Support NeoGAF

[Broshnat]

Good post radiohead, I agree with the vast majority of what you've said...

 

[jarrod]

*Cues the jarrod-esque lists*

For the American GameCube in 2005...

-Advance Wars: Under Fire (Nintendo)*
-American Chopper (Activision)
-Animaniacs (Ignition Entertainment)
-Barbie: Treasures in Time (VU Games)
-Batman Begins (Electronic Arts)
-Brothers in Arms (UbiSoft)
-Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (Take Two Interactive)
-Digimon World IV (Bandai)
-Disney's Chicken Little (Disney Interactive)
-Donkey Konga 2 (Nintendo)*
-Donkey Kong Jungle Beat (Nintendo)*
-Dora the Explorer (NewKidCo)
-Dragon Ball Z: Budokai 2 (Atari)
-Dragon Ball Z: Sagas (Atari)
-Fantastic Four (Activision)
-Far Cry Instincts (UbiSoft)
-FIFA Street (Electronic Arts)
-Fight Night Round 2 (Electronic Arts)
-Fire Emblem (Nintendo)*
-Frogger 2005 (Konami)
-Geist (Nintendo)*
-Get on Da Floor (Eidos)
-Get on Da Mic (Eidos)
-GT Cube (Crave)*
-Harvest Moon: A Wonderful Life for Girls (Natsume)*
-Hello Kitty: Rescue Mission (O~3 Entertainment)
-IronMan (Activision)
-Judge Dredd: Dredd vs. Death (Evolved Games)
-Just Cause (Eidos)
-Killer 7 (Capcom)*
-King Kong (UbiSoft)
-Madden NFL 2006 (Electronic Arts)
-Mario Baseball (Nintendo/Namco)*
-Medal of Honor: Dogs of War (Electronic Arts)
-Mortal Kombat: Deception (Midway)
-MVP Baseball 2005 (Electronic Arts)
-NBA College Football 2006 (Electronic Arts)
-NCAA March Madness 2005 (Electronic Arts)
-Nightmare Creatures 3: Angel of Darkness (UbiSoft)
-Pac-Man World's End (Namco)
-Pinball Hall of Fame (Crave)
-Resident Evil 4 (Capcom)
-ROBOTS (VU Games)
-Room Zoom (Jaleco)
-StarCraft: Ghost (VU Games)
-Star Fox Assault (Nintendo/Namco)*
-Stolen (HIP Interactive)
-The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe (Disney Interactive)
-The Incredible Hulk (VU Games)
-The Legend of Zelda (Nintendo)*
-The Movies (Activision)
-TimeSplitters: Future Perfect (Electronic Arts)
-Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon 2 (UbiSoft)
-Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory (UbiSoft)
-Ultimate Spider-Man (Activision)
-Virtua Quest (Sega)
-Winnie The Pooh: Rumbly Tumbly (UbiSoft)
-World Championship Pool 2004 (Crave)
-X-Men Legends 2 (Activision)
-Yoot Saito's Odama (Nintendo)*

...and highly potential releases (imo)....

-Bleach (Sega)*
-Chaos Field (Sega)
-ChibiRobo (Nintendo)*
-Deadlight (UbiSoft)
-Donkey Konga 3 (Nintendo)*
-Funkydilla (???)
-GiFTPiA (Nintendo)*
-Harvest Moon: Song of Happiness (Natsume)*
-Home Land (???)*
-Kao the Kangaroo 2 (Mastiff)
-Kirby Adventure (Nintendo)*
-Kururin Squash (Nintendo)*
-Metal Slug 4/5 (SNK Playmore)
-Milo and the Rainbow Nasties (???)
-Mobile Suit Gundam: The Ace Pilot (Bandai)*
-Mobile Suit Gundam Vs Z-Gundam (Bandai)
-Mr Driller: Drill Land (Namco)*
-Naruto (???)*
-Nintendo Puzzle Collection (Nintendo)*
-Phantasy Star Online: Blue Burst (Sega)
-Pokémon RPG (Nintendo)*
-Project Melfes (Namco)
-RoboCop (Mastiff)
-Safari Joe: The Dark Continent (Mastiff)
-Super Monkey Ball 3 (Sega)
-ZOIDS: Battle Legends 2 (Atari)*

...things are slowing but GameCube's still seeing a pretty healthy release schedule.

*denotes GC exclusive

 

[SonicMegaDrive]

Well, I'm impressed. Still, I'd like for them to sneak the elusive Mario 128 in there somewhere. I'll keep dreaming.

 

[psycho_snake]

We should make this the GAF bible, its long enough.

Sorry radiohead, but I couldnt be bothered reading it. This is my view on Nintendo.

Next gen is make or break. Currently, Xbox is comfortably in second place by about 1 million consoles. If Nintendo had a killer app game coming soon, that place would be threatened, but thats not happening. next Gen, they have to come second. They have lost enough marketshare at the moment. if they lose anymore next generation and do not gain any, then their best move would be to stop making home consoles and become either a second or third party deveoper (second party would be the better choice IMO), but carry on with handhelds. They know that market too well and they are very good at it. They are making good money off it and should continue making handhelds.

 

[missAran]

I'm not sure any of that was especially clever or "new." I don't know, these criticisms are clear and beated often. Nintendo has a comfortable profit margin, and until that's threatened, nothing will change.

 

[lexi]

Nintendo Puzzle Collection

I was under the impression that this was cancelled. If you know otherwise, I'd be extremely happy.

 

[psycho_snake]

Does anyone actually know how much of Nintendo's profit comes from Gamecube? I once heard somewhere that the handhalds make up 80% of Nintendos profits.

 

[Musashi Wins!]

I wish the mods would combine this with the PEACH WIFE thread.

 

[akascream]

With as many 'drr this is what Nintendo should do' threads as we've gotten over the last 4 years, you'd think there would be some kind of automated thread generator to save everyone the time of typing up a bunch of worthless bullshit nobody will read.

Shut the fuck up already.

 

[psycho_snake]

-Advance Wars: Under Fire (Nintendo)*
-Far Cry Instincts (UbiSoft)
-Fire Emblem (Nintendo)*
-Killer 7 (Capcom)*
-StarCraft: Ghost (VU Games)
-Star Fox Assault (Nintendo/Namco)*
-The Legend of Zelda (Nintendo)*

And thats my shopping list for GC in 2005.

Is it official that farcry is coming to Cube. man, thats gonna rock.

 

[jarrod]

Does anyone actually know how much of Nintendo's profit comes from Gamecube? I once heard somewhere that the handhalds make up 80% of Nintendos profits.

It's likely closer to 60/40 handheld/console. Now with DS though (and GC waning) it's probably go up to 70-80/30-20.

 

[jarrod]

Is it official that farcry is coming to Cube. man, thats gonna rock.

Yep... it surprised some, but UbiSoft's one of GC's strongest supporters really. Rayman 4 and POP3 are rumored for next fall too.

 

[SonicMegaDrive]

Please let Star Fox be good, please let Star Fox be good.......

 

[Axsider]

Warning!

You have entered a Nintendo thread. If you're too bitter to cope with yet another one, head back to the rest of the forum. If you're snapty00 hit reply and get it over with. There will be lots of talk about PS2 and Xbox, and I will glaze over how this generation and the last has gone from my point of view, but if the N word really hurts your eyes, you're going to see it a lot. So run while you still can!

=============================================


DOOM AND GLOOM. RIGHT OR WRONG?

I've just been over at the IGN boards, after spending a lot of time here, and the Nintendo board is mostly concerned with Sony's excellent third party support, the PS2's runaway success, how great Xbox Live is, worries about Nintendo in coming generations and the threat of EA software dominance spreading it's wicked reach across the globe, enslaving women & children, and commiting genocide upon the helpless damsels we call originality, innovation, industry creativity. This is all probably very healthy thinking for Nintendo fans, and they're not alone in this thinking. Xbox, PS2 and multiplatform advocates are all singing the same tune. But is it too doom and gloom?

There are posters, as well as more qualified industry analysts, hell, even fanboy journalists (whom shan't be named) who don't like where Nintendo is going. For them, the comfort of Nintendo profitability is not enough. Their unwillingness to commit to a more convergant hardware model, support online this generation, nor secure heavy western support is immensely frustrating. Gamers are increasingly woo'd by said factors, which has seen Nintendo have a diminishing presence in retail chains with the Gamecube console. Gamecube simply hasn't been appealing to westerners like the other machines have. With two successive generations, Nintendo's marketshare in the home has shrunk. It's made gufaws that rate modestly on the SEGA scale. But is it mortally wounded? Going anywhere soon? I'm not so sure.


Did you know? Cycle is another word for revolution!

This industry is unique. The formats on which we play videogames are reinvented cyclically, rebranded and marketed - at which point we can either embrace them, reject them, or meet them with a lukewarm indifference. I personally feel that it is this nature which has allowed cash wealthy underdogs to establish themselves strongly in the gaming world, and become the kind of phenomenons they have become. It happened first with Nintendo, again with Sony, and now with Microsoft. With all of this negative press, Nintendo is fast becoming underdog again. Is it still strong enough to be dangerous? Are people underestimating them? The videogame industry may be well over 20 years old, but we have only had four generations in the market as it exists today. Do we have enough to mark out definitive generational consumer trends with any degree of accuracy? Nintendo as a company has gone up, up, up, up thanks to it's handhelds, but their place in the home has gone up, up, down, down. What's next? Left, right, A, B, start? I say it depends on what Nintendo and it's competitors have in mind for the future... and what we do as well. We are fickle enough to embrace new brands in the console marketplace, but are we fickle enough to forget a company's perception?

And while we think about answering that.. has Nintendo's diminished performance this generation and last, really been anything to do with perception or brand power anyway?


Nintendo 64 Vs PlayStation

Take the Nintendo 64. It was plagued by arrogant manufacturing decisions from the start. Yes, it had the Nintendo name, it had Mario and friends... and sure these weren't as 'mature' as many games on rival Sony PlayStation - which was home to the pioneering of more movie-like games. But was this why, in latter life, Nintendo 64 was slain by PSone sales? Surely, the introvert "dream team" philosophy, difficult architecture, resulting lack of third party support and the cartridge format are all very big factors in their own right. If making kiddy games is so bad, then why did Nintendo 64 still sell in excess of 30 million units, with Mario 64 selling 10 million + itself? Why the strong presence of such games on non-Nintendo consoles today?


Gamecube Vs Nintendo 64

The reason I'm pitting these against each other is to qualify analytical complaints about Nintendo in the N64 generation, and to contrast them with the company's response & performance therein today. Nintendo suffered in the PlayStation generation. What did they do about it?

They ramped up production of Project Dolphin, the Nintendo Gamecube. People had complained about their stubborn reliance on cartridges... so Nintendo had Matsushita-Electric, the world's largest consumer-electronics maker, create a proprietary disk format that would nix load times significantly, as well as prevent piracy. They went with MoSys for fast latency memory. They had ArtX, soon to be owned by ATI, create a chip called Flipper... which predating Xbox's NV2A, performed somewhere between the already-at-market PS2 and aforementioned Microsoft console. While optimised PS2 games could look fantastic, it initially meant getting to know the PS2 hardware. Something detractors complained about in N64. So Nintendo made sure they had a developer friendly machine on their hands. They were tweaking with the machine, right up to the point it was unveiled at E3 at which point specs were made final - they made sure bottlenecks were few, and the machine was as efficient and cheap to manufacture as possible. They even dropped the innovative/unique three prong approach of the Nintendo 64 pad, and made a more conventional Playstation-esque controller.

In terms of promotional, and pro-active licensor activity: they have courted Japanese licensees like SEGA, Konami, Namco, and even Square-Enix (in which Sony holds a stake and has a strong relationship). To attend to complaints about a lack of mature titles - Nintendo acquired exclusivity to the Resident Evil series. They had a second party developer, Silicon Knights, create a Nintendo published horror game. They had the same developer work with Konami to recreate the classic PSone Metal Gear Solid game. They put their own most teen-friendly mascot in Namco's Soul Calibur II fighting game to spur on impressive sales. For the casual pick up and play gamer, interested in fun novel gimmicks.. they made the bongo peripheral, and with the help of Namco, partnered on making games for it. They tried to use the handheld market as leverage with selling Gamecube systems. This was a push on a "connectivity" concept that saw the Final Fantasy brand return to a Nintendo console for the first time since the mid-90s. A part of that collaboration came about as a result of the Q fund, a monetary fund set up at Nintendo for approving and funding small game projects in partnership with small developers. There are further fruits of such labors, like Geist from N-Space, Starfox Armada from Namco, and Advance Wars Under Fire from britsoft developer, Kuju. More recently they have given Europe games before the US market, and in what could well be response to public demand - created a Zelda title with a style more akin to the Ocarina of Time than the Wind Waker.

Fast foreward to today: Gamecube has performed below industry-analytical estimates and Nintendo's own estimates. Hardware is down. Third party support is up on N64, but not as high as it was at the beginning of this generation. Mario and Zelda haven't sold as much as they did last generation. Software sales of first party software is down, sales of other software up. Profitability is at an all time high, although this is in large part because of Gameboy. Nintendo posted its first quarterly loss in a very long time, this generation. Otherwise it is very healthy. It has an est. 5/6 billion warchest (possibly higher), has one of the best R&D depts in the industry, has fantastic IP, and is still one of the world's top software publishers. But the point remains, Nintendo was receptive enough to make improvements, and predicted 50 million consoles sold at one point, and have acheived only a small fraction of that.

What on earth went wrong?


Gamecube Vs PlayStation 2 Vs Xbox - enter Microsoft

By the time Xbox and Gamecube launched in the US (Nov 2001), Sony had already sold 20 million PS2s worldwide. By just over a year later (Jan 2003), it had sold 50 million! With backwards compatability making it that much easier for tens of millions of PlayStation owners to upgrade, AND known and loved franchises like Metal Gear, Final Fantasy, Tekken, ISS/Winning Eleven, (and despite Nintendo's coup) Resident Evil.. not to mention DVD playback and a hype whipped up suggesting that movie quality CG would be possible on the console - it had everything needed to entice buyers before it even hit the shops. Some people in Japan and other parts of the world reportedly became initial early adopters because of the DVD playback alone.. which lest we forget was new and exciting at the time for many of us. And all of this before Metal Gear Solid 2, Final Fantasy X, Gran Turismo 3, Winning Eleven 6/7/8, and this gens hottest property: Grand Theft Auto 3 (and later Vice City/San Andreas).

It's not a console without quality. While arguably being the home to the most content, thus the most shovelware, the machine is still home to many many critically acclaimed games, or games you can't get anywhere else. Despite it's age, it is still almost universally supported in newer multiplatform releases -- often before it's competitors. Sony, by November 2001, as their famous investors slide once said, had "already won the war". The battle in the console war now? ..Was for second place. And that's not been an easily fought battle for either party waging it.

Enter the William Gates III. Microsoft, worldwide leader in software for personal and business computing, one of the richest most secure companies in the world, and ran by none other than (Forbes 400) richest man in the world, Bill Gates... yeah, anyway, THOSE guys... well they decided they'd get into video games. As a part of that push, they had their machine include an ethernet adaptor for internet connectivity and a 10GB hard-drive: 8GB of which was to be used by end-users for game saves, music and downloads. In May of 2002 they also unveiled their plan to invest $2 billion over 5 years into the machine and a little something called Xbox Live: an online gaming service. Taking a hit on hardware, they had easily the most powerful console at Xbox launch. In addendum to this, they paid competitor Nintendo, and the founding Stamper Bros, 300 million dollars for the britsoft company Rareware/Rare in September '02. Rare have, to date, released only one game for the console and are famed among the hardcore fans for being slow to release games. However, as the company behind Goldeneye 007 on Nintendo 64, and as a respected house in general, their games are worth the wait, and more are on the way. A company Microsoft bought in 2000, Bungie, also struck gold with it's Halo franchise this generation - it is probably the most valuable western property outside of GTA. Putting the heat on Sony and Nintendo, MS acquired exclusives from dozens of western developers, conversions from PC that may not have otherwise broke the console market like those from iD (doom 3), Sierra, DICE and others, as well as exclusives from Japanese developers, like those under SEGAs wing, Tecmo, Koei, as well as virtually every major third party release, and some ports of popular PS2 games. Microsoft Game Studios (MGS) is now, itself, a viable and attractive first party publisher. They have acheived a lot as a result of all this effort. They have their foot, leg and upper torso firmly in the door of an industry that yields more revenue than movies. With Microsoft and Sony now having potential set-top boxes in so many homes, the prospect of yielding even more than this in future is strong indeed. Their Xbox Live service is highly regarded as the best of its kind currently on offer. It has a userbase amassed in excess of a million (as of July 04). The wind is definately in their sails in the North American and European territories but they have neither pulled away from Nintendo convincingly, nor caught up to Sony this generation.

And Nintendo? Where Nintendo have made improvements and rectified errors of old, they have made new mistakes. Their lack of foresight regarding the appeal of CDs has been mirrored with DVDs and the Nintendo Gamecube. Their controller has a unique face button arrangement, and only a fraction of the analog/click buttons that the other consoles have. As developer friendly as they tried to make it, this difference makes the increasingly popular move of porting code that much more unattractive. Nintendo's initial assertions at the start of this generation, that online gaming isn't yet widely popular enough, nor profitable, was also not reflected on the other consoles... however true that may or may not be. Sony pushed the SOCOM/headset bundle, and acquired many Network Play games - which included all EA games exclusively until recently. Microsoft, as I have already mentioned, made an even stronger investment in online gaming. Nintendo are now making sounds in Nintendo DS interviews that suggest they're about to change their tune on all of this... but it's too late for Gamecube. It's a shame really, because some of the great games for Xbox and PS2 have either not been ported to Gamecube at all or have suffered in quality and/or sales. Nintendo have improved third party relations this generation, but they did not court western developers as well as Microsoft or Sony, or in a way that reflected their own efforts with Japanese third parties. There are notable instances - like Metal Gear Solid for example - where they have had notable games, and potential success on their hands, but not capitalised by advertising. Nintendo of Europe and Nintendo Australia have both been sluggish to react to market conditions, price drops, retailers and competitor activity.. Iwata let it be known earlier in the year that he was ashamed of how things had gone in Australia for example. Parts of Europe, like the UK for example, are no better. With more 'western' genres like first person shooter, sports and racing sims being popular here - the Gamecube either doesn't offer the games at all, or it offers them inexclusively, without online components or other extras. Poor sales have resulted in reduced Nintendo shelf space in some stores, or in traditional multi-purpose high street stores, removal altogether. The machine itself is a minimalist purple cube - compared by some in the press to a toy. Black and Platinum units are less common, and "Spice" is no better perceived.

Yet, Nintendo are still very much with us. In worldwide sales, they are still competitive. And they're gearing up for some new battles...


Revolution Vs Xenon Vs PS3
Nintendo DS Vs PSP

Nintendo in coming generations is either going to fulfill its d00m3d destiny as decreed by armchair analysts everywhere, or it is going to prove it is a progressive, learning company, made up of talented people, and all under a brand that is vastly under-estimated.

Speculating on how Revolution could really well and truly fail next gen I would have to assume one or all of the following:

* Nintendo's diminishing share is as a result of a weakened brand, and the famed "kiddy" perception it has been unable to shake. It is not solely as a result of it's continued blunders.

* Microsoft will be willing to make the same or other similar, quantifiably large investments next generation - in order to make further progress.

* Sony will have put together an awesome console, that is capable of generating the same hype as PlayStation 2, and PSP/other-3d-handhelds will not cannabalise home console sales in any way.

* Events will occur that will allow Sony or Microsoft (maybe even both) to get the kind of head start in market-share that Sony has experienced this generation.

* That Microsoft has not significantly hurt the PlayStation brand.

* That Nintendo has learned NOTHING from this generation, despite learning from the prior one.


To be d00m3d or not to be d00m3d?

I'd like to end this stream-of-conciousness-tirade spewing forth from my tired fingers, by doing a quick copy_&_paste of my opening thoughts again. This is in the hopes of re-emphasising the nature of cycles, of revolutions, and returning to the beginning. This is my central theme, and I think it's why Nintendo have gone with Revolution as it's project name. Whether you take it as getting back to games, getting back to simplicity/user-friendliness, getting back to Nintendo Entertainment Systems, or just getting back to making people love Nintendo... we can all agree these are things Nintendo want.

This industry is unique. The formats on which we play videogames are reinvented cyclically, rebranded and marketed - at which point we can either embrace them, reject them, or meet them with a lukewarm indifference. I personally feel that it is this nature which has allowed cash wealthy underdogs to establish themselves strongly in the gaming world, and become the kind of phenomenons they have become. It happened first with Nintendo, again with Sony, and now with Microsoft. With all of this negative press, Nintendo is fast becoming underdog again.

Nintendo will be d00m3d or they won't be. They will either be changing enough to bounce back from this underdog climate currently pervading them, or they won't. As food for thought, I'll post some things that have indicated a changing Nintendo this generation following Gamecube's initial release:

* Yamauchi steps down
* Iwata, ex-developer who brought HAL from grave takes his place
* GBA SP unveiled
* Nintendo try to focus on using handheld market as leverage with Gamecube
* "Dream Team" philosophy fully abandoned. Third parties considered valuable.
* Development of TriForce arcade board. Partnerships with Namco & SEGA on software.
(F Zero GX/AC, Soul Calibur II + Link, Donkey Konga, StarFox Armada)
* Resident Evil exclusivity from Capcom. Good for core franchise games 2001 through 2004.
* Capcom 5 limited-exclusivity: RE4, PN03, Viewtiful Joe, Killer 7, Dead Pheonix (cancelled)
* Fitting exclusives from SEGA: Super Monkey Ball 1/2, PSO I,II & III, Sonic Adventure DX/2-Battle/Collection
* Q Fund used to loophole Square-Enix support
* First party published horror game: Eternal Darkness
* Three way collaboration: Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes
* Intent to extend Gamecube life with peripherals: bongos, microphone, and poss camera/dance mats in future
* Attempt to differentiate from competition:
(Nintendo DS + Stylus = start of push to innovate game interfaces/"styles-of-play" outside of graphical upgrades alone)
* Embracing useful technology in NDS: wireless, user-friendly stylus control, built in mic.
* Warming to non-game functionality: Pictochat, GBA SP SD-card based media player
* Commitment that aspects of DS may be reflected in Revolution
(meaning Rev. could have functionality to ensure games other consoles can not?)
* Intent to include backwards compatability and launch at same time as market leader (Sony) announced: lesson learned?
* Investments include Matrix' 3d memory, Gyration, Bandai corp
* Announcement of moves into movies/animation
* Ongoing partnerships with NEC, IBM, ATI.

Later!

Thom

Did anyone read that?

 

[mrklaw]

IMO - its doomed.

Firstly, kids are growing up fast. Whether by choice or manipulation and marketing by large corporations, kids are savvy consumers very early on. They also are very open to peer pressure from school.

To me, Nintendo is doing the same games, with the same magic that they always did. Trouble is, the kids no longer believe Tinkerbell is real.

They all want the biggest, the shiniest, the best brands. Although Nintendo is perfectly aimed at them, they don't want it because they want to be seen as grown up. Tweens don't play nintendo, they play playstation.

Couple to that the Microsoft factor, which despite doing about as well as Nintendo, seem to have the benefit of analyst reports. So its almost like whatever Nintendo do, they'll be ignored as also-rans by analysts. That sort of thing is contagious, so they'll do well to make it as a hardware vendor much longer.

Launching the Revolution is a brave act in itself.

 

[IAmtheFMan]

You know what scares me? How Nintendo is saying "look at the DS for clues on our next console."

Look, I think the DS is a nifty innovative thing, but if Nintendo is planning on using some of these innovations for their console in lieu of conventional console gameplay, it may not work as well. Not to say that I disagree with the sentiment that the industry could use some innovation, but next gen is make or break for Nintendo, and they seem to be sticking their neck out their more than they really need to.

 

[Idiot Member]

I'd hardly say that SMS had the same magic as SMB1-3, and SMW...

I still play those games to this day (I don't play SMB2 it sucks ass). I really enjoy the remakes too.

 

[human5892]

Did anyone read that?

I did, although I don't think it states anything of particular interest.

Sorry, Thom: your writing is coherent at least, but you don't say much that hasn't already been said a thousand times before (and is fairly obvious, anyway).

 

[psycho_snake]

You know what scares me? How Nintendo is saying "look at the DS for clues on our next console."

Look, I think the DS is a nifty innovative thing, but if Nintendo is planning on using some of these innovations for their console in lieu of conventional console gameplay, it may not work as well. Not to say that I disagree with the sentiment that the industry could use some innovation, but next gen is make or break for Nintendo, and they seem to be sticking their neck out their more than they really need to.

Thats exactly the problem. They seem so hell bent on trying to make new products innovative and they try all these stupid gimmicks that dont work. Nintendo could do so much more if they just tried to do what everyone else is doing. Nintendo refuse to go online whilst Sony and especially MS are having some success on it. They dont try and earn much third party support like MS and Sony are doing. They have bad console design..well, so does Xbox. they keep sticking with these "kiddy" games and although I enjoy some of them, the mainstream will look at them and pass. Games like Metriod Prime and the Upcoming Zelda are games that Nintendo need to make more of and also get from third parties.

 

[missAran]

I'd hardly say that SMS had the same magic as SMB1-3, and SMW...

I still play those games to this day (I don't play SMB2 it sucks ass). I really enjoy the remakes too.

Um.. Super Mario World, after playing SMB3, was nothing special (much like SMS was nothing special after Mario 64).

What we know as "Lost Levels" is SMB2 really, what we know at SMB2 is Doki Doki Panic. Both of which are great games. Respect, boy.

 

[Kai Dracon]

tl;dr? check!

u need 2 get laid omg? check!

omfg why do you people talk about nintendo? check!

get a life loser? check!

cheap photoshop picture "wit"? check!

inane post listing GAF stereotypical responses? check!


It's good to see everything is normal today on GAF!


As for the essay Thom, well - it's extremely well-written, props there. However, while it's a nice overview, it seems framed as if it is going to make some projections for Nintendo or try to prove/disprove some common assumptions about why Nintendo has faired as they have the last couple of generations. It doesn't do that however, making it all feel somewhat redundant for that level of detail. (If you were going to try and refute some stuff, the point-by-point detail would have made more sense.)

 

[Chittagong]

Process issues first: Whether you agree with the arguments or not, that was an excellent post. Rich in detail and examples. Good work Radiohead. I'm feeling sad seeing all the people going "too long, can't bother, you suck". What the hell are these people reading GAF for? Why not IRC instead? Those who enjoy one line posts, OA can provide plenty of those. I certainly enjoy more reading a looooong insightful post than three lines of GAFFERS OWNED BOMB BOMB PSP SEEMS OVER. Luckily there is a forum for both tastes.

Then to substance issue: Nintendo is in a tough spot - they are in an industry that has grown too big for them. The increasingly complex technology means that the majority of the value in the industry value chain will go to those doing the processors, displays, network tools, drives etc. Nintendo can not compete in component purchase bargaining power anymore, hence it has to rely on cheaper, simpler and even older technology. This will eventually render Nintendo incompetitive.

I believe that the profit and success in the mid-term belongs to companies that own or control as many critical parts of the value chain as possible. In the long term the profit will distribute even more unevenly to those parts of the value chain that are furthest away from satisfactory performance - graphics mainly.

Post long-term, beyond a day that I can imagine, the demand for graphic performance is satisfied (whatever Nintendo claims, I do not feel this has yet happened - just check the EA next gen screenshots). At this point the aggregate value in the industry value chain will start to diminish, the market becomes a commodity market. Or, a new activity with performance far from satisfactory is invented to allow new value creation (holograms!!).

My belief is that Nintendo has already initiated a significant shift in strategy that will pull Nintendo out of the competitive markets we currently see it in. It may return to it's roots in family games or toys, or as it lately has become to seem, take on totally another industry - cartoons / comics.

The industry realizes this already. The lack of Revolution chatter isn't because a lack of information only. It is because Nintendo is missing from many of the powerpoint presentations about the future of the industry. Even GBA2 chatter has completely dried down recently, and not only because of the initial success of the DS (remember initial N64 sales success!). In fact, there are a handful companies that are viewed more likely to succeed in the portable consoles market of the future than Nintendo.

The industry is changing, and this will see a significant shift in industry players and superpowers.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

Jesus H. Fucking Toadstool...

I seriously don't fucking get it. Why oh why do you people feel the need to throw down the profitability argument in these threads every single time?

Let me just say this: if profitibility leads to the kind of stagnation Nintendo is currently experiencing, then I DON'T FUCKING WANT CONSOLE MANUFACTURERS TO BE PROFITABLE.

Fucks sakes. You don't play profits. You play games. If the games are subpar, then who the fuck cares how much money Nintendo makes? I mean, Mario Party 24 and Kirby Air Ride 9 may be profitable, but I garauntee you they'll suck.

Nintendo isn't stagnent, they're just not as popular as they once were. Plus, you, you're talking about opinions of said stagnation. I'm merely talking about Nintendo's ability to profit as a counter-point to all the doom/gloom they receive in the press & opinions of some people.

I bet you're under the opinion that N64 "did better" than GAMECUBE, but then, you say: "you don't play profits, you play games"...well GAMECUBE has Metroid, Resident Evil and a whole lot larger library of 1ST & 3RD party games that the N64 would only *dream* of having...so where's that logic now? GAMECUBE is more satisfying than N64 games-wise...but some people will argue this up and down 'cos sales of N64 hardware and software say otherwise. But people don't factor in Nintendo's image & how they shot themselves in the foot with it, Microsoft's multi-billion dollar push into games and Sony's huge headstart...they instead say stuff like: Nintendo should court 3RD parties more or get into online gaming...bla bla bla. Guess what, Nintendo HAS been going after 3RD parties, but N64 burned alot of bridges and Nintendo had to re-build those bridges...plus, when it comes down to it, both Sony & MS can outbid Nintendo for 3RD party content so there's not some "miracle cure" there for Nintendo. Online is not a "miracle cure" for Nintendo either, sure it would satisfy a niche...within a niche, within another niche...this isn't gonna turn Nintendo's image around as it's way too late and has been too late for such a move. What it all comes down to is image, we haven't even seen "Revolution"...which will be the first home console released under the new leadership of the new Nintendo with probably a new image!

Nintendo made alot of mistakes this generation, Nintendo has "lost ground" bla bla bla...but, compared to the N64, GAMECUBE has so much more and does so much more. But people will still argue N64 was somehow "better" 'cos it sold better, had bigger million seller games and it was more profitable for Nintendo. But to me, I'd rather have my GAMECUBE than N64 'cos N64 had way too many droughts, hardly no 3RD party stuff, no Metroid, no Resident Evil, a lot less selection in the library and near the end it seemed like Nintendo themselves abandoned it completly. GAMECUBE, at least, won't be abandoned like the last year N64 was out as it's getting Star Fox, Fire Emblem, Zelda & Resident Evil 4 and I'm sure alot more next year...

Just 'cos Little Debbie isn't as popular as Hostess, doesn't mean she isn't making good cookies...

Just 'cos some people like Coke better than Pepsi, doesn't mean Pepsi should give up...

Just 'cos Fox Studio's makes more money than idependant movies doesn't mean b-movies should end...

 

[XS+]

Nintendo isn't stagnent, they're just not as popular as they once were. Plus, you, you're talking about opinions of said stagnation. I'm merely talking about Nintendo's ability to profit as a counter-point to all the doom/gloom they receive in the press & opinions of some people.

I bet you're under the opinion that N64 "did better" than GAMECUBE, but then, you say: "you don't play profits, you play games"...well GAMECUBE has Metroid, Resident Evil and a whole lot larger library of 1ST & 3RD party games that the N64 would only *dream* of having...so where's that logic now? GAMECUBE is more satisfying than N64 games-wise...but some people will argue this up and down 'cos sales of N64 hardware and software say otherwise. But people don't factor in Nintendo's image & how they shot themselves in the foot with it, Microsoft's multi-billion dollar push into games and Sony's huge headstart...they instead say stuff like: Nintendo should court 3RD parties more or get into online gaming...bla bla bla. Guess what, Nintendo HAS been going after 3RD parties, but N64 burned alot of bridges and Nintendo had to re-build those bridges...plus, when it comes down to it, both Sony & MS can outbid Nintendo for 3RD party content so there's not some "miracle cure" there for Nintendo. Online is not a "miracle cure" for Nintendo either, sure it would satisfy a niche...within a niche, within another niche...this isn't gonna turn Nintendo's image around as it's way too late and has been too late for such a move. What it all comes down to is image, we haven't even seen "Revolution"...which will be the first home console released under the new leadership of the new Nintendo with probably a new image!

Nintendo made alot of mistakes this generation, Nintendo has "lost ground" bla bla bla...but, compared to the N64, GAMECUBE has so much more and does so much more. But people will still argue N64 was somehow "better" 'cos it sold better, had bigger million seller games and it was more profitable for Nintendo. But to me, I'd rather have my GAMECUBE than N64 'cos N64 had way too many droughts, hardly no 3RD party stuff, no Metroid, no Resident Evil, a lot less selection in the library and near the end it seemed like Nintendo themselves abandoned it completly. GAMECUBE, at least, won't be abandoned like the last year N64 was out as it's getting Star Fox, Fire Emblem, Zelda & Resident Evil 4 and I'm sure alot more next year...

Just 'cos Little Debbie isn't as popular as Hostess, doesn't mean she isn't making good cookies...

Just 'cos some people like Coke better than Pepsi, doesn't mean Pepsi should give up...

Just 'cos Fox Studio's makes more money than idependant movies doesn't mean b-movies should end...

Nintendo's profiting off a base that isn't driving this industry forward. Refreshingly new developers like Starbreeze, developers of Riddick, aren't catering to the Nintendo contingent. While profitable, Nintendo is longer an influence in this market. If you're looking for games with more bite, don't buy a Nintendo console. It's that simple. The author of this thread is insecure about Nintendo's irrelevance. Frankly, Nintendo doesn't CARE -- so, the question is begged, why do you?

 

[DrGAKMAN]

Nintendo's profiting off a base that isn't driving this industry forward. Refreshingly new developers like Starbreeze, developers of Riddick, aren't catering to the Nintendo contingent. While profitable, Nintendo is longer an influence in this market. If you're looking for games with more bite, don't buy a Nintendo console. It's that simple. The author of this thread is insecure about Nintendo's irrelevance. Frankly, Nintendo doesn't CARE -- so, the question is begged, why do you?

I actually think Riddick was a rip-off of Metroid Prime, oh yeah and um...what's your point 'cos I've already heard that "I don't like Nintendo" opinion already...and it's just an opinion, not a point.

 

[Odnetnin]

Nintendo's profiting off a base that isn't driving this industry forward. Refreshingly new developers like Starbreeze, developers of Riddick, aren't catering to the Nintendo contingent. While profitable, Nintendo is longer an influence in this market. If you're looking for games with more bite, don't buy a Nintendo console. It's that simple. The author of this thread is insecure about Nintendo's irrelevance. Frankly, Nintendo doesn't CARE -- so, the question is begged, why do you?

actually the question is why do you? care enough to post?

You obviously don't as stated in the other thread. So pray tell how MS or Sony is driving the industry forward. Bias can do wonders for your comments.

 

[XS+]

actually the question is why do you? care enough to post?

You obviously don't as stated in the other thread. So pray tell how MS or Sony is driving the industry forward. Bias can do wonders for your comments.

Because they're companies that are willing to take risks. Nintendo continues to peddle the same stale games that've reaped them the profitability many Nintendo fans cite as an excuse to maintain support. Nintendo has followed Sony/M$ out of necessity, seeing how their reluctance to grow has cost them mindshare. Their refusal to offer an online solution is proof enough of their incorrigibly anachronistic approach to game design. Online gaming is a future that Nintendo wanted no part of. Look where it got them. Imagine if Mario Kart or SSBM were online-enabled.

 

[Odnetnin]

Because they're companies that are willing to take risks. Nintendo continues to peddle the same stale games that've reaped them the profitability many Nintendo fans cite as an excuse to maintain support. Nintendo has followed Sony/M$ out of necessity, seeing how their reluctance to grow has cost them mindshare. Their refusal to offer an online solution is proof enough of their incorrigibly anachronistic approach to game design. Online gaming is a future that Nintendo wanted no part of. Look where it got them. Imagine if Mario Kart or SSBM were online-enabled.

so the ds isn't risk? I don't see how MS or SONY are risk takers.

Look where it got them? 3rd place/2nd place by a narrow margin? Profitability? Equating Nintendo's lack of online to their lacklustre business model is flawed. Japan is NOT a huge online country and even there, the gamecube isn't selling well. Its too little too late and not capturing mindshare with the right games.

online really is a junk feature that will only come into play imo next gen. I don't play online games but not every game that has online features is full of people online waiting to play it. If I recall reading correct; the xbox live rooms for Crimson Skies (plus some other) were really deserted. Also, broadband penetration wasn't really there at the start of current gen - I fully expect Nintendo to have online titles next gen but well.. what do you expect now? This generation is almost over and I don't see how XBOX live has substantially won MS new fans?

 

[XS+]

so the ds isn't risk? I don't see how MS or SONY are risk takers.

Look where it got them? 3rd place/2nd place by a narrow margin? Profitability? Equating Nintendo's lack of online to their lacklustre business model is flawed. Japan is NOT a huge online country and even there, the gamecube isn't selling well. Its too little too late and not capturing mindshare with the right games.

online really is a junk feature that will only come into play imo next gen. I don't play online games but not every game that has online features is full of people online waiting to play it. If I recall reading correct; the xbox live rooms for Crimson Skies (plus some other) were really deserted. Also, broadband penetration wasn't really there at the start of current gen - I fully expect Nintendo to have online titles next gen but well.. what do you expect now? This generation is almost over and I don't see how XBOX live has substantially won MS new fans?

You don't think the PSP is a monumental risk for Sony? They're eating a loss of nearly $300 per unit. That's not a risk??

 

[sureshooting]

I LAUGHED!

 

[radioheadrule83]

I'm insecure about Nintendo's irrelevance ??..

I think you misunderstand my feelings on the matter.

With this thread - I'm saying that, when you think about everything that's happened in the past 10 years.... all the shit Nintendo is in is because of Nintendo. It's not because of Mario, or chibi Link, or gamers "growing up" -- let's face it, a lot of games today are the same genres of yesteryear, with the same juvenile premise in aging genres... I'm not saying these things aren't fun anymore. And of course, there are still new ideas all the time.

But I say, as far as games are concerned, and efficient hardware design (made with leading partners)... it's still something Nintendo is very good at. What they have sucked at is making prudent decisions that the industry and the press tend to like. I think their position has fuck all to do with this "kiddy" shit the press, and complete fucktard posters here and elsewhere post. I think it's to do with Nintendo being too controlling in the 8-bit days, being too arrogant following the 16-bit days, being introvert & selective with third parties during the 64-bit days, and throughout making the occasionally ill-advised hardware choice. Namely ones that don't embrace the idea of convergance. Consequentially, they have hindered their own brilliant work as well as the work of others who are trying to make a living on their systems.

What I'm ALSO saying, in light of these harsh truths:
...is that Nintendo are quite possibly, FAR MORE receptive than people have been giving them credit for. That was the reason in the "Gamecube Vs Nintendo 64" section of this thread's first post. Since the Gamecube went on sale they've made a boatload of changes, including new management, rebranding of Gameboy, an increase in first party output, a more outgoing relationship with Japanese third parties, and they are still trying to find new ways to reach out to others and differentiate. They're trying to diversify business to safeguard a future too. They've stayed toe to toe with the richest company in the world and their $2 billion investment. Far be it from insecure - I'M EXCITED - that competition has kicked Nintendo in the ass and they're turning a corner. Because they make great gaming hardware, peripherals and games, and have potential to do better. Competition is good remember?

As the title says, I'm implying Nintendo is in transition. I entertained the idea of Revolution being a name that implies coming full circle - getting back to games anyone can play... and additionally, that they have also become an under-estimated underdog for the first time since Atari made hardware.

Who's insecure? I'm just saying the fat lady ain't singin' yet!

 

[soundwave05]

I think they'll try something crazy with Revolution (non-traditional).

But I think the "Changing Face of Nintendo" is happening right in front of a lot of people and they're missing it.

Nintendo is going to be a real player in the anime market. Look at the deals they're making for anime licenses and opening of their own Nintendo animation studio and the investment in Bandai.

In 5-6 years, Nintendo could be a much more diverse company than they are today and a huge player in the anime market, which is huge in Japan and growing worldwide.

Do not assume they're going to put all their eggs into one basket and try to reclaim marketshare with Revolution. There's a chance even if Revolution is a well made machine with good software that it'll sell even less than the GameCube. That's just how competetive the market will become.

 

[Odnetnin]

You don't think the PSP is a monumental risk for Sony? They're eating a loss of nearly $300 per unit. That's not a risk??

a) you haven't covered MS

b) monetary loss = risk? You started with features and then went into monetary loss = risk and you go into money. Sure.. then.... You should know that ANY business ventrue = risk. There is no such thing as a sure deal

c) I'd like a source on the $300 dollar loss per psp (which I believe is bull).

 

[XS+]

a) you haven't covered MS

b) monetary loss = risk? You started with features and then went into monetary loss = risk and you go into money. Sure.. then.... You should know that ANY business ventrue = risk. There is no such thing as a sure deal

c) I'd like a source on the $300 dollar loss per psp (which I believe is bull).

My point being, Sony is bringing to market an AMAZING handheld at an immense loss for them. THAT, my friend, is what a LEADER does. While Nintendo timidly skims the water with its toes, Sony plunged headfirst. That's leadership.

 

[Odnetnin]

My point being, Sony is bringing to market an AMAZING handheld at an immense loss for them. THAT, my friend, is what a LEADER does. While Nintendo timidly skims the water with its toes, Sony plunged headfirst. That's leadership.

nvm. Haha @ you.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

I was going to try to respond to what XS+ said, but I think Odnetnin & radioheadrule83 already did a good job.

soundwave05 also made the excellent point that Nintendo is expanding it's business which will only make them more profitable. And if they can do well with the deals they've already been making with the Japanese anime business then they'll be able to create new franchises and expand current ones that can be interchanged with thier gaming business...and this only helps thier image!

I think most people believe that Nintendo "Revolution" will:
-have gimmicky features
-features that will alienate "traditional" gaming
-look gay
-have a toy for a controller
-have no online
-be the weakest hardware
-have an off-the-wall propriety format
-"instert bad assumption here"

In a way, this could all work out brilliantly for Nintendo. GAMECUBE lowered everyone's expectations of Nintendo...it makes most of us just assume that "Revolution" will be worse. People are ignoring that the new Nintendo in recent times have:
-stated that they're looking into console shell design more closely next generation
-released the GBA sp which looks slick and addressed issues people had with the regular GBA
-redesigned the final look of the NDS based on feedback about the look/ergonmics of the test models
-improved their advertising
-got Reggie (I know people hate him, but in reality, he's gonna HAVE to help change Nintendo's image, or else when he looks for his next advertising job people ain't gonna hire him unless Nintendo's image was improved)
-changed their tune on online gaming...it's still too late for GAMECUBE, but with NDS & "Revolution" they're gonna do wireless online gaming (there's evidence)
-more open to convergence and more standerdized things (NDS uses WiFi and that new MP3/MPEG cart plays standerd song & movie formats on a standerd SD card as oppossed to some goofy Nintendo propriety one...they included pictochat in NDS & are looking into dictionary/translator uses as well...something I don't think the anti-non-gaming old Nintendo would do)
-they're expanding their business (thus profitability and mindshare branding...also good for thier image) by creating a 3RD tier market and getting involved with Japanese anime
-been outputting more 1ST party games & beefing up in-house developers
-bringing over traditionally Japanese-only franchises
-looking heavily into new ways to play games (I'm sorry, but I find this to be awesome)
-have gotten closer to outside companies due to the idea of collaborations (something I think all forms of entertainment can benifit from)
-"insert stuff we just don't know about yet...Nintendo likes to keep secrets afterall"

I think Nintendo's #1 needed improvement is their image...and I think they're doing alot behind the scenes that really won't blossum until "Revolution" is launched.

 

[GG-Duo]

Process issues first: Whether you agree with the arguments or not, that was an excellent post. Rich in detail and examples. Good work Radiohead. I'm feeling sad seeing all the people going "too long, can't bother, you suck". What the hell are these people reading GAF for? Why not IRC instead? Those who enjoy one line posts, OA can provide plenty of those. I certainly enjoy more reading a looooong insightful post than three lines of GAFFERS OWNED BOMB BOMB PSP SEEMS OVER. Luckily there is a forum for both tastes.

Then to substance issue: Nintendo is in a tough spot - they are in an industry that has grown too big for them. The increasingly complex technology means that the majority of the value in the industry value chain will go to those doing the processors, displays, network tools, drives etc. Nintendo can not compete in component purchase bargaining power anymore, hence it has to rely on cheaper, simpler and even older technology. This will eventually render Nintendo incompetitive.

I believe that the profit and success in the mid-term belongs to companies that own or control as many critical parts of the value chain as possible. In the long term the profit will distribute even more unevenly to those parts of the value chain that are furthest away from satisfactory performance - graphics mainly.

Post long-term, beyond a day that I can imagine, the demand for graphic performance is satisfied (whatever Nintendo claims, I do not feel this has yet happened - just check the EA next gen screenshots). At this point the aggregate value in the industry value chain will start to diminish, the market becomes a commodity market. Or, a new activity with performance far from satisfactory is invented to allow new value creation (holograms!!).

My belief is that Nintendo has already initiated a significant shift in strategy that will pull Nintendo out of the competitive markets we currently see it in. It may return to it's roots in family games or toys, or as it lately has become to seem, take on totally another industry - cartoons / comics.

The industry realizes this already. The lack of Revolution chatter isn't because a lack of information only. It is because Nintendo is missing from many of the powerpoint presentations about the future of the industry. Even GBA2 chatter has completely dried down recently, and not only because of the initial success of the DS (remember initial N64 sales success!). In fact, there are a handful companies that are viewed more likely to succeed in the portable consoles market of the future than Nintendo.

The industry is changing, and this will see a significant shift in industry players and superpowers.

I would just like to point out this quality post, and that I agree with these points. Just look at the attempted Bandai share buy-out, the animation studio, the DS' target audience...

I think we should all take a look at the bigger picture before talking about Nintendo's future. What will happen beyond the Revolution?

 

[soundwave05]

I see them becoming perhaps the biggest Japanese anime company in the world.

Who's the biggest right now? Bandai? Then you have American companies over here like Hasbro and Mattel and 4Kids that license Japanese anime stuff.

Nintendo could easily become bigger than these guys. Yamauchi has flirted with the idea of becoming a Disney-esque entertainment conglomerate (in the early 1990s they were close to opening a theme park on an island), this might happen now.