Support NeoGAF

[xsarien]

Does the DS have Bluetooth also? I thought it had 802.11b (which is Wi-Fi) and another proprietary protocol.

Even an Ethernet jack doesn't guarantee that all your customers are capable of online gaming. Software has to be written that will allow the system to connect to the Internet, and in turn connect to other gamers who are also connected to the Internet. If such software does not exist for the DS, then the games will not be Internet playable.

Nintendo must lead by example here. They need to actually release several online playable games for the DS. If they do not, then don't expect developers to follow suit just because they've got an 802.11 connection. After all, Nintendo released Ethernet and modem adaptors for the GameCube, and look at how far that went.

Yes, or at the very least, the Nintendo/Motorola hybrid technology they developed for the GBA wireless adapter. That, in addition to 802.11. And again, there's a large difference between releasing seperate hardware and building it into the machine. Nintendo's a frugal company, they're not going to put something in the box, increasing the cost to the person buying the product, without any plans of using it.

Well, I sure hope so. The thing is, Nintendo was hyping up online gaming for the GameCube long before the GameCube was released. After the system released, though, it was a whole different story.

They were? That's certainly not my recollection of the pre-GCN launch.

 

[GDGF]

I'd imagine one of the best bits of evidence that Nintendo is embracing online gameplay for the DS, is that the next Animal Crossing is going to be a launch game/near launch game, and the fact that the producer has stated his intentions to take that title online since last E3 *







*and there is the fact, as jarrod stated, that Nintendo has said on numerous occasions that the WiFi was built in to allow this.

 

[jarrod]

No, they probably won't ignore it.

On the other hand, I don't see any hard evidence that Nintendo is willing to support online gaming on their next system. They need to talk it up...but they also need to do more than that, because they talked up online gaming for the GameCube and subsequently ignored it when push came to shove.

As it stands now, I'm not convinced that the N5/Revolution will be a good system for those who seek online gaming. Nintendo needs to convince me otherwise. I'll bet I'm not the only one who feels this way.

Granted but wouldn't you say it's a little premature for Nintendo to start convincing people currently? Again, console online's in it's infancy and you've admitted the lack of online GCN support won't hurt Nintendo in the long run... so what's the point in concetrating on it now? Wouldn't it be better to start making declarations about Revolution in about a year?

Also I don't remeber Nintendo talking up online at any point for GameCube, in fact all I remember is the opposite. :/

 

[Kiriku]

I think the presence of connectivity is worse than the absence of online games.

 

[Agent X]

Granted but wouldn't you say it's a little premature for Nintendo to start convincing people currently? Again, console online's in it's infancy and you've admitted the lack of online GCN support won't hurt Nintendo in the long run... so what's the point in concetrating on it now? Wouldn't it be better to start making declarations about Revolution in about a year?

Yes, but they need to somehow demonstrate that they're serious about online gaming. I don't buy the argument that they're going to automagically evolve from some Luddite "nobody cares about online gaming" stance to the KINGS of online gaming overnight. They need to work towards the goal, and that takes a lot of time and effort...they can't just snap their fingers and hope that the rest of the market (developers and consumers alike) will jump along wth them.

Also I don't remeber Nintendo talking up online at any point for GameCube, in fact all I remember is the opposite. :/

Sure they did. Before the GameCube system came out, they talked about how they would be offering a modem adaptor and an Ethernet adaptor, and how they had expansion ports on the bottom of the GameCube unit just for the purpose of connecting those devices. I don't think they would've made such a fuss over those peripherals if online gaming wasn't in their plans at some point. They backpedalled and changed their position only after seeing that Sony and Microsoft were eating their lunch, and that they didn't have a prayer of competing with even the discontinued Dreamcast--let alone the PS2 or X-Box--with regard to the development of compelling online games.

 

[slayn]

I don't recall gamecube being pushed as an online console either. I wasn't paying much attention to it but for a long time I remember the online plans being:

MS: xbox live, going all out

Sony & Nintendo: eh... we'll do something I guess... maybe

also, it may just be me, but I find it ironic that in this thread SSX is all, "the console maker is the problem. Developers can't be held responsible, lets all blame the console maker for not paving the way"

but when it comes to 2d gaming his opinion is, "you can't blame sony, they aren't stopping anybody from making 2d games. Its up to the developers to push 2d gaming. You gotta blame the developers, not sony."

just seemed odd to me is all...

 

[DDayton]

They backpedalled and changed their position only after seeing that Sony and Microsoft were eating their lunch, and that they didn't have a prayer of competing with even the discontinued Dreamcast--let alone the PS2 or X-Box--with regard to the development of compelling online games.

I think that's a bit of "gloom and doom" there... Nintendo would have certainly been able to create compelling online games... that's not the issue. The issue is that they opted not to, presumably because they didn't like the market for charging for the online games.

Online Mario Kart would have certainly smashed the competition, as well as Super Smash Bros. Melee.

 

[jarrod]

Yes, but they need to somehow demonstrate that they're serious about online gaming. I don't buy the argument that they're going to automagically evolve from some Luddite "nobody cares about online gaming" stance to the KINGS of online gaming overnight. They need to work towards the goal, and that takes a lot of time and effort...they can't just snap their fingers and hope that the rest of the market (developers and consumers alike) will jump along wth them.

I wouldn't expect that either but you don't think Nintendo's doing anything in terms of online R&D? And if they do manage to deliver online Mario Kart, Pokemon and Smash Bros next generation, you don't think consumers and developers would follow?

Sure they did. Before the GameCube system came out, they talked about how they would be offering a modem adaptor and an Ethernet adaptor, and how they had expansion ports on the bottom of the GameCube unit just for the purpose of connecting those devices. I don't think they would've made such a fuss over those peripherals if online gaming wasn't in their plans at some point. They backpedalled and changed their position only after seeing that Sony and Microsoft were eating their lunch, and that they didn't have a prayer of competing with even the discontinued Dreamcast--let alone the PS2 or X-Box--with regard to the development of compelling online games.

I don't remember any of that, I remeber Nintendo always being rather vague with their online commitments... could you provide some quotes from Nintendo reps or something?

 

[SolidSnakex]

I don't recall gamecube being pushed as an online console either. I wasn't paying much attention to it but for a long time I remember the online plans being:

MS: xbox live, going all out

Sony & Nintendo: eh... we'll do something I guess... maybe

also, it may just be me, but I find it ironic that in this thread SSX is all, "the console maker is the problem. Developers can't be held responsible, lets all blame the console maker for not paving the way"

but when it comes to 2d gaming his opinion is, "you can't blame sony, they aren't stopping anybody from making 2d games. Its up to the developers to push 2d gaming. You gotta blame the developers, not sony."

just seemed odd to me is all...

How did you even come to that comparison? Comparing a developer pushing online gaming to pushing 2D gaming? Online game is an addition to a console. If you don't show that you're interested in making online gaming for your own console, why should a 3rd party be interested? 2D gaming is a completely different subject. Any developer can make it, you aren't pushing it with any specific additional item have the ability to play it ect. The comparison doesn't work on any level.

 

[Alcibiades]

-- While only about a sixth of the U.S. population currently plays games online, that number will grow to nearly half the population by 2008.

what I want to know if this is the FPS/RPG-online market, or if this includes the under 25 frenzy over stuff like Yahoo games and other such internet entertainment...

heck, I downloaded one of those online casino programs for the freevideogames.com thing, I think the research needs to be very specific for it to be useful in this thread, what exactly is counted in the numbers for "population that currently plays games online"...

My hypocritical rant wasn't directed at you really... just a compilation of excuses I've heard. The market is there for Nintendo. I remember when the online adapters were announced fror the GC... you should have seen the fanboy lists of online games.

Then there was that pokemon ball poster... if ever a game should be online, that's the one that could sell millions.


Now Nintendo fans act like they never wanted online gaming in the first place.

edit:

because of the stuff above... the adapter is there, the promo posters, the gamespy announcements. Everything was in place and Nintendo bailed.


I'm really glad the DS is online enabled, but I haven't touched a handheld in years.

seriously reaching?, mike...

1. sure some people can dream up online games, but I doubt many people were or seriously expected it... From the very beginning it was pretty clear the only online enabled game confirmed had been Sega's Phantasy Star online...

yeah, magazines threatened to scream bloody murder if there was no free online in Double Dash, but clear-thinking people would have known Nintendo had no intention of jumping into something and losing money, especially if the audience was going to be far less than even 1 million...

that reviewers are mad that Nintendo doesn't have money to throw away like Sony and Microsoft is not really a concern to most people purchasing their games...

2. how would enabling a pokemon to be online ensure "millions" of additional sales it would have gotten anyway...

No console game except SOCOM (with a 70 million userbase to tend to) has gotten a million people online, I doubt any one GCN game would get "millions" of people online...

A stand alone Pokemon RPG would sell millions WITHOUT online, like SSX said... the extra sales of an online would would probably be marginal...

just look at Project Gotham Racing and compare it was part 2... ONLINE is selling games to be sure, just not to the masses...

3. about Nintendo gamers not wanting online:

hey, I wouldn't be stopped from playing Smash Brothers or Double Dash lag-free at no monthly cost if Nintendo had done so for this generation...

that said, I'm perfectly fine playing with family/buddies in the room and since the PC, PS2, or XBox don't have Nintendo's games online, I don't see how I'm "missing" something that was never included in the first place...

4. what do mean Nintendo bailed after posters and adaptors and GameSpy?

I never saw ANY posters claiming Nintendo was going to be makingn online games, they specifically said the adaptors were to serve Sega, and other than vague statements in interviews and some reports on the internet, I don't think anybody had any idea what the GameSpy thing was...

There was nothing for Nintendo to bail out of...

5. ok, so you haven't touched a handheld in years, but you've been pretty adament about things getting mainstream, so let me point out there are 50 million GBA's out there, making your no-handheld situation far more out of place than people who don't play consoles online, whose numbers stand at about 3-4 million...

I'm sure some would jump at the chance of getting some 1st party games online, but it's like saying "If you're ordering a hamburger and not a cheeseburger when the cheeseburger is clearly the tastier menu option, you must hate cheeseburgers."

Nintendo's prediliction for making games that are fun alone or with a small group of people kind of nulls the pangs for an online mode. Sure, it'd be GREAT if some of them had it, but it's not an overriding concern, something that determines whether or not their games are purchased.

And that applies to ANY popular game that isn't online, whether it be made by Nintendo or another company.

pretty much how I feel...

 

[etiolate]

Online Gambling has nothing to do with console gaming.

Online games get me into it for a week or so, but it really fails in comparison to playing in a room with people you know. Plus, they are all online pissing matches! Give me something unique and something that could only be done online. Playing a deathmatch against some personality-less prick in Iowa does not excite me.

 

[Agent X]

I wouldn't expect that either but you don't think Nintendo's doing anything in terms of online R&D?

They probably are, but they haven't given any public evidence that they're trying, or how hard they're trying. We don't know if Nintendo's really taking online seriously for the next generation, or if they consider it to be a passing fad and will just dabble in it by releasing a few relatively unsupported peripherals.

And if they do manage to deliver online Mario Kart, Pokemon and Smash Bros next generation, you don't think consumers and developers would follow?

Sure...if people still care about those games next generation. There are already plenty of racing and RPG games online, and a fair amount of online fighting games in development, too. Nintendo will be entering a crowded market--that market isn't going to wait for Nintendo to play catch-up.

Moving right along...will Nintendo's next system provide a wide repertoire of genres for online gaming? Will Nintendo's next system have online sports games? I don't just mean exaggerated, saccharine stuff like Mario Golf or Mario Tennis, but realistic games with lifelike players and rules. Will Nintendo's next system have any realistic racing games (like Gran Turismo or even Need for Speed)? Will Nintendo's next system have an MMORPG (massively-multiplayer online role-playing game) with a persistent world? These are all questions that Nintendo has not sufficiently answered.

Again, it doesn't makes sense for Nintendo to wake up one morning in 2006 and say, "OK, we support online gaming now, so buy our new system!" They need to realistically work toward that goal, even if only a little bit at a time. When I see people throwing around remarks like "Nintendo doesn't want to lose their shirts on online gaming" or "Nintendo doesn't have the money to invest in a massively-multiplayer game," then that tells me that Nintendo isn't serious about this aspect of the market, and isn't working toward the goal. It's often necessary in business to lose a little bit of money initially, in order to get to a position where you start making much more money in the long run. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

I don't remember any of that, I remeber Nintendo always being rather vague with their online commitments... could you provide some quotes from Nintendo reps or something?

No problem. Here you go:

http://cube.ign.com/articles/083/083894p1.html

Here are some quotes from that article which are anything but vague:

"Dolphin will combine Nintendo's world-class design and beloved franchise characters with the expansion of the world of gaming by an online network," said Genyo Takeda, Nintendo's corporate director and general manager of integrated research and development.

While Nintendo isn't yet providing specifics, it also announced plans for broadband connectivity. "Conexant's modem technology will connect Dolphin users to both the Internet and other gamers, creating a rich and dynamic entertainment experience," Takeda said. "We are also excited about working with Conexant to bring broadband connectivity to our powerful new gaming platform."

Here's an article that features lots of pictures from the official GameCube unveiling in Japan in 2000, including pictures of the modem adaptor and broadband adaptor (which they clearly wouldn't have shown at that early stage if they didn't have some interest in online gaming at the time):

http://cube.ign.com/articles/083/083955p1.html

By the way, if you really want some entertainment, look at the following IGN article to see what Nintendo fans in the year 2000 really thought of online gaming:

http://cube.ign.com/articles/085/085165p1.html

So, there you have it. Out of the nearly 6000 people that voted, most are interested in, firstly, using the Broadband Adapter for online games with the next highest percentage preferring the 56k Modem Adapter for games as well.

It's really interesting that at a time not so long ago, when Nintendo was clearly gung-ho about online gaming (as evidenced by the quotes above), Nintendo fans were equally supportive. But, when Nintendo changed its tune, a lot of ardent fans also altered their opinions (or at least those publicly expressed) to match. I know there are some Nintendo fans that are clearly disappointed in Nintendo's Luddite attitude, though...of course, most of them have already moved onto PlayStation 2 and/or X-Box by now.

 

[Alcibiades]

while Nintendo may have made comments regarding what GCN could do, it's a far cry from creating a hoopla and hyping up online at all...

those were very early statements before "Dolphin" was finally GCN and not really any promises of finalized commitments...

still, those are pretty vague in terms of commenting on online gaming for certain...

don't forget at one point Nintendo talked up the 64DD, but never really made official press releases or announcements for the US, and the same thing goes for that interview...

Microsoft and Sony though committed officially on online games, both 1st and 3rd party, whereas Nintendo said it would be an option for developers, but that in-house nothing solid had yet materialized...

 

[Agent X]

still, those are pretty vague in terms of commenting on online gaming for certain...

OK, let's try again:

"Dolphin will combine Nintendo's world-class design and beloved franchise characters with the expansion of the world of gaming by an online network," said Genyo Takeda, Nintendo's corporate director and general manager of integrated research and development.

Dolphin: Also known as GameCube. The GameCube name was officially announced less than a month after this.

combine: Join; merge; unite.

Nintendo's: Not Sony's. Not Microsoft's. Not Konami's, Capcom's, or Namco's. Not even Sega's. He's clearly talking about Nintendo's.

beloved franchise characters: As opposed to the not-so-beloved franchise characters, right?

expansion of the world of gaming: It seems like more than "just a niche" here. It also shows a focus on gaming, and not Web browsing, E-mail or instant messaging.

online network: Or, I suppose you could hook two modems together with a cord and simulate a makeshift LAN with some fancy Hayes codes.

There's nothing vague about his quote.

 

[xsarien]

There's nothing vague about his quote.

And it's not "hyping" it either. It's more of a simple mention.

 

[Agent X]

And it's not "hyping" it either. It's more of a simple mention.

Maybe it's not "hyping" in the traditional sense, but it's far more than a "simple mention" when he's talking about Nintendo's "beloved franchise characters" and "expansion of the world of gaming."

They evidently had intentions of supporting online gaming, or else they wouldn't have announced the hardware and spouted off those quotes. Yes, they had intentions. Maybe they do not have those intentions at the present time, but they certainly had them a few years ago.

 

[xsarien]

Maybe it's not "hyping" in the traditional sense, but it's far more than a "simple mention" when he's talking about Nintendo's "beloved franchise characters" and "expansion of the world of gaming."

They evidently had intentions of supporting online gaming, or else they wouldn't have announced the hardware and spouted off those quotes. Yes, they had intentions. Maybe they do not have those intentions at the present time, but they certainly had them a few years ago.

No, Microsoft had "intentions", Nintendo was feeling around. If they were serious about it during the GameCube's launch, the adapter would've been built into the unit.

 

[Agent X]

And if they were totally opposed to the concept of online gaming back then, they wouldn't have released--or even announced--first-party modems and Ethernet adaptors to begin with. My point stands.

 

[xsarien]

And if they were totally opposed to the concept of online gaming back then, they wouldn't have released--or even announced--first-party modems and Ethernet adaptors to begin with. My point stands.

It's called "appeasing the 3rd parties that wanted to make online games."

 

[Agent X]

Oh, please. Were they also planning on selling the rights to their "beloved franchise characters" to the third-parties in order to "appease" them?

 

[Alcibiades]

It really wasn't that big a favor to Sonic Team since they released a limited amount anyway, Nintendo didn't overproduce and lose out on profits, and Sonic Team was giving GCN Sonic games, so I'd say the trade-off was pretty good, considering Episode I & II was a pretty big game...

 

[xsarien]

Oh, please. Were they also planning on selling the rights to their "beloved franchise characters" to the third-parties in order to "appease" them?

Can you recognize PR when you see it?

 

[jarrod]

They probably are, but they haven't given any public evidence that they're trying, or how hard they're trying. We don't know if Nintendo's really taking online seriously for the next generation, or if they consider it to be a passing fad and will just dabble in it by releasing a few relatively unsupported peripherals.

Well then I don't see the problem? You admit Nintendo's probably been researching online, you admit skipping online this generation probably wasn't detrimental and you admit developers and consumers would probably follow Nintendo's lead next gen if they went online. So uh, what exactly is Nintendo doing wrong then by skipping online this generation?

Sure...if people still care about those games next generation. There are already plenty of racing and RPG games online, and a fair amount of online fighting games in development, too. Nintendo will be entering a crowded market--that market isn't going to wait for Nintendo to play catch-up.

But if everyone's starting from square one again in terms of userbase, how will Nintendo be playing catch up? And do you really think people won't care about Mario or Pokemon in a few years? Why exactly would the biggest franchises in gaming suddenly lose all their pull?

Moving right along...will Nintendo's next system provide a wide repertoire of genres for online gaming? Will Nintendo's next system have online sports games? I don't just mean exaggerated, saccharine stuff like Mario Golf or Mario Tennis, but realistic games with lifelike players and rules. Will Nintendo's next system have any realistic racing games (like Gran Turismo or even Need for Speed)? Will Nintendo's next system have an MMORPG (massively-multiplayer online role-playing game) with a persistent world? These are all questions that Nintendo has not sufficiently answered.

Agreed but really, is now the time these questions should be answered. Again isn't this little tirade against Nintendo ultimately premature?

Again, it doesn't makes sense for Nintendo to wake up one morning in 2006 and say, "OK, we support online gaming now, so buy our new system!" They need to realistically work toward that goal, even if only a little bit at a time. When I see people throwing around remarks like "Nintendo doesn't want to lose their shirts on online gaming" or "Nintendo doesn't have the money to invest in a massively-multiplayer game," then that tells me that Nintendo isn't serious about this aspect of the market, and isn't working toward the goal. It's often necessary in business to lose a little bit of money initially, in order to get to a position where you start making much more money in the long run. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

They can't work towards that goal without informing you every step? Online console gaming has an almost negligible impact on the market today, which is likely why Nintendo decided against pushing it. Nintendo themselves have said they'll push online gaming when it makes sense for them and the market... why's it so hard to take that at face value?

Anyway thanks for the early quotes. I wasn't aware that in Dolphin's gestation period online was going to be such a central component... at least not admittedly by Nintendo reps. Probably why apps like Thunder Rally and Raven Blade were sidelined... NOA's also had some big management changes this gen, I wonder if Lobb was one of the main guys pushing online?

 

[jarrod]

Oh, please. Were they also planning on selling the rights to their "beloved franchise characters" to the third-parties in order to "appease" them?

Uh, what? Where and when? :/

 

[xsarien]

Uh, what? Where and when? :/

A snide comment my way. But apparently he forgot about Nintendo being all about at least lending them out. Sega's F-Zero, Namco's Starfox, Capcom's Zelda games...

 

[Agent X]

Well then I don't see the problem? You admit Nintendo's probably been researching online,

Right, and they probably have been. Even though they've been publicly saying that they're not interested in online games, Nintendo in private may be doing something.

you admit skipping online this generation probably wasn't detrimental

Huh? I've been saying just the opposite, that it will be detrimental!

and you admit developers and consumers would probably follow Nintendo's lead next gen if they went online.

Only so much in that there's a Nintendo fan base that would follow them no matter what. I doubt they would win many converts over from the Sony/Microsoft camps (other than small group of hardcore gamers that tends to get all the systems anyway), as online gaming is far more entrenched on those platforms.

It's like the whole situation with sports games on the GameCube. There are sports games on the GameCube, but they only appeal to people who own a GameCube but lack a PS2, X-Box, or modern-spec PC. EA may be able to sell 30,000 copies of Madden NFL 2005 or NBA Live 2005 to GC owners starved for sports, but that's small potatoes compared to what those games will sell on other platforms.

So uh, what exactly is Nintendo doing wrong then by skipping online this generation?

1. They're not going to be as prepared as Sony/Microsoft to handle online gaming in the next generation.

2. They're constantly losing market share, and therefore brand loyalty (particularly in North America and Europe), because their system doesn't have online-enabled versions of popular games like Madden, Tony Hawk, and Splinter Cell.

3. They're perpetuating a stigma (further fueled by their stupid Luddite "nobody wants online gaming" quotes) that they're not at all interested in online gaming, which leads to their reputation of a "stagnant" and "non-evolving" company that doesn't listen to consumers.

But if everyone's starting from square one again in terms of userbase, how will Nintendo be playing catch up? And do you really think people won't care about Mario or Pokemon in a few years? Why exactly would the biggest franchises in gaming suddenly lose all their pull?

They are already losing their pull.

Super Mario Sunshine barely mustered enough sales to stand toe-to-toe with Jak & Daxter or Ratchet & Clank. Now, just about anybody making a platform game this generation would be proud as a peacock if their game sold as well as J&D or R&C--the problem is that the old Super Mario games used to sell about 4-5 times what J&D or R&C managed. Mario is one of the most storied and prolific video game franchises ever, having been around over 20 years--its GameCube debut should have done a lot better than it did. It's a huge disappointment.

Oh, and how's Pokemon Channel doing?

Agreed but really, is now the time these questions should be answered. Again isn't this little tirade against Nintendo ultimately premature?

Sure it is. At the same time, the Nintendo sheeple who proudly spout psychobabble about the DS being the big online platform of the future because it's including built-in 802.11b (which they conveniently forget that the PSP also offers) are also doing so prematurely, wouldn't you agree?

They can't work towards that goal without informing you every step?

Sure they can. But I think we're encountering a double standard here.

Nintendo has given many false alarms in the past that people have blown into being "the next big thing" (apologies to Brock Lesnar) for online gaming, like the GameSpy deal, AOL deal, the quotes I mentioned above, etc. The fans seem to love to spin this stuff into their favor. I remember when some of the biggest Nintendo supporters said how great it would be to have Mario Kart: Double Dash online because GameSpy inadvertently printed on their Web site one day last summer that it would have online play (a typo which they quickly removed)...then when that never materialized, they just retreated into their shells like good little Koopa Troopas, and went back to muttering the same nonsense about online gaming being a waste of time and bad for the industry.

So, you'll have to pardon me if I take this "Nintendo really is going online" hoopla with a great deal of skepticism. I'll be pleasantly surprised if Nintendo is secretly assembling the biggest online gaming extravaganza ever in time for the launch of the N5/Revolution. However, I can't put any faith into it, based on their track record with online gaming so far.

Let's put it this way: If I'm right, then I can go back to playing online games on other platforms. If I'm wrong, then Nintendo delivers great online games and fuels a competitive market. Either way, I win.

Online console gaming has an almost negligible impact on the market today, which is likely why Nintendo decided against pushing it.

You consider 4 million online console gamers "negligible"?

Nintendo themselves have said they'll push online gaming when it makes sense for them and the market... why's it so hard to take that at face value?

Because people have clearly been clamoring for online Nintendo games for the last few years, yet Nintendo continues to spit in their faces.

When does it begin to make sense? After Sony & Microsoft have amassed 10 million online gamers? After they've amassed 20 million? 30 million?

On that note, why do they have to follow Sony and Microsoft's lead here, anyway? Do they not want their company to be perceived as a "leader," that blazes new trails? Or are they now content to be considered a "follower," a shriveled shell of its former industry-leading self that no longer takes risks and plays it safe for fear of failure?

 

[neptunes]

All I can say is that playing animal crossing online would be fun.

 

[xsarien]

You consider 4 million online console gamers "negligible"?

Considering how many console owners there are worldwide, you're damn straight it's "negligible."

 

[jedimike]

Good points Agent X!

 

[jarrod]

Brace youselves, it's coming...

Right, and they probably have been. Even though they've been publicly saying that they're not interested in online games, Nintendo in private may be doing something.

Nintendo's company line is that online is the future, not the present. That's exactly what they've reinterated publicly, not a lack of interest just the market's not there yet for them. Please try to keep from perverting that again.

Huh? I've been saying just the opposite, that it will be detrimental!

Oh, my mistake sorry. Then you're just wrong.

Only so much in that there's a Nintendo fan base that would follow them no matter what. I doubt they would win many converts over from the Sony/Microsoft camps (other than small group of hardcore gamers that tends to get all the systems anyway), as online gaming is far more entrenched on those platforms.

But come Revolution's release, won't consumers be starting over with their platform decisions? Particularly with Xenon, which seems to be cutting out the XBox audience in favor of shaving costs and turning profit? Why are you so sure the Sony/MS "camps" will go unchanged, will people simply ignore buying a new platform and stick with their PS2s (and to a far lesser extent XBoxes)

It's like the whole situation with sports games on the GameCube. There are sports games on the GameCube, but they only appeal to people who own a GameCube but lack a PS2, X-Box, or modern-spec PC. EA may be able to sell 30,000 copies of Madden NFL 2005 or NBA Live 2005 to GC owners starved for sports, but that's small potatoes compared to what those games will sell on other platforms.

Madden usually pushes 200-300k on GameCube actually. "Small potatoes" is all in scale though. Madden on GameCube usually only seels a third of what it does on XBox so it's "small potatoes"... but then what would you call it when Madden on XBox sells a sixth of what it does on PS2?

1. They're not going to be as prepared as Sony/Microsoft to handle online gaming in the next generation.

Prove it. All we have so far is your interpretaion from PR that they're not interested in online gaming.

2. They're constantly losing market share, and therefore brand loyalty (particularly in North America and Europe), because their system doesn't have online-enabled versions of popular games like Madden, Tony Hawk, and Splinter Cell.

Again prove it. I'd need to see some sort of evidence that online gaming on PS2/XBox is actually significantly hurting GameCube's marketshare.

Besides, don't you think if a lack of online console gaming was really hurting Nintendo's bottom line that they'd...um... do something about it? Aren't they out to make money and expand their market? How little credit do you give them?

3. They're perpetuating a stigma (further fueled by their stupid Luddite "nobody wants online gaming" quotes) that they're not at all interested in online gaming, which leads to their reputation of a "stagnant" and "non-evolving" company that doesn't listen to consumers.

That's simply your own opinion and interpretation though. Have EA, Sega, THQ, Namco or anyone else significant for Revolution's success echoed these stigmas?

They are already losing their pull.

They're the second largest game maker in the world. Well ahead of Sony and Microsoft I might add...

Super Mario Sunshine barely mustered enough sales to stand toe-to-toe with Jak & Daxter or Ratchet & Clank. Now, just about anybody making a platform game this generation would be proud as a peacock if their game sold as well as J&D or R&C--the problem is that the old Super Mario games used to sell about 4-5 times what J&D or R&C managed. Mario is one of the most storied and prolific video game franchises ever, having been around over 20 years--its GameCube debut should have done a lot better than it did. It's a huge disappointment.

Mario Sunshine outsold both actually. Not that it's significant, both franchises pretty much failed to replace Crash or Spyro sales wise for Sony anyway... despite Jak's heavy year long television advertising campaign and Rachet being pushed at budget pricing and packed in with PS2 for Japan.

Then again, Mario Sunshine got punished in reviews for not being it's revolutionary predecessor. Had Nintendo delivered a product as important as Mario 64 maybe sales would've reflected that? Then again, their SNES ports on GBA are still selling 3-5 million copies each...

Oh, and how's Pokemon Channel doing?

I'm not sure but Pokemon RuSa's managed to outsell both PS2 GTAs. Best selling game this generation actually.

Sure it is. At the same time, the Nintendo sheeple who proudly spout psychobabble about the DS being the big online platform of the future because it's including built-in 802.11b (which they conveniently forget that the PSP also offers) are also doing so prematurely, wouldn't you agree?

DS is 6 months away though and plenty of actual facts and particulars have been revealed so far. That's a far cry from where Revolution stands.

Besides which, looking at the actual factors regarding DS, one has to wonder why Nintendo would include WiFi standard in addition to their own propietary local wireless solution? Has Nintendo ever incuded a hardware component they've not exploited?

Sure they can. But I think we're encountering a double standard here.

Heh, this should be good.

Nintendo has given many false alarms in the past that people have blown into being "the next big thing" (apologies to Brock Lesnar) for online gaming, like the GameSpy deal, AOL deal, the quotes I mentioned above, etc. The fans seem to love to spin this stuff into their favor. I remember when some of the biggest Nintendo supporters said how great it would be to have Mario Kart: Double Dash online because GameSpy inadvertently printed on their Web site one day last summer that it would have online play (a typo which they quickly removed)...then when that never materialized, they just retreated into their shells like good little Koopa Troopas, and went back to muttering the same nonsense about online gaming being a waste of time and bad for the industry.

So, you'll have to pardon me if I take this "Nintendo really is going online" hoopla with a great deal of skepticism. I'll be pleasantly surprised if Nintendo is secretly assembling the biggest online gaming extravaganza ever in time for the launch of the N5/Revolution. However, I can't put any faith into it, based on their track record with online gaming so far.

So basically, Nintendo fans blowing rumors and misprints out of proportion is your justification for not taking Nintendo Corperate at their word? Foget double standards, this is just illogical.

Let's put it this way: If I'm right, then I can go back to playing online games on other platforms. If I'm wrong, then Nintendo delivers great online games and fuels a competitive market. Either way, I win.

Win what? I'm not following?

You consider 4 million online console gamers "negligible"?

In the scheme of things, yes. CD add-on owners made up a larger percentage of the 16-bit generation than online console gamers do the current generation... so how much of an impact did Sega CD and PC Engine Super CD have on their successors?

Because people have clearly been clamoring for online Nintendo games for the last few years, yet Nintendo continues to spit in their faces.

Corperations don't spit.

When does it begin to make sense? After Sony & Microsoft have amassed 10 million online gamers? After they've amassed 20 million? 30 million?

I don't know, maybe? Do you think Sony and Microsoft will manage 10-30 milion online gamers in the next two years, looking at the current data?

On that note, why do they have to follow Sony and Microsoft's lead here, anyway? Do they not want their company to be perceived as a "leader," that blazes new trails? Or are they now content to be considered a "follower," a shriveled shell of its former industry-leading self that no longer takes risks and plays it safe for fear of failure?

What? Now you're just diverting into nonsensical nothings to get people riled up... let's try to keep this civil please.