Slashdot Mirror
Nintendo's Boss On Western Partnerships, Online
Matt writes "It seems Nintendo President Satoru Iwata has once again spoken out, in a talk to the Japan Economic Foundation, and GameCube Advanced has the highlights. Iwata downplays online gaming, citing the example of a PS2 golf sim which outsold its online counterpart [is this Minna No Golf Online, aka Hot Shots Golf Fore!, versus its prequel?] Also, Iwata speaks about Nintendo working with other non-Japanese companies (saying 'We are now holding negotiations with major Western game developers and will be able to conclude a deal by the end of the year if things go smoothly'), and about takeover speculation regarding Bandai [vague talk of 'a closer relationship'.] In addition, he warned again that the status quo in videogames is in jeopardy... 'We are facing a critical situation, in which the number of game players will decrease unless we change tack', Iwata said."
When will Nintendo learn? ONLINE PLAY MATTERS. It's the only reason x-box has sold a single console. Everyone knows it's games suck outside Halo. It's the online part that's saving the system.
they've always been the loveable underdog-an the also make the ALL the console games with the most amazing story lines.... i can't wait to see what comes of this "closer relationship"
I've heard Iwata-san pontificate on this multiple times. He believes MS and (to a lesser extent) Sony have staked too much on online games without thinking through the costs for consumers. To be honest, I agree... for most games in other genres, other than some clearly community-centric and dynamic examples, such as MMORPGS and virtual communities like Second Life, it's not reasonable for users to pay $50 or so for a game, and then pay a monthly fee to play.
The gaming industry needs to make money. But nickel and diming players, especially the younger set that consitutes the bread and butter still, may cause a backlash and revolt like what is happening now in music, and movies.
-- Samir Gupta, Ph. D. Head, New Technology Research Group, Nintendo Co. Ltd., Kyoto, Japan.
I saw a recent Slashdot poll that showed that most people here either like FPS or RPG games. I guess changing tack would mean more of these, if Nintendo wants to really crack the market better. I would like to see some better RPG games, myself.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
I really hope that their next system does well. I have a Gamecube, and I really like alot of the different interesting games they come up with. Animal Planet and Pikmin were both really fun.
Yay, someone understands! Down with the objectionably cartoony link with the ellipsoid head! (And no, I don't mind cartoon-style rendering if its done right.)
-jim
I survived the Dick Cheney Presidency 7 to 9 AM 7-21-07
Sure, Nintendo has a bad rap for making kids games, but remember their history. THey made the Famicom, the NES, the SNES, n64 and GameCube. They were all amazing consoles. And the games, Super Mario 64 has got to be the best game I have ever played, hell, i still get my N64 out and play it ever once in a while.
Hmmmm.. I can understand that the variety of games will decrease over time unless there is some kind of major structural breakthrough, but I don't really see the number of gamers going down IMHO. At some point there will be a huge business interest in pushing the boundaries which will lead to more investment. Hell, there are still addicts to this day playing Doom and all kinds of classics.
Even though in the future there may be fewer original games to choose from, I will still have no life and will still be playing games.
Slashdot in 5 Paragraphs
Currently everyone I know is a game player! That means it is next to impossible for the amount of game players to go beyond everyone... hence the only place to go is down. (But I don't think it will go down too much before rocketing back up again)
- Your stupidity got you into this mess, why can't it get you out? -Will Rogers
Iwata also downplayed online, using the example of a PS2 online golf simulation game that did not sell as well as an offline golf simulation game. Iwata says this is "proof that customers do not want online games," and that "most customers do not wish to pay the extra money for connection to the Internet, and for some customers, connection procedures to the Internet are still not easy."
Now, I can understand looking at this and saying - "online isn't the be-all end-all of technologies for consoles", but honestly, an online golf game - most likely the least online-needing sports subgenre there is - used as proof that online isn't a capability people want? What about all the people playing SOCOM on PS2? Splinter Cell on XBox?
Also, I don't see why Nintendo would want to cripple its next console system with lack of good network/Internet features like it did to the GameCube (come on, I love Nintendo, but that was dumb), especially if it will only be seen as lagging by consumers. Also, the not-a-Game-Boy DS will have wireless connectivity, so it's not as if they're abandoning the Internet altogether...
In summary: proof? yeah right.
I [may] disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
The one thing that makes Nintendo stand out above other companies is innovation, as long as their company continues to find new ways to entertain, as Nintendo often does their products will continue to have their place in the market. As much as people initially criticized it the Nintendo Dual Screen looks great and the touch screen features seem like the step in the right direction towards changing the way we play games. As time goes on the number of new genre's and innovations throughout the industry continues to deteroriate. And it's good to see that Nintendo is continuing with their ideas of new ideas in the industry. Having worked on the media side of the gaming industry for many years and only recently retiring from it due to a lack of interest in games (and the lack of significant income from doing so), I strongly agree that the generation of 20s and 30s gamers that have made the industry grow strong is becoming less and less interested in video games and only by creating new and innovative games, rather than cookie cutter rip-offs and sequels can the video game industry continue to thrive.
I find this part interesting. The one area in which Microsoft has been REALLY successful with the XBox is in winning the hearts and minds of western developers. I've found it worrying that Sony and Nintendo might not realize this is happening because they're concentrating on Japanese customers and developers and the XBox is bombing horribly in Japan. I'd be glad to see if Nintendo made actual moves to woo U.S. developers, it would be very easy to just neglect U.S. developers in the console market but this is certainly a foolish thing to do in the long run...
Of course then my question becomes, WHAT IS SILICON KNIGHTS UP TO?
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
As long as Nintendo wants to make games for a younger audience, offline games should be okay. Kids can amuse themselves with
For the gamer who enjoys true competition and high replay value, however, there is no substitute for the online experience. Starcraft, Counterstrike, Doom III, etc., are examples of this. Other types of online games, such as MMORPGs, allow for a dynamic and social feel that no offline game can authentically replicate.
On the other hand, a well-made online game tends to have a huge replay lifespan. Perhaps that is why Nintendo is hestitant to embrace them?
I can say from experience nearly every offline gaming experience I've had is many times better than online ones. The best multiplayer experiences I've had are with games like Mario Kart, GoldenEye, Smash Bros., Bomberman, Hot Shots Golf (minna no golufu), Culdcept, traditional fighting games (i.e. Soul Calibur), and cooperative shooters (i.e. Radiant Silvergun).
I'm not just drawing experience from console games either. Counter Strike in a LAN setting is tons better than counterstrike online. Rainbow Six (and its sequels) cooperative multiplayer is totally unplayable online compared to on a LAN. RTS games like WarCraft II, StarCraft, WarCraft III, Age of Empires, Empire Earth, Command & Conquer, Total Annihilation, etc have consistently been better in a LAN setting than online. Some of my favorite computer multiplayer experiences were hotseat games like Heroes of Might and Magic or Worms (or Scorched Earth and other derivatives).
I was reminded of the sharp difference between these two experiences after playing a lot of card and board games recently. After the semester ended I jumped on Yahoo! games to get a quick fix and was totally turned off by the cold atmosphere and lack of presence. I have also dumped hundreds of hours into Everquest, Asheron's Call, Dark Age of Camelot, Lineage 2 (beta) and City of Heroes to meet up with the promise of meeting up with my friends only to be turned back by countless gameplay and communications barriers so that for that rare occasion I would meet up and be able to play with someone I knew I was usually having more fun with the person hanging out at my house watching me play than with the person I was actually playing with.
It's just not the same without real people, face to face jumping up and yelling across the room at each other. Sorry, online is a subpar experience in my book. Online gameplay for console games totally uninterests me for any reason. Online gameplay for PC games is only necessary for a LAN. I've tried a large number of games over the years and am fairly conclusive in my position.
The Gamecube is the worst-performing Nintendo console to date(the Virtual Boy was classified as a portable). It's suffering the same fate as the N64 - superior technology, great 1st party support, dedicated fanbase... combined with dwindling third-party support, a shrinking installed userbase, and fighting a battle on two fronts. Despite bombing in Japan, the Xbox has managed to outsell the Gamecube on a regular basis in Europe and US markets. The PS2, of course, is dominating all. So much so that companies like Namco and Capcom have ported their 'exclusive' gamecube titles (Tales of Symphonia and Viewtiful Joe respectively) to the PS2 in order to hedge their bets (Viewtiful Joe received fantastic reviews from US publications but failed to even crack into
Third party support on the cube is a vicious cycle. Ubisoft ported the 2002 smash hit Spliner Cell to the cube, complete with Nintendo's much-touted (and now ignored) GBA-GC Connectivity feature and cube-exclusive content. Despite being met with commendable reviews, Splinter Cell was outsold by Mario Party 5, a game that most reviewers blasted for being another shallow party game that didn't bring anything new to the table.)
In short, Nintendo's own dedicated fanbase is killing the gamecube.
Casual gamers buy titles from all across the spectrum. Sports titles, platformers, action games.
Dedicated Nintedo fans primarily buy 1st party titles. When developers attempt original titles (Viewtiful Joe), the dedicated fanbase punishes them with low sales. When Nintendo slaps a mascot into a rehash title, they reward them with high sales.
Hardcore gamers are the ones who suffer. People who purchase titles based entirely on the gameplay. The breakout hit of 2003 was Disgaea, a quirky sprite-based strategy title that sold almost entirely on word-of-mouth. Thankfully the PS2's large userbase means hardcore titles have a decent shot. But in the Gamecube's shrinking userbase, hardcore titles are ignored.
It's obvious that Miyamoto has lost it. He's releasing less games and focusing on style over substance. The beautiful Wind Waker was marred with repetitive itemhunting and a lack of dungeons. Now Miyamoto has bowed to fanboy pressure and made a 'realistic' Legend of Zelda. So much for artistic integrity.
Iwata doesn't appear insane in his well-edited interviews, but even he's starting to slip. I probably would too if the company I was managing has been eating it's tail since 1999.
is that you, probably qualifying as a "hardcore" gamer, are not the concern. The concern is the casual gamer, the people who won't just keep playing video games no matter now bad they get, the people who wno't go to the bother of tracking down abandonware games from eras where the games were actually fun.
These people are a rather huge segment and if video games do not do a good job as presenting themselves as something interesting, creative, rewarding, and worth the money, these people may well go spend their disposable income on something else.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Good damn post.
Wind Waker was directed by Eiji Aonuma, not Miyamoto.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Online games are just multiplayer games that don't require friends in order to play.
A lot of people are really annoyed by this "you must have friends" requirement. These people then get upset at Nintendo because Nintendo isn't supporting their decision to live a lifestyle that will culminate in them dying alone, during an 8-hour Everquest marathon.
Is a 2 player mode for PC games, this is something consoles have been doing for years that still is not done on the PC. With consoles moving into the $500+ price range, I would rather just spend the extra $500 on a PC with better hardware.
More observant gamers will note that Nintendo has already tried online since the Famicom (term for Japanese ver. of NES) even before the Internet was in common use! Not only that, I'm gonna quote some stats: In Japan, the sales for Final Fantasy XI (online MMORPG) were around 100,000 aka dismal. In Japan. Final Fantasy games have a near-cult following in japan. Nintendo knows Online Play tanks. If you have to pay for online, it's not gonna be popular. And, if XBOX LIVE (EVIL XOBX in reverse) is the only reason XBOX sold a single console, then I guess that the year before XBOX LIVE came out that no one even touched the things. I bought the XBOX since it looked good at the time (although I wanna gamecube now) and played DVDs too.
I know, all of us here in Slashdot, would find it difficult to believe, but the majority of people who buys games, are playing them off-line. Blizzard for example, who sells millions of units per game, has stated repeatly that only a small fraction of it's player base ever goes online with their games. Although that fraction turns out to be a couple of hundred-thousand players, it's still a small portion of the over-all pie.
With the recent series of MMORPG cancellations, like Ultima X: Odyssey, Warhammer Online, Mythica, and several others, it is no secret that companies are re-evaluating what kind of profit an online game can generate. It is not the easy cash cow that developement houses came to believe it to be.
I was slightly irked by the announcement of the "classic" style Zelda game. I really anjoyed Windwaker and thought that the cell shaded graphics were well implemented and were delivered with a passing nod of the bygone SNES style. It's a shame that Nintaku fanboys hold so much power over the company. I also find it ironic that they are single handedly killing off Nintendo's famed streak of creativity.
"One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that, lacking zero, they had no way to indicate successful t
Low damn standards.
So you're saying that Nintendo's being uncreative becuase they decided not to do the same thing with their next Zelda game as they did with the last one?
Sadly, Iwata has maintained variations of the, "We are facing a critical situation, in which the number of game players will decrease unless we change tack," line for quite some time--and often applies it to the game market as a whole. Unfortunately, it's less of a factual statement on the condition of the gaming market, and more of an excuse for the fact that many of Nintendo's recent tactics for regaining console market share have failed.
Really, though, the gaming market is quite strong and will likely continue to be quite strong for quite some time... The PS2 has enjoyed very good times, and thus Iwata--if he stays to form--will probably predict the "demise" of the industry every single year that Sony beats Nintendo's console sales into the ground.
Some of the bullet points in that article are just laughable as little more than sour grape, such as, "Iwata downplayed the PlayStation as a 'home electronic appliance,' and not a 'game machine.'" Really, the PS and PS2 are 99% focused on games, so calling them anything other than a "game machine" is rather silly. While I could see that claim being possibly applied to the Xbox, trying to launch it against the PlayStation--which has a simply massive game library--just seems petty.
As for the online games, Nintendo has been continuously out of touch with the online market for quite some time... If he wants to take a good look at online games and their appeal, he should note that Xbox Live! is one of the main reasons the Xbox is managing to roughly keep up with the Gamecube in console sales, or the fact that Square Enix's Final Fantasy XI has been an absolute cash cow for them.
Anyway, not that it's a travesty (pretty normal, actually,) but Iwata is running a business more than actually having deep insight into the future of the industry. His statements seem to be directed in an attempt to lower confidence in Sony and Microsoft--and little else.
-Jayde
What's a sig?
Online play matters, but in more ways than one. Anonymity brings out the latent asshole in far too many people, which can all but ruin a player's experience with any online system that's not completely asshole-proof. I'd rather Nintendo waited on online play until they can perfect it than have them tarnish their image of providing quality, family-friendly games by releasing a half-assed or seriously flawed online system. It's probably true that XBox Live is the biggest attractor the XBox has right now, but I don't think Nintendo wants to be where Microsoft currently is with its XBox. I'm completely happy with Nintendo as a niche player (Apple anyone?), and I think they are too, from the looks of things.
Mike
Unfortunately, it's less of a factual statement on the condition of the gaming market, and more of an excuse for the fact that many of Nintendo's recent tactics for regaining console market share have failed.
Not to mention an explanation for why and hw Nintendo is continuing to rule the handheld market with an iron fist.
Seriously. The GBA is the most popular video game platform right now, more even than the PS2. Nintendo created that, and they're making gobs of money off of it. What's up with this recurring "OMFG IWATA IS THE FAILURE" nonsense? Looks like he's doing pretty well to me.
Meanwhile, XBox Live is only used by a fraction of XBox customers. I think attributing the XBox's success to it is a little silly.
mod parent up
/. would be touting it's death every other day
nintendo has been getting a free ride in the industry. if the xbox performed as bad as the cube
if the xbox performed as bad as the cube /. would be touting it's death every other day
Actually, the xbox is performing far worse than the cube. The Gamecube venture is making money. The XBox platform is overall losing Microsoft, if you look at their financial reports, about two hundred and fifty million dollars a quarter.
Back in the 2600 days there were piles of games that were practically the same. Granted, there was some lacking in hardware capabilities, but still. I mean how many different versions of "plane-drops-bomb-on-sub" did you play back then?
Then the NES came out. Better hardware, for sure, but same dillema. For every Double Dragon there was a Yo! Noid.
On and on. For every generation of new, powerful hardware, there is going to be a mix of good, innovative games - and a huge f-ing pile of cheap knockoffs. The new systems tend to dig us out of a rut at first, but after they're out for a couple years the stagnation will inevidably set in. Hell, look at music:
2000's - Boy Bands everywhere
90's - Nirvana clones
80's - Hair Metal
So while I am excited that Nintendo has taken it upon themselves to be the salvation of the gaming market (i'm sure whatever they put out will be cool as hell and will be fodder for countless message board arguments), I don't think today's market is any worse/better than the end of the 16-bit generation or any other.
itadakimasu
Nintendo is dying!
;)
j/k
-]Phreak Out[-
I don't think there's a problem with the video/PC gaming industry in general, just a problem with Nintendo. Take a look at nintendo.com. Almost everything they're advertising is a reissue of a classic game, either simply ported to Game Boy or with updated graphics (who need a new version of Mario Golf?)
While other systems are releasing innovative new games and developing still fairly new (at least to console) tech like online play, Nintendo's trying to market 20 year old products with slightly updated packaging.
Game Boy is for kids. There is no socially acceptable time and place for adults to play Game Boy. Don't release your nostalgia series for Game Boy! Consoles, on the other hand, are played by children and young adults alike. Make sure there are kid-friendly games with Mario and Donkey Kong, party games for the teens and college students and RPGs and FPSs with online support for the slashdotter 20-somethings, and watch your problems go away.
as long as nintendo continues to market mostly to the kiddy sector I can't seem to convince myself to buy any of their products. For all the games they make a year I can only manage to enjoy a handful, while at the same time other systems like the PS2 and XBOX make a wide range of games where I have more of a choice as to "childish" or "adult". When it comes down to dollars I'd rather spend them on the system I can enjoy more.
Panzer Dragoon Orta.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I don't know where you live, but everywhere I've been, it's perfectly acceptable for adults to play Game Boy. I've sat down on buses next to men in their 60s plugging away on a GBA SP. Mostly children play GBs, true, but that's because adults typically have something more constructive to do with their free time.
By reading this you acknowledge that you have read it.
Third party within 5 to 7 years.
I love Nintendo to death but I feel that they are heading the way of Sega if they don't change there ways. Online play does matter it may not be the holy grail of gaming that some people make it out to be but you cant ignore it or you will pay in the end. And as an XBox owner I can tell you that online play can make an good game into a great game. And for all you people out there still saying that the only good game on the XBox is Halo need to get out a little more.
Thomas-
And official online for Mario Kart too. That could really rock, especially if they implemented a Battle.net-like system with tournaments for the games.
Continuing to ignore the possibilities of online play is a mistake =(
Most single player console games offer so few hours of gameplay that they aren't worth my money anyhow. Maybe worth *one* rent most of the time.
First with the lack of backwards compatibility (for the NES) in the SNES
Eighty-five percent of Super NES buyers in the first year or so already had an NES. Would the extra $50 (remember, 1991 dollars, 1991 recession) have justified an NES-compatibility coprocessor? How many Power Base Converters (adapters to let the Sega Genesis read Sega Master System carts using the Genesis's built-in SMS-compatibility hardware) did Sega actually sell?
And yes, the Super NES was back-compatible with Game Boy titles. With an inexpensive adapter, it could play all games for the DMG (Game Boy monochrome) platform, except those requiring a link port device.
Also, the Atari/Tengen lawsuit was over console licensing of Tetris, which Tengen *lost*.
There were two lawsuits. One was over the use of Elorg's TETRIS trademark, which Tengen lost to Nintendo, the exclusive North American licensee. The other covered the lockout chip and Nintendo's licensing policy, Tengen alleging that Nintendo was abusing a monopoly and Nintendo counter-alleging that Tengen stole the source code to the lockout chip by defrauding the Copyright Office. Both claims eventually proved true to some extent.
It allows Splinter Cell:PT to be infinitely amusing. It allows four gamers to form a sponsored CounterStrike team and WORK playing CS. It gives WarCraft III more playability. Yadda yadda yadda...it's great.
HOWEVER...
I think that in order to get more people playing in Online communities, game makers are leaving behind those without LOADS of cash to tack onto a monthly bill along with Rent, Food and Phone.
I'm glad Nintendo hasn't forgotten those who don't have DSL.
Nintendo has already told us their direction was changing numerous times in the past. They are trying to get out of developing more lengthy titles that take over 40 hours to play in favor of games you can pick up and learn in 5 minutes. This guy isn't as nuts as he might sound. The industry is suffering due to a serious lack of innovation as well as the general human rush to perform more tasks faster in a shorter amount of time. In a sense, we don't have the time to play games like we used too.
This is why we're seeing the industry making such a strong push into the portable markets. I also believe game consoles as we know them will not be produced anymore once the next generation of them have been distributed to the masses. There is only so much smooth framerates and more complex reflection maps can add to gaming.
8==8 Bones 8==8
We are here again speaking of multiplayers like we were speaking of Internet 8 years ago. "Internet is COMING; big guys pay attention! ADAPT NOW OR DIE!" The fact is 8 years later, Internet is truly becoming mainstream and guess what, big guys are still standing and strong over the dead bodies of counteless early adaptors of Internet, a.k.a the dot.com era stars.
What's the problem with Internet dot.com? Putting everything on Internet without much real innovation that benefit the end customers.
Today, online play may be the hot topics but it's certainly a small market comparing to the overall size of game business. If you look at this from the point of view of the boss of Nintendo, it's definitely not important yet.
I know this is a matter of perspective, but still. .
A reactor melt-down is 'critical'. Massive head-wound trauma? Critical. Making ten percent fewer billions of yen a year selling Mario Brothers game cartridges. . ?
They're digital plumbers, for goodness sake! It's not a product; it's flashing lights on a screen! A hallucinogenic daydream! It's a complete freak of nature that a thin dime was ever made in the first place!
Several lucky stars should be counted and thanked that any grocery money was procured at all selling video games. And ugly words like 'critical' should be dropped immediately from the game industry lexicon.
My other favorite part was that grown men from the Japan Economic Foundation were in attendence, listening gravely as global strategies were being discussed.
It's DIGITAL ITALIANS WITH CUTE WRENCHES, for goodness sake! Chill the heck out!
-FL
Ok here are some numbers i had pulled up a week or so ago. But are semi-relevant here. Numbers are comparisons of PC MMPORG numbers and PS2 online subscribers. as well as the actual amount of hardware for online use they have sold. Sony online registered member numbers, check bottom paragraph gives you Everquest PC numbers PLUS the numbers for Everquest Online adventures (the PS2 game) A chart shoing subscriber numbers of several MMORPG's Everquest Online Adventures being the PS2 one at the bottom Chart And here is another SOE press release staing only 500k hardware adapters were sold in the US, and im pretty sure all of themaint gettin used. SOE press release either way this supports the fact that there isnt a cash cow in console online games. MMORPGS would generally have a higher active subscriber base then other online games due to their nature. PS2 is the highest proliferated console system in the US atm. And just using SOE's numbers (which might even be inflated) doesnt really give a rosy picture. granted FFXI for PS2 skews the numbers a good buit, but i think thats due to the different approach they have taken towards subscription and how they implemented the game.
Actually.. I don't think I've EVER seen mario with a wrench. He seems to like the soma just a little too much. Probably couldn't lift a wrench if he tried.
Woah hold on there chief.
<BR><BR>
Lives are not necessarily at state, but the company's future is. Jobs will be lost if Nintendo collapses. So to this man, the word 'critical' may be appropriate.
<BR><BR>
But seriously, I know geeks like to pick at minutae, but this is really a non-issue. And, by the way, the translator chose to use the word critical -- what he said could have just meant "really important" in Japanese, and the translator made a slight error.
Notice how it's always Nintendo making dire predictions about the gaming market shrinking? Notice the story on slashdot a few days ago about how the Japanese games market is stagnant, despite impressive ongoing growth in the US and Europe? Want to hazard a guess whether there's a connection?
This is really an illustration of a lot of what's wrong with Nintendo's marketing strategy. Their Japan-centric attitude, more pronounced than Sony's, has essentially seen them get slaughtered in most of the rest of the world during this cycle, even by a console from a notoriously disliked OS developer who'd never made a console before. Here in the UK, when we hear of a great Gamecube title released in Japan, we don't usually assume we have a cat in hell's chance of ever seeing it appear in our stores. I guess the situation might be better in the US, but the UK alone is a large and expanding market, never mind the rest of Europe. Sony and Microsoft don't need to worry about the games market contracting; their sales are telling them something very different, as they're focussing on much healthier markets.
Don't get me wrong, Nintendo do have some good games. However, it's a pretty small number compared with number that have appeared for the X-Box and, in particular, the PS2. Somebody above mentioned Disgaea; that's a great example of a superb (really, it is, if you haven't played it, do) sleeper hit, of the kind of which Nintendo desperately needs. The Naval Ops games are another good example; almost zero publicity bar word of mouth, and yet I noticed them racking up impressive sales on this basis. By contrast, look at Eternal Darkness for the cube. A superb game, which would have been a hit on any other console, but which, due to the Cube's audience, never got anywhere in terms of sales.
As one poster above said, Nintendo are in danger of being killed by their own fan-base, who are driving them down a particular road, oblivious to the fact it's a dead end.
Too many negative comments about the statements made, and while I can see the point behind some of them, I'm at least backing up Iwata's comments on a philisophical level.
The console industry is in a sad state, and the GameCube and GBA are the only "consoles" I currently am enjoying because Nintendo puts fun games onto them. I'll even take a port of the original Zelda over "GTA: Kill hookers in LA rather than Miami" or whatever they're calling the next GTA game.
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
Heh, heh. Move out of your parents basement and you'll describe the loss of your employment as 'critical' too. Or just ask the people who whine about outsourcing to India.
Microsoft are using the Xbox to get a foothold in the market, they fully expected the loss. They now have a very considerable chunk of the market which they didn't have before. Considering the type of market, their gain is considerable: publishers. They now have easily more third party developers than Nintendo, and probably rival Sony. You can bet their new console will not suffer from a shortage of titles in its initial first few months on the market, when the real money and market share gains are made.
Add to this that they've got 15+ million hardware sales which might otherwise have gone on hardware and software from Nintendo and Sony, that's a hell of a lot of word of mouth and brand loyalty lined up for the next machine. I'm not speaking as a Microsoft fanboy, but rather a fearing Nintendo fan. The drought of titles on the Gamecube is almost of PC-proportions currently. If the whole of Europe turned round and decided not to buy the next Nintendo machine I'd have trouble arguing with them, given the way we're treated. Then Nintendo would only have the US market. Going head to head against Microsoft with the release of their next machine could really hurt them, given the 3rd party army that MS can now call upon. It's hard to ignore just how big Sony's catalogue for the PS2 currently is, translate that to launch titles: come next-gen time, if Microsoft have 30 release titles to Nintendo's 8, Nintendo are going to lose, quality notwithstanding. Sure, they can retreat to Japan and build from there, but the whole thing is just playing out to be another Dreamcast.
You're talking bullshit.
/. stating that Capcom "isn't interested in developing more" Xbox titles, simply saying: "There are no plans... It's just not profitable enough.".
Yes, most people buy 1st party stuff on Nintendo consoles. But that's because Nintendo often makes the best games.
Splinter Cell did't sell too well on GC because the release date was lagging behind the other releases (XBox, PC, PS2).
It was Ubi Soft's own fault. If SC's release was not that late and more technically advanced, it would've sold more units.
You also gave Capcom as another example. Interesting, because a few days ago there was an article here on
Or just ask the people who whine about outsourcing to India.
Please please do not do this. Once started you'll never make them stop.
This Nintendo Boss doesn't scare me. A simple LRLRUDDUABBA-START will finish him.
Music wants to be free.
As a gamer with a cable modem, PC and a Gamecube, I really want online play capability with my console. I am buying the Broadband Adapter for the GC and downloading WarpPipe to allow me to play Mario Kart: DD!! online with other players. Personally, online play is inevitable, it was with PC and now will be with consoles ONCE enough people can actually have internet connections. Usually people don't have ethernet ports in their walls near the consoles. Wi-Fi should fix that. I think right now it's a bit complicated for players to set up their consoles to play online.
Kamran A
... and other issues such as connectivity, lag and figuring out a way to make it so any dumb idiot can connect isn't going to be easy. Since connecting to the internet and all the problems you have using internet for games is problematic.
Come on the internet quality of service for real-time games is problematic for everyone, everyone can't get the same online experience because it is ISP and router-hop dependent. No one can gaurantee quality of service with regards to latency at this time over the internet, so realtime games will not be so great when pings fluctuate or are well above 100ms.
Also I think online marketshare is for console internet "peripherals" are limited like the GC's broadband adapter are limited. You want an "all in one" console in that regard, you don't want to have to pay extra.
The online connectivity should be built right into the console. This means WiFi or ethernet which isn't going to be cheap from Nintendo's perspective, and then the internal software that makes leasing an IP address easy... but what happens later on when the internet goes to IPV6 and the console can't upgrade its internal software to support internet connectivity? Grandted IPV6 is a long way off but it shows you once you put connectivity in you're stuck with it unless you somehow support IPV6 well before it's widespread.
Nintendo as a company would like a profit on their console they can't lose gobs of money through a war of attrition like Xbox and Sony can with their other businesses to rely on to supply revenue. They need exclusive games from major publishers on their system or they are going to get creamed by the PS3, I really have no faith in Xbox2 unless it attracts developers with superior technology thats head and shoulders above the PS3 with exclusive system selling titles.
-
Iwata doesn't appear insane in his well-edited interviews, but even he's starting to slip. I probably would too if the company I was managing has been eating it's tail since 1999.
I think it's telling that Nintendo has repeatedly said (although I'm not sure if it was Iwata-san who said it specifically) that the day they stop selling consoles is the day they quit the game industry. Talk about sour grapes, it's like a threat: "You better buy our console or we'll take our 1st party titles and kill them all off." I know that Nintendo fans will want to burn me in effigy for this but I really believe Nintendo could become a very powerful player in the console (or even PC gaming market) by starting to develop for other consoles. Let the other guys waste their time and money fighting the console wars and ride on their coattails to success. I'd buy Nintendo games to play on my PS2, but I'm far less inclined to buy a Gamecube just so I can play them.Doom III is being developed specifically as a single-player game. id Software wasn't even going to include multiplayer support until they decided to unveil a 4-player max demo at E3.
the link port wasn't there on the original sgb but was on the later sgb2
If I recall correctly, the Super Game Boy 2, with a Game Link connector, was not made for any region where the Super NES was called the Super NES. From all the photo evidence I've seen, Nintendo sold the improved accessory only in Japan, where the console was called the Super Famicom. I have a feeling that like Atari in the Video Chess case, Nintendo may have been court-ordered to make and sell the SGB2, as the Pokemon manual contained full-color screenshots of Game Link trade and Game Link battle, which weren't possible at the time on GB (black and white screen), SGB1 (no serial port), or GBC (not yet released).
nintendo have done this again more recently with the gameboy player for the gamecube
I have one. However, there still exist a few Game Boy titles incompatible with the GB Player, such as Kirby Tilt n Tumble (would require tilting the GameCube) and any Majesco GBA Video title (would require Macrovision copy-degradation hardware, which Nintendo neglected to license when designing the Cube).
everywhere I've been, it's perfectly acceptable for adults to play Game Boy
I'm sorry, but I call bullshit on this.
I'm a 28 year old male who is an avid gamer. I have pretty much every console since the Colecovision and pay close attention to the industry (obviously you do as well, since we're both posting here). I work and live in the financial center of North America's sixth largest city; this is only relevent because I'd like to set the scene.
Since the release of the original GBA (and including the SP) I have yet to see one person beyond their teens playing it in public. Not one. I see hundreds of people every day on the train, streetcar, subway and bus. I see adults in foodcourts, on park benches and waiting for transit services. None of them are playing a GBA.
The simple fact is that it is a child's toy. I will certainly concede that there are a few titles targetted toward adults, but they are few and far between. I've played my SP on a plane, and seen others do the same-but that's pretty much it.
Here is a perfect example:
I bought a copy of Boktai a few months ago. Boktai is a game which requires that you play it in sunlight. I've put maybe 45 minutes into it, simply because of the stigma attached to adults playing portable video games. I don't believe this is a sign of weak character, rather an indication of the climate surrounding portable gaming. It isn't (and I don't believe it ever will be) ready for "prime-time" adoption by adults.
If you could be anything you want, I'll bet you'd be disappointed.
Yes, I agree with you. Five-year olds are absolutely revolting! I don't want any of those foul creatures to appear in any of my games.
All characters in all games should be ultra realistic adults. Hopefully this will usher in a new era of Soviet Realism in gaming.