Is this game over for Sony?

[Lord N]

ookaze said: Those that didn't support it didn't even start supporting the GC. Most went to the PS1 in N64 time, and didn't support the GC from the start, as the PS2 was out already.

EA, Eidos, Namco, Ubisoft. Those same developers continued supporting the Xbox, but stopped with the Gamecube because their titles sold far worse on that platform. This has been well established, and it's why those other devs never started supporting it to begin with.

This is not true at all. It's a mistake to think Nintendo is putting everything on the Wiimote. Their strategy is far better than that. If you don't see it, then perhaps their competitor won't either, which will make their strategy as much more effective. Wiimote is just adressing gameplay and exclusives. Improving the perception of other member of the family about videogames, and more specifically Nintendo consoles, is another. This is more important than you think. There is more of course, like improving the incentive for 3rd party devs to go on Nintendo console. But the family is important, so the word can pass that there's this videogame console that is like no other one. Because you can't show the Wii games like you can show a DS game.

Eric Aston said:Sigh... This is getting highly tedious. You're not going to believe it until you see it, I think. Suffice to say, it isn't about the Wiimote, its about the business plan behind it.

The business plan revolves around the Wiimote. If you take away the Wiimote, then you basically have a Gamecube with online play. Less-than-stellar online play, at that. The Wii without the Wiimote would be a weaker PS3 and 360 just as the Gamecube was a weaker PS2 and Xbox. Developers have even criticized the Wii for its substandard hardware and online service, and that's what these devs would have to work with should the Wiimote novelty wear off.

That's just not true at all. Beside, it's easy for you to say that now. The consensus was completely backwards before Nintendogs really launched the DS. It was said that the DS was a useless gimmick for GBA games.

I'm not saying that the DS would have been as wildly popular without the stylus, but it would have still been successful.

Couldn't be more wrong. Nintendo 1st party titles appealing mostly to kids is a teenage male FPS playing gamer's view. Basically, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Of course they appeal to kids, as they appeal to just about everyone.

It was Nintendo's first-party titles that skewed the Gamecube towards kids. Why do you think the general consensus was that it was a "kiddie console" with "kiddie games"?

As for the support from 3rd parties, I suppose you mean japanese 3rd parties. Because the support from western 3rd parties was really poor, especially compared to the PSP which launched later and had less units. Until after Nintendogs skyrocketed DS numbers, did they go like mad to develop for the DS. But they can't release poor games if they want to sell well now, it's too late. As good games take at least 2 years to make, and the Nintendogs success was just 1 year earlier, you won't see good western games before end of this year. You make excuses now for the gamble Nintendo made, which is easy. You just forgot to portray the spirit of the time, which was that PSP would *destroy* the DS in sales and games would be far better. Nintendo basically disrupted themselves in their best market which is handheld, which is VERY difficult to do, most companies can't do that. And you try to say it wasn't a big challenge or risk ?

I just told you that Nintendo's first party titles would have sold it. It would have been seen as the successor the the GBA(even though that's not what Nintendo originally wanted), and the third parties would have come onboard just as they did with Nintendo's other handhelds. Sony wanted the PSP to specifically target older males whereas the DS has a broader appeal(although most of its userbase is still kids). No points here, really.

Yeah, and you talk exactly like the people that were criticising the DS. I bet you were one of those, but now you're trying to downplay the opposition Nintendo had about the DS. Bitter people about the DS can still be heard today, as they were so wrong, blaming bad or non games (like Nintendogs or Brain Training) and Nintendo destroying their closed elite world. This time around, try to remember your skepticism if the Wii succeeds. You know, like "lack of support from 3rd parties" or "lack of power" or the "fad/trend" which "becomes passe". What's reassuring, is that these are exactly the same criticisms that were made about the DS, and Nintendo already showed once that they understood the market better than these people criticising them.

For your information, I never criticized the DS. I really didn't even care about it(or the PSP) when it first launched, so stop assuming things based on nothing. The rest of this paragraph is just you restating the same thing I replied to in the first place, so I'm not going to waste my time.

The producer of Okami would be even sadder that you prove to him that innovative games have no chance with gamers like you. Well, it's his fault too, as a game like Okami would have had more chances on the Gamecube than the PS2, despite the overwhelming number of PS2. I'm sure it would sell far more on the Wii too. New quality franchises can't always appear from AAA games. These established games are important for the market leader, which gets most of them, and sell thanks to them. But when you're not the leader, you need fresh concepts. Nintendo hope to get these fresh ideas with the Wii, from the small publishers that can't support a loss on a PS3 or XB360 game.

What are you even trying to say here? This doesn't address anything that I've said. [QUOTE Auto fulfilling sentence !! You're saying the reason casual games sell so well on the DS is because they are on the DS. Uh, we didn't learn anything. The reason they sell so well is because Nintendo made its marketing towards those casual gamers, which no one else has ever done in the videogame industry. Except EA with the Sims perhaps. And the games delivered what was marketed, which is even more important.[/QUOTE] No, that's not what I said at all. Seriously.........

Nonsense ! It's Wii Sports that carries this console. You can't understand Wii's success, because you're still stuck in your hardcore FPS gamer's view. You think Zelda:TP is more appealing to casuals than Wii Sports, and can't understand it could be the other way around. You don't even see Nintendo's strategy either, as you couldn't be more wrong on all counts. Zelda DOESN'T compete with Rayman or Elebits or Excite Truck. I told you about catering to 3rd parties. Then I'm sure that had Mario Party been out, Rayman wouldn't have sold. Had Mario Kart been out, Excite Truck (well, that's not 3rd party) wouldn't have sold. Elebits is on a league of its own, but wouldn't have been out with high costs for HD involved.

Why are arguing against a point that I didn't make, and why are you still making retarded assumptions? First of all, I never said that Zelda competed with those games, so that's a strawman argument. Second of all, I don't even play FPS's. So go ahead and feel stupid right about now. Why am I even repying to this? Your posts lack any structure and you don't even really have a point to make. You've done little more than take what Eric said, restate it with different vocabulary words, and then you're using this unfounded assumption that I'm some close-minded, FPS-loving elitist gamer to buttress the rest of your silliness. Erik Aston Those casual games are many times outselling Ninty's traditional franchises. Nintendogs has outsold Mario, Brain Training and Animal Crossing have outsold Mario Kart! 1) Animal Crossing is a Nintendo flagship titles that was established back on the N64. 2) New Super Mario Brothers has outsold Brain Age by almost 2-1. 3) Mario Kart DS has also outsold Brain Age. You are right about Nintendogs, but even that is a first-party title.