Support NeoGAF

DeaconKnowledge · May 31, 2007

dammitmattt said:
The Wii has barely shown the capabilities to do 480p that well. There are still early generation Xbox (and even Gamecube) games that look better than anything on the Wii.

The Wii is not yet a year old, we are in the first generation of games, developers have been caught with their pants down, Nintendo is still updating their SDKs, and The GameCube was only tapped by a small amount of devs.

If you think the graphical fidelity of the Wii will stay this way indefinitely, you are seriously doing yourself a disservice.

mre · May 31, 2007

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/06/11/100083454/index.htm said:
It took a while, but the industry's largest publisher, EA (Charts), has also come around to the Wii. At EA headquarters in Silicon Valley, developers glow at how the Wiimote opens a new aspect of games like "The Godfather" and "Tiger Woods". The company developed a new Wii-exclusive game, "MySims," due out in the fall; it is working with Steven Spielberg on a Wii title; and its latest FIFA soccer game will use Mii characters. "Nintendo is a pioneer," says John Schappert, COO of EA Studios. "They're zigging when others are zagging. It's another growth curve for the industry."

Wait... did we know this? Or did CNN get this wrong?

theBishop · May 31, 2007

Guru Pachter said:
I think Sony's going to look like the clear loser this cycle, come summer. I think Nintendo's going to look like the clear winner this cycle this coming summer, and that's going to be wrong. And it will reverse in 2009, 2010 when there are 5000 Blu-Ray movies available to rent at Blockbuster and when all the households who already have a Wii get their HD monitors and PS3 sales will pick up.

AzureNightmare · May 31, 2007

Smiles and Cries said:
bookmarked? :lol

Your bitter SDF fanboy tears taste sweet to me

Wiitard · May 31, 2007

dammitmattt said:
For some reason, a certain segment of the forum takes an orgasmic level of pleasure at the thought of Nintendo profitting. I've never seen anything like it and it absolutely baffles the mind.

Let's party because Coke is vastly overcharging us for soda water! Hooray for ExxonMobil's record profits! I am thrilled to be raped by Gillette's razor prices, just as long as they profit.

As consumers, this behavior makes NO ****ING SENSE.

One reason I'm happy with Nintendo's profits is that high profits invite entry. I do not want Nintendo to have waggle monopoly: I want waggle for PS2, I want Wiimote support for PC games, I want some fitness equipment manufacturer (Nike?) to enter the market in some fashion with exergaming software/simple hardware.

dkeane · May 31, 2007

mre said:
Wait... did we know this? Or did CNN get this wrong?

I think it's only for the practice/minigames included with the game. I saw something in the new Nintendo Power about it.

crbowen · May 31, 2007

dammitmattt said:
For some reason, a certain segment of the forum takes an orgasmic level of pleasure at the thought of Nintendo profitting. I've never seen anything like it and it absolutely baffles the mind.

Let's party because Coke is vastly overcharging us for soda water! Hooray for ExxonMobil's record profits! I am thrilled to be raped by Gillette's razor prices, just as long as they profit.

As consumers, this behavior makes NO ****ING SENSE.

You don't remember the last 10 years when everyone was saying "Nintendo going 3rd party" and the whole talk of them never making a home console again after GameCube?

It probably has to do with that. Now Nintendo fans don't have to worry about that. They are definitely more vocal about it, but that kind of goes with being a Nintendo fan.

[Nintex] · May 31, 2007

wow... just wow. I'm glad that Nintendo managed to get their stuff together again. But if any of you think that this is invested in a new HD machine or incredible games you're wrong. Sure Nintendo will put some more money in their projects but most of the cash is going straight to their bank accounts, the excact same way it happens for 22 years now.

PepsimanVsJoe · May 31, 2007

Zzz Zzz
Oh...yay for Nintendo
Zzz Zzz

Wiitard said:
I look at the 360 library and that is NOT where I want gaming to go.

::feigns shock::

Wiitard · May 31, 2007

Gofreak said:
I don't think so. The fact that games could be played in HD and looked better also in SD probably wouldn't do the system any harm.

Quite asides from popularity, is there anyone here that wouldn't prefer such a system personally? I'm taking a very consumer-centric viewpoint here, but I don't think the scenario I suggest would be damaging to Nintendo's business to any great extent.

I would honestly NOT perfer such a system personally because it would certainly mean less games would be developed for it and most certainly less quirky, experimental games. I look at the 360 library and that is NOT where I want gaming to go.

DeaconKnowledge · May 31, 2007

dammitmattt said:
For some reason, a certain segment of the forum takes an orgasmic level of pleasure at the thought of Nintendo profitting. I've never seen anything like it and it absolutely baffles the mind.

Let's party because Coke is vastly overcharging us for soda water! Hooray for ExxonMobil's record profits! I am thrilled to be raped by Gillette's razor prices, just as long as they profit.

As consumers, this behavior makes NO ****ING SENSE.

Could the bolded not be a criticism levied on the PS3?

I want Nintendo to be successful for a myriad of reasons:

I have absolutely zero interest in the PS3's bloated price and Blu-Ray hardware
I love the concept of the Wiimote and I want to see it properly harnessed. Market leadership makes it an inevitability.
I like Nintendo's games (natch)

This is why i'm impressed at their success. I'm also amazed because this time two years ago NOBODY thought Nintendo had a chance to be market leader ever again.

I also fancy myself an observer of business, and Nintendo's approach fascinates me.

mre · May 31, 2007

studio810 said:
I think it's only for the practice/minigames included with the game. I saw something in the new Nintendo Power about it.

Ahh ok. I'm all for Miis being used in more games, but this one just seemed... odd.

theBishop · May 31, 2007

crbowen said:
You don't remember the last 10 years when everyone was saying "Nintendo going 3rd party" and the whole talk of them never making a home console again after GameCube?

It probably has to do with that. Now Nintendo fans don't have to worry about that. They are definitely more vocal about it, but that kind of goes with being a Nintendo fan.

It would've made sense in the last 10 years for Nintendo to go 3rd party... in consoleland anyway, Gameboy is king.

Their hardware did nothing to differentiate itself from Playstation, Dreamcast, or Xbox and Nintendo probably could've done without the R&D costs of launching a new platform while at the same time selling their highly-anticipated games to a larger audience.

Of course DS has erased all that.

eggs. scrambled · May 31, 2007

dammitmattt said:
For some reason, a certain segment of the forum takes an orgasmic level of pleasure at the thought of Nintendo profitting. I've never seen anything like it and it absolutely baffles the mind.

Let's party because Coke is vastly overcharging us for soda water! Hooray for ExxonMobil's record profits! I am thrilled to be raped by Gillette's razor prices, just as long as they profit.

As consumers, this behavior makes NO ****ING SENSE.

It makes "NO ****ING SENSE" for consumers to care one way or the other. They should care about the margin between the value they get from the product and the price they pay for it. The seller's profit isn't part of the equation (unless it gives you some sort of psychic pain or pleasure -- which would be a bit sad either way).

If Nintendo is charging more than the value they deliver (relative to the next best choice), you don't need to worry. It'll catch up with them. Markets are smart that way.

Look at airlines. Since deregulation in the US, the price per passenger mile has dropped from $0.23 to $0.12 in constant dollars. For most consumers, it was worth getting less leg room and worse food for a cheaper flight. Airlines that didn't adjust like PanAm and Eastern are now distant memories. Nintendo is a lot like Southwest -- finding profitable ways to win very loyal customers at relatively low cost. Sony doesn't have to become the equivalent of Southwest, but the point is that it sure can't afford to be PanAm either.

Jokeropia · May 31, 2007

theBishop said:
.

I hope you're not bringing up Pachter to support the point that PS3 will somehow win in the end, because his track record is not exactly impressive.

DeaconKnowledge · May 31, 2007

gofreak said:
Well, if it gives you any idea, I remember AGES ago mocking up a revolution/ds networking idea, and having heard rumblings of nintendo's focus away from power, I used a screenshot from some PC game at the time as, what I thought, would be a reasonable expectation of what it would be capable of doing. When I looked at what PCs were doing back then I figured it quite reasonable to expect that from Revolution (taking into account its closed-box nature), even with a shift away from technical focus. But we're nowhere close.

Out of curiosity, what game did you use?

gofreak said:
I'm certainly not at that point either, I will still play and I'm sure, enjoy, Mario Galaxy, the next Zelda, Metroid etc. But I don't think that makes the approach 'OK', I'll still lament that these games could have looked so much better, or even been so much better via the possibilities that might have been opened by more power. Of course, it's a pointless lament at this stage since nothing can be changed now, but it comes back up when I see this back-patting over the strategy - in so far as I hope it doesn't become widely adopted in the future because of its market success now.

I don't see it being an industry wide sweep - as Microsoft has stated, they admire Nintendo's approach, but they recognize that there are consumers that don't want that, and will offer products to accomodate. Sony is always attempting convergence, so I doubt they'll adapt either. I think for both Waggle and activity is the part of Nintendo's strategy that will be converged on.

Evlar · May 31, 2007

eggs said:
It makes "NO ****ING SENSE" for consumers to care one way or the other. They should care about the margin between the value they get from the product and the price they pay for it. The seller's profit isn't part of the equation (unless it gives you some sort of psychic pain or pleasure -- which would be a bit sad either way).

If Nintendo is charging more than the value they deliver (relative to the next best choice), you don't need to worry. It'll catch up with them. Markets are smart that way.

Look at airlines. Since deregulation in the US, the price per passenger mile has dropped from $0.23 to $0.12 in constant dollars. For most consumers, it was worth getting less leg room and worse food for a cheaper flight. Airlines that didn't adjust like PanAm and Eastern are now distant memories. Nintendo is a lot like Southwest -- finding profitable ways to win very loyal customers at relatively low cost. Sony doesn't have to become the equivalent of Southwest, but the point is that it sure can't afford to be PanAm either.

Oh wow good post.

crbowen · May 31, 2007

[Nintex] said:
wow... just wow. I'm glad that Nintendo managed to get their stuff together again. But if any of you think that this is invested in a new HD machine or incredible games you're wrong. Sure Nintendo will put some more money in their projects but most of the cash is going straight to their bank accounts, the excact same way it happens for 22 years now.

Well, Twilight Princess was the most costly Nintendo game ever budget wise, Smash Bros Brawl got an entire building and studio created for its development, they just bought Monolith, and not to mention last gen purchases like Retro. And i'm sure Mario Galaxy's development isn't cheap.

DeaconKnowledge · May 31, 2007

theBishop said:
It would've made sense in the last 10 years for Nintendo to go 3rd party... in consoleland anyway, Gameboy is king.

WHAT

Tobor · May 31, 2007

eggs said:
It makes "NO ****ING SENSE" for consumers to care one way or the other. They should care about the margin between the value they get from the product and the price they pay for it. The seller's profit isn't part of the equation (unless it gives you some sort of psychic pain or pleasure -- which would be a bit sad either way).

If Nintendo is charging more than the value they deliver (relative to the next best choice), you don't need to worry. It'll catch up with them. Markets are smart that way.

Look at airlines. Since deregulation in the US, the price per passenger mile has dropped from $0.23 to $0.12 in constant dollars. For most consumers, it was worth getting less leg room and worse food for a cheaper flight. Airlines that didn't adjust like PanAm and Eastern are now distant memories. Nintendo is a lot like Southwest -- finding profitable ways to win very loyal customers at relatively low cost. Sony doesn't have to become the equivalent of Southwest, but the point is that it sure can't afford to be PanAm either.

Spot on analysis and analogy.

schuelma · May 31, 2007

Article now up on CNN:

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fort...6/11/100083454/index.htm?section=money_latest

ziran · May 31, 2007

I'm not sure if this has been posted, but here's the full article:
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fort...6/11/100083454/index.htm?section=money_latest

It's an interesting read, and I agree with a lot of it.

This bit is amazing:

In short, Iwata has made Nintendo as efficient as a bullet train and as stingy as a bento box. The company's 3,400 employees generated $8.26 billion in revenue last year, or $2.5 million each.

While exchange rates and fiscal calendars complicate comparisons to U.S. companies, let's do it anyway. Over roughly the same time frame, Microsoft employees generated $624,000 each; Google's performed 50 percent better, at $994,000, though still less than half as well as Nintendo employees. Nintendo's profits reached almost $1.5 billion, or $442,000 per employee, last year, compared with Microsoft's $177,000 and Google's $288,000.

Also, it's good to see Nintendo sounds like its attempting to manufacture 2 million per month, which is what they're going to need imo:

Until Nintendo gets more Wiis on retail shelves, all that is theoretical. Iwata says no single bottleneck has caused the shortage, and that has made the problem harder to solve. Because it was targeting a market that didn't exist, the company had no idea how popular the machine would be. And nobody could have known the Wii would still be selling so well as summer approaches.

That kind of thing just doesn't happen in the Christmas-centric world of gaming. "We cannot simply make 1.5 times as much or two times as much," he says. "When you're making one million a month already, getting to 1.5 million or two million is not very easy."

Oh, and this thread is filled with funny, bitter, posts.

Evlar · May 31, 2007

In short, Iwata has made Nintendo as efficient as a bullet train and as stingy as a bento box. The company's 3,400 employees generated $8.26 billion in revenue last year, or $2.5 million each.

While exchange rates and fiscal calendars complicate comparisons to U.S. companies, let's do it anyway. Over roughly the same time frame, Microsoft employees generated $624,000 each; Google's performed 50 percent better, at $994,000, though still less than half as well as Nintendo employees. Nintendo's profits reached almost $1.5 billion, or $442,000 per employee, last year, compared with Microsoft's $177,000 and Google's $288,000.

Yeah. That's incredible.

theBishop · May 31, 2007

Jokeropia said:
I hope you're not bringing up Pachter to support the point that PS3 will somehow win in the end, because his track record is not exactly impressive.

I've never seen statistics on Pachter's batting average, but I think this particular prediction makes a lot of sense. A lot of people feel like this generation of hardware jumped the gun, and Wii has come at a perfect time to give people something new without a big investment.

But there's still a shitload of PS2 owners in the world who haven't yet bought a new console. I find it hard to believe they'll look at 360/PS3 offerings 18 months from now and choose instead to buy the system that produces games that have most of the same limitations as the games they are currently playing.

PS: if you have a link tracking Pachter's predictions/outcomes, i would definitely be interested.

Pureauthor · May 31, 2007

theBishop said:
But there's still a shitload of PS2 owners in the world who haven't yet bought a new console, and I find it hard to believe they'll look at 360/PS3 offerings 18 months from now and choose instead to buy the system that produces games that have most of the same limitations as the games they are currently playing.

Your first mistake lies in the assumption that they can eventell that hardware-wise, the Wii is 'limited'.

Your second mistake lies in the assumption that they would care in the first place, even if they could tell.

Your third mistake is completely ignoring the Wiimote.

schuelma · May 31, 2007

theBishop said:
I've never seen statistics on Pachter's batting average, but I think this particular prediction makes a lot of sense. A lot of people feel like this generation of hardware jumped the gun, and Wii has come at a perfect time to give people something new without a big investment.

But there's still a shitload of PS2 owners in the world who haven't yet bought a new console, and I find it hard to believe they'll look at 360/PS3 offerings 18 months from now and choose instead to buy the system that produces games that have most of the same limitations as the games they are currently playing.

PS: if you have a link tracking Pachter's predictions/outcomes, i would definitely be interested.

That's a valid point. The argument against that would be that the majority of PS2 owners bought the PS2 because it was cheaper and had more mainstream attention- by that measure they would move to the Wii.

Evlar · May 31, 2007

theBishop said:
I've never seen statistics on Pachter's batting average, but I think this particular prediction makes a lot of sense. A lot of people feel like this generation of hardware jumped the gun, and Wii has come at a perfect time to give people something new without a big investment.

But there's still a shitload of PS2 owners in the world who haven't yet bought a new console, and I find it hard to believe they'll look at 360/PS3 offerings 18 months from now and choose instead to buy the system that produces games that have most of the same limitations as the games they are currently playing.

PS: if you have a link tracking Pachter's predictions/outcomes, i would definitely be interested.

I think they'll look at price tags before they look at anything else, but we'll see. The magic number is 180. Not 400, 300, or even 250. If Wii gets down to $180 and has games/features that can appease the mass market, that's what they'll buy. If it hits $180 and doesn't impress the masses they'll just keep waiting until one of the HD systems gets down that low.

gofreak · May 31, 2007

Wiitard said:
I would honestly NOT perfer such a system personally because it would certainly mean less games would be developed for it and most certainly less quirky, experimental games.

There's hardly been a shortage of games, or a shortage of quirky/experimental games on previous platforms that have erred closer to the state-of-the-art at the time of their release and that had all sorts of doom-mongering in the early years about development costs..(see: PS2)

And again, that's an awfully slippery-looking slope you got there. If less power = cheaper = more and quirkier games (which I disagree with anyway), why not go with even less? That'd be better, right?

Everything is relative. You could have had that system and it would still have held an advantage over the others in terms of development cost - not with the same margin, but it would still have had that relative advantage. Developers would still have liked it for that reason. And lets not forget, those 'cheaper-to-develop' games aren't really costing you commensurately less at retail either..

DeaconKnowledge said:
Out of curiosity, what game did you use?

I think it was either a 3D strategy game or Battlefield 2 or something..

DeaconKnowledge said:
I don't see it being an industry wide sweep

I hope not, but I think some might be more vulnerable to 'temptation' here than others by the end of this generation, at least to a certain degree. And I'm hoping Nintendo might be a little less fretful on the cost front next time around.

Tobor · May 31, 2007

PS2 owners are buying the Wii right now. Believe it. You don't sell 360,000 units in April to Gamecube owners and non-gamers alone.

Joust Williams · May 31, 2007

Yay Nintendo makes money

*goes back to FM2*

OnWarmerMusic · May 31, 2007

theBishop said:
But there's still a shitload of PS2 owners in the world who haven't yet bought a new console, and I find it hard to believe they'll look at 360/PS3 offerings 18 months from now and choose instead to buy the system that produces games that have most of the same limitations as the games they are currently playing.

While I see your point about users wanting to upgrade, I think a large majority of those PS2 owners are the "old casuals"... not the grandma casuals we see touted with the Wii, but the people who grab, say, Madden and maybe 2 or 3 other titles a year, and hence just buy into the market leader who has the highest number of titles which appeal to them. I think that those types of gamers will be less aware of the hardware gap between the Wii and 360/PS3, and more concerned with where they can get the biggest volume of software. If things continue as they are now, that could very likely be the Wii.

Wiitard · May 31, 2007

theBishop said:
I've never seen statistics on Pachter's batting average, but I think this particular prediction makes a lot of sense. A lot of people feel like this generation of hardware jumped the gun, and Wii has come at a perfect time to give people something new without a big investment.

But there's still a shitload of PS2 owners in the world who haven't yet bought a new console. I find it hard to believe they'll look at 360/PS3 offerings 18 months from now and choose instead to buy the system that produces games that have most of the same limitations as the games they are currently playing.

PS: if you have a link tracking Pachter's predictions/outcomes, i would definitely be interested.

Chance are, in 18 month the consumers will be offered a 250-400 dollars HD consoles with third party releases pretty much dried out. Most of the HD games, by the way, are available on PC and to my surprise even a new non-gaming laptop (!) with the, now standard, 2 gig RAM can run them well enough.

gofreak said:
There's hardly been a shortage of games, or a shortage of quirky/experimental games on previous platforms that have erred closer to the state-of-the-art at the time of their release and that had all sorts of doom-mongering in the early years about development costs..(see: PS2)

And again, that's an awfully slippery-looking slope you got there. If less power = cheaper = more and quirkier games (which I disagree with anyway), why not go with even less? That'd be better, right?

Everything is relative. You could have had that system and it would still have held an advantage over the others in terms of development cost - not with the same margin, but it would still have had that relative advantage. Developers would still have liked it for that reason. And lets not forget, those 'cheaper-to-develop' games aren't really costing you commensurately less at retail either..

DS kinda suggests that maybe yes, it could be.

dammitmattt · May 31, 2007

eggs said:
It makes "NO ****ING SENSE" for consumers to care one way or the other. They should care about the margin between the value they get from the product and the price they pay for it. The seller's profit isn't part of the equation (unless it gives you some sort of psychic pain or pleasure -- which would be a bit sad either way).

If Nintendo is charging more than the value they deliver (relative to the next best choice), you don't need to worry. It'll catch up with them. Markets are smart that way.

Look at airlines. Since deregulation in the US, the price per passenger mile has dropped from $0.23 to $0.12 in constant dollars. For most consumers, it was worth getting less leg room and worse food for a cheaper flight. Airlines that didn't adjust like PanAm and Eastern are now distant memories. Nintendo is a lot like Southwest -- finding profitable ways to win very loyal customers at relatively low cost. Sony doesn't have to become the equivalent of Southwest, but the point is that it sure can't afford to be PanAm either.

Thanks for expanding on my point, and I feel that the delta between utility I derive from the Wii and the price I paid for the Wii is too wide, especially from a technological standpoint when you compare the Wii to the Gamecube, or even to the 360 and PS3. Of course many people feel differently.

I would also like to seriously challenge the assertion that more Nintendo profit = more Nintendo games. That is wishful thinking, and it doesn't explain the same orgasmic pleasure that many (or most?) Nintendo fans take in the lack of profits on the 360 and PS3 sides.

Wiitard · May 31, 2007

dammitmattt said:
Thanks for expanding on my point, and I feel that the delta between utility I derive from the Wii and the price I paid for the Wii is too wide, especially from a technological standpoint when you compare the Wii to the Gamecube, or even to the 360 and PS3. Of course many people feel differently.

I would also like to seriously challenge the assertion that more Nintendo profit = more Nintendo games. That is wishful thinking, and it doesn't explain the same orgasmic pleasure that many (or most?) Nintendo fans take in the lack of profits on the 360 and PS3 sides.

Nintendo profits = more waggle games

Jokeropia · May 31, 2007

theBishop said:
I've never seen statistics on Pachter's batting average, but I think this particular prediction makes a lot of sense.

Well, he consistently overestimated NPD 360 sales by like 100k each month last year, and just before the Wii launched he predicted that it would get less than 20% marketshare. He's now very gradually backpedaling on these predictions, but is still for example predicting an insane 44% marketshare for PS3 in Japan.

theBishop said:
But there's still a shitload of PS2 owners in the world who haven't yet bought a new console, and I find it hard to believe they'll look at 360/PS3 offerings 18 months from now and choose instead to buy the system that produces games that have most of the same limitations as the games they are currently playing.

That would've been true if nobody cared about the Wiimote, but I think it's pretty evident that people do. Wii outsold 360 and PS3 combined and doubled in NA and Japan last month.

theBishop · May 31, 2007

The Sphinx said:
I think they'll look at price tags before they look at anything else, but we'll see. The magic number is 180. Not 400, 300, or even 250. If Wii gets down to $180 and has games/features that can appease the mass market, that's what they'll buy. If it hits $180 and doesn't impress the masses they'll just keep waiting until one of the HD systems gets down that low.

Price is absolutely a big factor. But PS2 isn't a dying console. Wii isn't going to walk away with a "victory" just because it launched at $250. When PS2 is still offering a very compelling experience at $130 (and eventually $99), Nintendo has to essentially win those people over on the merits of the Wiimote alone. The actual game content is comparable, if anything its biased towards PS2 at the moment.

People aren't just going to plunk down $250 because they can. They need to see something far beyond what they are already playing. If some of you think consumers can't tell the difference between Wii and 360/PS3, what makes you think they can see the difference between Wii and PS2?

Doc Holliday · May 31, 2007

dammitmattt said:
For some reason, a certain segment of the forum takes an orgasmic level of pleasure at the thought of Nintendo profitting. I've never seen anything like it and it absolutely baffles the mind.

Let's party because Coke is vastly overcharging us for soda water! Hooray for ExxonMobil's record profits! I am thrilled to be raped by Gillette's razor prices, just as long as they profit.

As consumers, this behavior makes NO ****ING SENSE.

And yes, most Wii games are fairly ugly on my HDTV, and that is just depressing.

This is what happens when companies dont make money.....Some of us like Nintendo games and maybe *gasp* there systems too. If a company doesnt make money, they will cease to exist....simple as that.

Look at whats happening to Sony.

PS... I still think Nintendo ****ed us over with the specs.

Neo C. · May 31, 2007

schuelma said:
Article now up on CNN:

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fort...6/11/100083454/index.htm?section=money_latest

That's a funny summary of damages

Broken teeth :lol
Babys :lol (Well, certainly not funny for the babys

).

Wiitard · May 31, 2007

theBishop said:
Price is absolutely a big factor. But PS2 isn't a dying console. Wii isn't going to walk away with a "victory" just because it launched at $250. When PS2 is still offering a very compelling experience at $130 (and eventually $99), Nintendo has to essentially win those people over on the merits of the Wiimote alone. The actual game content is comparable.

People aren't just going to plunk down $250 because they can. They need to see something far beyond what they are already playing. If some of you think consumers can't tell the difference between Wii and 360/PS3, what makes you think they can see the difference between Wii and PS2?

Maybe that they can touch it?

Haunted · May 31, 2007

theBishop said:

I believe that's the 8th time you've posted that Guru Pachter pic with the Guru Pachter quote now.

I'm lovin' it.

theBishop said:
People aren't just going to plunk down $250 because they can. They need to see something far beyond what they are already playing. If some of you think consumers can't tell the difference between Wii and 360/PS3, what makes you think they can see the difference between Wii and PS2?

Well, the Wiimote is the difference that's easy to spot and easy to understand.

theBishop said:
Nintendo has to essentially win those people over on the merits of the Wiimote alone. The actual game content is comparable.

Exactly.

Evlar · May 31, 2007

theBishop said:
Price is absolutely a big factor. But PS2 isn't a dying console. Wii isn't going to walk away with a "victory" just because it launched at $250. When PS2 is still offering a very compelling experience at $130 (and eventually $99), Nintendo has to essentially win those people over on the merits of the Wiimote alone. The actual game content is comparable.

People aren't just going to plunk down $250 because they can. They need to see something far beyond what they are already playing. If some of you think consumers can't tell the difference between Wii and 360/PS3, what makes you think they can see the difference between Wii and PS2?

I think people see a pretty huge difference between the two. This is just based on my conversations with casuals who have seen the system or heard about it through advertising, and based on the mass media reaction to Wii (which can be boiled down to "Holy shit look at the controller!")

schuelma · May 31, 2007

theBishop said:
Price is absolutely a big factor. But PS2 isn't a dying console. Wii isn't going to walk away with a "victory" just because it launched at $250. When PS2 is still offering a very compelling experience at $130 (and eventually $99), Nintendo has to essentially win those people over on the merits of the Wiimote alone. The actual game content is comparable.

People aren't just going to plunk down $250 because they can. They need to see something far beyond what they are already playing. If some of you think consumers can't tell the difference between Wii and 360/PS3, what makes you think they can see the difference between Wii and PS2?

But based on NPD sales, isn't Wii already winning over many of those people? I mean its selling about 100K a week in N.A when its in somewhat supply...I mean I guess yeah if it completely took away every customer from the PS2 it could sell 600K a month in May...but I gotta think Nintendo's pretty satisfied with how its competing already.

(in other words, what I'm trying to say is in my opinion customers are already saying that 250$ is worth it).

Tobor · May 31, 2007

theBishop said:
Price is absolutely a big factor. But PS2 isn't a dying console. Wii isn't going to walk away with a "victory" just because it launched at $250. When PS2 is still offering a very compelling experience at $130 (and eventually $99), Nintendo has to essentially win those people over on the merits of the Wiimote alone. The actual game content is comparable.

People aren't just going to plunk down $250 because they can. They need to see something far beyond what they are already playing. If some of you think consumers can't tell the difference between Wii and 360/PS3, what makes you think they can see the difference between Wii and PS2?

Because Wii Sports doesn't work on the PS2? Wii is selling double the PS2s numbers at twice the price. No other console is selling more than the PS2. Why is that? Because people want to play the Wii and it is affordable. It can only get more affordable.

TheKingsCrown · May 31, 2007

Tobor said:
PS2 owners are buying the Wii right now. Believe it. You don't sell 360,000 units in April to Gamecube owners and non-gamers alone.

I know about 10 that did when Wii launched. It isn't because its PS2 vs. Wii, its because of what Wii is.

theBishop · May 31, 2007

The Sphinx said:
I think people see a pretty huge difference between the two. This is just based on my conversations with casuals who have seen the system or heard about it through advertising, and based on the mass media reaction to Wii (which can be boiled down to "Holy shit look at the controller!")

That's what I'm saying though. Wii is going to have to be completely reliant on its controller to convert people. There's something like 120 million people in the world who got by just fine on a dual-shock, and its my personal opinion that they are going to need more than the Wiimote to convince them.

And there's always the wildcard scenario where Sony drops some sort of Wiimote knockoff for the PS2. Not saying it will happen, but i think it would significantly alter the way we look at this "war".

schuelma · May 31, 2007

theBishop said:
That's what I'm saying though. Wii is going to have to be completely reliant on its controller to convert people. There's something like 120 million people in the world who got by just fine on a dual-shock, and its my personal opinion that they are going to need more than the Wiimote to convince them.

And there's always the wildcard scenario where Sony drops some sort of Wiimote knockoff for the PS2. Not saying it will happen, but i think it would significantly alter the way we look at this "war".

I think everyone's point is that right now it already is converting people- more than a million a month worldwide (approximately of course).

Tobor · May 31, 2007

theBishop said:
That's what I'm saying though. Wii is going to have to be completely reliant on its controller to convert people. There's something like 120 million people in the world who got by just fine on a dual-shock, and its my personal opinion that they are going to need more than the Wiimote to convince them.

And there's always the wildcard scenario where Sony drops some sort of Wiimote knockoff for the PS2. Not saying it will happen, but i think it would significantly alter the way we look at this "war".

Why would Sony unveil a knockoff if people "got by just fine" with the Dual Shock? Either it is good enough, or it isn't.

People don't realize how bad a design or interface is until a better design comes along. You know, that "Oh, why didn't anyone think of this before" moment you have when you see something new and different.

theBishop · May 31, 2007

schuelma said:
I think everyone's point is that right now it already is converting people- more than a million a month worldwide (approximately of course).

Maybe it is. On the other hand, Wii is coming after the huge success of the DS, 20 million Gamecube owners, and a low price tag. We all know how rabid Nintendo fans can be. Wii is pretty much a perfect storm for mass adoption among the existing fanbase.

Obviously there is going to be a lot of overlap, but I think the PS2 owners are not the same group. I wonder what happens after Wii sells to the Nintendo hardcore.

I do not believe a system that is impossible to find in stores is selling significant numbers to grandparents and soccer moms. At least not in the US.

dammitmattt · May 31, 2007

Doc Holliday said:
This is what happens when companies dont make money.....Some of us like Nintendo games and maybe *gasp* there systems too. If a company doesnt make money, they will cease to exist....simple as that.

Look at whats happening to Sony.

PS... I still think Nintendo ****ed us over with the specs.

There is a LARGE difference in celebrating a company being successful and celebrating a company raping you in the ass.

As any company should, Nintendo values money over all else, including its customers, so it's hilarious to see the hardcore Nintendo fan cheerleading record profits, especially given that Nintendo could care less about that consumer. If they actually valued the consumer as much as people think they do, the Wii would be cheaper, the games would be cheaper, the Wiimote would be cheaper, and it would have more tech inside. On top of that, they could do all of this and STILL make profit.

I think Nintendo's business model is fascinating and I applaud them for all of the steps they have taken to get to this point and for all of the success they have had, but Jesus Christ, Gahiggidy & gang, get off their cock.

schuelma · May 31, 2007

theBishop said:
Maybe it is. On the other hand, Wii is coming after the huge success of the DS, 20 million Gamecube owners, and a low price tag. We all know how rabid Nintendo fans can be. Wii is pretty much a perfect storm for mass adoption among the existing fanbase.

Obviously there is going to be a lot of overlap, but I think the PS2 owners are not the same group. I wonder what happens after Wii sells to the Nintendo hardcore.

I do not believe a system that is impossible to find in stores is selling significant numbers to grandparents and soccer moms. At least not in the US.

Sigh..so I take it you subscribe to the Luke Smith theory that the Wii is selling to the Zelda crowd right now? Do you really think the controller and Wii Sports isn't having a significant impact among non and lapsed gamers? I mean these sales are insane and could be even higher...and you really think its just the Nintendo fanbase?

Support NeoGAF

Fortune Magazine cover story: How Wii won

Member

Golden Domers are chickenshit!!

Banned

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Golden Domers are chickenshit!!

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Wastes hours checking old Famitsu software data, but that's why we love him.

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Wastes hours checking old Famitsu software data, but that's why we love him.

Banned

GAF's Bob Woodward

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

SPOILER: Columbus finds America

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Wastes hours checking old Famitsu software data, but that's why we love him.

Member

Banned

Banned

Wastes hours checking old Famitsu software data, but that's why we love him.

Member

Banned

Banned

Wastes hours checking old Famitsu software data, but that's why we love him.

Similar threads