Who wants Nintendo to fail?
- Thread starter missAran
- Start date
Catchpenny
Member
DJPS2 said:
:lol Kinda sad that one of the worst D-Pads known to exist is better than the PS2/Gamecube/Dreamcast D-Pads, huh?
The white/black buttons are the only thing I dislike about that controller. Take them off, slap L1/L2 above the triggers and you've got the best standard controller ever. Sure beats a roided SNES controller.
drohne said:
Make sure to save him a spot in the constant Advance Guardian Heroes multiplayer game y'all have going on!
naz said:
It is BECAUSE we care that we are bitching. The "glory days" of Nintendo are something we all want to see again. And I want little bobby to see the nintendo at their best. At this point in time, Nintendo is an ugly fat old hooker that is only good for some "oral activities".
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
I was the one who said that I out grew Nintendo, and that they ceased to be relevant to my game needs. I didn't say they ceased to be relevant all together. Big difference there. Nintendo is still a player in the game industry, but they could suffer the same fate as Sega if they are not careful. I certainly have no stake in their success or failure, and I really don't want to see them fail, but it would also not impact the games I play all that much.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
missAran said:
Ture colors shown.
IMHO, Sony is every bit the "real" videogame company that Nintendo is. Microsoft, too.
I wouldn't miss Nintendo if they disappeared, since I rarely play my GBA. I would actually see more of them if they went third party, since I don't own a Gamecube.
When Nintendo decided that little printers and card readers for GB were more important than games, and that gimmicks were more important than good games design, they lost me. Mario 64 is the weakest (if most technically impressive) Mario I've played. I did not play SMS.
Nintendo? Who cares. I'm greatful a "real" videogame maker is soon to realease a handheld in the US.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Monk said:
Not me. I look upon 85-91 as the Dark Ages of videogaming. Went off to Amigaland and didn't come out until Sega forced Nintendo to do something worthwhile.
Oh the memories of the "Who wants Sega to fail" days right before they, um.. failed. 
It's clear that Nintendo missed the ball this generation. Hardware did nothing special, and actually lacked a lot of what the competition offers now (built in broadband, # of buttons on controller). Key franchises got lukewarm response (bash the N64 games and the # of them all you want, they still have gotten a lot more universal praise than what was released this gen). Reduced dev support than the competition. And a new handheld that will actually be a complete generation behind the competition come March.
Really, i don't want them to fail. But do they deserve it? Hell yes. If they can bounce back next gen so be it, but right now what they add to the industry from a hardware perspective is weak.
It's clear that Nintendo missed the ball this generation. Hardware did nothing special, and actually lacked a lot of what the competition offers now (built in broadband, # of buttons on controller). Key franchises got lukewarm response (bash the N64 games and the # of them all you want, they still have gotten a lot more universal praise than what was released this gen). Reduced dev support than the competition. And a new handheld that will actually be a complete generation behind the competition come March.
Really, i don't want them to fail. But do they deserve it? Hell yes. If they can bounce back next gen so be it, but right now what they add to the industry from a hardware perspective is weak.
psycho_snake
I went to WAGs boutique and all I got was a sniff
What I think everyone can agree on is that it would be better if Nintendo went second or third party.
Smiles and Cries
Member
Monk said:
:lol :lol :lol
I see it this way... SONY is doing great - they can never ever fail since they OWN every single one of the so-called, "REAL GAMERS"
Microsoft can buy second and third place in one scoop
Just let Nintendo be why kick an old dog?
Glory Days are called that for a reason, meaning it will never be again. Once in a Lifetime thing.
I look forward to SONY's Glory days to be over so I can laugh
:lol :lol
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
Nintendo supports often point to their dominance in handhelds to show that they are still successful and innovative, but lets face it, they haven't been challenged on that front in 10 years at least. They are now going to face a competitor who has as much resolve, resources, and more cash then they do. I'm not going to predict that they will lose their dominance in the handheld market by any means, but it wiill be challenged for the first time in a long time. Remember what the general reactions were back when Sony first announced they were getting into the game business with the orginal Playstation. And as I said in another post, perhaps the game market has grown enough to support two handhelds these days.
SantaCruZer said:
The "less games" part of your argument doesn't apply if you don't own Nintendo hardware, so you're not really missing anything (unless, of course, Nintendo went third-party).
As for "less competition", it's worth wondering whether Sony and/or Microsoft even worry much about Nintendo anymore. Sony might worry about the impending PSP vs. DS battle, and maybe Microsoft worries about besting MS in installed userbase numbers for XBox vs. GC, but it would seem as though Nintendo's been relegated to "also-ran" status.
There's a lot of nostalgia with Nintendo that can't be taken away from them, but nostalgia can only get you so far.
shpankey
not an idiot
anything that would limit Nintendo fanboys would be ok in my book, if that meant Nintendo failing then I'm ok with that. i'd prefer they just become 3rd party software development for all platforms available. that way nintendo fanboys wouldn't draw their trademark loyalties with a specific company again.
Agent X
Member
missAran said:
But Nintendo is not the only real video game company still making consoles. You've got other real video game companies like Sony and Microsoft out there, still making their own consoles.
missAran said:
A good game should still be good, regardless of who is making the system it plays on.
Sega hasn't become an utterly worthless developer--their quality is really about the same as it has been for the last decade. They've just been brought down to earth, since the games aren't tied to a console bearing the Sega name, and therefore you don't have the first-party cheerleaders praising every new first-party game to high heaven simple because it's a first-party game. The world now sees Sega for what it really is--a company that producess some spectacular games, some lousy games, and a bunch of others that are in-between.
I would imagine that a "third-party" Nintendo would be viewed similarly. Their games now are in a similar range to Sega's--some are amazing, and some are rubbish, but most are somewhere in the middle. I can't imagine that changing very much if they produced their games for other systems. The only difference would be that the "fanboy façade" would be lifted, and people would be likely to judge Nintendo's games fairly without feeling like they're contributing directly to the success or failure of their preferred console hardware.
I fail to see how Nintendo is a true videogame company, other than the fact they've been doing it longer. Its roots were dug in the playing card industry, amongst other things, before they went the console route. Sure, Microsoft may be a software giant and Sony may be an electronics pioneer, but both companies are relying more and more on their videogame consoles as their main source of revenue. Sure, they can augment these figures with sales from their other products, but I wouldn't consider it out of the realm of possibility to see at least Sony move almost wholly into the realm of gaming devices or perhaps conglomerate a number of their different products into one (this is where the PSP and its eventual successors seem to be going....) sometime in the future.
Also, my main beef with Nintendo is that it really isn't going *anywhere.* Its contentedness to stay stubborn and unmoving within the industry is aggrivating, only to release a handful of quality titles a year while throwing out stillborn "innovations" that mimic toys more than they do real gaming products. All anybody seems to look forward to on a Nintendo system is the next Mario title, the next Zelda title, the next Metroid title. Even when people call for a return to Nintendo's old days, I can't personally endorse such an endeavor in good conscience. They'd just be catering to nostalgia and continue to rely on their past to profit instead of a possible future. Sony, as a company, has a fair stable of AAA games these days which renders Nintendo's own first/second-party advantage in the past almost negligable. Its no longer a matter of which company makes higher-quality games, its more like which company's games do you prefer. However, Sony also has an incredible lineup of top-notch 3rd party games, too, while the dogged Nintendo fans only get thrown such a bone perhaps once or twice a year. Microsoft....is getting there. They, like Sony, believe in moving FORWARD in the industry, but their games aren't completely there yet. Maybe they'll have better luck with Xenon.
Also, my main beef with Nintendo is that it really isn't going *anywhere.* Its contentedness to stay stubborn and unmoving within the industry is aggrivating, only to release a handful of quality titles a year while throwing out stillborn "innovations" that mimic toys more than they do real gaming products. All anybody seems to look forward to on a Nintendo system is the next Mario title, the next Zelda title, the next Metroid title. Even when people call for a return to Nintendo's old days, I can't personally endorse such an endeavor in good conscience. They'd just be catering to nostalgia and continue to rely on their past to profit instead of a possible future. Sony, as a company, has a fair stable of AAA games these days which renders Nintendo's own first/second-party advantage in the past almost negligable. Its no longer a matter of which company makes higher-quality games, its more like which company's games do you prefer. However, Sony also has an incredible lineup of top-notch 3rd party games, too, while the dogged Nintendo fans only get thrown such a bone perhaps once or twice a year. Microsoft....is getting there. They, like Sony, believe in moving FORWARD in the industry, but their games aren't completely there yet. Maybe they'll have better luck with Xenon.
with the unlimited cash supply of MS, it's just a matter of time.naz said:
3rd parties found a better deal with Sony so they left Nintendo, later they finda better deal with MS .... well who knows Playstation 3 might face the same fate as N64. Then Sony will be the "ugly fat old hooker that is only good for some "butt activities"."
Smiles and Cries
Member
monkeyrun said:
Make it so number one!
Smiles and Cries
Member
Yes, I have just found a reason to buy myself an Xbox 2
I want it to kick all sort of SONY ass!
PSWHAT?
I want it to kick all sort of SONY ass!
PSWHAT?Catchpenny
Member
Manabyte said:
I actually agree with this sad, depraved individual for once. I'm a Nintendo fan and like their current products, but don't see a need for them to be on top of the gaming industry. They didn't rule it well back then and likely wouldn't rule it well now. Times have changed. As long as they continue putting out quality products, I'm happy.
If they want to appeal to a mainstream audience, they should go third party. If they want to do their own thing, they should keep putting out hardware and be happy as a strong niche player. Sega wanted it both ways and failed horribly. I don't want Nintendo to make that same mistake.
Crap and hypocrisy abound:
Funny. The market controls that Nintendo implemented managed to build quite a few companies into giants-Konami, EA, Namco, Capcom on and on. That's what reversed the crash. I'd expect that far more companies were making money than the constant stream of developers dropping out of business now.
Eye toy mimics a toy more than a gaming product. What are these stillborn innovations? And suppose there are so called stillborn innovations, at least they are trying something new.
All anybody seems to look forward to on Ps2 and Xbox is the next Halo, Gta, Gt, Madden, Splinter cell 3 etc.
You can't honestly believe that.
What does that mean, "Moving forward"? Does it mean 5 sequels a system? Or media center crap? Explain.
Funny. The market controls that Nintendo implemented managed to build quite a few companies into giants-Konami, EA, Namco, Capcom on and on. That's what reversed the crash. I'd expect that far more companies were making money than the constant stream of developers dropping out of business now.
Eye toy mimics a toy more than a gaming product. What are these stillborn innovations? And suppose there are so called stillborn innovations, at least they are trying something new.
All anybody seems to look forward to on Ps2 and Xbox is the next Halo, Gta, Gt, Madden, Splinter cell 3 etc.
You can't honestly believe that.
What does that mean, "Moving forward"? Does it mean 5 sequels a system? Or media center crap? Explain.
Smiles and Cries
Member
I just want ZELDA 2005 to crash this board :lol
IAmtheFMan
Member
To me, seeing Nintendo fail is less about any sort of console-pride that I'd lose with not being able to play a Nintendo game on a Nintendo console, but more to do about my perception of the changing industry. Nintendo, and Sega prior to their death, makes quality games that showcase great gameplay. Pikmin 1 + 2, MP 1 + 2, hell even Wind Waker, in addition to a whole bunch of others, were just a lot of fun to play. Yet, due to the evolution of the game market, these games are coming few and far between.
I've seen the death of a lot of quality game companies. The Lucasarts Graphic Adventure divison, Sierra (before being snatched up by Vivendi, then completely dismantled earlier this year,) Sir-Tech, INFOCOM, Looking Glass... companies that made awesome, awesome games which just didn't sell. I used to be slightly peeved, but then I'd go "well there's still company x and y making games I like" but the number is dwindling.
Furthermore, (and this is more of a personal thing) I don't necessarily like the way the industry is heading. Not necessarily the "mature" thing, but more along the lines of the fact that I don't enjoy racing games, I don't enjoy a lot of the newer FPS's, and the only sports game I like is Madden. A lot of my friends come over to my place, see I have 4 games for Xbox, about 12 for PS2, and about 30 for GC. They ask why, and I just respond that GC has the type of games I like the most. This isn't to say that I necessarily have a console bias; hell Katamari Damacy, and Ninja Gaiden got a looooot of play time by me.
I guess to sum up, I see Nintendo failing as another nail in the coffin of the type of games I really like to play. And I don't think a second or third party Nintendo (just conjecture by watching Sega) would be as good.
I've seen the death of a lot of quality game companies. The Lucasarts Graphic Adventure divison, Sierra (before being snatched up by Vivendi, then completely dismantled earlier this year,) Sir-Tech, INFOCOM, Looking Glass... companies that made awesome, awesome games which just didn't sell. I used to be slightly peeved, but then I'd go "well there's still company x and y making games I like" but the number is dwindling.
Furthermore, (and this is more of a personal thing) I don't necessarily like the way the industry is heading. Not necessarily the "mature" thing, but more along the lines of the fact that I don't enjoy racing games, I don't enjoy a lot of the newer FPS's, and the only sports game I like is Madden. A lot of my friends come over to my place, see I have 4 games for Xbox, about 12 for PS2, and about 30 for GC. They ask why, and I just respond that GC has the type of games I like the most. This isn't to say that I necessarily have a console bias; hell Katamari Damacy, and Ninja Gaiden got a looooot of play time by me.
I guess to sum up, I see Nintendo failing as another nail in the coffin of the type of games I really like to play. And I don't think a second or third party Nintendo (just conjecture by watching Sega) would be as good.
Musashi Wins!
FLAWLESS VICTOLY!
I can't be the only one who's largely indifferent to Nintendo's fortunes, simply wishes their games were as good as yesteryear and likes to see their fans cry because their largely repugnant (with the rare sterling exception of course)?
Jade Knight 08
Member
cooking right now. Teh best flavor!
radioheadrule83
Banned
The only reason I could see anyone wanting them to fail is if they wanted to play Nintendo games on other consoles.
Go on, buy a cube, no one need ever know!
I have all three consoles, and I don't want anyone to fail. But if you were to propose a question like: "If any of the three had to go third party, which would you rather it be?"
I would personally have to go for Microsoft. I don't think the games they have published have been particularly awe inspiring, I don't like their hardware. I like the potential damage they can do to the disproportionately popular PlayStation brand, and seeing as they WILL be around next gen - I really hope they level the playing field a bit. I like their ideas about middleware for next generation, and I like their online service. But is there anything about their first party games and hardware combination that has made me remotely enamored of Microsoft as a game company? I can't think of a thing. They're good for competition, and they've really helped us get value this gen, but Nintendo do some great work, and have to care about games because it's all they do... I'm all for them feeling a little heat when they're making mistaken decisions, but put out of hardware business? Diminished as a company? Failure? I just can't see why anyone would want that.
Go on, buy a cube, no one need ever know!
I have all three consoles, and I don't want anyone to fail. But if you were to propose a question like: "If any of the three had to go third party, which would you rather it be?"
I would personally have to go for Microsoft. I don't think the games they have published have been particularly awe inspiring, I don't like their hardware. I like the potential damage they can do to the disproportionately popular PlayStation brand, and seeing as they WILL be around next gen - I really hope they level the playing field a bit. I like their ideas about middleware for next generation, and I like their online service. But is there anything about their first party games and hardware combination that has made me remotely enamored of Microsoft as a game company? I can't think of a thing. They're good for competition, and they've really helped us get value this gen, but Nintendo do some great work, and have to care about games because it's all they do... I'm all for them feeling a little heat when they're making mistaken decisions, but put out of hardware business? Diminished as a company? Failure? I just can't see why anyone would want that.
Catchpenny
Member
Musashi Wins! said:
Ditto.
Wait, I thought that said Sega. Nevermind!
Musashi Wins!
FLAWLESS VICTOLY!
Catchpenny said:
haha. I got to the gaming boards too late!
Late Stage Marxist
Member
Naw they're still #1 in my books. I just think they should team up with MS and take down Sony, because I don't think either company can do it alone next gen. 
Cue "did Sony pee in your Cheerios" type questions. :lol
Cue "did Sony pee in your Cheerios" type questions. :lol
SonicMegaDrive
Member
Holy Christ, there is some bitter, bitter resentment toward Nintendo on this forum. Now I haven't been a particular big fan of theirs since the 16-bit era, but I can't find any reason for all this bile. Are their fans really that annoying? Do childish games really hurt you that badly? Are you a reformed Sega nomad bent on their destruction? I'd really like to know.
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
Competition is good in any type of business. It just seems that Nintendo has made some mis-steps over the past few generations that have helped to erode their place in gaming. For example, sticking with carts when everyone else was switching to CD/DVD, not being prepared for online play, etc. These don't seem to be good business moves on their part. Lets not forget that the CD add-on for the SNES became the PSX.
Sega made simliar mis-steps that lead to their demise. Sega's were much bigger IMHO. Sega CD, 32x, rushed Saturn to market, etc.
KFJ
Sega made simliar mis-steps that lead to their demise. Sega's were much bigger IMHO. Sega CD, 32x, rushed Saturn to market, etc.
KFJ