DVD Talk Forum

DVD Talk Forum (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/)
-   Video Game Talk (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/video-game-talk-15/)
-   -   Nintendo of France says Rare is going multiplatform. (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/video-game-talk/226205-nintendo-france-says-rare-going-multiplatform.html)

Flay 07-30-02 06:15 PM

Nintendo of France says Rare is going multiplatform.
 
This is a French site, so the translation is underneath the link

http://www.cubenation.com/news.php#566


Nintendo is uncorrectable. Many english magazines, and the internet website IGNCube have been stating that 2nd Party Developer Rareware, will approach a mulitplatform politic. The two best friends, repeatedly stated that the relations between the two were as normal as ever, high hopes, and the rumors were false. Yesterday, a Nintendo representative hid the truth once again, and rejected Matt Cassamassina's (IGNCube cheif) reports.

Today, a Nintendo representative spoke out. "Rareware will surely create and publish games for the Playstation 2, and the Xbox", receiving this information from Mathieu Minel of Nintendo of France. "This will not change the relationship between Nintendo and Rareware". "Licensed Nintendo games will remain exclusive to Gamecube" How could this happen with Nintendo playing such a large role, and owning a large enough percentage of the company? "Nintendo will sell some of its share in the company, which it possesses."
In other words, Mathieu Minel, he's the marketing head for Gamecube in France, said in an interview that Rare was indeed going multiplatform but would still do games for Nintendo, and that all the Nintendo owned license that Rare worked on would stay exclusive for the Gamecube.

Probably best to wait for an official press release, but I figured I would throw some more gasoline on the already raging fire.

YujiNaka 07-30-02 06:18 PM

Seems this should be merged with the other Nintendo thread going on...

If this is true, do we really see Nintendo making another console after gamecube?

I have heard rumors of Perfect Dark 0 going to Xbox from many, do you think this will happen?

-Jim

zig 07-30-02 06:20 PM

The first paragraph says he rejected the rumors, and the second paragraph says he basically said the rumors were true. Maybe the translation screwed up some of those words.

Anyway, as long as they keep making cube games, I'm happy.

Flay 07-30-02 06:22 PM


Originally posted by zig
The first paragraph says he rejected the rumors, and the second paragraph says he basically said the rumors were true. Maybe the translation screwed up some of those words.
It's about the time frame. Yesterday, they denied it. Today, they said it was true.

zig 07-30-02 06:26 PM

Ah sorry.. I get it now. Still, that's pretty wishy-washy.

Shawn 07-30-02 07:00 PM


I have heard rumors of Perfect Dark 0 going to Xbox from many, do you think this will happen?
I heard that too, but I also heard that PD0 would be on the PS2 and the XBox would get the sequel to Conker's. I'd rather have Perfect Dark 0 on the XBox, but we'll see what happens.

zig 07-30-02 07:21 PM

Either way I think it will be quite a while until we see PD0 on any system. Unless they've been lying to us all this time about how almost nobody is working on it.

Flay 07-30-02 07:23 PM


Originally posted by zig
Either way I think it will be quite a while until we see PD0 on any system. Unless they've been lying to us all this time about how almost nobody is working on it.
Every time they were asked about PD0, it was about a Gamecube version. Technically, they weren't lying if they are making it for another system.

Trigger 07-30-02 07:41 PM


Originally posted by YujiNaka
If this is true, do we really see Nintendo making another console after gamecube?
-Jim

This is what I've been saying all along... The Gamecube is the first time (I think it's the first time, I could be wrong) they've lost money on every console sold... if it's not the first than it's the biggest dip they've had so far. This is because they outsourced the manufacturing of this console. They also can't control the manufacturing of the game media as much as they could before I don't think - cartridges ate heavily into the revenue of the game developers that were loyal to Nintendo since they had to pay Nintendo money to manufacture them - Nintendo wouldn't even allow 3rd party developers to make their own cartridges. They could afford to do it before cuz they were the largest console seller in town. Now it's not the same story. They can afford to bleed money on the consoles because they're billionaires just like Sony and Microsoft - but the fact that 3rd party developers are sick of their antics and the fact that now 2nd party games are starting to expand to other systems... it just seems a logical step that they stop making home consoles - at least maybe stay out of the next generation fight. Gameboy and GBA and Gameboy Color are the biggest selling game hardware in history... they could just make those and stay billionaires and use their in-house game development team to make games for Sony or Microsoft's hardware. I don't think that by the time the dust settles and the next generation is about to sprout that people will really complain all that much. Personally, I'd rather it just be 2 consoles playing tug-o-war with our pocketbooks rather than 3. Nintendo's got some hugely successful first party game franchises that they can make huge money off of. Without 3rd party support, you're basically asking someone to buy your console (which you lose money on) so they can play the games you make exclusively for that console. They would sell alot more games (which are their profit) if they just made them for the other systems instead of trying to lose money to make money. I don't know - it seems like a logical step to me in terms of finance, but they've never done anything logically so we'll have to see. They may never stop making consoles or they might stop a generation or two from now.

Trigger 07-30-02 07:42 PM

By the way - I'd love to play Perfect Dark on my Xbox - I haven't ever played it, but I hear good things.

darkside 07-30-02 07:42 PM


Originally posted by YujiNaka


If this is true, do we really see Nintendo making another console after gamecube?

-Jim

Yes, this will not effect their decision. Rare will not make or break the Game Cube on their own and they still will be supporting the Cube. If Nintendo decides not to do another console it will because of many other factors.

zig 07-30-02 07:57 PM

I think they might skip the next generation of consoles and either extend the gamecube's life or just focus in the handheld market even more. I just can't imagine that Nintendo would ever give up on the console market and just make games. But I guess people said the same thing about Sega.

By the way, where did you read that they're selling the gamecube at a loss? I thought they were profitting at 200 dollars, and are just about breaking even at 150.

parrotheads4 07-30-02 08:04 PM

There are a million and one rumors about this. The latest (and most believable) is that Nintendo is allowing RARE to go multi-platform with online games. Nintendo feels the market would be too small otherwise. SEGA may actually handle the network.

Trigger 07-30-02 08:24 PM


Originally posted by zig
By the way, where did you read that they're selling the gamecube at a loss? I thought they were profitting at 200 dollars, and are just about breaking even at 150.
My info was something that had been going around when it was launched - before and after... now they have since moved production from Japan to China and are going to save some money that way. This just happened in June of this year. Whether or not it's a profitable piece of hardware is something that they haven't disclosed and since they tend to only disclose good news and cover up or keep quiet about the bad news, it's entirely possible that they are still losing money on each console.

joltaddict 07-30-02 10:29 PM

I would be very surprised to see a next gen Nintendo console. Why absorb the costs of hardware and marketing when you can be a hired gun like Sega and be chased after like a cheerleader on prom night?

How much do you think theyre making on liscencing? Third partys arent exactly breaking down their doors. I would bet they have paid more out to Capcom for exclusivity than theyve made on all the third party liscencing they got so far.

So... if your money is coming almost entirely from first party titles why are you making a console again? To increase expenses? This is a business.

darkside 07-30-02 10:38 PM


Originally posted by joltaddict

How much do you think theyre making on liscencing? Third partys arent exactly breaking down their doors. I would bet they have paid more out to Capcom for exclusivity than theyve made on all the third party liscencing they got so far.

Do you have any facts to back up any of those claims? Nintendo's profits certainly show a different story.

Kellehair 07-30-02 10:41 PM


Third partys arent exactly breaking down their doors.
That can, and IMO will, change.


This is a business.
Why doesn't M$ drop out then?

Josh H 07-30-02 10:46 PM

As I've said all along, it's likely to happen, and I don't think it's a huge deal.

Rare is a great developer, but there quality over quantity approach makes them almost a non-factor in the console war. I mean the Gamecube's been out since November, and they've yet to release a game. They'll probably only put out 3-5 games this whole generation.

Hardly enough to sway the console war in Nintendo's favor if they stayed exclusive, so there's no reason for Nintendo to pay them millions to stay second party, which is what it would take IMO, as Rare stands to make much more money going third party and widening their audience.

I'm not saying it won't hurt Nintendo at all if we see games like PD0 on other systems, I'm just saying it's not a backbreaker.

Nintendo can do just fine without them.

I've always thought they were somewhat overrated anyway. The only games of theirs I've loved are Banjo Kazooie, Blast Corps, and the original Battletoads.

Goldeneye and Perfect Dark were very good, but I wasn't as crazy about them as most as I don't like FPSs very much.

Diddy Kong Racing was OK, but really no better than Mario Kart, and Jet Force Gemini sucked. That's all their games I can think of off the top of my head.

I'm also tired of notions that Nintendo going third party like Sega. It won't happen. They are very profitable, Sega wasn't, end of story.

Nintendo actually makes a profit on each gamecube sold, even after the price drop. So everytime someone buys a gamecube to play Mario, Metroid, Zelda, etc. Nintendo makes an extra profit on the system, not to mention extra controllers and memory cards.

joltaddict 07-30-02 10:59 PM


Originally posted by darkside
Do you have any facts to back up any of those claims?
Oh so now I cant just pull stuff out my ass like everyone else?!? :p

Im talking purely about the business models. Microsoft and Sony need an install base to attract developers to get licensing fees. Sega and Nintendo have the software already. They have the games everybody wants to play.

I dont think its wild speculation to assume that Nintendo isnt getting alot of income from developers outside of the GBA. It may be wild speculation to say that RE exclusivity cost them a serious amount of cash but Capcom didnt do it because they love Nintendo. They are not attracting outside developers and they arent getting what they could out of selling their franchises to the widest possible audience.

Do you guys think Im saying the Gamecube is breaking them? Im not. Would it be a more profitable business model to go for the fees of of the GBA and whore themselves out on the next gen console? Oh yeah. Who wouldnt buy a Nintendo first party title if they didnt have to invest in a console just for Mario/Zelda/Metroid? Every gamer on the planet.

I got a Gamecube at launch, BTW. I LOVE Nintendos games.

YujiNaka 07-30-02 11:06 PM

I see a much wider market for Nintendo games if they were multiplatform..

I personally, and I imagine many others, like Nintendo games, but dont want to get a Nintendo system just for a few games.. when I would rather have a PS2 or Xbox that has many more games that I want on it.

If Nintendo made games for Xbox, I would most likely be picking up Super Mario Sunshine, as well as Metroid Prime.

I think they'd make more selling games on other systems, than the paltry if any profit they make on the systems and controllers and however else they make money on gamecube besides selling their own games.

I definately see Nintendo going multiplatform after Gamecube, and riding on GBA success for a while.. Do we plan for a Gamecube successor for another 5-7 years probably?

The console wars will be between Sony and Microsoft in the long run, and Sega and Microsoft will be content kings.

-Jim

joltaddict 07-30-02 11:07 PM


Originally posted by Josh Hinkle
I'm also tired of notions that Nintendo going third party like Sega. It won't happen. They are very profitable
One word. GBA.

You play to your strengths and hardware isnt what made Nintendo great. I think its damn near a certainty youll see Mario and the gang on the PS3.

Josh H 07-30-02 11:10 PM

I just don't see it happening.

Nintendo is too proud of a company and they are very profitable in their current form.

They could probably make a little more money going multiplatform, but I think most people that really want the games will buy their consoles for it.

I personally think all three companies will be around at least through next generation, and personally think MS is in the most precarious position beyond that do to struggles overseas. But who knows, maybe a console that is only successful in the U.S. can survive and stick around. Time will tell.

joltaddict 07-30-02 11:16 PM


Originally posted by Josh Hinkle
Nintendo is too proud of a company and they are very profitable in their current form.
That is one of the strangest things I have ever heard. :confused: Youre saying they wouldnt want to sell product to the widest possible audience? Proud or not they are not making the money they would be as a software only company. The majority of their profits are from the GBA and pokemon. They are underselling their franchises by restricting them. Theyre not some street gang warring over turf. Theyre a business. They will do the most profitable thing whether you "see it happening" or not. Its common sense.

Trigger 07-30-02 11:19 PM

This is a long way off anyway... the best test for this will be to look at Sega in a year to see how they've fared as a software only company. Maybe it'll work and maybe it won't. I'm sure Nintendo is watching closely at the very least.

Josh H 07-30-02 11:23 PM

Maybe stubborn would be a better word than proud. They've always been in the hardware industry and always been profitable at it. I think they'll keep at it until they get to the top again or are near bankrupt (which is the only case I see them going 3rd party).

I don't see them supporting MS or Sony. For one there's a lot of bad blood between them and Sony over the failed partnership of the CD addon for the SNES. And MS tried to buy them before making the X-box and they turned them down.

Plus their strategies are totally different. MS and Sony are going for a set top box (which I hate and won't buy) while Nintendo wants to stick to games only and thinks they can be profitable doing so.

If that turns out to be false, and they are no longer profitable, then I see them going third party.

As long as they continue turning record profits, I don't see them leaving the hardware industry to join up with companies they have bad blood with and that have very different ideas on the direction the video game industry should take, just to increase their profit margin.

I mean, do you think Sega would have went third party if the Dreamcast had been profitable? Probably not. They were losing tons of money and had no choice.

Nintendo is profitable and has a choice. They'll stay in the hardware business until they are no longer making huge profits.

Kellehair 07-30-02 11:26 PM


Youre saying they wouldnt want to sell product to the widest possible audience?
Why don't Sony, M$, Square, and lots of other companies go 3rd party then?

Trigger 07-30-02 11:31 PM

Oh god - how unstoppable would that have been if Microsoft had bought Nintendo lock, stock?... wow... Then we'd have an even race right about now.

Hey - if you people are going to crap on Microsoft by typing "M$" then you have to do it to all the console companies - I mean they are all gazillionaires and corporate suits... $ony and Nintendough are both greedy and fat companies as well. Plus - it's so petty.

Kellehair 07-30-02 11:35 PM

How's that crapping on Microsoft? Bill Gates is the richest man on Earth. I associate his company with money. When I think of Microsoft, I see dollar signs. It would be petty if I meant it as an insult but I really don't.

Josh H 07-30-02 11:37 PM

It does come across as an insult Kellehair, whether you mean it that way or not. It would be better to leave it out to avoid arguments as things like that are easily misunderstoon on message boards.

Trigger 07-30-02 11:38 PM

Oh - okay. It just seems like a jab and I see it all the time. Mah bad.

joltaddict 07-30-02 11:41 PM


Originally posted by Kellehair
Why don't Sony, M$, Square, and lots of other companies go 3rd party then?
Square sells their strength. The games. They get paid by Sony so they stay exclusive. Then they can throw more money away on bad movies. ;)

Sony and Microsoft OTOH, are both gunning for the set top box. They want the licensing fee for all the entertainment that comes in your house. Diametrically opposed goals from what Sega, Square, Nintendo and Rare do. They pay a fee to sell on a platform (with the sole exception of Nintendo). So why would any software provider get in a pissing match with Sony or Microsoft? Its a business, theyre not acting on principle. They want to maximize profits.

Some of you act like Nintendo are your buddys who just want to make cool games for you to play like theyre defending the industry from the evil corporations like Sony and M$ ( -rolleyes- ).

Flay 07-30-02 11:43 PM

Here is what Penny-Arcade thinks of people that use the $ in Microsoft:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2002/20020722l.gif

joltaddict 07-30-02 11:45 PM

Thats a funny comic and all but Palladium really is the devil. :(

Trigger 07-30-02 11:46 PM


Originally posted by Flay
Here is what Penny-Arcade thinks of people that use the $ in Microsoft:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php...02-07-22&res=l

:lol: Oh priceless... :)

Trigger 07-30-02 11:47 PM


Originally posted by Josh Hinkle
It would be better to leave it out to avoid arguments as things like that are easily misunderstoon on message boards.
And you wouldn't want to be misunderstoon... ;)

Josh H 07-30-02 11:50 PM

I don't think Nintendo is defending me from anything. I know they are just a company trying to make money.

I'm just a big fan of the games only strategy they've adopted.

I hate the idea of a settop box. It drives up the cost, and I'm paying for features I don't want. For example, the rumored new version of the X-box with built in Ultimate TV (MSs Tivo) has been said to cost $500.

I think it would suck if the PS3 and X-box 2 come out with Tivo and whatever crap they put in the set top box and cost $400-500 or more.

$199 is the most I'm willing to pay for a gaming system (not accounting for inflation). Especially since I don't want a do it all box. This is why Nintendo is the most attractive of the companies to me.

As for my reasons for not wanting a set top box:

For one thing, most of these features are gimmicky. I had a Tivo I won, in broke and I didn't bother paying to get it fixed because I was debating on cancelly the $10 a month service anyway. I just didn't use it enough because there isn't crap on TV worth watching other than sports, and being able to pause and do instant replays wasn't worth the money to me.

Secondly, when you combine a bunch of crap into one machine, it's likely that it won't be as high a quality as getting higher end stand alone things. For example, the DVD player/receiver combos aren't particulary good DVD players or Receievers. The same will be true of set top box game systems as they have to keep the cost at a reasonable level.

So for me, I'm going to spend the extra money and buy higher quality stand alone things, and then if I want to play games I'd have to pay extra for a bunch of features built into a set top box that I don't need because I already have them in my home theater.

joltaddict 07-30-02 11:59 PM

I dont have a problem having five consoles (yes my Genesis is still hooked up stop laughing) a DVD player and a cable box in my entertainment center. Josh you agree with me against a settop box but from the opposite side. You think its overkill. But Josh you and I are in the minority on this one. The average consumer would be thrilled with one machine that gave them access to everything. Hell Joe Six Pack is buying those craptastic DVD/VCR combos.

And the fact that two of the most resource rich corporations on the planet have made it a priority makes it a virtual certainty in the near future.

ScandalUMD 07-31-02 12:04 AM


Originally posted by joltaddict


That is one of the strangest things I have ever heard. :confused: Youre saying they wouldnt want to sell product to the widest possible audience? Proud or not they are not making the money they would be as a software only company. The majority of their profits are from the GBA and pokemon. They are underselling their franchises by restricting them. Theyre not some street gang warring over turf. Theyre a business. They will do the most profitable thing whether you "see it happening" or not. Its common sense.

Remember, licensing fees are pretty sizable. When you have a stable of multimillion selling licenses, it might be more profitable not to pay the licensing fees. Super Smash Bros. Melee has sold over 2.5 million copies, and Mario Sunshine has already sold 400,000 in Japan, since it came out last week, according to a story on Gamespot.

Nintendo makes more money from videogames than Sony or Microsoft. Microsoft hasn't made a dime on the Xbox; in fact, the Xbox has lost hundreds of millions of dollars, and Xbox Live will cost billions more. Microsoft has not clearly explained how they expect the console to ever recoup those losses. They have a lot of money to lose trying to set themselves up for domination of the industry, so Xbox will be around for a while. But I don't see why people expect Nintendo to drop out, when they're making money and the Xbox isn't.

Josh H 07-31-02 12:05 AM

Oh I agree Jolt, and that's why I hope Nintendo sticks it out in the hardware industry.

Joe Six Pack cares about convenience more than quality. Having a bunch of mediocre electronic equipment in one box is more appealing to them than having better quality equipment seperate.

So there's a good chance that set top boxes costing $500 or so could become the norm.

In that case I'd probably just resort to classic gaming. Digging out games I missed on the current systems, and waiting for the new set top box systems to be a generation outdated and significantly dropped in price before buying them.

joltaddict 07-31-02 12:13 AM


Originally posted by Josh Hinkle
In that case I'd probably just resort to classic gaming. Digging out games I missed on the current systems, and waiting for the new set top box systems to be a generation outdated and significantly dropped in price before buying them.
Or you can join the dark side.


Psssst... PC gaming.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:42 PM.


Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.