Nintendo Going Online, Releasing New Games 112
GamesIndustry.biz has an article up about the Big N's future plans. Shigeru Miyamoto stated recently that Nintendo plans to be fully supporting online play within a few years, with the DS leading the way. From the article: "Miyamoto, credited as the design genius behind key Nintendo franchises including Zelda and Mario, told the magazine that online gaming will reach the mainstream within three to four years, and that Nintendo will be moving in that direction as a result." Gamespot also has details on upcoming Gamecube games, including another Mario, the next Legend of Zelda, Donkey Konga 3, Mario Baseball, and a new Kirby game.
Will reach the mainstream? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Will reach the mainstream? (Score:2)
Nintendo's caught playing catchup with Sony yet ag
Re:Will reach the mainstream? (Score:2)
Nintendo's caught playing catchup with Sony yet again because of that mistake...."
Nintendo isn't
Re:Will reach the mainstream? (Score:2, Insightful)
In short, kids would be swearing, doing immature things like pausing 40 times. Not to mention years ago when gamecube was under construction, they weren't sure if TCP/IP would be too complicated for young audiences. That's how
Re:Will reach the mainstream? (Score:3, Insightful)
Niether are true. Nintendo's not opposed to on-line gaming, they're opposed to making a bad business move. Either on-line gaming is free to the customer at the big N's expense, or big N has to charge a fee and scare away a bunch of customers. Sony and MS aren't forcing Nintendo in this direction, they're not even very successful with their services. If anyth
Re:Will reach the mainstream? (Score:2)
Re:Will reach the mainstream? (Score:2)
And nobody's made a good business of it.
Re:Will reach the mainstream? (Score:2)
This is the first time I've heard any of this (especially the FF XI part). You might be right, but can you give me some sources?
Re:Will reach the mainstream? (Score:2)
Console based on-line gaming is just plain not a successful venture.
What's flamebait about my post?
Saying that Xbox Live is not very successful is either flamebait, inaccurate, or at least premature. 1.5 million paying subscribers, pre Halo 2, is not bad. Not great, but not exactly a failure.
Not a successful venture? Based on what? Because you're not profitable enough 2 years into a long te
Re:Will reach the mainstream? (Score:2)
Do you envision 10 million people using it and turning over a nice profit for MS? From your interesting choice of words "Not great, but not exactly a failure" I'm guessing you're not as optimistic. Frankly, there is little reason to believe a significant number of people would be willing to pay $10+ a month for an on-line service for gaming, especially whe
Re:Will reach the mainstream? (Score:1)
Re:Will reach the mainstream? (Score:2)
Why? Cheating...the bane of the online gamer. (Or the joy of some fucking knuckleheads)
If you let people run servers on their PC's, you are going to have tons of cheaters- it is a sad fact.
Personally, I would much rather play on Xbox Live than PC games, mostly due to that reason.
Yay b0rked link (Score:2)
Re:Yay b0rked link (Score:1)
At least it's a start... (Score:4, Interesting)
Online support for the DS would give them an easy chance to practice. It's a small group of users. And besides, it wouldn't take much bandwidth to serve DS games.
Re:At least it's a start... (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm probably in the minority here, but I love offline gaming and hate online gaming. Maybe the games have improved a bit, but the last time I played a game online, I had trouble finding people who suck as bad as I do, and getting killed repeatedly is not very fun. Also, the average gamer's maturity level leaves something to be desired. They appearently seem to enjoy linking one's sexuality with one's skill in a particular game. Not sure how those are coorelated, I chock it up to poor math education.
In contrast, to me playing in someone's living room with a bunch of good friends and some booze is much more enjoyable. You can catch up while blasting eachother and/or sending your sphere-enclosed primate off a cliff. I don't get that much time to play games, so when I do play them, I don't really want to have to deal with the frustrations that I perceive to be common in online gaming.
Re:At least it's a start... (Score:2)
I totally support you, and you are not alone in the situation.
Re:At least it's a start... (Score:2)
Re:At least it's a start... (Score:2)
Halo 2's system of "you don't find servers, they find you" is what people where complaining about when Halo 2 first came out (earlier this month).
But that system is what makes Halo 2 the best on-line game out there right now. I just go onto Live, and it finds people who suck just as much as I do. And as I get better, the opponents get better.
I've played over 150 Halo 2 games on Live so far, and I've only run across a few jerks. I was purposely TK'd ONCE, and I got into one game where i
Re:At least it's a start... (Score:2)
Of course, my one and only story submission to Slashdot was a story talking about how crappy Burnout 3's on-line functionality was- but that was before EA fixed it.
Re:At least it's a start... (Score:1)
Re:At least it's a start... (Score:2)
They just want a good business model.
--
Wiki de Ciencia Ficcion y Fantasia [uchile.cl]
Re:At least it's a start... (Score:2)
Nintendo has supported online games right along, but it sees online gaming as a niche market that it could not hope to turn a profit on. So they give people like SEGA the tools to make a PSO if they feel the investment is worth it. Much like Sony did with the PS2 I might add.
When online
the second link is wrong (Score:1)
Within 3-4 Years? (Score:5, Insightful)
If I had just bought a DS, which hypes online capabilites as a major feature, I would be very annoyed that I had to wait 3 years before I got any games that supported it.
Dreamcast? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Within 3-4 Years? (Score:1, Insightful)
Doesn't this strike people as Nintendo being stunningly... Uninnovative? A case of 'well, everyone else will be doing it, so we will too'?
Japan, probably Nintendo's biggest market, has pretty good broadband uptake - apparently as of Sept
Re:Within 3-4 Years? (Score:2)
When it comes down to survival of the fittest, you can't not follow the herd. It's not original, to be sure, but if it ensues that Nintendo will live on for the next few generations of consoles, why not do it?
Re:Within 3-4 Years? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Within 3-4 Years? (Score:2)
Re:Within 3-4 Years? (Score:1)
Re:Within 3-4 Years? (Score:4, Funny)
Upcoming GameCube games (Score:5, Informative)
MainStream? (Score:1)
Re:MainStream? (Score:2)
Finnaly!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Finnaly!!! (Score:1)
Re:Finnaly!!! (Score:1)
Re:Finnaly!!! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Finnaly!!! (Score:2)
Because those franchises are so much worse than the slew of mediocre Crash Bandicoot games the PSX had, or the "Get this: let's take the colorful and enjoyable Jak and Daxter, and make it all dark and stuff. It'll sell millions!" mentality that Sony's got. Nintendo makes fun games that don't try to hide what they are wi
Re:Finnaly!!! (Score:1)
Re:Finnaly!!! (Score:1)
Re:Finnaly!!! (Score:1)
Key word (Score:4, Insightful)
Online gaming for consoles isn't anywhere near mainstream as of now, even with services like Xbox Live.
Re:Key word (Score:2)
Believe me anyone can use live. Specially now they have the "automatch" thingie, (some people dont even know what a server is!) They dont even need to know how to type anymore (or speak for that matter)
Im just waiting on my
Re:Key word (Score:2)
I own a GameCube and really like it. It's a great little machine and see nothing tech-wise that would prevent it from being a great online console. The only
Re:Key word (Score:2)
Guess you've never bothered to look at SOCOM's sales figures.
Re:Key word (Score:2)
Less then 5% of PS2 owners playing games online is not mainstream.
Re:Key word (Score:2)
Online play made SOCOM outsell the vast majority of other PS2 games. It's as "mainstream" as any other game.
Is Soul Calibur not mainstream? It sold less than SOCOM. Fighting games must not be mainstream.
Hmmm (Score:5, Interesting)
When Nintendo finally moved to disc-based media with the GCN, they moved because load-times were far less of an issue with the current technology. They waited for it so they wouldn't rub their consumers the wrong way. While I loved the PSone, looking back, the load times were atrocious. Piracy of GCN games is near impossible and they're still able to keep up with the pack in most areas (with only the biggest games suffering from the proprietary media size limit).
The DS is another fine example waiting to unfold. Nintendo is just now doing 3D pocket gaming. There have been plenty of technologically superior portable game consoles capable of 3D, yet Nintendo's gameboy series has always done better in the market. There's no question that the DS is less powerful than the PSP, but I think Nintendo is more concerned with the quality of the game rather than the graphical superiority.
This is not to say that Nintendo made the right choice in waiting to advance their technologies, but I am saying that when Nintendo does enter the online arena, it will be a high-quality entrance, as history has proved. They might lose some sales because online console capabilities is a selling point for some people, but I think Nintendo has sent the message time and time again that they're not after the gamers who want bleeding edge technology; they're after the gamers who want high-quality, rich gaming experiences.
(and yes, I'm aware of Nintendo's forays into the online [n-sider.com] and CD-based [wikipedia.org] markets)
Re:Hmmm (Score:5, Interesting)
Nintendo 64 basically had basically the same graphics, the games were very small,simple and childish (with RARE and N exceptions!), quite expensive (zelda 64==$99!) and worst of all extremely scarce! worthwhile games came each 6 months to a full year!
Meanwhile the neighbours (teens lime me btw) were playing FF VII,KOF,SF,TEKKEN3 and Resident evil 2 and watching demos of the coming MGS in their PSX. It took me just one (1) visit to the home next door to realize that the n64 had to go. YES the psx had load times but by my 20th consecutive hours playing FFVII (and no, not replaying the same levels 10 times which was the n64 case), I simply couldnt care less.
Nintendo did many great things in their time (specially in the snes) and did great games for the n64 (not many but they did), however not placing a CD tray in the n64 because of "load times" thus giving birth to the psx, has to be one of the greatest mistakes in game history.
IMO announcing they are going online now is the equivalent of a big: "OOOOOPS!"
Why thank you! btw why didnt you thought that BEFORE everybody with a cube had to buy 4 fucking gameboys just to play zelda 4 swords? and crystal chronicles?!
Are you feeling lucky? Go ahead MOD my day!
Re:Hmmm (Score:2, Interesting)
Nintendo sold 30 million of those 'greatest mistakes in game history'. Frankly, if the N64 had been more like the Playstation, it really isn't all that clear they would have done better.
a.) Sony flooded stores with 3rd party crap
Re:Hmmm (Score:2)
I doubt it. Going on-line isn't exactly causing Sony or MS to build a 3 cubic acre money bin to swim in. Er.. have you checked how many sales SOCOM, HALO 2 and how many people is buying live to play Halo 2 right about now?
You can argue all you want, but I seriously doubt halo 2 and socom would had ranked that many sales if they werent online.
Re:Hmmm (Score:2)
Re:Hmmm (Score:2)
If 10 million copies of Halo2 end up sold, and there are only 2 million people using XBOX Live, then your statement would be false.
Frankly, I do not know how many people are subscribed to that service. If you can tell me it's a pretty substantial number (preferably backed up with a source), I'll retract that comment.
Re:Hmmm (Score:2)
Re:Hmmm (Score:2)
Ah... Hadn't considered that. Boy I'm torn. On the one hand, I could see that making the game really popular. On the other, it's difficult to imagine millions of people headed that route. Big question mark over my head.
" I also doubt those are halo 2 actual sells."
I really should have clarified my line of thought. I was thinking "in the future...". The first Halo became a must-have title for the XBOX. I'm fairly certain it's enjoyed sal
Re:Hmmm (Score:2)
(see the report on square enix profits rising thanks to FFXI)
I expect Nintendo to understand this, and bring on a Pokemon MMORPG.
--
Informacion sobre Robotech [uchile.cl]
Re:Hmmm (Score:1)
Re:Hmmm (Score:2)
The page talks about robotech, makes a little overview of the plot, and analyses its impact on japan, the west hemisphere and Chile (my country).
The part about Chile maybe be interesting, as I point out how Robotech may have helped the perception of the militar dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet on the young generation which watched the awesome adventures of the space militars.
I have many friends who tried (and some succeede
Re:Hmmm (Score:1)
Ah that sounds really cool! Think I'll needta fire up BabelFish and have a peek!
Thanks.
Re:It is clear, you've just got clouded glasses on (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It is clear, you've just got clouded glasses on (Score:2)
Actually, that had more to do with the quality games on the N64. There were quite a few must-haves including Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, Goldeneye, etc.
" I bet the president of Nintendo wanted to kill himself after he allowed the hardware team to botch N64 hardware design."
I doubt it. It was not botched, nor was it unsuccessful. If anything, it gave Nintendo the ability to survive the battle against Son
Re:It is clear, you've just got clouded glasses on (Score:3, Insightful)
The reason was the developers jumped ship to PS1 due to superior storage capacity that enabled you to make superior games with more content, better textures, and graphics then you could on a cart, lets face it, Cartridges were measured in mere megabits, a CD is 650Mbytes, there is no way you would want to develop for a cartridge.
CDs are cheaper to manufacture than carts, thus Sony offered better royalty rates. It wasn't that developers suddenly could do amazing shit with their game
Re:It is clear, you've just got clouded glasses on (Score:1, Troll)
Unlike you, who feels good about being modded up 1 to a 2, I don't feel the need to try and Karma Whore. I've had my fair share of 3s, 4s, and 5s on posts; more than enough to have my posts start at a 2 moderation. Karma Whoring is not necessary for me; if my posts get modded, they get modded, if they don't they don't. Either way I don't take enough time to check /. enough to bother most of the time. Recent healt
Re:It is clear, you've just got clouded glasses on (Score:1)
Dreamcast, Sega Saturn and the Sega CD all had CD/Optical disc based hardware and failed because they had no developer support or killer app exclusives to sell the system, you prove once again you responded out of knee jerk reaction rather then rational thought. You couldn't see the forest from the trees in my post, I
Re:It is clear, you've just got clouded glasses on (Score:2, Informative)
I just wanted to mention that the original Metal Gear [wikipedia.org] wasn't released for the NES. It was originally released on the MSX [wikipedia.org]. The NES version was a port from the original MSX title. A pretty bad port I should say considering you don't even see Metal Gear in the NES version. If you're a pretty big fan of the series, I'd reccommend downloading a MSX emulator and trying out the original and it's sequel Metal
Re:Hmmm (Score:1)
Does Miyamoto Have Some Ideas? (Score:4, Interesting)
Heck, if they're working with Square Enix, we might even see some kind of FFIX NDS connectivity as a proof of concept (wild speculation!). This might be followed by a version of Crystal Chronicles with online elements or full blown online multiplayer.
Re:Does Miyamoto Have Some Ideas? (Score:2)
Plus, it's cel-shaded graphics and low level of gore and realistic violence may help it appeal to a wider audience, tapping some demographics that cu
Re:Does Miyamoto Have Some Ideas? (Score:3, Funny)
I'm sure those games would (will?) sell well, but I hope Nintendo has something more exciting planned. I for one don't want another MMPOG "level treadmill" or have to deal with any more smack talking power gamers. I want I new drug that will make me want to string more Cat-5 to my entertainment center...
Nintendo official announcement (Score:1, Funny)
Nintendo PR: "OOOOOOPS!"
Wise words there in deed, now back to our regularly scheduled thread show
Go ahead, MOD my day!
Re:Nintendo official announcement (Score:2)
Re:hmm (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:hmm (Score:1)
Re:hmm (Score:3, Funny)
Re:hmm (Score:1)
Re:hmm (Score:1)
Microsoft... as always, just playing catch up and stealing all the good ideas.
Re:hmm (Score:2, Informative)
Re:hmm (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:hmm (Score:4, Insightful)
It's funny you should mention that. Me and a friend were discussing that very topic over lunch last week when both of us had classes canceled. He raised the legitimate point that, from the outside looking in, Nintendo doesn't seem to be innovating that much. I mean, there's well over 40 different Mario [wikipedia.org] titles to date. However, for the most part, I've found that when Nintendo licenses their characters into a new spin-off game, it's actually quite innovative. I can say with a certain amount of confidence that Mario Kart, Mario Tennis and Mario Golf are all really fun and different from any cart/tennis/golf game I've played. If they were simply cart/tennis/golf sims, then it would be a perfectly valid point to state that no innovation has been done, but that is not the case. All of the spin-off franchises brought something new to the new medium of sport, the hallmark "Nintendo quirkiness", or in the case of the Zelda series, you get a graphical overhaul/new battle system/new multiplayer features/new style of story-telling.
With that said, I'm looking forward to Mario Baseball. It will be interesting to see what spin Nintendo takes on the sport.
I really big to differ on the Sony note. Nintendo lost because Sony is just plain better at courting the consumer and the developer. While I'm a huge fan of the Final Fantasy series, there's not a tremendous amount of innovation between 7 and 10, aside from battle system improvements and new characters and story, it's pretty much more of the same. And I wouldn't have it any other way for FF, that's how I like it, but it's not innovative. Generic cookie-cutter sports titles, Yet Another Animated 2-D Generic Marvel vs. Capcom vs. KOF vs. SNK vs. SF games, Yet Another 'I Wish I Was Final Fantasy II So Bad' Sprite-Based RPG, all found a home on the PSX. Sony won because they knew which buttons to press while Nintendo was asleep on the job, not because they were innovative.
Re:hmm (Score:4, Insightful)
I think that Nintendo probably goes something like "Let's make baseball game", and come up with the idea for the game - then when they need to stick some characters in, they pick from their stock selection of Mario/Zelda, etc.
On the other hand, another company probably goes something like "Let's make a another Mario game". Then when they need to actually have some gameplay, they stick some stock baseball game in.
I think the use of Mario is more to just place their trademark on the game, more than anything. Of course, the name recognition helps as well.
Re:hmm (Score:1)
New Zelda Game (Score:2)
Donkey Konga... 3? (Score:1)
New Mario Game (Score:2)
What? Mario Baseball?! Come on, Nintendo... Mario Sunshine can't be your only Mario platformer to offer for the system!