You guys consistatntly miss a big point in the DS's success that isn't there for the Revolution. Developer support. When you are the market leader by far and wide and have been that way for a long time you have a good deal of developer trust and thus can try something like . But in the situation Nintendo is in in the Console market it doesn't have the support and making a quirky controller may do more to erode that support then to add to it.
Could revolution actually be the number 1 console next gen?
- Thread starter basanti
- Start date
The standard controller shell might come with it though. Also, it's apparantly cheapest to develop for revolution and I can't imagine the first releases on it being as plain as what the DS had right after launch so that should motivate developers to try at least one original game.Xenus said:
Can Nintendo be #1 in a market of gamers? You guys are right on this point, no, they can not.
Can Nintendo expand the market and bring in new players who are not gamers? I have no idea. If they do, however, they could easily sell the most number of consoles.
I do remember back when Playstation was on the market and the N64 was soon to be released at $250. Being $50 more expensive than the Playstation was going to be the nail in Nintendo's coffin. Or so said the rabid fans in usenet groups. That's one whole game! Now the same argument, for a different side, is invalid.
Can Nintendo expand the market and bring in new players who are not gamers? I have no idea. If they do, however, they could easily sell the most number of consoles.
I do remember back when Playstation was on the market and the N64 was soon to be released at $250. Being $50 more expensive than the Playstation was going to be the nail in Nintendo's coffin. Or so said the rabid fans in usenet groups. That's one whole game! Now the same argument, for a different side, is invalid.
standing ovation
Regular
basanti said:
I doubt Nintendo's Revolution will be the number one console.
Considering how people watch TV and play videogames -- on their stomachs, backs, or slouched in a chair -- the controller barely seems viable, as its wielder would have to sit up (or stand up) in order to see the screen while flailing their arms.
Nevertheless, Nintendo has a promising prospectus.
With a (relatively) tiny investment and a cult following, Super Mario & Co. isn't likely to lose money -- a sobering reality for its heavily vested competitors.
Nothing has been shown that will preclude gamers from playing the way they already do. The TGS video was showy, with guys jumping behind chairs and hacking away with the controller. The remote, according to Nintendo, is very sensitive. In actuality you'd probably rest the thing on your knee and make very small movements to play a game, not fling the thing across the room. If the game is one that you're supposed to interact with, like a golf game, I can see people complaining, mainly because their crappy real life golf swing will translate into a crappy virtual golf swing...standing ovation said:Considering how people watch TV and play videogames -- on their stomachs, backs, or slouched in a chair -- the controller barely seems viable, as its wielder would have to sit up (or stand up) in order to see the screen while flailing their arms.
Not a chance in the world.
No Hi-Def is going to kill nintendo in the end.
Controller and hardware that is behind everyone else is going to scare away major 3rd pary support.
Nintendo itself will not properly back revolution through it's entire life to establish it as #1, nintendo's last two consoles had their lives cut short because nintendo cut their lives shorts after they were failures.
No Hi-Def is going to kill nintendo in the end.
Controller and hardware that is behind everyone else is going to scare away major 3rd pary support.
Nintendo itself will not properly back revolution through it's entire life to establish it as #1, nintendo's last two consoles had their lives cut short because nintendo cut their lives shorts after they were failures.
Xenus said:
Seems like every time I turn around, yet another 3rd-party developer is announcing support for Revolution. Do actually follow the news, or are you just making the simple assumption that Rev support will merely be a continuation of end-of-lifespan GC support?
"3rd-party developer is announcing support for Revolution"
We heard that with the GC to, until Nintendo actually follows through and delviers a succesfull console with comeptetive 3rd party support they are going to be behind the 8 ball and not considered a contendor. There support has failed with their last two consoles and the revoultion is technically handicapped right out of the gates with no hi-def support. At least the GC was decent hardware but that still didn't save it.
The main issues with a nintendo console is NINTENDO!!, they simply refuse to learn from their mistakes, repeating them over and over again, they isolate and make it difficult for 3rd party vendors, if it's not cartridges it's a small disc format or this gen it will b a funky controller with hardware that is not comparable or as powerfull as PS3 or 360 and no Hi-Def.
If Nintendo actually wants to be #1 they need to put out a competitive product and actually support it through it's life span instead of bailing on it and only proudcing 1 or 2 quality titles for it a year.
Nintendo is a stubborn and short sighted company that thinks it can just coast on Old name brands and a trickle of games.
We heard that with the GC to, until Nintendo actually follows through and delviers a succesfull console with comeptetive 3rd party support they are going to be behind the 8 ball and not considered a contendor. There support has failed with their last two consoles and the revoultion is technically handicapped right out of the gates with no hi-def support. At least the GC was decent hardware but that still didn't save it.
The main issues with a nintendo console is NINTENDO!!, they simply refuse to learn from their mistakes, repeating them over and over again, they isolate and make it difficult for 3rd party vendors, if it's not cartridges it's a small disc format or this gen it will b a funky controller with hardware that is not comparable or as powerfull as PS3 or 360 and no Hi-Def.
If Nintendo actually wants to be #1 they need to put out a competitive product and actually support it through it's life span instead of bailing on it and only proudcing 1 or 2 quality titles for it a year.
Nintendo is a stubborn and short sighted company that thinks it can just coast on Old name brands and a trickle of games.
Most 'announcements' have been independant developer studios announcing 'Revolution' titles that'll never come to fruition.fearsomepirate said:
Most major publishers have said they'll support it in limited capacity and all evidence support this. A full list can be seen Here. Tiny compared to the other systems.
The list of announced titles (even/especially if you count untitled projects) is even more laughable. Its a fraction of PS3/360.
It is very, very fair to say that third-party support of Revolution is looking pretty sketchy at this stage.
How many games/publishers do you know for XB/PS before the E305 (less than you already know fr Rev)?
How many are working at full capacitity to PS3 or XB360 (ie all the titles or lots of exclussives)?
Some major publisher has at least one exclussive game (EA and that is rare) and everyone is working on Rev (do you realise that they shiped 1000+ dev kits that means that there are companys asking and some not even have their yet, like Epic and small companys).
There is a lot of guys that are interested just follow the news look at this, I am quite sure that this mean that as long as Rev is capable of runing the game it will appear on it, and that for a FPS fan may be a big bomb.
How many are working at full capacitity to PS3 or XB360 (ie all the titles or lots of exclussives)?
Some major publisher has at least one exclussive game (EA and that is rare) and everyone is working on Rev (do you realise that they shiped 1000+ dev kits that means that there are companys asking and some not even have their yet, like Epic and small companys).
There is a lot of guys that are interested just follow the news look at this, I am quite sure that this mean that as long as Rev is capable of runing the game it will appear on it, and that for a FPS fan may be a big bomb.
How was it relevant then? The X360, PS3 and Revolution were all unveiled at last E3.pc999 said:
PS3 has alot of third-party published exclusives announced and MS is publishing games from third-party developers (ie. exclusives).pc999 said:
EA is making an exclusive? Cool, havent heard. They made a couple on PS2 and one or two on the Xbox.pc999 said:
They've indicated already it isn't there focus, however.
There are what, 4000 PS3 devkits (2 months ago, more now) and even more X360. Its hardly indicative of anything.pc999 said:
Shock. That has to translate to games.pc999 said:
I'm sure commercial viability is a greater factor.pc999 said:
Nicked said:
To make a valid comparition.
Yes I remember, at the time people said a lot: F*** KZ and the 2Tflops, just look at the PS3 case it is just beatifull....
They are more advanced, plus if it is as easy as it is said to work on Rev they can start much latter than they ned with those two.
2 in 5 years to 1 before lauch, IMO that is a good indicative,
And they started shiping about 6 mouths before Rev ones IIRC.
That is just a eg, anyway, there is a big possiblity.
There is a lot of people that is very interested in Rev, I am sure many more will be if it as good specs. And once that Rev should be the best for FPS ...
People declare it dead, but it is very active for a dead company.
Last edited by a moderator:
Powderkeg said:
Most people are likely to buy a Revolution as a 2nd machine than an Xbox360 or PS3. Add to that the people who will buy Revolution as a 1st machine and you're looking at a lot of Revolutions. PS3 and Xbox360 will mostly be 1st machines without the benefit of being a 2nd machine.
standing ovation
Regular
OtakingGX said:
A successful interface is not only ergonomic and precise, but follows the path of least effort. It's a Couch Potato law.
pc999 said:
You don't see a reason for that happening? You don't see why people will spend far more money on non-Nintendo consoles?
Let me help you to see then....
Elder Scrolls and Final Fantasy are the pinnacle of the RPG genre. System sellers both. What does Nintendo have to compete with them?
Gran Turismo 3 was the 4th best selling console game and the best selling console racing sim in history. 11+ million copies sold. What does Nintendo have to compete to compete with it?
The Halo franchise is the best selling FPS franchise in history. What does Nintendo have to compete with it?
Grand Theft Auto was the best selling franchise last gen. What does Nintendo have to compete with it?
Maybe the reason for people to continue spending more money on other consoles is a little easier for you to see now?
NANOTEC said:
That's relies on some seriously flimsy math.
In all honesty, what percentage of Xbox 360 and PS3 owners do you think will buy a Revolution? 10%? Maybe 20% max?
I'd be willing to bet you'll find far more PC gamers who buy a 360 than you will 360 owners who buy a Revolution.
Powderkeg said:
I'd say more than people who bought GC as a 2nd machine. Next generation Nintendo will likely sell more Revolutions than GCs. This is obvious because Revolution simply has more going for it ie sexy design and innovative controller and good 3rd party support. Revolution is in a better position than GC as a 2nd machine because it offers something different vs GC which didn't offer anything different from Xbox or PS2. Revolution is also launching the same time as PS3 and not 18 months late like GC. It looks like SONY will lose some marketshare to MS and Nintendo next generation.
Fire Emblem? It's still relatively unknown in the US, but popular in Japan. Or Zelda, it's more action oriented, but it's a fantastically popular RPG.Powderkeg said:
Mario Kart? Double Dash sold worse than Super and 64 and still managed 8 million.
Isn't this a bit of a hyperbole? I can't imagine Halo and Halo 2 having outsold all the various incarnations of Doom, Half-Life, or Unreal.
Nothing. And I think they like it that way.
You can make counter-arguments with other selected examples: Super Mario Bros. sold 40+ million copies and Pokemon (in its various flavors) has sold 125+ million.
It is about the games. Each company has its own set of exclusives to lure fans in to buy their hardware. I think the reason people will spend far more money on non-Nintendo consoles this next gen is due to the fact that they'll cost more. The non-gamer market is huge, and reaching out to them could reap great rewards. It's good that there's still a small company in the business, one that can take risks and move laterally instead of just forward.
People complaining that Nintendo doesn't release a lot of games need to know why. Nintendo releases their games far and between because they want the 3rd party dev to release games between that time frame, because anything with mario on a nintendo console outsells any other game available. That is a big reason nintendo waits a few months before releasing. They admitted this themselves a while back. They released tons of first party games for n64 so much so that people didnt bother with 3rd party games as much because they paled in comparison to the big N games. Infact it was a big complaint of other devs, the gamecube was a 2nd console for most because most owners of gc owned it for the nintendo games not for the 3rd party support. Thats why 3rd party games dont sell as much as they do on xbox or ps2. If 3rd party games want to make money on a nintendo platform they need a good reason why a customer should buy it and you know what nintendo just gave them (the devs) a silver platter, the controller. The controller makes it so that devs can make variety of games for the rev (just like the ds), different and a good reason to buy their games on the rev, be it good controls or just different gameplay.
Similar threads
