Breaking news: YAHOO SMOKES CRACK

[Crash]

nintendo going multiplatform:

http://www.cube-europe.com/news.php?nid=3746

[DarkMaster]

As well they should, come on Nintendo, unless you got some amazing plan up your sleeve, I think its time to throw in the towel and become third or second party developers. You make great games, why not focus 100% on it? Regardless, if Nintendo can pull up its socks, more power to them, I'd love to seem them succeed. But if their future plans rely mostly on 1st party developed games, then come on...

[DeathsHand]

I agree with Darkmaster... It seems like fans only buy their systems for THEIR games... So I don't see why Nintendo fans think the idea of them developing for other systems (or one other specific system) is stupid... I mean, you'd be getting the Nintendo games you like ALONG WITH the good games on the other system that the Nintendo system wouldn't necesarily get... For the price of one system... *shrugs*

Although they SHOULD keep making handheld systems... :D

[Jonbo298]

This topic will get A LOT of replies. But here's mine:D I doubt Nintendo will leave this soon. I just don't see it happening yet. If Nintendo can't get any more ground next generation, I see them possibly folding on CONSOLES. Handheld will stay alive. But I hope this doesn't happen since I dont see myself owning a Sony or M$ console only to own Nintendo games. Thats what I would basically only buy. And all other companies would re-think their ways of making games if they stand a slim chance against Nintendo's Quality. But I dont see it happening yet. Maybe about 5-10 years down the road, just maybe.

[Joeiss]

I think it is sad when people limit themselves to only one company's brand of games. These people are missing out on so much.

[Crono]

I also agree with DarkMaster. Nintendo has had their success, time to step down.

They know for a fact that it's the loyal fans that keeps the GCN going. The sales charts clearly show that GCN is falling behind, and the gap will only become wider. And as DarkMaster said, unless Nintendo has something huge (and it would have to be really HUGE) up their sleeve, then they are doomed to failure, nothing would be able to bring GCN back into the # 2 spot. Nintendo is supposed to be the innovator, I haven't seen any innovation. Exactly what Bond told me on AIM: MS has been the innovator this generation, and I agree totally. With a build in Hard Drive and an Ethernet port. Online games are something Nintend should have started already, yet, I see nothing, and I bet we won't see any good online titles. Games like F-Zero, Mario Kart, 1080 Avalance and SSBM would all be good online titles, yet Nintendo doesn't take advantage, because their stubborn, and that will be their downfall.

[Crash]

are you guys crazy??? pc's outsell macs by millions... has apple stepped down? no... why? cause they have a loyal following... they are also superior computers! nintendo is a superior console..

what do you think metroid would look like on ps2 hardware... you guys are crazy!

sure its fun to play the games, but the graphics would suck... has anyone played nfl2k3 on the cube? looks like crap... 2k1 looks great on the dreamcast... think about it guys!

[Bond]

Originally posted by Crash
are you guys crazy??? pc's outsell macs by millions... has apple stepped down? no... why? cause they have a loyal following... they are also superior computers! nintendo is a superior console..

what do you think metroid would look like on ps2 hardware... you guys are crazy!
I believe the question is that, how would Metroid look on Xbox hardware? :D

[Gamer]

*Sheds a tear* i have mixed feelings about this...

[Joeiss]

I would love it if Nintendo went third party... I think it would be their best move. Why? Because they would like double their user base, and work on a more power machine, and a machine that almost every gamer has. This would make Nintendo sales off the hizzle my nizzle...


*shudders*

[GameKinG]

Well, ot would be profitble but would detract a lot of cube sales. Currently Nintendo makes more profit then sony in terms of their Game sectors.

[Xantar]

The PlanetGameCube editors pointed out that these analysts seem to have completely missed the point. And I agree with them.

It's about the bottom line, people. Profits. You make more profits, you win.

These analysts are saying that Nintendo could reach a wider audience if they went third party which is correct. But Nintendo would make vastly less money by doing so.

It's really not that hard to figure out. Nintendo gets to charge licensing fees for games developed on the GameCube. For every single GameCube game that's sold, Nintendo gets a small cut of the profit. On top of this, Nintendo gets to sell massive amounts of their own games and keep all the profits from those games. Sure, many games haven't sold as well as Nintendo might have hoped, but many have still sold a million worldwide.

What would happen if Nintendo went third party? Well, just for starters, they would have to pay licensing fees for their games instead of receiving licensing fees. It doesn't matter if their games sell more copies. Their profitability would be drastically reduced.

Analysts and people like IGN are always obsessing over units sold and having a wide audience, but they are missing the point. Nintendo is making money. Lots of it. In fact, this thread (http://www.planetgamecube.com/news.cfm?action=item&id=3999) here reports that Nintendo is making more money in this business than anyone else. This is despite the fact that Sony has more than twice Nintendo's marketshare.

You can talk all you want about what you'd like Nintendo to do. But right now, they're not going anywhere. They may have lost marketshare, but they're perfectly willing to let Sony and Microsoft sell more consoles as long as they are laughing all the way to the bank.

[Jason1]

EDIT: Xantar beat me to the cut, but I do go into a little more detail...

Planetgamecube has a little article on this...I like what Rick says

Rick says: No mention of the fact that Nintendo makes a great deal of money through the licensing fees to make games on it's console either, something it would lose out on by leaving that market.

Most importantly, this article focused solely on SALES, not profitablity, where Nintendo leads. It also ignored Nintendo's stranglehold on the handheld market.

There is a lesson to be learned here. If these analysts knew all the answers to these questions, why aren't they running multi-million dollar successful companies? Because those that can, DO. Those that can't, play armchair quarterback.

On a side note, it's also worth noting that this report came from Europe, where Nintendo is having a particularly hard time, so of course, the sentiment from that part of the world is going to be more "doom and gloom" than is accurate for the rest of the world.



also, you might want to check out this other article posted on PGC today. http://www.planetgamecube.com/news.cfm?action=item&id=3999

Once again, rick makes some good comments:

Rick says: So this all begs the question ... what's more important? Sure, Nintendo could ditch their "family values", and try to attract franchises that are more (or less, depending on your viewpoint) mature like GTA, DOA, etc., and become tops in the industry in terms of sales. Or they could keep focused on quality gameplay and thei strong bottom line, settle for being second place, and laugh all the way to the bank.
Console "fanboyism" is a funny thing. We all want to have the "number one" console. Why can't we just be happy with the games we have, and know that the company making them is healthy? Why is it important that all our friends have the same console? The answer is pretty simple: It's NOT important at all.




But if that's the kind of thing that keeps you up at night, just keep this in mind. Nintendo might be second in sales, but Sony has had to make DOUBLE the sales of Nintendo and still hasn't reached Nintendo's same level of profitability. That makes Nintendo #1 in my book.

BOTTOM LINE: The gamecube isnt losing money for Nintendo. They like to have their own consoles suited to their tastes, and as long as having their own console's is profitable, why bother going 3rd party? I will probably get bashed again for this, but I make valid points regardless.

[GameKinG]

Yeah, thats pretty much what it comes down to, and analyst look the other way for some reason. I agree that if they left their first party to their family fun stuff and let their second parties makes adult oriented stuff then they could really get big. Metroid and Eternal Darkness is a good start, as well as the RE deal. But they need something more GTA.

[GameMaster]

I would just like to see Nintendo's games and characters stick to their "native" console. It makes it more fun for me if their's a really good game on Nintendo and a friend of mine has a different system, and then I have something to brag about. It's no fun if I have Luigi's Mansion 2 and my friend also has it for X-Box.

[Crash]

I had a customer come into the store today, and she asked... hey, when does this zelda come out for the playstation... i (literally) said HA HA HA (exaggerated like that too) it's never coming to the playstation..... well it MIGHT, if nintendo buys the playstation.


see, people want nintendo stuff, they just got suckered into the playstation..... it'll all change next generation, count on it....

[BreakABone]

Originally posted by Crono
I also agree with DarkMaster. Nintendo has had their success, time to step down.

They know for a fact that it's the loyal fans that keeps the GCN going. The sales charts clearly show that GCN is falling behind, and the gap will only become wider. And as DarkMaster said, unless Nintendo has something huge (and it would have to be really HUGE) up their sleeve, then they are doomed to failure, nothing would be able to bring GCN back into the # 2 spot. Nintendo is supposed to be the innovator, I haven't seen any innovation. Exactly what Bond told me on AIM: MS has been the innovator this generation, and I agree totally. With a build in Hard Drive and an Ethernet port. Online games are something Nintend should have started already, yet, I see nothing, and I bet we won't see any good online titles. Games like F-Zero, Mario Kart, 1080 Avalance and SSBM would all be good online titles, yet Nintendo doesn't take advantage, because their stubborn, and that will be their downfall.

I'm just a tad curious on this point, ow exactly has Microsoft been innovative this generation. I mean sure they included the hard-drive, but I have not seen many make use of it hus far other than Blinx which seemed to suffer and well Fable whenever it plans on being released. I mean the ability to rip your own music is cool and all but doesn't add anything new. Maybe, I'm missing something on this hard-drive business, I mean it could be used for good, but thus far...

And I don't think online patches is a good either, with most console games, people expect it to be right the first time around.

does Ps2 have ethernet ports?

And this is a big one, everyone talks about online games, everyone seems to think it's the next step for videogames, thus far I've seen it expand multiplayer aspects of games and not much. Really, what is so special about being able to play someone from God-Knows-Where, Australia or elsewhere. I mean it may be cool if you don't have friends around and whatnot, but you could just not play the game.

Maybe someone is willing to point out the great aspect of online gaming, I have never got the big thrill in it nor do I think I ever will.

[DeathsHand]

Originally posted by Crash
it'll all change next generation, count on it....

Errr isn't that kind of what Nintendo fans were saying about this generation? Return to the glory days of SNES, etc? PS2 will die out because of lack of good games and difficulty of development, and NGC will pull ahead? :confused:

Also similar to the "Things will turn around when Resident Evil/Eternal Darkness/Super Mario Sunshine/Metroid Prime comes out" dealy? :confused:

[bobcat]

Well I agree. If Nintendo did decide to stop making consoles, would the games sell as well on other platforms (e.g. Xbox/Ps2?) I don't think so. Like a Mario game on Ps2 would just feel weird. I don't think marketing would be as appealing as it would on a Nintendo console.

And also this would limit Miyamoto's ideas as he has no say on what the controller will look like, or how powerful the system will be. Making profit is Nintendo's main aim as with any company, and they must be doing so. Why would they pull out? Even if sales aren't amazing, they are still very well in it, and making profit.

[Dyne]

I don't care. I want my Nintendo games.

Like it was said, the day Nintendo leaves the console business, that's the day they leave the video game business. I think they would pull anything out of their asses and succeed. Game Boy console hybrid you can hook up or take on the go? You got it.

They're getting more sales period. It's the rapid fluctuation of all these casual gamers. Take a look at how many sales there were in the last generation compared to this one. There's big differences. PS2 may have all those console sales, but do you really wonder how many are actually getting played?

[Crash]

Originally posted by DeathsHand
Errr isn't that kind of what Nintendo fans were saying about this generation? Return to the glory days of SNES, etc? PS2 will die out because of lack of good games and difficulty of development, and NGC will pull ahead? :confused:

Also similar to the "Things will turn around when Resident Evil/Eternal Darkness/Super Mario Sunshine/Metroid Prime comes out" dealy? :confused:

that was before nintendo got a new president who before was a guy about 80 years old. now, with iwata, things will be different. they are listening to consumers now....

gameboy advance sp... rechargable battery, backlit screen, and it flips because everyone was always complaining about scratching the screen... you think nintendo won't listen next generation gamecube??? it'll be online, it'll be backward compatable, it'll have a mature zelda...you know it will.

[Crono]

I don't think it matters if a Mario game feels "weird" on another console. Who really cares? And for all you Nintendo fans who only buy their systems... imagine all the other games you guys could be playing, I don't think you even realize what you miss out on.
I'll tell you one thing, it'd be hell of a lot cheaper to only be buying 2 consoles instead of 3. Nintendo is making us all-round gamers go out and buy their damn system for a few games, I don't really feel like doing that again, I cant just be wasting my money for a small handful of good games, I'd rather stick with 1 or 2 next gen consoles.

[TheGame]

heh heh heh

About time I creep into this thread...

First of all, I would like to say that Nintendo going third party would be a better move for ME. We talk about how the company makes more money as a first party, but who gives a damn? If Nintendo stops making consoles, there is one less console to buy, period.

Second of all, I think going third party could kill any developer. I'd much rather Nintendo become a second party.

Now, would it be a smart move for Nintendo? I say yes. Here are my reasons (debate if you dare):

1) Nintendo has faithful fans, but the group of faithfuls have been getting noticably smaller over the generations percentage wise. it went from NES's 100%, to SNES's 50%, to N64's 33%, and now to gamecube's ???%. The fact is, the market is growing, and Nintendo isn't.

2) If Nintendo developed exclusivly for Sony or Microsoft that could help both game quality and the sales of games.

On the game quality end, we'll say Xbox. Xbox is simply better hardware, more features, and more stuff to innovate with. You couldn't name one thing Nintendo could do with GCN that they couldn't do with Xbox as a second party.

On the sales end, Ps2. Imagine how much more effective the GBA-GCN(now Ps2) link up would have been. Pokemon online would also be a bigger possibility, and it would have a VASTLY bigger crowd of gamers to sell it to. I mean, what's more profitable, a game that sells 1 million copies on GCN, or 5 million copies on Ps2?

3) Nintendo would still be able to keep the GBA. The fact is, GBA is the most profit friendly system there is right now. Nintendo probably pays pennies to make it, and sells it for a pretty unreasonable price (especially the GBA:SP)...and people still feed in to it. Like it or not GBA is the reason Nintendo is the most profitable company, not GCN.

4) Partnership before competition strikes. It looks like Sony and MS are/were planning to make a handheld system... By Nintendo joining one or the other, not only will they get support from the company they join, they will also be able to relax even more than they are now in the handheld market.

ok, that's about it.

Personally, I think Nintendo should ride GCN out, then jump ship to Sony or Microsoft. Like Crash pointed out, Nintendo's console is superior... but gaming is coming to a time where graphics just don't matter. Next generation does anybody here really think a console will stand out in visuals? I don't think so.... I think only 2 thinks will seperate the systems. 1) The features the console has and 2) The games the console has.

Even now it's basically at that point. A game ugly as hell like GTA:VC can sell like there's no tomorrow, while visual masterpeices fail.

The thing I hate about Nintendo in comparision to Sony or Microsoft is that they worry WAY too much about profit. When they worry about that too much it in turn hurts the game quality because they aren't willing to go out on a limb with things, like for Example online gaming, or making any notorious changes to sequals(the way I see it, change the bad selling games, and keep the good selling games the same.. Nintendo has done the exact opposite this generation). If Nintendo becomes a second party they could worry about what they are great at... making games.

[BreakABone]

Originally posted by TheGame
heh heh heh

About time I creep into this thread...

Why couldn't they shot you before you crept in?

First of all, I would like to say that Nintendo going third party would be a better move for ME. We talk about how the company makes more money as a first party, but who gives a damn? If Nintendo stops making consoles, there is one less console to buy, period.

Well in that regard wouldn't it be a better move for any other console maker to stop making consoles? And who's to say someone else won't enter the area, I mean thus far we've had Nintendo enter, then Sega (well they had the MasterSystem, but no one really counts than) then Sony and now MicroSoft.

Second of all, I think going third party could kill any developer. I'd much rather Nintendo become a second party.

Well I don't know how exactly going 3rd party could kill a developer, I mean 3D0, Atari and Sega all did it and they don't seem to be dead or the last time I checked.

Now, would it be a smart move for Nintendo? I say yes. Here are my reasons (debate if you dare):

1) Nintendo has faithful fans, but the group of faithfuls have been getting noticably smaller over the generations percentage wise. it went from NES's 100%, to SNES's 50%, to N64's 33%, and now to gamecube's ???%. The fact is, the market is growing, and Nintendo isn't.[/qiote]

I'm a little baffled at your percentage, are you talking about the percentage of people who owned the console or who are still fans of Nintendo?

You're numbers are rather illogical at best, I mean for one, I believe this will probably be the biggest generation thus far, and if you know math if you have 100% of 10 and 50% of 20, it's still the same damn thing. But maybe, I'm missing the point of those numbers.

[quote]2) If Nintendo developed exclusivly for Sony or Microsoft that could help both game quality and the sales of games.

I don't see how working for Microsoft ot Sony will actually improve the quality of the games, I mean if Nintendo is regarded as one of the best developers in the world, how exactly would another team that isn't as well renowed teach them something?

And well, I don't know if that is completely accurate, I mean think about it, PS2/Xbox caters to a different group than Nintendo games. GTA:VC sells millions in no time yet games like Jak & Daxter and Ratchet & clank don't, let Mario and Animal Crossing are able to on the Cube.

On the game quality end, we'll say Xbox. Xbox is simply better hardware, more features, and more stuff to innovate with. You couldn't name one thing Nintendo could do with GCN that they couldn't do with Xbox as a second party.

They couldn't use their controller, the GBA player or the digital click.

I know the Xbox has more power and the best to it, but no one really shows how Xbox hardware makes a game more innovative, I mean take Blinx for example, took some features of the Xbox such as the hard-drive and did it improve the game any? does anyone consider it a top platformer of 2002? the next game that will push the hard-drive seems to be Fable unless their are some in between, but eh.

On the sales end, Ps2. Imagine how much more effective the GBA-GCN(now Ps2) link up would have been. Pokemon online would also be a bigger possibility, and it would have a VASTLY bigger crowd of gamers to sell it to. I mean, what's more profitable, a game that sells 1 million copies on GCN, or 5 million copies on Ps2?
How many games sell 5 million on Ps2? How many games sell 5 million period?

Anyhow, how is releasing another PokeMon increasing quality? And heck we don't even know what the hell the GCN PokeMon is like to make any judgements on if having it on Ps2 would have helped.

3) Nintendo would still be able to keep the GBA. The fact is, GBA is the most profit friendly system there is right now. Nintendo probably pays pennies to make it, and sells it for a pretty unreasonable price (especially the GBA:SP)...and people still feed in to it. Like it or not GBA is the reason Nintendo is the most profitable company, not GCN.

Yes no one would deny that Nintendo makes the most profit because of the GBA, but it's not like the GCN doesn't play a part in it, but it is largely due to the GBA and that is why Nintendo is trying to push it so hard.

4) Partnership before competition strikes. It looks like Sony and MS are/were planning to make a handheld system... By Nintendo joining one or the other, not only will they get support from the company they join, they will also be able to relax even more than they are now in the handheld market.

Well, I think Nintendo has a handle on the handheld market atleast for a few more years

-They are the only ones of the 3 who actually used cartidges before, and CDs aren't too ideal for a handheld console atleast IMO. Well atleast that's what EGM stated.
-Nintendo knows what types of games sell on a handheld. It isn't exactly the same as the console. I mean games like Mario, MegaMan, Sonic and all those others that may "deem" kiddie on the console are much more likely to sell on a console than Driver, GTA 2 or anything else. I mean it's not like they haven't been released to compare.



Personally, I think Nintendo should ride GCN out, then jump ship to Sony or Microsoft. Like Crash pointed out, Nintendo's console is superior... but gaming is coming to a time where graphics just don't matter. Next generation does anybody here really think a console will stand out in visuals? I don't think so.... I think only 2 thinks will seperate the systems. 1) The features the console has and 2) The games the console has.

Why is it that you talk about graphics and Nintendo, I mean if their big games on GCN are any signs, Nintendo doesn't want to push the extreme limits of the console, they want to push the envelope on gameplay. I mean Mario won't win any awards for graphical achievement, Animal Crossing won't be up their for any texturing awards or anything else.

As for the features, well noo one has any idea what Nintendo, Sony or MicroSoft may or may not include in their next console and if some features will even be needed. I mean with all the folks who own a Ps2 or Xbox, is a DVD player really important anymore? Nintendo has made a quite remarkable wireless controller, will wireless controllers be important next-gen?

I do think certain stuff like modems and hard-drives will be important to a console but some other features may or may not.

As for games, it's real hard to judge that now as well. I mean each generation is another fresh start somewhat, so folks can lose support while others can gain support. It's not like any of us are Ms.Cleo are we?

[TheGame]

*cough*

Well in that regard wouldn't it be a better move for any other console maker to stop making consoles? And who's to say someone else won't enter the area, I mean thus far we've had Nintendo enter, then Sega (well they had the MasterSystem, but no one really counts than) then Sony and now MicroSoft.

The reason I wouldn't mind Nintendo stopping is the fact that Nintendo is a great GAME developer... unlike Microsoft or Sony. Nintendo's desire to make profit is taking front seat over thier desire to make great games now-a-days... and it's hurting thier games. So, becoming a 2nd party would make them better.

Well I don't know how exactly going 3rd party could kill a developer, I mean 3D0, Atari and Sega all did it and they don't seem to be dead or the last time I checked.

Has Sega turnd a profit yet? No. They have only failed misserably a beating EA. 3D0 and Atari aren't in Nintendo's leauge as far as quality software.

don't see how working for Microsoft ot Sony will actually improve the quality of the games, I mean if Nintendo is regarded as one of the best developers in the world, how exactly would another team that isn't as well renowed teach them something?

like I said before, NIntendo is more worried about profit now-a-days... if they were worried about thier games half as much as thier system they would be able to flop out WAY more quality WAY faster.

And well, I don't know if that is completely accurate, I mean think about it, PS2/Xbox caters to a different group than Nintendo games. GTA:VC sells millions in no time yet games like Jak & Daxter and Ratchet & clank don't, let Mario and Animal Crossing are able to on the Cube.

Err, if There was No Cube, the people who purchased those games woudln't just drop dead. They would own whatever console thier precious Nintendo games are on and they would buy them just like how they are buying then now. The ONLY difference would be that there would be even more people to sell it too... there is no way possible it would sell less.

They couldn't use their controller, the GBA player or the digital click.

The digital click? LMAO, how many games really utilize that? Xbox's controller has three more buttons than Cube's anyway. Also, if Nintendo worked with MS, they would make an Xbox version of the GBA player.

I know the Xbox has more power and the best to it, but no one really shows how Xbox hardware makes a game more innovative, I mean take Blinx for example, took some features of the Xbox such as the hard-drive and did it improve the game any? does anyone consider it a top platformer of 2002? the next game that will push the hard-drive seems to be Fable unless their are some in between, but eh.

Err... The hard drive gives more room for innovation. That doesn't mean developers are taking advantage of it. Let an innovative developer like Nintendo work with hardware like that... I'm sure they could find more than enouh to work it.

As far as innovation on the home console market? Well, we'll see who's MMORPGs have the most features and the biggest userbases.

How many games sell 5 million on Ps2? How many games sell 5 million period?

Anyhow, how is releasing another PokeMon increasing quality? And heck we don't even know what the hell the GCN PokeMon is like to make any judgements on if having it on Ps2 would have helped.

The point was.. the userbase is bigger.. not that Pokemon would be an awesome game :rolleyes:

Well, I think Nintendo has a handle on the handheld market atleast for a few more years

-They are the only ones of the 3 who actually used cartidges before, and CDs aren't too ideal for a handheld console atleast IMO. Well atleast that's what EGM stated.
-Nintendo knows what types of games sell on a handheld. It isn't exactly the same as the console. I mean games like Mario, MegaMan, Sonic and all those others that may "deem" kiddie on the console are much more likely to sell on a console than Driver, GTA 2 or anything else. I mean it's not like they haven't been released to compare

Well, Nintendo has the advantage there... but you could have said the same thing before SNES came out... you could have also said Saturn and N64 would have been dominant before Psx came out... You could have said Nintendo will get second place this generation without a doubt until Xbox came out.

We can't really predict anything. Nintendo has fallen more times (especially in the US) to newcomers than anybody left in the console manufacturing biz.

Why is it that you talk about graphics and Nintendo, I mean if their big games on GCN are any signs, Nintendo doesn't want to push the extreme limits of the console, they want to push the envelope on gameplay. I mean Mario won't win any awards for graphical achievement, Animal Crossing won't be up their for any texturing awards or anything else.

That's because both of the projects were started on N64. Nintendo released those games because of 100% money management.

As for the features, well noo one has any idea what Nintendo, Sony or MicroSoft may or may not include in their next console and if some features will even be needed. I mean with all the folks who own a Ps2 or Xbox, is a DVD player really important anymore? Nintendo has made a quite remarkable wireless controller, will wireless controllers be important next-gen?

Well, if Ps3 is sticking to it's roots and being backward compatible, why not include a DVD player? I mean... some people's only DVD player is thier Ps2, does Sony want everybody to keep thier Ps2 for the DVD playback?

I think a DVD player may or may not be a must... but it is an extra feature that makes the system more valuable, any way you look at it. I can't imagine anybody not buying a Ps3 because it includes a DVD player.... but I can imagine people not buying a GCN because it doesn't include a DVD player.

As for games, it's real hard to judge that now as well. I mean each generation is another fresh start somewhat, so folks can lose support while others can gain support. It's not like any of us are Ms.Cleo are we?

Cubedojo's mom is :-/

[bobcat]

Originally posted by Crono
I don't think it matters if a Mario game feels "weird" on another console. Who really cares? And for all you Nintendo fans who only buy their systems... imagine all the other games you guys could be playing, I don't think you even realize what you miss out on.
I'll tell you one thing, it'd be hell of a lot cheaper to only be buying 2 consoles instead of 3. Nintendo is making us all-round gamers go out and buy their damn system for a few games, I don't really feel like doing that again, I cant just be wasting my money for a small handful of good games, I'd rather stick with 1 or 2 next gen consoles.

Who is to say that Mario will sell even sell as well on another console? It could , but then again it could completely backfire, and I don't think Nintendo would wanna take that risk.

I have more GC games than Xbox games. :D

[Jason1]

I have to quick comments for TheGame:

you say as for innovation, we will see who has the biggest userbase for their MMORPG. Somebody tell me when MMORPG's became the definition of innovation?


Also, you say the quality of Nintendo's games has suffered. Do you read any magazine's reviews, especially unbaised ones like EGM? You cant read reviews for games like Prime, Wind Waker, Sunshine, ect, and tell me their games have suffered. The simple fact is that they havent lost a step in game development. What they have lost is userbase.

[BreakABone]

Originally posted by TheGame
*cough*

Are you sick? Try some home made chicken soup.



The reason I wouldn't mind Nintendo stopping is the fact that Nintendo is a great GAME developer... unlike Microsoft or Sony. Nintendo's desire to make profit is taking front seat over thier desire to make great games now-a-days... and it's hurting thier games. So, becoming a 2nd party would make them better.
Ok, I won't go into anything with the quality of nintendo games versus MicroSoft's or sony's because U'm sure I will piss some folks off, but I see where you're coming from with that, but I don't see how making a profit is hurting their games, maybe I'm missing something here.

Has Sega turnd a profit yet? No. They have only failed misserably a beating EA. 3D0 and Atari aren't in Nintendo's leauge as far as quality software.
While, it is true Sega hasn't turned a profit, it really doesn't count since they were losing money before they went 3rd party, if it helps any, they are atleast not going more into debt. And I'm sure it will take some time for them to go above the red again.



like I said before, NIntendo is more worried about profit now-a-days... if they were worried about thier games half as much as thier system they would be able to flop out WAY more quality WAY faster.

Well, I don't think it's far to talk about Nintendo being out for a profit. Nintendo is a game maker and nothing else. Sony and Microsoft has other divisions that could help stomach any loss they made, Nintendo doesn't, they make their money only in the game market so it is important for them to make a profit.

I don't get the last statement, maybe you will rephrase it later.

Err, if There was No Cube, the people who purchased those games woudln't just drop dead. They would own whatever console thier precious Nintendo games are on and they would buy them just like how they are buying then now. The ONLY difference would be that there would be even more people to sell it too... there is no way possible it would sell less.

Well in a way, nintendo could end up dividing it's fanbase, I mean if PS3 would get Mario and xbox 2 get Zelda, I see some Nintendo fans getting pissed at it and not buying either. I mean you can say something that may happen, I could say something that might happen, the simple fact is no one knows for sure. you may say Nintendo fans are loyal, but that was when they could get all the games at one place when they are spread out, it could help or it could hurt. No one knows for sure.



The digital click? LMAO, how many games really utilize that? Xbox's controller has three more buttons than Cube's anyway. Also, if Nintendo worked with MS, they would make an Xbox version of the GBA player.
Well, it is true not many games use the "digital click" and as a whole I do find them pretty useless, but hey maybe Nintendo has something special with it, I doubt it.

O o, I know one game that was done on the Cube that would be a bitch on the Xbox, Animal Crossing, I'm sorry for such a powerful system, why the hell can't it keep time when it's plugged out?

Well, just because it has more buttons doesn't mean it's needed, and what three buttons? The black and white buttons as well as the back button? If you count the "z" button, that would be two more unless I missed a button on my Xbox.

Err... The hard drive gives more room for innovation. That doesn't mean developers are taking advantage of it. Let an innovative developer like Nintendo work with hardware like that... I'm sure they could find more than enouh to work it.
Well, I'm sure their are some features that the hard-drive opens up that wasn't done before, but I'm just not seeing it now. Maybe, Nintendo could work miracles with it, maybe they can't, but who's to say that Nintendo's next console wouldn't have a hard-drive?

[/b]As far as innovation on the home console market? Well, we'll see who's MMORPGs have the most features and the biggest userbases.
Ok how exactly is a MMORPg anything new? I mean it may be the first time it's done on a console, but it's nothing breatakingly new, but maybe that's just me.


[quote]The point was.. the userbase is bigger.. not that Pokemon would be an awesome game :rolleyes:

the next time you roll your eyes at me, well let's say you don't want to know what I'm gonna do.

Anyhow you say it's a bigger userbase, but how many Ps2ers would care for a PokeMon game, I mean it's not exactly in the audience's big interest is it?

There are many variables that are unpredictable just because something seems so clear cut doesn't mean it is.

Well, Nintendo has the advantage there... but you could have said the same thing before SNES came out... you could have also said Saturn and N64 would have been dominant before Psx came out... You could have said Nintendo will get second place this generation without a doubt until Xbox came out.

You have a point on that, the only difference is the GBA is out already, the Saturn did beat the PSX to the market, but the n64 didn't. The GBA has a loyal fanbase and much like the Ps2 at the moment, the competitors can try and catch up but it's highly unlikely especially with the SP coming out soon.

We can't really predict anything. Nintendo has fallen more times (especially in the US) to newcomers than anybody left in the console manufacturing biz.

that isn't too fair, I mean Nintendo has had more chances to fail then anyone else, and the fact that they continue to slip and remain profitability shows they either know how to squeeze a penny or aren't slipping too much.

[/b]That's because both of the projects were started on N64. Nintendo released those games because of 100% money management.[/b]
Well no one has any proof that Mario Sunshine was started on the n64, many have speculated it was the rumored Super Mario II 2, but no one can be 100% but Nintendo.

As for Animal Crossing, I think it was released (atleast in Japan) to fill in their line-up since they already had the game finished and not many folks got to experience it in Japan due to it's late release. I have no idea why it was released in NA, I mean I highly doubt that it was for money because Nintendo should know that a game with such outdated graphics, a kiddish look and well no real purpose wouldn't have sold too hot (even if it did), I think it was more or less a taste game.

Well, if Ps3 is sticking to it's roots and being backward compatible, why not include a DVD player? I mean... some people's only DVD player is thier Ps2, does Sony want everybody to keep thier Ps2 for the DVD playback?
I'm not saying Sony will not or shouldn't keep a DVD player in the next PlayStation, I'm just saying that it wouldn't be as important of a feature much like the CD player, I mean how many folks talk about that?

I think a DVD player may or may not be a must... but it is an extra feature that makes the system more valuable, any way you look at it. I can't imagine anybody not buying a Ps3 because it includes a DVD player.... but I can imagine people not buying a GCN because it doesn't include a DVD player.
I see what you mean here, and I agree with you on that much, it's better to have than it is not too, but I just don't think it's a must unless everyone else is doing it.


Cubedojo's mom is :-/

Well, I wonder how he feels about her recent legal troubles.

[ominub]

i dont think they have enough popular games if only they had more better games they would not have to think off somthing like this i really dont care what they do i dont like any of the games on gamecube except zelda OoT materquest thats it

[Jonbo298]

yeesh, lets see if I can bring anything POSITIVE about Nintendo. Nintendo is one company that tries new things regardless if they will succeed or not. There have been a few failures like the 64DD and the Virtual Boy, but some have succeeded. Some companies take some of Nintendo's ideas and use them. ie: Rumble feature. I dont see Nintendo leaving any time soon. Because if they said that they are going to develop for both Sony and M$, I would be pissed off. I dont want to buy 2 consoles for $300(that my likely cost of the next-gen consoles). Thats $600 right there! Plus, there are games and other things! I would rather spend and get one console where I know I am getting GOOD games. Not 75% ****ty games and maybe 25% getting decent scores.;) argh, I've run out of things to say:(

[BreakABone]

Originally posted by Jason1
I have to quick comments for TheGame:

you say as for innovation, we will see who has the biggest userbase for their MMORPG. Somebody tell me when MMORPG's became the definition of innovation?


Also, you say the quality of Nintendo's games has suffered. Do you read any magazine's reviews, especially unbaised ones like EGM? You cant read reviews for games like Prime, Wind Waker, Sunshine, ect, and tell me their games have suffered. The simple fact is that they havent lost a step in game development. What they have lost is userbase.

Well, I don't think there is such a thing as an unbiase "opinion" then it wouldn't be opinion, it would be fact.


EGM may seem to be the fairest but that doesn't make it unbiase. And there are several high scoring games that I don't like and several low scoring ones that I do love. So a review is only good for those who need guidance or confirmation.

[Jason1]

If you talk like that pengiun, you basically saying that there is no way to tell if a game is good or not. While sure, everything is based on opinoin, but if a game gets good reviews from all the major magazines, websites, ect., dont you think is a safe bet that thats a well-made, quality title? Oh wait, thats just opinoin again. If we ignore the reviews, who's to say superman64 really sucked?

[Dyne]

Yeah, I actually enjoyed Superman 64 for a while. True fact. I used to play it then go watch Superman on Kids WB. Then come back and play it. And my friend and I used to hide the car in practice mode and let the other find it. It kept us occupied for a very long time. =o

[TheGame]

Ok, I won't go into anything with the quality of nintendo games versus MicroSoft's or sony's because U'm sure I will piss some folks off, but I see where you're coming from with that, but I don't see how making a profit is hurting their games, maybe I'm missing something here.

Ok... Justin's explination on how worrying too much about profit hurts games:

First of all look at Gaamecube's design... you can not tell me that them holdng back didn't have anything to do with thier monney grubbing ways.

1) Gamecube doesn't feature a DVD player.... why? Because they saw how bad sony faird with a DVD player at first in Japan... profit first, system quality later.

2) Gamecube's best source of memory at launch was 500kb... do you really want me to go into this again. Simply put, if you remember, it hurt sports games back then, and it still hurts them now. Plus Nintendo sold it for an extremely rip off price of $14.99 in the face of competition who sold thiers for $34.99 with 16x the memory.

3) The disks... Ok, maybe it doesn't hurt games, or does it? Have you seen a nice long RPG come out for GCN yet? I haven't. Nintendo made these disks the prevent piracy, and in turn gave the disks much less memory. Don't give me that stupid "1.5GB is plenty" arguement, because it may be plenty for the games that are out now, but it's not as much as the competition. Plus there allready games on Ps2 that wouldn't be able to fit on those disks, more like 2-3 of them... Gran Turismo and every RPG for example.

these are just a few of many examples where Nintendo sacrificed quality for $$$... even selling Rare could be put on this list.

While, it is true Sega hasn't turned a profit, it really doesn't count since they were losing money before they went 3rd party, if it helps any, they are atleast not going more into debt. And I'm sure it will take some time for them to go above the red again

Yep, now that they know thier role, ditched GCN sports, and slowed down development and game releases I'm sure they will make it work. But will they ever be a highly successful third party? Put it like this, they need to slow WAY down before they start gaining respect again.

They are a good developer, capible of big things... but reasleasing too many games is killing them. They need to slow down and make some true killer apps (I'm talkin games that get in the high 9's) then they can work with momentum from that and get faster and faster.

Well, I don't think it's far to talk about Nintendo being out for a profit. Nintendo is a game maker and nothing else. Sony and Microsoft has other divisions that could help stomach any loss they made, Nintendo doesn't, they make their money only in the game market so it is important for them to make a profit.

If they went 2nd party would it be as important for them to make a profit? Would the sacrifices they make all the time to make profit be cured if they became a second party? If Nintendo was just sitting there, worrying 100% about games... and not how well thier console will fair in q4 of 2003... and not about what big name games they need to FORCE out in order to pull a profit... do you think thier game quality would go up or down?

I look at games like Luigi's mansion, and I think to myself about how much that game could have really been if Nintendo spent 2 years instead of the one year they took to develop it.

Well in a way, nintendo could end up dividing it's fanbase, I mean if PS3 would get Mario and xbox 2 get Zelda, I see some Nintendo fans getting pissed at it and not buying either. I mean you can say something that may happen, I could say something that might happen, the simple fact is no one knows for sure. you may say Nintendo fans are loyal, but that was when they could get all the games at one place when they are spread out, it could help or it could hurt. No one knows for sure.

Well, that's why I have repeated over and over that I would like them to become a second party, not a third party because "I think going third party could kill any developer"

Nintendo fans (at least the ones in this forum) are loyal enough to follow Nintendo into whichever connection they may have made. Hell, you would be shocked at how many people are buying Xboxes now that one of thier Nintendo favorites is coming out for the system.

If Nintendo went third party, that would be a servere problem, then, just like you said, they split up franchises. If they stick to one other sytem, I'm sure that system would be in my house and your house come 2006 :p

Well, it is true not many games use the "digital click" and as a whole I do find them pretty useless, but hey maybe Nintendo has something special with it, I doubt it.

O o, I know one game that was done on the Cube that would be a bitch on the Xbox, Animal Crossing, I'm sorry for such a powerful system, why the hell can't it keep time when it's plugged out?

Well, just because it has more buttons doesn't mean it's needed, and what three buttons? The black and white buttons as well as the back button? If you count the "z" button, that would be two more unless I missed a button on my Xbox.

Xbox has 10 Buttons:
A
B
X
Y
Black
White
L
R
L2
R2
(the last two are pressing the sticks)

GCN has:
A
B
X
Y
L
R
Z

As far as animal Crossing, it could serve as a problem, but as long as you keep your system plugged in you keep the time going, if you unplug the sytem it's your own damn fault that you have to reset the clock in thast game :)

Well, I'm sure their are some features that the hard-drive opens up that wasn't done before, but I'm just not seeing it now. Maybe, Nintendo could work miracles with it, maybe they can't, but who's to say that Nintendo's next console wouldn't have a hard-drive?

If it doesn, I'm shocked. Nintendo wouldn't spend the extra $$$ to put that in there system... and you can quote me on this when they release the specs.

Also, you talk about Animal crossing... imaging if That game was on an 8MB card or a limitless hard drive. The city could be ten times as big, there could be WAY more crap saved. Like events and stuff, and more customization. You could make a limitless number of those patterns with better graphics.

the next time you roll your eyes at me, well let's say you don't want to know what I'm gonna do.

:rolleyes:

Anyhow you say it's a bigger userbase, but how many Ps2ers would care for a PokeMon game, I mean it's not exactly in the audience's big interest is it?

Is it? I would be willing to put money of the fact that more Ps2 owners have GBAs than GCN owners. Plus, if there were no Nintendo system, like I said before, Nintendo fans would flock to the Nintendo brand... if it were on Ps2, or Xbox, it would sell to all the guys who would have bought it for cube, and all the guys who couldn't buy it because they don't have a cube.

There are many variables that are unpredictable just because something seems so clear cut doesn't mean it is.

Well, I just use common sense... I'll make a poll (well, maybe not a poll because of the situation nowadays) to prove my point.

You have a point on that, the only difference is the GBA is out already, the Saturn did beat the PSX to the market, but the n64 didn't. The GBA has a loyal fanbase and much like the Ps2 at the moment, the competitors can try and catch up but it's highly unlikely especially with the SP coming out soon.

Dreamcast was out allready too, before Ps2 came, and DC had a pretty strong backing, online at least. But when it's preformance got ripped apart everybody ditched it.

Ps2's preformance has yet to be simply killed off. That's why it stays. You can't tell me that GBA is the most advanced handheld technology in the world. GBA has a LOT of room to be killed visually.

As for Animal Crossing, I think it was released (atleast in Japan) to fill in their line-up since they already had the game finished and not many folks got to experience it in Japan due to it's late release. I have no idea why it was released in NA, I mean I highly doubt that it was for money because Nintendo should know that a game with such outdated graphics, a kiddish look and well no real purpose wouldn't have sold too hot (even if it did), I think it was more or less a taste game.

If Luigi's mansion is the best selling launch game of all time, I'm sure they knew they could make a few bucks with Animal crossing. They spent little to nothing to make it, so there is no way to lose. Kinda like Sega with Sonic mega collection.



and that's about it... in the end you kinda disagreed then agreed :p

soo... in conclusion :rolleyes: ;)

[TheGame]

Originally posted by Jason1
I have to quick comments for TheGame:

you say as for innovation, we will see who has the biggest userbase for their MMORPG. Somebody tell me when MMORPG's became the definition of innovation?

Has it been done before fully free roaming on a home console before? I thought innovation is breaking new ground... and in the game console industry this is definently new. Even a strong online community like Xbox live is breaking new ground.

Also, you say the quality of Nintendo's games has suffered. Do you read any magazine's reviews, especially unbaised ones like EGM? You cant read reviews for games like Prime, Wind Waker, Sunshine, ect, and tell me their games have suffered. The simple fact is that they havent lost a step in game development. What they have lost is userbase.

I didn't like Metroid Prime, and that's the first time a review led me wrong. So now I have grown to have a new disrespect for reviews. (plus I look at Animal crossing's scores some places and it pisses me off because I like that game).

[Crash]

you didn't like metroid prime... DIE DIE DIE!!!!!!!!!

[BreakABone]

Originally posted by TheGame
Ok... Justin's explination on how worrying too much about profit hurts games:

Penguin's advice on using spell check....

First of all look at Gaamecube's design... you can not tell me that them holdng back didn't have anything to do with thier monney grubbing ways.

Well, I don't mind the GCN design. As my teacher told us KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid)

1) Gamecube doesn't feature a DVD player.... why? Because they saw how bad sony faird with a DVD player at first in Japan... profit first, system quality later.
Well, I highly doubt that the DVD decision was based on the PS2' sales, I mean the Ps2 launched in March of 2000 and the GCN was revealed in August, that would give them like 5 months? Maybe, you know more than I do, but I don't think it is, I think it was more Nintendo's decision to avoid piracy.

2) Gamecube's best source of memory at launch was 500kb... do you really want me to go into this again. Simply put, if you remember, it hurt sports games back then, and it still hurts them now. Plus Nintendo sold it for an extremely rip off price of $14.99 in the face of competition who sold thiers for $34.99 with 16x the memory.
I know we've been through the memory card debate time and time again, and it all depends on the type of gamer you are. I mean I can only imagine how it hurts sports fans, but I've never had a problem with the 59 and I had a lot of games on them, and the 251 is about half full with 21 games now. But I do agree for such a small memory card, it was rather expensive.

3) The disks... Ok, maybe it doesn't hurt games, or does it? Have you seen a nice long RPG come out for GCN yet? I haven't. Nintendo made these disks the prevent piracy, and in turn gave the disks much less memory. Don't give me that stupid "1.5GB is plenty" arguement, because it may be plenty for the games that are out now, but it's not as much as the competition. Plus there allready games on Ps2 that wouldn't be able to fit on those disks, more like 2-3 of them... Gran Turismo and every RPG for example.
Well, Skies of Arcadia Legends is a nice long RPG, I mean it may be a port of a DC game, but it wasn't that large of a game on the Dc, and the fact that GCN doesn't have many RPGs make it hard to judge failry. Maybe, there are no RPGs because they won't sell on the Cube or the size of the disc, who is to know?

I will agree there are several games on Ps2/Xbox that wouldn't fit on one Cube disc, and people say that would hurt Nintendo in the long run, I really can't tell if it has.

these are just a few of many examples where Nintendo sacrificed quality for $$$... even selling Rare could be put on this list.

I don't know if they sacrificed "quality" as they did shortchanging, I mean the disc, memory cards and whatever are of good quality, but it was shortchanging consumers.

Yep, now that they know thier role, ditched GCN sports, and slowed down development and game releases I'm sure they will make it work. But will they ever be a highly successful third party? Put it like this, they need to slow WAY down before they start gaining respect again.
I think Sega will always be a respected developer, they may not be trusted by everyone but still. As for slowing down game development, I guess it would be wise for Sega to slow down the rate of releasing games and concern themselves with getting out high quality games that will sell better.

They are a good developer, capible of big things... but reasleasing too many games is killing them. They need to slow down and make some true killer apps (I'm talkin games that get in the high 9's) then they can work with momentum from that and get faster and faster.
I agree with you on that point, but I just put off 2001 and 2002 as testing years for Sega, I mean they were just going 3rd party and they don't know what sells where.

If they went 2nd party would it be as important for them to make a profit? Would the sacrifices they make all the time to make profit be cured if they became a second party? If Nintendo was just sitting there, worrying 100% about games... and not how well thier console will fair in q4 of 2003... and not about what big name games they need to FORCE out in order to pull a profit... do you think thier game quality would go up or down?
I don't think Nintendo make many sacrifices for a profit. I mean look at the constant delays and the secretive nature.

In a way having Nintendo worry about how they will do in q4 2003 would help gamers, I mean it means Nintendo has to get a fire under their ass to recent a game that might actually sell instead of delaying it forever.

I look at games like Luigi's mansion, and I think to myself about how much that game could have really been if Nintendo spent 2 years instead of the one year they took to develop it.

Well, I really don't know if the extra time would have helped Luigi's Mansion, the fact is Luigi's Mansion was a very limited concept no matter how much time they poured into it, I don't see it going very far.

But who's to say Nintendo as a 2nd party wouldn't be forced to a schedule or a tighter budget. I mean as their own developer they have any freedom they want.

Well, that's why I have repeated over and over that I would like them to become a second party, not a third party because "I think going third party could kill any developer"

And if Nintendo goes second party, which company do you think they should go to? I mean if Nintendo goes to Sony or Microsoft, I could see folks sharing some of the same issues with Nintendo that they do now.

Nintendo fans (at least the ones in this forum) are loyal enough to follow Nintendo into whichever connection they may have made. Hell, you would be shocked at how many people are buying Xboxes now that one of thier Nintendo favorites is coming out for the system.

Just because Nintendo fans are loyal to the Big N now, doens't mean they will be in the future. Some may leave Nintendo's camp because they felt that they sold out, others may have some type of grudge against the company that buys out Nintendo for forcing them out of the industry and so many other stuff could be an "N-Factor"

If Nintendo went third party, that would be a servere problem, then, just like you said, they split up franchises. If they stick to one other sytem, I'm sure that system would be in my house and your house come 2006 :p

Well, I don't know how much gaming I will be doing in 2006 as people grow out of stuff, but I guess it's understandable. Technically, if Nintendo does go 3rd party, I don't think it will happen any time soon.

Xbox has 10 Buttons:
A
B
X
Y
Black
White
L
R
L2
R2
(the last two are pressing the sticks)

GCN has:
A
B
X
Y
L
R
Z

Ok ok, I got the point even after we went over this on AIM yesterday.

As far as animal Crossing, it could serve as a problem, but as long as you keep your system plugged in you keep the time going, if you unplug the sytem it's your own damn fault that you have to reset the clock in thast game :)

Well, what if you don't plug out the system? Say, someone else moves it or you got to move or something else like that? It shouldn't be a force to keep a system plugged in all the time.

If it doesn, I'm shocked. Nintendo wouldn't spend the extra $$$ to put that in there system... and you can quote me on this when they release the specs.

There you have been quoted.

Also, you talk about Animal crossing... imaging if That game was on an 8MB card or a limitless hard drive. The city could be ten times as big, there could be WAY more crap saved. Like events and stuff, and more customization. You could make a limitless number of those patterns with better graphics.

I don't see how exactly the Memory Card factors into the game. I mean it worked on the n64 and it worked on GCn with no issue. Why would you want a much bigger city? I mean I know you are talking theorically, but imagine running around a much larger town with those damn errands, I think it would be more of a nuance than anything special.

I don't know what other events you are referring to, I was pretty sure the events were on the disc and not the memory card?

:rolleyes:

I've wanred you twice now....

Is it? I would be willing to put money of the fact that more Ps2 owners have GBAs than GCN owners. Plus, if there were no Nintendo system, like I said before, Nintendo fans would flock to the Nintendo brand... if it were on Ps2, or Xbox, it would sell to all the guys who would have bought it for cube, and all the guys who couldn't buy it because they don't have a cube.

Well, I would also assume that more Ps2 owners have GBA than GCN owners, I mean there is a much larger number of folks with Ps2, you do the math.

Well, I just use common sense... I'll make a poll (well, maybe not a poll because of the situation nowadays) to prove my point.

Do you have common sense?

Dreamcast was out allready too, before Ps2 came, and DC had a pretty strong backing, online at least. But when it's preformance got ripped apart everybody ditched it.
Well, I think DC suffered from a lot of stuff that isn't really in Nintendo's issues. I mean they had no support whatsoever from EA (which is the world's largest 3rd party) even if they are dropping GCN support, they are still supporting it. Not to mention, Sega was perceived as being weak going in and well the system wasn't the hottest seller.

Ps2's preformance has yet to be simply killed off. That's why it stays. You can't tell me that GBA is the most advanced handheld technology in the world. GBA has a LOT of room to be killed visually.

the GB was killed off visually by other handhelds. The GBC was as well. The GB still remains the strongest brand on the handheld side. just because it can be killed visually doens't mean folks will buy it.

If Luigi's mansion is the best selling launch game of all time, I'm sure they knew they could make a few bucks with Animal crossing. They spent little to nothing to make it, so there is no way to lose. Kinda like Sega with Sonic mega collection.
Like I said the game was released to fill the lineup, I'm pretty sure Nintendo knew they would make a profit on the game and it proved to be an interesting game.

Sonic Mega Collection was just a cheap way to gain something from Sega. I mean it didn't improve the Cube's line-up any during the end of the year, but it was a quick buck for Sega.

Another difference between AC and SMC, AC was never released in the US, but most if not all of those games on SMC were and a long time ago at that.

and that's about it... in the end you kinda disagreed then agreed :p
Well, I'm just here for the debate, I'm not saying everything I say is my opinion, but it makes it more interesting doesn't it?

Crash who is that weird kid in your avatar?

If you talk like that pengiun, you basically saying that there is no way to tell if a game is good or not. While sure, everything is based on opinoin, but if a game gets good reviews from all the major magazines, websites, ect., dont you think is a safe bet that thats a well-made, quality title? Oh wait, thats just opinoin again. If we ignore the reviews, who's to say superman64 really sucked?

Well, SuperMan 64 generally is considered a bad game, but some people may find some fun in it. I mean I had one friend who graduated last year, who actually loved the game and who am I or anyone else to tell him he shouldn't like it?

I mean there are some high scoring games I don't like at all then some low scoring ones I love, like Mystic Heroes.

Reviews/Previews and whatever else magainzes and sites put out should help make a decision, they shouldn't be the reason to buy a game.

[Dyne]

Holy crap, that quote button is pointy! You could poke an eye out with that thing!

[DeathsHand]

Originally posted by Dyne
Holy crap, that quote button is pointy! You could poke an eye out with that thing!

I wanna poke my own damn eyes out after reading all this bickering back and forth :-o

[TheGame]

Well, I don't mind the GCN design. As my teacher told us KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid)

Who cares about you... we are talking about the general plublic.

Well, I highly doubt that the DVD decision was based on the PS2' sales, I mean the Ps2 launched in March of 2000 and the GCN was revealed in August, that would give them like 5 months? Maybe, you know more than I do, but I don't think it is, I think it was more Nintendo's decision to avoid piracy.

There is a DVD player Cube out right now... at first Nintendo was going to launch it at the same time as the normal Gamecube in both regions, and decided to back down. Why?

Well, if it's piracy that's just Nintendo's greed. Psx did just fine, and it was pirated more than anything.

I know we've been through the memory card debate time and time again, and it all depends on the type of gamer you are. I mean I can only imagine how it hurts sports fans, but I've never had a problem with the 59 and I had a lot of games on them, and the 251 is about half full with 21 games now. But I do agree for such a small memory card, it was rather expensive.

Yes, it is a complete rip off... you can save about 10 games (of a normal game) and it's full. As for sports games, well, you might as well buy one card for every sport game you get.

Well, Skies of Arcadia Legends is a nice long RPG, I mean it may be a port of a DC game, but it wasn't that large of a game on the Dc, and the fact that GCN doesn't have many RPGs make it hard to judge failry. Maybe, there are no RPGs because they won't sell on the Cube or the size of the disc, who is to know?

I will agree there are several games on Ps2/Xbox that wouldn't fit on one Cube disc, and people say that would hurt Nintendo in the long run, I really can't tell if it has.

Well, SOA doesn't feature Cube style graphics, or FF style FMVs... so of course it would fit.

But let's talk about a developer that supports the Cube named Square... they would never put a port of FFX on GCN because of the disk limitations, period. Of course there is no way to know... all we know are the facts, and a fact is that there isn't much support from games that take high disk space.

I don't know if they sacrificed "quality" as they did shortchanging, I mean the disc, memory cards and whatever are of good quality, but it was shortchanging consumers.

I don't really know how to reply to this... you are contradicting yourself.

I think Sega will always be a respected developer, they may not be trusted by everyone but still. As for slowing down game development, I guess it would be wise for Sega to slow down the rate of releasing games and concern themselves with getting out high quality games that will sell better.

I agree with you on that point, but I just put off 2001 and 2002 as testing years for Sega, I mean they were just going 3rd party and they don't know what sells where.

thanks for agreeing, yet again. Right now Sega is respected, but imo they are losing respect, not gaining it.

I don't think Nintendo make many sacrifices for a profit. I mean look at the constant delays and the secretive nature.

You mean like when they wouldn't show anything from Rare because they were about to sell them? I'm talking about a general release with the Nintendo brand on it. Hell, even third party games seemed rushed. before fall 2002 there wasn't anything from Nintendo that I wouldn't consider rushed... hell, even games that fall (like Animal Crossing and Mario Party 4) seemed rushed and released because nintendo knew they would sell.

In a way having Nintendo worry about how they will do in q4 2003 would help gamers, I mean it means Nintendo has to get a fire under their ass to recent a game that might actually sell instead of delaying it forever.

Well, of course they should be worried... but they shouldn't just go into Shiggy's book of whacky ideas, put a nintendo franchise name on it, and release it ASAP. As a second party they could release two high quality Zelda games back-to-back in years much like Rockstar got out GTA3, and GTAVC so quick.

Nintendo play's on thier fans ignorance... If Nintendo doesn't have to go the extra mile to bring quality, they won't. That's why Nintendo loyalists head counts are going down.

Well, I really don't know if the extra time would have helped Luigi's Mansion, the fact is Luigi's Mansion was a very limited concept no matter how much time they poured into it, I don't see it going very far.

But who's to say Nintendo as a 2nd party wouldn't be forced to a schedule or a tighter budget. I mean as their own developer they have any freedom they want.

As a developer you have the freedom to spend as much time as you want on a game, and you don't have to worry about how a system does at launch, or how it fairs with the competition. You just worry about games. If Nintendo had this freedom it would be better for them imo.

And if Nintendo goes second party, which company do you think they should go to? I mean if Nintendo goes to Sony or Microsoft, I could see folks sharing some of the same issues with Nintendo that they do now.

I say Microsoft, because Sony doesn't need anymore help. If Nintendo were to be with Sony, Ps2 would probably trump Xbox (worse than it allready is) and the speed of new technology would slow way down.

Look at the handheld market... Technology there is WAY behind what it could be. Why? Because there is only one competitor who basically owns the market. I bet if Nintendo wanted to.... and if there were real competition on the horizon... they could release GBA at a super cheap price just to destroy the competition before if even gets a chance.

Just because Nintendo fans are loyal to the Big N now, doens't mean they will be in the future. Some may leave Nintendo's camp because they felt that they sold out, others may have some type of grudge against the company that buys out Nintendo for forcing them out of the industry and so many other stuff could be an "N-Factor"

Just because you saw the sun yesterday, it doesn't mean you will see it tomorrow... but common sense tells you that chances are at will come again.

Give me a break.

Well, I don't know how much gaming I will be doing in 2006 as people grow out of stuff....

You are joking right? If you have been a hardcore gamer this long, I'm sure the urge will continue for the rest of your life. I have plenty of examples in this forum alone. Hell, when you start getting a $4,000 paycheck every month, we'll see what you grow out of.

Ok ok, I got the point even after we went over this on AIM yesterday.

Do you need me to explain it again? Sheesh... some people never listen ;)

Well, what if you don't plug out the system? Say, someone else moves it or you got to move or something else like that? It shouldn't be a force to keep a system plugged in all the time.

You wouldn't be forced to... you just know unpluging it has a consequence. If sombody else moves it, get mad at them. It's just like an alarm clock.

I don't see how exactly the Memory Card factors into the game. I mean it worked on the n64 and it worked on GCn with no issue. Why would you want a much bigger city? I mean I know you are talking theorically, but imagine running around a much larger town with those damn errands, I think it would be more of a nuance than anything special.

Well, use more ideas... like have a bike so you can move faster. Bigger town means more possibilities.

I don't know what other events you are referring to, I was pretty sure the events were on the disc and not the memory card?

Err, I'm talking about the billboard... that's on the card, not the game.

I've wanred you twice now....

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Well, I would also assume that more Ps2 owners have GBA than GCN owners, I mean there is a much larger number of folks with Ps2, you do the math.

I wasn't talking about the fact that there are more Ps2 owners than Cube owners... just the simple fact that there are more GBA owners than Cube owners.

Well, I think DC suffered from a lot of stuff that isn't really in Nintendo's issues. I mean they had no support whatsoever from EA (which is the world's largest 3rd party) even if they are dropping GCN support, they are still supporting it. Not to mention, Sega was perceived as being weak going in and well the system wasn't the hottest seller.

So you are saying Sony would be considerd weak going into the handheld market? Please, explain.

the GB was killed off visually by other handhelds. The GBC was as well. The GB still remains the strongest brand on the handheld side. just because it can be killed visually doens't mean folks will buy it.

I'm not talking about the GB or GBC... neither of them had REAL competition. I'm talking about Sony here. The number one company in the game industry going up against Nintendo... the soon to be number 3 console in the gaming industry.

You act as if they are pushovers like Sega

Like I said the game was released to fill the lineup, I'm pretty sure Nintendo knew they would make a profit on the game and it proved to be an interesting game.

Sonic Mega Collection was just a cheap way to gain something from Sega. I mean it didn't improve the Cube's line-up any during the end of the year, but it was a quick buck for Sega.

Another difference between AC and SMC, AC was never released in the US, but most if not all of those games on SMC were and a long time ago at that.

A port is a port... Think about Shenmue 2. How many damn sega fanboys got on the game's case because it's a port of a DC game that was never released in america. But when Nintendo get's the same thing (even worse because it's ported from a weaker console) it's acceptable somehow now?

Well, I'm just here for the debate, I'm not saying everything I say is my opinion, but it makes it more interesting doesn't it?

you must like to type, because at this rate we got a LOT more typing to do.

[Stonecutter]

I didn't read all of this, and I'm not about to, but I will throw my $0.02 for those who are reading the whole thing.

It doesn't MATTER if nintendo is outsold 10,000 to 1 by sony AND ms, so long as they make money, they'll stay in the game, it's that simple. Going 3rd party might be the best thing to happen to the company, but it will never happen. Nintendo is far to arrogant to let it happen. If they WERE to be bought out the only real players in that game are MS and EA anyway and nintendo is also far to racist to let themselves be bought out by an American company (deny it if you will, but you know it's true.)

Nintendo makes enough money with the gameboy to put out another console even if the cube ends up being a huge failure. They'd be stupid enough to do it too.

That's the one thing you have to remember, no matter what else comes inbetween nintendo and the third party, stubborness will always be the final determining factor. They're simply not smart enough to do what's best for them.