The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
For those that don't know about this every friday, an executive from Nintendo of America will answer a single question of ours. Depending on the week, the interviewee will be different, but the answers will always come from one of the following three company bigwigs: VP of sales and marketing Reginald Fils-Aime, VP of corporate affairs Perrin Kaplan or VP of marketing and corporate communications George Harrison.
Today George Harrison ended his little speech with:
"Looking to the future and Revolution, it's still too early to discuss specific strategies, but I can tell you that we have learned much from the launch of the Nintendo GameCube. We realize that things such as having a strong software line-up at launch is critical to the success of Revolution. We understand what kinds of technologies and experiences the market is asking for. You are certainly correct that our financial and creative resources are vast, and we intend to fully flex this muscle more than ever in the coming years. "
I thought I'd post this considering there has been some random assumptions, like Gerrid for example, who have assumed there won't be a strong software line up for the system.
Today George Harrison ended his little speech with:
"Looking to the future and Revolution, it's still too early to discuss specific strategies, but I can tell you that we have learned much from the launch of the Nintendo GameCube. We realize that things such as having a strong software line-up at launch is critical to the success of Revolution. We understand what kinds of technologies and experiences the market is asking for. You are certainly correct that our financial and creative resources are vast, and we intend to fully flex this muscle more than ever in the coming years. "
I thought I'd post this considering there has been some random assumptions, like Gerrid for example, who have assumed there won't be a strong software line up for the system.
Page:
FinalFantasyFanatic wrote:
> Dringo wrote:
> For christs sake stop posting pointless posts that have been said a
> million times before then?
>
> Straight back at ya.
Name one.
> Dringo wrote:
> For christs sake stop posting pointless posts that have been said a
> million times before then?
>
> Straight back at ya.
Name one.
Dringo wrote:
> For christs sake stop posting pointless posts that have been said a
> million times before then?
Straight back at ya.
> For christs sake stop posting pointless posts that have been said a
> million times before then?
Straight back at ya.
gerrid wrote:
> Sorry but you and me and the entire forum would be wrong. I was
> saying they should pull their finger out and actually do something
> this time. Which is not an assumption that they won't do anything. IS
> IT?
For christs sake stop posting pointless posts that have been said a million times before then?
Why back up your point with a quote if it isn't a point but a demand.
Grrr. You've done down in so many estimations in my book.
> Sorry but you and me and the entire forum would be wrong. I was
> saying they should pull their finger out and actually do something
> this time. Which is not an assumption that they won't do anything. IS
> IT?
For christs sake stop posting pointless posts that have been said a million times before then?
Why back up your point with a quote if it isn't a point but a demand.
Grrr. You've done down in so many estimations in my book.
Dringo wrote:
> Oh gerrid you and I and the entire forum knew what you were trying to
> say. You didn't mean oh they may not... you were making a sensational
> claim based on possible information.
>
> A.k.a an assumption.
A.a.k.a balls.
> Oh gerrid you and I and the entire forum knew what you were trying to
> say. You didn't mean oh they may not... you were making a sensational
> claim based on possible information.
>
> A.k.a an assumption.
A.a.k.a balls.
Oh my.
And for the record yes the original post was sensationalist and no actually I didn't think Nintendo would only show the Revolution in concept form, but I was just provoking a discussion by saying what might happen if they did.
balls
so now you resort to "you didn't say it but I knew that you meant it"
Sorry but you and me and the entire forum would be wrong. I was saying they should pull their finger out and actually do something this time. Which is not an assumption that they won't do anything. IS IT?
so now you resort to "you didn't say it but I knew that you meant it"
Sorry but you and me and the entire forum would be wrong. I was saying they should pull their finger out and actually do something this time. Which is not an assumption that they won't do anything. IS IT?
Oh gerrid you and I and the entire forum knew what you were trying to say. You didn't mean oh they may not... you were making a sensational claim based on possible information.
A.k.a an assumption.
A.k.a an assumption.
Dringo wrote:
> You made assumptions that Nintendo would be too late sending out dev
> kits for revolution because they might not show it at E3.
No I didn't assume anything. I said IF they are late it will be bad. You said they've already got them. Oh you were lying by the way.
> You wrote an entire post on how the line up may not contain many
> decent third party titles.
See how stupid that sounds. "may not" is the operative phrase here. The whole thing was speculation. Assumption and speculation are not the same thing. I never said Nintendo WOULDN'T get 3rd party support, I said that they need it but they haven't been very good at getting it in the past. Which is perfectly valid.
> ::
>
> gerrid wrote:
> If 3rd parties don't get a chance to get to grips with Revolution
> soon, the launch will be another 3 game Nintendo only affair,
Are you saying that this isn't true? Where are the assumptions in that? Obviously if developers don't have enough time to make games there won't be any. Stop telling me that I was assuming that Nintendo would mess it up when I did nothing of the sort. I said what I think they should do, not what they ARE doing, or what they WILL do.
> You made assumptions that Nintendo would be too late sending out dev
> kits for revolution because they might not show it at E3.
No I didn't assume anything. I said IF they are late it will be bad. You said they've already got them. Oh you were lying by the way.
> You wrote an entire post on how the line up may not contain many
> decent third party titles.
See how stupid that sounds. "may not" is the operative phrase here. The whole thing was speculation. Assumption and speculation are not the same thing. I never said Nintendo WOULDN'T get 3rd party support, I said that they need it but they haven't been very good at getting it in the past. Which is perfectly valid.
> ::
>
> gerrid wrote:
> If 3rd parties don't get a chance to get to grips with Revolution
> soon, the launch will be another 3 game Nintendo only affair,
Are you saying that this isn't true? Where are the assumptions in that? Obviously if developers don't have enough time to make games there won't be any. Stop telling me that I was assuming that Nintendo would mess it up when I did nothing of the sort. I said what I think they should do, not what they ARE doing, or what they WILL do.
cweek2000 wrote:
> ...presumably saying "Mr. Point-Out-The-Obvious"
>
> Still, try not to double post. You're famous so we'll let you off
> this time.
I didn't double post. I responded to one person... then read a bit more... and responded to them.
> ...presumably saying "Mr. Point-Out-The-Obvious"
>
> Still, try not to double post. You're famous so we'll let you off
> this time.
I didn't double post. I responded to one person... then read a bit more... and responded to them.
Page: