Even if you like every game Nintendo puts out, that's hardly a decently-sized library.
I do like Nintendo titles, they tend to be excellent examples of their respective genres. I have 30 games for the cube I spent an average of $15 apiece on, and about 45 for the PS2, which I've spent about $18 apiece on. I'm happier with my Cube because it was cheaper, we play it at just about every get together I've had, and it hasn't broke on me yet(I'm on my third PS2, just picked another one up after determining I wasn't going to get a PS3 at launch).
Both of which are spin-offs from the main sequence of games. The games could end up being decent, but given how hard Crystal Chronicles sucked, and how poorly spin-offs in general do, I don't have much hope. In any case, who would want to play offshoots when the real Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest sequels will appear on PS3?
So was Seiken Densetsu AKA Secret of Mana(which was Seiken Densetsu 2). It started as FF: Adventure. FF:CC really wasn't a bad game either, you just had to play it with 2-3 other people for it to shine as anything other than a generic real-time dungeon crawl(the bucket was freakin' like Eris's apple, we almost got into fist-fights playing that game)*. The only thing I know about the new FF:CC is that it looks classic FF in styling, which is a good thing imo, and even if it goes along the same formula as the last one, that's no bigger of a departure than XI or XII. I've played every FF since 1(missing 3, which I'll probably play on the DS when it comes out) and the main series has been disappointing to me of late, so...
As to Dragon Quest, the only Dragon Quest title I know of for next gen systems *is* Swords. The prequel to swords was a game called Dragon Quest Kenshin, a stand-alone unit with SNES-style graphics, a friend of mine has it, it's actually quite a bit of fun. As to the main series - I found VIII to be incredibly easy, and short. I played it like the a DQ and just tore through it. It also had little annoyances like lens flare(in a cartoon!?) and inconsistant rendering(non cell-shaded environments). I'm not a graphics whore, at all, but I am a style whore. One of the things I loved about the original metroid prime was the little details they put in. Water flowing off the visor, mist, heat off the power beam, Samus's face lighting up. Or Windwaker, where the whole thing had a very consistant and imo excellent style to it.
Which will be a second-rate port of the "real" 360 and P3 versions.
Maybe, maybe not. You could argue that the 360/PS3 versions will be second-rate versions of the PC version, they won't look better, and they won't have the control.
The Wii version could end up having the control of the PC version, while lacking the graphics, and vice-versa for the PS3/X360.
The N64's TBA lineup was also quite promising as well. However, once the PSX picked up steam, a lot of those games vaporized.
Most famously FFVII. The SNES/Genesis->N64/PS/Saturn transition is why I don't buy consoles based upon the future. I've been burnt on that before. It is completely possible the same thing could happen to the PS3. I'm not counting on it, but it's possible.
The games I listed(that you quoted) are all Nintendo first/second party though, so it's unlikely they'll vaporize.
It's premature in both cases, but not equally so. On the PS3's side, it's just an assertion that the status quo will be maintained. On the Wii's side, it's an assertion that a dramatic turnaround will happen. Maintainence of the status quo is generally the more likely outcome. That is not to say that the Wii will fail, but rather that the odds are against it succeeding.
History within the console realm maintains that no company has yet to keep dominance for more than 2 generations. The status quo argument is the same one that was used for the N64, and we all saw how that worked out. If Sony pulls it off, it'll be the first time it's ever been done. And th
The only reason anyone cares about marketshare is because it impacts third party development. The only reason anyone cares about third party development is because it provides a huge amount of a machine's library(except in the case of Nintendo, which is an extremely strong first party). We care about the library because it impacts the value of our console purchase, and it determines how much time we can spend with our console. That's why the PS2 was so successful, it's a chicken and egg problem. Once you hit critical mass, titles come to your system, fueling even more console purchases, which fuels more third party development. It's all about momentum, the console war is.
As to marketshare from another perspective, the Gamecube didn't do badly. It destroyed the XBox in Japan(and was doing better than the 360 there until recently), didn't bomb but didn't do nearly as well in the US, and it'll probably finish up 2nd worldwide when all is said and done, but even if it doesn't the gap between the two isn't huge even atm. This, despite the fact that Microsoft lost billions of dollars and Nintendo turned a profit.
When it comes to library... first off Madden is a poor example, it comes out on everything(even the GC), and it's a launch title for the Wii. Anyway, they began to address the failings of their library during the GC. Making titles like Eternal Darkness, repairing relationships with Capcom, Konami, Square-enix, etc. Looking at their launch lineup, we have a Final Fantasy and a Dragon Quest, we have a 16:9 version of Zelda, we have a Metroid title, Call of Duty 3, a downright wierd title called Elebits from Konami, and an exclusive FPS/sword hybrid from Ubi(among others). We also have an exclusive Resident Evil(aka Biohazard), we have Hideo Kojima(of MGS fame) begging to get Snake into Smash Bros Brawl and stating his next project after MGS4 is for the Wii, and a ton of Japanese devs hedging their bets by doing development for the console(only announced atm, but the same can be said for the PS3), probably influenced by the success of the DS and the lower dev costs for the platform. I'm really not worried about the library, the titles already announced and with release dates that aren't TBA are more than worth the price of admission imo. Most of Nintendo's first party franchises within the launch window, and some decent third party titles at the same time. There is also stuff like Disaster - Day of Defeat, Project HAMMER, the resurrection of Kid Icarus, and the virtual console.
Lineups change, third parties shift to where the money and install base is. Declaring library victory for the PS3 is just as premature atm as declaring it for the Wii. Those titles could easily shift over if the Wii achieves that critical mass, and vice versa.
In addition, as to appeal, I saw first hand on numerous occassions the draw of Nintendo's games. Many of the people who would stop by and play them weren't gamers, they probably wouldn't buy a console, and they certainly wouldn't touch any but a handful of PS2 games in my catalog, but games like Mario Kart, Warioware, Mario Party, and the Mario sports games were huge draws. This doesn't affirm anything at all for the US, where the DS phenomenon hasn't occured, but it bodes very very well for Nintendo in Japan. If Nintendo manages to defeat Sony in japan, if they turn the Wii into a new DS-esque craze, they will win here. The PS3 will not get the huge bevy of third party titles the PS2 got(since most of them were japanese), and that combined with it's high price tag will cause it to lose.
There's a lot of ifs in that last paragraph. I'm not basing my purchasing decision or my advocacy on the hypotheticals. I'm basing it on the launch library, the announced titles with solid release dates within the first few months(something neither FFXIII nor MGS4 have), the virtual console, and the price(meaning value). I only judge by what I see, if the situation changes I'll re-evaluate.
These are the questions you should ask yourself atm p
I thought the original playstation did really well, and that was heavily influenced by Nintendo directly, seeing as they were jointly developing it.
Oh, but I kid.
The N64 wasn't horridly disappointing, it had some really good games, just a glacial release schedule since pretty much all of them were first party. It was disappointing compared to the SNES, sure. But if you remember the lessons learned from that little transition you certainly aren't going to jump on the PS3 bandwagon at launch.
The Gamecube was a lot better than the N64. It mainly only lacked a ton of jRPGs(it only has 4.5, one of which is a dreamcast port, they're all good though), and was really strong when it comes to party games. My GCN got more play than my PS2 because of this, people were always stopping by the appt with a case of beer to play crap like warioware, and most weekends, before I moved, the thing was almost constantly being used. It also got a lot of the cross-platform titles, and a handfull of great third party exclusives(some of which ceased exclusivity after a year and got inferior PS2 ports, like the capcom 5).
But anyway, all that is beside the point, I don't need faith to support the Wii. It has 10 titles I'd like to play due out at or around launch, which is something I can't say about the PS3. And I'm not evening factoring in the Virtual Console there. The amount of entertainment I'm looking at getting out of it, right off the bat, is so much more for so much less than the PS3 that it's ridiculious. $700 for 10 games(plus the VC) versus $740 for 2(and obsoleting my PS2). It's a no brainer.
Maybe you Sony people should look at the reaction on the internet and see it for what it is. The PS3 atm, is a fool's purchase. I'll reevaluate that in 2007 and 2008, but atm that is absolutely true.
I have about 30 gamecube titles.. I think. Something like that(I'd have to go count, I do have every game on the grandparent's list though + a bunch more). 4-player party games is where the system really shines(and the PS2 just doesn't, it's more of an all by myseeeellllffff system, metric ton of JRPGs, etc.), but there were some other gems that came out on it. And with the wavebird, lower load times, and just overall better feel imo I tended to get cross-platforms on the Cube when I could.
I definately got my money's worth out of the lil ol' Cube. Also sorta got my money's worth out of the PS2(and I'm on my third now[well fourth, 2 broken, 1 stolen], the slimline model rubs me wrong for some reason).
Intelligent Systems(internal team) typically has stories in their games. Fire Emblem(there's 9 of these, only 2 have hit the states though), Advance Wars, Paper Mario RPG
Alphadream(a 2nd party) put together Superstar Saga and Partners in Time.
Brownie Brown (2nd party, sorta, where all the square 2D guys went) did Mother 3 recently(sequel to Earthbound) the Seiken Densetsu remake sword of mana, and is doing Magical Vacations(an RPG) for the DS.
And of course there's Pokémon.
With the exception of Fire Emblem and Paper Mario they're all handheld games though.
Pretty big. It should even out in the end though, since retailers won't reorder stock that hasn't sold.
Right now, the best figures I can find say unless Sony sold around 9 million between Europe and Walmart, there's no way they've sold all those shipped units.
Here's what I'm basing that on. NDS(+ DS Lite) - 8 million Japan, 5 million US. PSP - 3.5 million Japan, 5 million US.
Per NPD(which isn't 100% reliable[conjecture when it comes to walmart] but the numbers there do match what Nintendo has stated) and Media Create. So that places DS European sales at around 3-4 million based on what Nintendo said about their sales at E3. I don't know a good sales tracking source for Europe, so that last figure is pure conjecture.
From some stuff I've seen(not good sources that track this stuff for a living), as of febuary of this year, Europe looked like this: DS 3.7 million, PSP 2.4 million. But I can't find a good source for that. It's in line with Nintendo's statements, but that's about it.
Presuming all of this stuff is correct, that would put global at: Nintendo DS - 16.7 million PSP - 11 million
And was square-enix included? I'm mainly interested in Super Mario RPG, Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana, FF2/3US and hopefully translations of FFV and Seiken Densetsu 3.
You had to give them credit card info and they ran an authorization through for the full cost of a replacement unit before advance shipping you one, IIRC. Then they reversed the transaction when your defective unit arrived. So I doubt it's hardware losses.
Nintendo is(was?) pretty much the gold standard of console support, warranty, build quality(fischer price tough, survives a warzone AND your kids) and QA. This seems to be a step down for them, which is disappointing, since the reliability of their hardware and quality of their service when it goes wrong is one of the big reasons I feel really comfortable buying the Wii at launch(first console in > 20 years I plan on buying at launch). I haven't picked up my lites yet, however, so I guess we'll see.
That's rather disappointing for Nintendo. Especially in contrast to their original fat DS launch policy, where they'd advance ship you a unit for even a single stuck or dead pixel.
I guess all that Japanese demand is really taxing on their supply chain or they realize what kind of hit they have on their hands or something.
I hope it's something innocent like demand and they aren't going to start dropping the ball on quality/QA.
It's a dev kit, first off, second off it's the inquirer, which was formed from register rejects and doesn't have BOFH, and third off, I saw a UC Berkeley benchmark with an emulated cell that would seem to indicate this is a production problem, not a design problem.
But seriously, WTF should I care? I really don't care which console wins the virtual pissing match in the "ooooh shiny" department, if I was one of the people that did, the PS3 is already into the realm where $500 video card purchases begin to look slightly reasonable.
I'll judge it by the games, when they're released or playable.
And if I really absolutely cared about graphics I'd be one of those clowns that put $500 a year down on a new video card.
Seriously, judging by your comments in this article, how much are you getting paid to be a Sony shill? Because damn, I'm not getting paid atm and serving almost the same function, and if it can pay the rent, maybe I'm in the wrong line of work.
First off, the PS3 has to succeed in order to get a library of exclusives(out of which you'd buy 20 titles), this is by no means assured. Most(as in > 90%) of the PS2's titles of note were 3rd party. Contrast this with nintendo, which generally puts out a good 10-15 AAA titles themselves(whether or not these appeal to you left aside for the moment) over a console generation.
So we have a chicken and the egg problem with the PS3. If it doesn't take off then the 3rd parties won't support it and you'll be stuck with SCEA first party titles. Which, well, largely, aren't of note(6 total AAAs in > 10 years, most of them are poor knock-offs, or methadone-style nintendo-platformer clones like Jak & Daxter).
We also have the virtual console added into the mix, with 3 whole console generations of, at the minimum first party titles, that are otherwise largely unavailable outside scrounging e-bay/garage-sales or going the legally nebulous route of emulation. This is, once again, in contrast to PS1/PS2 backwards compatibility, which is worth about $130 USD new, if you don't have a working PS2/PS1.
So, in order to justify the added $300-$400 expense it has to have compelling titles, and it's certainly not launching with them(only 3 exclusive[one of which will most likely not stay exclusive, Assassin's Creed] launch titles of any note[in limited genres no less] versus at least 8 for the Wii[all of which at least offer a new control scheme]). Most of the anticipated titles don't come out until sometime in 2007(most of those are still in a TBA status at that).
So all this adds up to, at launch, the Wii spanking the PS3 up and down the proverbial aisle like a red-headed stepchild when it comes to gaming value for your money. As it stands, right now, if you buy a PS3 at launch as a gaming machine you're what's known as an idiot.
Now, this might change in 2007, but I'm not counting on that. I still remember FFVII being shown on the N64 before it eventually went to the PSX due to disk space concerns and the high-cost of cartridges. A lot of titles could migrate given the realtor/hard-core gamer/dev backlash post-E3, especially if the PS3 fails to gain any real traction in it's first few months. There are other reasons to be skeptical of a solid exclusive content line-up as well.
With blu-ray disks costing 5-10x as much to stamp and master, up to $10 a disk according to some rumors, the exponentially increasing costs of development, and the possible ressurection of an old cartridge based risk due to the increase in costs to produce blu-ray disks instead of DVDs(It was actually possible in the cartridge era to overproduce a title, and even if it was a hit, actually lose money on the deal.), exclusivity becomes an enormous gamble. You're better off hedging your bets and doing a PS3/360/PC deal. Which means you're now talking paying an extra $100-$200 and what's probably going to be an extra $10 per game(over the 360) for... uhh... shoddy Sony workmanship I guess.
And people use the $600 version because one of the few selling points of the PS3 atm is blu-ray. The $500 version is crippled in this respect, because of the lack of HDMI, which will render all advantages of blu-ray null and void once content providers toggle the ICT flag on on their media.
There are reasons Sony defenders have largely gone underground in most major discussion sites on the internet. It's because you're all freakin' tools who are relying on the snake-oil that a massive purchase will become worth it down the line.
It's famitsu, what they're refering to as Bioshock, you probably better know as Resident Evil. It's not the spiritual heir to system shock coming out on the 360 and the PC(I think the PS3 as well). Nor is it Resident Evil 5 that's coming to the PS3/360. It's a different Resident Evil, as far as we know so far.
So that one is curious, since I didn't think any footage at all had been shown of that game, just an announcement.
If you want to back-up that amount of data, you already have tape drives today that can do up to 1TB/tape.
IBM supposedly found a way to get 1TB/mm data density on tape as well, and should be releasing a drive and tapes here in the next few years with > a petabyte of capacity.
Optical has advantages(and disadvantages) over tape, sure. Just saying, if you have a legitimate need to back-up that amount of data, you already have a way to do so.
It's DQ Kenshin(swords), basically dragon quest with Wii-style interactivity. Swing the wand to do a sword strike, spells, etc.
The last one was released as a stand-alone unit in Japan, with SNES style graphics no less, in 2003. It was a retelling of the original Dragon Quest. Friend of mine has it, and it was a hell of a lot of fun, can't read those crazy japanese moon-letters tho, so can't comment on plot. Not sure which DQ it's going to be following though. Hopefully 5, since we never got that one here(got skipped over in the SNES era).
And as to FF:CC, it's as much a Final Fantasy as XII is, both depart from the old-style interface pretty dramatically. The trailers for the new one make it look like CC is the spinoff franchise for more classic-style FF(only with Secret of Mana style multiplayer/gameplay), at least visually and element wise(airships/cinematics look like they belong in something like FF9 or one of the pre-7 FFs). If they beefed up the story-line and single-player(which were lacking in the original CC, multiplayer was were it shone), it should be pretty good.
It's dragon quest kenshin, and the only announced dragon quest for next gen systems. Do you not know what Dragon Quest Kenshin is/was!?
Obviously not. It was a standalone unit released in Japan in 2003. SNES-style graphics(like DQ7, the DQ series has never really put a huge emphasis on graphics or FMV), retelling of DQ1(basically, Dragon Warrior 1 here in the US) and you used a sword peripheral. Sold like crazy. One of my friends has a copy, it's a hell of a lot of fun actually, but I can't read japanese.
And canon, in FF? Comeon. While Crystal Chronicles is more in the vein of Seiken Densetsu(which started as FF: Adventure here on the Gameboy) than a traditional hit buttons til the FMV/dialog starts gameplay of the main series, it's still beefier than Mystic Quest was and has as much claim to the FF title as FFXII with it's cinematic gameplay/departion from the formula or FFXI, the mmo. It actually has the most in common with FFXI, because both emphasize multiplayer(and use similar races). The difference being that FF:CC plays like an MMO where you're in the room with your friends and can hit/yell at them. It's a mini-mmo, and all of it's depth comes from player interaction, not underlying mechanics. Heck of a lot of fun if you can get 4 people together with GBAs, some beer and a big screen.
There is no canon in FF. About the only thing linking the games together at this point is a guy named Cid, and I'm not even sure if FFXI had him, and the title. Prior to FF4, crystals of power were a common theme, which made a comeback in FFV, only to fade away for a while.
All we know about the new FF:CC and FFXIII is from some limited(probably pre-rendered) trailers. FFXIII could turn out to be in the vein of FFXII, which would make FFX(or X-2) the last "proper" title in the series(although imo, you have to go back further to get the good stuff). I saw more of the classic series in the FF:CC trailer though than I did in the FFXIII one, however. XIII seems to be going hyper-far into the VII vein of sci-fi fantasy, whereas CC looked more traditional, with airships and what not, more like 9 or pre-7.
And as to Square-Enix putting the main-series games solely on the Playstation. DQ9 hasn't been shown yet, but here's a little tidbit for you. I still remember FFVII being shown on Project Reality, aka the N64, and we all saw how *that* turned out. Square can and will jump ship in a freakin' heartbeat. So remember that before you lay down 3DO-level money with no main-series title out yet. That'd probably hurt more than the $199 the N64 cost if those titles don't stay on the PS3.
The people who buy FF:CC2 and the DQ sword game on Wii are going to be the people who only have a Wii and have no other choice if they want a taste of those series.
The people who buy a Wii at launch will be the people that want to play new installments of DQ and FF this year(as they're *launch* titles). The people who pickup a PS3 at launch are the people who won't be playing a new FF or DQ on their system for quite a bit past that, if ever(REMEMBER THE N64!).
Off the top of my head I'd like to see, third party, just to get the classics in: Megaman(Capcom), Black Mage(FF1-3/Square), Sonic(for the 8/16 bit rivalry), Rygar(Rygar - Tecmo), Belmont/Alucard(Castlevania - Konami), a Contra guy(Contra 1-2/Konami), Erdrick(Dragon Warrior 1-3/Enix), Master Higgins(Adventure Island/Hudson), Lolo(Adventures of Lolo 1-3/HAL), Billy Lee(Double Dragon/Acclaim), PacMan (Namco), Ryu Hayabusa(Ninja Gaiden 1-3/Tecmo), Prince (Prince of Persia / Then Virgin, now Ubisoft).
That covers most of the core NES stuff I can remember off the top of my head, some of em went on to be big, some of em didn't. There's just too many square/enix characters to pull from, and most only appeared in a game or two, so the oldie generics seem better. First party, the only guy missing is little mac.
Slashdot Mirror
Even if you like every game Nintendo puts out, that's hardly a decently-sized library.
I do like Nintendo titles, they tend to be excellent examples of their respective genres. I have 30 games for the cube I spent an average of $15 apiece on, and about 45 for the PS2, which I've spent about $18 apiece on. I'm happier with my Cube because it was cheaper, we play it at just about every get together I've had, and it hasn't broke on me yet(I'm on my third PS2, just picked another one up after determining I wasn't going to get a PS3 at launch).
Both of which are spin-offs from the main sequence of games. The games could end up being decent, but given how hard Crystal Chronicles sucked, and how poorly spin-offs in general do, I don't have much hope. In any case, who would want to play offshoots when the real Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest sequels will appear on PS3?
So was Seiken Densetsu AKA Secret of Mana(which was Seiken Densetsu 2). It started as FF: Adventure. FF:CC really wasn't a bad game either, you just had to play it with 2-3 other people for it to shine as anything other than a generic real-time dungeon crawl(the bucket was freakin' like Eris's apple, we almost got into fist-fights playing that game)*. The only thing I know about the new FF:CC is that it looks classic FF in styling, which is a good thing imo, and even if it goes along the same formula as the last one, that's no bigger of a departure than XI or XII. I've played every FF since 1(missing 3, which I'll probably play on the DS when it comes out) and the main series has been disappointing to me of late, so...
As to Dragon Quest, the only Dragon Quest title I know of for next gen systems *is* Swords. The prequel to swords was a game called Dragon Quest Kenshin, a stand-alone unit with SNES-style graphics, a friend of mine has it, it's actually quite a bit of fun. As to the main series - I found VIII to be incredibly easy, and short. I played it like the a DQ and just tore through it. It also had little annoyances like lens flare(in a cartoon!?) and inconsistant rendering(non cell-shaded environments). I'm not a graphics whore, at all, but I am a style whore. One of the things I loved about the original metroid prime was the little details they put in. Water flowing off the visor, mist, heat off the power beam, Samus's face lighting up. Or Windwaker, where the whole thing had a very consistant and imo excellent style to it.
Which will be a second-rate port of the "real" 360 and P3 versions.
Maybe, maybe not. You could argue that the 360/PS3 versions will be second-rate versions of the PC version, they won't look better, and they won't have the control.
The Wii version could end up having the control of the PC version, while lacking the graphics, and vice-versa for the PS3/X360.
The N64's TBA lineup was also quite promising as well. However, once the PSX picked up steam, a lot of those games vaporized.
Most famously FFVII. The SNES/Genesis->N64/PS/Saturn transition is why I don't buy consoles based upon the future. I've been burnt on that before. It is completely possible the same thing could happen to the PS3. I'm not counting on it, but it's possible.
The games I listed(that you quoted) are all Nintendo first/second party though, so it's unlikely they'll vaporize.
It's premature in both cases, but not equally so. On the PS3's side, it's just an assertion that the status quo will be maintained. On the Wii's side, it's an assertion that a dramatic turnaround will happen. Maintainence of the status quo is generally the more likely outcome. That is not to say that the Wii will fail, but rather that the odds are against it succeeding.
History within the console realm maintains that no company has yet to keep dominance for more than 2 generations. The status quo argument is the same one that was used for the N64, and we all saw how that worked out. If Sony pulls it off, it'll be the first time it's ever been done. And th
The only reason anyone cares about marketshare is because it impacts third party development. The only reason anyone cares about third party development is because it provides a huge amount of a machine's library(except in the case of Nintendo, which is an extremely strong first party). We care about the library because it impacts the value of our console purchase, and it determines how much time we can spend with our console. That's why the PS2 was so successful, it's a chicken and egg problem. Once you hit critical mass, titles come to your system, fueling even more console purchases, which fuels more third party development. It's all about momentum, the console war is.
As to marketshare from another perspective, the Gamecube didn't do badly. It destroyed the XBox in Japan(and was doing better than the 360 there until recently), didn't bomb but didn't do nearly as well in the US, and it'll probably finish up 2nd worldwide when all is said and done, but even if it doesn't the gap between the two isn't huge even atm. This, despite the fact that Microsoft lost billions of dollars and Nintendo turned a profit.
When it comes to library... first off Madden is a poor example, it comes out on everything(even the GC), and it's a launch title for the Wii. Anyway, they began to address the failings of their library during the GC. Making titles like Eternal Darkness, repairing relationships with Capcom, Konami, Square-enix, etc. Looking at their launch lineup, we have a Final Fantasy and a Dragon Quest, we have a 16:9 version of Zelda, we have a Metroid title, Call of Duty 3, a downright wierd title called Elebits from Konami, and an exclusive FPS/sword hybrid from Ubi(among others). We also have an exclusive Resident Evil(aka Biohazard), we have Hideo Kojima(of MGS fame) begging to get Snake into Smash Bros Brawl and stating his next project after MGS4 is for the Wii, and a ton of Japanese devs hedging their bets by doing development for the console(only announced atm, but the same can be said for the PS3), probably influenced by the success of the DS and the lower dev costs for the platform. I'm really not worried about the library, the titles already announced and with release dates that aren't TBA are more than worth the price of admission imo. Most of Nintendo's first party franchises within the launch window, and some decent third party titles at the same time. There is also stuff like Disaster - Day of Defeat, Project HAMMER, the resurrection of Kid Icarus, and the virtual console.
Lineups change, third parties shift to where the money and install base is. Declaring library victory for the PS3 is just as premature atm as declaring it for the Wii. Those titles could easily shift over if the Wii achieves that critical mass, and vice versa.
In addition, as to appeal, I saw first hand on numerous occassions the draw of Nintendo's games. Many of the people who would stop by and play them weren't gamers, they probably wouldn't buy a console, and they certainly wouldn't touch any but a handful of PS2 games in my catalog, but games like Mario Kart, Warioware, Mario Party, and the Mario sports games were huge draws. This doesn't affirm anything at all for the US, where the DS phenomenon hasn't occured, but it bodes very very well for Nintendo in Japan. If Nintendo manages to defeat Sony in japan, if they turn the Wii into a new DS-esque craze, they will win here. The PS3 will not get the huge bevy of third party titles the PS2 got(since most of them were japanese), and that combined with it's high price tag will cause it to lose.
There's a lot of ifs in that last paragraph. I'm not basing my purchasing decision or my advocacy on the hypotheticals. I'm basing it on the launch library, the announced titles with solid release dates within the first few months(something neither FFXIII nor MGS4 have), the virtual console, and the price(meaning value). I only judge by what I see, if the situation changes I'll re-evaluate.
These are the questions you should ask yourself atm p
I thought the original playstation did really well, and that was heavily influenced by Nintendo directly, seeing as they were jointly developing it.
Oh, but I kid.
The N64 wasn't horridly disappointing, it had some really good games, just a glacial release schedule since pretty much all of them were first party. It was disappointing compared to the SNES, sure. But if you remember the lessons learned from that little transition you certainly aren't going to jump on the PS3 bandwagon at launch.
The Gamecube was a lot better than the N64. It mainly only lacked a ton of jRPGs(it only has 4.5, one of which is a dreamcast port, they're all good though), and was really strong when it comes to party games. My GCN got more play than my PS2 because of this, people were always stopping by the appt with a case of beer to play crap like warioware, and most weekends, before I moved, the thing was almost constantly being used. It also got a lot of the cross-platform titles, and a handfull of great third party exclusives(some of which ceased exclusivity after a year and got inferior PS2 ports, like the capcom 5).
But anyway, all that is beside the point, I don't need faith to support the Wii. It has 10 titles I'd like to play due out at or around launch, which is something I can't say about the PS3. And I'm not evening factoring in the Virtual Console there. The amount of entertainment I'm looking at getting out of it, right off the bat, is so much more for so much less than the PS3 that it's ridiculious. $700 for 10 games(plus the VC) versus $740 for 2(and obsoleting my PS2). It's a no brainer.
Maybe you Sony people should look at the reaction on the internet and see it for what it is. The PS3 atm, is a fool's purchase. I'll reevaluate that in 2007 and 2008, but atm that is absolutely true.
I have about 30 gamecube titles.. I think. Something like that(I'd have to go count, I do have every game on the grandparent's list though + a bunch more). 4-player party games is where the system really shines(and the PS2 just doesn't, it's more of an all by myseeeellllffff system, metric ton of JRPGs, etc.), but there were some other gems that came out on it. And with the wavebird, lower load times, and just overall better feel imo I tended to get cross-platforms on the Cube when I could.
I definately got my money's worth out of the lil ol' Cube. Also sorta got my money's worth out of the PS2(and I'm on my third now[well fourth, 2 broken, 1 stolen], the slimline model rubs me wrong for some reason).
Intelligent Systems(internal team) typically has stories in their games.
Fire Emblem(there's 9 of these, only 2 have hit the states though), Advance Wars, Paper Mario RPG
Alphadream(a 2nd party) put together Superstar Saga and Partners in Time.
Brownie Brown (2nd party, sorta, where all the square 2D guys went) did Mother 3 recently(sequel to Earthbound) the Seiken Densetsu remake sword of mana, and is doing Magical Vacations(an RPG) for the DS.
And of course there's Pokémon.
With the exception of Fire Emblem and Paper Mario they're all handheld games though.
Pretty big. It should even out in the end though, since retailers won't reorder stock that hasn't sold.
Right now, the best figures I can find say unless Sony sold around 9 million between Europe and Walmart, there's no way they've sold all those shipped units.
Here's what I'm basing that on.
NDS(+ DS Lite) - 8 million Japan, 5 million US.
PSP - 3.5 million Japan, 5 million US.
Per NPD(which isn't 100% reliable[conjecture when it comes to walmart] but the numbers there do match what Nintendo has stated) and Media Create. So that places DS European sales at around 3-4 million based on what Nintendo said about their sales at E3. I don't know a good sales tracking source for Europe, so that last figure is pure conjecture.
From some stuff I've seen(not good sources that track this stuff for a living), as of febuary of this year, Europe looked like this:
DS 3.7 million, PSP 2.4 million.
But I can't find a good source for that. It's in line with Nintendo's statements, but that's about it.
Presuming all of this stuff is correct, that would put global at:
Nintendo DS - 16.7 million
PSP - 11 million
Or about 1/3rd of all shipped PSPs not selling.
Did I miss this? Where did you hear that?
And was square-enix included? I'm mainly interested in Super Mario RPG, Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana, FF2/3US and hopefully translations of FFV and Seiken Densetsu 3.
You had to give them credit card info and they ran an authorization through for the full cost of a replacement unit before advance shipping you one, IIRC. Then they reversed the transaction when your defective unit arrived. So I doubt it's hardware losses.
Nintendo is(was?) pretty much the gold standard of console support, warranty, build quality(fischer price tough, survives a warzone AND your kids) and QA. This seems to be a step down for them, which is disappointing, since the reliability of their hardware and quality of their service when it goes wrong is one of the big reasons I feel really comfortable buying the Wii at launch(first console in > 20 years I plan on buying at launch). I haven't picked up my lites yet, however, so I guess we'll see.
That's rather disappointing for Nintendo. Especially in contrast to their original fat DS launch policy, where they'd advance ship you a unit for even a single stuck or dead pixel.
I guess all that Japanese demand is really taxing on their supply chain or they realize what kind of hit they have on their hands or something.
I hope it's something innocent like demand and they aren't going to start dropping the ball on quality/QA.
The fantasy setting you're thinking of is Earthdawn.
It's a dev kit, first off, second off it's the inquirer, which was formed from register rejects and doesn't have BOFH, and third off, I saw a UC Berkeley benchmark with an emulated cell that would seem to indicate this is a production problem, not a design problem.
But seriously, WTF should I care? I really don't care which console wins the virtual pissing match in the "ooooh shiny" department, if I was one of the people that did, the PS3 is already into the realm where $500 video card purchases begin to look slightly reasonable.
I'll judge it by the games, when they're released or playable.
You realize that that's a gamecube game, right?
And if I really absolutely cared about graphics I'd be one of those clowns that put $500 a year down on a new video card.
Seriously, judging by your comments in this article, how much are you getting paid to be a Sony shill? Because damn, I'm not getting paid atm and serving almost the same function, and if it can pay the rent, maybe I'm in the wrong line of work.
Yea and why the hell would someone want to virtually play a guitar, or dance on a virtual pad, or play a virtual game of football, etc. etc. !?
Couple of points.
First off, the PS3 has to succeed in order to get a library of exclusives(out of which you'd buy 20 titles), this is by no means assured. Most(as in > 90%) of the PS2's titles of note were 3rd party. Contrast this with nintendo, which generally puts out a good 10-15 AAA titles themselves(whether or not these appeal to you left aside for the moment) over a console generation.
So we have a chicken and the egg problem with the PS3. If it doesn't take off then the 3rd parties won't support it and you'll be stuck with SCEA first party titles. Which, well, largely, aren't of note(6 total AAAs in > 10 years, most of them are poor knock-offs, or methadone-style nintendo-platformer clones like Jak & Daxter).
We also have the virtual console added into the mix, with 3 whole console generations of, at the minimum first party titles, that are otherwise largely unavailable outside scrounging e-bay/garage-sales or going the legally nebulous route of emulation. This is, once again, in contrast to PS1/PS2 backwards compatibility, which is worth about $130 USD new, if you don't have a working PS2/PS1.
So, in order to justify the added $300-$400 expense it has to have compelling titles, and it's certainly not launching with them(only 3 exclusive[one of which will most likely not stay exclusive, Assassin's Creed] launch titles of any note[in limited genres no less] versus at least 8 for the Wii[all of which at least offer a new control scheme]). Most of the anticipated titles don't come out until sometime in 2007(most of those are still in a TBA status at that).
So all this adds up to, at launch, the Wii spanking the PS3 up and down the proverbial aisle like a red-headed stepchild when it comes to gaming value for your money. As it stands, right now, if you buy a PS3 at launch as a gaming machine you're what's known as an idiot.
Now, this might change in 2007, but I'm not counting on that. I still remember FFVII being shown on the N64 before it eventually went to the PSX due to disk space concerns and the high-cost of cartridges. A lot of titles could migrate given the realtor/hard-core gamer/dev backlash post-E3, especially if the PS3 fails to gain any real traction in it's first few months. There are other reasons to be skeptical of a solid exclusive content line-up as well.
With blu-ray disks costing 5-10x as much to stamp and master, up to $10 a disk according to some rumors, the exponentially increasing costs of development, and the possible ressurection of an old cartridge based risk due to the increase in costs to produce blu-ray disks instead of DVDs(It was actually possible in the cartridge era to overproduce a title, and even if it was a hit, actually lose money on the deal.), exclusivity becomes an enormous gamble. You're better off hedging your bets and doing a PS3/360/PC deal. Which means you're now talking paying an extra $100-$200 and what's probably going to be an extra $10 per game(over the 360) for... uhh... shoddy Sony workmanship I guess.
And people use the $600 version because one of the few selling points of the PS3 atm is blu-ray. The $500 version is crippled in this respect, because of the lack of HDMI, which will render all advantages of blu-ray null and void once content providers toggle the ICT flag on on their media.
There are reasons Sony defenders have largely gone underground in most major discussion sites on the internet. It's because you're all freakin' tools who are relying on the snake-oil that a massive purchase will become worth it down the line.
If that were true, the PSX never would've taken off because of the success of the SNES.
I still remember FFVII being shown for Project Reality, aka the N64.
If you buy a PS3 at launch, you're what's known as an idiot.
I think you have been contaminated by puritan ideals.
Dude, you ever hear of bundling?
I mean, what two kids couldn't get around that?
It's famitsu, what they're refering to as Bioshock, you probably better know as Resident Evil. It's not the spiritual heir to system shock coming out on the 360 and the PC(I think the PS3 as well). Nor is it Resident Evil 5 that's coming to the PS3/360. It's a different Resident Evil, as far as we know so far.
So that one is curious, since I didn't think any footage at all had been shown of that game, just an announcement.
That's a serious problem when your console's price point is more than people are used to paying.
That and that neither of the titles you mention are *launch* titles as far as I know.
If you want to back-up that amount of data, you already have tape drives today that can do up to 1TB/tape.
IBM supposedly found a way to get 1TB/mm data density on tape as well, and should be releasing a drive and tapes here in the next few years with > a petabyte of capacity.
Optical has advantages(and disadvantages) over tape, sure. Just saying, if you have a legitimate need to back-up that amount of data, you already have a way to do so.
The point is it's not like the jump from tape to CD or VHS to DVD. Or from physical media to digital.
You got various benefits with each of those, and you only get a quality upgrade with the HD formats. Plus HDCP and the closing of the analog "hole."
Define dumbing down.
We're comparing PvE gameplay in MMOs right? So which implementation of a player up against a shell script with stats is "smarter"? Why?
It's DQ Kenshin(swords), basically dragon quest with Wii-style interactivity. Swing the wand to do a sword strike, spells, etc.
The last one was released as a stand-alone unit in Japan, with SNES style graphics no less, in 2003. It was a retelling of the original Dragon Quest. Friend of mine has it, and it was a hell of a lot of fun, can't read those crazy japanese moon-letters tho, so can't comment on plot. Not sure which DQ it's going to be following though. Hopefully 5, since we never got that one here(got skipped over in the SNES era).
And as to FF:CC, it's as much a Final Fantasy as XII is, both depart from the old-style interface pretty dramatically. The trailers for the new one make it look like CC is the spinoff franchise for more classic-style FF(only with Secret of Mana style multiplayer/gameplay), at least visually and element wise(airships/cinematics look like they belong in something like FF9 or one of the pre-7 FFs). If they beefed up the story-line and single-player(which were lacking in the original CC, multiplayer was were it shone), it should be pretty good.
It's dragon quest kenshin, and the only announced dragon quest for next gen systems. Do you not know what Dragon Quest Kenshin is/was!?
Obviously not. It was a standalone unit released in Japan in 2003. SNES-style graphics(like DQ7, the DQ series has never really put a huge emphasis on graphics or FMV), retelling of DQ1(basically, Dragon Warrior 1 here in the US) and you used a sword peripheral. Sold like crazy. One of my friends has a copy, it's a hell of a lot of fun actually, but I can't read japanese.
And canon, in FF? Comeon. While Crystal Chronicles is more in the vein of Seiken Densetsu(which started as FF: Adventure here on the Gameboy) than a traditional hit buttons til the FMV/dialog starts gameplay of the main series, it's still beefier than Mystic Quest was and has as much claim to the FF title as FFXII with it's cinematic gameplay/departion from the formula or FFXI, the mmo. It actually has the most in common with FFXI, because both emphasize multiplayer(and use similar races). The difference being that FF:CC plays like an MMO where you're in the room with your friends and can hit/yell at them. It's a mini-mmo, and all of it's depth comes from player interaction, not underlying mechanics. Heck of a lot of fun if you can get 4 people together with GBAs, some beer and a big screen.
There is no canon in FF. About the only thing linking the games together at this point is a guy named Cid, and I'm not even sure if FFXI had him, and the title. Prior to FF4, crystals of power were a common theme, which made a comeback in FFV, only to fade away for a while.
All we know about the new FF:CC and FFXIII is from some limited(probably pre-rendered) trailers. FFXIII could turn out to be in the vein of FFXII, which would make FFX(or X-2) the last "proper" title in the series(although imo, you have to go back further to get the good stuff). I saw more of the classic series in the FF:CC trailer though than I did in the FFXIII one, however. XIII seems to be going hyper-far into the VII vein of sci-fi fantasy, whereas CC looked more traditional, with airships and what not, more like 9 or pre-7.
And as to Square-Enix putting the main-series games solely on the Playstation. DQ9 hasn't been shown yet, but here's a little tidbit for you. I still remember FFVII being shown on Project Reality, aka the N64, and we all saw how *that* turned out. Square can and will jump ship in a freakin' heartbeat. So remember that before you lay down 3DO-level money with no main-series title out yet. That'd probably hurt more than the $199 the N64 cost if those titles don't stay on the PS3.
The people who buy FF:CC2 and the DQ sword game on Wii are going to be the people who only have a Wii and have no other choice if they want a taste of those series.
The people who buy a Wii at launch will be the people that want to play new installments of DQ and FF this year(as they're *launch* titles). The people who pickup a PS3 at launch are the people who won't be playing a new FF or DQ on their system for quite a bit past that, if ever(REMEMBER THE N64!).
So, joystick + mouse or trackball?
Welcome to a while ago mate, a long while ago...
Off the top of my head I'd like to see, third party, just to get the classics in:
Megaman(Capcom), Black Mage(FF1-3/Square), Sonic(for the 8/16 bit rivalry), Rygar(Rygar - Tecmo), Belmont/Alucard(Castlevania - Konami), a Contra guy(Contra 1-2/Konami), Erdrick(Dragon Warrior 1-3/Enix), Master Higgins(Adventure Island/Hudson), Lolo(Adventures of Lolo 1-3/HAL), Billy Lee(Double Dragon/Acclaim), PacMan (Namco), Ryu Hayabusa(Ninja Gaiden 1-3/Tecmo), Prince (Prince of Persia / Then Virgin, now Ubisoft).
That covers most of the core NES stuff I can remember off the top of my head, some of em went on to be big, some of em didn't. There's just too many square/enix characters to pull from, and most only appeared in a game or two, so the oldie generics seem better. First party, the only guy missing is little mac.
Bonk and Q-Bert, not so sure.