Re: What's eating at Nintendo?
 

I have great respect for Nintendo. They didn't hop on the bandwagon on every new thing that came out, (harddrive, online, dvd, etc.). They made their system the way they wanted it and stood by it. I have enjoyed every nintendo system to be released (except that horrid virtual boy, good concept, it just sucked though).

I have to say though, that it seems like Nintendo really has to prove themselves to be a serious contender with their next console or else I think Nintendo won't be able to ever recover from it.

As far as the handheld market, I think it will take a while for Nintendo to be dethroned as teh unquestioned ruler of the portable market. But I do think they will need to make GBA2 a serious upgrade from the GBA. I think the PSP poses a serious threat, but it wouldn't be as much of a threat if Nintendo released a new GameBoy system capable of pulling off full 3d environments.

Re: What's eating at Nintendo?
 

Well, from that interview, I can at least can understand that Nintendo is focused on getting out of the hole they dug themselves in. Though, I still believe they're ignorant to the fact they must have a more mature appeal to grab the casual gaming market.

Even though Nintendo is noticing their problems, they're focusing on all the wrong ones.

Re: What's eating at Nintendo?
 

Xantar, do you even play the GameCube? Cause I remember you didn't play that much games...

With the Cube, we miss the 'feeling' that those classic N64 games gave. They just had atmosphere and were among the best games of the world. GE, PD, OoT, MM, M64...
We don't have that many games like that on the Cube. Ones that come close are Metroid Prime, Eternal Darkness and Resident Evil. Those are moody games that we'll always remember.

Also, with the N64, you had enough friends that wanted to do multiplayer with you. I do know a couple of ppl that have a Cube, but they don't know the good multiplayer games. TimeSplitters? Never heard of it. Mario Party? That's so kiddy. Super Monkey Ball? Is that the PS game where you have to catch monkeys? :rolleyes:

Also, if you look at the top 30 games, you only see about 6 good 4-player games. :(

The Cube just doesn't have that feeling yet. So Xantar, I disagree.

Re: What's eating at Nintendo?
 

No, I haven't played the GameCube much (mostly playing with my friends), and I freely admit that. I don't think that disqualifies me from saying that people have lost perspective. If the N64 and the GameCube were very similar in terms of the quality of their library, I might just defer to you, but in this case, it's pretty clear to me that they are not.

First of all, expecting another Goldeneye or Ocarina of Time is totally unrealistic. The N64 was doing 3-D gaming for the first time. Any time it got the gameplay right, it was automatically revolutionary.

Secondly, I ask you again what did you do once you were done with those five games? Are you going to tell me that they were enough to satisfy you for all five years of the N64's life? And don't forget how long you had to wait after Mario 64 before another AAA title came out. That's why I say people are losing perspective. They look back on the N64 and only remember that there were some great games. They conveniently forget how long they had to wait for those games. Would you like the GameCube to have one or two great games every year while the PS2 and Xbox get all the third party software again?

So the GameCube is worse because people are too ignorant to inform themselves about the good multiplayer games? What's the problem here, and why don't you just boot up the games on your own console to get them to try it out? Or is it because you want to maintain a good image with your friends? I'm not trying to attack you here. I just don't really understand your argument.

Maybe people don't know about the good multiplayer games, but you acknowledge that the games are there.

Looking at that list, I see SSB: M, Madden NFL 2004, F-Zero GX, Wave Race: Blue Storm, Timesplitters 2, NBA Street Vol. 2, NCAA Football 2004, NFL 2k3, PSO Episode I and II and Super Monkey Ball. Okay, so a lot of those are sports games and American sports games at that (maybe there are some FIFA games on the Cube, but I don't really know). But then again, what's the definition of a "good 4-player game"? Is the only criterion that it has to be in the top 30? I would add Mario Kart: Double Dash!! to the list of good multiplayer games. Sure, IGN's review only gave it a score of 7.9, but even so, they acknowledge that the multiplayer in the game is great. I would also argue that 2-player games should be taken into account, too. You don't always have that many friends over, and even if you do, I have often found that I'm perfectly happy watching two friends play a game while I'm waiting for my turn. Thus, Soul Calibur II gets added to the list and maybe even Mortal Kombat 5.

Besides, how many multiplayer games do you know of for the N64? Certainly no sports games (ok, there was that Kobe Bryant game, but does anything by Nintendo and their second parties really match up to EA Sports?). Off the top of my head, I can think of SSB, F-Zero X, Mario Kart 64, Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. Feel free to remind me of anything I missed. The whole point of my argument is that the games are there. Maybe Nintendo could have marketed them better, but ultimately you can't blame them for putting the games out there. If you are missing out on some good multiplayer on the GameCube, you ultimately have only yourself to blame.

Re: What's eating at Nintendo?
 

That is the reason I feel N64 was better. Name a great Gamecube game that is exclusive and that didn't borrow the gameplay mechanics or style from a game that was released before on N64 (or Psx, or Dreamcast). Name a game on Gamecube that raised the standards for the whole industry or what a game should look and play like. The only games I can think of off the top of my head are Eternal Darkness, Metriod Prime, Animal Crossing, and Super Monkey Ball. The list for N64 at it's time is much longer.

What makes a game or a system great is offering gameplay experiences that are new, fresh, and original. So far, gamecube has failed at this.

Re: What's eating at Nintendo?
 

Ok, if that's your standard for judging which console is better, you're welcome to that opinion. However, taken side-by-side I would still take the GameCube. I simply recognize that the time when a game could set standards for an entire industry is mostly gone. Developers have figured out how to do 3-D gaming. Now they can come up with other ideas like sanity effects, open worlds, branching storylines etc., but none of those are innovations that videogames everywhere are going to have to adopt. You can't always get Z-targeting.

Besides, like I said, are a few revolutionary games enough to support a system especially in comparison to a console that has had worthwhile games nearly every month? There's a difference between an important console and a good console. Why worry so much about the effect that a particular game is going to have on the industry? You can recognize and praise a developer for that, but in the end, if you're having lots of fun, what does it matter?

Re: What's eating at Nintendo?
 

How exactly did this turn into a discussion of the N64 vs the GameCube?

I mean I believe the jump from N64 to GCN is comparable to the jump from the NES to the SNES.

It's more of an evolution in gameplay then it is a revolution in gameplay, unlike the jump from the SNES to N64.

To be fair, there were many genre-bending games in the n64/PSX era, but most of that deals with the jump from 2D to 3D. Heck this generation biggest backout game suffers the same faith, GTA III refined elements that were implanted in GTA, GTA II and GTA London. It just went 3D and was this huge success.

I don't see where many other elements of revolution are going. Many people point to online, but as far as I can note, it's basically taking multiplayer or co-op elements of a normal game and making it so that you can play someone from around the world? Does that sound like something revolutionary, I really don't think so. It does allow for a theoritical "endless" number of oppenents.

As for the comparison of n64 to GCN. I think they all have their merits. I mean on the n64 there was Mario Tennis, Mario Golf, Mario Kart 64, Mario Party 1-3, Super Smash Bros, GoldenEye, Perfect Dark and countless other hit multiplayer games. The GameCube to a large extent has a similar libraby of breakout games, the problem is they are all evolution of those prior franchises that were made successful and popular on the n64. Maybe people are beckoning for something new, I mean I don't think any of the games got worse in the jump...

Then there were the n64 masterpieces, like Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, GoldenEye, StarFox and so many more. I think a large part of the "letdown" with the Cube is that Nintendo stuck with more of the same with a lot of little different. I mean is Wind Waker not similar to Ocarina of Time? Does the fact that it has cel-shading graphics take away from it? Does the water trips? I mean would people not have complained if Nintendo did Wind Waker in a realistic manner similar to the way Ocarina of Time, they would say it hasn't changed much... like Mario Sunshine, many people complain that it's basically Mario 64+ waterpack. Is Nintendo damned if they do and damned if they don't?

I think that's all I got on this subject for now.

Re: What's eating at Nintendo?
 

Yeah I also think that you can compare N64-GCN to NES-SNES. Oddly, I enjoy the SNES a lot more than the NES. Basicly bacause of the horrible graphics, the limited button layout and the simple games. SNES had SO much more.

The funny thing is, I have A LOT of Cube games. Almost as many as I have N64...
But ALL my N64 games are SUPER. And I'm talking games like 1080, Excitebike 64, and more.

Most of my Cube games didn't keep me entertained for more than a few weeks.
Most games weren't more than polished versions of what we saw in the last generation... that's the problem, not enough innovation.

Re: What's eating at Nintendo?
 

"I think a large part of the "letdown" with the Cube is that Nintendo stuck with more of the same with a lot of little different. "

Exactly.

*shoots self in head for agreeing with BAB*

Darn, I missed ;)

Anyway, I think if Ninitendo was going to play off of the success of N64, they should wave went all out kinda like Sony did with Ps2. I think Gamecube changed a lot in the wrong areas, and stayed the same in the wrong areas.

For Example:
Like BAB brought up, Zelda. The original OoT got some of the best scores of all time, and MM was right on it's booty. This is an example of a successful product that Nintendo shouldn't have screwed with.

Then there is Mario Sunshine. This isn't a bad game by any means, but people's expectations were set with a true sequal of Mario 64 and because it wasn't that it hurt the sales. (Plus the fruity commercial)

Another game that could have stuck around is Perfect Dark... and they probably could have asked THQ to keep their best selling third party game the same. Notice that I'm mentioning games that could have evolved even with the same gameplay system or general look. Would it be that hard for Nintendo to make a realistic looking Zelda game with a different story? They cold even have taken WW's story with realistic graphics and I'm sure that it would have been a general bigger sucess.

Xantar, if you don't own a cube there is no way you can make such a judgment. Some of us here spilled $100-$200 beans on the system and have purchased a ton of games for it.

I remember when bringing home a game for my Nintendo 64 was somthing special, getting games for gamecube is just fustrating. Also, what do you mean side by side Gamecube is better? If Gamecube had the same games it has now with dumbed down graphics and was released in 96 I would like N64 more, and if N64 had the same games remade with this generation's level of graphics I would still like N64 more.

Nintendo was the king of innovation, now they are scared to try somthing new unless it's on a game franchise they know will sell... and those changes ended up dissapointing more people than it impressed.

+Rep to the smart n00bs

Re: What's eating at Nintendo?
 

N64 is a special system. Gamecube's lineup in general is better, but Gamecube has very few original games. N64 was a work of art. It had a lot of original titles and 2 games that can't possibly be left off of any 'top ten games of all time' list. Gamecube doesn't have an exclusive game that cracks the top 20, or an original game that can crack the top 50 imo.

Re: What's eating at Nintendo?
 

IMO, it's hard to compare the N64 with GC. The N64 was jumping from 2d graphics to 3d graphics. Of course games are going to be revolutionary.

But now the GC is jumping from 3d to ..... more 3d. It's harder to create a game that creates that "wow" factor simply because it's all been done before. (well, not 'all', but you get the point)

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to make an excuse for Nintendo, I'm just saying that it's a little harder to create those "wow" games in this generation (both for the PS2 and the Gamecube). And I think that, oh sh!t I gotta go to class, lol.

Re: What's eating at Nintendo?
 

Holy crap, I guess Nintendo has to go 4-D now to satisfy whiney consumers about lack of innovation.

That's the only way to be as innovative as 2D--->3D, right?

Geez, people got the Gamecube expecting revolutions comparable to those great times where all games were opened up to a new freedom of gameplay. We may not ever have another gaming revolution like that in gaming future (until virtual reality :)) I love the games I have for Gamecube, but I understand that getting the same feeling from Mario Sunshine as I did from Mario 64, the first 3D game I ever played, is nigh impossible.

Re: What's eating at Nintendo?
 

you know what the problem is?

nintendo served you some of the greatest games ever for its GENERATION so it could get a bigger fan base.
This time around Nintendo still offers you incredible games with great innovations and outstanding 3d graphics which undoubtably surpase the n64 in almost every way.

But the only reason you cant realise this is because your expectations are way too high. maybe its because of all the nintendo vs sony arguements back in the day which lead you to beleive that nintendo is some godly company which will surpass all its rivals.
Maybe thats because you were all alot mre younger wen the n64 was released and it clouded the fact that Nintendo is just another NORMAL company in compitition with 2 other NORMAL companies.

Nintendo is just like sony, they have a console with games which they plan to sell, they are just a company there is no "nintendo magic", just good games and if people cant realise this because they're heads are still up in the clouds since they were kids. Then maybe you wont realise that nintendo is just another company trying to sell there console and this fact is even more evident this generation when Nintendo is up against 2 other companies.

All new games! but they are just the same quality as you could find on another console, just like the n64.
Im not complaining, i love nintendo and there games but some people are way too hng up on the idea that nintendo is a godly company with "ninetdno magic" that'll make any 1st party game incredible. Dream on.


I hope that makes sense

Re: What's eating at Nintendo?
 

2 normal companies Ninty is competing with?! 1 company is a monopoly and the other has the stranglehold on the electronics and console hardware business. I'm not ranting or anything, but just pointing out something "off/odd" I saw.

Re: What's eating at Nintendo?
 

This stranger is right...

Nintendo is just a game company... They make good games, but there is no 'Nintendo Magic'... You guys gotta just get over all this hype and nostalgia and see Nintendo for what it really is... Not as a magical company that is destined to turn out hit after hit after hit, but as a company that's gone downhill since SNES...

But not really downhill, since the quality of their games has always been the same... Because it's not possible for a company to really go downhill...