Wow...thats a tough choice! Ecco, or Gilius Thunderhead's Ass Kicking Adventure...

This will consume me for hours.

Well, to Ian and the guys who doubted Nintendo, you may place your foot in your mouth.

We still doubt Nintendo; it's Sega that we never gave up on.

Ecco will be my first VC game! Great news!

What's this garbage? They chose to put out Golden Axe and Ecco over GUNSTAR HEROES!? >=O

Quote

---

Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
What's this garbage? They chose to put out Golden Axe and Ecco over GUNSTAR HEROES!? >=O

---

I HATE NINTENDO.

.....This whole VC thing right now is pissing me off. I hope all the d@mn websites out there start making editorials b!tching about this and hopefully Nintendo will get off their a$$es and release some good stuff now!

Sega where is my Gunstar Heroes?
Nintendo....I'm not even gonna ask. I'm just going to give u an evil stare until something worthwhile plops out.

I'm content with what is on now, sure I would like to see more AAA titles but I'm happy with Zelda, Bonk and Ecco at the moment.

Now we're complaining about VC titles? Will the bitching never end?

Quote

---

Originally posted by: The Omen
Now we're complaining about VC titles? Will the bitching never end?

---

How are the Genesis games playable on the Wii Remote? Did they not originally make use of the Genesis's three face buttons? Or besides 1 and 2 on the Wii Remote, would the third button if necessary be oddly placed like the B or A buttons?

I have yet to purchase a VC game. My brother insists the first one we get should be Super Mario Bros.

Some Genesis games are playable with the Wiimote, some are not...Sonic, for example, only uses one button on the Genesis controller anyway, so it can be playable with the Wiimote...

I think every Genesis game is mapping the third face button to A (next to the D-Pad). This obviously doesn't work very well. In Altered Beast, punch is the A button. This makes it almost impossible to move and punch at the same time.

Hey, simple truth. Ecco the Dolphin and Golden Axe are more classic games than Gunstar Heroes.

So I understand why Sega released it first. And the service is only 3 weeks old and you are complaining? We have available for download about or over 15 games with more coming. I think it is fine.

Why do people complain for no reason?

Quote

---

Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
Hey, simple truth. Ecco the Dolphin and Golden Axe are more classic games than Gunstar Heroes.

So I understand why Sega released it first. And the service is only 3 weeks old and you are complaining? We have available for download about or over 15 games with more coming. I think it is fine.

Why do people complain for no reason?

---

Quote

---

In Altered Beast, punch is the A button.

---

The Wii is great, I love it. But once again let's be realistic. There are plenty of roadblocks with Wii - internet router issues, over-complexity of setup (both the system, Miis, internet, synching controllers, etc) problems with direct pointing, component and S-video cable availability, system availability, and Virtual Console which is a far larger mess than the people here are willing to admit. I'm giving Nintendo some leeway since the console is brand spanking new and Virtual Console is finding its feet. However, the one game here and one game there philosophy is BROKEN and does nothing to enhance Virtual Console's viability to non-Wii users or to make me anxious to buy anything. If anything it pisses me off that I can't get the games I want (even though I'll buy 'em when they come out). Nintendo's making a bad move here - only Nintendo zealots can justify releasing fewer games instead of more, something they've been justifying (stupidly) since 1996. It's not good business and the past 10 years have proven that.

That said, I love playing Super Mario 64 and Super Star Soldier. I can't wait to get into Solomon's Key again, and Zelda, Trauma Center, and Mii Channel are all a blast. Nintendo's given me a great amount of fun this past week, and I hope they keep it up. Its their trickle down philosophy that drives me nuts and has driven them into third place two generations in a row.

VC needs its own forum.

Nintendo does deserve some of the flak it's getting over the VC, especially when you look at some of the titles Japan gets this year that North America doesn't: Super Mario Bros., Super Mario World, Donkey Kong Country, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, Contra III: The Alien Wars.

Like it or not, the lack of game releases is obviously a marketing decision on their part. NOA can't wait to release a press release in the middle of the next game drought that talks about the release of Super Mario RPG or Earthbound on the virtual console.

Quote

---

it pisses me off that I can't get the games I want

---

I think with getting a few games every week, the selection's gonna start adding up relatively quickly. The Wii's only been out a few weeks now.

Personally I have better things to complain about then the game selection. Though even now the "new" game flag never goes away and it's already starting to get interesting finding a specific game. With more to come I hope and update gives us a search feature.

You know, I change my mind Nintendo is obviously doomed because it is a huge deal when a bonus feature of the Wii isn't up to people's standards. Forget the games made for Wii (or any other system) it is the downloadable classic games that matter the most, so Xbox 360 is a failure as well!

Quote

---

Originally posted by: Svevan
There are plenty of roadblocks with Wii - internet router issues, over-complexity of setup (both the system, Miis, internet, synching controllers, etc) problems with direct pointing, component and S-video cable availability, system availability, and Virtual Console which is a far larger mess than the people here are willing to admit. .

---

Quote

---

Its their trickle down philosophy that drives me nuts and has driven them into third place two generations in a row.

---

Please don't misrepresent or misunderstand me. I am in no way saying that Wii stands or falls on the Virtual Console's success. I am only saying that Virtual Console as a Wii selling point stands or falls on its own success, and right now it is successful to a small few. There are people who haven't downloaded a VC game yet - why? Because the games they want aren't heiffing available, but they will be downloaded in Japan in a week.

Some casual gamers (or even non-gamers) loved certain games for NES or SNES and they want only to download what they are familiar with. These games are not available because according to Nintendo, they will only release games that have viability in our marketplace. Idiotic! You MAKE these games desirable by putting them out there! For 3 or 4 bucks I'll try ANYTHING on the NES or SNES if someone tells me it's good (5-8 is a bit much, and I think this is part of Nintendo's problem: high prices and profit margin equals lower sales numbers).

I really can't comment on the technical limitations of making these games available but based on Nintendo's track record of releasing games in EXACTLY the same way, I must assume that their decision is based on marketing decisions and not server crap. They have 15 games sitting there that we COULD be downloading and playing. And so what if I don't download them all right away? I will slowly work through what I want to if there are 50 available at one time. More games will equal more sales. I will buy Gunstar Heroes, SMB, Chip N Dale, etc the moment they come out. If they ALL come out, then I'll get two or three at a time and get the others later - nothing is stopping the hardcore from buying them all (except the limited amount of space on the Wii Menu) and variety will only encourage the casual or non-gamer to try the one game they really love. By only releasing "the classics" or as the Wii Shop Channel says, "the masterpieces," they only encourage the hardcore gamers to sit and wait for the stuff they like.

You may say that this is the point - more suspense ergo more purchases. Sorry, no - waiting all weekend for Super Star Soldier, Golden Axe, and Ecco did not make me buy any of them, and if you read our forums or anyone else's forums you'll see tons of people saying "I'll skip it this week." These people were going to skip these games anyways, and Nintendo didn't do anything to make them more viable. They're just pissing us off, saying "We'll give you what we think you want and only when we think you need it." Nintendo could be SELLING us games by doing monthly updates of 50 games or more, or at the very least sticking to a ten game a week system. Less is not more - it also makes the VC look less desirable to those considering Wii. Sure you can play old games on this console, but most of them aren't available yet. I may not see Yoshi's Island until March, and then Donkey Kong 64 in July, Majora's Mask in November. We may NEVER see awesome yet unnoticed N64 games like Mischief Makers, Buck Bumble, Rocket: Robot on Wheels, Glover, Mission: Impossible, Castlevania, or the flippin' Goemon games. Is NES Tennis really selling the Wii to anybody?

Is Virtual Console supposed to be an arcade that has a limited number of games at any one time, or a museum that is filled with all history and we can slowly work our way through? Nintendo can make money by putting more games out there and lowering the price, because it will appeal to both the hardcore and the casual gamer. Instead of feeling like a kid in a candy store I feel like a kid whose only system is the N64 - gotta wait till next month for another good game.

"5-8 is a bit much, and I think this is part of Nintendo's problem: high prices and profit margin equals lower sales numbers"

That has always been a Nintendo problem. They would rather have one sale at $100 than 100 sales at $10.

Let's do some business math for sake of argument (and because Ian's example is way to extreme). at $5, if Nintendo sold say, 100,000 downloads of the original Mario Bros, that would be $500,000 dollars in revenue right? Now, if they were $3 dollars, that would be $300,000 dollars in revenue. That's $200,000 dollars difference right? Now, 200,000 / 3 is 66,666.

Do you think a $2 price decrease would cause an addition 66,666 people to download the game? That is where the argument lies. I'm inclined to say that the price decrease wouldn't cause a sales increase of that magnitude, but that's just me. I'm not saying I'm happy with the current price, just trying to shed some light on Nintendo's angle. I definitely don't think they are dumb for charging as much as they are. There are much smarter economists and marketers than ourselves who are looking at this data along with hard statistical evidence before these decisions are made. I'm inclined to believe that they made the best financial decision for themselves.

Also, as another point of argument FOR the slow release of games...

I'm not saying I don't wish all the games were available, because I do, but lets think about this. How does Nintendo stand to make the most money off of the virtual console? Well, I would guess that they want to put the desire in people to collect them all (or at least all the 'good' ones). Now, in order for people to have this collecting mentality, it has to be feasible. If the Wii Shop was flooded with thousands of games out of the gate, people would be overwhelmed. They would perceive the overall price as even more expensive, as the overall price to own them all would be absolutely insane! This would make them immediately think that it is hopeless, and they may never go back to the shop again.

Now this is all consumer behavior mumbo jumbo, but there is a lot of truth to it. There has got to be some people out there that have downloaded every VC game that is available thus far. If there were 1000s of titles available, do you think they would have downloaded as many? Maybe. Do you think they would have downloaded that same set? Probably not.

Nintendo wants to make money. Every company does. It's the consumers job to decide whether or not they are crossing the line of value. If you don't think it is a value, don't download the games. That action, on a great enough scale, will cause all those marketers and economists to do their math over again.

I do think a lower price would increase sales but there is only a limited pool of potential buyers and a limited pool of games that can be easily "drafted" for the VC and there's a limit to the speed a buyer can "consume" (i.e. play until he gets bored) a game. At the higher price they might make more money overall since the buyers have a limit to how many games they'll buy over the life of the system. They also have to release the games slowly otherwise everyone will jump at the classics and not want the "lesser" games anymore. Games like Altered Beast wouldn't sell worth crap if you could pick from the greatest titles for all supported systems right away. They're trying to get the maximum returns from every title they can put on the VC.

Quote

---

Originally posted by: Ian Sane
That has always been a Nintendo problem. They would rather have one sale at $100 than 100 sales at $10.

---

"Do you think a $2 price decrease would cause an addition 66,666 people to download the game? That is where the argument lies."

Probably not so much for really major titles like Super Mario Bros but I could see it for weaker titles like Pinball or Soccer. I think a lower price helps the "for the hell of it" factor. A major title may sell the same no matter what but with the price ranges as they are I think purchases are a decision right now instead of an impulse. Also a lower price will make people consider rebuying games they already own for the convenience of having everything in one place. If the price is too high I think a fair bit of people are going to save their money more for games they don't have yet.

At the very least the current prices should not be the absolute lowest prices. Lousy games that don't sell should have lower prices. Right now this seems too much like Nintendo charging $30 for Player's Choice games instead of the expected $20 (which they thankfully seemed to have stopped doing). It's just higher than expected so people are less enthusiastic. We're constantly complaining about the VC here on the forum. The lousy selection probably wouldn't get as much flack if the prices were lower. "So we don't have that great of NES games. Who cares? They're only a buck." We don't have that. We've got a lousy selection AND prices higher than we expected.

As a longtime fan to me it just seems like Nintendo trying to get every last penny out of me yet again. It is so rare that I don't think they're trying to price gouge me. The Wii is supposed to introduce a lot of new people into gaming and thus introduce them to Nintendo. Is "Uncle Scrooge" Nintendo really who Nintendo wants to introduce to them? Here is a chance to get rid of the greedy jerk image.

You know I think we would be having this debate less if every Wiipoint was ten cents instead of a penny. Meaning the VC prices would be 100, 80, and 50 Points. It's all perception. Though I do think the flow should be quicker.

Quote

---

Originally posted by: Ian Sane
The Wii is supposed to introduce a lot of new people into gaming and thus introduce them to Nintendo. Is "Uncle Scrooge" Nintendo really who Nintendo wants to introduce to them? Here is a chance to get rid of the greedy jerk image.

---

gunstar has just been rated in australia for VC, so expect it in the next few months
as has super castlevania 4, contra 3 (well super probotector) and street fighter 2

u can stop complaining now