[DXB-KNIGHT]

Nintendo knows better than anyone else that Nintendo on other devices equals Nintendo's death.

[frankie_baby]

After the experience they had with the 3DS? Not a chance. Wii U will sell at a max. launch price of 300$. Period. Nintendo if necessary will downgrade the hardware further, but they'll never set up such a price.

I'm agreeing it will be 300, im just saying that 350 would be break even meaning theyll take a small loss

[Sponge]

Yet another article that demands Mario on iOS and Android, yet another person who just doesn't get the industry.

[zerokoolpsx]

$300-400 for the Wii U. They're sitting on a ton of cash. Their situation is not dire at all.

[TheNatural]

If they did go down that route then once there in there is no coming out. People would end up expecting to see the premium IP's on IOS/Android. Nintendo should stay well clear of that market!!

Let them expect, while Nintendo rakes in the cash. It's no different than what a lot of companies do, like Namco with Pacman or games so old they're considered almost public domain. Doesn't mean they're going to put their meaningful current games on a mobile platform.

They've released and rereleased old NES games in remakes, ports, versions, collectables, and digital sales so many times, there's literally almost no inherent value left in them to be just on a Nintendo platform. I could see them making a killing on mobile versions of some very old games.

[Cygnus X-1]

Nintendo used to be about value. Go look back at the E3 when Gamecube was unveiled and see what they had to say then versus what they're doing now. They're adding features that have a lot of cost to them that aren't making a lot of noise. Because motion gaming took off, doesn't mean 3D will, and doesn't mean tablet gaming will. Especially when there's a cost-reward problem with how much money is being invested in these things. Everyone says iOS and Android games should be developed, and laughs at this, but I actually think Nintendo will within two years. But not in the way people think. Nintendo has already peaked with the Virtual Console on Wii and people aren't going to accept buying those games again on Wii U, so Nintendo is definitely going to have some type of transfer system. They're starting to put NES games on the 3DS for double dipping, so after this dies down in about a year or so, I honestly think they'll start taking very old NES games and putting them on mobile platforms. What's to lose? These games, like Super Mario Bros, Donkey Kong, Metroid, Ice Climbers, etc are practically public domain at this point. The novelty of the Virtual Console has long since wore off with the Wii, and they've cashed in as much as they're going to there with these old games, especially transferring the games over to Wii U in some way. Just announcing "mobile development" would jump their stock and they won't have to provide anything meaningful. Simple, cheap, emulated ports of old NES games would give them a good amount of money while making it seem to investors like they're moving mobile.

Maybe this is the only possibility that actually is not dumb. I second your thinking. These games could be pure profits at no costs and this way to proceed could attract more investors.

But the best thing ever would be that analysts will finally shut up.

[NoRéN]

I am so sick of hearing about how Nintendo needs to bow down to Apple, leave the console business and start making casual bullshit games for iOS. It's like every single journalist or analyst is buying into this garbage. It's even worse when the contents of their articles/analysis reveal that they barely even know what they are talking about and are just writing a hit-piece based off the hot talking points. Why does it annoy me? Because it trickles down to the average uninformed person and shapes their opinion, which they ignorantly go on about in everyday conversations and I can't help buy shake my head.

Great post.

[The_Darkest_Red]

Yeah I noticed that. And also "the next Wii console, the Wii U". There's something ominous about the thinking there. It's the whole "it's just a new Wii" thing.

It's the same thing Nintendo got into when they decided to name the successor to the DS the 3DS. It's just one more reason why the Wii U needs a name change, in my opinion.

[Cipherr]

When journalists and analysts finally realise that wii music brought in more revenue than any mobile game ever then i'll listen to them

Ehh, that information is readily available to them, and in this very report, they are saying the losses expected by Nintendo will be almost half as bad as they expected, and then turned and forecast-ed profit in the next quarter, yet they are still, as loud as ever before waiving that mobile flag.

They have a wish, and no amount of actual data, profit, nor reasoning is going to stop them from shouting it at every opportunity, that much seems clear. When you have to revise your doom forecast from "the sky is falling" to "A slight chance of showers with profit on the near horizon" and yet your demeanor doesn't change on the whole mobile thing at all, I think its reasonable to assume their minds are made up.

I audibly loled at the prediction of WiiU being a complete and utter failure, leading to a jettison of Iwata from CEO, and the immediate replacement CEO who will SUUUUUUURELY put Mario on their cellphones immediately upon appointment.

I dont care who you are, that shit is funny.

I don't think it can really be used by either side as any sort of realistic argument for Nintendo's current well-being or lack thereof.

Riiiiiiiiight, so the rough start, which was quickly turned around and the next 6 years where the 3DS will bring in billions in profit and revenues doesn't count anymore, because.... you know, it had a rough start that led to a price drop. So forever the 3DS is a failure, nothing else counts after it sales volume and actions no longer suit the "Doomed" mantra.

How convenient. And how Tragic for the iPhone and its early price drop also. Shame all this success its having all these years later doesnt count.

[mugurumakensei]

If BMW released the new M3 at $60,000~ and it sold like shit, then cut the price by 33%~ would it be any surprise that it was selling well? I'm not really trying to get into the whole anti/pro-Nintendo thing with this comment, I just don't get why the 3DS's "success" should be lauded when it required dire action to achieve those numbers. Sure it's selling now after its price point was completely reworked, but it was a failure at $250. I don't think it can really be used by either side as any sort of realistic argument for Nintendo's current well-being or lack thereof.

If the 3DS was a failure in its first six months, what was the GBA or the DS?

The reality is DS started much slower, and the GBA didn't sell drastically more so than the 3DS. It seems to me that most people are analyzing the handheld situation without really considering history.

[Criminal Upper]

It's analysts and investors who put Nintendo in the position it's currently in.

Remember when Michael Pachter said the 3DS was too CHEAP at 250$? And that Nintendo would regret pricing it so low?

Classic.

[ElectricBlanketFire]

This disc being a crazy success is why Nintendo's stance on allowing their content on non-Nintendo devices makes sense:

[Smiles and Cries]

so who is paying for this agenda you guys are talking about? I mean I can see the bias but not sure who is leading this?

Is it just pro-USA company vs a Japanese company?

[Sky Chief]

All of the analysts saying its time to go third party, wtf!?

[BrokenEchelon]

If the 3DS was a failure in its first six months, what was the GBA or the DS? The reality is DS started much slower, and the GBA didn't sell drastically more so than the 3DS. It seems to me that most people are analyzing the handheld situation without really considering history.

Why didn't they get a third of their price slashed if they were doing worse than the 3DS was at $250?

[schuelma]

What a terrible article. My favorite part was the analyst predicting Wii U's failure plus Iwata's dismissal finally leading to the holy grail of mario on my ipad.

[Cygnus X-1]

I am so sick of hearing about how Nintendo needs to bow down to Apple, leave the console business and start making casual bullshit games for iOS. It's like every single journalist or analyst is buying into this garbage. It's even worse when the contents of their articles/analysis reveal that they barely even know what they are talking about and are just writing a hit-piece based off the hot talking points. Why does it annoy me? Because it trickles down to the average uninformed person and shapes their opinion, which they ignorantly go on about in everyday conversations and I can't help buy shake my head.

That's so true unfortunately.

[schuelma]

so who is paying for this agenda you guys are talking about? I mean I can see the bias but not sure who is leading this? Is it just pro-USA company vs a Japanese company?

I did not say anything about an agenda, but I do think that Apple gets every single possible benefit of the doubt from journalists and analysts.

[Christine]

Maybe this is the only possibility that actually is not dumb. I second your thinking. These games could be pure profits at no costs and this way to proceed could attract more investors.

Why do you think "attracting more investors" is important?

[SolarPowered]

I am so sick of hearing about how Nintendo needs to bow down to Apple, leave the console business and start making casual bullshit games for iOS. It's like every single journalist or analyst is buying into this garbage. It's even worse when the contents of their articles/analysis reveal that they barely even know what they are talking about and are just writing a hit-piece based off the hot talking points. Why does it annoy me? Because it trickles down to the average uninformed person and shapes their opinion, which they ignorantly go on about in everyday conversations and I can't help buy shake my head.

I agree here. This is kind of stupid, but has anything like this been said about MS since it's earlier days with the OG Xbox? I can't turn a corner without JP companies like Sony and Nintendo being doomed, but I don't hear a peep about Microsoft despite the trail of red ink it took for them to make it this far in the industry.

It's starting to feel more like a national bias than informed speculation. This is probably a dumb post on my part and I'd like to be proven wrong thoroughly.

[Rocket Punch]

Any drastic strategy shift that would dispatch the Mario brothers into the realm of Android and Apple's iOS operating system would likely require a change at the top of Nintendo, said Macquarie's Gibson. And that likely won't happen for a couple of years until the Wii U is shown to be a clear failure, he added

Focus people.

What should be taken from this article is that the Wii U is a failure before launch but it will take 2 years for people to realize it.

ANALysts.

Boggles the mind.

[mugurumakensei]

Why didn't they get a third of their price slashed if they were doing worse than the 3DS was at $250?

What does the 3DS price cut have to do with the very objective fact that DS had slower sales at its launch than the 3DS? At the time, Nintendo was already developing the gameboy successor if the DS failed. It just so happened DS started picking up steam after a yeat of being on sale so they scrapped the GBA successor.

[Foffy]

If the 3DS was a failure in its first six months, what was the GBA or the DS? The reality is DS started much slower, and the GBA didn't sell drastically more so than the 3DS. It seems to me that most people are analyzing the handheld situation without really considering history.

All that matters is if Nintendo doesn't make games on smartphones, they're failing, silly!

Seriously, this is getting old. While I would never buy the Wii U at $350, the doom of the company is anything but. They've been knocked a little off of their pedestal, and rightfully so. We, the consumer, benefit from panic mode Nintendo. I welcome more of that and less of the Nintendo we got with DS and Wii, the generation that had their most successful platforms but also the same two platforms Nintendo has had the biggest pile of games they've not released worldwide.

[whatsinaname]

Yet another article that demands Mario on iOS and Android, yet another person who just doesn't get the industry.

It is not that they don't get it, they just don't care. These analysts are just interested in the quarter on quarter share value increase. It is similar to the difference between slash and burn farming and subsistence farming. So what if you chop a few trees down and overload the soil thereby decreasing its long term fertility. Move Mario to iOS, the stock price will jump for two or three quarters, dump the stock and move onto the next company/industry. The care nothing about the long term health of a company.

[FoneBone]

Let them expect, while Nintendo rakes in the cash. It's no different than what a lot of companies do, like Namco with Pacman or games so old they're considered almost public domain. Doesn't mean they're going to put their meaningful current games on a mobile platform. They've released and rereleased old NES games in remakes, ports, versions, collectables, and digital sales so many times, there's literally almost no inherent value left in them to be just on a Nintendo platform. I could see them making a killing on mobile versions of some very old games.

Er, I'd say it's very different from third-party franchises that have historically appeared on pretty much every platform imaginable.

[GDGF]

Why do you think "attracting more investors" is important?

Oh speaking of which one of the nicer outcomes of tomorrow's news would be Nintendo having an opportunity to do a nice cheap buyback of some shares and lessen the influence of these guys.

[Anth0ny]

These people don't know what they're talking about. Everyone on GAF should know that.

[Effect]

so who is paying for this agenda you guys are talking about? I mean I can see the bias but not sure who is leading this? Is it just pro-USA company vs a Japanese company?

That's really a messed up aspect of this whole situation. No one is paying for this spin I think. Some people are just so much about Apple to an unreasonable degree (Apple can do no wrong fanboys? Perhaps. A desire to justify rebuying a new phone or iPad every year? I don't know.) that they will take it upon themselves to do this unprompted it seems. These people are in the positions were they are able to push this narrative regardless of what reality is. It doesn't matter what numbers you put in front of them they keep pushing it.

[TheNatural]

Er, I'd say it's very different from third-party franchises that have historically appeared on pretty much every platform imaginable.

The only difference is people think it's sacreligious for a Nintendo game to appear on a non Nintendo platform, that's all. Not that it's a bad move.

[tuffy]

They've released and rereleased old NES games in remakes, ports, versions, collectables, and digital sales so many times, there's literally almost no inherent value left in them to be just on a Nintendo platform. I could see them making a killing on mobile versions of some very old games.

The value in keeping them exclusive is greater than the value of selling them cheap on an app store, even for very old titles.

Consider that a Wii U (or any other hypothetical new Nintendo console) with exclusive new and old titles is better differentiated than one with only exclusive new titles. If someone really wants to play "Super Mario Bros." that badly, Nintendo wants to sell them the hardware for it without exception.

[Smiles and Cries]

I did not say anything about an agenda, but I do think that Apple gets every single possible benefit of the doubt from journalists and analysts.

you kinda get that respect when you become the top company in the world though

[Fourth Storm]

What a terrible article. My favorite part was the analyst predicting Wii U's failure plus Iwata's dismissal finally leading to the holy grail of mario on my ipad.

Yup, it is really is all-encompassing. The only thing they failed to mention was Miyamoto's "retirement."

[Sammy Samusu]

I'm not sure, but I think the fiscal meeting starts at 9pm EDT.

[Sho_Nuff82]

I think Nintendo is going to print money with their NSMB games being released for Wii U and 3DS this year.

[DXB-KNIGHT]

The only difference is people think it's sacreligious for a Nintendo game to appear on a non Nintendo platform, that's all. Not that it's a bad move.

Yes its a deadly move for Nintendo.

[Mama Robotnik]

Nintendo's most important asset is their IPs and software exclusivity. Retaining the exclusivity of Mario, Pokemon, Zelda, etc is fundamental to their success and to selling their hardware.

Selling their IPs on non-Nintendo hardware at a significantly lower prices, is an impulsive and short sighted idea that will do nothing but detrimentally affect the company. The brands will be devalued, focus will be diluted and the most essential selling point of Nintendo consoles will be gone.

I see all negatives and no significant positives to the idea, and I think it would be madness to pursue it. I'm saying that as an owner and user of iOS devices too.

[FoneBone]

The value in keeping them exclusive is greater than the value of selling them cheap on an app store, even for very old titles. Consider that a Wii U (or any other hypothetical new Nintendo console) with exclusive new and old titles is better differentiated than one with only exclusive new titles. If someone really wants to play "Super Mario Bros." that badly, Nintendo wants to sell them the hardware for it without exception.

Yeah. And I don't think it's totally crazy to think that putting VC games on iOS risks leading consumers to expect the new Mario platformer will eventually show up there.

[Lonewolf_92]

I am so sick of hearing about how Nintendo needs to bow down to Apple, leave the console business and start making casual bullshit games for iOS. It's like every single journalist or analyst is buying into this garbage. It's even worse when the contents of their articles/analysis reveal that they barely even know what they are talking about and are just writing a hit-piece based off the hot talking points. Why does it annoy me? Because it trickles down to the average uninformed person and shapes their opinion, which they ignorantly go on about in everyday conversations and I can't help buy shake my head.

I honestly feel mobile gaming on touch screen devices like phones is the modern generations FMV. Remember how those were supposed to change the way we gamed all those years ago and how everyone (including people who should have known better) said traditional gaming was "dead"? Once the fad ends we'll see who is left floating.

[Cipherr]

"With its 8,000 yen a share in cash, it can afford to still make a bet that its hardware will sell," said Gibson.

Wow yeah, the completely glossed over the 3DS for like the entirety of the article, thats crazy. You couldn't pull the 3DS's name out of these guys mouths 8 or so months ago. It was all they could talk about. Now, you would swear that they have forgotten it exists.

[Father_Brain]

I'm not sure, but I think the fiscal meeting starts at 9pm EDT.

Tomorrow, yes. Earnings release should be at 3AM or 4AM EDT - not quite sure which, off the top of my head. But I'll sleep through it anyway, so hey.

[the thoroughbred]

It's like some clever idiot, thought that giving some sort of donation to Reuters would do them some good. Hell it could even be Apple. It's laughable. Nintendo could sell just 20million consoles and still make a healthy profit. They've done it before.

[TheBanditKing]

Yeah I noticed that. And also "the next Wii console, the Wii U". There's something ominous about the thinking there. It's the whole "it's just a new Wii" thing.

Expect a lot of that, not just from these types either. I think a lot of people are going to be confused by WiiU(unless the name is changed). yes they built a brand with Wii but the message of what its suppose to be does not come through with that name, people are not going to understand its a whole new system, imo. Also WiiU at $350 is a no go for me, in fact its going to take something amazing to get me in a launch line at $300.

Still most of what was said in that article is not very well thought out but what do you expect from people that don't really understand the industry or its consumers.

[FoneBone]

I honestly feel mobile gaming on touch screen devices like phones is the modern generations FMV. Remember how those were supposed to change the way we gamed all those years ago and how everyone (including people who should have known better) said traditional gaming was "dead"? Once the fad ends we'll see who is left floating.

OK, this is just dumb. Smartphone gaming isn't going anywhere, regardless of what Nintendo does or doesn't do.

[BrokenEchelon]

What does the 3DS price cut have to do with the very objective fact that DS had slower sales at its launch than the 3DS? At the time, Nintendo was already developing the gameboy successor if the DS failed. It just so happened DS started picking up steam after a yeat of being on sale so they scrapped the GBA successor.

Ok, so based on this:

If the 3DS was a failure in its first six months, what was the GBA or the DS? The reality is DS started much slower, and the GBA didn't sell drastically more so than the 3DS. It seems to me that most people are analyzing the handheld situation without really considering history.

You're saying that the 3DS did no worse than the DS or GBA and can thus not be called a failure at $250.

But if it wasn't a failure at $250, then why did Nintendo choose to cut the 3DS' price by 33%~ when the other two systems had apparently been in the same boat?

Does that make it clearer? If the GBA, DS, and 3DS were all doing roughly the same at launch, why is it that Nintendo only panicked with the 3DS?

[TheNatural]

The value in keeping them exclusive is greater than the value of selling them cheap on an app store, even for very old titles. Consider that a Wii U (or any other hypothetical new Nintendo console) with exclusive new and old titles is better differentiated than one with only exclusive new titles. If someone really wants to play "Super Mario Bros." that badly, Nintendo wants to sell them the hardware for it without exception.

They've sold Super Mario Bros on a console for years now, and those titles in all likelihood are going to transfer over to Wii U. What revenue stream is going to come then from Wii U with these games? Everyone has had years with the Wii to buy it who wanted it. The novelty has peaked.

Not only that, but it's not as if the games would become unavailable, they just would be available elsewhere. And in reality, they have been, and have been for years with emulators. Releasing some almost 30 year old games on mobile platforms isn't going to hurt them a bit or force anyone to reconsider a decision to buy any of their hardware.

[Taker666]

I certainly wouldn't want Nintendo to release new titles on phones...but would releasing a few NES games hurt them?

Couldn't they use them as a way to rake in some easy cash and as a marketing tool for the new Wii U/3DS games in the franchises? I wouldn't think that would harm their hardware sales.

[Effect]

The only difference is people think it's sacreligious for a Nintendo game to appear on a non Nintendo platform, that's all. Not that it's a bad move.

It's a horrible move. Nintendo is a hardware company as well as a software company. What sense does it make for them to make software that will appear on another companies hardware? Nintendo software only appears on Nintendo hardware is apart of what makes then Nintendo. It is what makes people buy their hardware because they have content that can not be gotten anywhere else. To put their software on another companies hardware is for them to basically destroy their entire business strategy. For what? To sell $1 games? Why when one game can make them more then the entire iOS market combined? Regardless of what is said Nintendo is not in any financial trouble which makes talk about then going to be need to put games on the iOS in the future ignorant talk at best (they have not seen or bothered to look at Nintendo's financials and assets) or outright lies by the writers at worse.

[Coen]

Analyst thinking seems to be pretty simple these days: it's either an Apple product or it's a doomed one.

[Cipherr]

They've sold Super Mario Bros on a console for years now, and those titles in all likelihood are going to transfer over to Wii U. What revenue stream is going to come then from Wii U with these games? Everyone has had years with the Wii to buy it who wanted it. The novelty has peaked. Not only that, but it's not as if the games would become unavailable, they just would be available elsewhere. And in reality, they have been, and have been for years with emulators. Releasing some almost 30 year old games on mobile platforms isn't going to hurt them a bit or force anyone to reconsider a decision to buy any of their hardware.

Anyone else find it hilarious the lengths people will go to to argue how irrelevant Nintendo's IP's on other devices would be, only to put so much energy and effort into begging that they go to those platforms?

You claim it has no draw anymore, but yet, here you are on the other hand acting like it would generate this massive amount of money making it worth the tradeoff. Get over it. Its not happening.

I certainly wouldn't want Nintendo to release new titles on phones...but would releasing a few NES games hurt them? Couldn't they use them as a way to rake in some easy cash and as a marketing tool for the new Wii U/3DS games in the franchises? I wouldn't think that would harm their hardware sales.

I think they would rather do the exact same thing, but on their own hardware like the 3DS and WiiU with those old games. You are as likely to see them giving thought to putting old titles on phones, as you are to have seen them considering putting old titles on XBLA and PSN. I mean, whats there to lose right?

[M3d10n]

Nintendo used to be about value. Go look back at the E3 when Gamecube was unveiled and see what they had to say then versus what they're doing now. They're adding features that have a lot of cost to them that aren't making a lot of noise. Because motion gaming took off, doesn't mean 3D will, and doesn't mean tablet gaming will. Especially when there's a cost-reward problem with how much money is being invested in these things. Everyone says iOS and Android games should be developed, and laughs at this, but I actually think Nintendo will within two years. But not in the way people think. Nintendo has already peaked with the Virtual Console on Wii and people aren't going to accept buying those games again on Wii U, so Nintendo is definitely going to have some type of transfer system. They're starting to put NES games on the 3DS for double dipping, so after this dies down in about a year or so, I honestly think they'll start taking very old NES games and putting them on mobile platforms. What's to lose? These games, like Super Mario Bros, Donkey Kong, Metroid, Ice Climbers, etc are practically public domain at this point. The novelty of the Virtual Console has long since wore off with the Wii, and they've cashed in as much as they're going to there with these old games, especially transferring the games over to Wii U in some way. Just announcing "mobile development" would jump their stock and they won't have to provide anything meaningful. Simple, cheap, emulated ports of old NES games would give them a good amount of money while making it seem to investors like they're moving mobile.

They would lose the same thing Apple would if they licensed iOS for other smartphone makers. An exclusive feature that gets people to buy their hardware and partake in their software ecosystem.