Post by: SmellySocks on April 18, 2003, 05:13:48 PM
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.
Post by: manunited4eva22 on April 18, 2003, 05:35:26 PM
Post by: SmellySocks on April 18, 2003, 05:42:35 PM
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.
Post by: )Dark-LInk( on April 18, 2003, 08:20:34 PM
Post by: StRaNgE on April 18, 2003, 09:25:45 PM
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.
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 19, 2003, 06:40:40 AM
Post by: SmellySocks on April 19, 2003, 07:22:33 AM
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.
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 19, 2003, 08:17:33 AM
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.
Post by: SmellySocks on April 19, 2003, 08:55:13 AM
Post by: manunited4eva22 on April 19, 2003, 10:26:15 AM
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.
Post by: SmellySocks on April 19, 2003, 10:48:08 AM
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.
Post by: PIAC on April 20, 2003, 05:34:11 AM
or something
i dunno
*turns on metroid prime*
Post by: manunited4eva22 on April 20, 2003, 06:22:29 AM
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.
Post by: SmellySocks on April 20, 2003, 08:12:51 AM
:::Enjoys his Gamecube:::
Post by: ThePerm on March 17, 2006, 07:54:57 PM
Post by: IceCold on March 17, 2006, 07:59:28 PM
Post by: wandering on March 17, 2006, 08:15:40 PM
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
Post by: Kairon on March 17, 2006, 08:19:12 PM
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
Post by: TrueNerd on March 17, 2006, 09:41:16 PM
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.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on March 17, 2006, 09:45:20 PM
Post by: Pale on March 18, 2006, 03:26:52 AM
Post by: mantidor on March 18, 2006, 03:50:04 AM
animecyberrat? hes got better with the typing though
Ian!? problably also me
Nintendo!?!?
haha wait, this is most probably me
Post by: RiskyChris on March 18, 2006, 05:29:12 AM
Post by: TMW on March 18, 2006, 08:00:05 AM
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.
Post by: ThePerm on March 18, 2006, 08:02:05 AM
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
Post by: Pale on March 18, 2006, 08:04:18 AM
Post by: jasonditz on March 18, 2006, 08:32:23 AM
There are a lot of reasons to not like the idea of going third party for Nintendo:
1) They make a lot of money off the present situation, why change
2) They design their hardware with their games in mind... 3rd parties are at the mercy of hardware designers.
3) You either have to be platform agnostic like Sega (and split your fanbase just like Sega did this generation), or pick a single system to develop for. Then if that system flops, you're totally marginalized
4) 3rd parties have to pay licensing fees. Nintendo makes almost exclusively million sellers, so that's a lot of money to hand to another hardware maker for no good reason.
Post by: Dirk Temporo on March 18, 2006, 08:52:41 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: 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.
Solution? DON'T BUY ALL THREE SYSTEMS.
Post by: Ceric on March 18, 2006, 09:30:25 AM
Nintendo invests a lot of money into hardware R&D for company that just makes games. They could easily just pick-up parts. Methinks Nintendo is making a good chunk of change on there research that has nothing to with game systems.
The original argument in this thread is a little flawwed because by his logic it should have been the other way around. Everyone else should become third party because Nintendo developed the strongest games. *shrug* Sony is not very first party at all in my mind. In fact I think that MS was more like Nintendo regarding game realises then Sony BEFORE the XBox. They've made some pretty good Computer games the run on Windows that is there platform.
Also part of the reason Sega isn't making as good of games for consoles as the use to is because there "parent" company has straight out told them that they should focus on Arcades.
Another note is that Nintendo may have a higher licensing fee but that doesn't equate to more for them. When Nintendo goes to a hardware manafacture to make something for them they try to get it at as close to the manafacturing cost as possible if not the manafacturing cost. How do you say they do that. It's simple. Nintendo will pay the cost of manafactuing the peice. So at the point that hardware company is breaking even, ok. Then Nintendo gives you a certian percentage of the license fee. So now the Hardware company has a vested interest in every part of your console doing well because they make a little bit of money for every game you sell, governments do the same thing with saving bonds and like. Why would Nintendo do it like this? No fix cost. If Nintendo is doing badly they don't owe as much to the hardware company. If Nintendo is doing well they can afford to pay the extra to the hardware company and that makes that company happy. It also allows for price drops later on. Nintendo can go, "You know that it's now much cheaper for you to manafacture these parts and I've paid you X more than you would have made with a fix cost. I need a price break." They'll say yes because they now what a sweet deal they already have.
When the 360 was released they had an article on all that. MS has learned to adopt a model more like Nintendo. To the point that MS owns the rights for almost every part of the 360 so if say IBM makes them mad they can have someone else produce the chips. I'm sure that cost them more up front but in the long run for this sort of thing it's better.
I could keep going but I'm going to stop there.
Post by: jasonditz on March 18, 2006, 10:45:56 AM
You look at what happens to their systems every time there is a lag in blockbusters. The PS1 only really got going because of Battle Arena Toshinden, and was starting to teeter after that until MGS came along. The PS2 got its early launch hype, but before GTA3 came along it was really starting to tread water, to the point where there was talk on Sony corporate pulling the plug on the game division.
I mean, look at the PSP, it's dealing with the same situation: a bunch of mediocre or worse titles, the early hype (at least stateside) has died down and most of the interest is coming from its position as a (mediocre) media player. I haven't seen data on it in months, but last I saw the tie-in ratio was abysmal for the PSP, which leaves me wondering if they're even breaking even on the whole thing. To me it's just trying to survive until some big title comes along and justifies its existance.
Post by: Ceric on March 18, 2006, 11:34:16 AM
Post by: The Omen on March 18, 2006, 12:34:34 PM
Quote
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.
Honestly? I don't buy all three systems, nor do I buy 2. I am quite content with Nintendo and perhaps some of the bigger releases (like Knights of the Old Republic) on PC.
Post by: King of Twitch on March 18, 2006, 01:05:20 PM
People must've been depressed back in April 2003, even before the E3 Pac-Man debacle, though I notice no one replied with "oh, just go play your GBA."
Post by: Ceric on March 18, 2006, 01:42:55 PM
Post by: blackfootsteps on March 18, 2006, 02:16:07 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on March 18, 2006, 04:40:45 PM
SECOND Sega has a SH!& load of great games that a lot of people on here don’t know about simply cuz they aren’t on GC. Spartan, Virtua Fighter 5, House of the Dead 3, Sega GT online, Panzer Dragoon Orta, Condemned, Sonic Adventure, Super Monkey Ball, Sonic Riders, Sonic Rush, etc. Sega has just as many games going now as they ever have and they STILL have a ton of great games that are only overlooked because they aren’t on GC.
Sega going 3rd party was a good decision. Sega also has their hands in many hardware areas right now also, they have the Plug N Play Genesis and there’s a DVD player coming out that has Master System games built in. Sega is making a major come back and could easily release a brand new system if they chose, but they are too deeply involved in Ps3 and Rev and 360 stuff to do that right now.
Nintendo is far more profitable as a hardware maker than Sony so there is no need for them to abandon their hardware. Also Nintendo has Pokemon and GBA/DS not to mention all their million selling games to eat any losses they may or may not incur due to GC sales.
Post by: ThePerm on March 18, 2006, 05:37:15 PM
as a Sega fan myself, i really don't like how the company is going right now. The only thing that does look good right now is Condemned, but I would really like to see them bring up their Sonic Team and Am stuff up a notch. I'm not saying Sega isn't doing bad as far as profit goes, but I beleive in the Dreamcast Era they were making some great games.
Virtua Fighter 3, Typing of the Dead, Shenmue 1 & 2, Seaman, Space Channel 5, Phantasy Star Online.
as far as Sonic Team goes, i never liked the Sonic Adventure series. I was spoiled by Nights which to me had better gameplay. Especially Christmas Nights where I got to play as Sonic, and it was fun.
Post by: RiskyChris on March 18, 2006, 05:38:51 PM
Post by: ThePerm on March 18, 2006, 06:26:50 PM
there are quite a few games i could see being way better if only another take was put on it, it seems as though Sonic is trying to be too cool and tryign to appeal to non sonic fans, but really what i would prefer is Sonic to just be Sonic
http://www.sonic-cult.org/dispart.php?catid=8&gameid=2&subid=1&artid=1
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on March 19, 2006, 03:04:30 PM
Sonic, Virtua Fighter, and Super Monkey Ball seem to be their only success stories in the recent generation.
Post by: KnowsNothing on March 19, 2006, 03:09:19 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on March 19, 2006, 06:28:37 PM
Post by: jasonditz on March 19, 2006, 06:55:44 PM
Post by: IceCold on March 19, 2006, 09:11:27 PM
QuoteHahahaha, I made the same mistake of believing that the Sonic Team could actually still make a great game after playing Sonic Rush. But then Bloodworth informed me that it was really created by DIMPS, not the Sonic Team.. I looked it up, and they also made the GBA Sonic games. It seems that "created by Sonic Team" is a lie.
Originally posted by: jasonditz
Sonic Rush shows that Sega's still capable of making a hell of a game when they put their mind to it.
How naive of me.
Post by: wandering on March 19, 2006, 09:13:53 PM
Post by: jasonditz on March 20, 2006, 09:17:30 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: IceColdQuoteHahahaha, I made the same mistake of believing that the Sonic Team could actually still make a great game after playing Sonic Rush. But then Bloodworth informed me that it was really created by DIMPS, not the Sonic Team.. I looked it up, and they also made the GBA Sonic games. It seems that "created by Sonic Team" is a lie.
Originally posted by: jasonditz
Sonic Rush shows that Sega's still capable of making a hell of a game when they put their mind to it.
How naive of me.
The DBZ Budokai guys?
Post by: Ceric on March 20, 2006, 10:17:47 AM
2. PSO Rocks. I have it for the Gamecube. It's the only game I can do the same thing over and over and not get bored. If I could only find my disc. It came up missing a while back. That was over 100hrs. of gameplay.
3. All the PSO's where released for the Cube and they aren't releasing Universe for the cube. It's a crime I tell ya.
4. The new arcade fighter coming out from them looks very promising.
Post by: jasonditz on March 20, 2006, 10:40:29 AM
PSO was, IMO, much better for the Dreamcast... the idea of a monthly fee to play an online game that's really more Diablo than Everquest just doesn't make sense to me.
Post by: IceCold on March 20, 2006, 11:15:31 AM
Post by: jasonditz on March 20, 2006, 11:50:21 AM
Post by: MysticGohan on March 20, 2006, 11:56:19 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on March 20, 2006, 12:10:32 PM
Yuji Naka apparently feels the original was so perfect that he's afraid that if they port it or make a sequel they'll f*ck it up. So even he doesn't have much faith in Sonic Team.
Though I would never think that a game isn't great just because there's no sequel. Sequels are for games that sell, not necessarily games that are great.
Post by: Ceric on March 20, 2006, 01:03:46 PM
Post by: King of Twitch on March 20, 2006, 04:37:09 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on March 20, 2006, 05:17:18 PM
Sega continues to pressure Naka to make a sequel, but like Ian already said, he doesnt want to mess up the original game at all. the best they could do was make a NiGHTS level in Sonic Adventure which was a nice reference by the way and a fun level also.
The other reason why NiGHTS doesnt geta sequel is because Sega is under the mentality that original titles sell betetr than sequels which is why the only games getting seguels are thier top franchises that are proven sellers. Like Sonic and Virtua Fighter. Phantasy Star Online is cool and all but I miss the old style Phantasy Star games, they were so friggin awesome.
Post by: ThePerm on September 22, 2007, 03:37:17 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor
Perm
animecyberrat? hes got better with the typing though
Ian!? problably also me
Nintendo!?!?
haha wait, this is most probably me
qft, thats quite ironic
