What is Nintendo's "Revolutionary" weapon?
by Ajari Wilson · in General Discussion · 07/08/2005 (8:33 am) · 166 replies
I know I'm a big geek for starting this thread. Sorry if it has already been talked about. Like most of us here, I've been following the next generation systems and being an owner of all 3 consoles I have to admit that even though not much information has been told about the Nintendo Revolution, I'm not very excited about the system. (not that I'm too excited about anything "real" I've seen for the 360 or PS3 either) I hear it will be under powered compared to the 360 and the PS3. I've seen the little Metroid Prime 3 demo that looked almost exactly like the game cube version. And the Nintendo spokeperson (Regie Fills-Amie?) for that event was boasting about how "powerful" the system is."As you can see, the Revolution can more than hold it's own when it comes to graphical power". I would have been embarased to show that demo. I'm suprised he got that sentence out with a straight face. Nintendo is a stubborn company that always shoots themselves in the foot with their consoles (violence, cartridge, online, DVD, kiddie image and design, and now HDTV) but still manage to survive through Pokemon or the GBA.
"Revolution" so far means I get to play old games I've long forgotten about from an online service (I'm glad the big N is breaking new ground and changing the industry with online play. Now Microsoft and Sony need to get on the boat), I won't be playing the best looking games compared to the 360 and the PS3, and my system will most likeley look like a teched out Poptart. We have a lot to look forward to from Nintendo.
Anyway, despite my dissapointment with Nintendo and my lack of enthusiasm twards their new system, I am very eager to see this "mystery controller" they have up their sleeves. And I would like to ask you what you think or hope it will be.
This is what I hope Nintendo does to "revolutionize" the industry. The controller is obviously going to have some kind of touch screen (whoopee...) device but what I'm hoping for is some kind of VR headset. (Not like Vurtual Boy but a real VR headset) You ever wonder what happened to VR from the early 90's? Hasn't technology evolved far enough so that VR is very much a possability now? Screw HDTV and the limited pariphrial vision TV gives you in games like Halo, Burnout, and Metroid Prime. I'm tired of being hit from the sides by an enemy that I would have seen had I had the wrap around vision I do in real life. What better way to emerse yourself into the game world than to see nothing but the game and hear nothing but the game with 5.1 headphones. The screen can wrap around the inside of the headset slightly past your parephrials up, down, left, and right so you can never quite see the edge of the screen. The VR headset could also flip up when the game is paused or be flipped up manually. Having the headset wireless would probably be the best thing to do as well if it doesn't hurt costs too bad.
If the system came out for around $200 and the VR headset was $150 or less and came bundled with the system, I would pick it up over the 360 and the PS3 even if it had Nintendo 64 graphics. That alone is something I have NEVER experienced before. That would be a true revolution in games as we know them. And also may be why Nintendo is not supporting HD. But again, Nintendo is a very stubborn company that hates to evolve anything until it comes back to bite them in the ass (cartridge, online, kiddie image and design).
(Least paragraph I swear) To keep the cost down I would probably leave the 5.1 headphones optional. And leave the gameplay completley up to the controller, meaning no head movement will effect the game at all. I feel like a stupid 15 year old (not that all 15 year olds are stupid) with a "great" idea but it is fun to speculate and hope (I'm at work bored anyway). And plus I can say to the world "I KNEW IT!!!" if it is true. Well anyway, what do you guys think is this "revolutionary" device Nintendo has up their sleeves?
-Ajari-
"Revolution" so far means I get to play old games I've long forgotten about from an online service (I'm glad the big N is breaking new ground and changing the industry with online play. Now Microsoft and Sony need to get on the boat), I won't be playing the best looking games compared to the 360 and the PS3, and my system will most likeley look like a teched out Poptart. We have a lot to look forward to from Nintendo.
Anyway, despite my dissapointment with Nintendo and my lack of enthusiasm twards their new system, I am very eager to see this "mystery controller" they have up their sleeves. And I would like to ask you what you think or hope it will be.
This is what I hope Nintendo does to "revolutionize" the industry. The controller is obviously going to have some kind of touch screen (whoopee...) device but what I'm hoping for is some kind of VR headset. (Not like Vurtual Boy but a real VR headset) You ever wonder what happened to VR from the early 90's? Hasn't technology evolved far enough so that VR is very much a possability now? Screw HDTV and the limited pariphrial vision TV gives you in games like Halo, Burnout, and Metroid Prime. I'm tired of being hit from the sides by an enemy that I would have seen had I had the wrap around vision I do in real life. What better way to emerse yourself into the game world than to see nothing but the game and hear nothing but the game with 5.1 headphones. The screen can wrap around the inside of the headset slightly past your parephrials up, down, left, and right so you can never quite see the edge of the screen. The VR headset could also flip up when the game is paused or be flipped up manually. Having the headset wireless would probably be the best thing to do as well if it doesn't hurt costs too bad.
If the system came out for around $200 and the VR headset was $150 or less and came bundled with the system, I would pick it up over the 360 and the PS3 even if it had Nintendo 64 graphics. That alone is something I have NEVER experienced before. That would be a true revolution in games as we know them. And also may be why Nintendo is not supporting HD. But again, Nintendo is a very stubborn company that hates to evolve anything until it comes back to bite them in the ass (cartridge, online, kiddie image and design).
(Least paragraph I swear) To keep the cost down I would probably leave the 5.1 headphones optional. And leave the gameplay completley up to the controller, meaning no head movement will effect the game at all. I feel like a stupid 15 year old (not that all 15 year olds are stupid) with a "great" idea but it is fun to speculate and hope (I'm at work bored anyway). And plus I can say to the world "I KNEW IT!!!" if it is true. Well anyway, what do you guys think is this "revolutionary" device Nintendo has up their sleeves?
-Ajari-
#42
(example) like look at and there are pictures of buttons and every game would make there own
srry bout that didnt read that far
08/16/2005 (9:18 pm)
The best controller eva would be whole touch screen so every game could have its own controler setup(example) like look at and there are pictures of buttons and every game would make there own
srry bout that didnt read that far
#43
08/16/2005 (9:51 pm)
Hey, that's what I said!
#44
08/16/2005 (11:37 pm)
After a couple of months of gaming, though, a touch screen would be really, really ugly. My DS is starting to show the signs and that's with special care, only using the stylus and thumbpad. Touchscreens ain't the way to go.
#46
While I'm not entirely sure how I feel about it, it seems very possible that the "split controller" designs have some basis in reality. I mean, you generally hold half of the controller in either hand anyway, so it is feasible. I saw a layout that was basically 2 shoulder buttons, a z trigger behind the left shoulder button, 6 black buttons on the face, a small trackball beneath the buttons, an analog stick and a digital pad which I thought I would like particularly well. The real hook here was that it included an innovation (The trackball, which was apparently intended mainly for camera control.) and was able to emulate every controller from Nintendo's past systems perfectly. (With the added bonus of being able to emulate Sega's six button Genesis controller and Saturn 3D controller... I can speculate too!)
Here's the one: img72.imageshack.us/my.php?image=revcontroller8sc.png The only things that bother me are the placement of the analog stick and digital pad, the size of the analog and the fact that the grips are rounded, rather than having a sort of handle shape. Also, I'm not entirely sure what to make of the screen in the middle. It does seem Nintendo is pushing the whole personal interface thing, so it's a possibility. Also, consider how they mentioned Crystal Chronicles, which used the GBA as an extra screen, if I'm not mistaken. If they like they functionality, why not build it in, right?
"Grip" buttons are a recurring theme that I really don't think I could handle properly. Some people naturally grip fairly tightly, or sporatically, so I can't really imagine it would be included. Microphones, sure, they seem fairly standard now, particularly with online play in mind. Gyroscopes... They've already mentioned this wasn't in, but I think they may change their plans. It seems like too good a gimmick to waste, really. Plus, it could be adapted to make your controller into a sort of virtual racing wheel. (I would appreciate that use, I think, even if I never actually used it myself. There are far too many specialized controllers out there.) I'm not sure how they can sell Duck Hunt if they don't include a light gun functionality, but it seems unlikely anyway. (Though haven't they stated the tech on the controller won't be new, just never on a standard controller?) Holographic tech... I think not, in this generation.
I'm wondering, what plug interface the controllers will use. I really think consoles should begin manufacturing USB 2 controllers and supporting them for use on the PC. (I believe XBox 360 is making the move this generation, so expect it to be standard by the next.)
Anywho, I've praddled on long enough for now. :D
08/17/2005 (5:42 am)
I don't think I would like the "clean slate" style controller most people have been speculating. I like to be able to feel the buttons as I press them, so I know my hands are set right. This "haptic" thing sounds like it's far to new (Is it real?) to be any kind of cheap, so I'm wagering it wouldn't be shipped with every single controller. (In fact, touch screens may still be to expensive to make controllers.) While I'm not entirely sure how I feel about it, it seems very possible that the "split controller" designs have some basis in reality. I mean, you generally hold half of the controller in either hand anyway, so it is feasible. I saw a layout that was basically 2 shoulder buttons, a z trigger behind the left shoulder button, 6 black buttons on the face, a small trackball beneath the buttons, an analog stick and a digital pad which I thought I would like particularly well. The real hook here was that it included an innovation (The trackball, which was apparently intended mainly for camera control.) and was able to emulate every controller from Nintendo's past systems perfectly. (With the added bonus of being able to emulate Sega's six button Genesis controller and Saturn 3D controller... I can speculate too!)
Here's the one: img72.imageshack.us/my.php?image=revcontroller8sc.png The only things that bother me are the placement of the analog stick and digital pad, the size of the analog and the fact that the grips are rounded, rather than having a sort of handle shape. Also, I'm not entirely sure what to make of the screen in the middle. It does seem Nintendo is pushing the whole personal interface thing, so it's a possibility. Also, consider how they mentioned Crystal Chronicles, which used the GBA as an extra screen, if I'm not mistaken. If they like they functionality, why not build it in, right?
"Grip" buttons are a recurring theme that I really don't think I could handle properly. Some people naturally grip fairly tightly, or sporatically, so I can't really imagine it would be included. Microphones, sure, they seem fairly standard now, particularly with online play in mind. Gyroscopes... They've already mentioned this wasn't in, but I think they may change their plans. It seems like too good a gimmick to waste, really. Plus, it could be adapted to make your controller into a sort of virtual racing wheel. (I would appreciate that use, I think, even if I never actually used it myself. There are far too many specialized controllers out there.) I'm not sure how they can sell Duck Hunt if they don't include a light gun functionality, but it seems unlikely anyway. (Though haven't they stated the tech on the controller won't be new, just never on a standard controller?) Holographic tech... I think not, in this generation.
I'm wondering, what plug interface the controllers will use. I really think consoles should begin manufacturing USB 2 controllers and supporting them for use on the PC. (I believe XBox 360 is making the move this generation, so expect it to be standard by the next.)
Anywho, I've praddled on long enough for now. :D
#47
Virtual console. Oh wait that's the Phantom! But seriously, that just goes to show how desperate Nintendo was to show SOMETHING at E3. When that guy picked up that empty modem/DVD ROM player shell and said "This is the new Nintendo" I just started laughing, threw my hands in the air, and said to myself "I'm done with Nintendo". LOL The people in the crowd were oohing and aahing over that Metroid footage too. Regie Fills-Amie was all proud. Seems like everybody goes back to Resident Evil 4. That's their ONE. But that's besides the point. The point is that Nintendo already said the system won't be as powerful as their competitors and looking at the size of the console, which they said will be even smaller in it's final form, I don't see how it can be. So it doesn't really matter what the games look like because they'll never hold a candle to the 360 and PS3, and never be good enough for a next gen system unless you lower your standards because it's Nintendo.
I admit that fun is fun no matter what the graphics look like. But not everybody makes pure fun games. I wouldn't have played RE4 all the way through had it looked like RE Outbreak. RE4 wasn't that unique. The graphics and animations played a big part in my sticking with the game to the end and even considereing playing it in the first place. Not everybody makes fun games on Nintendo's systems and they are making damn sure that nobody makes visually stunning games either on the Revolution. I truly hope that isn't the case, but you gotta understand my disgust and being fed up with Nintendo's long history of bad decisions. I have hope. Litte faith. But I'm just curious what they are planning to make me wanna buy an under powered, under featured, un-popular (compared to the PS3 and maybe 360), under supported (we all know it will be), Revolution over the 360 and PS3. You wanna know what I really think (and hope)? Nintendo is starting from scratch now that they have seen the competition's cards. They never had a solid next gen system to begin with. Now they know what to shoot for. They've been playing the "wait and one up" game since the SNES days, and they're pros at it.
-Ajari-
08/17/2005 (5:55 am)
Quote:Virtual buttons.....virtual pad....virtual interface...
Virtual console. Oh wait that's the Phantom! But seriously, that just goes to show how desperate Nintendo was to show SOMETHING at E3. When that guy picked up that empty modem/DVD ROM player shell and said "This is the new Nintendo" I just started laughing, threw my hands in the air, and said to myself "I'm done with Nintendo". LOL The people in the crowd were oohing and aahing over that Metroid footage too. Regie Fills-Amie was all proud. Seems like everybody goes back to Resident Evil 4. That's their ONE. But that's besides the point. The point is that Nintendo already said the system won't be as powerful as their competitors and looking at the size of the console, which they said will be even smaller in it's final form, I don't see how it can be. So it doesn't really matter what the games look like because they'll never hold a candle to the 360 and PS3, and never be good enough for a next gen system unless you lower your standards because it's Nintendo.
I admit that fun is fun no matter what the graphics look like. But not everybody makes pure fun games. I wouldn't have played RE4 all the way through had it looked like RE Outbreak. RE4 wasn't that unique. The graphics and animations played a big part in my sticking with the game to the end and even considereing playing it in the first place. Not everybody makes fun games on Nintendo's systems and they are making damn sure that nobody makes visually stunning games either on the Revolution. I truly hope that isn't the case, but you gotta understand my disgust and being fed up with Nintendo's long history of bad decisions. I have hope. Litte faith. But I'm just curious what they are planning to make me wanna buy an under powered, under featured, un-popular (compared to the PS3 and maybe 360), under supported (we all know it will be), Revolution over the 360 and PS3. You wanna know what I really think (and hope)? Nintendo is starting from scratch now that they have seen the competition's cards. They never had a solid next gen system to begin with. Now they know what to shoot for. They've been playing the "wait and one up" game since the SNES days, and they're pros at it.
-Ajari-
#48
You are extremely quick at completely discarding the Rev's tech ability, which is funny, because unless you know more than the rest of us you're basing that on absolutely nothing. The PS2 is 'vastly' inferior to the Cube and X-Box. Look at Metal Gear Solid 3, God of War and Gran Turismo 4. Hardly ugly games, in fact, they're downright spectacular. The graphical difference will be mostly technical (ooh, the 360 has forty-six billion particles and the PS3 only has forty-two) but then end outcome? Games that are head and shoulders above what we have now.
You said not everbody makes fun games on Nintendo systems. It's not as if every playstation or X-Box game ever made is fun, not by a long shot. For that matter, not every GameCube game, nor all games of the next gen, be fun. Nintendo's lack of lineup? I have twenty-six titles that I play with more or less regularity. I've still a fair few to finish, too, so I don't think I'll run short on games. Funny, considering I've had it since about 6 months after release.
As for your take on Nintendo's Bad Decisions, well. They've had more profit from this generation of gaming hardware than Sony or Microsoft. They're still way, way ahead after over 100 years of being a company. Give them some credit, they know what they're doing far better than you do. Just because you don't understand or agree their decisions doesn't make them universally bad.
08/17/2005 (8:13 am)
Are you always such a pessimist, Ajari? Sheesh, it's depressing. It's pretty clear they're going for a bigger market penetration with the lower price point. Most gamers don't give to hocks about shaders, processor cores and all that other BS that Sony and Microsoft pump out to make them seem suprerior. Most gamers don't care about online play, wireless controllers or the fact that Nintendo held their cards at E3 for good reasons. So on, and so forth. Most gamers don't go onto online forums and vent their anger, so you'd be forgiven for thinking most gamers give a damn.You are extremely quick at completely discarding the Rev's tech ability, which is funny, because unless you know more than the rest of us you're basing that on absolutely nothing. The PS2 is 'vastly' inferior to the Cube and X-Box. Look at Metal Gear Solid 3, God of War and Gran Turismo 4. Hardly ugly games, in fact, they're downright spectacular. The graphical difference will be mostly technical (ooh, the 360 has forty-six billion particles and the PS3 only has forty-two) but then end outcome? Games that are head and shoulders above what we have now.
You said not everbody makes fun games on Nintendo systems. It's not as if every playstation or X-Box game ever made is fun, not by a long shot. For that matter, not every GameCube game, nor all games of the next gen, be fun. Nintendo's lack of lineup? I have twenty-six titles that I play with more or less regularity. I've still a fair few to finish, too, so I don't think I'll run short on games. Funny, considering I've had it since about 6 months after release.
As for your take on Nintendo's Bad Decisions, well. They've had more profit from this generation of gaming hardware than Sony or Microsoft. They're still way, way ahead after over 100 years of being a company. Give them some credit, they know what they're doing far better than you do. Just because you don't understand or agree their decisions doesn't make them universally bad.
#49
Maybe the plan is to knock something out using new-ish tech, but sell it for cheap.
Maybe the Revolution is that consoles and games don't need to cost a small fortune.
Maybe I'm way off the mark...
08/17/2005 (8:41 am)
Maybe the it won't technically be a next-gen console.Maybe the plan is to knock something out using new-ish tech, but sell it for cheap.
Maybe the Revolution is that consoles and games don't need to cost a small fortune.
Maybe I'm way off the mark...
#50
As far as their profit for this generation. I'm talking about strictly consoles, not hand helds. They own the handheld market, hands down, no contest, fagetabadit. To blend those figues of the GBA with the cube, Xbox, and PS2 wouldn't be fair. They used to be #1. Now they're getting killed in the console race. Dead last, and that's facts for you. If you call that doing a good job for your company than good luck with yours Matt. I don't think they know what their doing. In fact, I know they don't. Call me crazy, but they're obviously doing something wrong with their current console to be 3rd in a 3 man race. That makes 2 generations in a row. There's definatley a trend of bad desicion making going on.
Most gamers may not know what a shader is but they do know "looks good, doesn't look as good", and that's all they need to make a decision. Xbox is starting to beat PS2 in sales here in the US because people realise the slight difference in power. And if it didn't matter then what's the point of making each generation more powerful? Nintendo themselves said the Revolution isn't going to be powerful when compared to the competition during E3. Then they came with that cheezy line that went something like "it's not the size of the boat, it's the motion in the ocean" or "it's not the power of the system, it's how you use it". Something like that. I just remember thinking "it's over for Nintendo". That's what I base my knowledge off of. The facts.
Not my job to run their company so all I can do is vent online like an idiot with no life. I'm at work with nothing to do so I figured I'd get some N-fan boys rilled up. (not my original intent but I think it happened) I don't have to be a Nintendo exec to notice a stupid move when I see one (they obviously don't). Just because I'm here blabbing nonsense on an online forum right now doesn't mean I'm not good at making choices for personal or business gain. Anybody here will tell you that sticking with a cartridge when evrybody is going to CD is a stupid move. Is that what 100 years of experiance gets you? They paid dearly for that mistake and all I see is the same style of thinking from them.
But when the smoke clears and Nintendo is in last place again with the Revolution, everybody who reads this silly thread again will see that I was right. And I'll come back on here and say, "I told you so". And Matt, I like you. Your a loyal cat. You stuck with them. Bought 26 games for the system and I didn't even know the cube had that many games (joking...kinda). You've been debating with me on this from the beginning so all I can say now is only time will tell. The only thing I can see that will save them from going under in their console department this next generation will be this big special secret they have planned. It better be mind blowing or they will most definatley be in this same situation with their console a 3rd time in a row. And I believe 3 strikes and they will be out. After the Revolution fails, they'll quit the console market all together and focus on hand helds and bringing Zelda, Metroid, Star Fox, and Mario on Sony and Microsoft's systems. That's Ajari's great prediction! :p Watch!
-Ajari-
08/18/2005 (6:24 am)
Not angry with anything. Just disapointed. I'm usually more cheerful than this. As for Nintendo, they 're doing so bad this generation with their console, articles hardly ever mention them when comparing system statistics. Maybe the cube is doing good in Japan and Australia, I don't know. But they ain't so hot over here in the US.As far as their profit for this generation. I'm talking about strictly consoles, not hand helds. They own the handheld market, hands down, no contest, fagetabadit. To blend those figues of the GBA with the cube, Xbox, and PS2 wouldn't be fair. They used to be #1. Now they're getting killed in the console race. Dead last, and that's facts for you. If you call that doing a good job for your company than good luck with yours Matt. I don't think they know what their doing. In fact, I know they don't. Call me crazy, but they're obviously doing something wrong with their current console to be 3rd in a 3 man race. That makes 2 generations in a row. There's definatley a trend of bad desicion making going on.
Most gamers may not know what a shader is but they do know "looks good, doesn't look as good", and that's all they need to make a decision. Xbox is starting to beat PS2 in sales here in the US because people realise the slight difference in power. And if it didn't matter then what's the point of making each generation more powerful? Nintendo themselves said the Revolution isn't going to be powerful when compared to the competition during E3. Then they came with that cheezy line that went something like "it's not the size of the boat, it's the motion in the ocean" or "it's not the power of the system, it's how you use it". Something like that. I just remember thinking "it's over for Nintendo". That's what I base my knowledge off of. The facts.
Not my job to run their company so all I can do is vent online like an idiot with no life. I'm at work with nothing to do so I figured I'd get some N-fan boys rilled up. (not my original intent but I think it happened) I don't have to be a Nintendo exec to notice a stupid move when I see one (they obviously don't). Just because I'm here blabbing nonsense on an online forum right now doesn't mean I'm not good at making choices for personal or business gain. Anybody here will tell you that sticking with a cartridge when evrybody is going to CD is a stupid move. Is that what 100 years of experiance gets you? They paid dearly for that mistake and all I see is the same style of thinking from them.
But when the smoke clears and Nintendo is in last place again with the Revolution, everybody who reads this silly thread again will see that I was right. And I'll come back on here and say, "I told you so". And Matt, I like you. Your a loyal cat. You stuck with them. Bought 26 games for the system and I didn't even know the cube had that many games (joking...kinda). You've been debating with me on this from the beginning so all I can say now is only time will tell. The only thing I can see that will save them from going under in their console department this next generation will be this big special secret they have planned. It better be mind blowing or they will most definatley be in this same situation with their console a 3rd time in a row. And I believe 3 strikes and they will be out. After the Revolution fails, they'll quit the console market all together and focus on hand helds and bringing Zelda, Metroid, Star Fox, and Mario on Sony and Microsoft's systems. That's Ajari's great prediction! :p Watch!
-Ajari-
#51
-Ajari-
08/18/2005 (7:07 am)
And one more thing. Nintendo trying to cater to a "different" market is a cop out. Weak. They know they can't compete so they have to try to find a new audiance and compete in a different arena. Kinda pethetic, like Mike Tyson giving up boxing to persue a carreer in porno cause he keeps getting his ass kicked in almost every fight he's in now. Oh and by the way he has made many mistakes as well which led him to this fate. But I'm not spossed to be smart enough to know what mistakes he has made because I'm not ritch and famous. Sorry these posts have been having a negative tone. They are kinda ugly. lol Nintendo just pisses me off and I don't have anything better to do on my downtime at work. Ok I'm done.-Ajari-
#52
08/18/2005 (8:12 am)
Meh, I agree, games/game types are the most important part of a system, but it's silly to say hardware means nothing. Systems are getting so similar in game type (especially with so many cross-console games) many times the only determining factor in games is graphics/sound/AI. 
#53
-Peter
08/18/2005 (8:25 am)
I'm kind of glad Nintendo doesn't do all the things that you would do, Ajari. If they did they'd be just like the Xbox. There's nothing wrong with the Xbox. We just already have one and we don't need two. You're obviously happy with Microsoft. Just go play on their system and let us play on Nintendo. I think when Nintendo drops out of the console market I will too. I hate to break it too you but Nintendo really is trying to cater to a differnt market and they're doing a pretty good job at it. You're not in that market. That's fine. You don't need to be. Nintendo has enough money to survive without you.-Peter
#54
Let's have a look.
From here,
"Looking at Sony's game division, the picture's a bit more cheerful. That division saw sales of 172.8 billion yen ($1.54 billion), a 64% increase from last year. However, the group also saw a 5.9 billion yen ($52.7 million) operating loss -- attributed to marketing and research -- compared to last year's 2.9 billion yen."
And from here,
"According to Reuters' Japanese service, Nintendo reported a 78.5 percent decline in operating profit for the quarter ending June 30, 2005. Its 13.72 billion yen ($123 million) in operating income was off 3.75 billion yen ($33.4 million) from the same period in 2004."
Look at the bottom paragraph here.
"It also can't be understated that Nintendo saw a profit in its last quarter. By comparison, Sony Computer Entertainment today reported a quarterly loss of 5.9 billion yen ($52.6 million). Last week, Microsoft's Home and Entertainment division, which makes the Xbox, said it lost $179 million during its last quarter."
How on earth can you sit there and say they're doing badly? Please explain this. Granted, their presence in western countries is lesser than the other two consoles. I've never denied this, yet you insist on reiterating so. However. Nintendo do make a lot of games that appeal to all genders and ages, most of which aren't terribly interested in gaming consoles yet. You make a console that appeals to them, price it accordingly and bam, you hit a goldmine. Microsoft did it with the X-Box and many a PC user, Sony brought it to the 'cool' crowd and made gaming mainstream. What's to say Nintendo won't do it themselves?
As for graphics, well, the DC was above the PS1 and N64. Did it do well? Nope. It's all about image and marketing. I'll say it again. Image and marketing. Does premiering the 360 on MTV make it any more powerful? Make the games more fun? No, by using celebrities to pretend they like it and showing it on a 'cool' channel more or less makes it so.
Strangely, Ajari, you point out how badly they're doing in the current market, but because they're making the motions towards another it's a cop out? I'm baffled - how could they please you? By buying contracts to make overly violent and rather boringly mainstream games? Spawning out title after title of generic corridor shooter with 'innovation' *cough*? Making owning a Nintendo console 'cool'?
Nintendo makes Nintendo games. If people want to play those games, and they do, they buy a Nintendo console. That means more profit for Nintendo. While this cycle continues, they won't be developing for anyone else.
08/18/2005 (8:30 am)
As far as profit for this generation, Ajari, the X-Box is still $300 million in the hole. That's hardly succesful, unless you want to talk market penetration which Microsoft have done admirably. Why is it unfair to bring handhelds into the equation? Sony came aboard with the PSP, it's far from a one-man show there, too. Let's have a look.
From here,
"Looking at Sony's game division, the picture's a bit more cheerful. That division saw sales of 172.8 billion yen ($1.54 billion), a 64% increase from last year. However, the group also saw a 5.9 billion yen ($52.7 million) operating loss -- attributed to marketing and research -- compared to last year's 2.9 billion yen."
And from here,
"According to Reuters' Japanese service, Nintendo reported a 78.5 percent decline in operating profit for the quarter ending June 30, 2005. Its 13.72 billion yen ($123 million) in operating income was off 3.75 billion yen ($33.4 million) from the same period in 2004."
Look at the bottom paragraph here.
"It also can't be understated that Nintendo saw a profit in its last quarter. By comparison, Sony Computer Entertainment today reported a quarterly loss of 5.9 billion yen ($52.6 million). Last week, Microsoft's Home and Entertainment division, which makes the Xbox, said it lost $179 million during its last quarter."
How on earth can you sit there and say they're doing badly? Please explain this. Granted, their presence in western countries is lesser than the other two consoles. I've never denied this, yet you insist on reiterating so. However. Nintendo do make a lot of games that appeal to all genders and ages, most of which aren't terribly interested in gaming consoles yet. You make a console that appeals to them, price it accordingly and bam, you hit a goldmine. Microsoft did it with the X-Box and many a PC user, Sony brought it to the 'cool' crowd and made gaming mainstream. What's to say Nintendo won't do it themselves?
As for graphics, well, the DC was above the PS1 and N64. Did it do well? Nope. It's all about image and marketing. I'll say it again. Image and marketing. Does premiering the 360 on MTV make it any more powerful? Make the games more fun? No, by using celebrities to pretend they like it and showing it on a 'cool' channel more or less makes it so.
Strangely, Ajari, you point out how badly they're doing in the current market, but because they're making the motions towards another it's a cop out? I'm baffled - how could they please you? By buying contracts to make overly violent and rather boringly mainstream games? Spawning out title after title of generic corridor shooter with 'innovation' *cough*? Making owning a Nintendo console 'cool'?
Nintendo makes Nintendo games. If people want to play those games, and they do, they buy a Nintendo console. That means more profit for Nintendo. While this cycle continues, they won't be developing for anyone else.
#55
08/18/2005 (10:33 am)
I'll say one thing, although Nintendo IS making a profit and, though people don't realise this most of the time, doing very well financially. They aren't getting much face-time for their next-gen console like Sony and Microsoft, but by creating this unknown they're making people curious, and people are craving news as to their new console, if they can actually do something spectacular, they will kick major ass because everyone is watching, waiting, and hopeful, like Ajari said and if they do something that's amazing and impresses everybody, they will have ALL the attention. Every time they make the smallest announcement as to what they plan for the future everybody is looking at the article to see if they can find out something about the "Revolution". Bottom line: Nintendo hasn't been overlooked next-gen, Microsoft and Sony are just acting like it has, but if Nintendo doesn't pull they're bunny's ass out of that hat, they WILL be overlooked.
#56
I'm sure you all remember that fiasco...
08/18/2005 (10:42 am)
Hopefully, their idea of revolutionary isn't the Matrix Online :PI'm sure you all remember that fiasco...
#57
I think the Revolution will provide the fun this generation ... the same old games and controllers are getting very stale to everyone. EA reported a loss this past quarter which shows you that you cannot make cookie cutter products and last forever ... even if they have high production values. Games are about new experiences ... Nintendo right now is the only company providing new concepts in games among the big 3. Here's hoping they get their just rewards!
08/18/2005 (11:16 am)
I think they're doing great. Everyone dogged them out on the DS initially. Now read about all the great DS games that have hit shelves this summer that use the touch screen for innovative and fun concepts. Meanwhile ... the PSP is stylish and more powerful and yet ... it's not as much fun to play because everything is a sequel, some licensed drivel, or a cookie cutter game that wasn't done right. The DS is pulling ahead in the games department this summer, The new Kirby, Meteos, Advance Wars: Dual Stike, and Nintendogs are all titles I want to own. Meanwhile in PSP land there's nothing I want to own and the titles I did get were previously existing game licenses from 10 and 20 years ago. I'd take a DS and Meteos over any other game/system combination at the moment and I think I'll have a lot of fun with Nintendogs ... especially since it was an idea I thought of doing. Just seeing the fact that Miyamoto designed a game around an idea I wanted to do makes me feel all warm and tingly inside.I think the Revolution will provide the fun this generation ... the same old games and controllers are getting very stale to everyone. EA reported a loss this past quarter which shows you that you cannot make cookie cutter products and last forever ... even if they have high production values. Games are about new experiences ... Nintendo right now is the only company providing new concepts in games among the big 3. Here's hoping they get their just rewards!
#58
So now all of a sudden Nintendo creates niche systems that caters to a niche market? I don't believe that's where they want to be. They want to be where they used to be. #1 in system sales and in peoples eyes. But their not anymore. Nintendo can make whatever games they want, the facts are that not as many companies are willing to develop for them as much as they do the others. Nintendo can't support a whole system on their own. I think the reason is because since the N64, their systems have been lacking. People want the extras too. So I'm gonna buy Fight Night and Madden for the Cube over the Xbox and PS2 and pay the same price when the Xbox and PS2 have online fetures which greatly prolongs the life of the game and adds a totally new experiance? Not me. You can still be you and do what you've always done, but you have to evolve and follow trends as well as make them.
Nintendo has commented in the past that they didn't find online play very important and that it isn't what people want. Guess who was wrong again and is now reversing that statment with their new system. Now they don't see HDTV as important(I'm skeptical too though). They don't find system power very important. If those mini disks are so great, then why are they now going to DVD? That technology was available years ago and was already in use on the PS2 a year before the Cube dropped. I thought I was done disk swapping with Final Fantasy 9. The other companies aren't perfect either, but they aren't dead last in system sales either. I'll most likley get all the systems just like I did this time regardless. I do like Nintendo's games, I just wish there was more of them and better support from 3rd party publishers and developers. If they stop shooting themseves in the foot and give people and developers what they want, maybe they can get that.
Jeremy has a good point about providing a new controller to keep things fresh, but at the same time what's tried and true is tried and true. I don't hear anybody complaining about the steering wheel getting old. I don't hear anybody complaining about the keyboard/typewriter set up being old. These controllers work, but I'm eager to see what they have. They have always been the pioneers when it comes to controllers so I hope they set another trend. I just have a feeling it wont be enough.
-Ajari-
08/18/2005 (6:07 pm)
Well I do play Nintendo games. It's not the games I have a problem with. I enjoyed Pikimini 2, Zelda, RE4, F-Zero, and I'm currently playing Skies of Arcadia Legends(DC game I know but I'm playing it on GC). It's their way of doing things I don't like. Their stubborn nature to embrace new technologies that always comes back to bite them in the ass. They may be making profit but that's because their system has been priced like an item in a vending machine for a long time now. And it's bare bones on top of that. So of course it's gonna cost them $25 to build. Theres all kinds of ways you can still make a profit even if your not #1. One way is to give people less than the competitoin when it comes to system features to keep development costs down. If you look at that aspect then yes, that was a very smart and dumb move on Nintendo's part. But having the systems in homes is what I'm talking about. That's the battle they have lost. So now all of a sudden Nintendo creates niche systems that caters to a niche market? I don't believe that's where they want to be. They want to be where they used to be. #1 in system sales and in peoples eyes. But their not anymore. Nintendo can make whatever games they want, the facts are that not as many companies are willing to develop for them as much as they do the others. Nintendo can't support a whole system on their own. I think the reason is because since the N64, their systems have been lacking. People want the extras too. So I'm gonna buy Fight Night and Madden for the Cube over the Xbox and PS2 and pay the same price when the Xbox and PS2 have online fetures which greatly prolongs the life of the game and adds a totally new experiance? Not me. You can still be you and do what you've always done, but you have to evolve and follow trends as well as make them.
Nintendo has commented in the past that they didn't find online play very important and that it isn't what people want. Guess who was wrong again and is now reversing that statment with their new system. Now they don't see HDTV as important(I'm skeptical too though). They don't find system power very important. If those mini disks are so great, then why are they now going to DVD? That technology was available years ago and was already in use on the PS2 a year before the Cube dropped. I thought I was done disk swapping with Final Fantasy 9. The other companies aren't perfect either, but they aren't dead last in system sales either. I'll most likley get all the systems just like I did this time regardless. I do like Nintendo's games, I just wish there was more of them and better support from 3rd party publishers and developers. If they stop shooting themseves in the foot and give people and developers what they want, maybe they can get that.
Jeremy has a good point about providing a new controller to keep things fresh, but at the same time what's tried and true is tried and true. I don't hear anybody complaining about the steering wheel getting old. I don't hear anybody complaining about the keyboard/typewriter set up being old. These controllers work, but I'm eager to see what they have. They have always been the pioneers when it comes to controllers so I hope they set another trend. I just have a feeling it wont be enough.
-Ajari-
#59
Nintendo can afford to 'lose' this console generation, and many more like it, until they're in trouble. And when they start with an effective 90% market share like they did before the N64, the only way the could have gone is down.
08/18/2005 (7:00 pm)
Ajari, they are right about online play. Six to ten percent of console owners use it. Six, to ten, percent. That is hardly 'most people'. Those mini discs completely eliminated piracy on the Gamecube. And they do have a system in nearly every home. Because Apple have 5% of the home computer market share, does that mean the iPod, with it's 30%+ market share, means nothing?Nintendo can afford to 'lose' this console generation, and many more like it, until they're in trouble. And when they start with an effective 90% market share like they did before the N64, the only way the could have gone is down.
#60
I know that Xbox Live currently has over 2 million users. I guess giving people more options and more for their money isn't in Nintendo's best interest. If online gaming isn't popular enough to build into their system, then why are so many companies wasting their time making online games and why is the Revolution going to be online?
If the mini disk helped so well against piracy then why are they switching to DVD's with the Revolution?
-Ajari-
Edit: I can't believe you guys have me debating at home on my own time now :) I'm gonna call it a day for now. Good (but pointless) debate you guys. I had fun.
08/18/2005 (7:26 pm)
Matt, I'm talking about Cubes in peoples homes, not GBA's and a combination of their their last 12 systems. This is a console debate remember? The GBA is great, doing well, and I see Nintendo sticking with the hand held market for as long as they are in business. I know that Xbox Live currently has over 2 million users. I guess giving people more options and more for their money isn't in Nintendo's best interest. If online gaming isn't popular enough to build into their system, then why are so many companies wasting their time making online games and why is the Revolution going to be online?
If the mini disk helped so well against piracy then why are they switching to DVD's with the Revolution?
-Ajari-
Edit: I can't believe you guys have me debating at home on my own time now :) I'm gonna call it a day for now. Good (but pointless) debate you guys. I had fun.
Torque Owner Matt Benfall