The Pressures on the Next Nintendo Console

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Pressures on the Next Nintendo Console

Posted by ryuzaki0 on Monday September 18, 2006 @05:22AM from the big-shoes-to-fill dept.

With the launch of Nintendo's next-gen offering a little more than two months away, the importance that Nintendo is placing on this console is finally becoming apparent. Dyed-in-the-wool Nintendo loyalists and haters alike have both come to the same conclusion: if Nintendo is to stay a force in the non-portable console market, this system has to succeed. Along those lines, WhatEntertainment offers an editorial entitled Failure is not an Option. It explores the reality that Nintendo's failure would have repercussions on the industry as a whole. "Most of all I'm worried what this might do to the industry if it's a failure. In a landscape already filled with the carcasses of those that dared to try something new, and publishers more afraid than ever to try something a little different, the high-profile failure of a system that tried to put innovation and fun before graphics could be the final nail in the coffin of creativity." Meanwhile, GameInformer has a piece entitled Will Wii be Dissapointed Again? Billy Berghammer says what he doesn't want to say: the Wii could be another flop for Nintendo. From that article: "The launch price is low enough (outside of the $60 for controller costs) to avoid damaging my wallet the same way the purchase of a Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3 will, and the possibilities and promises from Nintendo somehow still keep me hoping for a bright future. But for now, the future is made up of many of the same promises and hopes I had when the N64 and GameCube were announced. I just hope I don't end up being disappointed once again."

35 of 341 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Zelda, Mario, Rinse, Repeat by ACAx1985 · 2006-09-18 05:27 · Score: 4, Insightful

As long as Nintendo continues the Mario, Zelda, (etc) franchises, their consoles will continue to sell with or without third party support. Fact is, their first party games are just THAT good.
1. Re:Zelda, Mario, Rinse, Repeat by masklinn · 2006-09-18 05:35 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Indeed.
  
  Plus the Nintendo war chest that dates back from the NES era (remember kids: nintendo has never EVER lost any money, even on hardware sales, even for a quarter, even during the worst of the GameCube era) is humongous, and the DS Lite prints money after all.
  
  They can afford several more gamecube-level failures, especially since gamecube-level failures still nets them profits without even the need for first-party games.
  
  --
  "The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
2. Re:Zelda, Mario, Rinse, Repeat by masklinn · 2006-09-18 05:59 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Well, I didn't read the article, but the the implication I get is not that Nintendo needs this to be a hit financially, as much as in the public opinion arena, to be a true contender in the console market in the future.
  
  Whatever happens in the west, even if the Wii utterly fails, Nintendo will always be a "true contender" on the japanese market (especially with the success of the DS, Nintendo has become omnipresent there).
  
  Nintendo won't stop making consoles anytime soon, trust me on that one.
  
  --
  "The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
3. Re:Zelda, Mario, Rinse, Repeat by Chris+Burke · 2006-09-18 06:12 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The HARDWARE costs nets them a profit, they still have R&D costs though.
  
  Right, right. So they have to do well enough to recoup their R&D cost. The reason why having a for-profit hardware console is important is that it means the very first sale of their console starts paying off that R&D cost. This is why they were able to make all their money back and them some despite the "failure" that was the Gamecube. If they had tried selling their console at a loss, like Microsoft, then they would most likely have ended up losing money overall, again like Microsoft.
  
  Instead, they made money. And that was on what was possibly the least exciting most "me-too" Nintendo console ever.
  
  --
  
  The enemies of Democracy are
4. Re:Zelda, Mario, Rinse, Repeat by antifoidulus · 2006-09-18 06:15 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Actually, in 2003 they DID lose money, but that was because the dollar took an (probably expected) nosedive versus the Yen. However, after that, Nintendo has been keeping much more dollars and euro on hand to avoid another fiasco.
  
  --
  Monstar L
5. Re:Zelda, Mario, Rinse, Repeat by joshsisk · 2006-09-18 06:49 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  "On the NES, SNES and N64 Mario and Zelda games where awesome, however that time is long long ago."
  
  There has only been one Zelda game and one Mario game since then. One game is not "long long ago".
  
  Windwaker was good, though not quite up to the standard of the N64 games. I never played Mario Sunshine, so I can't comment on it as a follow up to Mario World (or was it called Mario 64, I forget?).
  
  New SMB, however, was great fun! It's a retro-esque game, though, deliberately designed to be a succesor to the NES/SNES games... you can't really expect it to be a worthy follow up to Mario World/Mario 64/whatever it was called.
6. Re:Zelda, Mario, Rinse, Repeat by hardburn · 2006-09-18 09:39 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Remember that the three companies engineering and sell their consoles on very different models. Microsoft slapped the orginal X-Box together with whatever off-the-shelf PC hardware they could get from the lowest bidders. Microsoft did a little better job at engineering the 360, but it's still off-the-shelf PC stuff, for the most part. They sell both systems at a loss, but they also have massive cash reserves to protect themselves. So Microsoft's model is low fixed cost, low manufacturing cost, sell at a loss, absorb the loss until the other players in the market are squished.
  
  Sony is a big R&D company. They can manufacture most of the components for the PlayStation line themselves, so their manufacturing costs are low. They pour a lot into the intial R&D and, until the PS3, sold the unit at a profit. The PS1 looked like it was going to be initially sold at a loss in North America, but then RAM prices dropped, allowing them to sell at a profit by launch time. They had to recoup that big R&D loss, but as long as they sold a lot of units, they'd be OK. PS3 is something of a departure, in that it's sold at a loss and is tied to the company's overall Blue-Ray strategy. Sony can't afford for the PS3 to be flop, or even for it to just sell "pretty well". It has to be a smash hit or they'll never get their R&D cost back. So Sony's model is high fixed cost, low manufacturing cost (reletively), sell at a loss, make it up on licensing games.
  
  Nintendo spends comparitively little on R&D. Like Microsoft, they rely on third-parties to manufacture most of the components, but those components are usually specifically developed or modified for the console. They spend a lot of time keeping the manufacturing cost down (for example, the DS doesn't have a z80 processor like the Advanced does for playing old GameBoy games, which lowers manufacturing cost without loosing too many customers). So their model is low fixed cost, low manufacturing cost, sell at a profit, rake in more cash by licensing games.
  
  I have little doubt that Nintendo recouped their R&D cost for the GC before the $99 price drop. The system simply isn't that sophsticated. The Wii might be different, though, since it has such a wildly different controler design.
  
  --
  Not a typewriter
7. Re:Zelda, Mario, Rinse, Repeat by aardvarkjoe · 2006-09-18 11:08 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  But, of course, at this point we really have no idea how good this new controller is going to be for playing games. If it ends up being used for a couple of gimmicky features and otherwise a standard-style controller would suffice, then I'd say that $60 is far too much.
  
  It looks as though the Wii is going to live or die based on how well the new controller works. If it turns out to be everything the hype is claiming, then you're right and nobody will mind paying for it. But otherwise, that price is going to be a real turn-off for many people. The $30 controller prices for last-generation consoles was bad enough.
  
  --
  
  How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
8. Re:Zelda, Mario, Rinse, Repeat by SirSlud · 2006-09-18 15:00 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  It is definately on the high end, which sucks. No argument here.
  
  But I've played around with it, in house, and I'm absolutely convinced that once developers start getting creative with it, watch out.
  
  There is a pattern emergin in many upcoming Wii games. I'm not sure if other people have noticed, but from a game design standpoint, a lot of games are focused on 'mini games'. Those familiar with the Warioware brand or the Monkey Ball brand I'm sure are aware of the term, but a startling number of games coming out for the Wii make minigames the core focus. And there is a reason. These games a comparitively low budget (development wise) exercises in order to find out what makes using the controller fun. I am pretty convinced that after the first round, or possibly second round, some game will come around that makes people smack their foreheads, going, "I never knew my favorite kind of game was more fun using this type of controller."
  
  A lot of work has to be done on the developer side to filter input from the controller, and to tune how to interpret the results of the accelerometers and the pointing device SDKs. Once that initial round of solidifying up your in-house Wii input library happens, I'm pretty convinced we'll start to see games that make you wonder why dual analogue is the defacto standard. Everytime I've played one of the Wii projects at work under development, I've resolved that I'm not even going to risk it; the Wii is getting pre-ordered the day Futureshop starts accepting them.
  
  Based on the surprise Splinter Cell announcement, and a few other late announcements, I think some game designers have realized that one analog and one pointer is better than two analogs.
  
  --
  "Old man yells at systemd"
Opinion of article.... by Aeron65432 · 2006-09-18 05:30 · Score: 4, Insightful

Another flop? Did I miss something?
"Nintendo reported that as of June 30, 2006 they have sold a total of 21.00 million Nintendo GameCube units worldwide."
"With 32.93 million Nintendo 64 units sold worldwide..."
They're not #1, but they are certainly a strong (read: profitable) second-place contender. I wonder what these flops are?
1. Re:Opinion of article.... by Valharick · 2006-09-18 05:33 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Typically when someone talks about a Nintendo flop they like to pull out the Virtua Boy. Pretty much the one system Nintendo had that didn't do too well. Personally, I'd rather work for a company that sold 50M units in the black than one that sold 70M in the red.
2. Re:Opinion of article.... by ClamIAm · 2006-09-18 05:50 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I don't think you understand... Nintendo is always on the brink of failure. Yeah, they completely own the handheld console market. True, they don't lose money on hardware like Microsoft. Oh yeah, and they've only had one unprofitable quarter in their 100+ year history. But wait! No! They're doomed! (really)
3. Re:Opinion of article.... by Anonymous Coward · 2006-09-18 06:45 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  One thing that always has me curious is that the XBox numbers almost *always* say "unofficially estimated". The fact is, nobody really has any *real* Xbox sales numbers, because Microsoft doesn't share them. For instance: http://www.vgcharts.org/consworld.php . Who is the only one missing here? Microsoft is the only one that won't share. Makes me wonder. You should to.
4. Re:Opinion of article.... by Perseid · 2006-09-18 09:19 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  The PS2 was primarily just a graphical upgrade to the PS1. The controller is the same. Can you honestly claim that PS2 games play just like old PS1 games? Of course not. Innovation in games will take place on the PS3. And Nintendo's new controller does not inherently guarantee innovation any more than Sony's tilt function.
  
  And any console shortage is temporary. 360s were so rare for a while it was laughable. Now my local walmart has them everywhere. The same will be true of the PS3. There will be a shortage at first. Then the shortage will go away.
  
  Lastly, unless you're a temporal fugitive from the year 2008, you don't know how successful Blu-Ray or HD-DVD is going to be. Period.
5. Re:Opinion of article.... by Anonymous Coward · 2006-09-18 11:24 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Microsoft shipped 24 million Xbox consoles is the same style of measure that Sony uses which is units shipped versus units actually sold.
  
  When viewed from the unit sold perspective, Nintendo is in second place.
  I do not have the data and I am too lazy to do a Google, but this is indeed reflected in actual sales numbers that can be publicly found.
So the real news here is... by DorkusMasterus · 2006-09-18 05:31 · Score: 3, Insightful

that of the big three, Microsoft seems to be in the most stable place currently. Now, I'm by no means an M$ fanboy, but it does seem that the analysts are correct in their looking at Nintendo as needing a solid hit out of the Wii, to have a future in the console market. (They will still be fine with handheld sales alone, of course). Same thing with Sony and their PS3 (excepting the haldheld market, as the PSP is still struggling to find a foothold anywhere). PS3 will no doubt sell well to loyalists and such, but will it be enough to keep the company making as much money as they did in PS2 and game sales?

Only time will tell, but it's very interesting that this all places quite a bit on Microsoft's side, as they are going to be regarded as the "established" player in the market, come Christmastime, and with a well timed and measured price cut, they could be looking at a very good situation over there...

I personally (and here's the fanboy side) hope the Wii does well. Even if it's not all we hoped, it's still someone trying to innovate in a market crowded with sequels, little improvements from generation to generation, and I hope they are rewarded for it. I think it will do much better than say, the Dreamcast. But, overall, it's going to be an interesting year from here on out to see where the consumer speaks with their wallets...
1. Re:So the real news here is... by DorkusMasterus · 2006-09-18 05:48 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  I replied to your previous comment on this as well. You're looking at things from a purely financial standpoint, whereas I see it as a "on the gamers' radar" standpoint.
  
  If Wii doesn't sell well, and for argument's sake, neither does the PS3, who stands to benefit in the minds (and living rooms) of the world? Microsoft.
  
  Again, that is not to say Nintendo won't make more money (because truthfully, Nintendo will hedge everything very well as they always have, with a great business-savvy, and be fine).
  
  Just to say that when consoles come out again, it will be like two years ago, when people were saying "PS3 will be the thing to beat" until specs and figures came out...
  
  Microsoft will be there with the "successful" consoles, (perhaps not in terms of profits, but in terms of perhaps brand loyalty, if anything), and Nintendo will have to "prove it" in terms of the system.
  
  Don't get me wrong. I love Nintendo, and hope the Wii is a success... I plan on getting one. And I DON'T have a 360. But I still think that MS is not trying to profit on the 360, at least the system itself. They're trying to build a brand that's successful with gamers and synonymous with fun/good product. And if Sony and Nintendo don't do that this generation, then Microsoft, by default, wins in that arena.
2. Re:So the real news here is... by rjung2k · 2006-09-18 10:25 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  "The 11-17 year old male demographic all think "Microsoft is cool" primarily because of Xbox. These are the masses of tomorrow."
  
  At least until they grow up, move out of their parents' home, get a job, get some responsibilities, get a wife and kids of their own. Then we'll see how much time they have left for Microsoft's hard-core gaming vs. Nintendo's pick-up-and-play casual nature...
  
  --
  --R.J.
  Electric-Escape.net
Look at sales of the DS by dividedsky319 · 2006-09-18 05:32 · Score: 4, Insightful

I don't think anyone expected the DS to be as big as it has become. The same could turn out to be true for the Wii.

Plus, BECUASE the DS has become so popular, I think that people will be a lot more willing to give the Wii a chance.

Obviously only time can tell, but I think the DS's success is very important to the Wii...
1. Re:Look at sales of the DS by Anonymous Coward · 2006-09-18 05:49 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Something that was mentioned to me awhile ago was that Microsoft and Sony are working hard to capture the most "hard-core" 10% of gamers; a group of people that play a ton of games and purchase (potentially) over 50 games a year. The interesting thing is that these gamers require so much content that they will, likely, purchase any piece of hardware that comes onto the market. It seems to me that Nintendo is heavily targeting the people who will buy between 6 and 12 games a year and people who don't play games currently; if they're successful, I'd imagine that the Wii would sell 40 to 60 Million consoles worldwide in its lifetime and Nintendo would be super profitable.
2. Re:Look at sales of the DS by Tremor+(APi) · 2006-09-18 06:34 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I agree with that, certainly. I do think that Nintendo Wi-Fi has boosted the DS significantly, and I find it alarming that we aren't going to see any online-capable titles on Wii until 2007. The 360 is all about Live, which is doing really well for MS, even though they're really using Live as a giant profit machine. You get your 360 and your headset and hook up the ethernet cable and you're good to go. Built-in WiFi on Wii is a good move - it keeps you down to just the power and A/V cables because of the wireless controller, which makes it easier to set up, but it needs to offer that online capability ASAP, and with good quality games. I'm looking forward to Batallion Wars online on the Wii, and I'm hoping for online-capable Mario Kart, Mario Strikers, and Smash Bros. to be out in the near future as well.
  I see the Wii as a huge potential success for Nintendo; they can easily get up to 2nd place behind the 360 (the PS3 being very ready to flop, IMHO), and possibly even outdo the 360 if they succeed in drawing in non-gamers. The price point will be a big help on that front, but online capabilities are important; I want to be able to buy a Wii for mom and play some Wii tennis the day she unpacks it, or encourage a friend to buy a unit so we can go head-to-head online.
  With a non-online console, you go to a friend's house and play - if you buy your own, you get convenience, at the loss of the social aspect. With an online console, you've got a bigger incentive to buy your own unit, because it means you can play games with your friends from the comfort of your own sofa. When you're targeting non-gamers, you have to get them to want their own unit, not just want to casually use someone else's.
  
  --
  [Z?]
3. Re:Look at sales of the DS by Don_dumb · 2006-09-18 19:25 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I don't think anyone expected the DS to be as big as it has become. The same could turn out to be true for the Wii.
  EA certainly didn't expect it, only a month ago /. posted a story about EA complaining to Sony about the failure of the PSP (and probably their wasted development).
  I don't think the size of the DS' success was as much of a suprise as the fact that they were able to find a new market for consoles (if only portables). I dont think Dr Kawashima's Brain Training, has been given enough recognition for being a killer-app. The DS and more recently DS lite was the console parents brought for their kids under the child lobbying of "it will help me learn". But it would seem that the weekday morning TV & broadsheet newspaper coverage, and parents having a go that they themselves are buying DS and DS lites. The parents and previously non-games playing adults are buying the DS, (I wonder if anyone is doing a demographic study of who buys it, I reckon a much larger proportion of female owners than other systems). Part of the massive success of The Sims was that it didn't just appeal to gamers.
  
  If Nintendo has learnt anything from this it is that with less power, less overtly violent games, they can get a part of the public that Sony & MS dont consider. Judging by the marketing here (UK) they are doing just that, using Chris Tarrant (the middle aged Who Wants To Be A Millionaire host) and more twenty something women than men (always in bright, friendly environments), advertisng during the Friends .
  
  Like many people have pointed out Nintendo dont have to 'Win' the console battle, they dont even have to compete, MS & Sony can have the Madden & GTA playing (teenage 20-something crowd), Nintendo will have everyone else. And make profit.
  
  --
  If this were really happening, what would you think?
Same Arguments as DS had by MuNansen · 2006-09-18 05:34 · Score: 4, Insightful

The same arguments that were made against the DS are being used against the Wii ("gimmicky," lesser graphics power, etc.) as that Game Informer article proves. He hardly even mentioned the DS. He also neglects to mention the Sony backlash, and the fact that we're now in a time where people are a bit tired of the graphics arms race between M$ and Sony, and would like something new. At least to a further extent than has been true for consoles in the past.

That doesn't guarantee success by any means. There's just a lot of positive angles that the author was ignoring.
1. Re:Same Arguments as DS had by ArwynH · 2006-09-18 06:33 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The handheld market is a different game.
  
  No, not really. Remember when the PSP was coming out how everyone was oo-ing and aah-ing the 'technologicaly impressive' PSP? I remember it well, mostly because I was one of the those posting replies to posts like yours, that stated Nintendo has had it and that those two screens, mic and touch screen were all gimics, especially when compared to the PSP which is 'more powerfull than the PS1'. Of course all I could say at the time was 'think of the possibilities!'. Now it's more or less a done deal and pretty much everyone accepts that the DS was a good idea. At least I haven't heard anyone call any of the DSs features a gimic in a while now.
  
  The technology is not just unimpressive...
  
  The controller is more impressive than two screen, a touch screen and a mic if you ask me.
  
  ...it's backwards and it doesn't have the price advantage...
  
  Backwards? I doubt it. It's specs might not look as impressive as it's rivals, but numbers aren't what define technology. For instance, from what I hear, it's power consumption is pretty minimal. This means very little heat and smaller compact device. In those respects it's light-years ahead of it's rivals.
  
  As for price, in Japan it's half-price of it's only rival. 250,000 compared to 600,000. I'd call that an advantage.
  
  In the rest of the world it's cheaper than the cut-down version of the Xbox and includes a game. That is also what I'd call a price advantage. Don't forget those are release prices, I suspect the difference will grow further into the cycle.
  
  ...than the 'big boys'
  
  Yes, the other consoles are a bit big aren't they...
  
  The only real selling point the Wii has over the competition is Nintendo's stable of games, and look where that has got them since the N64
  
  Looked at Nintendo's software sales recently? I'd say they've done pretty well for themselves. Considering they are one of histories most successful game makers ( and a lot of those games were post-snes), I say that thier catalog was worth quite a bit.
2. Re:Same Arguments as DS had by Abcd1234 · 2006-09-18 07:15 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  lousy battery life (3 hours on 6 AAs), cost, size, and weight to name four.
  
  Hah, for a second there, I thought you were talking about the PSP...
We'll know about abject failure pretty quickly by Jerf · 2006-09-18 05:35 · Score: 3, Insightful

I think we'll know whether it's an abject failure pretty quickly, and it's probably not even worth worrying about this close to release.

Just wait for the reviews about two weeks after the Wii has been released to the reviewers, after the novelty has had time to wear off and there's a better sense of whether the games are actually fun, or if the controller is just a useless gimmick.

Right now, probably nobody really knows. The game devs and their testers are too close to the game to know whether it is any actual fun, and almost all of our reviewers have at most a few hours experience, all in the same day.

I think we'll only know it's an abject failure if the controller simply becomes tiresome, or hard to use, or to sum it up "no fun" with real use.

Otherwise, I'd expect the first Wii generation to look like the first DS generation, for the same basic reasons, and again for the same reasons, if you tried to determine the success of the DS based on that first generation you'd have been way off.

Anyhow, of all the times to be worrying about whether the Wii is going to fail, this is really the silliest, when we're this close to release. Just wait and see.
Doom and gloom by urbanradar · 2006-09-18 05:38 · Score: 4, Insightful

It seems to me that TFA is just trying to cash in on the current Wii frenzy. It's the old trick: Write something controversial, watch it get slashdotted before long, and watch the ad revenue flow in.

Personally, I'm unconvinced. IMHO, the Gamecube failed due to two points. It was underpowered compared to the XBox and the PS2, but yet didn't have enough innovative features to really differentiate itself from the competition. And, secondly, there weren't all that many games for it. The N64, too, suffered from this.

With the Wii, Nintendo has already taken care of those points upfront. Not only are we going to have tons of classic games from older consoles, a lot of vendors have also already pledged support for the Wii.
And as for being underpowered, well, yes, the Wii isn't as powerful as the XBox360 and the PS3, but the sheer freshness of its gameplay and its innovative games should more than make up for it. Especially since the Wii is being marketed as the "console for everyone". If Nintendo's strategy works, a lot of people who wouldn't otherwise have bought a console will buy a Wii, and they won't care about sheer raw power. And neither will Nintendo fanboys.

So I don't see why the Wii should suffer from the same problems as the N64 and the Gamecube.

--
Basilisk Digital
$60 unreasonable price for controller? by LoverOfJoy · 2006-09-18 06:02 · Score: 4, Insightful

I keep seeing these jabs on the price of the Nintendo controller (both parts). I can understand the disappointment. After the prices for x360 and ps3 people are looking to Nintendo as cheap affordable fun. Add on to that, Nintendo is well-known for making great party games and seem in a position to continue that so multiple controllers for a nintendo system seems a given. Given all that, is anybody seriously surprised by the price of the controllers? Sure, they probably could have taken a loss or a smaller profit by pricing the pair for $50 (35 and 15?) but is that typically the place to have lower profit margins? You're going to pay $50 for a wireless x360 controller and likely at least that much for a ps3 one. Why would anyone expect to see less for a two component wireless controller that probably has more state of the art technology in it? I wish they released a wii bundle with an extra controller rather than a game but I can see why they went the other way. To me, this is just further evidence that they will be successful. Financially, they'll make money. And because the wii is so much cheaper to develop for, they don't even need to have a HUGE install base for developers to continue giving support. Developers don't need to sell as many to make all their money back and then some. Finally, if the games are frequently $10 cheaper it won't take long before you've saved enough from the games to pay for the $10 more expensive controllers.
Re: PS2 was Weakest... by trdrstv · 2006-09-18 06:13 · Score: 5, Insightful

It was underpowered compared to the XBox and the PS2,
Incorrect. The PS2 was the least powerful contender this time around (after the Dreamcast dropped out fo course) The only thing the GC didn't have hardware wise over the PS2 was disk capacity, since they went with mini DVDs, and not DVD9's. For a good comparison of capable graphics, play RE4 for each.
I don't understand the 'Graphics Arms Race' much as The PS2 was technically inferior to both the GC, and X-box yet the PS2 had the largest user base. The PS1 was inferior to the N64 (except for disk / cartrige capacity) yet the PS1 sold more. The DS is weaker than the PSP, yet is sells more. The Gameboy was weaker than all competitors, but crushed the competition.
Clearly 'power' =/= greater sales. There is more to it than that.
Failure of Nintendo predicted for over a decade. by Maul · 2006-09-18 06:43 · Score: 2, Insightful

The failure of Nintendo has been incorrectly predicted by game magazines and other "journalists" for well over a decade... more like 15 years now that I think about it. It always is supposedly right around the corner. It started in the 90s when Nintendo was late to the North American 16-bit market and hasn't let up since.

Nintendo is still around making consoles after all this time. Maybe because they know how to make a profit without having to necessarily be the top-seller.

--
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
Re:It costs a Wii bit too much by jizziknight · 2006-09-18 07:01 · Score: 2, Insightful

The Gamecube had a 485Mhz PowerPC processor and the Wii will supposedly have one about 800Mhz or less. How is that tripling the power?
Clock speed isn't everything. You need to turn in your nerd card. Also, where are people getting this 800MHz BS from anyway? Unless something changed very recently, Nintendo hasn't released the final specs other than that the chips are made using a 90nm process.

--
Everything I say is a lie. Except that... and that... and that, and that, and that, and that... and that.
Enormous pressure due to fanboi hype by jchenx · 2006-09-18 07:32 · Score: 3, Insightful

IMHO, one of Nintendo's biggest pressures (and arguably their largest problem too), will be the hype generated by all the Nintendo fanbois. They are hyping the Wii as if it's the biggest thing EVER for gaming. All you need to do is read the buzz being generated here and on all sorts of gaming forums. There's a lot of "Nintendo can do no wrong" sentiment, which is very, very dangerous.

I want the Wii to succeed, but I don't like to be told by fanbois that it will (or "wii-ll") succeed, without them or myself even having tried out the console ourselves. I still have a lot of doubts, such as how sensitive the control will be, whether or not I'll get tired after a period of time, how long it takes me to adjust to, and more importantly, just how much "more fun" Wii games are, versus titles on other platforms.

I think it's healthy to be skeptical, but it seems like everyone brings up these valid points, a Nintendo fanboi shoots them down, saying that it's not going to be a problem, bashing all the other consoles, and claiming that Nintendo games have a monopoly on fun games. Puh-lease! This is starting a very dangerous precedent.

Don't get me wrong, I like what Nintendo is doing with the Wii, and I will get one this year. But you Nintendo fanbois need to back down a bit and let people have their doubts. Like or not, we're all going to get the real story once the dang thing ships.

--
-- jchenx
single controller is a mistake by Lord+Bitman · 2006-09-18 07:49 · Score: 3, Insightful

They include gimicky sports games which nobody would ever want to play except to try out the new controller, but only include one controller so you can't even do that decently. For $250, you get a bill for $60, which you can either use to buy a decent single-player game (meaning the bundled game was an interesting waste of plastic), or buy a second controller.

--
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
Wi + $60 = Wii by rAiNsT0rm · 2006-09-18 08:10 · Score: 3, Insightful

Let me begin by saying I used to be a Sony playtester and a reviewer, I also was running a Revolution/Wii website until a week ago. I went from excitement and enthusiasm in the Wii, not fanatical fanboi stuff - just happy that at least one company "got it," to pretty much not caring at all. A normally priced console that offered a fun experience accessible to everyone and doesn't engulf my entertainment system with its presence. Or so I thought.

As more and more details appeared, my excitement level dropped rapidly. I'm a jaded reviewer so my excitement level generally peaks at a 3 or 4, and the Wii had me at a 5 or a 6 which is pretty rare. Then to find the console will be $249 (and Nintendo then has the nerve to hype the fact that they are making profit on each Wii) and come with just one controller. Wi + $60 = Wii. Bringing the total to $310. Then for families and those who bought into the four player experience hype, we have $430.

The launch lineup isn't spectacular, and the control of Zelda and Red Steel have both been constant issues and received multiple redesigns *after* the games were well on their way to completion... not a good thing, especially when a 1st-party title can't get it right. In addition the sensor bar is small but still a drag.

Nintendo is resting way too much on the success of the DS and I think they may be in for a surprise. There haven't been any great DS releases in some time, with many of the top rated games being launch titles or pretty close to it. I think the Wii will sell out of its stock for Christmas and the next couple shipments but I think it will then taper off. Mario Galaxy doesn't do it for me personally and while it will help pick up sales down the road there isn't a whole lot on the radar still.

I still hope it does well because I think Sony and MS need to learn a bit of a lesson and bring gaming back around from a pure money-making venture into a *fun* and diverse money-making venture, instead of the next gangsta-simulator, racing, FPS now with 20% more polygons!!!!

--
http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
Re: PS2 was Weakest... by CronoCloud · 2006-09-18 15:43 · Score: 2, Insightful

Overall the GC is more powerful than the PS2 but the PS2 does have the advantage in certain categories, particle effects for example. That's one thing the PS2 is VERY good at.

But why the PS2 "won"? Games, lots of games, lots of diverse games, lots of high quality games, games for final fantasy fans, games for RPG fans who don't like final fantasy, FPS, TPS, online games, MMORPGS, action RPG's, diablo clones up the wazoo, niche games, board games, games that you can make games with. more character based platformers than the GC by far., sports games, wrestling games, racing games, you name it the PS2 has it.