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

[SIXTH-RATE SOMA]

Sorry, it's hard to tell with people talking about Nintendo nowadays

[Solkia]

I believe those ports were not authorized by the Japanese unit. (Communication in the early 80s-hah) The Japanese unit still used their own hardware in arcade machines.

 

Yep. It was a time when you could actually get away with that. One of the many reasons the industry crashed.

[Blue Blood]

In other news...

[\Lennox]

Reggie is spineless.

So he is a massive hypocrite for making us ready our bodies, then?

Well, so much for winning over the antithesis of the 2006 target market.

[Sami]

Well, the point could be people have bought the console already, for one thing. Abandoning the Wii U means alienating everyone that bought one, obliterating customer faith in Nintendo, making people unlikely to trust them enough to buy a successor, etc

 

If you want a historical example of why randomly abandoning consoles, add-ons, and product in general is fucking awful, look at SEGA. After the failed 32X people didn't want to buy the Saturn, which was also abandoned early for the Dreamcast which almost everyone didn't want to buy in fear that it too would be abandoned early, which it was.

 

When your customers have invested money and faith in your platform, it's not as easy as just starting again.

 

Fair point, I should have clarified on how long a time frame I had in mind when referring to "when the next system is ready" - around 2016 or so would be fair, no? That's four years on the market, which is the same amount of time the Gamecube had on the market in Europe and Australia. It's short, yeah, but I don't think it's unfair to assume this particular console isn't going to be kicking for too many years, especially when all signs show this generation won't be as ludicrously long as the last one. Likely between five and six years at the most. Nintendo entered the new generation a year early, and I think doing the same next time (but with a much better console) could do them a ton of good if they play their cards right.

 

In any case, I absolutely do agree with you. Making the same mistakes SEGA did wouldn't help matters at all, and the Wii U does still need to see some decent support from them until it's time to move on. Personally, I'd suggest a mainline Zelda in 2015 at the latest, then some other outsourced stuff along the lines of Hyrule Warriors. Maybe we could get that Star Fox game Kamiya wants to make? Or maybe work a deal with SEGA to make another F-Zero? Hell, they could start buying more western third party developers, having them do some experimental stuff on Wii U to build their relationship up until it's time to start pushing the boundaries and catch people's attention with whatever they've got cooking next generation.

 

The entire reason Nintendo's in the situation they're in now is because they're repeating one of SEGA's biggest mistakes - an arrogant, over-controlling Japanese rule. Interestingly, this was something they had handled very well before Iwata's ascension to the CEO position. I've read that Nintendo of America was fully responsible for their contract with Rare, sealing the deal without Yamauchi himself having to get involved at all. It's a shame that the entire company the American branch lost all influence after Yamauchi stepped down. 

 

To summarize what I personally think would help the most in getting them on track in the future - 

 

- More forward-thinking business philosophy. Right now we've got Iwata ruling the entirety of the company worldwide, unable to actually lead effectively and catch anyone's attention in the west. Surrounding him are a group of people appointed by him, likely to support his Japan-centric management style, and who lack the forward-thinking drive that made the company great in the first place. In fact, the man who was actually responsible for purchasing the Wii's motion technology was Atsushi Asada, who retired in 2005. Funnily enough, he was also the one who suggested they use the DS to target casual audiences like seniors with stuff like Brain Age. The question now is... who's left? From what I can gather, Iwata's been busy hiring his own inner circle and extending his influence, so I really don't see how a change in philosophy can even happen without investors forcing their hands or something else crazy happening.

 

I'll admit that this one is a stretch and I don't know how it could possibly happen. It's just wishful thinking on my part and not really worth discussing. I just hope the current BoD are willing to change their ways - Iwata's comments today are certainly hopeful, but talk is cheap after a year of apologies and "please understand", to me. I find it hard to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I'll be very happy if he surprises me.

 

- Make a machine that third parties will want to develop for. Something I think many of us can agree on is that Sony was smart to develop the PS4 the way they did. Going to third parties and making changes to the console's design in order to better serve their needs really should become common practice from all three companies, in my opinion, as it's those companies that drive the industry forward and generate the most sales. 

 

- Let the Wii U keep on keeping on, but don't waste more resources than necessary trying to do the impossible. The reason I disagreed with Azukara wasn't because of the notion that Nintendo shouldn't abandon the system right now, I actually agree in that regard. Look at the suggestions being made here - rebuild the OS from scratch? Patch online multiplayer into every game that only has local? Sweep the gamepad under the rug and start using the Pro Controller as the primary one (this one in particular is a good idea on paper as it could lower the price, but at the same time, it also throws away the only differentiating factor this console has and simply leaves it as an underpowered cheap Nintendo machine)? Loads of AAA+ games and bigger hard drives? At that point it's practically a different system entirely. Do you not think those resources could be better used on a successor console that has a better chance of competing? 

 

As of now, the Wii U's chances of catching any audience that isn't already fond of Nintendo are practically zero. It's selling even worse than the Dreamcast did, and as such I think trying to compete at this point is just a lost cause. I'd hate for resources that could have gone towards an absolutely stellar, hard hitting, competitive 8th gen console instead be wasted trying to do the impossible. I'll be getting a Wii U myself once X finally arrives, and I'd love to see some more stuff like that in the future. Great games to satisfy the userbase and reward the loyalty of their fanbase. Anything else, in my opinion, is overkill and could better be used on better ventures in the future.

[azoo]

First of all, the OS doesn't need a massive retool to be better. Just reorganization. But even so, the 360 majorly upgraded their OS repeatedly throughout it's life cycle and it worked just fine; why Nintendo can't do it is beyond me.

 

Second, patching multiplayer into games that are only local isn't a massive stretch. I don't know why it apparently is too big to cover at even some point before the end of this console's lifespan. 

 

Third, what I meant by "focusing on the Pro Controller first" by the way wasn't really dissing on the gamepad since it's actually a great idea that's not that bad at all. The point I was making was to build games with the buttons, triggers, and sticks only in mind, and then build games that don't have touchscreen usage or gyroscope as a mandatory gimmick, but rather as a secondary thing. Considering half the controller is that set-up it shouldn't be that hard, especially if the gamepad is mostly emphasized for being a second screen more than a seperate function.

 

And on that note, I was suggesting to bump up the price a nudge and include both a Pro Controller and a Gamepad in the bundle. It makes their beloved local multiplayer easier to handle, and makes it where you don't have to use the gamepad if you don't want to.

 

Fourth, AAA+ games isn't too much to ask for from Nintendo, they tend to deliver on most fronts (and since the gamepad isn't as much of a gimmick as it is an ease-of-access tool, it'll be much better than the wagglefest the Wii games are). And hard drives for consoles such as the 360 got larger and larger depending on newer models.

 

The only reason these ideas have "a better chance of competing as a new console" is because the graphics gap is just that bad, apparently. Sure, potentially it'd make for a better console next time. But why can't they start early on that? Just because you assume the Wii U is of no worth to anyone besides a few titles doesn't mean that should be it's fate.

[Jolt_TH]

So due to Christmas paycheck I have found I'm in a pretty good financial situation whereby I can actually spend some of it! Also having got a Wii U for Christmas I decided I needed another game. I will be getting SM3DW soon so I don't need to worry about that. I was thinking something multiplayer that I can play with my partner aswell as a decent single player mode, the only one that really springs to mind is Pikmin 3. I've seen a play through and it looks really fun and engrossing, would It be worth the buy? I heard it's pretty replayable too

[Mando-Whirl-Wind]

So due to Christmas paycheck I have found I'm in a pretty good financial situation whereby I can actually spend some of it! Also having got a Wii U for Christmas I decided I needed another game. I will be getting SM3DW soon so I don't need to worry about that. I was thinking something multiplayer that I can play with my partner aswell as a decent single player mode, the only one that really springs to mind is Pikmin 3. I've seen a play through and it looks really fun and engrossing, would It be worth the buy? I heard it's pretty replayable too

either Pikmin 3, or Wonderful 101 which is now permanently at 30$ at most places, W101 can be played with up to 4 players, although it does require a classic, or pro controller, its a solid game with an awesome single player, and a challenge and vs modes that can be played with as many people as you want, although the game is a buttonmashing beat-em-up

[Candescence]

The only reason these ideas have "a better chance of competing as a new console" is because the graphics gap is just that bad, apparently.

Considering the gap is nowhere near the gap between the Wii and the PS360, I'm more inclined to say that most third-parties are spoiled by their shiny new toys and won't accept anything less despite the fact that it really doesn't make much difference anyway (let's face it, neither consoles have anything actually new on display graphically aside from a bunch of gratuitous particle effects, it's pretty much the same as the last gen except slightly prettier). Which I consider rather pathetic, really.

 

When one of the most popular games of the last generation was fucking Minecraft, I have to raise doubts about whether graphics really matters.

[Mando-Whirl-Wind]

Considering the gap is nowhere near the gap between the Wii and the PS360, I'm more inclined to say that most third-parties are spoiled by their shiny new toys and won't accept anything less.

Ya I agree somewhat with this, and the truth is that the gap is tiny when the proper time and optitmization is used, however most groups complain and use it as an excuse even though it really isnt a good excuse

[Solkia]

Speaking OF "Shiny new toys", was there a reason they needed to shove full of needless shit?

 

I mean for fucks sake, what kind of game is going to use 8 cores?

[PSI Wind]

Speaking OF "Shiny new toys", was there a reason they needed to shove full of needless shit?

 

I mean for fucks sake, what kind of game is going to use 8 cores?

None, but those 8 cores give a lot of breathing room

[Solkia]

So would 4 cores. Most games rely on the GPU, and the ones that are CPU heavy never really go above 3 unless it's obnoxious shit like Crysis 3 which people with GTX 780's can't even get to 60FPS on Ultra.

 

They could have easily gone with a Quad-core, 4GB of RAM, and a 192-bit GPU and gotten by.

[Candescence]

I think the only place where graphics hardware improvements really matter are 'realistic' games. And yet, as the Game Overthinker pointed out, rather than celebrate the fact that we've finally reached the point where game visuals actually look realistic, developers insatiably strive for more despite it costing more money and putting more risk on projects, without even taking a moment to consider shortcuts that have similar results but are more efficient and cost-effective, you know, like they did in the old days when hardware was much weaker. How is that remotely sustainable?

 

And then there's stylized games, where, depending on how well the art style was executed, the visuals already look almost perfect. I'm talking about games like Mario 3D World and Sonic Lost World, where I can't really conceive of better hardware actually enabling any improvements aside from marginal detail improvements and slightly better textures.

 

And, as I mentioned before, it's quite possible that the pursuit of pretty visuals may be mostly pointless anyway - as I mentioned before, one of the most popular games in recent years is Minecraft. A game that many gamers seem to hate just because it looks 'ugly', and yet it's consistently ridiculously popular on PC, consoles and mobile. Not to mention the rise of mobile and indie gaming proves that most consumers don't give a rat's ass about how pretty their game is as long as it entertains them (or how good the game is, incidentally, but that's another topic).

[Solkia]

I thought gamers hated Minecraft because of Notch.

[Candescence]

I thought gamers hated Minecraft because of Notch.

Eh, I wouldn't know, but I certainly have seen plenty of comments across multiple sites hating on the game because of how blocky it looks.

[Sami]

We've had this debate countless times, and it still has nothing to do with Nintendo's situation right now. There are a lot of problems with how the industry is being run, but the number one factor keeping it running is money - something just about everyone but Nintendo is making right now.

The Wii U's failure shows the danger of trying to play their own game, and the fact that Iwata had to come out and admit that they actually are in fact competing with their competitors shows that they can't ignore the world around them anymore.

Criticize the industry all you want, but pretending business isn't booming and that Nintendo should continue to do exactly what got them in this situation in the first place is ridiculous. History has proven that, with the exception of the Wii phenomenon, the console with the best third party support will always be the one that wins. Nintendo has to cater to their needs if they don't want to sink deeper into irrelevancy.

 

 

edit - For the record, I'm aware that hardware sales have been on a decline the past two years and that publishers like Square Enix are overshooting their sales expectations by a ridiculous amount. You have to remember, though, that both the PS4 and Xbox One are reaching record high sales numbers, and that ten years ago the industry was operating on a much lower playing field. Like it or not, the industry is growing and the amount of money being earned and spent on big games is climbing. So yes, despite Tomb Raider's sales being "disappointing", the fact that GTA V sold more than any other game ever shows how good business is right now.

 

As long as Nintendo is a platform holder, they need to follow the industry's trends and capitalize on them.

[azoo]

We've had this debate countless times, and it still has nothing to do with Nintendo's situation right now. There are a lot of problems with how the industry is being run, but the number one factor keeping it running is money - something just about everyone but Nintendo is making right now.

The Wii U's failure shows the danger of trying to play their own game, and the fact that Iwata had to come out and admit that they actually are in fact competing with their competitors shows that they can't ignore the world around them anymore.

Criticize the industry all you want, but pretending business isn't booming and that Nintendo should continue to do exactly what got them in this situation in the first place is ridiculous. History has proven that, with the exception of the Wii phenomenon, the console with the best third party support will always be the one that wins. Nintendo has to cater to their needs if they don't want to sink deeper into irrelevancy.

 

...Which is why I suggested in the other argument that Nintendo should try getting on their level starting with the rest of the Wii U's lifespan, then really kicking it up with their next console. They shouldn't just sit there and keep making the same mistakes until next gen just because they're not as powerful as the competitors, that's just going to leave a sour taste in everyone's mouth while the naysayers continue to write "NINTENDOOMED" in blood on the walls for the next 4-5 years.

 

This is why I suggested all these changes and updates. Not that they'd all happen in an instant, but it seems realistic to think they'd be able to pull off most, if not all of those things I mentioned before this generation comes to an end. Sure, you could always say better luck next time, but this is a company in a competitive business. I don't think they're going to want to wait until the next console comes along.

[Sami]

...Which is why I suggested in the other argument that Nintendo should try getting on their level starting with the rest of the Wii U's lifespan, then really kicking it up with their next console. They shouldn't just sit there and keep making the same mistakes until next gen just because they're not as powerful as the competitors, that's just going to leave a sour taste in everyone's mouth while the naysayers continue to write "NINTENDOOMED" in blood on the walls for the next 4-5 years.

 

This is why I suggested all these changes and updates. Not that they'd all happen in an instant, but it seems realistic to think they'd be able to pull off most, if not all of those things I mentioned before this generation comes to an end. Sure, you could always say better luck next time, but this is a company in a competitive business. I don't think they're going to want to wait until the next console comes along.

 

Their mistakes have already been made, and blowing all of their cash trying to get in on the fun this generation is just wasteful. They shouldn't sit it out "just because they're not as powerful", they have to sit it out because they've past the point where they can hope for anyone to make games for them. The hardware simply isn't good enough for porting to be worth doing. Things might have been different if they hadn't plugged their ears and ignored everything around them, but it's too late to change now. 

 

The Wii U is what it is - a console created with absolutely no outside context taken into account. It's a fun little Nintendo box (or at least it will be by the end of 2014, depending on who you're asking) and may even be worth the asking price to some people, but not enough to be relevant in the games industry or the electronics business as a whole. No matter how much money the waste trying to catch people's attention, it won't change the fact that the console itself is flawed. 

 

That's why I'm suggesting they keep making games for it to satisfy the userbase and keep their confidence, and leave it at that.

[azoo]

And while they're satisfying their current fanbase, they're gonna continue trying to invite people in anyways, no matter if they "can't compete" or not. Regardless of if you think they failed beyond salvaging, they will continue anyways. So why stop revising and rebuilding here?

 

Which is why I think Iwata's realizations may lead to a more universal image, a broader library of variety, and a focus on online multiplayer for the Wii U as of this point onward, which would be fully realized by the next generation. It won't be exactly what people want, but it'll be getting there.

[Sami]

But you're asking for them to patch in multiplayer on existing games, release flagship games with AAA budgets, and change the entire focus of the console. All of these things will cost a lot of money and a lot of effort, as taking the Gamepad out of the package will require patching of every single game released so far, possibly even making some games unplayable. 

 

Yes, they've failed beyond salvaging, and yes, they will continue. However, I don't believe "continuing" has to result in them blowing their cash reserves after two years without profit in a vain attempt at "saving" the console.

 

I want Nintendo to survive, and I want them to be an extremely competitive, relevant force in the coming years, like they used to be. Those plans can't include wasting money on a failed console. 

 

They need to spend their money and time getting ready to bounce back next time, not waste it on the Wii U. What do you think will do them more good? A big AAA Metroid releasing on Wii U in 2015? Or that same Metroid instead being saved and polished to perfection for a 2016 release on the launch of their next console?

 

Edit - Wait, I just reread your post. You want them to include the Pro controller in the package and raise the price? How could that possibly help?

[azoo]

I'm seeing all this from the perspective that they're not going to make another console until the other companies are going to make another one. And going by all this, that won't be until... maybe 2018? Most console lifespans last for a solid 6-7 years, and the only way Nintendo would be able to poke one in early would have to be around 2017 at least before confusing the hell out of everyone.

 

I guess this argument keeps going in circles because it all comes down to if you think the ideas and things that the Wii U brought are salvagable or not. I think they are, you think they aren't. Of course I want them to take what they got, improve and do their best; meanwhile you'd rather them just keep doing what they're doing until the next console. I'd rather not like sitting in this same uncomfortable void until then, and I don't think Nintendo would like to either.

[Indigo Rush]

Nintendo has the money to "waste."

 

http://nintendoeverything.com/nintendo-has-812-8-billion-yen-in-the-bank/

 

Sorry Dissy, but it seriously sounds like you actively want Nintendo to suck this generation. Saying that they've already "lost" is downright cockamamie, this gen has just started, and it'll likely continue for more than half of a decade. The very things that Azu here is suggesting are not out of their limits. Updating an OS is nothing unbelievable; The Xbox 360 did it practically every other year.

 

 

Next gen alright.

 

Not forgetting that some 360 games still got DLC years after their release. Why then can't Nintendo patch their earlier Wii U games (something that does actually happen) with online multiplayer? The only thing preventing them from doing so is choice.

 

And Nintendo is more than capable of releasing AAA games with AAA budgets. Again, they have so much money to blow it's not even funny. And changing the focus of the console is a easy as changing their ad campaign. Get rid of their little kid commercials or just add some more "mature" or "middle-ground" advertisements.

 

 

Something. It's not that hard. Even SEGA was able to stay afloat longer than they should have by marketing alone.

 

And the Wii U has quite a few good games going for it right now. I just finished playing through Wind Waker HD, Nano Assault Neo, Super Mario 3D World, Wii Sports Club and Trine 2, and I'm gearing up to pay for Wonderful 101, All Stars Racing Transformed, Pikmin 3 and perhaps NSMBU/Luigi U, NES Remix, Dr Luigi, Rayman Origins, Sonic Lost World and Nintendoland. And that's not even beginning to scratch what's coming next: Donkey Kong, Hyrule Warriors, Bayonetta 2, Mario Kart 8, Monolith's "X" thingie, Smash Bros 4, Yarn Yoshi and The Inevitable Next-Gen Zelda Game That's In Development Right Now™.  And then there's that 3rd mystery Sonic game, and a number of cross-platform games (Child of Light, Watch Dogs, Mighty No 9, etc) ...and then there's the Virtual Console and Indie markets, as well as their mammoth-sized pre-existing library of backwards-compatible Wii and WiiWare games.

 

Final point, the Wii U is as doomed as the Gamecube was. That is, it isn't. If you want to go by sales alone, then fine. But the Gamecube had more than enough fantastic first, second and third party titles and cross-platform games to build a legacy, and I see no reason why the Wii U should be any different simply because they had a bumpy start.

[Wraith]

I don't even understand why you would expect any company to want to stop trying to attract more people at all, regardless of whatever the fuck the competition is doing. It's not like any money they blow trying to make the Wii U attractive wouldn't be made back by the next Pokemon game or whatever. This "beyond salvaging" mentality is kind of bullshit as much as I hate what these ignorant airheads running Nintendo are doing right now. They can get ready for next gen AND put proper effort into this one rather easily. Do you know who we're talking about here? 

 

Basically, "There is no salvaging this thing"...is kind of very overdramatic IMO.

[Milo]

And Nintendo is more than capable of releasing AAA games with AAA budgets. Again, they have so much money to blow it's not even funny. And changing the focus of the console is a easy as changing their ad campaign. Get rid of their little kid commercials or just add some more "mature" or "middle-ground" advertisements.

 

 

Something. It's not that hard. Even SEGA was able to stay afloat longer than they should have by marketing alone.

 

I assume that this post was way too good an opportunity to pass up posting this image in order to support your point.

 

Makes me wonder how NoA, had they actually had the balls to, would had advertised Conker's Bad Fur Day back in the day.