BlackNMild2k1
Member
Thank you for all of that, time do a little bit of reading.
If you find anything that has been debunked or confirmed, please let me know so I can update it.
Thank you for all of that, time do a little bit of reading.
You guys think the same game pricing from the Wii will hold?
Can't see this happening.. Pikmin 3 will be most likely their big flagship title. And Mario 2D will be for 3DS.
But if this happens, I'm with you.
but serious. everything cool is in the OP.
I was sarcastically asking, of course prices are gonna go up lol.Good question.
I can see them raising the price to 360/PS3 standarts. The outrage will be delicious.
Yes, I think games will get more expensive.
Good question.
I can see them raising the price to 360/PS3 standarts. The outrage will be delicious.
Yes, I think games will get more expensive.
Good question.
I can see them raising the price to 360/PS3 standarts. The outrage will be delicious.
Yes, I think games will get more expensive.
That's the problem I have. And to be more specific now that I think about it, because of that they won't calibrate correctly. They look fine, but once the game is on things move in the direction the controller is off at. I still have my original plus three 3rd party controllers. My Hybrid Heaven (which needs a sequel IMO) has been neglected for too long.
They were Nintendo Select titles at that point though.
because they (most of the time) stay at that price FOREVER. *looks at mario kart ds*I tend to think so, too.
But Nintendo is also pretty good at pricing things appropriately. For example.. $30 for Rhythm Heaven Fever? Hell yes!
I think first party might hold, but HD might mean a raise across the board.
Cod MW3 Wii was 59 Euros here in Austria allready, so it wouldn't exactly go up much. Unless 70 or 80 Euro becomes the standard pricing Next Gen. (if so fuck them)
I don't think it will go up that high, I sure hope not anyway.
Can't see this happening.. Pikmin 3 will be most likely their big flagship title. And Mario 2D will be for 3DS.
But if this happens, I'm with you.
Nintendo won't hold at $50 for the same reason Microsoft didn't hold at $50: because third parties think it's unfair.
And if they think it's unfair that Perfect Dark Zero is $10 less than Oblivion, then they are going just flatout refuse to develop for a system where New Super Mario Bros. 3 is $10 less than Max Payne 3.
I'm relly curious what other exclusive will be in the launch window, it won't just be Pikmin 3, I'm not saying something huge like Mario but a Kirby game or just having some other franchise that is on Nintendo consoles like Harvest Moon or something. Nintendo will want to have at least 3 games you can't buy for anything else in the launch window, even if there not huge games, because exclusives are their thing.
This and unlike Microsoft, Nintendo already has a stigma with Third parties as hogging all the sales and limelight. Having their games 10 dollars less would not be of benefit in getting third parties on board or in quelling that stigma.
So what do you guys do in this thread? Is this the right place to come and get mocked if I think that controller based asymmetrical multiplayer is flawed and that need to be able to support two screened controllers to come anywhere close to Nintendo's expectations?
Those companies that think they can both charge $60 and have Day 1 DLC can go to hell.This and unlike Microsoft, Nintendo already has a stigma with Third parties as hogging all the sales and limelight. Having their games 10 dollars less would not be of benefit in getting third parties on board or in quelling that stigma.
They really need:
- A couple "hardcore" franchises (brand-new or new to Nintendo consoles), at least one of which can stand toe to toe with Halo, Gears, Uncharted, etc.
- A couple games from existing Nintendo IPs
- A couple games that target the expanded audience and make neat use of the tablet.
Basically they're going to need some exclusives to convince the core gamers who aren't Nintendo fans to buy this.
Wont the lineup simply be.
Pikmin 3
Retro Title
U - Whatever
In what ways do you think it's flawed? also I have to say that while asymmetrical multi is a novel idea it's definitely not something I want to see used a lot.
I just think it's restrictive to developers and makes the console a harder sell when multiple people are going to be using it at the same time. I feel like there are only so many things you can do with local multiplayer when only one person gets to have the "good controller". Then there's the risk that some parents may skip the Wii U to avoid Christmas Day arguments between their children about who gets to use said controller. Granted the second is pretty trivial, but it's a risk I wouldn't be willing to take if I called the shots.
Pikmin 3 supposedly exists. The Retro title doesn't exist at all. And both of those are launch titles?
Nintendo is definitely gonna need a proven system seller at launch and more ammo some time in the launch window. I argued this before but momentum is everything. You can't rely on 3rd party games available elsewhere and ubisoft garbage to push your game out.
Even though Ace argued it before, the only proven system seller I can think of is some mario game of some sort. I say some sort because I'm not saying they'll have a big one prepared, it could be a NSMB-esque version they just threw together. None of their other proven system sellers would likely be ready for launch/launch window.
But they need something for sure.
and if so they'll enjoy a disappointing launch and pretty much no momentum. Good luck convincing people to plop down almost 500 bucks for AC3 and a new console.I know Nintendo is talking a big game about how they realize launch lineups are important and blah blah blah, but don't be surprised if it's still pretty lackluster and there aren't big or even kinda-big games in the launch window.
Game development alongside hardware development is a pain and, while the port-ability from other consoles is good for third parties making other console games, that doesn't mean a lot of good original games are going to float to the surface early on.
In addition, a good launch lineup is not necessarily...useful. I mean, it helps more than it hurts, obviously, but if Pikmin 3 isn't ready for the main stage this Fall, it ain't comin' out. Look at the Vita, where people will swear up and down that its launch lineups is one of the best ever. That "fact" isn't really helping that console much at all.
Basically, don't get your hopes up about a Pikmin 3 or a Retro title or a new Mario game. Assassin's Creed III may very well be the best game at launch.
If I were Nintendo, I'd advertise the free to play Ghost Recon: Online as being 'in the box'. Meaning that even the most rudimentary Wii U bundle will come with the standard pack in title and GR:O for the hardcore.
You think without telling us any information before the conference, they were building up something big for the conference and a nice new surprise.
and if so they'll enjoy a disappointing launch and pretty much no momentum. Good luck convincing people to plop down almost 500 bucks for AC3 and a new console.
I just refuse to believe that they'll let another situation like that take place and get out of hand again. Either the pricing of the console has to be masterfully aggressive, or there has to be system sellers at launch/launch window (that aren't on other systems).
Also there is a difference between a good launch and a launch that includes "that" game. If the Vita launch included a monster hunter game, I use that as my example because it's the only system seller I can think of for them right now, lol, they would have sold plenty more at launch.
Basically, don't get your hopes up about a Pikmin 3 or a Retro title or a new Mario game. Assassin's Creed III may very well be the best game at launch.
I don't know, Nintendo is in the fortunate position of they themselves being the company that can deliver the system seller. Sony would have to rely on monster hunter from capcom to have a good launch, they didn't, and the launch wasn't so good. 3DS same deal, no system seller, no system sales. We saw the epic meltdown that lead to. Lack of momentum is a real killer. Hard to get out of that rut.Yeah, but it didn't. Because those games take time and mastery of stable hardware. In-development systems rarely have either and almost never have both. Do you know when Vita kits were in some developers' hands? January of 2010, at least. That did not pay off in launch software.
The days of Miyamoto designing a game and designing the hardware to play that game are over. Now we'll get mostly locked-down devkits around a year before release and earnest game development can begin there. Then you'll get your Steel Divers, your Pilotwings, your "herp derp this is a port not a remake and I have an IQ of 70" Ocarina of Times.
Launches are shit now! We as an industry have to kind of learn to accept this.
Probably unnecessary. Third-party AAA titles like Assassin's Creed 3 and the latest Nintendo AAA game (Zelda, Mario, Metroid, etc.) will probably be enough. A brand-new IP would be great, but that's hardly a tipping point, imo.They really need:
- A couple "hardcore" franchises (brand-new or new to Nintendo consoles), at least one of which can stand toe to toe with Halo, Gears, Uncharted, etc.- A couple games from existing Nintendo IPs
- A couple games that target the expanded audience and make neat use of the tablet.
Basically they're going to need some exclusives to convince the core gamers who aren't Nintendo fans to buy this.
I don't know, Nintendo is in the fortunate position of they themselves being the company that can deliver the system seller. Sony would have to rely on monster hunter from capcom to have a good launch, they didn't, and the launch wasn't so good. 3DS same deal, no system seller, no system sales. We saw the epic meltdown that lead to. Lack of momentum is a real killer. Hard to get out of that rut.
Nintendo has to rely on themselves. I'm just under the impression that they've used every sparing moment since they've had the earliest possible dev kit, to get something prepared for launch that would move consoles. I mean it would presumable have a 2+ year development time wouldn't it?
The 3DS lauch was Nintendo's way of giving 3rd Parties room for their games.Yeah, but it didn't. Because those games take time and mastery of stable hardware. In-development systems rarely have either and almost never have both. Do you know when Vita kits were in some developers' hands? January of 2010, at least. That did not pay off in launch software.
The days of Miyamoto designing a game and designing the hardware to play that game are over. Now we'll get mostly locked-down devkits around a year before release and earnest game development can begin there. Then you'll get your Steel Divers, your Pilotwings, your "herp derp this is a port not a remake and I have an IQ of 70" Ocarina of Times.
Launches are shit now! We as an industry have to kind of learn to accept this.
The 3DS lauch was Nintendo's way of giving 3rd Parties room for their games.
Well overall I'm not so much arguing that there will be one, I'm just arguing that they need one. I honestly can't see how Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed will sell consoles since people will much happily pay less (a LOT less) to play those games on systems they already own.Miyamoto said a while back that he was having trouble finding people to work on Pikmin 3 because everyone was tapped. Previous EAD-born games like Luigi's Mansion are being outsourced to Next Level (whom I really like, don't get me wrong). I am sure they have studios that aren't busy, but I am unsure that those studios are working on "that launch game."