The "Nintendo Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
I look around the forums, and I see a lot of people saying how great it is that the Gamecube is using optical discs, has a big set of launch games, and looks to have some retty good third party support.
But really, come on. Nintendo should have had Optical Media storge for the N64- the only reason they didn't is because development plans with Sony broke down, leading to Sony taking the plans into their own hands and destroying Nintendo's market share. All Nintendo are doind is catching up with the rest of the market.
As for the launch games, I am seriously disappointed. I've been playing Nintendo consoles for years, and each one has launched with some completely epic, revolutionary, superb game. And for a time I thought that the GC would do even better. With Nintendo handing out francises left right and centre (Metroid, Starfox and Smash brothers all being made by Second Party developers) this should have left Nintendo with enough space to go away and make one of the most revolutionary, epic games ever.
Remember when Mario 64 came out? It was the first truely 3D game- it used 3D gameplay instead of using old 2D gameplay in a 3D environment. Even today it is the standard to which all new platformers are compared.
So, with all this free time, what have Nintendo given us? No Mario or Zelda at release. Instead Luigi's Mansion and Pikmin- original and fun games, but we expect so much more for the release of a Nintendo console. ANYONE who claims to be a Nintendo fan can tell you that!
It's what makes Nintendo a universally known brandname- they lead the market... well, at least they did. Nowadays they've taken a back seat. Tell me, what revolution will we see with the Gamecube? With the N64 revolution was there from day one- Mario 64 was the most talked about game ever. And then Zelda came along and has been voted the best game ever... and that's quite something.
So what about the Gamecube. Where is the revolution to come from with Ninty's short and sweet policy?
Ok, so maybe I'm being a bit unfair. As a HUGE Nintendo fan I'll certainly be buying one this summer. But my point still stands- Nintendo have the huge following they do because they produce some of the best, original, epic and revolutionary games ever. Now they've just become too relaxed.
sonic
But really, come on. Nintendo should have had Optical Media storge for the N64- the only reason they didn't is because development plans with Sony broke down, leading to Sony taking the plans into their own hands and destroying Nintendo's market share. All Nintendo are doind is catching up with the rest of the market.
As for the launch games, I am seriously disappointed. I've been playing Nintendo consoles for years, and each one has launched with some completely epic, revolutionary, superb game. And for a time I thought that the GC would do even better. With Nintendo handing out francises left right and centre (Metroid, Starfox and Smash brothers all being made by Second Party developers) this should have left Nintendo with enough space to go away and make one of the most revolutionary, epic games ever.
Remember when Mario 64 came out? It was the first truely 3D game- it used 3D gameplay instead of using old 2D gameplay in a 3D environment. Even today it is the standard to which all new platformers are compared.
So, with all this free time, what have Nintendo given us? No Mario or Zelda at release. Instead Luigi's Mansion and Pikmin- original and fun games, but we expect so much more for the release of a Nintendo console. ANYONE who claims to be a Nintendo fan can tell you that!
It's what makes Nintendo a universally known brandname- they lead the market... well, at least they did. Nowadays they've taken a back seat. Tell me, what revolution will we see with the Gamecube? With the N64 revolution was there from day one- Mario 64 was the most talked about game ever. And then Zelda came along and has been voted the best game ever... and that's quite something.
So what about the Gamecube. Where is the revolution to come from with Ninty's short and sweet policy?
Ok, so maybe I'm being a bit unfair. As a HUGE Nintendo fan I'll certainly be buying one this summer. But my point still stands- Nintendo have the huge following they do because they produce some of the best, original, epic and revolutionary games ever. Now they've just become too relaxed.
sonic
Page:
There has been whisperings of a get-together curry night.
We're looking at going to the Shampan in Penwortham as they have great deal on at the moment.
This is an OPEN invite to all riders and partners including would-be riders.
We went last night for a reccy and had this from the £9.95 meal deal:
Poppadom (1 each) and full relish tray
Onion Bhaji x 1
Dahl Puri x 1
Shampan Exotic Shashlick x 2 (should be £12.95 each)
Pilau rice x 2
Garlic nan x 1
Vindaloo sauce x 1 (in place of the second nan bread)
Vegetable curry x 1
Coffee & mints x 2
Extra's
Dessert x 2
Large Bottled Cobra x 2
Large wine x1
Small wine x 1
STUFFED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
£34.30
Check out the site for details: link to Shampan website
Let me know who may be interested by Monday night ;)
NOTE!! There may be other impromptu curry/meal nights before our next Xmas do :D
We're looking at going to the Shampan in Penwortham as they have great deal on at the moment.
This is an OPEN invite to all riders and partners including would-be riders.
We went last night for a reccy and had this from the £9.95 meal deal:
Poppadom (1 each) and full relish tray
Onion Bhaji x 1
Dahl Puri x 1
Shampan Exotic Shashlick x 2 (should be £12.95 each)
Pilau rice x 2
Garlic nan x 1
Vindaloo sauce x 1 (in place of the second nan bread)
Vegetable curry x 1
Coffee & mints x 2
Extra's
Dessert x 2
Large Bottled Cobra x 2
Large wine x1
Small wine x 1
STUFFED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
£34.30
Check out the site for details: link to Shampan website
Let me know who may be interested by Monday night ;)
NOTE!! There may be other impromptu curry/meal nights before our next Xmas do :D
>>Not only do you immmediatly come into this topic with a >hugely arrogant attitude and fail to even engage in the >debate that myself, Solskjaer and some others are having, >but you just start openly critising points without either >putting your opinions forward or giving constructive >critism.
Sorry maybe rude of me :)
>>1) What is YOUR view of the Gamecube launch. Every other >Nintendo launch has had one revolutionary or epic title, >but not this one.
Well lets see. Nintendo launched with the best ever jet ski game on ANY system. A suck em up - a game never tried before. It might be short but I do not regret its purchase as it has replay value in the form of a different reward and grade for everything you collect during the game, plus Zelda style side missions involving watering plants, capturing golden mice and growing a bean shoot throughout the game. The other US titles include Pikmin, again a brand new style of game. And although some claim this to be short they are jumping on the "ninty have gone for short games" bandwagon. The game has lots of replay value if you enjoy it. You wont compelte it first time through without a guide so that makes 2 plays and 20 hours of gameplay for starters. Then it has its challenge modes and ranks to return for. Super Smash Bros melee adds multiplaying fun to the launch line up. And before you say it - Yes I know Pikmin and Smash arent for the Euro launch but they are only anbout 3 weeks behind it and thats good enough in my view.
>>2) What is your opinion of Nintendo giving away >franchises like Metroid, Smash Bros and Starfox? And >especially the absolutely terrible state of Metroid- it >was so bad after 8 months of development that Shigsy >ordered it to be restarted with a new producer!
I dont mind Nintendo "giving away" their licenses as long as they are released under the Nintendo publishing brand. The licenes will return to Nintendo if need be, it isnt as if they have signed them over permanently. If it means we get quality depth filled games more frequently then I dont see the harm in it. If nintendo had kept the rights to star fox, Metroid and smash bros (although HAL might as well qualify as 1st party anyway) then we would only have seen one of them per year. As it is MetroidND Star Fox will both make 2002 American debuts, and thats alongside Mario and Zelda. Metroid is now in a fine state with nintendo insiders boasting it is looking really special. It was a shrew move by Nintendo to spread out the licenses to allow more big name games per year imo.
>>3) In the past Nintendo, as you have said, have always >had something up their sleave to pull out. However, big >titles like Zelda have always been publicised heavily >well before launch at trade shows. Given that, do you >think that Ninty have actually got some huge epic title >in their hand? After all Shigsy's short and sweet policy >is going the oposite way.
Im not sure if they have to be honest. Shigsy already told reporters that he is working on "something else" when questioned about Pikmin 2 and Mario Kart. Whether that is an online game, a pokemon tie in, Marionette or something completely off the chart remains to be seen. E3 will be the only chance for us to judge this reasonably IMO as it will be the time Nintendo releases its year ahead plans to the public.
At the end of the day, Nintendo has worked hard on getting third party support for the cube, and has tactically distibuted big licenses to second parties, all of this meaning we will be seeing more quality gamecube games in the first 2 years of launch than we saw in 5 years of the N64. In fact, by the end of 2002 there will be over a hundred titles available in the states - there was around 250 ish for the entire N64 lifespan.
I am completely happy with Nintendo at present. I dont think they are about to take over the gaming industry crown from the ps2, but they will sell enough hardware units to allow future generation consoles and keep giving us fun, unique and most importantly good games and thats all that matters.
Sorry maybe rude of me :)
>>1) What is YOUR view of the Gamecube launch. Every other >Nintendo launch has had one revolutionary or epic title, >but not this one.
Well lets see. Nintendo launched with the best ever jet ski game on ANY system. A suck em up - a game never tried before. It might be short but I do not regret its purchase as it has replay value in the form of a different reward and grade for everything you collect during the game, plus Zelda style side missions involving watering plants, capturing golden mice and growing a bean shoot throughout the game. The other US titles include Pikmin, again a brand new style of game. And although some claim this to be short they are jumping on the "ninty have gone for short games" bandwagon. The game has lots of replay value if you enjoy it. You wont compelte it first time through without a guide so that makes 2 plays and 20 hours of gameplay for starters. Then it has its challenge modes and ranks to return for. Super Smash Bros melee adds multiplaying fun to the launch line up. And before you say it - Yes I know Pikmin and Smash arent for the Euro launch but they are only anbout 3 weeks behind it and thats good enough in my view.
>>2) What is your opinion of Nintendo giving away >franchises like Metroid, Smash Bros and Starfox? And >especially the absolutely terrible state of Metroid- it >was so bad after 8 months of development that Shigsy >ordered it to be restarted with a new producer!
I dont mind Nintendo "giving away" their licenses as long as they are released under the Nintendo publishing brand. The licenes will return to Nintendo if need be, it isnt as if they have signed them over permanently. If it means we get quality depth filled games more frequently then I dont see the harm in it. If nintendo had kept the rights to star fox, Metroid and smash bros (although HAL might as well qualify as 1st party anyway) then we would only have seen one of them per year. As it is MetroidND Star Fox will both make 2002 American debuts, and thats alongside Mario and Zelda. Metroid is now in a fine state with nintendo insiders boasting it is looking really special. It was a shrew move by Nintendo to spread out the licenses to allow more big name games per year imo.
>>3) In the past Nintendo, as you have said, have always >had something up their sleave to pull out. However, big >titles like Zelda have always been publicised heavily >well before launch at trade shows. Given that, do you >think that Ninty have actually got some huge epic title >in their hand? After all Shigsy's short and sweet policy >is going the oposite way.
Im not sure if they have to be honest. Shigsy already told reporters that he is working on "something else" when questioned about Pikmin 2 and Mario Kart. Whether that is an online game, a pokemon tie in, Marionette or something completely off the chart remains to be seen. E3 will be the only chance for us to judge this reasonably IMO as it will be the time Nintendo releases its year ahead plans to the public.
At the end of the day, Nintendo has worked hard on getting third party support for the cube, and has tactically distibuted big licenses to second parties, all of this meaning we will be seeing more quality gamecube games in the first 2 years of launch than we saw in 5 years of the N64. In fact, by the end of 2002 there will be over a hundred titles available in the states - there was around 250 ish for the entire N64 lifespan.
I am completely happy with Nintendo at present. I dont think they are about to take over the gaming industry crown from the ps2, but they will sell enough hardware units to allow future generation consoles and keep giving us fun, unique and most importantly good games and thats all that matters.
===SONICRAV---> wrote:
Zelda and Mario has been shortened, with a new game every
> 6 months. This is NOT what the series was made for! The games were alwasy meant
> to be epic, taking years to make... not 6 months!
Chill!
Although most Ninty games are mini-projects at 6 months, Mario and Zelda are bigger projects because they're big names. Mario Kart is another bigger project.
It's only quirky ideas that might not be accepted that are develloped sparingly.
Pikmin was small and accepted.
Expect a bigger, more expanded and worked on sequel.
Luigi's Mansion wasn't as popular.
No problem. Big sales weren't needed as not much resources were put into the game in the first place.
Nintendo have priorities.
If a game is sure to sell, they put more into it to live up to the hype.
If not, they make a short 'n sweet game to test the water and see if it's accepted.
I think that the purpose behind this is to devellop a new franchise because people are going to tire of Mario and Zelda sooner or later.
Time to find a new one. The Pokémon of the 21st century.
Pikmin wasn't quite that good as a franchise, but something's sure to come up sooner or later.
Zelda and Mario has been shortened, with a new game every
> 6 months. This is NOT what the series was made for! The games were alwasy meant
> to be epic, taking years to make... not 6 months!
Chill!
Although most Ninty games are mini-projects at 6 months, Mario and Zelda are bigger projects because they're big names. Mario Kart is another bigger project.
It's only quirky ideas that might not be accepted that are develloped sparingly.
Pikmin was small and accepted.
Expect a bigger, more expanded and worked on sequel.
Luigi's Mansion wasn't as popular.
No problem. Big sales weren't needed as not much resources were put into the game in the first place.
Nintendo have priorities.
If a game is sure to sell, they put more into it to live up to the hype.
If not, they make a short 'n sweet game to test the water and see if it's accepted.
I think that the purpose behind this is to devellop a new franchise because people are going to tire of Mario and Zelda sooner or later.
Time to find a new one. The Pokémon of the 21st century.
Pikmin wasn't quite that good as a franchise, but something's sure to come up sooner or later.
Sony are releasing stuff earlier because they know they can. And people will still buy it. As Sonic said in a topic in FOG Prime, many people only buy the PS2 for the Sony brand. Therefore, those who bought a PS2 are likely to go on to buy a PS3 as long as that is still the most trendy console brand. While others will only buy a new console if it actually offers something more, many Sony fans will buy the PS3 even if it is not a decent generation leap, and is just Sony trying to cash in.
I think this strategy is dangerous- Many people will buy a PS2 as the price comes down and then after having the console about a year, everyone is talking about the soon to be released in Japan PS3... well, maybe that is exaggerating a little, but if Sony release consoles in such short gaps it could basically force other console makers to release their newer consoles early to appear to be keeping up- even if there is little jump from the old generation to the newer one- and people will just end up shelling out much more. I reckon Sony, and all console manufacturers, should just allow their consoles to last as long as there is sufficient interest and people are still buying them in good quantities.
I think this strategy is dangerous- Many people will buy a PS2 as the price comes down and then after having the console about a year, everyone is talking about the soon to be released in Japan PS3... well, maybe that is exaggerating a little, but if Sony release consoles in such short gaps it could basically force other console makers to release their newer consoles early to appear to be keeping up- even if there is little jump from the old generation to the newer one- and people will just end up shelling out much more. I reckon Sony, and all console manufacturers, should just allow their consoles to last as long as there is sufficient interest and people are still buying them in good quantities.
Maybe they had a very strong feeling that the PS2 would sell just as well as the PSX, so they had to rely on it.
It's strange that they released it so earlier compared to the Cube and Box. Maybe they needed the money ergently!??
And the PS3 speculation also adds a lot to this. Why so soon, are they really going bust, etc....
Nah, pretty un-likely ain't it!
It's strange that they released it so earlier compared to the Cube and Box. Maybe they needed the money ergently!??
And the PS3 speculation also adds a lot to this. Why so soon, are they really going bust, etc....
Nah, pretty un-likely ain't it!
Piracy wasn't as big a deal as people keep making out. Sony made hundred of millions of pounds from the PSX- it would have been bigger without piracy, but it's still not a bad amount to make!
After all, if they had lost money do you think they'd make the PS2?
Sonic
After all, if they had lost money do you think they'd make the PS2?
Sonic
I think that it's good Ninty and Sony didn't come to an agreement over a CD add-on, or even a new CD-based console.
The PSX was taken over by piracy, and the same could've happened to the SNES, or even the N64!! And it could even noe be ready to take place with the GC!
But luckily they came to a dissagreement, and the deal fell-through. I somehow don't think Sega's involvement will damage Nintendo's image or reputation!
It was also a good move for Sony, as they were able to show people what they could do with some CD's and a big, grey 32-bit box. And of course, pircay was invloved!
The PSX was taken over by piracy, and the same could've happened to the SNES, or even the N64!! And it could even noe be ready to take place with the GC!
But luckily they came to a dissagreement, and the deal fell-through. I somehow don't think Sega's involvement will damage Nintendo's image or reputation!
It was also a good move for Sony, as they were able to show people what they could do with some CD's and a big, grey 32-bit box. And of course, pircay was invloved!
RM18 wrote:
> I bet Nintendo regret not going into business with Sony. But I don't!
Same here! Had Ninty been in the market with Sony, then the mass market gaming would never take off. After all, the only reason for it was that Sony marketted the PS agressively, and gave developers drop down costs, making it absolutely huge.
Had Ninty and Sega been then only 2 competitors it is possible that mass market gaming would still not be here, and games would have far less money put into them
Sonic
> I bet Nintendo regret not going into business with Sony. But I don't!
Same here! Had Ninty been in the market with Sony, then the mass market gaming would never take off. After all, the only reason for it was that Sony marketted the PS agressively, and gave developers drop down costs, making it absolutely huge.
Had Ninty and Sega been then only 2 competitors it is possible that mass market gaming would still not be here, and games would have far less money put into them
Sonic
ah, maybe Nintendo were forced to use CDs, but still, whether or not that was a good or bad thing is debatable. It was obviously bad because of the price issue, so Ninty lost many potential customers, but that is not bad for us it is bad for Nintendo. So whether carts were the best medium for gamers is debatable...
I bet Nintendo regret not going into business with Sony. But I don't!
Page: