Not quite: see - CDi and some of the various edutainment Mario games in the 90sThat Nintendo has never made that mistake is a good thing.
Not quite: see - CDi and some of the various edutainment Mario games in the 90sThat Nintendo has never made that mistake is a good thing.
Total app store revenue in 2011: $3.6B - http://9to5mac.com/2011/07/07/apple...5b-downloads-425000-apps-nearly-3-6b-revenue/
Total Nintendo revenue in 2011: $12B - http://biz.yahoo.com/ic/41/41877.html
I will never understand why people want Nintendo to sacrifice their hardware business in an effort to gain market share in a smaller, more competitive market when the results of success are smaller and the result of failure is a complete loss of mind share and competitive advantage.
Nintendo going third party has been a joke for a decade.
Now it's reality, analysts are actually arguing this.
Also if you take their argument to its logical conclusion then almost nobody would make anything for consoles or handhelds, because there are a lot of gaming companies doing a lot worse than Nintendo are.
Uncharted? Make it for iOS/Android. Halo? iOS/Android. Battlefield? iOS/Android.
Yes you are. And Im not going to let you drag this off topic any more than that. If you want to have this discussion, and you are not walking away from it, you need to go back several posts in our exchange and directly respond to the points I put forth that you dodged half a page ago.
Just in case you have forgotten.
This is wrong. Its not my opinion that its possible making this move could harm them or their brand in some way, its a literal fact that its a possibility.
There is a risk involved in doing this, it would help if you could provide some solid reasoning using real world data as to why this risk is worth it. Something other than "I think that" would be a really good start. You tried to slither out of this one by saying that there was no risk, and that it was merely my opinion that there was a risk.
Its not. Its just the truth.
Second:
What you are supposed to say to that is anything that would solidify, rectify and perhaps support your statement that:
You see, in this statement here, you stated that the reason doing this isnt a bad move is solely because these games no longer hold any value at all on Nintendos own hardware.
This is factually false as proved by this 25th anniversary game selling millions worldwide. These old game do still hold value, and LOTS of it, specifically for Nintendos own hardware, the only place where this game could be played.
And this part of your post was handled properly by Ion
Then of course, if your up for it. Theres always this to address:
Because in like 3 years the app store will maybe probably reach like $24B in revenue and then they'll use that figure in their totally flawless logic without any flaws.
Just another example of the stupidity of the investor-driven need for quarterly profits and constant growth versus long term viability. Any legitimate questions about the current strategy are negated by the insistence on putting Nintendo games on iOS devices. Sure it would boost profits for a quarter, but it would destroy Nintendo in the long term.
People want short term profits now, otherwise you're worthless. Nintendo will keep doing what they need to do, know-nothing analysts be damned.
I know nothing about the feasibility of this, but is there a possibility for Nintendo to go private? Since they march to their own drum, I could see this being a better way for them to move forward. But it's probably not realistic at all.
A Mario game driven entirely by touch controls would be absolutely atrocious. That's all that need to be said to this iOS nonsense.
Total app store revenue in 2011: $3.6B - http://9to5mac.com/2011/07/07/apple...5b-downloads-425000-apps-nearly-3-6b-revenue/
Total Nintendo revenue in 2011: $12B - http://biz.yahoo.com/ic/41/41877.html
I will never understand why people want Nintendo to sacrifice their hardware business in an effort to gain market share in a smaller, more competitive market when the results of success are smaller and the result of failure is a complete loss of mind share and competitive advantage.
A Mario game driven entirely by touch controls would be absolutely atrocious. That's all that need to be said to this iOS nonsense.
Nintendo hardware is usually designed to fit the software, not the other way around. Maybe it's just me, but I don't think they'll be able to recreate the experience of Mario games on touch only interfaces all that reliably. If they could, surely they would've tried by now? And if they have to compromise the gameplay to make it work better with the interface, well...OBJECTION. A NEW ARGUMENT APPROACHES!
Let's talk *just* about iOS. There are approximately 400 million iOS devices out in the wild, right? Including 30 million+ iPhone's and like 11 million+ iPads sold in the last 3 months, right?
Now. Let's make the genuinely fair assumption that many people who have bought games for their iOS devices would be damn interested in buying a Mario game. Further, while we know many iOS games are like $0.99 (therein lying your point), we also know that some can be priced higher if they deliver a better experience...so lets say that Nintendo offers one up for $15-$20 and offers that caliber of experience. Mario is a brand name that everyone knows and if they make a full-fledged Mario game lots and lots of people will buy it. I for damn sure would. It'd be the new standard for gaming on the OS, hands down. It would be sitting at the top of the paid apps chart for a long, long time.
If just 10% of that iOS audience buys in (and they would, since Mario is that kind of name and iOS really does need full-featured games...which will come sooner or later) do you really think Nintendo would make "very little money" off of the investment? I mean, that's 40 million copies sold, and all they had to do was build it and put it on the iTunes store. No shipping, no boxes, no carts, no discs, etc.
Even if only 5% of that audience bought the game at that price, 20 million copies would be sold. What was the last console game that sold 20 million copies? That wasn't bundled with a console at some point? That's rare air indeed.
Think about it. If anyone can make an experience-defining game designed to take advantage of a touch screen in ways that make a game impossible on traditional controllers and desirable to all...Nintendo is that company.
To be fair, a *Kirby* game driven entirely by touch controls was absolutely awesome.
But, yeah, your point stands.
I wonder if the investors would believe in this report.
When i see an article like this on a subject i know, i can't help but think how many OTHER topics (that i know nothing of) they're reporting on are filled with bullshit inaccuracies and piss poor reporting like this.
They make it sound like Iwata is going it alone against the board or something if he's supposedly gonna get ousted in a few years, when in reality Nintendo is pretty much 100% united on their cause.
An interesting idea is that the mobile market actually 'lacks' a real competitive environment.
The market is huge, but is is also very new.
The fact that Angry birds has become a cultural phenomenon is testament to this.
The games, while fun, don't really have anything special. It is an old simple game with a cute exterior. Yet, it became the game to get. This tells me that there is a lack of competition.
Maybe Nintendo is not the best suited to take advantage of this situation, but probably speaks to why so many developers are moving into the mobile space.
As much as I thought Kirby Mass Attack was neat, the game ended up not being super fun for me, at least not fun enough to compel me to finish it.To be fair, a *Kirby* game driven entirely by touch controls was absolutely awesome.
But, yeah, your point stands.
?Wrong all-touch Kirby. There's another one on DS. But Mass Attack was still very good.
As much as I thought Kirby Mass Attack was neat, the game ended up not being super fun for me, at least not fun enough to compel me to finish it.
1. Enemies and traps were very very telegraphed. Like sometimes there was flashing and one would have up to 3 seconds to deal with whatever. I don't know if any other Kirby games were that obvious, I'm pretty sure Return to Dreamland was not though. This probably has more to do with one having to manage 10 liabilities at once rather than touch controls.
2. For the situations in which I had to actually react fast or put on pressure, flicking a bunch was not fun. For the situations in which I had to be accurate and methodical... I could sometimes tolerate.
3. I really dislike the Dedede Resort world. The worst one was the surfing level. Sliding up the ramps to get high was a right pain in the ass for the most part.
And I am probably being unfair here, but I think after my experience with Kirby Mass Attack, I am probably going to be warily enthusiastic for the next touch control platformer that I get my hands on.
Total app store revenue in 2011: $3.6B - http://9to5mac.com/2011/07/07/apple...5b-downloads-425000-apps-nearly-3-6b-revenue/
Total Nintendo revenue in 2011: $12B - http://biz.yahoo.com/ic/41/41877.html
I will never understand why people want Nintendo to sacrifice their hardware business in an effort to gain market share in a smaller, more competitive market when the results of success are smaller and the result of failure is a complete loss of mind share and competitive advantage.
I agree with the point you're trying to make but remember revenue is not profit. Nintendo make what, $20 on a $60 game = 33% App store devs make 70% of what Apple make. So the numbers Re closer when it comes to what the developers get from a sale.
Why is Nintendos total revenue being compared to app store revenue? App Store is just software revenue. The vast majority of Nintendo's revenue comes from hardware.
I agree with the point you're trying to make but remember revenue is not profit. Nintendo make what, $20 on a $60 game = 33% App store devs make 70% of what Apple make. So the numbers Re closer when it comes to what the developers get from a sale.
Does it?Why is Nintendos total revenue being compared to app store revenue? App Store is just software revenue. The vast majority of Nintendo's revenue comes from hardware.
so who is paying for this agenda you guys are talking about? I mean I can see the bias but not sure who is leading this?
Is it just pro-USA company vs a Japanese company?
Nintendo make what, $20 on a $60 game = 33%
Because the cult want Nintendo to stop producing their own hardware and make iOS games.
Except Nintendo is currently losing money on hardware. Software is where they do well.
And the App Store is literally exploding. That initial link from July 2011 is way off to how much it has grown since just then, it's now doing 2 billion a quarter. It's constant rise in revenue is off the chart. It will probably be pulling in over 20 billion revenue a year in just a year or two.
Do you know how much money the app store could make if Apple released it for Android? DO you?!?!?!
Except Nintendo is currently losing money on hardware. Software is where they do well.
And the App Store is literally exploding. That initial link from July 2011 is way off to how much it has grown since just then, it's now doing 2 billion a quarter. It's constant rise in revenue is off the chart. It will probably be pulling in over 20 billion revenue a year in just a year or two.
Actually basically nothing. Android users don't pay for apps. The vast majority of android phones being sold on the market are the cheap low-end ones. Those users aren't buying apps. It has been shown time and time again that iOS users are far more likely to spend money on apps than Android users.
It is why iOS is always the lead platform for mobile games.
Also, I am not saying Nintendo should go iOS, I am saying the logic to try to downplay how big the App Store in this thread is just incredibly wrong and in the numbers shown previously just plain extremely out-dated.
People are not trying to downplay the app store. They are trying to put into perspective what Nintendo does when we get these half-wit analysts that do not understand the games industry. They've never actually had to create a product and sell that product to an actual consumer. You get these finance guys that think they can do everything by manipulating the financials and have no experience trying to sell anything or make anything and they are clueless.
Well if Nintendo's investors want them to go iOS in masse then Nintendo has to convince them otherwise. The shareholders could very well demand for the high ups at Nintendo such as Iwata and co. be fired and be replaced by far more pro-smartphone/tablet types.
Even if it would be wrong it is still a strong possibility. Shareholders have made terrible choices in the past. Many many many many times.
Then we fundamentally disagree on the nature and potential of the market.
You think there is only a small market for expensive games because there are no expensive games (or, because almost all other games have been cheap and short games). I think a sizable market exists that hasn't been tapped because there have been no games made that are expansive and deep enough to justify a $15-$20 price. I believe that they most certainly can be made...and that if they come, so will the money. That's why I like the Republique project so much. It's pushing forward into the Undiscovered Country.
Again, if 5% bought in...20 million copies+ get sold. You can make a lot of fair arguments, but not one that suggests that 5% of the iOS market would NOT buy a high-quality Mario game at a $15-$20 price. I don't accept the notion. If you do, then we can agree to disagree.
Probably not enough to bother. It's a well documented fact that Android users don't like paying for apps, and that Android developers are probably undernourishedDo you know how much money the app store could make if Apple released it for Android? DO you?!?!?!
"Nintendo has to deal with the change and let Mario games be played on non-Nintendo devices," said Imazu. "I think it will take at least couple of years to see that."
One thing is for sure if shareholders are angry enough and do get Iwata fired GAF will have one of its biggest meltdowns ever. Regardless if the implication has anythig to do with iOS or not.
One thing is for sure if shareholders are angry enough and do get Iwata fired GAF will have one of its biggest meltdowns ever. Regardless if the implication has anythig to do with iOS or not.
You don't know very much about stock and share classes, do you? Iwata is in no danger of getting fired.