What people want, Iwata says, are simpler, more accessible games that are easier to play and solve?think thumb candy for dummies.
Dude! That's exactly what I want. Other than Gran Turismo, the only games I really like are the Escape Velocity series and several selected works for the NES, Genesis, and SuperNES. The new games are just too complicated to sit down and play for 30 minutes on a Friday night when you've been snubbed.
How come there never was "Balloon Fight 64?" That alone would have probably convinced me to buy an N64.
I don't give a damn about "story." I haven't ever played a game with a good story. You know who has the dumbest, most ludcrously stupid storylines? Squaresoft. Mechwarrior has more substance than all the RPGs I've ever witnessed. And I've gotta hand it to these guys for really clearing the vault with Final Fantasy X2. That has to be the stupidest advertisement I have ever seen. And why do they look like monkeys with boobs?
You want to know a real man's game? NHL 96 for the Genesis. Freakin' awesome. Nordiques rule.
Some examples of games with great story, design, and control (not all just for GameCube):
Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker
Sly Cooper & The Thievious Racoonus
Prince of Persia: Sands of Time
Ape Escape
It's this combination of 3D platform gamer and RPG that really gets my attention. You don't just make menu selections and watch pretty movies in games like these. You are immersed in an interactive world that makes you feel like an active part of the story.
They also allow you to do some really cool, crazy, ninja stunts without much difficulty. EVERY game from now on should somehow involve running up walls! I have been spoiled!
For those people that have a GameCube and don't have Eternal Darkness, run don't walk and get it. It really is a game that combines graphics, story, and gameplay. They have introduced this idea of sanity effects where the game starts to play tricks on the gamer. One example is a point during a boss battle, the tv went blank except for a "AV 1" message on the top of the screen. It scared the hell out of me. But it was just the game screwing with me. There are tons more some subtle some not subtle, but all of them are cool. I would say that it is one of the best games to come out in years that wasn't a sequel of some popular game.
Cinematic graphics and better stories are blind alleys? What the hell is he on about? And how can a company that is surviving pretty much soley on its constantly rehashed franchises accuse others of creating a feeling among gamers that there isn't anything new?
Rehashed franchises or not, the gameplay is new. And that's their point, game = gameplay. Nintendo consistently delivers great gameplay.
IMHO, cinematic graphics already looked like an incredibly bad idea six, seven years ago, when there was a huge outbreak of canned video in games.
At that time, all good game designers recognized game is not a movie. Since then there's been some progress that incorporates cinematic graphic techniques and mini-cutscenes in games in a very limited fashion, as in Max Payne, Warcraft III, Super Mario 64. I suspect that is about as far as we can go in this direction without taking the game out of the game.
Multiplayer is cool, but it doesn't look very interesting on consoles yet. You should note that good multiplayer and good single player games tend to be very, very different in design. Adding multiplayer mode wouldn't make Mario better.
It shouldn't hurt Nintendo if they wait a year or two and release multiplayer functionality with a new console or something.
Lain, please explain why not using CDs is Nintendo's downfall.
While you're at it, compare to Dreamcast which did use CDs.
The cartridges are expensive, but not that expensive. Nintendo has huge profit margins though their business is much smaller than Sony's.
Of course, if you had a game base like the PS2 has, you could get the customers to even hand over cash on the console itself. Sony makes profit on every PS2 sold.
I've got a gamecube and I only have a few big problems with it.
1. EVERY game always has extra features IF you plug in a gameboy advance into the gamecube. Not typically a problem, but EVERY game has characters advertising how great it would be. Excellent stuff to tell a child playing a game.
2. We bought the GC as a gaming system that the entire family could sit down and play together. Or even when friends come over, it's nice to play a game together. This is great except nearly every game that features multiplayer gameplay has most of the levels and games locked. This wouldn't be bad if you could play together and unlock more levels but really really sucks when you have to go in and play single player mode for 30 years to unlock more stuff. One big example is Super Monkey Ball; why can't you earn gameplay points in multiplayer? I absolutely hate buying or renting a game to play with other people just to find that all we can do is play level 1 over and over unless we take turns playing single player.
This problem isn't exclusive to GameCube, and it is a major annoyance. A great deal of time investment (and skill) in the single-player mode of a game should not be required to unlock the full multiplayer functionality of a great party game. I'm not sure where game designers got the idea that this was a good way to do things, but I wish they'd un-get that idea.
Sometimes it can be worked around. Just earn enough points in MonkeyBall to unlock one minigame, and save your game without having unlocked anything. Then you can restart and unlock whichever game you want to play at the moment. Just don't ever save over your data.
Lain, please explain why not using CDs is Nintendo's downfall.
While you're at it, compare to Dreamcast which did use CDs.
The cartridges are expensive, but not that expensive. Nintendo has huge profit margins though their business is much smaller than Sony's.
Of course, if you had a game base like the PS2 has, you could get the customers to even hand over cash on the console itself. Sony makes profit on every PS2 sold.
Well, Nintendo did develop a game console with a cd-rom with Sony called the, wait for it, Playstation. The reason that their lack of cd drive hurt was when third party developers didn't like having to spend so much money on the cartridges. The third party companies like being able to put lots of audio and FMV in the game, something that the N64 was not very good at. So given the choice of making one of the new cinematic games with tons of audio and FMV or paying a lot more for a game that lacked these features the companies moved in droves to the PS1. That's how the PS2 got their huge game base. Nintendo was playing catch-up with the GCN.
The Dreamcast was going to be huge. They had a very large user base in the US and Japan and huge third party support. But Sony started talking up the PS2 and how the graphics were going to blow anything else away. Sony's FUD, Sega's terrible business management, and Microsoft pulling support of the Dreamcast in favor of the Xbox were all large contributers to Sega's downfall and their decision to get out of the hardware business. But the biggest contributor to the Dreamcast's downfall was the huge amount of piracy. That's one of the reasons that Nintendo didn't want to move to optical media and the reasons that Nintendo moved to a proprietary DVD like disc for the GCN.
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
This is not true at all. Although the PS2 is third of the three, there isn't much of a gap between any of them.
There is not much of a gap on games that were developed for the PS2 in mind and ported over to the other two. EA games as an example. Games that started out as a GCN or a Xbox game do look much better on their respective platforms then they do ported to the PS2. But I really don't care about graphics unless they enhance the gameplay, like the use of lighting in Splinter Cell or the cell shading in Viewtiful Joe.
dang you all and this thread...made me look up GCN online and now i want one with the simpsons road rage and hit and run...wonder if my wife will kill me if i get it for the kids for christmas (she has worked hard to never have a game console in our house)....sigh, you people are bad for me
I don't know how XBOX controllers got through QC. Also the XBOX itself is huge. I guess they're just compensating for something...</shrek>
Now, the thing about online games is, you can be right there, to go Boo ya when you smoke someone at Smash Brothers. Unreal Tournament has some cool showoff moves you can do at the end but it's not quite the same..
Groverat hit the nail on the head. Online players are either too good, too stupid, too cheating, or have too crappy of a computer and lag games and disconnect. Takes time to set a game up. Bo-ring. </homer>
I for one think the Nintendo perspective is spot on. Gamers don't want to spend forever learning controls, reading tip books, and replaying the same level 40 times.
Granted, the preponderance of anecdotes likely to be posted here would lead one to believe the exact opposite.
However, the type of people who spend their leisure time reading/posting to a forum, probably aren't the gamers being referred to by this quote. We aren't representative of the majority.
When has The Majority ever had any sense or discernment, anyway? I'm surprised no one here has made the obvious analogy yet. I won't. It's too obvious.
Lain, please explain why not using CDs is Nintendo's downfall.
While you're at it, compare to Dreamcast which did use CDs.
Like HOM said, it was a big investment for companies to make games for the N64.
The limitations of cartridges made sure that the quality of textures of games were low... yeah yeah, graphics dont make games great, but they sure add to it. Also I believe that Squaresoft had a problem with cartridges (plus the buckets of money from Sony probably did not help Nintendo either)
The Dreamcast was great IMHO... but after the CD add on, 32X and Saturn failures I think a lot of people were uninterested in a Sega console.
Comments
Originally posted by Influenza
[T]he GameCube is the least powerful of the current consoles...
Actually, the PS2 is the least powerful. It's more like a beefed up Dreamcast then a GCN or a Xbox.
Originally posted by DoctorGonzo
Here is a story on Nintendo's recent woes
This choice quote bothers me:
What people want, Iwata says, are simpler, more accessible games that are easier to play and solve?think thumb candy for dummies.
Dude! That's exactly what I want. Other than Gran Turismo, the only games I really like are the Escape Velocity series and several selected works for the NES, Genesis, and SuperNES. The new games are just too complicated to sit down and play for 30 minutes on a Friday night when you've been snubbed.
How come there never was "Balloon Fight 64?" That alone would have probably convinced me to buy an N64.
I don't give a damn about "story." I haven't ever played a game with a good story. You know who has the dumbest, most ludcrously stupid storylines? Squaresoft. Mechwarrior has more substance than all the RPGs I've ever witnessed. And I've gotta hand it to these guys for really clearing the vault with Final Fantasy X2. That has to be the stupidest advertisement I have ever seen. And why do they look like monkeys with boobs?
You want to know a real man's game? NHL 96 for the Genesis. Freakin' awesome. Nordiques rule.
Originally posted by murbot
If you have hands larger than those of a 6 year old, it's fine.
Currently I am using the hands of a 6 year old child. But, if need be, I could "harvest" a larger pair of hands to use.
David
Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker
Sly Cooper & The Thievious Racoonus
Prince of Persia: Sands of Time
Ape Escape
It's this combination of 3D platform gamer and RPG that really gets my attention. You don't just make menu selections and watch pretty movies in games like these. You are immersed in an interactive world that makes you feel like an active part of the story.
They also allow you to do some really cool, crazy, ninja stunts without much difficulty. EVERY game from now on should somehow involve running up walls! I have been spoiled!
Originally posted by HOM
Actually, the PS2 is the least powerful. It's more like a beefed up Dreamcast then a GCN or a Xbox.
This is not true at all. Although the PS2 is third of the three, there isn't much of a gap between any of them.
Originally posted by DoctorGonzo
Cinematic graphics and better stories are blind alleys? What the hell is he on about? And how can a company that is surviving pretty much soley on its constantly rehashed franchises accuse others of creating a feeling among gamers that there isn't anything new?
Rehashed franchises or not, the gameplay is new. And that's their point, game = gameplay. Nintendo consistently delivers great gameplay.
IMHO, cinematic graphics already looked like an incredibly bad idea six, seven years ago, when there was a huge outbreak of canned video in games.
At that time, all good game designers recognized game is not a movie. Since then there's been some progress that incorporates cinematic graphic techniques and mini-cutscenes in games in a very limited fashion, as in Max Payne, Warcraft III, Super Mario 64. I suspect that is about as far as we can go in this direction without taking the game out of the game.
Multiplayer is cool, but it doesn't look very interesting on consoles yet. You should note that good multiplayer and good single player games tend to be very, very different in design. Adding multiplayer mode wouldn't make Mario better.
It shouldn't hurt Nintendo if they wait a year or two and release multiplayer functionality with a new console or something.
Lain, please explain why not using CDs is Nintendo's downfall.
While you're at it, compare to Dreamcast which did use CDs.
The cartridges are expensive, but not that expensive. Nintendo has huge profit margins though their business is much smaller than Sony's.
Of course, if you had a game base like the PS2 has, you could get the customers to even hand over cash on the console itself. Sony makes profit on every PS2 sold.
1. EVERY game always has extra features IF you plug in a gameboy advance into the gamecube. Not typically a problem, but EVERY game has characters advertising how great it would be. Excellent stuff to tell a child playing a game.
2. We bought the GC as a gaming system that the entire family could sit down and play together. Or even when friends come over, it's nice to play a game together. This is great except nearly every game that features multiplayer gameplay has most of the levels and games locked. This wouldn't be bad if you could play together and unlock more levels but really really sucks when you have to go in and play single player mode for 30 years to unlock more stuff. One big example is Super Monkey Ball; why can't you earn gameplay points in multiplayer? I absolutely hate buying or renting a game to play with other people just to find that all we can do is play level 1 over and over unless we take turns playing single player.
This problem isn't exclusive to GameCube, and it is a major annoyance. A great deal of time investment (and skill) in the single-player mode of a game should not be required to unlock the full multiplayer functionality of a great party game. I'm not sure where game designers got the idea that this was a good way to do things, but I wish they'd un-get that idea.
Sometimes it can be worked around. Just earn enough points in MonkeyBall to unlock one minigame, and save your game without having unlocked anything. Then you can restart and unlock whichever game you want to play at the moment. Just don't ever save over your data.
Originally posted by Gon
Oh yeah.
Lain, please explain why not using CDs is Nintendo's downfall.
While you're at it, compare to Dreamcast which did use CDs.
The cartridges are expensive, but not that expensive. Nintendo has huge profit margins though their business is much smaller than Sony's.
Of course, if you had a game base like the PS2 has, you could get the customers to even hand over cash on the console itself. Sony makes profit on every PS2 sold.
Well, Nintendo did develop a game console with a cd-rom with Sony called the, wait for it, Playstation. The reason that their lack of cd drive hurt was when third party developers didn't like having to spend so much money on the cartridges. The third party companies like being able to put lots of audio and FMV in the game, something that the N64 was not very good at. So given the choice of making one of the new cinematic games with tons of audio and FMV or paying a lot more for a game that lacked these features the companies moved in droves to the PS1. That's how the PS2 got their huge game base. Nintendo was playing catch-up with the GCN.
The Dreamcast was going to be huge. They had a very large user base in the US and Japan and huge third party support. But Sony started talking up the PS2 and how the graphics were going to blow anything else away. Sony's FUD, Sega's terrible business management, and Microsoft pulling support of the Dreamcast in favor of the Xbox were all large contributers to Sega's downfall and their decision to get out of the hardware business. But the biggest contributor to the Dreamcast's downfall was the huge amount of piracy. That's one of the reasons that Nintendo didn't want to move to optical media and the reasons that Nintendo moved to a proprietary DVD like disc for the GCN.
Originally posted by bunge
This is not true at all. Although the PS2 is third of the three, there isn't much of a gap between any of them.
There is not much of a gap on games that were developed for the PS2 in mind and ported over to the other two. EA games as an example. Games that started out as a GCN or a Xbox game do look much better on their respective platforms then they do ported to the PS2. But I really don't care about graphics unless they enhance the gameplay, like the use of lighting in Splinter Cell or the cell shading in Viewtiful Joe.
g
Originally posted by David Cronenbergs Mutant Love Child
Currently I am using the hands of a 6 year old child. But, if need be, I could "harvest" a larger pair of hands to use.
David
Please explain this "harvesting".
Originally posted by Whoring Slut
Please explain this "harvesting".
What don't you understand, Slut?
Sorry for not being more clear, kum.
(sorry for the abbreviation of your name... I can't help myself)
Now, the thing about online games is, you can be right there, to go Boo ya when you smoke someone at Smash Brothers.
Groverat hit the nail on the head. Online players are either too good, too stupid, too cheating, or have too crappy of a computer and lag games and disconnect. Takes time to set a game up. Bo-ring. </homer>
Granted, the preponderance of anecdotes likely to be posted here would lead one to believe the exact opposite.
However, the type of people who spend their leisure time reading/posting to a forum, probably aren't the gamers being referred to by this quote. We aren't representative of the majority.
Originally posted by Gon
Oh yeah.
Lain, please explain why not using CDs is Nintendo's downfall.
While you're at it, compare to Dreamcast which did use CDs.
Like HOM said, it was a big investment for companies to make games for the N64.
The limitations of cartridges made sure that the quality of textures of games were low... yeah yeah, graphics dont make games great, but they sure add to it. Also I believe that Squaresoft had a problem with cartridges (plus the buckets of money from Sony probably did not help Nintendo either)
The Dreamcast was great IMHO... but after the CD add on, 32X and Saturn failures I think a lot of people were uninterested in a Sega console.