Slashdot Mirror
Nintendo President On Future Of Gaming
Thanks to IGN Cube for their summary of Nintendo president Satoru Iwata's keynote speech at the 2003 Tokyo Game Show. Interestingly, Iwata suggested that "...gamers are getting older and tastes are becoming more sophisticated", but didn't necessarily see that as a good thing for industry growth, "because gamers might buy fewer games due to longer play value and a desire to play only software with very high production values." He also remained unconvinced that convergence of functionality for game consoles was the right path, saying: "Although PS2 was a sales success because it had a DVD player function, it troubled me that we had moved to a hardware where the sole function wasn't playing games" and concluded: "It is imperative that a game machine is easy to use for anyone. I don't agree that multi-function hardware is the only answer."
For example, a three-volume RPG that has a good storyline and length well beyond that of the average RPG -- relying, of course, on cutscenes and size of 'world' rather than things like the 20-second summons in FF7 or popping up an enemy every seven steps.
The game mechanics and storyline would have to be really good, there would have to be much more techniques/characteristics/equipment to gather, and they'd need to pay careful attention to make sure your character doesn't become too powerful too early (nothing sucks the fun out of a game like that; adjustable difficulty inside the game would be helpful). Make the game something where you can easily save, too, to make it less frustrating for gamers that don't have an hour to kill trying to get to a save point.
Gamers are changing, and perhaps the business should change with them instead of churning out the same old thing. Nintendo's been burned trying out new strategies, of course, but they also made a big score when they went from playing cards to video games. One has to innovate to stay relevant, and not stick with cartridges in a world of plastic discs.
Doesn't "...gamers are getting older and tastes are becoming more sophisticated" disagree with ""It is imperative that a game machine is easy to use for anyone"? Which is it?
How about we put it this way: "A game machine should not be unnecessarily complicated."
Older gamers don't buy fewer games because they want longer play value or high production values. They buy fewer games because they're ADULTS, with spouses and kids and houses and cars and jobs and all the other shackles of adulthood. If you can only squeeze in 3 or four hours a week of game playing time, one game will last you quite a while. And you're much less likely to tolerate a bad/boring/indifferent game.
I am NOT a man!
I am a free number!
"Although PS2 was a sales success because it had a DVD player function, it troubled me that we had moved to a hardware where the sole function wasn't playing games" and concluded: "It is imperative that a game machine is easy to use for anyone. I don't agree that multi-function hardware is the only answer."
It amazes me that Nintendo manages to refer to its proprietary disc DRM strategy as some sort of feature year after year and never gets called on it. When you're using a full size DVD-ROM drive for your games, tossing in movie and CD playback is trivial. It takes hardly any resources to add that and certainly doesn't take away from game production/functionality. But when you desperately, desperately want better DRM in your console, you have to make some sacrifices, like added features.
"...because gamers might buy fewer games due to longer play value and a desire to play only software with very high production values."
And the solution that Nintendo has already used for this, of course, is to implement the e-Reader in its GBA games so that you need to pay $4 or so per pack for new cards just to unlock the features that are in the game that you already paid for, like the extra levels in the newest Super Mario Advance game or the special attacks in Pokemon Ruby and Sapphire.
Why do these guys think that giving the customer more bang for their buck is a bad thing? Do they really think that that's the way to defeat the PS2 and PS3, which offer (or will offer) DVD playback, music CD playback, backwards compatibility, games that you don't need to buy peripherals or cards for, and everything else that they can possibly squeeze into your $200 console and $50-$60 games?
You make some great points in the post. I will make on major dispute, and that's Sony had a strong launch lineup. I was working at EB at the time of the PS2 launch, and there's no way that the software they had at launch was anything but one of the worst launch line-ups in history. Of course, there were about eight times more games than the N64 launch (which is to say 16, as opposed to say, 2), but the only strong titles at launch were SSX and Madden 2001. And that was pushing it.
I remember the lucky few that did own a PS2 within the first few months (and a memory card - lucky bastards) would stand in front of the wall just blankly staring, as if maybe a decent title would suddenly morph from the game wall into vision. The launch, by nearly every definition, was a complete failure. First, there weren't enough games. Then there weren't enough systems. Then there weren't enough memory cards. Compound this with Christmas, greedy retailers (including EB) who sold it for nothing less than a $600 bundle, and greedy Ebayers picking 5 up at a time, and you've got yourself one of the most fuddled up launches in the history of consoles. And let us not even speak of the first party *TITLE* (singular, not plural) at launch (-cough-fantavision-cough).
No, the Xbox and Gamecube launches fared fare better. Consequently, it's a testament to Sony's reputation among adult gamers as well as the surge of software in the spring and summer quarter of the following year. Oh yeah, it didn't hurt that Metal Gear Solid 2, Final Fantasy X, and Grand Theft Auto 3 also came out the following Christmas.