Topic: Editorial: Don't Leave Me Now

[Deguello]

Actually Jonny, the GTA games fit on two CDs for the PC.  That's about a GC disk.  And that probably without the super coolcompression tools involved.  

[The Omen]

Quote
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 rationale you used was "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."  

I agreed with  "Its Nintedos fault".  I disagree with the reasoning.  I think the double pack would sell very well, especially if it was released at the same time as the Xbox.  It would hardly kill Rockstar to make even more money on a 2-3 year old project.   When i said even earlier, i was making a hypothetical statement showing the later they release it, the less it would sell.  Nintendo again, has to be held responsible.  Ian Sane basically stated all the reaons why already.

[Mario]

Ok.. so, Nintendo are getting the shaft for not having games like Mafia, Sega Sports, Max Payne etc.

Does this mean Microsoft and Sony are getting "the shaft" for not having Viewtiful Joe, Billy Hatcher, the entire Resident Evil series, Tales of Symphonia, Skies of Arcadia, Baton Kaitos etc.?

Why aren't PS2 owners complaining that they aren't getting great games like that? And why are we complaining that we dont get crap like Mafia? Shouldn't it be the other way around?

[Ian Sane]

"Does this mean Microsoft and Sony are getting 'the shaft' for not having Viewtiful Joe, Billy Hatcher, the entire Resident Evil series, Tales of Symphonia, Skies of Arcadia, Baton Kaitos etc.?

Why aren't PS2 owners complaining that they aren't getting great games like that? And why are we complaining that we dont get crap like Mafia? Shouldn't it be the other way around?"

We complain about games that are available for the PS2 and Xbox but not the Cube.  We don't complain about exclusive titles like ICO, Halo, Final Fantasy X, etc. because we really have no chance of getting those titles.  The Cube games you mentioned are all exclusives so like how we don't usually whine about not getting PS2 or Xbox exclusives they don't whine about not getting our exclusives.

[mouse_clicker]

I can perfectly understand the Gamecube not getting obvious PS2 and XBox exclusives like Halo and Final Fantasy. It's when the Gamecube doesn't get games that are otherwise multiplatform, and would do well, like Burnout 3, for instance.

Quote
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.

Eh, both exclusive Resident Evils for the Gamecube sold over a million copies worldwide. I believe the only M-rated title for the Xbox that has sold over a million copies is Halo.

Quote
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.

Making a profit is what I consider fine, and Nintendo is better at that game than both Microsoft and Sony at the moment.

Quote
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.

This I completely agree with. I think one huge reason the XBox has succeeded at all is becaused Microsoft released Halo at launch, which really set a tone for the rest of its lifespan. Conversely, Nintendo set the opposite tone by not even releasing the traditional Mario game at launch. Hopefully they'll remedy this next generation.

In any case, I think Nintendo has a lot more work in establishing themselves as viable territory for mature games than any of you think. Since developers already have it engrained in their mindset that mature games won't do well on the Gamecube, they won't release their mature games on the Gamecube, which is only causing mature games to do worse on the Gamecube. True, if Nintendo had caught this problem at the beginning it wouldn't have reared its uglier head later on, but the fact is they didn't, and all we can really focus on now is how to fix the ordeal, which is almost impossible- it's one big viscious cycle that loops in on itself. I hope Iwata recognizes the benefits of his predecessor's agressiveness, because in times like these it's very useful.

[thecubedcanuck]

"Making a profit is what I consider fine, and Nintendo is better at that game than both Microsoft and Sony at the moment."

If you remove the hand held sales, is this still the case?

[Mario]

Yep.

[mouse_clicker]

I believe Nintendo started making a profit off of the Gamecube itself almost right after launch. I used to doubt the Gamecube's profitability, as well, but Rick assured me Nintendo was not losing money on the console. Obviously the immense change they're pocketing off of the GBA doesn't hurt, either.

[Bloodworth]

I think one big factor with Xbox that a lot of people are missing is that since it's based on PC architecture, it's like getting two ports for the price of one.  Once you get it running on Xbox, you've done most of the work for a PC port and can get two SKUs out of that development.  The GC has an entirely different architecture and smaller media, which makes those poor sales stick out even more.

[mouse_clicker]

It also gives lazy developers and excuse not to port their game to the Gamecube.

[Ocarina Blue]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
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.

Agreed. A golden Sun RPG a year or so into the Cubes lifespan could have done wonders.

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
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.

Yes: when it comes to apealing to hardcore gamers, you can't go past a contract with Treasure. Even if they're not so well known in the West yet, they will be. Treasure will one day rise to the heavens, single-handedly reviving the Japanese economy! Or something.

Quote
It also gives lazy developers and excuse not to port their game to the Gamecube.

Excuse? Nup, it gives them a valid reason. The X-Box's archetecture makes it simply more efficent to port to the X-Box than the Cube. Lazyness has nothing to do with it.

Quote
Originally posted by: 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)

Agreed, why do all the crap consoles sell so well over here? (The MSII outsold the NES.) all humanoid squids.  

[JubJub]

Here's something that i thought i'd bring up as it hasn't really been mentioned yet in this forum. From reading all the posting from other people i have been reading them in the frame of mind that 'each person owns a single console'. When u think of it like that, 3rd party support is really important.

When you think that a lot of people have more than 1 console, things are different.
(i own a GC and Xbox)

Last gen i owned a N64, all my friends owned a PS, and they all had them chipped and didn't buy many games at all, they just copied them all.

Now, its widely circulated that the xbox is the most powerful system of the current gen, and from what i can tell from the cross-platform games, it is.  There's a major difference in Burnout 2 for xbox and GC - the GC slows to 30 FPS in 2 player mode, the xbox stays at a solid 60 FPS.

I'm going all over the place with this post and not making much sense. I'm trying to get 3 points across:

1 - 3rd parties may prefer GC because of the difficulty in copying the games

2 - People own more than 1 system a lot of the time

3 - Different systems have different ports and customers choose the system that the game runs on best when purchasing.

Why would i buy Burnout 2 on GC when i can get the same game running smoother on the Xbox?

It may be beneficial for Nintendo to "help" renderware and the other cross-platform development tools work the best they possibly can for Nintendo hardware so that dodgily ported PS-2 games work best on the GC, therefore gain more purchases.

[thecubedcanuck]

Demo disks, demo disks, demo disks. That is one thing I really like about my x-box, is that I can preview games, AT HOME, on my gear, and decide if they are what I am looking for. IMO this is something NIN really needs to start doing. I would think that 1st, 2nd and 3rd party developers would be all for this.

[mouse_clicker]

Quote
Excuse? Nup, it gives them a valid reason. The X-Box's archetecture makes it simply more efficent to port to the X-Box than the Cube. Lazyness has nothing to do with it.

You misunderstood me- I was not saying developers are lazy in that they port games to the Xbox instead of the Gamecube, but because they won't port games to the Gamecube in addition to the XBox. I can perfectly understand a PC developers willingness to port their game to the XBox, given the similar architecture, but once it's on the XBox it's only a hop, skip, and a jump away from being on the Gamecube. The main reason it's NOT is because developers are too lazy to get used to a new architecture- they'll hide behind the excuse that their game wouldn't have sold well on the Gamecube when they really have no clue because they never even released it on the Gamecube. If releasing a multiplatform game on all 3 consoles simply became standard practice instead of the rare oddity, I guarantee you both the Gamecube and the XBox's audiences would diversify.

[Jonnyboy117]

Quote
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
they'll hide behind the excuse that their game wouldn't have sold well on the Gamecube when they really have no clue because they never even released it on the Gamecube.

They probably have a good clue from sales data on other games.  Laziness has nothing to do with it; if publishers thought they could make money with a GameCube release, they would do it.  These people are ruthless, and they want to make money.  Lots of it.

[KDR_11k]

(why are people getting so worked up over Mafia? That game was released around the same time as GTA 3 and sold far less)

Well, Goblin Commander was at first not meant to be released on the GC "because third party games don't sell on GC". What I think Nintendo needs to do is educate people that third party games are not necessarily bad.
I've heard from a software tester that the GC was supposedly weaker than the PS2. How could he say that? Well, he worked for a pretty bad publisher, the games he used as a benchmark were pretty bad to mediocre and I wouldn't doubt the GC ports were very sloppily done. That means sloppy ports aren't just an excuse, they do in fact exist and can drag a game down quite a bit.

For all the people debating over the sales of "mature" games on the GC: James Bond: Everything or nothing was the best selling game on the GC last week in the UK. I bet it sold pretty well in every market.

[mouse_clicker]

Quote
These people are ruthless, and they want to make money. Lots of it.

You just proved my point, Johnny! These developers are only looking for a quick buck, and are NOT up for the work required to make the Gamecube a viable 3rd party platform. I know it's possible- 1st and 3rd parties coexisted peacefully on the NES and SNEs, prospered even. If 3rd parties would take a more agressive approach themselves they could make the Gamecube into a place where 3rd party games can sell. It's a paradox, a catch-22, if you will. They won't release their games on the Gamecube as long as it's not a viable 3rd party platform, but it won't be a viable 3rd party platform until 3rd parties start releasing games for. You just supported my argument that 3rd parties are too lazy to embrace a strategy to mold the Gamecube into a console as opportunistic as the PS2 in this regard.  

[TheYoungerPlumber]

Why should thrid parties feel the urge to mold another company's console when they feel it isn't worth the financial risk?  I don't blame them either.  Nintendo should just focus on tis NEXT system's image and support (including holding off some important titles if needed), and do its best to keep its current userbase happy.  From Nintendo's behavior, that is either their plan, or they don't care about garnering more widespread thrid party support.

[Kyosho]

1st and 3rd parties coexisted peacefully on the NES and SNEs, prospered even

Keep in mind of the lack of competition.  And if I remember right, the PS2 came out earlier than the Gamecube, so in that regards the Cube was also about 1/2 a generation behind of its competitor.

You just supported my argument that 3rd parties are too lazy to embrace a strategy to mold the Gamecube into a console as opportunistic as the PS2 in this regard.

Being a programmer myself, I view it with this state of mind..
1) What audience I am targetting
2) The ease of porting/coding
3) The value of success after release

As you can see right now, people are bashing the Cube left and right, and 3rd minor parties are abandoning support for the Cube.  Demographically and statistically, I have to wonder about what age groups make up most of the audience as well as what tastes they have for games.  After staring at the current Cube library, I would have to say it's less than mature.  Second, porting code is a pain in the butt.  It's easier said then done.  If APIs were portable, then that wouldn't be a problem.  If I am used to a language already for instance PS2's difficult API, then why bother programming using another API that has a smaller user base with different genre tastes? Sure it may be *easy* to code in -claims Nintendo-, but that also means you have to research the Cube's onboard architecture and figure out a way to port everything so it utilizes the architecture.  That takes time and effort, and obviously the return result is not commonly rewarding as shown by recent releases.  

It really is not up to the Coders to mold the Cube to be the defining kind of if its generation.  It's up to Nintendo to HELP ease the change of scenery, and to ENCOURAGE as well as reward.  

[The Omen]

Quote
After staring at the current Cube library, I would have to say it's less than mature

Really? I guess not having 150 FPSs on the GC is 'less than mature'.

And Johnny, if these developers were so hungry for cash, they'd realize what everybody in business realizes-holding product back does not increase your market/wealth.  If they put the same effort across all 3 consoles, they would be rewarded for doing so.  When they release a sh!tty port 6 months late, what do they expect?  For instance, Hitman 2.  I believe it only sold 25,000 copies for the GC.  Had they released it the same time as the other consoles, i'm quite sure it would've sold more.    Who's to blame in that case?  If a game sells 100,000 copies, especially a port, you can't tell me its not worth the effort.  To be perfectly honest, most of these developers care about total game sales across all three platforms, not one platform.  So to me, it is laziness more than anything.  Nintendo has a role in it as well, but that only provides these developers with an excuse, its not the true reason.

[mouse_clicker]

Omen summed up my thoughts perfectly- refer to his post if you want my to know my opinion at the moment.

[Kyosho]

Really? I guess not having 150 FPSs on the GC is 'less than mature'

sarcasm aside, what I meant to say was they were not targetted toward the same audience that for example the PS2's library is targetted at.  Whether or not you agree, it doesn't really matter.   I am viewing this from a developer's point of view, not a consumer's.  

So to me, it is laziness more than anything. Nintendo has a role in it as well, but that only provides these developers with an excuse, its not the true reason.

I have to wonder how many of you actually do any sort of programming.  High school programming does not count either.  On another note, I have been pondering WHY Nintendo ports always get the shaft out of everything.  And somehow, I get the feeling it's due to the complex architecture of the Gamecube and that Nintendo isn't really as developer-friendly as they could be.  

[The Omen]

Quote
sarcasm aside, what I meant to say was they were not targetted toward the same audience that for example the PS2's library is targetted at. Whether or not you agree, it doesn't really matter. I am viewing this from a developer's point of view, not a consumer's.

I was responding to your point of view, which stated  "After staring at the current Cube library, I would have to say it's less than mature. "  But i digress.

Quote
but that also means you have to research the Cube's onboard architecture and figure out a way to port everything so it utilizes the architecture. That takes time and effort, and obviously the return result is not commonly rewarding as shown by recent releases.

If that doesn't support the laziness theory, then what does?   If they took the time and effort, it would be rewarding.  For an example of laziness, check Baldurs gate , which i believe was released 6 months late, and still turned out to be the worst version.  Oh, but i see, it took them 6 months to fiddle with the GCs architecture, then they decided to do a sh!tty job anyway.  What business sense, or programmingf sense , is that?

Quote
I have to wonder how many of you actually do any sort of programming. High school programming does not count either. On another note, I have been pondering WHY Nintendo ports always get the shaft out of everything. And somehow, I get the feeling it's due to the complex architecture of the Gamecube and that Nintendo isn't really as developer-friendly as they could be.

I don't think you have to be a programmer to understand business, which is the real issue.   But i do go to school with literally a couple thousand game design students(programming).  

The GC is a very easy architecture to develope for.  But the Xbox, as someone stated, kills two birds with one stone, since its basically a PC at its heart.  The PS2 has to be developed for, because its got the huge following.  The GC, while easy to develop for, is still different, and thus laziness , IE, "we don't have the time to spend on making this GC version, so will scrap it" kind of mentality.

[KDR_11k]

As I said, even Sony is complaining about lazy programmers not fully utilizing their machine.

[nemo_83]

I read the article and I will say that I agree entirely.  Nintendo has been passive with thier image allowing it to be run through the meat grinder beginning with the SNES when Sega began attacking Nintendo.

Diversifying thier own 1st and 2nd party lineups are the first step to gaining consumers and developers who see Nintendo as purposefully alienating their console from what the market is hungry for.  The try to pay too much attention to being different from their "competition" that they forget that their own lineup must have differenciations between titles.  You can't just release Mario Sunshine, Pikmin, and Donkey Konga and expect people to see you as different.  They just see you as one dimensional when you can't tell the difference between one tellutuby game and the next.