Does anyone here have a 3DS?|Page 2|General Gaming Discussion|Forum|SNES HUB

John Legendoffzelda said
I’m late to the conversation, but my sister owns a 3DS. She bought it to play the “Ocarina of Time” port, and I’m pretty sure “Animal Crossing: New Leaf” as well. I haven’t been keeping up with it at all, but I think she might get a 2DS so she can play “X” or “Y”.

But can’t she just play X or Y on the 3DS she already has?  LOL.  Have you tried her 3DS?  What do you think of it?

Mongunzoo said
The 2DS is an attempt to salvage the disaster that is the 3DS (and it IS a disaster in terms of what Nintendo handhelds usually do, it is still struggling to meet expectations outside of Japan despite a premature price cut that guarantees that the hardware is being sold at a loss). 

 

The main problem with the 3DS? The main feature of the system is not seen as a value; it is seen as a detriment.

1. 3D effect strains your eyes so parents are scared to buy them for their kids.

2.3D effect drains the battery life

3.3D effect makes the unit cost more money

 

The 2DS is what Nintendo should have put out in the first place. The macroeconomic conditions in 2013 are decline and depression, and the Vita, 3DS, and WiiU have already shown us what happens to expensive hardware in this day and age. Xbox One and PS4 will be similar, though I expect PS4 to win this gen. They will sell during the holidays because everything sells more (followed by the game “journalists”, “analysts”, and noisy forum dwellers screaming “they are UNSTOPPABLE!!!!!” then they will drop off a cliff. They are just too expensive. 

 

As for whether I buy a 2DS, lets take a count, shall we?

-The New Smash Brothers (sans WiiU)

-Mario Kart 7

-Pilotwings resort

-New Super Mario Bros 2 (despite the dumbass coin gimmick)

-Shin Megami Tensei 4

-Pokemon X and Y

That makes six games out now!

 

Thanks for reminding me of the 2DS, Colors! Going to buy one today!

Don’t forget Super Mario 3D Land!  I know you hate 3D Mario, but from what I’ve read, Super Mario 3D Land does a good job of melding 2D and 3D Mario gameplay together.

It’s also worth noting that the game has sold very well (8.6 million and counting) and has also outsold its 2D counterpart, New Super Mario Bros 2 (6.4 million and counting).  Of course, NSMB2 is a lazy bare bones sequel and SM3DL is a new, original experience, so these sales figures aren’t too surprising.  Still, this seems to be the exception to the rule that 2D Mario outsells 3D Mario.

As for 2D vs. 3D Mario, I’ve been thinking about this some more and I would love to see a Sonic Generations style Mario game featuring both 2D and 3D levels.  I would be thrilled if Nintendo would just ape Sega entirely and have fully 3D levels from past 2D Mario games (like Donut Plains from SMW) and have 2D reimaginings of 3D levels from Mario 64, Galaxy and hell, even Sunshine.  Sonic’s had a bumpy ride since the Genesis days, but I really can’t say enough good things about Generations.  I would love to see Mario get the same treatment.

It’s worth noting that both NSMB2 and SM3DL have been pack-in games for the 3DS.  I believe SM3DL is the first 3D Mario pack-in game though I could be wrong.  

Pack-in games always sell extremely well and they also create a bit of a chicken and the egg dilemma when evaluating their sales data: does the system sell because of the pack-in game or does the pack-in game sell because of the system?  In reality, its probably a bit of both.

Mongunzoo said
2D Mario has also been a non pack-in.

Super Mario Brothers 3 sold enormously well despite not being a pack-in

(NSMB Wii at first) and performed extraordinarily well, so well they made it a pack in and sold the Wii out for another year.

NSMBU for being so weak is neck-and neck with Nintendo land (the pack in) its an insane attach rate.

 

If the late Mr. Yamauchi is to be believed (and I have never been given a reason to doubt his instincts) how did he put it?

“The console is the box people buy to get to Mario.”

 

No one buys hardware for hardware. You can have the greatest hardware in the world and if it doesn’t have SOMETHING that people want to justify that price tag people pass. An empty box.

 

Note that it does not always have to be a pack-in. That just sweetens the pot to get the customer over the hardware hurdle easier. Hardware is always driven by good software, (Mario Brothers for NES, Sonic games for Genesis, SMW for SNES, Gran Turismo and FF7 for PS1, OoT and Goldeneye for N64, GTA for PS2, Halo for Xbox, Wii Sports and NSMB for Wii, and COD for your HD twin of choice.

 

Remove these games from the equation, and see how much hardware you sell.

 

Don’t believe me? Then look at the graveyard of gaming and see what hardware devoid of mainstream software looks like. If superior hardware was the key to the kingdom then PC gaming would not be in retreat, and the 3DO and NEO-GEO would have reigned supreme. PS1 would have lost to N64, and the Wii would have been steamrolled. Genesis would not have been competitive and the NES would be the little engine that couldn’t. 

 

SOFTWARE ALWAYS SELLS THE HARDWARE. Never doubt this. I had thought that the Wii would finally put this to rest, but oh well……

Of course software sells the hardware.  No one is arguing that.  I have never heard of anyone argue that console sales aren’t driven by software.  It’s about as common as common sense gets.  

I was stating that packing a game in with a system seems to inflate its total sales numbers.

Like you said, software doesn’t need to be a pack-in to move hardware.   In 1993, the Sega Genesis was flying off the shelves so people could play Mortal Kombat with blood in it.  At the time Sonic 2 was the pack-in I believe.  Were people buying the Genesis for Sonic 2?  Some were and some weren’t, but Sonic 2’s sales numbers were going up either way.

As for Mr. Yamauchi, he wasn’t a brilliant business man but his instincts were not always right.  He was human like the rest of us.  I hate to speak ill of the dead, but its worth noting that Yamauchi purposefully made the N64 difficult to program for.  The theory was that it would encourage only the best third party companies to develop for it and to lead to high quality third party support.   We all know how that worked out.  In fact, Yamauchi owns the N64-era Nintendo which made several mistakes.  He also owns the mistake of spurning Sony and inadvertently creating their greatest competitor.

I want to be clear that I have the deepest of respect for Yamauchi and his accomplishments, but to never doubt his instincts is a bit much.

Mongunzoo said
I have. Its like beating my fucking head against a wall lol. As you say, it’s common sense, but anything goes in the world of internet forums lol.

 

And I should clarify that his “brilliant instincts” are in the software arena. Donkey Kong SMB, and Tetris are just a few of his software victories.

 

To be fair, Sony tried to stick Nintendo with a crippling licensing agreement and Yamauchi had no choice; it would have been unprofitable for Nintendo. I would have done the same thing.

 

The N64 is a failure that he did indeed own, though in retrospect 3rd party companies were never going to support a Nintendo system again after the 16-bit war produced a real contender and the business laws loosened. The history of Nintendo is filled with bad blood with 3rd party companies, and there is a lot at play there. (EA, Square, ect.). 

 

No question the man had an eye for quality software.  

Fair enough re: Sony, though as you pointed out, Nintendo has a history of bullying third-party developers with tough high licensing fees and even restrictive contracts in the NES days.

That said, Nintendo didn’t have to let Sony embarass themselves at CES with an announcement of their partnership, only to be revoked the next day by Nintendo themselves.  Sony was right to be pissed about that.

I understand the necessity of Nintendo’s actions, I’m questioning their timing.  

It’s one thing to quietly walk away from a bad deal, it’s quite another to publicly humiliate what was once a potential partner.  Did Nintendo have the option of doing the former and choose the latter?  Or did they only find out about the unfavourable licensing terms at CES that year?

If they had the option to quietly sever ties with Sony they should have chosen to do so.  I’m sure Sony wouldn’t have been thrilled, but at least Nintendo would not have publicly shamed an industry giant and made an enemy out of their CEO.

Also, your version of the events directly contradicts what is stated in the following Wikipedia article, which clearly states Sony’s anger at being humiliated as a key factor driving towards the creation of the PlayStation.

The PlayStation was not a done deal when Nintendo spurned Sony at the 1991 CES show.  Sony had been working on brining CD tech to the Super Famicom.  The PlayStation was still a long ways a way and they must have had to invest a lot of resources to create a 32-bit system after having tried to make an add-on for a 16-bit one.

Again, you haven’t really demonstrated that walking away wasn’t at least a consideration for Sony.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation

Read my updated post.  The PlayStation was far from a done deal in 1991 when Nintendo humiliated Sony.  The Wikipedia article I cited lists Sony’s anger towards Nintendo as a key factor towards the development of the PlayStation.

Also note that there was strong internal opposition towards the PlayStation within Sony.

Seems to me like Nintendo could have ended things more amicably and potentially have dodged a bullet.