orthicviper

cool! maybe this is the one i bought back in the day.

i'd be more excited if it was filmed and shown in 60 FPS stereoscopic 3D, to be honest...

I didn't think they should include tapes with magazines, but offer them as a separate service one could pay for. Nintendo also sent out a VHS tape (at least in the U.S.) to many SNES owners that was a promotional video for Donkey Kong Country explaining the technology of the game and at the end it showed about 5 seconds of Killer Instinct. I'm not aware of any other time they did that or of any company doing a similar thing.

Do you think it would have been a successful product? The screenshots in magazines were oftentimes sucky, plus seeing a game in motion would have been very helpful and a lot more content could have been covered! I think it would have been a huge success for magazines to sell supplemental tapes showing actual gameplay on dozens of games. I really wish I could have bought sometihng like that. Actually, it could have been freely given away by Sega and Nintendo. Like, you give them enough UPC codes to prove you're a frequent game buyer, and they send you free of charge a video catalog of games for their system.

Here's my story of my experience with different game mags: I started with nintendo power since it was advertised in my SNES console box, then a year or two later picked up a GamePro since I had a sega genesis. I checked out other mags at the time but I subscribed to GamePro because it was the only one I remember that specified if a game had battery backup or password saving or not and I hated short games or games that made me start all over after running out of lives. I experimented with EGM, Video Games, and Die Hard Game Fan and they were good too but I never subscribed, though I would have if i had enough spare money. Around 1994 or 1995 I subscribed to Game Players because they became the funniest game magazine I ever saw. I think it was when the editor became Phil Donahue that the magazine started getting more humorous. I stopped subscribing after 1-2 years as they became Ultra Game Players and lost their humor. I guess they got too controversial and were scared to not get more serious. But I am just now wondering why GamePro was so popular. I may skim through a lot of game magazines here one day that I never read and see which one really was the best (maybe GamePro did deserve its huge success).

i don't do mobile games because I need physical buttons to enjoy my games. I tried finding some strategy games that wouldn't benefit from physical buttons but they all looked kinda boring.

PC's must be part of the "problem". I for one despise consoles now even though I spent so much time enjoying them growing up. Now I see them as a hindrance to advancing video games.

Actually I can enjoy the textures of 1st party PS1 games or 3d games later in the systems life, but I gotta have more polygons. Mitten hands are too annoying for me.

I much prefer video games to movies.

I agree that the 32-bit console style 3d graphics are too ugly but I think I'd enjoy retro 3d graphics in the style of World of Warcraft. I never played that game but it's an example of the kind of 3d graphics that I think are good enough to enjoy in a retro sense. I remember when I first played Twisted Metal on PS1, maybe my first PS1 game experience, and I was like wow cool graphics. But nowadays it is beyond ugly. It's the same thing with Super Mario 64.

I've seen a lot of retro-style games on Steam but most of them are too retro. I want 16/32-bit style or SVGA graphics, but most of them are NES style or EGA PC graphics style and it's too ugly for me. Some of the 16-bit style ones still look a bit lazy with the artistic level of detail or graphics that repeat too much. Terrian Saga and Super Cyborg are among the only few that've stood out to me. I wanted to like Oniken and Odallus but I don't enjoy NES graphics unless it's an actual NES game. How about you all, what kind of retro graphics style do you want?

which one do you most want to do if you can only choose 1?

well, why did you decide to quit VG's?

?! how many hours did you play to get that good?

Well that strategy could backfire if people see low sales of the newest nintendo console after the Wii U's failure, they might be expecting switch to fail and by limiting supply they could be making a really dumb marketing decision. Nintendo needs to get high sales ASAP and demonstrate the switch to be a success, but I could be overestimating the average gamer's wisdom.

I didn't have enough quarters to beat any game so all the games were my go-to games. I wanted to try a bit of everything!

reminds me of the shortage for the Wii U's gamecube-to-wii U controller adapter for super smash brothers. Nintendo is just baffling but they will get their comeuppance soon...

te72, you're supposed to enjoy games because of their quality, not because of hype or how newly released they are.

Why are you not a more agreeable person kitsunebi

I still believe a single console manufacturer competing only with PC would be the best situation for gamers. I believe the console maker would still make an effort to win customers from the PC but if they stagnated and became shitty then people would have no choice but to buy a PC which is my utopian dream world that I will fight like a revolutionary for on behalf of the PC Master Race... And I don't think you would need to do much upgrading te72 if any, because one thing many PC gamers complained a lot about during the PS3 era is how the consoles were holding back PC graphics because of the games that were designed for them and then ported to PC. As your frame rates lowered you could keep reducing your settings every couple of years until towards the end of the PS3's life and then your PC graphics would end up being PS3 quality anyway. Just my not-so-informed opinion.

Would you buy one if Nintendo made one? Would it be a killer product? I think it'd be a killer product! I think it'd kill so much that Nintendo could start stealing even the most loyal android and apple phone customers. If people had a choice between bringing around a boring android or apple phone, or a nintendo one with physical buttons to play awesome nintendo games, then there'd be millions who'd make the "right" choice. There were 13.36 million people who bought a Wii U so I guarantee at least 10 million would buy this phone. But if nintendo doesn't want to make this killer product, maybe they could gain a lot by making their games exclusive to android. The google play store gets a 30% cut of apps sold there but nintendo could probably get that closer to 0%. Maybe Google would even pay them additional money just for how this could hurt Apple sales and boost sales of android phones. They could do the opposite and go with Apple instead but their users are far smaller though they pay more for software. I could be overestimating Nintendo's brand value as maybe they've burned too many of us to be an influential force outside their normal realm of under powered consoles but I think if they set themselves up right they could be a strong influence in a war between android and apple. I think this idea would have worked best back when the sony PSP first came out and I actually never got why nintendo and sony just didn't make their current and future handhelds as cell phones back then but I don't think it is too late. There was the Xperia Play phone that played playstation one games. But maybe people weren't interested in old games and wanted new games, but I just don't think that phone was advertised well and didn't have high availability and is not an indication people aren't interested in a well known brand making a cell phone to have a great portable game experience.

Jake there would be no antitrust issue because I'm not suggesting they copy the valve steam box. I only suggest that they make a console that is a locked down PC with standardized components so games can be programmed bug free simply and performance improvements can be had by developers knowing exactly what GPU and other hardware they were programming for as well as simplicity for the buyer as they can have a small PC they can connect in their living room to their TV. Kitsunebi, PC's as they are are not a thing in Japan. But if you standardized the hardware, customized the OS, made a walled garden then there's no reason why it wouldn't be a viable product in Japan unless Japanese have some cultural hatred for any PC derivative. The idea I'm trying to express is a PC that is a lot like a console. Aside from that both of you only dismiss my idea due to the inabilities of the managers or designers. But I'd like you both to reconsider my question as this: If given Nintendo's current position, patent holdings, brand value, all other resources, but their managers and executives were replaced by more adaptable and dynamic people, could they take on Steam? Imagine they were bought by Google or Amazon and these companies were ready to use their grandest ideas on Nintendo even if that meant replacing the entire executive team and dozens of managers and designers.

I think if Nintendo made a digital store on PC they could dethrone Steam. But to do it they'd need to think outside the box(es) they've gotten themselves into. They'd need to port some of their most important games to PC and even better if they enhanced the visuals. They could also add internet play to them and later sell DLC that makes it work with VR headsets. Once millions of people have installed the software (certainly wouldn't be less than millions!) they could then start buying non-Nintendo games. Nintendo could be getting a cut of sales of games like Doom, Grand Theft Auto 5, Resident Evil 7 and all that other good stuff that Steam used to get 30% of. I think this strategy would work best if Nintendo came out with a PC console like a Steam Machine and probably would have worked better if that's that the Switch had actually been (a PC good enough for nintendo type of games). Maybe this is the Blue Ocean strategy nintendo missed out on, a bunch of PC gamers who only don't buy nintendo games because they dont want to buy nintendo hardware (I'm one of them and surely not alone). But don't misunderstand, I'm not proposing they go only after PC gamers, but just that they try to attract us while simultaneously turning current customers over towards a walled-garden PC steam-machine-like console that they'd have a digital store for. Am I right or am I right?

I want all game systems to fail. Unlike most/all people I think competition between console manufacturers hurts gamers instead of benefits them. We only need competition between game developers! When console manufacturers compete, we end up spending thousands of dollars more if we want to get all the console exclusives and get extra controllers for our friends or family. Console competition doesn't exist in some manner that I see as beneficial to gamers. I don't see Sony and Microsoft competing to lower prices on their pay-to-play-online services but instead Sony recently raised the price of Playstation Now. These services cost a lot more than they're worth IMO. For one Sony doesn't even seem to use dedicated services and gaming online on their PS4 is a slower experience than on Xbox Live. These companies don't even make their systems backwards compatible with the previous generation's controllers which is just a waste of our money and environmental considerations. So can you or someone give me examples of how this competition is benefiting gamers? Between timed and permanent exclusives I'm seeing no benefit here for anyone who doesn't have a very large disposable income. I do think Sony made the truest attempt at being competitive when they made the Cell processor for PS3. It didn't work out well but at least they really did try to do something to make their system stand out. That and Nintendo's Wiimote are the finest examples of being competitive or at least trying to be that I can think of off the top of my head. But people didn't like Cells and Wiimotes so it was of little benefit to gamers. The best competition would be if only one console manufacturer was left and they had to justify to the world why we should game on their console instead of a PC. Without having to spend a lot on marketing to beat the other two big names and pay for timed exclusives they'd have more money to invest in innovative new hardware and games.