Support NeoGAF

[Graphics Horse]

Part of his solution to keep track of foreign trends is to be CEO of the NA division while in cloistered in Japan?

Maybe he has Avatar technology.

 

[Poimandres]

It will be interesting to see what all this talk leads to... If it actually leads to anything!

I think changes are actually going to happen this time, but they damn well better have been planning this for a long time. If they are only investigating options now, Nintendo will be up shit creek for at least another year.

 

[SolidSnakex]

By releasing the gamecube with no online out the box.

Sure, but the first HALO wasn't online. It was just local play, which is what their games were on the N64. That's what they were good at and even now what they brag about being good at. And it IS what they're good. So, why the hell would you ignore that? For what? Star Fox Adventures?

 

[evanmisha]

His appointment at the top of NOA is pretty recent. The way I see it is, due to the Wii U's failure, he did it to try and get on top of the trends there.

That was announced almost a year ago, not long after the Wii U launched. Certainly long before the failure kerfuffle.

And I thought the announced reason for it was to expediate decision-making between NOA and NCL?

 

[jakncoke]

Is the Wii U really selling well in Japan? Don't see it selling beyond 20K in non release weeks.

Had a nice holiday but already down to 14k in week 2 with really not to stop its free fall till DK

 

[Spieler Eins]

Once again realizing problems several years too late while even any armchair analyst on the internet saw it coming. I think he even insisted until last year that the 3DS/WiiU names wouldn't confuse people, lol

It will be interesting to see what all this talk leads to... If it actually leads to anything!

So far, it never did.

 

[kankki]

Dude should sign up to GAF. We all saw this coming in June 2011.

We will be your Antenna of the West, Iwata!

Brilliant! NintendoOwnRXXX

 

[duckroll]

By releasing the gamecube with no online out the box.

Online wasn't really a big part of the PS2 or the Xbox either though. That certainly wasn't the main reason. If the GC had great multiplayer FPS titles you could play via splitscreen and link cable across multiple consoles, that would already have made a huge difference. The question is really where the games were. Nintendo gave up on that market, and that market became a cornerstone of gaming outside of Japan.

 

[SporeCrawler]

It's the biggest market in video games. It fucking better be targeted by Nintendo. Numbers don't lie:



Besides 8, 9 and 10, those games are all aimed at that 18-35 male demo. Since coming into power, Iwata has done fuck all to try and capture said audience.

Nintendo had them with the N64 and Goldeneye. They just need to want it again, and market accordingly. currently, they don't want it at all.

Thats the current trend. A few years back there was another demographic that bought your marios, animal crossins, pokemans, wii fits and nintendogs
Nintendo was the only company that aimed specifically at them yet they completely lost them.

Nintendos first and foremost goal should be to get them back.

A typical 18-35 male nowadays is not going to give up his gameplay time and money to play halo or cod for mario or zelda. Also about golden eye... The devs that made golden eye (rare, free radical) have fallen off from the fps market completely. I dont think that would have changed under nintendo at all.

 

[Sandfox]

Online wasn't really a big part of the PS2 or the Xbox either though. That certainly wasn't the main reason. If the GC had great multiplayer FPS titles you could play via splitscreen and link cable across multiple consoles, that would already have made a huge difference.

I kinda think Halo would've been too big either way.

Thats the current trend. A few years back there was another demographic that bought your marios, animal crossins, pokemans, wii fits and nintendogs
Nintendo was the only company that aimed specifically at them yet they completely lost them.

Nintendos first and foremost goal should be to get them back.

A typical 18-35 male nowadays is not going to give up his gameplay time and money to play halo or cod for mario or zelda.

Part of the process to getting that audience would have to be getting major 3rd party support which would give them pretty much every game that audience plays.

 

[Tookay]

Thats the current trend. A few years back there was another demographic that bought your marios, animal crossins, pokemans, wii fits and nintendogs
Nintendo was the only company that aimed specifically at them yet they completely lost them.

Nintendos first and foremost goal should be to get them back.

A typical 18-35 male nowadays is not going to give up his gameplay time and money to play halo or cod for mario or zelda.

They tried. It was called NintendolandWiiFitUWiiSportsClubWiiPlayUGameandWarioNSMBU.

 

[duckroll]

I kinda think Halo would've been too big either way.

You don't have to beat Halo to be relevant. There's a huge chasm between "more popular than Halo" and "not relevant at all in the FPS space". If the point is that if Nintendo can't make something more popular than Halo, they shouldn't even try to be relevant in the genre, then yeah that's one of many reasons how they got themselves into this position to begin with.

 

[Anth0ny]

I don't think that's necessarily true. Everyone I know complains about having to pay to go online, but they still do it because they want to play online. It's not a choice. They would much rather have to not pay for it.

Exactly! Are any of your friends saying "Fuck this, I'm not paying for online! I'm going to Nintendo where it's free!" Hell no. At this point, there's really no reason why Nintendo should be giving online away for free. It clearly hasn't done them any favors. The market has evolved to a point where it expects to pay a yearly fee to access online gaming.

They should go ahead and drop backwards compatibility too. Presumably, Wii and Wii U games would be a part of the Netflix-style Virtual Console. No BC necessary. Saves some money on each console sold.

 

[CoffeeGames]

My Wii U would stop being the 'bedroom netflix tablet' if we got an Endless Ocean game with better graphics. You've convinced me Reggie needs to be CEO as soon as possible!

Recent Lego games such as Marvel (best Marvel game in years) and LoTR are actually very fun for that age bracket, plus the end of that bracket has kids to play together with. They need better marketing as well, too, to make that come across.

I didn't say I didn't like Endless Ocean. I own and played/beat the sequel, and thoroughly enjoyed it. (BTW, download the Wii Fit U trial if you have a balance board, there is a scuba diving mini-game!)

And I agree, that a new Endless Ocean in HD could be impressive and fun. BUT, that doesn't mean I agree with NoA not localizing those games.

NoA didn't support the Wii with games that were 100% developed and translated for the system, why should we expect third parties to support Nintendo systems when NoA wasn't even doing it?

 

[Uncle Rupee]

It's the biggest market in video games. It fucking better be targeted by Nintendo. Numbers don't lie:

Besides 8, 9 and 10, those games are all aimed at that 18-35 male demo. Since coming into power, Iwata has done fuck all to try and capture said audience.

Nintendo had them with the N64 and Goldeneye. They just need to want it again, and market accordingly. currently, they don't want it at all.

I'm in the 18-35 market and none of those games appeal to me.

 

[EatChildren]

You don't have to beat Halo to be relevant. There's a huge chasm between "more popular than Halo" and "not relevant at all in the FPS space". If the point is that if Nintendo can't make something more popular than Halo, they shouldn't even try to be relevant in the genre, then yeah that's one of many reasons how they got themselves into this position to begin with.

Yes, this times one billion. One billion.

 

[hongcha]

"In Japan, I can be my own antenna, but abroad, that doesn't work," he said.

First thing I thought of when I read that:

 

[pswii60]

It's not like Wii U has been a massive success in Japan either.

 

[Lunar15]

It's not like Wii U has been a massive success in Japan either.

I was going to bring this up too.

 

[Mihael Mello Keehl]

Sure, but the first HALO wasn't online. It was just local play, which is what their games were on the N64. That's what they were good at and even now what they brag about being good at. And it IS what they're good. So, why the hell would you ignore that? For what? Star Fox Adventures?

Doesnt matter if halo was online or not. If fps genre was really one they shouldve kept gamecube shouldve been online. Surely the could have expected that the natrual evolution of multiplayer would of been online. That lack of foresight is whats killing them now today.

 

[Toski]

Thats the current trend. A few years back there was another demographic that bought your marios, animal crossins, pokemans, wii fits and nintendogs
Nintendo was the only company that aimed specifically at them yet they completely lost them.

Nintendos first and foremost goal should be to get them back.

A typical 18-35 male nowadays is not going to give up his gameplay time and money to play halo or cod for mario or zelda.

I think the 18-35 core gamer is interested in Zelda and Metroid, with F-Zero, Xeno series, Fire Emblem, and Mach Rider (lol) being potential dark horses. The problem is Nintendo puts them on portables (except for Xeno) where the Western core gamer isn't looking.

 

[Sandfox]

You don't have to beat Halo to be relevant. There's a huge chasm between "more popular than Halo" and "not relevant at all in the FPS space". If the point is that if Nintendo can't make something more popular than Halo, they shouldn't even try to be relevant in the genre, then yeah that's one of many reasons how they got themselves into this position to begin with.

The previous posts in the line of quotes were talking about dominating the market. Nintendo not being relevant in the market probably has more do with them not bothering to replace the IPs they lost during the gamecube era.

 

[Gorillaz]

Sure, but the first HALO wasn't online. It was just local play, which is what their games were on the N64. That's what they were good at and even now what they brag about being good at. And it IS what they're good. So, why the hell would you ignore that? For what? Star Fox Adventures?

I think they felt they could just ride on there own creations and platformers. Probably some pride even if those rumors of rivalry between Rare and Miyamoto back in 64 days are true.

The Wii era was basically their ego magnified

 

[AzaK]

It's always been their message to downplay the importance of following trends in games at least.

Thing is, there is a difference between following trends in games and following the broader trends of the industry. I agree that Nintendo shouldn't just start releasing shooty bang bang or third person action games like everyone else, but they need to understand how the industry has moved the last generation.

 

[kankki]

They should go ahead and drop backwards compatibility too. Presumably, Wii and Wii U games would be a part of the Netflix-style Virtual Console. No BC necessary. Saves some money on each console sold.

Well they can still have the VC but maybe have a less.. crappy one. They are way too strict with the emulator quality. They need to build a really good all-round emulator that you can chuck ROMs at.

Then they could make a whole lot of games available at one for the VC.

They should cost 1-2 dollars.

 

[rekameohs]

It will be interesting to see what all this talk leads to... If it actually leads to anything!

I sure hope it does, but I wouldn't get my hopes too high.

 

[Spieler Eins]

They tried. It was called NintendolandWiiFitUWiiSportsClubWiiPlayUGameandWarioNSMBU.

They needed to make actual new content for that group instead of rehashing the same minigames from before all over again and charge 300 bucks for it.

I'm in the 18-35 market and none of those games appeal to me.

Neogaf users don't exactly represent mainstream casual players.

 

[Breakfast at Noon]

please for the love of god put a stars system in there (trophies) just the thought of the stars sparkling onto the screen when you unlock one.. mmmmmmm.

and let use use them stars as points to buy things, not buy a game outright but use them to discount a game, a publisher can set how many stars to discount what %, they do not have to dothis but if Nintendo gave them incentive.

but to do any of this i suppose weneed a account system first....

 

[GamerSoul]

Guys have been saying this since I've been on gaf. I'm glad he's starting to admit it. I wonder if they will start listening to some of their fans now.

 

[Tookay]

They needed to make actual new content for that group instead of rehashing the same minigames from before all over again and charge 300 bucks for it.

I don't think that group is coming back, short of Nintendo finding a completely revolutionary hook and system to sell to them (like VR).

And I'm not sure they have the time to bide until they stumble upon that magic bullet gimmick either.

 

[Shiggy]

They needed to make actual new content for that group instead of rehashing the same minigames all over again and charge 300 bucks for it.

If we are looking at their output on 3DS and Wii U, rehashing existing concepts while offering very few new ideas is their current strategy. I guess Iwata's antenna told him that this was a brilliant idea.

 

[Mihael Mello Keehl]

Online wasn't really a big part of the PS2 or the Xbox either though. That certainly wasn't the main reason. If the GC had great multiplayer FPS titles you could play via splitscreen and link cable across multiple consoles, that would already have made a huge difference. The question is really where the games were. Nintendo gave up on that market, and that market became a cornerstone of gaming outside of Japan.

True but you couldnt even do link cable on gamecube. They still had got those 007s and stuff its not like they had nothing. Dreamcast was more forward thinking than that.

 

[Spieler Eins]

I don't think that group is coming back, short of Nintendo finding a completely revolutionary hook and system to sell to them (like VR).

And I'm not sure they have the time to bide until they stumble upon that magic bullet gimmick either.

Anything would have been better than the lineup (and marketing) so far. Why didn't they try anything with the NFC for example, it really doesn't even have a reason to exist. (Don't bring up that shoddy eshop Pokemon game)

 

[Kanyon]

At this point, stop trying to surprise customers. Look at what makes the competition successful... and do that, with your own unique spin. You know, third party support, good online infrastructure and all that jazz. These things are ESSENTIAL, and you lack them. No surprises needed.

I cannot agree with this enough, it's basically right on the money. The Wii was a great example as it provided an intuitive control scheme that catered to casuals AS WELL AS something for the hardcore audience. They should have looked at that and said "okay we sold 100 million but there were some where we could improve the experience, and how can we bring these 100 million purchases to upgrade to our next machine?" Nintendo needed to look at what their competitors did well and contrast that with what they did well and with what they lacked. Whatever happened to their revolution -> evolution strategy? Basically disrupt the market and then the next generation evolves that strategy.

NES -> Super NES
N64 -> GameCube
Wii -> ???

The Wii U has basically taken that strategy and thrown it out the window. There's no focus, simplicity or target for this console. They say the tablet controller is designed to entice the casuals to ditch their iPads and play the Wii U instead - But the Wii U doesn't offer the consumer any comparative experiences the consumer would get on the iPad. This is what I've posted in the past from this thread Eric Kain: Why Nintendo Needs To Stay In The Hardware Business,Regardless Of The WiiU

I agree with this post so much as it just hits the nail on the head... Nintendo needs to get back to doing what they do best, creating the best game hardware and game software on a competent platform that is also inviting to third parties. I'm of the opinion that ditching motion control as the primary input in favour of a tablet controller was probably the biggest mistake they made.

It really should have been only the two options of Wii Remote + Nunchuck and the Pro Controller. Making improvements to the accuracy of the Wii Remote and refining it to be the best motion controller on the market, would have been the killer feature they could have used to differentiate themselves from their competitors. The Pro Controller is there for traditional stuff but as is stands right now, there is just too many options (just look at the back cover of a Wii U game). I'm a pretty knowledgeable gamer and even get confused as to what control options there are for the Wii U.

This leads straight into consumer apathy, the Wii U is just so unfocused as it's trying to do too many things for too many people and the message is just getting lost. I'm of the opinion that people don't care about the Wii U because it just so confusing. If Nintendo want to right the ship with the next console they need to cut out all the superfluous control schemes like tablet controllers and balance boards, put more dollars into silicon hardware to be somewhat on par with competitors and concentrate on creating experiences that they do well and with a laser-like focus.

If they were so gung ho about trying to capture the tablet market, make a companion app and utilise that as the second screen like other devs are doing. There are ways to monetise your IP on other platforms without cheapening your content - Rayman Legends and Battlelog on tablets for example.

 

[Hero of Legend]

Well Miyamoto did say that he could've developed Halo if he wanted to.

Spoiler

I'm genuinely curious to see what a Miyamoto directed FPS would be like.

I know, can you imagine MIYAMOTO doing an epic sci-fi FPS? There is Prime, but that was from the brilliant minds of ex-Iguana Austin folks (key ones of which infamously left Retro to form Armature), hell I consider that a successor to Turok also by Iguana Austin.

So I don't REALLY know how much Nintendo in Japan themselves had in terms of creative input, a little, but I don't know if it made ALL the difference.

Something like Star Fox maybe? Remove the animals with a Samus like character in a FPS? Hmm, maybe!

 

[shouamabane]

I'm not sure it took much of an antenna to know that securing Monster Hunter and Dragon Quest as exclusives was a good idea for Japan.

 

[Conan-san]

So, hypothetically, let's say Nintendo didn't bother with the Wii U and told 3rd Parties exactly where they can shove their traitorous ways. Would the Targets missed by the 3DS be comparably bad or could they swing it?

 

[AHA-Lambda]

well at least he bloody admits it now.

 

[Anth0ny]

I've brought this up before, but this is the thing that amazes me the most about Nintendo's screwups over the years. They once controlled the FPS market on consoles. While MoH on the PSone was a success, that was mostly for its single player. If you wanted multiplayer FPS gaming you went to the N64. They dominated the multiplayer market in general with the N64. So, how the hell did they lose it all with the GC? The only competitive FPS they released on the N64 was Geist, and that came out at the tail end of the GC's time.

They really just allowed MS to walk in and take a market that was completely under their control without any resistance from them. Nintendo somehow had no competitive FPS games ready for launch or even shortly after launch. How do you make something like Goldeneye or Perfect Dark and not realize just how important that genre was to you as a company?

Iwata.

They closed down all of their Western studios (Retro came in later) and let Rare go to Microsoft. Considering how dominant PS1 was (and Japan centric its lineup was), I guess they figured they didn't need to focus on the Western market, and the loss of FPS' wasn't a huge deal.

Xbox and Halo picked up where N64 and Perfect Dark left off. Now that market is 100% gone from Nintendo. They fucking had it. Goldeneye was COD.

Thats the current trend. A few years back there was another demographic that bought your marios, animal crossins, pokemans, wii fits and nintendogs
Nintendo was the only company that aimed specifically at them yet they completely lost them.

Nintendos first and foremost goal should be to get them back.

That audience is gone and not coming back. Mobile games has them forever. Why pay for a dedicated home console and $50 games in 2013 when you could play quick time killers for free on the phone you already have? This is one of the reasons why the drop off is so huge from Wii to Wii U. Nintendo tried to get them back with the Wii U and failed miserably.

I'm in the 18-35 market and none of those games appeal to me.

You are the minority.

Whether they appeal to a certain age group isn't even that relevant, anyways. The point is, those games are the best selling games, and Nintendo doesn't have them, besides nerfed versions of COD and Ass Creed.

 

[Tookay]

Anything would have been better than the lineup (and marketing) so far. Why didn't they try anything with the NFC for example, it really doesn't even have a reason to exist. (Don't bring up that shoddy eshop Pokemon game)

I agree that they could have done better than rehashes of the Wii Greatest Hits, but I just don't think there is anything that can really sell this console to the casual audience, because there's nothing exciting about its hook.

The Gamepad was an unforced error. The question is whether they'll get to try again to find some great concept before they exit the console-side of the business.

 

[duckroll]

The prevous posts in the line of quotes were talking about dominating the market. Nintendo not being relevant in the market probably has more do with them not bothering to replace the IPs they lost during the gamecube era.

But MS didn't dominate the market with Halo. They weren't even close. They simply made a popular genre on PCs more accessible on consoles, and by doing so opened the floodgates on that genre again, something Nintendo already did with Goldeneye and Perfect Dark, but didn't choose to continue.

The dominance of the 360 can be completely attributed to building on what they already had. It wasn't about one game or IP after that, it was about having all the third parties moving their PC franchises onto consoles, more third parties creating new IPs for consoles in that genre, etc.

If Nintendo continued with making solid FPS titles with good multiplayer on the GC, they might or might not have been as big as Halo, but they would have actually introduced competition from that point. The point is that Nintendo stopped giving a crap about games like Goldeneye and Perfect Dark, and that exact formula went on to become the most mainstream part of console game internationally.

It's impossible to look at that and go "nah, it wouldn't have helped Nintendo dominate the market at all, they made the right choice."

 

[LeleSocho]

No shit.

first post etc. etc.

Everyone on the internet knew that.

 

[Hero of Legend]

Iwata.

They closed down all of their Western studios (Retro came in later) and let Rare go to Microsoft. Considering how dominant PS1 was (and Japan centric its lineup was), I guess they figured they didn't need to focus on the Western market, and the loss of FPS' wasn't a huge deal.

Err, actually Rare and Retro co-existed within Nintendo extremely briefly, like 4 months. But yeah, it went downhill post-2002.

 

[Lunar15]

One thing I can't stand is all the really vague speak. Just be freaking honest at this point. What did you misread? What trends did you fail to keep track of? Are you just guessing that you misread the market, or do you know specifically what you failed to see?

 

[DocSeuss]

At this point, stop trying to surprise customers. Look at what makes the competition successful... and do that, with your own unique spin. You know, third party support, good online infrastructure and all that jazz. These things are ESSENTIAL, and you lack them. No surprises needed.

An underpowered, overpriced console with a gimmick controller and ZERO third party support isn't going to fly.

You know what? An underpowered, overpriced console with a gimmick controller and zero third party support isn't a surprise, either.

A surprise would be a fantastic console with a wonderful, broad selection of games, great online infrastructure, and, like, the 3D Pokemon game everyone wants and a shooter designed by Miyamoto or something crazy like that. That would be a surprise.

 

[vid]

The only thing holding me back from buying a Wii U tomorrow is that my account and previous purchases are tied to someone else's Wii U. Fix the account system so I can give you money, Nintendo.

 

[Sandfox]

That audience is gone and not coming back. Mobile games has them forever. Why pay for a dedicated home console and $50 games in 2013 when you could play quick time killers for free on the phone you already have? This is one of the reasons why the drop off is so huge from Wii to Wii U. Nintendo tried to get them back with the Wii U and failed miserably.

I think it would be interesting if Nintendo were to target them on mobile with small titles, old VC games or e-shop ports.

 

[Polk]

Part of the process to getting that audience would have to be getting major 3rd party support which would give them pretty much every game that audience plays.

They cannot compete with free-ish timewasters on mobile/tablets though unless they would allow them on their platforms. This is everything Nintendo is against.
They could and probably should cut royalty fees (ie for next 12-18 months) for WiiU developers. Maybe then 3rd party could be profitable on their platform. Not like now they making bank from those fees.

 

[SolidSnakex]

that market is lost for nintendo. There is no chance that anyone from that demographic is going to be interested in them anymore.

I don't really believe that. If Nintendo made some really appealing FPS, and they already had the CoD's and Battlefield's coming to their platform, why wouldn't those gamers be interested in it? I don't think gamers have grudges or loyalty that would keep them away from platforms if it has games that they want. Right now Nintendo isn't doing anything that would appeal to them. They aren't trying whatsoever.

For all its failing the N64 still sold 20m units in the US. By comparison, the SNES sold 23m in NA and SA. So, the drop really wasn't anything alarming. If anything it was extremely impressive that the console held on that well. Nintendo seemingly did nothing to look at the N64's success in the US and identify why it managed to sell that well, while also figuring out why it wasn't as big of a success in Japan.

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

No shit.

DAT first post.