Is Nintendo Giving Up?

[Damaramu 0]

Nintendo isn't being killed really by anything that's their fault, except for the online issue. The major problem is the casual gamer--people who bought a PS2 or X-Box on an impusle buy and the only games they own are Madden and NBA Live. That's so annoying. It takes away credit from the really good games bought by the informed and avid gamers, and helps make E.A. Sports the disgusting monolith that releases the same games every year that it is.

What's wrong with buying sports games?

Informed and avid gamers? Is this that concept of a "real gamer" again?

[Renegade 0]

Nintendo isn't being killed really by anything that's their fault, except for the online issue.  The major problem is the casual gamer--people who bought a PS2 or X-Box on an impusle buy and the only games they own are Madden and NBA Live.  That's so annoying.  It takes away credit from the really good games bought by the informed and avid gamers, and helps make E.A. Sports the disgusting monolith that releases the same games every year that it is.

What's wrong with buying sports games?

Informed and avid gamers? Is this that concept of a "real gamer" again?

Nothing wrong with Sports games, although I do have a deep problem with E.A games. I don't follow football so I don't know what rival football game are like, but E.A's soccer games just plain out blow. Konami's winning 11 or PES titles provide much more depth and playability.

[MrRant 0]

All Nintendo needs is some hardcore sex and violence.

 

Actually what they need would be original games with a lower price point. If you undercut Sony and MS then that is a quick way to make up marketshare. How about instead of $50 bucks they put *most* new releases at say $35-40 with the occasional big game (Metroid, etc) at the $50 mark and release some value games at the $19.99 mark (ripoffs basically of successful games... ones that are good but... eh)?

 

It's just getting too goddamn expensive.

[AndrewTS 0]

Nintendo isn't being killed really by anything that's their fault, except for the online issue.  The major problem is the casual gamer--people who bought a PS2 or X-Box on an impusle buy and the only games they own are Madden and NBA Live.  That's so annoying.  It takes away credit from the really good games bought by the informed and avid gamers, and helps make E.A. Sports the disgusting monolith that releases the same games every year that it is.

What's wrong with buying sports games?

Informed and avid gamers? Is this that concept of a "real gamer" again?

In short, E.A. is to sports games what Final Fantasy currently is to RPGs. They're the most well-known and best-selling, but they don't deserve to be.

[Guest MikeSC]

Nintendo isn't being killed really by anything that's their fault, except for the online issue. The major problem is the casual gamer--people who bought a PS2 or X-Box on an impusle buy and the only games they own are Madden and NBA Live. That's so annoying. It takes away credit from the really good games bought by the informed and avid gamers, and helps make E.A. Sports the disgusting monolith that releases the same games every year that it is.

Nintendo's problems, hate to tell you, are theirs.

 

They have virtually NO third-party support (heck, the N-Gage has more third party support at this point) and that IS their fault.

 

They have not produced a franchise that sells consistently since the Super NES and THAT is their fault.

 

Nintendo has coasted on old glory for years now. People go nuts over slightly above-average games (*cough* Viewtiful Joe *cough*) that are Nintendo exclusives because the volume of quality titles for the system is weak.

 

And Madden, like it or not, IS one of the better games out there.

-=Mike

[Guest EQ]

I don't play sports games either (well, maybe the occasional Baseball game, but I don't buy them) but I can't argue with EA's strategy here.

 

Make a decent core engine, keep improving on it slightly every year and update the rosters for the teams. It's an ingenious way to make money. People buy the newest sports game every single year regardless of how different they are from the previous year's version.

 

For the most part, my experience has shown that people who love the EA Sports games really enjoy having the updated rosters, etc.

 

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

 

Now, on to Nintendo. I said it before, and I'll say it again. I wouldn't have any problem with Nintendo going third party, in the console market at least. If Nintendo says that they want to focus soley on games, why bother with consoles at all? They don't seem to be interested in taking part in the rapidly-expanding online console market, they have expressed no interest in making their future consoles all-in-one media hubs like Microsoft and Sony are doing. Their market share in the handheld market is even being brought into question. They are pretty much dominant now (although, I don't know how N-Gage has affected them). With the PSP on the horizon, it seems like Nintendo is going to face some real competition here for pretty much the first time since Game Gear.

 

If Nintendo really wants to focus on games, I say go third party and turn out some really awesome games on XBOX-2 and PS3. Imagine Zelda title that was truly epic, taking advantage of a built-in hard drive (just like XBOX's upcoming RPG, Fable).

 

I think it's pretty obvious that the console market is leaning towards the all-inclusive media hubs that Sony and Microsoft are looking to provide. Nintendo wouldn't be smart to release another console in 2005 that was just an updated Gamecube. I doubt they'd be able to compete.

[Invictus 0]

Gotta second what Andrew said, I'm gonna be sick if Nintendo stops making consoles and all we're left with is Sony and Microsoft. It's the principle more than anything, the company that basically INVENTED CONSOLE VIDEOGAMES getting muscled out by two grossly overbearing media conglomerates is a hard thing to stomach.

[AndrewTS 0]

Nintendo's problems, hate to tell you, are theirs.

 

They have virtually NO third-party support (heck, the N-Gage has more third party support at this point) and that IS their fault.

 

*looks at N-Gage game library*

 

*looks at GBA game library*

 

*looks at PS2 and X-Box library, then GC library, most of which are identical third-party titles*

 

 

They have not produced a franchise that sells consistently since the Super NES and THAT is their fault.

 

As opposed to those franchises that Microsoft and Sony have created. Oh, wait...

 

Nintendo has coasted on old glory for years now.

 

That I'll agree on. Rather than creating original titles, it's Mario Party XXIV, Metroid 3D, etc. However, they've dropped the ball on that, because some of their follow ups, both first and third party, are inferior to past editions. (Mario RPG and Yoshi's Island > Paper Mario and Yoshi's Story, Mario 64 > Mario Sunshine and sure as hell Luigi's Mansion, all of the N64 wrestling games > Wrestlemania X-8 and XIX, every new Metroid < Super Metroid, R.I.P. Gumpei).

 

The thing that hurt Gamecube the most, as far as I'm concerned, is the N64's failure. Just ask Sega.

 

Although the fact that the N64 lasted as long as it did and the Saturn fizzled out is certainly unjust itself.

 

People go nuts over slightly above-average games (*cough* Viewtiful Joe *cough*) that are Nintendo exclusives because the volume of quality titles for the system is weak.

 

Uh, no. I don't know why you don't like Viewtiful Joe, but yeeer wrong in my book, sorry. It's a great, innovative, slyish title with rock-solid, awesome gameply--like Treasure has every once in a great while. And frankly, Billy Hatcher, an above-average game to be sure, hasn't gotten much or any fanfare--because it is just that. Nothing great about it.

 

And Madden, like it or not, IS one of the better-selling games out there.

-=Mike

 

EDITed for truth and accuracy.

 

It's the principle more than anything, the company that basically INVENTED CONSOLE VIDEOGAMES getting muscled out by two grossly overbearing media conglomerates is a hard thing to stomach.

 

Nintendo didn't invent console games, but they did something way more difficult: brought it back from the dead after the 80's video game crash.

[DangerousDamon 0]

The thing i like about my game cube is that it doesn't crap out on me like my PS2 did on my brother. So now I am coming home from spring break and I can't finish my season of NHL 2004

[Guest MikeSC]

Nintendo's problems, hate to tell you, are theirs.

 

They have virtually NO third-party support (heck, the N-Gage has more third party support at this point) and that IS their fault.

 

*looks at N-Gage game library*

 

*looks at GBA game library*

 

*looks at PS2 and X-Box library, then GC library, most of which are identical third-party titles*

 

GC is getting steadily fewer and fewer 3rd party titles. It's not exactly hard to notice.

They have not produced a franchise that sells consistently since the Super NES and THAT is their fault.

 

As opposed to those franchises that Microsoft and Sony have created. Oh, wait...

Sony has Jak and Ratchet which are selling quite well. XBox has at least one title that sells a little --- well, unless you wish to ignore Halo. Crimson Skies also screams potential sequel --- and the only group that seemed to produce good titles outside of Nintendo for Nintendo systems, Rare, won't likely put out a second title as bad as "Ghoulies".

The thing that hurt Gamecube the most, as far as I'm concerned, is the N64's failure.  Just ask Sega.

 

Although the fact that the N64 lasted as long as it did and the Saturn fizzled out is certainly unjust itself.

Sega CD killed Sega. Nobody gave a system a chance after that. The Saturn had a horrible launch (stealth launches are bad ideas, especially when you have no titles to buy for months).

 

Dreamcast, though, was an awesome system that got dumped on the moment in hit the stores, in spite of the best launch line-up I know I've ever seen. It certainly owned PS2 in terms of quality software for a long time.

People go nuts over slightly above-average games (*cough* Viewtiful Joe *cough*) that are Nintendo exclusives because the volume of quality titles for the system is weak.

 

Uh, no. I don't know why you don't like Viewtiful Joe, but yeeer wrong in my book, sorry. It's a great, innovative, slyish title with rock-solid, awesome gameply--like Treasure has every once in a great while. And frankly, Billy Hatcher, an above-average game to be sure, hasn't gotten much or any fanfare--because it is just that. Nothing great about it.

VJ is just a side-scroller beat 'em up. If you don't like the graphic style (which, well, I do not), it has virtually no interest. My disappointment in that blah title is the big thing that got me to dump the GC entirely. I will never get the love that VJ gets.

 

Billy Hatcher wasn't above average. I'd hesitate to even call it average.

And Madden, like it or not, IS one of the better-selling games out there.

-=Mike

 

EDITed for truth and accuracy.

You can hate it all day long. I like football and it is an excellent football title. ESPN plays better -- but Madden brings the extras.

 

Hey, you love VJ and I think Madden owns that game four ways from Sunday.

It's the principle more than anything, the company that basically INVENTED CONSOLE VIDEOGAMES getting muscled out by two grossly overbearing media conglomerates is a hard thing to stomach.

 

Nintendo didn't invent console games, but they did something way more difficult: brought it back from the dead after the 80's video game crash.

And they haven't been able to adapt. The N64 was a horribly overrated system (the games all had a similar, ugly graphic style) and the GC has been a non-factor from the get-go.

-=Mike

...And God help them when their cash cow gets competition from Sony's handheld. I have no reason to expect Nintendo to be able to hold off Sony in the handheld market.

[Guest EQ]

...And God help them when their cash cow gets competition from Sony's handheld. I have no reason to expect Nintendo to be able to hold off Sony in the handheld market.

I agree... kind of.

 

I think Nintendo would have a chance at fighting off Sony if they started releasing more *original* software for the system. Showing off that GBA is a portable SNES is nice, but stop porting over SNES titles!

 

I mean, I think it's cool that now I can play the Super Mario Bros. games on my GBA wherever I want, but let's face it: they should have all been on the same cartridge just like when Mario All Stars came out for SNES. How about a new 2D Mario game? How about a new 2D Zelda game? I do, however, applaud them for giving use 2 new Metroid games for GBA.

 

What will also help Nintendo is the price of the system. At $99 (or even less if you get a plain GBA and not the SP), you have yourself a pretty cool little handheld. I think Sony's PSP will be nice, but it will also cost a pretty penny.

[AndrewTS 0]

  GC is getting steadily fewer and fewer 3rd party titles. It's not exactly hard to notice.

 

*checks Gamefaqs for list of upcoming releases*

 

Looks about the same for American releases for all three consoles, although as far as Japan third party titles, yeah, not much there. Also, Sonic Heroes came out on all three, Resident Evil for is a Gamecube exclusive right now, and the revamped MGS: Twin Snakes would be a great pickup if I didn't despise MGS2 and played MGS1 to death.

 

Sony has Jak and Ratchet which are selling quite well. XBox has at least one title that sells a little --- well, unless you wish to ignore Halo. Crimson Skies also screams potential sequel --- and the only group that seemed to produce good titles outside of Nintendo for Nintendo systems, Rare, won't likely put out a second title as bad as "Ghoulies".

 

Those two are third party titles, though.

 

X-Box has Halo 2 coming...uh...someday. Supposedly Doom 3 if anyone still cares. However, like Sony they aren't a 1st party developer, just a console maker.

Admittedly, X-Box does have a good lineup, that I'm not denying.

 

And Rare...yeah, there's a company that screams quality. Hot damn, DK 64 and Star Fox Adventures were fantastic titles, weren't they? Shame Nintendo lost them.

Face it, without Miyamoto to overlook them, Rare's worthless.

 

They also lost Acclaim. OH HOW WILL THEY EVER SURVIVE?!

 

Sega CD killed Sega. Nobody gave a system a chance after that. The Saturn had a horrible launch (stealth launches are bad ideas, especially when you have no titles to buy for months).

 

Sega CD hurt them, but it didn't kill them. Having a system $100 more with a couple games that looked like crap, and continually pushing the 3D games which were NOT the system's strength killed them, as far as I'm concerned. If the Saturn hadn't been screwed over from the start, they might have had something there. Plus, the titles that were big hits on the Playstation took forever to come out on Saturn, if it all. Plus, no awesome 3D Sonic at launch, no killer aps to speak of (VF was not a system seller in the States. Toshinden sucked, but it looked better, and Tekken upped the ante), and a non-existent ad campaign all contributed to its downfall.

 

Dreamcast, though, was an awesome system that got dumped on the moment in hit the stores, in spite of the best launch line-up I know I've ever seen. It certainly owned PS2 in terms of quality software for a long time.

 

Sony let out "DVD-ROM" and third parties abandoned like rats for the PS2. In many ways, the DC is technologically superior to the PS2 (although they both have the jaggies), and if it was still being developed for, you'd see it's still very powerful, although inferior to the Box and Cube.

 

VJ is just a side-scroller beat 'em up. If you don't like the graphic style (which, well, I do not), it has virtually no interest. My disappointment in that blah title is the big thing that got me to dump the GC entirely. I will never get the love that VJ gets.

 

Billy Hatcher wasn't above average. I'd hesitate to even call it average.

 

"Just a side-scroller beat 'em up..." with an innovative fighting system (with the slow mo, hyper speed) with puzzle-solving and old-school platforming goodness, great music and just damn fun to play.

 

Billy Hatcher is "above average," when you take into account all the cheap, chinzy, crummy 3D plats on the market like Ty.

 

And they haven't been able to adapt. The N64 was a horribly overrated system (the games all had a similar, ugly graphic style) and the GC has been a non-factor from the get-go.

 

How was the N64 overrated when pretty much everyone agrees it sucked?

 

...And God help them when their cash cow gets competition from Sony's handheld. I have no reason to expect Nintendo to be able to hold off Sony in the handheld market.

 

Other than them holding off Atari, Sega, Bandai, Nokia and a score of other handhelds that didn't stand much of a chance like the Neo Geo Pocket Color (great system, BTW), no.

 

However, as far as the PSP, I don't see much on the horizon except for plenty of half-assed 3D games to come...

 

When the PSP is released with a ton of bad PS1 games, will you still bitch about the GBA having a bunch of mostly-good SNES games re-released?

 

Think with the Game Boy is, it isn't just the games or the hardware, it's that it is Game Boy. The name "Game Boy" alone is one of Nintendo's biggest assets. Kids know the name, adults know it, and people of all ages know it, and they all buy. The PSP will never catch up to its library due to backward compatibility, and it is affordable and developer-friendly. If Sony plans to deliver the PSP for more than 100 bucks, that ain't gonna cut it. I don't think Sony knows just what it is getting into.

 

However, I fear the DS will fuck Nintendo over...

[Guest MikeSC]

Sony has Jak and Ratchet which are selling quite well. XBox has at least one title that sells a little --- well, unless you wish to ignore Halo. Crimson Skies also screams potential sequel --- and the only group that seemed to produce good titles outside of Nintendo for Nintendo systems, Rare, won't likely put out a second title as bad as "Ghoulies".

Those two are third party titles, though.

 

X-Box has Halo 2 coming...uh...someday.

It will likely be the best selling game of the year whenever the heck it comes out.

Supposedly Doom 3 if anyone still cares.  However, like Sony they aren't a 1st party developer, just a console maker.

Admittedly, X-Box does have a good lineup, that I'm not denying. 

 

And Rare...yeah, there's a company that screams quality.  Hot damn, DK 64 and Star Fox Adventures were fantastic titles, weren't they?  Shame Nintendo lost them.

Face it, without Miyamoto to overlook them, Rare's worthless. 

Star Fox Adventure actually was fairly decent.

Sega CD killed Sega. Nobody gave a system a chance after that. The Saturn had a horrible launch (stealth launches are bad ideas, especially when you have no titles to buy for months).

Sega CD hurt them, but it didn't kill them.

When your reputation for making quality games takes a hit, it is deadly. The Sega CD was a joke with mainly horrid titles (there were some gems, to be sure) and it made Sega look bad.

Dreamcast, though, was an awesome system that got dumped on the moment in hit the stores, in spite of the best launch line-up I know I've ever seen. It certainly owned PS2 in terms of quality software for a long time.

Sony let out "DVD-ROM" and third parties abandoned like rats for the PS2. In many ways, the DC is technologically superior to the PS2 (although they both have the jaggies), and if it was still being developed for, you'd see it's still very powerful, although inferior to the Box and Cube.

I don't doubt it. Sony's versions of DC titles weren't any better than DC titles (Crazy Taxi looked better on the DC, in my opinion --- and I didn't think the PS2 Soul Caliber 2 was a big step up from SC1 on the DC).

VJ is just a side-scroller beat 'em up. If you don't like the graphic style (which, well, I do not), it has virtually no interest. My disappointment in that blah title is the big thing that got me to dump the GC entirely. I will never get the love that VJ gets.

 

Billy Hatcher wasn't above average. I'd hesitate to even call it average.

"Just a side-scroller beat 'em up..." with an innovative fighting system (with the slow mo, hyper speed) with puzzle-solving and old-school platforming goodness, great music and just damn fun to play.

It was still just an average platformer. If you loved it, grand. I didn't.

Billy Hatcher is "above average," when you take into account all the cheap, chinzy, crummy 3D plats on the market like Ty.

The existence of crap titles doesn't make a sub-par title good.

...And God help them when their cash cow gets competition from Sony's handheld. I have no reason to expect Nintendo to be able to hold off Sony in the handheld market.

Other than them holding off Atari, Sega, Bandai, Nokia and a score of other handhelds that didn't stand much of a chance like the Neo Geo Pocket Color (great system, BTW), no.

This is Sony. They know what they're doing far better than the companies mentioned. They have gobs of money and a massive fan base from the PS1 and PS2 who will give anything they release a serious look.

However, as far as the PSP, I don't see much on the horizon except for plenty of half-assed 3D games to come...

 

When the PSP is released with a ton of bad PS1 games, will you still bitch about the GBA having a bunch of mostly-good SNES games re-released?

Can I mention the crap GBA games that are ALSO flooding the market?

Think with the Game Boy is, it isn't just the games or the hardware, it's that it is Game Boy.  The name "Game Boy" alone is one of Nintendo's biggest assets.

For the longest time, "Nintendo" was synonymous with "console gaming". Those days have passed.

Kids know the name, adults know it, and people of all ages know it, and they all buy. The PSP will never catch up to its library due to backward compatibility, and it is affordable and developer-friendly.

Again, who saw Nintendo becoming an also-ran in the console business?

 

If somebody provides a more attractive base for 3rd party development --- which Sony will --- then Nintendo loses a lot of titles. And they'll be back to them having to rely on themselves for all of the games, a situation they've never done well with.

If Sony plans to deliver the PSP for more than 100 bucks, that ain't gonna cut it.  I don't think Sony knows just what it is getting into.

Sony knows what they're doing. I have no doubt that the PSP will be successful. It is not the top-selling handheld console inside of 2 years, I will be more than mildly surprised.

However, I fear the DS will fuck Nintendo over...

Nintendo's inability to keep 3rd party developers will do a better job of that.

-=Mike

[AndrewTS 0]

It (Halo 2) will likely be the best selling game of the year whenever the heck it comes out.

 

Just like Duke Nukem Forever and Daikatana, right? Maybe you can crank up "Chinese Democracy" while you play it, too.

 

Star Fox Adventure actually was fairly decent.

 

 

When your reputation for making quality games takes a hit, it is deadly. The Sega CD was a joke with mainly horrid titles (there were some gems, to be sure) and it made Sega look bad.

 

The Sega CD and 32X were both big blunders, but you act is if it was impossible for Sega to bounce back after that. I disagree. However, Sega blundered far too much. They made decisions so boneheaded that Nintendo's track record is sparkling. For example: Digital Pictures, putting all their advertising into a half-assed licensed games, not promoting a ton of quality titles at all.

 

 

 

I don't doubt it. Sony's versions of DC titles weren't any better than DC titles (Crazy Taxi looked better on the DC, in my opinion --- and I didn't think the PS2 Soul Caliber 2 was a big step up from SC1 on the DC).

 

I think the DC SC1 plays better, too, but that's mainly a programming thing, as opposed to technical.

 

 

It was still just an average platformer. If you loved it, grand. I didn't.

 

The existence of crap titles doesn't make a sub-par title good.

 

You do know know "average" and "subpar" means, right? They're used to describe games somewhere between "good" and "bad." Video game are traditionally rated in regard to similar titles on the same system.

 

Also, if VJ is just "average," where are all those platformers that are head-and-shoulders above it, not just on Gamecube but on any of the big 3 systems? Tell me, because I really wanna know.

 

 

This is Sony. They know what they're doing far better than the companies mentioned. They have gobs of money and a massive fan base from the PS1 and PS2 who will give anything they release a serious look.

 

Like all those casual gamers who bought a PS2 to play Madden, right?

 

Can I mention the crap GBA games that are ALSO flooding the market?

 

Sure, and I'll point you to all the crap PS2 and PS1 games that have flooded the market, most of which are probably made by Acclaim.

 

For the longest time, "Nintendo" was synonymous with "console gaming". Those days have passed.

 

The GBA is more popular than the GC and X-Box combined, you know that right?

 

Again, who saw Nintendo becoming an also-ran in the console business?

 

When they put out the craptacular N64.

 

If somebody provides a more attractive base for 3rd party development --- which Sony will --- then Nintendo loses a lot of titles. And they'll be back to them having to rely on themselves for all of the games, a situation they've never done well with.

 

The GBA's installed user base is huge. No smart developer will abandon it for a system that is already known to be hard to develop for and doesn't have any units sold yet. Yes, developers will probably line up to make PSP games, but if they aren't able to get people to pay for the system, that ends quickly.

 

 

Sony knows what they're doing. I have no doubt that the PSP will be successful. It is not the top-selling handheld console inside of 2 years, I will be more than mildly surprised.

 

Maybe it will...after drastic price cuts, just like the GC is the top selling console right now because everyone already owns the PS2, and the X-Box, while doing well, hasn't grown as much.

 

Nintendo's inability to keep 3rd party developers will do a better job of that.

-=Mike

 

Thattaboy. Completely ignore my point that there are more 3rd party titles scheduled right now for the GC than for the PS2, and they're on par with X-Box. Adios to crapmakers Rare and Acclaim, too. They won't be missed.

[Guest EQ]

I have a feeling that if Rare were still making games for Nintendo, you'd be bringing up the good games they made, making them out to be one of Nintendo's greatest assets

[AndrewTS 0]

I have a feeling that if Rare were still making games for Nintendo, you'd be bringing up the good games they made, making them out to be one of Nintendo's greatest assets

Okay, which good games have they made lately?

 

....

 

....?

 

Thought so. I find that a silly basis, kinda like how Treasure fanboys always bring up a ten-year-old game to justify how great and innovative their titles are.

[Guest MikeSC]

It (Halo 2) will likely be the best selling game of the year whenever the heck it comes out.

Just like Duke Nukem Forever and Daikatana, right? Maybe you can crank up "Chinese Democracy" while you play it, too.

There is no chance of this becoming vaporware like Duke Nukem or utter crap like Daikatana. Not a chance.

When your reputation for making quality games takes a hit, it is deadly. The Sega CD was a joke with mainly horrid titles (there were some gems, to be sure) and it made Sega look bad.

The Sega CD and 32X were both big blunders, but you act is if it was impossible for Sega to bounce back after that. I disagree.

It was POSSIBLE --- but the seeds of doubt were planted. Then, when they abandoned the Saturn, people lost all faith.

 

To this day, I don't get why they abandoned the DC. From what I understood, the DC had a strong month of sales the month they pulled the plug.

However, Sega blundered far too much.  They made decisions so boneheaded that Nintendo's track record is sparkling.  For example:  Digital Pictures, putting all their advertising into a half-assed licensed games, not promoting a ton of quality titles at all.

Sega thought FMV games were the wave of the future for reasons lost on me. The only one that sold decently was Night Trap, and that was largely due to the controversy.

It was still just an average platformer. If you loved it, grand. I didn't.

 

The existence of crap titles doesn't make a sub-par title good.

You do know know "average" and "subpar" means, right? They're used to describe games somewhere between "good" and "bad." Video game are traditionally rated in regard to similar titles on the same system.

 

Also, if VJ is just "average," where are all those platformers that are head-and-shoulders above it, not just on Gamecube but on any of the big 3 systems? Tell me, because I really wanna know.

Ratchet & Clank 2 and Jak 2 own it. Metal Arms is better.

 

I don't care if Nintendo is lacking a ton of great games. "Charlie's Angels" doesn't become anything more than a horrid game because Nintendo has a lack of "beat 'em up" games.

This is Sony. They know what they're doing far better than the companies mentioned. They have gobs of money and a massive fan base from the PS1 and PS2 who will give anything they release a serious look.

Like all those casual gamers who bought a PS2 to play Madden, right?

I'll take my chances with the significantly larger base.

Can I mention the crap GBA games that are ALSO flooding the market?

Sure, and I'll point you to all the crap PS2 and PS1 games that have flooded the market, most of which are probably made by Acclaim.

Feel free.

For the longest time, "Nintendo" was synonymous with "console gaming". Those days have passed.

 

The GBA is more popular than the GC and X-Box combined, you know that right?

And Nintendo hasn't had serious competition. Atari? Please. The Lynx was a nice system and all, but Atari is --- well, Atari.

NEC? The TurboExpress was a real nice system --- but the TG-16 never caught on and it died.

Sega? Apparently, the Genesis was a fluke as none of their other systems seemed to sell well.

Nokia? Umm, no.

 

Sony is the toughest competition they will ever face --- a company that, in spite of having NO console experience, has managed to dominate the market.

Again, who saw Nintendo becoming an also-ran in the console business?

When they put out the craptacular N64.

And now they have competition on their one field that they have made their serious cash on.

If somebody provides a more attractive base for 3rd party development --- which Sony will --- then Nintendo loses a lot of titles. And they'll be back to them having to rely on themselves for all of the games, a situation they've never done well with.

The GBA's installed user base is huge.

Nintendo had the world in their lap in the console world. The Super NES became the best-selling of the 16-bit systems and things looked rosy.

 

Then, the PSX came out and just wiped the floor with them.

 

Nintendo cannot compete with a good company. They have not shown an ability to do so in about a decade now.

No smart developer will abandon it for a system that is already known to be hard to develop for and doesn't have any units sold yet.

Yes, they will in a moment. Sony will offer them a better deal and they will defect in a moment.

Yes, developers will probably line up to make PSP games, but if they aren't able to get people to pay for the system, that ends quickly.

They'll pull it off.

Sony knows what they're doing. I have no doubt that the PSP will be successful. It is not the top-selling handheld console inside of 2 years, I will be more than mildly surprised.

Maybe it will...after drastic price cuts, just like the GC is the top selling console right now because everyone already owns the PS2, and the X-Box, while doing well, hasn't grown as much.

Sony will release a product that will likely destroy the GBA in terms of power and quality software.

 

Call it a safe hunch.

-=Mike

[AndrewTS 0]

There is no chance of this becoming vaporware like Duke Nukem or utter crap like Daikatana. Not a chance.

 

There's always a chance.

 

It was POSSIBLE --- but the seeds of doubt were planted. Then, when they abandoned the Saturn, people lost all faith.

 

*you admit I was right, but don't really.

 

Sega thought FMV games were the wave of the future for reasons lost on me. The only one that sold decently was Night Trap, and that was largely due to the controversy.

 

It deserved to be banned, but not for the "controversy." I've seen more violent b-movies (which is what it was) with a PG-13 rating.

 

Ratchet & Clank 2 and Jak 2 own it. Metal Arms is better.

 

Ratchet & Clank 2 is really good, but Jak II? I played the same damn game in the last edition, minus the transformation gimmick. Where's the innovation? It isn't much better than the last game, so sorry--unacceptable.

 

You named two games, one of which has been up there with VJ for Game of the Year or at least Action/Plat honors. That doesn't justify your argument.

 

I don't care if Nintendo is lacking a ton of great games. "Charlie's Angels" doesn't become anything more than a horrid game because Nintendo has a lack of "beat 'em up" games.

 

It would be at the "bad" part of the continuum, so it wouldn't qualify, now would it? Great way to completely ignore the point made, as usual.

 

  I'll take my chances with the significantly larger base.

 

I'm sure those Madden freaks will love Final Fantasy VII-2.

 

Sony is the toughest competition they will ever face --- a company that, in spite of having NO console experience, has managed to dominate the market.

 

Agreed. Although only the Saturn attempted to compete directly, and prices, development woes, and bad 3D did it in.

 

Nobody is going to buy the Bluetooth Tapwave Whatthefuckever. However, there are two main marketing strategies that Sony is going to have to go with: carve out a niche of their own with the PSP or swipe a sizable portion of Nintendo's market share. I don't see a niche that the PSP could really fill, except for 20-something gamers who can afford the PSP, probably like Square, and have plenty of disposable income to blow on another portable. However, for wider success the price of it will have to be competitive with the GBA, or else there is no point to getting a system that is way more expensive than the GBA, and is moderately more powerful. And frankly, 3-D is not a good fit for a portable system.

 

And now they have competition on their one field that they have made their serious cash on.

 

However, they have not released a portable that is an N64-caliber bomb...yet. The D.S. we're not sure about exactly.

 

Nintendo had the world in their lap in the console world. The Super NES became the best-selling of the 16-bit systems and things looked rosy.

 

Then, the PSX came out and just wiped the floor with them.

 

What?

 

Actually, the SNES had a bunch of great games released near the end of its run, including stuff by Rare when people actually cared about their games. DKC was a major blow to consoles like the 3DO, Jag, and 32X, which were already on shaky foundations to begin with. In the mid-90s, the SNES was pulling far ahead in games and picked up plenty of new customers...then they pissed it away waiting to release the N64. The PSX didn't come out and wipe the floor with them, it just gobbled up the market share that Nintendo handed them on a silver plate while they promised a wonder system that would smoke them all, but instead delivered the N64.

 

Yes, they will in a moment. Sony will offer them a better deal and they will defect in a moment.

 

Yes, I'm sure companies will stop making games for the system with the huge installed user base and exclusively make games for the unproven portable. By "better deal" what are you referring to? The days of companies being licensed exclusively to one system are long gone. It's not sensible to make games for one unproven system when there's one out that is proven and will provide the best opportunity.

 

Sony will release a product that will likely destroy the GBA in terms of power and quality software.

 

Call it a safe hunch.

-=Mike

 

Could you be any more of a Sony fanboy? You are denying the fundamental differences between the console and handheld markets. Sony and the PS1 were all about the 3D. Sega tried to compete with them on that and they failed. The N64 was just kinda hanging around getting third-rate PS1 castoffs.

 

This is a different story. Sony needs a diverse software line, and that will be just to get themselves a foothold. The X-Box right now is a distant third in consoles, and that's with Microsoft's backing and losing money on every console. The next X-Box will sell better, but when the competition is strong (unlike it was when Sony came into the market), it is going to be hard to jump in and start taking over the market.

 

Sony will be in the same position in the handheld market: the GBA has a huge installed user base, and a backward compatible system that gives it a game library that is hard to match. X-Box's strategy has been to try to out-Sony Sony: make your system do a bunch of other things besides play games, line up a good group of developers to make games, and put together a flexible online plan. Yet they aren't making much headway.

 

Granted, MS was severely handicapped by the Japanese xenophobia (the DC had been outselling X-Boxes after it was officially "dead" for quite a while), something that Sony won't face.

 

However, the PSP is going to have to deliver something that makes people want to switch. It's not going to be able to compete via games for quite a while, the price point is questionable, and they have no experience in handhelds, which is quite a different market from consoles.

 

I don't see how they're going to waltz in and crush Nintendo like you think, and for some bizaare reason hope, they will.

[AndrewTS 0]

*Bump* Supposedly EA loves the PSP. Oh, hooray.

[BUTT 0]

Well, EA makes games for just about everyone. It isn't too surprising that they'd be on board for the PSP, especially considering how good Sony has been for them over the last few years.

[AndrewTS 0]

The original arcade Punch Out and several shooters would work great with the DS (assuming the screens are stacked vertically), although generally it seems a bit too gimmicky.

 

Oh, and Sony announced PSP/PS2/PSX (that overpriced PS2 with a few extra features) connectivity. Their originality stuns me.