[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):

[quote]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.

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?