Revolution and HD: Do your part.
- Thread starter orfanotna
- Start date
Teasy said:Though I should add that I don't care about HDTV myself, I might get a HDTV in 2009/2010
You'll get one much sooner.
I just saw the FIRST HDTV (1080i) for 700 quid (=$1300) in London. A Samsung crappy rear projection one, but still... things are getting better.
I hven't seen a lot of new TV techs, but what I have seen are pretty pants. Rear Projection looks washed out, they all have mangy balance, LCDs don't have great viewing angles. I'm currently borrowing a Samsung LCD TV/monitor as a friend upgraded his monitor and I thought I'd try it out. TV picture quality sucks next to my 10 year old Sony Trinitron. It can't produce a lemon-yellow (slightly orangey hue in the yellows) and if you're looking all of 20 degrees either side of straight on, the colours start to go funny at the edges. Said friend also bought a plasma HDTV. He didn't have anything but an analogue signal to show when I saw it, but again the picture wasn't up to CRT quality. Overly contrasty and...just yuck.
And digital pictures often look worse than analogue IMO. Since technological 'advances' we get JPeg artefacting, sound drops, rectangular areas of screen freeze, and other problems. Digital TV is still a WIP IMO and I see know reason to invest in technology that doesn't offer an improvement over my current old tech, and personally I resent being forced into a digital age which adds all these problems.
In maybe 5-10 years time there'll be affordable HDTVs with a decent quality source, and then it'll be worth my time and money. All these half-baked technologies with terrible colour balance and the like won't get a lookin.
And digital pictures often look worse than analogue IMO. Since technological 'advances' we get JPeg artefacting, sound drops, rectangular areas of screen freeze, and other problems. Digital TV is still a WIP IMO and I see know reason to invest in technology that doesn't offer an improvement over my current old tech, and personally I resent being forced into a digital age which adds all these problems.
In maybe 5-10 years time there'll be affordable HDTVs with a decent quality source, and then it'll be worth my time and money. All these half-baked technologies with terrible colour balance and the like won't get a lookin.
DuckThor Evil
Legend
I wait until Nintendo makes official announcement, but if N5 doens't support 720p, I won't even consider buying it... I didn't bought my hdtv to watch 640x480 all over again, but Like I said, let's hear what N has to say.
Dr Evil said:
http://planetgamecube.com/news.cfm?action=item&id=6332
sounds pretty official to me...
I see this as a huge negative.
Why? It reinforces the fact Nintendo is ambivelent to the hardcore gamer / early adopter, which has a negative effect on early sales and thus results in less 3rd party support.
First let me reinforce this point first: HD TV, for all its merits, is a side note compared to a feature like online gaming. HD TVs have ~10M install base in the US with I believe 15M projected in the next year. Europe is a HD TV mess. On the reverse, broadband penetration was at ~34M in the US and 165M world wide for the end of 2004 with projections of 215M for the end of 2005 (~40M in the US).
Broadband is now.
HD TV is the future.
No HD support, in of itself, is irrelevant IMO. Yet it is the chicken-or-egg scenario. To hit mass market appeal you need the early adopters to purchase the console, and to get the early adopters you need to appeal to industry trends. When developers do not see early adopters catching on they go with competing systems, and thus the console gets fewer releases and even fewer exclusives.
And while I could easily overlook this single example (As much as I am looking forward to HD I think it is really a minor point at this time), Nintendo has a history of sprurning industry progression and instead marching to their own beat (which has had a negative effect on 3rd party support). Just some examples:
N64: Shunned cheap/large CD based format for small/expensive (yet fast) ROMs
GCN: Did not support basic DVD playback, had irrelevant online support
Rev: No HD support, simplified controller?, shorter/less challenging games?
And look at the net effect on their install base:
SNES: ~70M
N64: ~34M
GCN: ~18.5M
Rev: ?
Nintendo clearly has NEGATIVE momentum. Further, like I pointed out above, their resistance to progressive technologies has alienated many early adopters which in turn has further emphasized the issue of poor 3rd party support. I could live with Nintendo not supporting HD, but every generation it is the same old tune. Getting momentum early is important for developer support, and Nintendo continues to kill momentum. Not an opinion, their install base and developer support factually back up that consumers and developers feel Nintendo is becoming less significant to the home console market. I hate to say that as a Nintendo customer for almost 20 years, but what other conclusion can you arrive at?
Further, Nintendo is sending a VERY negative message to hard core gamers / early adopters in conjunction with the no-HD news:
- Games are too complicated
- Console controllers are too complicated
- Games are too long
- Downplaying graphics
- Downplaying online gaming (until recently)
No HD support is just one symptom of a larger attitude. I find it very ironic that Nintendo, the company who almost single handedly revived the industry and made it what it is today, basically is looking for new markets. Why do they not fight for the market they made? I believe they have a misguided view that "Innovation > Evolution". Yet the biggest genres and games the last couple generations shows that many gamers want epic worlds that have refined and evolutionary gameplay. Not that innovation is bad, but tried and true formats are welcomed by consumers. The 10zillion Mario games is evidence of a desire for consumers to cling to known properties. The Rev controller is not even finished. At this point I am just hoping Nintendo wakes up and realized "different" is not "better". Being innovative is great, but as long as it increases functionality WITHOUT neglecting the current industry needs. Getting a few pluses in a controller yet having minuses that offset those gains is actually more detrimental because it would kill 3rd party support. It would be might hard to do a Madden or Fighter port if the controller is all funky. Alas, I believe Nintendo may be blowing a lot of smoke on the innovation due to the fact the Rev will support GCN games. Anyhow...
No HD TV support is not a big deal in of itself. The point would be is this move reinforces the trend Nintendo has taken for the last decade--which is clearly a smaller console base with SIGNIFICANTLY LESS 3rd party support.
Nintendo has done nothing to reinforce the message that they want the hard core gamer, the early adopter, or that their 3rd party support situation will be better than the already abysmal situation that currently exists on the GCN. I only own a GCN (because it works on CRTs with a modded Component Cable from lik-san) but the horrid 3rd party support--of Nintendo's own making--has made me regret that purchase. I only have money for one console, and the glut of "no games" this Spring has emphasized how poor Nintendo has done in gathering 3rd party support.
Until I see proof Nintendo has reversed course in regards to wide scale 3rd party support that compares with their competitors I wont be buying Revolution. The HD TV output issue is just a footnote in a long history of moves that slaps industry trends and evolution in the face, which in turn has result in less games because of decreasing 3rd party support. Gone are Rare, Factor5, and SK and 3rd parties are treating Nintendo like an unwanted step child (but I think they like this because it means more of the install base buys their software since it is the most/best available... which is great from a financial standpoint, but also means their marketshare shrinks).
The decreasing 3rd party support is sad because it turns many gamers off. I believe Nintendo makes the best 1st party software, bar none, but it has become clear that as the 3rd party support shrinks less and less gamers can stomach a diet of "Nintendo Only" software. Count me in that group.
Why? It reinforces the fact Nintendo is ambivelent to the hardcore gamer / early adopter, which has a negative effect on early sales and thus results in less 3rd party support.
First let me reinforce this point first: HD TV, for all its merits, is a side note compared to a feature like online gaming. HD TVs have ~10M install base in the US with I believe 15M projected in the next year. Europe is a HD TV mess. On the reverse, broadband penetration was at ~34M in the US and 165M world wide for the end of 2004 with projections of 215M for the end of 2005 (~40M in the US).
Broadband is now.
HD TV is the future.
No HD support, in of itself, is irrelevant IMO. Yet it is the chicken-or-egg scenario. To hit mass market appeal you need the early adopters to purchase the console, and to get the early adopters you need to appeal to industry trends. When developers do not see early adopters catching on they go with competing systems, and thus the console gets fewer releases and even fewer exclusives.
And while I could easily overlook this single example (As much as I am looking forward to HD I think it is really a minor point at this time), Nintendo has a history of sprurning industry progression and instead marching to their own beat (which has had a negative effect on 3rd party support). Just some examples:
N64: Shunned cheap/large CD based format for small/expensive (yet fast) ROMs
GCN: Did not support basic DVD playback, had irrelevant online support
Rev: No HD support, simplified controller?, shorter/less challenging games?
And look at the net effect on their install base:
SNES: ~70M
N64: ~34M
GCN: ~18.5M
Rev: ?
Nintendo clearly has NEGATIVE momentum. Further, like I pointed out above, their resistance to progressive technologies has alienated many early adopters which in turn has further emphasized the issue of poor 3rd party support. I could live with Nintendo not supporting HD, but every generation it is the same old tune. Getting momentum early is important for developer support, and Nintendo continues to kill momentum. Not an opinion, their install base and developer support factually back up that consumers and developers feel Nintendo is becoming less significant to the home console market. I hate to say that as a Nintendo customer for almost 20 years, but what other conclusion can you arrive at?
Further, Nintendo is sending a VERY negative message to hard core gamers / early adopters in conjunction with the no-HD news:
- Games are too complicated
- Console controllers are too complicated
- Games are too long
- Downplaying graphics
- Downplaying online gaming (until recently)
No HD support is just one symptom of a larger attitude. I find it very ironic that Nintendo, the company who almost single handedly revived the industry and made it what it is today, basically is looking for new markets. Why do they not fight for the market they made? I believe they have a misguided view that "Innovation > Evolution". Yet the biggest genres and games the last couple generations shows that many gamers want epic worlds that have refined and evolutionary gameplay. Not that innovation is bad, but tried and true formats are welcomed by consumers. The 10zillion Mario games is evidence of a desire for consumers to cling to known properties. The Rev controller is not even finished. At this point I am just hoping Nintendo wakes up and realized "different" is not "better". Being innovative is great, but as long as it increases functionality WITHOUT neglecting the current industry needs. Getting a few pluses in a controller yet having minuses that offset those gains is actually more detrimental because it would kill 3rd party support. It would be might hard to do a Madden or Fighter port if the controller is all funky. Alas, I believe Nintendo may be blowing a lot of smoke on the innovation due to the fact the Rev will support GCN games. Anyhow...
No HD TV support is not a big deal in of itself. The point would be is this move reinforces the trend Nintendo has taken for the last decade--which is clearly a smaller console base with SIGNIFICANTLY LESS 3rd party support.
Nintendo has done nothing to reinforce the message that they want the hard core gamer, the early adopter, or that their 3rd party support situation will be better than the already abysmal situation that currently exists on the GCN. I only own a GCN (because it works on CRTs with a modded Component Cable from lik-san) but the horrid 3rd party support--of Nintendo's own making--has made me regret that purchase. I only have money for one console, and the glut of "no games" this Spring has emphasized how poor Nintendo has done in gathering 3rd party support.
Until I see proof Nintendo has reversed course in regards to wide scale 3rd party support that compares with their competitors I wont be buying Revolution. The HD TV output issue is just a footnote in a long history of moves that slaps industry trends and evolution in the face, which in turn has result in less games because of decreasing 3rd party support. Gone are Rare, Factor5, and SK and 3rd parties are treating Nintendo like an unwanted step child (but I think they like this because it means more of the install base buys their software since it is the most/best available... which is great from a financial standpoint, but also means their marketshare shrinks).
The decreasing 3rd party support is sad because it turns many gamers off. I believe Nintendo makes the best 1st party software, bar none, but it has become clear that as the 3rd party support shrinks less and less gamers can stomach a diet of "Nintendo Only" software. Count me in that group.
Does that really affect Nintendo now though? It seems to me their next gen plan is to be bought alongside PS3 and/or XB360, and from the sounds of it hardcore gamers are eager to get Revolution so they can play their old favourites again. Later adopters will buy Revolution because of its 'Revolutiony' controls (whatever they are, apparently) and not because of it's specs.
Acert, that's the best post I've read in weeks. Think it's too long to put in my sig?
Unfortunately, Nintendo is making it abundantly clear that it's in business to sell its OWN games. Third-party support hasn't been a priority in YEARS.
Another damaging aspect of no HD support is negative customer perception. It's just bad PR.
Unfortunately, Nintendo is making it abundantly clear that it's in business to sell its OWN games. Third-party support hasn't been a priority in YEARS.
Another damaging aspect of no HD support is negative customer perception. It's just bad PR.
OICAspork said:
It's not silly; but rather practical for others. On my shoes, I've invested quite considerable on my set and expected to last for years (with minimum burns, dead pixels, ghosting, colour/contrast/brightness recalibration, etc.)...and use the other TVs instead.Anyways, it will be nice to see an HD feature on REV; but not that indispensable.
Shifty Geezer said:
Is it though? Honest question. I have not heard that from Nintendo. What I have heard is they think MS/Sony are going the wrong direction, but I have not heard them say, "We are a low cost alternative that is to be purchased alongside our competition, which is not really our competition".
Strategically I believe it would be a mistake to try to hit such a small market. Consoles, periphrials, games, etc... are expensive. It would be interesting to know the % of consumers who own 2 or 3 consoles. The risk Nintendo takes, though, is if they are the "2nd option" is that 2nd options are usually bought 3 or 4 years into the life cycle, not year one. So, where are these early buyers? They are gonna be choking on their MS/Sony console costs.
How many console gamers are going to buy a console and then pay money to play old games like Mario 64--especially if they already have it? I see this more as a novelty and perk and would prefer to see this free (ain't happening it appears). It will product profits for Nintendo, but will it increase the install base?
We do need to be realistic though. Will casual consumers poney up for 16bit and 32bit era games when they can have Killzone2? Halo 3? Tekken 5? Next Gen Madden?
Even if some hard core gamers get a Rev for the old library of games, and we see a large uptake of consumers picking up Rev as a "2nd console" will it be enough to turn around the opposite momentum.
Even more importantly: If it is viewed as a 2nd console, it will see even LESS 3rd party support. Why port a game when gamers already have another console?
I see that as a big problem.
And the lack of 3rd party support will directly affect primary sales. Nintendo needs to get the ball rolling early... if everyong is in "Wait and buy" mode it would kill the launch.
Like I said, the HD feature alone is not a huge negative. It is the continuation of a trend of spurning industry progression and the side effect it has had on 3rd party support.
And trying to be the "other" console is an unproven tactic. Getting an early foothold is important, and this generation they have 2 proven foes, not 1, who are aggresively demonstrating how they have evolved to provide better gaming. Nintendo, thus far, has spent more time bashing advancements in graphics, long games, HD, and the standard controller.
I see that as a negative message to early adopters who traditionally have been the trend setters and get the ball rolling.
Some good points as usual Acert, just a few things I don't agree with though.
Early adoption has never been a problem for a Nintendo console though. There are millions of Nintendo fans who will camp out at stores to be the first to have the system. The problem is selling to more then just Nintendo fans.
That's not really relevant for Revolution though. Since Nintendo have made it very clear that online is a massive part of their strategy this generation.
But third party support on a Nintendo console hasn't decreased from one generation to the next since SNES to N64. GC has significantly better third party support then the previous generation. N64's third party support was basically none excistent within 3 years of release and it ended up with a total of only 257 third party games. In comparison GameCube has over 500 third party games and 4 years into its life its third party support is still far better then N64’s was 3 years into its life.
Third party support doesn't continue from one generation to the next. At the start of a new generation it, for the most part (not completely of course), resets itself. Then it just comes down to keeping that support.
Early adoption has never been a problem for a Nintendo console though. There are millions of Nintendo fans who will camp out at stores to be the first to have the system. The problem is selling to more then just Nintendo fans.
That's not really relevant for Revolution though. Since Nintendo have made it very clear that online is a massive part of their strategy this generation.
But third party support on a Nintendo console hasn't decreased from one generation to the next since SNES to N64. GC has significantly better third party support then the previous generation. N64's third party support was basically none excistent within 3 years of release and it ended up with a total of only 257 third party games. In comparison GameCube has over 500 third party games and 4 years into its life its third party support is still far better then N64’s was 3 years into its life.
Third party support doesn't continue from one generation to the next. At the start of a new generation it, for the most part (not completely of course), resets itself. Then it just comes down to keeping that support.
Magnum PI said:PC-Engine said:I really feel for you guys not living in America. Over here you can get a nice 30" widescreen flat CRT HDTV with HDMI inputs for less than $600.
i have yet to see some HDTV screen under 2000 € (2,400 USD)
EUR2000 is closer to USD2600.
But as i said earlier in the thread, i just saw a Samsung HDTV set for £700=$1300=EUR1000
Teasy said:
That is a good point Teasy.
The contrast I see is the N64 had some decent 3rd party / 2nd party titles, even toward the end. This Spring, and even last fall, were really weak for Nintendo. Fall 2003 was just EXCELLENT. Their big game in 2004 was a refitted Metroid that was excellent but did not appeal very widely. Sadly RE4 missed the holidays.
With Rare, SK, and Factor5 no longer close to Nintendo I think we have definately seen a downturn in the number of quality games.
True, but developer relationships, market perception, and mementum do play varying roles.
While I agree each gen is a new start to a degree, I am not hearing much about 3rd party support. This is not a huge issue to some Nintendo fans. Many Nintendo gamers are happy with 1st party games. Nintendo may have the most rabid fan base out there. Their consumers LOVE their games--I know I do!
But as someone who has been on the Nintendo platform for a long time, I have seen a lot of series I liked (or others liked) leave the platform. Ninja Guiden, Perfect Dark, Conkers, Final Fantasy, etc...
That is a void Nintendo is having a hard time filling and it leaves some gamers feeling a void.
I think Nintendo has made some some genius moves. The entire back library is a great feature. Their controllers are always my favorite (maybe because I have small hands!) I still feel blow for blow they have the best quality 1st party software (my opinion of course). I think Nintendo knows how to run a tight ship and keep themselves profitable which in the long run is very important to consumers.
I guess I am just frustrated at the direction they are taking. I see so much potential for Nintendo, and I enjoy their products. But I cannot afford more than one console, and when value is weighed a console with a strong 1st party lineup + broad 3rd party support to fill in the areas the 1st party games cannot fill is important to me.
I guess I am dissappointed because I want my cake (Nintendo's 1st party games) and ice cream (top 3rd party games in large supply). I do not see doom or gloom for Nintendo... I just think as the industry vetern they could easily be at the forefront. I see no reason for them having to play second fiddle to anyone.
It is almost like they lost interest in the core market and are wanting to expand to a different audiance. That may not be true, but that is the feeling I get from them. Of course that is me, a hardcore gamer. I may just be out of touch with the direction of the market as I am in the niche early adopter / hard core gamer market. I just happen to also really enjoy Nintendo's software (and no, I do not think they should become a 3rd party!!)
I guess I liked the message from E3 2004: "Kickin' butts and taking names"
I think Nintendo should do more of that. I think we all got geeked out on the cool Nintendo On video... I think with good hype Nintendo can really put the hurt on.I just had a thought about this whole no HDTV thing. What if instead of HDTV Nintendo are going to have a high level of AA forced on all Revolution games? That would explain why they will not support HDTV at all because HDTV games wouldn't run with this very high level of AA. Also using really good AA will make games look better for the majority of consumers (with normal TV's) rather then for the minority (HDTV owners).
Similar threads
