Nintendo moving into online within 3 to 4 years

By Games Industry.biz Published 26 November, 2004

DS to go online "sooner than we think" - Miyamoto.

Comments attributed to Nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto in this week's Famitsu magazine indicate that the company is planning to bring its systems online within a three to four year timescale, with DS leading the way.

Miyamoto, credited as the design genius behind key Nintendo franchises including Zelda and Mario, told the magazine that online gaming will reach the mainstream within three to four years, and that Nintendo will be moving in that direction as a result.

In the current generation of console hardware, only Nintendo has shied away from providing online gaming services on their system - arguing that online play is not of interest to the majority of consumers as yet.

However, a translation of Miyamoto's comments in Famitsu which has been posted on the Internet reveals that he expects the Nintendo DS to get online games in the near future, which would lead Nintendo's movement into the online space.

DS online functionality would presumably use the system's wireless LAN capabilities to hook up to the Internet. At present, these functions can be used to communicate between DS units for wireless multiplayer or chat.

Intriguingly, Miyamoto implied that Nintendo is working with Square Enix on developing the online system for the DS. Square Enix formerly developed the PlayOnline system for the PlayStation 2, which was used as a launcher for Final Fantasy XI but had the capability to be used as a more comprehensive online gaming system.

Square Enix has confirmed that it is working on titles for the Nintendo DS, with a handheld version of its GameCube multiplayer RPG title, Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles, expected to launch next year. As yet the publisher hasn't commented on the possibility of this title having online functionality.

Elsewhere in the interview, Miyamoto also confirmed that a new Mario title, which is still being called Mario 128, is still in development for the GameCube - not for the company's next-generation Revolution console, as had been rumoured previously.

He also mentioned that Nintendo is working with "strong allies" to create a new Pokemon title for the Cube, but could not reveal further details of what this title would be.

Picture of Games.

About Games Industry.biz

Read more articles from Games by visiting the Games Industry.biz archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (72) Latest comment 7 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Dizzy #1 7 years ago

    3 to 4 years???

    Nintendo has left the building!

  • pjmaybe #2 7 years ago

    Psfffh!

    I've still yet to see a valid argument for Nintendo online.

    Aside from Multiplayer Blast Corps II! I'd buy it for that! ;)

    Peej

  • Razz #3 7 years ago

    how about killing off some those old IP's too.

    /coat

  • Blerk #4 7 years ago

    Online is still a very, very minority interest - despite what you'd like to believe, Dizzy. ;-)

  • tengu #5 7 years ago

    Makes FA difference to me, so long as that new Zelda plays as good as it looks, I'll be the proverbial pig in shit!

  • Dizzy #6 7 years ago

    Well 1 million times 50 euro a year is not bad for Live.

    Online games outselling PS2 games because of Live. I am sure Microsoft is very unhappy.

    Maybe only 2-3 million play online games on consoles but you should not underestimate the perceived consumer value when somebody sees a friend play online on PS2/XBox. People think of the Nintendo products as a toy and X/PS2 as a much broader console (even if they do not use online). When XBox2 comes along, MS will keep Live. Live is not an XBox add-on, it is their online platform and a way to bind customers. When they get an instant 1-2M users that migrate to X2 because they want to keep Live I am sure MS will be crying all the way to the bank.

  • Shinji #7 7 years ago

    Online games outselling PS2 games because of Live.

    Give an example, please.

  • sickpuppysoftware #8 7 years ago

    Online may be a minority interest but Nintendo know all about minority interests. Just look at the charts :(

  • Galvanizer #9 7 years ago

    "Nintendo" and "Square Enix" sittting in a tree K-I-S-S-I-N-G.

  • spindizzy #10 7 years ago

    Any Dizzys figures just refer to now ... think what the broadband takeup has been. I think in 3-4 years Nintendo is going to look very silly indeed if it isn't embracing broadband. To be honest, I think it looks very odd already (and this is coming from a lifelong Nintendo fan ... well, since the SNES anyway).

  • jumpdeveraux #11 7 years ago

    ...and will make their online capability available in Europe in 7 to 8 years.

  • Galvanizer #12 7 years ago

    But wait!!

    Who that jealous guy trying to cut down the tree with a chainsaw?

    Oh my! It's "Sony"!!

  • Galvanizer #13 7 years ago

    Jealous Motherfuckers!!

  • Daryoon #14 7 years ago

    People forget Nintendo have already done the whole online thing, years before the current generation even existed!

  • Blerk #15 7 years ago

    That's all very well, Dizzy - but you only describe a way to keep people who are already interested in online gaming. From what I can see, there are huge numbers of people who are just not interested in it at all. You can count me into that category - I'm not interested, and I can't see anything either now or in the future which would make me interested.

    In 3-4 years it may well be that just about everyone will be capable of playing an online game. I still think it will be a very small percentage of those people who actually do, and that for the most part it will be the same people who are playing now.

    The whole 'in a few years everyone will be playing online' thing is just nonsense.

  • Dizzy #16 7 years ago

    >Give an example, please.

    Err...
    Recently SW:Battlefront for example
    (http://www.evilavatar.com/module s.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=6525)

    But there are more... sniff around on the NPD stats if you *really* want to know... but I don't think there is any doubt that XBox Live is becoming an advantage. Hell even EG has separate reviews for Live features and today a big chunk about the PES review is about Live.

    10% of people going online might not be a "majority" by mathematical numbers but you can bet that 10% of any market is a BIG deal for companies selling stuff. And in 3-4 years it will probably be 30%. Nintendo will be hopelessly late to the party if they don't start next year, Sony is even sweating a bit trying to catch up. I am sure PS3 will launch will full online support.

    >Well 1 million times 50 euro a year is not bad for Live

    This is like having a free 1M seller (I doubt keeping up Live costs as much as developing a full blown game for 2-3 years) and it will only get better for MS. They might have 2M Live players soon.. who knows.
    /cannot believe I quoted myself!

    ;)
    Edited by 1 at 26/11/04 @ 13:20

  • Ignatius_Cheese #17 7 years ago

    Give a gold star to justMe! If people were actually to read the article correctly, Nintendo's prediction of online being "mainstream" in 3 to 4 years is probably quite close to the mark i.e. broadband uptake increasing, less limited online gameplay experience.

    The DS going online "sooner than you think" (everyone must have heard of WarpPipe's plans by now...) suggests that it will possibly be online by the European launch or shortly after that.

    Experimenting with your "third pillar" handheld in the online sphere is possibly a very, very good idea. Once you've perfected that model, transferring that over to a home console should be mere procedural.

    Now, all Ninty need is a few HUGE ideas to back the whole thing up!

    Watch this space...

  • Ignatius_Cheese #18 7 years ago

    10% of the market!!? Where the hell did you hear that from...? There is NO way that 10% of the gaming market is online. 5% would be an overstatement at the best of times!

  • Dizzy #19 7 years ago

    For XBox it is 10%

    PS2 doesn't really count since it doesn't have build-in Online features.. so it is not an accurate device to measure online take-up. But yeah, you will probably insist, for PS2 it is only 5%.
    Edited by 1 at 26/11/04 @ 13:22

  • Ignatius_Cheese #20 7 years ago

    And where is Xbox in the worldwide market...?

  • Nemesis #21 7 years ago

    Those people may be online Diz', but how many are a) on a trial ticket or b) a guest user on a Live account.

    Just something I bet the stats don't take into account.

  • Ignatius_Cheese #22 7 years ago

    Think about it. Nintendo's home market is the Japanese market. Which sees Xbox taking a nosedive.

    I myself am an Xbox owner, a broadband owner, and have no intention of joining Live as there really isn't the interest for me as a gamer...

    Halo 2 was one of the biggest letdowns of my gaming life. Ok, the multiplayer may be its biggest seller but still, meh...

    I need something new, fresh and inspirational than generic squad-based FPS with a half decent IP slapped on top of it. And for me Nintendo is the company that can (when it feels like trying!) breathe life back into the carbon-copy circle that we are presently stuck in.

    Oooooo, pretty graphics and identical gameplay! Meh...

  • Dizzy #23 7 years ago

    I am sure PS2 would also be close to 10% if Sony promoted it like Live and had build in network features. Hey wait!! The PSTwo has!!! I guess that 15$ that Sony payed extra (for build-in) could have been saved since consumers don't care! Sony and MS seem to believe in it... guess Nintendo knows better. They are after all the number one console!

  • Blerk #24 7 years ago

    I don't see how 'being late to the party' could affect their chances, though. A console is either online or it isn't. I can't imagine for a minute that the next Nintendo machine won't include online kit as standard even if Nintendo themselves don't support it. People buy machines because of the games, I can't imagine for a minute that they'd ever say "well I'd like a Nintendo but I'm not buying one because it doesn't play online games". So they either want one and get one or they don't and don't. And if they've bought one and online support turns up later.... what did they lose?

    Edit:
    Look at it this way - if Cube Mario Kart had had an online mode, would people have been happier? Yes, a small percentage would. But would it have sold more copies? No, not a chance.
    Edited by 1 at 26/11/04 @ 13:28

  • Shinji #25 7 years ago

    Xbox has 15% market share. Of the CONSOLE market. So discounting the huge PC market, Xbox Live accounts for a grand total of 1.5 per cent of the market.

    PS2 has 70% of the market in total, and about five per cent of those are online, as a rough estimate,

    In total, you're looking at about 5% of the console market being online enabled, in other words. Of that, there are probably a significant number who don't really buy online games - like the 250,000 PS2 users in Japan who have online exclusively for Final Fantasy XI, or thousands of Xbox Live users who use it for content updates rather than playing online.

    Battlefront was online on both Xbox and PS2, but it looked far nicer on Xbox. Saying that it sold better on Xbox because of Live is a fallacy - you have absolutely no proof of that. Also, I doubt Sony are losing any sleep over a sub-10,000 sales difference on a relatively low-selling title.

    Online WILL be important. Right now, it doesn't really matter a damn.

    Consider this: around 75% of people who have bought Halo 2, one of the most hyped online titles ever, don't play it online and don't even have Live accounts.

  • gizmo #26 7 years ago

    Groundbreaking Nintendo on-line title sees Mario and Luigi Firing dots at each other whilst avoiding Furby. To be released 2007/2008. Can you bear the tension?

    And thats the Japanese date.

    On a serious note though, I will keep my Cube if Mario 128 is still in development. Almost binned it after SMS.

  • Nemesis #27 7 years ago

    Keep in there Gizmo, it'll come good. Trust me.

  • Dizzy #28 7 years ago

    >Think about it. Nintendo's home market is the Japanese market. Which >sees Xbox taking a nosedive.

    FYI GameCube is also nowhere in Japan. What does this have to do with argument anyway? Are you saying Japanese don't wanne play online? Just look at Korea.

    >Oooooo, pretty graphics and identical gameplay! Meh...
    So why did you buy a Cube?


    >like the 250,000 PS2 users in Japan who have online exclusively for >Final Fantasy XI, or thousands of Xbox Live users who use it for >content updates rather than playing online.

    You just gave two arguments in favour of online gaming dude! I never said it was "only" competitive online play. So wait. FF sold 250K just because it was online? And some harddisks? Maybe some extra network adapters? Not to shabby deal for Sony. Oops... maybe .5M people paying 50 euro just to download stuff? Nice! Even better since MS doesn't need to fiddle with complicated matchmaking servers for those people.

    God... this is my last post. You guys can play around with % as much as you want. Fact is that a lot of games have online features on XBox (and it would be same on PS2 if it had the possibilities). So money is being invested in this. Maybe you should tell the publishers... they could save some money. Fact is that MS and Sony believe in it. They must be stoooopid. Fact is that games websites and magazines are talking about online features (and even up/downgrading scores based on it), so in the eyes of consumers it must look important as well. Fact is that yesterday 450000 people played online Halo 2. That is a lot of dedicated gamers with money to spend on potential online stuff. Fact is.. Nintendo is nowhere with online.
    You know having features that other products do not have is a way of competing for customers... even if they don't use it. So of those 5% that play online I wonder how many bought an XBox instead of a Cube because they "thought" it was a better console because it has more "features".

  • groovychainsaw #29 7 years ago

    Online may arrive with the DS in Japan, but wont arrive in Europe for... say... two years later?
    (thats my estimate based on typical nintendo support for europe!)

  • gizmo #30 7 years ago

    My personal favourite aspect of xbox live is not competitive play, but co-op with distant friends, who, due to the pressures of real life simply cannot come round and crash on the sofa for hours anymore. At least live enables us all to have a blast together a few hours each week. And a chat. Which is nice.

    So online gaming is massive to me, but I still enjoyed Fable and Halo2 campaign.

  • gamingdave #31 7 years ago

    Dizzy, they say there going into online, you say people want online, and yet you say they've left the building.

    Are you just suggesting they are to late? I dont think so. In the next gen online may well be of interest, and they will be involved. Were Sega to early?

  • Georgie K #32 7 years ago

    "I need something new, fresh and inspirational than generic squad-based FPS with a half decent IP slapped on top of it. And for me Nintendo is the company that can (when it feels like trying!) breathe life back into the carbon-copy circle that we are presently stuck in.

    Oooooo, pretty graphics and identical gameplay! Meh... "

    The thing is that Nintendo is also stuck in that carbon-copy circle for the past 7-8 years (with some major exceptions of course).

  • pjmaybe #33 7 years ago

    Let's not beat around the bush here. Online to Nintendo means Online Mario Kart, Online Mario Golf, Online Metroid Multiplayer, Online Mario Tennis.

    You see where I'm going with this? What IPs does Nintendo have that would really offer anything that great online?

    Or...(rubs chin) maybe they'll do something NEW! MMORPG Animal Crossing? Cor that'd be the best game ever though wouldn't it ;)

    Peej

  • Jos #34 7 years ago

    "You know having features that other products do not have is a way of competing for customers"

    I think it is more of a might be. They could glue a bannana onto the top of an xbox but this tastey vitimin rich extra isn't going to help win customers. Unless they are very hungry.

    I think that nintendo are going to have last mover advantage. They'll cherrypick from other online offerings. add in their own stuff and strike when there is a bigger market for it. The others are either going to have to build on what they have done both good and bad design points, or ditch a whole generation to compete on a level playing field.

  • gamingdave #35 7 years ago

    Or...(rubs chin) maybe they'll do something NEW! MMORPG Animal Crossing? Cor that'd be the best game ever though wouldn't it ;)

    Nope, im thinking more along the lines of a MMO Pikmin, complete with having to amass armies of men to build your base (adding a new element to pimkin of resource management) and bulding up stocks of fighters to go on a rampage.

  • Georgie K #36 7 years ago

    "I think that nintendo are going to have last mover advantage. They'll cherrypick from other online offerings. add in their own stuff and strike when there is a bigger market for it. The others are either going to have to build on what they have done both good and bad design points, or ditch a whole generation to compete on a level playing field. "

    Advantage of the last move! Only a company with killer PR and marketing can make good use of that, and Nintendo isn't one of them. They can only make great games (even though they becoming more rare with each passing year).

  • Rob #37 7 years ago

    Interesting that a lot of people think online has been good for MS this gen...if you actually look at the numbers, the Live! service has cost them way more to set-up and maintain than they have made from subscribers.

    Sure, they have the foundations/structure in place now, but it sure as hell hasn't been good for their bottom line.

    Sony, in fairness, realised quite quickly that online wasn't gonna be a major factor in this gen - they never busted a gut or spent a whole load of cash chasing a market that was never really going to grow large enough to offer any kind of useful returns.

    All three companies will be online next gen (many in fact believe that the 'revolution' will act as a wireless hub of sorts), this gen was just one too early.

  • steven #38 7 years ago

    "Nintendo moving into online within 3 to 4 years"

    Ironic, especially as Gamecube was actually the first console here to OFFICIALLY go online... (remember the launch of PSO I&II)


    Edited by 2 at 26/11/04 @ 14:25

  • ruttyboy #39 7 years ago

    Sooooo, when Ninty get into on-line, the net uptake is greater so there will be more customers (including their core customers ie. kids as opposed to techy early adopters) and in addition technology has moved on so it will be cheaper for them to do so, meaning a substantially reduced set-up cost.

    I don't see the problem there, but maybe it's just me.

    IMO they will only be handicapped by going in later than Sony and MS if customers are really that loyal between gens, history would tell us that they're not.

  • Georgie K #40 7 years ago

    To understand further the power of marketing: In Greece there is no Xbox Live or PS2 Online services. BUT, the marketing of Microsoft and Sony made the customers believe that it is a major issue (it's obvious that it's not). The result of this? The sales of PS2 and Xbox were 10 or 15 times larger than those of the Gamecube's. Till this day, gamers still cannot play online games and the sales numbers remain exactly the same! Go figure.....

  • #41 7 years ago

    didn't 'el presidente' Tony Blair have some plans on getting the majority of the UK online by 2008. I'm not sure why since it should be an individual choice, probably for some extra tax no doubt.
    Anyway, this would seem to coincide with nintendo's 3-4 year policy, so maybe there's something in it....
    Edited by 1 at 26/11/04 @ 14:28

  • rev9of8 #42 7 years ago

    "Ironic, especially as Gamecube was actually the first console here to OFFICIALLY go online... (remember the launch of PSO I&II) "

    I'll assume you're not counting the DC as being part of the current hardware cycle (I'm fairly sure that was online in Europe prior to the others). However, this also suggests something else which is highly improtant. Specifically, most software publishers in the console market don't consider it economically worthwhile to go online and are only prepared to do so when someone else is paying the bills.

    After all the only hardware with a wide range of good quality online support is the X-Box. Microsoft lobs lots of money at developers to go online and picks up most of the cost of the server side and network infrastructure IIRC. Sony's attitude is that it'll offer support if you as a developer want to go online but you're going to be paying all the backend costs whereas Nintendo's attitude is that you can do what you want just don't expect them to pick up any of the bill.

    Even Microsoft can't, and won't be prepared to, pick up everyone else's costs forever...

  • Sid-Nice #43 7 years ago

    This is from the article posted on Gamecube Europe.

    Recently Famitsu Magazine had an interview Mr. Shigeru Miyamoto. Surprisingly he revealed some things that we didn’t know. Here’s what you have to know:

    Within the next 3 to 4 years, online gaming will be mainstream. Nintendo knows that and will try to move into that direction.
    The Nintendo DS will get online gaming sooner than we all think.
    Square-Enix and Nintendo are working on getting the Nintendo DS online.
    The recently announced Mario Baseball is a joint project with Namco.
    Mario 128 is still in development for the GameCube (not for the GameCube successor, codenamed 'Revolution'). Miyamoto could not tell when the game will be released.
    Nintendo is working on a new Pokemon game for the GameCube. Shigeru also added that this game is in development with strong allies.

    Gamecube-Europe's original source was from a lesser known website something like gba/n64.com, cube-europe have removed the source so I'm not sure of the address or whether the story is official. Miyamoto's statement has been misquoted by idiots who are from the " Let's laugh at Nintendo school of journalism. " As others have also pointed out Miyamoto said " Within the next 3 to 4 years, online gaming will be mainstream. " He never said " Nintendo moving into online within 3 to 4 years. "

  • Blerk #44 7 years ago

    didn't 'el presidente' Tony Blair have some plans on getting the majority of the UK online by 2008

    Something like that, yeah. But most of those people are/will be on 56k connections and hence unable to use online gaming.

    Online gaming is still a very expensive passtime. If you don't play 'a lot' it's a waste of cash.

  • Pinchy #45 7 years ago

    makes you wonder why they bothered with the broadband adaptor for the GC in the first place.

    but anyway, i am in the same boat as Blerk. I care not for online. Not a bit.

  • Nikanoru #46 7 years ago

    The last game I played online was RO. After all my friends stopped playing it I realised it just lost the only attraction it had.

    *yawns at online gaming*

    I prefer multiplayer all-nighters on the couch with 2 or 3 people and plenty of food anyday.

  • Sid-Nice #47 7 years ago

    The world could be playing Halo 2 on-line, yet I'd be quite happy playing Paper Mario off-line alone. :)

  • rev9of8 #48 7 years ago

    "didn't 'el presidente' Tony Blair have some plans on getting the majority of the UK online by 2008. "

    Yep, but this is a country in which service providers can get away with calling 156kilobit per second "broadband" so 'online' might simply mean that they have a telephone or can alternatively communicate by carrier pigeon.

  • countlippe #49 7 years ago

    An online console user are seen by the console makers as commited gamers with money to spend.
    As the companies get the biggest return per user from this sub group then these are the people who are targeted.

    Simple as that.

  • onyxbox #50 7 years ago

    I've played on XBox live since it was out and I'm getting bored with it all now. The industry keeps telling me it's the best thing ever etc... but it has always played second place to the single player experience for me. And nearly 2 years on I'm contemplating throwing the towel in regarding online play.

    I love games but with online play I’m becoming less tolerant of all the obnoxious 12 year old yanks yelling down my headset about how much they're getting off on the fact they've beaten me to a pulp again.

    It gets tiresome and very rarely do me and my friends get to play a game against a decent bunch of people who at least seem to be in it for a bit of fun and not some form of digital jerking off.

    As more and more people sign on to the service the worse the signal to noise ratio is getting.

    I think Nintendo have perhaps made a little bit of a boob in not following the current 'trend' because they don’t have a tick in the box where online is concerned but at the same time I think they realise that Online games have got to change quite a bit before the mass market actually care about it.

    Getting you're arse kicked by 8-12 year olds every time you go online is not most peoples idea of fun and it takes an incredible amount of time and effort to be good enough to compete, time and effort the masses balance with other activities such as that thing called life.

  • Lothar Hex #51 7 years ago

    *Looks at the Cube games he'd like to see online*

    Erm...Smash Brothers. Thats about it for me really.

  • Dant #52 7 years ago

    I agree with everyone that says the vast majority of gamers aren`t interested in online gaming.
    I have loads of chav friends and when I asked them if they played online games they replied "Why play online with strangers when you can kick your friends ass on multi-player"

  • onyxbox #53 7 years ago

    chunky,

    You're right. With the right people it is a lot of fun and in that respect I also think Halo 2's online game setup doesn't quite work for me, nor does the proximity / push to talk thing. I think Bungie's intention was good and in theory it all sounds like the 'answer' but in reality it spoils the 'party' type atmosphere that (as you say) can be achieve with games such as PGR2.

    With PGR2 / Counterstrike etc.. once a game was full of good fun players that get on well with each other it stays that way all night and no one wants to leave. It’s difficult to achieve this in Halo 2 without adding tons of players to each others friends lists then sending private party invites etc., which becomes a bit of a mess really.

  • Daryoon #54 7 years ago

    You see where I'm going with this? What IPs does Nintendo have that would really offer anything that great online?

    I have a predictable answer...

  • spindizzy #55 7 years ago

    Someone else said this before and I'm too lazy to search but the reason I want online is *not* to play some incoherent imbecile, nor do I enjoy being picked off in 30s by someone who spends all day playing (QIII arena for example). What I want is to be able to play against my brother, and mates. We live in different countries now, most of us have broadband and frankly it's the closest I can get now to have massive sessions with a bunch of people on the sofa and a ton of pizzas.

  • Razz #56 7 years ago

    I wonder if Metroid would be that predictacble answer... :)

  • Daryoon #57 7 years ago

    The big benefit to multiplayer online gaming is that you have the whole of the screen to yourself. Multiplayer on 1 screen is crap as you each only have a small section of the screen.

    But the other players aren't in the same room...

  • mash the x button #58 7 years ago

    This one actually made me laugh

    /ha ha ha

  • Dagon #59 7 years ago

    "I wonder if Metroid would be that predictacble answer... :)"

    I'm thinking Pokemon.

  • Shinji #60 7 years ago

    If online is such an unappealing prospect to you naysayers - then why the hell do you lot bother come online to tell us about it?
    I've been playing online games for far longer than you have, I'll wager, and console online still doesn't really appeal to me. I'm completely sold on the social aspects of the 'net, but as in real life, I'd rather not socialise with a bunch of utter tards - and so far console online gaming hasn't been great at providing the level of community forming that you got on PC online games.

    That said, I'm also not really playing much online PC stuff these days. Online is great for having a discussion or a chat with someone. When it comes to playing a game against them, I'd rather have them sat on the sofa next to me. Personal preference, and one I know I'm not alone in.

  • captain-future #61 7 years ago

    3 to 4 years is about right. Today only about 2 to 5 % of console gamers use online services.

    Nintendo may be right but the competition learns NOW how the Online Market works...

  • Roamer #62 7 years ago

    I hate the fact that reviews focus on the online aspect of games as the most important multiplayer factor. I never play online, but I play with a bunch of friends in the same room all the time. I'm sure a lot of people do the same. Actually, I buy games first and foremost for their multiplayer value, and I think splitscreen multiplayer is far superior to online gaming.

    So, if Nintendo going online means that the splitscreen, the only way gaming can be considered a social activity, will be downplayed, I'd rather they never went online. Most of my friends don't even own a console, and so the only times they play is when they play multiplayer. Publishers would do well to remember that games like Goldeneye 64 carried such massive appeal because gaming suddenly wasn't exclusive to antisocial nerds in dank basements.

    Let's face it, online gaming is only interesting for those gamers who spend their nights in front of some sort of screen. Feeling lonely, and going to sleep with their mouse/joypad on the pillow next to them, I'm sure that the whole online was a perfect match. After all, their horribly disfigured, acne-riddled faces would be hidden to their opponents.

    I think Nintendo should play to their strengths and focus on being the console for social gamers. They really ought to ignore the small, but vocal, minority of hardcore gamers, or nerds, who use most of their salary on things such as Zbox live or Everquest, while living in their parents' basement. They spend a lot of money, but they have little to no influence on the mainstream market, or society for that matter.

  • space_ace #63 7 years ago

    never played online, never been interested
    (just to add an opinion)

  • firefly #64 7 years ago

    I've never played anything online myself. Partially due to lack of interest in most online titles and partially due to an extreme desire to avoid the general bother of figuring out how to get my Xbox connected to Live (USB modem and all). As such I will reserve judgement on the relative merits of online and offline gaming until I am more experienced, however, I cannot comprehend why anybody would subscribe to the idea that having an online mode instantly makes any game better. I can understand where people are coming from when they support online gaming and, despite my bitter disapointment at Halo 2's campaign mode, I can understand games where online play is the raison d'etre but I cannot see why Nintendo need to adapt to online gaming. Despite my frustrations at Nintendo of Europe's numerous failings I respect and admire Nintendo because they are willing to do their own thing whether that thing involves steering the market in an unexpected new direction or trying to be innovative to the detriment of their business. The fact is Nintendo are not even trying to be Sony, they are doing their own thing and I for one am willing to wait for a Nintendo game where online gaming is the point and not just some feature tacked on to appease the people who think every game needs an online mode.
    Edited by 1 at 27/11/04 @ 23:41

  • masterson #65 7 years ago

    "I've never played anything online myself. Partially due to lack of interest in most online titles and partially due to an extreme desire to avoid the general bother of figuring out how to get my Xbox connected to Live (USB modem and all). "

    If you're genuinely not interested then fair enough, but as for the "bother of figuring out how to get my Xbox connected to Live" you could've probablty googled it in the time it took you to write that post.

  • Nikanoru #66 7 years ago

    If you've got nothing left to say, make fun of the medium you're communicating through. Great strategy!

  • 3william56 #67 7 years ago

    It's Monster Thread Week on Eurogamer!

    Personally, I'd rather they added a second TV modulator to the next gen consoles, so you could hook up 2 TVs with independant pictures. Local multiplayer without multiple consoles / copies of the game / split screen is the multiplayer way to go IMHO.

  • onyxbox #68 7 years ago

    despite my bitter disapointment at Halo 2's campaign mode

    ditto.

    very overrated single player game if you ask me.

  • Blerk #69 7 years ago

    'Online gaming is still a very expensive passtime. If you don't play 'a lot' it's a waste of cash. '

    What a load of baloney. Who the heck gets broadband just to play their console online. Most people get broadband for use with their PC so using your console on it is just a bonus.

    Broadband is still bloody expensive, regardless of what you use it for. We (in the UK) are getting ripped off compared to the rest of Europe, and no mistaking.

    There are thousands and thousands of console owners who don't even own a PC. Saying that 'everyone has broadband anyway for using with their computer' is just crap.
    Edited by 1 at 29/11/04 @ 08:54

  • Blerk #70 7 years ago

    But you ignored my point:

    I don't have broadband for my PC. I have no interest in getting broadband for my PC because I already have a fast connection at work which I can use freely for 'other stuff'. Therefore if I wanted to take my console online to play games it would be very expensive. There are many, many console owners who don't even HAVE a PC.

    Broadband IS expensive, at least in the UK. There's no two ways about it. The less stuff you have that you could potentially use it for, the more expensive it seems.

  • Blerk #71 7 years ago

    I don't disagree that for some people it doesn't seem so expensive because they have multiple items which can use the connection. But 'The Programmer' dismissed my whole 'cost' thing as bullshit because you can use broadband for other stuff. That's true, you can - but you can't dismiss the whole argument because not everyone does.

  • Destria #72 7 years ago

    *aside*

    I'd hardly call a Gamecube an expensive luxury for being able to play the exclusives that DO get released. You can snag a Cube for less than three months broadband charges, *and* get a game with it too!