So does anyone here still support Nintendo? [Archive]

Met_K

04-10-2006, 02:49 PM

I am wondering, given the way things are on multiple issues, does anyone here still support Nintendo? I don't mean support in terms of Nintendo being the Bastard Golden Child Raping my Nostalgia or the duly elected Innovators of Gaming. I mean their products and development. Is there anyone here who believes that Nintendo has a good vision for gaming and the leadership and third party support to implement that vision, who believes that gaming is on the right track with Nintendo, and who believes that if Nintendo is able to enact its agenda, gaming will be better off?

If so, I'd like to hear some explanation of what you believe and why you believe it. Keep in mind, just saying "Teh Eveel Fanboys SuQ" isn't a real answer. Some 35-ish% of gamers still support Nintendo. If you are one of those, why?

And please, for the anti-Nintendo crowd, don't use this thread as a way to cheap-shot the Nintendo supporters. I would honestly like to see if anyone can articulate a meaningful, substantive basis for supporting Nintendo at this juncture, given all that is going on.

And lastly, lets not have the ass-hatted debate about how full of Nintendo/Microsoft/Sony/fucked-up fanboyism the Games forum is -- I honestly want to know if anyone still substantively supports Nintendo, and why.

And no, I won't do a poll.

What's up, gents? :D

Matt Perkins

04-10-2006, 02:50 PM

worm

04-10-2006, 02:53 PM

Doesn't the assertion that this forum is full of fucked-up fanboyism almost immediately containimate the thread?

I wasn't crazy about the cube, but I always feel that I give each console a fair shake before buying a Playstation.

ElGuapo

04-10-2006, 02:53 PM

I'll buy the Revolution instead of the PS3, now that I have a 360. I think the controller will be innovative, have some interesting games, and it will be maybe $100 less, if not half the price.

Qualify that. I'll wait and see what the games are like before I buy, but if it has a swordfighting game where I can actually swing and block, it's a day one purchase from me.

I also think the DS sounds cool, but I haven't bought one, due to not wanting to play games every minute of the day. It's good to have downtime doing other things.

Ed Solomon

04-10-2006, 02:58 PM

I stopped bad-mouthing Nintendo when the Micro sold well and the DS crushed. And don't even mention Nintendogs. The stupider the idea sounds to me the better it does.

I don't know about the future of gaming, but I've stopped betting against the future of Nintendo.

Robert Sharp

04-10-2006, 03:00 PM

I fully support their handhelds, yes. I haven't bought a DS either because I am still playing great GBA games. And I don't actually USE handhelds much. But I think Nintendo is doing good in that direction. But you probably mean their main consoles. There I am pretty disappointed. The Gamecube had some nice games, including Pikmin and Monkey Ball, but overall it feels very unsupported, even by Nintendo. Now the Revolution is on the way, those of us who have Gamecubes are pretty much ignored.

Will the Revolution work? I honestly don't know. I applaud them for trying to change the controllers though. I think it's about time, actually. If it works, I will be very happy. It's basically just a mouse, right? Except it's 3D and you wave it through the air (like you just don't care).

wildpokerman

04-10-2006, 03:00 PM

Rar, lets start some controversy on a forum where almost everyone owns multiple platforms. Most people here support Nintendo, most also support PC, X-box and Sony systems.

I own systems from all the manufacturers, they all have their good and bad points and games I want to play.

How about you MetK? Do you have any opinion or skin in the game or are you just out start flame wars (again)? Not that I'll know if you respond because this forum has a block poster option ;). If you write anything worth reading someone will quote it and I'll be able to see it in their post.

JaneP

04-10-2006, 03:01 PM

I think gaming is a better world with Nintendo in it. It's actually sort of a relief that they use such different language for talking about games than the others. Nothing about graphics, HD, whatever, the focus has really been on what it feels like to play, and that's refreshing.

That said, it makes me sad sometimes when I think the Revolution may be their last non-handheld console.

But the two games I'm spending the most hours on these days are Oblivion...and Animal Crossing Wild World. So I guess I count as a supporter.

Damien Neil

04-10-2006, 03:04 PM

I don't really understand what it'd mean to "support" Nintendo. I'm not sending them checks at their quarterly fund drive, if that's what you're asking. I don't wear a Nintendo baseball cap and riot every time they win^H^H^Hrelease a game, either.

I think that they're making games that I want to play, and showing every sign of continuing to do so in the future. My current three games are Oblivion (PC), CoD2 (PC), and Chibi Robo (GC), so they've got a share of my gaming attention.

Their "agenda" appears to be "1. make good games, 2. sell them, 3. profit". Since we can always use more good games, I guess I'd have to say that gaming will indeed be better off if Nintendo manages to enact its agenda. (Plus, any agenda that doesn't involve gathering underpants can't be all bad.)

I fully intend to buy a Revolution on launch day, assuming they aren't sold out. I suppose that's a kind of support. Am I a fanboy now? Is there a secret handshake or something?

Gary Whitta

04-10-2006, 03:10 PM

I heart Nintendo and also intend to buy a Rev on Day 1.

Derek French

04-10-2006, 03:14 PM

I have no real feelings towards Nintendo, one way or the other, but after trying both a PSP and a DS hands-on for a week, I will be purchasing a DS Lite when its available.

BobJustBob

04-10-2006, 03:16 PM

Nintendo consoles are always comparably priced, if not cheaper than the competition. Nintendo hardware is always solid and they have great tech support. Nintendo's first party offerings remain consistently great and rival games from any other developer (within their chosen genres, of course; expanding to new genres should be one of their goals).

So yes, I support Nintendo and want them to succeed. I don't care if they were forced into their current position by dwindling market share, all I know is that Nintendo's vision of the future of gaming appeals to me much more than Microsoft's (gaming as community experience) or Sony's (???).

Kunikos

04-10-2006, 03:19 PM

I love Nintendo...because I grew up with them and because of the DS my daughter plays on now and because they promise I can play all the old games on the Revolution which is probably the only console I'll be buying day 1.

... and then he ran out of oxygen and died. Poor Matt, he never knew what a valuable tool Mr. Punctuation can be.

also Met_K is a secret Nintendo hater IM CALLIN U OUT yeah you know it because im just crazy like that because this thread has driven me crazy because matt perkins is a gramma hatin foo beeatch

Idar Thorvaldsen

04-10-2006, 03:21 PM

Shadarr

04-10-2006, 03:26 PM

My current three games are Oblivion (PC), CoD2 (PC), and Chibi Robo (GC), so they've got a share of my gaming attention.
Is Chibi Robo any good?

Matt Perkins

04-10-2006, 03:26 PM

... and then he ran out of oxygen and died. Poor Matt, he never knew what a valuable tool Mr. Punctuation can be.

also Met_K is a secret Nintendo hater IM CALLIN U OUT yeah you know it because im just crazy like that because this thread has driven me crazy because matt perkins is a gramma hatin foo beeatch
It's not that I hate it so much as it hates me. I swear. Hate the grammar not the um, writer.

EvilIdler

04-10-2006, 03:28 PM

Nintendo make fun games. Even the ones definitely meant for kids can be
entertaining to old fogeys. The DS I bought a few weeks ago is my first
Nintendo product, though. Never been a fanboi or hater.

Oblivion, or defend a murder suspect? I'm torn!

Shadari

04-10-2006, 03:29 PM

This place is NOT representative of what the average gamer thinks. Average console fanboi, yes maybe. Point is the gaming polls keep showing that console fanbois are only half the story.

Qenan

04-10-2006, 03:36 PM

I'm dubious over the phrase "support Nintendo", but so long as they keep making fun games I'll keep buying them. Why not?

Ben

04-10-2006, 03:42 PM

This might be the worst thread in the history of the internet. Support Nintendo? What does that even mean? Where did you get your 35% of gamers support Nintendo statistic?
Did someone poll gamers asking which company they'd vote for if it ran for office?

madkevin

04-10-2006, 03:42 PM

How about you MetK? Do you have any opinion or skin in the game or are you just out start flame wars (again)? Not that I'll know if you respond because this forum has a block poster option ;). If you write anything worth reading someone will quote it and I'll be able to see it in their post.

I do believe that the above constitutes QT3's first ever "plonk" post.

Matt Perkins

04-10-2006, 03:47 PM

Met_K is today's winner.

Kunikos

04-10-2006, 03:49 PM

I thought "plonk" was bad wine, and that blocking a user was something you had to load into Firefox as an extension and isn't part of the board in any shape or form that I can see immediately here on the page.

Also, the new forum is lame and won't take vB codes it even offers up as being available-- case in point, try to use see?

Squirrel Killer

04-10-2006, 03:56 PM

I am wondering, given the way things are on multiple issues, does anyone here still support Nintendo?
And leaked Solid Snake's secret identity.

Damien Neil

04-10-2006, 04:02 PM

Is Chibi Robo any good?

Yes.

On one hand, it's just a platformer. As such, it's nothing special; you'll find games with better controls, better graphics, and so forth. On the other hand, it's got a great setting (inch-high robot navigating a human-sized house).

The game's geography is fairly small. There are only seven rooms, all of which you can access fairly early on. Physical progression though the game involves advancing through each room--figuring out how to get to the high shelves and so on. Often this requires acquiring new items; every time you get a new ability, you immediately think of two or three places that you'll be able to use it to pass an obstacle.

Gameplay is mostly puzzle-oriented rather than twitch-oriented. You can't jump and you almost never need fast reflexes. Once you figure out what you need to do, doing it is rarely challenging. This isn't an absolute rule--there are a couple places where precision movement is important.

The time system may annoy some people. You have a fixed amount of time in each day (configurable to 5, 10, or 15 minutes). At the end of the day, you automatically return to your "Chibi House" base station. If you're working on a puzzle somewhere, this means that you'll have to run back and restart it every 15 minutes. This generally doesn't take long (and you get items to speed up travel), but it can be frustrating if a day ends just before you finish a tricky section.

There are a lot of minigames. None of them are particularly special, but they're all reasonably well-done and they don't drag on.

So, if you like quirky puzzle platformers in which you play a tiny robot trying to keep a family together in the face of a small daughter who thinks that she is a frog and an unemployed father who blows the rent budget on action figures and robots...well, this is currently the best choice in that genre. :>

Lunch of Kong

04-10-2006, 04:27 PM

I got my DS Lite today. I'm gonna name it "Martha". She's so purrty in her navy blue dressings. Now that I've recharged her batteries, I think I will take her along with me on a stroll.

jim crawford

04-10-2006, 04:34 PM

How about supporting our troops, does anyone here do that?

edit: DON'T ANSWER

Kaigen

04-10-2006, 04:43 PM

I like Nintendo's vision for games for Nintendo games. I don't think it's something that should change the direction of the whole of gaming. In fact, the majority of Nintendo games move in the complete opposite of what I envision gaming should be. I'm one of those "games as art" guys, where Nintendo is more of a "games as toys" company. While my preference leans very strongly in one direction, I do feel that it's important that both directions are pursued.

I still enjoy Nintendo games quite a lot, and I fully support their direction they're heading in. I probably got more overall enjoyment out of my GameCube than any other platform in the passing console generation (Zelda, Pikmin, Mario Sunshine, Paper Mario, etc), but my single favorite games were played on the PS2 and XBox (Shadow of the Colossus and Psychonauts). I don't believe that Nintendo will ever retake the console industry, nor should they, but I believe that their direction is still an important one for the industry as a whole.

Jab

04-10-2006, 04:46 PM

I've been a nintendo fan since I first played SMB back in 1988, as a first party developer, they are the best. Third party though is where they are horrible. I can't remember the last mulit console game I bought for the gamecube, but they still make the best handhelds out there. If eb is right I should be getting brain age tomorrow.

They're great at making games that no one else would think of. I don't remember hearing about a game similar to chibi robo, or pikmin, or even odema on the xbox or ps2. The scary part is that I'm more excited about playing the classic games on the revolution then I'm about the new games on it.

jim crawford

04-10-2006, 04:55 PM

Hey wait, guys, I think the original post is satire!

Dave Long

04-10-2006, 04:56 PM

Is Chibi Robo any good?

Chick gave it five stars in the latest CGM. He's told me personally via e-mail that I should play it. It must be damn good.

You all know where I stand and Met_K's return rox.

Nintendo makes great games. They also make great hardware that rarely fails and is very durable for my kids (and me). They're trying to give us something to play that's not the same as the stuff that came before and I applaud that approach.

Better yet, they're asking third-parties to get on board with them and do the same. That UbiSoft game everyone's talking about looks great. The team that's making it proved themselves with GRAW (Ubi France is making Red Steel right?) and I'm pretty excited to see what they do with the Rev controller.

Shadarr

04-10-2006, 05:03 PM

The scary part is that I'm more excited about playing the classic games on the revolution then I'm about the new games on it.
That's because the Nintendo is innovative, which means you can't predict what it'll be. You know you like Castlevania and SMB3, but what are the new games going to be? Nobody knows. With the 360, you pretty much knew before anything was announced that there would be a bunch of racing games, sports games and shooters, only in full hi-def with Live play. Nintendo isn't that predictable. Could anyone have predicted Animal Crossing, Nintendogs or Phoenix Wright?

Jackstar

04-10-2006, 05:53 PM

I thought "plonk" was bad wine, and that blocking a user was something you had to load into Firefox as an extension and isn't part of the board in any shape or form that I can see immediately here on the page.
Load the user's profile, look over on the right, there's an "add user to ignore list" link.

Plonking is the most useful technology ever invented. Life on a forum without ignore is like driving without a windshield.

Cosmic Hippo

04-10-2006, 06:19 PM

Let's see, the Nintendo agenda ...

Eliminate boredom - yes

admit there is a problem and fix the proliferation of technology over gameplay and - yes

expand the controller paradigm to entice ordinary people to become gamers - yes

Cut prices - yes

Mindlessly focus on graphics and performance over gameplay - NO

Let other console manufacturers lock them into a paradigm where they create multiplatform games and then shit all over you - NO

I think this is exactly what they're trying to do, with varying levels of success. I really hope they succeed with this whole controller thing.

Also, regarding the PS3... the specs on that thing are ridiculous. By all indications, most TV's people will be playing it on will bring the quality down from the PS3's normal specs. Which means you'll be paying $500 for something you aren't even going to get. So yeah, I'll go with the less-powerful revolution. Especially since I never buy televisions, I just wait until someone else is getting rid of theirs.

wildpokerman

04-10-2006, 06:21 PM

Dammit I just realised that this thread is a play on the does anyone support Bush thread in P&R. Not only will I un plonk you metK I'm adding you to my favorites for starting a new q23 inside joke.

Ryan A

04-10-2006, 06:25 PM

I hate the saccharine-and-pointless Nintendo properties that so many otherwise rational adults adore (I'm talking to all you Animal Crossing evangelists that I STILL BLAME for my spending time and money on that crap).

Rather than viewing Nintendo as the purveyor of All Things Fun like I used to, based on my fond recollections of Ikari Warriors, Tecmo Bowl, Duck Hunt... I now see Nintendo as the system for Stuff That Pisses Me Off because of crap like Nintendogs.

Despite all that bile, I still think the Revolution will be the only next-gen console I'll consider buying.

JMR

04-10-2006, 06:31 PM

This thread might be the funniest ever on Qt3. It's amazing you guys believe the crap you write. To say this forum isn't dominated completely by Sony fanbois is absurd. The only way you could counter that is to put examples up like Midnight Son's claim he's independent despite insulting Nintendo mentioned in any thread and licking the ass of any Sony game mentioned in any thread.

There may have been a time when "Sony" counters were discussed in threads but that time is long gone. Some have stuck around but 99% of them went elsewhere where there was actual intelligent debate. Here it's simply name calling. I think when quatoria called CindySue22 a "whore" (is CindySue even female?... a man-whore?) over her (his) views that pretty much summed up the atmosphere here.

Here's a typical thread:

NINTENDO ADMINISTRATION DOES SO-AND-SO

Post #1: Ripped editorial from Nintendo blog or newspaper.

Post #2 through #6: Hiroshi Yamauch is more evil than Hitler.

Post #7: Stupid one-liner from Midnight Son

Post #8 through #51: Hiroshi Yamauchi is really more evil than Hitler.

There's no real intelligent discussion going on here. You either join in on Nintendo are evil to the core talk or leave.

Ryan A

04-10-2006, 06:39 PM

Yeah, threads always get better once everyone decides to get all metaclever

Cosmic Hippo

04-10-2006, 06:44 PM

Yeah, threads always get better once everyone decides to get all metaclever
Hahaha, you're so right. You deserve the "so" for using the word "metaclever."

Sharpe

04-10-2006, 06:52 PM

I must admit, Met_K's parody of my original post in the P&R forum had me laughing in my chair. You see, b/c I am in fact an overly stuffy type who really truly wants to be liked even by people who disagree with me and who does in fact speak (and type) in incredibly long and complex sentences, sometimes bordering on incomprehensibility. And Met_K..... isn't :0.

In the context, it was a beautiful riff. Met_K, I salute you!

And welcome back to the forum.

RickH

04-10-2006, 06:52 PM

Load the user's profile, look over on the right, there's an "add user to ignore list" link.

Plonking is the most useful technology ever invented. Life on a forum without ignore is like driving without a windshield.

Oh, man, I never knew this board had a killfilter.

Dave Long

04-10-2006, 06:56 PM

Oh, man, I never knew this board had a killfilter.

It didn't have one until it moved to the current software.

BDGE

04-10-2006, 07:13 PM

My 360 is dead after 3 months of ownership.

I've gone through three PS2 systems in 5 years.

I've never once had to deal with Customer Support for Nintendo hardware in my lifetime. (Ok, yea I blew out a lung trying to get NES carts working, but who didn't?)

Ryan A

04-10-2006, 07:18 PM

(Ok, yea I blew out a lung trying to get NES carts working, but who didn't?)

You know, I always suspected that made things worse. Especially the way most people seemed to be blowing more saliva than air into the carts.

Jab

04-10-2006, 07:18 PM

I think the only time I ever had problems with a nes system was when I over heated it playing for a long period of Zelda 1.

The trick that I was shown by a friend with nes carts was to blow into the cart with your shirt over your mouth, somehow it worked almost every time.

Jackstar

04-10-2006, 07:48 PM

Oh, man, I never knew this board had a killfilter.
Strictly speaking, it's not: when a post by someone on your hatelist would be displayed, the forum software "helpfully" displays a message saying, "some jackhole made a post here, thought you might want to know!"

I don't really know why. Isn't the point of ignoring someone, that... you ignore them? Anyway, still better than nothing.

quatoria

04-10-2006, 07:50 PM

I think when quatoria called CindySue22 a "whore" (is CindySue even female?... a man-whore?) over her (his) views that pretty much summed up the atmosphere here.

Sorry, what? I'm pretty sure I never did that.

Jason McCullough

04-10-2006, 09:14 PM

Tom, I'd say the median gaming console ownership here has settled on "PS2 or maybe Xbox" based on the games discussed here.

Nintendo gamers tend to play a lot more apple-whoring Harvest Moon "simulations", dating sims, and tentacle rape puzzle games, right? Everything here is RPGs, simulations, and quirky stuff. You and Mark pretty much set the tone that way, and when it originally started up the like-minded people from comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic & rpg came over.

There's also us running off the people who write badly or are 17 years old, but I dunno what direction that goes.

Aszurom

04-10-2006, 09:28 PM

I always thought that the cube was the inferior of the 3 current gen systems. Well, RE4 pretty much reversed my opinion of that. It looks quite a bit better on the cube than the ps2. Sort of a shame everything else went for cartoony primary colors and boxy characters (animal crossing, mario, etc.) because it seems the cube could have done some really good stuff. Xbox out-graphiced them both of course - but no RE4 there.

Anyway... cube hotness:
Metroid
RE4
Ikaruga
etc.

Qmanol

04-10-2006, 10:18 PM

The Cube's supposed inferiority is an interesting thing. Nintendo themselves released figures for polygons on screen that were significantly less than both the PS2 and Xbox. Of course both of those were calculated using synthetic demos and Nintendo's figures were a realistic in-game estimate, which was topped by a launch game.

But I'd really love them to get that 3rd party support back. Hopfully the buzz over the Revmote means it's a possibility this time.

E-phonk

04-11-2006, 12:53 AM

I'm quite a big nintendo <3 fan. I've had a nes, snes, gameboy with all around about 250 games when I was little (a lot of imports, my uncle worked at sony(!) ). Then I skipped the N64 because I was a PC gamer by that time (sold my snes with 120 games for a x486), and stayed away from consoles until I got a bit tired of PC RTS/FPS games and got myself a dreamcast first (second hand, dirt cheap with lots of games) and later a gamecube because I couldn't resist playing mario/zelda/metroid again. Currently I play my DS the most - so I will pre-order the revolution asap.

Not only is their hardware of good quality (my gameboy still works, my nes still works, dropped my DS without problems) - I also love their firstparty games, with a preference for Intelligent Systems (paper mario, advance wars) and zelda games.
It's funny how underneat those cute graphics they often have such great gamebalance. Advance wars can be a bitch (warroom levels), while looking so simple - and paper mario is easily one of my favourite RPG games just because of it's easy mechanics.
Between their established franchises like (paper)mario/zelda/metroid/mariokart and the new ones like pikmin/warioware/nintendogs/braintraining, they seem to always find an original twist or idea that turns out to be great fun. And it's an extra that they got my girlfriend into gaming.

I can't wait to play the revolution.

Jason Cross

04-11-2006, 01:20 AM

Nintendo gets a lot of love due in large part to nostalgia. Their first party development still cranks out some really great hits, but they're not all big winners. Sometimes their mediocre games, I think, get cut a little too much slack by a gaming press and hardcore public for whom video gaming was "playing Nintendo" when they grew up. (myself included)

I'm immensely curious about the Revolution (or whatever they want to call it), and I'm glad Nintendo is doing things the way they are. Going from that to "gaming would be better off if everyone followed Nintendo's path" is too big a leap, though. I think the market needs that bredth, that competition between your 360s and PS3s, and also your smaller, cheaper, less powerful system focusing on being different. If everyone was focused on being less costly and differentiating with "new ways to play," gaming would become a mire of gimmicky attachments and doohickys with no standardization. Nintendo is good to do it, but I don't want to see it become The Thing To Do.

As much as I have fond memories of great Nintendo games from my youth, I'm actually really tired of the company leaning on the same small set of franchises and characters. It's working for them, financially, but does every game have to be Mario, Zelda, Donkey Kong, or Kirby? Does the golf game have to be Mario Golf with all the Mario characters? Oh, there's Yet Another Zelda Game coming out for the DS? Let me guess, I collect rupees, I'll have a boomerang and use it to flip switches, I'll have bombs and blow open a cracked wall...

Many of the really big games Nintendo does within their franchises - major Zelda releases, major Mario releases, etc - are really great. But they drag out those franchises with every damn new game, it seems. I'd like to see some new faces.

I really hope Nintendo is successful with the Rev, and I for one am looking forward to that more than the PS3. The PS3 seems to be aiming to do everything the 360 does, "only it's better because it's Sony." It'll have some nice exclusives, I'm sure, but for the most part it's the same kind of games I get on the 360, with the same overall quality level. With the Rev, I know I'll be spending a lot less, and I'll at least be playing different kinds of stuff, even if it will seem like the same dozen Nintendo characters star in every freakin' game.

shang

04-11-2006, 02:45 AM

I don't care for the Nintendo first-party brands all that much (e.g. I think that Mario is one of most unlikeable main characters in video game history. I mean, who wants to play as a hairy plumber who speaks like a retard? Many, apparently..) However, despite the graphical themes and character design, Nintendo titles often have very polished and addicting game mechanics and those weigh more in my book.

DS is currently the console I play the most (I also own an xbox and a ps2) and I'm very interested in what Nintendo can do with the Revolution. Even if the controller turns out to be a total flop, I still "support Nintendo" for doing something tremendously more interesting than it's competitors which can be summed as "exactly like the last generation, but with better graphics".

Theodore Rex DX

04-11-2006, 03:07 AM

Mario is one of the better characters going, just because he's so unhip and unsexy and unfocus-tested. I think it's kind of cool that they made such a huge brand out of a character so unappealing to a lot of people. Says a lot about the product, too. I think I like to play as him to try to convince myself I don't play videogames to fulfil some kind of moronic adolescent power fantasy or wish fulfilment or whatever - even though that's always going to be a small part of it, maybe. They really fucked him up since Mario 64 with that Mickey Mouse shit, though.

shang

04-11-2006, 03:34 AM

They really fucked him up since Mario 64 with that Mickey Mouse shit, though.

True, the old NES/SNES sprites were more appealing, and more importantly, there was no speech (IT'S-a MEE, MAAARIO!).

Hans Lauring

04-11-2006, 04:05 AM

I agree totally with Jason.
I'm on the fence on buying the Xbox 360 or waiting for the PS3, because they're too similar for me to considering spending that kind of money on owning both.

I'm even more on the fence on the Rev, not because it's just another next gen system, but because Nintendo just focuses on franchises and games, that does nothing for me. But, and this is my point, if the prize is below $200 and they do interesting stuff with the controller, I might just end up ALSO owning a Revolution - something I probably wouldn't even consider if they just made another high priced system and tried competing with the two others on specs. So kudos for going their own way.

(I'd still rather play Advance Wars without the cutesy graphics and child characters on my PSP than on the DS, though)

Theodore Rex DX

04-11-2006, 04:36 AM

(I'd still rather play Advance Wars without the cutesy graphics and child characters on my PSP than on the DS, though)

There is an Advance Wars-ish game coming for PSP. Called Field Commander. It has no personality of sense of design at all, so it might be up your alley.

Hans Lauring

04-11-2006, 05:01 AM

It's funny because it's true.

... wait it's neither funny nor true.
But you're right, it looks so much better than any Advance Wars. But AW has finely tuned gameplay, which I hope Sony just copied (a look on the site looks like it, but it seems to have even fewer units and lack of units was my only gameplay gripe with AW).

But lets get back to the Rev. I'm happy that the first screenshots to come out features swordplay with the wonky controller and no Mario or Kirby in sight. I'll buy it if it's <200.

Ryan Markel

04-11-2006, 06:48 AM

Hans Lauring

04-11-2006, 07:13 AM

o.O

You're the sweet, sweet favorite.

Hey, it's easy. I can do it too.

I didn't say the things you're arguing against. Go read it again.

To sum it up.
Mario, Kirby et al doesn't do it for me, but Nintendo trying to make money from a target audience that isn't me is a perfectly valid business decision. Bully for Nintendo, I'm sure they know their tagert audience better than I do.

I like Advance Wars and even wrote that the underlying gameplay was sweet (allthough low on the replay value) and that I wished Sony would copy it whole cloth - I would however like it even more with a more adult themed art direction. Hardly scathing criticism that should get your fanboi knickers in a twist.

Gordon Cameron

04-11-2006, 07:41 AM

Because - you know - focusing on games is a really bad idea.

Low blow to isolate half a phrase... he said they focus on franchises and games that do nothing for him. Poorly placed comma, maybe, but if you hadn't been quote mining I think you'd have gotten the gist.

caesarbear

04-11-2006, 08:13 AM

Does anyone have a link to a forum where they actually intelligently discuss consoles?

zabuni

04-11-2006, 08:20 AM

No, not really.

Nick Walter

04-11-2006, 08:21 AM

Does anyone have a link to a forum where they actually intelligently discuss consoles?

Ah, the naivete of youth.

This forum is pretty representative of upper middle class educated console gamers. The medium and subject matter exclude the poor and the popular, and dogpiles get rid of (some) of the stupid and PC whores.

BobJustBob

04-11-2006, 08:22 AM

Drunkagain

04-11-2006, 09:00 AM

N64 was disappointment for me. And the GCN just didn't live up to it's potential.

But I love my GBA and DS. And I'm way more excited about the Revolution than I thought I would be.

So yeah I guess I support them. I just wish they would release more fucking games for their home consoles!

Ryan A

04-11-2006, 09:20 AM

N64 was disappointment for me.

You can't be serious.

Goldeneye
Banjo and Kazooie
Mario Kart
That Konami World Cup Soccer Game I Can't Remember The Name Of

Those four games alone were responsible for the most fun (SP as well as multiplayer) that I have ever had with a console.

Drunkagain

04-11-2006, 09:41 AM

You can't be serious.

Goldeneye
Banjo and Kazooie
Mario Kart
That Konami World Cup Soccer Game I Can't Remember The Name Of

Those four games alone were responsible for the most fun (SP as well as multiplayer) that I have ever had with a console.

Yup, dead serious. I'll also add Ocarana of Time and Perfect Dark to your list of games that didn't do it for me. On the whole the system was a letdown for me.

Ryan Markel

04-11-2006, 09:42 AM

Low blow to isolate half a phrase... he said they focus on franchises and games that do nothing for him. Poorly placed comma, maybe, but if you hadn't been quote mining I think you'd have gotten the gist.

No, the comma really did throw me off. I went back and read it and I understand what I saw before you mentioned something. If that's what was meant, then I'm sorry I misinterpreted the meaning of the post.

...because Nintendo just focuses on franchises and games, that does nothing for me.

There's some clause disagreement there.

I'm used to people bashing Nintendo for focusing on software rather than hardware in the current generation - which is something that frustrates me greatly.

I wasn't aware that I was a fanboy... I'm platform agnostic, but I will say that it's been my assumption that the Cube is a very underrated and misrepresented piece of hardware by a lot of people. Maybe that makes me a fanboy.

Rimbo

04-11-2006, 10:47 AM

Disclaimer: The only Nintendo I ever used regularly was a GBA. Never had an NES, SNES, or what have you. I did, however, see the spectacular fall of Atari (the first time, not the current next-gen fall of Atari) firsthand, and I remember clearly my disappointment in Atari Pac-Man. I'm old enough to remember playing Space Invaders when it was new and young enough to still play games.

I am wondering, given the way things are on multiple issues, does anyone here still support Nintendo? I don't mean support in terms of Nintendo being the Bastard Golden Child Raping my Nostalgia or the duly elected Innovators of Gaming. I mean their products and development. Is there anyone here who believes that Nintendo has a good vision for gaming and the leadership and third party support to implement that vision, who believes that gaming is on the right track with Nintendo, and who believes that if Nintendo is able to enact its agenda, gaming will be better off?

Yo.

If so, I'd like to hear some explanation of what you believe and why you believe it.

1. Playing Doom 3 was not a better experience than playing System Shock 2.

Corollary to 1: I didn't notice the presence or absence of graphical detail in either after five minutes into the game.

2. All of the things that the great power of the Xbox 360 and PS3 are supposed to enable -- according to Warren Spector (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/39/17), at least -- existed in the original, 8088-based CGA Starflight.

Corollary to 2: The extra development time required to take advantage of the power of the PS3 and 360 will make adding in better AI and the like less likely, not more likely.

3. One of the primary reasons for buying a console for gaming is that it's cheaper than a PC. If the console costs $500 or more, why not just get a new PC? Note that I'm far from a PC gaming advocate; quite the opposite, really -- but only because of the cost/benefit ratio. The PS3 and Xbox 360 lose big on that account. Given a choice between those and a new PC, I'll skip the next generation of consoles and just get a new computer... or a Revolution at a fraction of the cost of all of the above!

4. Sony and Microsoft's goal is to sell these at a loss in an effort to capture marketshare. What happens when the next generation comes around? If graphics quality matters so much, then that implies no one will want the old games. Which means that the whole market resets itself with each generation: The gains of the past generation do not translate into gains in the next generation. If, however, backwards compatibility matters, then graphics quality must not be nearly as important as they make it. Either way, they are wasting money on a fool's errand: They are either failing to make money when they could be by pricing their equipment too high, or they are failing to justify the losses by a gain in useful marketshare.

5. By the same token, Nintendo's vision of quality games has only failed because of poor execution, not because they have a bizarre vision. As long as they keep their eyes on that goal and adjust their strategy to hit it, they will be on the right track. And as long as they make increasing profits trying to do so, they will always be a significant player in the market.

6. As graphics power increases, Corollary to 1 above becomes stronger: The gains in graphics are leading to diminishing returns. Details are improving, but not in a way that changes the overall look and feel.

Hans Lauring

04-11-2006, 11:29 AM

No, the comma really did throw me off. I went back and read it and I understand what I saw before you mentioned something. If that's what was meant, then I'm sorry I misinterpreted the meaning of the post.

I see it now. Read it without the comma (I won't go back and edit it, or this entire senseless debacle will make even less sense).

Tom McNamara

04-11-2006, 11:36 AM

So is this still a parody of this thread (http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/showthread.php?t=25499)? Because it looks like not everyone reads the P&R forum :P

Rimbo

04-11-2006, 11:56 AM

...and some of us who -do- read P&R aren't paying attention...

Charles

04-11-2006, 11:57 AM

Corollary to 2: The extra development time required to take advantage of the power of the PS3 and 360 will make adding in better AI and the like less likely, not more likely.

This isn't true. I've often heard this kind of moaning over the years, and the truth is that AI is becoming a greater and greater focus of games nowadays, even moreso than graphics. For instance, I'm working on a next gen game, with a team well over 100 people, and the AI and behavior programming team (of which I am part) vastly outnumbers our graphics programmers. Factor of 4 to 1, give or take.

Used to be that game AI was done by one guy who was also doing a bunch of other stuff, and now companies have whole teams dedicated to it. And all this as graphics also continued to improve. So I think this kind of fear is misplaced.

Charles

04-11-2006, 11:59 AM

Also, I've been thinking about it, and 10 bucks says that E3's best game of show award will go to a revolution game, regardless of what kind of other awesome games might be shown.

RickH

04-11-2006, 12:08 PM

Nintendo got the same kind of hype for the Gamecube, why not for the Rev? The gee-whiz factor will take it through the roof. I look forward to reading about people standing in line 3+ hours so they can play 5 min. of a Rev game.

Rimbo

04-11-2006, 12:20 PM

This isn't true. I've often heard this kind of moaning over the years, and the truth is that AI is becoming a greater and greater focus of games nowadays, even moreso than graphics. For instance, I'm working on a next gen game, with a team well over 100 people, and the AI and behavior programming team (of which I am part) vastly outnumbers our graphics programmers. Factor of 4 to 1, give or take.

Used to be that game AI was done by one guy who was also doing a bunch of other stuff, and now companies have whole teams dedicated to it. And all this as graphics also continued to improve. So I think this kind of fear is misplaced.

So suddenly, without having to expend any more resources, you're able to do more?

The cost of development is the problem, because it means fewer risks, fewer games, smaller margins, more expensive games, and for constantly diminishing returns. The curve for improvements is diminishing; the curve for costs is accelerating. The things that companies will have to do to minimize their risks to survive at this stage are not pretty. Right now the VG industry is where the movie industry was in the 1960s, and this is bad, bad, bad business.

Industry consolidation is a sign of a shrinking market...

Charles

04-11-2006, 12:32 PM

So suddenly, without having to expend any more resources, you're able to do more?

The cost of development is the problem, because it means fewer risks, fewer games, smaller margins, more expensive games, and for constantly diminishing returns. The curve for improvements is diminishing; the curve for costs is accelerating. The things that companies will have to do to minimize their risks to survive at this stage are not pretty. Right now the VG industry is where the movie industry was in the 1960s, and this is bad, bad, bad business.

Industry consolidation is a sign of a shrinking market...

What, you think that 100+ team came free? Of course you have to spend more resources. But those resources also go to AI. AI is not being left at the side of the road like you are attempting to intimate.

And yes, of course, the way to make safe money is to avoid risk. That's true all the time. But that doesn't mean that people are going to stop innovating or pushing the envelope of what's possible in games. The game I'm working on is a huge risk which is definitely doing things never before seen, but it's being done off the backs of some smaller 'safe' projects.

Long story short, (which, coincidentally, is the same story as always), some companies are doing things the wrong way, and some are doing things the right way. Any company that chooses the safe route for too long will stagnate and die. And for all the bemoaning of lack of risk, it sure didn't stop us from getting Katamari Damacy, or Guitar Hero, or Brain Age.

Rimbo

04-11-2006, 02:21 PM

And yes, of course, the way to make safe money is to avoid risk.

No, the way to make money of any kind is to manage risk. If you don't make money, you get to take fewer risks, and a risky move for a failing company is not so risky for a succeeding one.

I'm talking about what the original post addressed: Money. Income exceeding outgo. How much you have to spend on a game console, how much your employer has to spend on you and your coworkers, and the real value each side gets per dollar spent.

These things dominate all other considerations in the whole equation, which is why there is still a Novalogic (http://www.novalogic.com/) but no longer is a Looking Glass Studios (http://www.ttlg.com/).

DaveC

04-11-2006, 02:23 PM

Nintendo is fine, I just think sometimes nostalgia clouds people's judgement about the company. I didn't grow up in the NES/SNES era so I don't have any of that nostalgia.

Charles

04-11-2006, 02:26 PM

No, the way to make money of any kind is to manage risk. If you don't make money, you get to take fewer risks, and a risky move for a failing company is not so risky for a succeeding one.

I'm talking about what the original post addressed: Money. Income exceeding outgo. How much you have to spend on a game console, how much your employer has to spend on you and your coworkers, and the real value each side gets per dollar spent.

These things dominate all other considerations in the whole equation, which is why there is still a Novalogic (http://www.novalogic.com/) but no longer is a Looking Glass Studios (http://www.ttlg.com/).

Sure, but absolutely none of this has any bearing on the fact that AI hasn't taken a back seat. In fact, AI is one of the contributors to the high costs, because you can't get away with having a single part time AI programmer anymore. You have to have an AI team, which is something you didn't need before, which increases costs, which leads to all the things you are talking about.

All I'm saying is that people aren't skimping on the AI like you seem to think.

Kunikos

04-11-2006, 02:35 PM

So is this still a parody of this thread (http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/showthread.php?t=25499)? Because it looks like not everyone reads the P&R forum :P

I don't because its such a pain in the ass to get into the hazmat suit and then go through the decontamination airlock...

Rimbo

04-11-2006, 03:01 PM

All I'm saying is that people aren't skimping on the AI like you seem to think.

What I'm saying is that it's because the companies that aren't skimping on AI (that aren't skimping on other things) haven't run out of money yet. They're not going to get positive ROI by doing this, and if you have negative ROI enough times, you go out of business.

Charles

04-11-2006, 03:03 PM

So you are saying that by adding more focus to AI, they are guaranteeing that their games won't break even, and that because of that, most companies that add a focus of AI will go out of business?

Okay, well, I'll just call you wrong and let time prove it.

Rimbo

04-11-2006, 03:55 PM

Are you being deliberately dense?

It's not the fact that there's additional focus on AI, you numbskull. It's that in order to add that focus to AI, the development staff, and thus the company's costs, have ballooned. Your employer is spending well into 8 figures per year just employing a team that large, and that's before you get into the management overhead (and salaries!), the cost of development equipment and software. And we haven't even gotten into marketing costs, should this team actually create a game to sell.

Size is what matters, not what you do with it.

Your game had better be a smash hit, because as I said before, the ratio of income to outgo dominates all other concerns.

Charles

04-11-2006, 04:16 PM

But I never argued that it didn't cost more. I only addressed your initial assertion that

The extra development time required to take advantage of the power of the PS3 and 360 will make adding in better AI and the like less likely, not more likely.

Which remains false, regardless of the price tag. And games can't get by with shit AI anymore -- AI being good or bad is often a huge factor in determining game reviews. With that in mind, AI is getting a bigger piece of the overall pie, even if that pie remains constant. Which is what you don't seem to grasp.

Rimbo

04-11-2006, 04:19 PM

OK, I'll grant that if you take out the price tag consideration, it's false; if you keep your development costs constant, then it's true.

Now name me one company that doesn't have to take the price tag into consideration?

With that in mind, AI is getting a bigger piece of the overall pie, even if that pie remains constant. Which is what you don't seem to grasp.

I grasp it perfectly: It means that companies are spending more and more for diminishing returns, which is still a recipe for failure. We've already seen a lot of consolidation and good developers going out of business as a result of this, and this process will accelerate in the next generation.

Take a good look at your 100-man team now, because there isn't enough money in all of christendom to keep that team together at that size five years from now.

Charles

04-11-2006, 04:31 PM

Well, I did just say that even if costs are kept fixed, AI is getting a larger part of the funding than it used to.

But I'll play ball.

Quit thinking as if all companies sink their eggs in to one basket. Because they don't. Not the good ones anyway, the ones that last. A good company will make it's base money off a lot of safe projects, known IPs, sequels, etc. Then it will take that money, and fund a 'big' game, which will push the envelope on all fronts. Most people do it, and occasionally it pays off. That's how they do it if they don't already have the money. But then you have companies like Blizzard, Valve, etc, who have the money already and do it anyway. And it pays off.

It's not just a simple slider that goes from "super expensive game" to "no AI", and it certainly isn't calculated based on a single project. It's based on the calculations of an entire company and all it's income and costs. Yes, what you've said is correct for a company stuck doing a single game, at a single time, and living day to day. However, most of the developers that are left nowadays are not living like that. Because you can't live like that and make a profitable game, very much for the reasons you've described. And so, adaptive companies have found ways around it that you apparently refuse to take in to account.

You are acting like the industry thinks that putting money in to the AI won't pay off in the long run, but the simple fact is that it does. Good AI can make or break a game, and publishers (and marketing) know it. In fact, it's marketing that's pushing the AI nowadays, if anything.

You seem to think that adding new AI is risky, but it isn't. You seem to think that adding new AI drastically bloats the cost of a game, but that's also false. If you want to look at what the side effect is of putting in more AI, then, as with graphics, look at game length.

Long game, good graphics, good AI. Pick two. Yes, there are exceptions. Yes, a lot of people only pick one. But for companies which don't have infinite resources, that's what the issue comes down to.

You cannot bilk on AI nowadays and make a successful game.

Rimbo

04-11-2006, 04:44 PM

You cannot bilk on AI nowadays and make a successful game.

Who is claiming otherwise?

Pretty much everywhere you just said "you seem to be thinking XYZ," you're wrong. Yes, I'm aware of the value of good AI; I'm a proponent of that idea, not an opponent of it, and why you keep thinking otherwise despite my repeated protestations is a mystery for the Ancient Ones to solve.

Yes, I'm aware of how game companies spread their risk out among several projects. ROI takes that into account; if your development costs twice as much, you have to have twice as many hits or make twice as much from those hits; spreading risk among multiple projects is already old news, and it alone won't deal with the higher development costs the PS3 and Xbox360 demand.

And we still have consolidation (you're not going to deny the consolidation, are you?), higher development costs, lower margins...

If you have to add to your development staff to support the new graphics capabilities, then you either have increasing costs or you have fewer resources for other things. The fact that AI as a percentage of that effort is growing doesn't matter, because we're talking about the growth in cost in absolute dollars, not as a percentage of overall bloat, and (most importantly) the ratio of that cost to revenue.

Charles

04-11-2006, 04:48 PM

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you said this:

The extra development time required to take advantage of the power of the PS3 and 360 will make adding in better AI and the like less likely, not more likely.

Rimbo

04-11-2006, 04:49 PM

Long game, good graphics, good AI. Pick two. Yes, there are exceptions. Yes, a lot of people only pick one. But for companies which don't have infinite resources, that's what the issue comes down to.

That's what I said originally that you took issue with.

All I'm really trying to say is that the number of companies that pick one is going to increase, and the number of companies that pick two is going to decrease... because the number of companies with tight budgets is going to increase.

Dave Long

04-11-2006, 04:51 PM

AI may be getting better, but it also seems clear that if you don't push the graphics capability of Xbox 360 or PS3, you may as well pack it in and go home. The way GAF is reacting to better quality shots of Red Steel, you'd think the game were for the Atari 2600.

Rimbo

04-11-2006, 04:52 PM

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you said this:

Yes, and you then agreed with me when you said this:

Long game, good graphics, good AI. Pick two. Yes, there are exceptions. Yes, a lot of people only pick one. But for companies which don't have infinite resources, that's what the issue comes down to.

You're agreeing with me, you sillyhead. All I've added to the conversation is that increasing numbers of projects will be forced to pick just one of those three.

Of course, saying that there's just these three things is oversimplifying things too, but I figure since you've been accusing me of oversimplifying that you would be aware of yourself doing it as well, right?

Charles

04-11-2006, 04:57 PM

I'm not agreeing because they are two separate things. The fact that the xbox 360 and the PS3 are powerful does not preclude good AI. Regardless of the power of a system, it still takes a constant amount of programming effort to make shit look good, programming-wise. And the trend has always been to skimp on game length rather than AI and graphics. The core "looks good" aspect of a game is entirely in the hands of the artists nowadays, and artists, coincidentally, are also the bottleneck for game length and content. It used to be that programmers were the bottleneck, but not anymore.

Anyway, think what you like. I don't expect we'll be seeing good AI only in ugly games or bad AI in good looking games as some kind of industry paradigm shift. And short games have been around a lot longer than this new set of consoles.