Topic: Editorial: Don't Leave Me Now

[RealmRPGer]

Quote
Originally posted by: The Omen

Quote
Honestly, which third party games that aren't on GCN, but are on PS2 and Xbox, are worth putting on the GCN? And why?

The Suffering, Hitman 3, MaX Payne 1&2, Knights of the old republic, Ninja Gaiden, FF(The real Final Fantasy), Sega Sports, Mafia, Colin Mcrae, Devil May cry, Manhunt, Burnout3, Mortal Kombat, MGS3, Fight Night, the list can go on and on.  Those are just off the top of my head.  And why these games?  Its simple.  What is gained by not having something your competitors have?  If your direct competition has games that you don't, then you'd better get them.  Even if a game is rubbish, you still have to have it as an option.

He did say games that are on BOTH PS2 and Xbox. While you do have some good examples, most are only on a single system. This leans towards console exclusiveness for a series. One console means a single source code, and certain divisions may just prefer a console. Whereas games on BOTH the PS2 and Xbox show that a company is flexible and is looking to maximize its sales. These are the ones that could much more easily be swayed by Nintendo if the right offer was made.

[TheYoungerPlumber]

I think what most of you are trying to get at is that Nintendo needs more *exclusive* 3rd party games.  EXCLUISVE titles--not just first party titles--define a console's personality and target userbase.  But how can Nintendo get more exclusives, short of providing its own franchises and development teams?  That's what the company itself is trying to figure out...Jonny's right: Nintendo needs to set the example.  

However, I strongly disagree with the suggestion that Nintendo pump out crummy games--as others have said, it would just damage its own reputation among followers.
Nintendo needs to  hunt down more budding third parties that develop "non-Nintendo" games.  Silicon Knights, Retro Studios and N-space (remember Geist, anyone?) are a good start, but Nintendo needs to get more serious about the matter.  Microsoft went on a feeding-frenzy before the Xbox launched, and Nintendo needs to do the same.  Nintendo *is* doing this, but too slowly.  Nintendo can't afford to fully buy-out development teams, and doesn't seem keen on owning more 2nd parties, but it can still build tight relationships with small developers like Camelot.  I'm skeptical of what will come from FF:CC and MGS:TS; it needs to put its full weight behind partners like Alpha Dream and NOISE but, more importantly, DIVERSIFY their partners' images and game styles.

Of course, there's always the problem of getting consumers and 3rd parties to notice these exclusive games...and that requires BURNING money on promotions.  Nintendo doesn't like that.  ED and Metroid Prime didn't seem to change anyone's perceptions of the GameCube, largely becasue Nintendo wanted to make a profit.

edit P.S.: If Nintendo wanted to promote a more diverse image without abusing money, a console launch promotional campaign would be the perfect outlet... Nintendo loves killing two goombas with one fireball.

[Mario]

Quote
Originally posted by: Inkwell

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario
But they're doing fine just now without them...

I really don't understand when people say this. They are doing fine now

I don't understand.

Quote
Originally posted by: RealmRPGer
If Twin Snakes sells well, it could be a major break for Nintendo. Konami would definately seriously consider releasing MGS3 on the 'Cube, and it would offer more support. When other 3rd parties realized how well games can actually sell on GameCube, they'd at least want to put their feet back in the water. However, the really big thing about Twin Snakes is that it's still a RE-RELEASE. Meaning many gamers will feel they've 'already played it' and thus not buy the game. There needs to be some serious marketing of "it's a whole new game!" in order to make casual multi-platform gamers buy Twin Snakes.

Agreed, Twin Snakes needs to sell well, and it all comes down to how it's advertised. I'd say with bad advertising it would sell about 200-300k (which is respectable, but not "wow"), because there are people who already know they want it, like some of us. But if it wants to break into the mainstream it has to be advertised well, as if it's a brand new Metal Gear game the same quality as the rest of the series.

Quote
He did say games that are on BOTH PS2 and Xbox. While you do have some good examples, most are only on a single system. This leans towards console exclusiveness for a series. One console means a single source code, and certain divisions may just prefer a console. Whereas games on BOTH the PS2 and Xbox show that a company is flexible and is looking to maximize its sales. These are the ones that could much more easily be swayed by Nintendo if the right offer was made.

Exactly, took the words right out of my mouth.

I agree with everything you said just there, TYP.  

[Beave]

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario
But they're doing fine just now without them...

well not quite, in australia GC has about 5% market share (i read that some time ago, i dont think its changed). Hardly any places stock games, and the shelf space is getting smaller and smaller each month. It's pretty hard to find a game at k - mart or other big retailers, only EB and places like that if your lucky

I'm ready to buy an x-box cause games like rugby league, v8 supercars etc are just not on the GC

[DrZoidberg]

Beave, several PGC forum users are Australian, i'm one, as is Mario, you don't need to explain to use the shortcommings of Nintendo in Australia, it needs SERIOUS in both Europe and Australia / New Zealand ( Ocarina Blue)

as for the rest of the editorial, i'm ready to leave pgc for ever, i pretty much agree, the biggest thing Nintendo could do for me as a gamer is help plug some gaping genre gaps, i'm talking about light gun games (Duck Hunt 2 please), music / rythm games (needs more Samba De Amigo and Bemani, among others), decent platformers (beit 3d or 2d) and others. They could do this three ways, Lead the way with internally developed titles, as discussed in the editorial, OR request said genres from friendly developers / second parties (could be a bit difficult, i doubt many teams would take too kindly to being forced to make a game, but if played right it could yeild gold) OR attract third parties that specialise in said genres by offering to publish the title or what ever.

sign treasure on for s'more shumps , either top down like ikaruga, or side scrolling like Gunstar Heros (sequel kthx)

[The Omen]

Quote
He did say games that are on BOTH PS2 and Xbox. While you do have some good examples, most are only on a single system.

More than half the examples i gave are on both PS2 and Xbox.  Not bad considering i didn't think about it.  If you need me to look at both systems game lists, i will.   I assure you, there are plenty more.  You don't dispute that, do you?

Alright, looking at The Xbox list, i found almost 25 games that are on PS2, but not on GC.  Theres maybe another 15-20 i'm not sure about.  Thats a hefty number.  Heres a few more-GTA3 and VC, Driver 3, Baldurs gateA2, State of emergency, Fallout:Brotherhood of steel, Mission Impossible,peration Surma, and a lot more.

I'm the biggest Nintendo fan there is, but even i can see that GC gets the shaft endlessly.  Are these great games?  Probably not, but it doesn't matter..Nintendo needs to have them.

[thecubedcanuck]

Once again, Ian has summed up my thoughts exactly, and yet another great editorial by Johnny.
Its time to take off the rose colored glasses and realize that their are indeed very serious problems with Nintendo strategy.

[thecubedcanuck]

" If Twin Snakes sells well, it could be a major break for Nintendo."

Bullchit, this is what everyone said about RE and Metroid prime.

"Inkwell: If they want to sell the PSP they need to halve the price first, USD450 is too much for ANYONE."

again that is BS, dont underestimate what people are willing to spend to be "IN". Look at the IPOD and how well it is selling despite its cost. To think that the PSP is going to be a flop like every other handheld is very foolish. The PSP will severly hurt Nins strangle hold on the handheld market, and if they think a hand held with 2 screens will fix that, then IMO they are even further offbase than I once thought.

[The Omen]

Cubed, you're right, it is Bullsit.  If MGS:TS sells 400 hundred thousand, it'll inevitably be compared to the original in sales, unfairly so, but it will be.  And when the media says it sold under expectations, thats what will be believed by everyone outside the Nintendo circle.

And about the editorial, i see nothing outlandish about it.  Johnny was just being honest.  I think he makes mostly valid points throughout, yet everyone gets insulted.  Come on people, we talk about these issues constantly, yet Johnny gets roasted?  There are problems at Nintendo.  Have been for over 10 years now.  They're slowly realizing this, and i think the N5 will be another step up.  But it doesn't mean the problems are gone.  The 3rd party situation is hit and miss.  One day, we're all cranked up because Nintendo and Namco make an agreement.  The next day, we're seeing Sega drop an entire line of games from the system.  Capcom 5 becomes the Capcom 2.  But Namco comes through again with RPGs -exclusive.  ...its been up and down the whole life of the GC, but they're trying this time around.  But right there we should all notice theres a problem.  Theres no stability with any 3rd party developers.

[Jonnyboy117]

Hey everyone, thanks for the lively and intersting discussion.  Please continuing being civil and avoiding personal insults.  This is an important issue with plenty of room for differing perspectives.

I will try to hop in and make some arguments during a break from work today.

[WesDawg]

OK, first I'm a jerk so I just skimmed the article, so maybe I missed this. It seems to me like most of Microsofts 3rd party support comes about because they buy it. They buy exclusives from Big Name companies. They buy nice ports of good selling PS2 games. Why else would MGS2 appear on the system? Or Panzer Dragon. Or Ninja Gaiden. Or why does Splinter Cell go there first. That's how MS survives without loosing support. Its not because of great sales of 3rd party games on their system. Its just because even if the game sells bad, Microsoft paid for the development, and the publisher is out nothing. It's not like they're doing something amazing or right. They're just taking the shot in place of the developers because they have the money to do it.

[Ian Sane]

"it needs to put its full weight behind partners like Alpha Dream and NOISE but, more importantly, DIVERSIFY their partners' images and game styles."

I agree with that point about diversity.  What advantage is there in having a good relationship with Camelot if all they release are generic Mario titles?  Those games could be made by anyone providing that EAD oversaw production.  Camelot has defined itself as a unique developer with games like Shining Force and Golden Sun.  Therefore they should work on something unique that showcases their talents and provides some variety to Nintendo's lineup.  Mario Tennis is a good game and will sell well because of the Mario license but it is not a system seller and will not help Nintendo in the long run.  Nintendo's teams should be more like Sega with each team working on their own unique stuff.

"sign treasure on for s'more shumps"

Sounds like a sweet idea to me.  Nintendo could give Treasure free reign to make whatever they wanted and I guarantee they would make some amazing games that would be unlike anything Nintendo makes.  There is the worry that Treasure's games wouldn't sell in North America but really all Nintendo would have to do is "train" their fans to associate Treasure with quality.  How do they do that?  Include a pack-in disc with the N5 launch that has Gunstar Heroes, Guardian Heroes and RADIANT SILVERGUN on it (assuming Treasure owns the rights to those games).  That would not only promote Treasure and build up hype for their next game (every N5 owner would become familiar with them) but would also give the N5 a boost in sales at launch since every hardcore gamer on the web would want to own one to get that hardcore Radiant Silvergun game they've all heard about that sells for $100 on Ebay.  Thus Treasure would become a strong name in North America, the N5 would have a huge hardcore following from the get go that would include non-Nintendo fans, and every major game site and game mag would be signing its praises at launch because of the Treasure bonus disc.  It wouldn't be enough on it's own but combined with some strong exclusive launch titles it would be a great start, something Nintendo did not have with the Cube.

[Jonnyboy117]

I think Treasure self-published some of those games in Japan, so they may still have the rights.

One big rift of opinion here seems to be whether Nintendo should be trying to win the console "war" or just be content with the market they have.  Suffice it to say that if you don't think Nintendo should have a bigger piece of the pie, my editorial isn't for you.  But I think Nintendo does want a bigger piece of the pie, because they are a corporation that wants to perpetually increase profits and make more money for their shareholders.  I think Nintendo does want to regain the lead over Sony and Microsoft and whoever else might try entering the race.  I hope to get some kind of comment from the company soon regarding this point.

[Jonnyboy117]

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
No. The fact that GTA wasn't released on GC showed how much Rockstar dislikes Nintendo, nothing else.

Please.  There is no such thing as a corporate grudge.  Maybe there are executive grudges, but I think their influence is greatly overstated.  Rockstar is a multiplatform label, and they have in fact released GameCube titles, so your theory falls flat on its face.  (By the way, Smuggler's Run: Warzones is a lot of fun.)  They haven't released GTA on GameCube because they don't think it would sell enough to be financially viable...and they're probably right!  And that's Nintendo's fault.

[mouse_clicker]

Quote
There is no such thing as a corporate grudge. Maybe there are executive grudges, but I think their influence is greatly overstated.

While I highly doubt this is the case with Rockstar, executive grudges kept Square and Namco off of Nintendo consoles for years. If anything, you're understating their influence.

I do agree very much that diversity is the key industry dominance- while the PS2 appeals to many different people, the XBox and Gamecube appeal to very specified groups, and sales continue to reflect the advantage of the former. It's not Nintendo's responsiblity to make their games diverse, however- people seem to expect Nintendo act out the part of a wide array of 3rd parties and then criticize them when they can't. Rather, Nintendo needs that wide array of 3rd parties, and instead of making "mature" games themselves they need to get 3rd parties who will do it for them. Nintendo has been great with bigger eastern 3rd parties in recent times, and all they need to do is extend that practice to western 3rd parties and smaller 3rd partiers overall.

Quote
They haven't released GTA on GameCube because they don't think it would sell enough to be financially viable...and they're probably right! And that's Nintendo's fault.

THIS is why I hate your editorials, Johnny- you make broad, sweeping generalizations like that and just expect everyone to believe you. How is it Nintendo's fault that their fans aren't all that interested in games like GTA? How is it their responsilibty to condition us to want such games? And if you're going to tell me it's because Nintendo lost all their 3rd parties, I went over all that in my editorial, so read it before you use that defense.

Regardless of all this, I hope your next editorial is over something entirely different, Johnny, because this one was little more than an extension of your last one. A third editorial on the same subject from the same viewpoint would be villanizing Nintendo. I'd suggest something like a Point Counterpoint, something where two opposing viewpoints are offered rather than just one, over and over again.  You're not offering any balance to the situation.  

Quote
again that is BS, dont underestimate what people are willing to spend to be "IN". Look at the IPOD and how well it is selling despite its cost.

iPod sales haved reached 2 million worldwide as of January 8th, 2004. Gameboy Advance sales have hit 20 million in the United States alone by February 14th, 2004. If the PSP is going to have sales comparable to the iPod, it WILL fail.  

[thecubedcanuck]

"How is it Nintendo's fault that their fans aren't all that interested in games like GTA?"

because NIN has created a horde of "stuck up we are better than you , because we said so gamers" this is why.

Look at many of the people who post here, they think anything non NIN is junk.

I have never, in all my life met a more pompous group, than those who post here on a regular basis.

[mouse_clicker]

Jesus, cubed, you're going to have to come up with a better defense that calling anyone who doesn't think Nintendo's the embodiment of Satan pompous. We're not all fanboys just because we disagree with YOU. Why don't you come up with a defense instead of trying to insult Nintendo's fanbase. It makes you look no better than the people you're attacking.

And if it makes you feel better, I LOVE Grand Theft Auto, both GTA3 and Vice City, and they were the main reason I bought my PS2, along with Ico. I'll probably be preording San Andreas once I buy a few parts for my computer.

Also, I made a comment about your iPod statement.

[The Omen]

Quote
They haven't released GTA on GameCube because they don't think it would sell enough to be financially viable...and they're probably right! And that's Nintendo's fault.

You surely can't be serious.  That is perhaps the most ridiculous thing i've read on these boards.  If Rockstar released the double pack right now, it'd sell okay.  If they released it early on, the sales would've exploded.  How can you think it wouldn't?  Its obvious the attitude at Rockstar is "come court us, and maybe we'll consider giving you the GTA series."  MS did, Nintendo didn't.  Thats why its not on the GC.

 As for grudges, there are some.  A lot of key people at Sega still seem to stick to that "Nintendos for kids" statement.  Sounds a lot like Segas advertising method in the early 90's if you ask me.
So why is it so hard to believe some people with-in certain developers couldn't care less about Nintendo?  If any of us had a DEV company, we'd make sure Nintendo had our game on their system, because we love Nintendo.  Is it so hard to believe some people dont like Nintendo, thus favor other consoles?  I'm sure its not entire companys, but i bet certain key people in the industry feel that way.
 

[manunited4eva22]

I'm sorry, but thats how things work.  You court the company.  How the hell do you think xbox got into the industry?  It certaintly wasn't with hype, they went after the developers, and it worked.  They paid, promised, whatever it took to ensure that they wouldn't fall flat on their face. Nintendo hasn't done that, they have only done enough to get off on this generation, and to some extent I agree with johnny on that, Nintendo can't completely control the mature aspect, but anyone who argues they can't do atleast a little more is insane.  

Nintendo Power is now completely devoid of intelligence, there is nothing intelligent written in it, and all game scores are obsurdly high.  When was the last time they hyped ED?  Never, oh yeah forgot about that.

If we were a big developer, we would do what every sane business company does, put the product where it will suceed, then later we could worry about who we liked.  This is business, this isn't fanboy world.

Canuck, why would you make such a blatently stereotypical comment in a place that it is guarenteed to offend.  It's like coming to a reading group and saying that because they prefer an author they are pompous stuck ups for not reading a lot of other authors.  People prefer certain things, and it's their choice, insulting them for being in a place that is better (say a GAMECUBE FORUM) than say, an xbox forum, is in itself stupid.

[Ian Sane]

Personally I feel that GTA would, even now, sell quite respectfully on the Cube.  Jonny is right though that Rockstar doesn't think it would sell.  And the fact that GTA is not on the Cube is partially Nintendo's fault.  If Rockstar doesn't feel the Cube userbase would buy GTA well that would be partially be Nintendo's fault.  It's the console maker's responsibility to attract a userbase that will buy the games released on the console.  I don't think it's fair for Acclaim to get mad at Nintendo for their games not selling since those games just weren't very good to begin with but GTA is critically acclaimed and is widely considered to be a good game so it should sell on the Cube.  If it doesn't something's wrong.  Still I think Rockstar is grossly underestimating the popularity of their own series.

Plus if a really major game (and this gen there's nothing bigger than GTA) is being released on every console BUT the Cube I think Nintendo should to expected by us fans to make an effort to secure it.  There's no excuse from a fan's perspective for GTA to not be on the Cube.  The Cube's hardware is easily sufficient and it's not an exclusive game.  Nintendo should have done all they could to get this game and it appears they did NOTHING.  I think it's fair to consider part of the console maker's job is to ensure that, when possible, the "best" games are available for it's userbase.  That means making deals over non-exclusive third party games.

[nolimit19]

Originally posted by: Mario
   But they're doing fine just now without them...

it depends on your definition of fine. barely scrapping for 2nd place is good in a race of 10, but in a race of 3 i would not say it was fine.  

[The Omen]

Quote
I'm sorry, but thats how things work. You court the company. How the hell do you think xbox got into the industry? It certaintly wasn't with hype, they went after the developers, and it worked.

Yes, thats what i said.

Quote
If we were a big developer, we would do what every sane business company does, put the product where it will suceed, then later we could worry about who we liked. This is business, this isn't fanboy world.

No kidding.  By saying i'd put it on Nintendo is saying I think it'd sell on the GC.  Why would you think the two biggest titles perhaps in the history of video games wouldn't sell?   Because of a preconceived notion that Nintendo is kiddie ?  Exactly the point.  Since I, the developer, have a respect for Nintendo as a company, and for their fans, i would put it on a Nintendo system , with anticipation of it selling, of course. Thats all i was trying to get across.
 

[nolimit19]

all i know is that nintendo needs to launch its next console with a more "mature" title. do not...DO NOT launch it with pikmin 2 and pokermon. well you can it you want, but to shake the negative image that nintendo has, i think it would be best for them to make a statement at the begining of the next generation of consoles.  

[Deguello]

I daresay this issue between 3rd parties and Nintendo may actually be unsolvable.  The best solution I see is a solution that is the best for both 3rd parties AND Nintendo.  Too many of you guys are ready to steamroll Nintendo for not  doing everything in their power to lure 3rd Parties, some of you even suggesting that Nintendo start making crap games so that 3rd parties get comfortable with their crappiness.  On the flipside, Too many guys suggest Nintendo get elitist with their 3rd Parties.  "Who needs them?"  Sorta stuff.  Nintendo kinda needs them.  They need them in a "I can't do it all by myself" way.

One thing I don't understand is why 3rd parties are just leaving the GC?  Are they just not affected by their piss-poor performance on the Xbox?  Of course they aren't.  Microsoft is subsidizing their failure.  Nintendo could do that.  Ensure they make a profit whether or not their games fail.  2 problems.  If it DOES fail, that doesn't do much to help out that there "image" thing everybody's talking about.  And without the worry of failure on the developers, why should they even worry about quality?  And even if they did "buy" their support, They could never compete with Microsoft on that.  They would outbid them everytime.  So that's out.

They could become all ruthless and iron fisted.  "Hey, you cancelled your GC games?  Alright WE cancelled your GBA games.  Isn't that great!?"  This would have been really effective in 2k1 and 2k2, but since the PSP is another option, they can't play that monopoly card.  AND there's that pesky image popping up again.  This would make them look difficult and unamiable to work with.  Though it would be a great schadenfreude feeling to help failing developers on their way to bankruptcy, it isn't right, both ecomonically and possibly morally.  Now if they used the GBA in the opposite direction, possibly halivng Licensing fees for devs making GBA games to make GC games, and if that game is exclusive, well, how does a buck sound?  That could be a great short term solution.  But if Nintendo should increase the licensing fess later, that could lead to another fallout.  That seems pretty good to me.

The problem with uber-pandering and bidding aggresively is, as my father says, "They sure would be fighting over a really small biscuit."  For some of these 3rd parties, it just would not be worth the effort.  They would bid aggressively and get the support, even front the marketing money and publish it themselves, only to have the game fail and the third party in question reach the same conclusion as before, except this time Nintendo has thrown money away.  Image isn't worth that.  Now some 3rd parties might BE worth it.  Like some whose games are viable in all 3 markets instead of just two.  I hate to make a value judgement, but companies like Acclaim and Midway are pretty medium-sized fishes in this lake compared to Capcom, Konami, Namco, Sqaure Enix, etc.  Their games are marketable to other territories as well as their own, while Midway's and Acclaim have a history of poor performance in Japan.  To continue this fish analogy, because I just ate some, I think the best selection of third parties would come from hooking the big fish and netting the little ones to grow at home until they grow big.  Not only are the medium sized ones too big for your net, the game warden will make you throw them back anyway, so it's not worth it.

I think the problem here is that people are trying to find somebody to blame.  Some of you guys blame Nintendo for not pandering to 3rd parties at the expense of their own game quality.  And some of you guys blame the 3rd parties for being crap and their crap selling like crap (I admit deservingly), but that's really not fair.  There is a solution out there, but it's not apparent, and bitching about it makes my head hurt.

[Jonnyboy117]

GTA III/Vice City/Double Pack couldn't have been released on GameCube earlier because of Sony's exclusivity deal, which is very real and has paid off considerably for all parties involved.  The Double Pack didn't come out on Xbox until fall 2003, and by then Rockstar could see the poor sales of practically every M-rated title on the system, including some excellent games like Eternal Darkness and the Resident Evils.  Would the Double Pack sell on GameCube?  It's all relative.  It might sell 100,000 copies, although I'd be surprised.  But it wouldn't be selling the hundreds of thousands that it has sold on Xbox, and I don't think it would have even if the Double Pack had been released on all three systems at once.  As for whether the third-place sales on GameCube would have exceeded porting and publishing costs, there's no way to know.  I can tell you that a game as large as GTA is not easy or cheap to port, and it would have been even more expensive to bring to GameCube thanks to the need for multiple discs for each of the two games included.