GameStop Theorizes Wii Shortage Deliberate

In GameStop's quarterly public conference call, company COO Dan DeMatteo called out Nintendo on what he sees as intentional supply shortages. Along with the news that the company hit $5.3 Billion in 2006, Next Gen reports that the call contained several remarks on the next gen systems. The Wii, Dematteo thinks, has been short supplied because 'they made their numbers for the year ... [Nintendo's] new year starts April 1st, and I think we're going to see supply flowing.' They also commented on the Euro launch of the PS3, with CEO R. Richard Fontaine saying, 'I think the summary of that was that it was a very good launch falling somewhat short of what [GameStop's Euro managing directors] would call a great launch.'

Comments

Nintendo Retaliates

[bym051d]

By stopping supply of Wiis to Gamestop.

Re:Nintendo Retaliates

[c0mmanderb0nd]

Yes the only company actually turning a profit on a console just really doesn't like money so they would rather not make it by holding back supply. Maybe Dan needs to go back to firing managers whose employees sell games to kids and continue with his own exceptional management policies, as in how to ass whip customers into trading in more games or over pre ordering things that will never sell out in a million years. "Yes sir you really need to preorder Barbie horse adventure 2, the first one was a major blockbuster not to be missed, dont forget to bring in your trades, did you bring any trades, did I mention we take trades." Maybe Dan should lay off speculation and go back to his telemarketer like tactics of commerce!

Re:Nintendo Retaliates

[TikiTDO]

Actually the article makes a rather valid point. Sure Nintendo could make a bajillion dollars right now selling all the consoles it could. Then come the end of their fiscal year they report all the high profit, get a few more investors. Come next year they suddenly find that they can't maintain the profit they did this year. All the investors see this, get pissed off, and a large number walk out.

On the other hand if they hold back, they are already making a decent profit. The growth wouldn't be as high as it would have with option 1, but there will still be some. Now comes next year, they ramp up production and make an even better profit at the end of that year. Now the investors they'll gain this year will be happy, and in fact they'll probably get a few more. Sure they can't guarantee what will happen after that, but in this world two years is a long time and I'm sure Nintendo has plenty of smart financial types thinking these things though.

Re:Nintendo Retaliates

[Dorceon]

If Nintendo sold all the consoles they could, they could take over the #1 installed base crown from the Xbox 360, which would force developers to support the Wii, which would lead to future profitability, both from increased console sales (since they'd be the most desirable console due to all the games) and licensing revenue (since Nintendo gets a cut of all the game sales for their console). In this case, short-term sales lead to long-term sales, making it stupid to hold back stock.

Re:Nintendo Retaliates

[TikiTDO]

There are several points to consider there. First, their fiscal year ends in April, they aren't loosing much by holding back for a month. Certainly they'll make it back fast when the production ramps up. Remember, this article only concerns March. Second, even if they were producing at full volume they are still at around half the Xbox 360 install base, if their momentum holds, and that is a VERY big if, they aren't set to be #1 for a while yet. In fact them holding back could be seen as a clever move by Nintendo to raise demand in a time when demand may start to drop. As for developer support. Nintendo already made their point, the Wii is selling fast and will continue to for at least a few more months. It's safe to say that most developers are sufficiently forced as it is.

Re:Nintendo Retaliates

[xero314]

If Nintendo sold all the consoles they could, they could take over the #1 installed base crown from the Xbox 360 I think what you me is "If Nintendo sold all the consoles they could, they could take over the #2 spot from the XBox (not 360), and still be millions of units behind the PS2 and the number one spot." You can add all the current gen consoles sales together and they don't even scratch the surface of the PS2s install base, which is still growing, even out growing the other consoles individually.

Re:Nintendo Retaliates

[heinousjay]

Oh, I get it, the Wii is last gen. That's a good one. How did you come up with it?

Re:Nintendo Retaliates

[xero314]

I think you misunderstood. I was not calling the Wii "last gen," I really don't get into that argument.

What I was saying is that the current leader in install base is the PS2, and there doesn't seem to be any console challenging that at this time. The PS2 has sold over 110 million units as of the end of 2006 (not including the christmas season where it did sell well), while all other consoles (not hand helds obviously) that are currently still on the market total 64 million (approximation, which includes, XBox, Xbox 360, PS3, Game Cube and Wii), with just under half of that being Xbox. So this puts the PS2 as number one, the XBox at number too and the Game Cube at Number 3. The current gen hasn't even begun to scratch the surface of install base. With Sony making a commitment to another 7 years of support for the PS2 (according the Game Stop), it looks like the PS2 will remain the leader through the rest of this years and probably beyond.

The PS2 is also still number one in total monthly game sales, including at least one game in the top 10 each month since it's introduction (with this months God of War 2 easily being a top 5 if not number one).

Re:Nintendo Retaliates

[heinousjay]

Oh, ok. I gotcha now. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

The PS2 does seem to be losing some steam in the latest charts, but obviously it will carry on for a while. I wouldn't trust the 7 years exactly, at least not for anything really worth playing, but certainly it's in Sony's interest to keep selling as much as they can.

Personally, I find playing the PS2 kind of painful now. It's not so much the graphics, although that's some of it. It's mainly the wired controllers. I hate being tethered now. It takes an incredible game to get me to drag it out all over again. God of War 2 pulled that off, of course.

Re:Nintendo Retaliates

[MBGMorden]

Personally, I find playing the PS2 kind of painful now. It's not so much the graphics, although that's some of it. It's mainly the wired controllers. I hate being tethered now. You do realize that there are wireless PS2 controllers quite easily found right? ;) Some of the cheapies are aggravating, but the Logitech ones are really nice IMHO.

Re:Nintendo Retaliates

[penp]

I got one of those logitech wireless controllers for my X-box, and it works like a dream. I'm thinking about picking up another for my X-box and two for my PS2, sure they're expensive but more than worth the price.

You mean like the PS3 or XBox 360 launch?

[stratjakt]

I bought two Wii's before christmas.

PS3s marketing campaign was based on somebody getting stabbed in the parking lot, to get them on the news as the seasons "hot gift".

Re:You mean like the PS3 or XBox 360 launch?

[elrous0]

The sad thing is, that same dude that got stabbed in the parking lot later got stabbed on ebay too.

Re:You mean like the PS3 or XBox 360 launch?

[senatorpjt]

Then again, after a month of trying to get one, I gave up the Wii and bought a PS3 instead.

Re:You mean like the PS3 or XBox 360 launch?

[tktk]

Consumer Buddhism is the Key

Desire is the root of suffering. Therefore if you desire a console too much, you won't obtain it and suffer.
I don't want a 360 or PS3 and they're plentiful.
I do have a Wii, but I went to the store half-heartily, stood in line, expecting to be turned away, and was 3rd to last to get a ticket.
I want to play games on the Wii but don't really like the games.
Some of the games that I'd like to play are on a different system.
And I have no time to play.

Hmmm....I started this as a joke, but maybe there's a grain of truth in there.

Re:You mean like the PS3 or XBox 360 launch?

[Kjella]

Well, most people that couldn't get one seemed to be of the type "I'll buy it when I can pick up from the shelf". While it's not staying on the shelf, within a few weeks everyone that preordered got one, though if you're betting on that flash shipment of consoles then it's still hit and miss. In any case, I think your story is offset by equally many in Europe that went "Hey, this Wii is actually kinda cool (for a gimmick), and the PS3 isn't due out for several months..."

Re:You mean like the PS3 or XBox 360 launch?

[sfe_software]

Then again, after a month of trying to get one, I gave up the Wii and bought a PS3 instead.

I've never been THAT big on game consoles personally. I enjoyed playing GTA3 on a friend's PS2 last year. When the latest consoles came out, the Wii had my interest. I know that all 3 of the top consoles offer wireless controllers, but the Wii is the only one where wireless is the default, complete with real time/space awareness (eg, gyros). And the console itself seems rather small.

I'm not sure if the Wii is HD capable (only played with it once, just last night) but the gaming experience is unlike anything I've tried to date. Plus, apparently Nintendo somehow obtained rights to the Sonic games/characters, since of course Sega hasn't offered a game system since (IIRC) the Dreamcast...

My experiences last night included several sport-related games (tennis, baseball, boxing) and even cow tossing... in all, though I'm not too happy with the performance of the "pointing device" interface, the overall performance of the controller is pretty awesome. It seems to be able to, accurately, interpret the realtime/space position of the controller, plus velocity etc. It does in fact, at some level, help the gamer put forth some actual physical work, and I believe this is the first system to do this (not counting DDR or Guitar Hero; the Wii does this system-wide, with many sports-type games included).

I'd been considering a Wii for some time now, and having finally experienced the system last night, I'm pretty sure I'll pick one up first chance I get.

OH SNAP

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, I know they didn't just talk trash about my beloved Wii. Join me is correcting their obvious error Slashdotters, I just know you will.

Re:OH SNAP

[spun]

Oh, I know they didn't just talk trash about my beloved Wii.

They totally did, dude! I saw 'em, they said your Wii was short and aged.

That is a double edged sword

[rolfwind]

You run the risk of having consumers turn to the Xbox360 instead because 3 months after Christmas is a long time to wait for a console.

I don't know if that is what Nintendo did... but it would seem short sighted to lose a customer over the life of this product and reaping in game sales just to have better numbers in one quarter.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[alcmaeon]

Yeah, I know what you mean. I haven't been able to get my hands on a cool Wii console, so I am going to settle for a 'tard box 360 instead. Wonder if I can get it preinstalled with Vista?

Re:That is a double edged sword

[DDLKermit007]

Gamestop is talking out of their ass. Nintendo still can't keep with with the DS Lite in Japan, and the Lite revision has been out for over a year, and thats the last place they want to have shortages.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[antifoidulus]

Well before the launch they were talking about how they produced so many units you should just be able to walk into your local retailer and walk out with one(sans waiting in line in cold weather for hours) on launch day. A huge nintendo fanboy friend of mine bought that line and ended up having to wait until well after Christmas to get one. He's not really bitter about it, but.....

Re:That is a double edged sword

[famikon]

I was holding out for a Wii. Two weeks after Christmas I couldn't take it and bought a 360. I am happy with the system, although I can only find an hour or two per week to play on it; therefore, I have no good reason to buy a Wii now.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[Skreems]

The 360 has been out for nearly two years. They've sold somewhere under 11 million units. The Wii has been out for all of 4-5 months and they've sold over 5 million. And they still can't keep them on the shelves. Since they make a profit on their hardware, unlike MS and Sony, this is basically like printing money to them. I think demand has just exceeded everyone's expectations.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[Osty]

You run the risk of having consumers turn to the Xbox360 instead because 3 months after Christmas is a long time to wait for a console.

I don't think Nintendo much cares if consumers turn to the 360, as long as they also buy a Wii. At current pricing, a Wii60 is not much more expensive than a PS3 and gives you all of the benefits of a hardcore gaming machine (360 or PS3) and casual machine (Wii). I have both, and everybody I know with a Wii also has a 360 (though not everybody I know with a 360 has a Wii yet). I don't know anybody with an interest in the PS3.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[Osty]

The 360 has been out for nearly two years.

1 year and 5 months is not "nearly two years". Give it a couple more months before you start using that line. The 360 shipped in mid-November of 2005.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[AvitarX]

Well before the launch they were talking about how they produced so many units you should just be able to walk into your local retailer and walk out with one(sans waiting in line in cold weather for hours) on launch day.

That is not true.

<a href="http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/ 11/01/1855217">Here</a> is a story where Reggie Fils-Aime says "not to get complacent."

Re:That is a double edged sword

[Anonymous Coward]

Reposting anon with formatting
Well before the launch they were talking about how they produced so many units you should just be able to walk into your local retailer and walk out with one(sans waiting in line in cold weather for hours) on launch day.

That is not true.

Here is a story where Reggie Fils-Aime says "not to get complacent."

Re:That is a double edged sword

[senatorpjt]

I don't know anybody with an interest in the PS3.

Have you asked anyone with a decent HD set? If you have one, the PS3 is a better deal than the 360 because of the Bluray.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[asusag]

Those numbers are important to their shareholders and I wouldn't disagree with Mr. Man from Gamestop. Waiting for April 1st instead of March 1st probably won't hurt their sales at all with how well the hype is holding on, whether it's deserving or not.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[@madeus]

I have a 50" HD Plasma, but I've definitely got zero interest in the PS3's Blu Ray. I get my HD TV via my satellite, and later this year those of us in the UK will be able to get additional HD TV via our 360's.

However, I don't have much interest in an HD-DVD drive for the 360 either. My perspective is, if I want an HD player (whichever one wins - Blu Ray or HD DVD) I'd rather get a good one, given how much I've invested already in my home media kit.

While I'm sure the PS3 is a competent console and plays games really well (even though the 'dashboard' and online software is a bit iffy sounding), I don't trust Sony's ability to write a really decent Blu Ray movie player, and I doubt the console is as quiet as a dedicated player (just like the 360 is noisy even when playing back DVD's). I'd be surprised if it didn't have compatibility problems evident in a year or two, just like we saw with most early DVD players.

I might well get a PS3 - despite owning a Mac, PC, DC, X-Box, GC, Wii and 360 I didn't get a PS2 though - it will need to have compelling unique titles to convince me (even if it's just two or three). If it had been the price of an X-Box I would have gone for it I think, but at 425 GBP for base package alone (compared to the 360's 260 GBP for Core - that's a fair step up, not that I'd get 'core'...) it was enough to make me not bother, given how similar it is to the 360.

I wonder how many other HD set owners (especially those of us in Europe who got sick of waiting for the PS3) have already got a 360 for the 'HD game fix', and are similarly not enticed by the PS3's inclusion of a Blu Ray drive. I'm still waiting for some PS3 'killer apps' (hopefully there will be some...).

Re:That is a double edged sword

[webheaded]

If you actually bothered to use the PS3 or read about the reviews before you went spouting off your Wii/360 fanboy rant, you would have seen that the Bluray player in the PS3 is actually very nice. I know a few people with a PS3 and they love the player itself. I'm not a Sony fanboy, but I'm not an XBOX fanboy either. Don't just spout crap off like that as fact when you have no idea what you're talking about, it just makes me not even want to read the rest of what you said. Saying, "I don't trust Sony to make a good bluray player blah blah blah," when you could actually see for yourself is just a pointless sentiment.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[ravenshrike]

Love how this was modded flamebait when it's naught but the truth. The only real downside to the PS3 is the controller, but they're releasing an actual remote within a couple of months. Nice to see how reflective of reality /.s mod system is.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[Raenex]

Well, as somebody reading this thread with a mod-point to give, I can say that the "fanboy" attack is getting pretty tiresome. If he had just given his point of view without the ad hominem it probably wouldn't have gotten modded down, and maybe modded up instead.

Nice to see how reflective of reality /.s mod system is. It isn't perfect, but no system is. For the most part it works pretty well.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[MeanderingMind]

It's not entirely pointless. A lot of people who bought PS2s expecting a very nice DVD player didn't get one, and worse many of those died entirely after a few short years. While this didn't happen to everyone, it's understandable that some people might be skeptical of look to a PS3 for movie playback.

He wasn't spouting crap off as fact without knowing what he was talking about. Just about everything he said is carefully worded to make it absolutely clear it's his opinion, his skepticism and his issues.

There really wasn't any need to bring charges of fanboyism into this at all. :/

Re:That is a double edged sword

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually I think Nintendo cares more about the US than Japan these days. Remember that they did release the Wii in the US before they released it in Japan. With the exception of the DS, all of the current consoles have more sales in the US than in Japan so it would make sense to view the US as the primary market.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[Zelos]

I think they would care: someone who only owns a Wii is going to buy a lot more Wii games than someone who owns a Wii and a 360.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[Osty]

I think they would care: someone who only owns a Wii is going to buy a lot more Wii games than someone who owns a Wii and a 360.

Not necessarily true. First, keep in mind that the core gamer demographic is now in their mid- to late-20s and early-30s. That means disposable income. Second, the Wii's bread-and-butter games aren't going to be the same titles you find on Xbox 360 or PS3. I suspect you'll be seeing more titles like Wii Sports, WarioWare Smooth Moves, Rayman Raving Rabbids, Cooking Mama, Trauma Center, etc. "Gimic" games like these will be huge (just wait for DDR on the Wii where you have to dance on a pad and swing the wiimote at the same time!), and you won't be able to get them anywhere else but the Wii (forget the SIXAXIS, it's just not the same). By that same token, gamers will generally buy shooters or sports titles on the 360 or PS3 rather than the Wii because beautiful graphics and "traditional" gameplay just work better there. Finally, going back to the first point, Nintendo's sitting on a gold mine with their Virtual Console. They've got their entire back library of NES, SNES, and N64 games to capture the nostalgic 20-something gamers. 360's XBLA will give them a run for their money, but for every Symphony of the Night on XBLA (which rocks, BTW -- SOTN should be a 360 system seller) you'll be able to get a Mario Kart 64, Super Mario Bros., and Link to the Past on the VC.

How strange will it be if the "battle" for next-gen supremacy comes down to low-fi games on XBLA (and XNA), VC, and whatever Sony offers? People bought Wiis for Zelda: TTP, they'll buy 360s for Halo 3 and PS3s for MGS4, but the real win will be from cheap, accessible games you can buy (or build!) in the comfort of your living room.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[@madeus]

You are mentally deficient. It's not a fanboy rant, just because it's not pro Sony.

I didn't say say it's not a good Blu Ray player, I said I don't trust them to make a good player in the PS3, just like the DVD player in the PS2 was (and is) pretty crappy. And I don't. We won't know if it supports all the fancy stuff in the Blu Ray spec until we've actually seen a sizable amount of content available that makes use for the format.

Apparently you don't remember what the DVD format launch was like and all the problems people had getting DVD's to play properly on early DVD players for the first year or two (and the DVD format is much less elaborate than the Blu Ray format).

At a guess, that's probably because you are an 13 year old who's brain is fried on Ritalin.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[miro f]

The reason they released the Wii earlier in US was because the holiday season in US is much more important than Japan, and Thanksgiving is a large part of that. It appeared to be a genius move since from the stores I heard everyone took their Wii along to the thanksgiving gathering, and exposed it to the non-gamer crowd, building a huge amount of hype.

Remember they released the DS Lite in Australia before US ;). That didn't set any precedent unfortunately, we still get screwed over regularly here (only just got Phoenix Wright 1 =( )

Re:That is a double edged sword

[Phisbut]

Have you asked anyone with a decent HD set? If you have one, the PS3 is a better deal than the 360 because of the Bluray.

No. I happen to live in a middle-class area where not everybody can afford a several-thousand dollars TV. Heck, a coworker doesn't even own a TV at all (by choice though), and some are still watching TV with rabbit's ears.

I brought my Wii to the office last week, and plugged it in the projector in the conference room. The viral effect of the Wii is amazing. Everybody passing by stopped to look and just "had to try it". It was pretty fun to watch a VP play tennis in a suit and tie.

The funniest part is that my coworker who doesn't own a TV now wants to buy a Wii...

Re:That is a double edged sword

[senatorpjt]

I don't think the PS3 or the 360 is really aimed at the market of people who can't even afford cable. That being said, at least according to (too lazy to look for a real reference) wikipedia, 24 million people in the US do have HD sets. I don't know about the rest of the world.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[Phisbut]

That being said, at least according to (too lazy to look for a real reference) wikipedia, 24 million people in the US do have HD sets. I don't know about the rest of the world.

24 million people out of a 300 million population is a penetration rate of 8%. While that number is bound to grow in the future, that is currently leaving out 92% of people out of the equation. And how fast HD penetration rate will increase is a total unknown. How long have people been saying that broadband Internet is a year away from being adopted by all, while only 20% of US population subscribes to it. There will always be a small percentage of people who owns/must-have the latest and greatest in technology, but aiming at that market while at the same time trying to outsell your competitor who aims at the general public is quite hard.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[beinh0wer]

By that same token, gamers will generally buy shooters or sports titles on the 360 or PS3 rather than the Wii because beautiful graphics and "traditional" gameplay just work better there.

I think Nintendo has a real shot of changing people's attitude towards FPS on consoles. A lot of people prefer to play FPS on PC because mouse/keyboard provides much better response and control than an analog stick and a trigger. All Nintendo needs to do is get one good FPS with great precision control using the Wii-mote and the nunchuck and I expect gamers may start requesting more FPS games on the Wii even though they do have 'inferior' graphics. Once this happens, watch out Sony and MS.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[KDR_11k]

Don't forget that player prices are only going down so by the time there's enough of a library to warrant buying a BRD player you can get one for 50$.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[fistfullast33l]

Nintendo still can't keep with with the DS Lite in Japan, and the Lite revision has been out for over a year, and thats the last place they want to have shortages.

Sorry, but I just want to point out the house of cards you're arguing about the Wii - they aren't faking the shortage because there obviously is a shortage due to the fact they can't keep up with demand. Wouldn't an artificial shortage cause it to appear there's high demand due to a shortage? If there wasn't a shortage, demand would be sated and inventory would be on the shelf. So arguing that they can't keep up with the DS Lite doesn't prove anything about it being a fake shortage or not - including the fact that we're talking about the Wii and not the DS Lite. Maybe it suggests that they are faking a shortage on the DS Lite as well. Sure, there might be overwhelming demand for the DS Lite, but is that demand more than the Wii? Can you show that it's more than the Wii?

So how does your argument prove there isn't an artificial shortage?

Re:That is a double edged sword

[Osty]

A lot of people prefer to play FPS on PC because mouse/keyboard provides much better response and control than an analog stick and a trigger. All Nintendo needs to do is get one good FPS with great precision control using the Wii-mote and the nunchuck

I'm not sure that's really going to be happen. The Wiimote is only mouse-like as long as it's pointing at the screen. Point it away (say, to turn) and it stops acting like a mouse (it lost its IR signature). I'm not saying that it's impossible to design a good Wiimote control scheme for FPS games. I'm just saying that they don't have that sorted out right now and the task is not as simple as, "Let's treat the Wiimote like a mouse!".

Re:That is a double edged sword

[Anonymous Coward]

Is "24 million" the # of HDTVs sold? If so, then higher than 8% have them, because typically more than one person lives in a home. How many families own HDTVs? Or take me, I have 2 room mates. While *I* purchased the HDTV, we all use it. So for statistical purposes they "have" HDTV too...

Re:That is a double edged sword

[Skreems]

My mistake. I saw "unveiled on MTV in May" in the wikipedia article and misread it.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[TriezGamer]

Yeah, I tried to mod your last post -1, Wrong as a result, but realized I didn't have mod points.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[TriezGamer]

That's a risk I don't think Nintendo needs to worry about, actually -- Many of the people who want a Wii aren't even gamers! They won't get a 360 'instead' -- to those people, it's Wii or Bust -- And because they aren't particularly hardcore gamers, they likely can be much more patient than fools like me.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[webheaded]

My main argument here is that he could try it if he wanted to before charging it with sucking. It's an extremely uninformed and prejudiced opinion. While the PS2 may have had problems, this is not the PS2, it is the PS3 and if you wanted to see whether or not the Bluray player was any good, you could go try it out or read something. But it appears he decided it was pointless to actually form an opinion based on anything other than the past. If this was October 2006, I could understand, but the PS3 has been out for about 4 months now so there's really no excuse for that. So yeah, maybe I didn't need to call him a fanboy, but I'm sick of seeing people karma whore and bash PS3 with no real reasoning behind it other than Sony sucks. Sony DOES suck, but that doesn't mean everything they make is shitty.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[Anonymous Coward]

Since they make a profit on their hardware, unlike MS and Sony,

MS initially was losing money on each system. Currently, allegedly, MS makes money on each system leaving Sony as the only company in the red.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[DDLKermit007]

There is no proof outside of pinning Shiggy, and extracting the information the Jack Bower way. Only educated guesses. Nintendo has a habit of going out of their way to try and meet demand at whatever costs. They got into another factory during the DS Lite's launch just to try, and get more units out. Wouldn't shock me if they did the same thing with the Wii baring IBM not being able to crank out enough chips somehow (remeber kids, IBM is making chips for all three consoles here, guess who the real winner is). Nintendo doesn't generally hype the shit out of their console after it launches. Hell look at their generally lame commercials for that kind of information. The only hype that generally goes on with Nintendo is them keeping mum about details of their systems up till the last minute, and thats all they need. Because honestly, who the hell had an inkling of what they were doing with the controller until they announced it? Sony & MS are still recovering from E3, and Nintendo isn't really competing with them.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[@madeus]

I think that's a good point.

I rushed to get a DVD player, because I only had a few of my favourite movies on VHS - I didn't bother collecting VHS tapes because I'd been waiting for a digital format for years (since the first time I saw a QuickTime movie on the Mac). But I already have access to a huge range of new movies via my HD satellite service (which comes with a PVR), and I'm in no rush to get a new collection.

Both my ability to get movies in HD via satellite and the knowedge that HD media formats are coming has actually hurt my DVD purchases a lot. It's been over a year since I bought a DVD. Microsoft have said (in a PR attack on Sony) that they think online will 'surely be distribution method for HD content' (as near as I can remember the quote). Though issues about users prefering to own/purchace physical copies aside, I wonder if the filesize of HD movies might impeed that quite a bit.

I expect we will see a much more fractured market with people with decent internet access buying HD content online and playing it primarily via devices like their 360/PS3/Apple TV, and others prefering to buy the discs on Blu Ray/HD DVD.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[sfe_software]

Sony DOES suck, but that doesn't mean everything they make is shitty.

Couldn't have said it better myself. One thing I've always hated about Sony is their constant need to push their own technology over more widely supported variations. They were the main force behind Beta (over VHS), Minidisc (still in use but never adopted mainstream), MemoryStick, etc. More recently, UMD (small discs primarily used for games/movies on the PSP), and most recently Blu-Ray (admittedly also supported by other tech companies and content producers).

I have owned two separate Sony car CD decks over the years that sucked. I've had a Sony home receiver crap out after like 3 years. An older (1994 or so) Hi-8 camcorder died due to Sony's use of inexpensive capacitors (repair would have involved replacing 60+ caps, not worth the cost/effort).

On the other hand, I've had my Sony Cybershot digicam since 1999 that takes awesome pics to date. Only 2.1 MP, takes 2 AAs (I use Rayovac IC3 w/15 minute charge, NiMH purchased in 2002) and still works great and takes great pics. 3x optical zoom, and overall great optics makes for great pictures even being 8 years old (not to mention, in 99 it was purchased as a display model at an awesome price, minor exterior scratches).

And, having had a PS2, which worked great for many years before being sold on eBay, I know Sony can in fact make a good product. Its DVD playback was lacking, but its primary purpose (playing video games) never failed, even with minor abuse.

I suppose my biggest gripe with Sony would be that they frequently push a new format in which the company has a vested interest. Granted, from a business point of view this is not inherently a bad thing, but in many cases their format isn't the most ideal (be it cost, general acceptance, etc). The Compact Disc is one exception, and the CDs quick acceptance was partly due to it being the only (or at least, the first) available format for digital audio. Sony's MiniDisc, on the other hand, primarily was adopted by audiophiles etc. BetaMax, while superior to VHS, lost due to (very minor) differences in cost (of recorders/players) and marketing (most other companies backed VHS).

Sony's MemoryStick is a fine technology, but is mostly found only in Sony products. Of course there also exists at least five other similar technologies, not to mention the various USB drives...

DVD caught on rather fast. As a replacement for VHS, it offered digital video at really high quality, digital audio supporting most major surround formats available, small physical storage requirements, random-access (to some extent), compatibility with audio CDs (and soon after, CD-Rs with audio, mp3, jpegs, etc)...

So now we have HDTV. Naturally we need a way to play back HD content from some kind of portable storage. HD-DVD seems the logical choice, except...

Blu-Ray came first, and is backed by (among others) Sony. HD-DVD has a similar number of backers (hardware makers and content producers). Both formats utilize a violet/blue laser which, having a smaller wavelength allows for more data in the same physical space. Neither are compatible with the other. Both use the same encoding algorithms, such as MPEG-4 and others (can't recall off hand but both formats offer the exact same choices).

In single and dual-layer formats, Blu-Ray has more storage; however (IIRC) HD-DVD should, theoretically, offer more layers than Blu-Ray can... but I'm not positive on the details...

Point being, here we have a definite divide among backers (electronics producers and content producers) so, I predict, a universal standard HD video format is a ways off. One format ultimately has to prevail, whether it's because of technical superiority or (more likely) marketing (eg, availability of specific titles). VHS prevailed because cost was lower than Beta, and more titles were made available. I'm sure whichever HD format prevails will have nothing to do with the format being superior in any technical sense...

Having had HD for

Re:That is a double edged sword

[sfe_software]

I rushed to get a DVD player, because I only had a few of my favourite movies on VHS - I didn't bother collecting VHS tapes because I'd been waiting for a digital format for years

I'm not disagreeing with your motivation, but I must assume you're a bit younger. When I was younger, VHS was pretty much *the* method of "owning" a movie. A digital storage method simply hadn't been considered yet (late 1980s). When so-called HiFi Stereo came out, it was simply a method of storing 16-bit digital audio on VHS tapes, the digital audio being mixed in with the video portion (for backward compatibility). The idea of digital *video* was still years away.

I'm not *that* old mind you; as a teen, VHS had already won over BetaMax as the standard format for home use (Beta was, and still is, used in many TV studios). Once it was possible to view high-quality video on the PC, of course the idea of a digital storage/playback format had to be coming soon.

Hell, I remember installing Windows 95 for the first time, on a 486 DX66, from CD-ROM. The CD came with a Weezer video in MPEG format (plus a couple others). That would be when the idea first struck me, though at that time it'd take a fast CPU, lots of RAM, etc to pull it off. But a few years later, the idea of a DVD player decoding high-quality video in realtime, outputting to a TV, became a realistic proposition.

I paid like $300 for my first DVD player; a Pioneer with NO features (mp3, jpeg, etc) back in 1999. It did have SP/DIF optical output, useless to me at the time.

When that player died, I got a DVD/VHS combo for $88, with all the features my pioneer didn't have. Hell, I paid about $250 for my first CD burner, and my latest DVD+/-RW was less than $50.

Hell, got off track there. I guess my point is that, unfortunately, there are two distinctly different disc-storage formats for HD content, and neither has yet gained any significant ground over the other. Both have several hardware manufacturers and content providers backing their format. Neither offers any real technical advantage. Players of either intend to support older DVDs and CDs, but won't play the other HD format (though at least one company announced a player capable of both).

Personally, if I had to choose one of the two formats to back, I'd pick HD-DVD, mostly because it is strongly based on the standard DVD format. I read that stamping plants creating DVDs now, can easily be used to produce HD-DVD discs; Blu-Ray discs, however, require significant changes in the machines in order to produce Blu-Ray discs.

Plus, historically, any format supported by Sony is doomed to fail, not counting the CD (created in conjunction with Philips). This last statement was mostly a joke, but then again look at the last 20 years' history...

Realistically I think the prevailing format will win due to availability of titles; the format having the most popular HD titles will attract the most consumers (that is, the format having more available titles that HD-ready consumers wish to purchase). I forget which format Disney backs, but I am sure Disney will be a huge influence in this debate.

Bottom line: I won't buy any HD player until one format wins (I'm sure many others feel the same way). Nothing worse than your new favorite movie being unavailable for you to own/play...

Re:That is a double edged sword

[sfe_software]

And how fast HD penetration rate will increase is a total unknown.

This is true. I recently went HD (a 37-inch Visio LDC) with Comcast service. Many (most?) average TV viewers don't even understand exactly what difference HD makes. Unlike when Color TV was first introduced, that concept was easily understood by most without having to see it. HD has to be seen, and more importantly one has to see a favorite show or movie on a good digital HD set, to truly understand the significance. If you've only ever viewed B&W TV, the idea of color was simple enough to understand.

How long have people been saying that broadband Internet is a year away from being adopted by all, while only 20% of US population subscribes to it.

I would have thought this number to be higher, but I won't disagree here. Hell, I do still see PeoplePC and NetZero ads on TV quite regularly, so obviously dialup is still used by many.

Most people I know personally, getting a computer for the first time, automatically go for either cable or DSL; I'm sure this is partially due to the fact that these new users are unaccustomed (and perhaps uncomfortable) with the idea of tying up the land-line for Internet access. I'm also sure it's partly due to the introductory offers they see on TV for cable or DSL, in most cases cheaper than an AOL dialup account... especially when combining broadband with a service they already pay for (phone or cable TV).

There will always be a small percentage of people who owns/must-have the latest and greatest in technology, but aiming at that market while at the same time trying to outsell your competitor who aims at the general public is quite hard.

It kills me when I think about the people I know (mostly relatives with too much money) who own a Plasma TV, yet have no HD service, because they don't actually understand the difference. Worse yet, they're watching regular 4:3 TV signals stretched to their 16:9 set and they swear it's "high definition" since they paid $2500 or more for the set. Oblivious to the fact that the picture is out of proportion, and running the audio through the built-in $3 speakers (or possibly an inexpensive surround kit). It's worse than the older people driving a Caddy with a 32-valve Northstar V8 and never once, in the lifetime of the car, using even a small portion of the available horsepower...

Anyway, my point is simply this: Color TV didn't take that long to be adopted by the majority. Broadband has been adopted by many at a steady rate, and like Color TV is easy for even the most technologically inept to understand the benefits of upgrading. But HD is difficult for many to understand, plus the providers aren't putting all that much effort into providing HD content. Even more importantly, the *need* for HD isn't all that great. Sure, Fox's "House" looks great in HD, but on an older TV it doesn't lack all that much. Color made a huge and noticeable difference, but HD does not add much to typical television (though many Discovery programs do benefit from HD, as do older movies re-digitized in HD).

Re:That is a double edged sword

[sfe_software]

They've got their entire back library of NES, SNES, and N64 games to capture the nostalgic 20-something gamers.

That, and they seem to have obtained the rights for the Sonic games, being the only console where Sonic games are available (Sega hasn't offered a new console system since the Dreamcast, I want to say 1998 or so). Apparently Nintendo licensed either the characters or the games themselves...

Nintendo has always been the more "kid friendly" system, usually offering more kid-oriented games, focusing on fun gameplay over violence and gore. As for the latest consoles, Nintendo is *THE* only console I know of offering an input system that uses free motion and inertia as input (not to mention being exclusively wireless by default). Having played with the Wii for the first time last night, I have to admit I was very much hooked; even already knowing the basic concept, you have to play with it to truly understand the significance of the wireless, gyroscopic, free-space control system.

Re:That is a double edged sword

[sfe_software]

All Nintendo needs to do is get one good FPS with great precision control using the Wii-mote and the nunchuck and I expect gamers may start requesting more FPS games on the Wii even though they do have 'inferior' graphics.

Elsewhere in this thread I have promoted the Wii, but one major drawback I noticed was in the "pointer" precision/sensitivity. Most games work great with the Wii controller, but when we tried to play a FPS I simply couldn't get the hang of it. Same with using the menus on the Wii in general, moving the controller in free space to control a mouse pointer. I don't know if this pointer sensitivity is adjustable, but even if so the default settings are very difficult for me (and my non-computer but avid gamer friends)...

Otherwise, Tennis, Bowling, et al work very nice with the Wii controllers, and add an entirely new dimension to console gaming IMO...

Re:That is a double edged sword

[Osty]

That, and they seem to have obtained the rights for the Sonic games, being the only console where Sonic games are available (Sega hasn't offered a new console system since the Dreamcast, I want to say 1998 or so). Apparently Nintendo licensed either the characters or the games themselves...

Maybe the older games, but newer Sonic games have shown up on the PS2, Xbox, and Xbox 360 (most recently with "Sonic the Hedgehog", the 3D game with the same name as the original 2D game). As of right now, 2D Sonic games have only shown up on Nintendo platforms (Virtual Console, GBA).

As for the latest consoles, Nintendo is *THE* only console I know of offering an input system that uses free motion and inertia as input (not to mention being exclusively wireless by default).

Huh? The PS3 has the SIXAXIS controller that uses motion sensing, and Microsoft tried the same thing on PCs way back in 97 or 98 (look up the Sidewinder Freestyle). The 360 and PS3 aren't exclusively wireless, but their wireless is built-in just like the Wii's, and as long as you don't buy the Core 360 pack they're all wireless out-of-the-box. While wireless is great, I like the fact that you can use wired peripherals on a 360 because it broadens the available third-party options. The only thrid-party controller I've heard of possibly coming to the Wii is a DDR dance pad. I don't know if that'll be wireless or if it'll use one of the Wii's USB ports.

Having played with the Wii for the first time last night, I have to admit I was very much hooked; even already knowing the basic concept, you have to play with it to truly understand the significance of the wireless, gyroscopic, free-space control system.

I've owned a Wii since the console launch (well, okay, I didn't get mine until the Monday after the Friday launch). I "get it". At the same time, I find myself spending much more time with my 360 than my Wii. The 360, at least for me, has done a very good job of stringing hits together -- I was hooked on PGR3 until Oblivion shipped. I was hooked on Oblivion until Dead Rising shipped. I was hooked on Dead Rising until Gears of War shipped. I was hooked on Gears of War until Crackdown shipped. And I was hooked on Crackdown until Castlevania: Symphony of the Night shipped. Of course, I've been addicted to Geometry Wars since day one and continue to be addicted now :). The Wii, on the other hand, hooked me for about a week with Zelda before I got bored. I still go back to Wii Sports every now and then, but Warioware has been the only Wii game to keep my attention for more than a week.

I guess my point is that right now the Wii is still sitting in gimic land. It has a metric pantload of potential, and not just with the Wiimote (I personally think the Virtual Console is more important than the Wiimote). Nintendo doesn't have to "win" to be successful, but they do need to step up a bit. Where's Metroid Prime 3? Where's Mario Galaxy? Why can't they supply enough Wiis to satisfy more of the demand?

It takes a thief...

[sqlrob]

This from the company that resells new reprints as used because the used sells for more.

artificially choking supply?

[ravyne]

If they're artificially choking supply at ~6million units sold worldwide already, I'd hate to hear those numbers if they weren't.

Re:artificially choking supply?

[soft_guy]

If Nintendo was really intentionally choking the supply, it would make them the biggest idiots of all time. There is a short window after launch where you are everybody's baby - if you don't make it then, then your platform will fail. Cutting off supply during this period would be beyond idiocy.

It is possible that Nintendo underestimated demand when they were reserving factory time for the Wii to be built. Then again, it is possible they just can't get enough units to market as quickly as they would like due to some factor beyond their control (this is most likely).

Re:artificially choking supply?

[Chris Burke]

If Nintendo was really intentionally choking the supply, it would make them the biggest idiots of all time. There is a short window after launch where you are everybody's baby - if you don't make it then, then your platform will fail. Cutting off supply during this period would be beyond idiocy.

How many times have we discussed on /. the importance of momentum and marketshare? Despite a very healthy start and the apparent success of getting non-gamers to buy the Wii, Nintendo is still sitting at less than half the market share of the 360. You are absolutely right; deliberately stunting their marketshare would be utterly retarded as it would hurt them in 3 ways: 1) Lower marketshare means less appealing to 3rd parties 2) People unable to buy a Wii would perhaps buy another console 3) Word-of-mouth advertising that gets the non-gamer interested in the Wii would be cut short.

I think they simply underestimated demand, and now it's both difficult and expensive to try to meet it.

Re:artificially choking supply?

[tknd]

Release date: November 19, 2006.
Today: March 27, 2007.

Days between the two dates: 129 days (including today)

Wii's produced till today: 6,000,000+

6,000,000 Wiis / 129 days = 46,511.628 Wiis / day.

Each Wii sold includes 1 remote, 1 nun-chuck, 1 sensor bar, 1 a/v cable, and 1 power brick. In addition to this, Nintendo must also produce additional remotes, nun-chucks, and classic controllers at roughly the same rate.

I don't know about you, but you find me a manufacturer that can produce electronic hardware at a rate of 46.5k units a day without running out of any supplied part in the process. Even if you give them an additional 30 days to buffer the launch dates with units to sell you'd still get roughly 37.7k Wiis per a day. In order to pull this off Nintendo has to have good engineering (low defect rate), good manufacturing process (low manufacturing defects, fast/efficient production lines), and good supply chain management (can be compensated by better engineering to accept multiple part alternatives in the event a supplier cannot keep up with demand--I've seen this with their battery manufacturer changes that ship with the remotes). That doesn't even begin to include what you're going to do when people send back defective units during the warranty period.

For a global/multilingual launch and a company that only deals with gaming hardware/software, I'd say they're doing a damn good job.

I don't think anyone expected this kind of demand; it's not everyday that your mom, aunt, and grandma (literally) say "I want a Nintendo (Wii)." If there was a new product that was the next big thing compared to sliced bread, this is pretty close.

Re:artificially choking supply?

[Kanasta]

Maybe Sony called them and begged them not to make the PS3 look any worse than it already is?

Re:artificially choking supply?

[macserv]

The Wii has well over the marketshare of the Xbox 360.

P.S.: Don't point me to NexGenWars... they estimate based on trends. VGCharts only uses official numbers.

Re:artificially choking supply?

[macserv]

Of course, I meant, "well over half the marketshare of the 360". I need sleep.

Re:artificially choking supply?

[Tom]

Nintendo is still sitting at less than half the market share of the 360. Half, yes. Sitting, no. The 360 has been out for what, four times the time the Wii has been around? Getting half the market share of a competitor who's been around four times as long isn't exactly "sitting", it's more an "in the process of overtaking".

Give it another 4, maybe 5 months and the Wii will be the best-selling next-gen console.

Re:artificially choking supply?

[soft_guy]

This chart shows installed base, not marketshare.

Marketshare would be the percentage of consoles sold in some period of time. This is just raw units shipped since launch.

Not that installed base is unimportant, but it isn't the same thing as marketshare.

Re:artificially choking supply?

[Phisbut]

Give it another 4, maybe 5 months and the Wii will be the best-selling next-gen console.

When will we catch up with the future and stop calling the Wii, PS3 and Xbox360 "next-gen". When does a console become "current gen"?

Re:artificially choking supply?

[miro f]

you have to remember as well that ramping up production is not cheap and quick. It takes time, it costs a lot of money, and if in two months the demand drops back, then you've essentially got a factory that's all kitted out and is essentially a huge waste of money.

Nintendo is a very conservative company, and as such, they would be more likely to just try to ride out the wave rather than spending huge amounts of money ramping up production only to be overproducing and having wasted all that money

Re:artificially choking supply?

[Phisbut]

In addition to this, Nintendo must also produce additional remotes, nun-chucks, and classic controllers at roughly the same rate.

At a slightly higher pace actually. Many Wii owners will eventually want 4 Wiimotes, so that's 3 extra Wiimotes per Wii sold. And they're currently as hard to find in stores as Wii consoles. I got a Wii at launch, but only managed to get a 4th Wiimote two weeks ago, and that's only because I managed to get my hands on Wii-Play with the Wiimote bundled.

Re:artificially choking supply?

[TemporalBeing]

Even if you give them an additional 30 days to buffer the launch dates with units to sell you'd still get roughly 37.7k Wiis per a day.

Not quite. You would have to factor in how quickly the initial supply sold out; after that it would come out differently - and likely still quiet close to the original 46.5k per day. So... suppose an initial supply of 400k units with a sell out of 7 days (close, I think):

Initial Supply = 400k
Initial Supply Sell Out = 7 days

400k / 7 = 57142.857.. Wiis/day

Sold Since = 5600000
Period = 129 - Initial Supply Sell Out = 129 - 7 = 122

5600000 / 122 = 45901.6393... Wiis/day

So, even more to the point - that's a massive amount to produce. Now, given that the typically produce this over the course of a week, delivered on Fridays to stores, and sold out within hours on Sunday morning...it's even that much more. So...

Weekly = 45901.6393 * 7 = 321311.47540...Wiis produced weekly
Sold out within 4 hours
321311.47540 / 4 = 80327.86885...sold per hour

Any manufacturer would love to have that kind of sales figure. The only thing I think could really compare for any single manufacturer would be for manufacturers of staples, toothpicks, paper clips, and such (where they sell hundreds in a single, small container).

Re:artificially choking supply?

[KDR_11k]

Nintendo is sitting at less than half the marketshare? The last numbers I saw had the Wii outselling the other consoles and thus taking the lead marketshare wise. Market share is the percentage of the sales during a time period, not the total sales.

Re:artificially choking supply?

[quadelirus]

I agree. The January figures seem to point towards Nintendo simply not being able to meet demand. I wasn't able to get a Wii until Feb. even though apparently the Wii sold over 400,000 units in January whereas the XBox 360 sold around 250,000 units (if I am remembering correctly). IMO it seems like Nintendo is having to churn out more units than anyone else (but hey I have no idea what I'm talking about so take it with a grain of salt) and they just don't have the manufacturing power to keep up. I've also noticed this month that controllers for the Wii are readily available which wasn't the case last month, so maybe things are slowing down a bit.

As to your point 2). I think it is probably true for the majority of people but it certainly wasn't for me. I had a PS2 and a couple of computers and I wasn't interested in forking over another couple hundred dollars for a console with updated graphics. I like the 360 a whole lot, its got amazing games and amazing graphics, but I won't buy one. The PS2 is fun enough for now if I want to do a bit of classic console play. The Wii, on the other hand, got me excited because of the new controller paradigm and I was going to wait 6 months to get one if necessary. In other words, I was not in the market for a console, I was in the market for a Wii.

As to the PS3, its beautiful allright, but I can't lay down that much cash for a console. There are much more important things I need that money for.

Re:artificially choking supply?

[Chris Burke]

I've also noticed this month that controllers for the Wii are readily available which wasn't the case last month, so maybe things are slowing down a bit.

Yeah, I've noticed that too. My guess is that the supply is catching up to demand, and the demand is limited by who is able to buy a Wii. At first that was large demand, since people would want several extra controllers, but most of them have the extras they need, and the limited amount of new Wii owners means a limited demand for controllers.

As to your point 2). I think it is probably true for the majority of people but it certainly wasn't for me.

I wouldn't even say that. If I lumped in people who would just blow off buying any console at all -- which was really my intent, since that's almost as bad for Nintendo -- then maybe it's a majority. The Wii is attracting a lot of non-gamers. I can only imagine how the non-gamer thinks, but I think that if they were excited about trying this new game system that excitement might wear off after half a year of being unable to buy one, and they may start re-thinking their need to buy a console at all. I'm a gamer and Nintendo fan, so obviously I can wait six months, but Random Soccer Mom probably not.

It just makes no sense to not try to get Random Soccer Mom's sale now if they could, because she might change her mind. Whether she is a minority or majority the fact is Nintendo wants her money.

ya think?

[mstahl]

I'm shocked....

I'm not so sure that's the case though. There definitely does seem to be more demand than can be quickly supplied. Remember kids, the PS3 was the intentionally shorted console, and now they're on shelves everywhere. The Wii on the other hand is actually selling still and there's tremendous demand for them.

Re:ya think?

[Anonymous Coward]

the PS3 was the intentionally shorted console

liar

Online Multiplayer

[Anonymous Coward]

Where in the HELL are the online multiplayer games for the Wii? Is that intentional too?

Re:Online Multiplayer

[7Prime]

Yes it is, and for good reason. Online multiplayer is the last psychographic Nintendo wants to hit, there are many consiquences for doing so. Blinding going into the online multiplayer market before establishing a good, solid, lineup of single-player and offline multiplayer games could have dier consiquences. It's quite possibly the single biggest reason why the DS and the Wii are doing so well, by heavily concentrating on offline gaming. Many many people are annoyed, intimidated with, and turned off by online multiplayer gaming. Currently, they're getting their fix (and thus fairly silent), but with the current trend toward strongarming developers into putting their games online, that could change very quickly.

The other consoles are taking over the huge gaping hole left behind by PC gaming, Nintendo has an opportunity to remain the bastion of traditional console gaming, and the followers that that genre has produced. I think its very wise of them to stay as far away from online games as long as they possibly can, in order to build up a pretty substantial library of single-player and offline multiplayer games.

Personally, my favorite version of multiplayer is sitting around, discussing games with my buds over a beer at the bar.

Re:Online Multiplayer

[pl1ght]

Id rather be drinking beer at home on the couch playing GoW or Resistance online with my buds. Its 2007. Nintendo needs to get their online MP act together. I dont think there is any good excuse these days to not have an online multiplayer component.

Re:Online Multiplayer

[Anonymous Coward]

Metroid Prime 3 and Super Smash Bros. Brawl are expected to have online multiplayer, although it hasn't been confirmed yet. Given that Metroid Prime Hunters was delayed to add online multiplayer, it seems likely that Metroid Prime 3 has also been delayed to either add or (hopefully) polish online multiplayer.

Re:Online Multiplayer

[Skreems]

I'd second the sentiment that online play pisses me off. If it's done well, as an added mode on top of a great game, then fine. But a lot of developers these days are using it as an excuse to deliver extremely half-assed single player content. I don't know how many times I've heard, "The story mode for Gears of War is kinda short and not that interesting, but the multiplayer is a lot of fun." Somehow, playing against a trash-talking pre-teen with nothing better to do than practice 8 hours a day just doesn't interest me in the same way as a well written story mode.

Re:Online Multiplayer

[7Prime]

Being 2007 doesn't have anything to do with it. Solitary entertainment has been around for millenia; it isn't going anywhere. It's not just old hat, it's extremely old, tried and true, old hat. The "everyone else is doing it" attitude doens't inspire any great new content. Nintendo's taking their own route, "single player fun", and I'd rather they do that as best they can, than dillute their resources by jumping onboard the online multiplayer fad.

Re:Online Multiplayer

[senatorpjt]

I thought the whole point of the Wii was that you could play multiplayer games with other people that are actually in the room. It doesn't matter to everyone else in the room if I can play 40 other people in a game online, if they have to just sit there and watch.

Re:Online Multiplayer

[MeanderingMind]

Nintendo's taking their own route, "single player fun"...

I vehemently disagree.

I've had a Wii since launch, and if there's one thing that is true of the console it is this: I never play it anymore when there aren't other people around. For whatever reason, I can't even bring myself to play Zelda unless someone else is there.

The system literally screams for you to call your friends, grab a few drinks and party. It and its games seem designed for groups, even if most people are spectating.

It seems meant for offline play, which at the moment is mostly centered around multiple people (although Super Paper Mario may get me to sit down with it when I'm alone).

Re:Online Multiplayer

[jmorris42]

> The story mode for Gears of War is kinda short and not that interesting, but the multiplayer is a lot of fun.

Translation:

Hot ingame graphics are a requirement to get reviewers and teens to buy, gotta pay those guys. With the popularity of online the equally expensive cut scenes, hollywood actors doing voices and paying somebody who can actually write a half baked plot can all be cut to the bone.

Multiplayer is pretty much multiplayer, regardless of the game, because the PLAYERS are the most important thing and they are fairly constant even across widely different game genres..... and lame.

Re:Online Multiplayer

[brkello]

Generally people who are bad at games feel this way. Some people are just naturally better. My brother and I could probably hop in to any random FPS and within an hour be better than a majority of the players. It is a wrong assumption to think all these people are teens with a lot of time. I think it is more likely that you have poor reflexes.

Though you do bring up a good point. Many, many people are terrible at games and find online play frustrating. Having cooperative vs. dumb AI is a lot more fun for them and there is probably a large market for this. PvP play is more for people who want to test their abilities against other intelligent people. They appreciate it because it is the ultimate form of competition. Sure, some people get egos over it and some are immature teens. But really, if you are actually up for a challenge that is the best place to get it.

Re:Online Multiplayer

[Anonymous Coward]

And even if it IS single player, it's still really entertaining to watch people run around- I was at a Wii demonstration near Shin Kong Mitsukoshi Main in Taipei a few days ago, and there was a considerable crowd just milling around watching people try Wii Tennis [or whatever it's actually called]. Having finished my errands for the day, I found a spot against the pillar and watched...for the next hour. I'd say as a rough estimate, at least ~50 of the people there were standing there before I showed up and were still there after I left.

Sorta like back in college, when DMC3 came out [prerelease leaked...]...there was 15 of us stuffed into one dorm room, with one sofa, watching him play. =P

Re:Online Multiplayer

[SuperMonkeyCube]

That's the one thing that Nintendo has had solidly going for it for quite some time now. Once Bomberman on SNES turned into a solid party game, and Nintendo saw the potential of social multiplayer, the multitap went out the window in the next generation. The N64 and the GC - four ports standard. What I appreciated just as much was that the games that are fun to play 4 player - Goldeneye, Mario Kart, Diddy Kong Racing, Bomberman 64 (1&2), Super Monkey Ball (1&2), all have good single player experiences. I guess the only Nintendo game you can't put in that category are the Mario Party games - which I suspect are rather lame by yourself but are big sellers. I'm just hoping that there really are Wii's in the store next week so I can get some Rayman action going.

Re:Online Multiplayer

[ravenshrike]

Actually, it wasn't that interesting. The enemy in gears was about as strategically sound as hitler, which pretty much any military historian could tell you was a fucking moron when it came to military planning. Seriously, with the numbers the enemy can call upon and the fact that the group you were primarily with were the only real resistance beyond a small enclave of soldiers on the planet the fact that they weren't tracked, had troops massed against them, and then literally swarmed after the second berserker is fucking laughable. You DO NOT leave an enemy group of soldiers that competent in your backfield and just send peicemeal forces against them.

Re:Online Multiplayer

[LKM]

Yes, being "bad" is certainly a factor. I'm working. I can't play games for hours every day anymore. I really loved Mario Kart DS online when the game came out, but within weeks, I wasn't able to compete anymore. That's not really fun. Yeah, you can blame the people who, like me, are "bad" at these games, but that doesn't change the fact that most people are like me, so competitive online gaming only appeals to a small minority of hardcore gamers.

Re:Online Multiplayer

[Anonymous Coward]

The fact that online sucks for anything other than FPSers and MMORPGs? Also drinking by yourself sucks too. I don't know why you'd not just invite your friends over to your house to play while drinking?

Re:Online Multiplayer

[theorangesven]

You're right, for the most part. Case in point, I hated fighting games as a kid, cause they're only good multiplayer and I was horrible at them. Now I go to tournaments for them. Also, it is more a about skill than time spent playing. For me, the real problem is multiplayer games that only really have online play. Online is nice, but pales in comparison to playing against someone in the same room. Far too many 360 games have a complete lack of local multiplayer support, and that's just stupid. Oh, and the real problem w/ 13 year olds playing shooters isn't that they've got so much more time to practice, but the fact that most shooters degenerate to twitch reflexes more than strategy, so the hyperactive 13 years olds are great at them. You'll notice a lot less of them performing well at strategy or fighting games.

Re:Online Multiplayer

[nikanj]

So play with your friends instead. Or are they the trash-talking pre-teens?

Re:Online Multiplayer

[zstlaw]

I think videogames have been focused on competitive play and neglected cooperative play for far too long. In World of Warcraft I run around and buff/heal strangers. I rarely Pvp except to defend horde cities from attack. The game allows me to help and interact with others without fighting them. How many console games can you do that in?

Crystal chronicles, Toe Jam and Earl, Perfect Dark... Most of these are pretty old games. Resistance fall of man had co-op but making the screen side by side was useless as your field of view was a tiny sliver of the screen. Halo had co-op play which lent it more popularity than multiplayer among my circle of friends.

I miss cooperative games. There were a number of good co-op games back in the 80s and 90s but most "multislayer" games are about killing buddies, not helping them. I am not competitive. I see no reason to try to beat friends at games. When I play sports (tennis/volleyball) it is all about having fun and a good match. I don't care who wins.

I bet the emphasis of multiplayer over cooperative play is one reason why typical FPS games are in decline. Not every gamer is super competitive. I think Jocks and Frat boys enjoy that aspect of games, Yet there are people who prefer entertainment and/or camaraderie. And it is beginning to look like they are the majority of the population. Now if developers would only realize this and make more Co-op games for the nights when I would rather not play warcraft...

Re:Online Multiplayer

[Skreems]

Generally people who are bad at games feel this way. Some people are just naturally better. My brother and I could probably hop in to any random FPS and within an hour be better than a majority of the players. It is a wrong assumption to think all these people are teens with a lot of time. I think it is more likely that you have poor reflexes.

Assumptions are fun!

I'm actually relatively good at games, and my reflexes are fine, thank you. Your mistake is assuming that all gaming should be is a PvP frag-match. Yeah, I can plow through a Halo 2 server and run circles around people racking up killing sprees with nothing but the sword. But that's only fun playing against people I know in real life, and even then it gets boring pretty quickly. Some of us enjoy playing a game where you work your way through a carefully constructed story, figure out how to fight your way through new scenarios rather than playing on the same 5 maps over and over again, and generally experience something new.

My comment about pre-teens with too much time on their hands wasn't even complaining about opponents being "too tough". What I was saying was this: if I'm looking for an interesting story to play through, throwing me on yet another multi-player map with yet another batch of adolescents to mow down is absolutely NOT going to provide a satisfying experience.

Basically, there's the "immature gamer" who's happy as long as they can taunt people while blowing them up with a rocket launcher. And the "mature gamer", someone who's looking for gameplay and a story with some substance. Online play has yet to reach the second group.

Re:Online Multiplayer

[Skreems]

I don't really want either. My favorite are games where you're the lone hero, working through a detailed and interesting story. Deus Ex, Half Life / Half Life 2, even the Halo 1 single player was pretty good in that regard. Beyond Good And Evil was also good in that sense. I'm just sick of people trying to excuse half-assed story with "but it has a multi-player mode!!"

so?

[tiedyejeremy]

At least they weren't impossible.
I bought one for my house and one for my nephews. I'd rather be complaining about a company providing a limited release when there is a lack of software than have the poor implementation of the competitors.

Doesn't make sense...

[__aaclcg7560]

The Wii, Dematteo thinks, has been short supplied because 'they made their numbers for the year ... [Nintendo's] new year starts April 1st, and I think we're going to see supply flowing.'

Most companies -- especially in the video game industry -- would shipped everything out the door that would increase their numbers at the end of the quarter. Doesn't make sense for Nintendo to postpone revenues into the next fiscal year. I wouldn't be surprised if the Wii becomes more widely available in April since it should have been available now. I don't think Dematteo knows what he's talking about.

Re:Doesn't make sense...

[L. VeGas]

Most companies -- especially in the video game industry -- would shipped everything out the door that would increase their numbers at the end of the quarter. I respectfully disagree. Video game companies would be more likely to do this because DVD stamping is cheap and easy to ramp up. Console manufacturing is a whole different ball game. Any type of manufacturing includes significant capital expenditures.

Also, consider the human factor. If you've already made your maximum bonus for the year, it might be worth reserving some future sales in your back pocket for the following year.

Re:Doesn't make sense...

[mypalmike]

Doesn't make sense for Nintendo to postpone revenues into the next fiscal year.

Game companies, especially large ones, do this kind of thing all the time. It's all about hitting the expectations for the quarter or year. If they've already hit their numbers this period, they want to do as much as possible to delay sales until the beginning of the next, so they'll have a better chance of hitting the numbers then. Project schedules for many products I've worked on have been moved around entirely to increase the chance of hitting guidance in a particular quarter.

Re:Doesn't make sense...

[Fozzyuw]

I respectfully disagree with you.

There are several reasons Nintendo would do this.

1) Free Press. "Wii Shortages Continue", "Wii still high demand!", etc
2) Viral Marketing. "Did you hear, Johnny and Sally both just got a Wii! I've been looking for 2 months and I haven't found one! They must be the most popular and coolest thing on the planet! I'm so excited now, I really want one! Mooooom! I really want to get a Wii! Everyone else is getting them!"
3) Japanese business culture. Well, I'm not expert here, but from the random information I've learned over the years about this culture, it feels like it makes sense to me. If they hit their quota, they're going to hold over sales for the next quarter to make sure they hit it again. Two outstanding quarters are better than one, in the eyes of shareholders. I would guess it's about make sure percentages don't drop. Nintendo of Japan does pull the strings for Nintendo of America (just ask them how many games where not allowed to be release in America because NOJ said no to NOA)

If GameStop has to make a press release about this, they're probably doing so to try and blow a whistle on them to put some pressure on them and take it off themselves. Consumers would be the first to blame GameStop, not Nintendo for not getting the product they want. Most would quickly complain that GameStop didn't "order enough units" instead of realizing they asked for 100 but only got 3.

Which, after talking to some employees at GameStop for the last couple of weeks, they said 3 is about all they got and were told that it would be 3 weeks before they could get more from Corporate. Also, I just have this strange feeling that this isn't the first time Nintendo has done this. There's something nagging me in the back of my head about this. Of course, I'm something of a Nintendo fan, but I do know they had and would likely continue to do 'less popular' business practices.

Nintendo was a Monopoly and did a lot of the same things Microsoft is known for back in the mid 1980's with the NES. I think it might have been in the book "Game Over", regarding Nintendo and the video game industry. I also just read the latest version of GameInformer with small snip-its of 'rumors' that Nintendo is being dicks to 3rd parties again with extra costs and delays getting them development kits.

So, yes, we all love the Wii, but don't have such a rosey picture of Nintendo. Though, I'd still take that over root kits any day!

Cheers,
Fozzy

Re:Doesn't make sense...

[senatorpjt]

Then again, Gamestop seems to be able to sell a Wii if you want to buy a $600 bundle. Fuck them.

Re:Doesn't make sense...

[MeanderingMind]

The book you mention is titled "Game Over - Press Start to Continue", and it is highly informative concerning the games industry if you a blissfully ignorant child at the time it all went down (as I was). I recommend it to anyone here who hasn't already informed themselves of what happened then.

Nintendo certainly had a Monopoly, and they used that power in the industry. How much of it was greed and how much of it was necessary corrective action to prevent the mistakes made in the Atari era is up to interpretation.

What they did (for whatever reasons) was unpopular with developers (however necessary it may or may not have been), hence the mass exodus around the N64 era to the Playstation.

I'm personally one who gives companies, as well as people, significant amounts of "benefit of the doubt" whether Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo. If there are problems with Nintendo and the shipment of development kits I'd much sooner chalk it up to logistical or supply issues (they can't seem to keep normal Wiis on shelves, developement tools are likely in a similar state) rather than any malevolence. Iwata is not Yamauchi, and I think he's eager to avoid the mistakes that made third parties abandon Nintendo for Sony in the first place.

This doesn't mean that he or Nintendo doesn't want my wallet, simply that he and the company he leads recognizes that in order to get at it properly they need third parties, and in order to get third parties they need to play nice.

The only logical reason to keep a third party away from a Wii dev kit at this point in time is to keep them from making a game with a pathetic excuse for a control scheme. Given that there are already games which have fallen into this category, I think we can largely rule that out.

Well I've rambled enough.

Re:Doesn't make sense...

[soleblaze]

Wii Dev kits currently have a 3 month wait time/waiting list.

One can only guess...

[7Prime]

But I'm not sure this makes a lot of sense. "Making goal" for the quarter isn't exactly the most important issue in the world, in comparison to the livelyhood of an entire console generation. I'm not saying that they didn't intentionally short the supply, but I doubt that it was for this reason alone, it's just too risky. I doubt it was to make the launch look incredible either, because they still did incredibly well, and would have sold out even if they had put twice the number of units into circulation.

Probably a more practical reason is to short the supply of units during the innitial games draught, a game release slump which is simply unavoidable for any console. If 5 million people get their Wii off the bat, and then have to wait 6 months for good games to start coming out, you're going to have a lot of angry people. Currently, most people are still focused on getting the damn system itself, and don't have time to bitch about the lack of games. Now that some big titles, such as Super Paper Mario, and possibly MP3 are on the horizon, they can satisfy more customers, with less public backlash.

Re:One can only guess...

[Chris Burke]

But I'm not sure this makes a lot of sense. "Making goal" for the quarter isn't exactly the most important issue in the world, in comparison to the livelyhood of an entire console generation.

It doesn't make any sense at all. The claim is that Nintendo, having easily met their fiscal goals, deliberately clamped production/shipments. First, so long as you don't appear to be sacrificing long term stability, investors would love for you to exceed your goal. Nobody complains about making more money, and I can't see why Nintendo would. The theory is that they want to move what would-be current-fiscal-year sales into the next fiscal year to make those numbers look better. That theory implies Nintendo thinks the demand for Wii is going to slack, which it doesn't show any sign of, and also that they think they aren't at any risk of frustrated customers buying one of the competitor's consoles. I think the opposite applies -- demand for Wii will continue to be strong, but only if people can actually buy one. The best advertising for the Wii is word of mouth (as in "come over and play Wii Sports"), and that only works if people can get them.

It would be a dangerous market game for Nintendo to play, and I see them as too conservative. If they can make a sale today, they will, because you never know if that sale is going to be around in six months.

Probably a more practical reason is to short the supply of units during the innitial games draught, a game release slump which is simply unavoidable for any console.

I think the Wii is more immune to a game slump than most consoles, simply because the mom/grandpa non-gamer demographic that is the whole "expanded market" thing the Wii is after is probably going to be happy with just Wii Sports for longer than any traditional gamer. This is also why the Wii is still very vulnerable to 3rd party issues, since if game uptake is low for the Wii despite the large number of systems out there 3rd parties may still be wary. Which means that right now not having a large number of Nintendo-published games for the Wii is good for 3rd parties; every sale of Trauma Center or Elebits or Rayman helps show the Wii as a 3rd party friendly platform.

Anyway, I know I personally am much more frustrated by my inability to play any Wii games than I would be if I owned the console and had to deal with a drought. If I owned a Wii and was pissed at the games drought, well, I already gave Nintendo my money and they made a profit on it. If I don't own a Wii because I can't find one, then if I don't like the lack of games I can go buy a different console and Nintendo has gained nothing. I really can't see this as being a rational reason for Nintendo to limit supply.

Here's the only thing that makes sense to me: Nintendo paid for an amount of manufacturing capacity based on their expected sales, and had every intention of meeting that demand. Actual demand far outstripped their expectations, so this supply was inadequate. Now they could have tried to increase their manufacturing capacity, and may have decided not to for two reasons: One, to keep the one-time costs of tooling up the factories off this year's report; and two, because they aren't sure in the long term that such capacity is really going to be needed. You can spend a ton of money building factories, but if demand trails off then you just blew that money for no reason. I'm betting this is the real reason -- again, being conservative, Nintendo isn't going to look at the higher-than-expected sales for a couple months and jump off the deep end constructing new factories.

The theory that Nintendo has the capability to make more Wii at will, but isn't due to some desire to manipulate the market, just doesn't hold any sanity-water.

Re:One can only guess...

[senatorpjt]

Then again, from what I've read about the PS3 launch in Europe, the availability of consoles at retail is considered failure. If Sony had only released 10,000 of them, it would have been a huge success!

Re:One can only guess...

[Maxwell]

It doesn't make any sense at all. The claim is that Nintendo, having easily met their fiscal goals, deliberately clamped production/shipments. First, so long as you don't appear to be sacrificing long term stability, investors would love for you to exceed your goal. Nobody complains about making more money, and I can't see why Nintendo would.

It makes perfect sense. Investors would much rather see a company make their goals for two years in a row, then to have one high year, followed by a dissapointing year. Consistency is rewarded. Nintendo would rather stall for a few weeks then sell everything they can *after* April 1st so fiscal 2007 looks as good as 2006.

JON

Re:One can only guess...

[Chris Burke]

It makes perfect sense. Investors would much rather see a company make their goals for two years in a row, then to have one high year, followed by a dissapointing year. Consistency is rewarded. Nintendo would rather stall for a few weeks then sell everything they can *after* April 1st so fiscal 2007 looks as good as 2006.

Like I said, that only appiles if the next year is going to be dissapointing, otherwise having an exceptional year is a good thing as far as investors are concerned. There is little reason to think there is going to be a slacking of demand that wouldn't be exacerbated by people frustrated at being unable to buy the console buying an alternative instead. If the goal is to avoid a dissapointing 2007 fiscal year, deliberately witholding supply now would be shooting themselves in the foot.

There is no sense behind Nintendo deliberately reducing supply given that they could increase it at minimal cost. If the cost to increase supply is substantial, then there is a financial argument, which I made in my last paragraph.

Gamestop is just frustrated

[elrous0]

I think Gamestop is just angry that they are stuck with shelves of the other consoles and they have no Wii's to actually bring in customers. They're probably also tired of answering the "Is the Wii in yet?" phone calls.

Trying to strong-arm Nintendo won't help, Gamestop.

Pure speculation but possible

[L. VeGas]

It's very, very common for businesses to proceed slowly after sales / profit goals have been met in a fiscal year. Short term planning proceeds on a year-to-year basis. Te vastly ramp up production without fully analyzing consequences is a good way to shoot yourself in the foot, even if every console produced was sold.

Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.

Say what?

[orclevegam]

That dosn't seem to make any sense at all. Now, if you were going to accuse them of holding out on shipments of Wimotes in order to be able to get them in the WiiPlay combo boxes, I'd say yeah, I can see that, but it dosn't make any sense at all for Nintendo to be holding back on the Wii itself. From what I've seen they have been making regular shipments to various retailers, just not very large shipments. If you're patient and willing to make an effort, you can get a Wii, you just need to check in on a regular basis (which can be even easyer if you can find out the shipping schedule for one of the retailers). I pre-ordered my Wii and had it on release night, so I didn't need to worry, but I also know of at least 12 other people who didn't and have since purchased them. Of course, I don't know anybody that's purchased a PS3, but that's not due to a shortage there.

Ok, yeah, that last one was un-called for. And I do like the PS3, but only enough to pay about $350, so till then, I'll stick with the Wii (and maybe a 360 if they release the new hardware and it comes down to $300).

Re:Say what?

[Grave]

I would like to say it's not a case of "holding out" on shipments. But it's not just the Wii. The DS and GBA SP are nearly as scarce (taking hours to a day or two to sell out at most stores vs. minutes to an hour or two for the Wii).

A person like Dan DeMatteo doesn't make those kind of statements unless he has legitimate reason to believe them. GameStop is a pretty large corporation, and CEO's of Fortune 400 companies don't blindly make that sort of accusation without there being some truth to it.

Re:Say what?

[mrchaotica]

The DS and GBA SP are nearly as scarce

Are you sure you don't mean DS Lite and Gameboy Micro?

Re:Say what?

[fotbr]

DS Lites are NOT hard to find. Unless you want the colored ones. But the white ones are all over. In the midwest, Walmart, Target, Best Buy, Circuit City, EBGames/Gamestop ALL have plenty of the white DS Lites in stock. Target had a few black ones, and I haven't seen any of the pink ones.

Now, thats a variety of stores from KC MO, KC KS, St. Louis MO, Columbia MO, Springfield IL, Peoria IL, Urbana/Champaign IL, and Little Rock AR that I've personally been in in the last two weeks, at various times of day, and various days of the week. Either I've been damned lucky and been there on nintendo-delivery day every single time, or people are ignoring the "old and busted" white DS Lites in favor of the "new and shiney" black and pink ones.

For what its worth, there were only two stores that did NOT have PS3s on the shelves, and NO stores that had Wiis.

Re:Say what?

[rhombic]

In the midwest, Walmart, Target, Best Buy, Circuit City, EBGames/Gamestop ALL have plenty of the white DS Lites in stock. Target had a few black ones, and I haven't seen any of the pink ones.

Now, thats a variety of stores from KC MO, KC KS, St. Louis MO, Columbia MO, Springfield IL, Peoria IL, Urbana/Champaign IL, and Little Rock AR that I've personally been in in the last two weeks, at various times of day, and various days of the week.

Dude, you gotta find a better hobby than browsing the electronics section of discount stores over a four state area. I mean, dude. Wow.

Re:Say what?

[Grave]

The GBA SP and DS Lite (all colors) are sold out at pretty much all retailers in the greater DC area, and I believe this is the case in many of the larger metropolitan areas.

In regards to the person who mentioned the GameBoy Micro, this is a dead system in the US. The GameBoy Advance SP, however, is still a good seller, though it has little further growth potential with the DS/Lite getting so many new titles.

Re:Say what?

[fotbr]

Job travel...I just stop in to see if any place happens to have a Wii.

Its either that or sit in the hotel room drinking beer and posting to slashdot. And we all know how well drinking and posting works.

Re:Say what?

[Scoth]

I still think it's a shame the Micro didn't do very well in the US. I love mine. With it and my flash card, I have several GBA games and a couple or three dozen NES games in a very nicely portable package. I have good eyesight, so the smaller screen isn't too much of an issue. Combined with the standard headphone jack and replaceable faceplate (== new screen, if you avoid scratching the inner screen itself), I find it to be a pretty perfect system for me. I never found the GBA SP to be very pocketable. I do keep my GBA SP around for the occasional GB Color game I want to play (still need to finish the Zelda Oracle games...)

Re:Say what?

[geminidomino]

Have the GBA NES emulators solved the scanline/resolution problem yet? I ask because most of my favorite NES games are text-heavy (Dragon Quest 3, Final Fantasy, and Ultima 4 being the top) and impossible to read the last time I tried it which admittedly was over a year ago.

Re:Say what?

[Scoth]

It varies by game. The current version(s) of PocketNES allow you to fiddle the lines that are dropped so you can usually find one that's readable (L-Select). I've played a lot of FF1-3 and Exodus Ultima without a problem at all, as well as some gameshow-type games, though the text is indeed noticeably squished. I've always found at least one setting that was a good compromise. I recently found several other obscure Japanese-style RPGs for NES that I've been trying out with decent success too. But then, part of it might go back to the good eyesight thing. I got my Micro as a birthday present, but in reading reviews they seemed equally split between "too small to read RPGs" and "looks perfect". On my old GBA SP, everything is nice and huge.

If all else fails, it offers an unscaled mode with the shoulder buttons scrolling up and down. Not ideal, but might be playable if you're desperate for some portable NES :) The automatic sprite-following mode works decently, although it's mostly useful for platform games. It's less useful for RPGs where the main sprites are going to be in the center most of the time.

The biggest problem I've run into is just general rom incompatibility. A few of the more complex ones are glitchy in various ways. I was disappointed that Elite didn't work. I did discover a Japanese NES emulator called HVCA that has FDS support - lets me play the original Doki Doki Panic and SMB2J. It seems to do scanlines about the same as PocketNES, although less configurably. It does support a few esoteric games better, so it's handy to have around too. All in all, my GBA/GBM have spent more time as a NES than a GBA, but I'm playing through Final Fantasy 5 Advance now so I've spent more time in GBA mode lately :)

Shortage?

[Applekid]

Is it at all possible that Nintendo didn't expect the system to do so well in the US? DS-Lite is still the #1 seller in Japan while here its sales are more down to earth. By looking at that performance and equating DS = Wii, I'd call it reasonable to assume that they didn't expect demand to be so high.

Re:Shortage?

[liak12345]

Good theory if they weren't near dead on with their predicted sales figures.

Re:Shortage?

[dead sun]

Except we got the Wii here in the US before Japan got the Wii. Talk about a weird approach if they expected lesser sales here, especially given that Japan is home to Nintendo.

I suppose it is entirely possible they expected high demand here, but they received higher demand than planned. I don't, however, think Nintendo shorted the US any more than it had to due to production constraints and launches elsewhere. I certainly doubt they'd do so over something as trivial as just making quarterly numbers.

Re:Shortage?

[Dorceon]

The winter shopping season starts earlier in the US (Black Friday) than in Japan (where Xmas isn't a holiday per se, you tend to get a big chunk of New Year's off, and the kids get gifts/money on New Year's Day.) That's why you'd launch the Wii in the US before Japan.

Re:Shortage?

[edwdig]

Think about what you're saying. They made sure they had enough manufacturing capacity to meet their predicted sales. Demand is higher than that, hence the shortage.

Oh of course

[Anonymous Coward]

I know when I want to drive demand from my customers, I always intentionally ship less and less product. Just seeing their little faces tighten up with anger as the realization they have ONCE AGAIN failed to buy my product warms my heart.

I think before too long I'll just stop shipping product all together, why the sheer panic as people riot in the streets for my items is sure to make me millions and millions of dollars

*point at lip with pinky*

Maybe it's true...

[Lord_Ultimate]

Given that my local Toys'R'Us says they are getting 60 Wiis in on April 1, I find this very believable. Kudos to Nintendo for realizing they already had a huge profit and deciding to make sure their next fiscal year also turns a profit. Realistically, it's an unnecessary move, but why risk annoying your stockholders with a losing year?

Re:Maybe it's true...

[wiz31337]

Be cautions. You may walk in to find a pallet of 60 PS3 consoles and a sign saying "April Fools!"

Re:Maybe it's true...

[xenocide2]

Kudos? They aren't risking anything by selling now. In fact it's the exact opposite! It's clear that they could stand to sell Wiis as they come off the line. Delaying the sales potentially results in fewer sales total. This isn't about annoying shareholders as much as misleading shareholders into thinking that the Wii demand is steady. And they may be damaging their long term prospects. The 3 months after Christmas are vital in demonstrating to consumers and developers where the market was headed, in addition to potentially lost sales. The more units in homes up front, the less incentive to go multiplatform, which leads to more unit sales, and a virtuous cycle.

Alternatively, this is about ramping sales of Super Paper Mario, which comes out shortly after April 1st. When you examine how many people bought the last Paper Mario game, re-imagining the franchise probably needs help. Now when you bring Wii and Zelda to the counter, the sales clerk can pre-sell you Paper Mario, and two weeks from now, suggestively sell you on it. Of course, this help comes at the expense of developers who've already released software, and customers who've paid higher prices because supply was intentionally stockpiled. This explanation at least makes sense to shareholders though.

Re:Maybe it's true...

[Doctor Faustus]

Given that my local Toys'R'Us says they are getting 60 Wiis in on April 1, I find this very believable.
I suspect my local Toy'R'Us is also getting 60 units on April 1, just like the got 60 units on March 4 when I bought mine. It's just time for the next shipment. They seem to like Sundays.

It was kinda cool leaving Toys'R'Us a few minutes after ten with my new Wii (arrived two minutes before they opened, waited outside the door for a minute or two, and went right in), and driving past the Best Buy in the same plaza, where there were half a dozen people waiting outside the door in sleeping bags for them to open at eleven. I didn't ask, but I have a suspicion they were there for Wiis.

Re:Maybe it's true...

[aveldina]

Just want to add, we also spent some time looking to find a Wii today, and the general feel was come back in April. Multiple stores told me they would not have stock until April. After everything I've heard recently, this would actually make sense.

Well that's pretty dumb.

[AbsoluteXyro]

He says he thinks Nintendo intentionally dried up their supply. Well, duh. Is it hard to believe Nintendo would intentionally sell their consoles? Shocking, I know!

Long suspected

[Aggrav8d]

For quite some time now I've thought the shortage was deliberate to help them liquidate their stock of GameCube titles. I was never interested in the GC but there's such a shortage of good Wii games (that I have not already played through) I am forced to look in other directions. The online retro titles don't interest me so I'm forced to choose between lego star wars and mario sunshine.

As for april 1, I don't think we'll see anything new unless Nintendo issues with their shares has ended. Miyamoto couldn't announce anything new at the GDC because of it, so why would the company be able to make any april 1 announcements? If the issue is resolved then it's news to me.

Re:Long suspected

[metamatic]

For quite some time now I've thought the shortage was deliberate to help them liquidate their stock of GameCube titles.

I don't buy it, for the simple reason that the Wii can run all those GameCube titles too. With the relatively small number of upcoming Wii releases, I'm expecting to work my way through the GameCube back catalog to fill in the gaps.

No, as a GameCube owner I can tell you that Nintendo has always had distribution problems. They just can't keep stuff in stores for whatever reason. Even high profile well-reviewed 'Cube games like Burnout 2 are difficult to find in stores and often go for a premium on eBay.

Re:Long suspected

[MeanderingMind]

I shortage of software might point to that, but a shortage of systems? More Wiis implies more consoles to run Gamecube titles. Selling fewer Wiis is unlikely to move additional Gamecube software.

Re:Long suspected

[Garse Janacek]

Since the first thing I did after (finally) getting my Wii and a couple major titles was to go out and buy (cheap!) a bunch of the old Gamecube games I missed out on since I haven't owned a console in more than 10 years, I'm skeptical of the notion that withholding Wii stock will increase sales of GC titles. Also, that would be the most radically shortsighted, stupid move they could make even if it worked, since a few extra dollars from old, mostly out-of-print GC games will not compensate for the potential lost sales from their new system that will drive revenue for years to come if people succeed in purchasing it.

It's actually quite likely that there will be increased supply in April, but not because Nintendo has been deliberately withholding them -- rather because they've been working on a ramp-up in production that will take effect in April. This has been public knowledge for quite a while, so "predicting" increased supply in April is a little disingenuous at this point.

Re:Long suspected

[miro f]

or it could e that they announced a ramp up in April to cover the fact that they've been withholding stock.

I still think it would be stupid of them, but, it appears everyone seems to think purposely withholding stock is the norm in the console wars.

Re:Long suspected

[ShadowsHawk]

I think the Wii is actually spurring an interest in Cube games. I know two people that never purchased a Cube, but have started buying all the bargain hits now that they have Wiis.

Mmmmm...

[MWoody]

Would you like a little ketchup to go with that hand that feeds you?

Stupid theory

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a stupid theory if you stop and think about it. Companies have revenue targets, but since when does it make business sense to stop at your target and not exceed it? Money in the bank is money in the bank. All that money spent on advertising to sell a product that's not in stock...? Come on. What a ridiculous theory.

The problem was that they launched worldwide! Normally, you launch in Japan, then North America, and then Europe and other territories. By launching worldwide simultaneously they tripled and quadrupuled the amount of stock they needed to supply at launch... and failed to meet it!

eBay markup

[tepples]

At current pricing, a Wii60 is not much more expensive than a PS3 Including the eBay markup on the Wii ($70 extra at this writing)?

Just curious...

[DoomfrogBW]

If Nintendo wants to control supply, who cares? It's their product. Get over it.

This is so *very* not news...

[The Ultimate Fartkno]

Nintendo has been using "supply shortages" as a business tactic dating all the way back to the NES. It keeps retailers and licensees in line, keeps anticipation high, and helps them leverage their software rollout strategy to the highest level.

And I'll apologize for using the "leverage" buzzword by providing documentation to back up my facts.

http://www.amazon.com/Game-Over-Press-Start-Contin ue/dp/0966961706/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2/104-2040246-58511 46?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1175043506&sr=1-2

Japan?

[Chimera512]

Here's a question that i haven't heard asked:
Are there Wii shortages in Japan? clearly /. is largely english speaking US/UK/Ireland and there's no japanese /.er's coming on and saying that they've got no idea what the US consumers are talking about and that there isn't a shortage in Nintendo's home market. I'd be interested to see if the Wii is selling out in Japan too.

Re:Japan?

[meringuoid]

I'd be interested to see if the Wii is selling out in Japan too.

Yes, yes it is. They're very keen on the Wii in Japan.

Re:Japan?

[chrnb]

I China Wiis are everywhere, usually comes with a modchip as well.

Been looking for a US Wii, but they are nowhere to be found - but a friend of mine in southern China says they have them there.

I wouldn't rule it out... but...

[WoTG]

Nintendo has a long history with being extremely careful to not oversupply the SOFTWARE side of the business. It looks far better to have just enough, or slightly too few, copies of a game at the retail level than to have old games piling up on the shelves. Old games sold at a discount compete directly with new releases, and it just makes a console feel unwanted.

But that logic does NOT work with the consoles themselves.

Let me see, six months ago, exactly how many people figured the Wii would be the #1 console in demand at this point in time? Yeah, about zero. So, exactly how was Nintendo supposed to prudently build a manufacturing chain that could supply all the Wii's that turned out to be demanded? It couldn't. So, yeah, give it some time and the units will arrive. April 1st? Sure, why not. That'll have been 6 months since we've discovered the demand for Wii's.

I bet Nintendo is on the phone right now...

[SetupWeasel]

reminding Gamestop how many other retailers would love to have some extra inventory.

PS2 doesn't matter in current-gen console "war"

[LKM]

What you say is true, but it doesn't really matter. The PS2 is going to die during the next 3 years either way. The question now is, which console will be the one to pick up the PS2's torch? This comes down to 360, PS3 or Wii. So the question is, which one (if any) is it?

Clearly, it would be in Nintendo's best interest to chatch up with and overtake the 360 as quickly as possible, to establish the Wii as the current-gen leader. Claiming that Nintendo intentionally sells less consoles is absurd.

Saying that the PS2 still beats the Wii is true, but it doesn't matter, since the Wii needs to beat the 360 and the PS3, not the PS2 - at least not for now :-)

Online kills Splitscreen

[LKM]

Personally, I like to play multiplayer games with my friends in the same room. I have absolutely nothing against online multiplayer, but it just doesn't interest me for anything other than providing better enemies than AI can. The issue with online multiplayer is that the devs often concentrate on online and then "forget" to include good splitscreen support. Why doesn't Motorstorm have four-player splitscreen? It's the perfect party game!

That's why I bought a Wii instead. Since Nintendo is dragging its feet with online, devs are basically forced to support "local" multiplayer.

Cartmanland

[4D6963]

I guess they learnt their lessons from Cartmanland

Gamestop could have all the Wii's they need...

[CaseM]

If they'd just invest in some duct-tape and a couple of Gamecubes.

Current Gen is

[paladinwannabe2]

A console generation becomes 'current gen' once:
1. It makes up the majority of the install base or
2. People are talking about the 'next gen', turning the former 'next gen' into the 'current gen'.

Try Europe

[KDR_11k]

Wiis go for little over retail on Ebay, the 360 just got a pricedrop to 300€ and the 500€ PS3 wasn't released. You can buy a "Wii60" instead of a PS3 and have 50€ left over to spend on some games.

Wii shortage = IBM shortage?

[macwhiz]

As a long-time Mac fan, the first thing that occurred to me when the Wii was so hard to find this winter was... is this a Nintendo problem? or an IBM problem?

IBM is notorious for production volume issues with PowerPC chips. Several times, Apple had to delay planned product refreshes because IBM simply couldn't churn out enough new-model chips to meet the projected demand. (Motorola was even worse.) It was IBM's supply issues, combined with an inability to break certain performance-per-watt barriers in the PowerPC design, that lead Steve Jobs to switch the Mac to Intel chips.

I strongly suspect that IBM is unable to supply enough Broadway chips to meet Nintendo's needs, even if Nintendo hired as much contract-manufacturing capacity as they could find to churn out Wiis. A Wii without a CPU isn't much use. Perhaps the problem is made worse by IBM also having to turn out Cell processors for Sony at the same time.

If my theory is true, I wonder... once Sony stops stuffing the retail channel with unwanted PS3s just so they can say they've "shipped" umpteen thousand units... will we see more Wiis as IBM diverts manufacturing capacity from Cell to Broadway?

How about the game shortage?

[wisconjon]

They short the consoles because they don't have a game selection to keep customers happy yet. Releases are getting pushed back. There's nothing really worth buying, so you play sports over and over and over and....

In the mean time, if people are forced to wait until June to get a box, then they'll be able to get Mario Party, Smash Brothers, Zelda...y'know, the franchise games. So they keep the customer happy in the long run by not giving them a system with only weak game choices... Make 'em wait and play tennis once or twice on their lucky friend's machine in the mean time.

Just a theory without any basis in fact.