Question: How much of the 3DS' price is influenced by the 3D functions? My main objection to the 3DS is that I don't want to pay extra for a feature that I'm not going to use; if it turns out that the 3D contributes very little to the overall cost then I may possibly consider getting it in time to buy the Mega Man Legends 3 Prototype.
you can't split out the cost of something as fundamental to the device as the 3D aspect
it would be like asking how expensive the extra screen is on the DS. You can't really model the cost of a DS that was engineered to play without the second screen, since the cost includes the R&D, the increased processor & GPU requirements, the cost of developing software to a new architecture, the cost of the case and housing, the cost of the extra LCD, etc.
I'd have to see to be sure, but I question how inherent to the process the 3D actually is for most titles. OoT3D is still OoT, n'est ce pas?
It also was developed with new models and new graphics specifically to take advantage of the 3D, and I don't think you can really separate the pricing based on that. I mean, can you really calculate the difference in Donkey Kong Country Returns being in a traditional Sprite format rather than rendered models? Or hell, having 3 D models in games at all versus just having a bunch of sprites?
Z0re on
0
Options
David_TA fashion yes-man is no good to me.Copenhagen, DenmarkRegistered Userregular
Well, I was asking more generally for any PS3 game that showed a significant advantage to having a HDD. Yes, yes, I know there's more to a game than graphical fidelity. There's variety of graphics, variety of gameplay, seamlessness of transition between different areas, and so on. And my point was that, for whatever reason, the HDD in the PS3 doesn't seem to have translated into any of this stuff. Even the first(ish)-party games for the PS3, which seem like they would be the ones most likely to show off the PS3's unique strengths, are not markedly better in any capacity than the HDD-less 360. Load times aren't shorter, graphics aren't much better, they don't tend to be longer, they don't tend to have a wider variety of textures or graphics.
That would be the most obvious one. Load times are shorter, to the point of being almost non-existant in something like Uncharted 2. That specifically is what Naughty Dog liked about the HDD, the ability to spool data to the drive meant that bar some unskippable cutscenes, there's never any loadscreens in UC2. And I'm fairly confident GoW3 did the same thing.
I'll agree that having a HDD doesn't mean more content, but it can and does mean better, quicker access to the content you have. Not everyone does it, of course, but that's not the same as it not being done and done well.
I'll have to go replay GoW3 - I don't remember the lack of load times, but maybe I just tuned them out. I know Ratchet & Clank had some pretty noticeable load times, because I played that recently.
Regardless, I think it's a safe bet that all consoles from here on out will have HDD built in, because if nothing else the existence of DLC and the like has changed the rules of the game.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Sweet pre install screens every two hours in MGS 4?
Anyways I could see MS going with a non HD model again but with USB support. Might be a way Nintendo goes again, though I'm thinking they might try a high speed custom HD DVD/Mini Blu Ray thingee to try and recapture the GCN magic load times.
Xenogears of Bore on
3DS CODE: 3093-7068-3576
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
edited April 2011
Nintendo blames poor GameBoy numbers on ignorant public, poor marketing; offering free downloadable version of "Excitebike 3DS" to boost sales.
The 3DS hasn't been selling as quickly as Nintendo expected and this, says Nintendo boss Satoru Iwata, is because people don't seem to understand the value of the 3DS or how to use it.
With 3.61 million units sold, the 3DS missed Nintendo's forecasted four million sales last month. Iwata admitted at conference this week: "Nintendo 3DS was launched in late March. The sales were high in the initial week, but sales fell below our expectations after the second week. Nintendo 3DS has not been selling as expected since the second week, and this is not just in the Japanese market but also in the United States and Europe, where no direct impact from the great earthquake has occurred."
He goes on: "Therefore, we recognize that we are in a situation where we need to step up our efforts to further promote the spread of Nintendo 3DS."
Iwata said the firm expected the quirks of glasses-less 3D to spread on its own once the machine released, but this hasn't happened. Also, demo booths in stores aren't doing the trick. "The value of 3D images without the need for special glasses is hard to be understood through the existing media. However, we have found that people cannot feel it just by trying out a device, rather, some might even misestimate it when experiencing the images in an improper fashion," he said.
People, he added, need to be taught to adjust the slider to suit them. He also admits: "We need to enhance the contents which can be enjoyed passively by non-active users, like a 3D video distribution service. We will promptly work on this after the currently planned hardware update."
Also, people aren't properly clued up on all of the console's features, such as StreetPass, SpotPass, Augmented Reality and Mii Maker. This needs fixing, he adds.
"It is now clear that the combination of these new features is not necessarily easy-to-understand by just saying one word to those without experience," said Iwata. "We have found that not all Nintendo 3DS users enjoy this software. There seems to be more than a few consumers who have Nintendo 3DS hardware but don't know about this software and possibly haven't had a chance to get interested in it."
Admitting that simply pre-installing the software isn't enough, Iwata says Nintendo's marketing will target the penetration of these features.
Iwata has also announced that, in order to get people to update their 3DS units next month, the company will offer a 3D version of the NES classic Excitebike for free for a limited time.
I wish I could sell something where 3.6 million in a month was considered 'poor'.
I guess it all depends on the details, like expenditures, marketing, and what you've told investors to expect on their faith. And of course, how much of that 3.6 million units translates to profits.
To be fair, I've never seen any promotional material on the 3DS. Not a commercial, not an ad, not even really a prominent feature on the many tech blogs I peruse daily. Not to mention, not only do I not know of anyone who has one, I don't know anyone who wants one. I know some rabid Nintendo geeks.
Nintendo blames poor GameBoy numbers on ignorant public, poor marketing; offering free downloadable version of "Excitebike 3DS" to boost sales.
That's my other problem with Nintendo.
Their innovations used to be instant game-changers, with virtually no drawbacks to complain about. I was never frustrated by flaws with the d-pad, L and R bumpers, or the analog stick. The Gameboy didn't fail to live up or feel like it was being driven by gimmicks. VirtuaBoy, Game Glove, ROB, yeah, ok, there were some losers, but they were meaningless compared to the successes.
But things like the second screen, the console-handheld interaction, the Wiimote and waggle, the 3D - increasingly they all seem to come out of the gate flawed, less than expected, gimmicky, or all three.
I sympathize, but it isn't a good sign when the vendor starts blaming the customer. We're sorry for not properly calibrating your new 3DS before deciding it wasn't worth it. Maybe it's because we're still a little mad about the screen brightness on the orig GBA.
That's what I'm getting at. In the real world, in games as they actually exist today, what is the lack of a guaranteed HDD doing to the state of 360 games?
Again, though, I think a big factor here is that devs, in the interest of prioritizing to maximize sales, are usually developing for the 360 and then porting as fast as possible to the PS3. The 360 represents more sales for the dev, which means that's the one you absolutely need to get out before Christmas (or before the next Halo or whatever). And you have to develop with a non-HDD compatability assumption. That's a real factor that isn't just about investing in additional voices or textures, at least not directly. At the point where they are porting to the PS3, the bulk of revenue is already out of their hands because the 360 version is done, so then they aren't going to go back and hire more actors, design more textures, etc. They have little incentive to do so, the R on that I is already capped.
However, if both consoles had launched with HDD standard, or even if the PS3 had just held onto the market share its predecessor had, then devs might have had more incentive to make additional investments in utilizing additional hardware capabilities. In that scenario there would be no obvious impediment other than the investment, and if one dev didn't, another would, releasing a superior product. I can certainly imagine a more graphically pleasing Dragon Age, despite that I generally agree with you that the importance of graphical eye-candy has been on a steady decline since as far back as the 16-bit era.
Yar on
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Nintendo blames poor GameBoy numbers on ignorant public, poor marketing; offering free downloadable version of "Excitebike 3DS" to boost sales.
That's my other problem with Nintendo.
Their innovations used to be instant game-changers, with virtually no drawbacks to complain about. I was never frustrated by flaws with the d-pad, L and R bumpers, or the analog stick. The Gameboy didn't fail to live up or feel like it was being driven by gimmicks. VirtuaBoy, Game Glove, ROB, yeah, ok, there were some losers, but they were meaningless compared to the successes.
But things like the second screen, the console-handheld interaction, the Wiimote and waggle, the 3D - increasingly they all seem to come out of the gate flawed, less than expected, gimmicky, or all three.
I sympathize, but it isn't a good sign when the vendor starts blaming the customer. We're sorry for not properly calibrating your new 3DS before deciding it wasn't worth it. Maybe it's because we're still a little mad about the screen brightness on the orig GBA.
Well, I said back when the Wii came out, based on my feelings on the DS, that Nintendo seemed curiously bent on using "innovative" design schemes (take that as you will) instead of offering much in the way direct competition with the marketplace, especially given the way the market wasn't really demanding it and few developers took great advantage of the potential.
Yes, on one hand you could take the Nintendo party line as granted, that they were more concerned with "delivering focused gaming experiences" than keeping up with the Joneses, but I always found it somewhat coincidental that many of their "innovations" involved further tweaking/miniaturization of existing technologies rather than direct technological competitiveness with the other players in the marketplace.
It's my opinion (and of course, open to debate) that if the Wii offered similar graphical and online provisions to that of its competitors at the time of release, we probably wouldn't be talking about the relative failure of the Wii right now. The motion controls were innovative enough to draw in a large number of new gamers, and developers would have likely lined up to take advantage of the console that had similar offerings to Sony and MS but promised better access to new and non-traditional gamers.
Because make no mistake, the market is dominated by traditional gamers. The Wii may have outsold both the PS3 and 360, but contrasted against factors like the Wii's much lower console price, the relative lack of cross-platform competition, and how the traditional-gaming platforms combined for 20% (or so) greater market share, the sheen of the Wii's sales victory becomes somewhat muted from any context other than purely financial. And really, touting the fact that Wii turned a profit on console sales as its "victory" is not concrete evidence of its success in a market where competitors are also maintaining financial viability (albeit in a different model).
To sum up, it's a bit of the old adage, "nothing succeeds like success." The Wii, right now, is not succeeding as evidenced by its stable of developers, contrasted sales figures, and quite simply the fact that Nintendo is abandoning it for another console. I don't think there's anyone to blame that on other than Nintendo itself.
Nintendo as a company really isn't comparable to Sony or MS as companies, though. If Sony releases a turd of a system that loses money hand over fist, oh well - win some lose some, we'll just sell some more TVs. If Nintendo blows a console, whoops, there goes half our revenue stream. They quite literally can't afford a business model which doesn't not guarantee profit, because it's really all they have.
And for them, at the end of the day, it really is all about profit. If they release consoles I don't like but they turn a profit, it's hard to fault them.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Nintendo as a company really isn't comparable to Sony or MS as companies, though. If Sony releases a turd of a system that loses money hand over fist, oh well - win some lose some, we'll just sell some more TVs. If Nintendo blows a console, whoops, there goes half our revenue stream. They quite literally can't afford a business model which doesn't not guarantee profit, because it's really all they have.
And for them, at the end of the day, it really is all about profit. If they release consoles I don't like but they turn a profit, it's hard to fault them.
I do fault them in the context that they've been entreated to alter their business model in a much more diversified way. As I said a few pages ago, if you look at the state of the market 20 years ago, Nintendo was gangbusters and companies like Apple were basically dead. Nintendo's myopia, or they might say "focus on gaming," has kept them from succeeding in the way that the other companies have: namely, increased utility.
Apple went ass-backwards into the gaming market by inventing a machine that happened to play games in addition to like a billion other things, and then had the added utility of basically letting the developers decide how their games are played (e.g., button location and number, incorporated motion uses, et al). It generated its success by A) being fairly hands-off with development, and getting into people's hands in the first place by doing more than one thing.
Fact: The Wii has a web browser. Fact: I'd rather pan-fry my own testicles than use it. With cayenne.
The truth is that Nintendo hasn't done anything in the last ten years that was truly "innovative," not since the GameCube. The Wii tech is a decade old, and the 3DS has the graphical capabilities of 1996. They've done a shit-ton of miniaturizing their tech, which is fun and all, but even in that they've been monofocused on the gaming side without adding any real utility other than occasional backward compatibility. I can't hardly applaud a company for taking decade-old tech, shrinking it down, and saying "Voila!" like they've done me a great favor.
I see Nintendo, and I see a company that has a real lack of vision. And that saddens me.
The truth is that Nintendo hasn't done anything in the last ten years that was truly "innovative," not since the GameCube. The Wii tech is a decade old, and the 3DS has the graphical capabilities of 1996.
The truth is that Nintendo hasn't done anything in the last ten years that was truly "innovative," not since the GameCube. The Wii tech is a decade old, and the 3DS has the graphical capabilities of 1996.
Uh no
I know, the 3DS isn't N64 port, but you might not know that from the game line up:
- OoT
- Starfox 64
- Excitebike
- Bomberman
- Paper Mario
- Pilotwings
- Mario Kart
- Animal Crossing
As a proud owner of literally every Nintendo console and handheld since, excluding the VirtualBoy and a couple of GameBoy models, I for the life of me can't come up with a reason to want a 3DS.
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
edited April 2011
integrating over "operating income" since 1981 seems like a pretty stupid metric
and regardless, the question is not whether the Wii has been profitable for Nintendo. It has been!
The questions are:
1) how is nintendo going to continue its strategy of lowball hardware and gimmicks in a world where it's being squeezed on both sides from capable, mature console competitors with solid third-party developers and from mobile devices & tablets?
and
2) as videogame aficianados, is Nintendo still relevant to us, or are they just going to continue specifically courting the casual crowd that they have had such success with from the wii?
take a look at the screen shots and tell me the 3DS is 96 hardware. Yes, there are a lot of remarks. Several of them (OOT) are up-graphic'd remakes. And half of what you list aren't remakes at all, just new versions of the game for the new platform.
EDIT: slightly more on topic...the Wii was hurt by being different from the other two consoles. You couldn't really port to or from it, and devs were big on multiplatform this generation. So you got shovelware, PS2(!) ports, and assorted shit, and then a few really good Wii-only titles. I have a feeling the trend won't be as strong next gen, but it really depends on the Cafe's control scheme and just how powerful it is.
Phoenix-D on
0
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
take a look at the screen shots and tell me the 3DS is 96 hardware. Yes, there are a lot of remarks. Several of them (OOT) are up-graphic'd remakes. And half of what you list aren't remakes at all, just new versions of the game for the new platform.
those are publicity stills, not really gameplay.
the 3ds i played with at PAX had good enough graphics - definitely better than the 2ds - but nothing really eye-popping.
of course those were just launch titles. it'll certainly get better. and also, really gee whiz graphics don't strike me as a huge deal on a portable so much as gameplay and suitability for use-case.
integrating over "operating income" since 1981 seems like a pretty stupid metric
and regardless, the question is not whether the Wii has been profitable for Nintendo. It has been!
The questions are:
1) how is nintendo going to continue its strategy of lowball hardware and gimmicks in a world where it's being squeezed on both sides from capable, mature console competitors with solid third-party developers and from mobile devices & tablets?
and
2) as videogame aficianados, is Nintendo still relevant to us, or are they just going to continue specifically courting the casual crowd that they have had such success with from the wii?
They still have the unique commodity of having Nintendo games. Even during their darkest years they still managed to sell multiple millions of copies of games like Mario Kart, Smash Bros, Zelda.
Xenogears of Bore on
3DS CODE: 3093-7068-3576
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
They still have the unique commodity of having Nintendo games. Even during their darkest years they still managed to sell multiple millions of copies of games like Mario Kart, Smash Bros, Zelda.
And I think, in a certain capacity, they're always going to have that leverage. But that's not the leverage of a console company, that's the leverage of a developer.
They still have the unique commodity of having Nintendo games. Even during their darkest years they still managed to sell multiple millions of copies of games like Mario Kart, Smash Bros, Zelda.
And I think, in a certain capacity, they're always going to have that leverage. But that's not the leverage of a console company, that's the leverage of a developer.
Exclusive titles are very much the leverage of a console company. Playstation would be nothing without the FF series or MGS, Xbox would have collapsed without Halo and Live, and Nintendo owes it's continued existence to the cast of Smash Brothers and their respective titles.
ArbitraryDescriptor on
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
They still have the unique commodity of having Nintendo games. Even during their darkest years they still managed to sell multiple millions of copies of games like Mario Kart, Smash Bros, Zelda.
And I think, in a certain capacity, they're always going to have that leverage. But that's not the leverage of a console company, that's the leverage of a developer.
Exclusive titles are very much the leverage of a console company. Playstation would be nothing without the FF series or MGS, Xbox would have collapsed without Halo and Live, and Nintendo owes it's continued existence to the cast of Smash Brothers and their respective titles.
I'n just saying successful proprietary titles aren't the exclusive domain of console makers.
The problem is Nintendo 3DS games are just way too expensive.
They should sell at a more reasonable price
Like maybe $0.99 - $1.99
That's not really a reasonable price, though. That's pretty much giving it away. Even after the e-shop launches, I doubt that there'll be anything less than $5. I think that's how much the cheapest things available on the Wii is.
Speaking as someone who is a sucker for cool technical gimmicks, I was excited about the 3DS as soon as the first reports came out that it actually worked. After seeing one in person I was even more excited.
Then it came out and I saw the launch title lineup.
Now... I want to play one, but there's nothing I want to play on it. It makes me sad and I don't want to shell out the money for a system that I will, hopefully, eventually, be able to buy games for that I want to play. I don't recall what launched with the DS, but I suspect that the dearth of anything exciting to play had a hand in impacting the 3DS' sales figures.
CptHamilton on
PSN,Steam,Live | CptHamiltonian
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
The problem is Nintendo 3DS games are just way too expensive.
They should sell at a more reasonable price
Like maybe $0.99 - $1.99
That's not really a reasonable price, though. That's pretty much giving it away. Even after the e-shop launches, I doubt that there'll be anything less than $5. I think that's how much the cheapest things available on the Wii is.
Even so, it still seems odd to hear Nintendo carp about Apple and other mobile companies "not being focused on gaming" when they're basically exploring the same territory several years later.
I mean, what's the difference if I play Super Mario Bros on my iPhone or on the 3DS from their app store?
Even so, it still seems odd to hear Nintendo carp about Apple and other mobile companies "not being focused on gaming" when they're basically exploring the same territory several years later.
I mean, what's the difference if I play Super Mario Bros on my iPhone or on the 3DS from their app store?
one is a sustainable long-term business model which can cover the development costs of worthwhile games, the other is a crapshoot race to the bottom where the big hitters sell well but the vast majority of the market makes close to nothing.
Even so, it still seems odd to hear Nintendo carp about Apple and other mobile companies "not being focused on gaming" when they're basically exploring the same territory several years later.
I mean, what's the difference if I play Super Mario Bros on my iPhone or on the 3DS from their app store?
one is a sustainable long-term business model which can cover the development costs of worthwhile games, the other is a crapshoot race to the bottom where the big hitters sell well but the vast majority of the market makes close to nothing.
Even so, it still seems odd to hear Nintendo carp about Apple and other mobile companies "not being focused on gaming" when they're basically exploring the same territory several years later.
I mean, what's the difference if I play Super Mario Bros on my iPhone or on the 3DS from their app store?
one is a sustainable long-term business model which can cover the development costs of worthwhile games, the other is a crapshoot race to the bottom where the big hitters sell well but the vast majority of the market makes close to nothing.
I take it the latter party is Nintendo?
Try and think long and hard about which service sells large amounts of crap for a dollar and which sells smaller amounts of everything at higher prices.
I'll give you a hint, the one that's a closed system has less stuff on it.
Even so, it still seems odd to hear Nintendo carp about Apple and other mobile companies "not being focused on gaming" when they're basically exploring the same territory several years later.
I mean, what's the difference if I play Super Mario Bros on my iPhone or on the 3DS from their app store?
one is a sustainable long-term business model which can cover the development costs of worthwhile games, the other is a crapshoot race to the bottom where the big hitters sell well but the vast majority of the market makes close to nothing.
I take it the latter party is Nintendo?
Try and think long and hard about which service sells large amounts of crap for a dollar and which sells smaller amounts of everything at higher prices.
I'll give you a hint, the one that's a closed system has less stuff on it.
The problem is Nintendo 3DS games are just way too expensive.
They should sell at a more reasonable price
Like maybe $0.99 - $1.99
That's not really a reasonable price, though. That's pretty much giving it away. Even after the e-shop launches, I doubt that there'll be anything less than $5. I think that's how much the cheapest things available on the Wii is.
Even so, it still seems odd to hear Nintendo carp about Apple and other mobile companies "not being focused on gaming" when they're basically exploring the same territory several years later.
I mean, what's the difference if I play Super Mario Bros on my iPhone or on the 3DS from their app store?
I see no way SMB could actually be playable on an iPhone.
HamHamJ on
While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
Speaking as someone who is a sucker for cool technical gimmicks, I was excited about the 3DS as soon as the first reports came out that it actually worked. After seeing one in person I was even more excited.
Then it came out and I saw the launch title lineup.
Now... I want to play one, but there's nothing I want to play on it. It makes me sad and I don't want to shell out the money for a system that I will, hopefully, eventually, be able to buy games for that I want to play. I don't recall what launched with the DS, but I suspect that the dearth of anything exciting to play had a hand in impacting the 3DS' sales figures.
The DS launched with virtually nothing. Picross and a Warioware game was about it.
Trauma Center was the only launch title I remember being even a little noteworthy and I don't recall if that was even a launch title or if it came out a bit after launch.
Posts
It also was developed with new models and new graphics specifically to take advantage of the 3D, and I don't think you can really separate the pricing based on that. I mean, can you really calculate the difference in Donkey Kong Country Returns being in a traditional Sprite format rather than rendered models? Or hell, having 3 D models in games at all versus just having a bunch of sprites?
That would be the most obvious one. Load times are shorter, to the point of being almost non-existant in something like Uncharted 2. That specifically is what Naughty Dog liked about the HDD, the ability to spool data to the drive meant that bar some unskippable cutscenes, there's never any loadscreens in UC2. And I'm fairly confident GoW3 did the same thing.
I'll agree that having a HDD doesn't mean more content, but it can and does mean better, quicker access to the content you have. Not everyone does it, of course, but that's not the same as it not being done and done well.
I'll have to go replay GoW3 - I don't remember the lack of load times, but maybe I just tuned them out. I know Ratchet & Clank had some pretty noticeable load times, because I played that recently.
Regardless, I think it's a safe bet that all consoles from here on out will have HDD built in, because if nothing else the existence of DLC and the like has changed the rules of the game.
Sweet pre install screens every two hours in MGS 4?
Anyways I could see MS going with a non HD model again but with USB support. Might be a way Nintendo goes again, though I'm thinking they might try a high speed custom HD DVD/Mini Blu Ray thingee to try and recapture the GCN magic load times.
I guess it all depends on the details, like expenditures, marketing, and what you've told investors to expect on their faith. And of course, how much of that 3.6 million units translates to profits.
To be fair, I've never seen any promotional material on the 3DS. Not a commercial, not an ad, not even really a prominent feature on the many tech blogs I peruse daily. Not to mention, not only do I not know of anyone who has one, I don't know anyone who wants one. I know some rabid Nintendo geeks.
so I'm mostly suspecting shareholder bullshit where they have to say this because they were slightly off on the forecast.
That's my other problem with Nintendo.
Their innovations used to be instant game-changers, with virtually no drawbacks to complain about. I was never frustrated by flaws with the d-pad, L and R bumpers, or the analog stick. The Gameboy didn't fail to live up or feel like it was being driven by gimmicks. VirtuaBoy, Game Glove, ROB, yeah, ok, there were some losers, but they were meaningless compared to the successes.
But things like the second screen, the console-handheld interaction, the Wiimote and waggle, the 3D - increasingly they all seem to come out of the gate flawed, less than expected, gimmicky, or all three.
I sympathize, but it isn't a good sign when the vendor starts blaming the customer. We're sorry for not properly calibrating your new 3DS before deciding it wasn't worth it. Maybe it's because we're still a little mad about the screen brightness on the orig GBA.
Again, though, I think a big factor here is that devs, in the interest of prioritizing to maximize sales, are usually developing for the 360 and then porting as fast as possible to the PS3. The 360 represents more sales for the dev, which means that's the one you absolutely need to get out before Christmas (or before the next Halo or whatever). And you have to develop with a non-HDD compatability assumption. That's a real factor that isn't just about investing in additional voices or textures, at least not directly. At the point where they are porting to the PS3, the bulk of revenue is already out of their hands because the 360 version is done, so then they aren't going to go back and hire more actors, design more textures, etc. They have little incentive to do so, the R on that I is already capped.
However, if both consoles had launched with HDD standard, or even if the PS3 had just held onto the market share its predecessor had, then devs might have had more incentive to make additional investments in utilizing additional hardware capabilities. In that scenario there would be no obvious impediment other than the investment, and if one dev didn't, another would, releasing a superior product. I can certainly imagine a more graphically pleasing Dragon Age, despite that I generally agree with you that the importance of graphical eye-candy has been on a steady decline since as far back as the 16-bit era.
Well, I said back when the Wii came out, based on my feelings on the DS, that Nintendo seemed curiously bent on using "innovative" design schemes (take that as you will) instead of offering much in the way direct competition with the marketplace, especially given the way the market wasn't really demanding it and few developers took great advantage of the potential.
Yes, on one hand you could take the Nintendo party line as granted, that they were more concerned with "delivering focused gaming experiences" than keeping up with the Joneses, but I always found it somewhat coincidental that many of their "innovations" involved further tweaking/miniaturization of existing technologies rather than direct technological competitiveness with the other players in the marketplace.
It's my opinion (and of course, open to debate) that if the Wii offered similar graphical and online provisions to that of its competitors at the time of release, we probably wouldn't be talking about the relative failure of the Wii right now. The motion controls were innovative enough to draw in a large number of new gamers, and developers would have likely lined up to take advantage of the console that had similar offerings to Sony and MS but promised better access to new and non-traditional gamers.
Because make no mistake, the market is dominated by traditional gamers. The Wii may have outsold both the PS3 and 360, but contrasted against factors like the Wii's much lower console price, the relative lack of cross-platform competition, and how the traditional-gaming platforms combined for 20% (or so) greater market share, the sheen of the Wii's sales victory becomes somewhat muted from any context other than purely financial. And really, touting the fact that Wii turned a profit on console sales as its "victory" is not concrete evidence of its success in a market where competitors are also maintaining financial viability (albeit in a different model).
To sum up, it's a bit of the old adage, "nothing succeeds like success." The Wii, right now, is not succeeding as evidenced by its stable of developers, contrasted sales figures, and quite simply the fact that Nintendo is abandoning it for another console. I don't think there's anyone to blame that on other than Nintendo itself.
And for them, at the end of the day, it really is all about profit. If they release consoles I don't like but they turn a profit, it's hard to fault them.
I do fault them in the context that they've been entreated to alter their business model in a much more diversified way. As I said a few pages ago, if you look at the state of the market 20 years ago, Nintendo was gangbusters and companies like Apple were basically dead. Nintendo's myopia, or they might say "focus on gaming," has kept them from succeeding in the way that the other companies have: namely, increased utility.
Apple went ass-backwards into the gaming market by inventing a machine that happened to play games in addition to like a billion other things, and then had the added utility of basically letting the developers decide how their games are played (e.g., button location and number, incorporated motion uses, et al). It generated its success by A) being fairly hands-off with development, and
Fact: The Wii has a web browser. Fact: I'd rather pan-fry my own testicles than use it. With cayenne.
The truth is that Nintendo hasn't done anything in the last ten years that was truly "innovative," not since the GameCube. The Wii tech is a decade old, and the 3DS has the graphical capabilities of 1996. They've done a shit-ton of miniaturizing their tech, which is fun and all, but even in that they've been monofocused on the gaming side without adding any real utility other than occasional backward compatibility. I can't hardly applaud a company for taking decade-old tech, shrinking it down, and saying "Voila!" like they've done me a great favor.
I see Nintendo, and I see a company that has a real lack of vision. And that saddens me.
Uh no
I know, the 3DS isn't N64 port, but you might not know that from the game line up:
- OoT
- Starfox 64
- Excitebike
- Bomberman
- Paper Mario
- Pilotwings
- Mario Kart
- Animal Crossing
As a proud owner of literally every Nintendo console and handheld since, excluding the VirtualBoy and a couple of GameBoy models, I for the life of me can't come up with a reason to want a 3DS.
mod edit: huge images are huge
It died after he posted it, I saw it earlier.
and regardless, the question is not whether the Wii has been profitable for Nintendo. It has been!
The questions are:
1) how is nintendo going to continue its strategy of lowball hardware and gimmicks in a world where it's being squeezed on both sides from capable, mature console competitors with solid third-party developers and from mobile devices & tablets?
and
2) as videogame aficianados, is Nintendo still relevant to us, or are they just going to continue specifically courting the casual crowd that they have had such success with from the wii?
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=140113&page=32
take a look at the screen shots and tell me the 3DS is 96 hardware. Yes, there are a lot of remarks. Several of them (OOT) are up-graphic'd remakes. And half of what you list aren't remakes at all, just new versions of the game for the new platform.
EDIT: slightly more on topic...the Wii was hurt by being different from the other two consoles. You couldn't really port to or from it, and devs were big on multiplatform this generation. So you got shovelware, PS2(!) ports, and assorted shit, and then a few really good Wii-only titles. I have a feeling the trend won't be as strong next gen, but it really depends on the Cafe's control scheme and just how powerful it is.
those are publicity stills, not really gameplay.
the 3ds i played with at PAX had good enough graphics - definitely better than the 2ds - but nothing really eye-popping.
of course those were just launch titles. it'll certainly get better. and also, really gee whiz graphics don't strike me as a huge deal on a portable so much as gameplay and suitability for use-case.
They still have the unique commodity of having Nintendo games. Even during their darkest years they still managed to sell multiple millions of copies of games like Mario Kart, Smash Bros, Zelda.
And I think, in a certain capacity, they're always going to have that leverage. But that's not the leverage of a console company, that's the leverage of a developer.
Like Sega.
Exclusive titles are very much the leverage of a console company. Playstation would be nothing without the FF series or MGS, Xbox would have collapsed without Halo and Live, and Nintendo owes it's continued existence to the cast of Smash Brothers and their respective titles.
I'n just saying successful proprietary titles aren't the exclusive domain of console makers.
They should sell at a more reasonable price
Like maybe $0.99 - $1.99
That's not really a reasonable price, though. That's pretty much giving it away. Even after the e-shop launches, I doubt that there'll be anything less than $5. I think that's how much the cheapest things available on the Wii is.
Then it came out and I saw the launch title lineup.
Now... I want to play one, but there's nothing I want to play on it. It makes me sad and I don't want to shell out the money for a system that I will, hopefully, eventually, be able to buy games for that I want to play. I don't recall what launched with the DS, but I suspect that the dearth of anything exciting to play had a hand in impacting the 3DS' sales figures.
Even so, it still seems odd to hear Nintendo carp about Apple and other mobile companies "not being focused on gaming" when they're basically exploring the same territory several years later.
I mean, what's the difference if I play Super Mario Bros on my iPhone or on the 3DS from their app store?
The Nintendo network going down for a week, and then being told that your personal information might have been stolen.
PSN: ShogunGunshow
Origin: ShogunGunshow
I take it the latter party is Nintendo?
Try and think long and hard about which service sells large amounts of crap for a dollar and which sells smaller amounts of everything at higher prices.
I'll give you a hint, the one that's a closed system has less stuff on it.
So Nintendo.
I see no way SMB could actually be playable on an iPhone.
The DS launched with virtually nothing. Picross and a Warioware game was about it.
Trauma Center was the only launch title I remember being even a little noteworthy and I don't recall if that was even a launch title or if it came out a bit after launch.