The Pressures on the Next Nintendo Console

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."

Comments

Zelda, Mario, Rinse, Repeat

[ACAx1985]

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.

Re:Zelda, Mario, Rinse, Repeat

[masklinn]

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.

Re:Zelda, Mario, Rinse, Repeat

[Chris Burke]

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.

Opinion of article....

[Aeron65432]

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?

Re:Opinion of article....

[ClamIAm]

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)

Look at sales of the DS

[dividedsky319]

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...

Same Arguments as DS had

[MuNansen]

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.

Re:Same Arguments as DS had

[ArwynH]

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.

Doom and gloom

[urbanradar]

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.

$60 unreasonable price for controller?

[LoverOfJoy]

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...

[trdrstv]

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.