Skip to main content

Where did Nintendo Go wrong.

Submitted by Tall Nick on
Forum

If we learnt anything from Star Wars, it?s that Empires don?t last forever.
Over the recent years Nintendo has been in a slow decline. Sales of their home console Game Cube have been less than the low market figures of the Nintendo 64.
The only thing that has kept them alive have been the ever popular Gameboy?s that, and added to the fact that Nintendo own the name Pok?mon.
Now the tide is changing, it may be a slow change but it?s the start of something disturbing.
Will Nintendo hold off all odds and stay in front, in the race of handheld glory?

Over the many years the once young and open minded youth of the world were given a revolution in the way we interacted with our friends and family, in the form of an affordable, friendly home console the Nintendo Entertainment System (or NES).
Bright colors and simple but compelling games spawned a legion of fans that have won their share of battles in the console wars.
Over the 30 odd years since that time the fan boys have all grown up and moved on from the simple, jump on a few turtles and save a Princess, into more of a, run around a city and shoot anyone in cold blooded murder, but Nintendo haven?t budged from their child like innocence.

Is this the reason for their decline, there are a lot of kids out there being born each day surely they all want to play that game where you jump on turtles and save the Princess?
Ask my twelve-year-old nephew, and he?ll tell you he would rather play what all his friends have, that game where you run around a city and shoot anyone in cold blooded murder.

So the times have changed and Nintendo?s appeal isn?t as great as it once was, so why not change with the times?
Well why fight to the death in an endless war against the two leaders (Sony & Microsoft) when you own the biggest selling franchise of them all, Pok?mon.
Yes it?s true while you where out there having your way with Metal gear solid & Halo, Nintendo where raking in the monies selling their creation to millions of young boys and girls in the form of one of the greatest marketing campaigns since that bread that came in sheets.

All was well for the giant, making pocket money with their home console, meanwhile adding to the pile with those irresistible pocket monsters. Then to top it off why re-invent the game when you can just add one more monster, and make even more money?

Now something has gone wrong, what was once an endless sea of revenue, owning the only hand held gaming platform (only making the smallest amount of updates with each model). Has suddenly got a competitor, and this one isn?t going for the low graphics and cheap solutions. No this competitor is going for all it can in a win or die sell-off, what do we do with our 5 years of making the next handheld model a SNES (Super Nintendo Entertainment System) with a touch screen?
Well the DS was the answer, add the least amount of polygons required for a 3D game, and make sure you get a Pok?mon game out there as soon as possible.

Nintendo?s president Satoru Iwata has be quoted saying ?The Nintendo DS isn?t about the latest and greatest graphics, it?s about pushing innovation in games?.
There have always been innovative games out in the market place, one doesn?t need to look far to see the likes of Vib Ribbon, Myst, and the Sims, not to mention all the others in the market place.

The elements that all innovative titles rely on are, the collaboration of Music, Graphics, and Game play.
Do you think that innovative games like REZ would have gotten far if we followed Nintendo?s example and kept the SNES graphics, or sound?
Then why are Nintendo taking one step forward by including a touch screen, and taking two steps back by limiting 3D graphics, and not including CD quality sound?
The addition of a touch screen on the DS inspires game developers to take a new approach when designing a game, but with a lack of graphics and sound all you end up with are games like, Polarium and Zoo Keeper. Sure these are fun games to play but have a short life span, there?s only so much you can do with a 16x16 pixel sprite, and I?ve listened to bleeps and pings with a midi sound track for long enough.
This is a main reason the life of the title will be short, sure you can ever strive for the perfect top score but after hearing song A for the 10th time the sound quickly turns off and the game is as exciting as solitare on the PC.
Wait a minute these game are meant to be played in short bursts, while on the train or during lunch, plus when developing a game for a hand held it?s hard to immerse a player into it.
That was my thought exactly until I got my hands on Lumines, add some sound and a blend of 2D and 3D graphics and you?ve got something a casual gamer will get into. The game is just as original as anything on the DS and it doesn?t need a touch screen.

16x16 pixel sprites have been around for a long time (around 15 years) the best use I?ve seen is in ?The Legend of Zelda, The Minish Cap? such a polished game, great animation and composition. Do you really think the up and coming Four Swords game on DS going to look even better, I don?t think so. Sure they can add a few more frames into each animation but it?s not going to be what Zelda?s: Ocarina of Time was compared to A Link to the Past.

Immersing A player into a handheld game can be difficult, a good example of immersion on public transport is looking at people with headphones in their ears. You see them everywhere walking around the city, they are immersed in that music why?
because it?s not blips and pings it?s quality.
Playing Ridge Racer DS is fun you get bright pixilated colors a box with wheels to drive and a short view distance, added to this is a soundtrack worse than that on the Playstation1.
Compared to Ridge Races (PSP) where you have a beautifully lit backdrop, reflections, and a soundtrack that rivals a Ministry of sound Chillout Sessions album.
I?m not trying to promote the PSP, this is just a reflection on Nintendo and a comparison in the current market place. I was going to bring up another point but it can fit into a topic of its own.

-Nick

Submitted by mcdrewski on Thu, 21/04/05 - 8:23 AM Permalink

Wow. Quite a broad set of discussion points there!

I'm really awaiting the first release of [url="http://www.popcap.com/launchpage.php?theGame=diamondmine&src=findagame"]Bejewelled [/url] for the DS. Stylus is the best interface to play that game as I can vouch for from the [url="http://www.astraware.com/all/default/bejeweled"]PalmOS Version[/url]. A lot of other popcap games are also excellent candidates (Insanaquarium, Dinomite etc)

I can also vouch that it's possible to be completely immersed in a handheld, non-3d, sprite-based game. For example, [url="http://www.handmark.com/warfare/preview.php"]Warfare Incorporated[/url], a classic RTS is fantastic, and implemented wireless PVP well before Nintendo and the PSP "revolutionised" handheld gaming.

And if anyone could port [url="http://www.scummvm.org"]ScummVM[/url], then you could re-release all of the lucasarts adventure games on the DS. Don't tell me they're not immersive! I spent a month of train trips finishing Monkey Island again on my Palm...!

Submitted by Kezza on Thu, 21/04/05 - 11:23 AM Permalink

Well...
The RTS genre could be seriously revitalized by the use of a stylus as a half direct, half gestural input device.
I NEVER want to see a FPS game for a portable gaming console (clunky controls anyone?), but I think it's not far off...

Also, I believe we overestimate the merits of 3D. It's a pity that it's so hard to sell 2D games on the merit of their graphics, because they quite often outstrip their 3d counterparts in gameplay. We are still yet to invent an effective and intuative form of 3d control for most game types.

One other thing I've always wanted to do (or at least see) is a 2D, cooperative or team based multiplayer platform game. I don't think nintendo is failing in innovation as much as market share...

Submitted by Rahnem on Thu, 21/04/05 - 7:25 PM Permalink

It's been difficult to watch nintendo's fall from grace, just as it was with sega. Using their previous backgrounds both sony (electronics, movies, music) and microsoft (computers, internet) are taking their platforms in directions that Nintendo simply can't compete with. So Nintendo are trying to innovate how players interact with games.

Submitted by LiveWire on Thu, 21/04/05 - 9:04 PM Permalink

i dont like to guess on what's happening to nintendo and where they are going - it seems like they are losing out and will soon suffer a simular fate to sega, but they seem to be hanging on alright. this article from gamasutra in particular surprised me:

April 6, 2005 [url]http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=5250[/url]
particually this point:
"Even so, these huge profits rival those of Sony?s games division and completely overshadow the consistent losses made by Microsoft?s Xbox division ? suggesting that Nintendo needs neither third party support nor even a best selling home console in order to generate enviable profits."

as for the DS, i've got an oppinion about the amount of inovation it offers and how it's been used so far. i intend to post it up as soon as i get some free time - it's kind of a long rant :)

on the subject of immersion, i've been totally immersed in 2d sprite games - recently metroid fusion on the GBA on a couple of years ago. i think there is a big difference between gameplay immersion and audio/visual immersion. and though fusion exceled in the gameplay imersion, the visuals and audio also had their own imersiveness, and it's had to say iof it would have been any better if they were high quality 3d. perhaps a higer resolution screen and better quality audio may have helped, but that's a immersive quality as a result of better technology making the result crisper and clearer, not imersive quality as a result of better technology allowing for 'better' art work'.

Submitted by souri on Fri, 22/04/05 - 12:57 AM Permalink

[url="http://cube.ign.com/articles/604/604674p1.html"]This IGN article[/url] has some numbers on how many game units and consoles have been sold for the last month, and the Gamecube is not doing good at all..quote:The first game from Nintendo's Tokyo studio, Donkey Kong Jungle Beat, debuted in March to abysmal sales figures. The bongo-based platformer sold through a paltry 39,000 units for the month, well below expectations.

Both Resident Evil 4 and Star Fox Assault, debuting exclusively for GameCube in January and February respectively, outperformed Jungle Beat, although neither ranked among the month's Top 10 sellers.

"Mario Party 6, NBA Street V3, Robots, MVP Baseball 2005, Dragon Ball Z Sagas, The Incredibles and Super Smash Bros. Melee, none of which sold more than 48,000 units, rounded out the GameCube Top 10 for the month."

Overall GameCube hardware sales for the month were a reflection of software sales: down. Approximately 90,000 GameCubes were sold for the month.

Sony, meanwhile, sold almost 500,000 more PlayStation 2s in March. Microsoft sold about 230,000 more Xbox consoles.

If software sells hardware, Nintendo is sure to be in even bigger trouble in April. There are no new games coming out for GameCube in April.
No new games coming out at all in April? [xx(]

Submitted by hyperswivel on Fri, 22/04/05 - 1:23 AM Permalink

Nintendo have always been at the forefront of developing new and creative gameplay, whether it's at the expense of pretty flashing lights that you game artists so desperately need to flesh out your gaming experience is of no consequence.
Super Mario 64 was the birth of the 3D platformer, and thanks to it's re-release as a DS game, reformed fanboys like yourself have been given an opportunity to discover a game that still holds up against and even puts to shame some of the games being released today.
Nintendo's in house titles are more often than not overflowing with original concepts and quality gameplay, which is more than can be said for Sony's in house titles which amount sweet FA. It's easy to win the console wars, just license your system to every developer willing to pander to the lowest common denominator's obsession with sex and violence and wait for the money to roll on in.
Sure, you find the occasional gem in the Grand Theft Auto or Metal Gear Solid series, but you have to sift through a cavalcade of shite to get to it.
Not with Nintendo. You pick up an exclusive Nintendo title, and more often than not it is solid GOLD! So you can keep your PSP with it's "beautifully lit backdrop, reflections and a soundtrack that rivals blah blah blah". I have a DS because it will allow me to play titles that Sony Cronies can only dream about. And that's games with substance, character and heart.

Submitted by LiveWire on Fri, 22/04/05 - 4:53 AM Permalink

i agree that many of the titles that nintendo brings out are top quality, but that dosnt change the fact that they need to increase their market share if only to encourage more 3rd party suport. sure yuo might get more crap filtering in, but at the moment if you want both GTA, etc and zelda you need to own two systems.

Submitted by hyperswivel on Fri, 22/04/05 - 4:59 AM Permalink

Don't you think exclusive titles are exactly what's keeping Nintendo alive? If it weren't for exclusive title rights, then we'd all have one generic console and you know what happens when there's no competition... prices go up, and quality comes crashing down. The last golden era of Nintendo was when they had control of RARE... what happened to them after they were lured with great hordes of cash. I think there was a Conker sequel that was largely ignored. Banjo Kazooie never made another appearance. Nintendo look after their children and their fans. If only the fans were as loyal and consistent as the product.

Submitted by Tall Nick on Fri, 22/04/05 - 7:23 AM Permalink

Exclusive title is the only reason Nintendo?s home consoles exist.
Incase your loyalty as a obvious Fanboy has clouded your vision, Nintendo don?t develop any in-house games any more.
Their sports titles are made by Camelot, Pok?mon is made by Game freak, and all Zelda titles are now being done by the folks who made ?The minish Cap?, Just because Nintendo is written on the box doesn?t mean they had anything to do with the idea.
Neither does it stop those same companies from releasing the same type of game under a new name (and different characters of course).

Hyperswivel, reading your first replay its obvious you?re a fanboy, and are really upset at the fact that Nintendo aren?t what they once were.
So I want to clarify some things before you continue in a blind rage.

?Nintendo have always been at the forefront of developing new and creative gameplay?

Yes they have been (past tense), yes Mario 64 was a revolution. I covered the point that Nintendo started a revolution, but name a (Nintendo published) revolutionary game that came out in the Game Cube.
Surely you wouldn?t say Mario Sunshine or Zelda Windwaker, or even Smashbrothers M are revolutionary?
No it seems that that quality about Nintendo has gone out.

?which is more than can be said for Sony's in house titles which amount sweet FA?

You forgot to mention Microsoft, but hey they?ve had enough trouble with launching the Xbox.
The beauty about Sony and Microsoft is the fact that you don?t need their approval to produce a game on there console, as apposed to Nintendo where they breathe down your neck until it?s what they want on there console.
Remember, Resident Evil only came out 6 years after it was released on PS1.
Why? Because the revolutionary Nintendo didn?t want to adapt.
Where as Sony and Microsoft don?t care what you do as long as you pay the dev kit fee?s and so spawn more Innovative games.

This is a long one,
?Sure, you find the occasional gem in the Grand Theft Auto or Metal Gear Solid series, but you have to sift through a cavalcade of shite to get to it.
Not with Nintendo. You pick up an exclusive Nintendo title?

This one?s difficult to retort for the reason that, I know you (the reason I?m picking on you) and you?ve never played more than 2 minutes of either of those games or any of the greats on a PS2 or Xbox.
Fact is that more great titles come out for PS2 and Xbox than Game Cube exclusive titles in a year, I think the ratio is around 10:3.

And to finish off,
?So you can keep your PSP with it's "beautifully lit backdrop, reflections and a soundtrack that rivals blah blah blah". I have a DS because it will allow me to play titles that Sony Cronies can only dream about?

Fact is Sony don?t need to dream up a good idea for a PSP game they?ve provided sufficient hardware for developers to do that, and they have 100+ developers and Publishers ready to get innovative titles off the ground.
Meanwhile Nintendo are still overlooking each title being produced for their system making sure sequels get made and flash games are ported.

I haven?t gone too far off topic have I? I don?t want to turn this into a plug for Sony.
I?ve always been a supporter of innovative games and am willing to buy a console to play something new. But this isn?t about how I feel towards games this is about the fact that because Nintendo are stubborn in their ways they have lost their revolutionary touch and if not changed aren?t going to be around for much longer.
The good news is that the great revolutionary games they publish will be.

Submitted by hyperswivel on Fri, 22/04/05 - 7:35 AM Permalink

A lot of very good points their Nick. While the Gamecube didn't host completely revolutionary games, they did at least try to be a bit more creative with their direction. Pikmin comes to mind, as does Donkey Kong Jungle Beat. I agree as far as Nintendo's iron fist needing to loosen it's grasp... I'm sick of going to EB month after month to find nothing new for my console. I'm not sure, but don't those developers you listed make games exclusively for Nintendo? I'd consider that pretty close to in-house, but I'll qualify my statements in future by saying "exclusive Nintendo property" or "stuff that Shigeru (The Shigster) Miyamoto done did".
Unlike a lot of gamers, I simply don't have the time to invest in multiple consoles. Sticking to a system that I know will deliver me quality titles with generally good replay value (particularly pick up and play multiplayer games that lend themselves to a party atmosphere). When something truly brilliant for another machine comes out that I can't find a similar alternative to on a Nintendo system, or on PC then I will consider purchasing one but until then I just can't justify it and will be sitting tight here in my comfort zone.

Submitted by Malus on Fri, 22/04/05 - 10:34 AM Permalink

I've noticed alot of "nintendo has fallen from grace" comments and although I'm no fanboy of any particular console I'd have to say that for all there cuteness and fluffy, happy visuals they still have some of the most creative titles as well as some of the best gameplay out there.

Is it so much a fault of Nintendo that they have lost favour with the 'masses' or is it a sign that people are becoming overly obssessed with visuals and not content?

Hmm reminds me of something....Can anyone say "Hollywood" ............

Submitted by LiveWire on Sat, 23/04/05 - 5:45 AM Permalink

quote:Is it so much a fault of Nintendo that they have lost favour with the 'masses' or is it a sign that people are becoming overly obssessed with visuals and not content?

i shouldnt think so. i think the main reason is lack of titles, not people looking only for pretty pictures. i think if nintendo had the same 3rd party support as the other consoles the market shares would be much closer, not becuase you could then get the pretty visuals on any system, but because you could then get a large range of good games on any system. and a whole lot with prety pictures, but you dont have to buy those.

whats interesting to note about nintendo though (and i base this on what i've read and heared not solid fact) is that while they have lost market share, they are still doing just as well finacially, if not more so, than they ever have. i dont think they have lost any gamers so - sony and microsoft have simply gained far more. to me it seems there's a big difference between market share and profits, and it's profits thats going to keep nintendo in the business or not.

Submitted by hyperswivel on Sat, 23/04/05 - 5:59 AM Permalink

That's an interesting point about Nintendo not losing market share as a result of it's competitors gaining ground. This is attributable to at least two facts. One being that there are more gamers than ever before, and also that unlikke ten years ago, company loyalty has dwindled and more and more people are owners of multiple systems which is nothing but good news for everyone... except poor people.

Posted by Tall Nick on
Forum

If we learnt anything from Star Wars, it?s that Empires don?t last forever.
Over the recent years Nintendo has been in a slow decline. Sales of their home console Game Cube have been less than the low market figures of the Nintendo 64.
The only thing that has kept them alive have been the ever popular Gameboy?s that, and added to the fact that Nintendo own the name Pok?mon.
Now the tide is changing, it may be a slow change but it?s the start of something disturbing.
Will Nintendo hold off all odds and stay in front, in the race of handheld glory?

Over the many years the once young and open minded youth of the world were given a revolution in the way we interacted with our friends and family, in the form of an affordable, friendly home console the Nintendo Entertainment System (or NES).
Bright colors and simple but compelling games spawned a legion of fans that have won their share of battles in the console wars.
Over the 30 odd years since that time the fan boys have all grown up and moved on from the simple, jump on a few turtles and save a Princess, into more of a, run around a city and shoot anyone in cold blooded murder, but Nintendo haven?t budged from their child like innocence.

Is this the reason for their decline, there are a lot of kids out there being born each day surely they all want to play that game where you jump on turtles and save the Princess?
Ask my twelve-year-old nephew, and he?ll tell you he would rather play what all his friends have, that game where you run around a city and shoot anyone in cold blooded murder.

So the times have changed and Nintendo?s appeal isn?t as great as it once was, so why not change with the times?
Well why fight to the death in an endless war against the two leaders (Sony & Microsoft) when you own the biggest selling franchise of them all, Pok?mon.
Yes it?s true while you where out there having your way with Metal gear solid & Halo, Nintendo where raking in the monies selling their creation to millions of young boys and girls in the form of one of the greatest marketing campaigns since that bread that came in sheets.

All was well for the giant, making pocket money with their home console, meanwhile adding to the pile with those irresistible pocket monsters. Then to top it off why re-invent the game when you can just add one more monster, and make even more money?

Now something has gone wrong, what was once an endless sea of revenue, owning the only hand held gaming platform (only making the smallest amount of updates with each model). Has suddenly got a competitor, and this one isn?t going for the low graphics and cheap solutions. No this competitor is going for all it can in a win or die sell-off, what do we do with our 5 years of making the next handheld model a SNES (Super Nintendo Entertainment System) with a touch screen?
Well the DS was the answer, add the least amount of polygons required for a 3D game, and make sure you get a Pok?mon game out there as soon as possible.

Nintendo?s president Satoru Iwata has be quoted saying ?The Nintendo DS isn?t about the latest and greatest graphics, it?s about pushing innovation in games?.
There have always been innovative games out in the market place, one doesn?t need to look far to see the likes of Vib Ribbon, Myst, and the Sims, not to mention all the others in the market place.

The elements that all innovative titles rely on are, the collaboration of Music, Graphics, and Game play.
Do you think that innovative games like REZ would have gotten far if we followed Nintendo?s example and kept the SNES graphics, or sound?
Then why are Nintendo taking one step forward by including a touch screen, and taking two steps back by limiting 3D graphics, and not including CD quality sound?
The addition of a touch screen on the DS inspires game developers to take a new approach when designing a game, but with a lack of graphics and sound all you end up with are games like, Polarium and Zoo Keeper. Sure these are fun games to play but have a short life span, there?s only so much you can do with a 16x16 pixel sprite, and I?ve listened to bleeps and pings with a midi sound track for long enough.
This is a main reason the life of the title will be short, sure you can ever strive for the perfect top score but after hearing song A for the 10th time the sound quickly turns off and the game is as exciting as solitare on the PC.
Wait a minute these game are meant to be played in short bursts, while on the train or during lunch, plus when developing a game for a hand held it?s hard to immerse a player into it.
That was my thought exactly until I got my hands on Lumines, add some sound and a blend of 2D and 3D graphics and you?ve got something a casual gamer will get into. The game is just as original as anything on the DS and it doesn?t need a touch screen.

16x16 pixel sprites have been around for a long time (around 15 years) the best use I?ve seen is in ?The Legend of Zelda, The Minish Cap? such a polished game, great animation and composition. Do you really think the up and coming Four Swords game on DS going to look even better, I don?t think so. Sure they can add a few more frames into each animation but it?s not going to be what Zelda?s: Ocarina of Time was compared to A Link to the Past.

Immersing A player into a handheld game can be difficult, a good example of immersion on public transport is looking at people with headphones in their ears. You see them everywhere walking around the city, they are immersed in that music why?
because it?s not blips and pings it?s quality.
Playing Ridge Racer DS is fun you get bright pixilated colors a box with wheels to drive and a short view distance, added to this is a soundtrack worse than that on the Playstation1.
Compared to Ridge Races (PSP) where you have a beautifully lit backdrop, reflections, and a soundtrack that rivals a Ministry of sound Chillout Sessions album.
I?m not trying to promote the PSP, this is just a reflection on Nintendo and a comparison in the current market place. I was going to bring up another point but it can fit into a topic of its own.

-Nick


Submitted by mcdrewski on Thu, 21/04/05 - 8:23 AM Permalink

Wow. Quite a broad set of discussion points there!

I'm really awaiting the first release of [url="http://www.popcap.com/launchpage.php?theGame=diamondmine&src=findagame"]Bejewelled [/url] for the DS. Stylus is the best interface to play that game as I can vouch for from the [url="http://www.astraware.com/all/default/bejeweled"]PalmOS Version[/url]. A lot of other popcap games are also excellent candidates (Insanaquarium, Dinomite etc)

I can also vouch that it's possible to be completely immersed in a handheld, non-3d, sprite-based game. For example, [url="http://www.handmark.com/warfare/preview.php"]Warfare Incorporated[/url], a classic RTS is fantastic, and implemented wireless PVP well before Nintendo and the PSP "revolutionised" handheld gaming.

And if anyone could port [url="http://www.scummvm.org"]ScummVM[/url], then you could re-release all of the lucasarts adventure games on the DS. Don't tell me they're not immersive! I spent a month of train trips finishing Monkey Island again on my Palm...!

Submitted by Kezza on Thu, 21/04/05 - 11:23 AM Permalink

Well...
The RTS genre could be seriously revitalized by the use of a stylus as a half direct, half gestural input device.
I NEVER want to see a FPS game for a portable gaming console (clunky controls anyone?), but I think it's not far off...

Also, I believe we overestimate the merits of 3D. It's a pity that it's so hard to sell 2D games on the merit of their graphics, because they quite often outstrip their 3d counterparts in gameplay. We are still yet to invent an effective and intuative form of 3d control for most game types.

One other thing I've always wanted to do (or at least see) is a 2D, cooperative or team based multiplayer platform game. I don't think nintendo is failing in innovation as much as market share...

Submitted by Rahnem on Thu, 21/04/05 - 7:25 PM Permalink

It's been difficult to watch nintendo's fall from grace, just as it was with sega. Using their previous backgrounds both sony (electronics, movies, music) and microsoft (computers, internet) are taking their platforms in directions that Nintendo simply can't compete with. So Nintendo are trying to innovate how players interact with games.

Submitted by LiveWire on Thu, 21/04/05 - 9:04 PM Permalink

i dont like to guess on what's happening to nintendo and where they are going - it seems like they are losing out and will soon suffer a simular fate to sega, but they seem to be hanging on alright. this article from gamasutra in particular surprised me:

April 6, 2005 [url]http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=5250[/url]
particually this point:
"Even so, these huge profits rival those of Sony?s games division and completely overshadow the consistent losses made by Microsoft?s Xbox division ? suggesting that Nintendo needs neither third party support nor even a best selling home console in order to generate enviable profits."

as for the DS, i've got an oppinion about the amount of inovation it offers and how it's been used so far. i intend to post it up as soon as i get some free time - it's kind of a long rant :)

on the subject of immersion, i've been totally immersed in 2d sprite games - recently metroid fusion on the GBA on a couple of years ago. i think there is a big difference between gameplay immersion and audio/visual immersion. and though fusion exceled in the gameplay imersion, the visuals and audio also had their own imersiveness, and it's had to say iof it would have been any better if they were high quality 3d. perhaps a higer resolution screen and better quality audio may have helped, but that's a immersive quality as a result of better technology making the result crisper and clearer, not imersive quality as a result of better technology allowing for 'better' art work'.

Submitted by souri on Fri, 22/04/05 - 12:57 AM Permalink

[url="http://cube.ign.com/articles/604/604674p1.html"]This IGN article[/url] has some numbers on how many game units and consoles have been sold for the last month, and the Gamecube is not doing good at all..quote:The first game from Nintendo's Tokyo studio, Donkey Kong Jungle Beat, debuted in March to abysmal sales figures. The bongo-based platformer sold through a paltry 39,000 units for the month, well below expectations.

Both Resident Evil 4 and Star Fox Assault, debuting exclusively for GameCube in January and February respectively, outperformed Jungle Beat, although neither ranked among the month's Top 10 sellers.

"Mario Party 6, NBA Street V3, Robots, MVP Baseball 2005, Dragon Ball Z Sagas, The Incredibles and Super Smash Bros. Melee, none of which sold more than 48,000 units, rounded out the GameCube Top 10 for the month."

Overall GameCube hardware sales for the month were a reflection of software sales: down. Approximately 90,000 GameCubes were sold for the month.

Sony, meanwhile, sold almost 500,000 more PlayStation 2s in March. Microsoft sold about 230,000 more Xbox consoles.

If software sells hardware, Nintendo is sure to be in even bigger trouble in April. There are no new games coming out for GameCube in April.
No new games coming out at all in April? [xx(]

Submitted by hyperswivel on Fri, 22/04/05 - 1:23 AM Permalink

Nintendo have always been at the forefront of developing new and creative gameplay, whether it's at the expense of pretty flashing lights that you game artists so desperately need to flesh out your gaming experience is of no consequence.
Super Mario 64 was the birth of the 3D platformer, and thanks to it's re-release as a DS game, reformed fanboys like yourself have been given an opportunity to discover a game that still holds up against and even puts to shame some of the games being released today.
Nintendo's in house titles are more often than not overflowing with original concepts and quality gameplay, which is more than can be said for Sony's in house titles which amount sweet FA. It's easy to win the console wars, just license your system to every developer willing to pander to the lowest common denominator's obsession with sex and violence and wait for the money to roll on in.
Sure, you find the occasional gem in the Grand Theft Auto or Metal Gear Solid series, but you have to sift through a cavalcade of shite to get to it.
Not with Nintendo. You pick up an exclusive Nintendo title, and more often than not it is solid GOLD! So you can keep your PSP with it's "beautifully lit backdrop, reflections and a soundtrack that rivals blah blah blah". I have a DS because it will allow me to play titles that Sony Cronies can only dream about. And that's games with substance, character and heart.

Submitted by LiveWire on Fri, 22/04/05 - 4:53 AM Permalink

i agree that many of the titles that nintendo brings out are top quality, but that dosnt change the fact that they need to increase their market share if only to encourage more 3rd party suport. sure yuo might get more crap filtering in, but at the moment if you want both GTA, etc and zelda you need to own two systems.

Submitted by hyperswivel on Fri, 22/04/05 - 4:59 AM Permalink

Don't you think exclusive titles are exactly what's keeping Nintendo alive? If it weren't for exclusive title rights, then we'd all have one generic console and you know what happens when there's no competition... prices go up, and quality comes crashing down. The last golden era of Nintendo was when they had control of RARE... what happened to them after they were lured with great hordes of cash. I think there was a Conker sequel that was largely ignored. Banjo Kazooie never made another appearance. Nintendo look after their children and their fans. If only the fans were as loyal and consistent as the product.

Submitted by Tall Nick on Fri, 22/04/05 - 7:23 AM Permalink

Exclusive title is the only reason Nintendo?s home consoles exist.
Incase your loyalty as a obvious Fanboy has clouded your vision, Nintendo don?t develop any in-house games any more.
Their sports titles are made by Camelot, Pok?mon is made by Game freak, and all Zelda titles are now being done by the folks who made ?The minish Cap?, Just because Nintendo is written on the box doesn?t mean they had anything to do with the idea.
Neither does it stop those same companies from releasing the same type of game under a new name (and different characters of course).

Hyperswivel, reading your first replay its obvious you?re a fanboy, and are really upset at the fact that Nintendo aren?t what they once were.
So I want to clarify some things before you continue in a blind rage.

?Nintendo have always been at the forefront of developing new and creative gameplay?

Yes they have been (past tense), yes Mario 64 was a revolution. I covered the point that Nintendo started a revolution, but name a (Nintendo published) revolutionary game that came out in the Game Cube.
Surely you wouldn?t say Mario Sunshine or Zelda Windwaker, or even Smashbrothers M are revolutionary?
No it seems that that quality about Nintendo has gone out.

?which is more than can be said for Sony's in house titles which amount sweet FA?

You forgot to mention Microsoft, but hey they?ve had enough trouble with launching the Xbox.
The beauty about Sony and Microsoft is the fact that you don?t need their approval to produce a game on there console, as apposed to Nintendo where they breathe down your neck until it?s what they want on there console.
Remember, Resident Evil only came out 6 years after it was released on PS1.
Why? Because the revolutionary Nintendo didn?t want to adapt.
Where as Sony and Microsoft don?t care what you do as long as you pay the dev kit fee?s and so spawn more Innovative games.

This is a long one,
?Sure, you find the occasional gem in the Grand Theft Auto or Metal Gear Solid series, but you have to sift through a cavalcade of shite to get to it.
Not with Nintendo. You pick up an exclusive Nintendo title?

This one?s difficult to retort for the reason that, I know you (the reason I?m picking on you) and you?ve never played more than 2 minutes of either of those games or any of the greats on a PS2 or Xbox.
Fact is that more great titles come out for PS2 and Xbox than Game Cube exclusive titles in a year, I think the ratio is around 10:3.

And to finish off,
?So you can keep your PSP with it's "beautifully lit backdrop, reflections and a soundtrack that rivals blah blah blah". I have a DS because it will allow me to play titles that Sony Cronies can only dream about?

Fact is Sony don?t need to dream up a good idea for a PSP game they?ve provided sufficient hardware for developers to do that, and they have 100+ developers and Publishers ready to get innovative titles off the ground.
Meanwhile Nintendo are still overlooking each title being produced for their system making sure sequels get made and flash games are ported.

I haven?t gone too far off topic have I? I don?t want to turn this into a plug for Sony.
I?ve always been a supporter of innovative games and am willing to buy a console to play something new. But this isn?t about how I feel towards games this is about the fact that because Nintendo are stubborn in their ways they have lost their revolutionary touch and if not changed aren?t going to be around for much longer.
The good news is that the great revolutionary games they publish will be.

Submitted by hyperswivel on Fri, 22/04/05 - 7:35 AM Permalink

A lot of very good points their Nick. While the Gamecube didn't host completely revolutionary games, they did at least try to be a bit more creative with their direction. Pikmin comes to mind, as does Donkey Kong Jungle Beat. I agree as far as Nintendo's iron fist needing to loosen it's grasp... I'm sick of going to EB month after month to find nothing new for my console. I'm not sure, but don't those developers you listed make games exclusively for Nintendo? I'd consider that pretty close to in-house, but I'll qualify my statements in future by saying "exclusive Nintendo property" or "stuff that Shigeru (The Shigster) Miyamoto done did".
Unlike a lot of gamers, I simply don't have the time to invest in multiple consoles. Sticking to a system that I know will deliver me quality titles with generally good replay value (particularly pick up and play multiplayer games that lend themselves to a party atmosphere). When something truly brilliant for another machine comes out that I can't find a similar alternative to on a Nintendo system, or on PC then I will consider purchasing one but until then I just can't justify it and will be sitting tight here in my comfort zone.

Submitted by Malus on Fri, 22/04/05 - 10:34 AM Permalink

I've noticed alot of "nintendo has fallen from grace" comments and although I'm no fanboy of any particular console I'd have to say that for all there cuteness and fluffy, happy visuals they still have some of the most creative titles as well as some of the best gameplay out there.

Is it so much a fault of Nintendo that they have lost favour with the 'masses' or is it a sign that people are becoming overly obssessed with visuals and not content?

Hmm reminds me of something....Can anyone say "Hollywood" ............

Submitted by LiveWire on Sat, 23/04/05 - 5:45 AM Permalink

quote:Is it so much a fault of Nintendo that they have lost favour with the 'masses' or is it a sign that people are becoming overly obssessed with visuals and not content?

i shouldnt think so. i think the main reason is lack of titles, not people looking only for pretty pictures. i think if nintendo had the same 3rd party support as the other consoles the market shares would be much closer, not becuase you could then get the pretty visuals on any system, but because you could then get a large range of good games on any system. and a whole lot with prety pictures, but you dont have to buy those.

whats interesting to note about nintendo though (and i base this on what i've read and heared not solid fact) is that while they have lost market share, they are still doing just as well finacially, if not more so, than they ever have. i dont think they have lost any gamers so - sony and microsoft have simply gained far more. to me it seems there's a big difference between market share and profits, and it's profits thats going to keep nintendo in the business or not.

Submitted by hyperswivel on Sat, 23/04/05 - 5:59 AM Permalink

That's an interesting point about Nintendo not losing market share as a result of it's competitors gaining ground. This is attributable to at least two facts. One being that there are more gamers than ever before, and also that unlikke ten years ago, company loyalty has dwindled and more and more people are owners of multiple systems which is nothing but good news for everyone... except poor people.