Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
GameCube (Games) Entertainment Games

Atari Drops GameCube Support For Two Titles 86

Posted by CowboyNeal from the nintendo-unfazed dept.
dade writes "Atari has dumped on Nintendo, making it the third company to do so in recent weeks. However, because the GameCube is a vehicle for first-party games, Nintendo's bottom line isn't affected. This article at switchbox asks if such a situation can last." Some good points are raised. While Nintendo is ostensibly content to hide in its niche market, it would seem to make sense that it would want to corner more of the gaming market if possible, especially given their history.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Atari Drops GameCube Support For Two Titles More

Atari Drops GameCube Support For Two Titles

Comments Filter:
  • Not that the article is very long, but it's also pretty uninteresting. So if you're wondering what those lost titles are:

    Terminator 3 and Driver 3

  • Atari? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by BoomerSooner ( 308737 )
    What is this, 1978?

    Who cares? The only Atari title I've seen is Neverwinter Nights and it was just rebranded from Infograms (although if my company name was Inforgrams I'd use Atari too).
    • How about Enter the Matrix? Atari essentially is Infograms.

    • Re:Atari? (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Atari 2003 is Atari in name only. In the mid-90s when Atari went bankrupt all of it's assets were sold off, including the right to the corporate name. Atari today and Atari in 1978 have nothing in common but their name.
    • Infogrames is Atari. They bought the name a few years ago, and started using it on a select few of their games, like Neverwinter Nights. Just a few months ago, they changed names entirely. This new Atari has just about nothing to do with the original....

  • Quote... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Acidic_Diarrhea ( 641390 ) on Thursday September 25, 2003 @02:00PM (#7056480) Homepage Journal
    From the switchbox blurb, "I know they're claiming that they're content to make a profit and hide out in their niche market, but eventually that will be eroded away if they can't make a strong showing with the next console."

    Why would Nintendo's market be eroded? If they continue to satisfy the people who buy in that "niche", why would their performance not continue as it has been? I don't know what the author means by a strong showing (similar sales to the GC or NES?) but I think that Nintendo's got a fairly good grasp of how they want their business to run. Sure, they'd probably like a larger share of the market but I believe that the executives at Nintendo aren't going to sacrifice their business model in an attempt to achieve that larger market share. Ultimately, I don't see how sticking to that business model will lead to Nintendo's market share being eroded.

    I suppose that one could argue that if Nintendo continues to go after the Mario crowd and Sony and MS both come out with consoles that have games with the Mario crowd in mind and the various other gamers in mind, then Sony and MS would be a more attractive option because their systems might satisfy more than one demographic. But really, that's a stretch. Nintendo is a lot like Apple - there's a devoted following and Nintendo doesn't want to alienate that following, a good move for maintaining market share, in my opinion.

    End rant?

    • Other thoughts (Nintendo != Apple) (Score:4, Insightful)

      by AvantLegion ( 595806 ) on Thursday September 25, 2003 @07:57PM (#7059575) Journal
      I don't totally disagree with you, but Nintendo's historical stubbornness/arrogance has cost them market share many times along the line.

      Example: Nintendo refuses to recognize the need for an advanced storage format (CD-ROM: 650MB) and opts instead to release a "next-gen" system with a storage format that held 20x less and cost more. Texture artists the world over screamed bloody murder. SquareSoft, creator of many of the Super NES's classic hits, thumbed their nose and walked away.

      Current example: Nintendo refuses to recognize the demand for online gaming. Repeatedly, they have made statements about how they don't see a sustainable business model in it. Meanwhile, Xbox Live and the PS2 Network Adapter each have shattered all sales expectations, and each system has surged mightily on the strength of online titles like SOCOM, MechAssault, and a dozen sports games. Each will also explode with the pending releases of SOCOM 2, Halo 2, Counterstrike, and other AAA online titles. Meanwhile, Nintendo sits on a gold mine - a game that, if taken online, would shake things up incredibly and even possibly could single-handedly spark a GameCube resurgence. Yet, Mario Kart will release with no online support. Likewise, other possible beneficiaries like F-Zero go without online play too.

      Apple is an innovator. If Nintendo were Apple, they would have been at the forefront of online console gaming. Instead, they continue to drag their heels, even after both of their competitors have been wildly successful, and will only continue to be more successful in that realm. Apple, while not perfect, are forward-looking and try to bring the future to the present consumer. If Nintendo is Apple, they are the worst of Apple. They're not the Powerbook, they're not the iPod. They're the one-button mouse.

      Nintendo CAN survive on a small market, but they have to serve that market in good faith. As a GameCube owner, I am part of that market - though I am also part of the PS2 and Xbox markets as well. I grow tired of Nintendo's stubbornness, and the failures it creates. My credit card does my complaining - I own far more Xbox and PS2 titles than GameCube. Next time, I may forego a Nintendo console entirely. Nintendo simply does not serve their customers the way Apple does.

      • Is Xbox live profitable? Given that the xbox in general is hemorrhaging money like a fire hydrant, I'd say not.
        Is Sony making money off of PS2 online gaming? I don't know, but I don't think they are.
        Many of the MMORPGs are consistantly profitable (Sony, but on PC), but Nintendo isn't opposed to facilitating that, as evidenced by PSO I/II.
        When there is money to be made for Nintendo, Nintendo will offer an online service. Right now, they'll let others throw money at online console gaming. The next generation
        • In general, I think many Nintendo fans are the type of people who like to sit down with friends and play together, not play by themselves against some dweeb named HaX0rURbraIN who's half way around the world.

          That is exactly why I bought a Gamecube today! After looking over the game catalogs for my Xbox (which has been used for only SNES emulation for the past month), the PS2, and Gamecube... I found the Gamecube had more (good) "party games" than the other systems. That's what I want my console to be.

    • Re:Quote... (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Bulln-Bulln ( 659072 )
      Nintendo is a lot like Apple

      To all people: please stop to compare Nintendo to Apple.
      Nintendo is no way like Apple.

      • Apple's hardware is overpriced.
        Nintendo has the cheapest of the 3 consoles.
      • Apple has just a small market share (hardware).
        If you compare the worldwide sales, XBox and GameCube sell about equally. The numbers vary depending who published them - according to GameSpy (I think it was GS, but I'm not sure) the GameCube is on #2, XBox is close on #3.
      • Apple has just a small mark
      • No way like Apple?

        How about this, Nintendo has a customer base of people who are loyal to their consoles. Apple has a customer base that is loyal to their machines.

        Now, you said that Nintendo is in no way like Apple yet I have just raised one example of how Nintendo is like Apple. Thus I have proven your original claim incorrect. Thanks for playing and please don't ever reply to one of my posts again.

  • While the GC is primarily a vessel for first party games (here is a good opportunity to mention they should go the way of Sega) they need the other games to get people to buy the system to play the first party games. If you get what I just said good for you, if not lets try this again. Many people, myself included, didn't buy a GC because while we may like SOME Nintendo games we couldn't justify buying the cube for the few first party games that weren't too cutesy or whatever for us. I am however buying a c

    • Re:The thing is... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by wcbarksdale ( 621327 ) on Thursday September 25, 2003 @02:48PM (#7056958)
      I don't think this is true. I bought my Gamecube to play Super Smash Brothers Melee, Super Mario Sunshine, and Animal Crossing. Since then I've bought Pikmin and Wave Race. Most of Nintendo's Gamecube games are either in some way unique or just done very well.

      Basically Nintendo is becoming like the Mac OS X of gaming platforms. Smaller market share, not much support from other companies, but very well put together.

      • Oh, now if we could just convience Nintendo to sell Mac or Linux Games... Nah. Never would happen unless the next Nintendo Platform ran off of Linux. Stranger things have happened.
        • Although, if you think about it, that'd be a great way for Nintendo to give Microsoft the finger.

          It'd never happen, because I honestly don't think that Nintendo is interested in waving their dicks back at Microsoft. They're more concerned about making good games, profitably.

          --Jeremy
          • They're more concerned about making good games, profitably

            Exactly. If Big N dropped outta the console market and stuck to making great games we could get all the other more unique games on both xbox2 and ps3. People seem to think that fewer consoles is a bad thing, but if you can still get all the games you just saved yourself a couple hundred bucks not having to buy that 3rd console.

            On a side note, people tend to think I have something against Nintendo. I do not. I simply think that Nintendo is better at

    • I would have been perfectly happy with just a Gamecube. Unfortunately I bought a PS2 first because everyone (non-gamecube owners) was telling me how the Gamecube sucked. I kind of feel like I threw the money down the toilet on the PS2 since there are not very many games that I want to play on it. The only saving graces have been the Final Fantasy Games and the fact that I can play DVD's with it. I think I use it more as a DVD player than a console.
    • ...which would add about 4000 games [retrogames.com] in one hit [sourceforge.net].

  • Jokes aside, its what I've thought all along (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Mike Hawk ( 687615 ) on Thursday September 25, 2003 @02:03PM (#7056516) Journal
    The market is finally going to mature and splinter. Microsoft will be the "other" console in the US and Europe and Nintendo will be the "other" console in Japan. This will allow the companies to taylor their products to the different audiences, which continue to grow more and more different everyday. The niche fanboy crowd can always import of course.

    This is good news for third party publishers too. With only two consoles to worry about in either market, their development efforts can be more focused on making the best possible end product. So farewell, Big N. I'll always remember the good times we had. IMHO, though, this is a good thing.
    • You seem to be missing out on the fact that Microsoft is determined to get more market share in Japan (by releasing a lot more games over there,) and Nintendo is determined to get more marketshare overall (by releasing their next conosle early.) Sony of course is determined not to let either of those happen. If Microsoft, by far and away the one closest to becoming a "niche" market given sales in Japan, is still working on rectifying that manner, why are you so sure that the trend will not only continue but
      • If Microsoft, by far and away the one closest to becoming a "niche" market given sales in Japan, is still working on rectifying that manner, why are you so sure that the trend will not only continue but accelerate?
        In short, why are you so sure it wont? American third party publishers are dropping the 'Cube and Japanese third parties were never fully on board with the XBOX. Noone can predict the future, but I see what's happening and the trend is pretty clear. You can fight the trend, but I don't think
        • I think that in this discussion of the future of the market, we are all forgetting an important factor: The might N-Gage from Nokia. That gaming system is going to revolutionize the video game market and, quite frankly, I don't see Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft surviving. It is literally the greatest piece of video gaming hardware ever created.

          Tony Hawk Pro Skater on the N-Gage is better than anything ever created. Remember when Mario 64 came out and everyone was so impressed with it? Well, when THPS is rele

  • The Article Says it All (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mhlandrydotnet ( 677863 ) on Thursday September 25, 2003 @02:09PM (#7056585)
    While obviously the lack of third party support will make it harder for the GameCube to compete directly with the Xbox and PS2, the chances are that it won't affect the bottom line - namely Nintendo's handsome profit figure - in the slightest.

    Also, the following quote gives us some insight into the types of company's that drop Cube support: Atari says that it cancelled Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines on the platform because "there simply wasn't enough time to develop the game on all three platforms".

    These aren't companies that are interested in putting out quality games. These are companies interested in pushing out games that will sell as fast as possible. But we've had this discussion many times here, right?

    • These aren't companies that are interested in putting out quality games. These are companies interested in pushing out games that will sell as fast as possible.

      Yep, and Enter the Matrix is Atari's biggest example yet...well, that and the original Atari's horrific port of Pac Man.
    • Terminator 3 may be bad, but you forget that Atari is the current publisher for the Unreal/Tournament franchise, Bioware (outside of Star Wars), and that Driver 3 looks pretty snazzy.

      Remember, the current "Atari" is actually the old Infogrames.

  • The Man (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Aggrazel ( 13616 ) <aggrazel@gmail.com> on Thursday September 25, 2003 @02:21PM (#7056706) Journal
    As long as Nintendo has Shigeru Myamoto (sp?) they are perfectly fine.
    • Not to give them ideas, but I always wondered why MS didn't try and hire him away. Offer him a ridiculously high 7 or 8 digit salary. What would Nintendo have left?
      • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • I've always wondered about that as well. I mean, with all the billions M$ is dumping into the XBox, why not just offer $1B to the guy. While I'm at it, hell, make it tax free to boot. ;p

        As another poster mentioned, the Japanese are a bit different than most American businessmen (company loyalty, honor, etc...), but I'm sure that $1B is certainly more than enough to make anyone think it over really hard.

        IMNHO, it would've (and still might) made a much better investment than some of the "unique" games and

        • It's only enough to make you think really hard if you're greedy.

          I'm sure he's quite well off with his salary from Nintendo, and seems to be very happy with his job. Why change jobs when you've got everything you need?

          How much is happiness worth to you? Working with friends you've known for years?

          I know for me, personally, if I was happy in my job, I wouldn't leave it just because some silly American executive was throwing money at me.

  • This sucks (Score:3, Funny)

    by cloudwilliam ( 517411 ) on Thursday September 25, 2003 @02:25PM (#7056741)
    I was totally looking forward to Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines on my GameCube, especially considering how well movie franchises translate to good games, as well as Atari's sterling reputation as a top-notch game developer. Who can forget Basketball or Outlaw on the 2600? And although I've never played Driver 1 or 2, the title alone is enough to send me into aploptic fits of anticipation. I guess I'll have to play it on my PS2, as long as it makes it to that console.
    • especially considering how well movie franchises translate to good games


      Yeah man, that Matrix game r0x0r3d so hard. This is a tragic, tragic loss.

  • Japan vs. US markets (Score:3, Insightful)

    by PainKilleR-CE ( 597083 ) on Thursday September 25, 2003 @02:27PM (#7056760)
    I think this was one of the most insightful parts of the gameindustry.biz article:

    Many commentators take it to indicate that the console's market share is in serious trouble, but yet recent figures have proved that it is neck and neck - and indeed possibly leading - the Xbox in terms of global installed base.

    However, much of that installed base is in Japan, where companies such as Eidos, Acclaim and Atari simply don't sell very many games, while others such as Namco and Capcom, both strong supporters of the GameCube, are on their home ground.

    Insight aside, though, Namco's also shown with Soul Calibur 2 that the GameCube can do very well in the US as a platform, as the game is selling more titles on the Cube than on either of the other platforms (and 3 to 1 vs. the PS2 version).

    I hate to say it again, because it's never good to lose publishers, but as with Acclaim and Eidos before them, Atari's another publisher I'm not sorry to see leave the platform, especially given the titles that were cancelled.

  • They'll Have to Pry The Nintendo Controller... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LordYUK ( 552359 ) <jeffwright821@noSPAm.gmail.com> on Thursday September 25, 2003 @02:32PM (#7056802)
    From my cold lifeless hands before I'd ever give up on Nintendo.

    Nintendo is the pinnacle of the console triangle, regardless of what "sales charts" may say. I can name more nintendo games that I wouldnt trade for anything than I can on PS2 or Xbox. They might not always be truly innovative (Mario Sunshine is more or less Mario 64) but in my humble opinion, FUN is the deciding factor.

    I have "wasted" more hours in front of Mario Kart (both of them) than I care to admit, and you bet your sweet mushroom butt that I will have DD when it comes out... I cant name ONE game on either the PS2 or the Xbox that is so good I'd HAVE to have the system just for it (note, there ARE good games, but MOST of them ARENT exclusive... halo, KoToR, GTA, etc)...

    You'll never see Mario on another system.

    To hell with the 3rd party developers. 90% of the time, their games sucked anyway. (there were exceptions, Capcom, Konami, Rare...)
    • You'll never see Mario on another system.

      I saw that and I thought there was probably a time when Sega fans said "You'll never see Sonic on another system." :)

      It's great that you love Nintendo so much. I grew up on Mario, Zelda, and Metroid, so I also have many fond Nintendo memories. However, it's clear that Nintendo is not in the best position right now, and they seem to be slipping; much like Sega years ago.

      The current price drop may actually save Nintendo, though. Personally, I still like my XBox ove
      • Nintendo... seems to be slipping; much like Sega years ago

        Nintendo is JUST LIKE SEGA??? Consider Nintendo's consoles:

        NES (Profitable)
        SNES (Profitable)
        N64 (Profitable)
        Gameboy (Profitable)
        Gameboy Pocket (Profitable)
        Gameboy Color (Profitable)
        Gameboy Advance (Profitable)
        Gamecube (Profitable)

        Virtual Boy (Unprofitable)

        Sega:
        Genesis (Profitable)
        Master system (?)
        Game Gear (unprofitable)
        Nomad (unprofitable)
        32X (unprofitable)
        Sega CD(unprofitable)
        Saturn (unprofitable)
        Dreamcast (unprofitable)

        So... they're e
        • People jumped from the Sega consoles because they didn't feel they got their money's worth out of the previous consoles, especially after the Sega CD and the 32X. There simply were not enough games released for those systems before they were supposed to upgrade to the next system so people felt ripped off.

          Now go to your local Best Buy or whatever and compare how many games are available for the GameCube versus the XBox. It probably varies, but my local Best Buy has about 50% more space for XBox games than
      • I saw that and I thought there was probably a time when Sega fans said "You'll never see Sonic on another system." :)

        One problem, though: Nintendo's already said they're not interested in making games if they're not making the system.

        Someone else already pointed out the problem with comparing Nintendo's current position to Sega's position after releasing the Dreamcast, not to mention that the DreamCast wasn't making a big impact in Japan, either.

  • Paraphrased (Score:4, Funny)

    by snubber1 ( 56537 ) on Thursday September 25, 2003 @02:45PM (#7056938)
    "Our shitty titles don't sell well enough to a more discriminating user base."

    • Re:Paraphrased (Score:3, Interesting)

      by ForemastJack ( 58751 )

      I read this and I think, "God, grant me mod points."

      But since that ain't happening today, I'll just respond. I have a GameCube. I had a PS2. (Now heading off to eBay.) Here's the difference between the systems, and why this doesn't matter:

      Buy a PS2 game, you've got what, a 50-50 chance of buying dreck -- assuming you haven't done your homework and checked reviews, etc. Buy a GameCube game, take it home, pop it in, and it's good.

      If a game is big enough, it'll get to the GameCube...GTA being a prin

  • New business plan? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Fammy2000 ( 612663 ) on Thursday September 25, 2003 @03:13PM (#7057155) Homepage
    1. Drop GameCube support
    2. ???
    3. Post quarterly loss!!

  • Sounds familiar. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by 2Flower ( 216318 ) on Thursday September 25, 2003 @03:27PM (#7057272) Homepage
    I recall another game console where it had great strength in its first party titles, even if the third party was a bit wobbly; a number of key characters and franchises with rabid fanbases which were proven sellers in the past; and a console which was cheap compared to the competition and sold to its niche.

    I think it was called 'Dreamcast'. At least check they were being sold out of stock at fifty bucks a pop to folks who wanted to use them as cheap Linux routers.

    You can't survive as a niche machine, no matter how many game design gods you have on your payroll. Maybe the niche is big enough to keep Nintendo afloat right now but if they aren't going to TRY to fight tooth and nail against Sony, they will eventually fade away. Nintendo is never going to say "Eh, we don't need third party, Mario and Link and Metroid will keep us in the green" because it's just not true.

    • Re:Sounds familiar. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by scot4875 ( 542869 ) on Thursday September 25, 2003 @04:08PM (#7057832) Homepage
      Gee, thanks for your insight, Mr. Video Game Market Analyst Expert.

      I hear this tired straw man argument so often that I wonder if people actually believe it's true. Can you offer one piece of evidence other than the anecdotal "Dreamcast had many 1st party games, Gamecube has many 1st party games, therefore they're the same thing!" Can you give *any* supported arguments that back up your implication that the Gamecube is going the way of the Dreamcast?

      Here -- I'll offer some other bullet points to consider: Sega of America was horribly mismanaged during the Dreamcast's demise. The Dreamcast had to compete with the Sony marketing juggernaut/hype machine far more than the Gamecube did/does. Sega has far fewer huge franchises than Nintendo does. I'd even go so far as to say that a larger part of Sega's fanbase was the more casual "I play X because it's cooler" segment of the market, whose loyalty stayed with Sega as long as they stayed in fashion.

      Maybe there was more to the Dreamcast's failure than just lack of 3rd party support.

      --Jeremy
      • "Can you give *any* supported arguments that back up your implication that the Gamecube is going the way of the Dreamcast?"

        Let's see: continuing plummeting prices, 3rd parties dropping support, innovative games and ideas that don't come out anywhere else and are ignored by the Madden buying, Grand Theft Auto loving masses.. no DVD playback, millions of units shipped, and a widespread expectation of failure.

        Frankly, the GameCube's best feature is also its worst feature -- the games that come out for it. P

        • Re:Maybe.. OR (Score:1, Flamebait)

          by scot4875 ( 542869 )
          Oh, yeah, and they both have 4 controller ports, too! I forgot that one. So I guess you're right -- because of some coincidences, they're the same. Flawless logic.

          And the power cord -- can't forget that. They both have power cords. Gee, I guess I just didn't see all of these parallels before.

          --Jeremy
          • Both don't play DVDs. Just today, I had someone ask me if they'll ever come out with "a DVD playing hookup" for the GameCube.

            Most people don't know or care that console DVD playback is about the same or worse than a 60$ DVD player you can get at Wal-Mart. It's just another feature to add on the game system they want to buy.
            • Tell them they can import a DVD-playing Cube that does region-free DVD playback and plays both Japanese and US games, but it's going to cost them $450.

              I have 2 consoles that can play DVDs, I don't need another one. I also have a significantly better DVD player that also plays VHS tapes, which I bought because my VCR broke (I couldn't justify buying another VCR without a DVD player, I could justify buying a GameCube without a DVD player).

              The fundamental difference between Nintendo and Sega is that Nintendo

    • Re:Sounds familiar. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by unclethursday ( 664807 ) on Thursday September 25, 2003 @05:42PM (#7058789)
      I recall another game console where it had great strength in its first party titles, even if the third party was a bit wobbly; a number of key characters and franchises with rabid fanbases which were proven sellers in the past; and a console which was cheap compared to the competition and sold to its niche.

      I think it was called 'Dreamcast'. At least check they were being sold out of stock at fifty bucks a pop to folks who wanted to use them as cheap Linux routers.

      Except that Sega was (and still is) in finacial trouble when they released the Dreamcast. Nintendo is not.

      Sega was reeling from past faliures like the Sega CD and 32X add ons for the Genesis/Mega Drive, and from the poor showing of the Sega Saturn when they released the Dreamcast.

      Nintendo, even though they lost a lot of marketshare to Sony during the PSOne/N64 times, was still very profitable with the N64.

      Sega was losing money (and is only just now starting to make money again). Nintendo was, and still is not losing money, but is making money.

      I love my Dreamcast, and wouldn't get rid of it for anything, but the fact remains that Nintendo and Sega were, and are in two different worlds when it comes to hardware buisness.

      The Dreamcast was a wonderful system that was killed by Sony's PS2 hype (even though in many ways the DC was superior to the PS2), and Sega's own blunders in the past. The only thing hurting the GameCube, really, is the supposed stigma that they are the 'kiddy console', mostly said by hormonal teenage boys (read: kids themselves).

      So, no, it doesn't sound fammiliar at all, really.

      Thursdae

    • Hmmmm... haven't they done that before???... I think the system was called Nintendo 64... or my memory is not serving me well.
    • you can't survive in a niche market... did someone tell Steve Jobs that?
  • heres a 4 step process for you

    1: take any post from either of the other two "*Company* drops Nintendo" threads

    2: Post it in this thread

    3: ...

    4: Profit!

  • Ninendo makes games too well? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    any anyone contemplated the possibility that Nintendo does too good of a job with their first party games and that's why they are losing 3rd party support?

    Given that I have a limited budget to buy 2 games, for instance, and the 2 best games out on the Cube both happen to be published by Nintendo, then I'd buy 2 Nintendo games. Versus on the PS2 or XBOX, the 2 best games out on the market for those consoles are probably not published by Sony or Microsoft. So then i'd end up buying EA, SEGA...etc games.

    Does
    • Yes, and most of Nintendo's hardcore fans ignore all but the best third party titles, like Viewtiful Joe, Soul Calibur II, and some Sega titles.
    • I concur. I know my Gamecube library has many more Nintendo titles than not. I have some Capcom games. Ikaruga bears the Atari logo though....but that was just the publisher.

      Why would anyone choose a 3rd party game if they have Nintendo games to pick from?

      Yes indeed, Nintendo's games are so good it kills the 3rd parties.

  • Nintendo "hiding in it's niche market" keeps it being out Playstation 2ed by Sony. The Console industry is so big these days that it can hold 2 or maybe 3 players.

    At least Nintendo knows the market segment it's aiming at (budget[ish] gaming for younger kids) - XBOX at the moment is trying to do everything for everyone and not being all that successful at it - despite millions spent (and lost).

  • This new quality control system of yours is working great! Now if you could just alienate a few more companies, like THQ and TDK, I think you'd have a strongest library out there.

  • No Loss (Score:1)

    by J3M ( 546439 )
    I had Driver and Driver 2 for the PSOne. While they were fun, it's not a big loss for the Cube if we miss out on the third. I bought my Cube for my kids, who now have to fight me for it because the games are so darned fun to play! Out of the games I have, more are Nintendo's own than third party anyway.

  • niche? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Funk_dat69 ( 215898 )
    I think its funny that Nintendo has a reputation for appealing to a niche market, when actually they try to market their games and hardware toward a more general audience (kids and adults included).

    Sony (with MS trying to steal their cake), it seems, markets towards a more specific group of people, that being the male teenager. It's just that this specific group BUYS GAMES LIKE MAD, and makes up the biggest percentage of gamers.

    Funny how that works...
  • Come on Atari. Now you've agreed not to release your T3 game on the Gamecube, its just two small steps to not releasing this pile of crap at all.

    This is yet another "Crap company decides to not release crap game on the Cube" story, nothing more.
  • Personally I have played and enjoyed consoles since the 2600. I did have pong first but it lost it's charm very quickly. After the 2600 I had a NES and let me tell you it was gamers heaven compared to the 2600. After the NES I had a SNES and again heaven was reclaimed anew. I also bought a Genesis too (used) but just for sonic and PGA Golf. After that I bought a N64 and damn was I impressed Goldeneye remains one of my favorites to this day. I also had a Play Station at the time and did not like it as
    • v. gammed, gamming, gams
      v. intr.
      To hold a visit, especially while at sea.

      gaming ( P ) Pronunciation Key (gmng)
      n.
      Gambling, especially casino gambling.
      The playing of games, especially video games.

      How old are you, nephew? Big boys use a spell checker before going on a rant. And notice, once again, a pro-Nintendo post ENTIRELY devoid of actual data and full of personal assertions without evidence.

      Atari is irrelevant. It's like taking a bucket of water out of the ocean and then checking to see how

Slashdot Top Deals

Remember, UNIX spelled backwards is XINU. -- Mt.

Close