Slashdot Mirror
Atari Drops GameCube Support For Two Titles
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.
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?
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
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.
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?
As long as Nintendo has Shigeru Myamoto (sp?) they are perfectly fine.
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.
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.
-PainKilleR-[CE]
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...)
This is my sig. Its pathetic.
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.
"Our shitty titles don't sell well enough to a more discriminating user base."
I don't really mind double posts on
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.
1. Drop GameCube support
2. ???
3. Post quarterly loss!!
If I had something intelligent to say, I would have said it.
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.
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 anyone else think that the quality of nintendo's first party games actually harms their 3rd party support?
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.
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...
FUNK!
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.