mike_intv

Even if Sega is re-releasing on different hardware or making them in a more enhanced form, it still strikes me strange as to why Sega would want to pull them (though I do imagine the Wii versions get very little new purchases these days).

@rjejr I agree — although it seems as if these are only for the PS4/XB1 so a lot of cost in prepping for WiiU. Much has been done for other systems previously, so I am guessing Ubisoft decided only to do them for the current super systems — where they won't sell.

Will there be regional versions with the proper/propre spellings?

I wonder if this will pop up in the reproduction market.

The system doesn't get rid of local ratings — it just does them quickly for all systems in a single pass. Interesting.

I am not sure why the alternate costumes are included to begin with?
Do they sell the game? Or do they make game-players look less than enlightened?

I think this is a matter of taste rather than censorship. There is nothing revealed in the costumes that you can't generally see at a beach or a Victoria's Secret network TV commercial in the US. But in a world where Playboy has decided to go "nude-free," maybe the idea of offering something different as an alternative (since the costumes have nothing to do with the story) was thought to be a better selling option in the west.

Before calling Nintendo names, do we know how many games are actually out there for which there that Nintendo can release for which there would be a market?

Let's use Tail Gator for an example. It is today a rare game (I base this on the fact you can't find it for under $100 on eBay) which means it has limited visibility outside of small groups like those who post on here. It is owned by a third-party which means profits have to to be shared or a license has to be paid (but Nintendo would bear the costs). It is probably a bad investment.

Nothing is stopping Natsume from putting together a collection of its games and making them available in physical (or download) form on any console of their choosing. If Nintendo could do nothing about Rare Replay, it does not have that power.

In other words, these things aren't happening because there isn't enough money in it.

From the report on Japanese companies:

Meanwhile, Nintendo (#8, -33%) and Nikon (#16,
-29%) fell substantially in value, unable to adjust to
the rapid changes in their main areas of business.

The drop in value roughly corresponds to the change from Jan./early 2014 to the same period in 2015. It does not reflect the recent increase in value (nearly doubled this year).

Clothing retailer Uniglo debuted (on the list of 30) at #7 — one spot above Nintendo.

Found a link to this in the comments on the source article: http://www.wired.com/2009/06/pachter/

Pachter is repeating himself!

@John_Enigma

First, Konami will have to be amenable to such a sale.

It has been using the IPs for mobile games and casino machines, so it may be completely out of Nintendo's control. In such a case, it would not matter who was in charge.

The 3DS re-release of the N64 Star Fox game sold almost as many copies as the highly-regarded Xenoblade release for Wii — according to data from VGChartz.

The most any Xeno-series game has sold is about 1-3/4 million. Three Star Fox games have sold at least that many copies — though the most recent was on the Gamecube.

I know the VGChartz numbers can be sketchy. But my point is to the general player, Star Fox is far more recognizable — and thus more likely to be bought — than Xenoblade Chronicles X. The latter will be a critical success, but it is doubtful it will be a sales success.

Nice to see a WiiU stretch goal that is (less than) half the goal for PS4/Xbox one. (150k vs. 350k)
Doubtful it will be reached, but it is still nice.

If I recall correctly, the timing of all of this came about during the period where Iwata took a turn for a worse, eventually died, and the immediate aftermath. Given that Iwata made final decisions at NoA, it could be that someone made a decision that they were not supposed to make or reversed a decision that others made that they disagreed with.

Maybe other parts of Nintendo were upset that NoA was going to escape this debacle and someone asserted authority during those dark days. Maybe Reggie wanted NoA to publish the game and was able to make it happen after no one was there to stop him. We don't know what really happened. We just know that the game appears to be really bad — potentially the worse game Nintendo has released in a very long time. Anyone not involved, by choice or by chance or by force, should be happy.

Alas, these games aren't coming to North America.
I guess we are too urban here.

Will it have off-screen play with sound?
(Had to ask that as there was so much of an issue with the e-shop release, especially in North America.)

I can't see paying $40 for this since I have the base game on the e-shop. I would add on the DLC, however, if made available.

@HollywoodHogan
Even a blind squirrel occasionally finds some nuts.

UK Tabloid not fact-checking --- How shocking. I wonder the same company owns any news networks.

Neither the comments nor the reaction are surprising.
I just wonder where the tipping point was reached.

@Arturo

Thanks. That was an unintentional error. I have corrected the post.

New 3DS LL outsold all other 3DS models combined by 3x.
Vita TV sold 2x more than XB1 — which combined to be less than the (old) 3DS LL.
(CORRECTED)

@Quorthon
I have no problem with companies making decisions for their bottom line.
But to implicitly promise and use that to generate funding for development ... that gives crowdfunding a bad name. This game dropped PS3, X360 and now WiiU. I wonder how much of the funds for the games were raised from people wanting/thinking they could get those versions.

I wonder if NoA was able to try to get out of publishing this because it was slated for later in that territory, while NCL and NoE were too close to deadlines when they realized this had quality issues.

The truth is that those with a Nintendo console who want to play this type of game will only do so if it is good. That is why many games of this type have fared poorly recently on Nintendo consoles while getting decent sales on the competing consoles — Nintendo owners expect quality. That is especially true for first-party releases.

Another point, since Nintendo appears to own this game, it would have had to have negotiated the rights for release. It may have been the publisher of last resort in Europe. At least it is coming.

Also, Nintendo has not had good luck with M-rated games. The WiiU had more available at launch than the PS4 — and you see how well that did. Meanwhile, a quality M-rated game like Bayonetta 2 sold 400K in the US and less than 750K worldwide (less than half the original did on each of its two platforms). So maybe NoA knows its market and made sure the game got out.

Recent history has shown that games that jump from Nintendo consoles to other consoles don't do too well. Ubisoft is working to become the next THQ, I guess. (See DeBlob, uDraw).

I will get both. I have DQ7 for the PS and DQ8 for the PS2 (the former barely touched, the latter waiting to complete the final battle, 140 hours in).

@Quorthon
As I have stated before, Nintendo, for whatever reason, shied away from M-rated games this e3.
Maybe it was to differentiate itself. (Sony made a big splash with CoD. MS with Halo).
Maybe it is because e3 is more a general media event and it could put Nintendo in a bad light. (After all, innocent things like Picto-chat have been been called child-molester tools by Fox News).
Maybe it was because the emphasis on M-rated games didn't work too well at launch (WiiU had more M-rated games available at launch than PS4 or XB1).
And maybe it knows what will sell and what won't — regardless of the push. (Bayonetta 2 sold worse than the original did on either console).
But if Nintendo is so bad — why is EA imitating it (e.g., Yarny).
Look, anyone looking at it could say the Digital Event was "meh." And anyone knows the company has its issues. But just like one person said (who was so reviled on these boards for saying it), posters here are not the majority of the audience.

@MikeW
We shall see what kind of market there really is for such when the sales for the Rare collection on the XB1 rolls around. If Sega's success (or lack thereof) is any indicator, Nintendo must stay a hardware company because otherwise these types of experiences would be lost forever, underneath the gray, green, and gravel grit of annualized war-based shooters and sports franchises.

@ericwithcheese2 If you look at e3, Nintendo showed games from popular franchises for main media, none of which had more than a T-rating. At least that is what it appears to be to me.

It was as if the Digital Event was designed to be "family friendly" - with more "mature" offerings left for later announcements.

It was as if the Digital Event was designed to be "family friendly" - with more "mature" offerings left for later announcements.

Should be interesting how well these are ported.

Bethesda may be good at making games. But if you look at its current catalog, almost every IP that it is servicing was acquired from somewhere/someone else. In other words, it has generally bought its way into games. My point is that being critical of others who take chances when your formula for success is to use your parent company to buy good IP from failing companies does not always give you a lot of room to talk big. But they do it anyway.

This decision makes much more sense than some others.

For example, Ubisoft has the Hasbro Game Chanel for PS3, PS4, XB360 and XB1 — but not WiiU. That makes no sense. It is as if decisions are being made for non-business reasons. Sort of like EA (which at least brought these games to Nintendo consoles when it held the license).

@NTELLIGENTMAN

You do realize that the PS2 was the weakest of the three consoles from that generation?
The Gamecube's smaller and proprietary disk format, not its hardware capabilities, are what caused it issues.

@ikki5 @Rect_Pola

This morning, Gamestop had online Wario, PacMan, Squid Boy, Squid Girl and Silver Mario.

What Nintendo did not anticipate were people wanting figures for games that have never sold well (or rarely sold well) — i.e., Fire Emblem.

And the hardcore shortages did not start until Wave 3 had none on store shelves. I pre-ordered every one of them, including Meta Knight, more than week after announcement. And shortages have led to a crazed frenzy of collectors and scalpers alike.

Personally, I hope more people get fed up — so I can continue to get all the amiibo that I want.

(Now don't think I don't think that Nintendo needs to make more and stop exclusives. But these things take time. And with the aggressive roll out scheduled, it may difficult to fix quickly).

If I am reading the quote correctly, he appears to be implying that Nintendo has manipulated supply to create intentional shortages.

I doubt Nintendo has done this to the degree that people sometimes think because sales by third-parties are sales that Nintendo does not capture (or profit from). People don't seem to understand that unless the company is doing the selling in the secondary market, it makes no money from this.

About the only thing that Nintendo is guilty of is being conservative in its estimates. But I doubt it thought that people who no longer played it games (or even owned its consoles) would want to buy all the amiibo.

I just hope for this Disney officials' sake that the supply chain does not break — because Karma can be cruel.

It is ironic that NIntendo, with really no other source of income, takes video games much less seriously than the entertainment company and the computer company which are its competitors in the console space.

One 3DS order. One two-platform order forthcoming.

One point that people are missing is that manufacturing expansion takes months not days. This situation will take time to improve.

I imagine that Nintendo will be paying someone to port this as soon as it can.

@Quorthon
It is a chicken or the egg question. And the genesis was when the Sony Playstation came out two decades ago, providing a true competitor for third-parties to flock to in an effort to escape Nintendo's then-Draconian contracts.

That was fabulous. Now I have to go make some deals.

This is a problem. What is even worse is that Nintendo-console owners are blamed for the problem. Not sure where the issue lies. But it is something that NOJ needs to sort out for all regions.

@DEAD
That was a reference to the new deal for the former Top Gear presenters.

@liveswired
There was a global service for iPlayer as well that is being shuttered:
http://arstechnica.co.uk/information-technology/2015/05/bbc-iplayer-usage-falls-for-first-time-ever-global-service-shuttered/

UK only — just like the iPlayer is becoming/has become.

I am glad it never came to the US — because I would be bummed out about it leaving.

@OneBagTravel

Still waiting for the ITV/Netflix announcement on that one.

Can anyone show where Slightly Mad said "maybe" before this latest attempt at what appears to be revisionist history?

Since they are being released on the Xbox 360 and PS3, this is a business decision rather than a technical one.

In the west, the only game Capcom has brought to WiiU has been Monster Hunter 3G.

That being said, this is a lot of effort and energy in re-releases. It makes you wonder where new creativity are — or are software companies treating consoles the way they have treated the mobile market but with higher price tags.

Nintendo made available for sale all the retailer-exclusive costumes from Hyrule Warriors (at least in the US). So I imagine these costumes will be able to be bought at some point. (Also, if you are going to do a retailer-exclusive costume or DLC, selling it at some point is a good thing to do for those who can't (or don't) shop at that vendor.