Yeah, but if Nintendo just released by the truckloads, wouldn't they make more sales? I would think that, even if they did release games that weren't as popular, people would buy those games out of nostalgia. Also, there would be the situation where someone is bored and says, "I wonder what <Insert Game> is like. I'll give $5 for that." There would probably even be a few crazy collectors that would try to buy every VC title.

Anyway, I think that Nintendo should quit this "release a game or two every week" strategy and just flood the market. It would be way more money for Nintendo, and it would make lots of fans happy.

I can't claim to have all the answers, but I have to say that a response like that ^ tell me you don't have a good head for business. It's always about the long term. If the fans are really fans they'll buy at least what they would if Nintendo released everything now, but rationing them out has more benefits than a DO IT NOW! strategy. In cases like this a smart company doesn't give a damn about the biggest fans because they'll be there regardless. It's the consumers who don't play video games 50+ hours a week and post at VG related message boards that they care about. Hell look at summer movie releases. If the industry wanted to it could have 5+ big movies debut in the same weekend. Why do you think that is never the case?

To re respond:

#1 I see it as a marathon. Sure they could pick up the releases to plug in the always slow summer gaming season, but I'd have to assume they're applying the "always keep them wanting more" strategy. When the good Wii titles do hit anyone who's been keeping up with VC releases wont be too preoccupied with those purchases.


#2 The N64 is a special case. There weren't alot of big games for that system anyway. They could release more, but picking up the pace there too much would effectively shoot their load. Furthermore there's much more to the VC than just N64 games.


#3 The only reply I can think of here is that people are much more conscious of paying $10 for crap than a non double-digit figure. Customers are stupid like that. From the little marketing I know I'd say this is the case here.

To add a final point I can't help but wonder if they want to get the response out of other customers they're getting from you. I'm not suggesting that you're going into cold sweats over the lack of N64 releases, but it's enough to keep you checking back, and looking through the list of what they are pumping out. When there finally is another N64 release I'm sure they'll get a burst of publicity out of it.

Furthermore I'm sure Nintendo is fully aware that a GREAT deal of the people who do want Wiis still can't get them. It could be entirely possible they they don't want to overwhelm them when they see the VC list. Of course that will be the case with those folks who buy the system 2-3 years from now, but they already know they'll be behind the game anyway.

On another note how does the Wii point system work? I take it you go to the store buy a card and that's got 2000 points you've got to buy stuff right? What's to stop somebody from entering in random numbers and buying stuff from a not yet purchased card that some unfortunate bloke across the country hasn't picked up yet?

Essentially its 1 cent per point so...

An N64 game costs 1000 points thus making it 10 bucks

The way it's working out is 3 games on the VC a week. And it's not always 3 games from Nintendo. It's usually just one from them, a TG16 game, and maybe Sega game or two. I don't see why they aren't doing at least 6 games a week. Also, third parties like Capcom, Konami, and Square-Enix really need to get on the game. I really don't see what is preventing them from putting out at least 4 games a month. They certainly have them.

But then again, who will be buying the VC games? Probably not fans who are casual gamers. I would say that the hardcore gamers would comprise 80% of the VC consumers.

It seems that Nintendo knows that too. How much advertising has been done for the VC games? (Not the VC in general.) I haven't seen one commercial for Mach Rider recently. Furthermore, even if there were advertising for the VC games, how effective would it really be in persuading casual gamers to buy the games?

In this respect, the VC market is a little more specialized, and you can't really compare it to the movie market. With movies, the movie goes to theaters for months before it goes on DVD and hence reduces the consumer market. It would make sense to spread out the DVD release so you can make as much money as possible from the theater phase.

In contrast, there is no "theater phase" for video games. (Unless you count rentals, but that is a little different.) Therefore, after Game X is purchased by a consumer, there is really no more money that can be made from that particular consumer for Game X.

I can see a video game company spreading out releases for development and/or to build up the surprise/interest of a game, but again the VC doesn't have either of these. Instead, I think that the longer that a VC game is available, the more likely that it will be purchased by the average consumer. This would especially apply to more obscure games. After the consumer gets done beating all of his old VC games, he will be searching for more.

I am no business expert either, but I think that the market is a little specialized and needs a few special considerations.

Not sure if this is news to many, but the latest NP issue says that Paper Mario [64] will be released on VC soon. Something else to look forward to, at least. :D

I want my fucking WAVERACE!

I know it's only a day early, but Zelda II: The Adventure of Link is one of the planned releases tomorrow. Apparently it'll be the 100th VC game released. Kind of a lame game if Nintendo wants to mark the occassion, but I know some people like it.

Is that right, 4.7 million VC downloads? I would say that is beyond successful. The cheapest ones are 5 bucks, so that means Nintendo has probably taken in at least $25 million on VC alone for Wii. That is amazing, considering that so many of the titles currently on there are old NES ones no one cares about, etc.

So. . . Earthbound? Kirby Super Star? EVER?

I read somwhere that they plan on releasing Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars for the VC.

Ah, http://wii.ign.com/articles/744/744751p1.html.

That's the link. Oh, and Kirby Super Star will be released. :D

I'm extremely interested to see how they'll do duck hunt

Nintendo should do a mega huge release either on September 23rd or November 19th for the US

SMRPG and KSS are ****ing win. I can't remember how many times I replayed both those games, but I still like them so that'll be another guaranteed $16+ from me. Honestly though, they need to release Mappy for NES still >=(

I think Nintendo's not so secret plan is to try and forget Earthbound ever existed.

"Gonna release 1+2 for GBA?"
"NAAAAAAW"
"How about translating 3?"
"NAAAAAAWWW"
"What about the Virtual Console that'd require no effort at all"
"NAAAAAAAAAAUUUUUUUGGGHH"
"Are you alright?"

http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/1...alrightgo4.jpg

Also where's Pilotwings 64 for crying out loud! I really do cry out loud trying to play that with my floppy penis N64 controller joystick, CAN'T TURN, CRASH INTO GROUND, BOUNCE AROUND HILARIOUSLY.

Duck Hunt = Wiimote as lightgun.

As for SMRPG I wonder if that wont follow the precedent of TMNT and be an extra buck because of the liscensing.

What licensing? Nintendo owns the rights to those characters, don't they?

Yeah. But you're forgetting to use fuzzy logic here, wvlf. Nintendo AND Square made SMRPG, and because Square is "the best video game company ever," Nintendo is going to have to pay extra licensing just to have the Square splash screen show when you boot up SMRPG.

Then explain FF6, FF3, FF1&2 etc...why didn't those take a long as time?

Point of Guru's post
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
You


Also. What the HELL do you mean? Your post makes NO SENSE.

I know for sure Squeenix owns the Geno character. (Look him up on Wikipedia.) I would assume that means any new main or secondary characters not originally of the Mario universe belong to Squeenix now. Although I could be wrong. The character section about Geno on Wiki also included the other main characters, and it said nothing about Mallow being owned by Squeenix. (Of course, Mallow was never used in a subsequent Nintendo game whereas Geno was -- Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga.)

The point is I'm addicted to gambling. (Points for naming where that's from.)

This week on Virtual Console US (6/4):

Zelda II - The Adventure of Link (NES)
Dead Moon (TG16)
Milon's Secret Castle (NES)
ToeJam & Earl in Panic on Funkotron (Genesis)

Another week of games I won't download. Sorry Zelda fanboys, but II wasn't that great to me. However, it did lead to one of the best levels and music in Smash Bros. Melee.

Is the second ToeJam worth picking up?

It's a sidescroller and nothing like the first. I remember beating it in a rental way back when I rented for my Genesis.

Oh well, I wasn't really expecting much after hearing that Zelda II was being released this week. They never seem to put out more than one well known game in the same week.

Too easy, considering Strangers With Candy has been airing on the Starz channels recently.

I can't even find screenshots on the 'net of Deadmoon for TG16. Perhaps when I see some I'll remember what game this is. Interesting choice of releases - I thought Millon's Secret Castle had already been released though?