Support NeoGAF

[tanasten]

Yea, but Revolutoin and DS are all about innovation through unique hardware. This discussion is about how Nintendo is "again" putting out a risky, innovative hardware platform for the purposes of making more innovative games. We really haven't seen that in their history. They just keep repeating it in their PR so you will accept as fact that every Nintendo console was as innovative as Revolution is (having seen no Revo games, any innovative games in Nintendo's past are not relevent to this discussion). So any great/innovative games on NES/SNES/N64/Cube really don't matter.

On a hardware Level, you got the true, but on a software level Nintendo has been pionering since the NES era, just falling a little with the arrival of PlayStation, but drawing again the standard for the future.

And now, they're keeping a new step away, it's not like them putting a koopa shell for the extra defense, it's just moving forward again the gaming industry, because there's not only the way of improving graphics.

So, my point is, I don't see Nintendo in a hurry to skip Sony's and Microsoft giants steps, they're doing their own vision of gaming.

Sony and Microsoft are just... rapiers looking for money (and maybe on the wrong well).

 

[papercut]

Yea, but Revolutoin and DS are all about innovation through unique hardware. This discussion is about how Nintendo is "again" putting out a risky, innovative hardware platform for the purposes of making more innovative games. We really haven't seen that in their history. They just keep repeating it in their PR so you will accept as fact that every Nintendo console was as innovative as Revolution is (having seen no Revo games, any innovative games in Nintendo's past are not relevent to this discussion).

We've already seen that Nintendo can make amazing games on ANY hardware. The purpose of this thread is to discuss exactly why Nintendo decided to break their trend of producing amazing software on fairly typical hardware. This thread is about the "start point of Nintendo's Revolution," not a brief history of their amazing gameplay.

Revolution was born of necessity, with a pinch of desperation. It was the right choice for them to make from a financial standpoint. It was not a choice they made as part of their unending crusade to bring our world the light of innovation.

I agree with you about the financials. Either way, Nintendo's innovations are mostly limited to control input. Shoulder buttons, analog stick, now the revmote. You can't really make a console itself revolutionary because all the console does is throw images on a TV screen (until you switch to VR or something). Looking at it from this point of view, I'd bet that Nintendo would have gone with the revmote even if they were doing better in the console race. The low cost/underpowered bit, not so much.

 

[speedpop]

Revolution was born of necessity, with a pinch of desperation. It was the right choice for them to make from a financial standpoint. It was not a choice they made as part of their unending crusade to bring our world the light of innovation.

This analogy seems to bother you quite a lot based on your posts within this thread itself, why is that?

 

[krypt0nian]

It is a single name: Wario Ware. It's a simple mini-game based game designed from roots diferent. The game was a crítical hit all over the world and it has been one of the most popular and most played games from non-gamers since Tetris.

What?

 

[AdmiralViscen]

This analogy seems to bother you quite a lot based on your posts within this thread itself, why is that?

Because it's annoying to hear everyone going on and on about how Nintendo is the big innovator just because they love innovating. They ruled the industry with an iron fist, then got spanked, and now they're taking a blue ocean approach because they can't get themselves back up to a first-tier console manufacturer the old-fashioned way. I hate PR drones.

 

[Zilch]

What?

Like I said on the first page, this guy likes to make up a lot of 'facts'. Loony.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

Because it's annoying to hear everyone going on and on about how Nintendo is the big innovator just because they love innovating. They ruled the industry with an iron fist, then got spanked, and now they're taking a blue ocean approach because they can't get themselves back up to a first-tier console manufacturer the old-fashioned way. I hate PR drones.

What do you suggest they do? MS & Sony are both GIANTS with more to fall back on besides games and their ultimate goal is to control all your entertainment and/or computing needs. Nintendo isn't that company. Tomorrow, Nintendo could reveal that Revolution is going to be a loss-leading super console more powerful than PS3...but would that make it or them better? In all likelihood it'd probably be worse for Nintendo 'cos: A) after the GCN & Nintendo's "kiddy" stigma, not too many people would take such claims seriously, B) casual gamers don't really know the difference between specs, they'll believe whoever barks the loudest, which doesn't benifit Nintendo since Sony & MS both bark alot more & C) this would lead Nintendo down a path they can't win...a path where their competitor's would ultimatly beat them 'cos they either have more cash (MS) or resources (Sony) to outpace them in the end. Plus, what if some future competitor (most likely someone just as big/boastful as Sony or MS) get's into the game business...Nintendo couldn't win such a war!

Nintendo's concerns are making games for their fans and remaining profitable even with a smaller marketshare...they can't do it by loss-leading, that would be a bigger risk for them than going in a new dirrection with Revolution. Companies can be competitive without bleeding money/doing what everyone else does. Another thing, if I were running Nintendo, I wouldn't change much or ramp up Revolution specs...Revolution will be a profitable machine that expands Nintendo's market regardless of it's lower specs.

I'm tired of alot of you kids whining about how great Sony is for bleeding/loss-leading...pffft...they're not doing it to give you $1000 tech in a $300 box...they're doing it to try & stomp the competition out of existance so that they can have a monopoly. Ultimatly, it's what all companies want...but some companies have gone to the point where they put up a front like everything is okay and then crash'n'burn Enron style. All the while Nintendo remains 'cos they value the bottom line...and I don't blame them. If you were running them you would do the same damn thing. No one pisses & moans about how T-Shirts costs pennies to produce but make almost 98% in profits.

 

[AdmiralViscen]

What do you suggest they do?

Exactly what they are doing. I said at least twice that I thought this was absolutely the best course of action for them, and that I was very excited by the prospects. But to say it's happening because of Nintendo's love of magic and mystery is stupid. It's because they need to do it to survive in the console arena. Financially.

 

[TheJollyCorner]

Sony and Microsoft are just... rapiers looking for money (and maybe on the wrong well).

Yeah, it's a good thing Nintendo doesn't care about money- just peace, love, and understanding.

 

[WrathOfOtaibah]

Yet another pathetic "save face" thread.

The Revolution is out of necessity. Nintendo tried to be a competitor with the Game Cube and it blew up in their faces, despite increased third party support from the Nintendo 64. Their games have been the lowest selling in their franchises. The Revolution is Nintendo's way of trying to spark up some insane sales like they did with the NES. This is Nintendo's attempt at changing gameplay. This is the real successor to the NES.

The Revolution is a wild card. I could see it doing really well or really poorly. As much as people here jabber on about how the Revmote will change gaming as we know it, if consumers aren't convinced, Revolution is screwed. It can't just be another Game Cube and be content with last place. With all the effort being made by Sony and Microsoft, Nintendo could easily be the forgotten one if Revolution doesn't turn out well.

Which is why they need several high quality great games in the first 18 months. No more delays, no more waffling, no more "Lets try toon shading!" Its about high quality gaming. Or else Nintendo might as well throw in the towel with consoles, hoping that they can still kick ass on the handheld front.

 

[tanasten]

I accept that Rev is the last oportunitty for Nintendo on home consoles. What you're telling is that Nintendo needed to go this way, but they really doesn't needed a Revolution, they could ride on the same line than GameCube, because great games would continue to sell well, and Nintendo is all about games and make profits every year.

To say, Microsoft has spend more than 3 billions of dollars on the Xbox division, and do you think now they're gona lead the industry? are you having with 360 a great & inovative experience?

That's what's about Nintendo and his Revolution. And again, when they were the leaders of gaming industry they have inovated and defined a lot of things. Shit, now a days there's hundreds of copys of their games...

 

[Hyoushi]

Nop, I'm from Barcelona.

 

[Annoying Old Party Man]

This thread shouldnt exist.
WarioWare was not the start of the gaming Revolution.
We dont know what the new system will bring to gaming
The future of gaming isnt a single, simple minded direction.
I consider myself a Nintendo fan and i cant stand these topics anymore, think what anti nintendites have to suffer...

 

[Stink]

Wario Ware..... The game was a crítical hit all over the world and it has been one of the most popular and most played games from non-gamers since Tetris.

It has?

And the obvious excitement is all over. Just ask a non casual gamer if he/she heard about revolution and what they think. The answer is ever it's pretty interesting.

"No" is not pretty interesting.

 

[StRaNgE]

PLease, forget my spelling and sentences. :lol

And for those who doesn't undestand the point on this topic, Ware Ware was the experiment that showed to Nintendo the way to do games for the future. Just get to play this game with some non-gamers and you will understand why.



Nop, I'm from Barcelona. I will work hard on english, I promise.

that is so NOT true though. Non gamers i know can not get into that game.
specially if i play with them. they hate being beat and with only seconds to try and know what the hell to do and me already knowing they loose. and then they hate it.

now a true game nongamers LOVE is pacman vs. that is my party game of choice.
everyone laughs and gets into it. that game is amazing in that sense.

 

[maxmars]

now a true game nongamers LOVE is pacman vs. that is my party game of choice.
everyone laughs and gets into it. that game is amazing in that sense.

Super MonkeyBall also does wonders for non gamers.

 

[AdmiralViscen]

I accept that Rev is the last oportunitty for Nintendo on home consoles. What you're telling is that Nintendo needed to go this way, but they really doesn't needed a Revolution, they could ride on the same line than GameCube, because great games would continue to sell well, and Nintendo is all about games and make profits every year.

Even Nintendo can't continue to lose market share and stay profitable. And third parties won't be giving Nintendo a third chance at a typical console.

 

[WrathOfOtaibah]

Nintendo makes the majority of their profits through their handhelds. I'm sure they make a tidy profit with their consoles but Nintendo makes insane profits off of the hardware alone. Plus shipping out ports that sell millions, the successful NES Classics lineup, etc. Then when you look at the Game Cube, all you see are games that sold half or less than that than the Nintendo 64. This is Nintendo's worst console performance ever. Just because they're kicking ass with the DS doesn't mean they should neglect the console market.

Nintendo's aim to go for price over power is good if they have the software to make the case. This is what Revolution needs. Nintendo has always been about the software and for GC, it was lacking. Sequels rarely lived up to the usual Nintendo quality. Whats worse is that these games often had delays. Which makes me wonder what the hell Nintendo is doing when it comes to developing these games. I hear that a lot of ideas get redrawn and scrapped. They're not in a position to pull this shit anymore.

Third parties have put a lot of faith into the new control schemes but I remember the good support that happened initially with the Game Cube. In 2001 and 2002, it seemed like everyone was on board for the system. Then once sales flopped, third parties finished up their GC properties, and moved back to PS2. Some of them (Capcom and Namco) even ported their GC titles to the PS2, which is a huge blow in my opinion.

 

[Prine]

How many variations of Nintendo speculation threads can you cocksuckers churn out?

 

[Oblivion]

How many variations of Nintendo speculation threads can you cocksuckers churn out?

Is that a challenge?

 

[Flipmo23]

Man, this thread makes me wish I didn't like Nintendo. That is one seriously sorry thread. I want the system for MP3 and the new Mario, not so they can take over the world or whatever some of you Nintendogs are praying for.