General Nintendo sales/business discussion topic (previously: The Wii U Thread)

[Conando]

Yeah, if EA IS trying to break Nintendo, it's not going to work. However, I think this is just EA being EA.

[Gabz Girl]

Brilliant article, and it shows just how nasty EA have been to Nintendo. This has to shared all over the Internet!

[SuperLink]

Unfortunately, EA has plenty of bad press and scapegoats it can hide under at the moment for the sake of convenience. Some news is more scathing than others! EA would probably rather hide under a more widely known controversy that it has already admitted to (the SimCity stuff amongst other things) than acknowledge the problem here.

 

Chances are they'll keep talking out their asses about it, even if most people know there's something fishy going on.

I really do hope it gets some more exposure tho, it's a good'n.

[Mando-Whirl-Wind]

Well, tipped off GameRant to the article, however they are kinda slow, and have a backlog, however if a couple people submitted it there may be a higher chance

[Tornado]

I'd be more partial to that article if roughly half of it wasn't the same tired stuff that has already been argued against in this thread as not being remotely as it was presented as.

[SuperLink]

So uh.. good news anyone?
 

 
WiiU is getting Injustice DLC, better late than never (I'm assuming to streamline DLC porting). Let's hope purchasers support it so devs know demand is there!

 

Now if only CoD got DLC too, there's definitely an oversight there.

Edited May 8, 2013 by SuperLink

[Conando]

AC III got all its DLC at a later time too, but at least it's there. I'm assuming the CoD thing is Activision being a butt. Either that, or they seriously are overly cautious.

[SuperLink]

AC III got all its DLC at a later time too, but at least it's there. I'm assuming the CoD thing is Activision being a butt. Either that, or they seriously are overly cautious.

I think they may have retracted the WiiU workforce to get Ghosts as close to the PS4 and 720 versions as they can, personally.

 

Perhaps Ghosts will be treated better when it comes to DLC, but maybe that's just wishful thinkin'.

[Patticus]

With EA acting like a spoiled child throwing a tantrum, there's a real opening for any publisher that wants to try to open up the Wii U to a wider audience and be almost unopposed.

RE: Huge Article

In order for EA to have it in its head that something like Nintendo having Origin be its go-to eShop and online system was going to happen, might Nintendo have given them some indication to that effect; made assurances that perhaps they later backed out of? I mean, it wouldn't be the first time the company has made big plans with an outside group, and left that company hanging well into proceedings (see: Sony's "Playstation").

Why would Riciardi come out on stage and say all that crap about an extensive online system if he had just intended to bully a reluctant-at-best Nintendo into it?

 

I'm no fan of EA, but hell... this likely isn't as one-sided as Jonathan Suedmeyer would have us believe.

[SuperLink]

With EA acting like a spoiled child throwing a tantrum, there's a real opening for any publisher that wants to try to open up the Wii U to a wider audience and be almost unopposed.

Exactly.

 

You could call it fanboyish behavior, but Activision really do have a potential audience all to themselves, isn't Battlefield supposed to be EA's CoD beater? Because they're deliberately ignoring a fraction of potential userbase.

[Patticus]

The thing is though, Activision might be as reluctant as EA to get on-board with the Wii U if it doesn't see that there is money to be made on the platform; if sales continue to remain slow, its support will dwindle too.

[SuperLink]

The last I heard of Activision, they were disappointed in WiiU performance but wanted to maintain a strong relationship with Nintendo or something. They've also called the WiiU next-gen which is a depressingly more positive stance than most of the Western industry.

 

So, I guess a reluctant relationship is better than no relationship in this instance? They know Nintendo is someone you never count out.

[Detective Shadzter]

Funny you guys should mention Activision...

Activision Q1 2013 financial results 'better-than-expected'
Net revenues reach $1.32 billion, up from $1.17 billion year-on-year

By Mike Jackson for CVG UK

Activision Blizzard has posted 'better-than-expected' financial results for the first quarter of 2013, ended March 31, 2013.

The firm's net revenues hit $1.32 billion, topping the $1.17 billion achieved in the first quarter of 2012.
Net revenues from digital channels represented 28 per cent of the company's total revenues, while World of Warcraft saw the loss of 1.3 million subscribers.

Launched on March 12, the StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm expansion sold through approximately 1.1 million copies worldwide in its first two days on sale and, according to Activision, was the number-one PC game for the quarter.

"Our first-quarter performance was driven by continued consumer interest in all of our key franchises," said Activision CEO Bobby Kotick.

"Blizzard Entertainment's StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm was the #1 PC game for the quarter. Additionally, during the quarter, Blizzard's World of Warcraft remained the #1 subscription-based MMORPG in the world with more than eight million subscribers, although the game saw declines of approximately 1.3 million subscribers, mainly from the East, but in the West as well."

He went on, "While we have had a solid start to the year, we now believe that the risks and uncertainties in the back half of 2013 are more challenging than our earlier view, especially in the holiday quarter.

"The shift in release dates of competing products, the disappointing launch of the Wii U, uncertainties regarding next-generation hardware, and subscriber declines in our World of Warcraft business all raise concerns, as do continued challenges in the global economy. For these reasons, we remain cautious."

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/405001/activision-q1-2013-financial-results-better-than-expected/

 

Let's hope they don't get too cautious and drop some/all support for Wii U.

[SuperLink]

I imagine a lot of publishers, Activision included, are really rooting for Nintendo's "aggressive marketing blitz" this Q3 to actually work.

[MykonosFan]

 

Pretty cool stuff.

[Conando]

I saw that earlier. I think that's some bit of good will there. I'm sure plenty of companies would tell people to "deal with it".

[Patticus]

The past two generations, Nintendo console reveals have taken much of the industry by surprise. The specs are decided on within Nintendo, maybe with feedback from internal game development studios, and unlike Sony with the PS4 or MS with the 360 (and maybe the new Xbox), they don't seem to go out there seeking the opinions of third parties, with a view to catering to them whenever possible.

When Nintendo is told by third parties that its system isn't powerful enough, despite all the rhetoric it has put out about making development easier, it responds with what amounts to, "You don't understand the Wii U."

I like Nintendo, I really do, and I don't at all like EA's attitude toward them, but the company could do a lot more to accommodate third parties and win their support. Sony & MS seem to bend over backwards for them. Why can't Nintendo?

[PSI Wind]

The past two generations, Nintendo console reveals have taken much of the industry by surprise. The specs are decided on within Nintendo, maybe with feedback from internal game development studios, and unlike Sony with the PS4 or MS with the 360 (and maybe the new Xbox), they don't seem to go out there seeking the opinions of third parties, with a view to catering to them whenever possible.

When Nintendo is told by third parties that its system isn't powerful enough, despite all the rhetoric it has put out about making development easier, it responds with what amounts to, "You don't understand the Wii U."

I like Nintendo, I really do, and I don't at all like EA's attitude toward them, but the company could do a lot more to accommodate third parties and win their support. Sony & MS seem to bend over backwards for them. Why can't Nintendo?

Probably because Nintendo has 1st Party games that make the system a seller, unlike Sony or MS who pretty much need to rely on 3rd or 2nd Parties.

[Mando-Whirl-Wind]

Probably because Nintendo has 1st Party games that make the system a seller, unlike Sony or MS who pretty much need to rely on 3rd or 2nd Parties.

 Thats true, Nintendo has always used 3rd parties to bolster it, rather than a crutch, whereas if MS or Sony lost say EA, they would be doomed

[Patticus]

Not assisting developers who are struggling and giving up on the Wii U in droves, and not bothering to go and listen to them when new consoles are being developed, reeks of the old Nintendo arrogance and shows that they still don't really take them seriously. That makes winning their favor so much harder than it needs to be, and leads directly to Avalanche et al not bothering at all.

As consumers, we are suffering from this.

[Kuzu]

You'd think Nintendo would try their best to get as much third party support as possible, but its almost like they think the Wii U can do just fine with 1st party titles and that they have no need for 3rd party support. I understand Nintendo are the juggernauts of video gaming and basically make money without even trying, but jesus.

[Scar]

 Thats true, Nintendo has always used 3rd parties to bolster it, rather than a crutch, whereas if MS or Sony lost say EA, they would be doomed

 

This displays a level of ignorance that I can scarcely comprehend. Both Sony AND Microsoft have powerful 1st party games to their name. They may not be as old as Nintendo's, but they're there all the same. 

[Tornado]

Probably because Nintendo has 1st Party games that make the system a seller, unlike Sony or MS who pretty much need to rely on 3rd or 2nd Parties.

Thats true, Nintendo has always used 3rd parties to bolster it, rather than a crutch, whereas if MS or Sony lost say EA, they would be doomed

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Computer_Entertainment#Software_development_studios

[The Kid]

Losing EA would certainly do more damage to Sony or Microsoft than it would Nintendo, if only because the latter doesn't rely on 3rd party as much. But saying they would be doomed is an overstatement. If you're arguing whether Sony's brands are more or less recognizable than Nintendo's... well that's a completely different debate.

[PSI Wind]

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Computer_Entertainment#Software_development_studios

Derp. I keep forgetting about that. Microsoft only has Lionhead and 343 that are well known though so yeah, Microsoft would be screwed without 3rd parties.