Eidos: Bye bye GC, you won't be missed

[Vince]

A bunch of PR nonsense to make angst filled teenagers less insecure about their purchase.

Thats a load of crap. MS told people their strategy to keep investers and retailers happy with what thier plan is. They are living up to it (which is why they wanted to purchase rare and develop more platformers for release late this year and next year). You have a very warped vision is you think this in some way helps teenagers feel anything.

Ouch! Reality hurts.

 

[Qroach]

It sure does. Did you see his reponse to my saying that?

M$ told a bunch of crap to anyone who bothered paying attention.

that cracks me up. He thinks he's even carrying on a argument, but what he's doing is just raising the signal to noise ratio on the board.

So far to recap

1. 3rd party games don't sell well on the gamecube
2. retail buyers pick up half as many gamecube units as they do XBox (which is way less than PS2).
3. When retailers pick up less units, publishers sell less games, and this makes it difficult for developers to justify supporting the platform.

It's not about some secret plan, bias, or the fact the publishers don't make good titles... I said it before gamecube came out and I'll say it again.

a) It was targeted towars a younger demographic from launch
b) Nintendo fans buy nintendo platforms for nintendo's games.
c) gamecube didn't cover all the genres that older gamers like.
d) Nintendo failed to attract the titles they needed to reach out to older gamers.

Despite all the people that didn't beleive that and still don't, it's the truth.

 

[Heretic]

He thinks he's even carrying on a argument, but what he's doing is just raising the signal to noise ratio on the board

Exactly. I couldn't agree more

cybamerc=signal
Qroach=noise

give it a rest

 

[GHost]

First post here.. just trying to bring the thread back to Eidos parting, and if N is in trouble..... and share how much i like my GC (with a reason)

1. talk about money
- if one was to invest in a console it is GC that does bring money, more, and faster, right NOW (no evidence, please someone put the numbers here if you have it).
conclusion: N is not in trouble at all

2. talk about games
- won't start enumerating now, I'll just mention that I've got my GC since end of March 2003, and still have to CATCH UP with OLD AAA titles, not to mention the list of upcoming once...... man I just can't find the time to read a book. Consider it a personal opinion, but one would hardly find a GC owner with another opinion ..... i think? anyone on this board?
conclusion: N is not in trouble at all

3. future titles
- again, I won't start the list (US-releases), it's more than enough of console selling titles.. Is there a GC-owner that's not happy with what's coming? please reply! otherwise...
conclusion: N is not in trouble at all

4. next gen
- well about this one I don't know it's still all hype and..... well, hype. please someone else put something here but having in mind how successful actually for me GC is, i think I'll be getting the next one too.


conclusion (as all non-XB-fanboys, here have already said): bye bye Eidos, we won't miss you.


cheers,
kfet

PS. to all the XB fanboys: why all the spitting at the Cube? do you own one? what is it that you don't like about it? that's insane, you're brain-washed by a marketing CAMPAIGN... that's SO obvious... don't you have a mind of your own? use it! please!

Edit: sorry, non-native english, confused by the spell-checker

 

[jandar]

So far to recap

1. 3rd party games don't sell well on the gamecube
2. retail buyers pick up half as many gamecube units as they do XBox (which is way less than PS2).
3. When retailers pick up less units, publishers sell less games, and this makes it difficult for developers to justify supporting the platform.

It's not about some secret plan, bias, or the fact the publishers don't make good titles... I said it before gamecube came out and I'll say it again.

a) It was targeted towars a younger demographic from launch
b) Nintendo fans buy nintendo platforms for nintendo's games.
c) gamecube didn't cover all the genres that older gamers like.
d) Nintendo failed to attract the titles they needed to reach out to older gamers.

Despite all the people that didn't beleive that and still don't, it's the truth.

1. agree
2. let's see some exact numbers before posting this
3. agree

a. XBox & PS2 were targeted for an older audience and is now working on it's younger market. Vice Versa for GC
b. a lot buy games for GC they like, whether it be nintendo or not
c. XBox & PS2 (at launch) didnt cover all genres either. Roundabout arguement.
d. XBox is still trying to get the younger crowd here.


anything can be twisted the way you want to see it QRoach. the bottom line: Nintendo needs to do more (and knows this and is working on this) and yet they still are the most profitable of the 3.

 

[function]

I'm a bit late to the party, but I'll just put down a few of my thoughts on this whole matter.

It's not the job of third parties to take risks, going against what their market analysis is telling them, to try and expand the user base of Nintendo's console for Nintendo's benefit. When they think that from day one investing in certain titles for another console can make them more money, their only obligation is to go with that other console.

If Nintendo want a large number of users across all ranges of the age spectrum, interested in all the major types of games, it's Nintendo's job to make the games that will attract them, or obtain titles from third parties that can do it for them. And Nintendo's efforts in this regard look weak compared to those of Sony and Microsoft.

Whether the Gamecube is predominantly used by kids, and whether the general gaming public (and developers/retailers) *see it* as a console predominantly for kids are two separate questions.

I can't say with certainty about the former, but I think the latter is probably true.

Nintendo fans will probably be happy with whatever happens in terms of 3rd party support, but the thing is that there seem to be fewer and fewer Nintendo fans each generation (or at least those willing to choose whatever Nintendo give them over all other possibilities). The more choice that you can offer customers the better, and the more customers you're likely to attract. And that's why third party support is important.

GC has lacked the kind of success that Nintendo were banking on, and it wouldn't surprise me to see them pull it early (Nintendo were originally talking about a 5 or more year lifespan) and shift development to their next machine. If they want to seriously compete against the Xbox 2 (let alone the PS3) they need to seriously work on getting a balanced range of quality titles from 3rd parties, even if it means spending some of their billions.

And the more developers they lose with the GC, the harder they're going to have to work to get them back.

The Gamecube is having difficulties, and it’s down to Nintendo. It’s not “all liesâ€￾ spread by people who have been brainwashed by Xbox marketing (why Xbox in particular I don’t know).

 

[function]

anything can be twisted the way you want to see it QRoach. the bottom line: Nintendo needs to do more (and knows this and is working on this) and yet they still are the most profitable of the 3.

GC is making more money than PS2? Despite Sony's higher R&D and initial loss on hardware I'd thought it was the other way round. Not saying you're wrong, just that I find this highly suprising.

[Edited for clarity]

 

[Qroach]

Hi Jandar,

1. agree
2. let's see some exact numbers before posting this
3. agree

Regarding number 2, you'll never see anything printed on the net about it. It's the type of thing publishers deal with on a daily basis. Just like you wouldn't find a confirmation on how EB wants to get out of PC games, only takes first to market orders on most new games, and usually restocks well know PC franchises.

What I said is the kind of thing you can choose to beleive or not, I'm certainly not going to make somehting like this up. Although there's some here that are so blinded, they won't listen to a word you say even when you are correct.

a. XBox & PS2 were targeted for an older audience and is now working on it's younger market. Vice Versa for GC

That's correct.

b. a lot buy games for GC they like, whether it be nintendo or not

Unfortunately, on the gamecube that really hasn't been the case... there's 4 companies that have had some sucessfull titles. Capcom, Sega, lucasarts, and of course nintendo. I don't think there's too many people working in games that would disagree that peopel tha tbuy gamecube mostly buy it for nintendo's games first while typically sticking with that formula. I bought a gamecube for nitnendo's games as well.

c. XBox & PS2 (at launch) didnt cover all genres either. Roundabout arguement.

Well, I would say tha they did a better job of covering the genres...
d. XBox is still trying to get the younger crowd here.

anything can be twisted the way you want to see it QRoach.

That's the thing, why would I want to twist anything? It doesn't change anything at all. All I've been doing is saying what has and is happeneing.

 

[Qroach]

Well said function. You'll still get a bunch of fans jumping down your throat for saying that, but what you wrote hit the nail on the head.

 

[function]

Cheers Qroach.

I figure there may be some strong disagreement, but it's a pretty civil board so that's okay.

 

[Heretic]

focus people!

Eidos holds a press conference to say:

We are no longer bleeding cash
Laura Croft ain't the only bitch in our stable
Nintendo sucks, we're through with ‘em

Given the above scenerio along with two consoles that are tied in sales, of which one is making a profit, the other (xbox, duh) will likely never see a single dime in the black this gen and the debate gets highjacked droning on for thousands of words about how and why Nintendo is doing so poorly? I don't think so

1. 3rd party games don't sell well on the gamecube

correction: shitty 3rd party games don't sell well on GC

2. retail buyers pick up half as many gamecube units as they do XBox (which is way less than PS2).

Says you mister big time industry insider with no proof. Do you know if any payola is involved? Would you say so if there was?

3. When retailers pick up less units, publishers sell less games, and this makes it difficult for developers to justify supporting the platform.

Yes the sky is blue, unless its very cloudy. Thank you for the insight

It's not about some secret plan, bias, or the fact the publishers don't make good titles... I said it before gamecube came out and I'll say it again.

Or in other words 'Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain Dorthy, I am a prophet and an insider, listen to me'

a) It was targeted towars a younger demographic from launch
b) Nintendo fans buy nintendo platforms for nintendo's games.
c) gamecube didn't cover all the genres that older gamers like.
d) Nintendo failed to attract the titles they needed to reach out to older gamers.

Despite all the people that didn't beleive that and still don't, it's the truth.

Half truths would be more accurate. The truth is Edios never gave GC much support to begin with and have pulled enough big boners of their own to warrant the skunk eye with this press release more than Nintendo.

 

[LisaJoy]

anything can be twisted the way you want to see it QRoach. the bottom line: Nintendo needs to do more (and knows this and is working on this) and yet they still are the most profitable of the 3.

GC is making more money than PS2? Despite Sony's higher R&D and initial loss on hardware I'd thought it was the other way round. Not saying you're wrong, just that I find this highly suprising.

[Edited for clarity]

in the last NPD release Nintendo was #2 behind EAgames, not only are they make more money than Sony, it was by a very large margin.
for a company in trouble, they sure are rolling naked in the money.

 

[CeiserSöze]

Great post, function. I consider myself a Nintendo fan and I agree on every point you made (so no bashing from me ). Although Nintendo is still doing very well the company can't afford to lose additional marketshare with every generation.

Still I don't see Nintendo going the way of Sega and the GCN the way of the DC. Nintendo isn't stupid and not so stubborn anymore too (pig-headed Yamauchi isn't in charge anymore ) and Iwata has probably realized that he has to change some things to remain competitive in the future (he even said so at E3). I don't expect to see the effects of these changes this gen though. First Nintendo has to rebuild a lot of bridges which were burnt during the N64-era ("F*ck off Square and f*ck off all you 3rd parties altogether!") and I think that's what they're focusing on during this gen. Eidos is irrelevant for that matter. If Nintendo manages to reverse the current trend with its next gen, they'll be back. And Acclaim and all the other smaller publishers which have scaled back Cube development too btw. Instead Nintendo seems to be aiming directly at the bigwigs of the industry: Kojima, Wright (and EA in general), Mikami, the people at Sega/Amuesement Vision, Namco/Monolith, the Square-reconciliation etc. These are (some of) the people / publishers that matter. And these aren't one-time deals, instead Nintendo plans to grow these collaborations into stable long-term relationships. Denis Dyack has hinted at it in a recent interview, Mikami and the guys at Amusement Vision both said that they want to continue working with Nintendo etc. If Nintendo succeeds in doing this, I don't have any doubts that Nintendo will do fine in the years to come.

 

[wazoo]

Instead Nintendo seems to be aiming directly at the bigwigs of the industry: Kojima, Wright (and EA in general), Mikami, the people at Sega/Amuesement Vision, Namco/Monolith, the Square-reconciliation etc. These are (some of) the people / publishers that matter.

These are also the most likely to be still alive when the next generation will start, unlike Eidos, which was build around the success of the now-dead Tomb Raider franchise.

 

[Qroach]

Heretic, your respons was so lame that I'm not going to bother with you. You're goggles areglued on tight...

 

[Magnum PI]

i think nintendo has neglected some factor for the GC sales.

retailers earns next to no money when they sell the gamecube, while they do more when selling PS2 or xbox.

retailers (who are not stupid) use their best selling space/shelves (?) for the more profitable stuff., and will tend to advice the consumers to buy it.
(more people that you think would let the retailer choose their console for them, as these ppl can be very persuasive)

so maybe it would help if nintendo could sacrifice more of their margins to the retailers. they need the retailers on their side.

 

[Heretic]

Heretic, your respons was so lame that I'm not going to bother with you. You're goggles areglued on tight...

You devote ten thousand words to noise in this thread alone and mine are too lame to bother with

good one

 

[Fox5]

anything can be twisted the way you want to see it QRoach. the bottom line: Nintendo needs to do more (and knows this and is working on this) and yet they still are the most profitable of the 3.

GC is making more money than PS2? Despite Sony's higher R&D and initial loss on hardware I'd thought it was the other way round. Not saying you're wrong, just that I find this highly suprising.

[Edited for clarity]

I doubt Gamecube is making more money than ps2, but gamecube and gba combined are. However, gamecube probably is doing better in a ratio of consoles sold to money brought in.

Lisajoy- Those numbers listed were only for games the company sold, not royalties and money made off systems and accesories. Besides, nintendo being behind EA is pretty bad, since they were crushing EA during the N64 days, even during its waning days.(I assume the numbers are including gba, I guess nintendo just lost a lot when they went from every game they sold being a multimillion seller to being lucky to make a million, whereas EA releases games on 4 systems with many at least approaching a million sold)

 

[wazoo]

Lisajoy- Those numbers listed were only for games the company sold, not royalties and money made off systems and accesories. Besides, nintendo being behind EA is pretty bad, since they were crushing EA during the N64 days, even during its waning days.(I assume the numbers are including gba, I guess nintendo just lost a lot when they went from every game they sold being a multimillion seller to being lucky to make a million, whereas EA releases games on 4 systems with many at least approaching a million sold)

You are a bit exagerating, I think. Nintendo was no1 and sold 22M software last year in Japan alone (how much EA did there ?). Worldwide both companies should be quite close.

 

[Fox5]

During the n64 days, I think it was said nintendo was selling about 40-60% of all software, with EA at like 20%.(it included gameboy of course) While I don't think EA is over 30% by now, nintendo has dropped quite a bit, with many smaller companies taking up percentage points whereas before like 5 companies made up 98% of all sales.