Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


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

Harrison On Nintendo's Shortcomings, Hopes 42

Posted by simoniker from the honesty-best-policy dept.
Thanks to EGM for their interview with Nintendo vice-president George Harrison, discussing the current state of the GameCube, as well as plans for the future. Harrison is surprisingly honest, commenting: "I think we've had individual successes with things like Zelda: The Wind Waker and Smash Bros. and others. If there's a shortcoming for us on GameCube, it's not delivering enough consistent breadth and variety of software. That really is the key." He also explains the exact reasoning behind the GameCube's recent price drop: "We see people buying it for $99 as a second system; potentially someone who has owned a PlayStation 2 for three years already and know that they have another two or so years to wait [for the next console hardware generation]."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Harrison On Nintendo's Shortcomings, Hopes More

Harrison On Nintendo's Shortcomings, Hopes

Comments Filter:
  • Check out this [totalvideogames.com] article.

  • So what you're saying... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Dancin_Santa ( 265275 ) <DancinSanta@gmail.com> on Thursday October 30, 2003 @04:12AM (#7345662) Journal
    George Harrison: If there's a shortcoming for us on GameCube, it's not delivering enough consistent breadth and variety of software. That really is the key.

    It's going to take time. A whole lot of precious time. It's going to take patience and time. To do it, to do it, to do it, to do it, to do it, to do it right.

  • He's got a point (Score:4, Interesting)

    by NanoGator ( 522640 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @04:17AM (#7345679) Homepage Journal
    " I think that, clearly, the improvement in graphics and presentation by the systems is reaching diminishing returns. We've talked about this before, but the reason for a consumer to buy the next generation of hardware, for many of the competitors, is not going to be because the graphics are prettier. It'll ultimately come back to what is a unique gaming experience."

    I think he's got that point nailed. Every generation, the artists have fewer and fewer limitations for creating realtime 3D graphics. We're at a point, even today, where the artist's style and vision are relative easy to achieve. How can the next generation of graphics be to the GameCube what it was to the N64? Beyond a few more polys and real-time shadow casting, not a whole heck of a lot. Whatever happens for the next systems, there's got to be a new dimension of gaming.

    Nintendo's aware of this. And since it's not so obvious what the next breath-taking move is (i.e. with the N64, it was faster frame rates and higher resolution) I'm damn curious what Nintendo comes up with.

    • Re:He's got a point (Score:4, Funny)

      by SmallFurryCreature ( 593017 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @04:58AM (#7345792) Journal
      BULLSHIT.

      There are still an awfull lot of limitations. If you don't believe me fire up a FPS editor and try to create a truly nice level.

      Sure for now the graphics look great. But then they also looked great a couple of years ago. Then new hardware came along and you went wow and promply forgot about how you thought the old games looked great.

      Sure sadly an awfull lot of games seem to just use the extra power of the hardware for bigger textures and more rounded boobs. Doesn't mean you can't use it for different purposes. Like say populating a city with cars and pedesastrians for you to drive through? Notice how older games of this style didn't have civi cars? Why do think this was?

      Yes I agree, it is going to be more about what you are going to do with the extra power of future hardware. No need to increase framerates above the refresh of the display or resolutions bigger then the number of pixels. But you can also use the extra power to create a more believable world. A world in wich when you chance the equipment on your character this is reflected in the graphics. A world in wich charactes properly walk on the floor even if it is a staircase not just hover above it. A world in wich cars propely move on their suspension so you can see if the car in front of you is about to loose control or is increasing his turn to close of the inside for you. Where on closing in on an enemy flight you can spot wether they already dropped their bombs so you can save your bullets for the other flight that has yet to reach their target. A fps where the enemy is carrying an m60 and you can see how many bullets there are left on his belt.

      Sure I may be dreaming but I think their is still an awfull long way to go. I have seen the shift from where you needed to consult the manual to see what the hell that red thing on the screen was supposed to be to where it is obvious that you have come across a med pack. Now I want to play a game where I can no longer see that the designer had to restrict himself to an X number of polygons.

      Oh and yes I do own a gba. So no I am not totally blinded by pretty graphics. But there is a reason people are excited about the PSP. Can you guess what it is?

      • Re:He's got a point (Score:3, Insightful)

        by DarkZero ( 516460 )
        Sure for now the graphics look great. But then they also looked great a couple of years ago. Then new hardware came along and you went wow and promply forgot about how you thought the old games looked great.

        Sure sadly an awfull lot of games seem to just use the extra power of the hardware for bigger textures and more rounded boobs. Doesn't mean you can't use it for different purposes. Like say populating a city with cars and pedesastrians for you to drive through? Notice how older games of this style didn'
        • I don't think he meant that we've reached the peak of video game graphics, but rather that the next generation of consoles and possibly even the one after that aren't going to have that "HOLY SHIT THIS IS AWESOME!" factor that, say, the Super Nintendo did with you loaded up Super Mario World for the first time or the PlayStation had when you loaded up FFVII for the first time. You may see more objects, less fog, less loading time, etc. but you're not going to see something that really shocks you graphically

      • Re:He's got a point (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 30, 2003 @06:05AM (#7345951)
        You know, just as a reeeeeal off topic note, the other day I was playing Wind Waker and was guiding Link up a slope. I had the quick thought to stand Link parallel to the slope and see if one of his feet would go through the ground or stay in the air. I was rather impressed to see that his knees were bent properly, the way you would expect them to be, and there was no "through the ground" action.

        Like I said, waaaay off topic, and not even really what you're talking about, but I thought it was slightly neat when I saw it.

        • Re:He's got a point (Score:3, Insightful)

          by kisrael ( 134664 ) *
          No, that's exactly on-topic, I think, or at least this subthread.

          It's amazing how scripted 3D human movement is in 90% of games. Take Soul Caliber 2; during some of Voldo's victory poses (and you think they could take the time to do victory poses right, since they can be easily 100% scripted without interference from either player) his weapon passes right through the floor! That's just wrong. Essentially, what we need (well, not need, but it's a worthwhile goal) is "rag doll physics" in everything. Poly
  • of the announcements that Sega made before disbanding the Hardware section of their company. ("100 more videogames before the next Dreamcast arrives!").

    I begin thinking that something alien like a Nintendo branded X-Box is in the work...

    • Oh please... (Score:2, Insightful)

      by xQuarkDS9x ( 646166 )
      To begin with, Sega is and was never nowhere near as big as Nintendo to begin with. The only reason Sega suceeded in the 80's and 90's was because they had several 8,16,32, 64 and 128 BIT gaming systems ending with the Dreamcast, and they had their own brand names like Sonic for example.

      Seeing as the DC was the first 128 bit console it had actually beat out PS2/Xbox/Gamecube. Alas, seeing as Sega didn't do nearly enough promo and ad work on the DC, it died off and they decided to go into the software busin
      • Exact quote: "The day we stop making consoles is the day we go out of the game business, persiod." In my perfect world, all games would be available for all systems, and you would choose the systems based on price, controller, power, features etc.
      • Let's look at this.

        Nintendo started out making cards.
        Then, they made arcade boxes.
        Then, they made consoles.
        Then, they made Pokemon.
        Then, they went back to consoles.

        Sega's gone the way of Nintendo. They focus in whatever market they can make money in, as long as it's relatively consistent with the notion of being a games company.

        The problem is that there is nothing wrong with that, yet everyone sees "they've changed" and says "they're dying!" when they might not be as lucrative as before--it happens.

  • Good plan (Score:5, Interesting)

    by The_dev0 ( 520916 ) <hookerbot5000@gma[ ]com ['il.' in gap]> on Thursday October 30, 2003 @06:50AM (#7346059) Homepage Journal
    We see people buying it for $99 as a second system

    I reckon this is an excellent move, as all the nintendo fanatics bought one in the first few weeks, but this allows them to get a chance in the homes of those with a PS2 and/or XBox, and let the games do the talking.

    I think Nintendo is taking the right steps to disprove the misguided notion that the GCN is a kiddie's system, and for 99 bucks, a lot more people would take an interest. I could definitely justify buying a PS/2 for 100 bucks with a couple of titles, and the same goes for the XBox. I reckon Nintendo are counting on people buying a 100 buck GCN, one or two of their really huge titles, and giving any financial loss on the discount back to the big N in game sales.

    • And they were dead right - there are enough games I've been interested in for the platform (Zelda, Metroid, Rogue Squadron to name a few) that once the price came down, I decided it was worth it as a second console system.

      PS2's software variety still kills GameCube, but as you alluded to, Nintendo's price drop allows them to attract the geeks that are interested in some of the Nintendo-exclusive games but didn't want to buy a second console at full price.

      Give a geek a price break and catch him with a bit

  • yep yep yep (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Historically game console sales have always been driven by realtively few "must have" games. The SNES sold because people WANTED to play Super Mario World, and especially Street Fighter II (before some smart ass goes and says that the Sega Genesis had SF2 also, you're right and wrong. SNES had a long exclusivity period, and this really boosted sales. Eventually the Genesis got SF2 Turbo.)

    To a large degree Sonic was a "must play" on the Genesis.

    What are "must have" games these days? For me, there are few i
    • I would consider the zelda games (wind waker) to be a must play game. I counting on mario kart to deliver as well....

      -Sean

    • For me, there are few if any games that I'm really itching for like I did back in the day when I wanted Super Mario World and SF2. The closest thing to a must have today is Half-Life 2. Am I just getting old and jaded? Or are games just not as fun anymore?

      A little from Column A, a little from Column B...I've found that the attraction I had to video games when I was 7 - 12 years old isn't what it was, but games like Vice City, Half-Life 2, Max Payne 2, etc. still deserve anticipation and excitement. It's

    • Didn't the Genesis get Street Fighter II: Championship Edition, and then SNES got Street Fighter II Turbo?
    • What are "must have" games these days?

      Depends on the types of games you like to play. Each system has some 'must have' titles, but if they don't appeal to you then the whole console just looks pretty pointless.

      The XBox has Halo and KOTOR, and possibly now Crimson Skies. If none of these appeal to you, then you can probably find most of the other good XBox titles on other platforms. Additionally, each is possibly the only title in each particular genre on that platform that is going to appeal to you. The
    • I'm a big PC gamer, and up till I got a GBA hadn't owned a console since the Genesis. When I look at what's currently out there, GameCube is the obvious choice. Sure PS2 has an assload of games, but most of them suck. GameCube on the other hand costs next to nothing ($99? That's like $20 more than a game!) and has a bunch of really good looking titles. Plus, with the GameBoy Player I'll be able to play all the GBA games I already have on the TV, or even multi with my GBA. XBox's big selling point is L
    • What are the "must have" games of today? I believe it all depends on what the player truly enjoys. For example, I am a hardcore RPG fan. I don't always like to play shooters. But every once in a while there is a game that comes out that I just get hooked on, like Medal of Honor: Frontline and SOCOM: Navy Seals. Somebody else might think that those games suck, but that dosen't mean that they aren't "must have" quality. It just depends on the players preferences.
  • I don't really game all that much, and I don't own a current generation console. but with the drop to 99$ I will be picking up a gamecube soon.

    Don't underestimate non-fanatical gamers, I see $99 and think even if all I ever do is play mario kart or what ever with my wife and its not that expensive. at $200 or $300 PLUS game price your starting to think "am I really going to play it that much, maybe I should just upgrade my computer..."

  • Well you're half right (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Daetrin ( 576516 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:52PM (#7350077)
    So I don't think that we're missing anything by not being involved [in online gaming]. I will say, though, that it certainly has played out the way we thought it would in this generation. The hype may have been more important than the actual substance.

    Good to see that acceptance of the truth is begining to leak through the denial. The online capabilities have been a big selling factor for the XBox, even though most people don't use it. PS2 is holding steady, they've got online play although not out of the box. GameCube however has been getting slammed by the press and message board junkies for their lack of online support.

    It doesn't matter that most people won't use the online capabilities much, they still buy into the hype. If someone thought that two consoles were equally valuable for the price, and then you added online capabilities to one and not the other, that would probably influence their decision.

    Plus of course there's always the gap between impulse and follow-through. Even if someone is never going to do much online play, they might like to think that they will. I'm a friendless geek (well, not entirely friendless, but all my friends who play games live in other states, so close enough =) but i'll still let multiplayer capabilities of games influence my purchasing decisions. I'll be more likely to purchase a game with cool multi-player aspects in the vain hope that i'll find someone to play it with sometime.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Being against torture ought to be sort of a multipartisan thing." -- Karl Lehenbauer, as amended by Jeff Daiell, a Libertarian

Close