You shouldn't feel bad.
But really, if you like games like Makai Kingdom and Phantom Brave, you are punishing yourself by not playing Disgaea.
But really, if you like games like Makai Kingdom and Phantom Brave, you are punishing yourself by not playing Disgaea.
I wonder what the response might be if someone was shown something that looked almost human.
I think it would be quite easy to make it profitable.
Small batches, limited release, and someone else is already doing the translation.
The point here is not that they won't make any money, but that it is not enough money to trouble themselves.
On the other hand, if they really want to capture the "hardcore" audience as the claim, they could do far worse than releasing a few niche titles even if the profit margins are slim to none.
Nintendo is a business, not a charity.
No shit. My point is they are hurting there own image by not releasing the games. That is not charity, that is business.
Small batches, limited release, and someone else is already doing the translation.
The point here is not that they won't make any money, but that it is not enough money to trouble themselves.
On the other hand, if they really want to capture the "hardcore" audience as the claim, they could do far worse than releasing a few niche titles even if the profit margins are slim to none.
Nintendo is a business, not a charity.
No shit. My point is they are hurting there own image by not releasing the games. That is not charity, that is business.
I think you are quite correct, unfortunately.
I meant it to be more of a publicity stunt of sorts.
Even if the game doesn't even sell enough to cover the expense of distribution, it makes NOA looks like they really care about their fans.
That's why I tried phrase it as them taking the expense to look good, much like an advertisement for the company.
And if it does sell well then that's just a nice bonus for them.
Even if the game doesn't even sell enough to cover the expense of distribution, it makes NOA looks like they really care about their fans.
That's why I tried phrase it as them taking the expense to look good, much like an advertisement for the company.
And if it does sell well then that's just a nice bonus for them.
I'm still not sure why NOA thinks it's not worth it to bring the games here. It doesn't take a a marketing genius to know that bringing over the games that passionate fans really want would make your company more popular and increase sales.
Think of it like paying for an effective ad campaign NOA.
Also, I'm not sure how plausible it is, but why wouldn't another publisher step up and localize these games for the Wii?
Surely there is some company with good ties to Nintendo that could take the risk, make a few bucks, and make NOA look less like a pack of profit hungry assholes...
Think of it like paying for an effective ad campaign NOA.
Also, I'm not sure how plausible it is, but why wouldn't another publisher step up and localize these games for the Wii?
Surely there is some company with good ties to Nintendo that could take the risk, make a few bucks, and make NOA look less like a pack of profit hungry assholes...
Dear Nintendo Investors,
Stop trying to force Nintendo to make shitty decisions.
You forced the 3DS out too early and now you Wii-bandwagon morons are starting to get iPhone envy.
Knock it off!
Just quietly sit back, let Nintendo make more Mario, Pokemon and Zelda, and enjoy your god damned money.
Stop trying to force Nintendo to make shitty decisions.
You forced the 3DS out too early and now you Wii-bandwagon morons are starting to get iPhone envy.
Knock it off!
Just quietly sit back, let Nintendo make more Mario, Pokemon and Zelda, and enjoy your god damned money.
Why stop at Zelda? Why not bundle a few of the most popular NES games with the system.
It would get a ton of people buying a 3DS and it would cost Nintendo basically nothing.
It would get a ton of people buying a 3DS and it would cost Nintendo basically nothing.
Still wanting a Mario version of Risk.
You could have different enemies and such as units. Koopas, Goombas, Toads, etc.
Come on USAopoly... You already did it with chess.
If you don't I'm just going to sit at my kitchen table and pout and sigh ineffectually until you announce it.
Starting.....
now.
...
...
...
...
*sigh*
...
...
...
...
...
*sigh*
...
...
You could have different enemies and such as units. Koopas, Goombas, Toads, etc.
Come on USAopoly... You already did it with chess.
If you don't I'm just going to sit at my kitchen table and pout and sigh ineffectually until you announce it.
Starting.....
now.
...
...
...
...
*sigh*
...
...
...
...
...
*sigh*
...
...
I must say I am intrigued.
For years now Nintendo has been... almost doing this kind of thing.
The main problem with connecting to your console with your handheld though is that it has to be optional and developers choosing to take advantage of them have to take a big gamble, hence there is never much support or very many games that use the features at all.
This is built in.
God just imagine some of the cool multiplayer games that are going to come along for this.
My main concern is just how damn big it is, if I were using just the touch screen it might be feasible, but if I am using it even partially as a standard controller it seems like it would be hard to hold.
It's going to have to be as light as they can possibly make it, and hopefully Nintendo has made the back in way that will enable a good grip, because the front sure doesn't look like they put much thought into ergonomics.
Aside from that concern, I am very excited. I for one am always harping on about how console developers seem to focus too much Online multiplayer these days and ignore the sheer joy of playing with a bunch of friends in one room.
This to me seems like a big leap in that direction.
For years now Nintendo has been... almost doing this kind of thing.
The main problem with connecting to your console with your handheld though is that it has to be optional and developers choosing to take advantage of them have to take a big gamble, hence there is never much support or very many games that use the features at all.
This is built in.
God just imagine some of the cool multiplayer games that are going to come along for this.
My main concern is just how damn big it is, if I were using just the touch screen it might be feasible, but if I am using it even partially as a standard controller it seems like it would be hard to hold.
It's going to have to be as light as they can possibly make it, and hopefully Nintendo has made the back in way that will enable a good grip, because the front sure doesn't look like they put much thought into ergonomics.
Aside from that concern, I am very excited. I for one am always harping on about how console developers seem to focus too much Online multiplayer these days and ignore the sheer joy of playing with a bunch of friends in one room.
This to me seems like a big leap in that direction.
It's not about semantics at all. One is seeing or hearing what happens to someone else, the other is having it happen to you. HUGE DIFFERENCE. Is watching someone go on a date the same thing as going on one yourself? or is that semantics as well?
I don't doubt that he was criticizing narrative games, but I also do not think that he was knocking the potential for narrative games. Narrative games by current definition are little more than movies with mini games or "missions" tossed in to keep you from getting to bored with its half-assed story.
The exception I make is for games where there is very little playing, but the choices you make have direct impact on the way the story goes.
In my opinion that is still a game, as to me a game is not defined by winning and losing but rather by the ability to influence outcomes and/or make choices.
Yes that means that to me a writing in a text editor or dialing a phone might be considered games , I'm still working it all out.
The exception I make is for games where there is very little playing, but the choices you make have direct impact on the way the story goes.
In my opinion that is still a game, as to me a game is not defined by winning and losing but rather by the ability to influence outcomes and/or make choices.
Yes that means that to me a writing in a text editor or dialing a phone might be considered games , I'm still working it all out.
I didn't mean to say that a game could not have a story, it obviously does. The important thing is how you structure that story. You are not telling it, you are making it possible to be experienced. Half Life and Ico are both terrific examples of exactly what I was trying to describe, they are linear stories yes, but they express this in the game through environmental circumstance. In this way there is one way the story could go, but the player chooses to take that action, though in my opinion in both cases this is mostly because there is little else they can do. You are correct each choice, or branching, should be carefully crafted for the player, but again what you are doing is giving the player a new environment in which to be a part of the larger story. You are not simply showing them chapter 2.
Mr. Allen I think you have a lack of understanding of your own medium. I may be a lowly Digipen student, but I can explain the basic principle of what Will Wright is saying since you clearly don't get it.
Point #1
Games are not the right medium to TELL stories.
This is one hundred percent true. When crafting the story of a game it would be a huge mistake not to account for the fact that it is not a passive experience. You can not simply show a character doing something, your goal is enabling the player to do something. God game or not, the avatar is the player, the player is the avatar. Failure to accept this and to frame your narrative as something being enacted by, changed, experienced by the player is failure to make a good game story.
Point # 2
If you want to tell a specific narrative, don't build a god-sim game
I fail to see why you couldn't build a god-sim game with a specific narrative. The only hitch is that you have to be very clever in establishing the inevitability of the consequences that happen to the player. This is true for all games which focus on a linear narrative. The problem is not with the openness of the god-sim but with the heavy handed laziness when trying to enforce a linear story structure that seems to predominate the industry. You can't just expect a player to do what you want them to. As you yourself stated it's not a movie, not matter how many cut scenes you cram in. Again agency is everything for video game narrative.
Point #3
don't dump on the power of narrative in games just because it is not a good medium for telling the story that YOU want to tell
Again he is not dumping on the power of narrative in games. He is dumping on TELLING a story through a game, simply because it can not be done. You can put in a little movie that tells a story but that is not the game. The game you play is not telling a story it's giving you a world, a situation, a role in which to become a part of the story, to be the story.
The narrative power of video games is unrivaled, no question about it, but it is not passive, no matter what you do to it, you are basically handing someone a dungeon master , not a dvd with mini-games
Point #1
Games are not the right medium to TELL stories.
This is one hundred percent true. When crafting the story of a game it would be a huge mistake not to account for the fact that it is not a passive experience. You can not simply show a character doing something, your goal is enabling the player to do something. God game or not, the avatar is the player, the player is the avatar. Failure to accept this and to frame your narrative as something being enacted by, changed, experienced by the player is failure to make a good game story.
Point # 2
If you want to tell a specific narrative, don't build a god-sim game
I fail to see why you couldn't build a god-sim game with a specific narrative. The only hitch is that you have to be very clever in establishing the inevitability of the consequences that happen to the player. This is true for all games which focus on a linear narrative. The problem is not with the openness of the god-sim but with the heavy handed laziness when trying to enforce a linear story structure that seems to predominate the industry. You can't just expect a player to do what you want them to. As you yourself stated it's not a movie, not matter how many cut scenes you cram in. Again agency is everything for video game narrative.
Point #3
don't dump on the power of narrative in games just because it is not a good medium for telling the story that YOU want to tell
Again he is not dumping on the power of narrative in games. He is dumping on TELLING a story through a game, simply because it can not be done. You can put in a little movie that tells a story but that is not the game. The game you play is not telling a story it's giving you a world, a situation, a role in which to become a part of the story, to be the story.
The narrative power of video games is unrivaled, no question about it, but it is not passive, no matter what you do to it, you are basically handing someone a dungeon master , not a dvd with mini-games
@hollowbody57: If you check out the Sifteo page under the "developers" page it says that they are actually working on an SDK right now.
Might be a little late considering it will launch later this year, but still.
Might be a little late considering it will launch later this year, but still.
@Demonbird: Supposedly it's meant to be open to third-party developers. Evidently they are working on an SDK. No word on if it will be free or even available for private use.
I'm seeing a lot of distaste for this, mostly from people who seem to think that this is meant to compete with PCs and laptops.
Excuse me while I put on my Captain Obvious cap.
*Puts on cap*
*Turns it to the side circa Fresh Prince of Bel-Air season 2*
*Turns it back*
This would never be able to directly compete with a PC or Laptop. The goal here is extreme portability. Backpack, purse, big huge pocket, fanny-pack.
*Flings cap in the air like it's 5th grade graduation*
*cough*
I will admit that in the past the selling point for most PC exclusive games has been spec reliant, but I think that in the past few years that has really changed and something like this, with lower specs, could ultimately prove fairly successful.
Get it running WOW and you've already got a pretty big demographic built in. Maybe get some PopCap games built in standard and I can almost guarantee that sucker will sell pretty well.
It's all going to be about how it gets marketed. Point it at hardcore PC gamers and you'll get squat, as most of the comments here prove. Show an attractive soccer-mom type playing Bejeweled while waiting in line or some older teens/twenty-somethings hanging out playing WOW and you might get a few bites.
My main complaint is who the hell wants to drag a mouse around with them all the time, maybe some of the more dedicated FPS types, but they aren't going to be buying this. I think an analog stick with some buttons cleverly built in would serve as far more attractive mouse default than nothing.
Yes you could us some of the keys to emulate something similar, but that would eat up a lot of valuable keyboard real estate.
And yes, adding the analog stick would screw up the whole streamline thing they have going on, but you could make it work. Make it subtle and classy, not a honking joystick.
Personally I see some real potential in this.
Excuse me while I put on my Captain Obvious cap.
*Puts on cap*
*Turns it to the side circa Fresh Prince of Bel-Air season 2*
*Turns it back*
This would never be able to directly compete with a PC or Laptop. The goal here is extreme portability. Backpack, purse, big huge pocket, fanny-pack.
*Flings cap in the air like it's 5th grade graduation*
*cough*
I will admit that in the past the selling point for most PC exclusive games has been spec reliant, but I think that in the past few years that has really changed and something like this, with lower specs, could ultimately prove fairly successful.
Get it running WOW and you've already got a pretty big demographic built in. Maybe get some PopCap games built in standard and I can almost guarantee that sucker will sell pretty well.
It's all going to be about how it gets marketed. Point it at hardcore PC gamers and you'll get squat, as most of the comments here prove. Show an attractive soccer-mom type playing Bejeweled while waiting in line or some older teens/twenty-somethings hanging out playing WOW and you might get a few bites.
My main complaint is who the hell wants to drag a mouse around with them all the time, maybe some of the more dedicated FPS types, but they aren't going to be buying this. I think an analog stick with some buttons cleverly built in would serve as far more attractive mouse default than nothing.
Yes you could us some of the keys to emulate something similar, but that would eat up a lot of valuable keyboard real estate.
And yes, adding the analog stick would screw up the whole streamline thing they have going on, but you could make it work. Make it subtle and classy, not a honking joystick.
Personally I see some real potential in this.
Given to the right kid an iPhone/Pad/Pod could be an awesome learning tool. There are all kinds of apps that can turn those suckers into a lot different of things.
You could experiment with drawing, making music, photography, video, etc. It could also be used to help kids who are like I was, somewhat smart but hopelessly unorganized. If my gameboy had all those notepad and calenders and what not, I think I would have had an easier time of keep track of my school business.
Sadly the only reason most kids(and their parents) want these products is just to look hip(Kid's still say hip right?). Sure their is an entertainment factor, but I feel it is significantly smaller. The sheer volume of people I encounter who can't use their iPhone as anything but a phone(and that barely so) makes me sad.
I expect kids will be a bit better in that regard, but I also don't see most of them using it for educational or productive purposes. That said, if my son wanted one, and if I felt he could be responsible with it, I would strongly consider buying him one.
You could experiment with drawing, making music, photography, video, etc. It could also be used to help kids who are like I was, somewhat smart but hopelessly unorganized. If my gameboy had all those notepad and calenders and what not, I think I would have had an easier time of keep track of my school business.
Sadly the only reason most kids(and their parents) want these products is just to look hip(Kid's still say hip right?). Sure their is an entertainment factor, but I feel it is significantly smaller. The sheer volume of people I encounter who can't use their iPhone as anything but a phone(and that barely so) makes me sad.
I expect kids will be a bit better in that regard, but I also don't see most of them using it for educational or productive purposes. That said, if my son wanted one, and if I felt he could be responsible with it, I would strongly consider buying him one.
@GohanEgret: Why do I get the sense that you are snickering and laughing at me?
@BMT: I was hoping no one would mention Kirby's pinball.
Not that it's particularly hard as far as pinball games go,but now it's just that I have to go dig through my box of gameboy games and find it and play the crap out of it again...
Curse you! I have midterms I need to study for damn it!
Not that it's particularly hard as far as pinball games go,but now it's just that I have to go dig through my box of gameboy games and find it and play the crap out of it again...
Curse you! I have midterms I need to study for damn it!
