Support NeoGAF

[AniHawk]

The better question is: how is Nintendo going to evenly support 4 platforms (GC, GBA, DS, Revolution) simultaneously, nevermind the logistics and marketing nightmare that it will present?

I agree. Especially since Nintendo's such a small, small company.

 

[GigaDrive]

Sega was able to handle (rather badly) the Genesis, GameGear, SegaCD, 32X, 32X CD, Saturn, plus Arcade, in the mid 1990s for a time.

I'm sure Nintendo will do much better with GBA, GameCube, DS, Revolution, GBA2

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Obviously, they're not small. But really, it seems that Nintendo is having a hard enough time supporting two platforms with ample and focused software. How does it benefit them, and in turn, the gamer, if they cannot sufficiently support them when their efforts are spread, IMO, too thin?

 

[jarrod]

GBA will probably be almost phased out by the time Revolution releases (late 2006 most likely). Internal GC support should only last a year or so after Revolution also... I think Nintendo will be fine supporting all the platforms, support will be slowing down on some while it gears up on others.... they're just going for more of a gradual shift this time rather than the abrupt N64/GC jump.

 

[neptunes]

saturation?

 

[jarrod]

EA, Sega, Konami, Activision, UbiSoft and most every 3rd party manage to support 5-10 platforms pretty well, why shouldn't Nintendo be able to handle 3-4?

 

[AniHawk]

Obviously, they're not small. But really, it seems that Nintendo is having a hard enough time supporting two platforms with ample and focused software. How does it benefit them, and in turn, the gamer, if they cannot sufficiently support them when their efforts are spread, IMO, too thin?

Well Nintendo's also expanding.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Yes, as a thrid party, though, they only have to worry about the software-side of things and can use a single marketing phase for all of their simultaneous multi-platform releases. I'm not necessarily doubting their ability, as I'm more curious to whether or not it's going to be enough. With their statements of "long haul" software support of legacy platforms, I have to wonder how well it can be done.

They're obviously confident of their ability to do so, or they wouldn't be bothered to do it.

Yeah, their expansion is probably the thing I wasn't thinking of...

 

[jarrod]

Well Nintendo's also expanding.

Indeed, right now in trems of sftware development Nintendo encompases...

-Nintendo R&D1
-Nintendo R&D2
-Nintendo EAD
-Nintendo SPD
-Nintendo Tokyo R&D
-Nintendo Software Technologies
-HAL Labratory
-Intelligent Systems
-GameFreak Entertainment
-Retro Studios
-Suzac
-Brownie Brown
-NdCube
-Noise
-Spiral
-Ambrella
-Ape

...not to mention continuing close working relationships (which yeilds "2nd party" software) with...

-Capcom Production Studio 1
-Namco CT Company
-Treasure Video Games
-Camelot Software Planning
-Amusement Vision (Sega Sammy)
-Rare (Microsoft Game Studios)
-Silicon Knights
-Alpha Dream
-Kuju Entertainment
-Fuse Games
-Paon
-Skip
-n-Space
-Jupiter
-Tose Software
-Eighting
-Hudson Soft
-Genki
-Creatures
-Seta
-Factor 5
-Vivarium

...not too bad.

 

[GDGF]

Also remember this. Just because the next GBA is in design phases, doesn't mean you'll be seeing it anytime soon. Remember Project Atlantis? We heard it was in development for several years before it launched as the Gameboy Advance. Hell, people were talking about it during the first year of Next Generation magazine's run.

 

[jett]

Heh, I wonder if the DS will still be around 2 years after its launch.

 

[GDGF]

If it's popular, I'd say it'll be around for long after that. Nintendo's never had any problem delaying one version of their portible due to the popularity of another. See the Project Atlantis example above.

 

[jarrod]

Project Atlantis (ie: GBA) was finished and ready for a 1999 release. The main reason Nintendo held off was the surprising success of GBC... if DS does well we won't be seeing GBE until 2007/2008 probably. If it sinks expect GBE in early 2006.

 

[GigaDrive]

I remember reading about Project Atlantis back in 1996-97. it was going to have a 143, 160 or 200 Mhz StrongARM processor. I believe the GBA is a very scaled back Atlantis.
much like the SFC/SNES is a scaled back version what Nintendo was first planning (10 Mhz CPU, backwards compat.

[speculation]
Atlantis would probably have been closer to Saturn, instead of a souped up fast SNES. I believe the GBA sits somewhere inbetween the Atlantis and GameBoy Color, as far as power/technology.

[not speculation]
incidentally, Nintendo had made Color GameBoy back in 1989-1990 that it chose not to release, until 1998's GameBoy Color.

 

[Spiritreaver]

Confused? Why do people keep saying this? The GBC, GBA, and GBA SP have all released within a few years of time. Was the market confused? I don't think so. The DS and GBN will be releasing within a similar timespan, whether or not the DS fails. I don't see how the market is going to get confused. If anything is going to be the entry of another system (PSP) that will confuse the market if it takes off.

Secondly, someone said they doubted that the GBN would not be able to allow PSP like graphics with decent battery life, or something of the sort. I think this may be the main reason we're not seeing the GBN out instead of the DS. Nintendo never released the GBC for a long long while because of the very reason. A jump to disc based, 3D powered, and online handhelds are a HUGE jump for the handheld industry. Nintendo wants to play it safe. Why release a portable with less than 10 hours of battery life when that's always been what Nintendo has strived for. They've always tried to give us cheap and more "economic" systems.

 

[GigaDrive]

1998 GBC - 2001 GBA - GBA SP 2003 - DS 2004 - 2006/7 GBNext

 

[mj1108]

...why does Nintendo need two handhelds at once?

Because owning 99% of the market isn't enough.

 

[GigaDrive]

...why does Nintendo need two handhelds at once?

because they can?

Nintendo had GBC and then brought out GBA a few years later. the next GameBoy should follow 2-3 years after DS. so it's not as if the next GameBoy is imminent.

 

[MaddenNFL64]

Man, I never noticed that the lastest iterations of GB were released so close.

I'm actually thinking they're testing the touch screen & not the dual screen. The next GB might have a screen that doubles as a touch panel.

 

[john tv]

Wait, so the DS won't play GB and GBC games?

 

[Insertia]

I wonder how different the handheld market will be by the time GBA2 arrives (assuming PSP is successful).

Right now, GBA software sells are pretty awful in comparison to the amount of hardware it sells. If PSP owners are like PS2 owners (and they are), PSP should have a better hardware/software ratio.

 

[Naked Snake]

Wait, so the DS won't play GB and GBC games?

There's still no definitive official answer to this, but people are assuming that it wont play GB and GBC games for the simple fact that during the E3 pres-conference Reggie said "an instant library of over 500 titles", while if it played GB and GBC games then it would have easily been over a 1000 games.

I'm not losing hope yet though, it's not dead until the fat lady sings.

 

[Kobun Heat]

It's so tough to care about GB and GBC games at this point, mostly since there's absolutely no chance of any more being produced. 95% of the reason I like backwards compatibility is because there are still games I want to play and brand new games that are still being made on older systems. That's why GBA compatibility is great - they're going to be making GBA games long after the DS is released, for sure.

But as far as the old GB software goes, I'd only play the games for nostalgia's sake - and if I'm going to get them down out of the attic, it's not going to be too hard to get a GB, or GBA, or SP down with them. Backwards compatibility for those games in the DS would be cool, but I'm not going to shed any tears if it's not there.

Same thing if the PS3 is compatible with PS2 but not PS1 games - I wouldn't really lose too much sleep over it now, let alone in 2006.