StarDestroyer.Net BBS

From Pointless Waste of Time.

Discuss?

Pretty much a long version of most of what I said in the Revolution thread, with some additional (valuable) stuff in there.

The whole thing about Nintendo stock was especially relevant to what I was saying: who gives a fuck how profitable they are? I'm a gamer, not a shareholder. And unless the games are good, Nintendo can blow me. I wasted money on my Gamecube. I have a handful of games for it and no game in years has come out that I remotely wanted to buy. My PS2, however, has no such issue. That's what it comes down to for me. I'm not a "this vs that" console wanker.

Heck, my brother just bought an XBox 360. We're getting a PS3 when it comes out.

Revolution though? Yeah, right? The entire thing sounds like ass. Wait n see. Nintendo doesnt have the trust I place in Sony.

That means a lot of uncomfortable fatigue in your wrists if you plan on playing all night (try holding your TV remote in front of you, keeping it level, for three hours). And that isn't a problem for the Rev target audience. It's not designed for people who play hours a day.

No one should be playing for three hours straight period; it's bad for your eyes and hands.

Now, there is a whole market of non-gamers and fringe gamers who would enjoy the hell out of that. But if you're the kind of gamer who cares enough to read an article like this, I doubt you're one of those people.

On the contrary, a defining trait of hardcore tech geeks and experts (gamers included) is an obsessive preference for old technology. You can't wave your metaphorical arm on the internet without whacking someone complaining about how gaming an games were better in the good old days.

Aside from that it's fairly accurate. Gaming partisanship is just ugly, and does nothing but make fellow gamers angry at each other.

Don't hate, appreciate!

Vympel wrote:The whole thing about Nintendo stock was especially relevant to what I was saying: who gives a fuck how profitable they are?

People that are debating how successful a company is, for one. Which is what we were doing, by the way.

Andrew J. wrote: People that are debating how successful a company is, for one. Which is what we were doing, by the way.

I never said "Nintendo is not successful". I said Gamecube failed, and that's true. I don't care if it turns a profit (by some miracle). The games selection is ass, and everyone knows it.

How do you get to "everyone knows it"?

I like gamecube's game selection, and, to me, they had plenty of titles and still have plenty coming out. Sure, it is just MY opinion, but it does demonstrate that your idea about "everyone" seems to be a little off. Maybe everyone like you?

Vympel wrote:

Andrew J. wrote: People that are debating how successful a company is, for one. Which is what we were doing, by the way.

I never said "Nintendo is not successful". I said Gamecube failed, and that's true. I don't care if it turns a profit (by some miracle). The games selection is ass, and everyone knows it.

Yes the Gamecube failed, because YOU don't like most of the games. All this profitiblity and marketshare data is irrelivant, the entire gaming industry meaures success arround YOUR opnion.

Vympel wrote:

Andrew J. wrote: People that are debating how successful a company is, for one. Which is what we were doing, by the way.

I never said "Nintendo is not successful". I said Gamecube failed, and that's true. I don't care if it turns a profit (by some miracle). The games selection is ass, and everyone knows it.

Your only standard for failure seems to be your own personal satisfaction. If you don't like the Gamecube just say that you don't like the Gamecube, and I'll be fine with that.

Vympel wrote:

Andrew J. wrote: People that are debating how successful a company is, for one. Which is what we were doing, by the way.

I never said "Nintendo is not successful". I said Gamecube failed, and that's true. I don't care if it turns a profit (by some miracle). The games selection is ass, and everyone knows it.

Not true, the selection is limited but I enjoy the games included. For adventure or cooperative RPG fans, it's a wonderful console.

If i may, what Vympel means basically is that for some (perhaps many) gamers Gamecube blew donkey nobs because the game selection was so small and only a few were quality games. Which i agree with, i can only think of a few, compared to PS2 or XBox, games that i liked on Gamecube.

And if i may chime in on something touched on in the other thread, yes Japanese games are practically irrelevent elsewhere, because the Japanese have the most...unique view of gaming i think i've ever seen. From a Western perspective; i'm sure they feel the same. I also dont understand this obsession with dry, stats based, almost novel-like RPGs that...have nothing to do with role-playing and are basically animated movies i have to pay more to see.

Thats not a knock against Nintendo, of course, nor is it a knock against Japan, it is however a serious knock on their ideas about what makes a good video game.

I enjoy the handful of games I got for it too, that still doesn't justify the purchase or make it a successful system.

Yes the Gamecube failed, because YOU don't like most of the games. All this profitiblity and marketshare data is irrelivant, the entire gaming industry meaures success arround YOUR opnion.

From a gamer's perspective, you're damn right it's irrelevant. Again, stop acting like a Nintendo shareholder. They're not your sportsteam. Tell us how you really feel. And please, spare me this "your opinion" crap. You can hardly swing a dead cat around the internet without hitting something about Gamecube's poor selection.

EDIT: 18- has it exactly right.

Anyway, this is bordering on thread-hijack, so let's stick to the "come down from the moon" parts of the article than talking about whether Gamecube can be considered a successful system. I've said my piece in that regard and feel no further need to justify my views.

Looking, especially, at the Gamecube's hardware stats, I can't imagine how anyone thinks this is going to be a competitive system for gamers.

Vympel wrote:Looking, especially, at the Gamecube's hardware stats, I can't imagine how anyone thinks this is going to be a competitive system for gamers.

As has been said, it's not really supposed to be. It's going to appeal to non-gamers with an intuitive interface while its low price-point makes it an attractive second system for those that prefer Sony and MS.

Or that's what Nintendo's hoping, anyway. Hey, it seemed to work okay for the DS. I guess all we can do is wait and see.

Vympel wrote:I enjoy the handful of games I got for it too, that still doesn't justify the purchase or make it a successful system.

Yes the Gamecube failed, because YOU don't like most of the games. All this profitiblity and marketshare data is irrelivant, the entire gaming industry meaures success arround YOUR opnion.

From a gamer's perspective, you're damn right it's irrelevant. Again, stop acting like a Nintendo shareholder. They're not your sportsteam. Tell us how you really feel. And please, spare me this "your opinion" crap. You can hardly swing a dead cat around the internet without hitting something about Gamecube's poor selection.

EDIT: 18- has it exactly right.

If any system has a poor selection its the X-Box, there is almost no game on that system worth having that can't be obtained on PC, PS2, or GCN. I've admitted before the PS2 has a better selection of games, its probably why they have such an overwhelming majority of the marketshare. What GCN has is a long list of completely exclusive, or initially exclusive games, that I consider must buys. Wind Waker, Eternal Darkness, Resident Evil 4(though no longer exclusive), Super Smash Bros. Melee (one of those timeless games that I've never really stopped playing over years, comparable to Tetris, Starcraft, Diablo II, Mario Kart), speaking of Mario Kart; Double Dash, Rouge Squadren II & III, Metroid Prime I and II, Tales of Symphonia(initially)

Andrew J. wrote:No one should be playing for three hours straight period; it's bad for your eyes and hands.

It is only bad for your eyes if you are staring at a screen which is too small/fuzy/shit.

It is only bad for your hands if a moron built the controller.

Which is why using Nintendo products for a prolonged time isnt a good idea

Vympel wrote:everyone knows it.

EVERYBODY KNOWS IT
EVERYBODY KNOWS IT
EVERYBODY KNOWS IT'S TRUE
OH YEAH
YOU GOTTA DO THE BEST YOU CAN
AND WORK OUT TWICE A DAY
DON'T ASK ME WHY I SAID IT
BECAUSE I ALREADY FORGOT

Vympel wrote:I enjoy the handful of games I got for it too, that still doesn't justify the purchase or make it a successful system.

I enjoy the games I got for the system, and that justifies the purchase to me. Perhaps I enjoyed them more or more of them appealed to me though.

Yes the Gamecube failed, because YOU don't like most of the games. All this profitiblity and marketshare data is irrelivant, the entire gaming industry meaures success arround YOUR opnion.

From a gamer's perspective, you're damn right it's irrelevant. Again, stop acting like a Nintendo shareholder. They're not your sportsteam. Tell us how you really feel. And please, spare me this "your opinion" crap. You can hardly swing a dead cat around the internet without hitting something about Gamecube's poor selection.

EDIT: 18- has it exactly right.

So, wait. Our opinions are invalid under the weight of... other opinions? Lots of people don't like the Gamecube's particular flavors of games. I'm fine with that. Shooter, fighter, or sports fans would be ill advised to purchase a gamecube, because they'll not find a bloody thing to satisfy their interests. However, if you're into adventure games or cooperative games along the lines of Gauntlet, Gamecube is the premier console.

the band the Eagles, for instance, are not what shall call the most diverse of bands. Everything is woven into a Western style of music, as a rule of thumb. Since the music does not appeal to a wide audience, the outliers would do well to not listen to the Eagles. The learned among them would not attack them as a failure to everyone based on their limited selection, as you are doing.

I believe Abraham Lincoln said it best- "People who like this sort of thing will find this the sort of thing they like."

EDIT: I started this post before Vympel called a halt to rebuttals, for the record.

Xon wrote:It is only bad for your eyes if you are staring at a screen which is too small/fuzy/shit.

It is only bad for your hands if a moron built the controller.

Which is why using Nintendo products for a prolonged time isnt a good idea

The safety section in the manual of my DS suggests a 10-15 minute break every hour, but that seems to be standard anti-seizure stuff for both games and TV: don't get too close to the screen, light the room well, don't do it if you're too tired, etc.

Vympel wrote:Heck, my brother just bought an XBox 360. We're getting a PS3 when it comes out.

Revolution though? Yeah, right? The entire thing sounds like ass. Wait n see. Nintendo doesnt have the trust I place in Sony.

I'm going to grab all 3 systems. I've never had a system where EVERY SINGLE GAME SUCKED ASS. Gamecube, PS2, XBox, PSX, N64, SNES, GB, GBA/SP, DS, PSP...they all had redeeming features.

I doubt that any next gen system will break that trend. As long as there will be good games on the system, I'll grab it.

I thought that article was surprisingly vacuous and devoid of any real information. Any idiot can write an identical piece about any of the "next generation" consoles, with more-or-less identical complaints stemming from previous ones. They're not all that interesting, frankly, and most of their criticisms miss significant counter-arguments (for example: the claim relating "Arcade Classics" to the downloadable games are bunk--Arcade Classics don't sell well because they're as expensive as modern games and you get a couple of hours of nostalgia, but a download can be significantly less expensive than that).

Master of Ossus wrote:I thought that article was surprisingly vacuous and devoid of any real information. Any idiot can write an identical piece about any of the "next generation" consoles, with more-or-less identical complaints stemming from previous ones.

Eh? No next-generation console apart from Nintendo has that control system (to say nothing of an equvialent that either Microsoft or Sony is hyping up the wazoo)- they use gamepads. No other next generation console is aiming to be some low-cost deliberately low-tech machine, except Nintendo (complete with specs, as per the article). How would someone write "an identical piece" with "identical complaints"?

They're not all that interesting, frankly, and most of their criticisms miss significant counter-arguments (for example: the claim relating "Arcade Classics" to the downloadable games are bunk--Arcade Classics don't sell well because they're as expensive as modern games and you get a couple of hours of nostalgia, but a download can be significantly less expensive than that).

That remains to be seen. I've seen arcade shit selling in stores for less than "modern" games, but I've never had the urge to buy them at all anyway- nostalgia isn't powerful enough for me to spend money on. I have MAME for that.

Vympel wrote:Eh? No next-generation console apart from Nintendo has that control system (to say nothing of an equvialent that either Microsoft or Sony is hyping up the wazoo)- they use gamepads. No other next generation console is aiming to be some low-cost deliberately low-tech machine, except Nintendo (complete with specs, as per the article). How would someone write "an identical piece" with "identical complaints"?

Everyone has been complaining about the controllers for both other Next-Gen systems, and everyone has been complaining about their price tags--both complaints are especially valid for the PS3.

That remains to be seen. I've seen arcade shit selling in stores for less than "modern" games, but I've never had the urge to buy them at all anyway- nostalgia isn't powerful enough for me to spend money on. I have MAME for that.

Fair enough, but I think that the ability to play (say) Mario III is easily worth a $5 download for me. I'm not sure that it's a selling point for the system, per se, but price is a major factor--and downloads are significantly less expensive than games which require packaging and shelf space.

Silver Paladin wrote:
I'm going to grab all 3 systems. I've never had a system where EVERY SINGLE GAME SUCKED ASS. Gamecube, PS2, XBox, PSX, N64, SNES, GB, GBA/SP, DS, PSP...they all had redeeming features.

I doubt that any next gen system will break that trend. As long as there will be good games on the system, I'll grab it.

Virtual Boy.

The Virtual Boy was more of an interstep fluke than anything else. Hell, not even Nintendo really knew what to do with it.

Besides, the early to late 1990s was really turbulent.

I agree with the article that nintendo's new system is not designed with hardcore gamers in mind, that is their "revolution" and it should make them alot of money. I have no interest in the revolution myself apart from a select few games, but I am seriously considering getting one for my mother who is retired and likes playing those silly flash and yahoo games (mainly mahjog) on the internet. Its small, affordable, and the tv remote thingy with fewer buttons and joysticks to confuse and annoy her, and a fishing type game sounds right up her alley. Right now she is playing alot of the small games you can buy for cheap off the xbox marketplace and loving the puzzle and quiz games, but the gamepad is a hassle. The revolution's point and click remote thingy will be a godsend to non-gamers. Just ask anyone who makes games for kids or look at most of the sucessful flash/java minigames on the internet, they'll all mainly point and click with the mouse. Nintendo knows this and is wisely designing a console to tap this unmined market.

The revolution's goal is to hook non-gamers, I don't give a rat's ass about the system but I may benefit indirectly when video gaming becomes more mainstream. I hope nintendo succeeds even though I won't be buying one. I predict that the revolution will disappoint serious gamers, they're not nintendo's intended market anymore. And I'll bet most who post on this board will fall into this category