Exactly. That's why it's smart for Nintendo to not waste money on an Online system right now. Let MS and Sony invest in it. It will either flop, or take off. If it takes off, more gamers will get interested in online gaming and Nintendo will have larger group of potential consumers to pitch their online games to whenever they take the plunge. If it flops, MS and Sony take a hit and Nintendo comes out unscathed. It's a win-win situation for Nintendo.

I don't know that I agree with that. It's certainly the cautious approach with the least up-front risk. However, if online console gaming is successful, Nintendo runs the risk of being left in the dust while Microsoft and Sony build a loyal following. So, I'd say it's more a win-lose situation. If online gaming fails, Nintendo will have made a smart decision but if it's a success, they will have sacrificed potential profits (and more importantly, marketshare) in online gaming. Time will tell if they made the right decision.

Well, even if online gaming is a success, Nintendo still has the capability to join in on it. Developers (at least some) will still develop online games for the cube, the more systems their game is on, the more money they make.

Nintendo is not in a win-win situation. It is most definately in a win-lose situation.

If online gaming flops... IF? It won't. People want on-line gaming, its only a matter of making it profitable for companies. EA not charging for its servers makes it a money losing venture, since they have to run the servers and also dont charge. The Xbox method at least takes off the cost of servers from the publishers and puts it on Microsoft, while also allowing extra charges for content by the publishers..

The Xbox method is the ONLY way to make big time online gaming work. Anyone in college knows this, as everyone in college (at least the 40,000 students at U of I Champaign/Urbana), broadband is awesome and basically all college kids have it. Its in the dorms, its in the fraternities, its in the apartments. It is also getting cheaper and cheaper in homes, with DSL/Cable costing $30-40 a month now, compared to the dialup cost of $20-$25 for AOL or the like.

PS2's online system won't work, its a stop gap measure. They will definatley go with Microsofts approach on PS3.

Nintendo, in my opinion, wont have another system after gamecube, and will most likely go the way of SEGA.

-Jim

Exactly what Zig said.

If online gaming takes off, all Nintendo has to do is put out some killer online games and they'll be in the thick of it.

Something like a Mario Kart Online would catch them up to Sony and MS in no time, if online gaming takes off and they decide to jump into the fray.

That's why I say its a win-win situation.

Personally, I have no interest in online gaming and hope it never becomes more than online modes in some games and an online only game like FFXI here and there.

I also don't want online gaming on my console. If other people do, good for them, as long as it doesn't affect me. It just doesn't interest me.

Broadband, at least in my area, is becoming more expensive and less reliable as more and more people decide they want it. A lot of people decide to go back to dial-up after trying broadband.

And I don't see Nintendo giving up on making new consoles until they're forced to. They're in 2nd place, so I don't see that happening either.

Nintendo is very profitable. The GBA is a huge cash cow, and nearly every first party game they put out sells over a million copies and sells a bunch of hardware too.

Nintendo will always have a console out IMO.

I have to greatly disagree. The Game Cube is going to be very successful for them (though not the huge money maker the PS2 will be) and there is no reason to stop until they actually have a major failure like the Saturn or Dreamcast.

Nintendo has taken a very smart approach. They realize online gaming is still in its infancy and not worth investing millions on, but they have left the option open if it catches on. Let Microsoft take the risks and dump millions on it. I'm doubting it will make much of an impact for any of the consoles, but time will tell. Socom likes pretty interesting and I might break down and try online gaming with the PS2. I also like the free game for the PS2, Twisted Metal Black online. The free game for the Xbox does not interest me at all. I doubt I would ever want to play Revolt online or anywhere. If its the same RC racing game that was on the Dreamcast I will pass.

1. We already knew 3rd parties would have the ability to choose their own monthly fee, if needed. That was revealed at E3.

2. PSO is bundled with the Japanese XBox Live package. The only way Sega could make any money was by charging consumers a monthly fee.

The North American version will be sold seperately.

Again, I'm not so sure it's that easy. Most people aren't going to be willing to pay for online gaming on more than one console. If Microsoft and Sony have already attracted a large user-base, there's less consumers available for Nintendo to draw on when they finally get serious about online. Putting out a flagship title isn't necessarily going to be enough to overcome the fact that Nintendo is late to the party. Certainly, Mario 64 and Zelda weren't enough to convince consumers to pick Nintendo over Sony in the previous generation.

2nd place? Where, Japan? Certainly not in the U.S.. However, I do agree that Nintendo isn't likely to stop making consoles anytime soon. As long as it's profitable, Nintendo will stick with it.

Nintendo is in second place in worldwide sells, which is the only number that matters as that reflects a console makers total sales/profits.


As for your other post, if Nintendo decides to go online if the X-box and PS2 are profitable online, they will be successful as long as they have killer first party online games.

People will be willing to pay for them, plus theres a bunch of people (casual gamers) who only own gamecubes, so that's another market they can dip into.

At any rate I don't see them bothering as Online gaming isn't going to be a huge success this generation. Companies will be lucky to break even IMO. MS is only projecting 50,000 users in the first year. They'll be lucky to get that IMO, and that's not going to entice Nintendo to enter the fray.

Hmmmm. I guess I'd be interested in a link supporting that if you have one. The latest numbers I've seen have the Gamecube solidly in third in the U.S. (over 500,000 units behind and increasing) and running even in Europe. Obviously, Nintendo (like everyone else) is ahead of Xbox in Japan but it hasn't been a huge success there. Either way, the U.S. is the largest market and is viewed by most companies as the most important due to size and potential sales growth. Just look at the N64 which was pretty much a disappointment in Japan and Europe but was still able to be profitable by having decent success in the U.S..

This isn't about whether or not online will be a success. This is about Nintendo's conservative stance on online gaming and whether it's in a win-win situation. You still haven't convinced me how Nintendo can win either way. If online is a failure, yes, Nintendo will, in effect, "win" by not losing money. However, if online gaming is a success, Nintendo will be far behind Microsoft and even Sony in garnering a large online user-base. That translates directly to lost sales which is money that Nintendo cannot recoup. They will face an uphill battle trying to win converts from Microsoft and Sony's networks. It's not impossible that Nintendo might someday build a loyal online following but each month that goes by without a viable online plan is one more month of lost potential revenue. That wouldn't be a "win" by my definition.

I'm too lazy to search for it, but I believe the last world wide numbers I saw were posted here a while back.

They were way ahead in Japan, a good chunck ahead in Europe and Austrailia, and trailing like you said here. It balanced out to them being ahead overall, but not buy a huge margin.

I did see some numbers on the gamers.com boards that show that the X-box has sold better here than the GCN since the price drops (though the PS2 is still killing them both) so the X-box might have moved ahead.

At any rate, the GCN should be flying off shelves for the rest of the year. ED has turned out to be a big surprise. The great reviews will sell a bunch of systems. RE sold some systems. Mario, Metroid and RE0 will sell a bunch of systems.

It's tough to argue that the GCN won't be securely in second place by years end.

But then again all three systems are here to stay, so who cares?

That's not correct Josh, unless you mean calender year.

Microsoft is projecting "tens of thousands" which is anywhere from 20,000 to 90,000 at launch in late 2002. By the end of 2003, they are projecting "hundreds of thousands" which could be anywhere from 200,000 to 900,000 users. Also by 2007, they expect to have 10 million online users.

And a little extra factoid: MS is launching the XBox Live service with the capacity for 600,000 users.

I just don't think Nintendo will have a problem catching up. Their first party games are the most popular and best selling games of all time.

If they put out some first party online games, they'll catch up in no time IMO.

Besides, even if online gaming takes off (which it won't IMO) MS is only estimating 50,000 users in the first year.

That's not a lot of ground to make up. If they put out an online Mario Kart, they'd get a bunch of subscribers in no time.

They don't really have to win over people from MS and Sony, they just need to get the loyal Nintendo fanbase in to Online gaming. Like I said, there's a bunch of people out there that only own a GCN (or an X-box, or PS2) as casual gamers usually only have one console.

If they get those people online with a Mario Kart calibur game, the gap will be closed.

Anyway, we'll likely have to agree to disagree as I'm not wasting anymore time arguing the point as I really don't give a crap about online gaming or how each system fares at it. :D

Here are some numbers from back in May.

Worldwide Units shipped:
1) PS2- 30 million
2) GCN- 4.5 million
3) Xbox- 3.5 million

Source: Gamepro

That's what I thought the numbers looked like. In that case MS hasn't caught up yet, because the sales disparity since the price drop isn't 1 million plus, but rather 115,000. Below are the numbers I got off the egm board at gamers.com. I'm not sure the exact period these numbers are for either. The poster cited gaming age:

PS2: 510,000
GBA: 313,000
Xbox: 226,000
GameCube: 111,000

Lost sales? What are you talking about? The top selling "online" games will never outsell the top selling "non-online" games. This is the whole reason why Nintendo is not going full steam with online gaming right now. They don't want to lose sales of "non online" games (which reach the widest audience) by wasting development time on "online" games (which only reach a limited audience). For proof of this in action, all we have to do is look at the PC market where online gaming is everywhere.

Top Selling PC games of 2001:
1 - The Sims - Electronic Arts
2 - RollerCoaster Tycoon - Infogrames
3 - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone - Electronic Arts
4 - Diablo II: Lord of Destruction - Vivendi Universal
5 - The Sims: House Party - Electronic Arts
6 - The Sims: Livin' Large - Electronic Arts
7 - The Sims: Hot Date - Electronic Arts
8 - Diablo II - Vivendi Universal
9 - SimTheme Park - Electronic Arts
10 - Age of Empires II: Age of Kings - Microsoft

11 - Black & White - Electronic Arts
12 - Frogger - Infogrames
13 - Roller Coaster Tycoon: Loopy Landscapes - Infogrames
14 - Command & Conquer Red Alert 2 - Electronic Arts
15 - Backyard Basketball - Infogrames
16 - SimCity 3000 Unlimited - Electronic Arts
17 - Backyard Baseball 2001 - Infogrames
18 - Age of Empires II: The Conquerors - Microsoft
19 - Max Payne - GodGames
20 - SimCity 3000 - Electronic Arts

source:
NPD
Games Domain

As you can see, even in the online friendly PC market, the majority of the top sellers are "non-online" games. This is where Nintendo is coming from with their online strategy. But then again, here is the latest from IGN CUBE:

Easier said than done considering how long it takes N to release regular games. If it takes off they'll be a year and a half behind everyone else.

To me as a GCN owner, it's sucky that Nintendo is so afraid of going Online. An Online versus mode in WaveRacer or Smash Bros. would probably made me keep those games instead of selling them out of boredome. If they wise up and see that gamers enjoy gaming Online they will need time to release Online games.

Gallant, I'm sure they are already researching what they need to do get online started. Read the quote from ign.cube posted by CreatureX above.

They aren't just saying screw online gaming and waiting to see what happens.

They're getting prepared, and if it takes off they'll be ready relatively quickly.

Given the igncube info mentioned above, and some other stuff I've read, I bet Mario Kart will be ready to go online when it's released -- if online gaming is doing well and they think it will be profitable that is. If it hasn't taken off, they'll just scrap the online mode.

Lost sales is in reference to monthly online fees. For every month that Nintendo does not have an online network, that's another month of lost revenue they could have had. It's money that is going to Microsoft or Sony instead. It's marketshare that is lost. If online gaming is a failure, Nintendo's plan will be vindicated but if online is a success, Nintendo will have lost out on a lot of potential revenue. Which leads to my whole point, that it is not a win-win situation for Nintendo.

Fair enough...