Is Gamecube in peril?

R&C might be a good game, but IMO the SMS camera walks all over R&C's..

Considering that's been the most consistent complaint about SMS.. well.. sheesh.

Johnny: Personally, I disregard your opinion on anything Nintendo since it clashes too much with mine. Yeah, sure you own the GCN and its big games.. but you've expressed a lot of disgust about each one with the exception of SFA. (which in comparison to Metroid or Mario, IMO, sucks) No offense, man. I'm just saying.. I listen to people's opinions.. but when somebody is almost always against my own opinion, I tend to block his/her's out. Don't you?

 

zurich:

?Freudian typo?

 

lol GG, fixed the typo

Not a freudian, maybe wishful thinking tho (I still believe what I posted)

 

Good god, this is some of the worst fanboy tripe. Someone please inform us of the big name games that majorly disappointed on the GC. Aside from sports games, the big games sold well on the GC.

At this point its stupid to _not_ publish on all three consoles. In the case of games like Spiderman and 007 games, you would be kissing away 30% of your total sales if you didn't publish on either XBox or GC.

Only the worst of the deluded fanboys believes any of the three consoles is going away at this point. The GC is holding its own in US and EU and surging in Japan. What has it done like 35% total console sales the past 2 months in Japan?

 

In other words, you are asking other people to list you the platformers better than Mario, then you insult them because they don't share your opinion. Why asking in the first place then?

It makes sense not to release some of the games on all three consoles actually. I'm sure Archie can tell you more about the logic of Square and Enix for example. One of the reasons is that with concentrating on one platform, developer is able to pour all the resources into it's development and advertising (instead to porting), make it better looking, and with that, build much more hype around it, resulting in possibly much bigger sales. Also, in certain cases, game exclusivity is purchased by one of console manufacturers.

 

Ben said:

Damn , my thoughts exactly. There is'nt any company on the planet who can spend near what MS can. Nintendo knows this. Now I wish Nintendo would allocate more for print ads and commercials but they are playing it smart..a tad conservative..but smart. There's still about 4 more years of this generation to go.

 

Actually, it's more like 2.5 years or so. We are in 2003 already, and everyone and their mother is expecting new consoles in 2005

 

the new consoles are going to disapoint . The jump wont be there. All the systems will be evenly matched and it will be up to the franchises to win the wars.

 

OK guys, let's sum up what you say :
- Xbox is more more powerful than GCN (to me just one "more" would be enough)
- M$ spend much much more money on advertising and promotion than Nintendo.
- Every single game on Xbox is better than 3 or 4 of them on GCN (how dare you compare Sega GT with SMS !! - car with platformer ...)
- Nintendo is probably earning money with the hardware.
- Microsoft is probably losing 100$ a piece of hardware (but they can afford it)
- Nintendo is ugly and Microsoft beautiful
- Worldwide GCN has the advantage on Xbox for the moment for the second position behind PS2.

With all that, you find it logical to say : "Nintendo will leave the hardware market"

Let me say to you i don't have the same understanding of the word "logical".

If you keep saying insanities like that, i'll give my own nonsense and will repeat it as often as possible (as repetition gives more strength) :
Microsoft has nothing to do in this market.

Just to finish, let's talk of this strong line up of the Xbox.
Here what we can say : Xbox has more "ugly PS2 games" than GCN.

Whaoooooooouuuuuuu !!!!

I'll end up with this guys : "Nothing means nothing". I think Xbox is a very cool system but Microsoft doesn't need enemies with defenders like you all !

 

Unless Nintendo start showing losses.........
There are no reason to leave the profitable hardware business.

 

Don't know about Zelda but iirc he said in an interview that he wasn't (or hadn't to be) heavily involved because the former Majora's Mask-team did everything so well. Don't know if it was him or someone else who came up with this cel-shading stuff.
After reading the roundtable interview with the Metroid Prime development team I got the impression that he was heavily involved in it. At least I have no other explanation how Retro could create one of or arguably the best game of the year after all those internal troubles they had
SMS: Afaik he only made sure that the controls were right and he had to 'authorize' this whole FLUDD-thing. The art is definitely not his style (besides of the already familiar Mario-characters).
Eternal Darkness and Starfox are probably the games on which he had the least influence. ED is nothing like a Miyamoto-game (although it's great) and SFA is a Rare-game.
Pikmin clearly was his last year's pet project though

 

I feel that logic is wrong imho.

Growth in profits is what investors like to see year after year. Thats the big problem for Microsoft right now. How can they possibly make more money than they are making now? What market can they break in to and in the long run make solid profit from? I guess video games made sense to them.

Nintendo can generate profit year after year but if there isn't signifigant growth in profits thats where investors get dissapointed. Electronic Arts and Activision have done an amazing job growing as the industry grows. Some big publishers have done a bad job despite the video game market becoming bigger and bigger every year (Eidos).

 

John-

I did. They hit 10Million units in Q4 '01, two million sold in Japan. It took them over two years to hit the ten million units sold level(shipped happened far sooner however).

Kolgar-

EGM said the Cube wouldn't have much third party support last year too.

Wonder what? If they like to swim naked in all the cash they are making, or if they prefer to wear a swimsuit?

Ceiser-

I'm familiar with that. Combined with the cel shading it is why I have no excitement for Celda. I still consider OoT the greatest game ever made, I thought MM was a steaming pile.

I read the interview also, I don't consider being several thousand miles away and teleconfrencing a few times a week heavy involvement though

Bromstone-

Nintendo has a P/E ratio of around 3 and pays dividends to their shareholders. The valuation on their stock is obviously far from strataspheric(obvious by their P/E), but they are certainly a very solid one to own. Nintendo's profits continue to grow due to both larger revenue from gaming and from their handling of their war chest(they don't keep too much in cash, and they employee some extremely competent brokers/investors, besting the broader Japanese markets for many years).

 

I agree, neither Nintendo nor Gamecube are going anywhere anytime soon. I just think the Gamecube lacks many notable games outside of the Nintendo first-party titles.

I love my Gamecube, but the only reason I buy anything other than Nintendo-made games for it is because EA has lowered the price on its sports games in an attempt to stimulate sluggish sales.

Practically everything else is done as well as or better on Xbox and PS2.

Kolgar

 

as i see more and more silly topics on this boards the question i'd rather ask is:

"is console talk in peril ?"

 

I enjoyed MM a lot... on my second try after I got used to this time-feature. My first try ended in frustration. :? I consider MM a very good game. Nothing more, nothing less (Zelda-gameplay is still great in MM but some new features aren't quite right. The time-feature is interesting but the implementation is kind of flawed and the morph-mask just don't seem to fit into a Zelda-game). OoT was better...

Maybe not "heavy" (if heavy = Pikmin-heavy) but at least a bigger involvement than just validating controls and FLUDD in SMS

 

I can found as many games lacking on the GC than I can found on the xbox, not necessarly the same.

If a game is done as well on the ps2 or xbox, there is no raison to bash it, because it is done as well on the GC too

 

Actually, there is a reason why it isn't as good on Gamecube: the GC control pad. Simply put, it wasn't built with sports or fighting games in mind. Hence, the system isn't as good a choice for sports or fighting games fans as PS2 or Xbox.

But if EA can't squeeze some sales out of its efforts on Gamecube, we may not have to worry about that much longer anyway.

Kolgar

 

Could've sworn I already posted a reply....


Kolgar:

> But if EA can't squeeze some sales out of its efforts on Gamecube, we
> may not have to worry about that much longer anyway.

EA is doing just fine on the Cube. Sure, a number of titles have done better on Xbox but the Cube versions are usually not that far behind. There are also a few titles that have done better on Cube than Xbox.

 

Harry Potter GCN did very well on the GCN. It may have actually done better than the PS2 version (or close to it). It's the cleaner looking game of the three as well. Maybe EA will actually look at data from this and learn something.


Hey guys LOTR TT is also better on the GCN as well..maybe it will sell pretty good on GCN. I know Bond NF is better on GCN ( I actually have played all three versions) and I believe it has sold more than XB. If publishers will look at this they will start to see better results in thier GCN sales. ALOT of your GCN audience is hardcore players..they aint gonna buy too much crap (just ask Acclaim ie Turok E).