Agreed it wasn't that spectacular (largely due to being so rushed). No, it's not the only successful game, however Microsoft continues to advertize it more than any other game, even more recent games like Ninja Gaiden (which is a shame really).
Halo: 3.10 M
Project Gotham: 1.07 M
GTA: Double Pack: 1 M
Splinter Cell: 1.33 M
And some more that did fairly well (note: different site--less complete and numbers are slightly more out of date). (source)
DoA3: 0.73 M
Ghost Recon: 0.79 M
Mech Assault: 0.51 M
Spider Man: The Movie: 0.51 M
So: no, Halo isn't the only successful XBox game, and the discrepancy presumably wouldn't be so large if it wasn't for the massive gap in advertizing between Halo and every other game combined. Then again, that may be a strategy for Microsoft: create a franchise that it can later use to draw in customers. In which case...
Wait for several people to claim that Halo 2 doesn't live up to the original despite being an improvement in basically every way!
You know as far as North American RPG sales go, FFTA outsold Golden Sun: The Lost Age (bestselling traditional GBA RPG of the same year) 478,137 to 374,791. Fire Emblem outsold.Hack 231,726 to 205,175. FFT outsold Caslevania SotN. It also outsold Parasite Eve. It also outsold Chrono Cross.
So what if no SRPG has been a million seller in North America as of yet? The only console RPGs that have been are Final Fantasy *insert number*, Pokemon *insert colour* and Kingdom Hearts.
which is the Reason that GTA3 and Vice city where able to be ported to the PC.
Which is why they've also been ported to the XBox, right? Or why Rockstar waited seven months release the PC version in both cases? IIRC Sony's agreement only required exclusivity for a certain time period.
But you'd be wrong to conclude that the library of exclusive titles explains the PS2 out selling the xbox - the facts just don't support that conclusion.
Maybe not recent titles. Want to know the four games on the PS2 that were nominated in the GameFAQs Spring Contest? Final Fantasy X (2001 exclusive) Kingdom Hearts (2001 exclusive) Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty (2001 exclusive) Vice City (was exclusive for a while, and...heck GTA3 was a 2001 exclusive at one point too). Looking at Gamerankings, and at the sales charts I have, it looks like Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec (another 2001 exclusive) was the biggest snub.
Nevermind the fact that small companies will now make games just for the PS2 to save money given the massive install base, so it gets a whole lot of small-name exclusives. This attracts some enthusiasts of certain genres (like, say, console RPGs, fighting games...). Yeah, sure, exclusives haven't helped the PS2.
Not just one-year, but sales since launch. The one-month numbers are on the *left* of the numbers I bolded. Incidentally 66 million sounds familiar for worldwide PS2 sales, though that's probably a bit out of date.
As for Wired, I have no explanation. Well, there is the alleged anti-Nintendo bias of the press but even supposing they are biassed I would think they'd be a bit more careful than that.
The one peripheral I have for the GBA is a battery pack (which has the bonus effect of bulking the entire thing up...which I like having large hands).
This is a nice novelty, though if some previous articles are true the DS may have text messaging and infa-red linking built-in, and I believe the PSP may as well. In all likelihood these systems will be somewhat more widespread than any individual peripheral (as peripherals tend to sell far worse than their systems) and likely done more professionally being first-party instead of an add on (I have bad experiences with third party hardware of any description usually).
Um... the GameCube has fallen pretty far behind Xbox and PS2 in America.
http://www.the-magicbox.com/topten3.htm
Hardware Sales in North America (For the month of March 2004) Rank System Manufacturer Units Sold Total Sold 1 GameBoy Advance Nintendo 496,614 21,237,545 2 PlayStation 2 Sony 294,437 23,226,879 3 Xbox Microsoft 198,445 8,384,051 4 GameCube Nintendo 163,028 7,297,191
Yes, XBox is currently surging a little due to a price drop. I wouldn't call 15% "pretty far behind". If anything, the XB and the GCN are about tied and very far behind the PS2 and GBA. Bear in mind too that the GC and XB both did far better in North America than any other area of the world. (IIRC it's 3mil/3.5mil in Europe, and 3mil/1mil in Japan compared to similarly high PS2 sales; don't have the figures onhand, though).
Price. For whatever reason people don't seem to want to pay as much for a portable console as a home console (and portable games tend to market for lower as well). It makes perfect sense too--portable hardware will always be a step behind the current generation for technology.
However what I'm wondering about is the 2D vs 3D issue. Personally I have a GBA largely for some great 2D experiences that they're comming out with today. On the other hand, every home console does 3D, and furthermore I'm not convinced a 3D game without a really good back-lighting system will work so well compared to clear-contrast bright sprites.
If, as rumors state, the PS3 will play PSP games, then I'll have very little reason to get the PSP itself. I've honestly barely used the portable aspect of the GBA (other than an extra screen at parties). What can I say? Camping trips are no longer "those boring things my parrents drag me along to" and I need to get out of the house more often....
Which is why you bought a GBA to play Final Fantasy Legend, Final Fantasy Legend II, Final Fantasy Legend III, The Final Fantasy Adventure, and Final Fantasy Tactics Advance, yes?
I think Nintendo's going to lose this fight just because they're too used to getting their way and ruling their software library with an iron fist. Granted it's lightened up a bit since the SNES bloodless Mortal Kombat days, but I think Sony's just going to bring more developers to the market with them.
I've yet to see evidence that Nintendo is still holding onto any draconian policies. Any content censorship was thrown out the window a while ago when they promoted Conker's Bad Fur day. From all I've heard their liscencing fee (for the GC) is $10, same as the PS2. I don't think they're holding back development information now either, as I believe they were beaten out the door on Cel-shading, for instance.
The only control I've heard of is barring games which have horrid gameplay (a few very trashy GBA games have been cancelled this way). If anything this is a good thing. I don't want to accidentally pick up a title that I can barely play.
I seem to remember reading an interview where they said consumers are not interested in a new technology, and that the will not be putting out a next generation console in 2005 or 2006.
I too remember an article claiming that they planned on a 2007 release which they later decided against. It doesn't sound like a terrible idea, actually; the jump from GCN/XBX graphics/hardware to what I've seen of next-gen looks smaller than the jump from PS2 to GCN/XBX (PS2 not having anti-aisling or four controller slots or fast load times) and yet look who's in the lead and still selling the most consoles. People dislike upgrading.
However everybody I know considers the GameCube a joke for some reason.
Odd; most people I know have respect for it (if not always as much as the PS2) but then I don't know anyone who's into online console gaming.
And you're right, I guess I'm no longer in Nintendo's target audience.
For that particular game, I meant. I assume you're still the target audience for MGS: TTT, Metroid Prime, or Eternal Darkness. For example, I believe Konami makes dating sims for the Japanese teenage girl market--doesn't mean they don't make games for other audiences as well.
Don't go the way of Nintendo and believe people are not interested in technological innovation.
Oh? IIRC Nintendo was the first company to display a cel-shaded game (though others beat them to the publishing line). Also, the visor effects in Metroid Prime were a reasonable step up from all I've heard (though it may be copying another game I haven't seen). Looking further back, what about F-Zero, Mario 64, and Donkey Kong Country?
Nintendo strikes me as one of the most innovative companies graphically. The difference is that they think about their market; Animal Crossing for the GCN is essentially N64 quality of graphics, but...even if it was ultra-realistic, would YOU buy it? You're not in the target audience, I'm guessing. Yes, some audiences care about graphics. No, not everybody does.
I find it amusing that the last game I played before comming here was Zelda 2: Adventures of Link.
Sure, the XBox can't compare to modern PCs. And...? Here's graphics which I have liked recently.
* Seeing the stone reef across the horison forgrounding a sunset in Skies of Arcadia (ooh: pretty)
* Bending space with the Charge Beam/Exhaust in Metroid Prime (mmmm: topological distortion...).
* Funny sprite animations in FF6.
The interesting thing is, I'm playing FF Anthology, and it certainly wasn't the drab opening FMV that caught my eye (though the graphics are newer). It's well-executed, entertaining details which entertain me, not pixels and polygons (as if I'd bother counting them all).
I object to claims that non-dynamic plot means no replay. Good and varied gameplay will often mean replayability (the main reason why I've played FFT and Super Metroid so much). Furthermore (and this is more subtle) just as scholars will read deep books many times, or re-watch groundbreaking movies multiple times, when a game's storyline is truly a work of art it can be worth seeing many times.
Granted, I've only found one such game I consider worthy of study (Koudelka for the PSX) so it's the exception rather than the rule in gaming. Well...there's a couple others where I didn't fully understand the plot the first time through (like FFT) but that's not necessarily a positive quality....
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember an article either about surpassing Apple on the desktop, or projected to surpass Apple in 2004. It was a while ago on Slashdot, mind, so it's too far back for me to search easily and check, and they both have about 3% market share so it's not like Microsoft is exactly scared.
I do feel that the criticism aimed at Nintendo can sometimes be overdramatic, and if anything I've been surprised at how good a few business decisions have been in retrospect. Case in point: Rare has released...practically nothing on the XBox (just Grabbed by the Ghoulies last time I checked). Also interesting is how Sony and Microsoft are now planning to use chips made by ATI and IBM for their next consoles (GCN's partnerships). At the same time...
HOW ARE THEY GOING TO MAKE MULTIPLAYER FEEL LIKE METROID?!?!? HOW!!?
Okay, now that my obligatory venting is done...to be honest I tend to buy games for a new experience. As much as I loved Metroid Prime, there's a reasonable chance I wouldn't buy Prime 2 if it sounded too similar. On the other hand, multiplayer will be something new, so will likely cause me to buy this.
Yes, this is called irony. Yes I am still angry at them for making it multiplayer *pouts*
Though, you'd really need a storyline based around it. I'm thinking specifically about the
*SPOILERS*
10 SA-Xs in Metroid Fusion.
*ENDSPOILERS*
There's also a lot of really nice puzzles you can set up for multiplayer. Anybody else here played those RPGs where the party splits in half and one side pushes a switch which moves an object in the other half of the dungeon? those puzzles tend to end up reasonably interesting every time, though this does assume both players are similar in skill....
Yes, it is slower moving than Super Metroid. This is the problem with 2D vs 3D; 2D is fundamentally faster and can pull off things like the Speed Booster, whereas 3D really can't. Yep, it takes over twice as long to charge up the charge beam, Missiles have a much slower firing rate, takes longer to jump, and all that.
At the same time it did really end up feeling like a Metroid game to me, and within hours I was finding myself successfully using some of my old Metroid strategies--tactics that I never thought could be made effective in a 3D game. Objectively the action is a little slower than Super Metroid, but probably faster than, say, Metroid II, and it was very nicely done overall.
Oh, and you forgot Jump. Sure, it's no Mario 64 in terms of it's jump complexity, but there's a lot of jumping, and grappling, and...to be honest it felt odd that the Jump button was the secondary button, actually (but they had to do that in order to pull off the special beam weapons).
The one real exception I've found is the way the Omega Pirate plays. When I went through on Hard Mode without too many items recently (notably lacking were all the beam-missile weapons other than Super Missiles) I just found that the randomness of which type of enemy showed up, and the randomness of whether all enemies would be the same type was rather obnoxious. It was also kind of silly that I found myself trying to memroize the ceiling so that I'd know where it's safe to walk while strafing.
Though yes, I can find very few flaws in this game in general, and a lot of things that just feel incredibly polished.
On every console game sold, a pretty hefty chunk of the money from the sale goes not to the developer or the publisher, but rather to the company behind the console. In many cases, this can be around 10 per game. Indeed, Nintento's share is apparently very large indeed, which accounts for why, in the UK at least, Gamecube games tend to debut at 45, rather than 40 as with the other consoles, and tend to drop in price more slowly.
Odd, I thought it was $10 (Gamecube) $10 (PS2) $9 (XBox) or something close to that. Of course, Sony gives very nice deals on greatest hits games, but this is hardly an incentive for small companies.
Wario Ware IS good, though. I found it drawing time away from the likes of Metroid Prime, even when I had just recently picked up Prime but had Wario Ware around for a while.
On the topic of finger twitching...eh, the GBA is getting at least as many (console-style) RPGs and SRPGs as the PS2, and those generally don't fall under the finger-twitching category.
Slashdot Mirror
XBox million sellers in the US (source):
Halo: 3.10 M
Project Gotham: 1.07 M
GTA: Double Pack: 1 M
Splinter Cell: 1.33 M
And some more that did fairly well (note: different site--less complete and numbers are slightly more out of date). (source)
DoA3: 0.73 M
Ghost Recon: 0.79 M
Mech Assault: 0.51 M
Spider Man: The Movie: 0.51 M
So: no, Halo isn't the only successful XBox game, and the discrepancy presumably wouldn't be so large if it wasn't for the massive gap in advertizing between Halo and every other game combined. Then again, that may be a strategy for Microsoft: create a franchise that it can later use to draw in customers. In which case...
Wait for several people to claim that Halo 2 doesn't live up to the original despite being an improvement in basically every way!
So what if no SRPG has been a million seller in North America as of yet? The only console RPGs that have been are Final Fantasy *insert number*, Pokemon *insert colour* and Kingdom Hearts.
Which is why they've also been ported to the XBox, right? Or why Rockstar waited seven months release the PC version in both cases? IIRC Sony's agreement only required exclusivity for a certain time period.
Maybe not recent titles. Want to know the four games on the PS2 that were nominated in the GameFAQs Spring Contest? Final Fantasy X (2001 exclusive) Kingdom Hearts (2001 exclusive) Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty (2001 exclusive) Vice City (was exclusive for a while, and...heck GTA3 was a 2001 exclusive at one point too). Looking at Gamerankings, and at the sales charts I have, it looks like Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec (another 2001 exclusive) was the biggest snub.
Nevermind the fact that small companies will now make games just for the PS2 to save money given the massive install base, so it gets a whole lot of small-name exclusives. This attracts some enthusiasts of certain genres (like, say, console RPGs, fighting games...). Yeah, sure, exclusives haven't helped the PS2.
Actually, GameCube sales were massively spiking in January and February. FFCC perhaps? Or maybe Mario Kart?
As for Wired, I have no explanation. Well, there is the alleged anti-Nintendo bias of the press but even supposing they are biassed I would think they'd be a bit more careful than that.
This is a nice novelty, though if some previous articles are true the DS may have text messaging and infa-red linking built-in, and I believe the PSP may as well. In all likelihood these systems will be somewhat more widespread than any individual peripheral (as peripherals tend to sell far worse than their systems) and likely done more professionally being first-party instead of an add on (I have bad experiences with third party hardware of any description usually).
In other words: meh
Um... the GameCube has fallen pretty far behind Xbox and PS2 in America.
http://www.the-magicbox.com/topten3.htm
Hardware Sales in North America
(For the month of March 2004)
Rank System Manufacturer Units Sold Total Sold
1 GameBoy Advance Nintendo 496,614 21,237,545
2 PlayStation 2 Sony 294,437 23,226,879
3 Xbox Microsoft 198,445 8,384,051
4 GameCube Nintendo 163,028 7,297,191
Yes, XBox is currently surging a little due to a price drop. I wouldn't call 15% "pretty far behind". If anything, the XB and the GCN are about tied and very far behind the PS2 and GBA. Bear in mind too that the GC and XB both did far better in North America than any other area of the world. (IIRC it's 3mil/3.5mil in Europe, and 3mil/1mil in Japan compared to similarly high PS2 sales; don't have the figures onhand, though).
However what I'm wondering about is the 2D vs 3D issue. Personally I have a GBA largely for some great 2D experiences that they're comming out with today. On the other hand, every home console does 3D, and furthermore I'm not convinced a 3D game without a really good back-lighting system will work so well compared to clear-contrast bright sprites.
If, as rumors state, the PS3 will play PSP games, then I'll have very little reason to get the PSP itself. I've honestly barely used the portable aspect of the GBA (other than an extra screen at parties). What can I say? Camping trips are no longer "those boring things my parrents drag me along to" and I need to get out of the house more often....
Which is why you bought a GBA to play Final Fantasy Legend, Final Fantasy Legend II, Final Fantasy Legend III, The Final Fantasy Adventure, and Final Fantasy Tactics Advance, yes?
I only have Japanese Data, but they're selling at about 1/10 the rate over there.
I've yet to see evidence that Nintendo is still holding onto any draconian policies. Any content censorship was thrown out the window a while ago when they promoted Conker's Bad Fur day. From all I've heard their liscencing fee (for the GC) is $10, same as the PS2. I don't think they're holding back development information now either, as I believe they were beaten out the door on Cel-shading, for instance.
The only control I've heard of is barring games which have horrid gameplay (a few very trashy GBA games have been cancelled this way). If anything this is a good thing. I don't want to accidentally pick up a title that I can barely play.
I too remember an article claiming that they planned on a 2007 release which they later decided against. It doesn't sound like a terrible idea, actually; the jump from GCN/XBX graphics/hardware to what I've seen of next-gen looks smaller than the jump from PS2 to GCN/XBX (PS2 not having anti-aisling or four controller slots or fast load times) and yet look who's in the lead and still selling the most consoles. People dislike upgrading.
However everybody I know considers the GameCube a joke for some reason.
Odd; most people I know have respect for it (if not always as much as the PS2) but then I don't know anyone who's into online console gaming.
And you're right, I guess I'm no longer in Nintendo's target audience.
For that particular game, I meant. I assume you're still the target audience for MGS: TTT, Metroid Prime, or Eternal Darkness. For example, I believe Konami makes dating sims for the Japanese teenage girl market--doesn't mean they don't make games for other audiences as well.
Oh? IIRC Nintendo was the first company to display a cel-shaded game (though others beat them to the publishing line). Also, the visor effects in Metroid Prime were a reasonable step up from all I've heard (though it may be copying another game I haven't seen). Looking further back, what about F-Zero, Mario 64, and Donkey Kong Country?
Nintendo strikes me as one of the most innovative companies graphically. The difference is that they think about their market; Animal Crossing for the GCN is essentially N64 quality of graphics, but...even if it was ultra-realistic, would YOU buy it? You're not in the target audience, I'm guessing. Yes, some audiences care about graphics. No, not everybody does.
Sure, the XBox can't compare to modern PCs. And...? Here's graphics which I have liked recently.
* Seeing the stone reef across the horison forgrounding a sunset in Skies of Arcadia (ooh: pretty)
* Bending space with the Charge Beam/Exhaust in Metroid Prime (mmmm: topological distortion...).
* Funny sprite animations in FF6.
The interesting thing is, I'm playing FF Anthology, and it certainly wasn't the drab opening FMV that caught my eye (though the graphics are newer). It's well-executed, entertaining details which entertain me, not pixels and polygons (as if I'd bother counting them all).
Granted, I've only found one such game I consider worthy of study (Koudelka for the PSX) so it's the exception rather than the rule in gaming. Well...there's a couple others where I didn't fully understand the plot the first time through (like FFT) but that's not necessarily a positive quality....
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember an article either about surpassing Apple on the desktop, or projected to surpass Apple in 2004. It was a while ago on Slashdot, mind, so it's too far back for me to search easily and check, and they both have about 3% market share so it's not like Microsoft is exactly scared.
Though, I probably do play shooters once or twice a year, I just replay old ones since I've yet to notice any great difference in the new ones.
HOW ARE THEY GOING TO MAKE MULTIPLAYER FEEL LIKE METROID?!?!? HOW!!?
Okay, now that my obligatory venting is done...to be honest I tend to buy games for a new experience. As much as I loved Metroid Prime, there's a reasonable chance I wouldn't buy Prime 2 if it sounded too similar. On the other hand, multiplayer will be something new, so will likely cause me to buy this.
Yes, this is called irony. Yes I am still angry at them for making it multiplayer *pouts*
*SPOILERS*
10 SA-Xs in Metroid Fusion.
*ENDSPOILERS*
There's also a lot of really nice puzzles you can set up for multiplayer. Anybody else here played those RPGs where the party splits in half and one side pushes a switch which moves an object in the other half of the dungeon? those puzzles tend to end up reasonably interesting every time, though this does assume both players are similar in skill....
At the same time it did really end up feeling like a Metroid game to me, and within hours I was finding myself successfully using some of my old Metroid strategies--tactics that I never thought could be made effective in a 3D game. Objectively the action is a little slower than Super Metroid, but probably faster than, say, Metroid II, and it was very nicely done overall.
Oh, and you forgot Jump. Sure, it's no Mario 64 in terms of it's jump complexity, but there's a lot of jumping, and grappling, and...to be honest it felt odd that the Jump button was the secondary button, actually (but they had to do that in order to pull off the special beam weapons).
Though yes, I can find very few flaws in this game in general, and a lot of things that just feel incredibly polished.
Odd, I thought it was $10 (Gamecube) $10 (PS2) $9 (XBox) or something close to that. Of course, Sony gives very nice deals on greatest hits games, but this is hardly an incentive for small companies.
So...you can go online and compare scores? I thought that was what message boards were for....
On the topic of finger twitching...eh, the GBA is getting at least as many (console-style) RPGs and SRPGs as the PS2, and those generally don't fall under the finger-twitching category.