Nintendo Names Tatsumi Kimishima As New President

RogueyWon writes: Following the death of Satoru Iwata in July, Nintendo has announced the appointment of Tatsumi Kimishima as its new president. The 65-year-old Mr. Kimishima has been serving as Nintendo's human resources director (PDF), following a previous stint as the CEO of Nintendo of America and earlier work on the management of the Pokémon franchise. Kimishima takes up post at a time of considerable change for Nintendo, with the company beginning a tentative step into the mobile games market and preparing for the launch of a new console, codenamed "NX", in 2016.

Comments

An HR guy as President?

[LaurenCates]

It might be my American sensibilities at work here, but does anyone else feel a little leery at that prospect?

That having been said, if he, like his predecessor, thinks of himself as a gamer, then I guess the HR concern has no bearing in reality.

Re:An HR guy as President?

[RogueyWon]

It's fairly rare for an HR director to step up to CEO level. In a lot of companies, the HR director isn't even on the board.

I'm only guessing here, really, but it looks as though he was more or less just filling time as HR director, possibly while being groomed as a potential successor. Even though nobody saw Iwata's death coming, there was speculation that another year of poor results could have led to calls for him to stand down, so I'm sure there was succession planning going on.

His time as the head of Nintendo of America (predecessor to Reggie Fils-Aime) is probably more notable. That's a fairly meaty job. It's also one he didn't do particularly well in some respects; Nintendo's US market-share generally declined during his tenure.

He doesn't seem to have a particularly high public profile. From what little I've been able to gleam, he's very conservative in his approach. Don't expect Nintendo to go embracing any radical ideas, or even many sensible modernisations, under his tenure. This is a conservative appointment by a conservative company based in the most conservative city of a country whose business practices tend to default to conservative. The message that this appointment sends is about a commitment to business as usual.

The lack of a real public profile makes it hard to tell, but he doesn't seem to be particularly passionate about games. The closest he's been to the coal-face seems to be during his time at The Pokémon Company, but even there he was very much on the business and marketing side rather than the development side. There's no rule that gaming company CEOs need to be passionate about games. But there are risks from going the other direction; would MS have fallen into so many obvious pitfalls during the development of the Xbox One if they'd had somebody who actually understood gaming and gamers in charge?

There's a chance that Kimishima's tenure might be quite a short one. If the NX doesn't take off (and the odds are against it - mid-cycle console launches have a poor history) and Nintendo doesn't protect or grow other areas of its business (handheld and mobile respectively), then shareholders are likely to look to see him replaced with somebody a bit more radical.

Re:An HR guy as President?

[Anonymous Coward]

As RogueyWon said, he was just filling up for a bit.

He is a stern-faced banker (worked there for more than 25 years). It's a face that says "I only played video games a few times with my grandchilds, I don't quite understand it, and youngsters shouldn't play this much, it's destroying their health and education"... ... But I suppose it's probably at least an exaggeration based on appearances.

Re:An HR guy as President?

[Vyse of Arcadia]

he was more or less just filling time as HR director, possibly while being groomed as a potential successor.

Given that Kimishima is already 65, I wouldn't be surprised if he's only president long enough for someone else to finish being groomed. I doubt Kimishima was ever groomed himself for the job; I think he was just experienced and available after Iwata's sudden death.

65 years old

[ZorinLynx]

That's around the age when I hope to retire.

Of course I'll probably be screwed out of that, but still.. It's amazing to see someone taking a job with that much stress and responsibility at that age. When I get there I'll be thinking "I've given enough to society. Time to get mine" and find somewhere pretty to relax.

Re:65 years old

[Anonymous Coward]

Hope you invested lots of money into retirement, or you're 64 right now! Governments worldwide are "adjusting" their mandatory pension plans to pay out later and later in life (basically the equivalent of ripping you off, but it's not a surprise, most government pension plans are either pyramid or ponzi schemes, or both!). I personally assume I won't even get anything in retirement except my savings. :(

Re:65 years old

[ZorinLynx]

This is exactly why I'm saving towards retirement, and why I don't plan to count on any government assistance.

I plan to live on my savings, and anything I get from the gov. will be a bonus.

Re:65 years old

[Falos]

I'm in Zorin's boat. Millennials are so jaded about the money they're handing over that it doesn't even register as an offense, just "how it is". The expectation of zero return is so long past fact that it's taken for granted. We don't say "scam" because that word is associated with less than perfect certainty.

He won't last long

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, 65 year old? This guy is already of retirement age, he will most likely die within the next 10 years. Do you really trust someone that old with understanding today's world? He's probably another old foggy who will go even more after youtubers.

Re:He won't last long

[freak0fnature]

Yet you are going to vote for Hillary...

Re:He won't last long

[U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M]

I'm 43 and I wouldn't even want the job. Yes I've been a gamer since the early days (Intellivision) but seeing the crap being sold as games these days, plus the social media shit on top of it all - I can't understand the appeal of it all. I mean, you want to Tweet your fucking achievements? In my days, the only achievement you had was being able to finish a game, which was pretty hard for most games. These days you have infinite lives, infinite retries, time rewinding, etc. You shouldn't even be proud to finish the damn game at all.

The only way I'd accept the job would be if it were for a sub-division within the company which only targets older gamers who want "classic/retro" games.

Now get off my virtual lawn!

Re:He won't last long

[phantomfive]

The only way I'd accept the job would be if it were for a sub-division within the company which only targets older gamers who want "classic/retro" games.

Really though, Nintendo mainly builds remakes of classic/retro games. So if you're going to work for a gaming company, that might be the one.

Re:He won't last long

[U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M]

Zelda in 3D isn't the same as Zelda in 2D.

Re:He won't last long

[Anonymous Coward]

These days you have infinite lives, infinite retries, time rewinding, etc. You shouldn't even be proud to finish the damn game at all.

This is a problem that goes well beyond gaming. Kids these days aren't allowed to fail. Ever. It's the "everyone gets a trophy" mentality and it's gotten into video games as well.

It used to be that the games taught you that the only way to succeed was to Get Good through lots and lots of practice. You either Got Good and made it through the hard spots, or you didn't, and lost. End of story.

These days games teach you that if you fail, you should just wait until the game gives up on you ever learning and lets you through anyway. It's really depressing to see. There's this mentality that "all a game's content should be accessible" which is just bullshit. It's a game. The ending is a reward only for the players who manage to put in the time and have the skill to beat the challenges the game provides. It's not a thing you just hand out to everyone just for paying the admission fee.

It's most annoying with MMOs that do automatic matching. Just because a person has unlocked a given piece of content doesn't mean they're at all capable of completing it, but because everyone gets a trophy, and the game will just keep on nerfing itself until the idiots make it through to ruin the fun of the skilled players. Which is just another reason to avoid MMOs, honestly - the only fun to be had with other players is playing against them, there's nothing more annoying than being forced to play with entitled idiots who've grown up with games that are designed to let everyone win rather than be a test of skill.

Re:He won't last long

[phantomfive]

Ironically, the most recent Zelda game (Link Between Worlds) is essentially a 2D game (isometric projection).

Re:He won't last long

[Anonymous Coward]

MMO

skill

Watching a YouTube video and pushing a button whenever an obscenely telegraphed event happens ain't skill, yo.

Re:He won't last long

[The Grim Reefer]

Yes I've been a gamer since the early days (Intellivision) but seeing the crap being sold as games these days, plus the social media shit on top of it all - I can't understand the appeal of it all. I mean, you want toÂTweetÂyour fuckingÂachievements? In my days, the only achievement you had was being able to finish a game, which was pretty hard for most games. These days you have infinite lives, infinite retries, time rewinding, etc. You shouldn't even be proud to finish the damn game at all.

Listen up whipper snapper, in my day do you know what happened when you "finished" a game? Mostly you died. There was no finish. It simply got to the point where too many things happened too fast for damn near anyone to deal with, or it simply wore you down until you made a mistake. Eventually games came along with a set number of levels. Do you know what happened when you got through them all? You got to start over at level one again, except it was much harder the second time through. If you were really lucky the color palette was slightly different too. And if you made it through all of the levels again, it got even harder, until you lost. Games back then had these number things we called scores. That's how you knew who won.

Re:He won't last long

[Anonymous Coward]

You do realize you're talking about the new style of MMOs, right? The "everyone gets a trophy" style, right? You're right, there's no skill required in modern MMOs, and it's because there's no skill required in modern games at all. The only skill required to "win" a game these days is either spending enough time to increase a number past the required cutoff point, or to pay enough money to get that number past the cutoff point.

The thing that modern MMOs do to make skill matter at all is make it take longer if you're bad, meaning that if you're grouped with bad players, it takes you far longer to do than you could with skilled players. And "skilled" is a relative term these days, the skill cap on modern MMOs is so low as to be effectively non-existent but today's "gamers" STILL FAIL TO REACH IT! But because "everyone gets a trophy" being horribly bad at the game simply isn't punished, meaning there's no incentive to get better.

It's why I don't play MMOs today - all skill does is let you complete a 10 minute task in 10 minutes, instead of taking over an hour. Older MMOs used to punish players for being bad with penalties, but newer ones just teach you to keep on trying until you've managed to hit the "we're giving up on you ever learning, so we're giving you a gold star anyway" limit.

Re:He won't last long

[Anonymous Coward]

Or maybe, just maybe, sometimes when I want to play a game, I want to run around horrendously OP (over-powered) compared to everything else to mindlessly waste time after work. Probably with a few beers.

Have you heard the phrase "it's just a game?" Here I thought video games were recreational activities. I guess I didn't realize that they were responsible for instilling character and moral fortitude into the youth.

Not everything is a competition, bro. I think you're taking the "achievement" thing a little too seriously. Either that, or if the basis of your self-confidence is how much uber micro you have and how much better you are at some fucking video game, you need to get out of the basement once and a while. You're clearly taking video games too seriously. We're talking about Nintendo, FFS.

Re:He won't last long

[Faust6]

A lot of this social media sugar just seems as though companies feel an obligation to appear "with the times", or appealing in that regard. Much of it can be safely ignored... so far. I'm more bothered by the direction of AAA games but I guess it's useless to fuss over those monstrosities.

Re:He won't last long

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe this is why there's a resurgence in the indie gaming world of obscenely difficult games. See Risk of Rain, Flappy Bird, Super Hexagon, Spelunky, etc. All of these are *really* really hard... and all pretty darn popular.

Re:He won't last long

[Anonymous Coward]

This may be something that appeals to you: http://store.steampowered.com/app/370360

Re: He won't last long

[donscarletti]

Ocarina of time came out 17 years ago, back when Kimishima was 48. How is this not retro?

japan is different

[Anonymous Coward]

japan is different they have lifetime employment and chasing-out rooms

"I promise to not change anything," he said

[NotDrWho]

"I hereby promise to manage forever as if it were still the late 80's and early 90's, stubbornly refusing to adopt any new innovations or technologies. I also promise to stay at least a generation or two behind every other console maker and to rely exclusively on our own Nintendo IP to float the company forever. I will valiantly dedicate myself to the pathetic-90's-kids-who-refuse-to-grow-up and weird-japanese-men-who-buy-used-panties-from-vending-machines who are our most dedicated customers."

Re:"I promise to not change anything," he said

[del_diablo]

Isn't that Capcom, SEGA and Konami? With their no games and Pachinko tables?

Re:"I promise to not change anything," he said

[Anonymous Coward]

to manage forever as if it were still the late 80's and early 90's

It still cracks me up that Nintendo still follows their same old nationalistic/xenophobic practice of releasing their games first in Japan, and only then to the rest of the world (often months or even years later). They didn't get the memo from about 15 years ago that the Japanese market is inconsequential now compared to the rest of the world. They're like the old soldier in the nursing home who doesn't know that we lost the war--because no one has to heart to tell him.

Re:"I promise to not change anything," he said

[del_diablo]

Well, its a pretty Japan thing.
Its also why none of their consoles shipped with SCART for the default video out in Europa, from Super Nintendo to Wii.

That said, it looks like Nintendo of America is the biggest old war tent solider, since they refuse to go full localization mode, when they don't produce games themselves.

Re:"I promise to not change anything," he said

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know, I here this new "NX" thing is fully automated and equipped with trans-warp drive.

Re:"I promise to not change anything," he said

[RogueyWon]

The late 80s and early 90s are Nintendo's comfort zone. They absolutely dominated the console gaming scene at the time. Then they made the decision to jerk the industry around with the N64's specs (opting for cartridges over a CD drive at a late stage in the process) and handed most of the third party developer ecosystem, and with them market share dominance, to Sony.

Funny, really, how every time it looks like a console manufacturer might have the console wars "won", they go and shoot themselves in the collective foot. Nintendo did it with the N64 hardware (and with general unpleasantness to third parties). Sony had the competition on the ropes in the PS2 cycle, but then went for a PS3 design which was over-priced and hard to develop for, allowing Microsoft to leap-frog them. Then Microsoft, on the verge of locking up the US as "their territory" and fighting Sony to a stalemate in Europe, goes on to commit a series of entirely unforced errors during the development of the Xbox One. Sony's back ahead these days, but I'm sure it's only a matter of time now until it over-reaches itself.

And yes, don't expect to see any particular changes in direction from Nintendo under its new leadership. What's really sad is that Iwata began talking last year about potentially ending region-locking on future Nintendo consoles, which would mean it would be effectively dead across the industry. What little we know about Kimishima from his time at Nintendo of America would imply that he is one of region locking's biggest defenders, so I don't think we can expect any Glasnost or Perestroika on that front now.

Re:"I promise to not change anything," he said

[drinkypoo]

Sony had the competition on the ropes in the PS2 cycle, but then went for a PS3 design which was over-priced and hard to develop for, allowing Microsoft to leap-frog them.

Haha "on the ropes"

Sure, the PS2 outsold the Xbox. But the Xbox exceeded all expectations and actually sold quite well. It didn't make money, but it did get Microsoft's foot in the door. And you're only telling half the story. The PS2 also had an overly complex design, and to the extent that Microsoft was successful with the Xbox, much of that success can be attributed to the ease of development for the original Xbox platform. That's what makes it so puzzling that Sony would try a wacky architecture again with the PS3. They already went down that road, and developers hated it.

Re:"I promise to not change anything," he said

[Anonymous Coward]

It will come with a larger version of R.O.B. the Robot, who now insists on being called R.O.B. E. R. T.

Re:"I promise to not change anything," he said

[RogueyWon]

To an extent, yes, but...

The PS2 managed something like 4 times the Xbox's installed base. Had Sony managed to replicate that kind of ratio in the PS3/360 generation, I suspect MS would have given up and gone home. Certainly, things were poor enough for MS in the PS2/Xbox generation that smaller third party developers often went PS2-exclusive even though they didn't have an exclusivity agreement with Sony; it just wasn't worth the costs of pointing to the Xbox or Gamecube.

And yes, the PS2 was slightly more expensive than the Xbox, while also being a bit harder to develop for. But the PS3 represented a significant escalation in both respects; the price was pretty eye-watering when it launched, compared to previous console launches. Hell, the 360 and even, to some extent, the Wii were pricey compared to past generations, but the PS3 was on another level entirely.

A simpler, cheaper PS3, without the (in retrospect reckless) gamble on Cell architecture might have resulted in a console generation that played out very differently.

Re:"I promise to not change anything," he said

[drinkypoo]

A simpler, cheaper PS3, without the (in retrospect reckless) gamble on Cell architecture might have resulted in a console generation that played out very differently.

I don't think it even had to be cheaper. I think if they had just spent their money on more commodity chips instead of something so hilariously special, today in gaming it would be "Microsoft who?"

Re:"I promise to not change anything," he said

[Anonymous Coward]

It still cracks me up that Nintendo still follows their same old nationalistic/xenophobic practice of releasing their games first in Japan, and only then to the rest of the world (often months or even years later).

Might want to update your talking points, that hasn't been strictly true in some time. F'rinstance, Super Mario Maker was released on September 11 in the US and September 10 in Japan. Literally hours apart. Super Smash Bros for Wii U came out in the US a full two weeks before coming out in Japan.

Re:"I promise to not change anything," he said

[RogueyWon]

Nah, I just checked and they still seem to be doing it for hardware, at least. The release gaps between Japan and the West on the New 3DS were several months.

That's a stark contrast with Sony's strategy. Despite being a Japanese company, they released the PS4 in the US and Europe months before the Japanese release. They could see that the Japanese home-console market isn't really worth a gnat's fart these days.

Funny, really, when MS launched the Xbox 360, they threw a huge amount of effort into breaking into Japan. Their Japanese teams were heavily involved in the design of the console and the controller. They pumped a fortune into Japanese games development, funding exclusives such as Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey, while paying for (time-limited) exclusive ports of otaku-focussed arcade titles like Idolm@ster and the Cave bullet-hell shooters. It failed. They didn't crack Japan. But the 360 still went on to be a successful console. This time around, neither MS nor Sony has really bothered with Japan.

In Nintendo's defence with the New 3DS, I guess the handheld market is a bit different. That's in decline in the West, squeezed between home console, PC and mobile gaming, but is still fairly resilient in Japan (even the Vita's doing quite well there now).

Re:"I promise to not change anything," he said

[Anonymous Coward]

And the Wii and Wii U came out in the US almost a month before they came out in Japan.

Then you have cases like Yoshi's Woolly World that came out in Australia(!) first, then the UK, then Japan, and finally the US later this year.

The point is that Nintendo's releases are all over the place, and that old chestnut that Nintendo releases everything in Japan first and the rest of the world later, just doesn't hold up.

Re:"I promise to not change anything," he said

[GuB-42]

It still cracks me up that Nintendo still follows their same old nationalistic/xenophobic practice of releasing their games first in Japan, and only then to the rest of the world (often months or even years later). They didn't get the memo from about 15 years ago that the Japanese market is inconsequential now compared to the rest of the world. They're like the old soldier in the nursing home who doesn't know that we lost the war--because no one has to heart to tell him.

Many Japanese companies still work like this. Often, the rest of the world doesn't even get a release. For example about half of the Monster Hunter games (from Capcom) don't make it outside Japan, and it is a huge franchise.
The good thing however is that the exported games that are released months later may end up better than the Japanese original.

Re:"I promise to not change anything," he said

[93 Escort Wagon]

It's funny to read comments here that seemingly imply the PS3 was a failure, since in the end the PS3 slightly outsold the XBox 360.

It's also worthwhile to remind people, once again, that the Wii outsold both by a healthy margin.

Now if we're using the PS2 as the benchmark... then everything else made by anyone, ever, was a failure. But expecting anyone (including Sony) to somehow replicate that success story is a tad unrealistic.

Re:"I promise to not change anything," he said

[marsu_k]

Now if we're using the PS2 as the benchmark... then everything else made by anyone, ever, was a failure. But expecting anyone (including Sony) to somehow replicate that success story is a tad unrealistic.

While I doubt PS4 will sell more than PS2, during its lifetime, it did sell more than PS2 during the first year.

Re:"I promise to not change anything," he said

[RogueyWon]

I wasn't implying that the PS3 was a failure. But it wasn't as big a success as it could have been. As console wars go, the seventh generation was a damned close run thing (as demonstrated by your link), and it was much more complicated than the numbers imply.

The Wii "won" the start of the cycle, with a massive sales lead at the 2-year point. But it ran out of steam in the late cycle and Nintendo fell to its first annual losses in the company's history during the closing years of the cycle. Its later years were characterized by a fairly miserable attach rate for games as well - a lot of those consoles sold early on just sat in cupboards neglected after a year or two.

The 360 more or less "won" the middle years, when it closed a lot of ground on the Wii and was comfortably ahead of the PS3 at the mid-point of the cycle. MS were investing a lot of money in exclusive titles at that point and the 360 had a (generally deserved) reputation as the best system for cross-platform gaming.

And the PS3 basically "won" the end-game, when its sales pulled ahead of the 360's, buoyed by a much stronger late line-up of exclusives (MS seemed to lose interest in supporting the 360 once the Kinect wave subsided).

But Sony's performance must have been a disappointment for the company. They had been the "must own" console of the previous cycle (a large portion of Xbox and Gamecube owners also owned a PS2) and they never quite re-took that position. There were certainly signs and statements from Sony during the first half of the PS3's life that indicated it was performing below expectations.

Following up a mega-successful console has historically proved difficult. The SNES dominated its generation, but Nintendo fumbled the successor. The Nintendo DS sold by the bucketloads and yet, despite a massive sales push (and the company moving to the hardware-at-a-loss model for the first time ever), the 3DS has never really broken beyond the kind of sales that the (successful, but to a lesser degree) PSP seemed to manage.

My original post a few layers back was basically about the inability of all three of the major console manufacturers to turn a commanding position in one console cycle into an equally commanding one in the next. There are strong signs that in this particular market, success breeds arrogance and complacency. I don't think any of the responses have refuted that.

Nintendo is new to mobile gaming?

[Anonymous Coward]

with the company beginning a tentative step into the mobile games market

Damn, you mean I hallucinated all those hours playing my Gameboy?

Right Choice

[MountainLogic]

Mr. Kimishima is a great choice Nintendo. He is a banker and CFO at heart, but I found him much more personable and approachable than Iwata-san. He goes way back in the Nintendo family including CFO at Pokemon and functionally the chairman of Nintendo of America (NOA). NOA tends to have alternating layers of Japanese and American levels of senior. Mr. Kimishima was definitely Japan's top representative to NOA in the US. As a banker and CFO type he is well placed to help Nintendo evolve into its next incarnation to meet the changing landscape of disappearing handheld business. His old Keiretsu bank employer is a nexus for business and money in Osaka. He knows how to build relationships outside partners and invent to put big N on a sound footing.

Or he's a hatchet guy

[rsborg]

he was more or less just filling time as HR director, possibly while being groomed as a potential successor.

Given that Kimishima is already 65, I wouldn't be surprised if he's only president long enough for someone else to finish being groomed. I doubt Kimishima was ever groomed himself for the job; I think he was just experienced and available after Iwata's sudden death.

This makes a lot of sense in a stable company. That or he's like Ellen Pao @ reddit (or Leo Apotheker @ HP) CEO who just ended up as a hatchet wielder. Given that Nintendo has been in revenue bind recently, it might just happen that the new interim CEO could make dramatic, unpopular changes that affect the workforce and direction with the company.

Re:Or he's a hatchet guy

[Xest]

They prefer to use Katanas not hatchets in Japan.

At the very end of the document:

[__aabppq7737]

a fellow is described as

An individualselected from among the Representative Directors who has advanced knowledge and extensive experience, and holds the role of providing advice and guidance regarding organizational operations in a specialized area (newly established on September 16, 2015)

I'm posting on September 14, 2015