Gamecube Discontinued - Game Over?

[NE146]

http://www.msnbc.com/news/949543.asp?0dm=C21BT&cp1=1 :hmm:

[Oobgarm]

But he cast doubt on the ability of Nintendo’s competitors to continue attracting users with games that are becoming more and more graphically sophisticated and difficult to play.
“Games that are sophisticated require a lot of time and energy,” he said. As games became more complicated, players were given up playing and this was leading to the gradual shrinkage of the market, he warned.

Nintendo will continue on the path they're on if they keep thinking that way, and that path will lead them to failure. Simple games might have been the only way to go in the past due to technology limitations, but with such advanced hardware, "sophisticated" games are becoming, or already have become, the standard. Look at the top selling games over the past few years. Look at the evolution of Nintendo's flagship titles since their debuts on their respective consoles. The more evolved technology gets, the more games will mimic real life.

The gradual shrinking of the market can be directly linked to the fact that there's too little AAA quality software.

Seems that Iwata has a little bit of Yamauchi in him, no?

[congobongo]

I agree with Mr. Iwata. I think many (not all) games HAVE gotten too complicated. Seems as though the masses disagree though.

[Oobgarm]

I agree with Mr. Iwata. I think many (not all) games HAVE gotten too complicated. Seems as though the masses disagree though.

It really depends on what camp you fall in.

Retrogamers, who rarely play post-NES systems, would agree with that statement. Not that their view is wrong or anything, but when you're used to a particular type of game, that's what you base your judgement off of.

Folks like myself, who enjoy playing pre-NES systems, but spend a good bulk of their game playing with the newer systems, see things in a different light. We've played the games during their evolution and their "complicatedness" seems like a natural progression to us.

Not attacking anyone here, just making an observation.

[chadtower]

Look at it this way... I am a retrogamer for sure. It's not because that's what I grew up with and that's what I'm used to. I'd love to play through Metroid Prime and about a hundred other recent games BUT I DON'T HAVE TIME. I can't spend 60 hours playing a game, that would conservatively take me 4 months. That's why I don't have a gamecube, ps2, or xbox. If there were more less intensive games for these systems I would be a lot more tempted to buy one. They could still be very pretty and have great sound but do they really need to consume a month's worth of my available gaming time just to learn? I am the type of consumer they'd do well to attract, too. I'm the type that spends $300/month on games...

[YoshiM]

I agree with Mr. Iwata. I think many (not all) games HAVE gotten too complicated. Seems as though the masses disagree though.

It really depends on what camp you fall in.

Retrogamers, who rarely play post-NES systems, would agree with that statement. Not that their view is wrong or anything, but when you're used to a particular type of game, that's what you base your judgement off of.

Folks like myself, who did have some exposure to the pre-NES systems, but got a good bulk of their game playing in during the heyday of the PSX, see things in a different light. We've played the games during their evolution and their "complicatedness" seems like a natural progression to us.

Not attacking anyone here, just making an observation.

Your Retrogamer classification is pretty broad, don't you think? At what time period does a system become worthy of getting "retrogaming" status? I know places like VGB call it NeoClassic gaming (or something along those lines) but it's still retro no matter how you slice it.

But as you said, the games' evolution included complexity. Nature of the beast. Hell, remember the INTV or the Coleco or even the Odyssey with their keypads/keyboards back in the day. If Iwata thinks games are complex now, he hasn't looked to the past. It's a different ball game now, like or dislike, immersing the player into the game is what is popular and it IS fun. While I can't play a sports game well to save my soul, I can't think of a better football game or basketball game that had fewer buttons than the SNES. The latest craze of stealth games need some level of complexity (may it be controller or gameplay) to pull things off.

Now Iwata doesn't really specify what he really means by complexity. The gameplay, the controller or making the game? If it's the graphics and making the game, that's what the people want as a large bulk of the audience jumped on when the PS1 was popular thanks to the draw of polygons. PCs were going this route a few years before the PS1. So Nintendo can either evolve in the console market or die. They can talk about going back to roots, but if the primary cash flow (mainstream market) doesn't latch on.....

[Oobgarm]

I'd love to play through Metroid Prime and about a hundred other recent games BUT I DON'T HAVE TIME. I can't spend 60 hours playing a game, that would conservatively take me 4 months.

Man, I hear you loud and clear. I don't have a lot of time to play anymore, and most recent games to demand a certain amount of time commitment. Unfortunately, that time I used to set aside for gaming is now consumed by other things. That's why I've been enjoying stuff like Wario Ware on GBA, an excellent pick-up-and-play game, and even getting back into some of the older classics I've neglected. If a newer game is good wnough to hook me in, though, I'll play it through until the end. Those games are getting fewer and fewer, though.... :/

[Oobgarm]

Your Retrogamer classification is pretty broad, don't you think? At what time period does a system become worthy of getting "retrogaming" status? I know places like VGB call it NeoClassic gaming (or something along those lines) but it's still retro no matter how you slice it.

But as you said, the games' evolution included complexity. Nature of the beast. Hell, remember the INTV or the Coleco or even the Odyssey with their keypads/keyboards back in the day. If Iwata thinks games are complex now, he hasn't looked to the past. It's a different ball game now, like or dislike, immersing the player into the game is what is popular and it IS fun. While I can't play a sports game well to save my soul, I can't think of a better football game or basketball game that had fewer buttons than the SNES. The latest craze of stealth games need some level of complexity (may it be controller or gameplay) to pull things off.

Now Iwata doesn't really specify what he really means by complexity. The gameplay, the controller or making the game? If it's the graphics and making the game, that's what the people want as a large bulk of the audience jumped on when the PS1 was popular thanks to the draw of polygons. PCs were going this route a few years before the PS1. So Nintendo can either evolve in the console market or die. They can talk about going back to roots, but if the primary cash flow (mainstream market) doesn't latch on.....

I agree that my Retro interpretation is a bit broad. It's tough to classify where "Retrogaming" ends and where modern gaming begins. I'm at a loss as to how to go back and rewrite it, but I know a lot of the Retrogamers do not/will not play systems beyond a certain point in time for one reason or another. Personal preference, time constraints, monetary issues, complexity, or whatever. Perhaps they didn't have an interest/desire to play the newest system. If that's your perogative, right on. Do what makes you happy. That's what games are for.

You nailed my point. Evolution is the nature of the beast. In most cases, not evolving with the general populace will lead to overall failure. Sure, small pockets of folks may latch onto the "retro" style, but if the mainstream doesn't get it, it's as good as dead.

[Oberfuhrer Hamm]

The article says that production will be halted until autumn. This is a sign of relief. If Nintendo have of stopped the GCN for good only 2 years in, I would have lost faith in Nintendo forever and never ever touched another piece of technology from them. Reason being, I just got a cool looking platinum Gamecube and I would be pissed if they halted it before I even got my money's worth.

EDIT: Nintendo does get kudos for realizing that the solution is to make better software. I don't know how many times it has been said on this board that the games make the console. Whether these new games will be good will be the question.

[chadtower]

If a newer game is good wnough to hook me in, though, I'll play it through until the end. Those games are getting fewer and fewer, though.... :/

You have that option, though. I don't. That's why my gaming now is tending heavily towards MAME. Games that are designed by nature to be 5 minutes in length. I can walk over to the machine, play 2 games, and get on with taking out the trash or getting those spare diapers from the basement or getting jammies out of the dryer for the kids. Gaming while the kids are up is useless and frustrating because they just hang all over me, walk in front of the tv, yell in my ear... and once they're in bed there are a hundred other things that need doing first... when you combine the fact that I need simpler, quicker games AND the fact that even if they released such things for current systems I could get 30 older games of a similar nature for the price of a new game... it's a losing battle for them.

[christianscott27]

the only thing that could save the cube would be dropping the software prices down to around $20. i think all of these industry people are missing that, its tough for a lot of consumers to walk into best buy and drop $45 on a new game that may very well prove to be unplayable. still all of this talk of nintendo's troubles misses the fact that nintendo still makes the best selling console on the market right now, thats right the GBA :) lets see sony try and crack that.

[Oberfuhrer Hamm]

If a newer game is good wnough to hook me in, though, I'll play it through until the end. Those games are getting fewer and fewer, though.... :/

You have that option, though. I don't. That's why my gaming now is tending heavily towards MAME. Games that are designed by nature to be 5 minutes in length. I can walk over to the machine, play 2 games, and get on with taking out the trash or getting those spare diapers from the basement or getting jammies out of the dryer for the kids. Gaming while the kids are up is useless and frustrating because they just hang all over me, walk in front of the tv, yell in my ear... and once they're in bed there are a hundred other things that need doing first... when you combine the fact that I need simpler, quicker games AND the fact that even if they released such things for current systems I could get 30 older games of a similar nature for the price of a new game... it's a losing battle for them.

I am at the opposite end of the spectrum. I have played and do own games of that type, but my problem is that I get very bored of them very quickly. Games like Pacman or Tetris where you play for a couple minutes, I cannot delve into. This is because I usually have entire afternoons free (I am a teenager), and because I never really had to play those types of games because they were all we had. I like to play a long game, one that takes me weeks to beat, so that when I do beat it I can have a sense of accomplishment. I also tend to like games with a good storyline or at least a set of longterm goals. For me, some new games are worth the price to pay. With others, just wait a while and they will come down in price to something that doesn't scrape the sky.

[Oobgarm]

If a newer game is good wnough to hook me in, though, I'll play it through until the end. Those games are getting fewer and fewer, though.... :/

You have that option, though. I don't. That's why my gaming now is tending heavily towards MAME. Games that are designed by nature to be 5 minutes in length. I can walk over to the machine, play 2 games, and get on with taking out the trash or getting those spare diapers from the basement or getting jammies out of the dryer for the kids. Gaming while the kids are up is useless and frustrating because they just hang all over me, walk in front of the tv, yell in my ear... and once they're in bed there are a hundred other things that need doing first... when you combine the fact that I need simpler, quicker games AND the fact that even if they released such things for current systems I could get 30 older games of a similar nature for the price of a new game... it's a losing battle for them.

I am at the opposite end of the spectrum. I have played and do own games of that type, but my problem is that I get very bored of them very quickly. Games like Pacman or Tetris where you play for a couple minutes, I cannot delve into. This is because I usually have entire afternoons free (I am a teenager), and because I never really had to play those types of games because they were all we had. I like to play a long game, one that takes me weeks to beat, so that when I do beat it I can have a sense of accomplishment. I also tend to like games with a good storyline or at least a set of longterm goals. For me, some new games are worth the price to pay. With others, just wait a while and they will come down in price to something that doesn't scrape the sky.

All I can say is "Enjoy what you can while you can." Chadtower's got children, which prohibits hiim from spending lots of time gaming, and I work too damn much. It sucks when real life kicks in and forces you to spend less time pursuing what you enjoy as a hobby/lifestyle and spend more time doing important tasks, but evolution is the nature of the beast.

Like how I tied those together there? LOL

[brandver3]

This is a very thin line. How do you gauge what is to complex? I personally would enjoy a return to the NES days where you could just pop in a game and play. No training mode, no reading the manual to learn every combo, just put it in an play.

But there lies the problem. A lot of gamers are used to longer, more complex games. And while I like RPGs and stuff I can throw my time into, I have to admit, the older I get the less time I have to throw around.

I don't think it is going to go back to the NES days, I'm sure there will be long titles as well, but I think an overall return to simplier games might be nice.

For example, GTA3 and Vice City, those games aren't that complex. You run, shoot, jump, steal cars. No combos, no move lists, just four esential buttons. But those four buttons translate into hours of gameplay. Not because its complex, just because it is a well executed, simple game.

[Oberfuhrer Hamm]

For example, GTA3 and Vice City, those games aren't that complex. You run, shoot, jump, steal cars. No combos, no move lists, just four esential buttons. But those four buttons translate into hours of gameplay. Not because its complex, just because it is a well executed, simple game.

I don't think that is a simple game, rather a complex game with simple controls.

[Nature Boy]

"Games that are sophisticated require a lot of time and energy," he said. As games became more complicated, players were given up playing and this was leading to the gradual shrinkage of the market, he warned.

Before reading *any* of the rest of this thread, I saw this quote and thought "gee, he sounds like a luddite retro-gamer".

There are merits to *every* kind of game, beit a short simple one or a long complicated one. You might not enjoy one type or the other (and I feel sorry for you if that's the case, as it's so much better to enjoy *everything* under it's own merits), but that doesn't mean much when it comes to the business side of things.

What I'd like to know is, where is this market shrinkage? He must be talking about Nintendo's market, not the gaming market in general. As far as I know, it's as big as it's *ever* been, 'complicated' games or not.

Sometimes Nintendo really worries me with their business strategies. How can they say that the PSP isn't a problem for GBA? Were they not paying attention when PS was around? Do they still think N64 outsold it?!? I just hope it's posturing for the media and doesn't reflect their actual strategy.

[chadtower]

No one ever seems to consider that perhaps their overall strategy is more targeted to Japan than the US. Did the PS really outsell everything else there? Remember, over there, the PCE held dominant market share for a long time. Their strategy has to at least be half predicated to that market. The US isn't the only game market on the planet. It may not even be the biggest.

[YoshiM]

Nintendo recently has been talking a good game: focusing on better software. Ok, that's all well and good, but what's the focus on? Pikmin 2? Same as Pikmin 1 only now with more Pikmin and another player. F-Zero? Starfox? What about the GBA? It seems to be a haven for SNES ports from the Big N. It's one thing to release sequels to franchises that are great and continue to raise the bar but to just update the graphics and maybe tweak game play or add some extras and then ship it out doesn't fly too well with me.

Hence why I don't own or play PS2 games :P

[Achika]

Nintendo needs to stop and take a 5 minute breather. Don't go making something "top secret, new and exciting." Just, don't....

When the cube came out, they made a statement that they admitted that the games on the 64 were a bit kiddish, and that the Gamecube would grow up. I've seen it "grow up" through the exclusive RE venture and Eternal Darkness. They hyped ED then just kinda gave up.... If they make more simple games, they will either give up on it within a year or so or just ignore how poorly they are doing with them and let that drive yet another console into the ground. Pikmin is a glorified lemmings. You can play for a short amount of time and shut it off. Not too long, easy to pick up and play. Same with Animal Crossing, Doshin, etc. They have done it already IMO and the ship is still sinking. My nintendo rep says her and others find their business tactics flawed in the US and they need to really start picking up on the promises they made when the system debuted...even with good deals & free games it's hard to sell that system.

While there are a number of exclusive games on the cube, when I look at the sections at Toys R Us, Gamestop, etc. most of the things I see are multiplatform stuff. I'd like to think that Nintendo will pull through, but if they pull out a "top secret gimmick" it leads me to believe that they are just throwing money at a system, kinda like everyone accuses Microsoft of doing. Sorry to let you fanboys hear that, but in some ways you have to admit that it's true.

Nintendo is like a carriage horse--walking around with blinders on to the world.

[christianscott27]

is it just me or is the xbox catching on and catching up? watching lots of G4 thats the vibe i'm getting. wish i'd bought one of those instead of my cube...ah rouge squadron made me do it.

[YoshiM]

Nintendo needs to stop and take a 5 minute breather. Don't go making something "top secret, new and exciting." Just, don't....

When the cube came out, they made a statement that they admitted that the games on the 64 were a bit kiddish, and that the Gamecube would grow up. I've seen it "grow up" through the exclusive RE venture and Eternal Darkness. They hyped ED then just kinda gave up.... If they make more simple games, they will either give up on it within a year or so or just ignore how poorly they are doing with them and let that drive yet another console into the ground. Pikmin is a glorified lemmings. You can play for a short amount of time and shut it off. Not too long, easy to pick up and play. Same with Animal Crossing, Doshin, etc. They have done it already IMO and the ship is still sinking. My nintendo rep says her and others find their business tactics flawed in the US and they need to really start picking up on the promises they made when the system debuted...even with good deals & free games it's hard to sell that system.

While there are a number of exclusive games on the cube, when I look at the sections at Toys R Us, Gamestop, etc. most of the things I see are multiplatform stuff. I'd like to think that Nintendo will pull through, but if they pull out a "top secret gimmick" it leads me to believe that they are just throwing money at a system, kinda like everyone accuses Microsoft of doing. Sorry to let you fanboys hear that, but in some ways you have to admit that it's true.

Nintendo is like a carriage horse--walking around with blinders on to the world.

Daaayam, she hits the nail on the head hard! Drove it through the wood.

Nintendo is starting to become what Atari was when they were still in the console game near the end. Came out with a system, brought their past titles up to date, then rinsed and repeated with the next generation. Using the power of the Atari name (at least that was the hope later on). Now Nintendo, IMO, is starting to fall into the same trap. Sony is in its second generation of hardware and they have some pretty good steam as they are still fresh and popular with lots of titles coming. Microsoft is the new kid on the block that (other than in Japan) is really starting to shine with upcoming titles.

Like Atari and Sega were when they dropped from the console race, Nintendo is now on their fourth generation of console. Already, as Achika pointed out, the ship is sinking. There was a huge blurt of 1st/2nd party Nintendo games last year, but the catalog still seems to be made up of mostly multiplatform games. While I love the past Mario games, Zelda, and the like the franchises are getting old. Old in fact that Nintendo is farming out some of the franchises to other companies (F-Zero by Amusement Vision, Star Fox and now DK done by Namco, Metroid by Retro and Fusion by Intelligent Systems to name a few). Will Nintendo continue with another console, or will "4" be its final ticket?

Conspiracy theory run amok? Maybe. Author suffering from caffeine withdrawl and a severe aspertame high, probably.

[Captain Wrong]

Look at it this way... I am a retrogamer for sure. It's not because that's what I grew up with and that's what I'm used to. I'd love to play through Metroid Prime and about a hundred other recent games BUT I DON'T HAVE TIME. I can't spend 60 hours playing a game, that would conservatively take me 4 months. That's why I don't have a gamecube, ps2, or xbox. If there were more less intensive games for these systems I would be a lot more tempted to buy one. They could still be very pretty and have great sound but do they really need to consume a month's worth of my available gaming time just to learn? I am the type of consumer they'd do well to attract, too. I'm the type that spends $300/month on games...

BING BING BING!!!!!

That's why I steer away from all the newer stuff. As far as I'm concerned, unless I can pick up and play and not have to devote a month of my life to "beating" the game, I'm not interested. I just don't have that kind of time anymore, nor if I did would I spend it on that.

I wish the companies would realize that we're not all 15 year olds who don't have anything else to do. (No offence to the 15 year olds. I just know when I was that age I had a lot more free time than I do now.) I don't want an epic quest. I don't want a massive movie disguised as a video game. I don't want to micromanage troops/cities/etc. All I want is a game I can sit down and enjoy for a little while and just forget about all the other bullshit.

That's ok though. I'm more than happy to fire up the Neo Geo and forget it's 2003.

[bargora]

The time crunch issue is one reason why I also enjoy the middle way of "mission" based games. You can play the mission a couple of times and either bask in victory or slink off in defeat, depending on whether you were able to overcome adversity and grasp the brass ring.

And you can usually do that in less than a half-hour.

Having missions allows even a complex game to be broken into smaller time chunks. While it works best for combat sims and can work in other genres as well (e.g., Jet Grind Radio), I suppose that unfortunately not all games can easily or effectively use this convention.

[SoulBlazer]

Frankly, I'm not worried. So Nintendo is stopping GC production for a few months. A lot of good games are coming out between now and the end of the year and I have faith in my little GC.

Now, if the fall comes, and they don't resume production -- then I'm worried.

I'd be curious, though -- what do you guys see as things that Nintendo needs to do to sell more consoles?

[Sothy]

Ya games are too complicated i want more Yoshis adventure games GO GO NINTENDO TO BANKRUPTXCY!!#

[SoulBlazer]

Here's a link to GameSpot's article about this:

http://www.gamespot.com/gamecube/news/news_6073133.html

I have quite a number of GC games on pre-order -- Rogue Squadron 3, F-Zero, Harvest Moon, FF: Crystal Chronicles, MGS: Twin Snakes.

[calthaer]

Mission-based games are the stuff. That's one reason why I like Deus Ex and Thief so much

Metroid Prime did a good job with this by spacing out the save points at good intervals.

I have the time to play games but man, there are very few games I really WANT to play. What's really scaring me is the fact that the games that really suck me in are the long, long strategy games like Master of Orion and Alpha Centauri. Those two games recently, besides Prime, have been the only ones that I just cannot put down. Animal Crossing too but sometimes that game is more like a chore.

Speaking of short games: go to your local video game retailer and find MOONBASE COMMANDER for the PC. I picked it up two days ago for like $5. The game is simple (with a level of strategy and complexity) and fun and a level lasts about 10 minutes for me. The downside is that it doesn't have a ton of tutorials that really lead you in - but you can figure almost everything out pretty handily. I wouldn't have paid more than $15 for it but $5 was really a steal. "Commander if you continue like this disciplinary action will be required! Find your center and focus!"

I want games with stories that have chapters like books. Give me more Deus Ex and Thief!

[Flack]

I think it was Pente (correct me if I'm wrong) that had the catch phrase, "a minute to learn -- a lifetime to master." To me, that's what makes a good game.

Tetris: "Rotate falling blocks and create rows across the screen which then disappear. When the screen fills up, you lose."

Pac-Man: "Eat all the dots and avoid the ghosts. Power pellets allow you to eat the ghosts as well."

Both of those instructions/descriptions are less than 20 words long, yet tell you everything you need to know about the games. That doesn't mean you'll be able to beat them anytime soon, but at least you can pick up a joystick and begin playing.

I picked up SOCOM a while back and it took me longer to read the instructions than I ended up playing the game.

File me in with the other parents. I have a 20 month old son, so my gaming hours have pretty much been restricted to "after bed time." With such little gaming time available, I end up playing a lot less Gran Turismo 3 and a lot more Pole Position.

Flack

PS: THERE IS NO SUCH PLACE AS ROPIO FALLS. IT'S AN ANAGRAM OF APRIL FOOL'S, SILLY GOOSE.

PPS: PLEASE PM ME IF YOU SEE THIS.

[kainemaxwell]

I think it was Pente (correct me if I'm wrong) that had the catch phrase, "a minute to learn -- a lifetime to master." To me, that's what makes a good game.
That would be Othello.

[kai123]

I think that this is a smart business move. Why would they just keep making something that isn't selling? Just stop for a few months until demand increases.

[omnedon]

I dunno.

I just finished reading Phoenix: The fall and Rise of Videogames, and with this historical perspective, these sorts of things are rarely as positive as the suits make them out to be.

NGC software may be quite the bargain in 10 months...

[zektor]

The Gamecube is a great system. If they stop production entirely and kill the system off it will eventually become a "wanted collectible", just as the TG16 and others that have done this before were. Is it a good thing for people who have invested the money into the system? Maybe, maybe not. But I will tell you now that I WISH I had purchased everything TG16 related I saw toward the end that was going for bargain basement prices. I remember actually seeing Magical Chase selling for $12.99, and I said "screw it". Hah...now I'll be lucky if I ever even see it again. Now, maybe the Gamecube will not go to that extreme, but who knows. I would like to see the system at least last out another 2 or so years before this is even a thought, but it does not seem likely. But Nintendo has one piece of hardware that will survive all of this and keep them afloat, and that is the GBA. The Gameboy was introduced in 88, and is still going strong in it's new incarnation. Backward compatible with every game released from then still now, the GBA is a wonder machine that will keep on selling, mark my words. Great games, and portable. Portability is where the furture of gaming is going folks. And, if Sony is going to jump into the bandwagon they had better do it pretty soon, because if they wait too long people will not be eager to go grab another system while they have one that does the job for them already...regardless of the games they release at debut...unless it is something really special...

[KlarthAilerion]

Well, when speaking about the current generation of console systems and how they've panned out, "backwards compatible" should be the key words.

The newer GameBoy systems should continue to sell well and dominate the handheld market because of the existing software library as well as new games, and any company that tries to break in on the market is going to learn that the hard way. I bought a GBA, and although I've only purchased 4 GBA games I already had 30 or so games that I could play on the system. So I spent about $200 on GBA-specific items altogether and had around 35 games to play. I wouldn't want to have to spend $100 for a system and then (assume a $20 retail price tag per new game on the new system, for the sake of competition) $700 more to get to 1 system and 35 games.

I bought a Gamecube for $150, 3 extra controllers for $20 (or $30.. can't remember) a piece, and 2 memory cards for whatever (I think $20 a piece). So I spent $250, and had no games to play. I figure I bought about 8 titles at full price ($50 each) during the first few months, so that's another $400, coming out to $650 for one system and 8 games. (And while I enjoyed Rogue Squadron and Tony Hawk 3 (or whichever), Pikmin was entirely too short to merit a $50 price tag. The cameras in Mario Sunshine pissed me off to no end. And I'm not buying another Zelda (or Mario-platformer, for that matter) game as long as they have stupid, annoying, childish sound effects every time a character moves or does anything. But anyway, I digress...)

Compare this to my recent purchase of a network-compatible PS2 ($200), extra controller ($20), two 8mb memory cards ($30 for both), two games at full price ($100), two Greatest Hits titles ($40), and Mark of Kri (hey, it was only $10 :P ).. $400 total. But I also have roughly 30 Playstation games, so you figure $400 with about 35 games for the system.

To make this comparison more even, add another $50 to the Gamecube for a network adaptor... that's $400 with 35 games compared to $700 with 8 games. Now consider that there is more PS2 software available than Gamecube software, there are more PS2 titles retailing at discount than Gamecube titles, and there are over 1,000 Playstation titles that the PS2 can play on top of the PS2 software library. There's no question that the better value can be found with the PS2 than the Cube. And I think that this issue of value (as well as the variety of selection of games) is the primary reason the Cube is not achieving Nintendo's desired sales.

I'd could also argue that there are more good games for the PS2 than the Cube, but that's a matter of opinion that I'm sure someone would disagree with me on (although I can't see how or why :P ). I wish I'd saved myself $700 bucks, though.

[TRM]

I believe that when a game (such as Mario Kart DD) is released for Gamecube, sales will rise. For the moment, there isn't a single Gamecube game which truely interests me, not even Mario Sunshine (though I do own it). Throw in some of the exclusive series which had a fairly large following, and Nintendo's got it.

[jaybird]

Nintendo continues to try to merge its strength (GBA) with its weakness (GCN). That connectivity crap blows ass chunks, but they actually did right with the Gameboy Player, which opens up a Playstation-type library of games to the Gamecube.

It all may be too little, too late.

As long as they stay in the handheld business, I'll be happy.

[Dire 51]

BING BING BING!!!!!

That's why I steer away from all the newer stuff. As far as I'm concerned, unless I can pick up and play and not have to devote a month of my life to "beating" the game, I'm not interested. I just don't have that kind of time anymore, nor if I did would I spend it on that.

I wish the companies would realize that we're not all 15 year olds who don't have anything else to do. (No offence to the 15 year olds. I just know when I was that age I had a lot more free time than I do now.) I don't want an epic quest. I don't want a massive movie disguised as a video game. I don't want to micromanage troops/cities/etc. All I want is a game I can sit down and enjoy for a little while and just forget about all the other bullshit.

That's ok though. I'm more than happy to fire up the Neo Geo and forget it's 2003.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

[The Clonus Horror]

I spent about 5 days with my younger brother, Stormin Gorman, who just turned 18. I am 27. Our mother passed away when he was 4 and we've only seen each other once a year since then, but we've always shared an interest in gaming.

So, you can imagine how most of that 5 days was spent....

I did notice something, however. Gorm was very adept at anything next gen, but kept dying on the most academic places on platformers such as Mega Man 2 or Castlevania.

I sat there squirming in my seat everytime he missed a "toe jump" on Castlevania, finally I said: "Gimme the paddle." (That's right, I said PADDLE) and he just laughed as I breezed through all of the jumps.

I laughed and said: "Gorm + Platformers=DUNCE!"

Then he whooped my candy ass at Smackdown: Shut Your Mouth, replying with: "Jim=VIDEO GAME DINOSAUR"

I thought it was funny that he was so good at these new, supposedly "complex" games, but because the gameplay of the older games was all they had going for them and it was so straightforward, he had a hard time adjustiing to that.

I don't know whether the newer games are better or not, but I thought that the Smackdown game was very fun to play and wasn't difficult to learn. However, I like fast, arcade-style games, so that's probably why. I sat there and watched him play Final Fantasy X for awhile and marvelled at the sheer grandiosity of it all, but it wasn't much fun for me to play.

[The Manimal]

I know what you're saying. I play games probably a couple hours a week at the max if that. I don't think I've touched my NES games (what I play most) in probably a month or two. My personal 'problem' with the games isn't the complexity or length, but instead the games themself. Either they seem childish or they seem senselessly 'shock value' ridden. I don't want to play games for 'shock value'.....but for how fun they are to play. And even stranger...the older I get, the more RPG's interest me (storylines and everything). Pretty much what I buy are old warhorses of games....the old standards...in their 18,344,332nd game in their respective series. I'm the kinda guy who would skip some newer hit and buy MISSLE COMMAND 64 or something like that.

[XpOsUrE]

No one ever seems to consider that perhaps their overall strategy is more targeted to Japan than the US. Did the PS really outsell everything else there? Remember, over there, the PCE held dominant market share for a long time. Their strategy has to at least be half predicated to that market. The US isn't the only game market on the planet. It may not even be the biggest.

Very, very true, and from what I have heard the japanese overall buy, support systems much more, and longer then people in the us. Maybe Nintendo since the begining has found that the us market is just a added bonus which it has been till lately. Though then again Nintendo got the monsoter known as GBA still in america :D .

[kainemaxwell]

Well, it happened...