. I'm not saying they aren't trying because they are, they just aren't tapping into what the mainstream really want. The gamers that they don't yet have any real support from. They're doing better but they've still got a long way to go before they start knocking down their image problem and getting the mainstream to care about them."
The other games I listed beyond RE4 & Zelda, you're right, aren't gonna appeal too too much...but they're definatly a good complimentary line-up of mature or "less kiddie" games than people are expecting from Nintendo to go along with those. And I DO see potential in Advance Wars & Fire Emblem 'cos of the strategy, anime & RPG appeal they'll bring with them...certainly "less kiddie" than what Nintendo has done in the past. I also agree that the sports & racing genre's are seriously lacking on GAMECUBE to their own admittance (smaller disc's, no online, poor memory card storage, etc.), but I believe these are issues that can't and seriously won't be addressed until next generation 'cos it's too late for it now. Does Nintendo pour wasted resources/money/time into these kind of games knowing that it's not going to help GAMECUBE this late in the game, or do they put that into "Revolution" to make sure it has better footing on such things starting next generation? They don't make sports/racing games themselves and what outside sports/racing developer is actually gonna make a top-teir racing game for Nintendo now, when GAMECUBE is not known for such games...sure it might be a good investment to build on in the future, but more likely it would be wasted on GAMECUBE and instead would make a better launch/near launch game for "Revolution". The top-selling sports/racing franchises come from EA now anyways so it's good that Nintendo kept them on for GAMECUBE. "Harcore action epics"? I think you're clutching there...
I agree, they still haven't "tapped" the mainstream gamer...I don't think they really ever have starting with how Genisis had way better sports (and thusly) mainstream support than SNES had. I think Nintendo realized (going into GAMECUBE) that the lack of RPG's (and Japanese support) hurt them and they really made strides in rebuilding burnt bridges there. I see them continuing to do this with more western game companies in the future. It's a slow process as you said and it'll take time, but I think a part of Nintendo's strategy in getting the "mainstream" gamer is by pouring it all into "Revolution" where they'll be "starting over" with the competition...at least that's what I would do in regards to western & sports games 'cos really it's just sorta too late for GAMECUBE now.
Kobun Heat said:
I think you're missing the entire point. Nowhere have I said that Nintendo should stop experimenting with new concepts. What I said was that developing new concepts in hopes of creating a market for them shouldn't supercede branching out into areas in which demand already exists.
It's like asking for a hamburger, and having somebody offer you a paperweight instead. Now, this may be the coolest paperweight ever made, but that doesn't do you much good when you're looking for food. In fact, you might not even realize that the paperweight is actually pretty damn cool, because you're too irritated by the fact that somebody tried to push it on you when you asked for a burger to do more than glance at it. On the other hand, if you asked for a burger and got one, then were asked to check out this cool paperweight, you'd probably be a lot more kindly disposed to the guy selling it and give it a real look. Yeah, that's a pretty awful analogy (I'm working on a real lack of sleep right now), but I think it gets the point across--if Nintendo were to make a public effort to respond to the desires people have already expressed, then pitch the innovative stuff, it wouldn't seem like they're ignoring the market. Right now, though, it's all paperweights.
FortNinety said:
Bingo. I have very similar feelings.
As I've gotten older and have had a greater amount of disposeable income I have cared less and less about which system I supported. I just buy the games that I want, if that means I buy a new system for it then I buy a new system. It's all worth it for the experience.
But supporting a failure feels bad sometimes. Bad like if you bought a new pair of shoes and someone told you their were ugly. Where as if a bunch of people had the same shoes you would cling to their beliefs that they were the best shoes. Even if the majority of other people did actually think they were ugly.
SolidSnakex
Member
"They don't make sports/racing games themselves and what outside sports/racing developer is actually gonna make a top-teir racing game for Nintendo now, when GAMECUBE is not known for such games."
Nintendo can do one. They don't always need to go out and get an exclusive 3rd party title. As you said, no 3rd party is going to make an exclusive racer for the GC, that's why Nintendo has to take the first step, make a big racer and show developers there is a market on the GC for that. It's probably too late, but it'd be a good lead into next gen so they could land an exclusive 3rd party racer from the start.
""Harcore action epics"? I think you're clutching there..."
Stuff like Devil May Cry, Ninja Gaiden, Shinobi ect.
"It's a slow process as you said and it'll take time, but I think a part of Nintendo's strategy in getting the "mainstream" gamer is by pouring it all into "Revolution" where they'll be "starting over" with the competition.."
I think it'll continue to be very slow unless Nintendo starts making some moves to show developers that's now how it works on their system. They need to step up next gen from the start with an online game, they need to start doing some of those sports and racers ect. if they expect developers to really commit to their system and possibly release exclusives in those genres.
"The thing is, if the hardware design was better thought out, then even less talented and experienced developers could get good results like Criterion or Konami."
They still can. As we've learned this gen, graphics don't revolve around how many polys can you throw onto screen. The art is a big part of it too. Look at Atlus' PS2 RPG's this gen, sure their budgets aren't as big as the FF's and they aren't as technically impressive, but to alot of people they look as good if not better because of the art. There's also small developers who've made impressive PS2 games, just as there have been big 3rd parties make unimpressive games on the PS2. Point is that when a bad looking game shows up on the Xbox/GC it's never because the hardwares holding them back, it's because the developer isn't good. The same should apply to the PS2.
It'd been better if the system was easy to develop for, but it's not but that doesn't mean that it's impossible to develop on. At some point developers have to stop laying the blame on the system and start looking at themself.
Nintendo can do one. They don't always need to go out and get an exclusive 3rd party title. As you said, no 3rd party is going to make an exclusive racer for the GC, that's why Nintendo has to take the first step, make a big racer and show developers there is a market on the GC for that. It's probably too late, but it'd be a good lead into next gen so they could land an exclusive 3rd party racer from the start.
""Harcore action epics"? I think you're clutching there..."
Stuff like Devil May Cry, Ninja Gaiden, Shinobi ect.
"It's a slow process as you said and it'll take time, but I think a part of Nintendo's strategy in getting the "mainstream" gamer is by pouring it all into "Revolution" where they'll be "starting over" with the competition.."
I think it'll continue to be very slow unless Nintendo starts making some moves to show developers that's now how it works on their system. They need to step up next gen from the start with an online game, they need to start doing some of those sports and racers ect. if they expect developers to really commit to their system and possibly release exclusives in those genres.
"The thing is, if the hardware design was better thought out, then even less talented and experienced developers could get good results like Criterion or Konami."
They still can. As we've learned this gen, graphics don't revolve around how many polys can you throw onto screen. The art is a big part of it too. Look at Atlus' PS2 RPG's this gen, sure their budgets aren't as big as the FF's and they aren't as technically impressive, but to alot of people they look as good if not better because of the art. There's also small developers who've made impressive PS2 games, just as there have been big 3rd parties make unimpressive games on the PS2. Point is that when a bad looking game shows up on the Xbox/GC it's never because the hardwares holding them back, it's because the developer isn't good. The same should apply to the PS2.
It'd been better if the system was easy to develop for, but it's not but that doesn't mean that it's impossible to develop on. At some point developers have to stop laying the blame on the system and start looking at themself.
Okay now I know what you mean by hardcore action epics. I think Zelda would work for that.
As far as the argument goes that Nintendo needs to make such'n'such game for their own system to show other developers that they're building that sort of following goes another way too. Developers probably see that as a reason NOT to bring that kind of game to GAMECUBE...why? Because we hear this reason *cough*excuse*cough* for publishers not to support Nintendo games...and that's 'cos Nintendo games will sell better on Nintendo consoles. I think if a publisher makes a serious effort at making a good game and advertising it and working with Nintendo then yes it should and probably will sell well regardless if a Nintendo game comes out at the same time or if Nintendo makes the same type of game.
In the genre of racing I think it'd be nice if Nintendo could make a nice internal one with the same production quality as say GT...but that isn't realistic. I think it'd be better to hire or aquire an already accomplished team who's done games like that before and go from there.
Already existing games (racing or otherwise) that come out on PS2 *and* X-BOX *should* also come out on GAMECUBE...if they don't it's either 'cos the maker of the game doesn't take Nintendo seriously or has something against them 'cos that "it doesn't sell" excuse can't be used if they're seriously treating Nintendo equally. I think Nintendo should make serious efforts in preventing this from happening but they have alot of things hindering them namely image.
Another approach I think Nintendo should and probably is headed (Reggie said: "you're going to see more Nintendo games and different Nintendo games") is to output more games covering more genre's. I mean if publisher's are gonna use excuses not to support Nintendo with different kinds of games then Nintendo should just go ahead and do them themselves. I think GAMECUBE has had more game output this generation than last already, even without RARE (and I certainly don't recall as many delays on GAMECUBE as N64 either). It'd be cool if Nintendo went back to the NES approach and just bring out tons of their own games in the first two years and let the third parties fill in the gaps and go from there. I wouldn't mind if Nintendo just had their own games and a few choice 3RD party games as well as more 3RD party exclussives & collaborations on "Revolution"...it'd be like almost every game would be exclussive. Just a thought...
As far as the argument goes that Nintendo needs to make such'n'such game for their own system to show other developers that they're building that sort of following goes another way too. Developers probably see that as a reason NOT to bring that kind of game to GAMECUBE...why? Because we hear this reason *cough*excuse*cough* for publishers not to support Nintendo games...and that's 'cos Nintendo games will sell better on Nintendo consoles. I think if a publisher makes a serious effort at making a good game and advertising it and working with Nintendo then yes it should and probably will sell well regardless if a Nintendo game comes out at the same time or if Nintendo makes the same type of game.
In the genre of racing I think it'd be nice if Nintendo could make a nice internal one with the same production quality as say GT...but that isn't realistic. I think it'd be better to hire or aquire an already accomplished team who's done games like that before and go from there.
Already existing games (racing or otherwise) that come out on PS2 *and* X-BOX *should* also come out on GAMECUBE...if they don't it's either 'cos the maker of the game doesn't take Nintendo seriously or has something against them 'cos that "it doesn't sell" excuse can't be used if they're seriously treating Nintendo equally. I think Nintendo should make serious efforts in preventing this from happening but they have alot of things hindering them namely image.
Another approach I think Nintendo should and probably is headed (Reggie said: "you're going to see more Nintendo games and different Nintendo games") is to output more games covering more genre's. I mean if publisher's are gonna use excuses not to support Nintendo with different kinds of games then Nintendo should just go ahead and do them themselves. I think GAMECUBE has had more game output this generation than last already, even without RARE (and I certainly don't recall as many delays on GAMECUBE as N64 either). It'd be cool if Nintendo went back to the NES approach and just bring out tons of their own games in the first two years and let the third parties fill in the gaps and go from there. I wouldn't mind if Nintendo just had their own games and a few choice 3RD party games as well as more 3RD party exclussives & collaborations on "Revolution"...it'd be like almost every game would be exclussive. Just a thought...
This may sound far-fetched, but if Nintendo happened to be knocked out of the hardware business what with losing all that billions of Yen, would they still continue with software developments? You also have to consider the fact of the handheld industry of that time.. is Nintendo still the leading brand in handheld or has some other company taken over as the GBA is definitely Nintendo's cash-cow at the current moment.
In all reality, all three companies are telling customers what they want. They were telling customers they wanted online when they weren't shouting for it. Now we have online, but has it expanded videogames as we know it? No, it's just long distance pissing contests. Microsoft and Sony are ready to tell everyone they want a set top/do everything/Master and Commander of your livingroom box. I never asked for that. Sony tells its customers it doesn't want 2d games. Game companies don't listen, they dictate.
The only difference is currently people are swallowing MS's and Sony's bullshit and rejecting Nintendo's.
etiolate said:
Yep, it hasn't done a damn thing for videogames. I mean, look at Final Fantasy XI--hell, all I need to do is invite a few thousand friends over with system link cables, and we can get the uber-LAN party started! No online connection required!
Seriously, that's about as reasonable as saying that shipping a system with four controller ports hasn't done anything for videogaming whenever N-fans start going on about how important it is to play multiplayer games with their friends. Try to have a little perspective.
I think people are overhyping Nintendo's shortcomings. They have their shortcomings, that's true, but they're still one heck of a profitable business, and I admire them for not simply trying to be another clone in the industry, unlike Microsoft, who have unprofitably tried to replicate the profitable Sony. Nintendo hopefully will have a GameCube redesign ready for next year, as well as a slick-looking Revolution system. GameBoy Advance SP and DS ver. 2 are living proof that Nintendo won't mess up on trivial factors next time. I still see them keeping connectivity just for the extra perks, but Revolution will definitely be online as broadband penetrations will be larger and Nintendo will have figured out what to do. I also see Nintendo taking strides in wireless gaming, and ingeniusly bundled the wireless adapters with the Pokemon remakes, immediately putting the number of users for GBA wireless gaming above the online userbase of the PS2 and Xbox, in less than a week. Nintendo will also continue to work with third parties from Japan, but I see them bumping up the interaction with western developers. Nintendo also is going to continue producing versions of franchises people want, like Zelda XII and others. Additionally, the GameCube peripheral revolution, while late, bodes well for the next system. And if Triforce is any indication, Nintendo will be ready to assist arcade development if need be. When it comes to disc media, I'm sure Nintendo will be able to figure out a way to create anti-piracy, high storage discs and will work out royalties again in the future.
The only direction Nintendo has to go now is forward and up.
The only direction Nintendo has to go now is forward and up.
Date of Lies
Banned
I definitively believe that people are quick to say Nintendo has failed this generation, while that's a lie.
I'm not going to start stating generalizations in order to rationalize the player's ranks in this generation, but I don't think it's unreasonable to say that Nintendo is having trouble finding itself a market. They're "kiddy," yet even 8 year olds beg their parents to get them an Xbox.
I think Nintendo still holds a big place in some of the gamers of this world, which is why we're so critical with them.
This generation is soon to be over. For Nintendo, I think the last big factor is how well the new Zelda will sell. If it sells well, it's an indication that there's still alot of brand interest that will translate into the next generation.
I have more faith for Nintendo next generation though.
I'm not going to start stating generalizations in order to rationalize the player's ranks in this generation, but I don't think it's unreasonable to say that Nintendo is having trouble finding itself a market. They're "kiddy," yet even 8 year olds beg their parents to get them an Xbox.
I think Nintendo still holds a big place in some of the gamers of this world, which is why we're so critical with them.
This generation is soon to be over. For Nintendo, I think the last big factor is how well the new Zelda will sell. If it sells well, it's an indication that there's still alot of brand interest that will translate into the next generation.
I have more faith for Nintendo next generation though.
SolidSnakex
Member
"Okay now I know what you mean by hardcore action epics. I think Zelda would work for that."
Possibly, but if it's like the previous Zelda's I don't think it'd work. They'd basically be changing the gameplay completely. Action epics tend to have the majority of their focus on fighting packs of enemies, while Zelda is more about adventures rather than fighting.
"Already existing games (racing or otherwise) that come out on PS2 *and* X-BOX *should* also come out on GAMECUBE...if they don't it's either 'cos the maker of the game doesn't take Nintendo seriously or has something against them 'cos that "it doesn't sell" excuse can't be used if they're seriously treating Nintendo equally."
Well you can take Burnout 3 for example, the reason they've given is the lack of online play. Some people don't want to accept this because they refuse to believe that some developers are taking online gaming this seriously at this point, but some really are. Criterion has put the series on all 3 platforms up till the 3rd version, it also happened to be the first version that had a big focus on online gaming. So whether people believe their reason or not, it does make sense.
"I mean if publisher's are gonna use excuses not to support Nintendo with different kinds of games then Nintendo should just go ahead and do them themselves."
Exactly. If they'd just release games that they wanted on their system, then it'd be much harder for developers to throw the "Well these types of games don't sell on that system". But they aren't doing anything about it really. So if a developer really wants to stick by the sales point, they can because it really does work. Certain games just don't sell well on the system while they do on others. Look at SC, alot of the time Nintendo fans say that certain games don't sell well on the GC because they're released later than they are on other systems. Yet you look at SC, it was released on the GC and yet still sold badly while the PS2 version did really well despite being released at the sametime as the GC version. Nintendo's problem really is that there's a mindset in their own base that they don't want to buy multiplatform games. This isn't in any other fanbase, and it's really hurting them now that there are fewer exclusives and alot more multiplatform titles.
"I definitively believe that people are quick to say Nintendo has failed this generation, while that's a lie."
Have they failed from a financial standpoint? Definetly not, no matter how much some people might not like how they've done things with the GC it's still a success from a financial standpoint. But consider the others. Their public image is just in a terrible position now, for the 2nd generation in a row a new comer is going to come in and go ahead of them. They've also lost more market, just like they did last gen.
Possibly, but if it's like the previous Zelda's I don't think it'd work. They'd basically be changing the gameplay completely. Action epics tend to have the majority of their focus on fighting packs of enemies, while Zelda is more about adventures rather than fighting.
"Already existing games (racing or otherwise) that come out on PS2 *and* X-BOX *should* also come out on GAMECUBE...if they don't it's either 'cos the maker of the game doesn't take Nintendo seriously or has something against them 'cos that "it doesn't sell" excuse can't be used if they're seriously treating Nintendo equally."
Well you can take Burnout 3 for example, the reason they've given is the lack of online play. Some people don't want to accept this because they refuse to believe that some developers are taking online gaming this seriously at this point, but some really are. Criterion has put the series on all 3 platforms up till the 3rd version, it also happened to be the first version that had a big focus on online gaming. So whether people believe their reason or not, it does make sense.
"I mean if publisher's are gonna use excuses not to support Nintendo with different kinds of games then Nintendo should just go ahead and do them themselves."
Exactly. If they'd just release games that they wanted on their system, then it'd be much harder for developers to throw the "Well these types of games don't sell on that system". But they aren't doing anything about it really. So if a developer really wants to stick by the sales point, they can because it really does work. Certain games just don't sell well on the system while they do on others. Look at SC, alot of the time Nintendo fans say that certain games don't sell well on the GC because they're released later than they are on other systems. Yet you look at SC, it was released on the GC and yet still sold badly while the PS2 version did really well despite being released at the sametime as the GC version. Nintendo's problem really is that there's a mindset in their own base that they don't want to buy multiplatform games. This isn't in any other fanbase, and it's really hurting them now that there are fewer exclusives and alot more multiplatform titles.
"I definitively believe that people are quick to say Nintendo has failed this generation, while that's a lie."
Have they failed from a financial standpoint? Definetly not, no matter how much some people might not like how they've done things with the GC it's still a success from a financial standpoint. But consider the others. Their public image is just in a terrible position now, for the 2nd generation in a row a new comer is going to come in and go ahead of them. They've also lost more market, just like they did last gen.
