the "big N" vs Sony and Microsoft

[NeoDevilMan]

I wonder if nintendo is gonna withdraw it's console market and concentrate on handheld, consider microsoft and sony lose money on console for their first and second yrs, and slowly made them up on later yrs and their softwares. and nintendo is not selling as much system as the other two companies, will it became sega? I kinda wish nintendo do well, but theres something wrong with what they're doing...

Sony and microsoft should go to hell and burn forever! bring back sega!!!

[Para]

I find it unlikely that Nintendo will ever go out of the console business.
Nintendo has always led the way in innovation when it comes to the gaming industry.

Not only that but Nintendo is too stubborn to deter from the console market.

[june86]

yo man sega is not dead yet they make arcade games now and they kick ass :D

[MoshiMoshiMenchi]

Nintendo has not always "led the way in inovation" If I remember correctly they were the LAST company to use an optical medium for their games...

[mikemike]

Nintendo will not withdraw from the Console market. With the next gen console codenamed "Revolution" due to release next year, they offer something more than Sony and Microsoft than just graphics and chop your arm pricing.

http://cube.ign.com/articles/522/522559p1.html

Though it really doesn't matter if they're on top or not in unit sales. The gaming industry doesn't survive on pride or glory, but on profits. Profits that Nintendo has been making with nearly every console handheld release since the NES. As long as Nintendo pulls a profit, they''ll be here for many, many more years to come.

Here's a great article on the Nintendo Business structure and the gaming industry that would open a few eyes.

http://www.buzzcut.com/article.php?story=2005053122342247

[jenl12343]

I think the days of nintendo in the home console market are numbered. They will always be in the handheld game.

[mikemike]

I think the days of nintendo in the home console market are numbered. They will always be in the handheld game.
You're both right and wrong.

Nintendo will not be at the top in the console market for a while, but being at the top doesn't mean jack if you don't rake in net profits AFTER the sale.

Interesting tidbit: Nintendo net profit for last year is higher then Sony and Microsoft combined, and higher than Sony Corp. as a whole.

That day you're mentioning is far from sight my friend ^^;

[Ragnax]

Nintendo has not always "led the way in inovation" If I remember correctly they were the LAST company to use an optical medium for their games...
If you call storage medium innovation. There's no innovation in just increasing specifications, such as storage space. Sure, optical media turned out nice (and Nintendo did switch to it after it had proven itself viable), but I wouldn't call it an innovation in gaming. Just an innovation in storage technology.

[orisa]

Nintendo focuses solely on gaming, while Sony and Microsoft participate in other areas of marketing. It matters not if Nintendo is making less profit than Sony and Microsoft all together.

[willieload]

i think the new nintendo system nintendo revolution is gonna be really good becuase they are bringing a whole new concept to gamming with their new controllers.. but they also need to widen the audiance. there focusing to much on young children ie making crapy kitty games. i think they have figured out to put some more mature games out their becuase they made resident evil 4 and now this new zelda game is supose to be mature.. i just think nintendo whent through a little bit of a hikup but now is getting back into the rhythm of things and widining their adduance

[Shabadage]

Nintendo rarely sells consoles at a loss. Plus, with the way Revolution will change the way we play games, Nintendo Isn't going anywhere.

Besides, no one makes more durable consoles than Nintendo, and with the recent problems with the X360 and the problems the PS3 is sure to have upon it's release, I know the only console I'll buy at launch is the Nintendo Rev. I can trust it to work for years and years, unlike my first or second PS2's.

[sf101]

i think the new nintendo system nintendo revolution is gonna be really good becuase they are bringing a whole new concept to gamming with their new controllers.. but they also need to widen the audiance. there focusing to much on young children ie making crapy kitty games. i think they have figured out to put some more mature games out their becuase they made resident evil 4 and now this new zelda game is supose to be mature.. i just think nintendo whent through a little bit of a hikup but now is getting back into the rhythm of things and widining their adduanceI'm guessing you didn't read the article above huh? Nintendo makes games maybe not rated R sex filled blood baskets(with a few exceptions) to attract retarded gamers but it doesn't need to. It's perfect in it's current position in the market.

[jenl12343]

I would like to see more sex filled blood baskets on a nintendo console though :p

well maybe blood and then sex.... not the two together

Anyway. After FF7 was on the ps and I was left with crummy carts on my n64 that was the end for nintendo and me. After the gamecube came out I said to myself. "thank god I didn't buy nintendo..." as I played my FFX :p

[NeoDevilMan]

I feel really bad for nintendo, a lot of loyal nintendo fans, are now sony and microsoft ppl, even kids are slowly turning away from nintendo, maybe cuz mario is not cool any more. or maybe we've all grow up and nintendo didn't... it's good thing that zelda grew up with us, it didn't stay with the simple save the princess plot anymore. or some lame control that's there for yrs.

one of the biggest problem nintendo really have to face is that... all of their current game systems number one selling games, are developed in house by nintendo. there's no best selling capcom games, or konami games. and a lot of good companies that made it the big N yesterday are gone, they turn to sony, or microsoft. like squaresoft (now squareenix) and rare(now brought by microsoft) and a few other good companies that make really good games for nintendo, like capcom(street fighters series) even when capcom tries to bring it's best selling games to gamecube(resident evil series) it didn't sell well, and they really try hard too by making re4 on gamecube, but it still disappoint capcom... therefor they have to make re4 for ps2 even it's not as good looking as the gamecube version... (you have to accept the fact that ps2 sold a lot more then gamecube 90 million vs 19 million) I hate nintendo to go away from the console market... but it's slowly happening cuz sony and microsoft are taking away nintendo's loyal fans one by one... >_<

[Kerii]

You forget to take into account Sony's track record of poorly manufactured products. I know several friends who have gone through numerous systems through just ONE product generation, whether the unit just died for no reason, fell over on its side and went kaput or whatever.

Nintendo on the other hand has a track record for quality and reliability. When people buy a system, it's usually their first and last system of that generation, sometimes even for future generations (GB, GBP, GBC, GBA, GBA SP, DS). Hell, I still have my old Gameboy of 16 years, and it still works like the day it was bought. This not even counting the GC's design with portability in mind.

That 90 million PS2s means nothing, if anything, it's a testament to Sony's horrendous unreliability. Hell, even Capcom's Shinji Mikami was griping about it (http://xbox1.com/article-expand.asp?i=127). It's just a ploy to try and get investor support by artificially boosting its market share. Farfetched? This isn't even the first time they've pulled something like this:
http://addict3d.org/index.php?page=viewarticle&type=news&ID=1026
http://xbox1.com/default.asp?t=E

Unfortunately for them, investors care about one thing and that's profitability, and Nintendo has both Sony and Microsoft beat in the games department, and that means investor trust (11% growth in company shares in 2004, whereas MS and Sony suffered losses).

[orisa]

one of the biggest problem nintendo really have to face is that... all of their current game systems number one selling games, are developed in house by nintendo. there's no best selling capcom games, or konami games. and a lot of good companies that made it the big N yesterday are gone, they turn to sony, or microsoft.
Umm, Nintendo is Nintendo today because of their first party games. Nintendo is more widely known for their first party games than those from third party. The only reason I can see why Capcom turned Street Fighter and Rockman (Megaman) away from Nintendo is because lots of newer gamers prefer to have graphics rather than comfortability. Even today, I still prefer Rockman X-X3 than X4-8 which were developed for PS1 and 2 because SNES ones are in fact more comfortable to play with.

Besides, although so many people complain about mass spawning of Mario games, they end up playing them. Just look at Mario Tennis; Many people said it's another Mario spawn and it's going to be boring, yet it was a success. What about Mario Kart DS? Another Mario spawn, but DS owners are hyped about it.


like squaresoft (now squareenix) and rare(now brought by microsoft) and a few other good companies that make really good games for nintendo, like capcom(street fighters series) even when capcom tries to bring it's best selling games to gamecube(resident evil series) it didn't sell well, and they really try hard too by making re4 on gamecube, but it still disappoint capcom...
What the hell are you talking about? Resident Evil 4 on Gamecube is one of the best selling games.


therefor they have to make re4 for ps2 even it's not as good looking as the gamecube version... (you have to accept the fact that ps2 sold a lot more then gamecube 90 million vs 19 million) I hate nintendo to go away from the console market... but it's slowly happening cuz sony and microsoft are taking away nintendo's loyal fans one by one... >_<
Correction. Sony and Microsoft are taking away Nintendo's graphic fans one by one.

[willieload]

Well i think this generation, Nintendo is rather gonna flop or be awsome because of the big risk they are taking with the controllers. rather it's gonna work well or just suck major balls. i guess we wont know untill the system comes out. all i know is that i'm getting it who els?

also nintendo is the only system that really tries with party games. playstation and microsoft are mostly 1 somtimes 2 player (true xbox does have some 4 player games) i actually really enjoy getting a mario party or some other party game and playing it with like 4+ people.. we do actually play them at parties along with other "stuff" ;)

[mikemike]

Well i think this generation, Nintendo is rather gonna flop or be awsome because of the big risk they are taking with the controllers. rather it's gonna work well or just suck major balls. i guess we wont know untill the system comes out. all i know is that i'm getting it who els?
It won't flop. The likely success scenario behind the Revolution is behind one factor. The price tag.

It's been said that the Revolution will be priced far below the Xbox360 and the PS3, estimated at around 150-200 US dollars.

Now, while it won't see it record breaking sales or topping the other two consoles, it will see sales as a Secondary system. Anyone could get one without cashing in their organs. People will have a Xbox360 and a Revolution. People will have a PS3 and a Revolution. It's userbase will grow, and with Nintendo now working along with more 3rd party developers, it's sure to be another profit for Nintendo.

The "console war" is now between Microsoft and Sony. They will spend millions on advertising campaigns to push which system is better and which games are cooler. All Nintendo has to do to make a profit is make games. Funny, since that's what they've been saying for years.

[i][b]

[jenl12343]

my question is how do you hope to have any real accuracy with the tv remote controller? You point and press the button at the screen but how will you know exactly where your aim is.

[mikemike]

my question is how do you hope to have any real accuracy with the tv remote controller? You point and press the button at the screen but how will you know exactly where your aim is.
While the exact specs aren't out yet, the technology that Nintendo patented and incorporated into the revolution controller setup is highly intuitive, basically mimicking simple actions we do in daily life. In shooters, you can aim far more accurately than with a analog controller, even a PC mouse.

Here's another good article on the possibilities of the Revolution Controller.

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3143782

[jenl12343]

Hopefully I'll be at E3 this year and test it out. Keeping my fingers crossed I can work my connections to make it happen.

What was it? may 9th they are showing off revolution?

[Ether]

hm, revolution in my opinion is the weakest of the three consoles. I mean, what games do they have? Most of their games r kiddy and stuff, so teenagers probably wouldn't be interested much. the only noticible feature is probably the dling of old SNES games, which isnt too good either. I mean, set the revolution up agaisnt a 360 or ps3, it'l lose so bad. 360, like a mini PC. ps3, gateway to GOOD games. An article even went out a few months ago, stating the power levels of the consoles. Microsoft stated that the new xbox 360 will be around 36 times stronger than the original, and creators of playstation 3 says that its aroudn 43 times stronger than the original ps2. and Revolution? turns out, nintendo said that its a "whopping" 3 times more powerful than the original gamecube. Nintendo's not gonna last long in competion with the new formidable consoles with better games. jus my 2 cents

[jenl12343]

powerful isn't always better. I'm a sony fan myself and I honestly think the revolution tv remote thing will only be good for a couple of games. (it would be interesting if they combined the eye toy with the nintendo remote..... ) Anyway, I'll probably get a Revolution because it will be cheap compared to the other consoles. The probably will depend on how much the old games are going to cost. Yeah you can play snes, nes or 64 roms on your computer but it isn't the same as sitting in front of your tv playing. I look forward to being able to play all the classic games like rampage or spyhunter or dragon quest/warrior or shadowgate or mario 3 or RC PROAM .... the list goes on and on. (it would be nice if they adapted some of the old games to use the tv remote.... like say operation wolf) But yeah it depends on how much they will cost. Maybe they should call it the nintendo Classic since I think I'm mostly going to use it for old games.

[mikemike]

An article even went out a few months ago, stating the power levels of the consoles. Microsoft stated that the new xbox 360 will be around 36 times stronger than the original, and creators of playstation 3 says that its aroudn 43 times stronger than the original ps2. and Revolution? turns out, nintendo said that its a "whopping" 3 times more powerful than the original gamecube.
Since when did hardware determine which is the best console?

Out of all the last gen models, the PS2 had the weakest hardware, yet met with much success thanks to clever marketing. The Dreamcast had more potential, but met it's demise with it's lack of titles (though were great games) Remember the Jaguar 64? It was claiming a 64-bit processor in the times of the 16bit SNES and Genesis. It's graphical capabilities were far higher than the two, yet it flopped.

While numbers may describe the graphical potential of a console, I really fail to see your logic at how the it is directly related to it's success.


hm, revolution in my opinion is the weakest of the three consoles. I mean, what games do they have? Most of their games r kiddy and stuff, so teenagers probably wouldn't be interested much.
The 'real' Revolution behind the Revolution is not the controller. It's the whole idea behind it. Similar to the DS, Nintendo is trying attract not just veteran gamers like so many on this board, but non gamers, people who haven't picked up a controller in years.

Now what would a non gamer pick up?

A $400 dollar high end gaming system or a $150 dollar medium end one with near similar graphics and functions?

A 9 button controller with dual analog and grip sensors or a simple TV like remote with motion capabilities?

The latest Halo 5 with expansion pack or Super Mario?


Nintendo's not gonna last long in competion with the new formidable consoles with better games. jus my 2 cents
Funny thing is, the Revolution is likely to be the console with most games. Why? Becuase it's the easiest to develop on. Many small developers have already noted that the Revolution offers the best chances for success in the gaming industry due to it's innovative controller and hardware design.

Nintendo, this time around is gaining much 3rd party support for the Revolution.

[Ether]

um, i think u misread. u even quoted me. i said "better" games. nowhere hav i said that nintendo would have any problems dishing out sh*tloads of games. look at the gamecube. its trailing behind xbox and ps2 cuz of its many crappy games and even crappier CD format. my main topic is GAMES, BETTER GAMES, not the amount of it. here, i'l even quote myself.
ps3, gateway to GOOD games. and like wut jen said, who the hell would wanna play games on a remote control. and i would bet u that halo would apeal way more to people than mario.

[Ragnax]

hm, revolution in my opinion is the weakest of the three consoles. I mean, what games do they have? Most of their games r kiddy and stuff, so teenagers probably wouldn't be interested much.
And would you please point me to your source of announced Revolution titles? Thank you.
If you're basing your statement on the GameCube's lineup, then play the games before you judge. You'll find them quite challenging. Sure, the games' style might be cartoonish, but then again; If a person is insecure enough to still worry about a game looking kiddy, you can hardly call said person a mature adult anyway.


the only noticible feature is probably the dling of old SNES games, which isnt too good either. I mean, set the revolution up agaisnt a 360 or ps3, it'l lose so bad. 360, like a mini PC. ps3, gateway to GOOD games.Besides the fact that when it was the only detail known about the Revolution it was enough to convince a whole horde of Playstation and XBox owners to purchase a Revolution for nostalgia alone?
And don't you suppose there's a reason why the 16bit era is often referred to as the 'golden age of gaming' as well?




An article even went out a few months ago, stating the power levels of the consoles. Microsoft stated that the new xbox 360 will be around 36 times stronger than the original, and creators of playstation 3 says that its aroudn 43 times stronger than the original ps2. and Revolution? turns out, nintendo said that its a "whopping" 3 times more powerful than the original gamecube.Because we all know that if I say the car I'm selling can break the speed of light, it really can, right? Because we all know that such a car would also auto-magically endow its owner with the biggest penis in the world, right?
Both Microsoft and Sony are flatout lying about the strength of the consoles, as those readings are only attainable in perfect lab conditions. In real world examples they fail horribly. Also note that for the PS3 in particular much of the speed comes down to parallelization, something about 5% of all professional videogame programmers can say they've mastered.
Oh, and the comment on the Revolution was bogus. It was just pulled out of thin air by a spokesperson and was later denounced again. In truth, we don't know how powerful the Revolution might end up.
Of note though is that Epic has received dev kits for the Revolution and judging by those thinks it might be able to run the Unreal 3 engine. That would put the Revoluion at about the same level as the PS3 and XBox360.


um, i think u misread. u even quoted me. i said "better" games. nowhere hav i said that nintendo would have any problems dishing out sh*tloads of games. look at the gamecube. its trailing behind xbox and ps2 cuz of its many crappy games and even crappier CD format. my main topic is GAMES, BETTER GAMES, not the amount of it.
Yes, because the PlayStation line is such a shining beacon of quality games. If you cut out the steaming pile of crap games, rehashes / remakes, collector's editions and carbon copy 'generic game from genre X' games, then you're left with a collection about the size of the GameCube's.

Again; Pick up a controller and PLAY THE DAMN GAMES BEFORE JUDGING ON LOOKS. Just about any game released on the Gamecube is an A+ title. Quality over quantity. I'd rather spend 50 bucks once on a game that can keep me entertained for 3 months, than thrice on three games that can entertain me for one month each.


here, i'l even quote myself. and like wut jen said, who the hell would wanna play games on a remote control. and i would bet u that halo would apeal way more to people than mario.
::In the era of the Commodore 64 and Amiga::
"Who the hell would wanna play games on a gamepad?"
::In the PSX/N64 era::
"Who the hell would wanna play games on a gamepad with a stick?"
"Who the hell would wanna play games on a vibrating gamepad?"
I rest my case.


Got an argument that actually holds water?

[Kerii]

um, i think u misread. u even quoted me. i said "better" games. nowhere hav i said that nintendo would have any problems dishing out sh*tloads of games. look at the gamecube. its trailing behind xbox and ps2 cuz of its many crappy games and even crappier CD format. my main topic is GAMES, BETTER GAMES, not the amount of it. here, i'l even quote myself. and like wut jen said, who the hell would wanna play games on a remote control. and i would bet u that halo would apeal way more to people than mario.Yes, Sony is so totally crushing the competition in games that they're reduced to making cheap knockoffs of its competitors mascots to generate sales like Taiwanese bootleggers. Oh wait...

http://www.joystiq.com/entry/1234000450061177/

[Strey]

Contrary to what any ms and sony fanboys might have to say, the revolution could stand to be the great sucker punch of the next generation. Of course, whether or not that becomes true depends on how well Nintendo plays their cards(if you know the joke the past line, good for you). The two things we know about the revolution work for and against it. First being the hardware, we know it will not be close to either the 360 or ps3 which means inferior graphics(inferior being a relative term considering what's possible on the current generation console hardware). However, having less than top of the line specs will mean lower system costs and makes greater ease in the production of games(which as Iwata has already stated will be similar to that of the gamecube) which in turn should intrigue and hopefully rally 3rd party developers(this is where I personally believe the revolution is, should the system succeed) and also lead away from the 59.99+ price tags. The other thing we know about the revolution is it's controller. It is shaped like a controller with a motion sensor and has an attached line with an analog stick. The form of it is sadly mocked by many whom overlook the possibilities available with it. Some people want to equate it to the powerglove, but they do not realize that it was actually a brilliant piece of gaming hardware that unfortunately no one at the time was either smart enough or daring enough to try and design suitable/original applications for. Imagine playing a Star Wars game, you have the standard revolution control plugged into a gamecube control peripheral for a more comfortable feel, you run and gun your way down a long corridor of sleek battle droids leaving them broken in your wake with your trusty blaster and suddenly a sith lord appears before you and viciously cuts the weapon, destroying it in your hands, a prompt comes up on the screen, you stand up and step forward,strangely it tells you to remove standard control, you comply in curiosity, and your lightsaber is drawn, you engage in meelee combat.... how cool would that instance in gaming be? The moments that can be made would topple any gaming experience before it. If the controller were used for your crow bar in half life, flashlight in silent hill, harpoon in RE4(for the first boss fight), your stabbing action in shadow of the colossus, or an extra attack if you did a certain motion in games like Ninja Gaiden or DMC, how much more would we get out of games like those with that much of a higher level of interaction? Despite all the glory that may yet be, this is the area Nintendo needs to market well. They have to encourage developers to implement the features of the revolution control at their own leisure. So, if a certain company makes a game using standard control functions, fine. The reason for this is that however anyone wants to defend the US side of game production, the fact is, new and different things scare the people backing developers and publishers. This is why we have horrible localizations, millions of atrocious GTA clones, years where best sellers are only sequels from popular franchises, nothing new in terms of premise or innovation in games, and regretfully why we miss many great games like Tales of Phantasia, Tales of Destiny II, Tatakae Ouedan(one of the best music rhythm games ever), Radical Dreamers, Bahamut Lagoon, Ryu ga Gotoku(most likely), Yoshinoya Beef Bowl(its a fun game damn it), Rogue Galaxy(more likely than Ryu but still not very likely), Tsumi to batsu(shooter by treasure, that says it all), the Langrisser series, and simply just a plethora of jewels destined to never reach these shores. Getting back to the main point though, Nintendo needs developers to begin with, as long as they're making games for the revolution, it will only be a matter of time before someone(if not nintendo themselves) makes a smash hit with the motion sensor feature forcing the money grubbing execs to push the various companies onto the bandwagon. In conclusion, if Nintendo can follow the game plan of :
1. Make reasonable hardware specs to make a cost effective system(cheap as possible, relatively anyway).
2. Keep game development as simple and cheap as possible(closer to the gamecube and hopefully with similar pricing).
3. Market the system to the developers before the control.
They will definitely become the force to be reckoned with as they once were in the console arena.

-Strey

[orisa]

I'm seeing lots of claimed statements about specs of PS3 and Revolution here. Am I missing something? Were they officially announced?

Besides, last thing I remember, both N64 and Gamecube had better graphics than PS1 and 2. If you are going to base your arguments on the past, then please take in account all the facts. Saying something like this:

First being the hardware, we know it will not be close to either the 360 or ps3 which means inferior graphics(inferior being a relative term considering what's possible on the current generation console hardware).
Just doesn't cut it.

[Kerii]

I'm seeing lots of claimed statements about specs of PS3 and Revolution here. Am I missing something? Were they officially announced?

Besides, last thing I remember, both N64 and Gamecube had better graphics than PS1 and 2. If you are going to base your arguments on the past, then please take in account all the facts. Saying something like this:

Just doesn't cut it.A point well made. More processing power doesn't always equate to better performance, as the N64 and GC both showed.

Something anyone familiar with IBM's G5 processors knows very well. If G5's put out even half the performance their specs dictated, they would trounce anything Intel and AMD have and are planning to release for the next couple YEARS. Yet, even dual G5 machines were crushed by single Pentium4 machines at less than half the cost in Adobe's in-house tests.

It's very hard to state concretely how well a CPU or GPU does in real world environments based on specifications and transistor count alone, especially given how different the chip architechtures are.

As for specs, though none have yet to be released, the Hollywood GPU going into the Revo will be from ArtX (formed from ex-SGI engineers, and now bought by ATi), the same people who made the N64 GPU and the Flipper(Dolphin) GPU for the GameCube.

[Strey]

Heh, if you managed to get anything at all out of what I said in that particularly long post, it should be that I have a good idea of what I'm talking about. http://www.gamespot.com/news/6125078.html?q=nintendo%20revolution - Stated that under Nintendo's own admission that the Revolution will be 2 to 3 times stronger than the Gamecube, with that in mind I don't see the end product being anywhere near a 3.2 ghz multi-core processor or 3.2 ghz cell processor(sony has already released initial specs trying to steal Microsoft's thunder). Also, when talking strictly performance(for console systems), numbers don't lie. In terms of hardware the gamecube is superior machine over the ps2, this is blatantly obvious if you try to play viewtiful joe(vfx can be your friend and foe) or even more so with Tales of Symphonia(Abyssion...) on both systems. However, if you talk about software, then the ps2 is the undoubted overlord of the two.

-Strey

[Ragnax]

Heh, if you managed to get anything at all out of what I said in that particularly long post, it should be that I have a good idea of what I'm talking about. http://www.gamespot.com/news/6125078.html?q=nintendo%20revolution - Stated that under Nintendo's own admission that the Revolution will be 2 to 3 times stronger than the Gamecube.And like I said; the 'two to three times' statement was something random spouted by a spokesperson that had no iidea about what he/she was saying. Nintendo renounced the statement quite a while back.
Actually Jim Merrick(sp?) now is saying the graphics of the Revolution will be 'comparable' to those of the XBox360 and PS3.

[Skye McCloud]

That whole "Revolution is 2-3 times more powerful than Gamecube" is a LOAD OF CRAP. The number was spouted out by some analyst who had NO idea what the specs were, and it has been completely shot down by Nintendo. In fact, Nintendo has said that the Revolution will be on par with PS3 and X-Box 360 in terms of graphics. The only difference is they won't support HD.

Now, I've just painstakingly read this entire thread, so I'm gonna be replying to a lot of old stuff.

First off, the above.

Second, Sony will have a lot of GOOD games? Hah! Out of every 10 games I see produced on PS1 and PS2, only one is actually half decent, let alone a GOOD game. Out of every 10 games on Gamecube, only 1 is not a high quality, completely worth your money game (Mind you, this depends on your preference as well. This is based on my preference, however.).

Third, in regards to the downloading, before they had announced ANYTHING on the controller, when they had only said "You could download NES, SNES, and N64 games", a lot of people were sold on it. They wanted it, even when Nintendo also added it'd only be first party games, unless 3rd party companies want to pump their games out. Sega has shown interest in doing this, as has SquareEnix. Surprise? No.

Fourth, in terms of power, Gamecube and X-Box were pretty much tied. They were both capable of the same power, while PS2 was way behind them. Now, even if we are to say those numbers are true, what are we comparing? A system's min power to its predecessor's max power? Given those outrageous numbers, there is only one way for them to be true:

1. The PS3's max power is compared to the PS2's minimum power.
2. The 360's max power is compared to the X-Box's minimum power.
3. The Revolution's minimum power is compared to the Gamecube's max power.

If that is the case, then yes, those numbers are QUITE accurate, because the PS3 and 360 are NOT that far ahead of their predecessors, and the two show very LITTLE difference to me. If the above is true, then what is the Revolution's max power? I would say somewhere along the lines of being matched with the other two systems.

Note, none of what I said is FACT. It is all SPECULATION! Do NOT go quoting me on it and attacking me because you thought what I said was fact, because it is NOT!

Fifth, so far, I have read very little positive words on the PS3 or 360, if any at all. As well, I've only read positive words for the Revolution. Developers not going to try their hand at it, my ass. If anything, Revolution is bound to be a system that most developers were dip their fingers into, to get a feel for it.

Sixth, as stated before, Nintendo makes more money in terms of console sales that Sony and Microsoft do combined. As well, if what I heard not long ago is true, then the only thing keeping Sony going right now happens to be their gaming area, which is only making profit thanks to game sales. Now, what'll happen if Microsoft steals their thunder and actually topples them?

Seventh, KIDDY GAMES!? WELL GUESS WHAT, ETHER?! HERE'S A BIG OLD *severely censored* ! Seriously, though, as a Cube owner, 90% of those games listed as "E" could NOT be finished by kids. Pikmin 2? Yea, no kid will be able to finish that, unless they're a professional gamer. That game was ridiculously hard once you reached a certain point. Just because Nintendo aims for games to be more appropriate for kids does NOT mean they are DESIGNED for kids. Nintendo tries to produce games people of all ages could play, thus, in order to do this, they need to design games for E ratings. However, that does not make them bad or easy games. If anything, I've found more of the E rated games on the Cube are harder than T and even M rated games! Isn't that funny?

I'll add more once I re-read the thread and see if I forgot to comment on something.

[Ether]

And would you please point me to your source of announced Revolution titles? Thank you.

dude, have you been living for the past 10 years? What kind of games has Nintendo been spitting out for the past decade? child and kiddy games. its a trend ok. the kiddy virus will pass on to the revolution, and revolution wil never have many that are comparable to xbox or ps3. i wil however admit that nintendo's super smash bros. and mario kart series are good ones. thats bout it. all their other "good" games are the ones that are also available for xbox/ps2, which means that nintendo never made them.


Yes, because the PlayStation line is such a shining beacon of quality games. If you cut out the steaming pile of crap games, rehashes / remakes, collector's editions and carbon copy 'generic game from genre X' games, then you're left with a collection about the size of the GameCube's.
At least ps2's "rehashes/remakes, collector's editions and carbon copy generic game from genre X games" are big hits, unlike nintendo's games.


Again; Pick up a controller and PLAY THE DAMN GAMES BEFORE JUDGING ON LOOKS. Just about any game released on the Gamecube is an A+ title. Quality over quantity. I'd rather spend 50 bucks once on a game that can keep me entertained for 3 months, than thrice on three games that can entertain me for one month each.
um, i would like you to give me the list of "Just about any game released on the Gamecube is an A+ title". i checked on gamespot, and dam, GC's games hav shitty grades.

so please, ur "Got an argument that actually holds water?" statement should be aplied only to yourself. dont act like a smartass. get sum links to back up what you say.


The only difference is they won't support HD.

Third, in regards to the downloading, before they had announced ANYTHING on the controller, when they had only said "You could download NES, SNES, and N64 games", a lot of people were sold on it

you said it urself. Rev's hd is gona suk bad. so how do u expect people to dl their games? if they do, um, due to Rev's sh**** hd, how many games do you even think'll fit on the revolution at a time? think

[Skye McCloud]

you said it urself. Rev's hd is gona suk bad. so how do u expect people to dl their games? if they do, um, due to Rev's sh**** hd, how many games do you even think'll fit on the revolution at a time? think

Wow, talk about misreading my post.

When I said HD, I meant High Definition, not Hard Drive. I would think that would be obvious since I was not only discussing about graphics at the time, but I also phrased it as "they won't support HD" and not "they won't have an HD."

As for dealing with a harddrive, or lack of one, it's simple: You don't download the games and store them. No, instead, when you buy the download, you have an account. That game is stored in your account, saying "Can download now". Every time you wish to play, the game just quickly redownloads into the flash memory.

[Ether]

um yea, another good point. who the hell would wanna waste $$$ oldies

[Skye McCloud]

Why do people buy the NES Classics on GBA? It's the same thing. Older people buy it because it's nostalgic for them, while younger people buy them because older people buy them.

There is no true reason why, though. People just do. There are many people who won't mind paying $1 to get an NES game they have not been able to play, outside of ROMs and emulators (Which is not only illegal, but many people don't do anyway), in over 15 years.

[jenl12343]

classic games are often better. thats pretty much my only reason for eventually getting a revolution (after a ps3.... and possibly a 360 depending on how they pan out)

[orisa]

dude, have you been living for the past 10 years? What kind of games has Nintendo been spitting out for the past decade? child and kiddy games. its a trend ok. the kiddy virus will pass on to the revolution, and revolution wil never have many that are comparable to xbox or ps3.
What's your definition of a "kiddy" game? A game that doesn't revolve around blood/gore/devils/mummies/nude polygons/etc.? A game that doesn't begin with "Final" and end with "Fantasy #"? Or perhaps a game that doesn't even get noticed? I bet you are one of those self-claimed gamers who think video gaming is all about violence and that a game has to have necks and organs flying around right? Well guess what, those "kiddy" games happen to be much more popular than momajority of PS2/Xbox's library.


i wil however admit that nintendo's super smash bros. and mario kart series are good ones. thats bout it. all their other "good" games are the ones that are also available for xbox/ps2, which means that nintendo never made them.
You obviously haven't even taken time to look at what's really available for Gamecube. Go back and do some research. Come back when you've at least looked at 20% of Gamecube's library. Also, I have to laugh how Sony always gets a copy of Gamecube's third party games that went great hit. It's either the developers thinking they'll get more moolah out of the same game released for Gamecube by releasing it for PS2, or Sony copying Nintendo.
"OMG ToS was a great hit on GC! Imagine what tsunami of fans it would create if it's released for PS2!"
"OMG look how much money Nintendo made out of RE4! We should release it for PS2 as well!"
"OMG Viewtiful Joe was such a success! It would be a greater success for PS2!"
"OMG Metroid is Nintendo's first party franchise! Too bad we can't copy it! Dammit, why do we always have to pick up gold that drops out of third party developers' asses!?"


At least ps2's "rehashes/remakes, collector's editions and carbon copy generic game from genre X games" are big hits, unlike nintendo's games.
Can you name those "big hits" you are talking about? Oh, and let's not use words "Final" and "Fantasy", or Viewtiful Joe, or Resident Evil 4, or Tales of Symphonia. It wouldn't cause any problems because the majority of PS2's library is made of "rehashes/remakes, collector's editions and carbon copy generic game from genre X games" that are big hits right?

Furthermore, let's just say Twin Snakes was a remake of Metal Gear Solid for PS1, and it was a big hit. Uh, can ayone remind me of other remakes Nintendo had?


um, i would like you to give me the list of "Just about any game released on the Gamecube is an A+ title". i checked on gamespot, and dam, GC's games hav shitty grades.
News flash! Gamespot is biased! If you are going to base your arguments around them, then I might as well as create a game review site myself and say all of Sony and Microsoft's games suck. I'd suggest GameFAQs, where the actual gamers themselves rate the games.


get sum links to back up what you say.
That goes for you too, I believe.

[jenl12343]

Yeah its too bad TOS isn't coming to the ps2 in north america.... I would have bought that game probably.

[Strey]

If anyone could post links or where the report/interview with Nintendo or Jim Merrick was, that'd be much obliged. Being a Fan of the once playing card making/taxi cab/love motel/toy production company, I tend to keep up with the news on the Revolution and can't for the life of me remember anything such reports on Ign, Gamingreports(Merrick's most recent interview said nothing in regards to specs), Nintendo, or even Gamespot. I seriously doubt the processing power of the new system will be equal to that of the 360 or ps3 simply because there would be no financial feasibility(the system is going to be atmost 299.99 since they did use the words "significantly lower" quite a bit when refering to the pricing in comparison to the 360 and ps3) to that notion at all. If one were to say despite the difference in power, that due to the ease of use and "sufficient" processing power, developers are able to more fully utilize the technology available to them, so they can make games graphically on par with current 360 or ps3 titles, then thats a statement that may yet be true. About the current generation games, people have been going to extremes at both ends to flame one another in some sort of rabid devotion to their favored console. It is a FACT that Sony has a lot of good games which is because they have an overwhelming amount of third party support and it is also a fact the best selling ones are all from franchises(which as I stated before is because of the fear of new and different things by certain execs) that beat to death the run&gun(fps counts into this) /adventure/stealth/platforming or any combination those formula. It is a FACT that Nintendo's game library is primarily composed of E rated games, which in itself isn't bad, however, what was bad about that scenario was that it is due to the lack of 3rd party support on the US front that it boiled down to such a situation. The games themselves were quite good like Metroid(the static crosshair bothered a lot of people, but aside from that it was the standard, but beautiful metroid fair with expansive environments you had to move through and backtrack to), Baten Kaitos, Windwaker(many didn't like the cellshade look, but the sheer scope of the game is above all else impressive),Tales of Symphonia, Mario related sports/party/series, Warioware Inc, Resident Evil Zero, Pikmin, Geist(sadly linear, but ambitious game, if given a year and half more time it could have been something spectacular), Donkey Kong Jungle Beat(by far one of the best games of the year for the system) and a handful of other titles. Both systems had good and great games, but Sony had much more due to circumstances at Nintendo's own fault. The Ps2 is a well utilized and supported machine. The Gamecube is the more technically advanced, but underutilized machine. Neither console is what you would call "bad" or "crappy," examples of those would be the jaguar and 3DO. These are facts we should all accept.

-Strey

[jenl12343]

nintendo has had their fair share of "innovative" flops
just look at this article of the worst nintendo products of all time

http://www.gamer-talk.net/feature46.html

who is to say revolution won't be one of them? Like I said wait and see... wait and see...

actually come to think of it isn't the new nindendo controller just a new and improved super scope

[Ether]

News flash! Gamespot is biased! If you are going to base your arguments around them, then I might as well as create a game review site myself and say all of Sony and Microsoft's games suck. I'd suggest GameFAQs, where the actual gamers themselves rate the games.

http://cube.ign.com/index/reviews.html - why dont u tell me IGN is biased too?
http://videogames.yahoo.com/reviews_jump?page=3&platform=2 here, read these too, and compare wit the ps2 and xbox on that same site.
um, and yea, about ur gamefaqs. u really need to check out ur own sites before u try using them in a debate. look at GC's ratings compared to xbox's and ps2's ratings. they're stil gettin owned.

u should read this one guy's review on gamefaqs bout GC http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/gamecube/review/R32648.html

and yes, i have a gamecube too. when i first got it, i was jus like this guy that reviewed. "i paid hella for this supposedly cool thing, yet theres hella little games for it." and wen they did start dishing out the games, most of it were direct ports of ps2 games. and if u didnt notice, the "final" and "fantasy" games are BIG hits, so u cant just "leave them out" as u have stated.

i got my links, wheres urs

[mirage]

Nintendo has not always "led the way in inovation" If I remember correctly they were the LAST company to use an optical medium for their games...

The first one to have CD was the Nec Pc-Engine in 1988/89(Open a GameCube or a IQUE and read wich name is on the two MotherBroad... yep is NEC ^^ )And so what?
Miyamoto himself said it was a big mistake an error for the Cardbrige support of the N64.

But you know the analogical stick is Nintendo, the Vibration in Pad is Nintendo, the four gamepad ports without outside hardware is Nintendo, Four button and trigger pad is Nintendo. Plateform Game is Nintendo etc...etc...

Sony and MS doesn't create anything they're juste good copycat that all. The 3 company in the consoles market who did the Innovation for hardware Was Nintendo, Sega (first 3D Game was Sega on Arcade game for exemple in 1985) and Nec.... The other have just made copy with little improvement (the eyetoys for exemple... The concept and the first was made by Sega and Nintendo have do the same with the GB)

[edit]For post Above.

Look the average rate note of all the PS2 Game and after look for the Average Rate Note of all the Cube Game....
Quantity doesn't mean Quality.. And on the Cube is quality first Quantity far after... And personnaly i prefer few game but damn good game thant the damn lot of crappy game you have on the PS2 (i have all the console if you want to know)

[Kerii]

http://www.revogaming.net/html/modules/news/article.php?storyid=133
A spanish website called Meristation carried out an interview with Nintendo frontman Jim Merrick recently, in which he landed several punches against Sony and Microsoft’s efforts in the next-gen console war. In the interview, Jim addressed one question that has been in the back of the minds of many a Nintendo fan. How good will the graphics be with the Nintendo Revolution?

The answer: a “difference will not exist” between the Revolution and its competitors in terms of graphical ability. This statement is clearly an attempt to reassure Nintendo fans peeking at Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 screenshots and videos floating around online. Now how about Nintendo releases some content so we can judge the “big-three” consoles for ourselves?
nintendo has had their fair share of "innovative" flops
just look at this article of the worst nintendo products of all time

http://www.gamer-talk.net/feature46.html

who is to say revolution won't be one of them? Like I said wait and see... wait and see...Because they're the ONLY company to ever even TRY to make anything new and innovative. Everyone else just copies off them if something becomes a hit, i.e. Sony and MS. If you compare the total number of products they ever put out, the number of successes far outweighs the failures, and obviously, the successes that were copied and marketed by Sony and MS with better graphics did good as well.


actually come to think of it isn't the new nindendo controller just a new and improved super scopeIf the SuperScope used IR, advanced gyroscopes, and Bluetooth, then yes.

[orisa]

http://cube.ign.com/index/reviews.html - why dont u tell me IGN is biased too?
http://videogames.yahoo.com/reviews_jump?page=3&platform=2 here, read these too, and compare wit the ps2 and xbox on that same site.
um, and yea, about ur gamefaqs. u really need to check out ur own sites before u try using them in a debate. look at GC's ratings compared to xbox's and ps2's ratings. they're stil gettin owned.

u should read this one guy's review on gamefaqs bout GC http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/gamecube/review/R32648.html
Learn to read. I don't recall anywhere in my last post of me talking about the HARDWARE, or IGN not being biased (IGN is biased as well. Are you happy?). We were talking about the GAMES and you had to bring up the hardware instead. If you want to talk about hardware so bad, let's try dropping PS2/Xbox and GC off a building first. I think we all know what the result will be, right? After that, we can discuss the actual hardware, which exclude the library of games and see which console is better. There, I'll ask you to read the same review you suggested me to read.


and wen they did start dishing out the games, most of it were direct ports of ps2 games.
For example? Medal of Honor: Rising Sun and Frontline? And what else? Hmm?


and if u didnt notice, the "final" and "fantasy" games are BIG hits, so u cant just "leave them out" as u have stated.
You said Sony's rehases/remakes and carbon copies of games from console X are big hits unlike Nintendo's. I quote:

At least ps2's "rehashes/remakes, collector's editions and carbon copy generic game from genre X games" are big hits, unlike nintendo's games.
I suggested we leave games that begin with "Final" and end with "Fantasy#" because we all KNOW they ARE big hits. I didn't want you wasting your time and my time listing each of them. I wanted to know what others there were besides "Final" "Fantasy #" series, Viewtiful Joe 1 and 2, ToS, and Resident Evil 4. After you list those "big hits" that you are talking about, then I'm sure we can compare your list to Nintendo's very own big hits that exclude Super Smash Brothers and Mario Kart.

[jenl12343]

you could say that all the RE games are all a rehash too..... oh and zelda. They keep making more zelda games which are the same thing over and over. How many times am I going to grab the master sword from the stone before they do it differently?

[animefreak6669]

Nintendos offical statement around the beggining of last year is "This will be our last major consol" However they have plans for future handhelds and mergers with other companies that run stricly on the nintendo systems.

[fluid]

Probably will end like Sega, but who knows...

[Kerii]

you could say that all the RE games are all a rehash too..... oh and zelda. They keep making more zelda games which are the same thing over and over. How many times am I going to grab the master sword from the stone before they do it differently?Quite the informed quote. You haven't even played any of the last couple Zelda games have you?

Ever hear of Majora's Mask, Four Swords, Four Swords Adventures, and The Minish Cap?
None of which even feature the Master Sword.

And I suppose next you'll complain how Mario Sunshine is just a rehash of Mario 64?

[jenl12343]

Majora's Mask and Mario Sunshine I have tried to block from my mind completely. I hate their style. I'd probably want a rehash instead of them. A proper looking link and what the hell was with mario and his water sprayer.

[NeoDevilMan]

a few points I would like to make...

1, how powerful of a game system don't matter... as matter of fact, all three systems are capable of making any fun games, the only limitation is how good the game deveoplers are. it's like comparing songs in cd and mp3... they're almost the same, we heard the same song, but we hardly notice any difference between them. same with gamecube, ps2, and xbox. they're able to do the exact same game, and almost the same experice(control, extra, graphic and load time) you can hardly be turn off by any of these minor difference (if they're not extremely bothersome like the load time difference between midnight club for ps2 and psp). all the hardware crap, how powerful each systems are are all advertising, getting the buyer's attention, we don't really know how good the systems are. only the deveoplers want the easiest system to make their games on, and the system that sold the most WILL have the most game deveoplers support.

2, rated "E" game, or "teen" or "M" games are not meant about their level of differetualities, they mean the contents weither it's suitable or not for young kids, teens or just for adult. we have some very easy M rated games that probably kids can finish and some very hard e rated games that even professional gamers takes days and get a few tries to finish.

3. is there any sega fans out there??? XD

[Kawada]

I didn't bother read the whole thread, but I would like to add a few points. Being a hardcore gamer to the bones, being someone who's had a small taste of being in the gaming industry (game design degree from college), and knows people in the industry, I would like to give some input from my almost unique perspective.

1. Nintendo ain't getting out of gaming anytime soon. Or consoles for that matter. They're rich enough to last them another decade of 3rd place consoles. And if they leave the console world, you can pretty much say Nintendo will be done with gaming altogether. (They mentioned it somewhere, I forget)

2. Saying Nintendo will never get back the crown is like saying Sony will never push nintendo off the throne 10 years ago. All it takes is one bad generation to get the gears going (N64 vs PS anyone?)

3. About image...nintendo always seems to get bashed for childish looking games, but I see no one bashing Katamari Damacy on how it looks, or the fact that Kingdom Hearts has Disney characters (Aren't disney always attached with kiddy?). Image means nothing if the game is good, and unfortunately, most people don't see things that way. Lots of people are hypocritical and they don't even notice.

4. To say a game is a rehash means you've just insulted the ENTIRE gaming industry. EVERY game is a rehash of a game before it. End of Story. ALL games are a rehash/modification of a game before it so don't complain about rehashes. An RPG is still an RPG while a platformer is still a platformer. It may be presented differently, but it's still the same. A rehash of something done before. It's all semantics.

I'd go on and rant but then I'd get more flamers than I could handle. I might add more if the thread continues though.

PS. If you say I'm biased about things, I've been around devs too much. Their way of thinking is just so....different.

[gandalfrockman]

Ok I am a dev, nintendo isnt going anywhere,not for a long time at any rate.
And hes right almost no game is completely original. There are original games they come out about once every 1-2 years, and most of them suck, thats usually why no-ones made them yet.

ps. For the time being I'll take that thing about us having a "different" way of thinking as a compliment. Very few of us think in conventional terms.

[jenl12343]

your right most games are a rehash. Just like every movie and every book. It isn't always a bad thing. What I was only trying to metion before is that nintendo is not without their rehashed games just like sony etc. There are games though that I need to shake my head at. Games that were mentioned like mario sunshine. Oh and another game that is coming out for the DS. Super Princess Peach. Ugh! like WTF. Nintendo seems to make wacky and often wrong decisions like this.

[NeoDevilMan]

usually, it takes many many failures to have one success. nintendo is good at that, and it always leaves some big marks on the gaming industry. (mario64, gameboy, donkey kong, pokemon)

while the other two console only loves numbers of sales they made, nintendo care about gaming. How to find out, just look at how many things nintendo tries, vs how many really new things ps1/2 or xbox tries.

the gaming industry will have a great lost if nintendo don't do console anymore, and the only way to keep nintendo doing all the new things, is show some supports.

(I hate how some ppl brought 2, 3, 4, or even 5 PS2, because Sony made PS2 such a bad machine with so much hardware problems that force gamers unable to play their fav. games... and worst, these ppl actually get another PS2 to play their fav. games... don't you see how evil Sony is? some even mod their system, and when the mod "destroy" their "lovely" PS2, they get another one... no wonder PS2 can get over 100million unit sold. Nintendo didn't seel well because they build a strong machine that's able to play the games you love for over 10+ yrs... I still have my nes and snes for over 10 yrs... and they play games just like when I first got them)

[jenl12343]

I thought the controller was crap for the cube. Couldn't get used to it. I know some people thought it was good. Sony had the right idea keeping their controller from ps to ps2. It was pretty easy to get used to. The xbox controller was crap when it first came out too and then they made a smaller version of it which was ok. It took a little getting used to for the controlls but picked it up pretty quick and then it felt natural

[Skye McCloud]

Just to end this one discussion on good/bad games, the only way you can judge if a game is good is to just play it yourself. You can't use game sites like GameSpot and IGN because they're be biased, you can't use sites like GameFAQS because you'll have people who are fans of another console come rate the game as a peice of crap, and you can't rely on fans of a game because they proclaim the game as the best game ever.

Next, in regards to the console power thing. Sony and MS do add stuff to their consoles. For instance, the DVD player in the PS2 and X-Box. These add-on features add money. Take out these features out of the PS2 and X-Box, and the price would be comparable with the Cube. This also applies to next gen. Nintendo is making a gaming-only console, although they will be designing an add-on you can buy seperately to play DVDs. However, DVD players is something that will be forced on you for PS3 and 360. This drives the cost up. Now add in everything else they add. The cost goes further up. This is why Nintendo can offer cheaper consoles. Hell, in the current gen, the Cube was a lot more powerful than the PS2, yet it cost less and they made more money than Sony did on it. I wonder why? Nintendo is good at making business deals to get what they need for as cheap as possible, thus keeping their prices down.

[Ether]

3. About image...nintendo always seems to get bashed for childish looking games, but I see no one bashing Katamari Damacy on how it looks, or the fact that Kingdom Hearts has Disney characters (Aren't disney always attached with kiddy?).

um, yes, if it werent for the stupid disney characters, kingdom hearts would've been much better. i've also heard that from alot of people.

[Skye McCloud]

um, yes, if it werent for the stupid disney characters, kingdom hearts would've been much better. i've also heard that from alot of people.

However, it would not be Kingdom Hearts then. As well, you clearly spoke to the small majority of people who had issues with Disney characters. Most people can get over it, because the game adds a level of seriousness to some characters you'd never see elsewhere.

[tijoh06]

you could say that all the RE games are all a rehash too..... oh and zelda. They keep making more zelda games which are the same thing over and over. How many times am I going to grab the master sword from the stone before they do it differently?

I love the Zelda series.. and calling it a rehash struck a nerve with me.
I mean take Final Fantasy (love this series too, but just to play devil's
advocate) and compare them with all the PAST FFs. It's the SAME THING.
You play a hero(ine), whom has to save the world, whom falls in love with
another character, and whom you have to raise his/her magDef so that you
you can survive that dreaded Ultima attack. The ONLY thing that changes
is the story, and maybe a gimmick, like, say, the MATERIA system.

But look at the Zelda series. Zelda has had a LOT done over the past iterations.
Zelda 1: first overthetop sidescroller adventure; new battery saving features
Zelda 2: 2d sidescroller; still sold hella well despite the drastic gameplay change.
Zelda LTTP: alternative world system; awesome graphics at that time
Zelda OOT: 3d Zelda; Link grows up; lock on targetting
Zelda MM: 3 day system; new ways to replay the game
Zelda WW: advanced 3d cell shading; attack-counter system; dramatic
'pause' effect when hitting enemies.

The only thing that really doesn't change is the storyline. But as you can
see, the GAMEPLAY is what makes Zelda new and not a 'rehash'


I thought the controller was crap for the cube. Couldn't get used to it. I know some people thought it was good. Sony had the right idea keeping their controller from ps to ps2. It was pretty easy to get used to. The xbox controller was crap when it first came out too and then they made a smaller version of it which was ok. It took a little getting used to for the controlls but picked it up pretty quick and then it felt natural

I've owned a ps2 for a while, and I absolutely HATE the button scheme.
For some reason I found it extremely difficult to memorize the symbols and
their positions. Whereas the GC controller, one can easily memorize it cuz
of its button scheme; kidney shaped and round colourful buttons can
easily be remembered.


But back on topic...

Since Nintendo seems to be 'kiddy' and always compared to Disney, let's
do that.

So what did people like in the movies? The Incredibles or Polar Express?
The Incredibles featured cartoon-like CGI with a great story to boot, while
Polar Express featured realistic CGI with a cliche story.

http://www.eonline.com/News/Items/0,1,15341,00.html?newsrellink

The Incredibles did incredibly well. In fact, the Incredibles nearly DOUBLED
the figures Polar Express produced over its weekend debut. And this is the
Incredible's SECOND WEEKEND.

So what's the bottom line? Disney is reaping in HUGE profits, whereas
Warner Bros. is collecting less.

In otherwords, Nintendo isn't going ANYWHERE for a LONG TIME due to their
amazing business model that produces mucho PROFIT.

[ArchWing]

I also think that nintendo should focus more in handheld, because I don't think they will stand a chance with Sony(Playstation) and Microsoft(Xbox).
Who knows? If they focus on handheld, maybe they will release a better handheld that will blow out the other two game companies.

[Shabadage]

Wow, there are sooo many tools in this thread, where's my Fanboy begone button?

My 2 Cents,
Revolution is one swift kick in the ass to the whole gaming industry. It's has the capability to FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE THE WAY WE PLAY GAME FOREVER! Now, I'm all for this innovation, but I think the public might be less receptive. Rest assured, it's going to change the gaming world, but I doubt if it will be on the scale Nintendo is hoping for. Maybe next generation, once the input system has been tweaked a little, more people will accept it.

But even if they don't accept the new control system, the old one is still there as default. Revolution has the strongest launch line-up of any system this generation (IMO), why? Cause it's got 20 years of Nintendo history, not just First Party titles, expect to be able to download Konami, Capcom, and most of the other big developers old games. The problem of a packed in game is solved right there, Nintendo already said it's going to give away a few old school games (Non-Rev or Cube) with the Rev. System (how many, or which ones, but they will be there). And failing that, you can plug any GC game into the system and play it just fine.

Now for those of you who had that crazy download theory on old games. There is no Hard Drive on the Rev. But it does have an internal SD card (I'm not sure if it's removable or not) that I believe is around the 512MB mark in size. This will handle both savegame storage, and downloaded games/firmware updates.

In terms of power, those of you claiming to know what the revolution is capable of, frankly, are full of shit. No one outside of Nintendo and a few select third party people know what the revolution is capable of. (Nintendo still hasn't told us everything) But considering the new Zelda (for the cube) looks almost as good as some First Generation X360 games, I think we can expect some great graphics capabilities out of it. (Remember, the Gamecube's GFX processor the tech base for the Radeon 9800 series, up until recently some of the best GFX cards avaliable in terms of raw power)
-----
I'm not passing any judgements on the PS3 till I get to play one for myself, Sony has lied WAY too much to me in the past for me to believe anything that falls out of their slack jawed mouths. I can tell you I won't be buying it on launch, I made that mistake with the Ps1 and the Ps2, and regretted it when they broke months later.

[Skye McCloud]

But even if they don't accept the new control system, the old one is still there as default. Revolution has the strongest launch line-up of any system this generation (IMO), why? Cause it's got 20 years of Nintendo history, not just First Party titles, expect to be able to download Konami, Capcom, and most of the other big developers old games. The problem of a packed in game is solved right there, Nintendo already said it's going to give away a few old school games (Non-Rev or Cube) with the Rev. System (how many, or which ones, but they will be there). And failing that, you can plug any GC game into the system and play it just fine.

Now for those of you who had that crazy download theory on old games. There is no Hard Drive on the Rev. But it does have an internal SD card (I'm not sure if it's removable or not) that I believe is around the 512MB mark in size. This will handle both savegame storage, and downloaded games/firmware updates.

As much as we're on the same side here, I have to disagree with you. First off, right now, the downloadable games are only Nintendo's first party games, because it's illegal for Nintendo to offer 3rd party games without consent from the owners of said game. However, Sega has expressed interest in it, and SquareEnix, given how close they now are with Nintendo, will probably take interest as well. Don't expect Capcom, though, their execs are idiots.

As for the memory, I don't think it will deal with all three of those things. I'd imagine Nintendo will have something else hold firmware updates, and something else for saved games. As well, I doubt the games will stay on the memory, because that'd be highly limiting, and some N64 games are over 50 MB. I mentioned earlier in this topic the idea I had forseen, on an account-based system that had you quickly redownload the game when you wanted to play it.

[jenl12343]

what? only first party games for downloading on the rev? that sucks. I thought they would have sercured the rights from mostly all the other companies they need. so I won't be able to download earthbound on my rev ? or street figher 2? I may have to reconsider getting a rev

[Kawada]

Nintendo did mention some time ago they got "All the usual suspects" with their download service. Dunno who, but we can assume it's the majority of old school games.


BTW, earthbound IS a nintendo game so you can download it.

[Skye McCloud]

I would expect several companies to jump on the bandwagon for the downloads, including:

Sega, SquareEnix, Konami, Namco, and possibly Capcom if the execs smarten up.

[jenl12343]

how will that work for games by say rare? they got bought out by m$oft right?

[Kawada]

The games rare did for nintendo back in N64 days was when they were still 2nd party. REALLY good chance you'll see their games downloadable.

[jenl12343]

I wonder if some of the games will get a face lift. I'd love to see killer instinct as a downloadable game but I'd like to see the arcade port because the one that actually made it to console was stripped down.

[Skye McCloud]

how will that work for games by say rare? they got bought out by m$oft right?

It depends. Stuff with Conker and Perfect Dark, yea, those won't return unless Rare says so. Those were characters created in house of Rare, and thus stayed with Rare. However, Donkey Kong games will be fine, as well some other games.

I think Diddy Kong Racing will be a big issue, as I believe only Diddy Kong is owned by Nintendo, but the rest are Rare.

[Excorsism]

i think FF first started on the nintendo consoles

[Skye McCloud]

i think FF first started on the nintendo consoles

Where it started doesn't matter if Nintendo holds no rights to it. That's like saying "Well, FF4-FF6 were on SNES, so they aren't allowed on PS1."

SquareEnix decides what it does, not Nintendo. If SE doesn't want FF to go up on the download, it won't.

[serpent of the abiss]

i think when the new zelda comes out people will be facinated and want a piece of the revolution aswell, i think the new zelda will be a starting point for new fans of nintendo