Big N says no to Online again :( - Page 3

tarakan69 · 03-29-2003, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dyne
Maybe it's just the speed of the information travelling to europe. Since when did europe become the superior source of information? Megaton propaganda anyone?

Well Shiggy has been touring Europe and giving interviews. Europe has been getting special bundles to make up for delays, and it shows Nintendo is taking the region in a serious manner now.

So WHY not... sounds like LEGIT information. Nintendo is about profit... so they are not going to jump in to untested waters.

TO STU

how/what game can lure more gamers online if an online MMRPG version of the most popular console RPG ever, can't? Food for thought.

So why should Nintendo EVEN risk?? Sure they have Pokemon... but most people who play Pokemon are kids and can't afford online.

Perfect Stu · 03-29-2003, 10:57 AM

Mark Kart
Mario Golf
Mario Tennis

not to mention an online FPS from Retro

or *gasp* any original titles made with online play in mind

oh, and Gamemaster...at least I'm realisitc. If Sony says "we aren't going to make a handheld system" I'll be like "ok", not "but maybe they just meant in 2003, so I bet we'll see a 2004 Sony handheld!!!

"

Or, what about me owning an Xbox and frequently playing PC games as well...and Jonbo sticking only to Nintendo consoles religiously?

Either way...I know I'm always gonna be flamebait in a forum where Nintendo has almost everyone by the tit

tarakan69 · 03-29-2003, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Perfect Stu
Mark Kart
Mario Golf
Mario Tennis

not to mention an online FPS from Retro

or *gasp* any original titles made with online play in mind

Originalty?? The main developers that come up with original and innovative games are Sega and Nintendo. IMO

Since I see that you have tendency to lean towards the PS2... it too hasn't been offering to many original games.

Also making new titles for online is WAY too risky, they will most likely bomb. If a game like Final Fantasy can't cut it... how will newcomer titles do it?? Also don't forget that online titles need more testing, development time, and money.

Also only because Retro made Metriod Prime a benchmark in gaming, WHAT on earth gaurantees that their online FPS will sell even if it's good.

gekko · 03-29-2003, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tarakan69
Nintendo is about profit... so they are not going to jump in to untested waters.

They jump into untested waters all the time. Online gaming has been tested, many times, and found to be not profitable. Nintendo knows that, and they are staying out.

Untested waters... hmm... Virtual Boy comes to mind, oh let's see... 64DD was online, Game Boy was online.

Your argument doesn't work.

Perfect Stu · 03-29-2003, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tarakan69
Originalty?? The main developers that come up with original and innovative games are Sega and Nintendo. IMO

Since I see that you have tendency to lean towards the PS2... it too hasn't been offering to many original games.

Also making new titles for online is WAY too risky, they will most likely bomb. If a game like Final Fantasy can't cut it... how will newcomer titles do it?? Also don't forget that online titles need more testing, development time, and money.

Also only because Retro made Metriod Prime a benchmark in gaming, WHAT on earth gaurantees that their online FPS will sell even if it's good.

1) Final Fantasy XI is online only, and requires an add-on HDD
2) 'with online play in mind' does not mean online only...far from it, actually
3) Nintendo is an innovative development company. Where did I say it wasn't?
4) SOCOM, a mostly-online title, has sold over 1 million copies in the United States. Would that qualify as a success?

bobcat · 03-29-2003, 07:32 PM

Meh. I only play FPS and RTS online (on PC)

Oh yeh and fighting games.

I'm not really interested in all the other stuff. Mods, Updates, Patches etc.

This doesn't come as a shock to me, and don't really care.

*waits for Zelda*

PuPPeT · 03-30-2003, 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by bobcat
Meh. I only play FPS and RTS online (on PC)

Oh yeh and fighting games.

I'm not really interested in all the other stuff. Mods, Updates, Patches etc.

This doesn't come as a shock to me, and don't really care.

*waits for Zelda*

Yea I get what you and others are saying bobcat, online gaming is not for every one but it is for me. People can not say after the success of Xbox live that online gaming is not going to the mainstream it is. A lot of people want to play games online if not to at lest look into gaming online. Nintendo may look as if it’s playing the whole online issue kool but when the next generation of console comes along it is just one more reason for people to say Nintendo oh yea there the ones that don’t do what I want!!!!!

And I also agree with some of you that game patch’s are a bad thing, Games should not launch with major bugs in them but the larger game code becomes the more risk there is of bugs being left in the code. But game updates are a very good thing to have it does add life to a game when you add new levels and weapons. Also I’m all for paying for them most people have no hang ups about paying to see a film that will last 90 mins yet you will not play around the same amount on a game that would give you 20, 30 or 40 hours of play a week!!!!!

tarakan69 · 03-30-2003, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Perfect Stu
1) Final Fantasy XI is online only, and requires an add-on HDD
2) 'with online play in mind' does not mean online only...far from it, actually
3) Nintendo is an innovative development company. Where did I say it wasn't?
4) SOCOM, a mostly-online title, has sold over 1 million copies in the United States. Would that qualify as a success?

1.So?? If as you say online is SO important then why don't you expect FFXI to sell.
2.Well games which consetrate on online, usually have a single player mode added just so it IS there, while all the real play takes online.
3.ok
4.Mostly online?? A Navy Seals games... like that bwouldn't be bought by the causual gamers due to it's theme alone. Not to mention that even though it was primarily an online title most people played it offline.

Shadow Fox · 03-31-2003, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Perfect Stu
4) SOCOM, a mostly-online title, has sold over 1 million copies in the United States. Would that qualify as a success?

No. Why? Only 500,000 network adapters have been sold WORLDWIDE. Apparently ALOT MORE people play the game offline than online, and I'm quite sure not all 500k of those network adapter owners have SOCOM in their collection.

Let's see...200k adapters sold in Japan...that gives SOCOM a 300k online user-base in the US (giving them the benifit of the doubt). That's not even 1/3 of SOCOM-owning populace.

Looking at the numbers:

Xbox: 5-6 million consoles sold worldwide; 400k online kits sold

GameCube: 5-6 million consoles sold worldwide; 300k online kits sold

Playstation 2: 50 million consoles sold worldwide; 500k online kits sold

This is what I believe is Nintendo's point- what profit can they make from an online service that only caters to a mere fraction of their userbase?

A good start- yes. A success? Far from it.

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

Perfect Stu · 03-31-2003, 07:45 PM

Ok Fox...a good start...I'll agree

And tarakan, to me online play is a big addition to a game. Why does my opinion have to reflect on how many copies FFXI has sold?

Online gaming may not be profitable at the moment. If I were running Nintendo, personally I see a HUGE future in that area so I'd want to get my feet wet while online gaming is on its rise. I guess Nintendo doesn't agree with me.

And people...why are you taking Nintendo's side when it's only going to affect gamers in a negative way? I would throw loyalty aside for a moment when the idea of Mario Kart Online was floating around as a definate possibility.

DarkMaster · 03-31-2003, 07:55 PM

Nintendo could at least try to establish a online user base and create a few online titles just to get things going, even if the going is slow at first. this way, if they ever wanted to really focus on some online plans, they could be assured to have a fairly satisfactory profit from it. Nintendo can't expect to all of sudden just jump into online gaming one day. They have to establish a good user base. I don't see why they can't even try a game or two online, like God, Mario Kart online would sell millions, how can they not see that? Super Smash Brothers 3 online would be another that could be sure to sale excellently.

Nintendo is famous for its quote "Quality gaming and nothing less" (I'm not sure if that is word for word, but you know what I'm talking about). By not going online, they are treating gamers in a negative way. How exactly is that pure quality? Can't they even try going online? I just don't see how they are being fair to the people who own a Game Cube. Not to mention GCN sales aren't exactly spectacular. Don't you think a huge online game like Mario Kart would boost GCN sales? You bet your ass it would.

Shadow Fox · 03-31-2003, 08:17 PM

DarkMaster, look at Gekko's earlier post- Nintendo HAS TRIED online gaming- since the NES. They somehow cannot work it into this uber business model they want it to be, and having tried with EVERY other home console they created (Famicom Network, Satelliview, RanDNet) and failing in the HOMELAND with internally developed software, what makes you think they'll just jump right in again until they get a clearer picture?

Nintendo is to online as to what most PS2/Xbox owners are to N64- they were burned, and are looking for other options to get their game/profit on.

Truth being though, if XboxLive or Sony somehow pull 4 million online consumers by the end of the year, we'll definately see Nintendo changing their minds about this.

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

DarkMaster · 03-31-2003, 08:24 PM

I was talking about trying with the GCN. I am aware that they have tried online before. My whole point was that Nintendo should make a start with online gaming on the GCN so they can establish an online user base.

Shadow Fox · 03-31-2003, 08:58 PM

I agree; but Nintendo is stubborn, and doesn't realize how profitable this could eventually turn.

There's only ONE available online game for GameCube, yet Phantasy Star Online and online adapter sales are comparable to XboxLive's sales so far (300k globally). If Nintendo realized that there was such a cult following to a 3rd-party game daring to take the leap, they'd AT LEAST promote the adapter itself even if Nintendo doesn't want to publish games.

The adapter would yield profits (it is manufactured by Nintendo), and it would put out more of a advertisement for developers to use the thing.

If it were me, I'd pay Capcom, Sega, Camelot, Hal, and Silicon Knights to put out as much Link-play/online content as possible for GameCube, then I wouldn't have to put out a single title myself.

But eh, Nintendo's been around for deccades now, and I reckon they know what they're doing...

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

tarakan69 · 04-01-2003, 12:40 PM

Well I'm not really intrested about the number of people who by the X-Box Live... as how many will remain one year from NOW.

4 million?? Forget it... they be lucky to hit 1 million active accounts. (How many accounts will close when a million will be sold)