"We're probably heading toward the end of an era of Japanese game developers making successful console games like in the West."
- Capcom veteran and Game Republic founder Yoshiki Okamoto argues that it's become exceedingly difficult for Japanese developers to create a blockbuster console title that can sell significant units worldwide.
Okamoto, who worked on major series like Street Fighter and Resident Evil during his time at Capcom, laid off his entire staff at Game Republic last year (the studio employed around 300 at its peak) after a publishing deal fell through.
Like many in his situation, he now focuses on mobile projects, avoiding the massive budgets and development teams often required to make modern console games. Okamoto believes mobile teams can be more like the smaller groups that worked on games in the early years of the industry.
Mobile has become an increasingly important segment for a number of Japanese developers and publishers, and two of the biggest companies that have risen from the country recently are mobile social game network operators: Gree and DeNA.
If creating a console hit continues to becomes more and more difficult for game makers in Japan, we're sure to see more Japanese studios and talented game developers abandon traditional platforms to look for success in the mobile space.
Kinda depressing to see greats like Yoshiki Okamoto struggle like this. I wonder if he's ever considered PC games and distribution services like Steam?
Wish they'd stop trying to compete directly with western studios and instead pump out fully polygonal 2.5D action titles in the vein of Super Metroid, Symphony of the Night, Double Dragon, Contra, Street Fighter II, The Legend of Zelda, etc. Take all that's good about the Japanese greats of old and breathe new life into them. Don't westernize them, just bring them up to today's technology standards and tweak a few things. Attempting to improve perfection usually just bites you in the ass, as has been shown by many of the sad attempts at rebooting such titles (Bionic Commando, Rygar, Ninja Gai Den to name a few).
@Julian Gosiengfiao + Kevin Fishburne - Hells to the yes! I would buy games like that in a microsecond. Japanese devs need to go fully Retro. Don;t they see that this is now the trend? If they don't then they are not paying attention. Go where the cash is people!
Let them go back to the 2D era where the Japanese 16-bit games are still leagues better than 99.8% of today’s 2D offerings; and let the big boys handle the games with immersion and good storytelling. This is good for everyone. Right now AAA Japanese games can’t hold a candle to western AAA games and western 2D games can’t hold a candle to the Japanese classics. This may actually make me want to consider purchasing a mobile game. There are probably 100’s of classics from the 80’s and 90’s that could be remade in HD for mobile and would sell like crazy.
It is unfortunate, hope we don't face the same fate. But maybe we haven't seen the last of big Japanese titles, maybe its just a hiatus until the industry improves to a point where AAA games are more efficiently made. I also think its the culture gap between East and West that makes it so. Games in the west are just of entirely different tastes from games in the east. I don't think a franchise like Mass Effect would be as popular in Japan as it is over here in the U.S.
"Capcom veteran and Game Republic founder Yoshiki Okamoto argues that it's become exceedingly difficult for Japanese developers to create a blockbuster console title that can sell significant units worldwide."
Interesting how japanese game developers are able to completely ignore, that the most successful console game publisher is still Nintendo, a japanese company.
For several reasons I don't really see any use in comparing the net income, equity and market value of Apple, MS, Nintendo and Sony, when it comes to the question if there is a future in japanese games development.
First of all, Apple isn't a games developer or publisher, with this logic you could throw Samsung in the mix as well, for MS the games branch is a small (and loss driven) part of the company and is mainly based on hardware sales, for Sony, the games business was a very profitable part of the company (amongst various other branches), a situation, they are trying to recreate, whatever it costs, for Nintendo as the last of the 4 companies, games are their main business.
Second of all, it's pretty useless, to compare the net income of a single year, when it comes to the question, how you would measure the success of the company. If I follow your kind of argumentation, Nintendo and Sony are in the same situation, both have a net income of "<0", but it's clear, the profit/loss structure of both companies is vastly different. I think you would agree, that it is pretty useless to say both Apple and Activision have a net income, that is bigger then $1.
Besides, your comparsion lacks the crucial point of debts and because of this, your whole picture is distorted. Sony's debts are bigger, then their assets, which puts them in a much lesser favorable situation, then any of the other 3 companies.
It's not the the comparsion isn't "fair", it's that it makes no sense. It would be better to compare Nintendo to EA or Activision, because both are game publishers, they at least have products, that directly compete with each other on the shelfs of the retailers.
"It would be better to compare Nintendo to EA or Activision"
"Nintendo as the last of the 4 companies, games are their main business."
thats true but 'you can't really compare them to EA or Activision since they don't make hardware'
"Sony's debts are bigger, then their assets"
where do you get that info from? I posted equity (asset - debt)
"it's pretty useless, to compare the net income of a single year, when it comes to the question, how you would measure the success of the company"
SONY
2008: $3.7B
2010: $0B
2012: $-4.8B
NINTENDO
2008: $2.8B
2010: $2.5B
2012: $0B forecasted
both trending down obviously...
EA and Activision are trending up from 2008 but at a veery slow pace
"Sony's debts are bigger, then their assets"
where do you get that info from? I posted equity (asset - debt)
You are right, their debts are still a little bit higher, then their assets ($166 billion vs. $135 billion), but even you must admit, that this is a vastly different scenario, then for Apple, MS or Nintendo. For comparsion, Nintendo's total debts are $2.27 billion, while their assets are worth $17 billion. When you are in the situation, Sony is in right now, that your debts are 80% of what your total assets are, it's harder to get money from the banks.
(Source:http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/ntdoy/financial s/balance-sheet and http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/sne/financials/balance-sheet)
" "It would be better to compare Nintendo to EA or Activision"
"Nintendo as the last of the 4 companies, games are their main business."
thats true but 'you can't really compare them to EA or Activision since they don't make hardware'"
And Apple is not publishing games at all, but this is the product category, Nintendo is making most of it's money with.
"NINTENDO
2008: $2.8B
2010: $2.5B
2012: $0B forecasted
both trending down obviously..."
Trend analysis at it's worst. Just because the years 2009 and 2011 don't support your argumentation, you leave them out. Otherwise it would look like this
2008: $2.8B
2009: $3.5B
2010: $2.5B
2011: $-531
2012: $0
What you call an obvious downtrend is a much more complex development and right now, Nintendo is trending upwards (at least during the last 2 quarters and in their full year forecast).
But numberporn aside, you totally miss the point, the article was about the statement of a japanese games developer, that he thinks the japanese game developers are having a hard time to make successful console games like in the west and I pointed out, that the company publishing the most successful games is coming from Japan and that this company mainly publishes games made by japanese developers.
"Trend analysis at it's worst. Just because the years 2009 and 2011 don't support your argumentation, you leave them out. Otherwise it would look like this
2008: $2.8B
2009: $3.5B
2010: $2.5B
2011: $-531
2012: $0
What you call an obvious downtrend is a much more complex development and right now, Nintendo is trending upwards (at least during the last 2 quarters and in their full year forecast)."
i only left them out to save some space. (also 2011 shouldn't be counted due to unusual disaster in Japan)
it may be up in one year (a "useless" comparison as you have said) but as we both have show it is going down in the past 4-5 years unlike EA and Activision. i don't have any financial education or training, just looking at the numbers and what they tell me.
in the past 3 months about 2 of the top 10 games sold in the US (which reflects other Western markets) were from a Japanese publisher. that is alot different from when I was a kid, when most of the top games were Japanese.
also lets not forget the only comparable company to Nintendo for the past few decades, Sega, (founded in US but moved to Japan) is a shell of its former self. and if the Japanese themselves say there industry is in trouble, who are we gaijin to tell them otherwise?
"in the past 3 months about 2 of the top 10 games sold in the US (which reflects other Western markets) were from a Japanese publisher. that is alot different from when I was a kid, when most of the top games were Japanese. "
I think taking the Top 10 games of 3 months in 1 territory is not nearly enough data to tell anything. Take a look at the broader picture, e.g. the 10 best selling games in this console generation:
Wii Sports 80 million
Mario Kart Wii 32 million
Wii Sports Resort 30 million
Wii Play 28 million
New Super Mario Bros. Wii 26 million
Wii Fit 22 million
Wii Fit Plus 20 million
Call of Duty Black Ops about 20 million (All platforms combined)
Kinect Adventures 18 million
Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 about 16 million (All platforms combined)
I think the numbers speak for themself. But let me put them in perspective, the best selling Wii game Wii Sports outsells the combined 10 best selling 360 titles and even if you say Wii Sports was a packed in title and doesn't count (even if it was sold alone in Japan), the spots 2,3,4 outsell the combined 14 best selling 360 titles.
This is why I think it's relevant to consider Nintendo, when it comes to japanese games development.
Sega never played in the same league as Nintendo, when it came to games sales, this doesn't mean, they didn't made good games and their best selling title Sonic the Hedgehog managed to sell an astonishing 15 million copies, but no other Sega game ever came even close to this number, which was well below then what Super Mario Bros. games sold at this time.
fair enough, but top 10 lists are nomally full of recent releases, the games you have listed are years old. however at least one Japanese company is doing very well as far as games software.
Capcom's problem is that other than the Resident Evil games, it just shovels out a new Street Fighter and Marvel VS game every 6-9 months and expects it to sell for $60.
They're like a one hit wonder musician who just keeps remixing his one song over and over again.
Interesting how japanese game developers are able to completely ignore, that the most successful console game publisher is still Nintendo, a japanese company.
"NET INCOME:
Apple $26B
Microsoft $17B
Nintendo $<0
Sony $<0
EQUITY:
Apple $77B
Microsoft $66B
Sony $25B
Nintendo $14B
MARKET VALUE:
Apple $658B
Microsoft $261B
Nintendo $18B
Sony $13B"
maybe it doesn't seem like a fair comparison, but you can't really compare them to EA or Activision since they don't make hardware
First of all, Apple isn't a games developer or publisher, with this logic you could throw Samsung in the mix as well, for MS the games branch is a small (and loss driven) part of the company and is mainly based on hardware sales, for Sony, the games business was a very profitable part of the company (amongst various other branches), a situation, they are trying to recreate, whatever it costs, for Nintendo as the last of the 4 companies, games are their main business.
Second of all, it's pretty useless, to compare the net income of a single year, when it comes to the question, how you would measure the success of the company. If I follow your kind of argumentation, Nintendo and Sony are in the same situation, both have a net income of "<0", but it's clear, the profit/loss structure of both companies is vastly different. I think you would agree, that it is pretty useless to say both Apple and Activision have a net income, that is bigger then $1.
Besides, your comparsion lacks the crucial point of debts and because of this, your whole picture is distorted. Sony's debts are bigger, then their assets, which puts them in a much lesser favorable situation, then any of the other 3 companies.
It's not the the comparsion isn't "fair", it's that it makes no sense. It would be better to compare Nintendo to EA or Activision, because both are game publishers, they at least have products, that directly compete with each other on the shelfs of the retailers.
"Nintendo as the last of the 4 companies, games are their main business."
thats true but 'you can't really compare them to EA or Activision since they don't make hardware'
"Sony's debts are bigger, then their assets"
where do you get that info from? I posted equity (asset - debt)
"it's pretty useless, to compare the net income of a single year, when it comes to the question, how you would measure the success of the company"
SONY
2008: $3.7B
2010: $0B
2012: $-4.8B
NINTENDO
2008: $2.8B
2010: $2.5B
2012: $0B forecasted
both trending down obviously...
EA and Activision are trending up from 2008 but at a veery slow pace
where do you get that info from? I posted equity (asset - debt)
You are right, their debts are still a little bit higher, then their assets ($166 billion vs. $135 billion), but even you must admit, that this is a vastly different scenario, then for Apple, MS or Nintendo. For comparsion, Nintendo's total debts are $2.27 billion, while their assets are worth $17 billion. When you are in the situation, Sony is in right now, that your debts are 80% of what your total assets are, it's harder to get money from the banks.
(Source:http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/ntdoy/financial s/balance-sheet and http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/sne/financials/balance-sheet)
" "It would be better to compare Nintendo to EA or Activision"
"Nintendo as the last of the 4 companies, games are their main business."
thats true but 'you can't really compare them to EA or Activision since they don't make hardware'"
And Apple is not publishing games at all, but this is the product category, Nintendo is making most of it's money with.
"NINTENDO
2008: $2.8B
2010: $2.5B
2012: $0B forecasted
both trending down obviously..."
Trend analysis at it's worst. Just because the years 2009 and 2011 don't support your argumentation, you leave them out. Otherwise it would look like this
2008: $2.8B
2009: $3.5B
2010: $2.5B
2011: $-531
2012: $0
What you call an obvious downtrend is a much more complex development and right now, Nintendo is trending upwards (at least during the last 2 quarters and in their full year forecast).
But numberporn aside, you totally miss the point, the article was about the statement of a japanese games developer, that he thinks the japanese game developers are having a hard time to make successful console games like in the west and I pointed out, that the company publishing the most successful games is coming from Japan and that this company mainly publishes games made by japanese developers.
2008: $2.8B
2009: $3.5B
2010: $2.5B
2011: $-531
2012: $0
What you call an obvious downtrend is a much more complex development and right now, Nintendo is trending upwards (at least during the last 2 quarters and in their full year forecast)."
i only left them out to save some space. (also 2011 shouldn't be counted due to unusual disaster in Japan)
it may be up in one year (a "useless" comparison as you have said) but as we both have show it is going down in the past 4-5 years unlike EA and Activision. i don't have any financial education or training, just looking at the numbers and what they tell me.
in the past 3 months about 2 of the top 10 games sold in the US (which reflects other Western markets) were from a Japanese publisher. that is alot different from when I was a kid, when most of the top games were Japanese.
also lets not forget the only comparable company to Nintendo for the past few decades, Sega, (founded in US but moved to Japan) is a shell of its former self. and if the Japanese themselves say there industry is in trouble, who are we gaijin to tell them otherwise?
I think taking the Top 10 games of 3 months in 1 territory is not nearly enough data to tell anything. Take a look at the broader picture, e.g. the 10 best selling games in this console generation:
Wii Sports 80 million
Mario Kart Wii 32 million
Wii Sports Resort 30 million
Wii Play 28 million
New Super Mario Bros. Wii 26 million
Wii Fit 22 million
Wii Fit Plus 20 million
Call of Duty Black Ops about 20 million (All platforms combined)
Kinect Adventures 18 million
Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 about 16 million (All platforms combined)
I think the numbers speak for themself. But let me put them in perspective, the best selling Wii game Wii Sports outsells the combined 10 best selling 360 titles and even if you say Wii Sports was a packed in title and doesn't count (even if it was sold alone in Japan), the spots 2,3,4 outsell the combined 14 best selling 360 titles.
This is why I think it's relevant to consider Nintendo, when it comes to japanese games development.
Sega never played in the same league as Nintendo, when it came to games sales, this doesn't mean, they didn't made good games and their best selling title Sonic the Hedgehog managed to sell an astonishing 15 million copies, but no other Sega game ever came even close to this number, which was well below then what Super Mario Bros. games sold at this time.
They're like a one hit wonder musician who just keeps remixing his one song over and over again.