The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Nintendo may, at last, have a reason to smile.
The Sega-sammy merger may have damaged one of Nintendo's closest third party allies. But things are looking better in the west.
Nintendo do there upmost to appease EA, the biggest third party publisher in the world. As well as advertising their games and providing constant support, Nintendo even reduced the royalties EA have to pay.
Nintendo have done similar, smaller deals with THQ, Ubi-Soft and Activision. With EA Nintendo have firmly got the biggest western publishers on board. Activision and THQ always produce titles for Nintendo whilst Ubi-soft make a special effort to make their titles appeal to Nintendo fans.
Unfortunatly, and as we all know, 4 major third party publishers want nothing to do with the mighty N.
Acclaim, Eidios, Rockstar and Codemasters.
Rockstar do produce the occasional game but their extreme adult content is not suited at all to Nintendo's demographic. Acclaim are a surprise loss. Once Nintendo's friends Acclaim ditch their Japanese allies to concentrate on PS2 and X-box development. Eidios were a suprise return, Hitman 2 and Timesplitters 2 were nice additions to our game collection but just as Eidios appeared they dissapeared again.
Codemasters makes of Colin McCrae promised many a game for Nintendo before pulling all support.
What does this mean? No Hitman, No Colin McCrae, No Worms Fort and No GTA.
But recent developments has meant the larger houses maybe moving in for the kill.
Ubi-soft, originally linked with Eidios, are now linked with Codemasters. Ubi-soft are firm supporters of Nintendo's machines often porting games (such as Splinter Cell and Rainbow Six) that would not appeal to a Nintendo audience. They offer cheap deals with the likes of Beyond Good and Evil and Prince of Persia as well as early release of the Rayman franchise. If Codemasters sign on the dotted line with Ubi-soft expect the age old company to be porting their games onto a Gamecube near you. The release of Second Sight under a Codemasters label was always a good sign.
EA are now linked with a £300 million deal to secure Eidios. The company that has produced games as massive as Tomb Raider, Championship Manager and Hitman may be porting some of these titles to Nintendo games. EA as I have already commented support Nintendo fully with only Burnout 3 not getting a release due mainly to the online orientated play.
Acclaim's debts are rising. The once epic company fell in this generation after a series of bad decisions, advertisement ploys and games. The company are flailing, expect them either to have been bought out or to have gone under by the end of the year.
This leaves Midway and Rockstar, two companies that do to some degree support Nintendo just not fully.
The complaints from Nintendo fans regarding third party support stemmed from the loss of Acclaim, Codemasters and Eidios...
It looks like those complaints will no longer apply.
The Sega-sammy merger may have damaged one of Nintendo's closest third party allies. But things are looking better in the west.
Nintendo do there upmost to appease EA, the biggest third party publisher in the world. As well as advertising their games and providing constant support, Nintendo even reduced the royalties EA have to pay.
Nintendo have done similar, smaller deals with THQ, Ubi-Soft and Activision. With EA Nintendo have firmly got the biggest western publishers on board. Activision and THQ always produce titles for Nintendo whilst Ubi-soft make a special effort to make their titles appeal to Nintendo fans.
Unfortunatly, and as we all know, 4 major third party publishers want nothing to do with the mighty N.
Acclaim, Eidios, Rockstar and Codemasters.
Rockstar do produce the occasional game but their extreme adult content is not suited at all to Nintendo's demographic. Acclaim are a surprise loss. Once Nintendo's friends Acclaim ditch their Japanese allies to concentrate on PS2 and X-box development. Eidios were a suprise return, Hitman 2 and Timesplitters 2 were nice additions to our game collection but just as Eidios appeared they dissapeared again.
Codemasters makes of Colin McCrae promised many a game for Nintendo before pulling all support.
What does this mean? No Hitman, No Colin McCrae, No Worms Fort and No GTA.
But recent developments has meant the larger houses maybe moving in for the kill.
Ubi-soft, originally linked with Eidios, are now linked with Codemasters. Ubi-soft are firm supporters of Nintendo's machines often porting games (such as Splinter Cell and Rainbow Six) that would not appeal to a Nintendo audience. They offer cheap deals with the likes of Beyond Good and Evil and Prince of Persia as well as early release of the Rayman franchise. If Codemasters sign on the dotted line with Ubi-soft expect the age old company to be porting their games onto a Gamecube near you. The release of Second Sight under a Codemasters label was always a good sign.
EA are now linked with a £300 million deal to secure Eidios. The company that has produced games as massive as Tomb Raider, Championship Manager and Hitman may be porting some of these titles to Nintendo games. EA as I have already commented support Nintendo fully with only Burnout 3 not getting a release due mainly to the online orientated play.
Acclaim's debts are rising. The once epic company fell in this generation after a series of bad decisions, advertisement ploys and games. The company are flailing, expect them either to have been bought out or to have gone under by the end of the year.
This leaves Midway and Rockstar, two companies that do to some degree support Nintendo just not fully.
The complaints from Nintendo fans regarding third party support stemmed from the loss of Acclaim, Codemasters and Eidios...
It looks like those complaints will no longer apply.
Page:
Dringo wrote:
> Memorandum! wrote:
> Your point is still essentially:
>
> "Rockstar do produce the occasional game but their extreme
> adult
> content is not suited at all to Nintendo's demographic."
>
> You say it as if it would be bad if Rockstar developed games for
> Nintendo, when it clearly wouldn't be.
>
> No, just that Rockstar's games aren't suited to Nintendo's
> demographic...
>
> It could potentially change that demographic.
>
> The post is about loss of third parties and some returning and the
> unliklihood of Rockstar jumping on board.
Nintendo are stuck in a continuing cycle that they cant and refuse to get out. There are not enough so called 'mature' and 'adult orientated' titles on the GC for it to appeal to a 'adult orientated' audience. The mature titles that Nintendo do have were not advertised nearly enough when they first released resulting in them being almost ignored by the public. Now that nintendo has been given this childish image third party companies that claim to aim themselves at 'mature audiences are pulling out. The only way nintendo can fight off this image and encourage these companies to stay and put out games on the GC is by having more adult games.
It's just one big complicated cycle that could have been stopped ages ago when the likes of eternal darkness, resi evil, resi 0, metroid prime and F-zero were released with huge davertising campaings spanning all mediums. Instead nintendo just released the game and chucked out a dozen adverts for each one on tele at times of the day when not even hedgehogs are awake.
> Memorandum! wrote:
> Your point is still essentially:
>
> "Rockstar do produce the occasional game but their extreme
> adult
> content is not suited at all to Nintendo's demographic."
>
> You say it as if it would be bad if Rockstar developed games for
> Nintendo, when it clearly wouldn't be.
>
> No, just that Rockstar's games aren't suited to Nintendo's
> demographic...
>
> It could potentially change that demographic.
>
> The post is about loss of third parties and some returning and the
> unliklihood of Rockstar jumping on board.
Nintendo are stuck in a continuing cycle that they cant and refuse to get out. There are not enough so called 'mature' and 'adult orientated' titles on the GC for it to appeal to a 'adult orientated' audience. The mature titles that Nintendo do have were not advertised nearly enough when they first released resulting in them being almost ignored by the public. Now that nintendo has been given this childish image third party companies that claim to aim themselves at 'mature audiences are pulling out. The only way nintendo can fight off this image and encourage these companies to stay and put out games on the GC is by having more adult games.
It's just one big complicated cycle that could have been stopped ages ago when the likes of eternal darkness, resi evil, resi 0, metroid prime and F-zero were released with huge davertising campaings spanning all mediums. Instead nintendo just released the game and chucked out a dozen adverts for each one on tele at times of the day when not even hedgehogs are awake.
My local primary school is filled with Nintendo loving kids.
All this 'assuming' that certain people buy certain consoles does my head in.
The only two casual gamers I know both have gamecubes and not ps2's and have purchased the Resident Evils and Eternal Darkness for them.
Casual gaming and mature title purchases on the cube? Whatever next, a PS2 owner with an A-level?
Anyway stuff that all the best people have Xboxes, even if they're evil cat killing Nazi's if they own an xbox they're the best.
Honest.
No R-E-A-L-L-Y.
The only two casual gamers I know both have gamecubes and not ps2's and have purchased the Resident Evils and Eternal Darkness for them.
Casual gaming and mature title purchases on the cube? Whatever next, a PS2 owner with an A-level?
Anyway stuff that all the best people have Xboxes, even if they're evil cat killing Nazi's if they own an xbox they're the best.
Honest.
No R-E-A-L-L-Y.
Memorandum! wrote:
> Your point is still essentially:
>
> "Rockstar do produce the occasional game but their extreme adult
> content is not suited at all to Nintendo's demographic."
>
> You say it as if it would be bad if Rockstar developed games for
> Nintendo, when it clearly wouldn't be.
No, just that Rockstar's games aren't suited to Nintendo's demographic...
It could potentially change that demographic.
The post is about loss of third parties and some returning and the unliklihood of Rockstar jumping on board.
> Your point is still essentially:
>
> "Rockstar do produce the occasional game but their extreme adult
> content is not suited at all to Nintendo's demographic."
>
> You say it as if it would be bad if Rockstar developed games for
> Nintendo, when it clearly wouldn't be.
No, just that Rockstar's games aren't suited to Nintendo's demographic...
It could potentially change that demographic.
The post is about loss of third parties and some returning and the unliklihood of Rockstar jumping on board.
gerrid wrote:
>
> I can't wait for Belldandy to come in here and shoot his load trying
> to say tha Nintendo are rubbish, it's so inevitable.
Well he can't hack it in Life any more so he's practicing here I fear :D
>
> I can't wait for Belldandy to come in here and shoot his load trying
> to say tha Nintendo are rubbish, it's so inevitable.
Well he can't hack it in Life any more so he's practicing here I fear :D
Rickoss wrote:
> Dringo wrote:
> And of course Acclaim lost the Turok license last month.
>
> That I didn't know.
Yep that and the Baseball licence they had.
They've just aquired some licence to compete with other street racer games though...
> Dringo wrote:
> And of course Acclaim lost the Turok license last month.
>
> That I didn't know.
Yep that and the Baseball licence they had.
They've just aquired some licence to compete with other street racer games though...
Your point is still essentially:
"Rockstar do produce the occasional game but their extreme adult content is not suited at all to Nintendo's demographic."
You say it as if it would be bad if Rockstar developed games for Nintendo, when it clearly wouldn't be.
"Rockstar do produce the occasional game but their extreme adult content is not suited at all to Nintendo's demographic."
You say it as if it would be bad if Rockstar developed games for Nintendo, when it clearly wouldn't be.
Yes that's true but it doesn't change what I was saying.
But if Rockstar games were available on Nintendo systems it would give Nintendo a wider demographic, which can only be a good thing, because wider demographic = more sales.
Stranger In Paradise wrote:
> Like the way how Dringo dismisses Sega so easily, I mean it's not
> like Sega have supported the Gamecube with a raft of exclusives like
> Super Monkey Ball, Monkey Ball 2, numerous Sonic's, Skies of Arcadia
> and...oh it seems like Sega have been supporting Nintendo.
I didn't have to mention SEGA at all in the post. I did so because it would point out not everything is rosey. SEGA still support Nintendo as far as I'm concerned, just the titles in development for the Gamecube has seemingly dried up this year as opposed to the last 2. Then again with a merger and re-building the development teams that is hardly surprising.
> And how can Rockstar be said to not be right for the console because
> of the target audience? Dringo's usually red in the face explaining
> the wide appeal of the GC and Nintendo, so now you're saying this
> wide appeal is ages 0-17 - despite Dringo's totally unproven
> assertion in the Donkey Konga topic that Rockstar targets 15 year
> olds with 18 rated games.
I was saying that Rockstar don't support Nintendo because their games don't appeal to Nintendo's demographic. I am right, that is why Rockstar don't produce games for Gamecube. GTA doesn't appeal to 5 year olds...
Nintendo games are enjoyed by all ages, but you know and I know that Nintendo's fan base is mainly made up of young children. Not how it should be but that is the case. This goes back to my Donkey Konga topic, and how Nintendo will hopefully have a good Christmas if they concentrate on selling software to the youngsters.
Clearly not Rockstar's demographic... which is why Rockstar don't make games for Nintendo. Sure if they made cute platformers and children movie licenses' I can almost guarentee they would make Gamecube games.
> Like the way how Dringo dismisses Sega so easily, I mean it's not
> like Sega have supported the Gamecube with a raft of exclusives like
> Super Monkey Ball, Monkey Ball 2, numerous Sonic's, Skies of Arcadia
> and...oh it seems like Sega have been supporting Nintendo.
I didn't have to mention SEGA at all in the post. I did so because it would point out not everything is rosey. SEGA still support Nintendo as far as I'm concerned, just the titles in development for the Gamecube has seemingly dried up this year as opposed to the last 2. Then again with a merger and re-building the development teams that is hardly surprising.
> And how can Rockstar be said to not be right for the console because
> of the target audience? Dringo's usually red in the face explaining
> the wide appeal of the GC and Nintendo, so now you're saying this
> wide appeal is ages 0-17 - despite Dringo's totally unproven
> assertion in the Donkey Konga topic that Rockstar targets 15 year
> olds with 18 rated games.
I was saying that Rockstar don't support Nintendo because their games don't appeal to Nintendo's demographic. I am right, that is why Rockstar don't produce games for Gamecube. GTA doesn't appeal to 5 year olds...
Nintendo games are enjoyed by all ages, but you know and I know that Nintendo's fan base is mainly made up of young children. Not how it should be but that is the case. This goes back to my Donkey Konga topic, and how Nintendo will hopefully have a good Christmas if they concentrate on selling software to the youngsters.
Clearly not Rockstar's demographic... which is why Rockstar don't make games for Nintendo. Sure if they made cute platformers and children movie licenses' I can almost guarentee they would make Gamecube games.
Page: