Next-Gen Console Bosses On Competitors

[ENU291]

Nintendo reminds me of Apple. 2 companies with some real potential and great IP but their antiquated business model and stubbornness to change holds them back from becoming true leaders in their fields. Nintendo stockholders need to make some management changes before Nintendo goes under.

[sytaylor]

Originally Posted by Edge

Number of polygons mean nothing. There is simply no debate: the N64 was graphically more powerful than the PS1. It had far more features (texture filtering, perspective correction, anti-aliasing) and was faster under REAL-WORLD situations (the polygons per second number on the PS1 "fact" sheet is untextured and unlit...when's the last time you saw a polygon in a game that didn't have textures or lighting applied to it?). As far as what games looked best, I don't think anything on the PS1 or Saturn can come close to Conker's Bad Fur Day. That game used more effects and had better backgrounds and character models than anyone would've thought possible on a previous generation machine. And surprisingly, it didn't even use the RAM expansion pack. But obviously, the N64's limitation wasn't due to graphics technology, but storage space. But I don't think that's something that makes one console more "powerful" than the other, unless you're going by the graphic quality of FMVs and pre-rendered backgrounds.

There is an argument for quake on the Saturn being impressive, since the saturn was essentially dual core it was one of the only games to ever really tap into that potential.

There were other n64 games that looked great, Turok 2 IMO was unsurpassed in its generation on consoles (well those first few levels anyway). I have to say though I miss cartridges, they felt like a game. You could drop it, slap it around, throw it downstairs and it still worked. It felt meaty, and "right". Wheras the somewhat flimsy CD drive on the PS always felt dirty to me.

[rek075]

Nintendo is still the top innovator of the gaming industry. The only thing that Sony seems to have brought to the table is loading times and hardware that breaks easily (unless you consider having a console sideways innovation). Listening to CDs and watching DVDs on your console is cool, but is it really GAMING innovation or is it a game machine trying to be more than one thing? I think the latter.

All of you thinking Nintendo's decisions are stupid have no clue. Miyamoto never wanted games that had load times, which is why they stuck with cartridge format for so long. Thank goodness too - I would never want to have to wait when I want to play games. I can't believe so many people can put up with this. When Gamecube went with optical storage, Nintendo made sure that there wouldn't be load times for the players.

Sony has won their fans through great marketing and 3rd party support.

Nintendo is not an innovator, They have rehashed the same games for 10 years now... Zelda just recently is changing its over all story and mechanics... Even though OOT went 3D it basically was the same thing as "A Link to The Past". Sony brought us also mature gaming, Nintendo has very very few games for adults.

Nintendos decisions are STUPID, They avoided CDs which are superior to Carts, Sure they have loading but they are CHEAPER (Did you like paying $60+ for Conkers and Zelda64?) and have the ability to hold ALOT more data. The Sound quality and video quality is also superior, why do you think Nintendos strongest ally (Square) turned thier back on them, Nintendo is living in the past. They think they can tell gamers what they want to play.

Look they claimed that Players don't want a system that can play Music CDs and DVD Movies yet guess what sales AND polls show that THEY DO WANT IT. Sure its good to stick to your roots but you also have to change with the times. Gamecube has load times, they are quicker then most consoles but they are still there. Heck some games have horrible load times.

Also how do you think Sony got such a strong 3rd Party Support? They appealed to the developers, When the PSX released Developers were allowed to create whatever game they wished they did not need approval from Sony, Sony has a very lax QA for titles, a Developer could release a stick figure game as long as Sony still recieves royalties. Why do you think the PSX had over a thousand titles? The PSX was also one of the first consoles that developers/publishers were allowed to press thier own titles, They didn't have to send a gold master to Sony to have it pressed like Nintendo forced upon with thier systems (kind like what Sony does with the PSP). A developer HAD to send the titles to Nintendo to have they manufactured and I think theys till do.

Honestly if Sony hadn't come into the Game industry I don't think consoles would be so advance, heck I bet we would just now be entering 128bit if that. Sony forced Sega and Nintendo to research better technology, without Sony both would be the only players because I dout MS would have been interested without seeing Sony coming in out of nowhere and dominating...

You should thank Sony if anything...

[Vagrant Zero]

Originally Posted by rek075

Sony has won their fans through great marketing and 3rd party support.

3rd party support? *GASP!* How utterly underhanded and evil of Sony. We should burn the heathens for their marketing practices as they are an afront to our god, the wise and all-powerful, The Great Ninnie!

[six_storm]

Magus, I agree with you to a certain extent. Sony has brought gaming consoles a long way yes. Nintendo not being innovative? I think Nintendo has done some pretty cool things over the past 10-20 years. They did invent the "rumbling" in our average everyday controllers. Really, they were the first. I believe that Nintendo did very well with consoles like NES, SNES, and N64 but kinda flopped with the GameCube and DS. They also flopped by going with the mini-CD or DVD instead of normal size DVDs. I know a lot of people that don't own DVD players but use their consoles to watch movies all the time.

Nintendo is not stupid, they just have a different focus than Sony or M$. They've done very well with selling their games and with the new Revolution being able to play ANY NES, SNES, N64 etc game, they are going to make a pretty good amount of money with it.

[rek075]

Using the same characters and themes in new games is not rehashing. By the same token Konami, Capcom, Squaresoft, and many more would be lumped in the same boat. Heck, Sony keeps making Grand Turismo's. Soon they'll be "rehashing" for 10 years as well. But they have done much more that this. Analog sticks, rumble features, connectivity, touch pads. I was referring to innovation of ways games are played and the type of games.

Originally Posted by rek075

Using the same characters and themes in new games is not rehashing. By the same token Konami, Capcom, Squaresoft, and many more would be lumped in the same boat. Heck, Sony keeps making Grand Turismo's. Soon they'll be "rehashing" for 10 years as well. But they have done much more that this. Analog sticks, rumble features, connectivity, touch pads. I was referring to innovation of ways games are played and the type of games.

Wow someone completly missed my point, When I said rehashing I ment taking something already excisting and doing nothing but turning it 3D. Thats what they did with Zelda, and since then Zelda has stayed the same.

This recent interview with Miyamoto basically says Nintendo is doomed this generation aswell...

http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/02/comm...ming/index.htm

"There's not a lot I want to play now," he told me recently. "A lot of the games out there are just too long. Of course, there are games, such as 'Halo' or 'Grand Theft Auto,' that are big and expansive. But if you're not interested in spending that time with them, you're not going to play."

Nintendo keeps thinking internally rather then what the consumer wants, what does every review and player complain about on many games? It's length and guess why? They want LONGER games, People are tired of games only lasting 10-20 hours and then having no reason to play it again, we WANT replay.

Sure short mini games are good for a quick fix but many (most) want longer games with alot of depth in the story and enviroments, Hell I thought that was the reason for newer and better technology... to expand our virtual enviroments, not limit them.

"The Revolution will use cutting edge technology, but it's ultimately about how that technology is used," he said. "We asked ourselves 'why would a family need or want to have a gaming console?' The answer is what's driving development of the Revolution."

Basically right here is what turns me off, They still see gaming consoles as a toy, not entertainment. They also still see most of the gamers as children when this is not true. The majority of gamers now are older kids/teens, The average playstation owner is around 18, This is why nintendo is failing. They are aiming for the minority, Times have changed yet they have not adapted to the change.

Nintendo needs a serious kick in the ass...