It isn't just cheap, accessible mobile games that are making it difficult to sell $60 console titles, believes Nintendo president Satoru Iwata -- it's the overly saturated market too.
Answering questions from investors last week following Nintendo's annual financial results, Iwata admitted he believes part of the reason that the Nintendo Wii U isn't selling as well as hoped is because Nintendo's games, and those of other console developers, aren't wowing consumers like they used to.
"We try to offer various kinds of software for a video game platform, and the games are improving steadily each year, but these improvements are becoming less noticeable," he says.
"In short, what one platform can offer will eventually become saturated. Every consumer will inevitably become tired of and get less excitement from the same type of entertainment."
It has become difficult to impress players, he adds, even when a greater amount of energy is put into development.
"The development challenges for home console games selling for around $50-$60 have increased significantly," he says. "Around the time when I first wrote a program for a home console game 30 years ago, two developers, including me, completed it in only three months. Things have changed dramatically since then, and we therefore need to expand the range of software developers."
According to Iwata, these challenges lead to a psychological hurdle for players, where they expect to pay a lower sum for their software.
"Lowering software prices and a rise in the number of devices you can play games on without a dedicated gaming machine are gradually setting the bar higher for us to encourage our consumers to pay a certain sum of money for software," he continued.
He added, "I believe the future of the video game industry depends on the number of games developers release that consumers consider to be fresh and worth paying for."
I think if Nintendo looked back at what it were doing back in 2004 with the Gamecube. it would be much more successful today. Nintendo had a consistent release of quality titles, in addition to exceptional titles like Metroid Prime and the Pikmin games.
Quality is in the eye of the beholder. I think Nintendo would take a success like Wii Sports over a lackluster Pikmin 2 anyday. Pikmin 3 will not save the Wii U.
IN 2004 the GC was done for. It was also Nintendo's worst selling console ever.
And how exactly are we determining that the Wii U is going to have so much fewer releases than the GC? It is only 6 months old. The paint isn't even dry.
Alex is saying Nintendo should have learned from the GC and should have been releasing a steady stream of game releases all along.
I replied that the GC was their worst selling console. IF the GC did have a steady stream of releases then it didn't help Nintendo sell consoles. :)
I also asked how one compares Nintendo's console platform today which is only 6 months old to their console platform from 2000-2005 and then determines that the game releases of their current platform won't be similar in number when all is said and done. Seems premature. I want to see the math on it.
@Bob Johnson
Sorry, I wasn't very clear. What I meant was, the games that Nintendo put out during the GCN days weren't "quality" in the eye of the consumer, which was indicated by the poor sales of the system. Nintendo is going down the wrong path if they re-use the GCN strategy of "games for single-player hard-core Nintendo fans." The Wii strategy of "games my friends would enjoy playing with me" was clearly superior from a business standpoint. It remains to be seen if Nintendo will follow that path again, which made the Wii so successful.
A game like NSMBW2 is on the right track, but the system is too expensive for just one multiplayer game, especially when it doesn't seem to offer much more than NSMBW which tons of people already have.
@ David Vance - Valid point and I don't doubt that Nintendo is aware of that as well as couple of 3rd party companies (at least, Capcom seems to be aware of that, depending on the franchise that the company is working on). We just have to wait and see what happens next.
@David Vance
I get what you're saying but the Wii U didn't launch with one multiplayer game it launch with two counting Nintendoland.
I think part of what Iwata is admiting is that NSMBU is not enough of a change to drive more hardware. Nintendoland also uses the same Nintendo IPs compared to Wii Sports, which was a totally new IP.
ACtually I wasn't referring to your post. :) Sorry for any confusion on my part.
And I think I agree with the gist of what you are saying. I mean I said that if Nintendo was more consistent with game releases on the Gamecube then it sure didn't help them sell Gamecubes. :)
I am looking forward to Pikmin 3 though. And there is always the possibility it could break out and become a hit.
In my mind, mobile games are not even a competitor. Yes you can get many cheap "games" for mobile, but the genres are limited and the controls suck.
IMO the issue is that pc games are cheaper, often better (as in more fun), and no longer have the distinct genre differences that use to separate pc gamers from console gamers. Indie games and sales (such as Steam sales) are now in the public eye. Console games are often relying on the "get people to buy it before they find out if it sucks or not" method (vs Steam having free weekends and demos). Any genre you want on a console can be found on pc, often for a 10th of the price; and it can easily, comfortably, and cheaply be played with a controller if needed. And for the price of a console and a few games, you can now get a decent pc and several games.
What I want is not necessarily "fresh," I just want "GOOD". Often, trying to make a game more fresh makes it less good... and it certainly makes it more expensive to make, therefore making it impossible to lower the price for customers. If developers focus on good, fresh will come naturally when needed. Heck, look at the best selling mobile games; there's very little fresh there.
I love pc games, but don't think the pc is taking a bite out of Nintendo's market.
One reason I actually like Nintendo's consoles is because I like pc games and find the other consoles to be a worse version of my pc gaming experiences.
Nintendo meanwhile is a great complement to my pcgaming habits. IT is the social living room console. The family console. The pick up and play console. Things the pc is weak at.
But, even though I think the 360/PS3 are lesser than versions of my pgaming experiences, those consoles still thrive because pcgaming is a hassle for large swaths of the population. Some folks just aren't that into the hobby to want to maintain a pc. Kind of like every person who drives a car isn't also a mechanic. Plus the initial outlay for a pc is a greater expense than for a console which is another barrier for pgaming.
btw, I'm with you as far as good games go, but I think everyone wants good games. ;) But if you remain stagnant you are going to have trouble pushing new product. And often one person's good game is another person's bad game.
I've never understood why people so easily dismiss ios as a viable threat. Nintendo has been saying for years now that they were not worried about ios devices, or android for that matter. There are lots of great games out there for ios and they are a lot cheaper than console games. 5 years ago all my nieces and nephews were clamoring for the latest DS, now they all have ipod touches and never play their consoles. Instead of grouping up and playing mario kart they circle round and play minecraft pocket edition. Collectively everyone paid 12.00 for their copies of minecraft as each itunes account can have 5 devices attached to it. 2 families at 6 bucks each for minecraft and they have endless hours of gameplay. Compare that to if they all had to play that on a DS. It would have been closer to $320 @ $40 per game. Do ios devices take away all customers from Nintendo sales or xbox sales? No, but they do affect it. When consoles were the only mainstream way for the masses to play games they had nothing to worry about, but now it is so much cheaper and easier to just grab an ipod touch for $200 and play free or cheap games. And while there are a lot of bad games out there, there are also a lot of great games out there with innovative controls.
MY kids have iOS devices, but they don't play Minecraft on them. My 12 yr old plays it on the computer. Before that he played it on the 360 until he found out the pc version is better. He barely touched the iOS version. The problem is the iOS version sucks in comparison.
And that's, in a nutshell, why dedicated gaming devices will continue to do well. They not only will have more processing power but different input devices and can tailor their hardware specifically for games.
Phones and tablets will likely never be made specifically for games and won't be able to just introduce new controls specifically for gaming. That's the advantage dedicated gaming hardware can exploit.
That's why some folks don't perceive iOS as much of a threat or at least as much of a threat as most folks seem to perceive it as. Nintendo can come across as dismissive of iOS for this reason. They have been told many times before that x, y or z will eat their lunch. Mobile gaming on phones isn't as new in Japan as in America from what I gather. The Japanese had more advanced phones than we did before the iPhone hit. And analysts thought mobile gaming was going to doom Nintendo back then.
The DS was doomed because there was the PSP. The Wii was doomed because the PS3 and 360 existed.
Everyone has had computers this whole time and well despite all the same sort of free flash games Nintendo marched on.
Now this doesn't mean they have nothing to worry about. It means they have always had things to worry about. And have always had to earn their $$$ from consumers because consumers have always had reasons to spend their money elsewhere.
"In my mind, mobile games are not even a competitor."
They are only competitors for players who don't view any single form of gaming as their primary form of entertainment. Consumers who view console or PC gaming as their primary form of entertainment in all likelihood only view mobile and tablet gaming as secondary or tertiary sources. Sources they turn to when they cannot access a console or PC.
Maybe part of the problem that mobile games pose to big publishers is that big publishers used to be able to have a lot of low quality, cheap-to-make licensed titles that would make them a lot of money so that they wouldn't be in such dire straights if they had a few "failed" AAA or AA titles. But now those sort of low-quality licensed games aren't selling as much (especially for $60 on consoles) when the same player base can play games of similar quality for free on their phones. I don't know, maybe this isn't the best place to ponder about it, but it was a thought I just had to get out.
Good point. If it wasn't clear I meant "cheap licensed stuff and (cheap) kid's stuff." Obviously there is lots of kid's stuff on consoles that is there to stay. The Wii U itself could be considered a kid's console with quality kid's games like Lego City Undercover or NSMB or NintendoLand or Scribblenauts. And I own Skylander's Giants on the Wii U too and my kids like it.
Only one or two of the Nintendo Land games fully utilize the Wii U controller. Most of the bigger budget games (read $50+) don't utilize the Wii U controller at all. Mostly because they are designed for multiple consoles and therefore the Wii U offers no advantage over playing these games on the PS3/Xbox. So it's not hard to imagine why $60 console titles don't sell well on the Wii-U.
Unlike the Wii-Controllers which developers could modify traditional controls to utilize the Wii U controller is pretty unique, and therefore any game that is released on multiple consoles I doubt will do well on the Wii U... which brings up a better question...
Will developers (other than those with Nintendo's IPs) make games that are specific to the Wii-U Controller and remove themselves from selling the game to the rest of the console market?
Once again Nintendo fails to realize the main problem they face. Lack of quality games on expensive new consoles. People will buy Nintendo products, if Nintendo actually produces products. Wii U has had nothing put lackluster ports from other consoles, including the Wii. No new Mario, or Zelda or anything on release. In fact, all of these titles seem to be focused on saving the 3DS which faces the same problem. Luigi's Mansion could have saved Wii U, but instead it got put onto the 3DS which I feel has sold about as much as it's going to sell at this point. Anyone who was interested in purchasing a 3DS has done so already.
New Luigi's Mansion: 3DS, not Wii U.
New Legend of Zelda: Goes to the 3DS. Wii U instead gets an HD port. AGAIN.
Nintendo's big announcement: Earthbound downloadable on the Wii U. Mother 3 would have been a better choice since everyone outside of Japan has been waiting for that game for almost 15 years. Why not both Nintendo?
Nintendo products will sell. Just give us a reason to buy them. I'm sincerely interested to see what happens with this new Smash Brothers game. To see if Nintendo can simultaneously save the 3DS and the Wii U with cross compatibility.
To be fair, the Wii U did have a new 2D Mario title on the day of release. It was a sequel to the Wii 2D Mario, not a port.
But it wasn't a system seller like Super Mario World (bundled with the SNES at launch) or Mario 64 (not bundled but might as well have been). I can remember with those machines feeling like this was the reason for its existence. $200 for a Super Mario World machine was expensive but felt within reason because it was a great experience. If more games came out to retroactively add value to the purchase, then all the better.
Likewise for Super Mario 64. It defined the 3D platformer and made you feel like you'd really gotten some value for your $250.
The Mario for the Wii U is good but feels like just more of the same. The asymmetric multi-player is intriguing but I've yet to have an opportunity to try it out.
I don't begrudge major titles going to the 3DS, especially if they're well suited to it. It isn't as if Nintendo lacks the funds to hire enough talent to fully cover both platforms. It feels more like Nintendo just doesn't understand why the Wii U isn't drawing more interest.
@ Jon Smith - "Nintendo products will sell. Just give us a reason to buy them. I'm sincerely interested to see what happens with this new Smash Brothers game. To see if Nintendo can simultaneously save the 3DS and the Wii U with cross compatibility." That could be arranged, especially after Capcom has used a similar strategy with Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate. Plus, Smash Brothers was going to be originally released for the 3DS, but thanks to the delay, the game could be done as a multiplatform game with the Wii U as part of the equation.
Call me crazy but the contract here is you buy the console then you get the option to buy 5 years worth of games at 3-4 games per year. That's the contract Nintendo has had with consumers since the N64 at least isn't it?
Nintendo has a huge set of older titles to draw from to offer a wide range of prices on the Wii U and 3DS but the prices are just too high. I was amazed to see that Nintendo thinks $4.99 is a reasonable price for old NES games. Not remakes with updated graphics and audio, the original games measured in kilobytes of ROM. (Why the NES Kirby game is a 24 MB download and hit on the Wii U's storage is a mystery.)
Up from there, SNES games on the Wii U Virtual Console are $6.99. I haven't noticed any N64 titles yet but I'll bet they're at least $8.99 or even $9.99. Perhaps Nintendo hasn't noticed but they're competing with much better looking clones of these games for lower prices on Android and the indie channels on other consoles. Yes, Nintendo spent quite a lot of money developing these games from scratch many years ago but if they hadn't long since gone into profits it seems unlikely they'd bother to revive them for the Virtual Console.
Nintendo cuts its own throat by overvaluing their old IP instead of making it an easy impulse buy. A kid who was born when the Gamecube was in stores isn't going to feel any nostalgia for NES games. Instead he's going to wonder why he should spend $5 for one instead of three or four much better looking games on his tablet. Adults looking to relive old pleasures would be just as happy and feel legally entitled to pick up the game for a buck at a garage sale and play it in an emulator on his PC.
You're selling bubble gum by the check-out line here, Nintendo. If the price makes the shopper pause to weigh the decision, the choice probably won't be in your favor.
Eh... I'm OK with the current price, and given I have transferred my data to my Wii U, some of those games I will get for a 1.00 or 1.50. Not a big problem for me personally, however I think the article addressees Iwata's feelings on the state of the industry and not the sate of Nintendo.
Prices are high. But they also don't want to give their stuff away for nothing either.
They can always lower prices eventually too. Much easier than raising them. Plus don't think that selling NEs games for a lot less is going to add to the coffers to any noticeable degree.
I think the 24mb Kirby size if accurate is probably due to the Wii U gamepad streaming functionality and the ability to save game state etc. And that nintendo is including the code for that stuff with each game instead of having it centralized. Just a guess. That and/or each game has the emulator built into it too.
You've got to be kidding. Game state for a game that is only a few dozen kilobytes is tiny, as NES only had a few KB or RAM, with the ROM in the cart mapped directly to the CPU's memory space and the code run straight from the chips. The whole VM should be a few hundred kilobytes at most. This can be seen in the numerous NES emulators on every PC OS.
Nor should it take much code for the GamePad support. It is just treating the wireless connection as a virtual video cable and the pad as a display of lesser resolution than the TV. The code requirement are pretty minimal. It's just a second render target for the GPU.
And if the 24 MB size isn't accurate it is Nintendo's problem because they plainly state it as that size in the eShop.
The only element I've seen so far that explains the added bulk is the screen that comes up when you first select the game. That image is probably several times larger than the NES code itself.
I wasn't expecting a tiny download little bigger than the original ROM. A good virtual manual could easily take up a few megs. But nothing like what Nintendo claims is needed. I'm very curious to see what is found when somebody dissect the contents of a Wii U's storage after a few items have been purchased.
I think the gist of my comment is the larger size is probably due to the Wii U functionality. Also I have seen that Nintendo isnt the most efficient with their OS and support software. The Wii for example rebooted everytime you exited an app. My guess is this sort of mentality is at play here. They could do it better but it is low on the priority pole because it is good enough for their purposes.
MY THOUGHTS on Nintendos current state. The 3ds is doing fine. The wii u is only doing poorly because most people don't know of its existence. Casual gamers, their main target demographic still don't understand that its a new system, not just a controller. POOR ADVERTISING (including the systems name im) has nit differentiated itself from the original wii enough for thw public to understand it. This has snowballed into poor starting sales which scares off developers who aren't making games.
it annous me that gamasutra has lots of headlines predicting its doom because that's going to scare away developers and potentially help cripple the system.
One good thing for yhe wii u. Its so easy to do cross olatform with engines like unity that soon a consoles ex lusive titles will become very important to selli g a system. And nintendo is king of exclusive titles.
Yeah the higher price tag is harder to sell but peiple will pay for quality they just need devlopers like you tomake cool games. I like nintendo. I want them to do well.
I don't think 3rd parties were ever going to make a ton of games for the Wii U anyway at least 3rd party AAA western developers.
None of them made any money with their Wii efforts even though their Wii efforts were mostly abysmal to horrible.
And the Wii U doesn't have the computing power of the next xbox or PS4 either.
So was never going to happen. I wouldn't be worried about Gamasutra scaring them away.
Now if I were a AAA publisher I would make one big exclusive for the Wii U that can reach all ages in a category that Nintendo doesn't cover. Put lots of polish and effort into it. You'll have a nice selling evergreen title for the Wii U.
I always thought this should have happened with the Wii. I mean it was never going to be the home of AAA western games. But there was also no competition. There was probably room, for example, for a great real racing game. Or a great western rpg. Or a great fps game.
The problem with the few efforts to make games that Nintendo didn't make on the Wii were
1) They were too violent or profanity laced or ..
Examples, Mad World, House of Dead Overkill, No more Heroes
I completely agree with you there. That is the major failing of many developers when it came to the Wii and now the WiiU. Unfortunately, many publishers don't want to expend that many resources to a single platform anymore.
However, there were a number of exclusive third party titles that were polished and were not overly violent or profanity laced. They just were not genres that typically sold well on the market.
He's been saying this for a while now. The value of games are starting to diminish, while the cost of making them is skyrocketing. Smartphones and tablets are not keeping with in the guidelines of what should be considered a good value for a game, therefore the consumer is beginning to believe that the value of games should be cheaper than what it needs to be at.
I think there are various reasons why the value of games diminishes. A game which is locked to an account for example has a lot less value (max. 50%) then a free tradeable one.
i feel they need to encourage more indie developers to make games for the wii u, so many fans always come up with innovative ways to use nintendos new technology, i remember when the wii came out someone modified the motion censored to be on glasses and allowed for a virtual experience using the wiis own technology
@ David Gonzales - Actually, that's not a bad idea! Time and time again, it has been brought up that the indie scene is the way to go at this point for the game industry. With the right moves, it can be a fresh new start for game development and a great way to solve the problems with game development cost as well as to solve other problems that are plaguing the videogame industry.
I agree and this is when Nintendo should also start bringing more talent in house and publishing new kinds games through themselves. There are plenty of talented and creative people out there to be found that would design and develop amazing games for Nintendo, similar and different to the titles they have always had and maybe even new twists on them.
Indie devs still have to make money too. There's only so long an indie developer can work for no money. Perhaps a year after leaving university but that's about it.
If the business model no longer works then the industry will crash.
I'm sorry but I wasn't a console gamer growing up so I don't have the "Nintendo Nostalgia" that I've seen many have. So to me Nintendo saying that "Players are Tired of the same old same old" is laughable. Every game they have seems to be the "Same old Same Old."
I know, I know there are "innovations" in the game but basically I see the games trotted out by Nintendo time after time. Mario, Zelda, Sport title, Kart Title, and secondary character game (Kirby or Donkey Kong usually or Yoshi maybe). Honestly Nintendo is the epitome of "same old same old." It'd be like a Call of Duty Dev saying "People are getting tired of the same old First Person Shooter year after year." :|
lol. Sorry I've read views from both angles here in this thread and that's why I laughed. It seems like a case of .....Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
IF they do too new of game experiences then some customers don't understand them and don't buy.
If they do the same old then some customers don't buy because they have been there, done that.
"It'd be like a Call of Duty Dev saying "People are getting tired of the same old First Person Shooter year after year."
They should be saying that, actually. Iwata seems to be admitting a problem with Nintendo here as well, so I don't think it's fair to imply he's being a hypocrite.
Okay fair enough Justin, how about I add this then: If they continue DOING what they've always done THEN they are being hypocritical. Honestly I haven't seen anything to show they're NOT just going to keep releasing the same things over and over again just like Call of Duty does.
I guess I'm just cynical and think that even if a COD DEV did say that they'd still just release the same crap.
@ James Yee - It is not that simple. As Justin said, Mr. Iwata seems to be admitting a problem with Nintendo as well, but there are people that still want to see another game come from a popular franchise series. There are fans that claim that they are tired of the same old, and yet, they still want to see another Mario game or another COD game, for example. It is a no win situation. I wouldn't be surprised if Iwata made his comments based on some of the reactions towards to Super Mario Bros. U, but that doesn't mean that people don't want to see another Mario game. Plus, it is not like that Nintendo hasn't tried to release new IPs, especially with the help from 2nd-party companies and from joint company effort. Unfortunately some of those titles don't get enough recognition and don't even get to be released outside of the US. Xenoblade Chronicle, The Last Story and Pandora's Tower were the lucky ones, but there are still couple other titles that still remain in Japan and may never be released outside of Japan.
"...We try to offer various kinds of software for a video game platform, and the games are improving steadily each year, but these improvements are becoming less noticeable," he says.
Where? How? What was the last major new intellectual property they made or pushed? Wii Music? The restoration of Kid Icarus? Lets be honest Iwata, you are not trying at all if you are not willing to make new properties, try new idea, or even fail sometimes.
That's why Wii is having a hard time, Nintendo has been asleep at the wheel for over a decade just recycling characters and creating only a handful of new properties. You can only re-release Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Donkey Kong, Pokemon, Kirby and Star Fox so many times.
They need new franchises, but if they keep saying, "We try to offer various kinds of software for a video game platform" as some sort of justification that they are doing EVERYTHING possible they are delusional.
It is one thing to fail, it is another thing not to try, but it is just pathetic to not even admit to not trying.
Iwata never said they are releasing boatloads of new intellectual property every year while still releasing Mario and Zelda and company. He said they release various kinds of software and that while their games are improving the improvements are becoming less noticeable.
Saying they aren't trying is absurd. They just came off major successes with the Wii and DS. Both of which were really new ideas that got lots of flak in the marketplace even as they flew off the shelves.
@ Lincoln Thurber - Adding to what Bob said and pointing out to what I said in an earlier comment, it is not like that Nintendo hasn't tried to release new IPs, even with the help from 2nd-party companies and from joint company effort. There was/is Xenoblade Chronicles and the upcoming Wonderful 101, for example. Plus, there's still expectations from people when it comes to seeing another game in the franchise series and it is not just with Nintendo. It is with other companies as well. In case of Capcom, there are still some people that want to see Megaman Legends 3 become a reality.
New IP isn't a cure all. If I paint my grey car red, it's still the same dam car. And yet now no one I know recognizes me on the street because they are looking for the grey car still.
That's why Nintendo still uses many of the same mascots.
I call BS. I see people buy games all the time. They are tired of gimmicks. I'm not saying throw out the Wii U controller. But I am saying they never should have launched with it! People just want to play games, gimmicks is an after thought. The $80-$120 price added to every Wii U unit hurt. How about you fully stock your virtual store Nintendo?
Think this is bad? Watch me give the same lecture with the PS4 and 720. Fully stock your virtually stores, full B/C your games, and sell your consoles at $250 instead of $500. Rip out some gimmicks to cut the costs by 25% at least. GAMES! Just make fun, affordable games!
I don't think the controller is a gimmick. I think it is a nice add-on actually in many regards. You gotta use one though for awhile. The map on the screen. Being able to input text easy enough. Playing a game without the tv. Extra easy to use additonal touchscreen buttons. No gimmicks there.
Now can it be used in a gimmicky way? Sure just like most anything can. And so far a gimmicky use might be holding it up to look around your world because you could probably get away with using an analog stick/gyro on a regular game controller to perform that function while looking at the tv. Even then not sure it would be as smooth or cool.
And what's a gimmick exactly? A new feature that time says you don't need or you get tired of? Every game has gimmicks. And what was once fun and new and novel is later old and tired and a gimmick. Sometimes it is difficult to know what is a gimmick and what isn't. Only time makes it easy.
Gimmicks are fun even if they are, in the end, a gimmick. Are you saying that Guitar Hero should never have been made because the guitar was a gimmick?
You say just make fun affordable games. But part of making fun games is giving you new experiences. Gimmicks are a part of that.
WiiSports wouldn't have been the same thing on a regular game controller. The controls made the game. Was that a gimmick? IF so should it not have been made? Does that make it not fun?
And can't controls be used as both a gimmick and must have feature? Maybe gimmick depends on the game/developer and use of said feature.
I'm amazed that some folks think we shouldn't have consoles with new types of controls for fear they might turn out gimmicky. That we've somehow reached the point where we can stop with introducing new types of control because what we have is fine. It misses the point of videogames in my mind.
To launch without the Gamepad defeats the entire purpose of the Wii U. MIght want to actually use one for awhile before writing it off. I mean to think folks that spend years thinking about and developing and eventually releasing a piece of gaming hardware are told to not sell it with their console even though those folks haven't used it and haven't spent nearly as much time in thinking about said device and its applications.
Yes, the Wii was a gimmick. Motion controls are a gimmick and just like plastic guitars they are fading from "general" use. As you say gimmicks CAN be fun but essentially they are very "specific use." For many the giant screen controller IS a gimmick because they have no clue what to do with it.
Go ahead, ask anyone standing around in the electronics section at Target, Best Buy (or your country's equivalent) and ask Joe/Jane Doe average about the Wii U. Good odds they'll say the "Wii what?" or "Isn't that just a new release of the Wii?" Or some other obviously disappointing answer to those at Nintendo.
1. They've done almost NOTHING to make people want to use the Wii U or even try to understand that controller. I know I don't get as much advertising as I used to but you'd think I'd see ads for the Wii U like the "Lets Play" ads for the Wii that did a good job of explaining what motion controls did. The Wii U "pad" thingy doesn't convert well to 30 Second ads, or they haven't made them yet.
2. They've not differentiated themselves enough from other consoles even WITH that giant controller. People see games available on all systems or games coming to Wii U months after other systems. Add to that the cost difference especially for the low end Xbox that does everything the Wii U does (as far as normal family is concerned) and there's no incentive to buy it.
I wholeheardtedly agree many don't know about the WiiU or understand what it does or think it is a just a Wii.
And I agree their marketing hasn't been up to snuff too. And that they haven't differentiated themeselves enough.
But it's early. It ain't a sprint. It's a marathon.
And gimmicks are what make the gaming world go around.
Tangent: Something that is used as a gimmick isn't necessarily and inherently a gimmick. Take motion controls. I don't agree they are a gimmick. They can be used and were used in a gimmicky manner. But in other cases they weren't. WiiSports is more fun with those controls. Some games benefit from them. The key is to use them where they work and not just to use them because they are there.
Ironically the vast majority of Nintendo's Wii games didn't primarily use motion controls.
I agree that the WiiU controller looks gimmicky. I have got Singstar, EyeToy, dance pads, steering wheel, Move, Classic Controller, Guitar Hero. In addition to this I have got of course Xbox360, PS3 and Wii controllers, a 3DS and a PSP. I am tired of all this stuff, they are fun, but I am tired of storing them somewhere, of charging them somehow.
I am starting to get rid of some of the things and I decided that it somehow really was an unnecessary excess. I don't want this any more, less is more, maybe I will only buy 1 console this generation. When I saw the first videos of the WiiU I thought, Oh no, an additional controller again. Maybe its just me, or maybe some other people who got balance boards, microphones, guitars etc. have the same feeling that the want to have less stuff laying around.
The Wiimote was easy to us. I saw all ages, all genders pick that thing up and play effortlessly. I've seen the complete opposite with the Wii U. When does it become a gimmick? When it's made to stand out from the norm. Which is fine when it compliments the fun.
The controller should have launched separately in 2013 X-mas with 10 games. 1 new, 4 Wii, 5 classic games GC-NES. Then dump the money saved into slightly better specs, and a launch price $250 per unit. I'm disgusted because we're looking at a next gen console crash and all these CEOs, and all their BS will do what, Iwata is doing. Blame the consumer. It's not the consumer's fault!
I would describe the Wii's motion controllers as bait, not as a gimmick.
The Wii successfully appealed to millions of consumers who Nintendo's competitors had effectively written off. The problem was Nintendo didn't develop the types of games needed to keep the majority of those new players engaged after the new toy effect wore off. The problem with the Wii U is the system was designed to appeal to existing players who's preferences and needs are underserved or ignored by MS, Sony and the AAA development community... but the Wii U launch library only contained games designed to appeal to the over served players.
So Iwata was correct that many players have grown bored with games based on gameplay concepts created 30 years ago for an audience which no longer exists. Or with games which on no level reflect the preferences or serve the needs of the majority of the audience. AAA sales stats over the past 5 to 6 years are clear evidence of this. But Iwata glossed over the fact that he utterly failed to exploit this vulnerability with the Wii U. Nintentdo can still turn this around if they develop the types of games needed to appeal to the underserved majority of the audience. The question is does Iwata understand what types of games are needed?
I think that Satoru Iwata makes an interesting point about the potential cost (negative) of "social gaming" or at least, these cheaper mobile-based experiences.
In many ways, mobile platforms have been a boon for the development community, especially independent developers. The barrier to entry is relatively low, as compared to console development.
On the other hand, just go and look at reviews on the iOS App Store. There are some high-quality titles there that offers many hours of gameplay, but you still get people saying "This isn't worth $2.99" and that really just amazes me.
It might be true that many of these games don't offer the same depth of experience as, say, a fully-fledged console title. But I think it is not unreasonable to consider the psychology behind perception of value, and whether or not customers can see a clear delineation between a rich mobile experience and a console experience - at least in terms of dollar value.
Iwata is right to at least raise that question, but in terms of Wii U, the question is about what Nintendo can control. It can't control market saturation as occurs through other businesses, and it can't control values of games released on iOS App Store. But it can ensure that Wii U has a solid library of great content and is well-marketed. On those two key scores, Nintendo can be found lacking. So, I think there's obviously more to it than Iwata's somewhat side-stepped points (albeit that they are still valid and worthy of consideration).
I am tired of the same old $60 price point for every game that is released.
I am tired of publishers then expecting me to put down an additional $50 for their "season pass".
I am tired of day 1 DLC's. I am just plain tired of DLC's.
I am tired of the marketing machine telling me what I want to play.
I am tired of games exclusively release ONLY on the XBOX, or ONLY on the PS3, or ONLY in the Wii U.
I am tired of shitty ports of games when the finally do release them on the PC.
I am tired of publishers trying to be like Steam. FYI you will NEVER be like Steam.
I could forgive all of thee above. The one thing that I am REALLY tired of is being treated like a criminal by game publishers. I understand that piracy is a problem, but inconveniencing me, a legitimate user is NOT helping your cause. I paid you money and I am the one who has to jump through the hoops?
If I was tired of the same old I would not be asking for a Wii U sequel to Metroid Prime. No sequel to Metroid prime no sale for a Wii U. period. Eat that Mr Iwata.
@ Alan Rimkeit - I could be wrong, but I think that Iwata might have made his comment based on some of the reactions towards Super Mario Bros. U. Having said that, you just proved that things are not that black and white when it comes to games and game franchises. There will be people that will claim that they are tired of the same old, but at the same time, they want to see another game in a franchise series and/or may be cynical about wanting something new. There will also be people that are not tired of the same old, waiting for a new game in a franchise series. Look at how many times people kept on asking for another Zelda game, even more than another Mario game at times. Not to mention, you are not the only one that wants to see a new Metroid game for the Wii U, which could take full advantage of the Wii U Gamepad (especially use the virtual reality aspect of the controller's functions). The situation with Nintendo and other companies is that they are stuck in the "screwed if they do and screwed if they don't" scenario.
If you weren't tired of the same old then you wouldn't need to buy a new Metroid Prime game. ;)
Also don't think Iwata is talking about not making the same IP given that he also talked about the next Pikmin coming out and the next Mario Kart, Super Mario game and Smash Bros etc.
He is more talking about keeping franchises fresh with new ideas and new ways to play. New IP ie new characters or images is only a small part of the same old I think.
I can paint my car but it's still the same dam car.
@ Bob Johnson - While I agree with your comment, there's a validity to Alan's comment. I may be mistaken, but I think that Alan was thinking about Iwata referring to comments in the same vain as the ones from people that criticize either the New Super Mario Bros. games or the Call of Duty games. There are people that do feel that there's barely a difference between the Call of Duty games as well as a difference between New Super Mario Bros. Wii and Super Mario Bros. U, feeling that there were/are little to no changes between the games from either franchise. In case of the two New Super Mario Bros. games for the big consoles, I could tell the difference between the two of them, but it wasn't enough for me to consider purchasing the Wii U version of the game at its current price at this point. To Alan, he doesn't mind another game in the Metroid Prime series and he really loves the mechanics/functions behind the game. Of course, a Metroid Prime game for the Wii U would take the Metroid franchise and the Wii U functions as well as the Wii U Gamepad functions to a whole new level, but there will be people that will try to undermine the Metroid Prime game and use the "tired of same old" excuse against it. From what I notices, that's not the case with Alan and I feel the same way as well. Even though I didn't have problems with Other M, I still would like to see Nintendo let Retro work on the Metroid franchise once again as Retro would know how to make the series look good on the Wii U.
All I am saying is don't go thinking Nintendo is not going to make most (of) the usual Nintendo franchises. I think that would be misinterpreting Iwata's comments.
And all I am saying is that Ninty needs to give me(and a hole lot of other people) a damn good reason to spend that amount of cash on a Wii U. That means games I and other want to play. Bring me Metroid and I will buy it and a Wii U on day one. I did the same for the GameCube.
I don't think the market is tired of the same old. Madden still sells well, as does Mario, Call of Duty, Angry Birds. No one gets tired of the franchises. Diablo 3 made a killing and it didn't even work the first day. People get tired of the saturation. Why would I pay for a game 'just like' COD for $60 bucks when I can you know, just buy COD? This is why so many publishers go under. You don't see cover bands charging 50 bucks to perform covers.
They'd rather just try to steal from a huge pie instead of creating their own dessert. No More Heroes didn't set the sales charts on fire and was just hack and slash game. But Suda 51 and Grasshopper Manufacture are still making games their own way.
They're just too many good games out now and too many games I have to wait for Amazon to drop the price on before I buy it. And it's only because I already threw a ton of money towards a sequel I was waiting to play, so that hurts a new IP developing into a something bigger.
@Bob: The same old franchises is directly correlated to that gameplay. The same old franchises have the same gameplay, which lead to his point about saturation. When there's 10 2D sidescrollers available for 40 bucks at the same time, most players will get sick of a lot of them and just buy the top franchise. The law of diminishing returns do play a factor for many customers for all the ripoffs
Ok sure NSMB is a side scroller. And the others before that were side scrollers. But you are really describing the genre and not the specific gameplay inside that genre which is what I think Iwata was talking about.
@Bob: I think I got that point. And you can use that across the board for multiple genres. For many people, the genre comes first and for others, one franchise represents that genre better. Many just don't care about the underpinnings if the games look and feel the same in the long run.
I disagree that no one cares about the underpinnings.
They do. Now most probably don't care about these things on a deep level.
But they notice them because the game feels new and fresh even though it feels familiar at the same time.
Also there are obvious new gameplay ideas that are hard to miss. NSMB has multiplayer, new power ups, new enemies, and things of that nature. PLus of course the levels aren't complete clones of previous games.
Franchises representing genres is beside the point.
If franchises representing genres were beside the point, then we'd see a lot more successful first person shooters outside COD, Battlefield, Halo, and Borderlands. And we'd also have a lot more competing kart racers with Mario Kart. And Mario Kart feels (my feeling, I could be wrong) like it stopped trying after the DS version
But Nintendo franchises aren't yearly events either. So that helps a lot of the gameplay feel fresh as well but that's not an industry standard. And what can be okay for Nintendo, hurts other developers wanting success on the same level.
For the record, I love the 2D Marios, they're fun to play.
? Well you're losing me further. When I say besides the point I ain't saying you aren't making another different good point or observation. Maybe you are. I just don't see what it has to do with what Iwata meant by his comments.
@Bob. He's talking about how they're making improvements in saturated genres. Small, incremental improvements into a franchise that's offers the same gameplay. No matter how fresh it may feel, New Super Mario Bros U is just one more 2D side scrolling platformer that can be found for cheaper. For the investors, it hurts because before that New Super Mario Bros and NSMB Wii sold like gangbusters. That's the connection I made.
Also, the other connection I made was a trend, for a lack of better term, that can be seen all across the board for all of games. Who really wants to pay 60 bucks for a new IP that reminds of a existing IP. For example, THQ really thought people wanted to pay 60 bucks for Homefront, when Call of Duty was right there on the shelf.
The saturation point he was making doesn't just stay with Nintendo's franchises, it's seen across all of the market. Thankfully, not all of Nintendo's franchises are easily cloned, so they may fare better. But Iwata's point tied into a price point was my focus.
Yeah don't think he said or believes that no matter how fresh their franchises feel they are just another game in the genre. :) I think his additional comments in the Q&A confirm this.
For example, he says one reason they held back Pikmin 3 is to put more work into it in order to make sure customers fully feel that it is a valuable title. He said he believes that a delicately crafted gaming experience on a dedicated game machine will never fail to appeal to the consumer. He said this has been reaffirmed by recent releases in Japan like Animal Crossing which caught fire there.
Ok I have to ask since when does anyone want to pay $60 for a lesser known game when a more well known game they haven't played is on the shelf next to it and seems similar? :) Never mind I don't really get what this has to do with Iwata's comments still.
Now I also don't completely get Iwata's use of the word saturation. But I think it is more about $60 games needing to sell millions nowadays in order to break even and thus you just can't have the breadth of $60 content you had before. The games cost so much more to make because it takes so much more to wow customers than before. Thus $60 titles aren't selling unless they can really justify that price point. Thus lesser $60 franchises are pushed aside. Not because the genre is saturated with other games though. But because the economics don't work. Actually the genres are less saturated in terms of $60 titles.
@Bob:
'since when does anyone want to pay $60 for a lesser known game when a more well known game they haven't played is on the shelf next to it and seems similar?'
It's not about wanting to pay $60 bucks for a clone. It's about that clone being put out by a publisher who thinks its worth $60 bucks cause its 'better' than the original. It's less about publisher trying to recoup costs and more about them foolishly throwing money in that direction and thinking it will comeback to them because it's $60. Publishers genuinely believe there's a real formula for duplicate success. Too many publishers crash and burn riding the wave
Truth be told, I worked in a call center for a game publisher and I've talked to many customers who buy games just because they like the genre. And a crowded genre hurts in the long run because if customers just see so much of the gameplay and design, fatigue will set in. If that wasn't true, then New Super Mario Bros Wii U should be setting the charts on fire like the previous games. That's what Iwata is saying. He feels no matter how much time and money they spend on making their sequels better and fresh, the buying public MAY not care cause they MAY see it as a sequel. Just look at the numbers between Galaxy 1 and Galaxy 2. I thought that was evident in this quote: '"In short, what one platform can offer will eventually become saturated. Every consumer will inevitably become tired of and get less excitement from the same type of entertainment."
You can't underestimate fatigue factor when it comes to people spending money on games. Not every Nintendo customer is a hardcore Nintendo fan. Not every hardcore title gets picked up by the hardcore. And I'm dying for more Nintendo software, I love it. But I'm probably not the one they have a hard time convincing to buy.
Iwata said he strongly believes a carefully crafted gaming experience on a dedicated games machines will appeal to consumers. He says this was reaffirmed most recently by Animal Crossing sales in Japan. It's in the Q&A.
And what's AC? It's a sequel. And there are many sequels on the 3ds that are selling well and should continue to sell well.
NSMB on Wii U has probably sold over a million so far. And will continue to sell well for years. It is too early to make any judgement about how well it will sell in the end.
No Iwata was talking about how it costs more than ever for Nintendo to justify the purchase of a $60 game in the eyes of consumers. And that they can't get away with releasing a $60 title they don't put a lot of effort into because customers won't notice the improvements.
Thus what they can offer on a platform eventually becomes saturated. And he is talking about the $60 games business.
Nintendo has positioned their platforms for other digital business models. For example, NSMB on the Wii U is going to get Luigi DLC this summer. That flies in the face of your interpretation of Iwata's comments.
IF you believe your own post about Iwata's comments then you must believe Nintendo will never release another one of their franchises. And will either close shop tomorrow because they don't think they can do anything or will release entirely all new IP in brand new genres that they created out of thin air overnight. lol.
Well that you for reading my mind and figuring things out for me. I guess Nintendo does really live in its own bubble. What the hell am I doing with this PS3 and PC? They don't make video games, they make interactive entertainment. Only Nintendo makes videos games. Guess I'll just stop Bioshock Infinite because Nintendo is will make great games because they always have. Damn alternatives!
Well not sure what you just said. And we were going in circles anyway.
I originally just asked that if you thought Iwata meant people are getting tired of franchises then why would Nintendo be releasing all their usual franchises with relatively few new ones?
I don't think you answered that. My point was only that he must not think people are getting tired of franchises then because he is releasing the usual ones. He must be talking about gameplay and keeping franchises fresh enough.
I don't disagree with you that most customers don't want to play every side scroller. I sure don't. I don't want to play every fps. Nor every racing game. ....
On the other hand some people do like to play every game in a genre which you also mentioned. I don't disagree.
But this has always been going on. It's nothing new. Clones have always been made too. I'm no fan of most clones either.
What is new is the economics of the $60 games business. There's not much room for anything but the biggest hits. ......BEcause those are the only games that can sell enough units to cover the budgets needed to make the $60 game worth it to the consumer.
I find the headline incredibly ironic coming from Iwata, considering he is the same person that could be blamed for why there was no Metroid game for the n64 at all. Or why every "NSMB" title is so incredibly similar to each other, especially considering they all have the exact same audio score (sound FX & music). Compared to the original Super Mario Bros. series, "new" SMB feels like the Stepford Wives - uncanny valley levels of similarity to the point of being creepy.
Even funnier still I got a notification from Nintendo on my Wii that was pretty much a deliberate ad in trying to promote the WiiU. The problem is there is currently nothing I specifically want to play FOR the WiiU. The overwhelming majority of games for the system that are of any degree of appeal, I'd already played on the other consoles, or on my PC. So I don't have a justifiable reason to pick them up and play again on the WiiU for that.
If Nintendo wants to impress, they need to get Smash Brothers on the WiiU, stat. I would also suggest throwing some money in the way of Suda 51 to make something for the system again. The entire Wii generation for me was almost completely lacking of any mature titles until No More Heroes came along, and I would love to see if there could be another game in the vein of Killer7 coming to the platform. Since they want to push the tablet controller so hard for developers, using the tablet to find Heavens' smile to kill with it and shooting that way would be a legitimate use of the AR-style technology.
I also just wish that the WiiU was less restrictive of games and saves stored on external storage; Being able to say they support it is a step in the right direction (no doubt taking a page from the homebrewers that enabled it for the Wii), but - correct me if I'm wrong - it's my understanding that you can't run games installed on external, or that games won't read saves that are moved to external for space-saving reasons...? If this is the case still, that pretty much leaves anyone that bought the "basic" WiiU screwed if they start amassing any kind of library.
@ Jorge Ramos - In defense of Iwata, I believe that he himself was/is aware of the problem with the New Super Mario Bros. games, so I do believe that he wasn't just talking about 3rd-party games in this case. He was including Nintendo's own games into the mix. That's why Nintendo will have to think very carefully on how to craft the next Super Smash Bros., because if the company does one mistake with that game, it will get the same criticisms that NSMB and CoD are getting from the people that keep on saying that they are tired of the same old thing.
"Mature" games didn't work on the Wii and games from Suda 51 haven't been big sellers. Not going to do much for Nintendo.
And I am just flabbergasted that so many act like the Wii U will never get another game in the next 5 years.
Don't most of games you've enjoyed on any console over the years come out after the first 6 months?
Hasn't NIntendo always released a bunch of big franchises and a bunch of minor ones and a few new IPs and dusted off some old ones during the lifetime of every one of their consoles? They seem like they have a pretty consistent track record.
No More Heroes managed to be a better lightsaber game than anything that officially came from George Lucas' properties, and its sequel continued on its zany flavor of fun.
Personally, since Killer7, I've yet to play a Suda51 game I didn't like. I haven't played Shadows of the Damned or Lollipop Chainsaw yet, but that's both equal factors of time and money not being in my favor to do so. :(
Further, there was also Madworld; I rather dug its Sin City-style aesthetic, the color commentary, and the gory satisfaction it enabled by working with the Wii's positives and limitations.
About the only thing that I would find myself playing if I had a WiiU is ZombiU; but I make a rule of never buying a console (or handheld) for one game. I just find it funny how Nintendo is having to resort to ads being pushed to Wii systems to try and promote the next console, when they've yet to put out something I would seriously want for it. Of all the WiiU store kiosks out there, only one actually had a playable demo of anything, and that game was the new Rayman, which admittedly was nice, but it wasn't something I would buy the system for.
@Kenneth,
Iwata has been in charge of Nintendo (of Japan) for some time. He'd been part of their corporate planning since 2000, and was the fourth president for the company since 2002. He's only recently decided to go "overseas" to take over as president for Nintendo of America.
You also forget that even with the strong (local) presence NoA has as a company, and the rather impressive following Reggie Fils-Aime developed (to the point of internet meme status), NoJ has always been the side to call the shots worldwide. Not even Reggie's charisma could fully overcome the Japanese boards' refusal to adapt, and why Nintendo has been rather left in third place since the decisions that hampered the N64.
Given Iwata is still officially positioned as an active employee at HAL Labs, that would also mean he has had a hand in why Earthbound64 failed, and why Mother 3 never left Japan; which, after trying out a fan-translated copy of the game, I'm STILL upset with him over.
Regardless of what they have planned, making his first decision as NoA's CEO being to not participate at E3 is/will be perceived as a sign of weakness. I am only cautiously optimistic for Nintendo's ability to rebound from this obvious slump.
Hey not questioning the merits of the Suda 51 games or MadWorld. Just saying they didn't sell. :) And thus not seeing that games such as these will "rescue" Nintendo from doom and gloom.
Not sure why it is funny to advertise your new product to owners of your old product. It's dirt cheap for them to do that. And they want to make people aware they have a new console. IT doesn't affect their rate of software development.
And again I think Nintendo's track record for releasing x amount of games during the lifetime of each of their consoles is pretty consistent. I don't fault anyone for waiting to buy a console until there are enough games to justify the purchase. Dont count your chickens until they hatch right? But I am annoyed that some of us act like there is never going to be another Nintendo game for the Wii U. We're just going to get NSMB and NintendoLand and LegoCity Undercover. That's it. lol.
Maybe Nintendo has finally figured out that they need new ideas like Wii Sports and Brainage to help drive sales these days and sequels to those games need to be a fresh as the orignal. They also need more online multiplayer games. I think Nintendoland would be a much stronger game if it had it and NSMBU would benefit from leaderboards for challenge mode.They need to advance their output if they really want to turn things around.
Ain't Nintendoland a new idea? It uses some old characters, but ideas are all new.
I find online that leaderboards are overrated. Not much fun competing for 1,145,237th place. You have to play 24/7 to even have a chance at the top. I tend to view those at the top of these things as superhuman. lol.
Nintendoland is a new idea but it appeals to Nintendo fans. Wii Sports totally broke away from Nintendo's norm and IPs.
If you don't like leaderboards you can ignore them but by not having them the appeal of the game is limited a bit. There have Miis in the plaza so Nintendo could have added more online interaction. Even letting you play against or team up with AI controled Miis from your plaza for some games would be great.
Frankly, I see this article not just about Nintendo but about the entire console ecosystem.
I started playing on a Sinclair ZX 48k back in 1983 (I was 4 back then), passed through ZX 128K, Master System, Gameboy, Megadrive, PS1, PS2, XBOX, PS3 and always... always on the PC.
The thing is... I loved gaming on my consoles, but now, I really don't see why anymore.
Every game is ported to all platforms, the PC having the mod scene almost every time, better graphics and support thanks to a dedicated community, and lower price.
The exclusives for each console are almost non existent and only a one or two are actually worth it (Demons Souls)
Game still cost 60€ YEARS after launch, it makes me buy stuff from the UK where the market lowers their prices months (sometimes weeks) after launch.
Steam is a daily regular for me, because... LOW PRICE GAMES, games I would have not bought but will do so because I like to try cheap stuff (and sometimes find some amazing gems *Orcs must die*).
I have a PC that plays the latest games without hickups that costed me 400€ 4 years ago and can connect to a TV a gamepad and just be like a console, actually I have played Mark of the Ninja in my 32" TV with my PS3 controller.
Indies VS AAA, frankly I love bough sides, and I can have them in the PC alone.
Also, my PC is used for game development, updating social networks and internets...
Tell me again why should I need a new console when I got my 4 year old PC?
I think I'll pass the next generation of consoles if they offer me the same.
The way I see it, Nintendo did great with the Wii by targeting casual gamers with a new, unique experience. Along the way, they made their games more casual to get more of this market which turned off more hardcore gamers. Now with the Wii U, casual gamers aren't as interested by the new gimmicks (if they even realize the Wii U and Wii are different systems) and think the Wii is just fine. Couple that with a surprising lack of games now or on the horizon and poor sales are all but assured.
While there certainly are other issues in the marketplace and plenty of new competition, I think Nintendo's issues are it's own doing and not really a result of an overall market shift.
IN 2004 the GC was done for. It was also Nintendo's worst selling console ever.
And how exactly are we determining that the Wii U is going to have so much fewer releases than the GC? It is only 6 months old. The paint isn't even dry.
Alex Knows this. That's why he said "it would be much more successful today".
?
Alex is saying Nintendo should have learned from the GC and should have been releasing a steady stream of game releases all along.
I replied that the GC was their worst selling console. IF the GC did have a steady stream of releases then it didn't help Nintendo sell consoles. :)
I also asked how one compares Nintendo's console platform today which is only 6 months old to their console platform from 2000-2005 and then determines that the game releases of their current platform won't be similar in number when all is said and done. Seems premature. I want to see the math on it.
Sorry, I wasn't very clear. What I meant was, the games that Nintendo put out during the GCN days weren't "quality" in the eye of the consumer, which was indicated by the poor sales of the system. Nintendo is going down the wrong path if they re-use the GCN strategy of "games for single-player hard-core Nintendo fans." The Wii strategy of "games my friends would enjoy playing with me" was clearly superior from a business standpoint. It remains to be seen if Nintendo will follow that path again, which made the Wii so successful.
A game like NSMBW2 is on the right track, but the system is too expensive for just one multiplayer game, especially when it doesn't seem to offer much more than NSMBW which tons of people already have.
I get what you're saying but the Wii U didn't launch with one multiplayer game it launch with two counting Nintendoland.
I think part of what Iwata is admiting is that NSMBU is not enough of a change to drive more hardware. Nintendoland also uses the same Nintendo IPs compared to Wii Sports, which was a totally new IP.
ACtually I wasn't referring to your post. :) Sorry for any confusion on my part.
And I think I agree with the gist of what you are saying. I mean I said that if Nintendo was more consistent with game releases on the Gamecube then it sure didn't help them sell Gamecubes. :)
I am looking forward to Pikmin 3 though. And there is always the possibility it could break out and become a hit.
IMO the issue is that pc games are cheaper, often better (as in more fun), and no longer have the distinct genre differences that use to separate pc gamers from console gamers. Indie games and sales (such as Steam sales) are now in the public eye. Console games are often relying on the "get people to buy it before they find out if it sucks or not" method (vs Steam having free weekends and demos). Any genre you want on a console can be found on pc, often for a 10th of the price; and it can easily, comfortably, and cheaply be played with a controller if needed. And for the price of a console and a few games, you can now get a decent pc and several games.
What I want is not necessarily "fresh," I just want "GOOD". Often, trying to make a game more fresh makes it less good... and it certainly makes it more expensive to make, therefore making it impossible to lower the price for customers. If developers focus on good, fresh will come naturally when needed. Heck, look at the best selling mobile games; there's very little fresh there.
One reason I actually like Nintendo's consoles is because I like pc games and find the other consoles to be a worse version of my pc gaming experiences.
Nintendo meanwhile is a great complement to my pcgaming habits. IT is the social living room console. The family console. The pick up and play console. Things the pc is weak at.
But, even though I think the 360/PS3 are lesser than versions of my pgaming experiences, those consoles still thrive because pcgaming is a hassle for large swaths of the population. Some folks just aren't that into the hobby to want to maintain a pc. Kind of like every person who drives a car isn't also a mechanic. Plus the initial outlay for a pc is a greater expense than for a console which is another barrier for pgaming.
btw, I'm with you as far as good games go, but I think everyone wants good games. ;) But if you remain stagnant you are going to have trouble pushing new product. And often one person's good game is another person's bad game.
MY kids have iOS devices, but they don't play Minecraft on them. My 12 yr old plays it on the computer. Before that he played it on the 360 until he found out the pc version is better. He barely touched the iOS version. The problem is the iOS version sucks in comparison.
And that's, in a nutshell, why dedicated gaming devices will continue to do well. They not only will have more processing power but different input devices and can tailor their hardware specifically for games.
Phones and tablets will likely never be made specifically for games and won't be able to just introduce new controls specifically for gaming. That's the advantage dedicated gaming hardware can exploit.
That's why some folks don't perceive iOS as much of a threat or at least as much of a threat as most folks seem to perceive it as. Nintendo can come across as dismissive of iOS for this reason. They have been told many times before that x, y or z will eat their lunch. Mobile gaming on phones isn't as new in Japan as in America from what I gather. The Japanese had more advanced phones than we did before the iPhone hit. And analysts thought mobile gaming was going to doom Nintendo back then.
The DS was doomed because there was the PSP. The Wii was doomed because the PS3 and 360 existed.
Everyone has had computers this whole time and well despite all the same sort of free flash games Nintendo marched on.
Now this doesn't mean they have nothing to worry about. It means they have always had things to worry about. And have always had to earn their $$$ from consumers because consumers have always had reasons to spend their money elsewhere.
"In my mind, mobile games are not even a competitor."
They are only competitors for players who don't view any single form of gaming as their primary form of entertainment. Consumers who view console or PC gaming as their primary form of entertainment in all likelihood only view mobile and tablet gaming as secondary or tertiary sources. Sources they turn to when they cannot access a console or PC.
There is no room for that stuff any more on consoles at AAA game prices.
When you hear about all these developers moving to mobile you can bet that's where 3/4 of them are coming from. :)
Good point. If it wasn't clear I meant "cheap licensed stuff and (cheap) kid's stuff." Obviously there is lots of kid's stuff on consoles that is there to stay. The Wii U itself could be considered a kid's console with quality kid's games like Lego City Undercover or NSMB or NintendoLand or Scribblenauts. And I own Skylander's Giants on the Wii U too and my kids like it.
Unlike the Wii-Controllers which developers could modify traditional controls to utilize the Wii U controller is pretty unique, and therefore any game that is released on multiple consoles I doubt will do well on the Wii U... which brings up a better question...
Will developers (other than those with Nintendo's IPs) make games that are specific to the Wii-U Controller and remove themselves from selling the game to the rest of the console market?
I would say nope... not likely.
New Luigi's Mansion: 3DS, not Wii U.
New Legend of Zelda: Goes to the 3DS. Wii U instead gets an HD port. AGAIN.
Nintendo's big announcement: Earthbound downloadable on the Wii U. Mother 3 would have been a better choice since everyone outside of Japan has been waiting for that game for almost 15 years. Why not both Nintendo?
Nintendo products will sell. Just give us a reason to buy them. I'm sincerely interested to see what happens with this new Smash Brothers game. To see if Nintendo can simultaneously save the 3DS and the Wii U with cross compatibility.
But it wasn't a system seller like Super Mario World (bundled with the SNES at launch) or Mario 64 (not bundled but might as well have been). I can remember with those machines feeling like this was the reason for its existence. $200 for a Super Mario World machine was expensive but felt within reason because it was a great experience. If more games came out to retroactively add value to the purchase, then all the better.
Likewise for Super Mario 64. It defined the 3D platformer and made you feel like you'd really gotten some value for your $250.
The Mario for the Wii U is good but feels like just more of the same. The asymmetric multi-player is intriguing but I've yet to have an opportunity to try it out.
I don't begrudge major titles going to the 3DS, especially if they're well suited to it. It isn't as if Nintendo lacks the funds to hire enough talent to fully cover both platforms. It feels more like Nintendo just doesn't understand why the Wii U isn't drawing more interest.
Call me crazy but the contract here is you buy the console then you get the option to buy 5 years worth of games at 3-4 games per year. That's the contract Nintendo has had with consumers since the N64 at least isn't it?
They seem on-contract to me.
okay, I am calling you crazy. I never signed a contract with Nintendo. You are pulling something totally out of thin air.
However, you are right that Nintendo consoles, since the N64 days, only have about 3-4 games worth buying a year.
Up from there, SNES games on the Wii U Virtual Console are $6.99. I haven't noticed any N64 titles yet but I'll bet they're at least $8.99 or even $9.99. Perhaps Nintendo hasn't noticed but they're competing with much better looking clones of these games for lower prices on Android and the indie channels on other consoles. Yes, Nintendo spent quite a lot of money developing these games from scratch many years ago but if they hadn't long since gone into profits it seems unlikely they'd bother to revive them for the Virtual Console.
Nintendo cuts its own throat by overvaluing their old IP instead of making it an easy impulse buy. A kid who was born when the Gamecube was in stores isn't going to feel any nostalgia for NES games. Instead he's going to wonder why he should spend $5 for one instead of three or four much better looking games on his tablet. Adults looking to relive old pleasures would be just as happy and feel legally entitled to pick up the game for a buck at a garage sale and play it in an emulator on his PC.
You're selling bubble gum by the check-out line here, Nintendo. If the price makes the shopper pause to weigh the decision, the choice probably won't be in your favor.
They can always lower prices eventually too. Much easier than raising them. Plus don't think that selling NEs games for a lot less is going to add to the coffers to any noticeable degree.
I think the 24mb Kirby size if accurate is probably due to the Wii U gamepad streaming functionality and the ability to save game state etc. And that nintendo is including the code for that stuff with each game instead of having it centralized. Just a guess. That and/or each game has the emulator built into it too.
You've got to be kidding. Game state for a game that is only a few dozen kilobytes is tiny, as NES only had a few KB or RAM, with the ROM in the cart mapped directly to the CPU's memory space and the code run straight from the chips. The whole VM should be a few hundred kilobytes at most. This can be seen in the numerous NES emulators on every PC OS.
Nor should it take much code for the GamePad support. It is just treating the wireless connection as a virtual video cable and the pad as a display of lesser resolution than the TV. The code requirement are pretty minimal. It's just a second render target for the GPU.
And if the 24 MB size isn't accurate it is Nintendo's problem because they plainly state it as that size in the eShop.
The only element I've seen so far that explains the added bulk is the screen that comes up when you first select the game. That image is probably several times larger than the NES code itself.
I wasn't expecting a tiny download little bigger than the original ROM. A good virtual manual could easily take up a few megs. But nothing like what Nintendo claims is needed. I'm very curious to see what is found when somebody dissect the contents of a Wii U's storage after a few items have been purchased.
I think the gist of my comment is the larger size is probably due to the Wii U functionality. Also I have seen that Nintendo isnt the most efficient with their OS and support software. The Wii for example rebooted everytime you exited an app. My guess is this sort of mentality is at play here. They could do it better but it is low on the priority pole because it is good enough for their purposes.
it annous me that gamasutra has lots of headlines predicting its doom because that's going to scare away developers and potentially help cripple the system.
One good thing for yhe wii u. Its so easy to do cross olatform with engines like unity that soon a consoles ex lusive titles will become very important to selli g a system. And nintendo is king of exclusive titles.
Yeah the higher price tag is harder to sell but peiple will pay for quality they just need devlopers like you tomake cool games. I like nintendo. I want them to do well.
None of them made any money with their Wii efforts even though their Wii efforts were mostly abysmal to horrible.
And the Wii U doesn't have the computing power of the next xbox or PS4 either.
So was never going to happen. I wouldn't be worried about Gamasutra scaring them away.
Now if I were a AAA publisher I would make one big exclusive for the Wii U that can reach all ages in a category that Nintendo doesn't cover. Put lots of polish and effort into it. You'll have a nice selling evergreen title for the Wii U.
I always thought this should have happened with the Wii. I mean it was never going to be the home of AAA western games. But there was also no competition. There was probably room, for example, for a great real racing game. Or a great western rpg. Or a great fps game.
The problem with the few efforts to make games that Nintendo didn't make on the Wii were
1) They were too violent or profanity laced or ..
Examples, Mad World, House of Dead Overkill, No more Heroes
2) Not polished enough
Red Steel, numerous ports, Conduit,
3) too arty
Mad World, No more Heroes, ...
I completely agree with you there. That is the major failing of many developers when it came to the Wii and now the WiiU. Unfortunately, many publishers don't want to expend that many resources to a single platform anymore.
However, there were a number of exclusive third party titles that were polished and were not overly violent or profanity laced. They just were not genres that typically sold well on the market.
I don't think he is talking about resale value. :)
The value has dropped to free.
Just like journalism and music before.
If the business model no longer works then the industry will crash.
I know, I know there are "innovations" in the game but basically I see the games trotted out by Nintendo time after time. Mario, Zelda, Sport title, Kart Title, and secondary character game (Kirby or Donkey Kong usually or Yoshi maybe). Honestly Nintendo is the epitome of "same old same old." It'd be like a Call of Duty Dev saying "People are getting tired of the same old First Person Shooter year after year." :|
IF they do too new of game experiences then some customers don't understand them and don't buy.
If they do the same old then some customers don't buy because they have been there, done that.
They should be saying that, actually. Iwata seems to be admitting a problem with Nintendo here as well, so I don't think it's fair to imply he's being a hypocrite.
I guess I'm just cynical and think that even if a COD DEV did say that they'd still just release the same crap.
Where? How? What was the last major new intellectual property they made or pushed? Wii Music? The restoration of Kid Icarus? Lets be honest Iwata, you are not trying at all if you are not willing to make new properties, try new idea, or even fail sometimes.
That's why Wii is having a hard time, Nintendo has been asleep at the wheel for over a decade just recycling characters and creating only a handful of new properties. You can only re-release Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Donkey Kong, Pokemon, Kirby and Star Fox so many times.
They need new franchises, but if they keep saying, "We try to offer various kinds of software for a video game platform" as some sort of justification that they are doing EVERYTHING possible they are delusional.
It is one thing to fail, it is another thing not to try, but it is just pathetic to not even admit to not trying.
Saying they aren't trying is absurd. They just came off major successes with the Wii and DS. Both of which were really new ideas that got lots of flak in the marketplace even as they flew off the shelves.
New IP isn't a cure all. If I paint my grey car red, it's still the same dam car. And yet now no one I know recognizes me on the street because they are looking for the grey car still.
That's why Nintendo still uses many of the same mascots.
Think this is bad? Watch me give the same lecture with the PS4 and 720. Fully stock your virtually stores, full B/C your games, and sell your consoles at $250 instead of $500. Rip out some gimmicks to cut the costs by 25% at least. GAMES! Just make fun, affordable games!
Now can it be used in a gimmicky way? Sure just like most anything can. And so far a gimmicky use might be holding it up to look around your world because you could probably get away with using an analog stick/gyro on a regular game controller to perform that function while looking at the tv. Even then not sure it would be as smooth or cool.
And what's a gimmick exactly? A new feature that time says you don't need or you get tired of? Every game has gimmicks. And what was once fun and new and novel is later old and tired and a gimmick. Sometimes it is difficult to know what is a gimmick and what isn't. Only time makes it easy.
Gimmicks are fun even if they are, in the end, a gimmick. Are you saying that Guitar Hero should never have been made because the guitar was a gimmick?
You say just make fun affordable games. But part of making fun games is giving you new experiences. Gimmicks are a part of that.
WiiSports wouldn't have been the same thing on a regular game controller. The controls made the game. Was that a gimmick? IF so should it not have been made? Does that make it not fun?
And can't controls be used as both a gimmick and must have feature? Maybe gimmick depends on the game/developer and use of said feature.
I'm amazed that some folks think we shouldn't have consoles with new types of controls for fear they might turn out gimmicky. That we've somehow reached the point where we can stop with introducing new types of control because what we have is fine. It misses the point of videogames in my mind.
To launch without the Gamepad defeats the entire purpose of the Wii U. MIght want to actually use one for awhile before writing it off. I mean to think folks that spend years thinking about and developing and eventually releasing a piece of gaming hardware are told to not sell it with their console even though those folks haven't used it and haven't spent nearly as much time in thinking about said device and its applications.
Go ahead, ask anyone standing around in the electronics section at Target, Best Buy (or your country's equivalent) and ask Joe/Jane Doe average about the Wii U. Good odds they'll say the "Wii what?" or "Isn't that just a new release of the Wii?" Or some other obviously disappointing answer to those at Nintendo.
1. They've done almost NOTHING to make people want to use the Wii U or even try to understand that controller. I know I don't get as much advertising as I used to but you'd think I'd see ads for the Wii U like the "Lets Play" ads for the Wii that did a good job of explaining what motion controls did. The Wii U "pad" thingy doesn't convert well to 30 Second ads, or they haven't made them yet.
2. They've not differentiated themselves enough from other consoles even WITH that giant controller. People see games available on all systems or games coming to Wii U months after other systems. Add to that the cost difference especially for the low end Xbox that does everything the Wii U does (as far as normal family is concerned) and there's no incentive to buy it.
I wholeheardtedly agree many don't know about the WiiU or understand what it does or think it is a just a Wii.
And I agree their marketing hasn't been up to snuff too. And that they haven't differentiated themeselves enough.
But it's early. It ain't a sprint. It's a marathon.
And gimmicks are what make the gaming world go around.
Tangent: Something that is used as a gimmick isn't necessarily and inherently a gimmick. Take motion controls. I don't agree they are a gimmick. They can be used and were used in a gimmicky manner. But in other cases they weren't. WiiSports is more fun with those controls. Some games benefit from them. The key is to use them where they work and not just to use them because they are there.
Ironically the vast majority of Nintendo's Wii games didn't primarily use motion controls.
I am starting to get rid of some of the things and I decided that it somehow really was an unnecessary excess. I don't want this any more, less is more, maybe I will only buy 1 console this generation. When I saw the first videos of the WiiU I thought, Oh no, an additional controller again. Maybe its just me, or maybe some other people who got balance boards, microphones, guitars etc. have the same feeling that the want to have less stuff laying around.
The controller should have launched separately in 2013 X-mas with 10 games. 1 new, 4 Wii, 5 classic games GC-NES. Then dump the money saved into slightly better specs, and a launch price $250 per unit. I'm disgusted because we're looking at a next gen console crash and all these CEOs, and all their BS will do what, Iwata is doing. Blame the consumer. It's not the consumer's fault!
If I bought every videogame peripheral under the sun and then looked in my closet 5 years later I too would think it was too much. lol.
STuff has a way of piling up over time.
OK so anything standing out from the norm as you call it is a gimmick.
In other words anything new is a gimmick to you until proven otherwise. IN other words change scares you.
Always a problem for new products I guess.
I would describe the Wii's motion controllers as bait, not as a gimmick.
The Wii successfully appealed to millions of consumers who Nintendo's competitors had effectively written off. The problem was Nintendo didn't develop the types of games needed to keep the majority of those new players engaged after the new toy effect wore off. The problem with the Wii U is the system was designed to appeal to existing players who's preferences and needs are underserved or ignored by MS, Sony and the AAA development community... but the Wii U launch library only contained games designed to appeal to the over served players.
So Iwata was correct that many players have grown bored with games based on gameplay concepts created 30 years ago for an audience which no longer exists. Or with games which on no level reflect the preferences or serve the needs of the majority of the audience. AAA sales stats over the past 5 to 6 years are clear evidence of this. But Iwata glossed over the fact that he utterly failed to exploit this vulnerability with the Wii U. Nintentdo can still turn this around if they develop the types of games needed to appeal to the underserved majority of the audience. The question is does Iwata understand what types of games are needed?
In many ways, mobile platforms have been a boon for the development community, especially independent developers. The barrier to entry is relatively low, as compared to console development.
On the other hand, just go and look at reviews on the iOS App Store. There are some high-quality titles there that offers many hours of gameplay, but you still get people saying "This isn't worth $2.99" and that really just amazes me.
It might be true that many of these games don't offer the same depth of experience as, say, a fully-fledged console title. But I think it is not unreasonable to consider the psychology behind perception of value, and whether or not customers can see a clear delineation between a rich mobile experience and a console experience - at least in terms of dollar value.
Iwata is right to at least raise that question, but in terms of Wii U, the question is about what Nintendo can control. It can't control market saturation as occurs through other businesses, and it can't control values of games released on iOS App Store. But it can ensure that Wii U has a solid library of great content and is well-marketed. On those two key scores, Nintendo can be found lacking. So, I think there's obviously more to it than Iwata's somewhat side-stepped points (albeit that they are still valid and worthy of consideration).
I am tired of publishers then expecting me to put down an additional $50 for their "season pass".
I am tired of day 1 DLC's. I am just plain tired of DLC's.
I am tired of the marketing machine telling me what I want to play.
I am tired of games exclusively release ONLY on the XBOX, or ONLY on the PS3, or ONLY in the Wii U.
I am tired of shitty ports of games when the finally do release them on the PC.
I am tired of publishers trying to be like Steam. FYI you will NEVER be like Steam.
I could forgive all of thee above. The one thing that I am REALLY tired of is being treated like a criminal by game publishers. I understand that piracy is a problem, but inconveniencing me, a legitimate user is NOT helping your cause. I paid you money and I am the one who has to jump through the hoops?
Wii 1st year lineup: November 2006 - December 2007
Nov/Dec 2006:
WiiSports
ExciteBike
Zelda:TP
January 2007:
Wario: Smooth Moves
February 2007:
WiiPLay
April 2007:
Super Paper Mario
May 2007:
Mario Party 8
June 2007:
Big Brain Academy: Wii Degree
Pokemon: Battle Revolution
July 2007:
Mario Strikers: Charged
August 2007:
Metroid Prime 3: Corruption
October 2007:
Donkey Kong: Barrel Blast
Battalion Wars 2
November 2007:
Fire Emblem:Radiant Dawn
Super Mario Galaxy
Link's Crossbow Training
Wii U 1st year lineup: November 2012 - December 2013
Nov/Dec 2012:
NintendoLand
New Super Mario Bros Wii U
January 2013:
February 2013:
March 2013:
Lego City Undercover*
April 2013:
May 2013:
.... to be continued
*Nintendo published. Credits have numerous Nintendo personnel mostly in support positions like localization and marketing.
Gamecube 1st year lineup: November 2001 - December 2002
November 2001:
Luigi's Mansion
Wave Race: Blue Storm
December 2001:
Pikmin
Super Smash Bros. Melee
January 2002:
NBA Courtside 2002
June 2002:
Eternal Darkness
August 2002:
Disney's Magical Mirror Starring Mickey Mouse
Super Mario Sunshine
September 2002:
Animal Crossing
Star Fox Adventures
October 2002:
Mario Party 4
November 2002:
Metroid Prime
N64 1st year lineup: September 1996 - December 1997
September 1996:
Pilotwings 64
Super Mario 64
November 1996:
Killer Instinct Gold
Wave Race 64
December 1996:
Star Wars: Shadows of the Empire
January 1997:
February 1997:
Blast Corps
Mario Kart 64
March 1997:
April 1997:
May 1997:
June 1997:
July 1997:
Star Fox 64
August 1997:
Tetrisphere
GoldenEye 007
September 1997:
October 1997:
Mischief Makers
November 1997:
Diddy Kong Racing
December 1997:
Bomberman 64
N64 had 7
Gamecube had 5.
Wii had 6
Wii U had 3.
Although I would imagine that ALL publishers are probably producing less games but spending more money on development at the moment.
If you weren't tired of the same old then you wouldn't need to buy a new Metroid Prime game. ;)
Also don't think Iwata is talking about not making the same IP given that he also talked about the next Pikmin coming out and the next Mario Kart, Super Mario game and Smash Bros etc.
He is more talking about keeping franchises fresh with new ideas and new ways to play. New IP ie new characters or images is only a small part of the same old I think.
I can paint my car but it's still the same dam car.
All I am saying is don't go thinking Nintendo is not going to make most (of) the usual Nintendo franchises. I think that would be misinterpreting Iwata's comments.
Exactly. But let's not act like they don't have a consistent track record of delivering.
And let's not act like Nintendo wants you to buy the Wii U and has no plans of making another game for it.
They'd rather just try to steal from a huge pie instead of creating their own dessert. No More Heroes didn't set the sales charts on fire and was just hack and slash game. But Suda 51 and Grasshopper Manufacture are still making games their own way.
They're just too many good games out now and too many games I have to wait for Amazon to drop the price on before I buy it. And it's only because I already threw a ton of money towards a sequel I was waiting to play, so that hurts a new IP developing into a something bigger.
Not the same old franchises.
You can bank on that since he also talked about all the usual Nintendo franchises coming out this year. ;)
Ok sure NSMB is a side scroller. And the others before that were side scrollers. But you are really describing the genre and not the specific gameplay inside that genre which is what I think Iwata was talking about.
They do. Now most probably don't care about these things on a deep level.
But they notice them because the game feels new and fresh even though it feels familiar at the same time.
Also there are obvious new gameplay ideas that are hard to miss. NSMB has multiplayer, new power ups, new enemies, and things of that nature. PLus of course the levels aren't complete clones of previous games.
Franchises representing genres is beside the point.
If franchises representing genres were beside the point, then we'd see a lot more successful first person shooters outside COD, Battlefield, Halo, and Borderlands. And we'd also have a lot more competing kart racers with Mario Kart. And Mario Kart feels (my feeling, I could be wrong) like it stopped trying after the DS version
But Nintendo franchises aren't yearly events either. So that helps a lot of the gameplay feel fresh as well but that's not an industry standard. And what can be okay for Nintendo, hurts other developers wanting success on the same level.
For the record, I love the 2D Marios, they're fun to play.
? Well you're losing me further. When I say besides the point I ain't saying you aren't making another different good point or observation. Maybe you are. I just don't see what it has to do with what Iwata meant by his comments.
Also, the other connection I made was a trend, for a lack of better term, that can be seen all across the board for all of games. Who really wants to pay 60 bucks for a new IP that reminds of a existing IP. For example, THQ really thought people wanted to pay 60 bucks for Homefront, when Call of Duty was right there on the shelf.
The saturation point he was making doesn't just stay with Nintendo's franchises, it's seen across all of the market. Thankfully, not all of Nintendo's franchises are easily cloned, so they may fare better. But Iwata's point tied into a price point was my focus.
For example, he says one reason they held back Pikmin 3 is to put more work into it in order to make sure customers fully feel that it is a valuable title. He said he believes that a delicately crafted gaming experience on a dedicated game machine will never fail to appeal to the consumer. He said this has been reaffirmed by recent releases in Japan like Animal Crossing which caught fire there.
Ok I have to ask since when does anyone want to pay $60 for a lesser known game when a more well known game they haven't played is on the shelf next to it and seems similar? :) Never mind I don't really get what this has to do with Iwata's comments still.
Now I also don't completely get Iwata's use of the word saturation. But I think it is more about $60 games needing to sell millions nowadays in order to break even and thus you just can't have the breadth of $60 content you had before. The games cost so much more to make because it takes so much more to wow customers than before. Thus $60 titles aren't selling unless they can really justify that price point. Thus lesser $60 franchises are pushed aside. Not because the genre is saturated with other games though. But because the economics don't work. Actually the genres are less saturated in terms of $60 titles.
'since when does anyone want to pay $60 for a lesser known game when a more well known game they haven't played is on the shelf next to it and seems similar?'
It's not about wanting to pay $60 bucks for a clone. It's about that clone being put out by a publisher who thinks its worth $60 bucks cause its 'better' than the original. It's less about publisher trying to recoup costs and more about them foolishly throwing money in that direction and thinking it will comeback to them because it's $60. Publishers genuinely believe there's a real formula for duplicate success. Too many publishers crash and burn riding the wave
Truth be told, I worked in a call center for a game publisher and I've talked to many customers who buy games just because they like the genre. And a crowded genre hurts in the long run because if customers just see so much of the gameplay and design, fatigue will set in. If that wasn't true, then New Super Mario Bros Wii U should be setting the charts on fire like the previous games. That's what Iwata is saying. He feels no matter how much time and money they spend on making their sequels better and fresh, the buying public MAY not care cause they MAY see it as a sequel. Just look at the numbers between Galaxy 1 and Galaxy 2. I thought that was evident in this quote: '"In short, what one platform can offer will eventually become saturated. Every consumer will inevitably become tired of and get less excitement from the same type of entertainment."
You can't underestimate fatigue factor when it comes to people spending money on games. Not every Nintendo customer is a hardcore Nintendo fan. Not every hardcore title gets picked up by the hardcore. And I'm dying for more Nintendo software, I love it. But I'm probably not the one they have a hard time convincing to buy.
Iwata said he strongly believes a carefully crafted gaming experience on a dedicated games machines will appeal to consumers. He says this was reaffirmed most recently by Animal Crossing sales in Japan. It's in the Q&A.
And what's AC? It's a sequel. And there are many sequels on the 3ds that are selling well and should continue to sell well.
NSMB on Wii U has probably sold over a million so far. And will continue to sell well for years. It is too early to make any judgement about how well it will sell in the end.
No Iwata was talking about how it costs more than ever for Nintendo to justify the purchase of a $60 game in the eyes of consumers. And that they can't get away with releasing a $60 title they don't put a lot of effort into because customers won't notice the improvements.
Thus what they can offer on a platform eventually becomes saturated. And he is talking about the $60 games business.
Nintendo has positioned their platforms for other digital business models. For example, NSMB on the Wii U is going to get Luigi DLC this summer. That flies in the face of your interpretation of Iwata's comments.
IF you believe your own post about Iwata's comments then you must believe Nintendo will never release another one of their franchises. And will either close shop tomorrow because they don't think they can do anything or will release entirely all new IP in brand new genres that they created out of thin air overnight. lol.
Well that you for reading my mind and figuring things out for me. I guess Nintendo does really live in its own bubble. What the hell am I doing with this PS3 and PC? They don't make video games, they make interactive entertainment. Only Nintendo makes videos games. Guess I'll just stop Bioshock Infinite because Nintendo is will make great games because they always have. Damn alternatives!
Well not sure what you just said. And we were going in circles anyway.
I originally just asked that if you thought Iwata meant people are getting tired of franchises then why would Nintendo be releasing all their usual franchises with relatively few new ones?
I don't think you answered that. My point was only that he must not think people are getting tired of franchises then because he is releasing the usual ones. He must be talking about gameplay and keeping franchises fresh enough.
I don't disagree with you that most customers don't want to play every side scroller. I sure don't. I don't want to play every fps. Nor every racing game. ....
On the other hand some people do like to play every game in a genre which you also mentioned. I don't disagree.
But this has always been going on. It's nothing new. Clones have always been made too. I'm no fan of most clones either.
What is new is the economics of the $60 games business. There's not much room for anything but the biggest hits. ......BEcause those are the only games that can sell enough units to cover the budgets needed to make the $60 game worth it to the consumer.
BEfore the lesser hits could make money.
Even funnier still I got a notification from Nintendo on my Wii that was pretty much a deliberate ad in trying to promote the WiiU. The problem is there is currently nothing I specifically want to play FOR the WiiU. The overwhelming majority of games for the system that are of any degree of appeal, I'd already played on the other consoles, or on my PC. So I don't have a justifiable reason to pick them up and play again on the WiiU for that.
If Nintendo wants to impress, they need to get Smash Brothers on the WiiU, stat. I would also suggest throwing some money in the way of Suda 51 to make something for the system again. The entire Wii generation for me was almost completely lacking of any mature titles until No More Heroes came along, and I would love to see if there could be another game in the vein of Killer7 coming to the platform. Since they want to push the tablet controller so hard for developers, using the tablet to find Heavens' smile to kill with it and shooting that way would be a legitimate use of the AR-style technology.
I also just wish that the WiiU was less restrictive of games and saves stored on external storage; Being able to say they support it is a step in the right direction (no doubt taking a page from the homebrewers that enabled it for the Wii), but - correct me if I'm wrong - it's my understanding that you can't run games installed on external, or that games won't read saves that are moved to external for space-saving reasons...? If this is the case still, that pretty much leaves anyone that bought the "basic" WiiU screwed if they start amassing any kind of library.
"Mature" games didn't work on the Wii and games from Suda 51 haven't been big sellers. Not going to do much for Nintendo.
And I am just flabbergasted that so many act like the Wii U will never get another game in the next 5 years.
Don't most of games you've enjoyed on any console over the years come out after the first 6 months?
Hasn't NIntendo always released a bunch of big franchises and a bunch of minor ones and a few new IPs and dusted off some old ones during the lifetime of every one of their consoles? They seem like they have a pretty consistent track record.
No More Heroes managed to be a better lightsaber game than anything that officially came from George Lucas' properties, and its sequel continued on its zany flavor of fun.
Personally, since Killer7, I've yet to play a Suda51 game I didn't like. I haven't played Shadows of the Damned or Lollipop Chainsaw yet, but that's both equal factors of time and money not being in my favor to do so. :(
Further, there was also Madworld; I rather dug its Sin City-style aesthetic, the color commentary, and the gory satisfaction it enabled by working with the Wii's positives and limitations.
About the only thing that I would find myself playing if I had a WiiU is ZombiU; but I make a rule of never buying a console (or handheld) for one game. I just find it funny how Nintendo is having to resort to ads being pushed to Wii systems to try and promote the next console, when they've yet to put out something I would seriously want for it. Of all the WiiU store kiosks out there, only one actually had a playable demo of anything, and that game was the new Rayman, which admittedly was nice, but it wasn't something I would buy the system for.
@Kenneth,
Iwata has been in charge of Nintendo (of Japan) for some time. He'd been part of their corporate planning since 2000, and was the fourth president for the company since 2002. He's only recently decided to go "overseas" to take over as president for Nintendo of America.
You also forget that even with the strong (local) presence NoA has as a company, and the rather impressive following Reggie Fils-Aime developed (to the point of internet meme status), NoJ has always been the side to call the shots worldwide. Not even Reggie's charisma could fully overcome the Japanese boards' refusal to adapt, and why Nintendo has been rather left in third place since the decisions that hampered the N64.
Given Iwata is still officially positioned as an active employee at HAL Labs, that would also mean he has had a hand in why Earthbound64 failed, and why Mother 3 never left Japan; which, after trying out a fan-translated copy of the game, I'm STILL upset with him over.
Regardless of what they have planned, making his first decision as NoA's CEO being to not participate at E3 is/will be perceived as a sign of weakness. I am only cautiously optimistic for Nintendo's ability to rebound from this obvious slump.
Hey not questioning the merits of the Suda 51 games or MadWorld. Just saying they didn't sell. :) And thus not seeing that games such as these will "rescue" Nintendo from doom and gloom.
Not sure why it is funny to advertise your new product to owners of your old product. It's dirt cheap for them to do that. And they want to make people aware they have a new console. IT doesn't affect their rate of software development.
And again I think Nintendo's track record for releasing x amount of games during the lifetime of each of their consoles is pretty consistent. I don't fault anyone for waiting to buy a console until there are enough games to justify the purchase. Dont count your chickens until they hatch right? But I am annoyed that some of us act like there is never going to be another Nintendo game for the Wii U. We're just going to get NSMB and NintendoLand and LegoCity Undercover. That's it. lol.
I find online that leaderboards are overrated. Not much fun competing for 1,145,237th place. You have to play 24/7 to even have a chance at the top. I tend to view those at the top of these things as superhuman. lol.
If you don't like leaderboards you can ignore them but by not having them the appeal of the game is limited a bit. There have Miis in the plaza so Nintendo could have added more online interaction. Even letting you play against or team up with AI controled Miis from your plaza for some games would be great.
I started playing on a Sinclair ZX 48k back in 1983 (I was 4 back then), passed through ZX 128K, Master System, Gameboy, Megadrive, PS1, PS2, XBOX, PS3 and always... always on the PC.
The thing is... I loved gaming on my consoles, but now, I really don't see why anymore.
Every game is ported to all platforms, the PC having the mod scene almost every time, better graphics and support thanks to a dedicated community, and lower price.
The exclusives for each console are almost non existent and only a one or two are actually worth it (Demons Souls)
Game still cost 60€ YEARS after launch, it makes me buy stuff from the UK where the market lowers their prices months (sometimes weeks) after launch.
Steam is a daily regular for me, because... LOW PRICE GAMES, games I would have not bought but will do so because I like to try cheap stuff (and sometimes find some amazing gems *Orcs must die*).
I have a PC that plays the latest games without hickups that costed me 400€ 4 years ago and can connect to a TV a gamepad and just be like a console, actually I have played Mark of the Ninja in my 32" TV with my PS3 controller.
Indies VS AAA, frankly I love bough sides, and I can have them in the PC alone.
Also, my PC is used for game development, updating social networks and internets...
Tell me again why should I need a new console when I got my 4 year old PC?
I think I'll pass the next generation of consoles if they offer me the same.
Also old != invalid.
The pros and cons of pcgaming vs console gaming are well known and go back a decade or two. The Wii did great despite pcgaming.
So, while you do a good job of outlining why you like pcgaming, it has very little to do with Iwata's comments.
While there certainly are other issues in the marketplace and plenty of new competition, I think Nintendo's issues are it's own doing and not really a result of an overall market shift.