Slashdot Mirror
GameCube Production to Halt
avayre writes "Nintendo is to press the pause button on production of its GameCube consoles while it clears inventory of unsold machines. the company's president said on Thursday. But Satoru Iwata promised the struggling games company was developing a radical new product to be announced next year -- however he gave few details save to say it would be a departure from mainstream gaming consoles 'that will have a big impact on the world.'" My prediction is that it's just downtime until Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles ships. That'll help move those units that are gathering dust.
So is it just me, or does this remind anyone else of the whole Sega kaboozle - Genesis went down, Sega released the radical Dreamcast, and... well everyone knows what happened next...
"struggling games company was developing a radical new product to be announced"
I make that the "stop" button.
would it actually hurt Nintendo at all to follow Sega's path and go multiplatform? With the Game Boy raking in huge wads of cash they could focus on making those classics for Xbox/PS2, slicing a chunk of the market from their would be competitors and spread the ole 'Games are fun' ethos for which Nintendo has become famous for, without get caught up in the hardware wars.
Mother, do you think they'll like this sig?
Struggling games company? Yes the GameCube isn't selling well but that does not mean that Nintendo is struggling. Far from it. In fact just the other day at PlanetGameCube they posted a story about Nintendo posting a profit. Doesn't sound like struggling to me.
"Armed forces abroad are of little value unless there is prudent counsel at home" - Cicero
"this is not entirely true. nintendo's primary market is the japanese gamer, who tends to have greater affinity for the "cartoony" character. this doesn't play as well in the west because there is significantly more cultural definition between what is childish and what is more "adult". thus, the western gamer will tend to denigrate a game with cartoony graphics as childish, while and eastern gamer will be unaffected by it or even gravitate towards it.
think *anime* "
Ugh. Anime sucks.
But you have a point. Its amusing how the Western "violence and power over people is macho" is perceived by many people as mature - see most films, hip hop/rap music etc. Its all about attempting to force `respect` via violence/threats, rather than earning it. I guess its an instant-gratification thing, like the quest for fat-reduction pills and surgery, rather than eating the right food and excercising.
As I recall, when Nintendo announced GC at E3 a few years ago, they made the statement that it was aimed at anyone who enjoys playing games. I'm 23, I own a gamecube, with ambitions to buy the other 2 systems (PS2 for FF, Xbox for Steel Battalion), and out of all the games I've played on any system, Nintendo games keep my attention longer than any of them, and are way more innovative and fun. As far as most of the games having cartoony graphics, the only game I can think of like that is Zelda, and since you mentioned "harmless adventure games", I think you should go back and play the Resident Evil series again.. survival horror, IMO is not a harmless adventure game. Insofar as the console market being mostly older generations, that is a byproduct of the fact that kids don't have the market power to buy stuff, combined with the fact that 90% of games on systems other than GC being rated M, sports games aside. I for one, applaud the big N for having some cojones and going and making fun, innovative games, like Pikmin and Animal Crossing(BTW, I know more adults than kids that play that) which, if people would look for a game that's not just kill people break stuff.
I have no regrets, this is the only path.
My whole life has been "UNLIMITED BLADE WORKS"
--
I always thought Nintendo was the Japanese word for "No Blood".
Seems like Nintendo'd be in a better position to go third party than Sega was. Sega, for all the great games they make, haven't been able to sell them since the Genesis days. Nintendo has a much higher "mascot factor" (imagine all the Zelda or Mario games they could sell on PS2), and they are not nearly as strapped as Sega was when the ditched the DC.
"If you think of the games that Nintendo have become famous for, most people would name those that have had Rare input"
While Goldeneye was a stunning game, and probably the second greatest console FPS ever (yes, I like Halo a lot), its worth remembering that (a) Mario 64, Mario Kart, Zelda etc. were great too, and (b) nearly all the talent at Rare has since left to do other things (Timesplitters 2 was pretty natty, thanks to ex-Goldeneye guys, for example).
Personally, I think Microsoft paid through the nose for Rare, and aren't going to come close to seeing that money back. Kameo was meant to have come out when, for example?
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"
"Games that are sophisticated require a lot of time and energy," he said. As games became more complicated, players were given up playing and this was leading to the gradual shrinkage of the market, he warned. "We are thinking of launching a completely different kind of game. We are confident that we can develop a product that anyone can enjoy and that will provide people with a new kind of excitement," he said.
My guess is that they're going to rehash the old "Silpheed", "It came from the desert" and "Ayatis" concepts, which were basically ultra spectacular, linear plot based games that were among the first true interactive movie games that were fun to play.
We might see the return of shooters such as R-Type and Einhander. And of course Mario will be stripped down to it's classic gameplay elements that made it so much fun to play.
What I want are games that are enjoyable even if played for 30 minutes. Games should make you spend your free time in an enjoyable manner, putting your head off other thoughts, and shoudn't make you waste any more time.
Super spectacular, linear story driven games are good for me, as long as they make me feel I am part of the action.
I'd like game reviewers to start thinking about this.
Hack your mind out of its sandbox.
I have a GC and a Ps2 and I much prefer the GameCube. It looks better, more consistantly good and well made games. But the reason I got a Ps2 first was because it played DVDs. This just reminds me of the problem with the N64. They went for a cartridge system instead of CD, proclaiming it quicker to load, but it didn't help them.
Rubbish. Complete and utter rubbish.
Sorry, I normally try to be more rational and thoughtful in a post, but this time I thought I'd better emphasise my position. How many of these 'rubbish' games have you played? I bought a Gamecube on the strength of just two games - Pikmin and Super Monkey Ball. Brilliant, both of them. Luigi's Mansion was also a nice change for the norm.
I tried the big sellers - Mario and Zelda, but to be honest I don't have the time for them anymore. A shame that, because both looked very enjoyable. Metroid Prime is not to my taste, but to be described as rubbish? I don't think so.
I'm no platform bigot. I own PCs running XP, PCs running Linux, a Mac Plus, an OS X-bsed POwerbook, a Playstation, a Playstation 2, a Gamecube and a couple of Gameboy Advance SPs. Frankly, I couldn't care less who produces the hardware so long as it does what I need from it. And Nintendo are kings of the non-violent, slightly off-beat fun to play games.
Cheers,
Ian
itll be a ppc970 (aka G5) and a radeon post 9800 chip. since the GC is basicly a G3 and a radeon, thisll let it be backward compatable, a HUGE selling point. I doubt theyll change the media though, maybe make it a little bigger, but still not standard. and the pricell be right. people complain that the Xbox is just a PC, well the GC isnt that far off, chip wise.
I want 2D games back.
Besides the mess with the oversized controller, if you drop the anti-Microsoft fanboy ravings - Xbox is a *better* product than the other two were offering.
I don't quite believe that it's a better product than PS2 or GCN.
First of all, what are the Xbox's exclusive, must-have games? Halo, KOTOR, Halo 2 (soon). That's all I can really think of now. There's probably more. Halo and KOTOR will be on PC soon enough, and Halo 2 will most likely be eventually. I found all of the flagship Nintendo titles extremely fun so far, and there have been plenty. Not to mention exclusive non-flagships, like Eternal Darkness.
Then you say there's Xbox-Live. While I agree that it's a good service, the voice comm takes away from the product, because there are always people who don't know how to act in public, and this should be considered public. A good community has people acting like civilized people. PC games have a much better community. Granted, it is not without people acting like idiots, but it is still much more developed. And Live is also missing out on the great EA (and I think Sega, although I'm probably wrong because they have PSO) games, such as Madden and NCAA Football, and the other sports games.
This is the way I've seen it for a while. GCN has the most must-have games (in my eyes) and the quality of the games is stunning. The PS2 has a large library of games, with a few must-haves in there, but the quality of most of them is missing. Their online strategy is also helped from EA who is running their own servers for their EA Sports games. Xbox has the least amount of must-have games, and their online library is nothing to be compared to the PC. And since I'm a large PC gamer, Xbox is insignificant to me. But that's only my opinion.
It's like sex, except I'm having it!
Actually, if the boot licensing cost were high enough, Sony actually could make money selling Linux for GC. It really would sell a ton of units, or at least it would sell all the used GCs really rapidly, which would lead to people having to buy new GCs, which would eat up that stock. It would sell a ton of the ethernet adapters, too. Given that the Gamecube has a 400MHz PowerPC and, what, 32MB of some quite fast memory? It might end up being very useful for certain types of problem, and inexpensive enough to be worth clustering. Not to mention it doesn't get much more plug and play than connecting the network adapter to the OUTSIDE of the case, sticking in a CD, and connecting it to the network.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Perhaps make the next gameboy a truly excellent piece of engineering and marketing without such obvious ommissions as a backlight or a headphone jacket?
Where would you have put a headphone jack on the SP case?
Perhaps realize that a fair proportion of gameboy owners are adults and make more adult type games for it?
By "adult type games", do you refer to the types of games endemic of PCs? First-person shooters have been made for the GBA (see Dark Arena, Wolfenstein, Doom, Serious Sam, 007, etc). Real-time tactical sims wouldn't work well because of lack of controller buttons (even the PS2 has the same problem), but Advance Wars and other turn-based war games work well. There are even decent RPGs such as Golden Sun and Pokemon Ruby, but anything massively multiplayer would in theory require a wireless Internet access subscription and a game subscription, and most GBA owners can't afford that. Or by "adult" do you refer to explicit sexual themes?
Extend the battery life by realising adults can hold a heavier device then a 8yr old
Though adults can hold a heavier device, this doesn't mean they want to. Look at mobile phones for adults: they've still gone in the direction of smaller. And if you really want to add weight to add battery life, larger batteries are available for both cellphones and the GBA SP.
and can pay more for both hardware and software?
That's called a "laptop."
Will I retire or break 10K?
You make one point about the adult demographic, but you two others...
I think the biggest problems with many of Nintendo's offerings are not necessarily that they aren't super violent or suggestive, but that:
1) They're the story telling equivalent of a low-budget Saturday morning cartoon series. Adults tend to want stories with more interesting themes than "save the princess from the bad guy" and characters with more depth than their alignment and/or funny way of speaking. Certainly it depends on the game, and some people will alway skip through the story screens, but forcing the main character to never say a word just gets strange after a while, especially if the other characters are all talking. Personaly, I think they sould take a cue from Shrek and some of the other computer animated movies which have successfully targeted people of all ages.
2) They're too easy! We've been playing video games all our lives, we're not so hopeless as to need a little fairy to explain the weak point of every boss or to warn us every time a shadow appears at our feat that a hand will try to grab us in about 2 seconds. I think I died maybe twice during my entire time playing Zelda 64... and then not from monsters, from sliding off the edge of an invisible platform. Sure you can waste your life finding the 147th spider, but how are you supposed to feel like beating the game is an accomplishment when you're virtually assured of eventual victory given enough time? I've seen the little kids of today get overly frustrated playing games even as simple as Mario 64, but they still play and they get better... and besides, you don't have to STOP making games for little kids just because you make some targeted for adults.
Adults tend to want stories with more interesting themes than "save the princess from the bad guy" and characters with more depth than their alignment and/or funny way of speaking.
Uhh, if you don't like Mario, fine, but I think history slightly disagrees with you here.
As for depth...I have to say I find Microsoft and Sony's latest offerings (aside from a few games) about as stimulating as a pile of gravel. I used to be glad when XBox commercials came on, it gave me more time to go make a sandwich or something.
forcing the main character to never say a word just gets strange after a while, especially if the other characters are all talking.
Bow down before Chrono Trigger and Earthbound, heathen! Two of the greatest games of all time, on a Nintendo system, and with mute heros. And certainly better than anything Sony/Microsoft have or will come up with anytime soon.
They're too easy! We've been playing video games all our lives, we're not so hopeless as to need a little fairy to explain the weak point of every boss or to warn us every time a shadow appears at our feat that a hand will try to grab us in about 2 seconds.
Take away the help, and people would be whining about how things are too challenging, I guarantee. And if you don't want to use the hints, IGNORE THEM. If you want to pat yourself on the head for figuring things out, you are not forced to follow any advice they give you.
I've seen the little kids of today get overly frustrated playing games even as simple as Mario 64, but they still play and they get better... and besides, you don't have to STOP making games for little kids just because you make some targeted for adults.
I think Gabe from Penny Arcade says it best.
I really don't like how this has turned into a war between the different consoles. You'd think they'd sell these things based on their merits--the games, controllers, ease of use--but instead it seems to be more about numbers.
Everyone always quotes the number of PS2 and XBoxes out there, and then scoffs at the Gamecubes. Okay, I understand what you're saying, if what you're most concerned about with is having a large number of people to play against online. If you're just concerned about having enough userbase out there that companies will want to fund a game on your platform, I think GC's still got enough. It's just a matter of actually connecting with your audience. I'll get to that in a second.
PS2 development is a pain in the ass. So says anyone I've talked to who has worked on it. Sure you can licence an engine to get around that little problem, but then you're giving a cheque to someone else, too. And what about studios that already have their own engines in-house? Wasted money.
XBox is good for companies used to developing for Windows. This is well-known. Unfortunately, for gamers it's just not the best option, unless what you're interested in is DOA3 or their Beach Volleyball game. Nearly every other popular game available for the XBox is also available for either the PS2 or the PC. Or they have worthy competition on another console.
The Gamecube is just a nice gaming console. Its appeal is to those in the audience who are just after the games. They don't want to have to think about what kind of DVD player is included, or getting the specific type of surround sound system to get the audio working at 100% of potential. They just want something that they can plug in quickly, and get as much enjoyment out of it as the next person. DVD, MP3 ripping, hard drive attachments.. they'll just get another box to look after that. If they decide to get a new gaming system in a few years, it just means they won't have to look for a new DVD player when they get rid of their game console. Simplicity.
I think by now it's kind of obvious where my prejudices lie, now, so lets get back to my little connecting with the audience theory.
The reason I think Gamecube hasn't done as well as the others has to do with the way the game industry is set up. In order for a game company to keep operating, it needs to have cash flow. Guaranteed cash flow is even better. To guarantee cash flow, companies have a full playbook of possibilities:
- Release sequels to popular games
- Create franchises with a yearly refresh cycle, such as EA Sports
- Integrate an online component into the game, and require the user to continue to pay for the priviledge to play the game with others
Notice that nowhere in there is "Innovate new titles." This is not a guaranteed method of success, especially in today's gaming society. Why is that? I think it's because of the way companies handle their advertising.
Let's say you're Nintendo. You have a totally new game idea, like sayyy... Pikmon. You want people to buy it. What do you do? If a product is totally new, with a totally different type of gameplay, then people are going to want to know how it plays before they go about purchasing it. They want more than a few pictures or videos or testimonials.. they want a FEEL for how the product handles.
This is where demo discs come in handy. Sure, I can go into my local gaming store and maybe see a GC running Wind Waker, but how often do they put the game I want to try on for me to play-test? Am I going to be able to play it long enough to "get into it?"
The XBox people know this; XBox Magazine comes with a demo disc every month. It features demos of upcoming games, some videos.. you know, the usual. You can play it in your very own home, at your own pace, with no annoying sales people or even more annoying my-life-is-games-ers telling you how to get past that certain point.
Sony's PS2 people get it too; their PS2 Magazine also comes with a demo