100°

Cancelling the NES Mini Was Stupid

Derik Moore of Gaming Rebellion examines the main reason that is claimed for Nintendo shutting down production of the NES Classic, and details why that reasoning would have been very stupid on Nintendo's part.

Read Full Story >>
gamingrebellion.com
2499d ago Replies(3)
dedicatedtogamers2499d ago

Nintendo has reasons for cancelling it, and while I'm sad that it's cancelled, let's at least be intelligent and examine why the NES Mini even came out in the first place.

NES Mini exists because Nintendo was going to have a terrible holiday 2016. The 3DS was (and is) on the decline. The Wii U was (and is) dead, and the only big game coming to 3DS was Sun/Moon. Nintendo needed something to perk up brand awareness for their company, so NES Mini did the job.

Nintendo handles their old IPs differently than Microsoft or Sony. They release VC games in order to provide a "boost", not to round out the library. THAT is the annoying part. It is why you have a scattering of different games across the 3DS and Wii U eshop but no consistency between them. Nintendo has a slow Summer ahead for the Wii U? Announce Earthbound. Nintendo getting ready to launch a new Pokemon title in 6 months? Announce Red/Blue. NES Mini was simply a continuation of that philosophy.

If any of this is confusing, you can simply look back at Nintendo's treatment of older titles on Virtual Console. There are years of history to prove my point.

If/when the SNES mini comes out (I wouldn't count on this Holiday, but maybe next Spring/Summer?), you will watch them to do the exact same thing by releasing the system in fairly limited quantities and then cut production a year later.

Tetsujin2499d ago

It makes sense, however it still doesn't excuse Nintendo for cancelling without stating why, which is why I'll never buy from them again. I will not tolerate a company (regardless of who) just to drop a product without stating why, especially when the wrong crowd (scalpers) bought them up just to resell them at a higher price. All Nintendo had to do was release a why, and while it will sting, at least it will help understand their decision.

rando 2499d ago

finally an article i can agree with.

LIGATURE2499d ago

Lol these are going for 400$ on ebay.its like,get real.payin that for emulator in a nintendo cosmetic box

Show all comments (10)
100°

Unitek Multi-Port 8 Switch Game Card Reader With Remote Review - All You Could Ask For

Infinite Start Reviews the Unitek 8 Switch Game Card Reader.

Read Full Story >>
infinitestart.com
190°

Xbox May Opt For "Timed Exclusivity" In Future, But Should Never Fully Abandon It

Hanzala from eXputer says, "Abandoning exclusives meant while Microsoft could still profit, Xbox would be doomed as a platform; I'm relieved it's not happening."

Lightning771d 6h ago

They even said it in the article.

"Xbox business meeting clarifies the future of the console, which is that it’s not the end of the platform."

Ives said for the 100th time this past week. LS and AA don't grow console sales, or services. Sustainability and revenue is what it drives. So those types of games only makes sense to drop your walled garden and drop those types of games everywhere.

However Again, logic says Just buy a PS6 if games like Blade, Elder Scrolls, next Halo release on PS6 Day date or year or so after it
Doesn't matter. Makes no sense for an Xbox to even exist and no saying "get it on GP!" definitely won't work because you're getting everything on PS6 including Sony's AAA's. Xbox rental service would render useless. Those AAA games need that walled Exclusive garden to sell your console and services AA or LS drive long term revenue and sustainability but don't grow your console sales or services.

purple1011d 5h ago

blaade is multiplat, mark this post in your calendar or whatever..

I did quite a bit of research just up here interest on who owns which movie characters for licensing, Sony obv owns sipderman in a different way sop thats separate,. But what I found was interesting. Disney have stipulated all Marvel games from now on the multi platform. wolverine also escaped this clause because the deal was agreed so long ago, before this new licensing deal.

it also included the fact Marvel was in financial trouble in the 90s and sold the X-Men to 21st centuryFox, later Disney came and brought out fox, folded it back into marvel, and this is why they can licence wolverine (being part of men) to Sony.

also intersting, at the same time they sold The incredible HULK to universal pictures, and that licence remains, so although he's a marvel character, Disney cant actually make a film without universal pictures consent.

Lightning771d 4h ago (Edited 1d 4h ago )

"Disney have stipulated all Marvel games from now on the multi platform."

I looked that up and couldn't find anything about that. Indy isn't Marvel but they are owned by Disney and that game's exclusive. There was even a long debate if the game was exclusive and now we know.

Last year, after Blade was announced I saw tweet or somewhere on social media maybe an Article where Disney stated they leave it up to the publishers or the devs making it.

Here it is.

https://gamerant.com/blade-...

Basically yes Disney essentially said it's up to Bethesda. It's convoluted article but thats basically what they say.

They don't dictate where their games goes they leave that up to devs/ pubs.

Christopher1d 4h ago

***blaade is multiplat, mark this post in your calendar or whatever.. ***

It's going to Xbox, PC, and streaming services. PS? I wouldn't bet on that. Wouldn't rule it out, but not worth betting on that chance.

purple1011d 4h ago (Edited 1d 4h ago )

yeh, that wasn't his words, thats a game of Chinese whispers for sure mate.

here's what this website says "Disney chimed in on the platform exclusivity questions about Marvel's Blade, clarifying that the game's choice of target platforms is completely up to Bethesda''

but his actual tweet

when asked about platform says "thats a question for Bethesda"

thats not the same thing, not by a long stretch, in fact, quite a stretch for this website, to even get that headline. its upto Bethesda to announce it, but the decision, thats not clear.

I can't find the article I want either it was somewhere deep into licensing agreements of Disney/marvel and Spiderman got mentioned and my interest piqued. it was about 2 hours worth of reading too, so im not going to do that all again on the chance I stumble on the same quote, but im 99.999% sure all Disney is multiplat from now on, ohh ye that's it it was something like ''After the success of Spiderman they dont want their characters limited to one system'' or something like that,..

Lightning771d 2h ago

"its upto Bethesda to announce it, but the decision, thats not clear."

You're trying to twist things. Of course Bethesda will announce it, it wouldn't be Disney that announces a game. How are those things different? They said it's up to Bethesda for the platform it releases on.

I dunno if I believe what you're saying it would of made news especially across Twitter and other media. That "stipulation" you said would applied to Wolverine since they started development around the same time right?

As I said in my comment why would MS have that game go multiplat? They need compelling AAA games for their console and they certainly wouldn't let Blade go doesn't make console buissness sense. Even if something like that were true MS would spend a pretty penny to keep it exclusive.

Laxus1d 1h ago (Edited 1d 1h ago )

You're wrong lol, the only reason they didn't announce a platform is because Blade might be a nextgen title.

It's 100 percent exclusive.

crazyCoconuts14h ago

That's interesting. I would expect all of it to be fluid - like no rule of gonna be set in stone. I'm sure they want to get their brand out there in a positive light and make money in the process. Worst thing would be to have a company make a crappy game that drags a Marvel character down with it.
So if Sony studios can keep making great games, and they say sure, but like some small % of people won't be able to play it, dunno...
That being said, EA did well with Star Wars and maybe Machine Games will do well with Indy, so who knows

Profchaos7h ago(Edited 7h ago)

Disney have always said whatever do what you want exclusive or multiplatform makes no difference just make sure it sells they have always left it up to the licensee ever since the sega genisis/md had a run of exclusive Disney (actually excellent) games.

The games always have to sell above x copies and make so much money otherwise they pull the license rights and charge a breach fee what you do with the license has always been up to the holder

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 7h ago
Laxus1d 1h ago (Edited 1d 1h ago )

Actually. I think GamePass is a perfectly valid reason to still choose Xbox over Playstation even in the extremely unlikely scenario that everything goes multiplat.

If you like Xbox games why would you go to the platform where you'd have to pay 70 dollars for every game that you get for nothing extra on Xbox? Especially when Call of Duty starts hitting GamePass. That's a lot of money you'll save.

Is being able to play Spiderman and God of War worth spending all that extra money? That's subjective and depends on if you even have that much money to spend.

Lightning771d ago

I have to disagree. Gamepass is a great service but if everything goes over along side PS6 exclusives. People would buy PS6 over a Series 2. PS is way more popular globally. That alone would dwarf the GP long term plan, easily. As I said influencers would just tell their fans to buy a PS6 instead of a Series 2. It won't go nearly as good as you may think for Series 2. The selling point is here's our Aaa's to be on GP Day and date only on Series 2 and PC of course.

70$ for all of PS 1st party and Xbox 1st party. People buy multiple games, buy one after another line'em up back to back if you can. In my eyes and many other gamers eyes, that's a ultimate gaming machine. GP wouldn't be able to save the console at all imo.

EvertonFC15h ago(Edited 15h ago)

"If you like Xbox games why would you go to the platform where you'd have to pay 70 dollars for every game"

It's called ownership, something gamers have always wanted and always will.
GP imo is great for 7-16 year olds who are at school who maybe have parents on low income or benefits.
Most people work and have money for there hobby. Colin Moriarty mentioned once if you are moaning or struggling to pay for a games console or to pay £70 for a game maybe just maybe gaming isn't the hobby for you.

shinoff218311h ago

Lightning I think your right. I don't think gamepass is enough but maybe that's the plan bow out slowly.

Everton your spot on. While gamepass and ps plus are cool and have some good shit. I still prefer to own. I hated renting a house, making payments on a car. Now I own, took awhile on the house part but the points the same. Ownership means something

Laxus3h ago(Edited 3h ago)

@Lightning77

With the way the economy is going. People are gonna be looking at ways to save money. Missing out on a few games is not gonna be a huge factor as long as they can play Call of Duty for nothing extra. I don't think you're looking at the wider gaming audience. You're just looking at people like us who are on these websites talking into echo chambers.

Either way it's subjective. Believe it or not some people don't give a flying f about Playstation exclusives.

But we can agree to disagree.

@EvertonFC
Idk if you noticed but Netflix and other streaming services are huge. Most people don't care about ownership as long as the price and convenience is right.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3h ago
__SteakDeck__16h ago

@Laxus That wasn’t the reason why they didn’t announce platforms for Blade. You’re coping. 😂

crazyCoconuts14h ago

I mean... AA/AAA/LS all play a part in the exclusivity game, in proportion to their popularity with customers. Helldivers is just AA LS.
Fortnite is LS, can you imagine the impact of that was just on one platform? Sure AAA is bigger. But there will be some Sea of Thieves lovers out there that haven't pulled the trigger on a PS yet but now will. Small number I'm sure, but it adds up.

S2Killinit14h ago(Edited 14h ago)

As if they would ever come out and say “we are doomed” lol

Just because they said nothing to see here, doesn't mean there is nothing to see there.

Kiryu19924h ago

6 month timed exclusive and than on to other platforms and get to charge full price

This is where the future of the gaming business is. Permanent exclusives just don’t make business sense because development costs are in 100’s of millions

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3h ago
derek15h ago

Oh it's happening. It's clear to me that the xbox division has recieved new marching orders from on high once Microsoft was duped into spending near 100 billion on gaming. This move is purely financially motivated and has nothing to do with a philosophical change regarding exclusivity. That podcast last week was about managing the message as it is clear from the Nintendo direct and how quick announcements for ports to ps5 afterwards that Microsoft has made the decision long ago and is moving forward with it. All those reports leading up to the podcast of everything being ported were maybe from disgruntled xbox execs who had hoped to manipulate Microsoft into changing the new plan.
You're only deluding yourself if you think xbox's meager fanbase can financially support all the content potentially coming out of their now enormous 1st party. I was opposed to abk purchase but it may have forced Microsoft to eventually give up their identity as a platform holder.

Hofstaderman12h ago

This about sums it up succinctly.