Slashdot Mirror
Nintendo - Stodgy, Not-So-Super Mario?
Thanks to the Washington Post for their article discussing Nintendo's current position in the console wars. Although many of the usual points are discussed (despite Sony and Microsoft's efforts at innovation in online gaming and elsewhere, Nintendo has "...stuck to a philosophy that people who buy and play video games enjoy the familiar and care little for such gimmickry"), the piece also points to possible failure in Nintendo's current tactics ("The company proclaimed that the Game Boy Advance would be a 'Trojan horse' for the GameCube - but that Trojan horse never opened because very few game designers have figured out cool ways to take advantage of that connectivity.") The article ends with an analyst's concern that "...the game console market might be starting to move beyond what Nintendo can deliver."
for many industry changes, there's always a company that argues "people don't really want this new technology". Hence train companies that insisted that the cozy feeling of train travel will let them keep their customers, the ppl who argued a personal computer will never spread because people wouldn't have any use for an electric editor that was many times more expensive then the easy-to-use typewriters that were common at the time, and so on...
their arguement does hold. there will always be demand for train travel, typewriters, etc. However the consumer never fails to quickly grasp the new technology and raise their expectations. The firms that fail to follow get reduced to the sidelines, although many continue to exist. I'm afraid the poster was correct in his opinion that Nintendo strategy is doomed. People do expect their games to look realistic, and when faced with a choice of 2 consoles or games at similar price point, they'll go with the more flashy/realistic/prettier one. The value of nintendo's trademarks is not really a growth generator, trademarks require technology or marketing behind them, and Nintendo's ability to do both will deteriorate if they fail to create games that lead, not trail the competition.
Nintendo is dead when it is dead. Until then it is just a company that is not doing terribly well at the moment. Sony is the clear winner in the console race. MS is the clear loser but doesn't need to win in the first round. Nintendo needs the consoles badly but may be able to survive on the handheld where it is so far in front that it is lapping the competition.
So on to the next round. We have a fairly good idea what sony is going to do. PSP and the Cell based PS3. MS is going to do more powerfull x-box and move away from standard parts to stop the copying of its games. Nintendo? Well so far only that something very intresting would be released in the near future.
The coming round may kill off nintendo if sony can deliver with both its new platforms. May kill but not likely. Don't forget that in japan itself nintendo is not doing badly at all. It is just the western markets were it is goofing off. It may just become more of niche player then it once was. Can you say atari?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Am I the only person that sees no internet connectivity as an advantage? I couldn't care less if my console can go online or not.
Yes. How on earth can a console not having any connectivity be an advantage? It's like saying that a console with only one controller port is an advantage.
What I want is an excellent multiplayer experience that I can share with three other people in the room. Nintendo's games have got this in spades.
What I want is the choice to play either online or with friends on a system. Sony's and MS's consoles have got this in spades.
A game of Mario Party just wouldn't be the same if the people you were playing against weren't in the same room.
A game of Mario Party isn't the same if you don't immediately have a bunch of people at hand to play with. With the Xbox, PS2 and PC I can just jump online and play some multiplayer games. An eight player game of Midtown Madness 3 (especially with people I know) on Xbox Live is hilarious stuff.
I see nothing wrong with Nintendo forcing us to be social creatures in order to get our multiplayer fix. Let Microsoft and Sony make games that can be played online; the truth of the matter is all the multiplayer games I play are on Nintendo right now, except for Guilty Gear X2 (PS2) and Power Stone 2 (DC).
And why would you not want Nintendo to make online playable games? If you like their output so much, why would you not want them to make an online game for you to play?
I put my books on Amazon, Smashwords, Demonoid, ISOHunt and Pirate Bay. Search for 'Michael Cargill'
Just comparing them to other "dying" technologies.