Hopes for Nintendo.

*Sigh*

While the gamecube was rather fun this year, it just doesn't seem to put out as much as it used too. Sony has been pumping out tons of great games, meanwhile Gamecube has some good games (almost all of them made by Nintendo and the most popular games that are on all three systems), but most of them are just...bad, and it seems the bad games are put on the cube. (Example is Charlie's Angels...bleeagh.)

Miyamato really needs to step up. If he wants more popularity, he should definitely standardize online play, get some GODDAM VOICE ACTING FOR ZELDA, so on and so forth.

Any thoughts?

I think your idea for voice acting for Zelda is a stupid idea, but other than that I to agree that the Gamecube hasn't been doing as well. I'm confident things will only get better though since the 2005 line up for GCN looks great.

Originally Posted by RenaKunisaki

get some GODDAM VOICE ACTING FOR ZELDA

A big NO to that!

But you're right about the rest, but it's too late for Nintendo to fix the online stuff now... Wait for the next console, it might be online.

I know what you mean, many developers are dissing Nintendo and so are most people. I even seen stores that barely sell a Gamecube game but got lots of PS2 and Xbox games. It's just stupid.

I know some dude is gonna give us a list of what games are good (he's probably gonna include Metroid Prime, Metroid Prime 2, Eternal Darkness, Super Mario Sunshine, etc etc etc) and to be honest almost none of the many "good" games for the Gamecube appealed to me. I mean wow, get Pikmin, beat it, and then never play it again. That's what I hate the most.

Gamecube in my opinion kinda turned out 'soft' in some way, not to mention Nintendo/developers had to experiment with all their new ideas... Donkey Konga, Star Fox Adventures, The Wind Waker... It's pretty risky and it rarely ever works.

I'm just gonna say I think Gamecube is OK and that it wasn't that bad after all, though I liked N64 way more.

I hate the very idea of voice acting in the Zelda series.

And, though I wouldn't mind online play, it's a bit late for the GC to get any. And that wouldn't be Miyamoto's decision anyways


And I very much disagree on the first paragraph. I own a PS2... It has some great games. But during the past, oh, four months or so, Katamari Damacy and Star Ocean 3 were the only games I thought were worth buying for it.

On the other hand, the GC got Tales of Symphonia, Paper Mario, Pikmin 2, and for those who care (not me), Donkey Konga. Now look into the next two months, and the GC will get Baten Kaitos, Metroid Prime: Echoes, and Mario Tennis. The PS2 will get Wild Arms 3, and for those who care (not me), GTA: San Andreas.

They're running about even, but I would personally give the edge to the GC. The GC certainly isn't being buried under an avalanch of good PS2 games or anything, as you seemed to suggest

And that's not even mentioning the DS, coming out next month, or GBA games.



Really, I'm tired of people all proclaiming the suckitude of Nintendo, or how they're doomed, or how they need to shape up or get out, or any of the other things along those lines. People who say these things are simply ignorant. Nintendo could be doing better, certainly, but they're not doomed, and they still churn out great games.

If those great games are not quite to your taste, then why do you have a GC in the first place?


EDIT: And I'm equally tired of ignorant Nintendo fanboys bashing other consoles just because they can. I will have none of that in this thread.

The think the N64 was by far the worst of all of nintendos main platforms.


Anyway, the gamecube actually started to outsale the XBOX so some of the points here are a little unfounded. It hasn't sold as many models as the ps2, but that's because sony got a two year head start. So for the GCN and GBA to come in at the last minute and immediatly blow microsoft and sony out of the water as far as sales go (I'm including the GBA) is actually pretty damned impressive.

However, I will say this, as much as I love nintendo for thier works, they're freaking morons.

Miyamoto's sheer stubborness when it comes to following suit is best described as stupidity. Why oh why do they INSIST on making thier hardware unique?

I mean, let's be honest, nobody cares about the hardware. All people care about is the games it houses. And the GCN controllers awkward design and lack of the right number of buttons makes it immposible to house several games. Let's face it, altough the controller is quite comfertable the damn thing limits possibilites more than any controller on the market. As a result, developers generally don't work with the GCN hardware as much as they do the other platforms because the GCN hardware has the least amount of options to work with. You just don't see very many GCN exclusive games that aren't made by nintendo. And then there are the several annoying things about owning a GCN.

I can't use a CD guard.

I can't use a lens cleaning disc.

I have to pay more if I want a game Dr. that'll fix my GCN games.

Why? Because nintendo was too stuborn to use REGULAR discs like everyone else.

And please, no more of that "Keke, Nen10do mak kiddy games, rotfl." crap. The audience range a game can be reccomended for has absoulutly nothing to do with it's quality.

Zelda may not have exploding heads and profanity, but I'd still choose it over duke nukem anyday.

Miyamoto's sheer stubborness when it comes to following suit is best described as stupidity.

Why do you people insist on thinking that Miyamoto makes all the decisions? Iwata, and before him Yamauchi, is the president. Miyamoto helped design the GC controller if my memory serves, but that's about it as far as hardware goes. Online strategies were certainly not his department, either.

And I fail to see how the GC controller is limiting in any way. It's my favorite of the current console controllers.


And I disagree on your first sentence as well The N64, in terms of game quality, was far better then the GC or any of the current consoles. It had Mario 64, Zelda: OoT, MM, Mario Tennis, Super Smash Bros, Ogre Batle 64, Bajo-Kazooie, Goldeneye, Harvest Moon 64, and Star Fox 64. All of those are AAA games for me, and the current consoles, all three combined, still have less games of such high quality... in my opinion, of course.

Why are you telling me any of this?

Ok, let me explain my point on the controller.


ps2: Two sticks. Eight buttons. Large D-pad. Pressable control sticks. Pressive sensitive feature.

GCN: Seven buttons. Annoyingly small d-pad. Control sticks don't press.


A perfect example of what I mean about how difficult it must be for developers of multi-console games that have somewaht complicated control schemes is Metal Geat Solid: The Twin Snakes. Silicon Knights obviously went all out trying to get the MGS2 gameplay to work on the GCN controller. For the most part it wokred, but some features that they ported to the GCN controller ( the uses that used the P.S. feature for example) were just broken.

And it isn't just the controller that limits possibilties. It's the overall abilities of the GCN itself.

The xbox and ps2 versions of splinter cell: PT got that awesome online multiplayer that was what mostly made the game what it is.

What did the GCN version get? GBA connectivity. Wow. But I can't blame Ubisoft for that, it's not THEIR fault nintendo is too stuborn to give online support.

MK deception for the ps2 and xbox both support online play. But because they can't do that for the GCN version, gamecube owners have to wait longer than ps2 and xbox owners for the game. and to be honest, I doubt the wait will be worth it as there's not a damn thing midway can do that can justify the absence of online play on the GCn version. But like I said about ubisoft, it's not midways fault.

Also, I thought the n64 mostly housed mediocre games, alot of you may disagree, and I don't care.

Yeh, voice acting is a big "no-no" in the Zelda games, it will spoil the game.

Anyway, I'm not really complaining about Nintendo, because great titles are coming to the Xbox that are coming out next month (Halo 2) and for the PC (Half Life 2) so that should keep me entertained.

Nintendo has released Paper Mario 2 and are going to release Zelda Minish Cap, dont forget.

About voice acting in the Zelda games, I'm one of the few who thinks IT SHOULD DEFINITELY BE DONE, but since there's already another thread for that, let's get to the topic at hand...

These days Nintendo has really dropped the ball when it comes to competing with the other systems, and mostly I blame Nintendo's refusal to evolve with the rest of the industry. It seems Nintendo is too stuck in the old ways and refuses to even see it. A lot like China; in China's early history, it was easily the most advanced civilization on Earth, but over time the Chinese became convinced that their ways were perfect and remained stagnant, while the rest of the world advanced and eventually walked all over China. That's what's been happening to Nintendo as of late.

But what can Nintendo do get out of this jam? First thing is to not rely on sequels so much, especially the age-old franchises like Mario, Zelda, Metroid so much. Having them around still is fine - I mean, Konami still has Metal Gear, Castlevania, Gradius, Contra and the like - but the degree to which Nintendo depends on their old series is just ridiculous. And the spin-offs too (remember all those Pokemon knockoffs?) Nintendo claims to be all creative and stuff, well then show it! Make some great NEW franchises. Sure, this generation they've got new stuff like Pikmin, Advance Wars and the upcoming Geist, but it doesn't seem like enough.

Secondly, Nintendo's got to kill the 'kiddy' image once and for all. I'm not saying that it should become another Rockstar, but I am saying it should make a commitment to the older demographic. This generation, we've seen the new Metroid games, Biohazard on GC and Eternal Darkness, but it obviously hasn't been enough. Nintendo needs to make new games that eschew their typical cartoony style and have at least a T-rating. And if Nintendo would REALLY try to appeal to the 18-25 crowd, then 3rd-party developers would return. Look at GC now - most multiplatform games come out for PS2 and Xbox and leave Nintendo in the cold.

Lastly, STOP IGNORING THE REST OF THE INDUSTRY, THINKING YOU KNOW BETTER THAN EVERYONE ELSE. 'Cuz obviously you don't. GC has done the worst of the three systems, so obviously the Nintendo Difference hasn't made much of a difference marketwise. Come next system, SUPPORT ONLINE GAMING IN FULL INSTEAD OF JUST HAVING TWO OR THREE ONLINE GAMES. And as for the games you develop, take hints from other companies and stop designing games like you're still in the 8/16-bit era. For one thing, MOST DEFINTELY USE VOICE ACTING. And don't say that voices would 'kill' Zelda and other Nintendo franchises. I'm sure old-school fans of Metal Gear, Sonic and Final Fantasy said the same thing when it came time for those series to go 3D, and they were all wrong. And give your main characters some dialogue (well, expect maybe Link) . We're not playing 16-bit era RPGs anymore, where the main character hardly ever says a friggin' word. Giving Samus dialogue in Metroid Fusion worked better than expected. Give your characters some dialogue, then maybe newer gamers could REALLY get a feel for them.

Well, that's all I have to say...

Also, I thought the n64 mostly housed mediocre games, alot of you may disagree, and I don't care.

The vast majority of games on all systems are crap, at best It's the good games you should consider: How many, how good, and when. Everything else is irrelevant, all in all.


But Nintendo has made quite stupid mistakes, and I'm not arguing that. Just look at the PS1/N64 situation: The PS1 dominated that generation, in terms of sales. Know why? Because Nintendo was stupid. Sony didn't do anything amazing, really, Nintendo just did stupid things. Like alienating Squaresoft, and sticking with the cartridge format.

I tink Yamauchi's stubborn arrogance has been deeply ingrained in the company. I had hoped that Iwata would begin to change things, but he hasn't, at least not much. Look at Europe: It is the fastest growing video game market in the world, and it will soon surpass North America in terms of importance. Yet Nintendo, because they seem incapable of acknowledging this fact, has neglected European markets. Their advertising there sucks, and they just put very little effort into it.

And remember their stubborn insistence that online gaming is unnecessary, and the irrational obsession with GBA connectivity?

Nevertheless, I remain hopeful. I'm too lazy to go into details, but I am confident that Nintendo is taking steps in the right direction. They have dropped the focus on the GBA connectivity, and forms of wireless multiplayer on the DS is a major focus.

Now I just have to hope that the quality of their games remains high.

Paper Mario? Mario Tennis? Tales of Symphonia? What happened to the revolutionary games like Perfect Dark, Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, Lylat Wars (Star Fox 64)?

See, this is what I mean. It's not like in the past, with the former consoles. They always had some really popular and wonderful games. I sort of don't feel the same thing with Gamecube. The closest thing to come close to Perfect Dark was Timesplitters 2, and I hated that game and worshipped Perfect Dark. Super Mario Sunshine wasn't very "revolutionary" and we never even got to see Donkey Kong in a platform game. And instead, Star Fox went platform/adventure. Link went cartoon (can't really complain on that one, but still) and Mario Kart went to hell.

Sure, Gamecube had its moments in the spotlight (SSBM and Metroid Prime are two example) but it ended up being sold almost cheaper than the games you can play on it.

I also really don't think voice-acting is a step forward. You know how hard that is? Take 'Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic' as an example. The game took like three CDs to install (and surely a lot more time, waiting and work) just because of the voice-acting. All we need now is a Zelda game that takes 10 years to make only to be expensive and then completed in a few days.

Originally Posted by Tigerboi

Why are you telling me any of this?

Probably because he's replying to you. When you post on a message board, shouldn't you expect to get replies to your posts, especially ones that people disagree with?

Originally Posted by Tigerboi

Ok, let me explain my point on the controller.

ps2: Two sticks. Eight buttons. Large D-pad. Pressable control sticks. Pressive sensitive feature.

GCN: Seven buttons. Annoyingly small d-pad. Control sticks don't press.

The GameCube's D-pad is fine so long as you get used to it. The shoulder buttons are far better than then PS2's due to their increased sensitivity. The sticks are fine, albeit the C-stick is a little awkward at times (I find the sticks much better than the PS2's, mainly because the sticks seem to be too loose on the PS2 controller). The button layout on the GameCube controller is perfect, with everything centred around the A button, so you don't have to memorise obscure positions. The GameCube's, although lacking slightly in number of buttons, feels the most natural to me. The PS2? I have to adapt to it every time I play it because the controller feels so...out of place. Maybe Nintendo's just spoiled me.

Of course, I can definitely agree that the GameCube could've used another button or two, but there are ways to get around it. The controller is also a little smaller than it could be, but I don't have the largest of hands. Plus, the GameCube has Wavebird. Need I say more on that?

Originally Posted by Grey

But what can Nintendo do get out of this jam? First thing is to not rely on sequels so much, especially the age-old franchises like Mario, Zelda, Metroid so much. Having them around still is fine - I mean, Konami still has Metal Gear, Castlevania, Gradius, Contra and the like - but the degree to which Nintendo depends on their old series is just ridiculous. And the spin-offs too (remember all those Pokemon knockoffs?) Nintendo claims to be all creative and stuff, well then show it! Make some great NEW franchises. Sure, this generation they've got new stuff like Pikmin, Advance Wars and the upcoming Geist, but it doesn't seem like enough.

Nintendo's decisions make perfect sense from a marketing standpoint. They're keeping it safe by relying on franchises that sell. I'd much rather see the same old stuff than watch Nintendo go under because they tried to create "classic" characters and failed miserably at it.

Originally Posted by Grey

Secondly, Nintendo's got to kill the 'kiddy' image once and for all. I'm not saying that it should become another Rockstar, but I am saying it should make a commitment to the older demographic. This generation, we've seen the new Metroid games, Biohazard on GC and Eternal Darkness, but it obviously hasn't been enough. Nintendo needs to make new games that eschew their typical cartoony style and have at least a T-rating. And if Nintendo would REALLY try to appeal to the 18-25 crowd, then 3rd-party developers would return. Look at GC now - most multiplatform games come out for PS2 and Xbox and leave Nintendo in the cold.

Nintendo has plenty of mature software on their console. You know what the problem is? People associate Mario and Zelda with Nintendo. Unless they want to stop making those games, or turn them into dark, gritty, and overall generic games (a sin, basically), then they'll stick with the image of being "kiddy," despite the fact that the ratio of game ratings is relatively the same across all consoles. And of course, there's the fact that Nintendo's really the only fisrt party in the industry aside from Bungie that is successful. The PS2 and XBox rely mostly on third party support; Nintendo doesn't. Since Nintendo makes Zelda and Mario, and they are the console's primary developer when it comes to "killer-app" titles, that's what people see most, and thus, judge the console on.

Starting new and more mature franchises would be great, but it would also also alienate third party developers in my mind. If Nintendo were to create a blockbuster first-person shooter game, much less a continuous franchise, then other developers may simply not want to compete. You have to strike a very fine balance.

Originally Posted by Grey

Lastly, STOP IGNORING THE REST OF THE INDUSTRY, THINKING YOU KNOW BETTER THAN EVERYONE ELSE. 'Cuz obviously you don't. GC has done the worst of the three systems, so obviously the Nintendo Difference hasn't made much of a difference marketwise. Come next system, SUPPORT ONLINE GAMING IN FULL INSTEAD OF JUST HAVING TWO OR THREE ONLINE GAMES. And as for the games you develop, take hints from other companies and stop designing games like you're still in the 8/16-bit era. For one thing, MOST DEFINTELY USE VOICE ACTING. And don't say that voices would 'kill' Zelda and other Nintendo franchises. I'm sure old-school fans of Metal Gear, Sonic and Final Fantasy said the same thing when it came time for those series to go 3D, and they were all wrong. And give your main characters some dialogue (well, expect maybe Link) . We're not playing 16-bit era RPGs anymore, where the main character hardly ever says a friggin' word. Giving Samus dialogue in Metroid Fusion worked better than expected. Give your characters some dialogue, then maybe newer gamers could REALLY get a feel for them.

I abhor such an idea. Online gaming isn't as huge an industry as you think - only about 10% of gamers with consoles capable of online connectivity play online. Nintendo may be lagging technology-wise, but consider that the costs of maintaining an online network may well overshadow the sales from online games, and we have a different story on our hands. Remember, Nintendo is a video game company. They do not have near-infinite pockets, unlike Sony and Microsoft. They have to be profitable in all situations, and if they have to lose some fans to do so, then they'll do it. They're in the business to make money. Sony and Microsoft are both also in the business for that purpose, but they can take far more risks than Nintendo can.

Oh, and voice acting in Metroid? Not such a good idea. Nintendo's silent protagonists have a place in my heart. Why? Because you become the characters in their games, not just play as them. When I explore deep caves in Metroid, I feel that I'm Samus, not just playing as Samus. I don't want my impression of who and what the characters are to be smashed into a thousand pieces. Oh, and professional voice acting costs money. Nintendo is cheap.

And Rena, I'm not replying to your post because you fail to justify your arguments effectively.

Originally Posted by lord-of-shadow

The vast majority of games on all systems are crap, at best It's the good games you should consider: How many, how good, and when. Everything else is irrelevant, all in all.


But Nintendo has made quite stupid mistakes, and I'm not arguing that. Just look at the PS1/N64 situation: The PS1 dominated that generation, in terms of sales. Know why? Because Nintendo was stupid. Sony didn't do anything amazing, really, Nintendo just did stupid things. Like alienating Squaresoft, and sticking with the cartridge format.

I tink Yamauchi's stubborn arrogance has been deeply ingrained in the company. I had hoped that Iwata would begin to change things, but he hasn't, at least not much. Look at Europe: It is the fastest growing video game market in the world, and it will soon surpass North America in terms of importance. Yet Nintendo, because they seem incapable of acknowledging this fact, has neglected European markets. Their advertising there sucks, and they just put very little effort into it.

And remember their stubborn insistence that online gaming is unnecessary, and the irrational obsession with GBA connectivity?

Nevertheless, I remain hopeful. I'm too lazy to go into details, but I am confident that Nintendo is taking steps in the right direction. They have dropped the focus on the GBA connectivity, and forms of wireless multiplayer on the DS is a major focus.

Now I just have to hope that the quality of their games remains high.

Now you're generally saying everything I was. And what I (!!!) disagree with what you said about the games for all systems. There was a general belief with the N64: If it wasn't published by nintendo, don't buy it. Just about every game you named was published by nintendo.

Probably because he's replying to you. When you post on a message board, shouldn't you expect to get replies to your posts, especially ones that people disagree with

Well, he himself said most of it was irrelevant.

The GameCube's D-pad is fine so long as you get used to it. The shoulder buttons are far better than then PS2's due to their increased sensitivity. The sticks are fine, albeit the C-stick is a little awkward at times (I find the sticks much better than the PS2's, mainly because the sticks seem to be too loose on the PS2 controller). The button layout on the GameCube controller is perfect, with everything centred around the A button, so you don't have to memorise obscure positions. The GameCube's, although lacking slightly in number of buttons, feels the most natural to me. The PS2? I have to adapt to it every time I play it because the controller feels so...out of place. Maybe Nintendo's just spoiled me.

I've tried getting used to the d-pad. The fact that it fits under the tip of my thumb is in a dugout part of the controller makes it useless for me.

Also, your statement about the controller somewhat contradicts. Nintendo basically based the playstation controller.

Think sony got an idea or two from this?

http://snescentral.edgeemu.com/perip...controller.jpg

PS2 took all the good features of the SNES controller, then addeds stuff like those prongs, the double shoulder buttons, awkwardly positioned control sticks, hard angles and whatnot.

The flaws aren't in the SNES controller that the PS controller is based off of, they're in the additions Sony made.

Well, he himself said most of it was irrelevant.

I never said anything of the sort.

There was a general belief with the N64: If it wasn't published by nintendo, don't buy it. Just about every game you named was published by nintendo.

What direct difference does it make? That's still more great games then you'll find this generation.



Wlliam: I think your problem is that you're just getting tired of games, period. You've seen it all before, and you're unable to overcome that. It's quite a common thing. Perhaps you'll grow out of it; I did.

Or maybe your tastes have changed. Either way, to get angry at Nintendo about it is sheer foolishness.

Originally Posted by lord-of-shadow

PS2 took all the good features of the SNES controller, then addeds stuff like those prongs, the double shoulder buttons, awkwardly positioned control sticks, hard angles and whatnot.

The flaws aren't in the SNES controller that the PS controller is based off of, they're in the additions Sony made.

Eh, I say the controller is too basic to really not like. That was my point.

I never said anything of the sort.

Well, you did infact something was irelevant but I appearantly misunderstood what what you were infact talking about.