PDA

View Full Version : Twilight Princess DELAYED


Lightsaberboy
08-16-2005, 07:31 AM
http://cube.ign.com/articles/642/642238p1.html

this saddens me =(

IG-64
08-16-2005, 07:54 AM
At least they're making it better.

Though i'd rather it have been a revolution release title.

Astrotoy7
08-16-2005, 08:50 AM
Twilight Princess.... could they not have come up with a more childish and girlier name?? It'll probably get shipped with Twilight Princess Barbie on her Twilight Princess Unicorn(TM) [/nauseated]

mtfbwya

Prime
08-16-2005, 08:53 AM
Twilight Princess.... could they not have come up with a more childish and girlier name?? How about Twilight Princess of Doom?

Bob Lion54
08-16-2005, 08:55 AM
It sucks that it's delayed, BUT I'm glad they are taking extra time to make it better.

I wish all gaming companys would do that.

Alegis
08-16-2005, 08:59 AM
Twilight Princess.... could they not have come up with a more childish and girlier name?? It'll probably get shipped with Twilight Princess Barbie on her Twilight Princess Unicorn(TM) [/nauseated]
The horror!

Was really looking forward to this one. But if it will make it better, sure I'll wait. The bigger the better.

Astrotoy7
08-16-2005, 09:10 AM
How about Twilight Princess of Doom?

AWESOME. Now Id buy it. She sounds like a bisexual vampire gothic witch :p

mtfbwya

RoxStar
08-16-2005, 09:35 AM
Ha. I read somewhere that nintendo said the game "was basically complete" and that they were just tweaking a few things to make it better. I guess they pulled a VALVe :p

Lynk Former
08-16-2005, 09:54 AM
@ Astro: yeah but you're more worried about what people think of you than if the game will be fun ;)


Anywayz, I can't blame them for delaying it, if it'll make a bigger and better game, go ahead. Plus the latest screenshots released really show you WHY they want this delay, just look at the size of that town!!

http://media.cube.ign.com/media/572/572738/imgs_1.html

toms
08-16-2005, 09:55 AM
It sucks that it's delayed, BUT I'm glad they are taking extra time to make it better.
I wish all gaming companys would do that.

but saying a game has been delayed to "make it better" is like a politician saying he needs to "spend more time with his family". It usually means "we have had a few major problems here and need to try and figure out how to fix them".

I can't think of that many "delayed to make it better" games that have been that good.... its often a case of trying to salvage a mess. (Though OF COURSE there are some exceptions to this).

I can't see Nintendo delaying a game by that much just for "tweaking", especially as it means they ahve almost nothing on the horizon for the whole year, nothing to counter the 360 with and are going to miss the whole Xmas period.

I'm sure it will be a great game by the time they finally let it out (they wouldn't risk a bad zelda game devaluing the franchise), but whether it will still matter by the time it comes out is another matter. Might make more sense to shift it to being a revolution launch title.

[edit] still, at least we'll have Geist to keep us entertained on our GCN until Zelda comes out, after all they have been making that "better" for months now.
http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/914965.asp ;)

Lynk Former
08-16-2005, 10:02 AM
There is a quote from Shigeru Miyamoto I would insert here if I could remember it which involved delaying games and making them better, yada yada... Nintendo has always delayed its games if they felt it needed to be better, it's happened to plenty of their titles and will continue to happen if they feel they really do need to make it better.

One of the few instances when Nintendo could not delay a game any further was The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker, and that was a bad choice on Nintendo's part because they had to cut short some dungeons, etc. While TWW was a great game, I, as well as a lot of people felt that the game wasn't as good because of what NOT delaying it did to it.

I don't care what the "real" reason is, I just wanta kickass game. And I repeat, tis NOT going to be a Revolution game, the graphics would have to be COMPLETELY redone to fit a more powerful platform and like I said, Nintendo has already announced a seperate Zelda Revolution title.

Stark Rhavyn
08-16-2005, 10:10 AM
This will probably hurt Nintendo pretty bad. By the time Z:TP comes out the Xbox360 will be out and there won't be any major releases for the GCN for the holiday. Lots of people were going to be trading in their 'cubes by then anyway, now there'll be more. I'm thinking about it myself.

Lynk Former
08-16-2005, 10:15 AM
I think the smarter thing to do would be to wait awhile before you get a 360, I'm not saying this for any reason but because Microsoft is actually coming EARLY and it's best to wait until prices are at a more affordable level.

But in the case of Twilight Princess, I would say that the people who would get a 360 would most likely not be the people to get TP in the first place so it really doesn't make a difference ;)

coupes.
08-16-2005, 11:11 AM
Woah... I wasn't expecting that. The game had already been pushed from a june 2005 release. It look like Nintendo has leaned from it's mistakes with TWW, where it still needed some polish when it was released. The new screens really look promising though, all the stuff we were fed was really old, before E3 old.

Astrotoy7
08-16-2005, 11:24 AM
@ Astro: yeah but you're more worried about what people think of you than if the game will be fun ;)

I never get worried Lynk, especially when it comes to anything with the word "Princess" in it. The only reason Im not sacrficing my POS gamecube to Satan is because of "The New Zelda Game"(thats what Im callin it)... so, I too share the hopes and aspiration of you zelda zealots :p

mtfbwya

ZBomber
08-16-2005, 11:59 AM
ZELDA ZEALOTISM!

As much as I lurve Zelda, I haven't been keeping up with this game. At all.

-ZeldaBomber

El Sitherino
08-16-2005, 03:02 PM
Twilight Princess.... could they not have come up with a more childish and girlier name?? It'll probably get shipped with Twilight Princess Barbie on her Twilight Princess Unicorn(TM) [/nauseated]

mtfbwya
Uh oh, I smell fanboy come in for attack.

Seriously dude, noone cares you're a "peak of masculinity".:rolleyes:

Tyrion
08-16-2005, 03:10 PM
Twilight Princess.... could they not have come up with a more childish and girlier name?? It'll probably get shipped with Twilight Princess Barbie on her Twilight Princess Unicorn(TM) [/nauseated]

mtfbwya

Twilight Princess...Astrotoy....Twilight Princess...Astrotoy...

I don't see a difference. :p

Mike Windu
08-16-2005, 05:30 PM
Are twilight princess the Japanese equivalent of blue genies?

In that case, I see no difference either. :p

Dark Sad Shadow
08-16-2005, 05:31 PM
show more respect to the Zeldas series :P

Lynk Former
08-16-2005, 06:09 PM
The new screens are bloody awesome, I love those two shots of "Hyrule Market" which is just SO full of people. It's no wonder they want to delay the game seeing as it could be bigger than any of us realise. All those people, all that dialogue, all the many things you could do in the game. If this is a GameCube game (which it is, don't think otherwise) than I'd LOVE to see what Nintendo come up with for Zelda Revolution.

I'm guessin that TP will be released mid 2006 at the latest.


Zelda no Denetsu: Tasogare no Hime - Japanese title, just so you know XD

Mex
08-16-2005, 06:09 PM
http://media.cube.ign.com/media/572/572738/imgs_1.html

You can see the same npc about 3 times in a row on that screenshot. :indif:

ZBomber
08-16-2005, 06:12 PM
When was the original release? December 05?

Lynk Former
08-16-2005, 06:14 PM
Ironically the screenshots don't do the game ANY justice. They're all so washed out and dull while the demo showed a very bright and more detailed world that's a billion times better than what these shots show.

Strange huh.


@ Z: it was June 05

Lightsaberboy
08-16-2005, 06:15 PM
When was the original release? December 05?

november 05.

Feanaro
08-16-2005, 06:23 PM
Didn't nintendo do release Zelda Majora's Mask for 64 just before the gamecube came out? they like to do stuff like that. But if i had a gamecube i would buy this game, i may just have to buy a gamecue once its out.

Lynk Former
08-16-2005, 06:27 PM
If people don't want to get a GameCube just for this game they'd most likely end up getting it if they ever buy a Revolution.

IG-64
08-16-2005, 06:43 PM
Twilight Princess.... could they not have come up with a more childish and girlier name?? It'll probably get shipped with Twilight Princess Barbie on her Twilight Princess Unicorn(TM) [/nauseated]

mtfbwya

Oh grow up. :p

CapNColostomy
08-16-2005, 06:44 PM
I'm getting it for sure. Sucks it's taking so long. And I have to agree with Astro, if for no other reason than his post being hillarious.

shukrallah
08-16-2005, 07:45 PM
It doesn't matter how late they release this game, it will run on the Revolution so people with GCNs and Revolutions can play (its a smart marketing technique, in my opinion)

They are not fixing a major bug, did you read the article? They are adding NEW LEVELS. Crap, this game could be huge. Remember OoT on N64? All the NPCs and such, it was huge? They are doing it again.

Hehehe, to make up for the release date being pushed back, Nintendo should give us a pic of good old Ganondorf!!! :D :D :D

Ironically the screenshots don't do the game ANY justice. They're all so washed out and dull while the demo showed a very bright and more detailed world that's a billion times better than what these shots show.

I think the screenshots are amazing, but if you say the real game looks better... well.. then I am even more excited!


Oh well, I was going to just grab this for Christmas. They said the game will not be released before March 2006.

Twilight Princess.... could they not have come up with a more childish and girlier name?? It'll probably get shipped with Twilight Princess Barbie on her Twilight Princess Unicorn(TM) [/nauseated]

Its called that because their are two rhelmes, a normal one and a twilight rhelme. I guess the princess (zelda) is trapped in the Twilight rhelme. Maybe the two rhelmes are merging or conflicting with each other because of Ganon (hence monsters entering the normal rhelme?)

acdcfanbill
08-16-2005, 08:13 PM
i hate to see rushed games, and since w/ consoles you dont get patches, im glad they will take their time and do it right.

even tho im giddy as a school girl kekekekekekeke

also, i hope for a better ganondorf this time, the last one i didnt like so much.

Mike Windu
08-16-2005, 08:57 PM
What, you mean, the final very anti climactic fight where you deflected shots back at him? :p

Yeah, the final conflict this time will hopefully be a cool showdown of swordsmanship.

(Now if only they could make the final battles of Final Fantasy look awesome)

Hopefully Kingdom Hearts 2 will be out before this game, otherwise people will be saying it copied zelda >_>

shukrallah
08-16-2005, 09:00 PM
I liked sword fighting Ganon in WindWaker.

Lynk Former
08-16-2005, 09:09 PM
@ lukeskywalker1: The Twilight Realm is more like an infection that is poisoning Hyrule more than another dimension. Nothing is known about what this realm actually represents but it has been hinted that Ganondorf isn't the one responsible for the twilight... yada yada yada, *can't be bothered going into further detail* But of course


And as far as last battles go, the Ocarina of Time Ganon battle may have been easy and repetative, but GODDAMN it have a really cool feel to it. The music, the lightning in the background, how Ganon towered over you, it was all so damn cool!! XD

shukrallah
08-16-2005, 09:18 PM
Oh ok.

Yeah, the OoT battle was great, and that unexpected transformation into Ganon was... amazing.

The thing is, I always imagined link and ganondorf in a sword fight. Too bad it didn't happen. It did in Windwaker, but really... a 10 year old kid fighting a 500+ year old man? I hope Ganondorf has his two swords (or the big sword, in the spaceworld 2000 video/SSBM)

Mike Windu
08-16-2005, 09:35 PM
Hopefully it will be pretty much the Spaceworld demo :p

ET Warrior
08-16-2005, 10:09 PM
Only....you know.....longer...

^_^

shukrallah
08-16-2005, 10:17 PM
Yeah, 11 seconds doesn't cut it. :D

Mike Windu
08-16-2005, 11:01 PM
Well that was a given, silly :p

Now if only Nintendo could return Star Fox to awesomeness...

Namco sucks at Nintendo games

toms
08-17-2005, 06:55 AM
Whats up with all the gushing over the screenshots? I'm only just starting to work through them but they don't look that impressive to me.
The npcs in the first crowd one have really low-poly counts and bad textures. Look at the head of the guy in the middle front! And the guy clipped through the shelf on the right. The kid running in the 2nd town one has tiny deformed legs!
The wolf in the snow one looks like an n64 shot.
Link looks cool, but the other characters seem to have really low poly counts and be pretty angular. Even epona.
I thought the older shots of the fight on horseback were more impressive... but then I suppose things have moved on a bit graphically since then.

I have my suspicions that they were having trouble with the horse riding controls, but thats just me.

Lynk Former
08-17-2005, 07:54 AM
Like I said, the screenshots don't give the game any justice, the demo looks very different from any of the screens shown, a lot more detailed and it seemed to have a higher polygon count.

The difference has been noticed by many who have compared shots from the E3 demo with screenshots and trailer footage.

Bob Lion54
08-17-2005, 09:18 AM
^^^^^
Yea, the screens really don't look as good as the vids I've seen.

By the way, I really liked the drawings from the link. Link looks awsome.

Lightsaberboy
08-17-2005, 09:43 AM
the graphics in the screenshots look pretty similar to when i played it at E3, and they were fine for me. horeback controls were pretty good too, pretty easy to get the hang of.

Hermie
08-17-2005, 09:54 AM
horeback controls were pretty good too, pretty easy to get the hang of.
Best typo ever.

ChAiNz.2da
08-17-2005, 10:00 AM
Best typo ever.indeed. Made me want to go out and buy a GameCube :lol:

Lynk Former
08-17-2005, 10:30 AM
the graphics in the screenshots look pretty similar to when i played it at E3, and they were fine for me. horeback controls were pretty good too, pretty easy to get the hang of.

Are you kidding? I've seen the comparisons, the effects on the demo were so much better. more colourful, brighter. And that's not just comparing screenshots to a live demo, it's comparing the trailers to the demo too.

My guess is that they've taken a bunch of screenshots from a slightly earlier version (older than the E3 demo) and just release them periodically to make people happy.

ET Warrior
08-17-2005, 10:35 AM
I'm still sad that it's pushed back to '06....I have it pre-ordered and fully paid for....I just need it to arrive

;_;

Lynk Former
08-17-2005, 10:44 AM
I know what you mean, I wanted it to come near the years end too even though I felt it was being rushed.

toms
08-17-2005, 12:09 PM
I guess a lot of the charm of zelda games does come from the LIFE they breath into their characters through cool animation etc... SO I'm sure the cities would look much better in motion... can't help but be a little underwhealmed though, as these are all i have to go on.

Is there anything else good on the GCN horizon for now? Once I've finished Symphonia I'm thinking i might flog mine and by a ps2 to play Shadow of the Colossus (better screenshots than TP BTW) as i figure i can probably buy a gamecube again cheap by the time it comes out... or get it for the revolution.
It'll be just my luck for me to sell my GCN and then a great game come out...

That said, i'm STILL waiting for Tales of Symphonia to drop to a decent price... isn't there a PS2 version...hmmm...

shukrallah
08-17-2005, 01:44 PM
Nah, I don't think there is anything too good coming out this Christmas now. But check out some older games on GCN that were great, like MGS TTS... or Xmen Legends (on PS2 also)

If I didn't have a GCN I would just buy the revolution and pick up this Zelda game. Also, wait a little while before buying a PS2... the price is expected to drop to around $100 in a few months. That extra $50 could be spent on a new game for the system.


Have they released a Zelda Demo on GCN disk at all? If so... I got to get it. Lynk, where did you play it?!

Astrotoy7
08-18-2005, 06:17 AM
.. you're a "peak of masculinity"....

why thank you sithy :)

The only problem with having to wait so long for anything is that expectations creep up higher and higher....

I agree with IG, perhaps they probably shouldve just waited and made it a launching game for the N-Rev.... Zelda is one of Nintendos trump cards that wouldve been absolute marketing genius... ah well, at least the GC gets to go out on a high note :)

mtfbwya

Seph
08-18-2005, 08:08 AM
Well it might be hard to believe but It looks like nintendo actually respects their loyal fans. LukeSkywalker1 not yet, but I did get the trailer in my nintendo power and they prolly played it at E3 or just watched the trailers.

toms
08-18-2005, 08:10 AM
They rarely release GCN playable demo disks do they? (only one i remember is viewtiful joe). I'm assuming he saw it at E3 or another games show.

All i can see on the horizon for the next 6 months is Battalion Wars: Under Fire (which i'm not at all sure about), Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance and Odama (though that won't be out for a long time).
If i could get old GCN games at a reasonable price it might be worth it, but Twin Snakes and Ikagura are about the only old one i really want, and they are still well expensive, even on ebay.

Lynk Former
08-18-2005, 09:27 AM
I agree with IG, perhaps they probably shouldve just waited and made it a launching game for the N-Rev.... Zelda is one of Nintendos trump cards that wouldve been absolute marketing genius... ah well, at least the GC gets to go out on a high note :)
You say that it would be absolute marketing genius if Twilight Princess was a Revolution launch title... do you know how stupid that actually is? No really, do you? Has anyone even thought about how stupid it would be to convert the game into a Revolution game even if it is being released in the transition period between the new and old generations?

Think about it. The Nintendo Revolution is backwards compatible to the GameCube and Twilight Princess is being built as a GameCube game. People who have a GameCube will be able to enjoy this game, but what about people who don't have a GameCube? Some of those people may buy a GameCube just to play this game... but what of the people who don't want a GameCube at all but may be willing to buy a Revolution? They could buy a Revolution and be able to play this game.

But the best part is that you don't HAVE to buy the Revolution to play this game. If you are a GameCube owner and you cannot afford to buy the Revoluition right away or at all, you will still be able to buy this game and play it and enjoy it.

This game is very much wanted by the gamer community, there is no doubt about that. The Legend of Zelda has the power to grab a very large audience and this game is making a lot of people drool. To make this game accessable is the key to its success. Limiting it to the Revolution only would only hurt its sales. And then there is also the fact that Nintendo have already stated that there will be a seperate Revolution Zelda game on the horizon.

In the end, I expect this game to be fun, that's all I want from it. I don't give a f*** whether it will be bigger than Halo or Grand Theft Auto or whatever. I just want more of that goodness that I have played in Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask and The Wind Waker and for there to be new and exciting experiences to be had with this game.

And already I know that Twilight Princess will have everything I've wanted in it and more. I don't like waiting but if I have to I will.

toms
08-18-2005, 11:30 AM
And already I know that Twilight Princess will have everything I've wanted in it and more. I don't like waiting but if I have to I will.

Cool!! how?? [/kidding]

Its kind of impossible to tell if its a good decision to delay it or not, as we don't have much information to work on.

I don't think changing it to a REV title is as daft as you make out though. i don't think they have released any info on what REV launch titles will be - so there may alreayd be a zelda one - but assuming there isn't:

- Having a big name zelda title to bundle with your console will definately help shift units.
- Launch titles often sell far more than late-in-the-day titles. (Ocarina was like the 4th biggest seller on n64, beaten only by ones like Mario64, mariokart and Goldeneye - Majora came late and was about 15th in the list, selling about the same number as WCW Revenge and Ep1 Racer) (tho it did need an expansion pack)
- Gamecube titles won't shift many REVs - late PS1 titles didn't have people queueing to buy PS2s... its more of a bonus that your old games will still work.
- As the REV is compatible with the GCN it shouldn't be too hard to port the game across.
- If the problems they are having are to do with getting the most out of the GCN hardware then movig to REV will give them a lot more to work with.
- Launching a big GCN game just before the REV runs the risk of either overloading the market with zelda games (if there IS a REV zelda launch title) or getting people to buy cheap GCNs for it, so they won't want to buy a new console a few months later.

As i said, we are only guessing, but i'd think a retooled REV version would sell far more, and have the benefit of selling lots of their new console. Whether this would outweight the costs of retooling it is hard to say... but its not inconcevable.

Eternal Darkness was retooled from an n64 game to a GCN one (a much hard task i'd think) and that turned out pretty good).

ps/ all this is entirely MHO

Astrotoy7
08-18-2005, 11:59 AM
thanks Toms.... Lynky must learn to control his emotions methinks :p

I really dont care that much to engage in any further discussion about it. Lets just hope it turns out well, and not just a piece of shyte eye candy :(

mtfbwya

Lynk Former
08-18-2005, 12:18 PM
@ Astro: I wasn't angry, I just thought what you said was stupid.


@ toms: Aright, since we're going for dot points here I'll do the same to counter what you've just said...

- Judging from Nintendo's stance towards Zelda it is obvious that they do not believe it is a good idea to sell the series as a launch title. I've noticed that they wait till enough units of the console have been sold before bringing out a Zelda game. It seems to work very well.
- Ocarina of Time sold more than Mario64, Mario Kart and GoldenEye worldwide. Majora's Mask wasn't popular in the first place but yes, some people may have sen it as coming late. The difference is that the GCN wasn't backwards compatible to the N64.
- If the Revolution can play GameCube games then I don't see why they need to make it a Revolution game in the first place :p
- The GameCube hardware is more than capable, I don't think that's the problem, it's just the fact that games like this take more time to make because they have more substance than say your average FPS.
- Who ever said that Nintendo was going to saturate the market by releasing two console Zelda games in close proximity to eachother? Nintendo just said that they will be releasing a Revolution Zelda game, nothing more.

As I've said before, allowing Twilight Princess to be accessable to both the GameCube and Revolution userbase will result in more sales, NOT restricting it to Revolution only.

El Sitherino
08-18-2005, 12:21 PM
I don't think changing it to a REV title is as daft as you make out though.
Except it is. It's retarded to cut your market when you can easily keep it completely open by having it on the GameCube. Limiting it to the revolution loses money. Having it on GameCube opens you up to take full advantage of the market.

Basics of free market, never limit yourself.

If you don't get it yet, ask me and I'll explain or take an economics course.

Seph
08-18-2005, 12:48 PM
What's sad is that a friend of mine owns a perfectly good gamecube said he'd buy a revelution for this game. So I told him and said that it's coming out for GCN and I'd let him borrow my Master quest to tide him over until then, So he freaked out and told me I was wrong that it's a revelution title so I'm waiting for an apology.

ET Warrior
08-18-2005, 02:25 PM
Especially considering the fact that companies make more money off of video game sales than actual unit sales, it seems ONLY logical for TP to be a GCN title. Firstly, it will still help sell Revolutions, because people who don't own a 'cube will probably decide to get a revolution just because of this game, and potential future Zelda's. I know a few people who have already told me such.

Secondly, you have set up a situation where people who own gamecubes but can't afford a new console will STILL buy your game, and everyone who buys the new console will ALSO buy your game.

Prime
08-18-2005, 04:04 PM
Secondly, you have set up a situation where people who own gamecubes but can't afford a new console will STILL buy your game, and everyone who buys the new console will ALSO buy your game.But you want people to move to the new console and ditch the old console. Putting out the game on the old console is detrimental to that goal. They want people to say, "Damn, I really want to play that game, so I better get this new box." Not "**** the new box, I can play this game anyway and only pay 50 bucks." Sure, some can't afford it, but a lot of people can, and you want to give every incentive you can to switch. This is a strong way to do that. Kind of like Halo 3 getting people to buy the 360.

It is a common practice that most campanies in most fields (especially technology) use that tactic. They understand that they may take a hit in the short term (those who do not buy the game because they only have the old platform) for increased profits in the long term (they buy the new console and you sell them lots of new games to play on it).

ET Warrior
08-18-2005, 05:51 PM
But the Revolution is GOING to get a Zelda title, and THAT will pull people to the revolution. But keeping THIS title on the GCN means that it'll draw both, selling a TON of copies of this game, while still having hte draw to revolution down the road.

Mike Windu
08-18-2005, 06:34 PM
edit: decided to contribute more

I believe that putting out a big name title near the end of the console cycle is sort of silly. They should be pushing more for the Revolution instead of the Cube imo, simply because they need to.

Zelda is one of the most famous titles out there, it doesn't matter if they put out another Zelda game later, launch titles help boost sales. (like Halo 3)

Putting out a Zelda game later would sell, sure, but it wouldn't do as good as a Zelda launch title.

But since it's been announced by Nintendo to come out for the GC I don't think they should recall that and put it on the Revolution.

Prime
08-18-2005, 10:07 PM
But the Revolution is GOING to get a Zelda title, and THAT will pull people to the revolution. But keeping THIS title on the GCN means that it'll draw both, selling a TON of copies of this game, while still having hte draw to revolution down the road.I haven't followed the Revolution/Zelda trends, so I don't know what is getting released when, but if they want to sell the Revolution in the near future, then having it exclusive is the way to go.

shukrallah
08-18-2005, 10:26 PM
Well, its common sense, if I really want Zelda, but I don't have GCN, you see Zelda Twilight princess on the shelf, you look over and see a backwards compatible Revolution... and you have a choice, buy an outdated console and play zelda, or buy a brand new next gen console and play the same exact game, possibly with a small graphical improvement and no doubt, faster loading times. What you choose? If it were me, and I had money to burn, I'd grab the revolution and zelda.

EDIT: I forgot:

If i could get old GCN games at a reasonable price it might be worth it, but Twin Snakes and Ikagura are about the only old one i really want, and they are still well expensive, even on ebay.

Twin Snakes is actually pretty new (2004 release date) but I managed to pick it up brand new at GameStop for only $20. They had the used one on another shelf for $17. I figured, for $3 extra I can have it brand new, guaranteed to work. I don't know how the pricing works in the UK.


EDIT: GameStop Reference:
http://www.gamestop.com/product.asp?product%5Fid=916385

El Sitherino
08-19-2005, 12:02 AM
I dunno. Perhaps I trust Nintendo knows what they're doing since they've been selling **** for much longer than most of us have been alive.

Mike Windu
08-19-2005, 12:06 AM
Forgive us for being a bit skeptical because in the process of selling said ****, they've made some silly mistakes :p

Then again, that is to be expected with any huge company. Nintendo gets a lot of press attention when they mess up.

Lynk Former
08-19-2005, 01:29 AM
There are still a lot of games being released right now as we speak, should all of those games be stopped and released for their respective next gen consoles? No, because all consoles (cept maybe the 360) is backwards compatible, you have a library of last generation games ready and able to be played on your new consoles.

The Revolution is THE backwards compatible console. I would think that if people are gonna get a Revolution they'd take advantage of the GCN and virtual backwards compatiblity features. It's one of its main selling points, the fact that it has 20 years worth of gaming behind it which includes Twilight Princess.

People make it sound like that the Revolution won't sell if there is no Zelda Revolution game as a launch title. XD AHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH... Come on guys, you know that isn't true. I know most people here probably don't have that optimistic an opinion of Nintendo but Nintendo still make great profits and Nintendo is like a "style" and there will always be a group of people who will want that "style."

And to add to that Nintendo has already said that there will be a new Zelda game in the future, just like there will be a new Metroid game and a new Mario game and a new Donkey Kong game and a new... well you get the idea :dozey:... it's stupid to think that Nintendo only has this planned.

The funniest part is that you guys forgot a BIGGER game than Zelda that is a launch title for the Revolution. SUPER SMASH BROS. Anyone remember that game? The perfect Nintendo launch title, it worked for the GCN, it'll work for the Revolution.

I don't mean to sound this way but a lot of what people have said is very narrowminded to JUST how Zelda will affect the market. Yeah, Zelda is great, but it's not the only game that Nintendo sells in large numbers, and it's not the only thing that attracts people TO Nintendo.

XD *shakes head* lol.

Astrotoy7
08-19-2005, 06:03 AM
Lynk, i still dont get why you get so worked up about this ****. Whatever they do im sure Nintendo will make a crapload of money, none of which is going to be forwarded to you or I :( :p

mtfbwya

Lynk Former
08-19-2005, 06:27 AM
*points at where we are*
Web Forum. This is where you come when you have a 5 minutes to waste to post an opinion.

*points at thread*
The Legend of Zelda. Something I'm interested in, a thread that interests me.

*points at other members*
Other people. Interaction.

*points at Astro*
A person who is trying to look clever with the whole "don't get worked up, chill" thing.


:dozey:

It's a thread about Zelda, everyone is expressing their opinion and so am I, if my opinions seem strong to you then I suggest you don't read them and leave me alone. Okay?

Mike Windu
08-19-2005, 06:43 AM
People make it sound like that the Revolution won't sell if there is no Zelda Revolution game as a launch title. XD AHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH... Come on guys, you know that isn't true. I know most people here probably don't have that optimistic an opinion of Nintendo but Nintendo still make great profits and Nintendo is like a "style" and there will always be a group of people who will want that "style."

We said it would sell better. We all know Revolution will gather sales. But a Zelda launch title would definitely boost the number of Revolution sales as well as boosting its own.

There are still a lot of games being released right now as we speak, should all of those games be stopped and released for their respective next gen consoles? No, because all consoles (cept maybe the 360) is backwards compatible, you have a library of last generation games ready and able to be played on your new consoles.

Comparably they don't generate the number of sales that a series such as Zelda does. Only games I think that would generate that sort of money would be Final Fantasy XII or Kingdom Hearts II.

And to add to that Nintendo has already said that there will be a new Zelda game in the future, just like there will be a new Metroid game and a new Mario game and a new Donkey Kong game and a new... well you get the idea ... it's stupid to think that Nintendo only has this planned.

Yes, we are quite aware that there is a Zelda game planned for the future. But that's not the point. We are stating that having Zelda as a launch title for the Revolution would, as stated above, not only boost the sales of the Revolution, but of the game itself.

The funniest part is that you guys forgot a BIGGER game than Zelda that is a launch title for the Revolution. SUPER SMASH BROS. Anyone remember that game? The perfect Nintendo launch title, it worked for the GCN, it'll work for the Revolution.

Hmm... I could have sworn I mentioned ssb somewhere in one of my posts, but I can't find it anymore. Oh well. The point is, just because we simply don't mention a title doesn't mean we have forgotten about it. SSB is a heavy hitter franchise. Much like Zelda. What? Nintendo coming with TWO heavy hitters upon launch doesn't seem feasible to you?

SSB is my favorite game besides Kingdom Hearts, and I look forward greatly to playing it. Note I said playing it, not buying it. Because that's what happened last time. Bought a GC, holy crap SSBM is awesome. But... not much else imo. Sure there's Metroid Prime, but meh. Sure there's Mario, Windwaker, whatever. I wait for all those to drop -20 before I buy them because they aren't must have games for me.



I don't mean to sound this way but a lot of what people have said is very narrowminded to JUST how Zelda will affect the market. Yeah, Zelda is great, but it's not the only game that Nintendo sells in large numbers, and it's not the only thing that attracts people TO Nintendo.

Granted, Nintendo has a lot of other franchises, but other than Mario and Metroid (not a bad amount of money this cycle, sequel could have sold better) and Starfox (... come on. As an avid SF player I must call BS on both of their decisions for this franchise. Hell, SF Adventures even copies the Zelda formula almost exactly.) Zelda, whether you realize it or not, is still something that sells a hell of a lot and generates a hell of a lot of money. Having people buy a 50 dollar GC, play Zelda, and sell it back is not good marketing strategy IMO. Having them buy a Revolution, AND Zelda... that's good marketing. They've already caused a big buzz about the whole secrecy thing... why not play into that?

The Revolution is THE backwards compatible console. I would think that if people are gonna get a Revolution they'd take advantage of the GCN and virtual backwards compatiblity features. It's one of its main selling points, the fact that it has 20 years worth of gaming behind it which includes Twilight Princess.

Aye, it is. But it was the selling point of the PS2 to be able to play your PS1 games. That is what caught my attention, but once everyone got caught in the flood of PS2 games, you forgot about the old PS1 games. Now, I'm not saying Nintendo will be like that, but I believe it will lose potential sales.

Lynk Former
08-19-2005, 06:57 AM
We said it would sell better. We all know Revolution will gather sales. But a Zelda launch title would definitely boost the number of Revolution sales as well as boosting its own.
I don't believe it would make enough of a different for Nintendo to justify wasting more money upgrading it to a Revolution game. That's what I think.

Yes, we are quite aware that there is a Zelda game planned for the future. But that's not the point. We are stating that having Zelda as a launch title for the Revolution would, as stated above, not only boost the sales of the Revolution, but of the game itself.
And I'm saying it's not wise to use Twilight Princess that way. That's what Smash Bros Revolution is for. Twilight Princess on the other hand is the game that Nintendo wants to make accessable to as many people as possible. To do that you make it a GameCube game. Yes it may boost the Revolution sales initially but that's thinking on a very short term base. Seeing as a Zelda game will be released on the Revolution in the first place why bother to spend more money just to limit the userbase that can play this game?


Hmm... I could have sworn I mentioned ssb somewhere in one of my posts, but I can't find it anymore. Oh well. The point is, just because we simply don't mention a title doesn't mean we have forgotten about it. SSB is a heavy hitter franchise. Much like Zelda. What? Nintendo coming with TWO heavy hitters upon launch doesn't seem feasible to you?
It's also unwise to bring out too many big hitters out at the same time. Again, people are thinking short term.

Granted, Nintendo has a lot of other franchises, but other than Mario and Metroid (not a bad amount of money this cycle, sequel could have sold better) and Starfox (... come on. As an avid SF player I must call BS on both of their decisions for this franchise. Hell, SF Adventures even copies the Zelda formula almost exactly.) Zelda, whether you realize it or not, is still something that sells a hell of a lot and generates a hell of a lot of money. Having people buy a 50 dollar GC, play Zelda, and sell it back is not good marketing strategy IMO. Having them buy a Revolution, AND Zelda... that's good marketing. They've already caused a big buzz about the whole secrecy thing... why not play into that?
This is exactly why I think it's better for the game to be accessable. You're only thinking about half of the field. Think of it this way, you have a GameCube and you cannot afford to buy a Revolution at this point, but you can buy Twilight Princess. If TP is a GCN game, bingo, you can play it. If TP is a Revolution game, damn you can't get it, it's a Revolution game. Does that automatically mean that this person will go out and buy a Revolution? What if they want to buy a PS3 instead and Twilight Princess is the last GCN game they will be getting?

Like I keep saying over and over, making Twilight Princess accessable to the old and new generation means more sales for Twilight Princess. Nintendo doesn't need to worry about boosting Revolution sales because they have other games to do that.

Mike Windu
08-19-2005, 07:21 AM
But they should worrying, because they're not stacking up to their competitors.

TP will cater to fans who won't be getting a Revolution, but where does that put Nintendo?

Also, I am unaware of any OTHER big name franchises being released by Nintendo on launch day. Zelda would not only garner interest; hell, it's a system seller. It's been a system seller all it's game career. OoT = win for 64

Maybe XBOX 360, but PS3 is still dominating where Nintendo once stood.

Eyes on the prize, Violet. Eyes on the prize.

:p

Lynk Former
08-19-2005, 07:42 AM
But they should worrying, because they're not stacking up to their competitors.
They aren't? And how would you know this? Just because it's general public opinion from a specific group of people. Yes, it is true that Nintendo aren't for the techy type of people. But that's okay because that isn't Nintendo's target audience. And because of that Nintendo is focusing on an audience they know they can reach, anyone who likes the Nintendo way of gaming, they are also making efforts to capture new groups of people.

TP will cater to fans who won't be getting a Revolution, but where does that put Nintendo?
TP will cater to fans who either have a GCN or Revolution. You make it sound like that if it isn't a Revolution game, no one will buy it. *sighs* I won't bother to continue this line because it's moving from Zelda to overall Nintendo.

Finishing off, Nintendo isn't going to die so don't worry, just because Nintendo isn't popular with your friends doesn't mean they're in trouble. Just because Twilight Princess is being released 6 months before the Revolution doesn't mean that no one will buy it.

ChAiNz.2da
08-19-2005, 07:49 AM
There are still a lot of games being released right now as we speak, should all of those games be stopped and released for their respective next gen consoles? No, because all consoles (cept maybe the 360) is backwards compatible, you have a library of last generation games ready and able to be played on your new consoles.

The Revolution is THE backwards compatible console. I would think that if people are gonna get a Revolution they'd take advantage of the GCN and virtual backwards compatiblity features. It's one of its main selling points, the fact that it has 20 years worth of gaming behind it which includes Twilight Princess.
well, regarding the 360.. their motive on backwards compatibility is questionable... a little excerpt from their press release:
The hard drive might seem like an expensive luxury to some shoppers, particularly those buying for someone else this holiday season, but for current Xbox gamers, it's a critical piece of equipment. Without a hard drive, the Xbox 360 will not be able to play any games from the current Xbox, including the phenomenally successful "Halo 2". - source (http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/17/commentary/game_over/column_gaming/index.htm?cnn=yes) | additional source (http://www.xbox.com/en-US/news/2005/0817-xbox360launchdetails.htm)
I would think that Nintendo (and possibly others) have that going for them if they include the backwards compatibility by "default" rather than require some optional accessory.. but the pessimistic part of me (or capitalist rather ;) ) would seem to think to either release TP solely for the Revolution or adding bonus options, graphics, etc. for the Revolution version if they decide on a GC release.

In any case, die-hard players are going to notice that although they can play TP on a GC, they're going to be "missing something" by not getting a Revolution... either way, it's $$$ for the Corp...

Lynk Former
08-19-2005, 08:03 AM
The Revolution's backwards compatibility will be by default, all NES, SNES, N64 and GCN games will be able to be played using the Revolution controller. The Revolution does have controller ports for GCN controllers, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's for GCN controllers, it could also be used as recharge ports or used for the Bongos or if other past accessories.
NES, SNES and N64 games are downloaded from Nintendo's online network while GCN games are played directly from their discs.

Okay, okay I'll list down a group of different type of people.
1. A person who does not have a GCN but can get a Revolution and TP
2. A person who does have a GCN and can get a Revolution AND TP.
3. A person who does have a GCN but cannot get a Revolution but can get TP.
4. A person who does have a GCN but wants to get a PS3/Xbox360 and TP.

Let's say TP is a Revolution title. Person 1 and 2 will be able to get it, but person 3 and 4 won't be able to.

Now let's say that TP is a GCN title. Person 1, 2, 3 AND 4 can get it.

toms
08-19-2005, 08:52 AM
I guess it depends what your aim is... to sell copies of zelda, or to sell Revolutions. I would have thought the idea was to sell revolutions.

You can actually buy second hand GCNs for less than GCN games these days. If i didn't already own one then what i would do is buy a second hand GCN and Twilight Princess, play it, sell them both. Which benefits nintendo in the short term because they sell lots of Princesses, but it doesn't benefit them long term as they don't get a new customer.

I'm of the opinion that a Zelda launch title for the revolution would boost sales by a dramatic amount... every console needs a big name franchise at launch... and i may be biased because i'm a huge zelda fan... but a zelda lauch title would be much more likely to make me buy a console than SSB or even a Mario title (unless they do something amazing with it). (and though metroid is a great game, its name isn't on the same level)

The xbox 360 is going to be backwards compatible too, but Microsoft are already saving up their best franchises to laucn on that, rather than bringing them out as xbox games just before it launches.

Still, either way it'll sell bucketloads. I just think the timing will hurt.

Astrotoy7
08-19-2005, 08:56 AM
I pick (c) :D

If the N-Rev ever got some more SW and FF titles I wanted, Id probably eventually get one when the price went down a bit :)

Im sure it can peacefully coexist next to my ps3, just like me and you Lynk...

mtfbwya

Lynk Former
08-19-2005, 09:29 AM
Nintendo is also doing what Sony did for the PS1 when the PS2 was launch. The GCN will still be available for awhile as a budget system for those budget families who can't afford to buy one of the next generation consoles.

To put it more simply, it's like releasing a movie on a DVD or a UMD (if you had to choose between one or the other). It would be smarter to go for the DVD rather than the UMD because you have more people able to play DVDs.


The Revolution already has Smash Bros, a Mario title, Metroid Prime 3 and a brand new Nintendo franchise on the way as well as other stuff. They will be enough to sell the Revolution.

If people truely do want Twilight Princess I'd think they would get it despite it being a GameCube game.

shukrallah
08-19-2005, 11:12 AM
Reasons not to put TP on Revolution


Zelda is already configured for the GCN controller... as a revolution title you would want to take advantage of the Revolutionary controller and options right? So by porting it they would have to completly redo the controller stuff.
The size of the GCN disk as already been accounted for, they know how much they can fit on a disk. By making it a Revolution title they would either have to add a crap load of stuff... or the game would look small in front of new next gen NR games.
They would have to completly redo the models. No one who has a Revolution would be impressed if they walk into a market and see a bunch of "Clones" walking around. On GCN, however, that is acceptable. While the graphics are already pushing the limit (for a current gen console) they would have to be a whole lot better for the NR.
The game will be pushed back further.
The price of the game will raise (will be $50... on NR it will be $60+)
World Detail would have to be improved...
Oh and.. yeah, its already playable on Revolution through backwards compatability.

Astrotoy7
08-19-2005, 11:41 AM
The Revolution already has Smash Bros, a Mario title, Metroid Prime 3 and a brand new Nintendo franchise on the way as well as other stuff. They will be enough to sell the Revolution....

Hey, dont foget the New STARFOX RPG. This screenshot shows the lifelike detail the N-Rev will be capable of :

*rubs eyes to focus*

props to pieski for his connections at Norwegian Nintendo HQ :p

ChAiNz.2da
08-19-2005, 11:49 AM
Hey, dont foget the New STARFOX RPG. This screenshot shows the lifelike detail the N-Rev will be capable of :

*rubs eyes to focus*
There isn't enough money in the world to make me dress up like that, or actually pose long enough to provide photographic proof... :lol:

Pie™
08-19-2005, 12:00 PM
Hey, dont foget the New STARFOX RPG. This screenshot shows the lifelike detail the N-Rev will be capable of :

*rubs eyes to focus*
Hey, where's my credit? :mad:

toms
08-19-2005, 01:07 PM
I thin the controller one might be the major issue... knowing nintendo they will want to tie the gameplay of their new games as closely as possible to their new controller, whatever it is. I'd suspect the REV zelda will have some sort of functionality that is highly reliant on the new controller.

Considering they'd have all the source materials and models, and they'd have 7 or more months to improve the graphics and add more detail... and whether it is a GCN or a REV title it will still have to compete graphically with next gen games, as the 360 will be out by then and the PS3 and REV may be too. Not ideal either way.

Lynk Former
08-19-2005, 01:12 PM
*looks at toms last paragraph* Exactly! You've just helped me highlight a very good point there.

The fact that people think that a game has to be graphically beautiful to be enjoyed. Just by that you can bet that Nintendo will DEFINATELY keep this as a GameCube game just to prove to everyone that you don't have to have uber perfect graphics to make a kickass game.


Another thing is that the Revolution won't be coming mid 2006, it'll arrive at the end of 2006.

Tyrion
08-19-2005, 01:16 PM
The fact that people think that a game has to be graphically beautiful to be enjoyed. Just by that you can bet that Nintendo will DEFINATELY keep this as a GameCube game just to prove to everyone that you don't have to have uber perfect graphics to make a kickass game.

*inserts 2 cents*

I still think OoT was one of the best looking games ever. The graphics sucked technology rise, but the color balance and design was great.

I hope they release it on the Gamecube personally. Because I actually have a Gamecube, and I don't want a Revolution.

Astrotoy7
08-19-2005, 01:37 PM
Hey, where's my credit? :mad:

fixed, my good fellow :D


mtfbwya

Prime
08-19-2005, 02:51 PM
The fact that people think that a game has to be graphically beautiful to be enjoyed. Just by that you can bet that Nintendo will DEFINATELY keep this as a GameCube game just to prove to everyone that you don't have to have uber perfect graphics to make a kickass game.While that is true and I agree, to many people kick ass graphics = good game and crappy graphics = bad game. And great graphics sells games and systems, rightly or wrongly. We all know that. Nintendo wants to sell games in the long run, not prove a philosophical point. And presumably they are aiming to sell Revolutions, not GCs, or worse yet nothing since the GC owners already have that system.

They aren't going to say, "See, even though it isn't pretty, you are having a lot of fun right? You don't need to upgrade and give us your big dollars! If you want pretty, go play on our competators machines!" That want to say, "You really need our new system so you can play this game!"

To some extent, this a chance for Nintendo's to get back to being a real player in the console wars (although I haven't looked at the Revolution, so I don't know how likely that is). Presumably they aren't going to shoot themselves in the foot by passing up a chance to convince players to get the new system...

I hope they release it on the Gamecube personally. Because I actually have a Gamecube, and I don't want a Revolution. And it is exactly that attitude that Nintendo wants to defeat. Releasing the game on the GC removes the reason to want a Revolution, which hurts their business plan and makes them less money.

Tyrion
08-19-2005, 03:24 PM
And it is exactly that attitude that Nintendo wants to defeat. Releasing the game on the GC removes the reason to want a Revolution, which hurts their business plan and makes them less money.

I figured someone would say that. If they don't release it on the gamecube, then they lose a sale from me. I'm not gonna spend 300 dollars for the revolution just to play Legend of Zelda. If that was the case, I'd just go to a friends house and play the game there.

But then I'm probably in the minority when it comes to that.

Besides, how could it hurt their buisness plan? If both the revolution and the gamecube games sell for the same price, then they still get money. They lose money selling the Revolution anyway. Selling games on the gamecube will help curb losses from the Revolution, while still having a new-generation console for competition's sake. Then people will buy the Revolution once the newer, more taxing games come out.

Lynk Former
08-19-2005, 03:55 PM
@ Prime: You're making it sounds as if no one will want a Revolution if Twilight Princess is not a Revolution game. Alright then, I supposed no one will want the Revolution for Super Smash Bros. Revolution or Metroid Prime 3 or the 20 years of Nintendo gaming that you can access through the system. What you're saying sounds pretty silly really.

And the fact is that selling Revolution is NOT the issue here. If you want to talk about the supposed grim future for Nintendo then start a new thread, really. I've said it a million times already, a lot of people will want this game and making it accessable is Nintendo's #1 priority.

Tyrion, you're not a minority with your view, there will be a lot of people who will have a similar story to you. Either they won't be getting a Revolution at all because they either cannot afford one or will be switching to the PS3 or Xbox360 or won't get one at all. Or they just want to stick with their GCN until the Revolution comes down to an acceptable price or when it has proven that it has a decent enough library to invest in.

Making this game accessable to people like that will be a very good choice. Or we could go for the PC gaming route where you have to upgrade your system to be able to play the game.

Remember that Nintendo doesn't attract all the tech geeks and multimedia savvy type people that Microsoft and Sony do. They attract a totally different crowd of people with a totally different kind of experience. If this were, say, Halo 2 and we were dealing with the Xbox and Xbox360 then I would agree with you, but we're not. this is Nintendo, things work differently for Nintendo and it's obvious that the majority don't understand Nintendo's stance on... well, anything, seeing as there is so much critisism towards such trivial things.

Prime
08-19-2005, 05:44 PM
I figured someone would say that. If they don't release it on the gamecube, then they lose a sale from me. I'm not gonna spend 300 dollars for the revolution just to play Legend of Zelda. If that was the case, I'd just go to a friends house and play the game there.

But then I'm probably in the minority when it comes to that.Hard to say, really. A lot of people feel that way, especially at first, and there is nothing wrong with that. But eventually most people feel they have to upgrade, and the developers want that to happen sooner rather than later. When DVDs came out there were a lot of people who asked why would they switch when they already had their movies on VHS. Now that it is much more difficult to get VHS and most of the best stuff is almost exclusively on DVD, most people have switched. Same with records to tapes to CDs.

Eventually, if not now, you and others are going to want to switch to a nextgen console. Nintendo are trying to get you to select their console. If they think making TF exclusive to the Revolution will convince you to do that, they will.

Besides, how could it hurt their buisness plan? If both the revolution and the gamecube games sell for the same price, then they still get money. They lose money selling the Revolution anyway. Selling games on the gamecube will help curb losses from the Revolution, while still having a new-generation console for competition's sake. Then people will buy the Revolution once the newer, more taxing games come out.It can hurt their business plan in a few ways. The console and game sales are kind of apples and oranges. Console sales generate a lot more money per unit for starters (even if the overall units sales are not comparible), and they are also ensuring future profit because people are going to buy games for the new system, because even with backwards compatibility at some point people are going to get tired of just playing GC games.

Compare this to just the sales Twilight Princess for the GC. Even if the game is popular, the money they make will generate less in the long run than making it exclusive to the Revolution. There maybe more TP units sold in total, but it reduces the console sales and future sales, so in terms of overall revenue it is less. Plus, there is nothing inherent from that to make you buy another Nintendo game. All the profit is short term.

Again, this is traditionally how new technology is rolled out, and how companies entice customers to buy it. It is a common business practice to take a short term hit to improve the prospect of even greater revenue down the line. Being in the wireless network business, I can tell you we do exactly the same thing. Game engine designers do the same thing. It isn't really worth it for them to make an engine for just one game cost-wise. But they will take the short term hit to profit because the licensing of it will make them even more money down the line. It is the same in most industries. If that method didn't work, you would see much more technology being backwards compatible. But if they did that, eventually people would feel they have what they need and not buy new stuff.

@ Prime: You're making it sounds as if no one will want a Revolution if Twilight Princess is not a Revolution game. Alright then, I supposed no one will want the Revolution for Super Smash Bros. Revolution or Metroid Prime 3 or the 20 years of Nintendo gaming that you can access through the system. What you're saying sounds pretty silly really. But that's not what I'm saying. Like any decent system, there are always going to be lots of good games. The point is that in the end Nintendo wants to sell its console, and like every business it will use every opportunity to convince customers to take the plunge and give them their $300. If they think TF is going to help, great. If Super Mario Bros. Revolution is going to help, great. If Metroid Prime 3 is going to help, great.

They are going to use all of those to get you to buy the console. Assuming TF lines up with the console release schedule and so on, Nintendu will use it is part of their business plan to get people to transition. It isn't the only incentive they will use, but it can be one. And they will use every incentive at their disposal, including this one if they feel it will help. Happens all the time, everywhere.

I've said it a million times already, a lot of people will want this game and making it accessable is Nintendo's #1 priority. Well, not to split hairs but making money is their #1 priority. And a good way to make the most money possible is to make the game Revolution exclusive, again assuming that development can be made to line up. They want to ensure long term profitability.

Tyrion, you're not a minority with your view, there will be a lot of people who will have a similar story to you. That's true. A lot of people will feel the same way, which is of course valid. But those feelings are the same every time a new technology comes along to replace an older technology. And every time the company with the new technology does everything it can to get you to switch. And using "exclusives" is one of the most common ways to do that.

Or we could go for the PC gaming route where you have to upgrade your system to be able to play the game. Ironically, PC manufacturers do exactly the same thing. "If you want to play this game/use this software/do this thing, you need to be the newest video card/RAM/CPU/motherboard/harddrive to do it! Give us your money!"

If they really felt that in general making things backwards compatible to with older systems made more money in the long run, they would all be doing it. They know that isn't the most effective way. They want to see you more stuff, and they can't do that if you feel you have everything you need.

However, backwards compatibility can be used as an incentive to switch to their system and not the new XBox or PS. Microsoft seems to feel that the 360 is strong enough not to really need that so much...

Remember that Nintendo doesn't attract all the tech geeks and multimedia savvy type people that Microsoft and Sony do. They attract a totally different crowd of people with a totally different kind of experience. If this were, say, Halo 2 and we were dealing with the Xbox and Xbox360 then I would agree with you, but we're not. this is Nintendo, things work differently for Nintendo and it's obvious that the majority don't understand Nintendo's stance on... well, anything, seeing as there is so much critisism towards such trivial things.But they are still in business to make money, right? I mean, they have shareholders and whatnot, and so are required by law to base decisions on the bottom line. :)

This is way to long a post. In the end, I'm not saying that Twilight Princess should or will be put out exclusively for the Revolution. I'm just saying that Nintendo may very well feel that doing so will make them the most money in the long run, and they may very well be right. :)

Mike Windu
08-19-2005, 07:12 PM
Finishing off, Nintendo isn't going to die so don't worry, just because Nintendo isn't popular with your friends doesn't mean they're in trouble. Just because Twilight Princess is being released 6 months before the Revolution doesn't mean that no one will buy it.

Ah ah. Not to correct you, but it's not my friends.

The freakin CEO/representative/president whatever has already expressed concern that Rev will not beat Sony.

Nintendo probably won't die out. But they need to do something. Revolution yes, is a step in the right direction, but we'll see how far that step takes them.

They aren't? And how would you know this? Just because it's general public opinion from a specific group of people. Yes, it is true that Nintendo aren't for the techy type of people. But that's okay because that isn't Nintendo's target audience. And because of that Nintendo is focusing on an audience they know they can reach, anyone who likes the Nintendo way of gaming, they are also making efforts to capture new groups of people.


Once again, it's not general public opinion. Nintendo has expressed these concerns at several press conferences, either through small remarks or flat out statements.

I could probably look it up if you want. :/

El Sitherino
08-19-2005, 07:56 PM
Ah ah. Not to correct you, but it's not my friends.

No problem as you didn't correct him.
Nintendo has never said they aren't "cool" ;)

The freakin CEO/representative/president whatever has already expressed concern that Rev will not beat Sony.

... Uh, no duh. Sony has contracts for exclusive deals for franchises people want. They were even trying to get an exclusive contract with Rockstar for GTA. They're creating a market based on fads, and as long as they stay current they'll bring in the majority.
Meanwhile Nintendo holds back to doing what they've always done and makes insane profit on their consoles as well as games. That's why they're still a huge percentile in the entire entertainment market, where as Sony is merely a 2%.


Nintendo probably won't die out. But they need to do something. Revolution yes, is a step in the right direction, but we'll see how far that step takes them.

They're letting Microsoft and Sony battle it out. Sony and Microsoft lose money on each console sold, eventually one will outsell the other leaving the other to crash out of the market. Then Nintendo could easily keep rising as it is.


Once again, it's not general public opinion. Nintendo has expressed these concerns at several press conferences, either through small remarks or flat out statements.
And once again, I say you're a liar. Nintendo has never shown sign of concern over anything, not even the failed VirtualBoy, which if it had overcome the technical flaws could have been a damn fine system.


Also, I'd like to show you Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3. It came out for playstation after the PS2 had been released. They could have put it on the PS2, but there was no need. It sold a hell of a lot of copies because it was a wanted game and those who had only PS1's could play it and so could the kids going into getting the PS2's. The people set on direct switch to the revolution will get the game regardless, if they intend on getting it.
Those who wish to wait will buy the game for their gamecube and make the switch when they wish to. Those who don't will be getting the game for the gamecube and Nintendo will still be getting their money. In a manner it's win-win, sure they aren't getting the people with no intention on switching, but are those people really going to switch anyway? Will this game be the catalyst that pushes them to switch? I doubt it. You act like this is the be-all-end-all of games and if it's not on the revolution it'll fail.

I think mario and metroid are the stronger launch titles. They do, after all, have the worlds largest fan base to ever exist in the gaming world.

shukrallah
08-19-2005, 08:55 PM
Actually Sith I read on IGN some interviews where Nintendo seemed a little concerned about the markey. Im not sure why, reguardless of what everyone thinks, Nintendo has a ton of capitol. They have been in the business for around 100 years. They know what they are doing.

... Uh, no duh. Sony has contracts for exclusive deals for franchises people want. They were even trying to get an exclusive contract with Rockstar for GTA. They're creating a market based on fads, and as long as they stay current they'll bring in the majority.
Meanwhile Nintendo holds back to doing what they've always done and makes insane profit on their consoles as well as games. That's why they're still a huge percentile in the entire entertainment market, where as Sony is merely a 2%.

Yup, games like Metal Gear Solid are PlayStation Exclusive for a certain number of years. Thats why Nintendo won't see a Sons of Liberty port for a while, not to mention Snake Eater. Like you guys said, the devs make you feel like you need to buy the new consoles.

My plan: Forget next gen untill the prices drop. Many people will be selling games now. I'll take this oppertunity to enhance my GCN library. Soon the PS2 price will drop, I'll grab one of those, grab my MGS games, and a few other PS2 exclusive games and I'll be set for years. They still sell used N64 games, from $5-$15. I can't wait for the day PS2 and GCN games are $5 a peice.

Mike Windu
08-19-2005, 11:30 PM
No problem as you didn't correct him.
Nintendo has never said they aren't "cool" ;)


Nor did I not say that they weren't cool. I corrected him on his statement that I got the whole "omg Nintendo sux they will dai" from my friends.

Nor did I even say that. At all. Plus the implication is there that I am a child and know nothing about the gaming industry.

So yeah. that thing.

anyway:

And once again, I say you're a liar. Nintendo has never shown sign of concern over anything, not even the failed VirtualBoy, which if it had overcome the technical flaws could have been a damn fine system.

You can say whatever you want. Browse around at gameinformer or ign; you'll find it.

(They have a huge archive so it might take a while)

edit: here's one: http://cube.ign.com/articles/582/582843p1.html

Other articles have like one sentence things. For example: "while President ________ something something something, he did acknowledge that sales were down and that Nintendo was in a slump blah blah blah"

Lynk Former
08-19-2005, 11:44 PM
It think people in this thread have A LOT of misconceptions about Nintendo which need to be addressed. You're looking at this company as if they were another Sony or Microsoft. They aren't. I will explain.


Hard to say, really. A lot of people feel that way, especially at first, and there is nothing wrong with that. But eventually most people feel they have to upgrade, and the developers want that to happen sooner rather than later. When DVDs came out there were a lot of people who asked why would they switch when they already had their movies on VHS. Now that it is much more difficult to get VHS and most of the best stuff is almost exclusively on DVD, most people have switched. Same with records to tapes to CDs.
Firstly, you're right about this, it does take people awhile to switch over and upgrade. And that is really the point, it takes time, most people don't switch over until the media has been established, in the meantime people will still be playing and buying PS2 games and GCN games even when the PS3 and Revolution are about to be released. It's interesting to note that the N64's sales dropped very suddenly once the GameCube was released but the PS1's sales didn't. Why? Backward compatibility, the fact that people still wanted these "old" games and could play them on the PS2. Yes, I know that it didn't last long and that people did switch over tot he PS2 games pretty quickly, but there was still a great demand. A GREAT demand. When people want a game, they will buy it. If Doom 1 and 2 can be sold in this day and age I think people will buy Twilight Princess by the truckloads eventhough it may be a GameCube game.


It can hurt their business plan in a few ways. The console and game sales are kind of apples and oranges. Console sales generate a lot more money per unit for starters (even if the overall units sales are not comparible), and they are also ensuring future profit because people are going to buy games for the new system, because even with backwards compatibility at some point people are going to get tired of just playing GC games.

Compare this to just the sales Twilight Princess for the GC. Even if the game is popular, the money they make will generate less in the long run than making it exclusive to the Revolution. There maybe more TP units sold in total, but it reduces the console sales and future sales, so in terms of overall revenue it is less. Plus, there is nothing inherent from that to make you buy another Nintendo game. All the profit is short term.

Again, this is traditionally how new technology is rolled out, and how companies entice customers to buy it. It is a common business practice to take a short term hit to improve the prospect of even greater revenue down the line. Being in the wireless network business, I can tell you we do exactly the same thing. Game engine designers do the same thing. It isn't really worth it for them to make an engine for just one game cost-wise. But they will take the short term hit to profit because the licensing of it will make them even more money down the line. It is the same in most industries. If that method didn't work, you would see much more technology being backwards compatible. But if they did that, eventually people would feel they have what they need and not buy new stuff.
Like I said at the start of my post, you're looking at Nintendo as if they were Sony or Microsoft. I also love the fact that you're giving Nintendo advice on how they should proceed when in the end they've made more profit than Sony and obviously Microsoft. Nintendo ARE good at what they do, no they're GREAT at what they do. Their tactics confuse people a lot of the time because most of them don't understand it, which is very obvious to someone like me who watches everyone as they get frustrated with Nintendo. But in the end, Nintendo profit, they make tonnes of money, and even if they aren't seen as #1 in the public eye, from a business sense they are #1 because they make a MUCH larger profit than Sony when they seem to do so little compared to Sony.

Actually generating money in any sense isn't absolute, it's extremely relative. Just because a game is sold cheaper than other games doesn't mean it won't generate as much revenue. It may be the case where Twilight Princess was cheaper to create, sold MANY units and generated a TONNE of cash compared to a nextgen game of the same calibur.

The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures was an extremely cheap game to make, in fact it only cost a few hundred US dollars to make. It sold pretty badly compared to say, Halo 2. But it sold, and it made such a large profit relative to how much the game took to make. Pretty cool huh.


But that's not what I'm saying. Like any decent system, there are always going to be lots of good games. The point is that in the end Nintendo wants to sell its console, and like every business it will use every opportunity to convince customers to take the plunge and give them their $300. If they think TF is going to help, great. If Super Mario Bros. Revolution is going to help, great. If Metroid Prime 3 is going to help, great.

They are going to use all of those to get you to buy the console. Assuming TF lines up with the console release schedule and so on, Nintendu will use it is part of their business plan to get people to transition. It isn't the only incentive they will use, but it can be one. And they will use every incentive at their disposal, including this one if they feel it will help. Happens all the time, everywhere.
This is where people are failing very badly to understand. The Xbox360 is coming out December this year, correct. The PS3 is stated to come out some time in 2006, correct. But most people don't realise that the Revolution will have a end of 2006 release date. It may even be delayed to the start of 2007. Now I know what everyone is going to say now "oh no Nintendo have lost, etc, etc, too late in the game, blah blah, they're gonna fail." If you think that then you should reread my comments about how little people understand Nintendo and their great success.

Now continuing on, Twilight Princess will most likely have an April 2006 WORLD WIDE release date. The Revolution will most likely come at the end of 2006 or at the start of 2007. Which gives it almost a year buffer space. Granted that people will be moving on to the Xbox360 and PS3 in this transitional period, but Nintendo isn't actively concerning themselves with Sony and Microsoft, they're heading down a totally different path than their competitors.


Well, not to split hairs but making money is their #1 priority. And a good way to make the most money possible is to make the game Revolution exclusive, again assuming that development can be made to line up. They want to ensure long term profitability.
You don't know that for a fact though do you seeing as you haven't managed a successful billion dollar company... who everyone seems to doubt but makes bucket loads of money anyway. I do agree that Nintendo could make more money, and yes, seeing as it is a business people think that should be their only goal in these matters. But if it was then they would be just like Sony or Microsoft. And as I keep saying, Nintendo are NOT like Sony and Microsoft. Despite their great profits, Nintendo is committed to furthering gaming through their own unique ways. The goal of Sony and Microsoft is to dominate the market and to consume.


That's true. A lot of people will feel the same way, which is of course valid. But those feelings are the same every time a new technology comes along to replace an older technology. And every time the company with the new technology does everything it can to get you to switch. And using "exclusives" is one of the most common ways to do that.
Yeah, exactly, and Nintendo have MANY exclusives, more than the other two, and making Twilight Princess a GameCube game won't make it any less exclusive, but it will make it more accessable to whoever owns a GameCube AND Revolution. And yes, Nintendo will want you to switch from the GameCube to the Revolution, but again, I say you're looking at TP as if it was a shining beacon of success where if Nintendo doesn't take advantage they will fail. It isn't, and as I keep saying, Nintendo already has a lineup of OTHER games to attract people to the Revolution. Yet still, you keep persisting that Nintendo will fail without Twilight Princess. And yet again, you're confusing Nintendo with the likes of Sony and Microsoft with those kinds of views. I'm sorry if I'm not interpreting you correctly, but this is how it looks to me.


Ironically, PC manufacturers do exactly the same thing. "If you want to play this game/use this software/do this thing, you need to be the newest video card/RAM/CPU/motherboard/harddrive to do it! Give us your money!"

If they really felt that in general making things backwards compatible to with older systems made more money in the long run, they would all be doing it. They know that isn't the most effective way. They want to see you more stuff, and they can't do that if you feel you have everything you need.

However, backwards compatibility can be used as an incentive to switch to their system and not the new XBox or PS. Microsoft seems to feel that the 360 is strong enough not to really need that so much...
And as I keep saying over and over, don't look at Nintendo as all these other companies.


But they are still in business to make money, right? I mean, they have shareholders and whatnot, and so are required by law to base decisions on the bottom line.

This is way to long a post. In the end, I'm not saying that Twilight Princess should or will be put out exclusively for the Revolution. I'm just saying that Nintendo may very well feel that doing so will make them the most money in the long run, and they may very well be right.
Don't make me repeat myself Prime, you so know what I'm going to say since I've said it so many times before already in this post :p


Ah ah. Not to correct you, but it's not my friends.

The freakin CEO/representative/president whatever has already expressed concern that Rev will not beat Sony.

Nintendo probably won't die out. But they need to do something. Revolution yes, is a step in the right direction, but we'll see how far that step takes them.
Don't worry, you didn't correct me, in fact you gave misleading information to try to prove your point. The "freakin CEO," Iwata-san, said that Nintendo won't be competing with Sony and Microsoft because those two companies have gone down a different path from Nintendo. He never expressed any concern about the Revolution not standing up to the PS3, in fact he said that the Revolution will please people who follow Nintendo and it will attract a new breed of gamers, and people who are non-gamers.

The general feeling that the Revolution won't beat the PS3 comes from the media. Sorry to correct you like this seeing as you seemed so sure of yourself :p


Once again, it's not general public opinion. Nintendo has expressed these concerns at several press conferences, either through small remarks or flat out statements.

I could probably look it up if you want. :/
You could look it up if you want so you could reread it and realise that Nintendo was expressing concern about the state of the gaming business, not if they were going to be able to hold up against their "competitors." They feel that Sony and Microsoft are leading gamers down a very destructive path and don't want anything to do with it which is why they are taking steps to create their own path.

Other articles have like one word things. For example: "while President ________ something something something, he did acknowledge that sales were down and that Nintendo was in a slump blah blah blah"
WOW! OMGWTF MEGATON!!!!111 Like no other company in the history of companies has had those concerns before! RUN FOR THE HILLS!
Sorry lol. But the quote you said was taken very much out of context to support your arguement. It was very much expected that things would slow down in this period. Take a look around but it's slowed down for Sony and Microsoft too. It was expected to.


That was a long post... any questions? I mean seriously people, I've laughed at many of these posts that have been posted, not because I'm trying to be mean, but because people have some very strange views about Nintendo and think of them as being just like Sony and Microsoft. I'm finally understanding why people are so frustrated with Nintendo now because of this.

Mike Windu
08-20-2005, 12:16 AM
WOW! OMGWTF MEGATON!!!!111 Like no other company in the history of companies has had those concerns before! RUN FOR THE HILLS!
Sorry lol. But the quote you said was taken very much out of context to support your arguement. It was very much expected that things would slow down in this period. Take a look around but it's slowed down for Sony and Microsoft too. It was expected to.

...

And once again, I say you're a liar. Nintendo has never shown sign of concern over anything, not even the failed VirtualBoy, which if it had overcome the technical flaws could have been a damn fine system.

Which one of you is correct? Neither, imo. That quote was not a direct quote, because I did not have my archive of GI magazines to flip through and find you a quote.

I also remember a Nintendo representative speaking about the DS... something like "If the DS doesn't sell then we're out of the market" or something to that effect.

Once again, you can find it.

I mean seriously people, I've laughed at many of these posts that have been posted, not because I'm trying to be mean, but because people have some very strange views about Nintendo and think of them as being just like Sony and Microsoft. I'm finally understanding why people are so frustrated with Nintendo now because of this.

Interestingly enough, I find your posts amusing (and the other fiery N advocates) because you all state that Nintendo is so unique amongst its competitors etc etc and we should love Nintendo for what it is etc etc and always does something different. It's all a bunch of justification to cover up the fact that Nintendo is not doing well in this console war. (Those of you who say that Nintendo is not involved in this console war, well... they are. :/ You put out a console. Someone else puts out a console. Compete for sales etc.

I'm all for independent thought, and I do like Nintendo, but numbers just don't add up.

If you're free and independent and you sell enough to get you in 2nd or 1st place, then I'm all for that.

edit: have been notified that those stats are inaccurate. nevertheless. Nintendo isn't in first place anymore :p

Like I said at the start of my post, you're looking at Nintendo as if they were Sony or Microsoft. I also love the fact that you're giving Nintendo advice on how they should proceed when in the end they've made more profit than Sony and obviously Microsoft. Nintendo ARE good at what they do, no they're GREAT at what they do. Their tactics confuse people a lot of the time because most of them don't understand it, which is very obvious to someone like me who watches everyone as they get frustrated with Nintendo. But in the end, Nintendo profit, they make tonnes of money, and even if they aren't seen as #1 in the public eye, from a business sense they are #1 because they make a MUCH larger profit than Sony when they seem to do so little compared to Sony.

Oh gosh Lynk. Please, please bring some knowledge and light to us heathens and pagans who have lived for so long without knowing the TRUTH! ...:/

Yeah, Nintendo has made a hell of a lot of profit. But they're not making profit like they used to now that there is something other than Sega Genesis competing against them. I would give advice to Nintendo if I was a consultant. Seeing as how I'm not, and how probably none of us are (if you are, congratulations; you're excluded from this generalization) I can only give my opinion of what is the best logical move for Nintendo to make.

The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures was an extremely cheap game to make, in fact it only cost a few hundred US dollars to make. It sold pretty badly compared to say, Halo 2. But it sold, and it made such a large profit relative to how much the game took to make. Pretty cool huh.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

WOW OMG I DID NOT KNOW THAT HOLY CRAP THANK YOU FOR ENLIGHTENING ME WOW I FEEL SO HONORED TO KNOW THAT PIECE OF INFORMATION.

It generated profit, but not as much as Nintendo/Miyamoto wanted. Which is a shame, cause I really like that guy.

"Biggest Dissappointment of all the games he's made:
The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventure (Gamecube) "It's such a great game and just not enough people played it, you know? I just wanted it to sell better."

From EGM #195

I love Miyamoto. I love his ideas. Four Swords Adventure was cool. Only reason imo that it didn't sell as much as, say... Halo 2. Is because it required use of the gba as a controller to get the full benefit. Why would people want to play a game that would not give them 100% access unless they bought a 70+ dollar gba + 5 dollar cord link?


And as I keep saying over and over, don't look at Nintendo as all these other companies.

Forgive us, but Nintendo is a gaming company. So is Sony's Playstation branch and Microsoft's XBOX branch. Therefore, Nintendo MUST be considered among those, no matter how free thinking and radical Nintendo may be.

(why do Nintendo threads always gather such huge debate? >_>)

Lynk Former
08-20-2005, 12:31 AM
I also remember a Nintendo representative speaking about the DS... something like "If the DS doesn't sell then we're out of the market" or something to that effect.
No Nintendo representative has ever said that Mike, but I have heard a lot of people in the media say that.


Interestingly enough, I find your posts amusing (and the other fiery N advocates) because you all state that Nintendo is so unique amongst its competitors etc etc and we should love Nintendo for what it is etc etc and always does something different. It's all a bunch of justification to cover up the fact that Nintendo is not doing well in this console war. (Those of you who say that Nintendo is not involved in this console war, well... they are. :/ You put out a console. Someone else puts out a console. Compete for sales etc.
I never stated that Nintendo is so unique amongst its competitors, all I'm saying is that Nintendo does its business differently than Microsoft and Sony and has different overall goals. Yes, Nintendo is part of the console war, they're just here to attract a different type of audience. Action movies and comedies are both movies, but they're not necessarily going to attract the same audience. Think about it.

Sales
Microsoft: $34.27 billion
Nintendo: $4.26 billion
Sony: $63.23 billion

Profits
Microsoft: $8.88 billion
Nintendo: $0.57 billion
Sony: $0.98 billion

Assets
Microsoft: $85.94 billion
Nintendo: $9.06 billion
Sony: $68.04 billion

Market Value
Microsoft: $287.02 billion
Nintendo: $12.80 billion
Sony: $38.00 billion


* the following taken from forbes.com

Electronic Arts
Sales: $2.82 billion
Profits: $0.50 billion
Assets: $3.34 billion
Market Value: $13.28 billion

EA is comparable in size to Nintendo.



Oh gosh Lynk. Please, please bring some knowledge and light to us heathens and pagans who have lived for so long without knowing the TRUTH! ...:/
Whoops, you made a bit of a mistake their, forbes listed Sony and Microsoft as a whole, not by their gaming divisions. And just because they overall make more money than Nintendo doesn't mean 100% of their earnings go into one division.

Yeah, Nintendo has made a hell of a lot of profit. But they're not making profit like they used to now that there is something other than Sega Genesis competing against them. I would give advice to Nintendo if I was a consultant. Seeing as how I'm not, and how probably none of us are (if you are, congratulations; you're excluded from this generalization) I can only give my opinion of what is the best logical move for Nintendo to make.
Read what I said above.



I don't need to say anymore than that.

Mike Windu
08-20-2005, 12:52 AM
No Nintendo representative has ever said that Mike, but I have heard a lot of people in the media say that.

I promise you, someone did.

It was in a GI issue I believe.

Lynk Former
08-20-2005, 12:59 AM
Sorry they didn't ;)

Mike Windu
08-20-2005, 01:05 AM
How many GI issues have you read? :p

And from the statement that you are not a GI suscriber (from our lovely msn chat :p) I can assume that you would not have read the article where someone from Nintendo says that. XD

Lynk Former
08-20-2005, 01:12 AM
You're saying that a Nintendo rep expressed concern. How is that different from any other company expressing some concern over their product? Sony did just before the release of the PSP, Microsoft did before the release of the Xbox... etc and etc.

Astrotoy7
08-20-2005, 01:23 AM
Lynk, your points are very clear, and those forbes numbers were very interesting.

Ive stayed quiet when you're attitude was directed towards me, but even as others try to make a comment, I think you're being condescending in alot of what you say. So what, people may not be entirely 100% aware of Nintendo's successes and strategies as you are. Its almost as if no one can post an *opinion* about Nintendo without you being there to pick it apart.

You are an unrelenting Nintendo propagandist.

I personally like Nintendo's products, as I have said I have a GC, a GBA and even a Game & watch Donkey Kong II - which Ive had since I was a kid :) This does not mean that I will spend every post I have writing the wrongs of peoples opinions about the gaming Co. I wouldnt do this for sony, or MS or damn anyone. Its just sad.

Plus the implication is there that I am a child and know nothing about the gaming industry.

yes, thats the vibe Im getting from Lynk in alot of what he's saying here. I wish he could share the knowledge he does have without those undertones.

*tries to remember a time when console theads were fun*

mtfbwya

Lynk Former
08-20-2005, 01:35 AM
Ive stayed quiet when you're attitude was directed towards me, but even as others try to make a comment, I think you're being condescending in alot of what you say. So what, people may not be entirely 100% aware of Nintendo's successes and strategies as you are. Its almost as if no one can post an *opinion* about Nintendo without you being there to pick it apart.
If you haven't already noticed Astro, but each individual is acting the same way towards eachother. The view you have of me stems from our rocky past where you and I have clashed many times. Yes, there is a much debating going on and I know that people aren't aware of many things, and I know that I am not aware of many things. But I am stating my opinion as are others. Whether it sounds condescending or not come from a point of view. Which in your case leans in a certain direction because of our previous encounters.

That being said, I attack the arguements but never the person. I'm actually have a lot of fun with this because what Prime and Mike are both saying are very good points and it's fun to counter them.


You are an unrelenting Nintendo propagandist.
Maybe, or maybe I'm just having fun debating about something.

I personally like Nintendo's products, as I have said I have a GC, a GBA and even a Game & watch Donkey Kong II - which Ive had since I was a kid :) This does not mean that I will spend every post I have writing the wrongs of peoples opinions about the gaming Co. I wouldnt do this for sony, or MS or damn anyone. Its just sad.
Good for you.


yes, thats the vibe Im getting from Lynk in alot of what he's saying here. I wish he could share the knowledge he does have without those undertones.
Again Astro, you're coming at me this way because of old arguements we've had in the past.


*tries to remember a time when console theads were fun*
If you're not enjoying it then you don't have to take part in it.

Prime
08-20-2005, 01:41 AM
If Doom 1 and 2 can be sold in this day and age I think people will buy Twilight Princess by the truckloads eventhough it may be a GameCube game. But that has nothing to do with my point. I'm not doubting or commenting on the ability of the game to sell.

Like I said at the start of my post, you're looking at Nintendo as if they were Sony or Microsoft. I also love the fact that you're giving Nintendo advice on how they should proceed when in the end they've made more profit than Sony and obviously Microsoft. I am not given them advice of any sort. I was only pointing out that it is a very common business tactic to encourage customers to switch to new technology by offering exclusive content. And that was in response to the comments saying that it would be foolish for a company to not make that content available to older platforms. The fact is it is not foolish, and in fact is done all the time. that is where my comment ends. I was using TF and the Revolution as a hypothetical example since that is what the thread is about.

Nintendo ARE good at what they do, no they're GREAT at what they do. Sure they are. A lot of companies are. Companies can take pride in what they produce. But if what they create is quality and doesn't sell, they will stop doing it because they are obligated to.

Actually generating money in any sense isn't absolute, it's extremely relative. Just because a game is sold cheaper than other games doesn't mean it won't generate as much revenue. It may be the case where Twilight Princess was cheaper to create, sold MANY units and generated a TONNE of cash compared to a nextgen game of the same calibur. That may be true. And if it turns out that releasing TF on both consoles will generate the most money in the long run, that is what Nintendo will do. If making it exclusive to the Revolution will make them the most money in the long run, they should do that instead. Doesn't make them bad.

Now I know what everyone is going to say now "oh no Nintendo have lost, etc, etc, too late in the game, blah blah, they're gonna fail." If you think that then you should reread my comments about how little people understand Nintendo and their great success. I've not making any comment on the console wars or how Nontendo will fair. At least at this time :D

You don't know that for a fact though do you seeing as you haven't managed a successful billion dollar company... But we do know that for a fact. That is because Nintendo is legal obligated to the shareholders to do so. And since I do work for a publicly traded company, I know that the bottom line is what matters, because that is how we are legally required to operate. That is in part why publicly traded companies need to file quarterly financial reports to the exchanges.

If it was discovered that the CEO and executives of Nintendo were running the company without the bottom line being the #1 priority, then the board of govenors (as the representatives of the shareholders who have invested in this publicly traded comapny) would then be obligated to remove the CEO and executives from their positions. There would also be investigations by whatever stock exchanges Nintendo trades on due to the negligence of the executive. The shareholders would also then have the right to take legal action against Nintendo for misuse of their investment capital.

who everyone seems to doubt but makes bucket loads of money anyway. I know they make lots of money. I wasn't commenting on their financial situation, only on how they are responsible to their shareholders.

I do agree that Nintendo could make more money, and yes, seeing as it is a business people think that should be their only goal in these matters. But if it was then they would be just like Sony or Microsoft. And as I keep saying, Nintendo are NOT like Sony and Microsoft. Ah, but that is not the difference between Nintendo and Microsoft/Sony. Since they are all publicly traded companies, they are all legal obligated to their shareholders to make the most money possible. The difference between Nintendo and say Microsoft is that Nintendu seems to follow the legal rules and guidelines of business practices and work within the law as a whole. Microsoft on the otherhand attempts to bend and even break the law to gain an advantage.

Having the bottom line be the top priority to not mean a company like Nintendo won't make good products that the customers will want and enjoy. Developing quality products is usually the best way to to make money.

Despite their great profits, Nintendo is committed to furthering gaming through their own unique ways. The goal of Sony and Microsoft is to dominate the market and to consume. Well, that may be their mantra, and most companies have something like it. And they may be working towards that. My company does the same thing. But make no mistake, they do what they do because it think it will make them the most money. They are not doing it because they are "swell guys." :) But it doesn't make the company or the people who work for it evil.

Yeah, exactly, and Nintendo have MANY exclusives, more than the other two, and making Twilight Princess a GameCube game won't make it any less exclusive, but it will make it more accessable to whoever owns a GameCube AND Revolution. And yes, Nintendo will want you to switch from the GameCube to the Revolution, but again, I say you're looking at TP as if it was a shining beacon of success where if Nintendo doesn't take advantage they will fail. I haven't been commenting on whether Nintendo should make TF exclusive to the Revolution or not. I was only using it as a hypothetical example. They should do what will make them the most money.

It isn't, and as I keep saying, Nintendo already has a lineup of OTHER games to attract people to the Revolution. Yet still, you keep persisting that Nintendo will fail without Twilight Princess. And yet again, you're confusing Nintendo with the likes of Sony and Microsoft with those kinds of views. I'm sorry if I'm not interpreting you correctly, but this is how it looks to me. I'm sure the Revolution will have all sorts of good games. I'm not talking about that. And while I agree that Nintendo probably follows better business practices than Microsoft, they are in fact the same in their legal obligations because they are all publicly traded companies.

And as I keep saying over and over, don't look at Nintendo as all these other companies.They may be "better citizens" of the business world, but they are the same in a legal and shareholder sense.

Don't make me repeat myself Prime, you so know what I'm going to say since I've said it so many times before already in this post :p Same here :p

El Sitherino
08-20-2005, 01:43 AM
Hmm... not exactly "woe is me, we're being outmatched by another company" concern. Not even concern, it's standard business practice. Your sales slump you make cuts. It's really nothing to be concerned about. Unless they outright say they're generally concerned I see no reason to believe they're concerned. And mike, if nintendo really said that I'm sure we'd hear it constantly from the anti-nintendo guys. But we haven't therefore I highly doubt anything of the like was ever said.

Astrotoy7
08-20-2005, 02:07 AM
heh... those epic "clashes in the past" you are referring to, you make us sound like superheroes battling for good and/or evil ... :D

If you're not enjoying it then you don't have to take part in it.

now *that* is a good idea !!

*recedes into shadows*

mtfbwya

Lynk Former
08-20-2005, 02:20 AM
Alright, after much discussion in this thread and finally over MSN, Mike, Prime and I have finally come to up with what we agree upon and what we do not agree upon.


We all agree that Twilight Princess, as would any other game being released in this transitional period between generations, would have the portential to boost Revolution sales.
We all agree that Nintendo has an obligation to make a maximum amount of profit from Twilight Princess.
However we disagree about the way this is done. One side says that TP has more portential for long term profit if it were a Revolution game to attract more people into buying a Revolution. The other says that it has a better chance as a GameCube game due to accessability to a larger more established audience.
We do agree that either way, the persons involved in the debate all do not have the full facts to be able to determine if what they are saying has any weight over the others arguement. All is based on speculation.



Agreed? Anything else anyone wish to add before I close this thread once and for all?

Prime
08-20-2005, 02:22 AM
I'd like a cookie for all my hard work here.

Mike Windu
08-20-2005, 02:25 AM
Indeed.

Nice work us. :p

Lynk Former
08-20-2005, 02:29 AM
*gives everyone a cookie each*

It was fun debating about all of this, and despite Astro trying to demonise me, we all got agressive, I did feel that my "opponents" were aggressive with their points but I expected that to happen.

In the end, we all had fun and came to an understanding.

*group hug*