Slashdot Mirror
Mixed News for Nintendo, Microsoft
If you were to just look at downloadable content this week, Wii and 360 owners would have a lot to cheer about. Virtual Console downloads include the (under-appreciated) Legend of the Mystical Ninja and the original Castlevania. Xbox 360 owners can finally sink their teeth into the board-game spectacular that is Settlers of Catan. Classic titles Millipede and Centipede will also be on offer via Xbox Live Arcade. Unfortunately, there are some less cheery things to discuss as well. Virtual Console sales are down, apparently, and some analysts are questioning whether Nintendo's success may be bad for the industry overall. As for the 360 ... the Elite may be bringing back some old problems. 'Red Rings of Death' have already been reported with the just-released consoles, and DRM issues with Live Arcade titles on the 'upgraded' system are making some new owners frustrated.
The whole "It's hard to make money because people only buy 1st party Nintendo games" schtick is really, really obnoxious. People buy quality titles (for the most part). Nintendo makes quality titles. The few third parties that do make quality titles sell well. It's not like I picked up Zelda because it was made by Nintendo; I picked up Zelda because it has gameplay that I enjoy, great artistic direction (vs. throwing mounds of polygons at you), and has proven a dependably excellent quality series. I also picked up Rayman, despite the fact that it's a third party title, because it looked to have some excellent off-beat humor and gameplay, and it lived up to that expectation.
Agreed.
So Nintendo is good at making really fun and well-polished games....and they make a big profit....they increase the amount of people who might call themselves a 'gamer'....this is a bad thing?
I think the whole argument is flawed because it says to me "Nintendo makes great games, they sell well, are fun, and get new people to play them. This is a bad thing because third party developers can't sell their crappy games, and have to spend more time and resources to compete by making decent games."
Maybe the fact that Nintendo makes some good stuff shows that a lot of games/developers suck? I don't know, perhaps it is the phenomena of "wrecking the curve".
In other news, analysts made the shocking discovery that the Nintendo Gamecube had the least amount of support from third party publishers leaving Nintendo-published titles to overrun the top end of sales charts on the Gamecube.
And this is why we have the first gaming "drought" all the hardcore players are complaining about. No one expected the Wii to sell like it has, and instead focused on PS3 which was supposed to dominate from Day 1. Fast forward 6 months and we get a drought of Wii games and developers are jumping the PS3 ship. Go figure.
And how is this any different from Nintendo's business strategy from past generations?
Insert Sig Here
That's not true. It's also good if you like the way Nintendo does business, or if you like the way Nintendo makes controllers, or if you like the way Nintendo makes systems. Because if they are on top, everyone will want to emulate or out-do them.
When one player who has been on the bottom gets on top, it usually leads to change.
Some change, at this point, could only be positive. The games industry is in a serious state of stagnation.
HDTV acceptance doesn't affect the Wii significantly for a number of reasons. The first reason is that the Wii is not an HD player, while still being cheap enough to purchase alongside one. The second reason is that HD might go nowhere, as you say. The third reason is that game consoles typically make shitty video players with the included software; for example the PS2 was an amazingly horrible DVD player (slimline is better but still not very good.) And in the case of the Xbox it's an external peripheral. External peripherals for video game systems have never succeeded. Even if it sets new records in that regard it will be an extremely niche product.
I don't see the problem here. Third parties ARE making Wii games, and they are more interested in making games for Nintendo in this generation than they have been of late, largely because of the Wii's massive popularity. And they are less interested in developing for Sony than ever before, largely because of the way Sony has totally blown their attempt to capture this generation so far. Whereas Microsoft is still a hit-and-miss sale to developers. They like the tools, they fear doing business with Microsoft, both very logical stances.
It can only be seen as bad for the industry if you don't ask Blizzard.
If the market grows, it's good for the industry. "Good for the industry" doesn't require that it's good for all the players, you know. If it truly led to a monopoly that would be one thing, but we all know that's not happening here.
Also, no one with a fucking clue can seriously argue that Nintendo has only slightly increased the size of the gaming market. The GBA SP and later the Wii (and the DS lite of course) have done more to legitimize adult gaming than anything all the other console manufacturers put together have done since the dawn of time (as we measure it on game consoles anyway.)
This is a stupid argument and you are stupider for having suggested it, and I am stupider for having read it. Microsoft has a monopoly position, Nintendo does not, stop using this stupid argument, thank you.
There is too much money for anyone to give up and unless the other players deserve to die, they will figure out that some innovation is what is required in the market.
Microsoft will probably be there for at least one more generation. There is no reason for Sony to give up at this point. Nintendo will not have a monopoly by the end of this generation, or the next. I am not an atomic playboy.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"