the new GBA is the GB Pocket of the advance generation. I'd imagine that manufac. costs hav gone way down, which would mean parts are smaller, cheaper. Phasing out the old less profit margin GBA makes complete sense. And yes, GB/GBA's are still the only console out there to be sold at a profit (not sure about DS, but I doubt it). So it's only logical to redesign and use the cheaper compenents, while making the system better/attracting a new Demographic.
Anyone else think that Reggie, the pres. of NOA, is probably the only reason for a lot of the recent changes to N's policy? I think he'd probably be a good choice for president of the whole company.
I didn't say an "increase is numbers is innovation." I simply pointed out that Nintendo's last innovative idea wasn't exactly Earth-shattering. And I was referring to having to control the game with the d-pad while trying to manipulate the screen with the stylus in my right hand. Using A, B, X, and Y in place of a d-pad hardly offers an equal experience. Also, the lack of an analog stick on the DS was stupid when they're touting the system as being able to play 3D games. I've tried Mario 64DS and Rayman both, and couldn't get the hang of either using the thumb-strap. The lack of resistance and knowing exactly where you are on the controller makes subtle analoge manipulation excruciatingly difficult when it shouldn't be.
As for the Gameboy Mini, it's just Nintendo repackaging the same hardware AGAIN. That's hardly innovation. Oh look... it's small now. I've always laughed at people who buy revisions of products. It's just Nintendo's way of bending over their millions of loyal but blind fans and shafting them up the ass. The same way Nintendo hasn't come up with an original IP in forever (for that matter, the way they haven't made a NEW Mario game for a handheld since... the original Gameboy?). Tell me how innovative it is to port your entire library of NES and SNES titles to a handheld, spend no money or effort on it, and then sell your consumer base products they've already bought for $30?
For that matter tell me how innovative it is to be the only console out of the 32/64-bit generation to stick to low-capacity carts over CDs even though they were the last to launch. Tell me how innovative it is to be the only console out of the 4 systems in the current generation NOT to support online gaming despite launching second to last (by 3 days). Explain to me how innovative it is to have a system with two-screens and a stylus while your competitor's machine can play mp3s, movies, eventually download game demos for free, and serve as a photo-album, all while supporting game media that provides developers with a canvas roughly 15 times larger and gives them more and better paint (1.8GB vs 128MB media size; system specs). Explain why innovative Nintendo's killer app is a 10 year old port. I rest my case . . . for now.
hey, at least my n64/gc never broke down. There are pieces to no less than 5 ps2's and a couple of PS lying around.
As for the CD/Carts point, they knew what they were doing, they chose carts acuse they were faster/more reliable at the time.
How innovative is providing a large scale wireless online solution for free coutry wide?
GC had online support, noone used it cause N decided to further persue other means of online. PSO 1 and 2 anyone? I've already explained my position on the new GB/ but hey, why buy the old if your old one breaks (I break gameboys alot) when you can get the new more capable one?
Keep in mind that nintendo is still a business, it may not be new, but the NES classics have sold extremely well, so I'm sure N is laughing all the way to the bank; the new gameboy will sell well, the DS sales are still growing (now if we could only get some more software), and if this new online network works out, they will be making even more money.
PS2 - Another sytem that gains marketing by making teenage boys feel like a rebel because they got the 'p - s - 2'(what a ring) with shooting and violence AND SOMETIMES EVEN a little nudity.
GC - Tries things that no other company tries as they're (other companies) scared it will lose them money. In a LOT of cases it does cost nintendo a bunch, but they've always been the pioneer. I mean of course a system with DVD capability (ps2, xbox)is going to sell but I would figure most people have a dvd player that handles the decompression a LOT better.
Xbox - Does a little dance with the ps2 in terms of 'violence sells' so lets keep pushing that envelope. I really like my Xbox and GC, I would like ps2 also but since I have an xbox with better graphics, many ports of ps2 and xbl. ps2 can go fuck itself.
I own all three, and so far, nintendo is the only one that makes games about fun and not just graphic ability. Also, I think it's more impressive to make a great game with less power.
sorry for long post
thinking is like pong, it's easy, but you miss sometimes.
Actually Nintendo claims that the REV will be very easy to develop for, and they seem to be gaining more support this GEN, Square are going to help them out and im sure more companies will follow, GC wasnt very promising up against PS2, REV is looking promising, Third Party Developers would be silly not to join Nintendo this time around.
If they really wanted to garner some attention from developers, they'd just give the dev kits for free. Or give em like 5 extras just cause. (That was pure brilliance on Microsofts part for the first box)
Craps, I'm an old man!
Assault Andy Administrator
I make other people create vaporware
I'm gonna wait a while before I make a decision. Gaming isn't a huge part of my life now, so I may well not get any of the new consoles.
I'm rather partial to the Revolution, because I'd love to see what it could do to a Zelda game (the new one looks gorgeous enough as it is!). However, I'm fully aware of Nintendo's ability to leave crucial make-or-break decisions to a panel of untrained monkeys and a teapot. If the teapot gets thrown against the left wall, they make a really cool game. If it gets thrown against the right wall, they make a game so weird that it just freaks people out and flunks.
[klunk-splash]
"...Right wall it is! "
So far I've found the onuss with all NextGens to be on graphics and power, rather than something people actually find entertaining. Yeah, they have some great games - but nothing I would buy an entire console for. I find myself playing all consoles and still longing to get back to the SNES.
With the old N64, it lasted a long time, and there was always some game that could excite, and those games you had would last. These days you shell out a couple of hundred for a console that will be half price in four months time, and after a year or two they've announced the sequel and you have to shell out again. It's got to the stage where sequels to consoles are coming out even faster than the sequels to the actual games!
All these companies already have huge franchises behind them, but they're being squandered - especially in the case of Nintendo. Mario removing graffiti? The illegitimate lovechild of Zelda and Hey-Arnold? A sequel to Nintendo's best beat-em-up ever... which is almost identical to the first one?
I love the Zelda titles, I enjoyed the old Mario titles, and I've loyally despised the Playstation for years. But if Nintendo continue to prostitute their greatest titles in this way, sooner or later even the little three year olds that run their shoddy company will realise their games suck. I can only cope with their adultery for so long.
Someone please release the new Zelda game and give me back my faith in Nintendo!
Specs are the least importance to me. I'm probably going to lean over to the Rev, Super Smash Brothers Online can't be wrong! (I forget where the source is from but you go look for it) Even though we have not seen the controller, (because Nintendo doesn't want M$ or Sony stealing the ideas) I'm sure we can trust Nintendo to invest gameplay in their games and drag more third parties into thier system.
I had a Playstation 2 for abit (borrowed from my friend) and when I was renting some games I noticed there were very few games I was interested in. GTA:SA was way overated, Katamari Damacy had little vaule, I hate turn based RPGs, racing games, and fighting games. But MGS3 was the only game that apealed to me, mainly because of its story. So basicly, even if the PS2 has great thrid party support, I dislike most of the games.
I had an Xbox for a few days, played Halo 2, found it extremely boring. I think I know what to expect from Xbox 360.
I don't really need to input my comments on GC considering Rev isn't going to be the same as but stronger.
It's pretty ironic that the fact Xbox fans used to bash the ps2 for its crappy graphics and the ps2 fans said "graphics don't matter," Well now the next gens are reversed! =P
"It's pretty ironic that the fact Xbox fans used to bash the ps2 for its crappy graphics and the ps2 fans said graphics don't matter," Well now the next gens are reversed! =P"
I was aware of that article, but wasn't sure if it was 100% true because it is written up by M$ afterall. Oh well, to satisfy you I'll just re-input the following:
"It's pretty ironic that the fact Xbox fans used to bash the ps2 for its crappy graphics and the ps2 fans said "Graphics don't matter." Then when it seems the ps3 beats the xbox 360 in graphics the oppinions were reversed! =P"
And that is/was true if you looked in the ps3 vs xbox360 topics in the forums.
so basically cow, you like the good storied stealth action games. those are good. i agree about there not being many appealing games though. but fighting games racing games and rpgs etc. are on all the systems. ps2 just has a lot more. (MGS4 is coming too.)
ive grown away from them a bit and theyve grown tiresome a little too but does anyone remember the armored core games. if nexus was their last game, its sad too see all the possabilities with the next gen. that could be done to games like that go to waste. just a thought.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by the Author.
"
