|
J-Spot posted:If they're still making the games there's really nothing you as a consumer are missing out on by not having Nintendo branded hardware. It was a trip seeing the first Sonic game show up on the Gamecube, but now people don't think anything of it. Gamecube nothing, that was a port of a Dreamcast game. Ditto Chu Chu Rocket (which is still kickass on the GBA). The real main event was when Sonic Advance was announced.
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 01:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:47 |
|
|
No matter what happens over the next seven years, what are the chances we'll still be getting a Mario and Sonic at the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games title?
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 03:51
|
|
|
Viewtiful Jew posted:No matter what happens over the next seven years, what are the chances we'll still be getting a Mario and Sonic at the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games title? Probably somewhere around 400%. (It will be on three consoles and the PC)
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 03:53
|
|
|
I don't know what an effort post is but I'm glad it makes you people happy.Strange Matter posted:This is probably the single most interesting post in this entire thread. Where did you get all this information from? I mentioned my sources at the very top. If you want to know a specific source, then I'll try my best to provide one for you. For example, here is talk of Fire Emblem Awakening possibly being the last one. It's possible Yamagami was joking but we've seen what happened to Advance Wars. Advance Wars: Dual Strike was such a hit in the West that they designed the sequel, Advance Wars: Days of Ruin towards non-Japanese players. The tone and artstyle was changed to appeal to Western audience. However, AW:DoR underperformed, had its Japanese release cancelled, and we didn't get any more Advance Wars games since then. I think he was serious about the pressure on the game's sales and their desperation to hit that sales target. The game seems to... pander to certain Japanese demographics in its design, such as having a hot springs episode. Nintendo's internal developers and partners are under a lot of pressure to expand their teams and become more technically proficient. For example, AlphaDream had to outsource 3D rendering to another company when developing Mario & Luigi: Dream Team. It's something all Nintendo studios will have difficulty coming to drips with except perhaps Retro Studios and Monolith Soft. Both of those have a history of technical aptitude and appear to have some of the most technically impressive games on the Wii U. However, some information came from conversations I had with developers based in the LA (CA), Austin (TX, a real hotbed of talent, this one), Paradise (NV), and Redmond (WA) areas. I've heard enough stories about the strange mishaps and wacky politics in the game industry to last me a lifetime. Quest For Glory II posted:I think there's some selfishness that had to lead to these poor decisions. Keeping the Wii U architecture in line with Wii/Gamecube benefits only Nintendo, because they don't have to relearn anything. But Microsoft and Sony recognized "look, let's just LITERALLY make x86 computers and make porting as easy as possible." One company was self serving and the other two companies served the third parties. Microsoft and Sony definitely listened to Epic and built boxes to work with Unreal Engine 4 while Nintendo said "no, we're doing our own thing, for ourselves" and as a result UE4 is not available for Wii U. I'd say the lack of focus is what has hurt the Wii U the most. Given Nintendo's limited resources, it's attempting to do so many different things that it's difficult to succeed with a single objective. Much of this comes from natural growing pains since Nintendo has been slow to embrace HD development and online. With the original Wii and DS, Nintendo did a good cost benefits analysis on what a large cross section of consumers wanted and concentrated on a few core features. Intuitive controls and affordable gaming was at the top of list. They realized many people stopped playing games because game controllers were more and more complicated over the years. If I stopped playing games during the Atari/NES era or even the PS1/N64 era, then I would have a hard time playing games with a modern controller with dual analog sticks and multiple buttons. The Gamecube controller was an attempt to address this but the instant win A button was not as successful as the Wii-mote. Nintendo used intuitive control methods, such as pen + paper, a woman's compact or a television remote, when designing the DS and the Wii. You'll notice that Nintendo games enjoy a wide range of demographics and include groups not typically targeted by game companies, such women and the elderly. This is because they realized controls were the biggest barrier to entry for these demographics. They were okay with making sacrifices in the Wii's design. For example, the console doesn't have HD output outside of emulators. While a lot of core gamers were upset with this decision, many people played 360/PS3 games in SD, such as Gears of War 2. This could be from a lack of an HDTV, an HDTV with the wrong cables, or an HDTV with the right cables but the wrong system settings. They were okay with making some unpopular decisions in order to cut down on costs and concentrate on a few key strengths. A lot of people think the Wii's lack of power led to an early death but I don't think that was the biggest issue. I think their big mistakes were underestimating the important of a solid online infrastructure, not aggressively partnering with like-minded indie/mid-tier developers to fill up the release schedule, and pursuing big publishers who needed the HD consoles to succeed in order to justify their costly R&D budgets. The Wii U attempts to meet the needs of many different developers (both internal and external) but fails to wholly meet the needs of each specific group. They probably should have concentrated on small-medium sized developers with an aggressively priced device since they couldn't match Sony/MS in courting AAA publishers. Nintendo seems to have settled on making the Wii U a family oriented console with their 2013 lineup. It's a tough sell when the console costs $300+ and the Wii/360/PS3 have large discounted libraries available. Their core gamer stuff seems aimed at 2014+. I feel that Nintendo is their own worst enemy when it comes to this holiday. I can substitute many Wii U games with similar 3DS games. For example, Donkey Kong Country Returns 3DS for Donkey Kong Tropical Freeze, Super Mario 3D Land for Super Mario 3D World, Sonic Lost World 3DS for Sonic Lost World Wii U, Pokemon X/Y for... Pokémon Rumble U. Al Borland posted:I agree with most of this but I'm a bit torn about portability to the PS3. The Cell processing was a toe stubbing mistake for Sony. They went with it over multi-processing because they got some bad advice. I'd say it made developing titles for all major consoles a bit of a headache as going from cell to multiprocessor was a bit of a headache. At least to my understanding. I could be totally wrong on this as I haven't tried it. I've just heard the bemoanings of some fellow programmers. I don't mean to give the impression that the Cell architecture was easy to develop from other than Vita porting was relatively easy. While it was an upgrade from PS2 development, the decision to use the Cell processor was a major factor in the mass exodus of once exclusive support to Microsoft. It took years before middleware got good enough for developers (not including Bethesda) to use the PS3 as the lead in order to deal with the cell processor and PS3 split memory restrictions for multiplatform games. In fact, I'd say the decision to use Cell along with a Blu-Ray player in the PS3 is the single worst decision made. It delayed the system and raised the production costs extraordinary heights. In terms of net present value, the PS3's mistakes ate up all of the PS2's profits and a good deal of the PS1 profits. In terms of opportunity cost within the Sony's game division, the PS3 rescue mission siphoned resources from the PSP's battle against the DS, caused a collapse of a core pillar in their business, damaged third-party relationships, and caused a tremendous loss of talent due to various belt tightening measures. I also don't want my criticism of the Wii U to be an endorsement of PS4/XB1. I think both of those consoles will face a number of challenges from the rise of mobile gaming to high costs of development and power consolidation around a handful of third-party publishers. I've read that something like 75%+ of retail revenue for third-party games in North America goes to the big four (Electronic Arts/Acti-Blizzard/Ubisoft/Take2). This isn't counting someone like Bethesda Publishing with Fallout and Elder Scrolls. These publishers will probably get more and more powerful by cannibalizing smaller publishers and developers. Going forward, we'll probably hear a lot about Sony/MS shareholders wanting to divest from home consoles and reinvest in those resources in mobile. [url=]The Xbox and Playstation were created when home consoles accounting for 80% of the gaming market.[/url] Home consoles were poised to be the target of technological convergence. We now know that Apple and Google were correct in that mobile devices would be where technological convergence occurs. Home consoles are extremely expensive to make, require massive amounts of manpower to support, and are a volatile market with little room for growth. Sony and Microsoft are obviously not happy to have missed the rise of mobile while continuing to funnel billions into home consoles. They're locked in a prisoner's dilemma in that the first to lose the home console fight provides enough resources for the winner to cannibalize and go on for a few more years. It's like watching two men fight over a loaf of bread when the house burns down around them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 04:53
|
|
|
Sunning posted:In fact, I'd say the decision to use Cell along with a Blu-Ray player in the PS3 is the single worst decision made. It delayed the system and raised the production costs extraordinary heights. In terms of net present value, the PS3's mistakes ate up all of the PS2's profits and a good deal of the PS1 profits. In terms of opportunity cost within the Sony's game division, the PS3 rescue mission siphoned resources from the PSP's battle against the DS, caused a collapse of a core pillar in their business, damaged third-party relationships, and caused a tremendous loss of talent due to various belt tightening measures. I disagree with the Blu-ray player being a bad decision. One of the few things keeping PS3 afloat for a long time was it was the cheapest Blu-ray player on the market. That helped it win over HD-DVD, and now both consoles use Blu-ray media, which benefits Sony. I also don't believe mobile devices are going to kill consoles. Phones are good for 30 seconds at a time gaming but are garbage for anything else.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 06:16
|
|
|
That loving Sned posted:What does that even mean? Core, as far as I can tell, is a game that appeals to people who really really like video games, the type who will be buying a PS4 or bone this year (or brought a Wii U last year.) Mario is super popular but I'd describe it, or at least 3D World, as a casual title due to its 4 player multi focus.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 07:04
|
|
|
Sunning posted:I don't know what an effort post is but I'm glad it makes you people happy. Well you see it's a post that you put effort into. So, not like most of the posts on the internet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 07:54
|
|
|
This thread is very long, and I'm going to respond to a statement posed on the very first page... because there's no way I'm going to read through all 100+ pages and the several thousand posts up to this point without losing sight of the thought I wanted to put down here.quote:I'd be curious to hear from people who don't own a Wii U and aren't interested in one, and why. And whether they'd ever be interested. I've considered myself a fan of Nintendo since the old Game & Watch handhelds, and I've mostly enjoyed their consoles (including Virtual Boy!) and the Wii U simply isn't what I'd expected or wanted as a long-time fan of Nintendo. I like their first-party titles, and I generally like the consoles themselves for what they do, and I like Nintendo for sticking to their guns for their "it's about the games, not how many DVDs or Blu-Ray discs you can cram onto the machine" mentality. I had this little pet theory that sounded like it'd be what Nintendo would do, since I have a personal history of making some scary-accurate predictions and hopes for their first-party games (Meta Knight in Brawl, more pilots/machines and personalized music tracks for each pilot in F-Zero, a first-person Metroid, better Kirby, simultaneous play in Mario games, etc etc...). This "theory" I'd been running with compares the Wii to the NES -- not necessarily a brand-new technology, just refined to be usable, carefully marketed so as to not saturate the market, and a large library of games both casual and core, spanning virtually every genre (including Tarot readings!) and essentially the "baby steps" to get people hooked on the technology. Then they'd blow us away by further refining this technology and making games with significantly more depth, a notable increase in video technology (8-bit -> 16-bit evolution), more power to make more stuff happen on-screen (such as having many more sprites onscreen without losing framerate), and expanding on core concepts presented in the games themselves, resulting in a much more fun experience. Now, the NES evolved into the SNES, widely considered one of the greatest videogame consoles of all-time primarily because of the aforementioned upgrades along with awesome first-party games to entice third parties to develop for the thing. My theory followed that "well, they're going to do the same thing as they did with the NES". Make some interesting games and experiences with the new control method, while saving the really biggest guns for their next console. Like the second coming of the SNES or something. Hook a bunch of players with the new setup, and then reel in not only the new players, but old-guard too for life by "upgrading" the technology towards a logical conclusion, reminiscent of what happened with the NES -> SNES, I had thought the Wii would evolve into what comes down to WiiSNES. They reeled in the customers, both old and new. Casual and hardcore. Then they need to secure those fans by blowing them away with something awesome, right? The Wii U is not that upgrade, nor is it blowing me away with some really cool games that I desperately want to enjoy playing. I would hardly even call it an upgrade. They're actively pushing me away by focusing more on the features rather than making cool and innovating game experiences. They did not substantially upgrade the hardware to do more "stuff" with. All they really did that I could call "progress" is making it so you can play games (on the tablet-screen-controller dongle) while watching TV. They seem to have decided that making quality-of-life upgrades for non-players (such as the aforementioned games taken on controller-screen while TV is in use thing) was a good idea instead of putting us in awe of cool new experiences and it backfired...because many of those who became interested with the Wii already bought a Wii and see no reason to buy Wii 2.0 PocketLiteColor3D Now with HD-support! I'm no expert, but I feel like they'd have done a whole lot better if they secured those fans and enticed the core players back with a true upgrade, complete with more in-depth games, a more powerful system, a fair balance between casual games and core games, and also bringing out their very big guns again with interesting, practical refinements in a sweet new Legend of Zelda, a radical new Metroid, an even faster F-Zero, a fun new Mario instead of a rehash, and maybe an actual Pokemon game that isn't terrible and isn't on a handheld to pull the core back to them. By now, they should also have a plan hammered-out for incorporating online play where applicable, such as with multiplayer Mario, F-Zero, and of course, Pokemon. But they don't. They're doing something ridiculous and it pushes away the core even further. Sure, it's an interesting console. I like what they're trying to do by changing the way we control our games. But they needed to knock my socks off with something amazing instead of trying to reel in even more of the casual set that they'd already snagged with the Wii, most of them bought a Wii and see no reason to get a Wii U because, while interesting, it isn't doing anything particularly spectacular. Can they recover from this? Sure. Nintendo always finds a way to survive, and a couple bad years are nothing unless their poor decisions keep up. That said, they probably need to go back to the drawing board, and come up with a "true" successor to the Wii instead of banking on the Wii U to improve. I do not plan to buy one, because it has nothing that appeals to me. Most of what it has to offer are things we've already experienced, for example, NSMB:U is almost exactly the same game as NSMBWii. Nintendoland seems similar to WarioWare titles. Zombi U is something we've done countless times except with shenanigans that use features for the sake of using them instead of for any real purpose. As for the console's new built-in features? Cool, great. They should keep them in mind when deciding what they can sacrifice when it is time to make a better machine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 08:10
|
|
|
Seiren posted:Most of what it has to offer are things we've already experienced, for example, NSMB:U is almost exactly the same game as NSMBWii. Nintendoland seems similar to WarioWare titles. Zombi U is something we've done countless times except with shenanigans that use features for the sake of using them instead of for any real purpose. You are 66% wrong here, by the way. And NSMBU is a much better game than NSMBWii, but I can't argue the fact that on surface level they're almost exactly the same.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 08:14
|
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:Core, as far as I can tell, is a game that appeals to people who really really like video games, the type who will be buying a PS4 or bone this year (or brought a Wii U last year.) Mario is super popular but I'd describe it, or at least 3D World, as a casual title due to its 4 player multi focus. OK, that makes sense. I thought it was referring to the game's legitimacy within the Mario series, and not it's appeal to people who play video games as a hobby. I still don't see how a 3D Mario platformer, even with multiplayer, wouldn't be designed with long-time gamers in mind. The 2D ones show that you can make levels as hard as you want, as long as one person is good enough to get through, you're all able to progress.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 08:39
|
|
|
J-Spot posted:I don't know, I think they could be fine without the media center stuff if they just focus on making their system more valuable to the gaming crowd. Trouble is Sony is already way ahead on that front and I don't see Nintendo even coming close to matching them, let alone exceeding them. Am I the only one that remembers that Nintendo tried to do this whole media center bullshit too? That whole Tvii thing, about how you can use your gamepad as a remote and a TV guide? http://www.nintendo.com/wiiu/built-in-software/#/tvii Yes, it lacks the capacity to even play DVD's, or store movies. I didn't say they did it competently.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 09:08
|
|
|
OatmealRaisin posted:I also don't believe mobile devices are going to kill consoles. Phones are good for 30 seconds at a time gaming but are garbage for anything else.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 13:32
|
|
|
The era of PC gaming with wireless transmissions to television sets to replace PC gaming is nigh upon us I... I want to believe. Buying Nintendo games on my PC and never hearing the words "console exclusive" 
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 13:34
|
|
|
Strange Matter posted:I don't think that's really the point though. The idea isn't that mobile gaming is directly competing with console gaming. The problem is actually exactly what you said, that phones are good for short, simple games but terrible at long, complex ones. As a result, the costs of developing phone games will always be low, and the costs of developing console games will always be higher, and will continue to be higher until Sony and Microsoft start seeing their profit margins start eroding. The expectation for consoles is that each iteration should be a monumental leap from its predecessor, but as the tech gets better it becomes increasingly expensive for the next generation to improve upon it. I think what Sunning was getting at is that MS and Sony's shareholders can see this trend and aren't particularly happy with it. I don't know - I could see mobile gaming fall into the same pitfall that Nintendo did. At their heart, the selling point for mobile (as it was with the Wii) is simplicity. The games are dirt cheap, easy to understand and provide simple thrills. The problem is, once consumers tire of that, where do you go from there? More complexity (raising development costs)? Better graphics (raising development costs)? The addition of cutscenes/story (raising development costs)? And, even if mobile gaming does improve in those ways, it will almost assuredly be the weaker sister to dedicated devices. If mobile game pricing ever rises to the point where people have to think about a purchase, I think they'll opt for the fuller experience. Also, let's not forget that the current mobile gaming scene is more saturated with awful games than the Atari in 1982.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 14:29
|
|
|
OatmealRaisin posted:I disagree with the Blu-ray player being a bad decision. One of the few things keeping PS3 afloat for a long time was it was the cheapest Blu-ray player on the market. That helped it win over HD-DVD, and now both consoles use Blu-ray media, which benefits Sony. The Blu-Ray player in the PS3 cost Sony a lot of money and led to production delays. According to some reports, the PS3 lost about $4.951 billion on supporting the system. They ended up trading a queen in exchange for pawn with that decision. I don't think their master plan was to sell the PS3 at high losses losses in order secure a very small royalty rate for themselves and the rest of the Blu-Ray board. The PS3 project probably had so much bloat and scope explosion around its development years that it failed to adequately meet the needs of several company goals. Along with the inability to compete with cheaper Korean and Chinese electronics, the losses in the gaming division were a major factor in the Sony's poor financials over the years. I guess maybe securing the Blu-Ray royalties (in a post Netflix world) was some Hail Mary pass that would pay dividends later but the company ended up with a string of heavy losses and several round of down-sizing. In hindsight, a price competitive and timely PS3 without Blu-Ray would have probably helped them more. We're already experiencing publishers shift resources to mobile devices. For example, we've seen what Capcom has done with Capcom Online Games, such as announcing Breath of Fire 6 (called a 'Touch Online RPG') as a mobile/social game. Even Deep Down is a Capcom Online Games. A lot of people expect Deep Down to be a Dark Souls or Dragon's Dogma type of game but may end up surprised with how the game plays and is monetized. Capcom is reluctant to in invest in games such as Megaman or Dark Stalkers but will happily pursue mobile/social gaming. Between their large overheard and mounting investor pressure, it's a lot easier for large publishers to justify investments in mobile than in niche projects for consoles. Even AAA games will become difficult to justify due to high costs of development. Some publishers, such as Square-Enix, are slowly divesting out of AAA gaming and focusing on mobile/social. The issue isn't whether mobile gaming is as in depth or well-designed as console gaming. It's whether mobile provides a better return on investment than consoles games for publishers. Games such as Candy Crush Saga and Puzzle & Dragons don't require much money to develop and maintain but they rake in several million dollars each day. With the rapid growth of this market, we'll probably see big publishers invest more and more into this market. Remember, more and more people have grown accustomed to mobile gaming. Many children will grow up with tablets and mobile games. These people will expect certain types of gameplay, controls, and pricing schemes. It's not as if complex games don't exist on tablets and smart phones. As mobile gaming grows, we'll also see more complex games developed for those systems, such as Deus Ex: The Fall, XCOM:Enemy Unknown (iOS), and Chaos Rings. I think it's one of the many factors affecting Nintendo. Their software pricing for the 3DS isn't as competitive with what consumers have grown to expect from mobile gaming. I think if you enjoy really popular high-end AAA games, such as Elder Scrolls/Fifa/Call of Duty/Battlefield/Assassin's Creed, or well-budget games targeted at a certain audience, such as various Kickstarter projects, then you will be pretty good for quite some time. However, we are already seeing publishers feel investor pressure to invest more resources in mobile/social and less in expensive console gaming. Eventually, the lack of investments will affect home consoles.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 14:49
|
|
|
God bless you Sunning, it's really nice to read all your thoughtful, fleshed out, well reasoned posts in this thread  That said, I definitely agree with you. A lot of people underestimate how much money there is in mobile gaming, especially in Japan. In 2012 mobile game revenues were higher there than console and handheld software and hardware combined: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=650611 That's why the big Japanese publishers are trying the hardest to shift to that market. Capcom even just announced an iOS Monster Hunter game (that bafflingly seems to be played in portrait mode  ), and I bet TGS is going to see a bevy of other Japanese developers announce iOS and Android stuff.There's a lot of denial that the rise of mobile games has any effect on the traditional games market, even around here. While I can't say for sure, I really don't think it's a coincidence that handheld sales have slowed down significantly at the same time that mobile gaming exploded. It's likely that that will make it much harder for Nintendo to recapture the Wii's extended audience with the Wii U as well. Crowbear fucked around with this message at 15:32 on Sep 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 15:29
|
|
|
Sunning posted:I'd say the decision to use Cell along with a Blu-Ray player in the PS3 is the single worst decision made. There seems to be a general misunderstanding of what the Cell architecture is. Cell is just a marketing name and doesn't make it physically distinct in how it functions. In the book, The Race for a New Game Machine, the author describes the PS3 and Xbox 360 architectures as virtually identical, much like the XBone and PS4. In fact, MS stole almost all of the hardware design from Sony. The primary difference is software support which has been the underlying foundation of Microsoft's business since it was founded. Because of this, Microsoft will probably win any competition for 3rd party support. RVWinkle fucked around with this message at 15:54 on Sep 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 15:51
|
|
|
Astro7x posted:Um... they announced DKC Tropical Freeze and Super Mario 3D World on their E3 Nintendo Direct. I suppose I should expand on what I mean by core game. The core games for Nintendo consoles are the classic Mario/Zelda/Smash Bros trio that I keep going on about. For Mario, it's a unique platformer that isn't a remake. Galaxy, Sunshine (even though it reviewed badly) and 64 are the games I'm talking about. Zelda is something along the lines of Twilight Princess, Wind Waker and Ocarina of Time. Smash Bros is coming out in 2014 but I haven't heard anything about Mario or Zelda. These three games sell Nintendo consoles, always have and always will. The promise of a new Zelda game helped sell the Wii (though the motion controls and Wii Sports were huge factors as well). Smash Bros Melee helped sell the Gamecube, alongside Sunshine and Wind Waker. The problem Nintendo is facing, other than what has been correctly been pointed out. The core games that people buy Nintendo consoles for haven't been released/announced and so there's no incentive to pick it up. The core games are generally wide reaching popular titles that practically everyone loves. If Nintendo finally announces the new Zelda (one that isn't a remake of Wind Waker) and a new Mario that isn't a remake or 2D NSMB style game, then the console will do a lot better. I don't think it will become the best selling console at all, but I think it will do about as well as the Gamecube and avoid being the Virtual Boy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 15:54
|
|
|
While those are game I would love to have on WiiU, the games you are discrediting are the games that sold the best. I think your personal problem is that they seem to be doing zero effort HD versions of their best selling games rather than innovating with something new.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 16:26
|
|
|
We should start a goon betting pool for things like WiiU end of life, total console sales, how many more home consoles Nintendo releases before calling it quits. It would let people put their money where their mouth is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 16:27
|
|
|
Crowbear posted:God bless you Sunning, it's really nice to read all your thoughtful, fleshed out, well reasoned posts in this thread You know the quote 'I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones' that is attributed to Albert Einstein? I know not what platforms Final Fantasy XVI will be on, but Final Fantasy XVII will be on Mobage Town. I don't believe Japanese publishers and several Western publishers know how to deal with the rising costs of console development. But they do know how it's much easier to adapt their games to the needs of the mobile market. Remember the good old days where everyone was afraid of handhelds taking Japanese games from consoles? RVWinkle posted:There seems to be a general misunderstanding of what the Cell architecture is. Cell is just a marketing name and doesn't make it physically distinct in how it functions. In the book, The Race for a New Game Machine, the author describes the PS3 and Xbox 360 architectures as virtually identical, much like the XBone and PS4. In fact, MS stole almost all of the hardware design from Sony. The primary difference is software support which has been the underlying foundation of Microsoft's business since it was founded. Because of this, Microsoft will probably win any competition for 3rd party support. I'd agree that the Cell wasn't bad on its own but its use was exacerbated by the split memory design and the last minute GPU downgrade. Nonetheless, I'd attribute a lot of development hurdles to the Cell SPUs (several floating point processors tied to an integer processor) being suited for very specific tasks as opposed to an all purpose CPU. Between the improvements in middleware and the Playstation tool chain, the PS4's flexible hardware is such an improvement for game development in this regard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 16:43
|
|
|
Not specifically Wii U, but it seems like a new Advance Wars would be a license to print money for Nintendo. I would buy DLC war room maps like a crack addict scoring some rocks. I wouldn't care if it was a dollar a map. I was going to buy a Wii U soon for my niece and nephew, but after reading this thread, I think I won't. Thanks thread.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 16:57
|
|
|
Someone said earlier that the 3DS is 20% behind in sales from where the DS was at this point in it's life. Did the DS have a Pokemon game at this point in its life cycle?
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 17:46
|
|
|
One and the Same posted:Someone said earlier that the 3DS is 20% behind in sales from where the DS was at this point in it's life. Did the DS have a Pokemon game at this point in its life cycle? IIRC no, Pokemon Diamond/Pearl would come out the next year.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 17:49
|
|
|
keyvin posted:Not specifically Wii U, but it seems like a new Advance Wars would be a license to print money for Nintendo. I would buy DLC war room maps like a crack addict scoring some rocks. I wouldn't care if it was a dollar a map. I was going to buy a Wii U soon for my niece and nephew, but after reading this thread, I think I won't. Thanks thread. Frankly, getting them each a 2DS or a 3DS is not only cheaper in the case of 2 2DS, they would also probably get more use out of them. I still want to really like the Wii U because of how much I feel my gaming PC fills the same niche a PS4 or XBone is trying to fill, while the WiiU seems to still be trying something different but the more I read this thread, the more it seems like a 3DS is in every way a better purchase.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 17:49
|
|
|
One and the Same posted:Someone said earlier that the 3DS is 20% behind in sales from where the DS was at this point in it's life. Did the DS have a Pokemon game at this point in its life cycle? Hm, I figured the 3DS was killing it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 17:51
|
|
|
WickedHate posted:Hm, I figured the 3DS was killing it. It's doing well but the DS was on a whole other level. One and the Same posted:Someone said earlier that the 3DS is 20% behind in sales from where the DS was at this point in it's life. Did the DS have a Pokemon game at this point in its life cycle? It did. Diamond and Pearl came out in April 2007, which was 2 years and 5 months in, give or take. It doesn't matter though, even if the 3DS hits Nintendo's estimates for the fiscal year on the backs of Pokemon and Monster Hunter it'll still be well behind the DS. Nintendo estimated 18 million 3DS's shipped this year, and they've overestimated both console and handheld shipments for 2-3 years now and never hit them. In fiscal year 2007 the DS shipped 24 million units. In fiscal year 2008 it shipped 30 million. It then went on to ship another 31 million and 27 million in the next 2 years. If the 3DS with what will probably be its 2 biggest games ever can't even come close to the DS's 4th biggest year then, as you can see, the gulf will just keep getting bigger as time goes on. e: Fixed some numbers Crowbear fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Sep 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 18:01
|
|
|
Cowman posted:
Do people believe Super Mario 3D World is a remake of 3D Land? I never quite get that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 18:01
|
|
|
Abrasive Obelisk posted:IIRC no, Pokemon Diamond/Pearl would come out the next year.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 18:01
|
|
|
WickedHate posted:Hm, I figured the 3DS was killing it. The DS was an absolute mammoth so 20% behind doesn't seem too bad considering how much the mobile space has changed. Only difference now is that Nintendo is probably supplementing the profits from the 3DS to offset WiiU costs instead of having two successful and profitable pillars.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
One and the Same posted:Someone said earlier that the 3DS is 20% behind in sales from where the DS was at this point in it's life. Did the DS have a Pokemon game at this point in its life cycle? DS Launch: December 2, 2004 Diamond/Pearl: September 28, 2006 Difference: 665 days 3DS Launch: February 26, 2011 Pokémon X/Y Release: October 12, 2013 Difference: 959 days. So, yes. X/Y launch is 34 days from now, so at this point in its life the DS would have had a pokemon game released for 260 days. e: Kind of beaten, but these are the Japan dates, not the NA ones.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 18:07
|
|
|
Louisgod posted:The DS was an absolute mammoth so 20% behind doesn't seem too bad considering how much the mobile space has changed. Only difference now is that Nintendo is probably supplementing the profits from the 3DS to offset WiiU costs instead of having two successful and profitable pillars. How's the Vita doing comparatively and how much of a profit is it for Sony?
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 18:12
|
|
|
WickedHate posted:How's the Vita doing comparatively and how much of a profit is it for Sony? It is doing absolutely horribly everywhere but Japan, where it is only doing pretty bad. It's less important to Sony than either of Nintendo's platforms are to them, though. e: This is getting quite off topic but the weird thing to me about the DS vs 3DS comparison is the software sales. In FY 2007 alone the DS sold 20% more software than the 3DS has in its whole life up to now
Crowbear fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Sep 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 18:14
|
|
|
RVWinkle posted:There seems to be a general misunderstanding of what the Cell architecture is. Cell is just a marketing name and doesn't make it physically distinct in how it functions. In the book, The Race for a New Game Machine, the author describes the PS3 and Xbox 360 architectures as virtually identical, much like the XBone and PS4. In fact, MS stole almost all of the hardware design from Sony. The primary difference is software support which has been the underlying foundation of Microsoft's business since it was founded. Because of this, Microsoft will probably win any competition for 3rd party support. Er, you need to read that book again. The three cores of the 360 are indeed practically identical to the Power Processor Element CPU core used in the PS3's Cell. The thing is is that Cell is built as one PPE plus multiple "Synergistic Processing Elements" which are pared down but numerous processing cores that were meant to handle individual tasks. The use of one traditional core + multiple SPEs was what made programming for the PS3 a real bear for newcomers and porting. The 360's design of "traditional core, three of them" was a lot easier to work with, it behaves similarly to standard PC multicore architectures. While certainly Microsoft's software support really helped, the fact is the 360's design was simply a lot closer to what other systems were built like, and required less work to bring your games over.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
keyvin posted:Not specifically Wii U, but it seems like a new Advance Wars would be a license to print money for Nintendo. I would buy DLC war room maps like a crack addict scoring some rocks. I wouldn't care if it was a dollar a map. I was going to buy a Wii U soon for my niece and nephew, but after reading this thread, I think I won't. Thanks thread. Advance Wars was never a big seller. That is the reason they're not doing anything with it. It has a dedicated fanbase but Intelligent Systems' other stuff is generally more profitable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 20:01
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Advance Wars was never a big seller. That is the reason they're not doing anything with it. It has a dedicated fanbase but Intelligent Systems' other stuff is generally more profitable. Yup, it's one of those games popular online and not elsewhere. The first DS one did so poorly they cancelled the Japan release of Days of Ruin. BTW if anyone isn't convinced ported/multiconsole games are important, check this poo poo out. I mean it's not going to sell consoles, but if you can get people to buy into your platform, the rewards are obvious.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 20:55
|
|
|
Jeffrey posted:We should start a goon betting pool for things like WiiU end of life, total console sales, how many more home consoles Nintendo releases before calling it quits. It would let people put their money where their mouth is. Total sales of 10 (+/- 2) million units, last first-party release summer 2015 and it's some sort of Kirby game. The bulk of those sales come from a SKU that packs in Super Mario 3D World for $250 starting in Spring 2014. Everyone pretends to be surprised that an HD Wind Waker remake doesn't move consoles. Nintendo doesn't officially stop "supporting" it until they get their next console out for the sake of saving face, which "was made with third parties in mind" despite none of them ever being solicited for input. The next console, Super GameCube, comes out for Christmas 2016 and is roughly equivalent in power to the XBone/PS4, which makes sense considering there are at least four years left in that generation, but it runs on PowerPC architecture out of a misguided belief that this will save costs. Nintendo fans defend the decision voraciously, and point to the high attach rate of SM3DW as evidence of Nintendo's fanbase's ability to support a console through first-party game sales, despite the fact that it was a pack-in game. Third parties, having grown accustomed to XBox One, PS4, and PC releases all running on x86 hardware, give zero fucks about developing AAA titles for (or porting them to) the Super GameCube. Nintendo prices it at $300 and since the tablet idea didn't survive to the next generation they actually manage to eeke out a small profit on each box sold. The two dual-analog gamepads that come with the system include hardware that effectively makes them sixaxis controllers. Nintendo fans bristle at the comparison to the PS3's controllers, and despite being used to steer in Mario Kart 9, they generally are used like any other game pad by developers. Sales of the Super GameCube outpace the WiiU by 20% or so, which is seen as a victory despite the fact that its numbers are empirically abysmal. Shortly afterward the PS4 has its price lowered to $300 to compete with the newly Kinect-less XBox One Basic SKU, continuing what looks like a generation-long stalemate in North America between the two competitors. Sony's lead in Japan and Microsoft's lead in Europe (after spending a bundle to un-gently caress a botched launch) cancel each other out. Without even intending to do so, the two giants effectively murder any growth of Nintendo's Super GameCube. Super GameCube hobbles along in a place similar to the WiiU, but is perceived as less of a failure due to doing slightly-better numbers that effectively cement Nintendo as the perennial third-place console manufacturer. They eventually write down billions in R&D costs and unsold inventory, but the wound is salved somewhat by a slowly rebounding yen. Meanwhile, Nintendo is able to stop the bleeding on its earnings reports with robust 3DS software sales and a strong-selling 3DSi that has a better battery life, slightly smaller screens, and thinner profile. Nintendo fans point to this as evidence of Nintendo's clear health and say that home consoles are now their secondary business. 3DS platform revenues continue at a pace equivalent to the DS, which is seen as a victory because Nintendo fans live in a fantasy world where a complete lack of growth despite inflation, population increases, etc "isn't important." By 2018 Nintendo's "war chest" is gone due to R&D costs for the 3DS successor and their complete failure to establish a foothold in the living room. Due to home console gaming's lack of popularity in Japan at this point, Nintendo goes all-in on their next-generation handheld. It either saves the company or they end up getting bought out by Mitsubishi for less money than Sony was offering because Nintendo. Reggie says "gently caress this," retires to a private swingers' resort island called BodyReady, and buys his kids an XBox One. It quickly becomes their favorite toy. At some point the Vita has a hardware revision that makes the device cheaper, includes 16 gigs of on-board memory, and becomes more widely used as an accessory for the PS4 than a platform in its own right. Thanks to its modern touch screen, superior battery life, and ability to play "lighter" PSN games without the main console turned on, Sony accomplishes what Nintendo failed to with the WiiU gamepad. They still lose money on the Vita overall but it becomes the first seemingly-successful implementation of "second screen." Debate rages over whether it was "worth it" for Sony.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 21:21
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 23:23
|
|
|
CURATOR OF ANIME posted:Do people believe Super Mario 3D World is a remake of 3D Land? I never quite get that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 23:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:47 |
|
|
TheScott2K posted:Super GameCube
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2013 00:03
|
|