Lhadatt: a GCN port of Advance Wars Would be called GameCube Wars, in keeping with the tradition of naming it after the platform it apears on.
Printable View
Lhadatt: a GCN port of Advance Wars Would be called GameCube Wars, in keeping with the tradition of naming it after the platform it apears on.
you're doing a great job at annoying me.
It's not that I think NoA controls everything, so much as most of everything that will make it this side of the Paciffic. Barring any edicts from mount NOJ anyhow.Quote:
Originally posted by Lucas Barton
oh, and what's up with you thinking that NoA controls everything?
:confused: explain.Quote:
Originally posted by Lucas Barton
you're annoying me.
You say they got all the franchises that count, but they keep getting short-ended. MGSTS is just a remake. It could end up a very awesome remake, but it's still a game most people have played allready. Snake Eater will be exclusive for PS2 next year. As for RE, while RE4 is looking good, RE online looks more appealing because of the innovations they're adding to it. GTA ports are too little too late. Final Fantasy isn't a full blown cinematic angsty teens save the world rpg blockbuster that all the PS Final Fantasy games are, it's just an action rpg with the FF name stuck to it. If the big N wants these franchises to matter, they should make them all exclusive.
But it does support the tech seeing as the chip is in the GBA unit.Quote:
Originally posted by Lucas Barton
um...he said Triton Labs, not Nintendo.
It's just not out of the box compatible.
dude, with every single post you've made in this thread, you've made it pretty damn clear that you're missing the point of this thread,Quote:
Originally posted by ShineAqua
:confused: explain.
you're letting Nintendo of America's history influence your opinion. not only are we not talking about NoA, but we're talking about a completely different Nintendo here. we're not talking about the past here.
Yeah, NoA's been stupid in the past about some things, but we're getting Fire Emblem and the GBA Earthbound. Wait for a bit, I think they'll localize more as time goes on.Quote:
Originally posted by ShineAqua
You also make some good points Lhadatt, however I'm concerned with what's going on in-house because that's always going to effect third parties in some form or annother. And thus far NOA isn't interested in first party RPG's which have become a power house genre in the U.S.
As for RPGs being a "powerhouse", I think that's more your opinion than market fact. RPGs don't typically sell as much as, say, action/adventure, racing or other genres.
Nitnendo has plenty of older-gamer content on the way. Geist, Pilotwings, the new Star Wars game, Metroid Prime 2, all the EA stuff, RE4... it doesn't really have much of a "kiddie" look to it. I think you're letting the company's history influence your opinion of its current state -- which isn't to say that its background shouldn't be discounted, but the company is changing with the change of leadership. The thing you're ignoring is development time. You're not going to see these changes over night -- you are starting to see them now because they are ready to show them off. I think we'll see more changes in the near future (example: the online plans).Quote:
Also my gripe wasn't that they're aren't enough M rated games on the unit as much as it is with NOA's abandonment of all the gamers from previous generations. It cost's more to make a customer than it does to keep one, and Nintendo isn't going to keep much of the aging gamers population with games like Mario Sunshine. Those gamers would buy a PS2 so they can get their dose of more serious plot intensive games, and still have a plethora of "kiddy" games to satisfy thier inner child.
I'm really not sure you're getting the point of this thread, Shine. This is about the changes Nintendo is making to its traditional way of doing business. They have a new president. They are actually trying to compete, and they are doing a nice job of it. Yeah, they slacked off for an entire console generation, but I think that had more to do with the morale of one man (The Old Man, Yamauchi) than the company itself. Please try to keep an open mind about this stuff.
EDIT: Shine's right, it should be GC Wars in my first post here, not Advance Wars. :D
You're talking about Nintendo, and Nintendo of America is, last I heard, a Nintendo company. So what if NoJ is taking things in a "new direction", how much has that effected what NoA is doing right now? And talk of the future is just that, talk. All I have to base an opinion of Nintendo on is the past, which I have every right to do. Now if NoJ takes a more affirmative role in the practices of NoA, and taking them along in this "new direction," then the answer to the question you posted at the start of this thread is a resounding yes. But as it stands right now, nothing substantial has materialized, so right now big N can't compete with Sony.
Edit: Lhadatt, RPG's (and not only RPG's, they're just on convenient example) are generally geared towards adults, and though we see more games geared for adults apearing on the Cube (yes I'm a picky asshole) it's not enough. Don't get me wrong I love games like Pikmin, Animal Crossing and the like but most people like choice. The GCN doesn't offer much of that that the PS2 doesn't have x10. But you're right that I need to give it more time. The future looks good but plans get cancelled. So all I have for refference is a N64 with three games on the shelf next to it (though I now have a GC with more games right next to that.)
But with new gameplay, movies and voice acting! And the director of VERSUS! :p Besides, I've maintained since the GC MGS rumors popped up that we would see another MGS game on the Cube. Konami was reported by some site to let slip that they were working on a Snake side-quest. I'm not 100% sure about this anymore since nothing was said at E3, but I still think it should be kept in mind.Quote:
Originally posted by Green
You say they got all the franchises that count, but they keep getting short-ended. MGSTS is just a remake. It could end up a very awesome remake, but it's still a game most people have played allready.
Unless Sony gave Capcom a big bag o' money for exclusivity, I expect them to port it.Quote:
As for RE, while RE4 is looking good, RE online looks more appealing because of the innovations they're adding to it.
It will still sell. Especially if the graphics are updated.Quote:
GTA ports are too little too late.
You speak as if this is a bad thing.Quote:
Final Fantasy isn't a full blown cinematic angsty teens save the world rpg blockbuster that all the PS Final Fantasy games are, it's just an action rpg with the FF name stuck to it.
To the contrary: we're seeing lots of innovation here. We don't know what RE4 will be like gameplay-wise, it may have elements from RE Online. Collaboration with Konami means more projects to hit the GC down the line. Square's approach to the Cube seems to indicate that it wants some freedom to innovate -- they want to try new things, and Nintendo is supporting them (perhaps they feel stifled on the PS2? I wouldn't blame Sony for telling them they can't do certain things due to the failure of Bouncer and their other non-RPG games...).Quote:
If the big N wants these franchises to matter, they should make them all exclusive.
Nintendo is setting the stage for a nice come back. They aren't going to have all the pieces in place yet.
It's all been announced within the past 3-6 months. Of course you won't see it yet -- none of this stuff is out! No one knows how it will do on the market.Quote:
Originally posted by ShineAqua
But as it stands right now, nothing substantial has materialized, so right now big N can't compete with Sony.
This is a speculative thread based upon analysis of Nintendo's repositioning of its strategy, not an analysis of its history. Yes, Nintendo would have trouble competing if they just kept the status quo. However, they are actively changing the way they do business. The question at hand is, "Are these changes enough to allow Nintendo to compete with Sony? If not, what should be done?"
The company's history is relevant in that they are staying true to it while trying to innovate -- can it be done? Or are they doomed to failure at the hands of the market leader and the monkey who won't quit throwing around large chunks of money? This is not solely about the company's history, nor is it about what you can directly see happening right now -- it is about the future of the company and gaming as a whole.
That's very exciting if you're right, but (1) Capcom bailed with that all exclusive for the GC special 5 thing, (2) I don't see the GC FF selling as half as much as the PS FF games, (3) even if RE online is ported will it matter all that much? Just like the GTA ports, they'll sell but Sony will have gotten a much bigger peice of that action. One thing I did forget was that MGS4 will be GC exclusive. Then again, MGS online could end up stealing it's thunder if it's a Sony exclusive.
All in all what you said about setting up the peices is very interesting. Hell, I'm all for exclusive content for the GC simply because I'm tired of blurry and jagged PS2 games.