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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - UNITY - Nintendo & Wii U Finish The REVOLUTION

Yuukiwr on 29 November 2013
ps4tw said:
Dv8thwonder said:

Always posting within minutes of each other how odd.


and here comes the conspiracy theory. How about more than one person things your being unreasonable? 

you have to accept trough that you wont find anyone who really takes you serious here, with such a user name ;)



Around the Network
justinian on 29 November 2013

It is going to take a miracle, Lucas. I hope you have a damn good speech ready on the 1st January 2014.
That's the problem with predictions. Most people get them wrong but they can hide when their forecast proves to be rubbish. But you can't. Those same people are also quickly forgotten. You won't.

I don't know if to applaud or ridicule your stubborn stance.

Either way it's a shame the thread has gone so childish in many ways. Oh well, that can't be help.



justinian on 29 November 2013
pezus said:
justinian said:
It is going to take a miracle, Lucas. I hope you have a damn good speech ready on the 1st January 2014.
That's the problem with predictions. Most people get them wrong but they can hide when their forecast proves to be rubbish. But you can't. Those same people are also quickly forgotten. You won't.

I don't know if to applaud or ridicule your stubborn stance.

Either way it's a shame the thread has gone so childish in many ways. Oh well, that can't be help.

It was never really a prediction. More like false hope

Yes, I suppose one can view it that way. I still rather call it a prediction.

To dash one's prediction is one thing. To dash one's false hopes however....



Zod95 on 30 November 2013
johnlucas said:

 

John, it's pointless to debate with you. You simply ignore some of my arguements and just focus on what is convinient for you to talk about. For example, when I say Nintendo isn't able to leave Mario and Zelda, you have no answer for that. If you could, you would say no dev does such thing. But you can't, since I gave you already examples of devs doing so.

When I talk about great games that were 0% inspired on Nintendo games, you just ignore that they are great games and that they were not inspired on Nintendo games. You say for example that Crysis and LA Noire didn't sell well, as if their sales were making them worse games.

When I talk about the fact that Nintendo avoids large investments or ambitious game concepts, you just ignore that too to only talk about how smart and competent and successful they are.

...and so on. There's no way I can debate with you as long as you keep this lunatic behaviour. It's just pointless.

Even in matters as simple as grammar, you fail to see reality. Look:

1 - I said "Nintendo avoids everything that is either massive money spending (which would dramatically lower their ROI's) or monsters of uncontrolled quality detail such as MMO and game expandable by users (which would demand much more effort in order to receive good critic scores)."

2 - You understood this: "So Nintendo should spend massive money in order to receive good critic scores"

3 - I told you: "Don't twist my sentence. There's a "or" that separates those 2 different subjects, so they're not cause & effect.". In fact, my sentence was: Nintendo...that is either...(which...) or...(which...). See: "Nintendo avoids everything that is either massive money spending (which would dramatically lower their ROI's) or monsters of uncontrolled quality detail such as MMO and game expandable by users (which would demand much more effort in order to receive good critic scores).". Is it hard to understand that I'm talking about 2 different things (separated by a "or") that are not cause & effect??

4 - I guess so, since you replied: "Nobody's twisting your words. What you said is clear to everyone. You just didn't like how I dismantled your argument.". Hopeless...

 

You are being demolished by Seece regarding prediction numbers. You have no answers to my arguments proving Nintendo is far from being the most commited dev to gamers. Your OP is becoming pointless in every sense. I think now it's just useful to you and the people that share your fanatism.



Prediction made in 14/01/2014 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 100M      XOne: 70M      WiiU: 25M

Prediction made in 01/04/2016 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 100M      XOne: 50M      WiiU: 18M

Prediction made in 15/04/2017 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 90M      XOne: 40M      WiiU: 15M      Switch: 20M

Prediction made in 24/03/2018 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 110M      XOne: 50M      WiiU: 14M      Switch: 65M

Zod95 on 30 November 2013
Final-Fan said:

At first I was disagreeing with your definition of quality.  And strictly speaking, I do.  But it seems to me that the point you're driving at in the first paragraph is that "quality" is "what gamers like to play", and that's something I can work with.  More on this later.  (If you disagree with that assessment, then perhaps you should look at the above text in strikethrough and see if it is a better response.) 

You say that reviewers sometimes give good scores to little-played games, which you appear to be claiming is a sign that the their reviews reflect an opinion of game "quality" (as defined above) not shared by most gamers, because all gamers have their own personal and different judgments of game quality.  Although technically speaking "consensus" in the sense of 100% agreement can't be achieved in judging game quality, I believe we certainly can and do have collective majority opinions which can be identified, and it's not slim majorities either.  Generally these judgments are hashed out among people who like the type or genre of game that is in question, i.e. people who only play FPSes will contribute to the collective judgment of FPSes and not, say, LittleBigPlanet. 

I understand your desire to do something a little more scientific, to try to identify certain measurable properties that games have, but the problem is that at the end of the day your objective is to tell how "good" the games are.  That is by definition a question of quality.  Your criteria only muddied the waters by introducing bias for the types of games that happen to have more of the specific things you chose to measure, out of all the possible choices; and your method also inherently has bias against games that are stronger in qualities that have less association with numbers that can be easily quantified.  (I continue to disagree that a great in-game story doesn't reflect time and effort on the part of the developer, and you have yet to really say anything to back up this claim.)  And ignoring quality carries its own risks, which you acknowledged with the idea of the game that had a million empty square miles of playable area, or a thousand cookie cutter characters that didn't really add to gameplay. 

Spare me your list.  Aside from what I said above, it is heavily disputed; you don't want to continue that debate, which is fine, but you don't get to turn around and act like those numbers are not in dispute.  (Side note:  johnlucas was kind enough to point out the game WarioWare DIY which indisputably fills the content creation/sharing, and you make your own minigames which is analogous to making your own levels.  But we aren't debating that any more )

Back to "what gamers like to play".  There is a very easy way to measure this.  It's not perfect but it should be pretty good, on average, if we take certain things into account.  It's called SALES.  I think that there are plenty of games that fans of the genre who played them would agree are great games which don't have great sales; this can be attributed to the following reasons. 
1—Type.  If the genre or type or style of game is not as popular, even though people who like that type of game like that particular game, there are not as many people who like that type of game in the first place, so less overall people will buy it. 
2—Cost.  People will pay more for a thing they like more; if a thing costs less, more people will buy it even if they like it less.  So cheap games can sell more than more expensive games that are more well-liked. 
3—Knowledge.  If there is poor marketing, not as many people will be aware of the game that they would like, and they will lack the opportunity to buy it. 
4—Availability.  If people don't have the platform, they can't play the game.  This overlaps with cost.  Games on platforms people already own (such as computers) have a lower cost than games that require the purchase of a console.  However, people can spread the cost of the console between all the games on it they want to buy, so they are likely to buy a console that has a lot of games of types they like, especially if the games aren't available on computers. 

If we keep those factors in mind, we should be able to use sales as a good way to judge the collective opinion of all gamers as to how the "quality" of various games, in the eyes of the ENTIRE population, and not just the fans of that type of game.  Therefore it is a more objective measure than if we were to rely on the opinions of people who like game type A telling people who like game type B about how good game A1 is, especially if people are arguing about whether game A1 is better than game B1. 

Going by the sales of games with similar cost that had good marketing, Nintendo games have high quality.  This compares Nintendo games with Sony games and Microsoft games, by an objective measurement.  Nintendo games actually often continue to sell well at full price at times when the Sony/MS games would have long since been given price cuts!  Remember, higher cost means people have to like it more in order to buy it than if it had a lower cost. 

It's impossible to gather consensus even if you group people by game genre's tastes. For example, my favourite racing games (from 1st best to 6th best) are TrackMania United, Midnight Club 2, Crashday, Project Gotham Racing 4, Vanishing Point, MotorStorm Pacific Rift and TOCA Race Driver 3. No Gran Turismo, no Forza, no Need For Speed, no Burnout, no Mario Kart. No game had more than 90 in Metacritic and no one sold more than 2 million units. Who in the world shares this same taste? I guess no one...and very very few lists would be even close to mine. Maybe, and only maybe, if we had every quality game list racing fans we could aggregate the values and get at the end a list of the highest quality racing games. But we don't.

As for my final goal, it's not to tell what are the best games (I'm not that arrogant) but just to give clues about where they might be and, above all, which might be the most commited devs to this industry that I love. I don't feel comfortable when I see a poorly commited company like Nintendo to be so praised by people that comment on forums (who should be the most informed ones). Like I said earlier, I find Nintendo to be quite competent...it's their attitude that I hate. My desire regarding Nintendo is that they either change their attitude towards gamers or that they fail in the videogaming business (to give more space to who is really commited). This is not a matter of tastes, this is a matter of respecting the industry and putting the gamer first. And don't come up with the argument that all companies are here to make money because, although that's true, I see a lot of different between Zumba Fitness makers and Valve. Money isn't everything and only some devs have the heart to see that and the artistic value and willingness to invest to demonstrate it. Again, I'm not talking about tastes. Neither Majesco nor Valve have games in my personal top quality list. But I'm not blind. I can see different attitude, different behaviour and different achievements between those companies.

Regarding sales being a criteria to measure quality, that fails miserably. You have already listed 4 reasons why that wouldn't work, but there are more. I will not waste my time listing them. The bottom line is that sales can only tell you about the gamers' expectations, once they occur before the gamer experiencing the product. By the way, this made me laugh: "Going by the sales of games with similar cost that had good marketing, Nintendo games have high quality".



Prediction made in 14/01/2014 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 100M      XOne: 70M      WiiU: 25M

Prediction made in 01/04/2016 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 100M      XOne: 50M      WiiU: 18M

Prediction made in 15/04/2017 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 90M      XOne: 40M      WiiU: 15M      Switch: 20M

Prediction made in 24/03/2018 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 110M      XOne: 50M      WiiU: 14M      Switch: 65M

Around the Network
Incubi on 30 November 2013

Anecdotal report from one of Nintendo's flagship retail partners suggest both WiiU(not enough consumer interest) and PS4(stock not being replenished in time) have missed Black Friday sales craze in NA.

On the games console side, X360 and Nintendo 3DS looks to be the big winners at Target. Basically, we can perhaps prepare for best and worse when it comes to Nintendo products when the numbers from the week ending nov 30 is published. It will have Nintendo 3DS as the clear winner followed by X360. 

http://venturebeat.com/2013/11/29/apples-ipad-comes-out-a-big-winner-on-black-friday/



Seece on 30 November 2013

Top Sellers Across The Country
From coast to coast, yesterday’s top sellers at Walmart – in stores and online – were big screen televisions, the iPad mini, laptops, XBOX ONE, PS4 and Call of Duty Ghosts

Walmart Black Friday.



 

Incubi on 30 November 2013
Seece said:
Top Sellers Across The Country
From coast to coast, yesterday’s top sellers at Walmart – in stores and online – were big screen televisions, the iPad mini, laptops, XBOX ONE, PS4 and Call of Duty Ghosts

Walmart Black Friday.

Link please. From what i see Nintendo 3DS is in Walmarts best selling list at number 9. Its the highest selling game system followed by WiiU at number 11. 



Seece on 30 November 2013
Incubi said:
Seece said:
Top Sellers Across The Country
From coast to coast, yesterday’s top sellers at Walmart – in stores and online – were big screen televisions, the iPad mini, laptops, XBOX ONE, PS4 and Call of Duty Ghosts

Walmart Black Friday.

Link please. From what i see Nintendo 3DS is in Walmarts best selling list at number 9. Its the highest selling game system followed by WiiU at number 11. 

http://news.walmart.com/news-archive/2013/11/29/black-friday-shoppers-have-spoken-walmart-delivers-biggest-shopping-day-of-the-season



 

Incubi on 30 November 2013
Seece said:
Incubi said:
Seece said:
Top Sellers Across The Country
From coast to coast, yesterday’s top sellers at Walmart – in stores and online – were big screen televisions, the iPad mini, laptops, XBOX ONE, PS4 and Call of Duty Ghosts

Walmart Black Friday.

Link please. From what i see Nintendo 3DS is in Walmarts best selling list at number 9. Its the highest selling game system followed by WiiU at number 11. 

http://news.walmart.com/news-archive/2013/11/29/black-friday-shoppers-have-spoken-walmart-delivers-biggest-shopping-day-of-the-season

So much for their best-seller list. Even at Wal-Mart which traditionally is Nintendo territory did PS4 and Xbox One end up as winners on Black Friday according to this press release. However, you did leave this little bit out from the Walmart quote:

"In addition, hand-held video games and SLR digital cameras were some of the most popular items on Walmart.com.

I'm guessing they're refering to the Nintendo 3DS and not the Vita:D

Edit: I expect all hardware manufacturers to issue press releases to the media next week making their spin on sales numbers(Like they do every year). Nintendo releases their BF figures through PR / interviews with USAToday and CNET on Monday. Gonna be interesting:)