N'Trouble

http://www.gaming-age.com/cgi-bin/sp...uble&pagenum=1


In the 1984-1995 Nintendo defined videogames. The NES, Game Boy, and SNES sat at the top of the console charts amidst tough competition from Sega and NEC. But then came Playstation, and Sony's dominance in the industry has sent Nintendo scrambling for second place against newcomer Microsoft. Nintendo's drop in profit due to lagging GameCube sales is a trying sign that the house of Mario is on shaky foundation. We take a look at what happened and what changes could come in store for the big N.
What happened with GameCube?

With the Nintendo 64, Nintendo learned quickly that games had to be on a cheaper format and that third-parties had to provide more support in order for a system to be a bona fide success. This was supposed to change with the GameCube. Nintendo switched to proprietary DVD discs to minimize production and third-party costs, and worked with ATI to create an efficient chipset that would lessen development time and draw developers. So what happened? GameCube set a kid-oriented image for itself from top to bottom. The console itself was cute, the majority of games from launch until now have been decidedly children-oriented, and the cube was a strict games-only platform. The GameCube sat right next to PS2 and Xbox at a cheaper price. But at only $50 dollars less, the competition's sophisticated style, more diverse library, and DVD playback did not make Nintendo's console an attractive buy. At present, the console still suffers from consumer value perception. The new Player's Choice line-up is $10 + more than the competition's value titles, the console is still only $50 dollars cheaper than PS2 or Xbox, and the GC still has the most limited game library of all three consoles.

No party like a third party

Third-party has been decidedly better on GameCube than the N64, but companies are still reluctant to release big name titles for the system. Early on, major Japanese developers viewed GameCube as a machine that catered to children, and took their big name titles elsewhere. The Resident Evil franchise exclusive to GameCube has proven not to be lucrative for Capcom, most recently indicated in Nintendo's own lowered software sales statement, and a recent report by Japan's Nikkei Industrial Newspaper. But things are starting to turn around. Square's development of a Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles and rumblings of Konami's Metal Gear Solid franchise heading to the cube shows Nintendo working hard to secure better exclusives and heighten third-party relations.

17 and over not admitted

A large sector that the GameCube neglected was older gamers. Consumers that once flocked to Mario and Zelda have grown up and turned to more mature videogame content. The large line-up of Mature titles on PS2 and Xbox were a large success, none more prominent that Grand Theft Auto III and Vice City on PS2. Rockstar's multi-million selling franchise provided concrete proof that videogame tastes have headed in a different direction – a trend that Nintendo did not catch on to. While Resident Evil and Eternal Darkness tried to provide something for the older gamer, the offerings were simply too few compared the larger library of mature content on PS2 and Xbox. The neglect of mature offerings on GameCube is a strange absence. Nintendo had its own success with mature content with Killer Instinct and Goldeneye in the mid 90's. Minimal first-party mature content on GC has only furthered the company's image as one that catered more to children.

GC done right

The cube has not been without its merits. The console's proprietary DVD disc format has limited piracy much more than the standard DVD format used in PS2 and Xbox. The GC's Game Boy Advance connection and Game Boy Player is a smart attempt to bridge the company's most successful product to its less-than successful product. More importantly, the GameCube is slowly repairing third-party relations lost during the N64 days.

The end for GameCube?

As far as GameCube is concerned, the company will have to ride out the next two years the best they can. The console will never perform up the Nintendo's initial expectations. But it will have legs to stand on before the next console comes into play. The company should announce some major in-house titles next month at E3 that will keep a hold on its current user and fan base. Big titles like Final Fantasy, Resident Evil, and perhaps Metal Gear Solid should bolster more attention from the older crowd.

Nintendo = third-party

While Nintendo did not meet its sales projections this fiscal year, the company's net income of $547 million is no small feat. Rumors continue to run rampant that the company will become a third-party publisher, but with $6-7 billion cash in the bank and over a half billion in profits this fiscal quarter alone, Nintendo has no reason to concede to Sony and Microsoft just yet. The company enjoys control over the entire game experience, from gameplay to the controller players use to play the game. The only way to keep a strict control over all its properties is to provide an entire game experience to the consumers, and that includes a Nintendo-branded console to play on.

The next step

The company's 38% drop in profit from its previous fiscal year is a clear indication that Nintendo needs to change their strategy. The company's last two consoles have under performed and cost the company a large portion of console market share and lowered brand acceptance in all demographics. Nintendo needs a strategy that will keep it in competition with Sony and Microsoft, but at the same time distancing its product to stick out of the crowd. The key to success may lie in the shining star in the company's product line – Game Boy. The commandeer of the portable gaming market, GBA sales surpassed Nintendo's expectations with 15.4 million units in hardware sales and 58 units in software sales, up 16 percent from last fiscal year. While the current GC/GBA link-up and Game Boy Player are attempts at merging Game Boy's success to GameCube, a more seamless integration with Game Boy and its next console will be a necessity. Having a built-in Game Boy cartridge slot in the company's next system would give consumers instant access to the GB's vast library and provide a library of new 2D titles on a home console. 2D games have long been neglected since the 32-bit polygon revolution and are currently regulated to portable consoles like Game Boy. A built-in cart slot would allow GB developers to hit two consumer sectors with one stone, while maintaining the same development costs. Another way to attract buyers is DVD movie playback. While Nintendo will likely not create a home entertainment solution ala Sony and Microsoft, DVD is clearly a movement that consumers have no problem buying into. The design of the next console will also play an important factor in how consumers view the new product. The GameCube was chastised by many for its Fisher Price looks, more so when next to PS2 and Xbox. The design of the next console should follow in line with the design of the new Game Boy Advance SP - a sophisticated game console sleek enough for adults, and simple enough for kids.

These solutions may not be the answer to Nintendo's sales woes, but each solution provides something that consumers find lacking in GameCube – value. The GC, its player's choice titles, and its game library aren't representing enough value for consumers to make an investment in the company. Nintendo needs a product that offers more solutions and added value to regain consumer confidence.

They need a controller that isn't designed for preschoolers.
They need a game I actually want to buy.

Nintendo can live off the GBA... until that market is hit with some legit competition. Once the bottom drops out for the GBA, and it will, just like it did for Nintendo's home consoles, they'll probably start shifting more attention on actually selling games and becoming #1 again.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeremy
...becoming #1 again.

---

I can't see that happening. Unless they change a lot of things.

I concur. They need to revitalize their image quite a bit. They're going with the same things that worked for them a decade ago, the problem is, it isn't a decade ago.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeremy
Nintendo can live off the GBA... until that market is hit with some legit competition. Once the bottom drops out for the GBA, and it will, just like it did for Nintendo's home consoles, they'll probably start shifting more attention on actually selling games and becoming #1 again.

---

This post made me take you off ignore for what it's worth.

Next version of GB will be 3D. I don't see where else it can go. That will give the oppertunity of someone big with a good backlog of 3D titles, say Sony, a chance to break the hardware market.

I don't think Nintendo will ever become number one again in the home console because the market has changed so much since the SNES days. Nintendo would have to destroy themselves and carve and entirely new image, not to mention focus almost entirely on marketing, to even have a chance at becoming top of the market.

The best bet for Nintendo is for them to capitalize on the mistakes of their competition, and move in from there. They had a slight chance to do this when Sony decided to enforce censorship on BMX XXX.

Nintendo just needs to find a new audience, and fast. they can't afford to continue losing half of their market share with every new console they make.

oh, and get Miyamoto directly invloved in game development again. especially with his own creations. it was really obvious that he had no hand in Wind Waker.

http://www.boomspeed.com/jnyace13/stfunewbie.jpg

Hey now, his green thumb was quite evident in Wind Waker, what with all the grass cutting and all. Seriously though, yeah, they do need to find a new audience. The current audience of casual gamers will stick with Sony. Hell, if they put up with the shit they endured during the first 9 months of the PS2's life, they'll stick with them through anything (until the next cool thing comes along anyway.)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ammadeau
They need a controller that isn't designed for preschoolers.

---

Actually, I think the GC has the best controller among the three major consoles. It's just incredibly comftorable wrapped around the hand. About the only real complaint I have with the pad is the d+pad is a touch small, but since it's not used on that many games anyway, it's not such a big deal.

Until the GBA player comes out domestically, that is :sneak:

What a pointless article. Nintendo is still making tons of money, just not as many tons as they may have hoped.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by burgundy
What a pointless article. Nintendo is still making tons of money, just not as many tons as they may have hoped.

---

My thoughts exactly.

That article pretty much encompasses every typical anti-Nintendo arguement. The bottome line is that they are not going anywhere anytime soon.

Furthermore, the arguements about software quality are baseless.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ammadeau
They need a controller that isn't designed for preschoolers.
They need a game I actually want to buy.

---

None of these interest you? -

Animal Crossing
Super Mario Sunshine
Eternal Darkness
Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker
Pikmin
Skies of Arcadia Legends
Star Wars: Rougue Squadron
Starfox Adventures
Metroid Prime
Resident Evil
Resident Evil 0
Super Monkey Ball
Super Monkey Ball 2
Luigi's Mansion
Super Smash Brothers Melee

If you can honestly say yes, the problem is yours and not Nintendo's. The GameCube has the best lineup of exclusive titles on the market.

Nintendo, don't change a thing about your game designs or consoles. If I want to play "Playstation" style stuff, I'll play my Playstation. No need to be like the others.

Variety = good
Wavebird = best controller out there.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ammadeau
They need a controller that isn't designed for preschoolers.

---

Damn straight.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by PBMaX
The GameCube has the best lineup of exclusive titles on the market.

---

Those are all great games (well, most of them), but if you think that list is better than the 8 page list of PS2 exclusives, you're insane.

Nintendo (or any other company) won't make it to #1 unless Sony fucks up. Would Sony have made it to #1 if Nintendo had gone with CDs instead of carts for the 64? I doubt it.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by StriderKyo
Those are all great games (well, most of them), but if you think that list is better than the 8 page list of PS2 exclusives, you're insane.

---

Meh, the only PS2 exclusive that can stand up to the Cube's exclusives is DDR. Errrrr....maybe Maximo too, but after that, no. Not saying that games like Time Crisis 2 aren't great, but they can't hold a candle to Sunshine, Monkey Ball, Metroid, etc.

Quote:

---

Those are all great games (well, most of them), but if you think that list is better than the 8 page list of PS2 exclusives, you're insane.

---

Whatever happened to "personal taste"?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by StriderKyo
Those are all great games (well, most of them), but if you think that list is better than the 8 page list of PS2 exclusives, you're insane.

---

In terms of quantity no.

In terms of quality, comparing the top 12 PS2 games to that list, I'd have to say yes.

The same goes for the top 12 games in the Xbox library.

I'd like to see Nintendo putting a bit more effort into original franchises. Eternal Darkness, Animal Crossing and Pikmin are good starts. Half the reason my GC gathers so much dust is I've already played alot of what comes out for it. If they are going to redo old games, make sure that they're different enough to where it really feels like a new game (eg Wind Waker or Metroid Prime). How much different can Mario Golf, Mario Tennis, Mario Party 4, Mario Kart (w/o online) be from the originals? If they end up being amazingly different, I'll eat my words, but it always seems like more of the same from Nintendo on their home consoles.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CorruptedOldGnom(sic)
Whatever happened to "personal taste"?

---

It's all well and good, but is largely irrelevant to discussing the independent merits of anything with another person.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by PBMaX
In terms of quantity no.

In terms of quality, comparing the top 12 PS2 games to that list, I'd have to say yes.

---

I don't think you can rule out quantity, because even if Nintendo game X is a 9/10, if there's 15 8/10 exclusive games on PS2, it's kind of silly to limit yourself to one game for the sake of a slight improvement.

Okay, let's go through the list:

Super Mario Sunshine : good game, but obviously not everyone really liked it, myself included. I don't think it can stand up to the vast array of PS1 and PS2 action platformers available.

Eternal Darkness
Resident Evil
Resident Evil 0 : Again, all solid games, but would you honestly put them ahead of Fatal Frame, Silent Hill 2, Onimusha 1 & 2, Clock Tower 3 and Code: Veronica? Even if you would, the difference in quality is not such that it justifies getting a Cube over the system that is going to see the vast bulk of survival horror releases.

Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker : I'll grant this one. I can't think of anything on PS2 in the same category that I'd objectively put ahead of it.

Pikmin : A fun little game that controls well. But as a strategy game, it's incredibly short and doesn't hold a candle to the PS2's best offerings - Kessen, Dynasty Tactics, Ring of Red, Romance of the Three Kingdoms VII.

Skies of Arcadia Legends : the most derivative rpg of the last several years, with a 1 dimensional cast and a story completely ripped off from various Final Fantasies. The PS2's rpg library destroys this game.

Star Wars: Rougue Squadron : A nice 3D shooter. The PS2 has the best version of Rez. Next.

Starfox Adventures : This game is really nothing special. Nice graphics, but most in its target audience would (and did) go for Kingdom Hearts instead.

Metroid Prime : I like Metroid Prime, but obviously people went for its christmas competition - Vice City and Splinter Cell (now on PS2) in far larger numbers. Prime is better than those games (imo), but again, not so much better that it justfies buying a system with such a limited library.

Super Monkey Ball : Hmmm...arcadey time-based multiplayer action game? I'll take Ridge Racer V. Monkey Ball was good, but I just never felt compelled to play through the single player mode on the difficulties that let you play all the levels.

Super Monkey Ball 2 : Nothing that directly compares in the PS2 library, but I thought SMBall 2's single player mode was a major step back from the first one. For an arcadey Sega action game I would (and did) take Shinobi first.

Luigi's Mansion : You have to be kidding me. If I want a 3D roaming puzzle solver with a childish story I'll go for MGS2: Substance first. At least that doesn't cramp my index fingers. Ico might make for a better comparison, though. And a better game.

Super Smash Brothers Melee : Virtua Fighter 4, King of Fighters 2002, War of the Monsters, Guilty Gear XX. Smash Bros.' actual fighting just wasn't much fun after a couple of days. Too simplistic.

I have nothing against the Cube. I have one, and several of the games on that list. But the problem is that while you can list 12 great games, I could list dozen more great exclusives on PS2 that the GC doesn't have an answer for - the PS2 has so many niche genres represented, and so much more of everything in almost every category. Obviously, most people feel the same way. The fact that Sega Sports is dropping the Cube is also a big negative for me. The GC is a decent system, but if I had to choose today, I wouldn't buy it before a PS2 or even an Xbox (I like the online thing).

Quote:

---

Originally posted by StriderKyo
I don't think you can rule out quantity, because even if Nintendo game X is a 9/10, if there's 15 8/10 exclusive games on PS2, it's kind of silly to limit yourself to one game for the sake of a slight improvement.

---

I never said there is no reason to own a PS2 or XBox. I own them all and very much enjoy each of them. There are a whole lot of great games to play on every system.

My point is to simply show that the Cube has a bunch of great games; the best exclusive library IMO. Anyone who doesn't like at least a few of the games I listed, in truth probably just doesn't like Nintendo.

IMO yes, a 10/10 game is worth more than a handful of 8/10 games, as they don't come around very often. What you call a slight improvement I call the difference between greatness and merely good. One Wind Waker, Super Mario Sunshine, or Metroid Prime is worth a boatload of 8/10 games.

People who point to the Nintendo library as a reason why the system hasn't beaten out the PS2 are missing the point. The games are there.

The Cube has sufferred the same problems as the N64--some quality first party titles surrounded by (SEGA and Capcom notwithstanding) 3rd party dreck. I like Nintendo games but I get excited about the next one every couple months or so and then I beat the game and play the waiting game. Wind Waker is good but the forced scavenger hunting was an exercise in tedium. I think I enjoyed Dark Cloud 2 overall. This PA strip sums up my point entirely and THEY are Nintendo fan-boys.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by StriderKyo
Smash Bros.' actual fighting just wasn't much fun after a couple of days. Too simplistic.

---

Have you ever actually played Super Smash Bros. Melee? You are dismissing the game as "too simplistic" when it seems you hardly even gave it a chance. If you'd stick with it, you'd realize that Melee offers more than almost any other fighting game out there.

P.S.
http://www.stormy-waters.com/downloads/001.rar

Too simplistic my ass. :kirby:

Yes, yes, another let's-pick-on-the-guy-in-last-place anti-Nintendo article. I'm sure the same thing was happening to the TurboGrafx 16 in 1992. Whatever, it means nothing to me - I thoroughly enjoy my GameCube (including the controller), and I have no regrets about chossing it over the PS2.

As a matter of fact, I'm going to try to focus on my GC collection instead of getting games for my older consoles. Monkey Ball, Sonic Mega Collection, and Burnout 2 are calling my name...

Nintendo should pay Sega, Capcom and EA with their $500 million profit for the quarter, for 3 year exclusivity to Nintendo consoles. Then you'd see how many fans of the PS2 and Xbox come a clamoring. Nintendo needs to drop the gaming gauntlet down and show the competition who's got the cash.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by gamevet
Nintendo needs to drop the gaming gauntlet down and show the competition who's got the cash.

---

:lol:

Yep...Microsoft and Sony don't even compare financially to the likes of uber-corp Nintendo. :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Schlep
:lol:

Yep...Microsoft and Sony don't even compare financially to the likes of uber-corp Nintendo. :D

---

No, but they have a huge reserve of cash, that need to be put to good use. ;)

Marcus Lai is so going to be banned from the GA Forums. They don't respond well to that sort of Nintendo talk there ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by StriderKyo
blah blah blah

---

I completely agree with you.

But Ico kills Luigi's Mansion. and RE games are getting too old and repetitive.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by gamevet
Nintendo should pay Sega, Capcom and EA with ...

---

EA, sure, they can swing a vote, but it would take more than 500 Million to get them alone to put everything on the GC exclusive for 3 years. Sega and Capcom? No. Those companies alone won't swing much of anything.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Mamoscott
Have you ever actually played Super Smash Bros. Melee? You are dismissing the game as "too simplistic" when it seems you hardly even gave it a chance. If you'd stick with it, you'd realize that Melee offers more than almost any other fighting game out there.

---

It is a piece of shit.
A huge stinking piece of shit.
It is the worst fighting game I have ever played.
It gets owned by fucking Way of the Warrior.

Melee fucking ruled. It is a quick, pick up and play game that is as deep in gameplay as YOU allow it to be.

I'd rather staple my cock to my asshole.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeremy
Nintendo can live off the GBA... until that market is hit with some legit competition. Once the bottom drops out for the GBA, and it will, just like it did for Nintendo's home consoles, they'll probably start shifting more attention on actually selling games and becoming #1 again.

---

companies like Microsoft are letting Nintendo have the portable market as a favor, not because they know there isn't a dollar to be made in it outside of the gameboy. i'm not even lying!


The GameCube is a failure, which is sad, because it had so much potential. Up until this point I've been dissapointed by the library of software too.

"The GameCube is a failure, which is sad, because it had so much potential. Up until this point I've been dissapointed by the library of software too."

I don't think its a failure. Nintendo is still making money off the GC. Is MS making money off the XBox? Probably not. As far as the library goes, I really can't see how anyone could be dissapointed in it. Since it's come out, it's had the best lineup I've ever seen on any system and this years gonna be a good one too.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Chibi Nappa
Meh, the only PS2 exclusive that can stand up to the Cube's exclusives is DDR. Errrrr....maybe Maximo too, but after that, no. Not saying that games like Time Crisis 2 aren't great, but they can't hold a candle to Sunshine, Monkey Ball, Metroid, etc.

---

Isn't this about sales? Nintendo may have the better quality games but didn't Vice City almost sell more than Sunshine and Zelda combined?

The average gamer couldn't care less about consistent quality for a console. They want what's cool and available. They believe only the hype. You want an example? Try convincing most people that Prime isn't a FPS.

Quote:

---

I'd rather staple my cock to my asshole.

---

Unecessary mental image +1.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kbuchanan
As far as the library goes, I really can't see how anyone could be dissapointed in it. Since it's come out, it's had the best lineup I've ever seen on any system and this years gonna be a good one too.

---

I'll take a gram of whatever that is.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by PBMaX

None of these interest you? -

Animal Crossing
Super Mario Sunshine
Eternal Darkness
Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker
Pikmin
Skies of Arcadia Legends
Star Wars: Rougue Squadron
Starfox Adventures
Metroid Prime
Resident Evil
Resident Evil 0
Super Monkey Ball
Super Monkey Ball 2
Luigi's Mansion
Super Smash Brothers Melee

---

No, none of them interest me enough to buy a console for them. Most of them don't even interest me enough to pay $20 for the game itself. Of course, I've only tried about half of them. I think Wind Waker was the only one I actually liked, but I'll take Dark Cloud 2 over it. Yes, it is a personal preference, but that's what gaming purchases are based on and right now there are more games exclusive to PS2 than I can actually afford to buy. There's no room for considering Gamecube.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 88mph
It is a piece of shit.
A huge stinking piece of shit.
It is the worst fighting game I have ever played.
It gets owned by fucking Way of the Warrior.

---

I won't go as far as cock stapling, but I'll agree 100% with this. Smash Brothers is the worst fighting game I have ever played. It's not fun alone and it's not fun in a group so high on illegal substances they can't even tell what they're playing. It's just not fun.

Two people claim Smash Bros. as the worst fighting game ever?

It's an awesome game. It's not supposed to play like friggin' Street Fighter or Virtua Fighter.

Here here. Testify NZE. If you want a deep fighting game, go pick up VF. If you want a quick game that can be deep, pick up a Smash Bros. game. I've had the first game since the day it came out and I still play it on a semi-regular basis.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by StriderKyo
Star Wars: Rougue Squadron : A nice 3D shooter. The PS2 has the best version of Rez. Next.

---

that's such a horrible comparison (although better then your Monkey Ball/Ridge Racer one). i mean, how can you compare a free roaming 3D shooter to an on rail shooter? although i do agree that Rez is a much better game.

atleast compare Ace Combat 4 to Rogue Leader. that's also better than Rogue Leader.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 88mph
It is a piece of shit.
A huge stinking piece of shit.
It is the worst fighting game I have ever played.
It gets owned by fucking Way of the Warrior.

---

:lol:

it is a serious question of taste there, as i still play ssbm long after even alpha 3 and soul calibut have collected dust. I will be fully honest, right now there are abotu 8 games that i car about for the ps2, period,a dn few of them sold well. someone starts a nintnedo's in trouble thread every month or so, and thats just the way it goes, but i could care less, if anything i have started regretting getting an x-box, as the only good games for it have already been ported, or werent as good as they were hyped, and yes, im speaking directly about the sega games. i enjoyed jet set, got bored with gun valk, and played the first level of panzer and havent been bothered to pick it up again since. for me, the gc has been far better than i even hoped after the 64, so im a happy camper.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by NeoZeedeater
Two people claim Smash Bros. as the worst fighting game ever?

.

---

one of them is 88, any other questions?:D

What really matters is the market share. Retailers aren't going to stock stuff that isn't selling fast because they would rather dedicate the space to stuff that is selling.

It's not about how great the games are but whether the masses are attracted to the system enough. In the old days veteren gamers made up most of the game industry but today we don't account for the majority anymore.

It's about survival and nintendo being slow to change and adapt to demands, not about whether thier games are great or not.

The PA strip is so true. Nintendo are relying too much on only themselves to keep a whole system afloat (like the n64) and forgetting about the bigger picture. This is why their slice of the market share is being eaten up. (especially by newbie gamers of the playstation 1 era who don't really have a fondness or knowledge of nintendo and therefore have no real loyalty to the company. Look at it from thier perspective)

But any time someone mentions this you are immediately labelled a "nintendo basher", or "anti-nintendo". If anything we love nintendo and want them to do well which is why we think it's important to look at the issue realistically instead of ignoring the rest of the industry and what the competiors are doing. If somebody steps on your turf you should fight to gain it back, right?

So often the common attitude is:"All that matters is I love nintendo and will continue to buy and support x game and look forward to x title in the future. Who fucking cares about sales as long as I am happy and we know thier games are great?"

But what if there's no tommorow and they lose control over the market that it becomes hard to get it back as a result of demand being ignored? While joe casualgamer is waiting 4 months for his delayed game he may well blow his cash on another game on a rival system because of being too gamestarved to wait. The frequent releases on the rival system create an impulse buy and if he doesn't buy this other game he will feel he's missing out. That's pretty much what happened with the n64. I waited ages for some top games, beat them after playing them to death and had to wait ages again for the next game, pouring a majority of my money into ps1 games over n64 ones because there were barely any third parties and a lack of support for certain favourite genres on n64. (nintendo do not specialise in all genres and once in a while I like to play something not from them. Solution? change thier ways a little, be more flexible, respect the struggling third parties)

Having said all that, to thier credit they've done a great job with regard to thier relationship with capcom, konami and namco and they've filled in the genre gap that the n64 had a problem with, (read rpgs, fighters, arcade ports) but there is still more work to do as a result of there being 3 competitors now instead of 2. It's not enough that they just fix thier old mistakes but rather they try to improve enough upon existing examples to stay level with the other systems or at least keep thier heads above the water.

I hate to say it, but the only way Nintendo *may* come out on top in the next generation is to make up a bunch of shit about their console that will never pan out to be true, buy up as many development houses as they can so they're not making games for competing consoles, not make the console look like a schoolgirl's lunchbox, make a controller with a button configuration that all existing genres can actually work well on, drop licensing fees altogether, and go with a standard medium like full size dvds.

As far as the GameCube's present situation is concerned, that article mentioned something about 'a real bonafide success' in regards to Nintendo not having one in the last two generations (this one included). I hate to break it to them, but the N64 was a 'real bonafide success' and its situation was worse than GameCube's, probably by a pretty wide margin.

Also, as someone mentioned, Nintendo doesn't leak money the way Microsoft does with the Xbox. And thank god for Nintendo, because obviously the software is not flying off shelves. But yet again, as someone mentioned, it's not as though the software isn't there. There are plenty of third party titles out there, many of them mature, and they don't sell. Of course, many of them are sub-par as well... But still, Nintendo is debt free, sitting on 6+ billion dollars, still well in the black even with their earning statement 38% below estimated, and they have a virtual monopoly on the handheld market for the time being and the near forseeable future. In other words, they aren't in trouble.

And let's not forget the fact that that earning statement was for the last fiscal year. Earnings on GBASP, Zelda and Pokemon (in the US) were not included. Nintendo has since stated that GameCube sales increased 20% with the release of Zelda. Add on top of that the forthcoming US release of the GBPlayer, and that'll be another boost, I'm fairly sure. Plus, 2003 will see the release of the Capcom 5 (minus 1 I think), F-Zero, Crystal Chronicles, the Mario sports games and other exclusive titles that at the very least will sustain Nintendo this year. Trickling in? Maybe. Hell, probably... But Nintendo won't be going the Sega route anytime soon because of it.

So is the outlook any rosier for 2003? Maybe, maybe not... depends on what you like. If we're talking sales, probably, but not by leaps and bounds. Is that a bad thing, like the article suggests. No. They'll still be well in business and trudging along. Do they need to change their stategy to try to envelope a bigger market share? No, they don't need to. But as a business, they should anyway, and that means getting on the ball content-wise and marketing the hell out of it, and getting more high-profile exclusives from third party developers.

For the record, my GC gets way more play than my PS2, and I still haven't been compelled to own an Xbox yet, the Wavebird is my favorite controller, and Nintendo's franchises do it for me. I'm not worried about this generation, but if Nintendo doesn't do some or all of those suggestions in the first paragraph in the next generation, then they'll lose even more market share, and there's only so much of the pie to go around.

--Scourge .

2k3 = GC's year.

Hopefully with a larger cube base (they are selling cheap) this will influence take up of thier major titles (increasing software sales - the thing that really counts) and big antipation and hype by more fans and converts for future games on the system which will have the flow on effect (word of mouth) of bringing some ps2 gamers towards the cube. I'm glad they will be working on the second prime right after the first game for example as this shows a change in nintendos traditional attitude. ("when original game is done, let's break and ignore making sequels for 4 years" :D )

Oh and the argument about whether MS bleeds because it sells box at a loss is negated by the fact that MS make huge yearly profits from their OS sales and other software that covers the tiny costs to get the xboxs in homes and in building thier userbase. So either way, nintendo still lose thier market share without much penalty to the competition. (unless they fight back)

Again it comes down to whether retailers will want to stock GCs on shelves in favour of whatever is currently selling better. In the past nintendo could bully them and stuff but retailers have increased power these days.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by OmegaFlareX
Yes, yes, another let's-pick-on-the-guy-in-last-place anti-Nintendo article. I'm sure the same thing was happening to the TurboGrafx 16 in 1992.

---

And where is the TurboGrafx 128? Oh wait...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GameHED
2k3 = GC's year.

---

I heard this about 2001. And 2002.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MVS
EA, sure, they can swing a vote, but it would take more than 500 Million to get them alone to put everything on the GC exclusive for 3 years.

---

they would never do that. PS2 game sales probably account for %50 of EA's incoming revinue. i'd say at least 750 million. maybe more.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 88mph
I'd rather staple my cock to my asshole.

---

shit, people would pay to see that. make a PPV out of it.

2k3 = PS2's year... again.
2k4 = Halo 2 and Fable come out finally, but it'll probably still end up being PS2's year.
2k5 = PS3's year.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ammadeau
2k3 = PS2's year... again.

---

How's that? I haven't seen much to be interested in for PS2 this year. It's not that I don't believe you, I just need more information. :)

Castlevania is coming...:whoa:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Schlep
How's that? I haven't seen much to be interested in for PS2 this year. It's not that I don't believe you, I just need more information. :)

---

It doesn't matter. The install base is so huge that even weak releases will sell decently and there's nothing on the xbox or gc list to convince people to jump ship, so to speak.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ammadeau
It doesn't matter. The install base is so huge that even weak releases will sell decently and there's nothing on the xbox or gc list to convince people to jump ship, so to speak.

---

Oh, I thought you were talking about fun games, not boring sales numbers. :rolleyes:

I haven't seen a thread like this since Dreamcast was kicking around with new software releases. So much of the same sentiment being thrown around.

Gamecube is not for me. It could have so many games blah blah blah but I for one already have a PC and I was sold early on to Xbox so all the time I would wish to spend on playing video games is taken and I still cannot tap the amount of video games available (new releases only to boot) for those alone. The Xbox goes through a dry spell and I don't notice since I still have yet to beat Steel Battalion and Crimson Sea which (damnit Ammadeau - you were finnally wrong about a game) I don't think clicks with me. Then there's the fact that I've got a Q3 Clan to keep up with and Shadowbane takes up SO MUCH TIME. I play THAT at work. So GC could have god on a disc and it wouldn't change MY situation any (and I imagine my situation is not far flung from the 'casual' and 'mainstream' experience). So people have thier PS2 or whatever. Why buy lots of consoles when you're not the person who has to have every good game that comes out. Odds are most people play games to enjoy the ones they can get and not pay much attention to what they can't. Even if it is not the best! So many more people COULD have Broadband for instance but many do not feel the need to pay more for something they only use with a passing interest.

So with that I say: The Gamecube has no steam to give. The didn't spend anything on making themselves the cooler/more powerful twin to the PS2 like Microsoft did so if people WERE looking for an option the Gamecube surely seldom enters in thought.

As to Strider's comparisons: stick to wise cracks, Monkey Ball is to Gamecube as RRV is to PS2? º_o

ºTracer

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MVS
EA, sure, they can swing a vote, but it would take more than 500 Million to get them alone to put everything on the GC exclusive for 3 years. Sega and Capcom? No. Those companies alone won't swing much of anything.

---

EA can't even make 500 million a year on all of their products sold, so I'm sure that kind of money would be more than enough incentive. Sega had no problem giving Shenmue to Xbox, or Panzer Dragoon Orta. MS was more than happy to cover thier developement costs. Something many a company could only dream of.


Someone stated that Nintendo profited $500 million in one quarter. Just imagine if Nintendo took a hit for say $750 million and took the money to buy the exclusivity of several key companies like Konami and maybe they already have, by securing Metal Gear Solid on the GC. I'm pretty sure Nintendo lined somebody's pockets to bring that title over.


Could you imagine the affect, if EA went exclusive to the Cube, or say the next Nintendo console? It would defineatly have an effect on the sales of PS3 or Xbox next.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by gamevet
EA can't even make 500 million a year on all of their products sold, so I'm sure that kind of money would be more than enough incentive. Sega had no problem giving Shenmue to Xbox, or Panzer Dragoon Orta. MS was more than happy to cover thier developement costs. Something many a company could only dream of.


Someone stated that Nintendo profited $500 million in one quarter. Just imagine if Nintendo took a hit for say $750 million and took the money to buy the exclusivity of several key companies like Konami and maybe they already have, by securing Metal Gear Solid on the GC. I'm pretty sure Nintendo lined somebody's pockets to bring that title over.


Could you imagine the affect, if EA went exclusive to the Cube, or say the next Nintendo console? It would defineatly have an effect on the sales of PS3 or Xbox next.

---

You're talking 3 years though. 500 Million is twice thier advertiseing alone, so what covers the rest. Buying exclusivity from EA is folly to think. Especially for 3 years and when there is the option to just make even more money by NOT doing it. Seriously, thier bread and butter already sells poorly on Gamecube as it is.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GSX-R


atleast compare Ace Combat 4 to Rogue Leader. that's also better than Rogue Leader.

---

How's that? I think the Dreamcast's "Air Force Delta" was a better game than AC4. The enemy planes in AC4 are'nt even that tough. At least the Tie-Fighters in Rogue Leader provided some challenge and the enemies in Air Force Delta, actually made you work for a kill. I quite literally, walked through the first 10 or so levels in AC4. The only real challenge to that game, was that you had to beat the clock, to finish the mission. That was more about how you decided to take out the ground or air units, than it was air combat skill.

In Ace Combat 4 your wing men actually helped you which they did not do in AFD (they weren't even there). AC4 has a compelling original premise, great control and some nice gfx (for a PS2 game) with good wingmen AI to boot. To be honest, I found there to be plenlty of challange and lots of fun (key word) to be had from it. Both are great titles and I would wager that RS2 was more popular but AC4 is no slouch game by any strech. Don't discredit it. It's well made and only surpassed in its genre by AFDS on Xbox.

difficulty doesn't = fun.

Ace Combat is as good as it gets on PS2 as far as flight games go.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Lucas Barton
difficulty doesn't = fun.

Ace Combat is as good as it gets on PS2 as far as flight games go.

---

Hey, I enjoyed playing my copy of Ace Combat 4 and have enjoyed the previos installments very much, but I can't really say it's a better game than Rogue Leader.

im not saying Rogue Leader was bad, i liked the game, but tie fighters just flew around, and were pretty easy to shoot down, occasionally they'd just make a sharp turn.

Ace Combat 4 just had better dog fights that were more fun, and had that good Top Gun quality music to top it off.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by gamevet
Someone stated that Nintendo profited $500 million in one quarter. Just imagine if Nintendo took a hit for say $750 million and took the money to buy the exclusivity of several key companies like Konami and maybe they already have, by securing Metal Gear Solid on the GC. I'm pretty sure Nintendo lined somebody's pockets to bring that title over.

---

Nintendo doesn't make 500 mill in a quarter. they made slighly more than that in a fisical year ending last month.

still, they have the funds to buy pretty much whatever they want.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GameFreak
http://www.gaming-age.com/cgi-bin/sp...uble&pagenum=1



Rumors continue to run rampant that the company will become a third-party publisher, but with $6-7 billion cash in the bank and over a half billion in profits this fiscal quarter alone, Nintendo has no reason to concede to Sony and Microsoft just yet. The company enjoys and added value to regain consumer confidence.

---

Yep, a halp billion this fiscal quarter.;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kinopio
Nintendo doesn't make 500 mill in a quarter. they made slighly more than that in a fisical year ending last month.

still, they have the funds to buy pretty much whatever they want.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 88mph
http://www.boomspeed.com/jnyace13/stfunewbie.jpg

---

You're relentless. How come I never got a STFU Newbie when I joined?

Anyhow. OMFG!!! ONLY 547 MILLION DOLLARS! OMFG NO!!!! This is ridiculous. Although I agree with the solutions (more diverse game library and such) Nintendo isn't in any danger of losing ground. Now that they lowered their fee's, I think more ports and maybe exclusives will be set to the Gamecube. I also think that allowing a 2D AND 3D interface into the console with the portability of the Gameboy to go along would do Nintendo good.

Who knows, though.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by burgundy
What a pointless article. Nintendo is still making tons of money, just not as many tons as they may have hoped.

---

Exactly. It's like some guy asking for a huge dinosaur as an adoring and loyal pet that can breath fire and burrow underground, then complain when they don't get that burrowing thing...

What? It's the only analogy I could think of, okay?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Schlep
:lol:

Yep...Microsoft and Sony don't even compare financially to the likes of uber-corp Nintendo. :D

---

Sony has debt and businesses. Nintendo has 7 billion BANKED. No debt... that's takes them. In the end, though, Microsoft owns them all with like, what? 40 billion? or more like 200 or something. But Microsoft is also not gaming exclusive and has the PC end that funds the Xbox, not the other way around.

Nintendo is in a good way.

Andrew, Nintendo isn't in any danger NOW, but what about in a decade, if their profits keep shrinking they like are doing?

Yes, Nintendo has enough money to stay in business for a long time with their current strategy, but it's clearly not working, they're not really getting any new fans, and the problem will probably only get worse as time goes on (after all, they werent seeing 58% drops in profit during the N64 years). Nintendo runs the risk of slowly driving themselves into irrelevance... as great as Zelda is, it isn't the powerhouse it was 5 or 10 years ago. The game industry seems to be outgrowing Nintendo... they're not struggling now, but what could happen in the future?

While Miyamato is doing "garden" projects like Pikmin that don't sell and don't move systems, people are buying PlayStation2s for GTA and Xboxes for Halo. All the while Nintendo's profits are shrinking - 58% is a HUGE drop. HUGE! No matter what way you look at it... HUGE!

They have to change up their strategy significantly if they still want to be competitive a decade from now. It's really as simple as that.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeremy
Melee fucking ruled. It is a quick, pick up and play game that is as deep in gameplay as YOU allow it to be.

---

Give it up, pretentious fighting game fanatics are ignorant.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by diffusionx
Andrew, Nintendo isn't in any danger NOW, but what about in a decade, if their profits keep shrinking they like are doing?

Yes, Nintendo has enough money to stay in business for a long time with their current strategy, but it's clearly not working, and the problem will probably only get worse as time goes on. Nintendo runs the risk of slowly driving themselves into irrelevance... as great as Zelda is, it isn't the powerhouse it was 5 or 10 years ago. The game industry seems to be outgrowing Nintendo.

While Miyamato is doing "garden" projects like Pikmin, people are buying PlayStation2s for GTA and Xboxes for Halo. All the while Nintendo's profits are shrinking - 58% is a HUGE drop. HUGE!

They have to change up their strategy significantly if they still want to be competitive a decade from now.

---

7 billion ain't going anywhere, though. Especially when they make a profit on EVERY console they sell. So right now they have a secure business plan. It won't pay dividends like Sony is getting from its mainstream publicity, but it also won't make them go under like Sega. (ZING to most on the board ;))

You're right, though, I agree Nintendo needs to shake up their image.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by diffusionx
Andrew, Nintendo isn't in any danger NOW, but what about in a decade, if their profits keep shrinking they like are doing?

Yes, Nintendo has enough money to stay in business for a long time with their current strategy, but it's clearly not working, they're not really getting any new fans, and the problem will probably only get worse as time goes on (after all, they werent seeing 58% drops in profit during the N64 years). Nintendo runs the risk of slowly driving themselves into irrelevance... as great as Zelda is, it isn't the powerhouse it was 5 or 10 years ago. The game industry seems to be outgrowing Nintendo... they're not struggling now, but what could happen in the future?

While Miyamato is doing "garden" projects like Pikmin that don't sell and don't move systems, people are buying PlayStation2s for GTA and Xboxes for Halo. All the while Nintendo's profits are shrinking - 58% is a HUGE drop. HUGE! No matter what way you look at it... HUGE!

They have to change up their strategy significantly if they still want to be competitive a decade from now. It's really as simple as that.

---

That's why I think they need to pull a Sony, either this generation or next. Buy exclusive content that will surely garner a more adult audience. Nintendo does'nt need to buy a company, but outright buy some exlcusivity, even if it means a 3 year deal. What would happen to PS3 or Xbox next, if say Nintendo were to buy exclusive EA support for the next 3 years? Just the EA sports titles would be enough to sway the casual gamer over to the Nintendo console. Back it up with a solid online package (Free the first 2 years) and just outright buy the market.

Quote:

---

Smash Bros.' actual fighting just wasn't much fun after a couple of days. Too simplistic.

---

HA HA HA HA! That's funny.

How about this... let's just say Nintendo's as kiddy as people say they are (which they aren't...) Isn't it kinda selfish to expect Nintendo to cater their games to your tastes, just because you "grew up?" (become overly concerned by how others perceive you instead of just having fun is closer to the truth... that isn't growing up) Do you also expect Disney to start making dark, bloody epics instead of their Disney cartoons because you outgrew them?

Nintendo is still making the best games around, and they're still making money. Only problem they have is a lack of 3rd party support, which they're starting to take baby steps to fix. The games they make are just fine the way they are.

Also, I love Miyamoto's quote in EGM:
"Nintendo does not make violent games like [Grand Theft Auto]... We need to find something that is a substitute for [GTA] in terms of a game that sells. It's our mission to find an alternative that is unique and nonviolent."

Smart and classy.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by gamevet
EA can't even make 500 million a year on all of their products sold, so I'm sure that kind of money would be more than enough incentive. Sega had no problem giving Shenmue to Xbox, or Panzer Dragoon Orta. MS was more than happy to cover thier developement costs. Something many a company could only dream of.


Someone stated that Nintendo profited $500 million in one quarter. Just imagine if Nintendo took a hit for say $750 million and took the money to buy the exclusivity of several key companies like Konami and maybe they already have, by securing Metal Gear Solid on the GC. I'm pretty sure Nintendo lined somebody's pockets to bring that title over.


Could you imagine the affect, if EA went exclusive to the Cube, or say the next Nintendo console? It would defineatly have an effect on the sales of PS3 or Xbox next.

---

Actually EA makes up the most of the gaming sectors financial pie. I think it's something like 4 billion - 6 billion in an industry of 8 billion a year? Something like that.

Nintendo needs NEW mature franchises, not shitty exclusives from Sony which have run their course and are riding on momentum alone.

Resident Evil and Final Fantasy are the games that rooted the PS1 in, so them coming over looks a lot like Nintendo simply stealing others thunder, instead of making louder thunder.

Lets get some fresh stuff like PN 03 on the 'Cube to attract heads... just not shit.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Andrew
Actually EA makes up the most of the gaming sectors financial pie. I think it's something like 4 billion - 6 billion in an industry of 8 billion a year? Something like that.

---

:bang: Yeah right!

That $8 billion a year industry includes hardware and accessory sales. I doubt EA even makes $1 billion of that.


This will give you an idea of how well the top selling titles of a year make out. In Japan at least.

www.the-magicbox.com/Chart-BestSell2002b.htm


Nintendo had 14 titles in the top 100 in Japan, of the top 10 titles of 2002 there, only 8 of them sold over a million units. If EA were to sell 10, million unit selling games at a profit of $25 each, they would still only make about 250 million in profit.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by frostwolf ex
one of them is 88, any other questions?:D

---

Sorry man, I just like my fighting games not to suck so much ass.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by xS
Castlevania is coming...:whoa:

---

So is Jesus... watch out!

All this EA talk, all I said was it would take more than 500 mil to get them exclusive to nintendo for 3 years.

A lot more.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MVS
All this EA talk, all I said was it would take more than 500 mil to get them exclusive to nintendo for 3 years.

A lot more.

---

They would have all developement cost's covered, still make money off of units sold and have a nicely padded bank account. How is that a bad decision for any company? Obviosly Capcom liked the money Nintendo lined thier pockets with.


Sure it would'nt sound like a viable decision on Nintendo's part, but they really need a mass market title that the average Joe can relate to. Sports titles are big sellers in the US and one of the main reasons the Xbox and PS2 sell in the US like they do. Madden is probably in the top 3 for console games sold last year.

Shit, am I the only one that really like all three consoles line-ups?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Mamoscott
Have you ever actually played Super Smash Bros. Melee? You are dismissing the game as "too simplistic" when it seems you hardly even gave it a chance. If you'd stick with it, you'd realize that Melee offers more than almost any other fighting game out there.

P.S.
http://www.stormy-waters.com/downloads/001.rar

Too simplistic my ass. :kirby:

---

I'm interested in that file there, but can't see it. What is it?

Smash Bros. is a fun game, which is all it comes down too. If I can sit down with my friends and have a good time with it, that's all I need. As a matter of fact, I just did.

Just cuz it doesn't have a thousand combos doesn't mean it's not good.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by gamevet
They would have all developement cost's covered, still make money off of units sold and have a nicely padded bank account. How is that a bad decision for any company? Obviosly Capcom liked the money Nintendo lined thier pockets with.


Sure it would'nt sound like a viable decision on Nintendo's part, but they really need a mass market title that the average Joe can relate to. Sports titles are big sellers in the US and one of the main reasons the Xbox and PS2 sell in the US like they do. Madden is probably in the top 3 for console games sold last year.

---

EA is bigger than Capcom.

I did not say anything about if it was a good or bad idea, merely that it would take more than 500 million for EA to do it.

250-300 Mil a year, methinks.

ERTS creates, markets and distributes interactive entertainment software for a variety of hardware platforms. For the nine months ended 12/31/02, revenues increased 61% to $2.02 billion. Net income totaled $307.9 million, up from $54.2 million. Revenues were driven by Harry potter and the Chamber of Secrets, The Lord of the Rings, and The Two Towers. Net income also reflects improved operating margins driven by revenue growth and cost reductions.

If they are up to 307.9 Million Net (on 2.02 Billion sales), I would assume a minimum of 250-300 Mil a year Net to make it worth their while.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by OmniGear
Smash Bros. is a fun game, which is all it comes down too. If I can sit down with my friends and have a good time with it, that's all I need. As a matter of fact, I just did.

---

Get enough friends together and even Daikatana becomes fun. The game itself only needs to be not mind-numbingly boring in order for such a thing to have happen (re: Sonic Shuffle), which is how Goldeneye and Halo became popular. Not because they were excellent games, but because playing multiplayer required everyone to be right there.

I don't think Capcom is as happy with only Nintendo money, given that they are going to go mostly Multi-platform now.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by OmniGear
I'm interested in that file there, but can't see it. What is it?

---

It's a video of a kick ass guy playing Smash Brothers Melee.

The file is compressed in .rar format, so no one just clicks it and tries to stream it from the site. Just right-click the link -> Save Target As... and download it your hard drive.

If you don't know how to open .rar files, you should be shot.
http://www.rarsoft.com/download.htm

I've got a few amazing Smash Bros Melee vids, but I'm not sure how much bandwidth I've got to spare this month. If enough people want them, I suppose I could post them though. :kirby:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MechDeus
Get enough friends together and even Daikatana becomes fun.

---

You also need a crack pipe. And crack. A lot of it.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MechDeus
Get enough friends together and even Daikatana becomes fun. The game itself only needs to be not mind-numbingly boring in order for such a thing to have happen (re: Sonic Shuffle), which is how Goldeneye and Halo became popular. Not because they were excellent games, but because playing multiplayer required everyone to be right there.

---

That's not true. I don't like Time Splitters 2, therefore playing Time Splitters 2 is not fun for me, regardless of how many people are playing.

I'm not saying Smash Bros. is an excellent game, and I can certainly see why some people would call it simplistic, but it's still fun to play, and I like having fun.

Mammoscott, I'm dling it right now. :)

EDIT: that winrar page doesn't open. :(

Quote:

---

Originally posted by OmniGear
EDIT: that winrar page doesn't open. :(

---

Sorry, try this.

http://www.rarsoft.com/download.htm

Nice video. He can throw weapons with the best of 'em. :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by diffusionx
Andrew, Nintendo isn't in any danger NOW, but what about in a decade, if their profits keep shrinking they like are doing?

Yes, Nintendo has enough money to stay in business for a long time with their current strategy, but it's clearly not working, they're not really getting any new fans, and the problem will probably only get worse as time goes on (after all, they werent seeing 58% drops in profit during the N64 years). Nintendo runs the risk of slowly driving themselves into irrelevance... as great as Zelda is, it isn't the powerhouse it was 5 or 10 years ago. The game industry seems to be outgrowing Nintendo... they're not struggling now, but what could happen in the future?

While Miyamato is doing "garden" projects like Pikmin that don't sell and don't move systems, people are buying PlayStation2s for GTA and Xboxes for Halo. All the while Nintendo's profits are shrinking - 58% is a HUGE drop. HUGE! No matter what way you look at it... HUGE!

They have to change up their strategy significantly if they still want to be competitive a decade from now. It's really as simple as that.

---

yeah, he pretty much nailed everything there.

if Nintendo doesn't find a new audience soon, they're gonna be fucked next generation. sure they'll be able to afford to make another console, but it won't have enough of a market share to stay alive. Nintendo might be able to survive this blow if it happens (which seems very likely) if they can maintain their foothold in the handheld market.
but their spot in the console industry would pretty much be gone. it hurts to say it, but i don't think they're gonna be able to compete sales wise next generation unless they really do a complete 180 with their image, and change their game plan. the only way they're gonna be able to survive is to throw a good chunk of all their money into getting some serious exclusives. Madden, Square Enix, GTA seems out of the question.

unless there's some huge huge huge 3rd party support at launch, Nintendo's gonna have to start thinking about what they're gonna do with the rest of their money.
if this really goes down, they better use that money to transcend their market while it's still theirs, and hope they can keep that foothold.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Andrew
7 billion ain't going anywhere, though. Especially when they make a profit on EVERY console they sell. So right now they have a secure business plan. It won't pay dividends like Sony is getting from its mainstream publicity, but it also won't make them go under like Sega. (ZING to most on the board ;))

---

that's the thing though, they'll have a shit load of money from GameCube and GBA, but what good is it to invest all that money into a product that they can't sell?
they'll be able to to survive im sure, but they'll have to pull out early if anything.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by gamevet
That's why I think they need to pull a Sony, either this generation or next. Buy exclusive content that will surely garner a more adult audience. Nintendo does'nt need to buy a company, but outright buy some exlcusivity, even if it means a 3 year deal. What would happen to PS3 or Xbox next, if say Nintendo were to buy exclusive EA support for the next 3 years? Just the EA sports titles would be enough to sway the casual gamer over to the Nintendo console. Back it up with a solid online package (Free the first 2 years) and just outright buy the market.

---

see, that's good thinking. they need to aim for either EA, or Square Enix. still, i think having good third party support at launch would still be a big factor. although if Nintendo got something this big, im sure developers would be more then willing.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Mzo
How about this... let's just say Nintendo's as kiddy as people say they are (which they aren't...) Isn't it kinda selfish to expect Nintendo to cater their games to your tastes, just because you "grew up?" (become overly concerned by how others perceive you instead of just having fun is closer to the truth... that isn't growing up) Do you also expect Disney to start making dark, bloody epics instead of their Disney cartoons because you outgrew them?

Nintendo is still making the best games around, and they're still making money. Only problem they have is a lack of 3rd party support, which they're starting to take baby steps to fix. The games they make are just fine the way they are.

Also, I love Miyamoto's quote in EGM:
"Nintendo does not make violent games like [Grand Theft Auto]... We need to find something that is a substitute for [GTA] in terms of a game that sells. It's our mission to find an alternative that is unique and nonviolent."

Smart and classy.

---

see, the only way i could see this working is if they went full force kiddy system. trying to please everyone didn't seem to work for them on GameCube. RE didn't do much, Madden didn't do much, i don't think MGS will help much, and im sure Crystal Chronicles isn't gonna do much either.
i love my indigo GameCube, and i think the design of the system is excellent, and im sure people bought a lot of black GameCubes, but what did they do?
if Nintendo doesn't have a slick console at launch for the adult market, i dunno, they're pretty much fucked.
Nintendo really is gonna have to do a huge 180 with just about everything except for game development if they want to have any chance of gaining market share again.

Quote:

---

The average gamer couldn't care less about consistent quality for a console. They want what's cool and available. They believe only the hype. You want an example? Try convincing most people that Prime isn't a FPS.

---

This is very sad but true. There are many gamers out there that dont play the GC becuase it doesnt interest them, but then there area ton of people who don't play the GC becuase "It has kiddyy games" or "The controller is so gay". They automaticly dismiss it because it is not the cool thing to play. I thought Animal Crossing was a great gam, but I wasnt willing to play it enough to get the full experience so I sold it to a friend. So many people bash for having bought Animal Crossing. People don't understand that a game doesn't have to have blood, sex, cussing to make a game fun. Now sure there are games out there like that that are fun. My whole point is that Nintendo is the only system out there that is different from the rest and thats what makes the GC my favorite.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by gamevet
:bang: Yeah right!

That $8 billion a year industry includes hardware and accessory sales. I doubt EA even makes $1 billion of that.


This will give you an idea of how well the top selling titles of a year make out. In Japan at least.

www.the-magicbox.com/Chart-BestSell2002b.htm


Nintendo had 14 titles in the top 100 in Japan, of the top 10 titles of 2002 there, only 8 of them sold over a million units. If EA were to sell 10, million unit selling games at a profit of $25 each, they would still only make about 250 million in profit.

---

Market share is more than just game profits:

Quote:

---

FINANCIALS As of March 1, the stock was trading at $52.31, giving the company a market capitalization of $6.9 billion. Forward P/E ratio was 159.0. Trailing 12-month revenue was $1.3 billion.

---

source: http://www.redherring.com/mag/issue97/830018883.html

I went a little overboard, but EA is a powerhouse in the industry.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Lucas Barton
that's the thing though, they'll have a shit load of money from GameCube and GBA, but what good is it to invest all that money into a product that they can't sell?
they'll be able to to survive im sure, but they'll have to pull out early if anything.

---

Why would they, though? If they're turning a profit on their consoles anyway, and not losing money then they have no reason to change. I think that's why they are so slow to change... why bother when there's a chance they'll lose?

Maybe Nintendo just doesn't care about being number one, or how it is ranked. Maybe Nintendo just wants to make games for people who like Nintendo.

I would like to see some turn around, but if nothing happens I'm not going to sweat. I like Nintendo how it is. If they change, I'll still like them. Not that it matters, I own all 3 consoles... so I'm not helping them.

I sorta wonder if anyone (read: casuals) would even care if Nintendo revamped their strategy.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CorruptedOldGnom(sic)
I sorta wonder if anyone (read: casuals) would even care if Nintendo revamped their strategy.

---

Probably. It's all in the attitude and look, my friend. Stupid males will buy anything that they deem is cool. That being said, a total revamp of logo's, system design and company appearance would be in order.

From there, get the system to be played and supported by someone like Vin Deisel or whomeever is popular that guys and girls both like, a like. And you've got your start.

The next step is to make sure you schedule your games out properly. None of this April - July drought, or what have you. Get a good number of launch titles out, then in a month drop another, and another the next month, let Capcom drop one the next month to have all the heat on them, etc.

If people have something to consistently play for the first two year, Nintendo will be back in contension with Sony. No longer could people claim them 'kiddy' or their games lacking at certain points. This is something that Microsoft has failed to do when they could have made an impact in the industry.

A good way to keep people busy is to release games for the gameboy and next-gen system that can be played on both systems. So 2D on the big screen again, that way if someone releases something like Final Fantasy Tactics or something like that, you can play at home and when you're out........ saves batteries too.

Nintendo has to make some changes, but they could pull ahead of Microsoft. It takes this, and a pinch of luck too.... damn that bag of luck! Where is it when you want it, anyway?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Mzo
HA HA HA HA! That's funny.

How about this... let's just say Nintendo's as kiddy as people say they are (which they aren't...) Isn't it kinda selfish to expect Nintendo to cater their games to your tastes, just because you "grew up?" (become overly concerned by how others perceive you instead of just having fun is closer to the truth... that isn't growing up) Do you also expect Disney to start making dark, bloody epics instead of their Disney cartoons because you outgrew them?

---

No, because kids still love Disney cartoons. Ive moved on, maybe, but kids love Disney still (even then, thats not totally true - isnt Disney starting to put more effort into CG movies like Pixar? Theyre changing). HOWEVER, less people seem to be buying Nintendo than ever before. The market seems to be demanding that Nintendo change. Such is the way of a free market.

A better analogy than Disney would be the 1980s automobile market. The American car companies were getting slaughtered because people preffered smaller Japanese cars to American gas guzzlers. If American companies didn't evolve, they would've been toast. Simple as that.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Andrew

Why would they, though? If they're turning a profit on their consoles anyway, and not losing money then they have no reason to change. I think that's why they are so slow to change... why bother when there's a chance they'll lose?

---

making a profit won't mean shit when they only have 15% of the market. that's not enough to survive.
like i said, they'll just be putting money into something they can't sell. they can expect to lose half of the what they have left of their market share, which is what now? less than 30%? oh yeah, they're gonna gonna make some good profit on the 8 systems they sale. they can't afford to lose any more of their share. they better hope they find a new audience out of nowhere quick.
i think we'll know by the end of the year what Nintendo plans on doing in the future. i think 2003(and the beginning of 04) is the year that Nintendo finds out if all their investments were worth it.
if RE, Crystal Chronicles, Metal Gear, and pretty much all the great stuff coming out this year don't increase sales, they're fucked come next generation unless like i said, they do a complete 180 and get lucky.

I think that even if Nintendo does do a 180 and becomes more like Sony and Xbox that it wont make a difference. Alot of people think that Nintendo sucks and is just for kids and they will always be like that. I like Nintendo they way it is now but there are people out there that think owning a Nintendo is "gay". A lot of the gamers I know outside of the boards could care less if Nintendo "grew up". With the way our society is close minded and materialistic, it almost seems that Nintendo will be doomed to fail, which I hope is not the case.

I think there's something larger at work here that is being ignored. And it's beyond the "kiddie" image. With the shift from an industry dominated by Japanese developed games to one dominated by US developed games and major inroads by European developers, it hardly matters the focus of the Corporation when it's the focus of the consumer that is driving the market.

Sony isn't riding high on the hog with first party titles. Sure GTA didn't make them, but with the runaway successes of 3 and Vice City and with all the imitators that followed, the consumer focus that was split in the 32 bit war between those with their apron strings still tied by mother Nintendo and those that jumped ship for the shiny disc and games with blood has gelled with today's developers using technological advances to continue to move toward games with higher realism. And those developers by and large are copping PC-centric attitudes.

The higher the complexity of the technology, the more complex the games get and the more complex the userbase and their needs/wants grow. Why are shmups a stone age artifact? Why do platformers have to be debated as to whether or not they are viable anymore? Or whether or not they can even be considered platformers anymore?

So there are three things at work: 1) games are more complex, 2) the userbase is older and more complex and 3) the developers of the most complex games are perceived to be North America and Europe, where the focus is on more PC-centric gaming experiences and sports games. Where does this leave Nintendo? Out in the cold.

It's not Nintendo's problem, it's the Japanese Industry's problem. There needs to be a consortium of developers that takes an in depth look at what has happened to cause the big shift from Japan to elsewhere in the mindshare of the world industry, and if Nintendo wants to really be on the cusp of the next big thing, they need to head the consortium. They've been making steps of sorts to do this with key partnerships like that with Capcom, but they need make it a primary focus.

Nintendo needs to use some of that capital and those profits to try to make up ground between Japan and the other regions, not just Nintendo and Sony/Microsoft. One thing they've done recently was to reduce licensing fees, which is nice, but that's probably the smallest thing they could have possibly done to attract developers. They've obviously been working on capturing some exclusive deals with Capcom, Square Enix, Konami, and Sega, but they should also be looking at EA as many have suggested.

Not only should they be looking for exclusively developed games, but they could go the old Square route of having EA publish titles for NA for the Gamecube, where Nintendo starts to cultivate a lot of stuff that gets released in Japan but never sees the light of day in NA. This may not be the biggest thing to hit the US, but it would open up the floodgates a bit to more exclusive content in the US and have the EA brand that the American public seems to love so much more than Nintendo's. We'd start seeing more niche titles which would cater more to hardcore gamers and we'd see some of those not so niche titles that for whatever reason, Nintendo chooses not to publish for the American consumer.

Also, the lag between Japanese release of Japanese developed games and NA/Europe/Australia releases needs to stop. Nintendo could really set a new standard if they took some of their resources and applied them to getting all of their key partners as well as themselves to make all games non-region specific from the get go. And by non-region specific, I don't mean able to be played on US/Japan and European machines; I mean worldwide release of games on the same day, without delaying the initial release. This would certainly not do much for 2003, but it could make a big impression for 2004 and going into the next generation.

So what do these three things amount to? More games on the shelves, more exclusive content, and content that is there faster and looks different than their competitors. Then they need to market the hell out of it. If they are going to change the minds of American and European consumers, they need to show them what they are missing. At this point, they aren't missing much, since a) hot titles trickle in, b) a lot of the "hot" titles look like they're made for 8 year olds, and c) everything else is available on PS2 or Xbox.

Quote:

---

You also need a crack pipe. And crack. A lot of it.

---

Only for single-player. And a mute button. I swear to God those fucking mosquitos are the most annoying-sounding enemy in the history of videogames... and if there's anything worse I don't want to know about it.

Quote:

---

That's not true. I don't like Time Splitters 2, therefore playing Time Splitters 2 is not fun for me, regardless of how many people are playing.

---

Then you should either try livelier friends or not focus on doing so well in the game. I actually had fun playing Tao Feng with some friends, even if most of the time was us making fun of the game and someone else trying her hardest to act drunker than she really was. I've found that enough friends gathered around, talking shit, and screwing around can make almost anything interesting.

Except the Star Wars Holiday Special. Even with a group of six of us I still had the intense urge to doze off.

Quote:

---

I'm not saying Smash Bros. is an excellent game, and I can certainly see why some people would call it simplistic, but it's still fun to play, and I like having fun.

---

I thought it was fun at first, but that wore off after a few gatherings when I started to really try and learn it. It was sort of a "the more I learned, the less interesting it became" kind of deal. A lot of other non-gamer people I know find it quite fun, although since I'm generally far better than them I just do stupid things like play as Kirby and do nothing but swallow people to help level off the field.

Scourge makes an excellent point. The video game industry is losing its identity and becoming more and more similar to PC gaming. Personally, I think this is a sad sad thing. For the most part I don't like Western-made games, "If it ain't Jap it's most likely crap" is my motto. The fact that sidescrollers are all but dead makes me want to cry. Japanese games don't cut it with the general public anymore, and I think it's Japanese developers that really gave video games their own unique character or essence. Now it seems like that's fading. If Nintendo wants to make it big anymore they'll probably have to cut deals with some big-name Western devcos. Or they could change their own games to be more Western in style, but that would be truly hideous and I would never forgive them for it. I'm really disappointed with the direction gaming is going in, and I'm afraid it's going to get worse. I really hope some kind of underground game development scene pops up, because the industry itself is going to shit. Help us homebrew gaming, you're our only hope!

Good points Scourge!


Not only are the N.America and European titles taking a larger market share in the US, but they are starting to make headway in Japan as well. EA's - Medal of Honor cracked the top 10 in Japan for the month of November 2002.


I think the best way that Nintendo can gain marketshare in the next wave of console, is to have someone else manufacture and market the system as their own. There have been rumors of such an idea coming from Nintendo and it may be what they need to do.

When Sony released the first Playstation, they already were known as a cutting edge electronics company. Adult consumers could relate to buying a gaming console with a name like Sony backing it. The Xbox is also benefiting from the MS name, as many people using PC's already know them as a serious adult oriented software company. The Nintendo name however, is always thought of as the game machine I played when I was a kid.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Scourge
A long post.

---

If consumers want more complex, PC-type games and developers, why is the PC gaming industry in the shithole that it currently is? And why then is the Game Boy Advance thriving on primarily ports of old 16 (or even 8) bit titles and 2-D side scrollers/action games?

And since when do people love the EA brand more than Nintendo? :blank:

The console gaming industry is changing dramatically, because Microsoft and Sony want to control your living room. They're interested in gaining market share/brand loyalty, so the Sony Playstation 4 (or the Xbox 3) can be your one stop for all your home entertainment needs, an all-in-one cable box/DVD player/game system/tivo/etc. And then of course you're going to want to buy a Sony television for the best results/compatibility and various other Sony electronics that will no doubt work in conjuction with future Playstation systems.

Nintendo just wants to make games. As long as they stay profitable and make great games, I don't think they'll go anywhere.

If things keep going the way they are, Nintendo will eventually be catering to one market (people who want a dedicated gaming system), while MS and Sony will be fighting over everyone else (unless one of them decides to drop out of the race for some reason).

how can so many of you ignore that Nintendo loses just about half of their market share with every new console they make?
they'll have a shit load of money lying around, but they won't be a profitable company anymore. well, as far as console sales go that is. well, im sure they'll make profit on whatever they make, but they're gonna have a hell of a hard time selling it that's for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MechDeus
Only for single-player. And a mute button. I swear to God those fucking mosquitos are the most annoying-sounding enemy in the history of videogames... and if there's anything worse I don't want to know about it.

---

Don't forget you can't leave without your buddy Superfly. Yes I'm spamming.

Lucas, do you know what you're talking about?

Quote:

---

they'll have a shit load of money lying around, but they won't be a profitable company anymore. well, as far as console sales go that is.

---

Quote:

---

well, im sure they'll make profit on whatever they make

---

Which is it? :confused: