By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Should Nintendo launch in 2011-12 starting the next gen with monster power?

 

Should Nintendo launch in 2011-12 starting the next gen with monster power?

Launch in 2011- early 12 ... 115 63.89%
 
Launch in 2011, just larg... 42 23.33%
 
Re-release current Wii in 2011, just with HD 23 12.78%
 
Total:180
axt113 said:
Khuutra said:

What are you talking about? Doki Doki Panic was released in all territories.

The actually Super Mario 2: The Lost Levels didn't sell as well at all in Japan, unless I am mistaken.

But it wasn't called Mario 2 in all territories

Which?

Actually, doesn't matter. Doki Doki Panic was outsold by Super Mario 64 in all the territories where it was called Super Mario Bros. 2, and the actual Lost Levels was outsold in Japan and continues to be outsold in every territory on the planet on the Virtual Console.

His point re: Super Mario Bros. 2 persists regardless of the version you're talking about.

Pardon me for dropping the other line of conversation: I don't tink we're going to get anywhere with that one.



Around the Network

.



Khuutra said:
axt113 said:
Khuutra said:

What are you talking about? Doki Doki Panic was released in all territories.

The actually Super Mario 2: The Lost Levels didn't sell as well at all in Japan, unless I am mistaken.

But it wasn't called Mario 2 in all territories

Which?

Actually, doesn't matter. Doki Doki Panic was outsold by Super Mario 64 in all the territories where it was called Super Mario Bros. 2, and the actual Lost Levels was outsold in Japan and continues to be outsold in every territory on the planet on the Virtual Console.

His point re: Super Mario Bros. 2 persists regardless of the version you're talking about.

Pardon me for dropping the other line of conversation: I don't tink we're going to get anywhere with that one.

Wow, talk about totally missing the boat, my point was, first it wasn't an actual Mario game, it was another game with a Mario mod placed on it, secondly it wasn't even released everywhere at around the same time like most Mario games, and trying to argue that Doki Doki panic was outsold, misses the point of Doki Doki not being a mario game, hence my point about you can't really compare Mario 64 to it and hope to get anything worthwhile.

 

Now Mario 3, Mario 1, Mario world, NSMB DS and Wii, etc. those are games you can compare to Galaxy sunshine and 64



axt113 said:
Khuutra said:

Which?

Actually, doesn't matter. Doki Doki Panic was outsold by Super Mario 64 in all the territories where it was called Super Mario Bros. 2, and the actual Lost Levels was outsold in Japan and continues to be outsold in every territory on the planet on the Virtual Console.

His point re: Super Mario Bros. 2 persists regardless of the version you're talking about.

Pardon me for dropping the other line of conversation: I don't tink we're going to get anywhere with that one.

Wow, talk about totally missing the boat, my point was, first it wasn't an actual Mario game, it was another game with a Mario mod placed on it, secondly it wasn't even released everywhere at around the same time like most Mario games, and trying to argue that Doki Doki panic was outsold, misses the point of Doki Doki not being a mario game, hence my point about you can't really compare Mario 64 to it and hope to get anything worthwhile.

Hence my point that the actual Super Mario Bros. 2 was also outsold by Super Mario 64 in Japan, and then in every territory on the planet on the Virtual Console.

Like I said: his point persists regardless of the version you're talking about.

Edit: Ah, alas, it seems I am wrong concerninig Japan. Pardon me on that point, I should have checked the numbers.



Khuutra said:
axt113 said:
Khuutra said:

Which?

Actually, doesn't matter. Doki Doki Panic was outsold by Super Mario 64 in all the territories where it was called Super Mario Bros. 2, and the actual Lost Levels was outsold in Japan and continues to be outsold in every territory on the planet on the Virtual Console.

His point re: Super Mario Bros. 2 persists regardless of the version you're talking about.

Pardon me for dropping the other line of conversation: I don't tink we're going to get anywhere with that one.

Wow, talk about totally missing the boat, my point was, first it wasn't an actual Mario game, it was another game with a Mario mod placed on it, secondly it wasn't even released everywhere at around the same time like most Mario games, and trying to argue that Doki Doki panic was outsold, misses the point of Doki Doki not being a mario game, hence my point about you can't really compare Mario 64 to it and hope to get anything worthwhile.

Hence my point that the actual Super Mario Bros. 2 was also outsold by Super Mario 64 in Japan, and then in every territory on the planet on the Virtual Console.

Like I said: his point persists regardless of the version you're talking about.

Nope, because again, the lost levels weren't released in the US back in the day, you can argue that it was outsold in Japan, but without having US to compare to (VC doesn't count, because not everyone buys games on VC), your argument still fails, because you don't know how well it would have performed worldwide at the time



Around the Network

SMB 1 sold about 5 times as much as it did in Japan

SMB 3 sold about 3 times as much, so without NA, the comparision you're trying to make is flawed



axt113 said:
Khuutra said:

Hence my point that the actual Super Mario Bros. 2 was also outsold by Super Mario 64 in Japan, and then in every territory on the planet on the Virtual Console.

Like I said: his point persists regardless of the version you're talking about.

Nope, because again, the lost levels weren't released in the US back in the day, you can argue that it was outsold in Japan, but without having US to compare to (VC doesn't count, because not everyone buys games on VC), your argument still fails, because you don't know how well it would have performed worldwide at the time

Ignoring the fact that I allowed for better sales in Japan - actually, I don't have to. You just said that performance in one territory doesn't matter, even if that selfsame territory has had 2D lead 3D in every other case?

You backpedal too quickly off of this. I think it clear that yo uare only holding to data sets so long as they fit your point: at least I go so far as to admit when I'm wrong, and say as much in my posts.

You're not actually interested in a discussion. You're interested in repeating the same talking points over and over, committing the debate equivalent of covering your ears and shouting when the other person is talking to you. You will not budge from your point regardless of the reason shown to you, and you insist that the other person "fails" with every post.

I had thought that this would end amicably, but speaking with you has been a markedly unpleasant experience and I will endeavour not to engage you in a discussion again. Come find me when you're willing to talk with someone, rather than talk at them, and we can get somewhere.



Khuutra said:
axt113 said:
Khuutra said:

Hence my point that the actual Super Mario Bros. 2 was also outsold by Super Mario 64 in Japan, and then in every territory on the planet on the Virtual Console.

Like I said: his point persists regardless of the version you're talking about.

Nope, because again, the lost levels weren't released in the US back in the day, you can argue that it was outsold in Japan, but without having US to compare to (VC doesn't count, because not everyone buys games on VC), your argument still fails, because you don't know how well it would have performed worldwide at the time

Ignoring the fact that I allowed for better sales in Japan - actually, I don't have to. You just said that performance in one territory doesn't matter, even if that selfsame territory has had 2D lead 3D in every other case?

You backpedal too quickly off of this. I think it clear that yo uare only holding to data sets so long as they fit your point: at least I go so far as to admit when I'm wrong, and say as much in my posts.

You're not actually interested in a discussion. You're interested in repeating the same talking points over and over, committing the debate equivalent of covering your ears and shouting when the other person is talking to you. You will not budge from your point regardless of the reason shown to you, and you insist that the other person "fails" with every post.

I had thought that this would end amicably, but speaking with you has been a markedly unpleasant experience and I will endeavour not to engage you in a discussion again. Come find me when you're willing to talk with someone, rather than talk at them, and we can get somewhere.

No, what I said was looking at games that only released in one territory, and comparing it to a game that released ww, isn't going to give you an accurate view of sales.

Who is backpedaling, I an pointing out that your argument is flawed, you say that you can admit that you are wrong, well, can you prove it

No, sorry, I'm not the one trying to twist the facts to make my argument work, you keep trying to argue about games that weren't actual mario games, or that didn't see the light of day outside Japan until the VC, and I'm comparing games that were on an even footing, I haven't needed to twist my data to make it work, so yeah, when you actually want to argue in reality, you know where I am.



hsrob said:
Mazty said:
hsrob said:
Mazty said:

Well you could make the argument against the PS3, apart from the fact the term shovelware came from the junk games produced on mass for the wii...
Yes it is a hypothetical argument, but one rooted in, as i said, surveys which suggest many wii owners do not tend to play on their consoles for an amount of time that a serious gamer would.
Problem is the install base, as I've been saying, may not be interested in another console, because they are content with what the wii offers. Clearly they did not want good graphics (360 and PS3 provide better) or media playback, or even a remote that worked 'well' (180ms lag), so why would they buy a better console if they are happy with dated graphics and a laggy pad?

Yes again this is hypothetical, but not something that should just be dismissed as the above point shows that wii owners have not got a want for high quality, therefore why buy a better Wii?

You are making judgements about the quality of Wii games and assumptions about Wii owners which you can't back up and which I would argue don't even matter.  You may not appreciate many of Wii's offerings and you are entitled to your opinion but this 'quality' doesn't speak to the buying habits of the people who play Wii games or their likelihood of supporting Nintendo's new console.  You are using soft data (surveys?) which suggest that these people don't play their games much but in the end it doesn't matter one bit as long as they buy games, and by extension, hardware.

The only hard data we have is attach rate. You are right that the attach rate doesn't mean much when you take a snapshot but (and you'll have to take my word for this if you are new to the site) the Wii's attach rate has been rising for over 3.5 years which tells us that it's established users and new users are continuing to buy games in significant numbers.  Once again it doesn't matter if they only play each game for 5 minutes, the point is they are willing to hand their hard earned over to Nintendo /andor it's third parties.  So what about the behaviour of these people makes you so sure they won't continue to spend their money on Nintendo in the next generation? 

The only data we have says they have been willing to buy games and continue to buy games, which strongly suggest thats they have so far been happy with the products they have purchased and are willing to spend money.  I'm not saying this guarantees their future loyalty to Nintendo or their gaming habit, but why are you so sure that it doesn't.

 

Well let's look at thte facts of the wii and what a new one could offer:
The wii is technically very dated. The games are graphically dated and AI is not going to be impressive compared to the rest of the market.
The pad response time is about 180ms meaning the owners are not concerned about a responsive pad, nor is it 1:1 without motion +.

What could a new console offer that could entice people who clearly are not bothered about graphics or tech as they have the wii to begin with?

If they wanted cheap gaming they'd have chosen the xbox. If they wanted hardcore games, xbox or PS3. If they wanted state of the art graphics/bluray they'd have gone for the PS3.

So again, what could a new console possibly offer to these people who dont care about graphics, tech or media?

You brought up this figure so many times in this thread I thought I'd look it up.  I have no idea where you came across this figure but I did come across this article which addresses the general topic of controller lag and lag in console games.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-console-lag-round-two-article?page=3

In case you don't feel like reading it, lag of 100ms-150ms is not unusual even in the biggest and best FPS shooters available for the HD consoles.

 

I got the lag of the wii pad from the same sight so have a look. Fact is the wii latency is a good 5 frames higher than other games. <100ms is acceptable (work with what's acceptable for lag) but 180ms or even 250ms? Far, far too high. No onw would play a game with that kind of ping.

http://www.ozymandias.com/comments-on-wii-controller-latency

If you've played most of those games with high lag, you should know that the controls being slightly unresponsive is a usual complaint, especially for killzone 2 and mirrors edge.



Mazty said:
hsrob said:
Mazty said:
hsrob said:
Mazty said:

Well you could make the argument against the PS3, apart from the fact the term shovelware came from the junk games produced on mass for the wii...
Yes it is a hypothetical argument, but one rooted in, as i said, surveys which suggest many wii owners do not tend to play on their consoles for an amount of time that a serious gamer would.
Problem is the install base, as I've been saying, may not be interested in another console, because they are content with what the wii offers. Clearly they did not want good graphics (360 and PS3 provide better) or media playback, or even a remote that worked 'well' (180ms lag), so why would they buy a better console if they are happy with dated graphics and a laggy pad?

Yes again this is hypothetical, but not something that should just be dismissed as the above point shows that wii owners have not got a want for high quality, therefore why buy a better Wii?

You are making judgements about the quality of Wii games and assumptions about Wii owners which you can't back up and which I would argue don't even matter.  You may not appreciate many of Wii's offerings and you are entitled to your opinion but this 'quality' doesn't speak to the buying habits of the people who play Wii games or their likelihood of supporting Nintendo's new console.  You are using soft data (surveys?) which suggest that these people don't play their games much but in the end it doesn't matter one bit as long as they buy games, and by extension, hardware.

The only hard data we have is attach rate. You are right that the attach rate doesn't mean much when you take a snapshot but (and you'll have to take my word for this if you are new to the site) the Wii's attach rate has been rising for over 3.5 years which tells us that it's established users and new users are continuing to buy games in significant numbers.  Once again it doesn't matter if they only play each game for 5 minutes, the point is they are willing to hand their hard earned over to Nintendo /andor it's third parties.  So what about the behaviour of these people makes you so sure they won't continue to spend their money on Nintendo in the next generation? 

The only data we have says they have been willing to buy games and continue to buy games, which strongly suggest thats they have so far been happy with the products they have purchased and are willing to spend money.  I'm not saying this guarantees their future loyalty to Nintendo or their gaming habit, but why are you so sure that it doesn't.

 

Well let's look at thte facts of the wii and what a new one could offer:
The wii is technically very dated. The games are graphically dated and AI is not going to be impressive compared to the rest of the market.
The pad response time is about 180ms meaning the owners are not concerned about a responsive pad, nor is it 1:1 without motion +.

What could a new console offer that could entice people who clearly are not bothered about graphics or tech as they have the wii to begin with?

If they wanted cheap gaming they'd have chosen the xbox. If they wanted hardcore games, xbox or PS3. If they wanted state of the art graphics/bluray they'd have gone for the PS3.

So again, what could a new console possibly offer to these people who dont care about graphics, tech or media?

You brought up this figure so many times in this thread I thought I'd look it up.  I have no idea where you came across this figure but I did come across this article which addresses the general topic of controller lag and lag in console games.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-console-lag-round-two-article?page=3

In case you don't feel like reading it, lag of 100ms-150ms is not unusual even in the biggest and best FPS shooters avail able for the HD consoles.

 

I got the lag of the wii pad from the same sight so have a look. Fact is the wii latency is a good 5 frames higher than other games. <100ms is acceptable (work with what's acceptable for lag) but 180ms or even 250ms? Far, far too high. No onw would play a game with that kind of ping.

http://www.ozymandias.com/comments-on-wii-controller-latency

If you've played most of those games with high lag, you should k now that the controls being slightly unresponsive is a usual complaint, especially for killzone 2 and mirrors edge.

lol.  You realize that blog article you're linking to is from July 2006 right?  And it's only recalling the author's E3 2006 experience, meaning he was playing on at best beta software (Red Steel at that, bizarf!) and with test hardware?  And still, there's no source for your 180ms figure?