What was the biggest mistake made by Sony, MS, and Nintendo?
- Thread starter border
- Start date
Now back up there, Zelda:TWW was a master class in solidarity (except for the hunting for maps that you then have to use to hunt for the pieces). Everything felt satisfying, from the feel of Link's movement to small things like knocking plates off of tables (sharp nudge made a jug spin for example). The style was absolutely beautiful, with gob-smacking animation standards.
And I am so sick and tired of hearing people moan about Link being young. Guess what hotshot? He was young at the start of OOT too, and you didn't complain then.
Sorry, this subject just really pisses me off. (I am aware you admit it's a good game, this rant is more targetted at the majority of TWW haters)
I like WW a lot, but I have a severe hatred for the endless sailing. Even with the teleportation, once you go on the triforce hunt or if you want to get every major treasure chest, it becomes such a headache and chore that I wanted to slit my wrist.
But besides that, I think WW is one of the most artistically inspired games this generation or any. It holds a spot with a rare breed of games, including ICO.
But besides that, I think WW is one of the most artistically inspired games this generation or any. It holds a spot with a rare breed of games, including ICO.
I officially dub this thread....
I don't have anything substantial to add. I agree with all of what Ned had too say and would stress that some of the littler things have played a more important role than can be imagined.
1. I'm convinced that disc scratches coupled with the huge controller and console assured that Xbox could never succeed in Japan this gen.
2. The sale of Rare played a much more important role. It was the turning point for both Nintendo and MS. It substantiated MS's will to succeed and at the same time substantiated Nintendo's unwillingness to compete.
I don't have anything substantial to add. I agree with all of what Ned had too say and would stress that some of the littler things have played a more important role than can be imagined.
1. I'm convinced that disc scratches coupled with the huge controller and console assured that Xbox could never succeed in Japan this gen.
2. The sale of Rare played a much more important role. It was the turning point for both Nintendo and MS. It substantiated MS's will to succeed and at the same time substantiated Nintendo's unwillingness to compete.
Father_Brain
Banned
I don't really know about MS and Sony. As for Nintendo...
Ever: PlayStation, duh.
This gen: launching GC with a "hip, edgy" marketing campaign aimed at older gamers = good. Launching GC without the hardware design or software to back that image up = very, very bad. To the casuals, Xbox was the black, sleek thing that played Halo; GC was the purple lunchbox that played Luigi's Mansion.
Ever: PlayStation, duh.
This gen: launching GC with a "hip, edgy" marketing campaign aimed at older gamers = good. Launching GC without the hardware design or software to back that image up = very, very bad. To the casuals, Xbox was the black, sleek thing that played Halo; GC was the purple lunchbox that played Luigi's Mansion.
sonycowboy
Member
Mistakes, plenty to go around. The good decisions would be a bit more interesting 
Mistakes
---------------------------
Sony
1) Not enough launch units, but didn't fess up until late in the US launch - Hurt publisher goodwill as they suffered financially and really recognized how dependant on Sony they were
2) Poor developer tools - This really hurt developer goodwill
3) Not recognizing the importance of online
4) Indecision regarding HDD and online apps (Real Networks, AOL, Cisco, etc)
Nintendo
1) Not reacting to the shift in demographics of this industry
2) Not procuring enough third party content (even if it's multiplatform)
3) Absolute dismissal of online.
4) Concentration on GBA/GCN connectivity was weak.
Microsoft
1) Extremely poor Japanese relationships and support
2) Not enough exclusive third party content, leaving Sony with the Lions share
3) Inability to sign EA to Xbox Live early on
4) Launch in Europe was much too late in the game
Mistakes
---------------------------
Sony
1) Not enough launch units, but didn't fess up until late in the US launch - Hurt publisher goodwill as they suffered financially and really recognized how dependant on Sony they were
2) Poor developer tools - This really hurt developer goodwill
3) Not recognizing the importance of online
4) Indecision regarding HDD and online apps (Real Networks, AOL, Cisco, etc)
Nintendo
1) Not reacting to the shift in demographics of this industry
2) Not procuring enough third party content (even if it's multiplatform)
3) Absolute dismissal of online.
4) Concentration on GBA/GCN connectivity was weak.
Microsoft
1) Extremely poor Japanese relationships and support
2) Not enough exclusive third party content, leaving Sony with the Lions share
3) Inability to sign EA to Xbox Live early on
4) Launch in Europe was much too late in the game
Most seem to be just answering this based on what they personally regard as mistakes, rather than answering your actual question. In that regard, I wouldn't really say MS or Sony have made mistakes, since their financial position and place in the market have only grown relative to their previous position. Of course, that's much easier for MS since they started from zero. On the other hand, I'm sure MS had hoped to grab more marketshare than they have, in which case I think the biggest mistake is probably their timing in launching against two entrenched competitors.border said:
For Nintendo, the issue isn't as clear cut. They certainly are losing console marketshare relative to last gen, but I believe they're increasing handheld userbase with the GBA relative to the earlier GBs. So they have the advantage of two products in this sector between which there seems to have been a momentum shift but one which maintains their overall position. Still, if you wanted to examine why the GC has been losing momentum relative to the N64, I'd suspect the biggest mistakes lie in the disconnect between what Nintendo wants to bring to market and what the market wants.
sonycowboy
Member
segasonic said:
It's also not a mistake, in terms of how the system could have done better saleswise. And if that was a measure of success, then the Xbox is the greatest failure in the history of videogames :lol
I take this question to be more of a, what mistakes were made that hindered the success of the platform.
To that end, I don't think having 2 instead of 4 controller ports or breaking systems hurt Sony. Sure it was a cheap move and would have allowed for more multiplayer gaming, but I'm sure it had no significant impact on the performace of the platform. The same as "Celda", while controversial and disappointing to some, did not hurt the GC platform in any significant way. Microsoft was also not significantly hurt by a large controller in the US or the Thompson drives.
By significant, I mean anything that could have affected software or hardware sales by anywhere near a million units.
Musashi Wins!
FLAWLESS VICTOLY!
Sony: I think their only significant mistake has been having such a jump on everyone else, they've not given the right attention to later business plans and peripherals. They didn't seem to know what to do with their HD, their online plans are chaotic and half-assed and I wonder if their attitude will become more focused and effective with their handheld plan. Maybe that's where the real time in planning is going. I don't know. I'm just thinking that having dominance in the console realm doesn't mean you should be slack about the future.
Microsoft: I think they've had a lot of bumps with a first time home console go of it, but they've done remarkably well. They have to become more cost effective. It would also help if they figured out a way to entice some more Japanese gamers and position their software better on their machine in the West. They can't squander the incredible gains they've made this time round by having a dumb financial plan.
Nintendo: It's about the software. They failed to position themselves with 3rd parties in the general market, and their own first party offerings aren't as unique or enticing. Especially vs. PS2 third party juggernaut. I think they also suffer from a sort of identity crisis...their machine and software is obviously best suited for children and they might even do better if they didn't pretend that was sometimes not the case. Apologists aside, I honestly believe if they had made a different Mario and Zelda game when it still mattered...their position would be quite different.
Microsoft: I think they've had a lot of bumps with a first time home console go of it, but they've done remarkably well. They have to become more cost effective. It would also help if they figured out a way to entice some more Japanese gamers and position their software better on their machine in the West. They can't squander the incredible gains they've made this time round by having a dumb financial plan.
Nintendo: It's about the software. They failed to position themselves with 3rd parties in the general market, and their own first party offerings aren't as unique or enticing. Especially vs. PS2 third party juggernaut. I think they also suffer from a sort of identity crisis...their machine and software is obviously best suited for children and they might even do better if they didn't pretend that was sometimes not the case. Apologists aside, I honestly believe if they had made a different Mario and Zelda game when it still mattered...their position would be quite different.
sonycowboy
Member
kaching said:
That's not quite completely true. Their positions may have grown, but I think we have to look at missed opportunities to have grown them even more as mistakes. As I said before, all sides have made plenty of mistakes. In the case of Nintendo, I think they simply are refusing to change and play the game that Sony & Microsoft have created.
You absolutely have to have strong third party support, with exclusives, and recognize who your customers are. They have painted themselves into a very small corner and with this platform, I think their intractability has doomed them.
open_mouth_
insert_foot_
sonycowboy said:Mistakes, plenty to go around. The good decisions would be a bit more interesting
Mistakes
---------------------------
Sony
1) Not enough launch units, but didn't fess up until late in the US launch - Hurt publisher goodwill as they suffered financially and really recognized how dependant on Sony they were
2) Poor developer tools - This really hurt developer goodwill
3) Not recognizing the importance of online
4) Indecision regarding HDD and online apps (Real Networks, AOL, Cisco, etc)
Nintendo
1) Not reacting to the shift in demographics of this industry
2) Not procuring enough third party content (even if it's multiplatform)
3) Absolute dismissal of online.
4) Concentration on GBA/GCN connectivity was weak.
Microsoft
1) Extremely poor Japanese relationships and support
2) Not enough exclusive third party content, leaving Sony with the Lions share
3) Inability to sign EA to Xbox Live early on
4) Launch in Europe was much too late in the game
IAWTP. well said.
I think Microsoft would have been doomed in Japan no matter what they did (after all, why buy a "gaijin" system when the PS2 has plenty of crap on it already?), but they seem to be making some good strides in other markets (advertising EVERYWHERE here, and decent sales in the UK)
Nintendo kinda screwed themselves by giving the Cube a proprietary disc format (it may have stopped piracy, but it also leads to things like developers having to waste time with extra programming as well as cutting out things from their games-see the lack of vocal tracks in some US versions of games like Sonic Heroes) and an odd controller designed for only certain genres in mind (why would fighting games need a "camera stick?") and I am of the preception that if they didn't have Gameboy they'd have been third party as of now
Nintendo kinda screwed themselves by giving the Cube a proprietary disc format (it may have stopped piracy, but it also leads to things like developers having to waste time with extra programming as well as cutting out things from their games-see the lack of vocal tracks in some US versions of games like Sonic Heroes) and an odd controller designed for only certain genres in mind (why would fighting games need a "camera stick?") and I am of the preception that if they didn't have Gameboy they'd have been third party as of now
Maybe so, but you'd have to factor in the cost to capitalize on those "missed" opportunities and whether they would have produced significant growth in marketshare as a result. Attempting to capitalize on these missed opportunities may very well have been the mistake rather than the other way around.sonycowboy said:
sonycowboy said:
I don't think it has hurt PS2 too much either, but multiplayer games can be a great easy way to sell a system. For example when I played Goldeneye and Mario Kart 64 at a friends house, I knew that I just had to have an N64. I've heard many people say the same about Halo and even Super Smash Bros. Melee. Those are all the most popular games on their respective system too.
Plus it is a great way to sell extra controllers.
MrPing1000
Member
Nintendo : cancelling the addon for the snes with sony. Whoopsy
norinrad21
Banned
Nintendo---- Keeping Miyamoto on the board of directors.
Sony------ online support
MS ------ can't think of any except their image problem in Japan
Sony------ online support
MS ------ can't think of any except their image problem in Japan
"
And I am so sick and tired of hearing people moan about Link being young. Guess what hotshot? He was young at the start of OOT too, and you didn't complain then."
Sorry I have to disagree. Celda only solidified Nintendo's rep as 'teh kiddie' amongst casuals. Lots of folks bought a N64 just to play OOT. Not too many people followed suit. Why? While the cell shading was spectacular a lot of folks hated the art. It looked like a childrens book.
It went from this....
Your average Casual can still feel a bit secure playing this.
to this sugar laced fruit cup art.
Imagine the dissapoint of a lot of gamers. WW was a good game (albeit not as good as OOT) but it is a Flagship title for Nintendo. So guess what? Image does count for something!
Image if Halo 2 had art like this?
instead of this?
And I am so sick and tired of hearing people moan about Link being young. Guess what hotshot? He was young at the start of OOT too, and you didn't complain then."
Sorry I have to disagree. Celda only solidified Nintendo's rep as 'teh kiddie' amongst casuals. Lots of folks bought a N64 just to play OOT. Not too many people followed suit. Why? While the cell shading was spectacular a lot of folks hated the art. It looked like a childrens book.
It went from this....
Your average Casual can still feel a bit secure playing this.
to this sugar laced fruit cup art.
Imagine the dissapoint of a lot of gamers. WW was a good game (albeit not as good as OOT) but it is a Flagship title for Nintendo. So guess what? Image does count for something!
Image if Halo 2 had art like this?
instead of this?
I feel like picking on Nintendo, mainly because I've been following them for the entire generation, and because I think that Sony's and MS' mistakes are far overshadowed by their successes.
I think that Nintendo's biggest mistake was the GameCube hardware design as a whole. It's hard to break it down much further than that other
- The style alienated casual users everywhere.
- The first memory cards were tiny, and sent an immediate message that Nintendo wasn't serious about sports gamers. Not a group of people that you want to reject.
- The media was small, leading to the usual compromises.
- And their worst decision of all, only including 24 MB of main memory. If a console wants any chance at having plentiful ports of good games, it needs to have at least as much main memory as the market leader, and preferably more. What does Nintendo do? They include 8 MB less main memory, but include 16 MB of slow-ass A-RAM that requires special handling. If the other factors made developers think twice about GameCube versions of their software, this was probably the final straw in a lot of cases.
Of course, all of these decisions were defended as an "elegant" and "efficient" design, and could be used to extremely favourable results, as long as the programmers were competent. Naturally, that ignores the fact that competent programmers could make even better games with more resources.
As far as software mistakes... well, it's death by a thousand cuts. They didn't make any single catastrophic decision. Celda wouldn't be considered a mistake had Eternal Darkness, Too Human, and the Resident Evils had panned out as planned. Metroid Prime's unorthodox control scheme wouldn't have mattered had Nintendo secured another few normal FPSes, which might have happened if Retro and Rare hadn't tanked on their initial GCN development. Even the connectivity campaign could have been cool if it hadn't been at the expense of other multiplayer options.
A million little mistakes, and no huge successes. That's the story of the GameCube.
I think that Nintendo's biggest mistake was the GameCube hardware design as a whole. It's hard to break it down much further than that other
- The style alienated casual users everywhere.
- The first memory cards were tiny, and sent an immediate message that Nintendo wasn't serious about sports gamers. Not a group of people that you want to reject.
- The media was small, leading to the usual compromises.
- And their worst decision of all, only including 24 MB of main memory. If a console wants any chance at having plentiful ports of good games, it needs to have at least as much main memory as the market leader, and preferably more. What does Nintendo do? They include 8 MB less main memory, but include 16 MB of slow-ass A-RAM that requires special handling. If the other factors made developers think twice about GameCube versions of their software, this was probably the final straw in a lot of cases.
Of course, all of these decisions were defended as an "elegant" and "efficient" design, and could be used to extremely favourable results, as long as the programmers were competent. Naturally, that ignores the fact that competent programmers could make even better games with more resources.
As far as software mistakes... well, it's death by a thousand cuts. They didn't make any single catastrophic decision. Celda wouldn't be considered a mistake had Eternal Darkness, Too Human, and the Resident Evils had panned out as planned. Metroid Prime's unorthodox control scheme wouldn't have mattered had Nintendo secured another few normal FPSes, which might have happened if Retro and Rare hadn't tanked on their initial GCN development. Even the connectivity campaign could have been cool if it hadn't been at the expense of other multiplayer options.
A million little mistakes, and no huge successes. That's the story of the GameCube.
Drinky Crow
Banned
Sony: Shitty manufacturing quality.
MS: "Project Midway".
Nintendo: Hubris.
Sega: Retardation.
MS: "Project Midway".
Nintendo: Hubris.
Sega: Retardation.
the problem with using numbers and profits to judge nintendo is that places profit/games. and nintendo has the games and the style and the design. the purple gamecube doesn't attrect 18plus males. fine. it doesn't sell well either. fine. but it's extremely well designed. tww didn't feel like zelda, fine. but it does feel like a perfectly designed game. nintendo is catering to a small market, but they are doing so with a sense of style and passion about creating games that might not appeal to everyone. not everything needs to be all black and green and dark, really. and if nintendo can make even alittle bit of money doing so, it's in the best interst for gaming, for them to do.
ps2 only has one or two games (ico and maybe maybe gradius v) that show any sort of understanding beyond profit. xbox has none of course.
ps2 only has one or two games (ico and maybe maybe gradius v) that show any sort of understanding beyond profit. xbox has none of course.
Ned Flanders
Banned
To those who take issue with my point regarding Wind Waker:
I'm in no way dismissing it as a bad game. I still own the game to this day and aside from the tedious sailing and the fact that the overall gameplay wasn't exactly a quantum leap from the N64 games, I'd consider it excellent in every other regard.
But the point was that it became a divisive, stifling bane to the system, when it could have been a great means of pushing the user base forward and drawing in those who had either already dismissed the system or never given it a chance. Do you remember the anticipation for the game's unveiling after the Spaceworld videos had been circulating? You could cut the anticipation with a knife...and it was one of those things that superceded console-centrism where everybody was waiting to see the new Zelda title. When it was finally unveiled (acutally with the god-awful Power-Puff Link that was later toned down), the shit fell like a bombshell and immediately shattered interest of those looking for something more mature and engaging who didn't already own the system. The Spaceworld videos of the mature-looking Link title could almost be viewed as deliberately deceptive in retrospect, and all in all it was an immensely wasted opportunity. You had the whole gaming communities attention, their thoughts giddy with anticipation of something like you demoed at SpaceWorld, and managed to instantaneously make the system finally dismissable to those who needed another excuse. The gameplay didn't matter...YES, it was about the appeareance, and the demographic appeal. We can no longer act like that just because a game is high quality it should automatically be good for the console. The trappings DO affect marketability, and if you hurt the marketability of your games, you hurt the marketability of your console.
So again, it's not that WW was a bad game at all, it was just a wasted opportunity. Same with Mario Sunshine. The game was solid enough, one of the better titles on the system (although like WW it didn't break the mold of it's N64 predecessor), but it came out a year too late. There was almost no marketing hype, whereas if it came out with the console they could have piggybacked each other's hype (A new Mario with a new console for X-Mas? May as well just start printing money).
WW's timing was also completely flawed. It should have been the title to follow the Zelda we're receiving next year, not vice versa. As it is, Nintendo completely wasted the hype that was building up for the game and the potentially great things it could have done in selling more consoles. The rationality of dismissing a game because it looks "kiddy" is really beside the point, because people are going to do it regardless, and Nintendo should know that by now. But they are apparently just so comfortable with alienating the older demographic that they are willing to hurt the console in order to maintain remain absolutely steadfast in their creative license. It boggles the mind.
I'm in no way dismissing it as a bad game. I still own the game to this day and aside from the tedious sailing and the fact that the overall gameplay wasn't exactly a quantum leap from the N64 games, I'd consider it excellent in every other regard.
But the point was that it became a divisive, stifling bane to the system, when it could have been a great means of pushing the user base forward and drawing in those who had either already dismissed the system or never given it a chance. Do you remember the anticipation for the game's unveiling after the Spaceworld videos had been circulating? You could cut the anticipation with a knife...and it was one of those things that superceded console-centrism where everybody was waiting to see the new Zelda title. When it was finally unveiled (acutally with the god-awful Power-Puff Link that was later toned down), the shit fell like a bombshell and immediately shattered interest of those looking for something more mature and engaging who didn't already own the system. The Spaceworld videos of the mature-looking Link title could almost be viewed as deliberately deceptive in retrospect, and all in all it was an immensely wasted opportunity. You had the whole gaming communities attention, their thoughts giddy with anticipation of something like you demoed at SpaceWorld, and managed to instantaneously make the system finally dismissable to those who needed another excuse. The gameplay didn't matter...YES, it was about the appeareance, and the demographic appeal. We can no longer act like that just because a game is high quality it should automatically be good for the console. The trappings DO affect marketability, and if you hurt the marketability of your games, you hurt the marketability of your console.
So again, it's not that WW was a bad game at all, it was just a wasted opportunity. Same with Mario Sunshine. The game was solid enough, one of the better titles on the system (although like WW it didn't break the mold of it's N64 predecessor), but it came out a year too late. There was almost no marketing hype, whereas if it came out with the console they could have piggybacked each other's hype (A new Mario with a new console for X-Mas? May as well just start printing money).
WW's timing was also completely flawed. It should have been the title to follow the Zelda we're receiving next year, not vice versa. As it is, Nintendo completely wasted the hype that was building up for the game and the potentially great things it could have done in selling more consoles. The rationality of dismissing a game because it looks "kiddy" is really beside the point, because people are going to do it regardless, and Nintendo should know that by now. But they are apparently just so comfortable with alienating the older demographic that they are willing to hurt the console in order to maintain remain absolutely steadfast in their creative license. It boggles the mind.
but the question shouldn't be if it was a sucessful game, which it was to some extent. but was it a good game. Nintendo's path is more like Rogar Atlman's than Michael Bay. Of course not everyone is going to like WW, but that doesn't take away from the fact that it's an perfectly designed game.
I agree with this assessment to a certain degree. There's also the fact that maybe Nintendo can't play the game becase it doesn't have all the equipment.sonycowboy said:
Both Sony and Microsoft are huge companies with massive resources - Sony is a well known electronics maker with a large media empire, and Microsoft has a software monopoly with the kind of power that would make Rockefeller weep. Nintendo makes playing cards.
The corner-cutting (no DVD, small storage media and inital memory cards) made the Gamecube look miserly compared to the Xbox and its "marketshare now, profitability later" financial model. Couple that with Sony's massive head start, the aformentioned stubborness and many other mistakes and, well, you've got today.
Back in the day Nintendo was a big fish, but now the sharks are in the water.
Ugh, that sounds so defeatist/corny.
SantaC
Member
explodet said:I agree with this assessment to a certain degree. There's also the fact that maybe Nintendo can't play the game becase it doesn't have all the equipment.
Both Sony and Microsoft are huge companies with massive resources - Sony is a well known electronics maker with a large media empire, and Microsoft has a software monopoly with the kind of power that would make Rockefeller weep. Nintendo makes playing cards.
The corner-cutting (no DVD, small storage media and inital memory cards) made the Gamecube look miserly compared to the Xbox and its "marketshare now, profitability later" financial model. Couple that with Sony's massive head start, the aformentioned stubborness and many other mistakes and, well, you've got today.
Back in the day Nintendo was a big fish, but now the sharks are in the water.
Ugh, that sounds so defeatist/corny.
You are correct. Nintendo doesn't have the same kind of recsources that MS and Sony have. It hurts them for sure.
Idiot Member
Banned
I think Sony's largest mistake was their production quality of their ps2s. I think there has been a lot of backlash because of it.
Taking an uncalculated hit on hardware simply to hurt your competition isn't necessarily wise.
The PS2s lack of vram simply has not played a a part in the larger picture.
Either your recollection of history is shoddy, or mine is. Regarding challenging of MS.
I would say Microsoft's biggest faults were not only system design, but software development. They should have hired a lot of japanese r&d people not only for design of hardware, but for software too. I would have gone out and bought one of the larger publishers that were in a little trouble.
Taking an uncalculated hit on hardware simply to hurt your competition isn't necessarily wise.
The PS2s lack of vram simply has not played a a part in the larger picture.
Either your recollection of history is shoddy, or mine is. Regarding challenging of MS.
I would say Microsoft's biggest faults were not only system design, but software development. They should have hired a lot of japanese r&d people not only for design of hardware, but for software too. I would have gone out and bought one of the larger publishers that were in a little trouble.
Idiot Member
Banned
biggest mistake for nintendo imho was staying in the hardware game.
CrimsonSkies
Member
Sony made a mistake? Nintendo continues to make a habit of mistakes. So I won't comment on either of those.
Microsoft on the other hand is a hard one to figure out. They don't seem very comitted to getting established IP and are trying to create their own. Other than some limited success outside of the Halo franchise. They really haven't done a good job at all of creating brand IP's that sell consoles. At least so far. Third parties having better looking games on the console is the major selling point outside of Halo.
Microsoft on the other hand is a hard one to figure out. They don't seem very comitted to getting established IP and are trying to create their own. Other than some limited success outside of the Halo franchise. They really haven't done a good job at all of creating brand IP's that sell consoles. At least so far. Third parties having better looking games on the console is the major selling point outside of Halo.
very touching.mumu said:
Sony - cumbersome hardware design, could have been more elegant. should have had better development tools support early on. but really, they havent made any major mistakes at all.
MS - terrible handling of the japanese market. missed opportunities in korea. the design of the box itself was a mistake. its ugly. the original controllers were badly designed.
Nintendo - too conservative. silly design. unspecific goals, we want to target the kids (celda), we want the adult market (eternal darkness). failed to woo third parties, specifically western third parties who are becoming more and more important to the masses.
TheGreenGiant
Banned
Nintendo : Iwata - we want to make games with lowered difficulty that everyone can play
Gamers : Windwaker.. ARGGHH.. Please die. Goddammnit.. only the pig killed link.
Gamers : Windwaker.. ARGGHH.. Please die. Goddammnit.. only the pig killed link.
Mr_Furious
Member
This isn't a Nintendo profit topic neither. My post expresses disappointment, not hatred. Out of the 3 companies, Nintendo's the only one that continually disappoints me with their business decisions. I love Nintendo and wish they'd turn things around but they just aren't being aggressive enough and are resting on their laurels, in my opinion.OniShiro said:
radcliff said:
It's hard to debate "what ifs" so I'll just say that I still whole heartedly feel unleashing Sony onto the market was about as foolish a mistake Nintendo could make. Even if they chose CD over cartridge, developer relations weren't the highest back then and Nintendo was quite militant about what they allowed on their N64 and how many games a single company could make. They put into place the "Mario Club" which rated the quality of each game. Nintendo's "quality over quantity" stance forced a lot of games onto competing platforms and at that time Sony was willing to allow just about anything on their PS1. Only later did Sony impose their notorious "concept approval" process.
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
Sony: Insane pre-hype for PS2 that left a bad taste in the mouths of many in spite of PS2 success - paving way for super-critical eyes to be turned on PS3. Poor handling of HDD support, ending with a bitch-slap in the face of faithful adopters with PSTwo's lack of HDD support in the same year HDD comes out in US. Wacky Sony top brass who continually pull X statement out of their collective ass.
Microsoft: Arrogance - we're Microsoft, we pwn whatever industry we casually glance at! Banking on "edgy" Xbox image to make the cool kids all gravitate over. Leaving Xbox first and second-party library barren for long stretches to a degree that would make N64-era Nintendo point and laugh. Losing Japanese support. Doing things the Microsoft Way (TM) with Xbox Live - a "closed" online model, which forced online communication via voice with no keyboard support. Scaring away online RPGs, especially on a system where PC MMOs could be readily ported.
Nintendo: Being Nintendo*
*this is both a jab at Nintendo for being stubborn on some things, and at whiney fanboys who can't accept Nintendo is Nintendo. And no, "Celda", did not damn Nintendo. Johnny Casual Gamer has already decided he's too grow'd up for elf-boy fantasy worlds and is a mackdaddy gansta who only hangs with the GTA dopeshow. He wasn't twisting on the floor with his gut knotted up over Nintendo denying Spaceworld Zelda to the gamers. He probably thinks Nintendo Tapes are made in California, and has never heard of Spaceworld to begin with.
Microsoft: Arrogance - we're Microsoft, we pwn whatever industry we casually glance at! Banking on "edgy" Xbox image to make the cool kids all gravitate over. Leaving Xbox first and second-party library barren for long stretches to a degree that would make N64-era Nintendo point and laugh. Losing Japanese support. Doing things the Microsoft Way (TM) with Xbox Live - a "closed" online model, which forced online communication via voice with no keyboard support. Scaring away online RPGs, especially on a system where PC MMOs could be readily ported.
Nintendo: Being Nintendo*
*this is both a jab at Nintendo for being stubborn on some things, and at whiney fanboys who can't accept Nintendo is Nintendo. And no, "Celda", did not damn Nintendo. Johnny Casual Gamer has already decided he's too grow'd up for elf-boy fantasy worlds and is a mackdaddy gansta who only hangs with the GTA dopeshow. He wasn't twisting on the floor with his gut knotted up over Nintendo denying Spaceworld Zelda to the gamers. He probably thinks Nintendo Tapes are made in California, and has never heard of Spaceworld to begin with.
+1 Mistake from MS
Letting go of stranger. What were they thinking? This game looks like its going to an awesome plaformer/adventure. I know its exclusive, but that doesnt guarantee that the series will stay exclusive to xbox and xbox2
idiots, hopefully the success of Fable inspires MGS division to put more faith into original IPs that arent racers or shooters
Letting go of stranger. What were they thinking? This game looks like its going to an awesome plaformer/adventure. I know its exclusive, but that doesnt guarantee that the series will stay exclusive to xbox and xbox2
idiots, hopefully the success of Fable inspires MGS division to put more faith into original IPs that arent racers or shooters
disabledHeliocentric
Member
Sony: PS2 hardware's architecture especially its vector units and GPU which many developers under utilize and ehich has lead mto PS2 games having a rough look i.e. the aliasing and tearing we all are familiar with.
Microsoft: The system had profoundly unappealing software for most of its shelf life. 2004 has been hot. Previous years were quite pathetic. The system still has some gaps. Things are looking way up as we head into the sunset for xbox and the next system's launch. But xbox could have really used some of these games two years ago.
Nintendo: They have made big mistakes with big franchises. They didn't launch with Mario.
Then they clumped all of their big franchises into one quarter leaving pretty much Mario Kart and Viewtiful Joe as the only big games for the next year. And they didn't really follow up on the high expectations people had from Mario 64 and the N64 Zeldas. They have gotten really bad ideas mixed in with their brilliant ones, that games are for kids and should be easy and if possible less lengthy. And all the while most other developers have made leaps and bounds and a lot of consumers simply put have moved on to stuff like Grand Theft Auto. Imo, Nintendo has floundered the most opportunities, after all the xbox had truly pathetic content its first few years while the cube had a slew of stunning AAA classics.
Microsoft: The system had profoundly unappealing software for most of its shelf life. 2004 has been hot. Previous years were quite pathetic. The system still has some gaps. Things are looking way up as we head into the sunset for xbox and the next system's launch. But xbox could have really used some of these games two years ago.
Nintendo: They have made big mistakes with big franchises. They didn't launch with Mario.
Then they clumped all of their big franchises into one quarter leaving pretty much Mario Kart and Viewtiful Joe as the only big games for the next year. And they didn't really follow up on the high expectations people had from Mario 64 and the N64 Zeldas. They have gotten really bad ideas mixed in with their brilliant ones, that games are for kids and should be easy and if possible less lengthy. And all the while most other developers have made leaps and bounds and a lot of consumers simply put have moved on to stuff like Grand Theft Auto. Imo, Nintendo has floundered the most opportunities, after all the xbox had truly pathetic content its first few years while the cube had a slew of stunning AAA classics.
TheGreenGiant
Banned
Prine said:
Stranger is back to XBOX exclusive if the GTASA issue of EGM is to be believed. The PS2 version has been cancelled.
Red Dolphin
Member
radcliff said:
This is the biggest mistake in the industry in recent years bar none. Nothing else comes close and continues to hurt Nintendo.
It's hard to say say how dominate Nintendo would be now but it would most definately be better then their current situation. There's no question. In the 64/32 bit era I think the N64 and Playstation would have been about 60/40 in their sales ratio similar to the 16-bit era between SNES and Genesis/MegaDrive.