Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Hawkeye_a · May 12, 2009, 04:59 PM

Originally Posted by Stogieman

As long as they don't kick the bucket BEFORE Ghostbusters is released next month.

I thought they already delayed the Ghostbusters game on all non-Sony consoles ?

Stogieman · May 12, 2009, 05:18 PM

Only in Europe.

http://www.joystiq.com/2009/05/06/so...n-resurrected/

Update: Atari US has clarified its publishing plans for the North American region. The 360, PS3, Wii and DS versions will all be released in the US on June 16, as previously announced. The PSP version will be released worldwide in Autumn.

DarkStarRed · May 13, 2009, 05:03 AM

That's strange it's "Ghostbusters" already on sale (out of stock) right now for the Wii on Amazon Vivendi games.

Dakar V · May 13, 2009, 09:36 AM

Nintendo: We're not ignoring hardcore gamers, we're leaving them wanting more

"I will give you that hardcore gamers have an insatiable appetite for everything Nintendo," she said, "and we love that! We love that. When we get to a point where core gamers say, "OK, Nintendo, enough! We don't need any more games from you guys...." None of us wants to be put in that position, right?

"We don't want your appetite to ever be satisfied, because when we satisfy you, it's time for us to go [dusts off hands], "OK! Let's go on home now!" And none of us wants to go home. So there's this sort of fun...relationship, I think, that's happening between Nintendo and the hardcore gamer — which we enjoy and hope that the core gamer enjoys it."

Stogieman · May 13, 2009, 03:43 PM

Just when I thought the Sony PR bulls*** couldn't be topped, Nintendo comes out with this gem.

exca1ibur · May 13, 2009, 06:07 PM

Nintendo has ignored the 'hardcore' market ever since the SNES. I don't by any of the BS in their 'excuse' here. They are making money hand of fist, by ignoring the 'hardcore' market, so financially there is no reason to change and with the current hardware they couldn't if they wanted to.

Hawkeye_a · May 14, 2009, 12:45 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar V

Nintendo: We're not ignoring hardcore gamers, we're leaving them wanting more

Woah. a distinct tone of arrogance there imo. They seem to be starting to think they're on a pedestal.... again (think post SNES days). Seems like the cycle will continue.... Nintendo at the top now, starts getting arrogant....Sony at the bottom, gets humble....and so on and so forth.

But yeah that was a stupid statement for Nintendo to make.

And exca1ibur, i agree with you 100%..... but it must be pointed out that last generation, despite having a more powerful console(than the 'winner') the hardcore still shunned Nintendo in favor for the PS2/XBox..... why should Nintendo keep courting a niche which has already decided to ignore them ? So is courting the 'core' more important than 'winning' from a company's standpoint ? I'll bet Sony and Microsoft are wishing they were in Nintendo's position today, eh ?

Dakar V · May 14, 2009, 03:09 PM

No ****, Sherlock.

---

Already? Hope it comes with a slimmer price.

---

Mild Editorial: Can someone explain to me why E3 is going to big again this year? Two years ago when the economy hadn't gone in the shitter they were complaining about how expensive it was and just too big. They wisely scaled down last year, but now this year, forecasted to be no better than last, they're stepping things up? How does that make sense?

Dakar V · May 14, 2009, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by exca1ibur

Nintendo has ignored the 'hardcore' market ever since the SNES. I don't by any of the BS in their 'excuse' here. They are making money hand of fist, by ignoring the 'hardcore' market, so financially there is no reason to change and with the current hardware they couldn't if they wanted to.

I'm not sure I'd fault for the N64 for not being hardcore. I mean, it features the greatest console shooter of all time, plus a two more of the greatest games of all time. The N64s fault was in its format and unwieldy, semi-redundant controller. Now, if you want to say it was the slip-up that started the spiral down... yeah, I agree.

Dakar V · May 14, 2009, 03:13 PM

Re-posted, because it seems like Hawkeye missed it

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a

but im just pointing out some rather strange decision making at work. If the guys making these games just want t 'showoff' cool technology that is appreciated by a niche thats cool....im just saying it would be a better investment(like the pS2 was) to cater to the biggest market as well.

No one is going to write with a quill and ink when a ball-point pen is available. I guarantee almost every game ever made has had features cut because some just weren't feasible/possible to do with the technology available at the time; There's no reason to develop while pointlessly holding one hand behind your back. You know the drill: Core titles get developed on the best tech available, and then features get cut when(if) it's ported.

Now, here's the bad news for you: RE5 and SFIV did just fine (if not very well) on just the 360 and PS3. Which means Capcom can continue to ignore the Wii as a primary platform when developing its core titles (And can consider it an option for ports).

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a

The whole console wars thing aside..... i really don't see the correlation between:
-bad game sells
and
-good game will not sell

I'll summarize than answer to the original question that got obfuscated over more posts than it should have as usual:

Wii owners have yet to display an ability to discern quality rated titles from bad ones and instead appear to rely purely on brand recognition (Nintendo) followed by a limited selection of genres (sports games) or demographic (Everyone). The numbers back-up these assertions and have already been posted above.

sek929 · May 14, 2009, 03:16 PM

Originally Posted by Dakar V

I'm not sure I'd fault for the N64 for not being hardcore. I mean, it features the greatest console shooter of all time, plus a two more of the greatest games of all time. The N64s fault was in its format and unwieldy, semi-redundant controller. Now, if you want to say it was the slip-up that started the spiral down... yeah, I agree.

The N64 was amazing and to hell with anyone who says less!

...the joysticks were really poorly made though, I only have like one out of five controllers that has decent spring left in it.

Dakar V · May 14, 2009, 03:17 PM

I returned the first two blue controllers I bought in a week (Third one lasted, somehow).

sek929 · May 14, 2009, 03:32 PM

I just did inventory.

I have:

2 Grey: 1 Terrible, 1 is the best controller I have.
1 Red: Mediocre
1 Green: Terrible
1 Black: Mediocre
1 Blue: Worse than terrible

Slightly OT I also have 6 Xbox original controllers. 2 are broken, 1 constantly rumbles but works, and 3 work beautifully.

I have two original SNES controllers, both work like new.

Dakar V · May 14, 2009, 03:34 PM

Originally Posted by sek929

1 constantly rumbles but works

Is that the gfs?

sek929 · May 14, 2009, 03:35 PM

Hey-ooooo

Dakar V · May 14, 2009, 03:37 PM

No need for the Rumble Massage community app.

sek929 · May 14, 2009, 03:41 PM

No need for me, either...

Edit: and again your question to Hawkeye falls behind inane bullsh!t.

angelmb · May 14, 2009, 03:45 PM

I haven't had any issue with my N64 controllers but all my GAMECUBE controllers are prone to peel off (and then lost) the outer rubber layer of the primary analog stick.

sek929 · May 14, 2009, 03:46 PM

Wow, you must not have played very hard, everyone I know with an N64 wore out at least 2 controllers.

Hawkeye_a · May 15, 2009, 12:53 AM

Lair(PS3) Dev Factor 5 Closes

angelmb · May 15, 2009, 06:18 AM

So sad, the N64 Star Wars games were top notch, IMO reason enough to justify the memory expansion pak.

Wow, you must not have played very hard, everyone I know with an N64 wore out at least 2 controllers.

Well, it was my very first 'desktop' Nintendo system (I have had several GB before) so I guess I babied it

mattyb · May 15, 2009, 08:05 AM

Another quality Wii game.

Dakar V · May 15, 2009, 10:40 AM

Another news bukkake:

Report: Sony losing about $40 on each PS3

Let's do a lot of assuming here. First, the slimline saves them an additional $50 per console. So they're up $10 a console. They have to drop the price by the holidays, most likely by $100, meaning even after the introduction of the slimline (if it comes out this year) Sony will still be losing more money on the PS3 by the end of the year then right now.

---

April NPD

- DS: 1.04M477K (+85%)
- Wii: 340K261K (-43%)
- Xbox 360: 175K155K (-47%)
- PS2: 172K60K (+87%)
- PS3: 127K91K (-42%)
- PSP: 116K52K (-31%)

DSi outsells everything else combined, PS2 outsells the PS3 by over a third.

Top 10 Games of April 2009
Wii Fit - Wii - Nintendo - 471K
Pokemon Platinum - DS - Nintendo - 433K
Mario Kart Wii - Wii - Nintendo - 210K
Wii Play - Wii - Nintendo - 170K
The Godfather II - 360 - EA - 155K
Resident Evil 5 - 360 - Capcom - 122K
New Super Mario Bros. - DS - Nintendo - 119K
Mario Kart DS - DS - Nintendo - 112K
Guitar Hero Aerosmith - 360 - Activision - 110K
The Godfather II - PS3 - EA - 91K

I yield my analysis to the man from kotaku
(Emphasis added by me)

Notable new releases that failed to make the overall software top 10: Rhythm Heaven (April 5), Ninja Blade (April 7) Excitebots (April 20), X-Men Origins: Wolverine (May 1 - possibly arrived in stores after the May 2 NPD cut-off date).

Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars doing a slow burn at best: The game, which sold 89,000 copies in the 19 days it was out during its first NPD month had 27 more days on sale during the new reporting period. It failed to sell 91,000 copies, the lowest software sales number listed on the top 10.

Missing T's: Of the top 10 games listed in the April NPD software charts, six are on Nintendo platforms and rated E. Of the remaining four non-Nintendo-platform games, three are rated M. There is one T-rated game, a Guitar Hero spin-off.

Hawkeye_a · May 15, 2009, 11:27 AM

The PS2's sales look awfully close to the XB360's.

And Sony looses $1bn over the last fiscal year http://www.newsfactor.com/news/Sony-...d=032002YEPRFK so much for Ghzs, GBs and pixels.

Dakar V · May 15, 2009, 11:48 AM

Of course, for that number to really mean anything, it'd have to be limited to the gaming division.

starman · May 15, 2009, 12:09 PM

Originally Posted by Dakar V

I'm not sure I'd fault for the N64 for not being hardcore. I mean, it features the greatest console shooter of all time, plus a two more of the greatest games of all time. The N64s fault was in its format and unwieldy, semi-redundant controller. Now, if you want to say it was the slip-up that started the spiral down... yeah, I agree.

Greatest console shooter of ALL TIME?

No.

Dakar V · May 15, 2009, 12:15 PM

Originally Posted by starman

Greatest console shooter of ALL TIME?

No.

Feel free to, you know, actually provide some kind of alternative for debate.

klb5090 · May 15, 2009, 12:21 PM

Originally Posted by starman

Greatest console shooter of ALL TIME?

No.

Assuming were talking about Goldeneye here...

Goldeneye (for console shooters) is like The Beatles (for rock n roll)...
Its the foundation of the house (for console shooters), its gray, ugly, and pretty bland without many features but without it none of the more "good looking" and useful parts would be built.

starman · May 15, 2009, 12:38 PM

Originally Posted by Dakar V

Feel free to, you know, actually provide some kind of alternative for debate.

I never liked Goldeneye, mostly because by then I was already playing Marathon and Quake.

Best console shooter of ALL TIME...Halo.

Dakar V · May 15, 2009, 12:40 PM

The first one?

starman · May 15, 2009, 12:44 PM

Yes, the first one.

Much better multiplayer (like....the ability to not have to see where the other person is), much better single player story.

Dakar V · May 15, 2009, 12:45 PM

I smell a poll coming.

So what other options should I throw in?

jokell82 · May 15, 2009, 12:52 PM

Trying to name the best console shooter of all time is like trying to name the best Saturn car of all time - it doesn't really matter since the competition (PC shooters) simply outclasses them in every regard.

Dakar V · May 15, 2009, 12:54 PM

Originally Posted by jokell82

Trying to name the best console shooter of all time is like trying to name the best Saturn car of all time - it doesn't really matter since the competition (PC shooters) simply outclasses them in every regard.

That makes sense... if you play PC games.

starman · May 15, 2009, 12:56 PM

Originally Posted by Dakar V

I smell a poll coming.

So what other options should I throw in?

Perfect Dark (N64)
Marathon 2 (Xbox Live)
Quake 2 (PS2)
Quake 3 Arena (Dreamcast)
Half-Life (PS2)
Turok 2 (N64) (Great game, but SERIOUSLY long gaps between save points)

I don't know if you'd count PC ports as true shooters, though.

Dakar V · May 15, 2009, 12:58 PM

No, no PC ports.

Stogieman · May 15, 2009, 01:03 PM

Originally Posted by starman

Yes, the first one.

Much better multiplayer (like....the ability to not have to see where the other person is), much better single player story.

I'll agree that the campaign in Halo 1 was much more epic than 2 or 3 but for multiplayer, nothing beats Halo 3.

sek929 · May 15, 2009, 03:16 PM

Originally Posted by starman

Yes, the first one.

Much better multiplayer (like....the ability to not have to see where the other person is), much better single player story.

That's if you had three other friends with an Xbox and a LAN connection to play on. I myself played 4 player split-screen on Halo CE which is the exact same type of gameplay as Bond 4 player.

Bond was more fun and was filled with more hilarity. It had a way quicker pace than CE, more like a Quake Area feel to it.

Goldeneye 007 is the reason we have console shooters.

starman · May 15, 2009, 06:23 PM

Originally Posted by sek929

Goldeneye 007 is the reason we have console shooters.

Uh, no.

Stogieman · May 15, 2009, 06:44 PM

Uh, yes.

See how annoying these one or two word responses are?

starman · May 15, 2009, 06:58 PM

You have nothing to back that up. How many ARE on consoles in the first place? We couldn't even come up with enough for a poll.

sek929 · May 16, 2009, 03:02 AM

Originally Posted by starman

Uh, no.

Then name a console FPS that preceded it...I didn't think so.

Goldeneye was the grand-daddy of all console FPSes, and it was damn brilliant at that.

starman · May 16, 2009, 12:07 PM

Originally Posted by sek929

Then name a console FPS that preceded it...I didn't think so.

Goldeneye was the grand-daddy of all console FPSes, and it was damn brilliant at that.

Name 10 that came AFTER that. That's the point. Other than Halo, Turok, and Perfect Dark there weren't many at all. That's my point.

Stogieman · May 16, 2009, 01:20 PM

Well, off the top of my head I can think of:

Killzone
Resistance: Fall of Man
Time Splitters 2
Metroid Prime
SOCOM: Navy Seals
Oddworld: Strangers Wrath
Bad Company
Haze (Hey, you didn't say it had to be a good FPS

)

exca1ibur · May 16, 2009, 02:39 PM

Call of Duty
Dues Ex <- one of the all time greats for me
Bioshock
Unreal Tournament

sek929 · May 16, 2009, 04:36 PM

Rainbow Six: Vegas 1&2
Pariah
Red Faction

jokell82 · May 16, 2009, 05:44 PM

Originally Posted by exca1ibur

Call of Duty
Dues Ex <- one of the all time greats for me
Bioshock
Unreal Tournament

Deus Ex was a PC shooter, as was UT.

And upon further research, Call of Duty was a PC shooter as well.

jokell82 · May 16, 2009, 05:49 PM

Originally Posted by sek929

Rainbow Six: Vegas 1&2
Pariah
Red Faction

Rainbow Six is another PC shooter, ported to consoles. Pariah was a simultaneous release on PC and XBox, so I'm not sure how you'd classify that one.

sek929 · May 16, 2009, 05:57 PM

Rainbow Six was a PC shooter but Vegas came to the 360 before any other platform. I had no idea about Pariah though.

jokell82 · May 16, 2009, 09:28 PM

Originally Posted by sek929

Rainbow Six was a PC shooter but Vegas came to the 360 before any other platform. I had no idea about Pariah though.

I didn't even know it existed. Was it any good?