Nintendo Confirms New Console In 2005
GweeDo writes "It is official. Nintendo will be releasing their next console right along side Sony's PS3 in 2005. The news was released here by cube.ign.com. They also went on to say that Retro Studies is working on a Prequel to Metroid Prime. The best quote to all you people that said Nintendo was leaving the console market is this: 'Iwata emphasized Nintendo's plans to stick in the console industry by saying, "When we withdraw from the home game console, that's when we withdraw from the video game business."'"
... we all couldn't imagine a videogame market without a SEGA home console and, who could have seen it before, releasing games for Sony and Nintendo consoles!
This is not intended as flamebait for the SEGA lovers, since I was a fervent DC evangelist since the day it was released in Japan.
So, a market without Nintendo hardware is possible, just as a market without SEGA hardware is now. We still get their great games, but not on their hardware.
The reason Nintendo fans buy their systems is for the Mario, Metroid, Zelda, Pokemon type games. These are just geared for all ages. Nintendo tries to capture the largest market and make truely enjoyable products for ALL gamers. I would hate to see big bouncing breast volleyball games with medicore ratings instead of a damn good Mario game.
Uh, dude, console lifecycles have always been 4 to 5 YEARS. That's a lot of time to play with them.
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
Title exclusivity sucks ass. I hate that each of these consoles has at least one extremely compelling title that is available only on that console.
It means having to have multiple consoles in order to play the games that you want to play... My house now has all three current generation consoles (Got my son a PS2 Christmas of last year, picked up an Xbox for myself last summer, and ended up getting a Gamecube this year at the after Christmas sales).
At least I'm covered when a new game comes out, but even then I'm faced with difficult decisions. When we want a game that's available for more than one platform, we have to decide which version to get, resigned to the knowledge that we're gonna be committed to playing said game at one of three locations (The Home Theater, the kids' playroom, or my son's bedroom).
It makes PC gaming look so much more attractive than consoles, knowing that I had software portability; that one title could be played on any of the PCs.
I also have to concede that First person shooters suck on consoles. I long for the Keyboard and Mouse combo whenever I play Halo. I'll never be half as good at it as I am at Quake.
I also have to take issue with your assertion about Better Prices. It may be valid for the hardware (PS2 and Xbox for $200, Gamecube for $150), but it's completely invalid for the game titles themselves. A new game costs $50 (at a retail store), regardless of the console you're buying it for. I have seen no indication that games for Platform X are any less expensive than they are for Platforms Y or Z.
I wish there was a single platform specification, with multiple hardware vendors building compatible systems, all capable of running the same software. Then you'd have real choices.
(Oh yeah, I guess there is... They call them PCs)
For those that would die defending it, Freedom
has a sweet taste that the protected will never know.
I see a LOT of complaints that Nintendo makes "kiddy", that they don't make anything an 18-30 year old gamer would want to play, etc., etc.
The complaints obviously don't come from anyone who has actually played a GameCube game for an extended period of time. Nintendo has done an excellent job appealing to both young kids and older GAMERS, IMO.
All of Nintendo's "big" GameCube games are extremely fun to play. Cartoonish characters
appeal to younger players, but it is the solid, fun games that have kept Nintendo fans loyal since the 80s.
Take SSB: Melee, for example. It is filled with characters kids will like based on appearance. Mario, Luigi, Pikachu, Yoshi, etc. It is also extremely fun, but has tons of retro Nintendo goodness that only an older gamer will appreciate (I doubt an 8-Year old understands who the "Ice Climbers" are).
Animal Crossing is yet another game that looks like it is "for kids" at first glance, but delivers some interesting, innovative gaming as well as the ability to play old NES games... a feature that was obviously designed for older fans.
And then, there is Metroid Prime, which is probably the best console game released within the last two years.
Most of the GC games can be enjoyed by anyone. As more people who grew up with the original NES start to have children, Nintendo might actually be able to reclaim the top spot. Why? Because parents will be able to purchase their family a console that they can enjoy for the retro-ness, and their kids can also enjoy.
Honestly, my PS2 got more use in 2002 as a DVD player and a PS1. I haven't been impressed with too many games that have come out in 2002 for it. On the other hand, the my Cube has been getting a lot of play time, and will continue to do so since Link and I will have some serious princess rescuing to do come Spring.
What Nintendo HAS NOT done well is appealed to casual idiot who thinks that having sex with a hooker and then running her over to get your money back is the epitomy of good, "mature," gameplay. This is a good thing.
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
If all else was equal, would there be a good reason to get a GameCube over a PS2 or XBox?
The only legitimate reason to buy any console is because it has games you want to play, and can't play elsewhere.
I'm going to snag a Gamecube (in addition to my PS2 and XBox) because of Metroid Prime and Eternal Darkness, not because it can process 76.87 jiggawatts per cubic tachyon pulse.
"...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
Your kidding right?
I have a total investment in my PS2 and games of around $1200. I have an investment in my computer of around $4000. How is that better price to performance? There are a lot of better games available for my PS2 than there are for my computer. They also work right out of the box. I don't have to mess with Windows. I dont' have to hunt down new drivers. I don't have to install the latest patches. I just pop in the cd/dvd, fire up the console, and play the damn game. That is how gaming should be. I also get to play from the comfort of my couch.
Also, how often do you upgrade your computer? Do you still have the same computer you had 5 years ago and does it play the latest games? Probably not. Just like I upgrade my computer system every couple of years, I don't want to be using the same gaming hardware for the next 20 years. The NES was great but it had it's day. The same with all of the other consoles that came and went. I still have a ton of PS1 games that I play but I don't play them as much as the newer PS2 games because most of the PS2 games are better. They have better graphics, better sound, etc. The technology has advanced and to utilize the newer technology, you need newer hardware.
It's much more expensive to upgrade a computer than it is to buy a new console. How much is a "nice" graphics card these days? You can spend more on just a graphics card than on a console and still have a lot of other parts to buy, and the first computer you purchase will cost much more because you have nothing to start with and to compare price to performance, you need a decent gaming computer, not the Wally-World special.
How is it that one careless match can start a forest fire, but it takes a whole box to start a campfire?