| 25 Sep 2006 03:46 pm |
Call me an asshole again Rep: 57  Joined: 06 Jan 2006 Posts: 41,907 OFFLINE | If I may, I want to ask you a question Professor_gad, why did you buy a video game console? Did you purchase what ever you had because it can play MP3s? Or maybe you bought it for the reson that it can play a DVD. Well I bought a console to play games, DVD playback is useless because I have a DVD player. MP3 playback is useless, I have a computer and plenty of songs to choose from. A video game console is primarily used to play video games, that is the main reason a person buys a system. So why would Nintendo want to add all those features and increase the price to an ungodly amount?
---
 | |
 | | 25 Sep 2006 11:32 pm |
Professor_gad Guest | Today the only thing people care about is having lots of green stuff. Yes, there was a day when Nintendo made games for entertainment and out of love for the hobby. But those days are gone.
Companies that sell technology that teens like, are companies that get rich. Nintendo is still in it’s “oh lets sell games for little kids” stage. If it were to go and try to appease the those 12+ it would recieve more business.
Yes, consoles are for games. But you can’t make a fortune out of “games and games only”. More variation in Nintendo’s exported goods would greatly increase Nintendo’s salary.
P.S. I don’t buy/play console games anymore, so I don’t really care much about this subject. I just like to investigate global issues.
— — -
Long live computers!
-If you know a programming language put this in your signature-
| | | 25 Sep 2006 11:33 pm |
hahahahaha Rep: 17 Joined: 10 Sep 2005 Posts: 14,285 OFFLINE | Professor_gad wrote:
Today the only thing people care about is having lots of green stuff. Yes, there was a day when Nintendo made games for entertainment and out of love for the hobby. But those days are gone.
Companies that sell technology that teens like, are companies that get rich. Nintendo is still in it’s “oh lets sell games for little kids” stage. If it were to go and try to appease the those 12+ it would recieve more business.
Yes, consoles are for games. But you can’t make a fortune out of “games and games only”. More variation in Nintendo’s exported goods would greatly increase Nintendo’s salary.
P.S. I don’t buy/play console games anymore, so I don’t really care much about this subject. I just like to investigate global issues.
— — -
Long live computers!
-If you know a programming language put this in your signature-
um... you do that...
| | | 25 Sep 2006 11:33 pm |
Taking noobs to school Rep: 29 Joined: 21 Jun 2006 Posts: 14,705 OFFLINE | You should register you r smart
---
 | | | 25 Sep 2006 11:57 pm |
The drummer Rep: 5 Joined: 20 Aug 2005 Posts: 14,487 OFFLINE | ok
---
<iframe src=“http://gamercard.xbox.com/REPLACE-THIS-WITH-YOUR-GAMERTAG.card” scrolling=“no” frameBorder=“0” height=“140” width=“204”>Put your gamertag here too.</iframe>
http://www.myspace.com/linkious
 | | | 26 Sep 2006 01:03 am |
Call me an asshole again Rep: 57Joined: 06 Jan 2006 Posts: 41,907 OFFLINE | Professor_gad wrote:
Today the only thing people care about is having lots of green stuff. Yes, there was a day when Nintendo made games for entertainment and out of love for the hobby. But those days are gone.
Nintendo doesn’t care as much about money as Sony or Microsoft, that is the reason they didn’t put in MP3 or DVD players. That is the reason the Wii is going to cost less than half the price of a PS3 and just under half the price of the 360, and last it is the reason why Nintendo’s games are still going to cost only $50 instead of $60 or $75. Nintendo is all about delivering a great game to their fans for as little as possible.
Professor_gad wrote:
Companies that sell technology that teens like, are companies that get rich. Nintendo is still in it’s “oh lets sell games for little kids” stage. If it were to go and try to appease the those 12+ it would recieve more business.
Although that is true you must think about it, yes Nintendo is primarily a younger kid’s company. However the third party companies are not, that is the reason the gamecube had so few 'M Rated' games and why the Wii will have so many. They’re already confirmed to have The Godfather and who knows what else it will get in the future. Take-Two is interested in the Wii now, so that may even mean Grand Theft Auto on the Wii
Professor_gad wrote:
Yes, consoles are for games. But you can’t make a fortune out of “games and games only”. More variation in Nintendo’s exported goods would greatly increase Nintendo’s salary.
That isn’t true, Game Consoles were selling just as much when they didn’t have DVD playback. The Playstation 1 has sold over 102 Million units sense it’s release, making it the best selling console on the market. It did not have DVD playback. Also Nintendo did a great job with the NES and the SNES, of course they got killed when Sony released the PS1 but that is to be expected. Nintendo will do just fine without DVD playback, and who knows they may pull a Microsoft and let you buy something that allows for playing DVDs.
Professor_gad wrote:
P.S. I don’t buy/play console games anymore, so I don’t really care much about this subject. I just like to investigate global issues.
Well, in that case I hope I was of some help in your investigation.
---
| | | 26 Sep 2006 02:47 pm |
EB V3 Guest | rysn wrote:
all u nintendo haters out there come chat god danmet nintendo is for kids
Was that even a sentence?
| | | 26 Sep 2006 03:15 pm |
Professor_gad Guest | [off-topic]Is this turning into an argument?[/off-topic]
I see that your not the easiest person on the world to debate. But I still hold to the fact the Nintendo (as a first party) should improvise. Basic games released by nintendo are getting smaller, cheaper, and more boring.
I also believe, that even though games are hot stuff, it should not be the main leg that supports Nintendo’s income and company. When a game is first released, they can produce a big sale; but then what? The game gets old, and people stop buying it.
Another factor is that there is great compitition in the game sales. If a new/high tech game creation company were to pop up out of nowhere, Nintendo would have a big problem. Yet if Nintendo would sell other goods as well, there would be other sources of income and Nintendo would not feel such a great loss.
One last thing to note- Baby boomers. Yes, as some of you who have not been in highschool (and above) may not know, baby boomers are coming. This means that soon, there will be alot of retired people(45+), less work people(18+), and less children/teen(18-). How does this affect our economy? Let us see....
Fewer teens and kids means less need of toys, games, ect... Fewer adults means less economic “power source”. And alot of retired people means- Medicine technology on the rise, and lots of business for retired center owners!
So lets see, Nintendo deals primarily with children goods. The people who work for nintendo are adults. These adults are going off to retirement, and the amount of needed games is decreasing since there are less children. What does this mean? Nintendo and all other game creation companies business will go down! However, if Nintendo were to distribute items that appeal to all teens/children as well as adults, the baby boom would not hurt them so much.
So there are three factors that may permenantly harm the Nintendo Company-
#1) Competition
#2) Boringness of currently distributed games
#3) Baby boomers
| | | 26 Sep 2006 05:37 pm |
Call me an asshole again Rep: 57Joined: 06 Jan 2006 Posts: 41,907 OFFLINE | Professor_gad wrote:
[off-topic]Is this turning into an argument?[/off-topic]
I would much rather call it a debate between two intelligent individuals.
Professor_gad wrote:
I see that your not the easiest person on the world to debate.
I’ll take that as a complement... I think
Professor_gad wrote:
Basic games released by nintendo are getting smaller,
The Legend of Zelda is to be Nintendo’s largest game yet, with 50+ hours of gameplay and a map that could potientially be as large as the maps of the Elder Scrolls games.
Professor_gad wrote:
cheaper,
They certainly don’t seem to be getting chaper, Nintendo has stepped up throughout every generation in gaming. The quality of their games has only risen sense the days of the NES.
Professor_gad wrote:
and more boring.
Super Smash Brothers Melee was said to have been the ultimate party game. Brawl will be better than that.
Professor_gad wrote:
I also believe, that even though games are hot stuff, it should not be the main leg that supports Nintendo’s income and company. When a game is first released, they can produce a big sale; but then what? The game gets old, and people stop buying it.
Some games are years old and still get the attention of fans across the globe. Sony has Final Fantasy VII, Nintendo has the Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time. Games don’t just get old and people don’t just stop buying them. Sure nintendo had some problems because the Wii is their first console to support backwards compatibility but Sony can provide a fine example of a game still selling years after it’s release. And Nintendo aims to show the same thing with the inclusion of classic games in their virtual console.
Professor_gad wrote:
Another factor is that there is great compitition in the game sales. If a new/high tech game creation company were to pop up out of nowhere, Nintendo would have a big problem. Yet if Nintendo would sell other goods as well, there would be other sources of income and Nintendo would not feel such a great loss.
Nintendo has already proven that statement wrong, the Playstation Portable could do anything, play MP3s, Movies, pictures, and browse the internet. The DS can only play games and chat between systems. And yet the DS kicked the PSP’s butt in sales, further more a little research might show it outselling things like the ipod, Portable CD players, and maybe even protable DVD players.
Professor_gad wrote:
One last thing to note- Baby boomers. Yes, as some of you who have not been in highschool (and above) may not know, baby boomers are coming. This means that soon, there will be alot of retired people(45+), less work people(18+), and less children/teen(18-). How does this affect our economy? Let us see....
Although this may be true, it won’t change the fact that retired people will buy games for children/teens and work people will buy them for theirselves. Even though the number may decrease it doesn’t change the fact that people will play video games. Also not this, those people who are in their 30’s probably grew up playing video games, do you think that they will stop playing them just because they got older? I don’t, people grow up listening to bands that were popular when they were young, but they didn’t grow out of liking those bands. The same will apply to games.
Professor_gad wrote:
So lets see, Nintendo deals primarily with children goods. The people who work for nintendo are adults. These adults are going off to retirement, and the amount of needed games is decreasing since there are less children. What does this mean? Nintendo and all other game creation companies business will go down! However, if Nintendo were to distribute items that appeal to all teens/children as well as adults, the baby boom would not hurt them so much.
As I said before, just because they get older doesn’t mean they’ll stop playing games, especially when Zelda and Mario are still around.
Professor_gad wrote:
So there are three factors that may permenantly harm the Nintendo Company-
#1) Competition
Nintendo hasn’t done so well in the console market in the past years but they still own in the Handheld market, which by the way, is doing better than the console market right now.
Professor_gad wrote:
#2) Boringness of currently distributed games
I don’t find the current gaming generation boring, and apparently neither does most of the other gamers.
Professor_gad wrote:
#3) Baby boomers
Already explained.
---
Last edited 26 Sep 2006 05:38 pm by Cid | | | 26 Sep 2006 06:31 pm |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 6 Joined: 02 May 2006 Posts: 4,255 OFFLINE | This is a stupid topic.
---
  | | | 26 Sep 2006 07:00 pm |
Call me an asshole again Rep: 57Joined: 06 Jan 2006 Posts: 41,907 OFFLINE | yes, I’m not even sure why it was revived...
---
| | | 27 Sep 2006 12:31 pm |
Mooman Guest | Why are there so many PS3 fanboys who never know when to shut up?
| | | 27 Sep 2006 09:37 pm |
Professor_gad Guest | First of all, I would like to define cheaper.
I did not mean cheaper as in “cheap graphics” because graphics has never been a problem for Nintendo. You could make a game with superb graphic quality, and people will not buy it because it has low interest or meaning.
However a game with not so good graphics but with a good “play me quality” can bring humungous income (halo brought a gross of 100 M on the first day it was released!).
I happen to know several game addicts who are constantly nagging that Nintendo games are getting to short, and to an extent pointless. An example of this is the “new super mario bros”. This game is basically a remix of the original sm bros, and you can win it faster than you could the old one. And as I stated before, it’s increased visual quality did not fill in the gap of its uselessness.
So I still hold to the fact that Nintendo should bring back the good old originality to it’s games.
And may I please remind you, when exactly was “Super Smash Brothers malee”, and “The Legend of Zelda” released? Let me note that I am disatisfied with New games, not Old ones.
I know that adults and grannies/granpapies play video games.... Yet I consider this to an extent embarrassing. And even if 30% of the mature people would still play games, this wouldn’t account for the amount of retired nintendo employees, and for the fewer amount of customers. There would still be a disbalance. The amount of money would go down in the end. (and since when did I say that adults were the brick foundation of Nintendo’s company? I just said that they would stop working on Nintendo. Kids are always the ultimate resource *puts on a devious grin*.)
| | | 27 Sep 2006 11:33 pm |
Call me an asshole again Rep: 57Joined: 06 Jan 2006 Posts: 41,907 OFFLINE | Professor_gad wrote:
First of all, I would like to define cheaper.
I did not mean cheaper as in “cheap graphics” because graphics has never been a problem for Nintendo. You could make a game with superb graphic quality, and people will not buy it because it has low interest or meaning.
I wasn’t talking about graphic either, I personally think that the gameplay in games has risen for Nintendo. Although “The Legend of Zelda the Wind Waker” and “Super Mario Sunshine” weren’t as good as the Ocarina of Time or Mario 64, they were still great games. A lot of the games on the gamecube were great games. The problem with the game cube was the lack of third party support which came from the hardware itself. I understand that the gamecube was a piece of shit compared to the PS2 and the Xbox, but as far as games go, the gamecube had some of the best and funnest to play. And in the end that should have been all that mattered. However people these days have to have technological advances in everything, a game system isn’t enough anymore. People have to have something extra even if they don’t need it, which is the main reason the Wii will support full on internet browsing. To me, this is better than being able to play DVDs (which btw, is the only thing the Wii lacks when compared to the 360, it supports MP3s, images, and video)
Professor_gad wrote:
An example of this is the “new super mario bros”. This game is basically a remix of the original sm bros, and you can win it faster than you could the old one. And as I stated before, it’s increased visual quality did not fill in the gap of its uselessness.
Nintendo remade that game as a way to honor the franchise, which I believe it deserves. In fact there are several games that I would love to see remade with updated graphics, games from Nintendo as Sony alike. The Legend of Zelda a Link to the Past would be awesome in 3D I think, same story and items but with a system that handles like the Ocarina of Time. On the Sony side, I have been waiting for a remake if Final Fantasy VII sense they showed the PS3 Tech Demo in 2005. So I don’t really see remakes as being a bad thing.
Professor_gad wrote:
And may I please remind you, when exactly was “Super Smash Brothers malee”, and “The Legend of Zelda” released? Let me note that I am disatisfied with New games, not Old ones.
I used Melee because it is still current gen and can’t be classified as old until the 17th.
Professor_gad wrote:
And even if 30% of the mature people would still play games, this wouldn’t account for the amount of retired nintendo employees, and for the fewer amount of customers. There would still be a disbalance. The amount of money would go down in the end. (and since when did I say that adults were the brick foundation of Nintendo’s company? I just said that they would stop working on Nintendo. Kids are always the ultimate resource *puts on a devious grin*.)
I think the bolded number is likely to be higher than that. The people in this generation of gaming grew up with games, just because they get older doesn’t mean they’re going to give up games. I think it’s likely that over %60 of the people in this day and age will be playing games well into their 50s maybe even older, because it is a part of their lives now.
---
| | | 28 Sep 2006 12:49 pm |
Professor_gad Guest | Lol! I can see it now... A 50 year old playing super mario, or link.
Seriously, wouldn’t you eventually get bored, or go blind? Old people ussually play golf, or sit around in retirement centers.
Yes, Nintendo has released some nice games like sm sunshine, but it isn’t as productive as it used to be.
They need something new, something flashy. Something that would stay in the history of Nintendo as the star of their company. Can you see it yet? Close your eyes with me, and try to picture something this big.
(some ideas of this “big” thing- Randomly generated levels, 3d room editors, virtual reality [beyond the flat screen], 2d game remakes in Qubed voxel form, endless levels, Wireframe graphics, large gta’s representing cities in the US, and more!)
| | | 28 Sep 2006 01:01 pm |
Call me an asshole again Rep: 57Joined: 06 Jan 2006 Posts: 41,907 OFFLINE | Professor_gad wrote:
Lol! I can see it now... A 50 year old playing super mario, or link.
I could see it happening, I know I will still be playing Zelda when I’m 50 
Professor_gad wrote:
Seriously, wouldn’t you eventually get bored, or go blind? Old people ussually play golf, or sit around in retirement centers.
If they keep releasing new and better things then I wouldn’t get bored. Of course I don’t get bored easily at all, I’ve played a game that’s nearly 10 years old hundreds of times. Going blind is a possibility, but you can go blind from eating certain things.
Professor_gad wrote:
Yes, Nintendo has released some nice games like sm sunshine, but it isn’t as productive as it used to be.
I think it’s all going to change with the Wii, I’m fairly certain that TP can and will be the best Zelda game yet.
Professor_gad wrote:
They need something new, something flashy. Something that would stay in the history of Nintendo as the star of their company. Can you see it yet? Close your eyes with me, and try to picture something this big.
Nintendo already has a shining star of the company, they have what is often considered to be the best game ever made.
Professor_gad wrote:
(some ideas of this “big” thing- Randomly generated levels, 3d room editors, virtual reality [beyond the flat screen], 2d game remakes in Qubed voxel form, endless levels, Wireframe graphics, large gta’s representing cities in the US, and more!)
^^; isn’t most of that a bit out of reach in this day and age with the technology we have?
---
| | | 28 Sep 2006 02:14 pm |
Professor_gad Guest | None of those are impossible. I design 3d games, so I would know. The only thing I consider impossible is real, virtual reality. Like, a game or technology in which you could touch and feel things that were premade in 3d digital format. In other words, you make a 3d chair on your computer, and then with the special technology you make it become a real thing.
Randomly generated rooms, 3d level editors, and wireframe, are three of the easier ones from the list. Terragen makes random terrain, isn’t level layout easier to make than terrain? Wireframe is far to simple so I won’t go on prooving it possible. Also, game creators use 3d level editors all the time, the customers are not given these editors only because the company doesn’t want to loose business, or because the editor is far to complicated.
Infinately large rooms is also a possiblility if what you see dissappears behind you, and new things, that are in range ahead of you, are generated randomly. So infinate rooms, is simply an illusion like the endless stairs in sm64.
Gta’s the size of cities are possible, have a look at Pilot wings! It was a Nintendo 64 game to! All you need to do to pull off large rooms(sometimes called levels) is make sure your computer/console only processes things you see.
So as I have shown, computer hardware is powerfull enough to do the things above. There just aren’t enough intelligent game designers out there that are willing to do it.
| |
|
Previous Page - Post Reply |
|
»
Games
» nintendo is the biggest piece of crap and sony and microsoft r going to sloter nintend
