Nintendo doesn't deserve it's sucess
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="whoisryanmack"]I'm just not really sure what this is proving or disproving. I don't remember arguing that MS or Sony were more honorable companies, and I actually redifined honorable in this context. You just chose not to accept it, and continued using honorable literally.
Please identify why Ninty's lack of divisions changes the amount they've spent on R&D and console production, or the amount of tech advancement they've provided. (hint: don't say motion control!)
..and I've quite rebutted your point in an ironclad way. I told you exactly what it was supposed to mean, and exactly when it would pertain to this argument. You, of course, cannot prove me wrong because I'm not wrong...so you proceed to call the argument "straw man". So again, please identify why exactly Ninty showed more risk by releasing essentially last gen hardware at a much lower cost than did Sony or MS?
Raoul_Duke_HST
moving goal posts thats nice too -
I am saying at the very least you cannot say that nintendo is any more or less deserving of their success. Nothing that you have percieved them to do is any worse then what Microsoft or Sony did. Quite the opposite actually.
do tell...I see that you have
As for R&D - Microsoft prolly had the lowest R&D costs of the three as they just put newer tech into their console.
What? So I am to suppose that newer tech is cheaper. *noted*
Sony's 'R&D' was a marketing ploy for their other divisions re: blu-ray and cell - you really think the cell was made so gamers could benefit?
And this changes production and development cost for it's placement in consoles how? It matters not to me if the intention was to serve gamers, I'm concerned only with the fact that it does. (or could, will, etc.) Again, I'm not pretending any console makers do it for me, but I do care what I get out of the deal.
Finally the risk - changing the entire market paradigm is a risk that is orders of magnitude higher then doing more of the same.
We've discussed this, and I came up with...What do the companies stand to lose? I say money. So, what would be the qualifying factor for risk? (You seem sharp enough to figure this out)
Also 'last gen hardware' is intellectually dishonest and you know it...
What would you call it? New hardware based on last gen hardware? Ok, we'll use that.
See, the real problem here is that you're not arguing the real issues. The things I'm worried about are, are casuals and non-gamers benefitting from the Wii? Are gamers and the industry benefitting? I would have to say no to these things. The Wii offers very little in the form of advancing gaming, and very much in the way of putting cash into Ninty's pockets due to marketing, hype, and misinformation. The price casuals, and gaming in general, are paying for this is the message we're sending that we don't care about technical advancement. We just want a good time that may or may not last a few minutes. How well do epic adventures work on Wii? Not well. How well do point and click party games work? very, very well. I don't want to see this become the standard.
[QUOTE="Raoul_Duke_HST"][QUOTE="whoisryanmack"]I'm just not really sure what this is proving or disproving. I don't remember arguing that MS or Sony were more honorable companies, and I actually redifined honorable in this context. You just chose not to accept it, and continued using honorable literally.
Please identify why Ninty's lack of divisions changes the amount they've spent on R&D and console production, or the amount of tech advancement they've provided. (hint: don't say motion control!)
..and I've quite rebutted your point in an ironclad way. I told you exactly what it was supposed to mean, and exactly when it would pertain to this argument. You, of course, cannot prove me wrong because I'm not wrong...so you proceed to call the argument "straw man". So again, please identify why exactly Ninty showed more risk by releasing essentially last gen hardware at a much lower cost than did Sony or MS?
whoisryanmack
moving goal posts thats nice too -
I am saying at the very least you cannot say that nintendo is any more or less deserving of their success. Nothing that you have percieved them to do is any worse then what Microsoft or Sony did. Quite the opposite actually.
do tell...I see that you have
??
As for R&D - Microsoft prolly had the lowest R&D costs of the three as they just put newer tech into their console.
What? So I am to suppose that newer tech is cheaper. *noted*
do you even know what R&D means? The tech is not cheaper - the research and developement (hint!) to develope that tech definitely are
Sony's 'R&D' was a marketing ploy for their other divisions re: blu-ray and cell - you really think the cell was made so gamers could benefit?
And this changes production and development cost for it's placement in consoles how? It matters not to me if the intention was to serve gamers, I'm concerned only with the fact that it does. (or could, will, etc.) Again, I'm not pretending any console makers do it for me, but I do care what I get out of the deal.
How is the PS3 currently serving gamers? Your could, will, ect. could easilly be applied to the wii
Finally the risk - changing the entire market paradigm is a risk that is orders of magnitude higher then doing more of the same.
We've discussed this, and I came up with...What do the companies stand to lose? I say money. So, what would be the qualifying factor for risk? (You seem sharp enough to figure this out)
If Nintendo was wrong about the market they stood to lose the entire company. What does sony or MS stand to lose?
Also 'last gen hardware' is intellectually dishonest and you know it...
What would you call it? New hardware based on last gen hardware? Ok, we'll use that.
The tech in the wii was not available last gen. Simply because it is not bleeding or even cutting edge does not make it 'last gen'
See, the real problem here is that you're not arguing the real issues. The things I'm worried about are, are casuals and non-gamers benefitting from the Wii? Are gamers and the industry benefitting? I would have to say no to these things. The Wii offers very little in the form of advancing gaming, and very much in the way of putting cash into Ninty's pockets due to marketing, hype, and misinformation. The price casuals, and gaming in general, are paying for this is the message we're sending that we don't care about technical advancement. We just want a good time that may or may not last a few minutes. How well do epic adventures work on Wii? Not well. How well do point and click party games work? very, very well. I don't want to see this become the standard.
How is the gaming industry not benefitting. More sales = more money = more resources = better product. Also the games like Zach and Wiki would not be made on the other two consoles because there is not market for them there. The wii is a shot in the arm that the industry needs every so often. Is it perfect? Not at all. But is it some devious plot by Nintendo to set video games back 10 years? Nope. Its a shift and not every one likes shifts that life.
[QUOTE="GraveRIP"]Wow this post is bad. Im sorry so much fanboyism makes me sick. Also you called NIntendo penniless. LMAO thats enough to show you dont know what the hell your talkin about.Uncle_Uzi
Notice how I said "the THEN penniless" and also have some common sense dude, it was an exaggeration.
good god, your still wrong with that point. The Gamecube was a mild success after mass price slashing, but even after that it was profitable to sell the console. Nintendo were in a better position to make a new console this time around then they ever have before. They've always been more profitable than their competitors, which i too think is for the worse atm but as a brand they've had far more prestige than MS dare dream.
[QUOTE="whoisryanmack"]How well do epic adventures work on Wii? Not well.
Ponmop
I have to assume you haven't tried Zelda, Metroid, or RE4 yet.
I would argue that RE4 worked better on GC.
As for the other 2, MP is great. The FPS formula works outstandingly on Wii. Zelda, I dunno. I can't really get behind that. It wasn't awful, but it wasn't really fantastic either. Strictly technically speaking, I feel like it would have made more sense using buttons rather than the Wiimote.
Still, by not well, I didn't mean "impossible". It works, the platform just doesn't lend itself well.
[QUOTE="whoisryanmack"][QUOTE="Raoul_Duke_HST"][QUOTE="whoisryanmack"]I'm just not really sure what this is proving or disproving. I don't remember arguing that MS or Sony were more honorable companies, and I actually redifined honorable in this context. You just chose not to accept it, and continued using honorable literally.
Please identify why Ninty's lack of divisions changes the amount they've spent on R&D and console production, or the amount of tech advancement they've provided. (hint: don't say motion control!)
..and I've quite rebutted your point in an ironclad way. I told you exactly what it was supposed to mean, and exactly when it would pertain to this argument. You, of course, cannot prove me wrong because I'm not wrong...so you proceed to call the argument "straw man". So again, please identify why exactly Ninty showed more risk by releasing essentially last gen hardware at a much lower cost than did Sony or MS?
Raoul_Duke_HST
moving goal posts thats nice too -
I am saying at the very least you cannot say that nintendo is any more or less deserving of their success. Nothing that you have percieved them to do is any worse then what Microsoft or Sony did. Quite the opposite actually.
do tell...I see that you have
??
As for R&D - Microsoft prolly had the lowest R&D costs of the three as they just put newer tech into their console.
What? So I am to suppose that newer tech is cheaper. *noted*
do you even know what R&D means? The tech is not cheaper - the research and developement (hint!) to develope that tech definitely are
Sony's 'R&D' was a marketing ploy for their other divisions re: blu-ray and cell - you really think the cell was made so gamers could benefit?
And this changes production and development cost for it's placement in consoles how? It matters not to me if the intention was to serve gamers, I'm concerned only with the fact that it does. (or could, will, etc.) Again, I'm not pretending any console makers do it for me, but I do care what I get out of the deal.
How is the PS3 currently serving gamers? Your could, will, ect. could easilly be applied to the wii
Finally the risk - changing the entire market paradigm is a risk that is orders of magnitude higher then doing more of the same.
We've discussed this, and I came up with...What do the companies stand to lose? I say money. So, what would be the qualifying factor for risk? (You seem sharp enough to figure this out)
If Nintendo was wrong about the market they stood to lose the entire company. What does sony or MS stand to lose?
Also 'last gen hardware' is intellectually dishonest and you know it...
What would you call it? New hardware based on last gen hardware? Ok, we'll use that.
The tech in the wii was not available last gen. Simply because it is not bleeding or even cutting edge does not make it 'last gen'
See, the real problem here is that you're not arguing the real issues. The things I'm worried about are, are casuals and non-gamers benefitting from the Wii? Are gamers and the industry benefitting? I would have to say no to these things. The Wii offers very little in the form of advancing gaming, and very much in the way of putting cash into Ninty's pockets due to marketing, hype, and misinformation. The price casuals, and gaming in general, are paying for this is the message we're sending that we don't care about technical advancement. We just want a good time that may or may not last a few minutes. How well do epic adventures work on Wii? Not well. How well do point and click party games work? very, very well. I don't want to see this become the standard.
How is the gaming industry not benefitting. More sales = more money = more resources = better product. Also the games like Zach and Wiki would not be made on the other two consoles because there is not market for them there. The wii is a shot in the arm that the industry needs every so often. Is it perfect? Not at all. But is it some devious plot by Nintendo to set video games back 10 years? Nope. Its a shift and not every one likes shifts that life.
The gaming industry could well not be benefitting despite profit, in the long term anyhow. How would you like the new standard to be Mario Party strictly because it sells? I sure as hell wouldn't, and it has nothing to do with my fear of change.
The industry could use a good shot in the arm every once in awhile, good point. I will not disagree that more of the same is not always the best. I have repeatedly said however, that my objection is the way Ninty is going about doing the shooting that irks me. I surely cannot write all the things I dislike again, so sorry to you, and sorry to my argument if it is now weaker for that.
Finally, Ninty's intent is surely not to set gaming back. Ideally, their goal would be to set gaming forward X many years, but even shooting for nothing would be fine.
Really, I think you'd like me alot more if you went back and read throughout the thread. It's really difficult for me to reproduce arguments that were sporadic moments of genius. I'm now left with the skin and bones of numerous tangents.
See, the real problem here is that you're not arguing the real issues. The things I'm worried about are, are casuals and non-gamers benefitting from the Wii? Are gamers and the industry benefitting? I would have to say no to these things. The Wii offers very little in the form of advancing gaming, and very much in the way of putting cash into Ninty's pockets due to marketing, hype, and misinformation. The price casuals, and gaming in general, are paying for this is the message we're sending that we don't care about technical advancement. We just want a good time that may or may not last a few minutes. How well do epic adventures work on Wii? Not well. How well do point and click party games work? very, very well. I don't want to see this become the standard.
whoisryanmack
what, did you just say you would rather have technical prowess over a few minutes (possibly more) of fun... wow, you completly missed the point of what video games are about..
video games are like any other form of entertainment... it doesn't matter if they use allllll the latest technolgies or not, as long as in the end, the product is entertaining...
would you say, The Departed is crap movie, cos theres no special effects? or South Park is crap, cos it uses simple animation techniques? But Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within was the most awsomest movie ever, cos it pushed the boundaries of CGI animation..?
The gaming industry could well not be benefitting despite profit, in the long term anyhow. How would you like the new standard to be Mario Party strictly because it sells? I sure as hell wouldn't, and it has nothing to do with my fear of change.
The industry could use a good shot in the arm every once in awhile, good point. I will not disagree that more of the same is not always the best. I have repeatedly said however, that my objection is the way Ninty is going about doing the shooting that irks me. I surely cannot write all the things I dislike again, so sorry to you, and sorry to my argument if it is now weaker for that.
Finally, Ninty's intent is surely not to set gaming back. Ideally, their goal would be to set gaming forward X many years, but even shooting for nothing would be fine.
Really, I think you'd like me alot more if you went back and read throughout the thread. It's really difficult for me to reproduce arguments that were sporadic moments of genius. I'm now left with the skin and bones of numerous tangents.
whoisryanmack
I read the whole thread and my main point of contention is still that Nintendo is doing something wrong. They aren't plain and simple. If the new standard becomes Mario Party that is bad, but it is equally as bad that the old standard has become "Sports Game '0X" "Fps XX" "Stealth Game XX". At least with the wii games like Zach and Wiki or Dewy's adventure get to be made. Do you think Little Big Planet would exist if the Wii wasn't a run away sucess? Probably not.
As for them misleading people - they were not in a position to do that. Sony was more of a household name then Nintendo when the Wii and DS came out. Both had to sell on there own merits and are continueing to do so. It generally does not take more then 6 monthes or so for an empty fad to die. That fact that we are far beyond that for both systems says that their sales are something more.
[QUOTE="whoisryanmack"]The gaming industry could well not be benefitting despite profit, in the long term anyhow. How would you like the new standard to be Mario Party strictly because it sells? I sure as hell wouldn't, and it has nothing to do with my fear of change.
The industry could use a good shot in the arm every once in awhile, good point. I will not disagree that more of the same is not always the best. I have repeatedly said however, that my objection is the way Ninty is going about doing the shooting that irks me. I surely cannot write all the things I dislike again, so sorry to you, and sorry to my argument if it is now weaker for that.
Finally, Ninty's intent is surely not to set gaming back. Ideally, their goal would be to set gaming forward X many years, but even shooting for nothing would be fine.
Really, I think you'd like me alot more if you went back and read throughout the thread. It's really difficult for me to reproduce arguments that were sporadic moments of genius. I'm now left with the skin and bones of numerous tangents.
Raoul_Duke_HST
I read the whole thread and my main point of contention is still that Nintendo is doing something wrong. They aren't plain and simple. If the new standard becomes Mario Party that is bad, but it is equally as bad that the old standard has become "Sports Game '0X" "Fps XX" "Stealth Game XX". At least with the wii games like Zach and Wiki or Dewy's adventure get to be made. Do you think Little Big Planet would exist if the Wii wasn't a run away sucess? Probably not.
As for them misleading people - they were not in a position to do that. Sony was more of a household name then Nintendo when the Wii and DS came out. Both had to sell on there own merits and are continueing to do so. It generally does not take more then 6 monthes or so for an empty fad to die. That fact that we are far beyond that for both systems says that their sales are something more.
[QUOTE="whoisryanmack"]The gaming industry could well not be benefitting despite profit, in the long term anyhow. How would you like the new standard to be Mario Party strictly because it sells? I sure as hell wouldn't, and it has nothing to do with my fear of change.
The industry could use a good shot in the arm every once in awhile, good point. I will not disagree that more of the same is not always the best. I have repeatedly said however, that my objection is the way Ninty is going about doing the shooting that irks me. I surely cannot write all the things I dislike again, so sorry to you, and sorry to my argument if it is now weaker for that.
Finally, Ninty's intent is surely not to set gaming back. Ideally, their goal would be to set gaming forward X many years, but even shooting for nothing would be fine.
Really, I think you'd like me alot more if you went back and read throughout the thread. It's really difficult for me to reproduce arguments that were sporadic moments of genius. I'm now left with the skin and bones of numerous tangents.
Raoul_Duke_HST
I read the whole thread and my main point of contention is still that Nintendo is doing something wrong. They aren't plain and simple. If the new standard becomes Mario Party that is bad, but it is equally as bad that the old standard has become "Sports Game '0X" "Fps XX" "Stealth Game XX". At least with the wii games like Zach and Wiki or Dewy's adventure get to be made. Do you think Little Big Planet would exist if the Wii wasn't a run away sucess? Probably not.
As for them misleading people - they were not in a position to do that. Sony was more of a household name then Nintendo when the Wii and DS came out. Both had to sell on there own merits and are continueing to do so. It generally does not take more then 6 monthes or so for an empty fad to die. That fact that we are far beyond that for both systems says that their sales are something more.
I just don't know abtout all that mbut I'm prety dunk now. So, I can't even read you rpost really. It's kind of cool actually, but i know hee weaas a point in thtere somewhere at sometims. And it was good. Oh well, I'll take the loss on theis one I gess. Shouldn've gaught be an ahour or so earlier and we couldve had something goin ong here. But alas, theere shall be no such discuisson now.
[QUOTE="Raoul_Duke_HST"][QUOTE="whoisryanmack"]The gaming industry could well not be benefitting despite profit, in the long term anyhow. How would you like the new standard to be Mario Party strictly because it sells? I sure as hell wouldn't, and it has nothing to do with my fear of change.
The industry could use a good shot in the arm every once in awhile, good point. I will not disagree that more of the same is not always the best. I have repeatedly said however, that my objection is the way Ninty is going about doing the shooting that irks me. I surely cannot write all the things I dislike again, so sorry to you, and sorry to my argument if it is now weaker for that.
Finally, Ninty's intent is surely not to set gaming back. Ideally, their goal would be to set gaming forward X many years, but even shooting for nothing would be fine.
Really, I think you'd like me alot more if you went back and read throughout the thread. It's really difficult for me to reproduce arguments that were sporadic moments of genius. I'm now left with the skin and bones of numerous tangents.
whoisryanmack
I read the whole thread and my main point of contention is still that Nintendo is doing something wrong. They aren't plain and simple. If the new standard becomes Mario Party that is bad, but it is equally as bad that the old standard has become "Sports Game '0X" "Fps XX" "Stealth Game XX". At least with the wii games like Zach and Wiki or Dewy's adventure get to be made. Do you think Little Big Planet would exist if the Wii wasn't a run away sucess? Probably not.
As for them misleading people - they were not in a position to do that. Sony was more of a household name then Nintendo when the Wii and DS came out. Both had to sell on there own merits and are continueing to do so. It generally does not take more then 6 monthes or so for an empty fad to die. That fact that we are far beyond that for both systems says that their sales are something more.
[QUOTE="whoisryanmack"]The gaming industry could well not be benefitting despite profit, in the long term anyhow. How would you like the new standard to be Mario Party strictly because it sells? I sure as hell wouldn't, and it has nothing to do with my fear of change.
The industry could use a good shot in the arm every once in awhile, good point. I will not disagree that more of the same is not always the best. I have repeatedly said however, that my objection is the way Ninty is going about doing the shooting that irks me. I surely cannot write all the things I dislike again, so sorry to you, and sorry to my argument if it is now weaker for that.
Finally, Ninty's intent is surely not to set gaming back. Ideally, their goal would be to set gaming forward X many years, but even shooting for nothing would be fine.
Really, I think you'd like me alot more if you went back and read throughout the thread. It's really difficult for me to reproduce arguments that were sporadic moments of genius. I'm now left with the skin and bones of numerous tangents.
Raoul_Duke_HST
I read the whole thread and my main point of contention is still that Nintendo is doing something wrong. They aren't plain and simple. If the new standard becomes Mario Party that is bad, but it is equally as bad that the old standard has become "Sports Game '0X" "Fps XX" "Stealth Game XX". At least with the wii games like Zach and Wiki or Dewy's adventure get to be made. Do you think Little Big Planet would exist if the Wii wasn't a run away sucess? Probably not.
As for them misleading people - they were not in a position to do that. Sony was more of a household name then Nintendo when the Wii and DS came out. Both had to sell on there own merits and are continueing to do so. It generally does not take more then 6 monthes or so for an empty fad to die. That fact that we are far beyond that for both systems says that their sales are something more.
I just don't know abtout all that mbut I'm prety dunk now. So, I can't even read you rpost really. It's kind of cool actually, but i know hee weaas a point in thtere somewhere at sometims. And it was good. Oh well, I'll take the loss on theis one I gess. Shouldn've gaught be an ahour or so earlier and we couldve had something goin ong here. But alas, theere shall be no such discuisson now.
lol fair enough - i need to get to bed anyway. have fun with the hooch and have a grand evening:)
The Wii and DS have by no means earnedtheir position in sales, and certainly don't deserve any respect in SW.
The new Nintendo business approach is a last ditch, below-the-belt attempt to stay in the market on Nintendo's part. A name brand with an immense lack of quality titles for its platforms as of late, Nintendo has shifted its focus to a simpler, more aproachable market: Everyone. Indeed, the new Nintendo has understood that it simply cannot compete in the same market as the Xbox 360 or the Playstation 3. The evidence is standing clear in the open for all to see -because of the GameCube's immense failure, the then penniless Nintendo was forced to change aim. They realized that the majority of their original audience, the hardcore gaming community, simply was not interested in games that they were making anymore. Franchises of impeccable quality such as Halo or Final Fantasy were destined to overtake the poorly aging "classic" Nintendo IPs in the eyes of true gamers.
With this tragic knowledge, Nintendo was in a tough position to get back in the game -in fact, it was too tough for them to handle. So Nintendo went back to the drawing boards, wondering who they could fool into help making Nintendo a big name again. It was dead obvious: when gamers knew that Nintendo was stale, their non-gaming counterparts did not! They found out that an American housewife would just eat anything up that helped them lose some extra pounds! They found out that old people in nursing homes would instantly like something that they could enjoy without upsetting their arthritis! They understood that changing their target audience was the only way to go. And so they created the Wii and the DS, two despicable platforms that any serious gamer wouldn't waste their time on.
The end result was perfect: A machine that true geeks wouldn't play,taking aim and appeal to a non-gaming, geek-o-phobic audience. It sold like hotcakes. And it remained true to its principle, being the scourge of serious gaming and the saviour of the casuals. Real gamers didn't buy it; they didn't need to, for Nintendo making mountains of cash to fill their money-hungry pockets was a dead certain from the get-go. Eventually these gaming nightmares overtook sales of true gamer's plaforms, stealing all that they had of their hard earned media steam and casual appeal.
The Nintendo's new business strategy doesn't deserve to sell well, because its lack of fresh, deep titles makes it an old gimmick to the gaming community - something that Nintendo's new audience will soon find out as well. Yes, it is only a matter of time before this last-ditch effort fails miserably at the heels of more prestigous and respectable brand names.
Uncle_Uzi
First off, anyone who defends the PS3... their credibility is just gone.
Nintendo is merely taking advantage of a market in the video game industry, and not only that, the most predominate one and intermingled it with a hardcore audience appeal too. MP3's sales show MANY MANY hardcore gamers bought the Wii. As for the 360, it's a great system, if you like racers and shooters. Otherwise you may as well not own the system. Obviously you aren't a real gamer or you would require more than racing games and FPS games to fulfill your gaming needs.
Every Playstation fan nowadays is all "b-b-b-b-b-b-b-but teh graphics", but isn't it appropriate that last gen they supported (as did everyone else in the world) the WEAKEST console graphics-wise? The only reason everyone is worried about teh graphics now is because that's the only thing they can muster up to defend their stale systems.
Nintendo brought back originality to video gaming, and that is the best thing any company could do. Mere graphical upgrading is getting stale.
[QUOTE="sonic_spark"]Is the TC serious? Somebody tell me.
I like do things in lists, it makes my thoughts my more organized and easily readable.
1.)Nintendo, not penniless. Their portables alone could carry Nintendo on their back. Which were always dominating.
It's called "style". He was using language in such a way to make the post prettier to read. You, as the reader, are supposed to understand the point he's making, not take it literally. If they were penniless, how did they develop a new product?
I understood that. I just wanted to point out that despite the fact that the Gamecube was a failure its impact on Nintendo didn't hurt them enough to be "desperate for money". I think it was pretty obvious that Ninty isn't hurting for money.2.)Casual games was Nintendo's way of opening the market up. It worked. It's beneficial for everyone.
This assumes 1) casuals buying Wii have never seen videogames before, and 2) that casuals eventually become hardcores. Neither of those are always true, so the only thing we can say for sure is that Ninty is making profit. That's it. Beneficial for Ninty.
I didn't assume anything. Casuals by games = More consoles = More games being bought = Broader amount of genres and titles= More money for companies = More games for us. I never implied that casuals turn to hardcores. I meant what I said, its beneficial for everyone.
3.)Nintendo could compete with Sony and Microsoft. In fact, aren't they right now?Oh wait...no...cause the Wii isn't a real console..LOL.While Nintendo MIGHT be able to compete with Sony and MS, they aren't right now. The meaning behind "blue ocean" is actually to not compete with those already in the industry. We can guess this is because they've succesively lost a few gens in a row.
2 gens in a row. They ended up winning the 16-bit era, wiki that if need be. Secondly, yeah they're going in a different direction taking who they have now (hardcore Ninty sheep) along with the new breed of casuals. But we can all be honest here, they're not fooling anyone. If they can squash Microsoft and Sony, they will. Reggie gloats about it all the time.
4.)They do deserve their success. An underpowered system that bases itself on its controller of all things.. balsy isn't it?If you consider spending very little to bring out old hardware for a second time, yes, they are quite balsy. Not like those wussies at Sony and MS who spent boatloads of cash developing new products that might well fail.
Quite balsy by basing old hardware on anew control concept that is unfamiliar even to the hardcore. If you ask me and anyone else here, Sony and Microsoft dumped boat loads of money into what? The safe route. Upgraded graphic machines, thatadd a feature or two to help blend in with the 21st century idea of having a"media center". Sony's risk was a new format. The format is great. But, not that that's balsy, ITS THE PRICE. WhereasNintendo shot in the dark with this motion sensing remote. Everyone was skeptical before itcame out.That's balsy. MS and Sony are not even close. Those were safe upgrades to their consoles.
5.)The DS deserves everything. The touchscreen is the greatest things to come to handhelds. I mean, if PDA's have them, why not a Gameboy? Sounds right to me. And although the PSP has more media applications, its overrpriced and it reallyis a portable console, not a true handheld. Not to piss on Sony, its a good machine, but doesn't suit the market, at least not yet.I think PSP is better, but that's just me. I'll give Ninty the DS, it's pretty cool.If Wii was as good a console as DS is a handheld, we wouldn't be having this argument.
I completely agree. The DS's wifi is great, with plenty of online titles. The PSP has more options which I like. But the games aren't really "handheld". I'm on a plane trying to play Metal Gear, it was a bit frustrating. I flip my DS open try playing Mario, that seemed more of a "travelling experience" till I pulled out the PSP and watched Family guy.6.-the ultimate point
President Iwata of Nintendo just said less than a couple weeks ago that Nintendo is taking a break from Wii sports 2, cooking mama and all the other "casual games" in lieu of bringing better titles to the table. Translation: Nintendo didn't forget the hardcore's....they just openly state that they're going after casuals and non-gamers first (as per your point #2)
Yes they did, but are implying that they haven't forgotten the hardcores.We're still in year 1 right now, and if people remember the 360 didn't have the best game list either till its year 2. Better titles are in development and third parties are signing on like no other. Ground-up Wii projects will come, hardcore titles will be there. No this is not wishful thinking, its a fact. Read gamespot/ign news articles for once.
"Will be" "are coming" etc...all meaning the same thing. Do not exist.
The same thing can be said for Sony and Microsoft. There are a handful of games being developed, and those "will be coming".whoisryanmack
Another arrogant "hardcore" gamer.
What is with the "hardcore gamers are the only one who deserve to game!!! we are all that is one!!" mentality?? Pffft!
Man, get over yourself, Nintendo is opening up games to handicapped, elderly, familes, that's great news, not bad.
Also, last I checked the Wii just had one of their more hardcore games ever released in Metroid Prime 3, and is releasing the worthy successor to Mario 64 in Galaxy next month. You remember Mario 64, that game that made a significant controbution to the gaming industry us "hardcore' gamers all know and love way back in 1996.
Meanwhile the DS is getting one of arguably best handheld games next week based on reviews of the Japanes version, Zelda: Phantom Hourglass. Not to mention Ninja Gaiden: DS allso comes out within weeks. Is Ninja Gaiden not "hardcore" enough for you?? LOL, sad.
Last week I got my DS into my moms hands so she could try out the Change Counting game in Brain Training 2, she really enjoyed it. That is freakin awesome, my mom playing video games. Nintendo got this done, my years of games that she never had interest in, and Nintendo got this done. It was a great sight to see and it shows why Nintendo desrves every bit of their success.
Change is good bro, so lighten up on the doom and gloom of Nintendo's success, don't be so damn selfish.
[QUOTE="darkmario123"][QUOTE="Watersage64"][QUOTE="MrDziekuje"]Let me translate this for you guys.
"Nintendo are making monies. I are angry."
Seriously, that was a bad post man. Mainly due to the fact that it isn't true.
Uncle_Uzi
Or it could be that Nintendo literally betrayed it's target audience, since it couldn't keep up with real companies.
You answered your question right there. If their old strategy wasn't working, why shouldn't they come up with a new one? Are you saying that they should continue doing what doesn't work until they go out of business?
Wait, Im Uncle Uzi....
But here's what I'm saying: (plaese don't take this too literally, I know some of you will) Japan is a country with a culture focused on honor. Sony, an honorable, brave companyis proud of its past sucesses, and will give its figurative life to defend its principles (as seen with the PS3). Nintendo on the other hand, a company of chnaging values and customs, has given up its honor code and simply let its history of quality almost dissapear.
It's like comparing kill counts in WoW - Sony and Nintendo are in the same area. Sony, building upon past success has decides to go into the hidden high-level grove and continue to challenge itself by fighting always challenging monsters. They kill less, but the kills are more honorable and notable. Nintendo however, has decided to retreat to the plains to fight measly boars, getting many kills, but truly earning none of them. It's like that... sorta...
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :lol: That line is sig worthy.
Such a fanboy. Nintendo took a different path, which is best for them now and its a "low blow".
Nothing honorable about corporate companies. There is nothing honourable about the way SCE has led the games industry thus far. There is very little honour in good business. Especially against heavy competition and they have all proved that anything goes so far.
"The Wii and DS have by no means earnedtheir position in sales, and certainly don't deserve any respect in SW."
After thatI realized a few things about the TC that, if I were to post, I'd just get modded.
Great post, I completely agree. Nintendo has turned their backs on who made them successful in the first place, and the ones that cannot see it are being held hostage by their beloved franchises.JocktheMotie
Yeah Yeah.....Whatever
The Wii and DS have by no means earnedtheir position in sales, and certainly don't deserve any respect in SW.
The new Nintendo business approach is a last ditch, below-the-belt attempt to stay in the market on Nintendo's part. A name brand with an immense lack of quality titles for its platforms as of late, Nintendo has shifted its focus to a simpler, more aproachable market: Everyone. Indeed, the new Nintendo has understood that it simply cannot compete in the same market as the Xbox 360 or the Playstation 3. The evidence is standing clear in the open for all to see -because of the GameCube's immense failure, the then penniless Nintendo was forced to change aim. They realized that the majority of their original audience, the hardcore gaming community, simply was not interested in games that they were making anymore. Franchises of impeccable quality such as Halo or Final Fantasy were destined to overtake the poorly aging "classic" Nintendo IPs in the eyes of true gamers.
With this tragic knowledge, Nintendo was in a tough position to get back in the game -in fact, it was too tough for them to handle. So Nintendo went back to the drawing boards, wondering who they could fool into help making Nintendo a big name again. It was dead obvious: when gamers knew that Nintendo was stale, their non-gaming counterparts did not! They found out that an American housewife would just eat anything up that helped them lose some extra pounds! They found out that old people in nursing homes would instantly like something that they could enjoy without upsetting their arthritis! They understood that changing their target audience was the only way to go. And so they created the Wii and the DS, two despicable platforms that any serious gamer wouldn't waste their time on.
The end result was perfect: A machine that true geeks wouldn't play,taking aim and appeal to a non-gaming, geek-o-phobic audience. It sold like hotcakes. And it remained true to its principle, being the scourge of serious gaming and the saviour of the casuals. Real gamers didn't buy it; they didn't need to, for Nintendo making mountains of cash to fill their money-hungry pockets was a dead certain from the get-go. Eventually these gaming nightmares overtook sales of true gamer's plaforms, stealing all that they had of their hard earned media steam and casual appeal.
The Nintendo's new business strategy doesn't deserve to sell well, because its lack of fresh, deep titles makes it an old gimmick to the gaming community - something that Nintendo's new audience will soon find out as well. Yes, it is only a matter of time before this last-ditch effort fails miserably at the heels of more prestigous and respectable brand names.
Uncle_Uzi
Bad ... worse then that ... sad ...
First of all, Final Fantasy has been around as long as many of Nintendo's IP's.
Second of all, what did Sony do when they brought out the PSone ... they changed the market and expanded it. You hear noone complaining about that, do you?
Third and final (as I don't want to waste my time), look at Gamerankings ... at least one of the games for the Wii which got above 90% (MP3:Corruption) is exclusive, unlike the 360 which has all of theirs ranked above 90% being multiplats.
[QUOTE="rimnet00"]Having a top end PC and an Xbox 360... I still think the Wii is an amazing piece of hardware. So... yah you are just delusional.daqua_99Same with what you believe. The Wii gives us something that the others can't give us ...
not true. motion sensing has always been around and now sony plans to bring it on the ps2.also motion sensing existed with the use of a camera. I do hope better games will come for it in the future tho. coz I have yet to see a revolution!
lol this gen nintendo says graphics aren't important but next gen with the money they've made will completely contradict that statement. that said nintendo does deserve their success coz they marketed their product perfectly. there will always be misinformed customers to pray on. ofcourse its still too early so when more developers work for wii it'll be more interesting...hopefullyGreat_Ragnarok
Okay, so you're saying Nintendo will be all about graphics next-gen and have the most powerful machine... :lol:
Not gonna happen.
I like Ninty games. IMO any zelda, ssbm, and many more titles > Halo3.
I buy the console for the games, not because it's the best console.
And I am fine with horrible graphics.
I would also be fine without the wiimote, but it certainly adds a point to the game for me
spoken like a true fanboy child.
[QUOTE="---OkeyDokey---"]but the ds is the greatest handheld ever made :|Eponique
It's too bad fanboys don't realize this. They'd rather play console ports or ignore the success of it completely.
So I'm a fanboy if I don't think the DS is the best handheld ever made?"The evidence is standing clear in the open for all to see -because of the GameCube's immense failure, the then penniless Nintendo was forced to change aim."
Why am I always reading idiotic statements like this on this board?
Let's look to see if Nintendo really was "penniless" at the end of the GCN era shall we?
The following is Nintendo's cash and total assets in billions of U.S. dollars:
March 31, 2004: 6,265 cash, 8,787 total assets
March 31, 2005: 6,896 cash, 9,852 total assets
March 31, 2006: 5,369 cash, 10,098 total assets
March 31, 2007: 5,992 cash, 13,707 total assets
------------------------------------------------------------
Now let's look at Nintendo's net income,in millions of U.S. dollars:
March 31, 2004: 288.787
March 31, 2005: 760,519
March 31, 2006: 855,888
March 31, 2007: 1,516,323
-----------------------------
Therefore, at March 31, 2006 (pretty much the end of the GameCube era), Nintendo has approximately $6 billion in cash, $10 billion in total assets, and had made $855,888,000 in net profit over the last year.
I realize you cows and lemmings are jealous of Nintendo's success, but is that any reason to LIE and say they were penniless when they had bilions of dollars in cash?
[QUOTE="Eponique"][QUOTE="---OkeyDokey---"]but the ds is the greatest handheld ever made :|gingerdivid
It's too bad fanboys don't realize this. They'd rather play console ports or ignore the success of it completely.
So I'm a fanboy if I don't think the DS is the best handheld ever made?Fine, but you have to accept that it's a great handheld, and not something Nintendo made for a quick buck.
Franchises of impeccable quality such as Halo or Final Fantasy were destined to overtake the poorly aging "classic" Nintendo IPs in the eyes of true gamers.Uncle_Uzi
When he says true gamers, I think he means New Gamers. I think he frgot or just didn't know that FF has been around since the NES days. Part of the reason it's a success is the original Nintendo fanbase is coming back to buy the Wii, so I think we can call them the true console gamers, since they were the ones that were there for the 1st large market.
I didn't count the Atari 2600 in this, sorry guys. It was popular but the NES was the eral ground breaker.
How immature, really, saying a successful company doesn't deserve success just because you don't like how it's getting successful. But whatever, unlike some people, I buy consoles based on games, not on the company.
How immature, really, saying a successful company doesn't deserve success just because you don't like how it's getting successful. But whatever, unlike some people, I buy consoles based on games, not on the company.
glitchgeeman
well said, and i completely agree
[QUOTE="---OkeyDokey---"]but the ds is the greatest handheld ever made :|Eponique
It's too bad fanboys don't realize this. They'd rather play console ports or ignore the success of it completely.
The irony...it's damning
[QUOTE="glitchgeeman"]How immature, really, saying a successful company doesn't deserve success just because you don't like how it's getting successful. But whatever, unlike some people, I buy consoles based on games, not on the company.
Microsoft1234
well said, and i completely agree
This is exactly what he's arguing. He's saying that the games are of lesser quality and are being bought by people who don't know any better..exactly as Nintendo had planned. If true, that is not a good long term strategy for the industry.
Nintendo will stagnate the gaming industry, as long as they are making a profit they don't care about moving gaming technology forward.trizzle_a
Are you serious? Nintendo is the only console company that is trying to do something new in the industry. What is the difference between the Xbox and the 360? The games just look a little better, besides that there has been no other changes. So how is nintendo going create a stagnent market when they are forcing developers to be creative in how they design a game??
So as far as your atagnent arguement goes.....you don't have one. And please don't complain about it being a minigame only console, that's about the only thing we wver hear from you guys, and some minigame collections aren't bad. It's a lot more fun to play a variety of games rather than the countless shooters that have come out as of late. While some of these have been good, please, can we try something new for once?
The Wii and DS have by no means earnedtheir position in sales, and certainly don't deserve any respect in SW.
The new Nintendo business approach is a last ditch, below-the-belt attempt to stay in the market on Nintendo's part. A name brand with an immense lack of quality titles for its platforms as of late, Nintendo has shifted its focus to a simpler, more aproachable market: Everyone. Indeed, the new Nintendo has understood that it simply cannot compete in the same market as the Xbox 360 or the Playstation 3. The evidence is standing clear in the open for all to see -because of the GameCube's immense failure, the then penniless Nintendo was forced to change aim. They realized that the majority of their original audience, the hardcore gaming community, simply was not interested in games that they were making anymore. Franchises of impeccable quality such as Halo or Final Fantasy were destined to overtake the poorly aging "classic" Nintendo IPs in the eyes of true gamers.
With this tragic knowledge, Nintendo was in a tough position to get back in the game -in fact, it was too tough for them to handle. So Nintendo went back to the drawing boards, wondering who they could fool into help making Nintendo a big name again. It was dead obvious: when gamers knew that Nintendo was stale, their non-gaming counterparts did not! They found out that an American housewife would just eat anything up that helped them lose some extra pounds! They found out that old people in nursing homes would instantly like something that they could enjoy without upsetting their arthritis! They understood that changing their target audience was the only way to go. And so they created the Wii and the DS, two despicable platforms that any serious gamer wouldn't waste their time on.
The end result was perfect: A machine that true geeks wouldn't play,taking aim and appeal to a non-gaming, geek-o-phobic audience. It sold like hotcakes. And it remained true to its principle, being the scourge of serious gaming and the saviour of the casuals. Real gamers didn't buy it; they didn't need to, for Nintendo making mountains of cash to fill their money-hungry pockets was a dead certain from the get-go. Eventually these gaming nightmares overtook sales of true gamer's plaforms, stealing all that they had of their hard earned media steam and casual appeal.
The Nintendo's new business strategy doesn't deserve to sell well, because its lack of fresh, deep titles makes it an old gimmick to the gaming community - something that Nintendo's new audience will soon find out as well. Yes, it is only a matter of time before this last-ditch effort fails miserably at the heels of more prestigous and respectable brand names.
Uncle_Uzi
have you played Zelda: Twilight Princess? How about Resident Evil 4: Wii edition? Metroid Prime 3: Corruption? Super Paper Mario? Coming up: Manhunt 2, Super Mario Galaxy, Soul Caliber Legends, No More Heroes, Star Wars: The Force Unleashed, Super Smash Brothers Brawl. I don't know...I liked those games,I own a 360, and I will own a PS3 when MGS4 comes out. I think you're really cheating yourself when you limit your gaming experiences to "a true gamer's system." I put that in quotes because the Wii is for gamer's, casual and hardcore alike.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment