The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Long, long ago (well, about 10 years) there was a little something called the Gameboy). I would say that 85% of hard-core gamers would have played on this machine. Back in its day, it was a “must have” for everyone. I think that one of the nice things was, to us and to Nintendo, was that it appealed to girls, as well as it did boys. I think that this was partially to do with the great success of the Gameboy, not just in this country, but worldwide, and the fact that the games weren’t all male related.
As kids of the digital age, I think we all craved about having a portable NES in our hands on those boring car journeys we had. We are wanted to have something to do, but we never dreamed of having something as good as what we have today. Nintendo are not silly, they know what us gamers want. So, come 1988, they released their fantastic new handheld machine, which quenched our thirst for a hand held computer. At last, we could finally say goodbye to those boring journeys and look forward to playing the games like Mario, which would keep us entertained for hours on end.
As the gameboy was a huge success, Nintendo couldn’t help but make another handheld. This was called the Gameboy Pocket. What was new then? Well, surprise, surprise (as Cilla Black would say) this was a hand held that could fit in your pocket, mainly due to the original having the same weight and dimensions of a breeze block. The same thing happened, as before, it was a huge success.
Later on Nintendo found the technology to release another gameboy. The next Gameboy (named Gameboy Colour) would be in full colour. We could finally say goodbye to the black and white gameboys and say hello to the new coloured ones.
Where am I going with this? Well, Nintendo was very lucky to have the GameBoy so well liked by people. Let’s just take a second to look at the Sega GameGear. This had a bigger screen, and it was in colour (unlike the GameBoy original). The only problem was that, despite the fantastic games and Sega’s magic, the machine ate batteries for breakfast with its backlight screen and was far too chunky, being almost twice as big as the gameboy.
And even though Nintendo didn’t upgrade the machine for a long time, people were still buying the original Gameboy, leaving the GameGear to be a bit of a flop really. Now, let’s turn things around. Lets imagine that the GameGear was selling more than the Gameboy, then that would be it for Nintendo with the hand held side of gaming.
This is where we have to feel sorry for companies that didn’t quite get there. Even if their first attempt wasn’t super, if it was selling well then they would make money, and therefore have the money to make a new handheld.
This doesn’t just go for the computer companies, but also for the game companies. If they release a game that sells well, they are obviously going to make sequels.
This is where it starts to leave a sour taste in my mouth.
I wish companies would quit will they are ahead. I would hate to see a company go bankrupt just because they rushed into trying to make another console without putting as much thought as the previous consoles had. Why would they do this? Because money gets the better of them. I’m not saying that computer companies should stop making consoles altogether after they release a console that sells well, just to wait a long time until they release another.
I think this is a good tactic because the longer you keep gamers waiting for a machine, the more they are going to want to get it.
This leaves companies in a hard position. Deep down, they know that if they wait too long to release a console, another company could release theirs and then gamers would get that instead.
Personally, I think that companies should risk it, and wait as long as possible to release their console. I have four reasons for this,
1) It will keep the gamer waiting, therefore making them want it more.
2) The company will have more time designing, making, and just finishing the final touches to the console…everything counts, you know!
3) It would also (and this is very important) give the game developer longer to make the launch titles, making them look and play like they have not been rushed. Also, if a certain developer is having troubles, they know they are not being pushed too fast to make a game.
4) If you wait until rival consoles are released, you may find that people could be disappointed with them, and wait for your one to be released instead.
All these are some pluses in waiting to release a console, but you also have to look at the minuses.
1) As stated before, a company could halt the release too long, resulting in the gamer to look elsewhere for a computer.
2) Argh, I hate this one. HYPE. People are going to be hyped so much about the console because they have been waiting so long, and maybe their expectations have gone too high. This will leave them disappointed with the console, then they are bound to tell their friend that they are disappointed with it, and then the friends are going to think twice about buying one.
I really do think that the decision (when to release the console) is a very important issue with gaming because it could be the key to success or if you do not get it right, the slide to hell. I would hate if the decision was all down to me, wouldn’t you?
Sega decided that they wanted to release their 128-bit console before everyone else’s and just look at what has happened to the Dreamcast. Okay. It made some excellent games, and was loved by thousands but at the end of the day, come March 2002 the Dreamcast will stop producing games for all us Dreamcast owners. Now, let us just think for a moment. If Sega could turn back the clocks, do you think they would have released their console a little latter on?
If you ask me, they would have released it a couple of months either side of the Ps2 launch release, but that’s just a guess.
And maybe if Sega released the Dreamcast later on, it may have been much more successful and we wouldn't be seeing headlines such as “Dreamcast. RIP”. We will just never know though.
So, this is where I would like to ask you if you think companies should release their console before, the same time, or after rival consoles?
Have your say.
Cheers.
As kids of the digital age, I think we all craved about having a portable NES in our hands on those boring car journeys we had. We are wanted to have something to do, but we never dreamed of having something as good as what we have today. Nintendo are not silly, they know what us gamers want. So, come 1988, they released their fantastic new handheld machine, which quenched our thirst for a hand held computer. At last, we could finally say goodbye to those boring journeys and look forward to playing the games like Mario, which would keep us entertained for hours on end.
As the gameboy was a huge success, Nintendo couldn’t help but make another handheld. This was called the Gameboy Pocket. What was new then? Well, surprise, surprise (as Cilla Black would say) this was a hand held that could fit in your pocket, mainly due to the original having the same weight and dimensions of a breeze block. The same thing happened, as before, it was a huge success.
Later on Nintendo found the technology to release another gameboy. The next Gameboy (named Gameboy Colour) would be in full colour. We could finally say goodbye to the black and white gameboys and say hello to the new coloured ones.
Where am I going with this? Well, Nintendo was very lucky to have the GameBoy so well liked by people. Let’s just take a second to look at the Sega GameGear. This had a bigger screen, and it was in colour (unlike the GameBoy original). The only problem was that, despite the fantastic games and Sega’s magic, the machine ate batteries for breakfast with its backlight screen and was far too chunky, being almost twice as big as the gameboy.
And even though Nintendo didn’t upgrade the machine for a long time, people were still buying the original Gameboy, leaving the GameGear to be a bit of a flop really. Now, let’s turn things around. Lets imagine that the GameGear was selling more than the Gameboy, then that would be it for Nintendo with the hand held side of gaming.
This is where we have to feel sorry for companies that didn’t quite get there. Even if their first attempt wasn’t super, if it was selling well then they would make money, and therefore have the money to make a new handheld.
This doesn’t just go for the computer companies, but also for the game companies. If they release a game that sells well, they are obviously going to make sequels.
This is where it starts to leave a sour taste in my mouth.
I wish companies would quit will they are ahead. I would hate to see a company go bankrupt just because they rushed into trying to make another console without putting as much thought as the previous consoles had. Why would they do this? Because money gets the better of them. I’m not saying that computer companies should stop making consoles altogether after they release a console that sells well, just to wait a long time until they release another.
I think this is a good tactic because the longer you keep gamers waiting for a machine, the more they are going to want to get it.
This leaves companies in a hard position. Deep down, they know that if they wait too long to release a console, another company could release theirs and then gamers would get that instead.
Personally, I think that companies should risk it, and wait as long as possible to release their console. I have four reasons for this,
1) It will keep the gamer waiting, therefore making them want it more.
2) The company will have more time designing, making, and just finishing the final touches to the console…everything counts, you know!
3) It would also (and this is very important) give the game developer longer to make the launch titles, making them look and play like they have not been rushed. Also, if a certain developer is having troubles, they know they are not being pushed too fast to make a game.
4) If you wait until rival consoles are released, you may find that people could be disappointed with them, and wait for your one to be released instead.
All these are some pluses in waiting to release a console, but you also have to look at the minuses.
1) As stated before, a company could halt the release too long, resulting in the gamer to look elsewhere for a computer.
2) Argh, I hate this one. HYPE. People are going to be hyped so much about the console because they have been waiting so long, and maybe their expectations have gone too high. This will leave them disappointed with the console, then they are bound to tell their friend that they are disappointed with it, and then the friends are going to think twice about buying one.
I really do think that the decision (when to release the console) is a very important issue with gaming because it could be the key to success or if you do not get it right, the slide to hell. I would hate if the decision was all down to me, wouldn’t you?
Sega decided that they wanted to release their 128-bit console before everyone else’s and just look at what has happened to the Dreamcast. Okay. It made some excellent games, and was loved by thousands but at the end of the day, come March 2002 the Dreamcast will stop producing games for all us Dreamcast owners. Now, let us just think for a moment. If Sega could turn back the clocks, do you think they would have released their console a little latter on?
If you ask me, they would have released it a couple of months either side of the Ps2 launch release, but that’s just a guess.
And maybe if Sega released the Dreamcast later on, it may have been much more successful and we wouldn't be seeing headlines such as “Dreamcast. RIP”. We will just never know though.
So, this is where I would like to ask you if you think companies should release their console before, the same time, or after rival consoles?
Have your say.
Cheers.
Page:
You never know, but they have just under a year to make themselves mainstream, how many people do you know who aren't really into games have heard of the Xbox or the Gamecube, i know very few, an awful lot more know about the PS2, and if they drop the price to £199 in time for christmas, when it will be the only console parents can buy their whining kids, it's game set and match Sony.
Bonus wrote:
> The only problem is if you hold out to add finishing touches to
> games then you run the risk that developers wont want to make games
> until they know what the definate final spec of the machine will be,
> the only main reason for companies to hold off on releasing games
> consoles would be to make enough to keep up with demand. The second
> problem is that there is very little in the way of scope for
> releasing a console, if SEGA had held back the dreamcast to be in
> direct competition with Sony's PS2, SEGA would have vanished without
> trace, at least we still have a great games company in the firm!!
> Microsoft and Nintendo have played a waiting game, not through
> choice but through, the fact that it has taken them longer to get
> their systems up and running. In the currnet console war, Sony hit
> the ground running and now has a massive head start over MS and
> nintendo, I honestly think that the GBA and pokemon will be the
> saving grace of nintendo again. Microsoft will susrvive due to the
> fact that the structure of their company warrants the collapse of
> the Xbox as they aren't solely dependent upon it for income.
> Whatever happens companies never know when the best time to release
> their consoles is, but Sony seems to have gotten it right this
> time!
Cheers for that Bonnus. The last bit you said, "but Sony seems to have gotten it right this time!", this may be true at the moment, but we will have to wait until the release of the gamecube and X-Box.
Microsoft have gone for the "good things come to those who wait" approach, but will it work for them?
Only time will tell, but I still think that choosing when to release a console determinds success, don't you?
> The only problem is if you hold out to add finishing touches to
> games then you run the risk that developers wont want to make games
> until they know what the definate final spec of the machine will be,
> the only main reason for companies to hold off on releasing games
> consoles would be to make enough to keep up with demand. The second
> problem is that there is very little in the way of scope for
> releasing a console, if SEGA had held back the dreamcast to be in
> direct competition with Sony's PS2, SEGA would have vanished without
> trace, at least we still have a great games company in the firm!!
> Microsoft and Nintendo have played a waiting game, not through
> choice but through, the fact that it has taken them longer to get
> their systems up and running. In the currnet console war, Sony hit
> the ground running and now has a massive head start over MS and
> nintendo, I honestly think that the GBA and pokemon will be the
> saving grace of nintendo again. Microsoft will susrvive due to the
> fact that the structure of their company warrants the collapse of
> the Xbox as they aren't solely dependent upon it for income.
> Whatever happens companies never know when the best time to release
> their consoles is, but Sony seems to have gotten it right this
> time!
Cheers for that Bonnus. The last bit you said, "but Sony seems to have gotten it right this time!", this may be true at the moment, but we will have to wait until the release of the gamecube and X-Box.
Microsoft have gone for the "good things come to those who wait" approach, but will it work for them?
Only time will tell, but I still think that choosing when to release a console determinds success, don't you?
"So, this is where I would like to ask you if you think companies should release their console before, the same time, or after rival consoles?"
Well, the Saturn and the PlayStation were released at similar times, with the Saturn expected to 'win the war', but thanks to bugged programming etc, the PSX toppled it. But that was due to programming and not timing I suppose. Sega knew that the PSX was selling well when they brought out the Dreamcast, however they claimed that they weren't worried about the PlayStation, more so of the PS2. How they got it wrong. they should have aimed teh Dreamcast at PSone owners - trying to make them change formats, but despite releasing it a year earlier in the UK than Sony did of the PS2, it was still up against the PS2 - Sega's mistake.
Trying to convince a market who fed on hype, that wanted something yet to be released, and when it finally was, wasn't up to their expectations, and so the PSone is still outselling PS2 4 to 1. Will the market ever move on or will we get games like Simpsons Wrestling and Who wants to be a millionairre plaguing our lives for eternity! I certainly hope not.
I have no idea what relevance my post has.
Thanks and Dan there is no rule!
Well, the Saturn and the PlayStation were released at similar times, with the Saturn expected to 'win the war', but thanks to bugged programming etc, the PSX toppled it. But that was due to programming and not timing I suppose. Sega knew that the PSX was selling well when they brought out the Dreamcast, however they claimed that they weren't worried about the PlayStation, more so of the PS2. How they got it wrong. they should have aimed teh Dreamcast at PSone owners - trying to make them change formats, but despite releasing it a year earlier in the UK than Sony did of the PS2, it was still up against the PS2 - Sega's mistake.
Trying to convince a market who fed on hype, that wanted something yet to be released, and when it finally was, wasn't up to their expectations, and so the PSone is still outselling PS2 4 to 1. Will the market ever move on or will we get games like Simpsons Wrestling and Who wants to be a millionairre plaguing our lives for eternity! I certainly hope not.
I have no idea what relevance my post has.
Thanks and Dan there is no rule!
Hehehe, I couldn't be bothered to read it Dan :-)
Edge Master wrote:
> Wow! A brilliant post that kept me interested all the way through. I
> know you've just won GAD, but for this not to win would be a serious
> injustice. Excellent stuff mate and a nice dedication to the
> Dreamcast too!
Cheers Edge. There isn't a rule that says you can not win GAD twice within X days is there?
Anyway, Dan, what is your answer to the question?
> Wow! A brilliant post that kept me interested all the way through. I
> know you've just won GAD, but for this not to win would be a serious
> injustice. Excellent stuff mate and a nice dedication to the
> Dreamcast too!
Cheers Edge. There isn't a rule that says you can not win GAD twice within X days is there?
Anyway, Dan, what is your answer to the question?
The only problem is if you hold out to add finishing touches to games then you run the risk that developers wont want to make games until they know what the definate final spec of the machine will be, the only main reason for companies to hold off on releasing games consoles would be to make enough to keep up with demand. The second problem is that there is very little in the way of scope for releasing a console, if SEGA had held back the dreamcast to be in direct competition with Sony's PS2, SEGA would have vanished without trace, at least we still have a great games company in the firm!! Microsoft and Nintendo have played a waiting game, not through choice but through, the fact that it has taken them longer to get their systems up and running. In the currnet console war, Sony hit the ground running and now has a massive head start over MS and nintendo, I honestly think that the GBA and pokemon will be the saving grace of nintendo again. Microsoft will susrvive due to the fact that the structure of their company warrants the collapse of the Xbox as they aren't solely dependent upon it for income. Whatever happens companies never know when the best time to release their consoles is, but Sony seems to have gotten it right this time!
Page: