Sega vs Nintendo

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by ChainLegacy

The virtual console alone makes the Wii far better than Naruto. Screw modern gaming anyways, this is supposed to be an old school thread

For me, old school would be like: PC >> SNES >> Amiga >> Genesis

PC: Because of games such as Indiana Jones & The Fate of Atlantis, Monkey's Island, well you guess it.

SNES: Shooters like Axelay, games like Actraiser, and Secret of Mana.

AMiga: Speed Ball and moar point & click adventure games.

Genesis: Streets of Rage, Crusader of Centy, Phantasy Star 4, etc

[Benoit]

Originally Posted by Nosauz

but sonic is defined by speed

No, he isn't. Which is why people complain about recent Sonic games not being Sonic games. Sonic is about momentum combined with good platforming.

Look you don't say it but your vehement denialism of critical flaws with the wii platform make you a yes man for a platform that doesn't support games other than first party titles.

I have explained time and time again why this is wrong. Either counter it with an actual argument instead of repeating the same statements, or agree to disagree.

The point is the wii is a flawed system yet at every point I've made about the catalogue being filled with predominantly crap you continue to say that there are good games, yes your right, but it doesn't mean that I'm wrong.

And you'll notice I never said that there aren't a lot of titles that aren't appealing to non-casual gamers. That's not the point I was making, and not the point I was countering.

Originally Posted by 2H-Dragon

Yeah, but I'm just saying just because they sell the most consoles doesn't mean they are dominating.

The market disagrees with you.

And when comparing Market share you compare the revenue not the net profit.

It's misleading to only compare revenues without comparing costs, and hence, profit.

Revenue does not enter into the equation if we're doing market share analysis. When doing so, we speak of units sold.

Originally Posted by Nosauz

if your game sucks you'll probably sucker in some the first time but eventually your base will disappear, this is why sometimes there are perks to developing on an open system versus the closed console market

This looks like a strawman argument to me; the two are not related.

[Zetsubo]

11/10 for big old greay cartriges.

Nintendo.

Duck hunt ruled !

Everything except the virtualboy was excllent.

To us boys' in the 80's nintendo could do no wrong.

nintendo power was the magazine to be found in all our backpockets and book bags.

Talk about full page game maps... especially for mario or contra.

To us, Sega was exotic and strange... double dragon on the sega was no fun compared to nintendo.

most sega owners eventually were left to form niche groups like Linux users had user groups.

[2H-Dragon]

Originally Posted by Benoit

The market disagrees with you.

It's misleading to only compare revenues without comparing costs, and hence, profit.

Revenue does not enter into the equation if we're doing market share analysis. When doing so, we speak of units sold.

Yeah you are right marketshare isn't based on units sold it was kinda late when I wrote that. I kinda noticed I wrongly interpreted a lot of things.

Let me say this though, considering on the XBOX360 is clearly the most successful software wise and 3rd party games just don't sell on the Wii. It is probably more interesting for 3rd party devs to go for the 360(though that might not be true there's a lack of data).

Originally Posted by HayashiTakara

Nintendo in it's history, it's first party always outsells 3rd party.

Yeah, but never where the changes this big. The best selling 3rd party game on the wii is Guitar Hero III, which is ranked 12th.

[Nosauz]

Originally Posted by Zetsubo

11/10 for big old greay cartriges.

Nintendo.

Duck hunt ruled !

Everything except the virtualboy was excllent.

To us boys' in the 80's nintendo could do no wrong.

nintendo power was the magazine to be found in all our backpockets and book bags.

Talk about full page game maps... especially for mario or contra.

To us, Sega was exotic and strange... double dragon on the sega was no fun compared to nintendo.

most sega owners eventually were left to form niche groups like Linux users had user groups.

yea for generalizations of a console you had no experience with!!!!! A+++++ review would read again... end sarcasm

If you played video games for the games themselves you would no better but oh well, lets just keep our preconcieved notions

@benoit
Look, the sad matter of fact is game development is a business, and in the end what platform to produce on and the overall quality gradient you have to compete on is dependent on platform espeically in the 360/ps3 vs Wii debate. here you have two platforms with two different standards, publishing on the wii is much more forgiving then on sony and msoft's machine, why? intial costs to make the game are less, there is no need to make your own engine when it comes down to it development costs are far lower on the less technically advance platform, the competition is about maximizing gameplay and what the system to do, which is a little bit easier then building your engine ground up and trying to compete in that essence. Thus when you select your platform, and because the goal is to sell copies, if you meet the minumum threshhold of "good" game quality on the wii, it will not translate to a good game on the ps3/360 due to the graphical and computational benchmarks of those systems. Just look at the Condiut, touted as the breakthrough fps for wii, when infact it's just the same geometrical rooms with the same enemy units and turns DC into a box of identical rooms when your supposedly battling through the white house and pentagon, yet still many claim it as ground breaking in the genre when in fact it is mere average. Why would people still try to mask a turd as a golden turd? Simply because of the lack of quality shooter games on the console, so in fact my argument isn't strawman since these two subjects are indeed intertwined. Condiut doesn't compete with kz2, h3, mw1 and 2 it competes with cod4 hence platform choice in development does matter and pertain to quality.

[Leo Keichi]

Well, the Wii does have some mature games like Resident Evil, Ookami, Call of Duty, and so on. It's just that they don't sell that much, because people who own a Wii prefer other kind of games.

But it's not like Wii games are badly done. In the end, it's all a matter of taste, really. When I was a teenager, I preferred N64 over PS1 and Saturn, but nowadays I prefer PS2 or PS3 over Gamecube or Wii. I guess your interest for Nintendo games lessen when you get older. I still play my Nintendo DS, though.

[Zetsubo]

Originally Posted by Nosauz

yea for generalizations of a console you had no experience with!!!!! A+++++ review would read again... end sarcasm

If you played video games for the games themselves you would no better but oh well, lets just keep our preconcieved notions

@benoit
Look, the sad matter of fact is game development is a business, and in the end what platform to produce on and the overall quality gradient you have to compete on is dependent on platform espeically in the 360/ps3 vs Wii debate. here you have two platforms with two different standards, publishing on the wii is much more forgiving then on sony and msoft's machine, why? intial costs to make the game are less, there is no need to make your own engine when it comes down to it development costs are far lower on the less technically advance platform, the competition is about maximizing gameplay and what the system to do, which is a little bit easier then building your engine ground up and trying to compete in that essence. Thus when you select your platform, and because the goal is to sell copies, if you meet the minumum threshhold of "good" game quality on the wii, it will not translate to a good game on the ps3/360 due to the graphical and computational benchmarks of those systems. Just look at the Condiut, touted as the breakthrough fps for wii, when infact it's just the same geometrical rooms with the same enemy units and turns DC into a box of identical rooms when your supposedly battling through the white house and pentagon, yet still many claim it as ground breaking in the genre when in fact it is mere average. Why would people still try to mask a turd as a golden turd? Simply because of the lack of quality shooter games on the console, so in fact my argument isn't strawman since these two subjects are indeed intertwined. Condiut doesn't compete with kz2, h3, mw1 and 2 it competes with cod4 hence platform choice in development does matter and pertain to quality.

Dude !

This was in 1986 to 1988 !

We were 9 and 10 year olds and I am relating the memories from then !

What the hell ?

Get a grip !

You talking as if I am relating my current understanding of the systems now ?

What the hell did we know about game play, system design, 8 bit systems and sound processors ?


All i knew then was:

Nintendo was it.

Nintendo was hip.

Nintendo power was the bible.

Mario was the prohpet


Bear in mind also most of us were comming from Atari 2600 systems and games like "ET"

The sega looked too damn much like the Atari for some of us that were burned as grade schoolers.

Ohh GAWD how I hated yars revenge... and PACMAN was nothing like on the arcade boxes at the mall.

So the cure for that was seeing mario spit fireballs was the sweetness.

Nintendo was grea and did not remind us of the Atari.

Remember... we were kids !

Ohh... and we all thought Punky Brewster was a babe... I mean she was hotness.

That episode where she built her RC car made us think of rape !

Ohh the memories...

[Benoit]

Originally Posted by 2H-Dragon

Let me say this though, considering on the XBOX360 is clearly the most successful software wise and 3rd party games just don't sell on the Wii.

That third-party games don't sell on the Wii is myth, like I said before. Just check the sales charts.

Originally Posted by Nosauz

if you meet the minumum threshhold of "good" game quality on the wii, it will not translate to a good game on the ps3/360 due to the graphical and computational benchmarks of those systems

A game that is only good because of its technological prowess is not a good game.

Just look at the Condiut, touted as the breakthrough fps for wii, when infact it's just the same geometrical rooms with the same enemy units and turns DC into a box of identical rooms when your supposedly battling through the white house and pentagon, yet still many claim it as ground breaking in the genre when in fact it is mere average. Why would people still try to mask a turd as a golden turd?

Because motion controls are easier and more fun to use than a game pad when it comes to FPSs?

Simply because of the lack of quality shooter games on the console, so in fact my argument isn't strawman since these two subjects are indeed intertwined.

Except that you said "open system versus the closed console", which really isn't what your argument is about. It's about games competing in the same genre on the same platform.

And, again, please learn to use some paragraphs!

Originally Posted by Zetsubo

This was in 1986 to 1988 !

Then what was the Virtual Boy doing in your post?

[Zetsubo]

Originally Posted by Benoit

Then what was the Virtual Boy doing in your post?

Ooo for petes sake...

[HayashiTakara]

Originally Posted by Zetsubo

Dude !

This was in 1986 to 1988 !

We were 9 and 10 year olds and I am relating the memories from then !

What the hell ?

Get a grip !

You talking as if I am relating my current understanding of the systems now ?

What the hell did we know about game play, system design, 8 bit systems and sound processors ?


All i knew then was:

Nintendo was it.

Nintendo was hip.

Nintendo power was the bible.

Mario was the prohpet


Bear in mind also most of us were comming from Atari 2600 systems and games like "ET"

The sega looked too damn much like the Atari for some of us that were burned as grade schoolers.

Ohh GAWD how I hated yars revenge... and PACMAN was nothing like on the arcade boxes at the mall.

So the cure for that was seeing mario spit fireballs was the sweetness.

Nintendo was grea and did not remind us of the Atari.

Remember... we were kids !

Ohh... and we all thought Punky Brewster was a babe... I mean she was hotness.

That episode where she built her RC car made us think of rape !

Ohh the memories...

Punky Brewster was awesome. How about Parker Lewis can't Lose? XD

[Zetsubo]

I don't know parker lewis.

In my country at the time we had only one public TV station... and punky was it.

[Nosauz]

Originally Posted by Benoit

That third-party games don't sell on the Wii is myth, like I said before. Just check the sales charts.

Again what metrics are you using? Generally profitability for wii titles is the 70,000 mark, depends on what you consider selling well, I will say this now, third parties sell no where near nintendo titles, end of story, and nintendo titles are the once that reach market saturation.

Originally Posted by Benoit

Because motion controls are easier and more fun to use than a game pad when it comes to FPSs?

Have you played The Conduit? If you have I think you would grossly disagree. The game is not well designed and even if it's "fun" if the game is bad no matter how promising the game play mechanic might be it will still suck, just look at Red Steel.

Originally Posted by Benoit

Except that you said "open system versus the closed console", which really isn't what your argument is about. It's about games competing in the same genre on the same platform.

Except it's not, it's about games competing with games regardless of platform, then the limitations of platform do confer a sub category of judgment due to the limitations of the platform itself.

Originally Posted by Benoit

And, again, please learn to use some paragraphs!

Meh it depends if I'm multi tasking or not, but seriously the internets is serious business.

[Leo Keichi]

Originally Posted by Zetsubo

Dude !

Bear in mind also most of us were comming from Atari 2600 systems and games like "ET"

The sega looked too damn much like the Atari for some of us that were burned as grade schoolers.

Ohh GAWD how I hated yars revenge... and PACMAN was nothing like on the arcade boxes at the mall.

So the cure for that was seeing mario spit fireballs was the sweetness.

Nintendo was grea and did not remind us of the Atari.

Lol, I remember when I first saw Mortal Kombat, and I was like: "wow, such realistic graphics! I've never seen anything like this before, it looks like a movie!" I never thought I'd see much better graphics than those, until I played Samurai Shodown II for Neo Geo.

I remember too when Mickey Mouse games like Fantasia and Castle of Illusion were the hip where I lived. Atari looked like something from the far past by that time.

[Benoit]

Originally Posted by Nosauz

Again what metrics are you using? Generally profitability for wii titles is the 70,000 mark, depends on what you consider selling well

Third-party titles generally sell a couple hundred thousand, if not a couple millions.

if the game is bad no matter how promising the game play mechanic might be it will still suck, just look at Red Steel

I haven't played Red Steel yet, but a friend of mine has, and he says it's not as bad as people make it out to be. And yes, he has played good titles like Halo.

Except it's not, it's about games competing with games regardless of platform, then the limitations of platform do confer a sub category of judgment due to the limitations of the platform itself.

Make up your mind already. You keep changing what you're saying. First it's about closed vs. open, then it's about games of the same genre on the same platform, and now you're saying all the games are competing.

but seriously the internets is serious business

Just because this isn't grade school is no reason to put little effort in your posts. We still have to read them. Show some respect.

[HayashiTakara]

It's pointless in arguing with people who doesn't know what they're talking about and is blinded by your personal bias.

[Nosauz]

Post those metrics, about third parties "generally" sell 100,000 of units, because I'm pretty sure maybe some hot title off vc might hit those metrics but then again I haven't fished through npd's in a long time since they refuse to include digital distribution in their metrics.

[The Master]

Got to say I quite liked Sonic Unleashed on the Wii, I thought the Werehog sections were fun if a little repetitive but they added variety. While I would like to see Sonic return to an old school 2D format I don't think they would still be making sonic games if they had not gone 3D and experimented. Sonic was brilliant in 2D and I think it would be good if they did a remake of the first 3 games using the Unleashed game engine.

I agree with Zetsubo though, while I liked Sega during the whole Sega vs Nintendo period. I prefer Nintendo now. Has anyone else found there tastes have changed as to who they liked during the Sega/Nintendo period. Anyone gone from Nintendo to Sega?

[roriconfan]

Originally Posted by The Master

Anyone gone from Nintendo to Sega?

That is a great joke man. Do you know more?

Seriously, Sega was forced to insert Sonic, its mascot, into Nintendo games. Doesn't that mean anything? Sega was defeated three times in a row before joining the enemy. And the rest is history.

Currently, Nintendo goes for quantity over quality and that indeed means more money, the only factor that matters in the trade. It may work for now but let's see if the gamers get fed up soon and turn to other games that actually pose a chalenge besides shaking your hands to clean windows.

Timing the pressing of the button in Legend of the Dragoon. Filling the field in favorable elements in Cronocross. Desiding the best position and ammo to use in Armored Core. Now THAT was interesting and addictive. It took me two minutes to be bored with the shaking joystick of Wii games. No thrill, no anxiety, no planning at all.

[Benoit]

I wouldn't be surprised if anyone jumped from Nintendo to Sega. At least Sega still experiments and from time to time releases something great (Valkyria Chronicles, Phantasy Star Portable 2,...). Not to say that Nintendo is bad, but they tend to keep to their established series and formulas when it comes to non-casual games.

Can anyone explain to me how I get to NPD game sales numbers? Their website is a maze. I have numbers from one year ago, but I'm not sure if everyone would consider that relevant.

[HayashiTakara]

Originally Posted by roriconfan

That is a great joke man. Do you know more?

Seriously, Sega was forced to insert Sonic, its mascot, into Nintendo games. Doesn't that mean anything? Sega was defeated three times in a row before joining the enemy. And the rest is history.

Currently, Nintendo goes for quantity over quality and that indeed means more money, the only factor that matters in the trade. It may work for now but let's see if the gamers get fed up soon and turn to other games that actually pose a chalenge besides shaking your hands to clean windows.

Timing the pressing of the button in Legend of the Dragoon. Filling the field in favorable elements in Cronocross. Desiding the best position and ammo to use in Armored Core. Now THAT was interesting and addictive. It took me two minutes to be bored with the shaking joystick of Wii games. No thrill, no anxiety, no planning at all.

Nintendo has no control over 3rd Party /end discussion.

Having waves of garbage from no name publishers/developers didn't damage Sony and it won't happen with Nintendo.