Slashdot Mirror
Third Place Is Fine By Nintendo
anaesthetica writes "The New Yorker writes that Nintendo is fine with third place. Between Sony and Microsoft both trying to build the most comprehensively next-generation console, and barely breaking even in their efforts [Zonk: Though that's changing for Microsoft], Nintendo has decided to go a different route. Wii doesn't have all the bells and whistles, but it focuses on simple fun playing games — a strategy which turns out to be much better for Nintendo's bottom line and stock prices. From the article: 'A recent survey of the evidence on market share... found that companies that adopt what they call "competitor-oriented objectives" actually end up hurting their own profitability. In other words, the more a company focuses on beating its competitors, rather than on the bottom line, the worse it is likely to do.'"
because Nintendo is the one console I don't see as a competetor for 3rd place in this race, N will get 1st or 2nd I suspect.
34486853790
Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
You mean giving customers what they want will help sell your product?
I'm shocked! Shocked I say!
Don't just game, Dungeoneer
I find the same to be generally true among humans.
All I see are articles talking about how fun Wii is, the new way of interacting with games.
But is this new game play interaction something that can keep the wii going in the longterm?
I have tried it, so I honestly don't if tilt controllers are something to build a console around.
Also, with PS/3 being a fully functional computer with a keyboard/mouse/blueray, its more than just a console. And Xbox live with internet access to media is more than a console. The Wii is a console and priced like it.
Essentially, Nintendo makes its consoles and games and that is the company. They really have nothing else to gain from other things like XBox live, hard drives in consoles, and Sonys Blu Ray. Microsoft and Sony are thinking broader, but still focused on the companies bottom line. If you want to do just the game division, that is fine, but when and if that works that company would find it hard to take that success and apply it to other divisions. The PS3 without Blu Ray is cheaper and maybe easier to make, but if Blu Ray is a success because of the PS3 and/or vice versa, well lets just say Sony will get the last laugh as they dominate to huge markets.
Of course there is more to this and the OP's arguement has merits, but in this dogfight, Sony and Microsoft have FAR FAR more at stake than the success of its gaming division.
Invexi - a Phoenix, AZ based web design and web development company.
Sony and Microsoft have comparable products. Nintendo is going it's own way. If you want a traditional console with high definition graphics, you'll be choosing an Xbox 360 or a PS3. If you want Nintendo's motion sensing game console, you'll buy a Wii. I consider the purchase of a Wii to be independent of the purchase of either of the other systems. If you can afford a PS3, you can certainly afford to purchase a Wii as well. Because of the Wii's unique control scheme most of it's games will be Wii exclusive. If you want those games, you'll need to buy a Wii. Most of the games on the other two consoles will be ported to both. So someone who wants to buy an Xbox 360 could change their mind and buy a PS3. And vice versa.
It remains to be seen how well the Nintendo Wii will sell once there is sufficient supply. Three quarters of the people who purchased the Wii also purchased Zelda. Did they purchase a Wii because they want a Wii or because they wanted Zelda? The comment I have about non-gamers picking up the Wii is: The Lord of the Rings movies were very popular among non-nerds, but does that mean that those same non-nerds will play D&D every week? People may play the Wii at someone's house and think it's fun, it doesn't mean that they'll go out and purchase one. High definition televisions are coming down in price which will drive people to want high definition content for them. I think the Wii will do fine, I'll just be a devil's advocate to the Nintendo fanboys. Honestly, I don't think the Wii will be third, it will be competing for first with the Xbox 360. The PS3 will be in last place because it has equivalent graphics to the Xbox 360 for a higher price. 1UP has an article called "PS3: What the Cell is Going On?" (with examples), but I can't directly link to it.
Nintendo and Microsoft's consoles are currently profitable per unit (Microsoft's manufacturing costs have decreased dramatically). Sony is in a bad way with the PS3. Short supply with huge losses per unit. If Sony cuts the price, it's competitors can easily match and exceed that cut. A price war between Microsoft and Nintendo would be an unprecedented disaster for Sony. Imagine the reaction of the Big 3 American auto makers if Toyota and Honda had a price war in the U.S.
Excellent point. I often have seen the same said of open source. It's not about beating Microsoft. As long as the software we make is useful to us, we can't lose.
Its that simple. Nintendo cant compete on the hardware level. Nintendo barely even makes their own games these days.
:)
...
That's why the Gamecube (which was considered to be roughly as powerful as the XBox) was able to be released at the same time as the XBox, cost $100 less than the XBox and (unlike the XBox) was sold at a profit. Nintendo could have produced a system that was more powerful than the competition and charged less than the competition but would likely have lost market share; they needed something drastically different in order to attract gamers, and they needed something drastically less expensive to develop for to attract developers.
All they did was buy motion sensing technology and designed a controller. They should just release it for PS3 and 360, and sell it for $200
With the exception of Guitar Hero and DDR I can't think of a single add on that was actually purchased by anyone
It's funny to see some people calling the XBox360 and the PS3 "just the same old warmed-over stuff with high-resolution graphics", talking up the Wii's "innovativeness", while others refer to the Wii as yesterday's technology with an extra gimmick or two, instead of what PS3/XBox360 are doing...
In the past, "innovative" controllers have been released for Nintendo consoles (Power Glove, U-Force, Power Pad, ROB the robot), but none of those ever had more than a couple of games at most that were really designed for the controller, because releasing it as a new controller for an existing system made it a gimmick. The Wiimote possibly could have been a GameCube add-on. It's probably not the technological focus of the console. But it is the philosophical focus of the Wii. Almost all Wii games are designed specifically for the Wii controller. At this point the controller can no longer be considered a gimmick, since it's really an integral part of the whole console. The console would have to be the gimmick, and time will tell. There seems to be an awful lot of reviewers out there that write about how playing games on the Wii is "just plain fun", and they can't stop smiling while they play. At this point it's still hard to buy a Wii at any retail store because they're selling out, just like the PS3. I'd say the Wii is not going to be just a gimmick.
From what I understand it's about twice as capable as a GameCube. Obviously it doesn't have the graphical power of the PS3 or the XBox360, but as it has been said many many times, that's not what they're going for. I'm guessing that a lot of the focus on the earliest game development has been on making the controller work well with games. I'm sure that once developers get more familiar with the Wii, they'll be more prepared to make use of the added power the Wii has over the GameCube, just like developers will do over time for the new generations of the other consoles.
Wii Sports is included with the console (for now), and games in general seem to peak out at around $50, with some going as low as $30.
It is my belief that the PS3-Linux connection is likely to do more damage than good. The PS3 is a very powerful computer at it's *ahem* core. However, the crowd that's likely to run Linux on it is the crowd that's not likely to run out and buy a whole lot of video games or Blu-Ray movies. My figures may not be accurate, but I'd understood that Sony is losing something like ~$200 per console. This means that, for every console they sell to someone that doesn't buy at least $200 worth of additional product, they are taking damage.
Heck, I'm tempted to buy one and turn it into a Linux box so that I can deliberately damage Sony. I've been finding myself increasingly angry with them over the past few years, and quite frankly I think it's time for them to get spanked for their behavior. However, I'm not tempted enough to shell out $600 to do it. heheheheheheh