Topic: Hoping For the Fall of Nintendo Consoles

[SmellySocks]

As a gamer, I like to play games.  A variety of games from a variety of companies.  I want to be able to play Halo and Fable.  I want to be able to play the Final Fantasies, the Dragon Warriors, the Metal Gears, and the GTAs.  I want to be able to play the sports games, the action games, the adventure games, the RPGs, the FPSs; and yet, I love Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Eternal Darkness, Pikmin, Animal Crossing, SSB, Earthbound.  I am tired of relying on Nintendo systems to provide me with all of the above because, in the end, I am disappointed.  I feel I missed out on some of the greatest games ever made on non-Nintendo systems because I do not have enough money to spend on all three systems.  As a gamer, not a businessman, I am ready for Nintendo to make software only.  I am ready for them to drop out of the hardware industry.

This would seem to be a little unfanboyish, but I am speaking as a Nintendo-biased gamer.  I love my Nintendo games more than any others, but why do I have to miss out on all the beautiful 3rd party titles because I like to play Nintendo games?  If Nintendo produced games exclusively for one system (PS3 hopefully), a large part of this problem would be solved.  

I am not suggesting that Nintendo drop out of the handheld industry because they are obviously strong in that market.  I just don't understand why Nintendo participates in the console industry when it doesn't even want to compete with the other hardware companies.  If someone can enlighten me on the subject please do so, because I can find no reason other than profit for why they are willing to support a console that is not supported by a large majority of consumers.  It just makes no sense to me.  Nintendo is quickly becoming a niche company, and I am not a big fan of that.  

[manunited4eva22]

Yes, Nintendo should stop making a ton of money so you can save some money, great plan chief.

[SmellySocks]

Hey cheif,
1.)  I wasn't talking about software prices.  I was talking about hardware prices.  Who has the money spend $200-$300 for 3 systems.  

2.)  I swear my post asks for reasons outside of business.  Just a game world without money being a factor.  I acknowledge the business side.  

3.)  Who said they would stop making money?  I'm sure quite a bit of more money could be made with software on a MUCH larger userbase than a future Nintendo system will probably hold.  Besides, they wouldn't have to spend as much money on hardware R&D anymore (well at least outside of the portable market).  Besides, as it is, chief, Nintendo's system has the highest priced 1st party games.  

So, I guess dropping a failing future console must mean Nintendo loses lots of money...:::sarcasm:::

On a side note, these opinions are just predictions.  Don't take what I say as fact.

[)Dark-LInk(]

i dont like that idea i hope it NEVER EVER HAPPENS!!

[StRaNgE]

how old are you?


Why Nintendo, you could have easily said X-box or sony going under and the 3rd party games going to Nintendo.

Why would they stop when they make more off console sales then just software alone as well as 3rd party software that they would not make anything from if the did stop?

Why should they  save you the 200 for another console and  have to fire 100's of employees to save you that small amount?  what about all those employees kids who will now starve and have to go on welfare because you did not want to own two systems.
Will you give them a place to sleep  and food to eat? I promise you that will run you over 200 extra a month to do  for sure.

[mouse_clicker]

If you ask me, it's not Nintendo's fault 3rd-parties aren't making Gamecfube games (at least not mostly). All we get are half assed prots of 6 month old games that get no advertising, and THEN the 3rd-party says it's Nintendo's fault the game didn't sell (like when Konami blamed Nintendo for the N64 Castlevanias selling bad when they were just really crappy games). If 3rd-parties want their games to sell, they better start bringing their games up to the quality of Nintendo's. I don't own a whole lot of 3rd-party Gamecube games, but the ones I DO own are incredibly good, and strangely enough it's those same 3rd-party titles that actually sell well on the Gamecube. We don't ignore 3rd-party games because we choose to- we ignore them because 99% of them probably weren't even worth the money to make the disc. If you want 3rd-party titles so bad, why not get a PS2, seriously (in addition to your Cube). I have both and I can definetly my gaming needs or more than fulfilled.

[SmellySocks]

Here's the point I was trying to make:  why would you want to have to purchase three different gaming systems to satisfy all your wants and needs.  I, personally, can only afford to buy 2.   I can't buy 3 different systems.  And, yes, I do believe that the 3rd-party problems are Nintendo's fault.   With the reduction of royalty costs, I hope more 3rd parties turn their way.  A Nintendo system would be my system of choice for all 3rd parties, but unless they can shake the bad market image that they've had since 1998, I don't see that happening.  Don't get me wrong, I am a BIG Nintendo fan.  I just wish there were some way to bring us back to the glory days of SNES.

And dear God, I swear I said leave the business side alone.  Give me a reason outside of business.  I'm not an idiot.  I know how many employees would be gone.  I know what internal problems it would cause.  I'm just ignoring that at the moment to have a topic that would start an interesting video gamers dream topic.  

As for X-Box.  Microsoft won't be leaving any time soon.  They have plenty of money to lose.  As for Sony, regardless of their current pretty-much monopoly on the industry, I see them screwing up before Microsoft does.  

If it were my choice, I would absolutely love it if one of the above companies dropped out and made games for Nintendo.  3rd parties would also come rolling in.  It's just a frustrating situation NOW.  Give it 3 years, and I might change the subject line of this thread....a matter of fact.  I'm going to change it now.  Sounds too ugly.

In closing, I don't really hope for the fall of Nintendo.  I just wish for another catchy Nintendo system.  But I would just like to talk about the not-so-bad side of software-only.

Ahhhh...peace and SNES.

Let's be nice.  

[mouse_clicker]

We're GETTING the glory days of the SNES era. We saw the return of Metroid in all it's glroy, we got a Zelda so incredible some people are still reeling from it, we're getting strong support from Namco, who used to hate Nintendo, we're seeing the return of Square, we're getting ANOTHER Zelda, ANOTHER Metroid, and ANOTHER Mario. On top of all that we have Sega's very strong support, which is nothing less than great, AND Nintendo making a ton of new franchises. I'm more content as a gamer than I've ever been before and I attribute it all to Nintendo and to my Gamecube.

And just to clarify something, how is it Nintendo's fault they have an image? They just make the games, it's the public that forms the image. And if the 3RD-PARTIES put all their "mature" games on the Gamecube, maybe they could fix their own problem.

[SmellySocks]

Good points.  Can't argue with any of that.  It's nice to see civility.

[manunited4eva22]

I don't undrestand your logic, you say Nintendo would be better off if they wnet third party, but when proven wrong you say I know that, what is going on?

And to be frank you are trying to make a strictly business decision into a question of class. There is no way to ignore the business side because that IS the answer.

It would be like saying, why don't we suddenly stop using gasoline, besides the business aspect of it. In terms of harm it causes you are right, there is no reason why not to, but if you acknowledge that in business as well, it would be near suicide.  

[SmellySocks]

Suicide?  I hope you're kidding.  Let's use Sega, for example (No, Nintendo is in no way in Sega's position).  Was it suicide for them to go 3rd party?

And when was I proven wrong?  I stated an opinion on a matter.  I didn't say Nintendo would lose money.  I don't believe it would.  It would lose employees, yes.  Money?  Not a terrible amount.  Nintendo makes the majority of its money from the Game Boy and from SOFTWARE.  If Nintendo had a larger user base, more than likely, it would mean more software sales (unless a few factors went into it---->competition).  

How is that "proven wrong"?

And about the gasoline.  Would you, as a consumer, not a businessman, want to use gasoline or an imaginative source of energy that is more cost-effective dollar-for-dollar and less harmful to the environment?

I'm not trying to start an argument here.  I'm just wanting people to look at some of the good things if Nintendo went third party.  

Note:  I really would like to change my original post because it poorly expressed my opinion.  

[PIAC]

well.. trying to look at it in a strictly gaming sence, i dont think it would work that well at all, nintendo makes great nintendo games cause they know their hardware very well, and perhaps the quality your used to as a nintendo fan wouldn't transport onto other consoles as easily as it would on their own. i can see what your driving at, but well no, its bad dont drive at it ^_^ nintendo games for nintendo consoles for now and for ever it shall be
or something
i dunno
*turns on metroid prime*

[manunited4eva22]

No, nintendo makes most of its money from licensing. That is the major difference between sega and nintendo. Sega was trying to make licensing fees a absolute bare minimum, nintendo has always had a premium one. And how would Nintendo NOT lose money? All licenses are  gone, and as much as you would like to say that hardware is causing a loss, Nintendo makes money off of each sold console by this point. The same is expected for the next generation.

My point on the gasoline was that though gasoline is environmentally dangerous, it is more important to the economy of many companies than to the environment.]

Here is another example: Why shouldn't you pirate games. From the gamer perspective, you get everything  the same as someone who payed for the game, except you spend nothing. What you neglect to realize is that there are reasons beyond you saving a few bucks for you.

If you haven't picked up on what I am saying I wont bother trying to make it any more obvious.

[SmellySocks]

Hmmm...now I will admit that I've been proven wrong.  Oh well.  
:::Enjoys his Gamecube:::

[ThePerm]

i dont like your idea

[IceCold]

Damn you Perm

[wandering]

Quote
1.) I wasn't talking about software prices. I was talking about hardware prices. Who has the money spend $200-$300 for 3 systems.

Divide the cost of the system you want to buy by the number of games you want to get on that system. Let's say you want to get 20 ps2 games. And the ps2 is $150. So, you're paying, what, a $7.50 premium on all games? Not that bad.

Oh, also ThePerm, you suck

[Kairon]

If Nintendo goes third party, then they won't be able to innovate like before in hardware.

Don't forget, Miyamoto is hugely responsible for Nintendo controllers. And don't forget, whenever controller technology takes the next big leap, who brings it? That's right, Nintendo.

Also, Nintendo holds the belief that software and hardware design is tied together. Mario 64 was designed ALONGSIDE the N64 controller. Miyamoto's long-ago Marionette game project (meaning puppets) evolved into the hardware Rev controller which is now spurring on new types of play because of that interplay between software and hardware.

Simply put, Nintendo DOES NOT belief in just software, or just hardware. Nintendo believes that videogames are really made of a combination of both.

To go third party and give up the ability to benefit from the synergy, Nintendo would have to give up the very essence of what they know videogames to be. And that sounds like a pretty bad thing to me.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[TrueNerd]

Kairon said everything I was going to. It was probably worded much better then my statement would have been as well.

But to piggyback off of that, look at Sega's lineup before and after they went third party.

Before:
Shenmue
Seaman
NiGHTS
Jet Grind Radio

After:
Sonic Riders
Shadow the Hedgehog

OH GOD, GOING THIRD PARTY SUCKS. Sega used to take risks and make creative games when they were a first party developer. They don't anymore, for whatever reason. Maybe they're more interested in making the dough or maybe all their great  developers left. I don't know. The point is, they suck now and I don't think it's coincidental. I would hate to see Nintendo do nothing other then churning out Mario Parties and Mario sports spin-offs. I hate to see it now, but as long as I see creativity like Pikmin, Animal Crossing and Wario Ware and hardware risks like the DS and Revolution which enable even more inventive games, the Mario Parties and other spin-offs are a lot easier to take. We would not see this stuff if Nintendo was third party. They need to be their own boss because they are the only ones who would let them do this stuff.  

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Calling for closure.

[Pale]

Why is it that people first bump super old topics... then people who respond fall for it and re-ignite the same old debate? =P

[mantidor]

Perm

animecyberrat? hes got better with the typing though

Ian!? problably also me

Nintendo!?!?

haha wait, this is most probably me

[RiskyChris]

This bumping old topics is ridiculous.  Can we get some rules on these forums so this doesn't happen anymore?

[TMW]

Whats so terrible about bumping old topics?

Anyways, according to THIS article, Nintendo boasted a whopping $1.03 billion dollar profit during the last four quarters, beating Sony by a little over $600 million dollars.

I find it very hard to beleive Ninty will go the way of Sega any time soon.  

[ThePerm]

on every other board this topic is discussed quite frequently, rather then looking for a more recent  threads I went for the most original one. Since double posting of the same topic is not allowed.

Anyways, as far as Nintendo goes. I could see some benfits of nintendo going third party. It would help the power vacuum and allow for systems to become less about graphics and mroe aboutgames. Since a lowered level of competition would end such things. However, the problem with a lack of competition is theres a lack of drive, and things end up overal mediocre.

for example lets take Sega, Sega is a shell of what it used to be. If I were Sega I would have a new system out by now with some badass games. Sega is releasing no badass games. Their sonic team games are shadows of the glory that was Nights, and where the heck is Shenmue? Korean MMORPG? WTF I'm still waiting after two games to fight Lan Dhi and it doesnt look like its happening anythime soon.

I think Revolution is going to be a good source of episodic games. I wish however they would get a hard drive. My theory is though since Revolution uses usb that a funny thing is you might be able to use xbox's hard drive on revolution. Which would totaly piss off Microsoft, but hey whatever works right?

as far as reviving old threads. Its a very difficult rule to make, because there has to be some limits on which threads can be rivived and which ones can't. For instance rather than creating a new tipic anytime i make a change to my pad, i just make an addition to the official cribs thread. The offficial Avatar thread is like 3 years old. Its just a thread that simply hasn't died. Some threads need to be revived because their a funny read when you have information that you didnt have before. As far as this thread goes, i thought it would be relevant, because there are still those who claim Nintendo will go third party. Like the president of the company who makes Duke Nukem.

then there are those that beleive Nintendo is hurting for money...they should see these bar graphs

http://nintendoinsider.com/site/EEEFylpkElFffmiBlr.php