D-realJos
03-06-2003, 01:26 AM
Hey all!
I've been meticulously looking over a few things that have been happening in the world of Nintendo lately, and I came up with some a few interesting things to share with you guys. The surface of any situation is usually "cut and dry" and relatively easy to understand. Sometimes however, if you allow yourself to, you can unravel additional meaning and interpret these situations in "new ways." These "new ways" may simply be other angles to view a situation, or -- on very rare occasions -- may be the correct/only way to view a situation. So, let that be the basic of this topic as you read on.
Situation 1: ATI entered a major deal with Nintendo to design technologies for use in Nintendo products
On on the surface: It's great to see ATI and Nintendo work again. Thanks to the first efforts of the ArtX team(creators of GCN's GPU, Flipper) since their acquisition, ATI currently now has the most powerful GPU on the market and has recently announced (http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/030225/tech_ati_1.html) another one with the intention on staying "one step ahead" of Nvidia and their new Geforce FX chips. As a result, Nintendo fans are proud to hear this news since this chip will no doubt be a powerful and highly impressive one.
This is one way the view the situation and also the most apparent. But, what else could this suggest?
Beneath the surface: Nintendo knows that in order to gain more market share from Sony, it can't afford to let them get such a large head-start in the next generation like they did in this one. Nintendo have since went on to say they are working toward that goal. Therefore, more than anything else, this deal with ATI is the clearest indication so far that Nintendo is serious about this. If this deal is indeed about Nintendo's successor to GameCube, then they may be well ahead of Microsoft, who hasn't finalized their deal yet but has gone on record to state that they intend to beat Sony to the market in the next generation. Interesting, no?
(A is ahead of B, but B is ahead of C, so A is... ahhh.. i'm lost)
Situation 2: "We've been conducting online experiments with Mario Kart for quite some time. This time around, we've looked at it, and I still feel that [the kind of experience Mario Kart delivers] would be very difficult to pull off online." -- Miyamoto (http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/news/0,10870,2911878-3,00.html)
On the surface: I've heard quite a few people ask; "what the hell is so difficult about adding online play to the game." Most people see that statement as some kind of continual effort to avoid online play. Mario Kart likely won't be online and that's the bottom line and that the only thing most people chose the gather from Miyamoto's statement.
But, what else can we possibly gather?
Beneath the surface: This is anything but some kind of "cop-out" to avoiding online gaming. With the likely unfortunate possibility that Mario Kart won't be online, comes two very interesting points. The first point to note is: Nintendo is very clear that they won't just jump online just because everyone else is doing it and they can too. If you took time to read that quote, it's definitely not a technical problem that existed, but it's solely about gameplay. Nintendo experimented, and despite what many of us thought we knew about "Mario Kart + Online," in the end, Nintendo realized it isn't the type of game that can truly exploit the capability. An experience that's "very difficult" to create online(I actually have a separate topic on this, which I hope to post in the near future). What this all comes down to is the fact that Nintendo isn't contented with throwing bones at us, hoping that online play will magically make games better, as many developers today seem to think. They are taking time and paying attention to what type of gameplay works and what doesn't. This is good, as quality software is key, online or not. You can bet that when even they do go online, it will be an experience to talk about.
The second point is the fact that Nintendo has stated numerous times that they don't see online gaming to be viable/profitable and can't afford the risk. It's no secret that they've been looking into the possibilities, despite what they've said. The fact that they were experimenting with Mario Kart seems to be the first indication that they may have found a way around whatever fears(mainly financial investment, coupled inadequate profit)they initially had about putting their games online. They apparently are in the selection process -- examining which games work best online. Surely, if they're looking for the right game, then Mario Kart can't be the only game they experimented with. It's very likely they'll follow through on games that give them good " test results." Perhaps a game such as Mario Tennis(among other possibilities) has already been through this process, which would add some substance to reports surrounding Nintendo's "World Smash" games.
Well, that's it. Any comments?
PS: If anything interesting comes to mind, look for a follow-up/update to this thread.
I've been meticulously looking over a few things that have been happening in the world of Nintendo lately, and I came up with some a few interesting things to share with you guys. The surface of any situation is usually "cut and dry" and relatively easy to understand. Sometimes however, if you allow yourself to, you can unravel additional meaning and interpret these situations in "new ways." These "new ways" may simply be other angles to view a situation, or -- on very rare occasions -- may be the correct/only way to view a situation. So, let that be the basic of this topic as you read on.
Situation 1: ATI entered a major deal with Nintendo to design technologies for use in Nintendo products
On on the surface: It's great to see ATI and Nintendo work again. Thanks to the first efforts of the ArtX team(creators of GCN's GPU, Flipper) since their acquisition, ATI currently now has the most powerful GPU on the market and has recently announced (http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/030225/tech_ati_1.html) another one with the intention on staying "one step ahead" of Nvidia and their new Geforce FX chips. As a result, Nintendo fans are proud to hear this news since this chip will no doubt be a powerful and highly impressive one.
This is one way the view the situation and also the most apparent. But, what else could this suggest?
Beneath the surface: Nintendo knows that in order to gain more market share from Sony, it can't afford to let them get such a large head-start in the next generation like they did in this one. Nintendo have since went on to say they are working toward that goal. Therefore, more than anything else, this deal with ATI is the clearest indication so far that Nintendo is serious about this. If this deal is indeed about Nintendo's successor to GameCube, then they may be well ahead of Microsoft, who hasn't finalized their deal yet but has gone on record to state that they intend to beat Sony to the market in the next generation. Interesting, no?
(A is ahead of B, but B is ahead of C, so A is... ahhh.. i'm lost)
Situation 2: "We've been conducting online experiments with Mario Kart for quite some time. This time around, we've looked at it, and I still feel that [the kind of experience Mario Kart delivers] would be very difficult to pull off online." -- Miyamoto (http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/news/0,10870,2911878-3,00.html)
On the surface: I've heard quite a few people ask; "what the hell is so difficult about adding online play to the game." Most people see that statement as some kind of continual effort to avoid online play. Mario Kart likely won't be online and that's the bottom line and that the only thing most people chose the gather from Miyamoto's statement.
But, what else can we possibly gather?
Beneath the surface: This is anything but some kind of "cop-out" to avoiding online gaming. With the likely unfortunate possibility that Mario Kart won't be online, comes two very interesting points. The first point to note is: Nintendo is very clear that they won't just jump online just because everyone else is doing it and they can too. If you took time to read that quote, it's definitely not a technical problem that existed, but it's solely about gameplay. Nintendo experimented, and despite what many of us thought we knew about "Mario Kart + Online," in the end, Nintendo realized it isn't the type of game that can truly exploit the capability. An experience that's "very difficult" to create online(I actually have a separate topic on this, which I hope to post in the near future). What this all comes down to is the fact that Nintendo isn't contented with throwing bones at us, hoping that online play will magically make games better, as many developers today seem to think. They are taking time and paying attention to what type of gameplay works and what doesn't. This is good, as quality software is key, online or not. You can bet that when even they do go online, it will be an experience to talk about.
The second point is the fact that Nintendo has stated numerous times that they don't see online gaming to be viable/profitable and can't afford the risk. It's no secret that they've been looking into the possibilities, despite what they've said. The fact that they were experimenting with Mario Kart seems to be the first indication that they may have found a way around whatever fears(mainly financial investment, coupled inadequate profit)they initially had about putting their games online. They apparently are in the selection process -- examining which games work best online. Surely, if they're looking for the right game, then Mario Kart can't be the only game they experimented with. It's very likely they'll follow through on games that give them good " test results." Perhaps a game such as Mario Tennis(among other possibilities) has already been through this process, which would add some substance to reports surrounding Nintendo's "World Smash" games.
Well, that's it. Any comments?
PS: If anything interesting comes to mind, look for a follow-up/update to this thread.