Support NeoGAF

[KtSlime]

That sounds like your regular barrier to entry, not a case of "snubbing" at all.

If good ideas can't get done because there is no dialogue due to an antiquated business model, something is wrong.

 

[Gospel]

If Trip Hawkins wants an open platform, he needs to realize that the PC still exists.

Well, the man does mentions browser based games...

 

[Crazymoogle]

Oh, I knew that -- that wasn't my point. What I meant was that, if I understand this correctly, doesn't that mean that if someone wanted an "open" iOS device for their own hacking, it's essentially available that way? I mean, if you pay $99 a year, can't you program and run your own software as much as you want?

Sure, essentially. You need to own a Mac or Macbook (something running OSX) in order to compile anything, but once you have the SDK license you can make your own apps and pretty much break any requirements you like (unless you try to get it published.) It just lets you run an environment where you can create your own signed executables. What it won't let you do is run jailbreak software or sign already built executables.

The entry requirements are very low, and you use existing hardware.

Nintendo, by comparison, does require proof of business, proof of an office location, substantial fees for acquiring test kits, and so on. It made a lot of sense earlier in the history of the industry, but I admit I'm pretty surprised they haven't moved forward with a Yaroze-like digital download platform SDK with lower system requirements. A good middle-ground might have been going the same route as Apple, only with a bar (say, 10 dollar apps) to avoid the low cost race to the bottom they mention. It would open a great avenue for 3DSiware while keeping the retail channel intact.

 

[exwallst]

Funny that he didn't mention Facebook games. Those seem to be the most disruptive to the 'old' way of business.

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

lol Hawkins, but he brings up two very good points.

 

[[Nintex]]

"At least Nintendo had the courtesy to tell you upfront that you were going to be screwed."

best quote ever.

 

[Hot Coldman]

Like the points, wish it was someone else saying them.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

So he simultaneously laments open and closed platform policies. Is his ideal scenario one in which anyone can develop a game for the platform with no licensing fees, but there's still someone who says "Yes this game can come out, no this game cannot"?

 

[BobTheFork]

Anyone who laughs this off because Trip said it...great, lulz abound, but what do you actually think about the point?

 

[1-D_FTW]

Anyone who laughs this off because Trip said it...great, lulz abound, but what do you actually think about the point?

I think he's just bitter. Nintendo's policy was wrong why? Because they ditched having huge markups on hardware and subsidized it by having license fees? This ultimately grew the market. 3DO was an example of what happened when you didn't subsidize things and let the electronic companies have their normal markups.

As for Apple? What's the beef? It's too popular? Should Apple charge more than 30 percent royalties? Should they start being big brother and saying what's good and what's not? It's an open system, but because it's too popular, there's too many apps? That's what the free market is. You rise to the top because your product is distinctive.

 

[Guevara]

So he simultaneously laments open and closed platform policies. Is his ideal scenario one in which anyone can develop a game for the platform with no licensing fees, but there's still someone who says "Yes this game can come out, no this game cannot"?

Yeah I don't get it:

Nintendo is bad because the barrier to entry is too high and and bedroom devs can't make cheap $1 games.

Apple is bad because the barrier to entry is too low and the market is flooded with crap made by bedroom devs so nobody makes any money.

What's the answer? Some imaginary middle point that currently doesn't exist? Oh and browser based games, lol.

 

[Deku]

Yeah I don't get it:

Nintendo is bad because the barrier to entry is too high and and bedroom devs can't make cheap $1 games.

Apple is bad because the barrier to entry is too low and the market is flooded with crap made by bedroom devs so nobody makes any money.

What's the answer? Some imaginary middle point that currently doesn't exist? Oh and browser based games, lol.

His new console of course.

I have a lot of respect for Trip and what he is saying isn't fundamentally wrong, but just like you have people who are really 'in their own world' here on NeoGAF, Trips many years in the backwater of videogames may have created that mentality for him.

Because frankly, you can't discount the man who created EA and arguably launched the Genesis by simply agreeing to put games on it. He changed the world.

 

[Pathetic Basement Virgin]

Yeah but at least the PS2 had consistently good software....

What's that got to do with anything? You are not telling anyone anything they don't already know.

 

[Boonoo]

So he simultaneously laments open and closed platform policies. Is his ideal scenario one in which anyone can develop a game for the platform with no licensing fees, but there's still someone who says "Yes this game can come out, no this game cannot"?

Well that's pretty much what Steam is, right?

 

[charlequin]

Well that's pretty much what Steam is, right?

Steam takes the same 30% cut Apple does.

 

[Boonoo]

Steam takes the same 30% cut Apple does.

Ah, right, I was thinking about development fees.

 

[Kuran]

Man, it's since 1985 that Nintendo influenced the industry into certification process and rules of devellopment and it's now he's complaining?
"Let's have no quality standards and let us do what we want" is always the word of devs and publishers. Yet, many fail to do a product that is any good and they barely succeed into getting approved. Just imagine if there was no standard? It would be a fucking wasteland.

Also, why not complain about Sony and Microsoft or anybody else that did follow Nintendo into liscensing process since 1985??

LOL

Quality standard? Where ? Babiez?

 

[Tobor]

"Over encouraged supply"? haha, that's a good one, Trip.

 

[BobTheFork]

I think he's just bitter. Nintendo's policy was wrong why? Because they ditched having huge markups on hardware and subsidized it by having license fees? This ultimately grew the market. 3DO was an example of what happened when you didn't subsidize things and let the electronic companies have their normal markups.

As for Apple? What's the beef? It's too popular? Should Apple charge more than 30 percent royalties? Should they start being big brother and saying what's good and what's not? It's an open system, but because it's too popular, there's too many apps? That's what the free market is. You rise to the top because your product is distinctive.

Well, I think his point was that you CAN'T rise with so much clutter. I'm not sure if I agree with him but that kind of market dilution was a major reason for the gaming crash. I don't he is saying that this will kill the gaming industry, but it could cripple this great new market they have by making the same mistake and not managing it properly.

As for Nintendo, it grew the market for THEM, but his point I think it that it's choking out up and coming devs. I want there to be as many companies as possible pushing out great content. I think Nintendo would rather they be the ones with all the great content.

If I understand his point, it's that these market leaders aren't making the decision that benefit th industry the most, just themselves. They can do that if they want, but that's the objection here.

 

[Deku]

"Over encouraged supply"? haha, that's a good one, Trip.

He's talking about over production of apps. And he's right on that.

As for Nintendo, it grew the market for THEM, but his point I think it that it's choking out up and coming devs. I want there to be as many companies as possible pushing out great content. I think Nintendo would rather they be the ones with all the great content.

If I understand his point, it's that these market leaders aren't making the decision that benefit th industry the most, just themselves. They can do that if they want, but that's the objection here.

Que? The current 60b global games market is more or less on Nintendo's licensing models.

Sony tweaked a few things with the PS but it is the same model

 

[Cygnus X-1]

The licensing agreement wan't exactly a nice thing, but after the crash of 1983 it was absolutely necessary in order to prevent the industry from disappearing definively.

 

[charlequin]

Yeah I don't get it

The blurb from Gamasutra makes it clearer that, rather than Hawkins taking Apple and Nintendo equally to task, he was using Nintendo's model as a point of comparison to say "if you felt hemmed in by the model Nintendo introduced, Apple's model isn't actually better despite their claims." He's telling people not to gold-rush the App Store because they're just going to get lost in a flood of titles.

 

[BobTheFork]

He's talking about over production of apps. And he's right on that.




Que? The current 60b global games market is more or less on Nintendo's licensing models.

Sony tweaked a few things with the PS but it is the same model

Look, I don't know enough about the industry to properly analyze it. I was transcribing what I though he meant when talking about 'knowing Nintendo is going to screw you when you signed the deal' I know Nintendo makes a ton of money off the Wii and DS, maybe he thinks not enough of their licencees do and he doesn't think they will fair much better with the new Apple model for reasons I said above.

Edit:^^^ yeah what he said.

 

[kyoya]

I have both criticism and praise for Nintendo on this one:

First, does Iwata physically walk through retailers like Wal-Mart, Target, Toys R Us, Gamestop, Best Buy and just see how much shovelware there is for both the Wii and DS? Does he understand that there is a limit of just how many "Imagine" and "Paws & Claws" games from UbiSoft and THQ we need? Then again, perhaps they actually sell well and are a quick pick for clueless parents and kids with allowance to waste. Obviously, this shovelware literally shoves the good games off the shelf from great ambitious developers (large and small) that actually care about quality and creating something new and innovative.

I have to check around with different retailers when there is a particular quality Wii or DS game I want that I can't find at one of these retailers I've mentioned (or just turn to Amazon). Then again, I guess that's how it's always been, checking around to find what you actually want. It just appears that both Nintendo of America and eager-to-please retailers leave the consumer to swim through the spew of low-grade crap DS and Wii games.

Now, as far as developers having to pay to use certified Nintendo equipment, and what I assume are certified facilities to manufacture Wii and DS media - this is the part I approve of. Nintendo does not want to be associated with product defects of any kind - which is why (I assume) they mandate on manufacturing to third-party publishers and this has to be paid for. If publishers were allowed to choose whatever testing equipment, or media manufacturing they wanted for Wii or DS, and the media turns out defective, then, not only are they screwed, but Nintendo is screwed as well (i.e. bad press, PR nightmare). Nintendo doesn't want to be associated with this.

Now, if only Nintendo could properly address its defective third-party approval process of shovelware titles, then....perhaps we'd see better quality titles on the shelves.

 

[Deku]

Most best buys I go to have a new release and recommended shelf. The quality titles aren't hard to find and are far more featured than the Petz and no-name genre titles from unknown publishers.

Yes of course, selling shovelware is part and parcel of the industry.

 

[Graphics Horse]

Sooner or later the app store is going to balance out to become a sustainable, profitable system on the whole. It might take a big crash, a gradual exodus, or a more varied pricing structure, but it'll sort itself one way or another, nobody is interested in using it as a long term money pit.

 

[onipex]

Quality standard? Where ? Babiez?

Nintendo use to limit the amount of software a publisher could put out and not approve a lot a games that did not meet their standards. Crappy games still got through but the NES had a lot less crap than the systems that came before it.

When Sony came along they opened the flood gates again. Nintendo took Sony's approach with the Wii and let publishers release whatever they wanted and how much they wanted.

 

[BishopLamont]

I have both criticism and praise for Nintendo on this one:

First, does Iwata physically walk through retailers like Wal-Mart, Target, Toys R Us, Gamestop, Best Buy and just see how much shovelware there is for both the Wii and DS? Does he understand that there is a limit of just how many "Imagine" and "Paws & Claws" games from UbiSoft and THQ we need? Then again, perhaps they actually sell well and are a quick pick for clueless parents and kids with allowance to waste. Obviously, this shovelware literally shoves the good games off the shelf from great ambitious developers (large and small) that actually care about quality and creating something new and innovative.

I have to check around with different retailers when there is a particular quality Wii or DS game I want that I can't find at one of these retailers I've mentioned (or just turn to Amazon). Then again, I guess that's how it's always been, checking around to find what you actually want. It just appears that both Nintendo of America and eager-to-please retailers leave the consumer to swim through the spew of low-grade crap DS and Wii games.

Now, as far as developers having to pay to use certified Nintendo equipment, and what I assume are certified facilities to manufacture Wii and DS media - this is the part I approve of. Nintendo does not want to be associated with product defects of any kind - which is why (I assume) they mandate on manufacturing to third-party publishers and this has to be paid for. If publishers were allowed to choose whatever testing equipment, or media manufacturing they wanted for Wii or DS, and the media turns out defective, then, not only are they screwed, but Nintendo is screwed as well (i.e. bad press, PR nightmare). Nintendo doesn't want to be associated with this.

Now, if only Nintendo could properly address its defective third-party approval process of shovelware titles, then....perhaps we'd see better quality titles on the shelves.

Shovelware has nothing to do with Nintendo's "quality control" though, they're going to be created regardless.

 

[Tobor]

He's talking about over production of apps. And he's right on that.

Good thing he's transitioning to web-based games. That should take care of it. Lol.

Over production isn't the problem. Under-marketing is.

 

[Boombloxer]

I have both criticism and praise for Nintendo on this one:

First, does Iwata physically walk through retailers like Wal-Mart, Target, Toys R Us, Gamestop, Best Buy and just see how much shovelware there is for both the Wii and DS? Does he understand that there is a limit of just how many "Imagine" and "Paws & Claws" games from UbiSoft and THQ we need? Then again, perhaps they actually sell well and are a quick pick for clueless parents and kids with allowance to waste. Obviously, this shovelware literally shoves the good games off the shelf from great ambitious developers (large and small) that actually care about quality and creating something new and innovative.

I have to check around with different retailers when there is a particular quality Wii or DS game I want that I can't find at one of these retailers I've mentioned (or just turn to Amazon). Then again, I guess that's how it's always been, checking around to find what you actually want. It just appears that both Nintendo of America and eager-to-please retailers leave the consumer to swim through the spew of low-grade crap DS and Wii games.

Now, as far as developers having to pay to use certified Nintendo equipment, and what I assume are certified facilities to manufacture Wii and DS media - this is the part I approve of. Nintendo does not want to be associated with product defects of any kind - which is why (I assume) they mandate on manufacturing to third-party publishers and this has to be paid for. If publishers were allowed to choose whatever testing equipment, or media manufacturing they wanted for Wii or DS, and the media turns out defective, then, not only are they screwed, but Nintendo is screwed as well (i.e. bad press, PR nightmare). Nintendo doesn't want to be associated with this.

Now, if only Nintendo could properly address its defective third-party approval process of shovelware titles, then....perhaps we'd see better quality titles on the shelves.

Interesting post. I'd also say that price/value are in the eye of the beholder--people have proven they are willing to pay for those $1/free/micro-traction web/social games. I think the bigger perspective is that it's a platform that they don't control, and thus, they have some natural hostility to it. After all, you can easily spend $40 across multiple games, and that's a Wii game you could've bought.

Mobile/Social games having less value is for the consumer to decide. Currently, they think otherwise.

 

[1-D_FTW]

Look, I don't know enough about the industry to properly analyze it. I was transcribing what I though he meant when talking about 'knowing Nintendo is going to screw you when you signed the deal' I know Nintendo makes a ton of money off the Wii and DS, maybe he thinks not enough of their licencees do and he doesn't think they will fair much better with the new Apple model for reasons I said above.

Edit:^^^ yeah what he said.

There's a reason consoles have always been cheaper than PCs. They're subsidized. And even when Nintendo is selling at a profit, there's still tons of R&D + marketing they do that's not included in that "cost" category.

These consoles are subsidized. Fact. It's why they've become so popular. Blaming Nintendo for making money is kind of missing the point. That's the incentive. If all first parties did was lose money on console hardware, what incentive would there be? To go bankrupt or tick off the stock holders.

Has Nintendo increasingly become about their own hardware? Sure. But that's because they create the highest rated games and the other third parties liked creating games on closed platforms where they didn't have to compete with Nintendo. Over time, it's become an out of control negative feedback loop.

I'm aware Nintendo had some pretty despicable habits at their previous peak, but it doesn't totally explain why they flocked to Sony so hard. Not having to compete with Nintendo games was a huge part of it. This helped create the halfhearted mentality they currently have with Nintendo platforms. "We can't beat them, so why try? *release shovelware* See? The game sold like poo."

 

[CoffeeJanitor]

SHOTS FIRED

 

[szaromir]

What's the problem with iOS/Apple? Devs make an app for it, are successful, go on to make more games for AppStore. Not successful, try to find success elsewhere. The problem of supply>demand solved by typical free market rules.

 

[Gahiggidy]

I used to work for the U.S. Trustees Program... one of the first things I did when given access to the bankruptcy records database was search for "3DO". And there it was, Trip Hawkin's company.

 

[1-D_FTW]

SHOTS FIRED

I'm not really firing any shots (if that's directed at me). From what I can tell, his major beef seems to be that Nintendo introduced the license fee concept and they're solely about creating profit for themselves at the expense of anyone else. I think that's just a simplistic view that ignores the past history.

 

[BobTheFork]

There's a reason consoles have always been cheaper than PCs. They're subsidized. And even when Nintendo is selling at a profit, there's still tons of R&D + marketing they do that's not included in that "cost" category.

These consoles are subsidized. Fact. It's why they've become so popular. Blaming Nintendo for making money is kind of missing the point. That's the incentive. If all first parties did was lose money on console hardware, what incentive would there be? To go bankrupt or tick off the stock holders.

Has Nintendo increasingly become about their own hardware? Sure. But that's because they create the highest rated games and the other third parties liked creating games on closed platforms where they didn't have to compete with Nintendo. Over time, it's become an out of control negative feedback loop.

I'm aware Nintendo had some pretty despicable habits at their previous peak, but it doesn't totally explain why they flocked to Sony so hard. Not having to compete with Nintendo games was a huge part of it. This helped create the halfhearted mentality they currently have with Nintendo platforms. "We can't beat them, so why try? *release shovelware* See? The game sold like poo."

I wasn't even trying to say that Nintendo should lose money for the industry. Also, to be fair that's a gross generalization you're made. There are many many failed games by third parties for Nintendo systems are aren't anywhere near shovelware. Nintendo did it to because they needed to and needed to help stabilize the industry, I totally get that. That was in 1986, It think they could stand to reevaluate the process. I'm not trying to forget history, but maybe it's time they let go of history.

 

[1-D_FTW]

I wasn't even trying to say that Nintendo should lose money for the industry. Also, to be fair that's a gross generalization you're made. There are many many failed games by third parties for Nintendo systems are aren't anywhere near shovelware. Nintendo did it to because they needed to and needed to help stabilize the industry, I totally get that. That was in 1986, It think they could stand to reevaluate the process. I'm not trying to forget history, but maybe it's time they let go of history.

I know it's not the only issue for the 3rd parties. Nintendo is ass backwards on lots of things. *cough*anything online*cough*. It's not that simple.

But for hardware makers, these are hardly big oil companies. Being a platform holder isn't a license to print money. MS' entire operation is still in the red. Sony has been feast/famine and is basically right around the break even point for their entire history. 3DO (which he noblely claimed took less) was charging an arm and a leg for the systems since they weren't subsidized and couldn't sell them (lot of good it does publishers if there's no audience). Atari ended a disaster. Mattel couldn't have ended too greatly or they wouldn't have left the business. Sega left. NEC left.

Should Nintendo embrace DD and have sliding royalties for variable pricing? That would be great for everyone. But before Trip blames Nintendo for being the evil empire, let's just bow down to what a disaster the console business has traditionally been. What good would it have done if there's wasn't a way for anyone to succeed.

 

[BobTheFork]

I know it's not the only issue for the 3rd parties. Nintendo is ass backwards on lots of things. *cough*anything online*cough*. It's not that simple.

But for hardware makers, these are hardly big oil companies. Being a platform holder isn't a license to print money. MS' entire operation is still in the red. Sony has been feast/famine and is basically right around the break even point for their entire history. 3DO (which he noblely claimed took less) was charging an arm and a leg for the systems since they weren't subsidized and couldn't sell them (lot of good it does publishers if there's no audience). Atari ended a disaster. Mattel couldn't have ended too greatly or they wouldn't have left the business. Sega left. NEC left.

Should Nintendo embrace DD and have sliding royalties for variable pricing? That would be great for everyone. But before Trip blames Nintendo for being the evil empire, let's just bow down to what a disaster the console business has traditionally been. What good would it have done if there's wasn't a way for anyone to succeed.

It still feels like a discussion between 'then' and 'now'. I don't think anyone would have questioned how they did it 'then' it needed to be done. But now it's...well 'now' and I think it's fair to give them some of that criticism and question if things are different enough now that they should make some changes. I don't think there is any real one answer or absolute argument, but he has a few good points and I don't think he's the only one that thinks that way. Taking stage and firing shots at the two biggest targets looks bitter though and doesn't help his point much.

 

[kyoya]

I know it's not the only issue for the 3rd parties. Nintendo is ass backwards on lots of things. *cough*anything online*cough*. It's not that simple.

Should Nintendo embrace DD and have sliding royalties for variable pricing? That would be great for everyone. But before Trip blames Nintendo for being the evil empire, let's just bow down to what a disaster the console business has traditionally been. What good would it have done if there's wasn't a way for anyone to succeed.

I have to question Nintendo's online digital download stance as well with a couple theories:

*Has Nintendo "run the numbers" already so to speak and have determined that digital downloads are too risky? With Nintendo of Japan calling the shots, and the lack of online offerings of other services in Japan with its "cell phone" culture - I think so. Perhaps we were all lucky enough to get Netflix. Perhaps Nintendo of America wants to move forward with further online offerings and Nintendo of Japan is saying no. If we had Nintendo of Japan executives living in America and elsewhere (with time to observe what we do on our free time outside work), perhaps they'd think differently if they'd just see the ease-of-use in online offerings. Cultural differences: In Japan, people barely have enough time to eat and sleep after a long stressful workday. Outside of Japan we've got time to put our feet up and enjoy online offerings after the typical 9-5 workday.

*Is Nintendo scared that digitial downloads could take away too much attention from its first-party offerings?

*Does Nintendo even want to invest the millions in building a stonger online network infrastructure that could sustain a huge online play/download gaming audience? Does Nintendo fear that if they strongly market and advertise the Wii Shop Channel (which they could)- that they could sustain that kind of network traffic? I think back to a few years ago when Microsoft went into "crisis mode" a day after Christmas when everybody unwrapped their 360's, went online Christmas morning, but MS could not handle the network traffic. Many people could not get on to XBL. Who know how much money MS has spent in just maintaining XBL traffic. Does that whole thing scare Nintendo off?

<shrug> I'm just wondering. Nintendo appears to have always sat quietly and watched its competitors test the waters first before they make a move. That's how it's always been.

 

[_Bro]

"those of us who make games."

That's why Bob from Bob's Game was denied a kit? lul