 |
|
|
| |
Iwata: 'Safe To Say The Wii Has Recovered From Slowdown'
by Leigh Alexander [PC, Console/PC]
|
|
| |
|
January 6, 2010
|
| |
After what Nintendo called a "healthy" holiday in the U.S., president Satoru Iwata says December Wii performance made great strides toward alleviating the console's 2009 decline concerns.
"I think it's now safe to say the Wii has recovered from slowdown," Iwata told Reuters -- displaying optimism that was nonetheless cautious.
"I'm not sure if it's prudent to use words like revival and recovery lightly before making absolutely certain we can maintain this momentum," the exec enforced. "So, I steer clear of such words today."
As recently as November 2009, Iwata said Wii unit sales in Japan "cannot be defined as healthy," and described the console's loss of momentum as "urgent."
However, Wii's late September price cut from $249 to $199 drove up console sales 85 percent on a weekly basis in the U.S. The first price cut in the console's lifetime doubtless strengthened Wii's holiday sales, as did a greater supply.
The company estimates the console sold in excess of 3 million units in December, compared to December 2008's 2.15 million units.
|
| |
|
|
But rereading this information. He said it was 'unhealthy' in Japan, and the numbers given are purely U.S. numbers. In any case paragraph 2 and 3 contradict. He clearly used 'recovered' and then states he will 'steer clear of such words'... as such this news should be confined to the marketing BS trashbin.
Exactly how is his statement premature when the article just said that he's cautiously optimistic?
FTA:"I'm not sure if it's prudent to use words like revival and recovery lightly before making absolutely certain we can maintain this momentum," the exec enforced. "So, I steer clear of such words today."
He said that he felt like it was in recovery but not that it was out of the woods. So how in that can you sir read a contradiction. Seems like you didn't really read the article until after you posted about the headline. And then upon actually reading the article you say he contradicted himself as if his cautious optimism was never stated. How is that marketing BS trashbin?
Right now, they are still receiving 4 shovel ware games for every one quality one.
Read his first quote. Then read his second quote.
1st:
"I think it's now safe to say the Wii has *recovered* from slowdown," - (* added) He clearly uses the word.
2nd:
"I'm not sure if it's prudent to use words like revival and recovery lightly before making absolutely certain we can maintain this momentum, so, I steer clear of such words today." - Clearly not. You just used it.
This is marketing BS because if you read only the first statement it leads you to believe all is right with the Wii again. Then you read the rest and he points out, we aren't out yet.
As such it is a well done interview to allow people to pretend whatever they heard is right. Which is marketing BS at its best.
That Kool Aide must taste good to them, because the keep making more of it.
@Uyiosa
I agree the third parties need to think better about how the want to approach the Wii, and they need to find a way to push the content players on that system want rather than the paradigms PS3 and Xbox 360 continue to churn out. I think the third parties should look to the content on the DS and research it for how they should approach making games on the Wii.
I want to remind you of something. The PS2.
What does that have to do with anything? You said: "Right now, they are still receiving 4 shovel ware games for every one quality one. " The same can be said of the PS2s library.
The System with the largest user base will always receive the lion's share of shovelware. So your point is moot.
But of course your point about 3rd parties is valid. But they are already on board, but they are too busy goofing around to make any decent games, save a handful of developers.
Yes, it is good for them, and only them. There have been several great third party games than have crashed and burned that used the Wii competently. Very few Third Party games have made a dent in the pool of Wii owners. I don't see any of this changing. Nintendo will continue to make lots of cash and everyone else will fail on the Wii.
I think publishers say "We invested 50m in this Xbox 360/PS3 title, we can invest 25m in marketing". However, a Wii game may be finished with USD 10m or less, and thus the marketing budget is much lower. You can't market a game with USD 1m. I am sure Mario & Sonic did cost less than USD 20m to develop, but Sega spent over USD 10m in marketing only during the 2008 Olympic Games (not counting all they had spent in the previous year), in other words they spent more in marketing than in development, yet it was worth.
Have you seen Level 5 in Japan? For Inazuma they created an anime that, while not burning the charts, it has a higher ranking than Pokemon Diamond. Every bit of marketing helps. And for their new game, they are using Ghibli, the studio from legendary artist Hayao Miyazaki, to create the tie in. I haven't seen anything like that in the West.
@ John Giordano:
This is always the case. For a real laugh, go back to the story about Nintendo's 2008 Fiscal Year and then read Sony's. Even though Nintendo made billions, they were ragged on for "a decline in profit". Even though Sony lost billions, they were praised for losing less money than they did before. Overall, the press was all rosy over Sony's report and yet bashed Nintendo theirs. It's quite entertaining.
@ Everyone -
I personally could care less about the 3rd party situation on the Wii anymore. Developers haven't figured out the Wii yet because they don't really want to. Meanwhile, Nintendo can single-handedly carry the system (something Sony nor Microsoft could ever do with their systems) and 3rd parties can either make serious efforts on Wii (i.e. generous budgets, marketing muscle, non-test on rail games, etc.) or continue to lose money on HD consoles. I don't have any sympathy for them with their Wii failures.
The Wii's success is NOT good for the industry. The arguments about companies making bad games for the Wii is tired and entirely wrong, chinatown wars is one palpable example of this.
Third parties games fail on Nintendo consoles because of Nintendo's business strategy which is highly monopolistic and controlling. Note the difference between Nintendo's model versus Sony's model during the PS2 generation. During the PSX/2 generation, Sony would push heavily for new triple-A content in new genres thus establishing a market for it on their console. They got Final Fantasy which established a huge market for RPG's on their system. They got GTAIV which opened up a market for third-person action games. And it goes on and on, Sony's strategy is to get a triple-A games and then let 3rd parties follow in once a market has been establsihed for a certain genre of game.
Nintendo's strategy is quite literally "Appeal to the N64/gamecube audience + casuals." The n64 and gamecube business model was simple and designed from the perspective of a toy company. Release a console and have 2 first-party triple-A's a year, one for christmas and one for birthdays. It is a strategy strictly aimed at little kids. The wii's success is predicated upon expanding that model to appeal to the heavily casual crowd through wii sports and wii fit, whose inexperience with games in general make them mentally similar to a child in relation to interactive entertainment. They will buy the heavily casual fair and the multiplatform casual stuff that does well (guitar hero) but little else.
Nintendo's success is not great for the rest of the industry, it is great mainly for Nintendo. Every person on the margin who gets a Wii instead of a 360 or PS3 is a lost customer for expensive, bleeding edge games (that employ a lot of game developers).
The Wii is a disaster for developers.
How can the introduction of Millions of new potential customers be disastrous for the games industry? Are you really suggesting that the availability of new markets and demographics is a bad thing?
Despite what you think, it is no more Nintendo's responsibility to ensure that your game is a success than it is Sony's or Microsoft's. Their responsibility is to make sure their Console is a success, not the games on the console. Sony and Microsoft may be lending a hand to 3rd party developers to make a bigger impact, but that is only because they have nothing on their own that really sells the console.
Nintendo doesn't have to worry about it. They are a household brand and have been for over 20 years. They have established franchises that are still going for much of those 20 years. They can sell their own console without having to get 3rd parties involved.
Wait isn't that the bad thing you were talking about? Yes, but it is not a bad thing.
The Wii is a good thing for the games industry for a number of reasons:
1. New Markets. The Wii has opened up gaming to millions of new gamers. These are $$$ that you could be getting if you really wanted to try.
2. Accessibility. The Wii made gaming more accessible to those new gamers. Believe it or not, most of these new gamers are intimidated by the controllers of the PS3 and 360. The games you complain about being major sellers on the Wii are major sellers on the Wii and other systems (for games like Rockband and Guitar Hero) because they are easy for the non-controller minded people to understand. They pick up Wii Sports and realize "Oh playing bowling on this game is like bowling in real life." The same for Wii Fit, Guitar Hero, Rockband etc. They understand that swing the Wii Remote underhanded rolls the ball down the lane to hit the pins. What they have a hard time understanding is that twisting the analog stick to steady the ball and pressing the x button at the right time rolls the ball down the lane. Such levels of abstraction are not something they comprehend easily.
3. Marketing. The games industry is learning that they need to do better at marketing their games to access these new gamers. They are learning that their dependency on the gaming rags are not going to keep them afloat in these new markets. They have to start advertising where the market it is. It is no longer a "If we build it they will come" it is a "If we build it we have to go out and find them" market. The websites these new gamers read don't actively report on games, but of you have a game their readers would love, these sites would be more than willing to listen to you and take the game for a spin as well as sell some advertising space.
As an example of this, Last night was the Season Premiere of "Biggest Loser" I sat through part of it with my wife. In the Hour that I watched it, I saw 2 commercials for EA Sports Active. The Fitness game from EA. The commercial was for a product the fans of the show would be interested in. That is how you sell to this new market. You go where they are.
So instead of half arsing your way through development on a Wii game and rushing it out with little to no marketing and then complaining about how poorly your game sold, how about taking a step back before development and plan out your development and strategy to maximize the market for your game. That's what Nintendo did. Why is it so hard for you.
What are you complaining about? I don't see your point. Nintendo is making money with it's consoles and MS and Sony don't. I can't blame Nintendo for having a successful strategy while others have none. And from what I've seen, most 3rd party titles for the HD consoles don't generate profit, they generate loss. This is a disaster for developers.
After reading the original article this is sourced from the two statements are actually one statement and it does not in anyway try to imply that all is right with Wii (implying that there is anything wrong with Wii or it sales despite a slow year in gaming overall) I'm sorry but Market BS would just out right say the Wii is doing ok and we're (Nintendo) not concerned about anything else.
FTOA: Japan's Nintendo Co Ltd said sales of its Wii video game console in the United States hit a record high in December, countering market worries that momentum for the three-year-old machine had peaked...
followed by:
"I think it's now safe to say the Wii has recovered from slowdown," Nintendo President Satoru Iwata told Reuters in an interview on Tuesday.
"But I'm not sure if it's prudent to use words like revival and recovery lightly before making absolutely certain we can maintain this momentum. So, I steer clear of such words today," he said.
"safe to say" can also be "safe to assume"
The momentum they would have to measure would be in how the Wii does in January 2010 as oppose to January 2009 after the Christmas sales of 2008.
As for marketing, how did chinatown wars fail to market? As for EA active, its sales are still blown away by Wii Fit even though the general critic's consensus is that EA active is the superior software.
As for Nintendo's strategy being bad for the industry, my point was not in relation to other console makers which have lost money but to developers. No third party developer has done well on the Wii after the initial launch blitz. Nintendo forgos a lot of profit by being so restrictive, notice the almost complete lack of online gaming on Nintendo platforms as evidence of this. They do not care about following the market leader model of making money on both first party and third party licensing. Their general software and platform strategy is very clearly "Nintendo-first."
The PS2 had a huge number of casual gamers too only they bought games from third parties. Nintendo's casuals don't and the sales show this.
Game developers will breathe a larger sigh of relief if Microsoft or Sony is the market-leader for the next generation. The Wii was suppose to offer a way to make profits through cheaper games. In reality it has been an abysmal disappointment for third parties.
Following your marketing point, MW2 costed around 50M to develop, and 150M to market.
@Thomas Lo
"... almost complete lack of online gaming ..."
Focus on local multiplayer is what makes Nintendo games attractive. Local multiplayer is all family strategy, online "fuck off to the l33tz you loser noob" is teen strategy.
I always find it interesting, that people are taking Chinatown Wars for the DS as a proof, that 3rd party games don't work on Nintendo hardware. The same title bombed on the PSP too, I remember many people predicting a PSP version of this game will sell like hotcakes, well it didn't. In fact, I am sure it sold better on the DS, then on the PSP. Maybe it was the game, not the platform.
If Nintendo wanted to monopolize it's own console, wouldn't it just be easier to outright block third parties from putting games on their system?
Chinatown Wars actually didn't do that bad on the DS. People only saw the first two weeks and didn't realize the game had legs.
I think this points more to the disconnect between critics and the general audience.
If you look at the time played EA Active has had trouble getting to 8 hours per person. Wii Fit was more than 2x than and Wii Fit Plus is already north of 10 hours.
Critics tend to sample games more than they play them. They also rarely represent the Wii audience. I wouldn't put stock in a review as a clear indication of quality (and certainly not of sales). Time played, however, is a great measure of how much people enjoyed a game.
...I also fit into the camp that likes diversity and is very glad to see it in gaming. Different people like different things. I don't know why that's a bad thing. Why should someone liking something different than someone else mean that one person should be ridiculed for their likes? Diversity is a good thing! People like different kinds of games, and thankfully they have options. I hope that both continues and expands!
I do agree with your assertion that the Wii is a disaster for developers. Many developers and their sales force have had several years to figure out what is good and marketable gameplay for the system, and they haven't. Those developers have not lived up to their capabilities, and their sales have suffered for it.
If one takes your arguments to their logical conclusion, suffering Wii developers would be best served by developing nothing on the Wii and instead developing on other consoles. Then they could pit their mediocre gameplay ideas and flabby marketing muscle against tougher competition... and lose even more money despite higher sales, because their development and marketing costs are higher?
If developers and marketers can't succeed to eke out even a tiny profit on the largest home console platform, which also has the weakest competition, the lowest development cost, and the highest (perceived) software demand of the console market, then it's their own darn fault.
Consider Band Hero vs. LEGO Rock Band. Band Hero has sold twice as many copies on the Wii as LEGO Rock Band so far, and a major reason may be because people discovered how crippled LEGO Rock Band was in regards to downloadable content, while Band Hero had almost full support. There's no technical reason why LEGO Rock Band could not have the same support that Band Hero did. Either the developers just didn't implement it, or their lawyers couldn't secure the rights to the songs (which would not be the developer's fault, I suppose).
Or maybe the Wii market is far too casual and Nintendo's development of the Wii audience too narrowly focused for third parties to survive that dont have the names "guitar" or "band" in their games while Nintendo's muscle ensures people buy a "Wii sports"-type game once a year and 2 mario/zelda games a year for their kids. That is the same pattern of purchase you saw on the N64 and it is the pattern you see nowadays with the Wii (+ the wii fit/sports craze).
Now all the caveats may be true. Critics don't matter. Marketing is bad. Etc. Etc. The fact is the Wii does have some good games that in a lot of developers minds should have done a lot better and it is not easily explained away by soley blaming developers or publishers.
I will stand by this statement; even as the Wii expands in market share, its share of the overall software market for third parties won't increase commensurately. And as this fact becomes clearer, it will be clear that game developers will have a smaller pie to divide among themselves versus the PS2 generation.
Well said.
I buy 2 Mario/Zelda games a year for myself, not my kids, FYI. Also, in the N64 days, there were many third party games that I actually found appealing; with the Wii, it seems most third parties aren't even trying. I played Star Wars: Force Unleashed on both the 360 and the Wii. I found the gameplay in the Wii version to be more fun and immersive than the somewhat unresponsive 360 version, but many people wrote it off because the graphics weren't mind-blowing. I'll be the first to admit that graphics were absolutely atrocious, which is a shame, given the fact that the Wii is clearly capable of better.
I think one of the biggest problems is that third parties want to maximize their profit by having a multi-platform release (which is perfectly reasonable.) When they go to make the Wii version though, they think that, just because it isn't on par with the 360/PS3, it's alright to pawn it off to a lower quality dev, even though it's above the level of the GameCube, which saw the likes of Resident Evil 4 (a third party game), Metroid Prime (a second party game), and Twilight Princess (a first party game).