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.'"

Comments

Not too surprising

[quizzicus]

...the more a company focuses on beating its competitors, rather than on the bottom line, the worse it is likely to do.

I find the same to be generally true among humans.

Ok But...

[moore.dustin]

Sonys bottom line is being focused on with the PS3. Blu Ray is part of the focus on the companies bottom line.

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.

Re:Is Wii fun?

[HappySqurriel]

I have tried it, so I honestly don't if tilt controllers are something to build a console around.

The question I would have for this is how much time did you try it for, what games did you play and did you keep an open mind?

But is this new game play interaction something that can keep the wii going in the longterm?

The Wiimote (and Nunchuck) are no where near perfect implementations of the technology and yet they're far better than any controller I have used. When you play most conventional games (FPS, Racing Games) the Wiimote (and Nunchuck) is actually almost as good as the best interfaces for these games (Keyboard & Mouse, Steering Wheel) and in many games it is actually superior (Adventure games). The beauty of the Wiimote is that it allows for (nearly) endless usage options and a good designer can make a highly useable and intuitive interface.

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.

I have a PC, why do I need another one that doesn't have the functionality and expandability of my existing PC?

The open source motto

[Geof]

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.

Re:I find that amusing

[soft_guy]

Just because the PS2 was successful does not guarentee success for PS3.

Re:I find that amusing

[KDR_11k]

Sony will get 1st place because they can lose half their market from the PS2 and still move 50+ million units and well they won't lose half their followers.

No, they cannot do that and keep #1. They would if the other two kept selling the same number of consoles they did last gen but those 50 million people they'd no longer have probably want a new console, too. If half of them picked the 360 and half picked the Wii Sony's lead would be insignificant, if the distribution was less even Sony would be #2.

Losing half their market is being generous, from the looks of it they're heading for a self-reinforcing cycle that hurts the PS3 and helps the competition (games and developers leave the platform -> fewer buyers -> games and developers leave the platform). If they lose the lead at the start more and more games are going to migrate (and many are already doing that) to the competition and by the time the PS3 reaches an acceptable price the competition will have control of many major game series that were exclusive to Sony on the PS2. Square Enix said they want to go multiplatform, GTA4 will be multiplatform! They've only got MGS4 and FF13 remaining as their big draws and both are too far off while the competition is hitting with Gears of War and Zelda right now.

Re:I find that amusing

[the dark hero]

The software developers might be able to concentrate a little more on actual gameplay and controls than wasting time putting realistic skin on a player model.

It's not about wasting so much time than it is wasting money. Games for the wii will require significantly lower budgets or the budget may be dispensed differently. what i think will happeb is that there will be less crunch time graphics-wise and it may allow the artists to come up with more unique designs. hopefully, this will get rid of the "hollywood glitz" some videogames suffer from and it will provide for some creative, more interesting titles.

Re:Nintendo just cant compete with the hardware...

[HappySqurriel]

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 ...

One man's treasure...

[norminator]

It's barely more capable than the Gamecube and the only two gimmicks it has going are the wireless controller and the virtual console. BOTH of these could have been released for the Gamecube, which already had a broadband adapter as well.

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.

It's barely more capable than the Gamecube...

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.

And now all of these games which look like budget titles (Wii sports, Excite Truck) are $60 just like all the other new 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.

Re:One man's treasure...

[norminator]

I think Nintendo is pulling a blunder here by using the controller to promote games, instead of games to promote the controller.

I'm not sure you understand the concept of the Wiimote... it's not about having a different controller, it's about having a more natural and fun way to interact with the system. As you (and I) said above, gimmicky controllers for systems past only had one or two games for them, so the controllers were not successful. Nintendo wants to encourage people who aren't currently gamers to become gamers. Releasing a new add-on controller and then trying to push a whole library just for that add-on is a bigger effort than you seem to believe. The Wii was designed for and around the new interface. And now, all of the games can take advantage of that interface.

To me, it really doesn't make sense for a developer to create a tennis game for a gamepad-style controller. In the past, they've always had to do that. Even if a Wiimote-style controller would have been developed (well) for an earlier system, a game developer can't count on very many people buying that controller to use it with their game. Now, someone can come in and make a great tennis game that really uses that controller, because everyone who owns a Wii has that controller. Suddenly developers have a reason to make a game that can take advantage of the controller.

The Wii may be twice as powerful as the previous Gamecube, but the Gamecube wasn't a powerhouse to begin with.

I skipped over the GameCube/Xbox/PS2 generation entirely, but my understanding was that the PS2 was the least powerful of that generation, and that the GameCube was a close 2nd to the XBox.

I'll come right out and admit it: Graphics matter.

They matter... to a point, and Nintendo knows that to appeal to a wide market, they can't make the console too expensive by throwing in all of the HD stuff. It'll do what it needs to for an SD display, which is still by far the most dominant display type in peoples' homes. They can tackle HD in the next generation. And as for Wii Sports... it's not supposed to be a graphical marvel. It's there as an introduction to the Wiimote. That's why it's free with the console. That's why there's several different games (none with any real depth) on the disc. It's funny though, from people I've talked to that own a Wii, it's the most talked about title. People seem to be playing it for hours and having a great time. And it's not the same as Atari 2600 fun... even though it doesn't have the PS3 graphics, it still is immersing. The graphics are enough to start to draw people in, and the technology in the Wiimote draws people in the rest of the way.

As I said before, Nintendo hasn't abandoned cool technology in the Wii. They've just changed the focus of that technology.