Twilight Princess DELAYED

[Lynk Former]

The Revolution's backwards compatibility will be by default, all NES, SNES, N64 and GCN games will be able to be played using the Revolution controller. The Revolution does have controller ports for GCN controllers, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's for GCN controllers, it could also be used as recharge ports or used for the Bongos or if other past accessories.

NES, SNES and N64 games are downloaded from Nintendo's online network while GCN games are played directly from their discs.

 

Okay, okay I'll list down a group of different type of people.

1. A person who does not have a GCN but can get a Revolution and TP

2. A person who does have a GCN and can get a Revolution AND TP.

3. A person who does have a GCN but cannot get a Revolution but can get TP.

4. A person who does have a GCN but wants to get a PS3/Xbox360 and TP.

 

Let's say TP is a Revolution title. Person 1 and 2 will be able to get it, but person 3 and 4 won't be able to.

 

Now let's say that TP is a GCN title. Person 1, 2, 3 AND 4 can get it.

[toms]

I guess it depends what your aim is... to sell copies of zelda, or to sell Revolutions. I would have thought the idea was to sell revolutions.

 

You can actually buy second hand GCNs for less than GCN games these days. If i didn't already own one then what i would do is buy a second hand GCN and Twilight Princess, play it, sell them both. Which benefits nintendo in the short term because they sell lots of Princesses, but it doesn't benefit them long term as they don't get a new customer.

 

I'm of the opinion that a Zelda launch title for the revolution would boost sales by a dramatic amount... every console needs a big name franchise at launch... and i may be biased because i'm a huge zelda fan... but a zelda lauch title would be much more likely to make me buy a console than SSB or even a Mario title (unless they do something amazing with it). (and though metroid is a great game, its name isn't on the same level)

 

The xbox 360 is going to be backwards compatible too, but Microsoft are already saving up their best franchises to laucn on that, rather than bringing them out as xbox games just before it launches.

 

Still, either way it'll sell bucketloads. I just think the timing will hurt.

[Astrotoy7]

I pick ©

 

If the N-Rev ever got some more SW and FF titles I wanted, Id probably eventually get one when the price went down a bit

 

Im sure it can peacefully coexist next to my ps3, just like me and you Lynk...

 

mtfbwya

[Lynk Former]

Nintendo is also doing what Sony did for the PS1 when the PS2 was launch. The GCN will still be available for awhile as a budget system for those budget families who can't afford to buy one of the next generation consoles.

 

To put it more simply, it's like releasing a movie on a DVD or a UMD (if you had to choose between one or the other). It would be smarter to go for the DVD rather than the UMD because you have more people able to play DVDs.

 

 

The Revolution already has Smash Bros, a Mario title, Metroid Prime 3 and a brand new Nintendo franchise on the way as well as other stuff. They will be enough to sell the Revolution.

 

If people truely do want Twilight Princess I'd think they would get it despite it being a GameCube game.

[lukeskywalker1]

Reasons not to put TP on Revolution

 

• Zelda is already configured for the GCN controller... as a revolution title you would want to take advantage of the Revolutionary controller and options right? So by porting it they would have to completly redo the controller stuff.
  
• The size of the GCN disk as already been accounted for, they know how much they can fit on a disk. By making it a Revolution title they would either have to add a crap load of stuff... or the game would look small in front of new next gen NR games.
  
• They would have to completly redo the models. No one who has a Revolution would be impressed if they walk into a market and see a bunch of "Clones" walking around. On GCN, however, that is acceptable. While the graphics are already pushing the limit (for a current gen console) they would have to be a whole lot better for the NR.
  
• The game will be pushed back further.
  
• The price of the game will raise (will be $50... on NR it will be $60+)
  
• World Detail would have to be improved...
  
• Oh and.. yeah, its already playable on Revolution through backwards compatability.
  

[Astrotoy7]

The Revolution already has Smash Bros, a Mario title, Metroid Prime 3 and a brand new Nintendo franchise on the way as well as other stuff. They will be enough to sell the Revolution....

 

Hey, dont foget the New STARFOX RPG. This screenshot shows the lifelike detail the N-Rev will be capable of :

 

*rubs eyes to focus*

 

props to pieski for his connections at Norwegian Nintendo HQ

[ChAiNz.2da]

Hey, dont foget the New STARFOX RPG. This screenshot shows the lifelike detail the N-Rev will be capable of :

 

*rubs eyes to focus*

There isn't enough money in the world to make me dress up like that, or actually pose long enough to provide photographic proof...

[Pie™]

Hey, dont foget the New STARFOX RPG. This screenshot shows the lifelike detail the N-Rev will be capable of :

 

*rubs eyes to focus*

Hey, where's my credit?

[toms]

I thin the controller one might be the major issue... knowing nintendo they will want to tie the gameplay of their new games as closely as possible to their new controller, whatever it is. I'd suspect the REV zelda will have some sort of functionality that is highly reliant on the new controller.

 

Considering they'd have all the source materials and models, and they'd have 7 or more months to improve the graphics and add more detail... and whether it is a GCN or a REV title it will still have to compete graphically with next gen games, as the 360 will be out by then and the PS3 and REV may be too. Not ideal either way.

[Lynk Former]

*looks at toms last paragraph* Exactly! You've just helped me highlight a very good point there.

 

The fact that people think that a game has to be graphically beautiful to be enjoyed. Just by that you can bet that Nintendo will DEFINATELY keep this as a GameCube game just to prove to everyone that you don't have to have uber perfect graphics to make a kickass game.

 

 

Another thing is that the Revolution won't be coming mid 2006, it'll arrive at the end of 2006.

[Tyrion]

The fact that people think that a game has to be graphically beautiful to be enjoyed. Just by that you can bet that Nintendo will DEFINATELY keep this as a GameCube game just to prove to everyone that you don't have to have uber perfect graphics to make a kickass game.

 

*inserts 2 cents*

 

I still think OoT was one of the best looking games ever. The graphics sucked technology rise, but the color balance and design was great.

 

I hope they release it on the Gamecube personally. Because I actually have a Gamecube, and I don't want a Revolution.

[Astrotoy7]

Hey, where's my credit?

 

fixed, my good fellow

 

 

mtfbwya

[Prime]

The fact that people think that a game has to be graphically beautiful to be enjoyed. Just by that you can bet that Nintendo will DEFINATELY keep this as a GameCube game just to prove to everyone that you don't have to have uber perfect graphics to make a kickass game.

While that is true and I agree, to many people kick ass graphics = good game and crappy graphics = bad game. And great graphics sells games and systems, rightly or wrongly. We all know that. Nintendo wants to sell games in the long run, not prove a philosophical point. And presumably they are aiming to sell Revolutions, not GCs, or worse yet nothing since the GC owners already have that system.

 

They aren't going to say, "See, even though it isn't pretty, you are having a lot of fun right? You don't need to upgrade and give us your big dollars! If you want pretty, go play on our competators machines!" That want to say, "You really need our new system so you can play this game!"

 

To some extent, this a chance for Nintendo's to get back to being a real player in the console wars (although I haven't looked at the Revolution, so I don't know how likely that is). Presumably they aren't going to shoot themselves in the foot by passing up a chance to convince players to get the new system...

 

I hope they release it on the Gamecube personally. Because I actually have a Gamecube, and I don't want a Revolution.

And it is exactly that attitude that Nintendo wants to defeat. Releasing the game on the GC removes the reason to want a Revolution, which hurts their business plan and makes them less money.

[Tyrion]

And it is exactly that attitude that Nintendo wants to defeat. Releasing the game on the GC removes the reason to want a Revolution, which hurts their business plan and makes them less money.

 

I figured someone would say that. If they don't release it on the gamecube, then they lose a sale from me. I'm not gonna spend 300 dollars for the revolution just to play Legend of Zelda. If that was the case, I'd just go to a friends house and play the game there.

 

But then I'm probably in the minority when it comes to that.

 

Besides, how could it hurt their buisness plan? If both the revolution and the gamecube games sell for the same price, then they still get money. They lose money selling the Revolution anyway. Selling games on the gamecube will help curb losses from the Revolution, while still having a new-generation console for competition's sake. Then people will buy the Revolution once the newer, more taxing games come out.

[Lynk Former]

@ Prime: You're making it sounds as if no one will want a Revolution if Twilight Princess is not a Revolution game. Alright then, I supposed no one will want the Revolution for Super Smash Bros. Revolution or Metroid Prime 3 or the 20 years of Nintendo gaming that you can access through the system. What you're saying sounds pretty silly really.

 

And the fact is that selling Revolution is NOT the issue here. If you want to talk about the supposed grim future for Nintendo then start a new thread, really. I've said it a million times already, a lot of people will want this game and making it accessable is Nintendo's #1 priority.

 

Tyrion, you're not a minority with your view, there will be a lot of people who will have a similar story to you. Either they won't be getting a Revolution at all because they either cannot afford one or will be switching to the PS3 or Xbox360 or won't get one at all. Or they just want to stick with their GCN until the Revolution comes down to an acceptable price or when it has proven that it has a decent enough library to invest in.

 

Making this game accessable to people like that will be a very good choice. Or we could go for the PC gaming route where you have to upgrade your system to be able to play the game.

 

Remember that Nintendo doesn't attract all the tech geeks and multimedia savvy type people that Microsoft and Sony do. They attract a totally different crowd of people with a totally different kind of experience. If this were, say, Halo 2 and we were dealing with the Xbox and Xbox360 then I would agree with you, but we're not. this is Nintendo, things work differently for Nintendo and it's obvious that the majority don't understand Nintendo's stance on... well, anything, seeing as there is so much critisism towards such trivial things.

[Prime]

I figured someone would say that. If they don't release it on the gamecube, then they lose a sale from me. I'm not gonna spend 300 dollars for the revolution just to play Legend of Zelda. If that was the case, I'd just go to a friends house and play the game there.

 

But then I'm probably in the minority when it comes to that.

Hard to say, really. A lot of people feel that way, especially at first, and there is nothing wrong with that. But eventually most people feel they have to upgrade, and the developers want that to happen sooner rather than later. When DVDs came out there were a lot of people who asked why would they switch when they already had their movies on VHS. Now that it is much more difficult to get VHS and most of the best stuff is almost exclusively on DVD, most people have switched. Same with records to tapes to CDs.

 

Eventually, if not now, you and others are going to want to switch to a nextgen console. Nintendo are trying to get you to select their console. If they think making TF exclusive to the Revolution will convince you to do that, they will.

 

Besides, how could it hurt their buisness plan? If both the revolution and the gamecube games sell for the same price, then they still get money. They lose money selling the Revolution anyway. Selling games on the gamecube will help curb losses from the Revolution, while still having a new-generation console for competition's sake. Then people will buy the Revolution once the newer, more taxing games come out.

It can hurt their business plan in a few ways. The console and game sales are kind of apples and oranges. Console sales generate a lot more money per unit for starters (even if the overall units sales are not comparible), and they are also ensuring future profit because people are going to buy games for the new system, because even with backwards compatibility at some point people are going to get tired of just playing GC games.

 

Compare this to just the sales Twilight Princess for the GC. Even if the game is popular, the money they make will generate less in the long run than making it exclusive to the Revolution. There maybe more TP units sold in total, but it reduces the console sales and future sales, so in terms of overall revenue it is less. Plus, there is nothing inherent from that to make you buy another Nintendo game. All the profit is short term.

 

Again, this is traditionally how new technology is rolled out, and how companies entice customers to buy it. It is a common business practice to take a short term hit to improve the prospect of even greater revenue down the line. Being in the wireless network business, I can tell you we do exactly the same thing. Game engine designers do the same thing. It isn't really worth it for them to make an engine for just one game cost-wise. But they will take the short term hit to profit because the licensing of it will make them even more money down the line. It is the same in most industries. If that method didn't work, you would see much more technology being backwards compatible. But if they did that, eventually people would feel they have what they need and not buy new stuff.

 

@ Prime: You're making it sounds as if no one will want a Revolution if Twilight Princess is not a Revolution game. Alright then, I supposed no one will want the Revolution for Super Smash Bros. Revolution or Metroid Prime 3 or the 20 years of Nintendo gaming that you can access through the system. What you're saying sounds pretty silly really.

But that's not what I'm saying. Like any decent system, there are always going to be lots of good games. The point is that in the end Nintendo wants to sell its console, and like every business it will use every opportunity to convince customers to take the plunge and give them their $300. If they think TF is going to help, great. If Super Mario Bros. Revolution is going to help, great. If Metroid Prime 3 is going to help, great.

 

They are going to use all of those to get you to buy the console. Assuming TF lines up with the console release schedule and so on, Nintendu will use it is part of their business plan to get people to transition. It isn't the only incentive they will use, but it can be one. And they will use every incentive at their disposal, including this one if they feel it will help. Happens all the time, everywhere.

 

I've said it a million times already, a lot of people will want this game and making it accessable is Nintendo's #1 priority.

Well, not to split hairs but making money is their #1 priority. And a good way to make the most money possible is to make the game Revolution exclusive, again assuming that development can be made to line up. They want to ensure long term profitability.

 

Tyrion, you're not a minority with your view, there will be a lot of people who will have a similar story to you.

That's true. A lot of people will feel the same way, which is of course valid. But those feelings are the same every time a new technology comes along to replace an older technology. And every time the company with the new technology does everything it can to get you to switch. And using "exclusives" is one of the most common ways to do that.

 

Or we could go for the PC gaming route where you have to upgrade your system to be able to play the game.

Ironically, PC manufacturers do exactly the same thing. "If you want to play this game/use this software/do this thing, you need to be the newest video card/RAM/CPU/motherboard/harddrive to do it! Give us your money!"

 

If they really felt that in general making things backwards compatible to with older systems made more money in the long run, they would all be doing it. They know that isn't the most effective way. They want to see you more stuff, and they can't do that if you feel you have everything you need.

 

However, backwards compatibility can be used as an incentive to switch to their system and not the new XBox or PS. Microsoft seems to feel that the 360 is strong enough not to really need that so much...

 

Remember that Nintendo doesn't attract all the tech geeks and multimedia savvy type people that Microsoft and Sony do. They attract a totally different crowd of people with a totally different kind of experience. If this were, say, Halo 2 and we were dealing with the Xbox and Xbox360 then I would agree with you, but we're not. this is Nintendo, things work differently for Nintendo and it's obvious that the majority don't understand Nintendo's stance on... well, anything, seeing as there is so much critisism towards such trivial things.

But they are still in business to make money, right? I mean, they have shareholders and whatnot, and so are required by law to base decisions on the bottom line.

 

This is way to long a post. In the end, I'm not saying that Twilight Princess should or will be put out exclusively for the Revolution. I'm just saying that Nintendo may very well feel that doing so will make them the most money in the long run, and they may very well be right.

[Mike Windu]

Finishing off, Nintendo isn't going to die so don't worry, just because Nintendo isn't popular with your friends doesn't mean they're in trouble. Just because Twilight Princess is being released 6 months before the Revolution doesn't mean that no one will buy it.

 

Ah ah. Not to correct you, but it's not my friends.

 

The freakin CEO/representative/president whatever has already expressed concern that Rev will not beat Sony.

 

Nintendo probably won't die out. But they need to do something. Revolution yes, is a step in the right direction, but we'll see how far that step takes them.

 

They aren't? And how would you know this? Just because it's general public opinion from a specific group of people. Yes, it is true that Nintendo aren't for the techy type of people. But that's okay because that isn't Nintendo's target audience. And because of that Nintendo is focusing on an audience they know they can reach, anyone who likes the Nintendo way of gaming, they are also making efforts to capture new groups of people.

 

Once again, it's not general public opinion. Nintendo has expressed these concerns at several press conferences, either through small remarks or flat out statements.

 

I could probably look it up if you want. :/

[El Sitherino]

Ah ah. Not to correct you, but it's not my friends.

No problem as you didn't correct him.

Nintendo has never said they aren't "cool"

 

The freakin CEO/representative/president whatever has already expressed concern that Rev will not beat Sony.

... Uh, no duh. Sony has contracts for exclusive deals for franchises people want. They were even trying to get an exclusive contract with Rockstar for GTA. They're creating a market based on fads, and as long as they stay current they'll bring in the majority.

Meanwhile Nintendo holds back to doing what they've always done and makes insane profit on their consoles as well as games. That's why they're still a huge percentile in the entire entertainment market, where as Sony is merely a 2%.

 

 

Nintendo probably won't die out. But they need to do something. Revolution yes, is a step in the right direction, but we'll see how far that step takes them.

They're letting Microsoft and Sony battle it out. Sony and Microsoft lose money on each console sold, eventually one will outsell the other leaving the other to crash out of the market. Then Nintendo could easily keep rising as it is.

 

Once again, it's not general public opinion. Nintendo has expressed these concerns at several press conferences, either through small remarks or flat out statements.

And once again, I say you're a liar. Nintendo has never shown sign of concern over anything, not even the failed VirtualBoy, which if it had overcome the technical flaws could have been a damn fine system.

 

 

Also, I'd like to show you Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3. It came out for playstation after the PS2 had been released. They could have put it on the PS2, but there was no need. It sold a hell of a lot of copies because it was a wanted game and those who had only PS1's could play it and so could the kids going into getting the PS2's. The people set on direct switch to the revolution will get the game regardless, if they intend on getting it.

Those who wish to wait will buy the game for their gamecube and make the switch when they wish to. Those who don't will be getting the game for the gamecube and Nintendo will still be getting their money. In a manner it's win-win, sure they aren't getting the people with no intention on switching, but are those people really going to switch anyway? Will this game be the catalyst that pushes them to switch? I doubt it. You act like this is the be-all-end-all of games and if it's not on the revolution it'll fail.

 

I think mario and metroid are the stronger launch titles. They do, after all, have the worlds largest fan base to ever exist in the gaming world.

[lukeskywalker1]

Actually Sith I read on IGN some interviews where Nintendo seemed a little concerned about the markey. Im not sure why, reguardless of what everyone thinks, Nintendo has a ton of capitol. They have been in the business for around 100 years. They know what they are doing.

 

... Uh, no duh. Sony has contracts for exclusive deals for franchises people want. They were even trying to get an exclusive contract with Rockstar for GTA. They're creating a market based on fads, and as long as they stay current they'll bring in the majority.

Meanwhile Nintendo holds back to doing what they've always done and makes insane profit on their consoles as well as games. That's why they're still a huge percentile in the entire entertainment market, where as Sony is merely a 2%.

 

Yup, games like Metal Gear Solid are PlayStation Exclusive for a certain number of years. Thats why Nintendo won't see a Sons of Liberty port for a while, not to mention Snake Eater. Like you guys said, the devs make you feel like you need to buy the new consoles.

 

My plan: Forget next gen untill the prices drop. Many people will be selling games now. I'll take this oppertunity to enhance my GCN library. Soon the PS2 price will drop, I'll grab one of those, grab my MGS games, and a few other PS2 exclusive games and I'll be set for years. They still sell used N64 games, from $5-$15. I can't wait for the day PS2 and GCN games are $5 a peice.

[Mike Windu]

No problem as you didn't correct him.

Nintendo has never said they aren't "cool"

 

Nor did I not say that they weren't cool. I corrected him on his statement that I got the whole "omg Nintendo sux they will dai" from my friends.

 

Nor did I even say that. At all. Plus the implication is there that I am a child and know nothing about the gaming industry.

 

So yeah. that thing.

 

anyway:

 

And once again, I say you're a liar. Nintendo has never shown sign of concern over anything, not even the failed VirtualBoy, which if it had overcome the technical flaws could have been a damn fine system.

 

You can say whatever you want. Browse around at gameinformer or ign; you'll find it.

 

(They have a huge archive so it might take a while)

 

edit: here's one: http://cube.ign.com/articles/582/582843p1.html

 

Other articles have like one sentence things. For example: "while President ________ something something something, he did acknowledge that sales were down and that Nintendo was in a slump blah blah blah"

[Lynk Former]

It think people in this thread have A LOT of misconceptions about Nintendo which need to be addressed. You're looking at this company as if they were another Sony or Microsoft. They aren't. I will explain.

 

 

Hard to say, really. A lot of people feel that way, especially at first, and there is nothing wrong with that. But eventually most people feel they have to upgrade, and the developers want that to happen sooner rather than later. When DVDs came out there were a lot of people who asked why would they switch when they already had their movies on VHS. Now that it is much more difficult to get VHS and most of the best stuff is almost exclusively on DVD, most people have switched. Same with records to tapes to CDs.

Firstly, you're right about this, it does take people awhile to switch over and upgrade. And that is really the point, it takes time, most people don't switch over until the media has been established, in the meantime people will still be playing and buying PS2 games and GCN games even when the PS3 and Revolution are about to be released. It's interesting to note that the N64's sales dropped very suddenly once the GameCube was released but the PS1's sales didn't. Why? Backward compatibility, the fact that people still wanted these "old" games and could play them on the PS2. Yes, I know that it didn't last long and that people did switch over tot he PS2 games pretty quickly, but there was still a great demand. A GREAT demand. When people want a game, they will buy it. If Doom 1 and 2 can be sold in this day and age I think people will buy Twilight Princess by the truckloads eventhough it may be a GameCube game.

 

 

It can hurt their business plan in a few ways. The console and game sales are kind of apples and oranges. Console sales generate a lot more money per unit for starters (even if the overall units sales are not comparible), and they are also ensuring future profit because people are going to buy games for the new system, because even with backwards compatibility at some point people are going to get tired of just playing GC games.

 

Compare this to just the sales Twilight Princess for the GC. Even if the game is popular, the money they make will generate less in the long run than making it exclusive to the Revolution. There maybe more TP units sold in total, but it reduces the console sales and future sales, so in terms of overall revenue it is less. Plus, there is nothing inherent from that to make you buy another Nintendo game. All the profit is short term.

 

Again, this is traditionally how new technology is rolled out, and how companies entice customers to buy it. It is a common business practice to take a short term hit to improve the prospect of even greater revenue down the line. Being in the wireless network business, I can tell you we do exactly the same thing. Game engine designers do the same thing. It isn't really worth it for them to make an engine for just one game cost-wise. But they will take the short term hit to profit because the licensing of it will make them even more money down the line. It is the same in most industries. If that method didn't work, you would see much more technology being backwards compatible. But if they did that, eventually people would feel they have what they need and not buy new stuff.

Like I said at the start of my post, you're looking at Nintendo as if they were Sony or Microsoft. I also love the fact that you're giving Nintendo advice on how they should proceed when in the end they've made more profit than Sony and obviously Microsoft. Nintendo ARE good at what they do, no they're GREAT at what they do. Their tactics confuse people a lot of the time because most of them don't understand it, which is very obvious to someone like me who watches everyone as they get frustrated with Nintendo. But in the end, Nintendo profit, they make tonnes of money, and even if they aren't seen as #1 in the public eye, from a business sense they are #1 because they make a MUCH larger profit than Sony when they seem to do so little compared to Sony.

 

Actually generating money in any sense isn't absolute, it's extremely relative. Just because a game is sold cheaper than other games doesn't mean it won't generate as much revenue. It may be the case where Twilight Princess was cheaper to create, sold MANY units and generated a TONNE of cash compared to a nextgen game of the same calibur.

 

The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures was an extremely cheap game to make, in fact it only cost a few hundred US dollars to make. It sold pretty badly compared to say, Halo 2. But it sold, and it made such a large profit relative to how much the game took to make. Pretty cool huh.

 

 

But that's not what I'm saying. Like any decent system, there are always going to be lots of good games. The point is that in the end Nintendo wants to sell its console, and like every business it will use every opportunity to convince customers to take the plunge and give them their $300. If they think TF is going to help, great. If Super Mario Bros. Revolution is going to help, great. If Metroid Prime 3 is going to help, great.

 

They are going to use all of those to get you to buy the console. Assuming TF lines up with the console release schedule and so on, Nintendu will use it is part of their business plan to get people to transition. It isn't the only incentive they will use, but it can be one. And they will use every incentive at their disposal, including this one if they feel it will help. Happens all the time, everywhere.

This is where people are failing very badly to understand. The Xbox360 is coming out December this year, correct. The PS3 is stated to come out some time in 2006, correct. But most people don't realise that the Revolution will have a end of 2006 release date. It may even be delayed to the start of 2007. Now I know what everyone is going to say now "oh no Nintendo have lost, etc, etc, too late in the game, blah blah, they're gonna fail." If you think that then you should reread my comments about how little people understand Nintendo and their great success.

 

Now continuing on, Twilight Princess will most likely have an April 2006 WORLD WIDE release date. The Revolution will most likely come at the end of 2006 or at the start of 2007. Which gives it almost a year buffer space. Granted that people will be moving on to the Xbox360 and PS3 in this transitional period, but Nintendo isn't actively concerning themselves with Sony and Microsoft, they're heading down a totally different path than their competitors.

 

 

Well, not to split hairs but making money is their #1 priority. And a good way to make the most money possible is to make the game Revolution exclusive, again assuming that development can be made to line up. They want to ensure long term profitability.

You don't know that for a fact though do you seeing as you haven't managed a successful billion dollar company... who everyone seems to doubt but makes bucket loads of money anyway. I do agree that Nintendo could make more money, and yes, seeing as it is a business people think that should be their only goal in these matters. But if it was then they would be just like Sony or Microsoft. And as I keep saying, Nintendo are NOT like Sony and Microsoft. Despite their great profits, Nintendo is committed to furthering gaming through their own unique ways. The goal of Sony and Microsoft is to dominate the market and to consume.

 

 

That's true. A lot of people will feel the same way, which is of course valid. But those feelings are the same every time a new technology comes along to replace an older technology. And every time the company with the new technology does everything it can to get you to switch. And using "exclusives" is one of the most common ways to do that.

Yeah, exactly, and Nintendo have MANY exclusives, more than the other two, and making Twilight Princess a GameCube game won't make it any less exclusive, but it will make it more accessable to whoever owns a GameCube AND Revolution. And yes, Nintendo will want you to switch from the GameCube to the Revolution, but again, I say you're looking at TP as if it was a shining beacon of success where if Nintendo doesn't take advantage they will fail. It isn't, and as I keep saying, Nintendo already has a lineup of OTHER games to attract people to the Revolution. Yet still, you keep persisting that Nintendo will fail without Twilight Princess. And yet again, you're confusing Nintendo with the likes of Sony and Microsoft with those kinds of views. I'm sorry if I'm not interpreting you correctly, but this is how it looks to me.

 

 

Ironically, PC manufacturers do exactly the same thing. "If you want to play this game/use this software/do this thing, you need to be the newest video card/RAM/CPU/motherboard/harddrive to do it! Give us your money!"

 

If they really felt that in general making things backwards compatible to with older systems made more money in the long run, they would all be doing it. They know that isn't the most effective way. They want to see you more stuff, and they can't do that if you feel you have everything you need.

 

However, backwards compatibility can be used as an incentive to switch to their system and not the new XBox or PS. Microsoft seems to feel that the 360 is strong enough not to really need that so much...

And as I keep saying over and over, don't look at Nintendo as all these other companies.

 

 

But they are still in business to make money, right? I mean, they have shareholders and whatnot, and so are required by law to base decisions on the bottom line.

 

This is way to long a post. In the end, I'm not saying that Twilight Princess should or will be put out exclusively for the Revolution. I'm just saying that Nintendo may very well feel that doing so will make them the most money in the long run, and they may very well be right.

Don't make me repeat myself Prime, you so know what I'm going to say since I've said it so many times before already in this post

 

 

Ah ah. Not to correct you, but it's not my friends.

 

The freakin CEO/representative/president whatever has already expressed concern that Rev will not beat Sony.

 

Nintendo probably won't die out. But they need to do something. Revolution yes, is a step in the right direction, but we'll see how far that step takes them.

Don't worry, you didn't correct me, in fact you gave misleading information to try to prove your point. The "freakin CEO," Iwata-san, said that Nintendo won't be competing with Sony and Microsoft because those two companies have gone down a different path from Nintendo. He never expressed any concern about the Revolution not standing up to the PS3, in fact he said that the Revolution will please people who follow Nintendo and it will attract a new breed of gamers, and people who are non-gamers.

 

The general feeling that the Revolution won't beat the PS3 comes from the media. Sorry to correct you like this seeing as you seemed so sure of yourself

 

 

Once again, it's not general public opinion. Nintendo has expressed these concerns at several press conferences, either through small remarks or flat out statements.

 

I could probably look it up if you want. :/

You could look it up if you want so you could reread it and realise that Nintendo was expressing concern about the state of the gaming business, not if they were going to be able to hold up against their "competitors." They feel that Sony and Microsoft are leading gamers down a very destructive path and don't want anything to do with it which is why they are taking steps to create their own path.

 

Other articles have like one word things. For example: "while President ________ something something something, he did acknowledge that sales were down and that Nintendo was in a slump blah blah blah"

[sarcasm]WOW! OMGWTF MEGATON!!!!111 Like no other company in the history of companies has had those concerns before! RUN FOR THE HILLS![/sarcasm]

Sorry lol. But the quote you said was taken very much out of context to support your arguement. It was very much expected that things would slow down in this period. Take a look around but it's slowed down for Sony and Microsoft too. It was expected to.

 

 

That was a long post... any questions? I mean seriously people, I've laughed at many of these posts that have been posted, not because I'm trying to be mean, but because people have some very strange views about Nintendo and think of them as being just like Sony and Microsoft. I'm finally understanding why people are so frustrated with Nintendo now because of this.

[Mike Windu]

[sarcasm]WOW! OMGWTF MEGATON!!!!111 Like no other company in the history of companies has had those concerns before! RUN FOR THE HILLS![/sarcasm]

Sorry lol. But the quote you said was taken very much out of context to support your arguement. It was very much expected that things would slow down in this period. Take a look around but it's slowed down for Sony and Microsoft too. It was expected to.

 

...

 

And once again, I say you're a liar. Nintendo has never shown sign of concern over anything, not even the failed VirtualBoy, which if it had overcome the technical flaws could have been a damn fine system.

 

Which one of you is correct? Neither, imo. That quote was not a direct quote, because I did not have my archive of GI magazines to flip through and find you a quote.

 

I also remember a Nintendo representative speaking about the DS... something like "If the DS doesn't sell then we're out of the market" or something to that effect.

 

Once again, you can find it.

 

I mean seriously people, I've laughed at many of these posts that have been posted, not because I'm trying to be mean, but because people have some very strange views about Nintendo and think of them as being just like Sony and Microsoft. I'm finally understanding why people are so frustrated with Nintendo now because of this.

 

Interestingly enough, I find your posts amusing (and the other fiery N advocates) because you all state that Nintendo is so unique amongst its competitors etc etc and we should love Nintendo for what it is etc etc and always does something different. It's all a bunch of justification to cover up the fact that Nintendo is not doing well in this console war. (Those of you who say that Nintendo is not involved in this console war, well... they are. :/ You put out a console. Someone else puts out a console. Compete for sales etc.

 

I'm all for independent thought, and I do like Nintendo, but numbers just don't add up.

 

If you're free and independent and you sell enough to get you in 2nd or 1st place, then I'm all for that.

 

edit: have been notified that those stats are inaccurate. nevertheless. Nintendo isn't in first place anymore

 

Like I said at the start of my post, you're looking at Nintendo as if they were Sony or Microsoft. I also love the fact that you're giving Nintendo advice on how they should proceed when in the end they've made more profit than Sony and obviously Microsoft. Nintendo ARE good at what they do, no they're GREAT at what they do. Their tactics confuse people a lot of the time because most of them don't understand it, which is very obvious to someone like me who watches everyone as they get frustrated with Nintendo. But in the end, Nintendo profit, they make tonnes of money, and even if they aren't seen as #1 in the public eye, from a business sense they are #1 because they make a MUCH larger profit than Sony when they seem to do so little compared to Sony.

 

Oh gosh Lynk. Please, please bring some knowledge and light to us heathens and pagans who have lived for so long without knowing the TRUTH! ...:/

 

Yeah, Nintendo has made a hell of a lot of profit. But they're not making profit like they used to now that there is something other than Sega Genesis competing against them. I would give advice to Nintendo if I was a consultant. Seeing as how I'm not, and how probably none of us are (if you are, congratulations; you're excluded from this generalization) I can only give my opinion of what is the best logical move for Nintendo to make.

 

The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures was an extremely cheap game to make, in fact it only cost a few hundred US dollars to make. It sold pretty badly compared to say, Halo 2. But it sold, and it made such a large profit relative to how much the game took to make. Pretty cool huh.

 

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

 

[sarcasm] WOW OMG I DID NOT KNOW THAT HOLY CRAP THANK YOU FOR ENLIGHTENING ME WOW I FEEL SO HONORED TO KNOW THAT PIECE OF INFORMATION.[/sarcasm]

 

It generated profit, but not as much as Nintendo/Miyamoto wanted. Which is a shame, cause I really like that guy.

 

"Biggest Dissappointment of all the games he's made:

The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventure (Gamecube) "It's such a great game and just not enough people played it, you know? I just wanted it to sell better."

 

From EGM #195

 

I love Miyamoto. I love his ideas. Four Swords Adventure was cool. Only reason imo that it didn't sell as much as, say... Halo 2. Is because it required use of the gba as a controller to get the full benefit. Why would people want to play a game that would not give them 100% access unless they bought a 70+ dollar gba + 5 dollar cord link?

 

And as I keep saying over and over, don't look at Nintendo as all these other companies.

 

Forgive us, but Nintendo is a gaming company. So is Sony's Playstation branch and Microsoft's XBOX branch. Therefore, Nintendo MUST be considered among those, no matter how free thinking and radical Nintendo may be.

 

(why do Nintendo threads always gather such huge debate? >_>)

[Lynk Former]

I also remember a Nintendo representative speaking about the DS... something like "If the DS doesn't sell then we're out of the market" or something to that effect.

No Nintendo representative has ever said that Mike, but I have heard a lot of people in the media say that.

 

 

Interestingly enough, I find your posts amusing (and the other fiery N advocates) because you all state that Nintendo is so unique amongst its competitors etc etc and we should love Nintendo for what it is etc etc and always does something different. It's all a bunch of justification to cover up the fact that Nintendo is not doing well in this console war. (Those of you who say that Nintendo is not involved in this console war, well... they are. :/ You put out a console. Someone else puts out a console. Compete for sales etc.

I never stated that Nintendo is so unique amongst its competitors, all I'm saying is that Nintendo does its business differently than Microsoft and Sony and has different overall goals. Yes, Nintendo is part of the console war, they're just here to attract a different type of audience. Action movies and comedies are both movies, but they're not necessarily going to attract the same audience. Think about it.

 

Sales

Microsoft: $34.27 billion

Nintendo: $4.26 billion

Sony: $63.23 billion

 

Profits

Microsoft: $8.88 billion

Nintendo: $0.57 billion

Sony: $0.98 billion

 

Assets

Microsoft: $85.94 billion

Nintendo: $9.06 billion

Sony: $68.04 billion

 

Market Value

Microsoft: $287.02 billion

Nintendo: $12.80 billion

Sony: $38.00 billion

 

 

* the following taken from forbes.com

 

Electronic Arts

Sales: $2.82 billion

Profits: $0.50 billion

Assets: $3.34 billion

Market Value: $13.28 billion

 

EA is comparable in size to Nintendo.

 

 

 

Oh gosh Lynk. Please, please bring some knowledge and light to us heathens and pagans who have lived for so long without knowing the TRUTH! ...:/

Whoops, you made a bit of a mistake their, forbes listed Sony and Microsoft as a whole, not by their gaming divisions. And just because they overall make more money than Nintendo doesn't mean 100% of their earnings go into one division.

 

Yeah, Nintendo has made a hell of a lot of profit. But they're not making profit like they used to now that there is something other than Sega Genesis competing against them. I would give advice to Nintendo if I was a consultant. Seeing as how I'm not, and how probably none of us are (if you are, congratulations; you're excluded from this generalization) I can only give my opinion of what is the best logical move for Nintendo to make.

Read what I said above.

 

 

 

I don't need to say anymore than that.

[Mike Windu]

No Nintendo representative has ever said that Mike, but I have heard a lot of people in the media say that.

 

I promise you, someone did.

 

It was in a GI issue I believe.

[Lynk Former]

Sorry they didn't