The Faceless Master
Member
the thing basically says nintendo isn't about to risk billions losing money selling high powered consoles when they can do something different and make money selling less powerful consoles...
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Reggie Speaks... Yet Again
- Thread starter imastalker co.
- Start date
Nintendo had best watch out because they're making quick and easy money with these 'non-games' like Nintendogs & Brain Flex etc. If Nintendo see these as more profitable than your normal Zelda, Mario etc. what can we expect from them?
These non games are cheap, easy & quick to make; I hope Ninetdno doesn't sell out with dare I say it 'gimmicky non-games' that seem cheap to make & almost totally profietable.
If these little game-farts do sell well like Reggie is stating then whats going to stop them looking for the next Nintendogs/Brain Training by producing effortless crap thats like already a flash game on the internet or something.
These non games are cheap, easy & quick to make; I hope Ninetdno doesn't sell out with dare I say it 'gimmicky non-games' that seem cheap to make & almost totally profietable.
If these little game-farts do sell well like Reggie is stating then whats going to stop them looking for the next Nintendogs/Brain Training by producing effortless crap thats like already a flash game on the internet or something.
SolidSnakex
Member
Any1 said:
It is the right thing for them. The only comment I really have a problem with is the one about how the other console developers are just going to be making games in a prettier package. That's really no different from the Mark Rein comment about the Rev controller that so many Nintendo fans got mad about. It's being shortsighted on developers potential with those products. As Nintendo has seen with their own DS, just because you give developers a fancy new device it doesn't mean they're going to be able to do anything special with it. The same 3rd parties that can do something special with it are the same ones that can do the same with regular controls and more powerful hardware.
Warm Machine
Member
Man, his hollywood comparisons are really bad.
Any1 said:
These kind of overstatements of Nintendo's lacking appeal are commonplace here on GAF, and they are completely off base. Nintendo has sold over 4 million copies worldwide of each of Super Mario Sunshine, Zelda: The Wind Waker and Mario Kart Double Dash!! In fact, they've released dozens of million-sellers for the underperforming Cube alone. Almost every other gaming company in existance (Electronic Arts being the sole exception) can only dream of the total game sales Nintendo has shown year after year.
Obviously, on a year-to-year basis, Nintendo is showing diminuishing returns on the home-console front. To combat this trend (which no doubt will ultimately lead to Nintendo losing money, even though it is currently still fantastically profitable), they're right to try something different -- I agree with you there. Like all healthy companies, Nintendo wishes to grow rather than shrink, even if a shrunken Nintendo still dwarfs the likes of Konami or Take2. So yes, a lot of what Reggie is saying makes sense. But statements of Nintendo being doomed ignore widely available facts -- they make no sense, since virtually every other games company is in worse shape than Nintendo.
I think the root of the problem is that Nintendo, by and large, is no longer as relevant or appealing to you, or to most of the gamers you know. Believe me, I understand those sentiments completely. But please avoid translating and extrapolating such feelings to statements on and predictions of Nintendo's success or failure. That's a different matter entirely.
Warm Machine said:
Actually I would say they are pretty apt. Hollywood banks on very expensive special effects to draw in the young male demographic but a lot of times we have movies with very expensive budgets that bomb at the box office because the market is flooded with those types of movies. The correlation to the videogame industry I thought was obvious. How many big budget games bomb every month? The worst part about the video-game industry is that publishers can't use DVD sales to compensate the losses like the Movie industry can. Small dev houses have all but dissapeared and even huge publishers have been assimilated and its not because the market is "Heathy". If it was the industry wouldn't be cannibalizing itself.
Do you think publishers actually like to spend 20-30 Million on damn near every game they produce?
John Harker
Definitely doesn't make things up as he goes along.
Heh, I posted this in the other Reggie speaks thread.
But nooooooo, no one ever listens to me, do they....
But anyway,
I love this guy.
But nooooooo, no one ever listens to me, do they....
But anyway,
I love this guy.
ziran said:great read!
agreed with most of it. as much as i'm looking forward to the controller i'm as excited about the internally developed software from nintendo (for revolution)
...Nintendo Freehand System?
I saw someone mention on this forum that developers have been calling the system "freestyle". Not sure I really like the name, but it could cater to the hip-hop crowd. I can hear certain MC's using it as a punchline already.
Free advertisement = Good.
SolidSnakex
Member
Pellham said:
It's not like they've completely changed. They refused to go online this gen, and next gen they seem to be refusing to take part in the move to HD. They still have the same mentality they had back then, as in show us we're wrong and we'll change.
I still think the HD thing is a little premature - it remains to be seen how the ps3 copes, but when xbox360 games are coming in for so much stick for not looking next-gen enough and one of the flagship HD games (PGR3) doesnt even manage to run 60fps or in 720p you gotta askif perhaps pushing HD isnt that great a move right now..
Could still come back and bite nintendo on the ass tho - it really wouldnt surprise to see them saying how onw is the right time for HD at the start of the next generation and how they made mistakes with revolution by not including it just like they are doing now with online and the revolution over the gamecube..
Could still come back and bite nintendo on the ass tho - it really wouldnt surprise to see them saying how onw is the right time for HD at the start of the next generation and how they made mistakes with revolution by not including it just like they are doing now with online and the revolution over the gamecube..
SolidSnakex said:
You can't honestly say that online was a big deal this generation. It enjoyed moderate success on the XBox with XBox Live and one game was popular for it on the PS2 (FFXI), but in no way was it a make or break deal for consumers. Having online or not would not have made the PS2 sell any better for one. And HD is not a big deal either. You will still be able to use the Revolution on HD-compatible TVs, it'll just not take full advantage of it. Will most consumers notice the difference? Until we actually see some games, who knows.
SolidSnakex
Member
Pellham said:
Read Reggie's quote again
I support Nintendo's dedication to innovation and I think that they're putting a lot of good ideas into the Revolution but the lack of HD support is a mistake. You can argue that it's premature (which I don't really agree with) but I think Nintendo should let developers decide. Even if the system is not as powerful as what the competition has to offer I still don't understand the reason for not supporting HD. Nintendo's argument about HD making game development more expensive is just bullshit - though I don't blame them for trying to justify it. I wouldn't expect otherwise.
That said it's old news and I don't understand why people act surprised every time it is brought up.
That said it's old news and I don't understand why people act surprised every time it is brought up.
SolidSnakex
Member
cybamerc said:
I'm not saying its great, but i'd rather have a company that atleast tried instead of going around saying that it's not worth it.
Nintendo never said it wasn't worth it. Just that it wasn't the right time. Now they're doing it and it looks like they're getting it right from the beginning.SolidSnakex said:
I think we can all point out areas where one of the companies is behind the others. To say that Nintendo doesn't embrace change because it stuck with carts and was hesitant with regards to online is ignorant to say the least.
SolidSnakex
Member
cybamerc said:
Are you denying that they haven't done those things? We're going into the 3rd gen since Nintendo has been leader and each time around they refuse to back something that seems logical at the time and their fans back that decision only to change by the end of that gen. Last gen it was disc formats, this gen it was online play and next gen it looks like its going to be HD. Not exactly what i'd call "Change before you have to". It's more along the lines of change because you're going to be even more left behind than you already are in that area.
GitarooMan
Member
cybamerc said:
I agree with this in general, Nintendo certainly doesn't fear change in some areas. I think the online thing is the same as the HD thing, i.e., if NoA had their way it would have been in GC (or HD in the case of REV), but because it's not that important in JP and NCL makes all the decisions it was not pushed. Hence the massive spin the NoA is forced to pull on lack of HD on Rev and no real online on GC....
reggie deflates his own silly hollywood analogy once he gets around to naming nintendo's recent mainstream successes: brain training and nintendogs are not taxi driver and the godfather. nintendogs and the godfather may both appeal to broader audiences than noisy action fare, but the godfather's real distinction is in its thematic and artistic sophistication. until nintendo can make similarly distinguished games, they should refrain from such grasping comparisons...their games to date are so obviously paltry that they look ridiculous in the godfather's reflected light.
drohne said:
Played Nintendogs much? It's actually quite well-made. Perhaps not Godfather well-made (chalk that one up to marketing hyperbole, yes), but still, a pretty accomplished product, not an "obviously paltry" one. And I'm saying this even though the subject matter doesn't interest me at all (but then, this 'broadening the audience'-thing isn't supposed to apply to me, already-a-gamer).
Also, Nintendo's 'games to date' do include many titles that are genuinely, enduringly beloved. Didn't Time Magazine once call Ocarina of Time 'the Gone with the Wind of videogames'? Agree or disagree, its paltriness doesn't seem to be quite as obvious as you suggest. (Now, whether or not Gone with the Wind is all that good, that's another question...)
Dragona Akehi
Retired
Firest0rm said:
Cute, but inaccurate. Yamauchi wanted to go with a CD drive for the N64. Miyamoto said it would ruin Mario 64 due to load times and demanded carts.
Yamauchi helped with the design of the DS... and look how that's going right now.
Yamauchi = The ultimate pimp.
who the fuck has sat down for more than 2 minutes with Nintendogs and thought "man this is one cheaply made game." seriously.. I would be willing to bet good money that nintendogs had a budget to rival many big studio games. the game freaking reeks of polish. I'm not going to try and convince haters that it is the best game ever made or even a great game (their minds are made up) but to say the game was made on the cheap shows that you really have no idea what you are talking about.
as for commenting on reggie's statements, they pretty much get the blanket reaction Nintendo has gotten from me for a year now. They are taking a huge gamble. If it pays off it will pay off huge (DS). If it fails (highly unlikely) nintendo will have to work hard to get back in the game (if they would even want to by that point).
edit - note that paying off huge DOES NOT MEAN higher marketshare. it means they making the money they are very happy with making. if they are still in third place with a lower market share but pulling in a couple of billion of dollars in profit each year, I just don't see them sweating being second or first place too much.
as for commenting on reggie's statements, they pretty much get the blanket reaction Nintendo has gotten from me for a year now. They are taking a huge gamble. If it pays off it will pay off huge (DS). If it fails (highly unlikely) nintendo will have to work hard to get back in the game (if they would even want to by that point).
edit - note that paying off huge DOES NOT MEAN higher marketshare. it means they making the money they are very happy with making. if they are still in third place with a lower market share but pulling in a couple of billion of dollars in profit each year, I just don't see them sweating being second or first place too much.
evilromero
Member
MightyHedgehog said:
That same structure existed in 1985 as well. He is right about one thing- the videogame industry was as strong and robust at one point in time. The ability to play simple, yet compelling software such as Super Mario Bros. attracted a broader audience. Lately, the more complex games become, the more we push away the Baby Boomb gen and the early Y generation. If you notice the most popular games among this crowd are Zuma, Bejeweled and parlor games. Games that require little instruction and are universally understood.
ironichaos
Member
Gee. Probably because they also have millions of fans willing to buy the next Mario Kart, Super Smash Bros., Legend of Zelda or Metroid Prime.
That was a good freakin' read. I don't know why people say it's PR bs. It's really quite honest stuff. I mean, he even says Electroplankton, Brain Training are not games.
Although, it probably helps that I agree with him about the health of the movie industry and the video game industry.
Although, it probably helps that I agree with him about the health of the movie industry and the video game industry.
Bluemercury
Member
drohne said:
Taxi driver a good film?also i would like to know which games and in which console those would fare well compared to Godfather.....really.....
ThunderEmperor said:
Well, that's great for them but how does it benefit me? I'd rather they take a bath on it and give me 1080i games and graphics that are suitably superior to current gen.
I can't wait until Revolution game images start floating out. It's going to be like Xbox 1.5 but worse.
That said, I'm really looking forward to seeing what developers do with the control interface.
A lot of what Reggie says makes sense. But almost its entire premise rests on the assumption that Xbox 360 and PS3 are going for more bells, more whistles, more HD.
While that may be true for a lot of games, the extra power makes it at least possible to innovate. While Revolution eschews graphics technology, they are embracing controller technology to bring new gaming methods to consumers.
But PS3 and Xbox 360 are just as capable of extending gameplay options. PS2 has already shown that Sony is willing to try new things, with Eyetoy, the new Buzz! controller etc. PS3 will only expand those options.
So while I applaud Reggie and Nintendo's attempt to broaden the market, his argument is IMO over simplifying the situation with the competition
While that may be true for a lot of games, the extra power makes it at least possible to innovate. While Revolution eschews graphics technology, they are embracing controller technology to bring new gaming methods to consumers.
But PS3 and Xbox 360 are just as capable of extending gameplay options. PS2 has already shown that Sony is willing to try new things, with Eyetoy, the new Buzz! controller etc. PS3 will only expand those options.
So while I applaud Reggie and Nintendo's attempt to broaden the market, his argument is IMO over simplifying the situation with the competition
koam said:
This isn't exactly some random press release where you would bold 4000 sprites on screen!! or something. It lays out what Nintendo is doing next gen from a pure business perspective. This speech was directed at members of the business community, not hardcore game fans, which is why it's interesting to read.
radioheadrule83
Banned
That was a damn good read.
ironichaos
Member
That's a strange question.
How does the iPod benefit you? Does it give you suitably superior sound quality compared to a CD? Does it give you suitably cheaper music compared to a CD? No, but it does benefit you by giving you a convenient, appealing form and simple, easy to use interface. Sacrifices must sometimes be made for the greater good.
Graphics are not the only refinements in video games. And they are most definitely NOT the ONLY BENEFIT.
By not focusing the majority of their resources on graphics, Nintendo has specifically chosen to create an environment (for themselves as well as third-parties) that will highlight unique ideas over big budgets. If you don't like it, you can choose not to play. Either way, get over yourself -- not everything is created to benefit you.
mariosbrother
Member
cybamerc said:
Because if the hardware isn't as powerful in terms of churning out HD, you would have developers giving you 1080i @ 15fps. Let's be real.
Also:
720
vs
480
mariosbrother said:Because if the hardware isn't as powerful in terms of churning out HD, you would have developers giving you 1080i @ 15fps. Let's be real.
Also:
720
vs
480
you actually can't correctly represent 720p vs. 480p in a fixed pixel graphic. the problem is that you will have to scale one of the images which means you are then at the mercy of whatever interpolation you use. I mean I agree with your point, but you can't show it on the computer. the closest you could get is to film or shoot 720p and 480p on the same tv.
mariosbrother
Member
borghe said:
Yes, so I used no interpolation to scale the image down, then just stretched it to fit the same 720 dimension. It's definitely not representative, but it's still a decent comparison. Point: as long as you can match polygons and effects, the jump in resolution isn't quite as noticeable.
yes because we all know that Nintendog is very easy to make. no reasearch or development, it just happens that one day miyamoto's dog created it with it paws.Screenboy said:
Oh and btw, Brain training is very easy to do also, no research needs to be done at all. it just one day some books turned a DS cart, and it sold millions.
John Harker
Definitely doesn't make things up as he goes along.
mariosbrother said:Because if the hardware isn't as powerful in terms of churning out HD, you would have developers giving you 1080i @ 15fps. Let's be real.
Also:
720
vs
480
In motion, in a racing game, you can't tell me you really expect to see a big difference between the two.
Especially if ones 30fps vs 60
edit: i didnt mean you specifically mariosbrother, I just mean in general.
this is impossible. you are changing the pixel count hence they need to be interpolated.mariosbrother said:
again, interpolated.
if it's not representative it's not a decent comparison. Not trying to bust on you. just warning you that you'll be called out on it. I agree with you entirely, but your method of proving it will be attacked, and rightly so.
mariosbrother
Member
borghe said:
I'll give you the interpolation on the reduction because I was 'guessing' what pixels to remove' (~every third pixel), but enlarging the pixel sizes to fill out 720... not so much. True that 480 resolution doesn't incrementally fit into 720 nicely, but ARRRGGH!!! it's good enough.
So I take it back, it's 'representative' and thereby can be considered a decent comparison.
For the casual onlooker (not you), s/he can quickly observe that there is less relative pixel data, but also notice that the resulting difference is not all that great.Back to work...