Support NeoGAF

[PoliceCop]

Yep, they are definitely taking their sweet time with this issue. Which, buy the way, they promissed would be addressed way back.

And it would: we would get demos, opened SD, HD support in a week if Nintendo was feeling any kind of fire under their ass. Unfortunately, they don't.

Yeah, just like they did last gen after it became painfully obvious that online was becoming an increasingly important asset in winning the console war and satisfying the consumer base. The fact is, Nintendo is much more interested in making a simple product than a good one. And that's exactly the reason why their current online system would be considered primitive had it been released five years ago.

 

[ZealousD]

Agreed.

I have to believe that calling Metroid Prime a 1.0 is a bannable offense.

 

[ethelred]

I have to believe that calling Metroid Prime a 1.0 is a bannable offense.

Sorry, apologies. I put the decimal point in the wrong spot. I've corrected it.

 

[ZealousD]

Sorry, apologies. I put the decimal point in the wrong spot. I've corrected it.

I have to believe that calling it less than a 1.0 is punishable by death.

 

[PkunkFury]

this thread took a turn for the pathetically hilarious

 

[BrodiemanTTR]

HEY GUYS, DO YOU THINK ETHELRED DOESN'T LIKE METROID PRIME? I THINK ETHELRED DOESN'T LIKE METROID PRIME. ETHELRED, DO YOU NOT LIKE METROID PRIME? BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I'M PICKING UP ON IN YOUR POSTS, THAT YOU DON'T LIKE METROID PRIME.

 

[legend166]

Yeah, just like they did last gen after it became painfully obvious that online was becoming an increasingly important asset in winning the console war and satisfying the consumer base. The fact is, Nintendo is much more interested in making a simple product than a good one. And that's exactly the reason why their current online system would be considered primitive had it been released five years ago.

Online isn't an important asset in winning the console war though. In any way.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

Yeah, just like they did last gen after it became painfully obvious that online was becoming an increasingly important asset in winning the console war and satisfying the consumer base.

For something that supposedly became painfully obvious, I don't recall it doing much good for the one system last gen that pushed online most aggressively. If anything, doesn't Wii's early success even against the more comprehensive early online strategies of X360/PS3 show that it's still not one of the most important things?

 

[PoliceCop]

I'd venture that the success of the Xbox was due to 1.) Halo and 2.) the appeal of a vastly superior online infrastructure. It's easy to minimize the importance of online gaming when your business plan is largely contingent upon your ability to market a product to senior citizens, toddlers, and soccer moms.

 

[yoopoo]

I'd venture that the success of the Xbox was due to 1.) Halo and 2.) the appeal of a vastly superior online infrastructure. It's easy to minimize the importance of online gaming when your business plan is largely contingent upon your ability to market a product to senior citizens, toddlers, and soccer moms.

Online gaming came to Xbox a year later after the launch, Xbox was already a popular brand by then.

Ironically PSO on GC was the first official online game released in NA last gen.

 

[vanguardian1]

Well, I'd sure like to try it, but I live with the 33% of American households who can't get a real form of broadband.

 

[PkunkFury]

I'd venture that the success of the Xbox was due to 1.) Halo and 2.) the appeal of a vastly superior online infrastructure. It's easy to minimize the importance of online gaming when your business plan is largely contingent upon your ability to market a product to senior citizens, toddlers, and soccer moms.

The online structure had little to nothing to do with the first Xbox's success, if the attach rate of Live on that machine is anything to go by

http://www.*******.com/2006/07/13/xbox-live-attach-rate-has-grown-50-percent-from-xbox-to-xbox-36/

eh, apparantly I can't link to this site, but here's a qoute from MS about the success of Live, then vs. now

Speaking at the Develop Conference in Brighton, England, Jeff Sullivan, a developer relations managers for Microsoft's Games Technology Group, reported that the attach rate for Xbox Live amongst Xbox 360 users is now up to 60%. By comparison, the original Xbox gained a mere 10% attach rate.

It's easy to maximize the importance of online gaming when you project your desires as a hardcore/niche gamer onto the public en masse

 

[PoliceCop]

The online structure had little to nothing to do with the first Xbox's success, if the attach rate of Live on that machine is anything to go by

http://www.*******.com/2006/07/13/xbox-live-attach-rate-has-grown-50-percent-from-xbox-to-xbox-36/

eh, apparantly I can't link to this site, but here's a qoute from MS about the success of Live, then vs. now



It's easy to maximize the importance of online gaming when you project your desires as a hardcore/niche gamer onto the public en masse

It's also easy to minimize the importance of positive word of mouth (something generated by Live), which ironically is the Wii's greatest strength. It doesn't seem to matter that the system has a terrible library because everyone and their grandpa hears about it on the news or in the paper.

Edit:
The situation is somewhat similar to last gen. I'd still maintain that the Gamecube had a better lineup than the Xbox, but the Xbox was ultimately more successful due to better image and word of mouth. Yes, I realize that the adoption rate for online console games is small, but the image generated from what a certain system does or does not offer is ultimately very important in terms of sales.

 

[TheGreatDave]

The Xbox did better because the Gamecube was purple and Halo is a totally American style game. That's pretty much all it came down to.

 

[Deku]

There's a parallel thread here talking about the 360, and mostly about Live.

 

[PoliceCop]

The Xbox did better because the Gamecube was purple and Halo is a totally American style game. That's pretty much all it came down to.

Hey, that almost sounds like it has something to do with brand image.

 

[Azure Dream]

Well, I'd sure like to try it, but I live with the 33% of American households who can't get a real form of broadband.

Hey guy, don't worry, satellite is "good enough" for people like you and me! We're unrealistic for expecting anything more than ping times of a minimum of half a second, expensive hardware, and a service that depends on whether or not it's really, really cloudy outside.

"Proper" broadband coverage is a joke. You always get that "cost-justification" speech slapped in your face by someone wanting to feel smart any time you complain, but that doesn't make it any easier when you're relegated to dial-up, not even full speed dial-up at that. Their next "helpful" suggestion? "Move! lol" Absolute genius.

 

[Phife Dawg]

I'd venture that the success of the Xbox was due to 1.) Halo and 2.) the appeal of a vastly superior online infrastructure. It's easy to minimize the importance of online gaming when your business plan is largely contingent upon your ability to market a product to senior citizens, toddlers, and soccer moms.

So Xbox was a success now? And ultimately more successfull than GC? Are you talking about the Americas, worldwide? XBox managed to sell around 3-4 million more in the Americas iirc and GC should be on par worldwide, since GC sold around that amount more in Japan. It's hard to analyze since we don't have european numbers but seeing that both consoles bombed equally hard it's moot anyways). Now go on with your agenda.