Do You Think Nintendo's Near Death?

[Laivasse]

IMO the N64 was a piece of shit. I know it had some great games, but really it was a piece of crap. Nintendo need to start making decent controller's, being the fighting game freak, and proclaimed the Larry Bird of fighting games, the N64's + GC's controller just doesn't cut it.

Plus they need to ditch whatever agenda they have with mature games. They also need to reform to using normal discs, people don't want to buy a console where they can't pirate games on. I love Nintendo, I bought a GC about a month ago and I love it, but it definately has it's problems too.

I happen to agree with you, but you should be prepared for the wave of people that wont. The N64 was pretty terrible...every single game had a horrific smeared look, due to the console's poor attempt at antialiasing. I just couldn't look at some games. Analogue pads are not good for FPS games either - if I want to walk in a straight line down a hallway I don't want to have to constantly correct my angle. Fair dues to Nintendo for its innovation, but pads are one area where practicality wins out over nice ideas, IMO.

This applies to the PS d-pad too. There is no reason for it to be split into a kind of 4-button style other than to look cool. The old Megadrive/Genesis-style whole-button d-pad feels much better.

As to your point about piracy: Agreed. People might get all huffy at the mention of piracy, but one of the biggest reasons for the PS1's longevity was the ease with which you could pirate games for it. With a cartridge-based console and then with the Gamecube's discs Nintendo have made their consoles excessively...fiddly. While it may ensure more developers get their money, it can create problems for a console, especially if it's already losing out in popularity.

 

[OCybrManO]

Well, you'll probably prefer the GBA2... the official competition to the PSP. It is scheduled to be shown at the upcoming E3. The DS was never meant to be in direct competition with the PSP. It's just another one of their experimental stopgap products that they use to test the market... like the VirtualBoy.

Nintendo, unlike Sony and Microsoft, is about innovation and pushing the industry forward... whereas the competition hasn't done anything new in a decade or more. The N64 had an analog stick and a rumble pack before the Playstation had either of them. They tried a true 3D system. Who remembers the failed bulk storage device that predated the XBOX's hard drive (the N64DD)? They made the GBA and GC able to connect with each other and made entire games based around this functionality. Then, they just recently released a handheld with two displays and touchscreen capability. What did Sony and Microsoft do other than improving the power of the hardware? Online capability? Nope, the N64 had a modem expansion... but, as with many experimental products, Nintendo didn't do much with it.

EDIT: The worst thing about cartridges wasn't the lack of piratable media (The Playstation actually used discs that could hold games too big to fit on standard CDs). IIRC, there was a device that could read and make a copy of N64 games. The biggest problems came when Playstation games got price cuts. Cartridge manufacturing was much more expensive than making CDs. Do you remember how Playstation games used to cost $5-10 less than N64 games? I had both systems and that definately influenced my game buying decisions. Frankly, some of the final generation of N64 games pushed the system out past the Playstation in terms of graphics, IMO. Conker's Bad Fur Day squeezed just about everything possible out of the N64... and I was impressed, at the time.

 

[Warbie]

What have you got against Yoshi Touch and Go?

It's the best recent handheld game out imo - and i'm including all the recent PSP games in that.

Also, you're seriously comparing the Dual Shock to the N64 and GC pads?? Come on.

 

[Sui]

In my opinion, even though I'm not interested in handhelds, the DS is a games console. It was created for gamers, of all ages, to play games and have fun. THAT is why the DS sells, because it's a light-hearted handheld with a reasnable price tag. £99 for a new console isn't bad at all, especially when the games are made by Nintendo.

The PsP however, while it does have better graphics, is not a gaming console. It's more of a media station. It has advanced graphics and can play specialized DvDs... which is why it is extremely expensive, and only avaliable to those with lots of money. But if you have lots of money... why not just buy a Ps2 / widescreen TV? problem solved. it's not like you'll ever want to use the damn things when travelling anyway.

And about Nintendo dying... Nintendo will outlast the human race... and if it doesn't, there is no God. Either that or God works for Sony...

 

[Computer5k]

God made the PSP, South Park told me so

 

[Cole]

True god did make the PSP, Kenny also commanded the angels with his golden PSP.
Oh wait....Im Athiest
That South Park episode was great though
Lotsa laugh.

 

[Kazuki_Fuse]

Still all depends on who you're talking to. The GameCube controller and the MS Controller S fit me much better than the PS2s controller. The PS2 controller feels too small in my hands and causes me to fumble around too much.

That might be a good thread...which console controller is the best??

I don't like the PS2 controller much either. The DreamCast controller was awesome I feel, best I've used. I think if you talk to hardcore game enthusiasts they'll say in fact the Saturn was the best and most responsive controller ever. I never used one so I don't know.

My beef with the GC controller is mainly with the D-Pad, it's size and positioning don't mix with me.

 

[dlandis72]

Nintendo has the ultimate niche. They have found a soft spot in the hearts of almost every gamer. Sure, Sony might release some hot new MGS or GTA game but there's something a bit more satisfying about chillin' on a couch with some friends and playing mario or zelda. Until this generation dies off and the next generation of unappreciative children take over, Nintendo will be just fine. If you have a younger brother or sister, make sure to introduce them to the joys of Nintendo. I just bought my 11 year old brother a GC for his bday. We are going to have some good times!

 

[Datrix]

Nintendo's GameCube will only be seeing one game this month

Aahhhh! One game?! My Gamecube and Gameboy Advance is already dead...but Nintendo itself will never die!

 

[Mr. Redundant]

nintendo are alive?

 

[Kschreck]

After reading IGN's latest "The Nintendo Minute" Volume 10 askes George Harrison the following question:

This week's question: According to retail release lists, PS2 and Xbox have about 20 games apiece coming out -- many of them top-quality efforts -- in April. Oppositely, GameCube owners will only see a single new release for the month. The question is, how do you hope to maintain a GameCube audience if you don't release new games on a consistent basis?

the artcicle even stated that its because the GC games are overrunning into june instead of april and all the games you mentioned there are PC Games And/OR Sequels....not that impressive really

Not one of those games I listed where just for PC. All of those games are for the consoles and yes some of them are also on the PC but they are ALL on the consoles.

 

[operative x]

I think that Nintendo isn't in as good a situation as the SNES days, they are loosing ground though with the Gamecube (and soon to be) handheld market. I was one of the first poeple to own a GC, but because of the HUGE lack of games for it at the time, i ended up trading it for an XBOX. Though I am not very happy with the XBOX, i dont think i would have been any happier with the GC (now looking back i should have gotten a PS2). But anyway, I think they are loosing mostly on the fact that they have so little games. And btw, the controller S is the best controller in existence.

 

[Warbie]

Nintendo looks set to make a profit of 400 million pounds this year (which, for our American cousins, is 752 million dolars)

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=7848

So, not dying quite yet

 

[Cole]

They did great with the N64, but what hurt them alot?
Take a look at alot of past generation Nintendo Consoles. They had this one game.. Now look at the Ps\Ps2 and you will see one SUPER HUGE FRANCHISE is theres now.

Nintendo brought Final Fantasy to the U.S. Gaming Market.
A very very long long time ago, Final Fantasy was made. It scored huge in Japan, and did great in the U.S., but no so great that everyone new about it.

Nintendo changed that all. They brought this game to the U.S. Gaming Market and made it known even more to the U.S. Market. They did a huge advertising campaign for Fintal Fantasy and that game really pushed there consoles. Final Fantasy brought many great profits throughout there console era .

All of the sudden... Square... goes with the PS and not the N64.
It did hurt the N64 sales, those who loved final fantasy did not pick that n64, they picked that playstation. Because guess what just as nintendo did, Sony also did a huge advertising campaign for Final Fantasy.


So you see people, the N64 did great, and it would have done even better if Square would have gone with the N64. Though they didn't.. The N64 was a huge sucess though.'

Well whatever, theres a piece of knowledge. N64 brought me into gaming, I owe Nintendo alot .

 

[KU_]

Also, expect the new Zelda game for the GC to sell alot.

 

[Kazuki_Fuse]

N64 brought me into gaming, I owe Nintendo alot .

Brought you into gaming? Man you must be damn young then. The Vic 20 brought me into gaming lol.

 

[Warbie]

The use of disks, the lack of Squaresoft, but most importantly, they were late to market. By skipping the 32-bit generation, people jumped on with Sony for lack of a better choice. By the time the N64 came out, nobody really cared that much about Nintendo anymore, especially because all their favourite games and most major developers were on the Playstation anyway.

Yet the best games of that generation (and arguably any) were on the N64 and, given the current technology, would not have been possible on disk.

In terms of gameplay the N64 was almost a generation ahead of anything Sony and Sega could offer. They may have dropped the ball financially, but in terms of pure gaming quality it was as good as it gets.

 

[Kazuki_Fuse]

Sounds pretty biased to me.

 

[Cole]

The use of disks, the lack of Squaresoft, but most importantly, they were late to market. By skipping the 32-bit generation, people jumped on with Sony for lack of a better choice. By the time the N64 came out, nobody really cared that much about Nintendo anymore, especially because all their favourite games and most major developers were on the Playstation anyway.

Did you know Nintendo looked into disks? Oh yes they looked into disks WITH SONY. I mean literally they both were working togeather to see for load times and things, but in the end Nintendo found that disks were just to slow so they went with cartridriges while sony continued there research in hope to make a faster disk, which they did for the playstation.

So all in all, if nintendo would have kept with the disks idea the N64 may infact have slower loadtimes than it currently does.

 

[Warbie]

Yes. Much, much slower load times.

The seamless experience that is OoT or GE would have become a grainy mess seperated by long loading times.

Even the PS2 and Xbox today suffer form excessive loading at times. This isn't a big deal in some titles - in others it has a great impact on the experience.

(imagine jumping into one of the paintings in Mario 64, and then having to wait while a 'loading level' bar slowly fills up on the screen)

From a gamers point of view i'm very glad Nintendo stuck with cartridges that generation. I'm also glad they are using thier small dvds with super fast loading time on the GC (which are much faster than anything else this gen)

 

[Lt. Drebin]

The use of disks, the lack of Squaresoft, but most importantly, they were late to market. By skipping the 32-bit generation, people jumped on with Sony for lack of a better choice.

I'm glad someone mentioned this. The fact that Sony was given such a long time with the market all to themselves is a HUGE issue--it has happened twicw now...that's unacceptable. If the GameCube had an entire year before the PS2 and XBox were released I don't think Sony would be in the same position of absolute domonance....I think Sony would still have the sales lead, certainly not the exhorbitant number they have now, but we'd be looking at an incredibly contested market....further, I don't think the XBox would have succeeded the same way it has...being launched next to the PS2 would not have been good for MS.

I think Nintendo understands this now....Iwata has mentioned it....they have to be quick to the market with several good titles ready to roll. There are far too many people that will buy a new console simply because it's the first one out there....the latest and greatest.

 

[Direwolf]

Well we'll see what happens this time. It looks like Microsoft is going to have the lead. Will they pull a Dreamcast or a PS2?

 

[Smack500]

For one thing there handhold systems, and games would keep them afloat if anything. As far as the console market goes they do pretty good world wide. However I think they need to do something to revamp how there seen in the west. There sales in america are pretty pitiful. Also they had the handheld market cornered, but from what I have seen with the psp. I bet it wont take more then a year for it to surpase the ds in total sales and take the market.

With the psp taking alot of their sales in the handeld department, and xbox has to have been cutting down there console sales alot in the west. I think a change is in need, unless they want to continue getting less support from game makers and smaller profits.

 

[OCybrManO]

Also they had the handheld market cornered, but from what I have seen with the psp. I bet it wont take more then a year for it to surpase the ds in total sales and take the market.

Just wait until after E3 before you make any claims about Sony taking over the handheld market. According to Nintendo (in a statement made last year), the DS and PSP aren't supposed to be in direct competition with each other. It's supposed to be GBA2 (or whatever they decide to call it) vs PSP with the experimental DS filling a niche market. Hopefully they will announce more details at this year's E3. If they never said anything about a GBA2 I would have bought a PSP already... but I'm waiting because if the GBA2 is at least nearly as powerful as the PSP (and with a decent battery life) I'm getting it instead because Nintendo has much more experience in the handheld market and I just like their games more, in general.

 

[Lt. Drebin]

Just wait until after E3 before you make any claims about Sony taking over the handheld market. According to Nintendo (in a statement made last year), the DS and PSP aren't supposed to be in direct competition with each other. It's supposed to be GBA2 (or whatever they decide to call it) vs PSP with the experimental DS filling a niche market. Hopefully they will announce more details at this year's E3. If they never said anything about a GBA2 I would have bought a PSP already... but I'm waiting because if the GBA2 is at least nearly as powerful as the PSP (and with a decent battery life) I'm getting it instead because Nintendo has much more experience in the handheld market and I just like their games more, in general.

Yeah...I have to agree. The PSP hasn't dented Nintendo in the handheld dept. They haven't even scratched Nintendo's dominance. Nintendo has a little over 200M handhelds in the hands of consumers (GameBoy,GameBoy Adv, and DS included). As long as Nintendo continues to release a new handheld every now and then, there's NO way Sony can come close any time soon.

About the GBA2, word is still that they're working on it being a portable GameCube. I heard they've been working on it since the GameCube was released. Should be interesting to see what Nintendo has to show.

 

[operative x]

In terms of gameplay the N64 was almost a generation ahead of anything Sony and Sega could offer.

That just screams Nintendo fanboy. How can you simply ignore games like MGS, Silent Hill, Residen Evil 2, Tekken 3, Final Fantasy 7, Grand Turismo, and Nightmare Creatures? Sure Zelda: Ocarina of time and Mario 64 are great games, but PS1 had awesome games too. This almost follows the same logic of DS vs. PSP. Instead of saying one console was a generation ahead, just enjoy all the great games on those consoles.
My $0.02

 

[Warbie]

I'm not ignoring them, and enjoyed those titles greatly. I still stand by what I said though.

Remember when Mario 64 was released. For the first time ever we had analogue control. It's easy to forget how much of a massive impact that had at the time, and on gaming. The same goes for Golden Eye/Perfect Dark - analogue as standard allowed for some truly original and innovative titles that the other console couldn't cater for. Sure, the dual shock turned up - but it wasn't the standard, and as such few games were designed with it in mind (and even fewer that used it well)

To me the Saturn and PS felt 'almost' next gen. They provided the 3d environments, but didn't give the controls to allow us to experience them fully. Of course, many of the games on these systems didn't need analogue, and were excellent.

(I'm talking purely in terms of innovation, not how much fun they were. Probably read Edge too much )

 

[Laivasse]

I'm not ignoring them, and enjoyed those titles greatly. I still stand by what I said though.

Remember when Mario 64 was released. For the first time ever we had analogue control. It's easy to forget how much of a massive impact that had at the time, and on gaming. The same goes for Golden Eye/Perfect Dark - analogue as standard allowed for some truly original and innovative titles that the other console couldn't cater for. Sure, the dual shock turned up - but it wasn't the standard, and as such few games were designed with it in mind (and even fewer that used it well)

To me the Saturn and PS felt 'almost' next gen. They provided the 3d environments, but didn't give the controls to allow us to experience them fully. Of course, many of the games on these systems didn't need analogue, and were excellent.

(I'm talking purely in terms of innovation, not how much fun they were. Probably read Edge too much )

Analogue and FPS was an awful mix, IMO.

 

[OCybrManO]

IMO, using analog control for aiming in FPS games was great (I wouldn't care about using a d-pad for forward/backward and strafing movement). For once, you had the option of turning slowly for accurate shots or turning quickly if someone was behind you without having to hold down a quick turn button... and if something wasn't horizontal, vertical, or at a 45 degree angle from where you are aiming you could get to it faster with an analog stick (even if the d-pad moves at the top speed of the analog stick) because you could go in directions between the 8 that are supported by a d-pad. Besides, the d-pads didn't get removed... it was the developers that decided to go with analog sticks in their FPS games (and I agree with their decision).