Nintendo's Iwata - Innovate or Die
Linker writes "CNN/Money has interviewed Satoru Iwata, where the president of Nintendo Ltd. says the gaming industry is in the midst of a crisis of innovation, which could lead to its demise. The idea, of course, is to justify the existence of the upcoming Nintendo DS, but Iwata does point out that the gaming market in Japan has been shrinking in the past few years - and the U.S. and Europe may do so soon."
Why do I suddenly have this mental image of a swarm of bees chasing down a game designer?
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
I grew up playing video games (mostly during the winter months). I had a Coleco, NES, Genesis and later played a lot of PC games at college. (Doom, Quake, etc). Looking back at it now, I just can't believe I wasted as much time as I did.
Things are even worse now that games are getting to be so complicated. Unless I can pick up a game, figure it out in 10 minutes, I don't want to play it. I refuse to commit large chunks of time to games anymore. Which is why I still play Tetris and all the classics on a Game Boy when I have a few minutes to kill on a commute or something.
It seems like the lack of innovation has simply spawned more and more complicated games that people don't want to bother with.
I've been thinking about the new DS for a long time and haven't thought of many gaming methods to take advantage of the dual screen. Alright, this is off-topic.. Anyway - the donkey kong mario racer game that the last pic showed had your location on the track... big deal... the next innovation for them should be making the gamboy thinner with a larger screen, not fatter with two.
mix_master_mike
vafrous
I dont play any more console games cause they just plain suck. I dont care much for the improved graphics if the gameplay is horrible and rehashing another horrible game yet again. I would rather play a text game on my palm that's fun than play some impressive looking game that sucks.
Sweet merciful crap! If it wasn't for these games, nobody would have wanted to grow up to be a game designer and create some of the games we see today. Some of those kids' parents need to just slap those brats across the face!
Reminds me of the scene in Back to the Future II, "You mean you have to use your hands? Aww, that's a baby's toy!"
Hmmm.
Frankly, I think it's great that the game industry (at least Nintendo) is trying to innovate itself out of this potential problem.
Yay free market.
I'd like it even more if certain other industries could be made to feel this same pressure.
What does he mean there's no innovation in the game industry? I mean, looking at my shelf, I've got Madden 2003, Gran Turismo 3, Tekken 3, Onimusha 3, Super Mario 3...Oh, wait, I think I get it...
Then I thought wow Microsoft has been releasing a popular game for years, and nobody realized it. No I'm Not talking about Flight Simulator. I am talking about THIS
Most companies won't though.
Pushing the same crap over and over is fairly risk free.
God knows I own every Zelda game (excluding the 3D0 crap).
Sigs? We don't need no stinking sigs!
Seriously. If the 'big gaming company' took more risks (hell, they are big enough to take risks) on innovative games instead of working on sequels to games or the latest shooter, the gaming industry would be more exciting.
Instead, we are fed the same old games.
But can you blame them? Works in hollywood like a charm.
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
This is why all the new innovations are geared towards handheld devices. For over a decade Nintendo has been pushing handheld devices which really did not live up to the technology of the time. Their leadership in the market enabled them to curb innovation. But I view console gaming to be like the Slam Dunk Contest in the NBA. It's all been done, what else is there?
...Guns, Girls, and Graphics.
This is the formula used (depressingly successfully) by many game companies nowadays. Everything else can be sacrificed by these three.
GUNS: Actually, violence in general. More violence is good, but quality ("realism", meaning extra gore) can make up for a lack of quantity.
GIRLS: The more women and the less clothing, the better. Any kind of implied sexuality is better than nothing, however.
GRAPHICS: Photorealism = good, any other graphics style = bad. This is mostly an extension of Guns and Girls, since "realism" (actually pandering to a perverse fantasy, but your average gamer has a hard time telling the difference) is key to these areas.
These three factors contribute to what is sometimes called PPLQ, "Perceived Penis Length Quotient". The higher the PPLQ, the better the game will sell, because it is perceived as a Manly Game. Nintendo's problems as of late stem mostly from the fact that it refuses to satisfy PPLQ, under the deluded impression that innovation and gameplay are actually important to the average modern gamer. Thus, we get games like Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles and The Legend of Zelda: the Wind Waker, games doomed before they ever hit shelves because they were not deemed Manly enough.
from the article: "Dance Dance Revolution," which U.S. officials strongly resisted bringing over from Japan, has proven to be a lasting change to gameplay.
then it doesnt say why they resisted it. And who the officials are.
slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
Take a look at a game made by, say, the Gamecube, the Xbox, and a PC. Quick, which one looks the best?
Now, odds are you'll say "The PC". Which, at $1000 - $2000 for the hardware, that's certainly true.
For the Gamecube and the Xbox, the systems are pretty well matched. From what I've seen, the Xbox can do lighting better thanks to the shaders, while the Gamecube seems to have better anti-aliasing (take a look at Super Monkey Ball 2).
Fast forward 18 months when the Xbox 2, PS3, and Gamecube 2 come out, all with chips made by IBM, 2 of which have chips made by ATI. Now which look better?
Once we reach a point of technical ability, all of the consoles will start to look the same in graphical and processing power. So then it's going to come down to one thing:
Who has the better games?
PS2 still has the most, though I imagine most PC developers will continue the trend of "PC/Xbox" hybrids (though with the Xbox 2 it will be curious to see how possible this will still be, though XNA should help with the tranferral).
Nintendo at least is trying some new things. Using a stylus to "draw" Pac-Man on a screen, or to "shoot" in Metroid. Or using Congo drums for a Donkey Kong platform game (and, of course, the upcoming Donkey Konga itself).
Will most of these works? Probably not. There's a good chance that most people will think that playing a platform game with drums will suck donkey balls (pun intended), or that drawing on a screen won't be fun. But in an a realm where Final Fantasy XII seems to play like Final Fantasy XI only with a blond in a hoochie skirt (for Pete's sake, woman, put on some tights and have some dignity instead of letting it all hang out like you're going to walk down Prostitute Avenue), and every first person shooter looks the same, it's going to the ones that are different that will pull it out.
Personally, I'm betting that the Xbox will continue to be big on the FPS and Sports games, PS2 will rock the RPG and "everything else", while Nintendo will grab those "Games you must have or die" kind of things (Nintendo, new Mario, and of course GBA games).
I'll withhold judgement on Nintendo's innovation until I see sales rise (remember the lesson from SEGA: different doesn't always mean $$$), but if nothing else, you've got to give them credit for at least doing something different than the other guys.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
its great that Nintendo is really trying to do this, because they have been one of the largest victims of this anti-innovation, perfect example being their relentless release of mario-themed games. (i know its practically their mascot, but maybe its time for a new one...)
It's tough for developers to sell a new innovative game because few publishers want to take the risk. It is much easier to take a successful franchise and develop sequel after sequel.
... ie: All of EA's sport franchises.
Rinse, lather, repeat
Chewie does not get a medal. Come on, George. Can a Wookie get a medal?
The current crisis in the gaming industry does not surprise me. Today, games are primarily a product, not an entertainment. It costs a hell of a lot of money to develop a state-of-the-art game; this leads to a lack of creativity, since it is cheaper to rely on tried and true gameplay concepts than to innovate. With innovation, there is always the risk of people not accepting it. However, this leads to many similar games, people get used to this similarity, and become even less tolerant to new concepts. At the same time, the technology advances, games become more complex, costs raise etc. I guess somewhere in there the industry lost the concept of joy. A game is .... well, a game! :) A game is supposed to be funny. I think things changed when the CEOs and lead designers in the game companies were no longer creative minds who created several games before (like Sid Meier), but managers and professional designers drilled to create "an economic and reliable video game product". And hey - I'm sick of playing games that feel primarily like a product, and not like a game.
This sig does not contain any SCO code.
the gaming industry is in the midst of a crisis of innovation
Two words: online gaming
If we continue down the same path as we have in the past, people may become tired of gaming
In economics they call this Diminishing Marginal Utility. The more you consume something, the less gain you experience from consuming one more unit of that thing. To combat this, marketers need to offer you something novel. I don't know why anyone would think that video-games are imune to this...
Gamers will "tolerate" it as long as the games are good. Tired or not, they're still fun to play, which is really the point. It's not as if Nintendo is alone here... what are the new big games everyone else is putting out? Halo 2? Doom 3? GTA: San Andreas? The next sports game? As far as I'm concerned, there's nothing wrong with sequels. If you don't like them, there's plenty of other games out there for you to buy.
I'd also like to point out that sequels can be innovative. Just because it has Mario in the title doesn't automatically mean that it's the same old thing.
When a company's financial situation is worsening, one tactic is to make it appear that it is the market as a whole that is suffering or shrinking and not the particular company's individual performance. Its a simple play to artificially hold up your company's stock, or at least drag everyone else down with you. You'll find that many American publishers have just announced significant profits for this past fiscal year or for the coming fiscal year while Nintendo posted their first quarterly loss in decades.
All I have ever said, and have been brutalized repeatedly for on this site, is that the American/Eurpoean markets are different from the Japanese. It is easy to show that the gamers have different tastes, a number of recent slashdot articles have proven that, and that the Japanese market is shrinking overall while the western markets continue to show growth. As soon as NoA starts treating American's as special again (as it did with the significant difference between the NES and FamiCom) they have a chance to recover. If they continue resting on their laurels and giving us the exact same hardware and software as is released Japan, their western market share will continue to shrink until they are totally irrelevent. My prediction all along has been the fragment of the market into one worldwide success and a different second place in Region 1 and 4 from Region 2. If the current trend continues the big winner will still be Sony, with MS and Nintendo ceasing to compete directly and each taking second in different parts of the world. The only question in my mind is will Nintendo be too stubborn to port their software to Playstation or Xbox when the Americans finally boot them out of the hardware business.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Good point. There's few things more suspicious than a focus group... ;)
<grrr>
I think Penny Arcade hit the nail on the head in their article on the recently launched City of Heroes, when they said the game had plenty of depth, but lacked width. That is the increasing problem with electronic games; they may be complex, but they lack any real sense of immersion. Goto area A, fight monster B, retrieve item C, rinse and repeat. It's the same formula we've seen a million times before, only with a shinnier wrapper and new kung fu grip.
I think someone should tell Dr. Gupta's secretary that they've been transcribing from a GameSpot interview with Michael Pachter, instead of the great doctor's notes. Whoops.
It's like this: Developer platforms are the problem. Much innovation was created by reinventing the tools everytime they made a game. Its alot like the loss of innovation that occurred in typing or writing many versions of a page of a book verses typing and deleting on a computer. The process of doing something over and over again allows your brain to rework the problem and come up with better solutions.
http://www.livejournal.com/users/cixel
In the Saturn and dreamcast ereas we saw some of the most innovative and fun games ever -- Sega had to put out fun games they couldn't compete on anything else. But then Sega got crushed by nintendo and sony who were pumping out the same games we played last year but with better graphics and more advertising. To be honest I really haven't been all that interested in games since the dreamcast died and I am not surprised the industry is hurting now. I don't care what your advertising budget is or how many polygons your GPU can push yesturday's gameplay is still yesturday's game!
Really?
Matrix 3 "bombed?"
Sorry, but it did far from bomb. The two matrix sequels were filmed together for a budget of $200 million. That's pretty expensive plus a marketing campaign of about $50-75 million for the two. However, Matrix 2 has taken in over $281 million in the USA alone, covering the costs of both movies (that is WITHOUT dvd/vhs/tv rights sales). Worldwide, it has taken in $457 million.
Therefore, by definition, ANYTHING matrix 3 made was in essense a profit. It was impossible to bomb as the movie was already in the black (i.e. proifiting). That being said, Matrix Revolutions has made $285 million worldwide (again, minus dvd, tv, tie-ins, etc).
If that's a bomb, then that's a bomb i'd love to be responsible for...
It's almost repeating to an exact year.
1984: Game industry is bloated with too many consoles with too many accessories created ahead of demand (Intellivision2), the same games being re-branded and resold, too many boring tie-ins (E.T.), and a saturated market that was fed up with it.
Result:
Industry colapses.
1994: Game industry is bloated with too many consoles with too many accessories created ahead of demand (Sega Genesis, 32X, CD, Saturn, Game Gear), the same games being re-branded and resold, too many boring tie-ins (Captain Novolin), and a saturated market that was fed up with it.
Result:
Industry implodes.
2004: Game industry is blaoted with too many consoles with too many accessories (PS2 + HD + Network card + microphone + eyetoy = Jesus Fucking Christ!), the same games being re-branded and resold, too many boring tie-ins (Fight Club, the game?), an a saturated market that is getting poorer every day thanks to these wonderful tough times.
Result:
Who knows, but you can bet your buttons that the Nokia nGage is going to die.
Well, maybe it won't happen till next year. But sooner would make such wonderful symetry.
Don't Crease the Weasel!
I was just thinking about this the other day.
how, since SEGA (who have been the leg-up for innovation in the gaming industry) stopped making consoles, we havent seen any attempts towards any next-generation systems, only little plastic boxes that hook up to the TV.
Now the DS is coming out, which may start a future of systems that can easily replace the systems that hook to TV's (though I dont see it happening)
but it throws the handheld market out of the repetitive 2d-only market.
Now there's the PSP, but I honestly wouldnt want to buy that, it's neither innovation, or really something that can be called handheld or portable.
all it is is a PSone with games that are incompatible with all of sony's other products.
the only selling point is the mp3 player, which will attract the sony fanboys right away. but you can just buy a psone with a monitor, and you got a fairly portable system, with pre-existing games.
The DS will have its own games, yes, but they'll have their own unique features that take advantage of the DS' power, people may make fun of the DS, but it's a system with a hell lot more innovation and potential than anyone has done to date, and is something nintendo hasnt done before to date.
but with all that, we need more innovation, and the only real innovator left is nintendo, really.. Sony just copies the innovation and adds a tacky feature here or there to make it sell like hotcakes. and Microsoft.. well we dont need to go there. Sega and nintendo used to be the main innovators back in the 90's and now that Sega no longer makes systems, it's really up to nintendo now to do it, or else we're facing a dark age for console gaming. Because if Sony and Microsoft get their way with the industry, console gaming will mostly die for the most part. and any innovations will be minor details, nothing new, since they wouldnt have competition except each other, and they leech, so nothing would really come up.
I say, go nintendo.
but honestly I think that there hasn't been a fresh new game type in a really long time.
I really think the last truly innovative game type may have been the Battlezone remake of 6 or 7 years ago. That was an evolution of game types.
Since then, all we've gotten are refinements on the typical, RTS, SPRPG, MMRPG, FPS Shooter, and F/TP Adventure games.
We're talking to YOU here, Bioware! You evil swines! You sold me Neverwinter Nights no less than THREE TIMES! You sold me FOUR of Baldur's Gate! Do you have any IDEA how many hours of my precious life you've taken up with those things?
Gah. I don't know how they get away with it, really I don't.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
I like to play games on my PS2. Being a girl, I really don't like the "popular" categories of Guns, Driving, and Sports. I'm not into real violence but I like a challenge.
It takes work, but it is possible to find creative games from companies willing to put out something somewhat unique. Kya: Dark Lineage is a good game from Eden with fighting, puzzles, and stealth. Sly Cooper (Sucker Punch games) is an awesome looking game also involving some intelligence to get through.
I am disappointed in most of the sequels they are putting out now. The original Jak & Daxter was a fun game, but Jak 2 and the rumors about Jak 3 follow the formula of guns and hijaking vehicles. Yawn. Sure it's safer to crank out a tried and true character sequel, but at least put some thought into what the gamer wants to see. However I will not expect it to change, and I'll keep up my feeble search of quality games.
Gupta, buddy! How ya been? Better practice the trolling a bit more often, as you're getting a bit rusty.
Anyone who doesn't know this guy yet, read his post history, or check here. Known troll who always falsely claims to be working at Nintendo, Sega, etc.
They're working on that, it's currently scheduled for a release on the 24th of September
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Quoting from the article:
While there were some very promising titles on display at this year's show, there were very few games that were truly unique. Most, instead, rehashed familiar genres, tossing in a few new elements or simply polishing gameplay.
If you take out the "simply polishing gameplay" phrase, this statement would apply to movies as well. Most movies are pretty much just rehashes of existing concepts, with different actors and special effects. Yet, the movie industry thrives and makes billions of dollars.
So my sense is that the game industry isn't going anywhere, it's just maturing as a creative medium. That means that, over time, you're going to see less innovation, just like you do in most creative media. Doesn't mean people are going to stop buying.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
while Nintendo posted their first quarterly loss in decades.
I think the word you were looking for wasn't "decades", it was "ever". And while they are of course trying to hold up their recent loses in a positive light, the overall game/console sales in the Japanese market has declined. Even Sony has felt the burn in that respect.
Nintendo is having problems not because of the localization thing, but because they don't want powerful 3rd party developers and they do their damndest to keep those they do embrace on a very short leash.
Take GTA3, sold more copies than grains of sand on the beach right? But if you add up all the crap 3rd party stuff released on the PS2 you will see that GTA3 is not even 10% of all the software sold on the PS2. What does this mean? It means that there are people that will buy anything, even what you or I may think is crap, not because they are stupid but because given a large enough group of people, there is a good chance that someone will like your game.
More selection equals more games that any given person is going to want, and this equals more systems sold. Nintendo (and MS to a point) are in a spot where the 3rd party shovelware makers are not all that interested in porting to their system because they don't have a strong enough user-base to buy their games. MS kisses ass and throws money at the problem, and eventually this will work. Nintendo on the otherhand holds it's nose up and is content with their 1st party line ups.
...because Japan's population has been shrinking. And getting older, on average. And that economic slump isn't helping things.
Until someone comes out with some real polling results, you can't say that the Japanese populace is becoming "disenchanted" with video gaming. There could be many other factors at work.
[PowerPoint] is a tool for capitalist presentation
I again find myself referenceing Uncle Orson. What about "The Game?" This is the type of game I would love to play. The game adjusts itself depending on how you react and it is different for everyone!
Don't waste time... procrastinate now!
I think these attempts at innovation by Nintendo have more to do with internal company factors than truly revolutionizing the state of gaming. Like pushing the revolutionary GBA-Gamecube link, which IMO had more to do with Nintendo trying to leverage their handheld dominance in the console market (the results speak for themselves, maybe a couple of decent games, the rest being unlockable content that did nothing but force Gamecube owners to buy a GBA to play a Gamecube game.)
Nintendo sees the writing on the wall- they can't compete head-on with Sony and Microsoft (it's tough competing against a consumer electronics giant on one hand, and the Evil Empire on the other), so they are trying to change the game. Which is fine by me, it's just all the self-serving PR that annoys- Nintendo, the company that cares.
If Nintendo really wanted to innovate, they might have actually tried to enable online play with the Gamecube.
That being said, the Nintendo DS at least looks better and has some potential (but really so does the PSP to some degree). I look forward to seeing if any DS games are able to capitalize on the new hardware and really offer truly significantly new gameplay experiences. If those games don't come out, the DS dual-screen and touchscree will be all for naught, leaving the PSP with the significant hardware advantage.
Is he doing this to be ironic? Who knows, it's still funny as hell.
One of the biggest things you can do is to support independent developers. There are a number of smaller developers out there that are trying to push the envelope in gameplay. Of course, with limited resources the smaller developers can't provide the flash and dazzle of the larger games.
I'm part of one of those smaller game development houses; we develop online RPGs. Our current game, Meridian 59, is a classic online RPG with open PvP. Yes, open PvP isn't for everyone, but many people wish to have this in their game. Our game is smaller and not as well-known as the larger online RPGs, but we get by.
Of course, the first reaction of most people is to judge the game by the graphics. Unfortunately for them, the graphics do not indicate the quality of gameplay. The combat is fun, there is not much of the "treadmill" you see in other games, and the PvP has been carefully balanced over the years. Meridian 59's gameplay is very fun, and we even charge less than most other games requiring no box purchase to play the game in the first place. But, people who judge games only on screenshots will never enjoy these finer aspects of Meridian 59.
Really, this is why many games go for the flash instead of substance; it sells more games. We're working on an engine upgrade to Meridian 59, but this is not going to affect the gameplay, it will only make the game look better in screenshots. And, we have many other upgrades in store as the game grows. However, think of the time and effort we could have poured into gameplay....
The point of this ramble is that if you want to see more innovative games, then start searching them out and playing (and paying for!) them. There are a number of great independent online games (I'm more familiar with them given that I work with online games), and there's a good number of quality single-player games out there as well. It's just a question of going a little bit off the beaten path and finding them for yourself.
My thoughts,
Brian "Psychochild" Green
MMO developer's blog