The Trouble with Nintendo. A TL;DR topic.

[rgraves]

Nobody gives a shit if something is of 'merit or consideration' to somebody else when coming to their considered opinion of something. I won't go and see film I think is shit just because some other people like it. I don't cut COD slack because lots of other people love it. And it's the same with games or indeed a console - I will buy them when I think they look good or have something to offer me.

Is the WiiU's problem that too many people aren't factoring in whether others show it 'merit or consideration'? No, that's completely irrelevant. The WiiU's problem is that not enough of the people who are in the market for games and consoles are interested in what it has to offer.

Besides, your argument is nonsensical because when people say 'I think the WiiU is crap' or 'I don't think there's any interesting Nintendo games at the moment', they are obviously speaking for themselves and not for everyone. This is just a tedious rerun of the very tired argument constantly made during the Wii era, to people complaining about that console: oh, but you're not everyone! That's your opinion! The Wii is popular!

No shit, doofus. But that hardly affects my personal view.

In amongst all your wailing and nashing of teeth, you've agreed my point - Nintendo are getting on with things how they see fit - some 'hardcore' gamers personal view isn't going to affect that because they believe they are right.

It's like a Morrissey fan going to a Steps concert and then just standing at the back shouting this is shit, your songs are shit, nobody wants to hear this, why don't you sing something good. Who's in the wrong place, the Morrissey fan or Steps? Should Steps be concerned about the Morrissey fan or the rest of the crowd?

[TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap]

I think Nintendo are given a lot less slack than either Sony or MS on things.

I don't think that's true; when a company that has a certain pedigree fucks things up, they get grilled over it. When Microsoft entered the console space with the original Xbox, they were laughed at and had a real hard time to win hearts. They managed it though, and took careful note of everything that went wrong to make sure they wouldn't make the same mistakes with the 360. The 360 became really popular because it offered what people were looking for; a wide selection of good looking games on a console with excellent online functionality. Lately they have been under increasing criticism for drawing out the generation far too long and for focusing on Kinect and services and ads at the expense of 'real' game experiences. Now that the generation winds down, it's not certain at all if they'll be in the same dominant position in the next round.

Sony got loads of shit for 'killing the Dreamcast', but eventually won the hearts of gamers because the PS2 was a great machine with a stupendeously amazing software library. However, a lot of this goodwill was eradicated with the arrogance of the PS3 unveiling and the disastrous launch period where we had a hugely overpriced console that didn't do half the stuff that was promised, had bad third party ports and had no outstanding games of its own for a good while. Eventually they made up a lot of this by adding features, dropping prices and getting some great exclusives out. Now that the generation winds down, the public eagerly awaits the PS4 and Sony is back in the race.

Nintendo used to be a driving force of innovation and amazing new experiences, and has solely focused on churning out games for casual players on underpowered hardware for 2 generations now. We don't get excited by another Mario Kart, because we already played it 7 times before. We can't get excited about third party games on the platform because there hardly are any, and most of it is pap. We are disappointed because we want the good old Nintendo from the days of the NES, SNES and Nintendo 64 back.

[scottcr]

Have faith in Retro...

I'm envisaging an almost open world like Metroid game coming... with lots of COLOUR and WEATHER. Coming into land on the planet in your ship and looking around, no doors, just emptiness...

then... you jump into your ship... and fly it! (I reckon there's a reason why Nintendoland features you flying your ship btw)

[Cappuccino Kid]

The trouble with Nintendo

Here's some thoughts I've had about what's wrong with Nintendo...

Basically, Nintendo are the Arsenal of videogaming.

[Gique]

we may have had a better schedule if Iwata didn't have a "sorry too hardcore" stance on a LOT of really not that hardcore at all titles they could be publishing from affiliated devs.

[Clipper]

I'm not sure the mythical Nintendo that all the "hardcore" and "serious" gamers talk about in this thread ever existed.

Nintendo has pretty much always made games for kids (either in age or at heart). Go look at their top sellers in every generation... there are outliers like some of Rare's output but other than that its the same old colourful fun stuff.

On NES and SNES they had very good 3rd party support and so those 3rd parties provided the other pieces of the puzzle.

They havent had decent 3rd party Support since SNES because of Sony , you can trace all the issues back to them not going through with the playstation collaboration. Then ploughing their own furrow with the cart only N64

Since then their machines have been for kids and the young at heart who enjoy those franchises and types of games. New IP each generation alongside the old favourites.

The problem now is that their market is being eaten into as kids are being weaned onto more "mature" consoles much earlier and on handhelds they are getting used to smartphones.

So the future for Nintendo is catering to a narrowing/shrinking market, well in the west at least. Having a less powerful console is down to conservatism but considering their financial position you can see why it makes sense for them, look at difference in profitiability between GC and XBOX which both sold similar numbers.

I can see WiiU doing GC numbers this gen and they may evne break even or make a profit but the shareholders will be apopletic as they will be expecting Wii levels of performance to repeat and the market just isnt the same now and the market they tapped with it is not one to upgrade and do it all again for prettier Wii sports

[matt0]

Gamers: Nintendo don't have third party support!

Scottr: AH-HA! Here's TWO of them! Count 'em. Not one, but TWO. Now you've got no excuse to buy one!

Gamers: Is this guy serious?

This is the same nonsense people leveled at the original xbox. "APART from Halo what does it have?!" It had fucking Halo though, so... there you go.

The Wii U looks a bit bleaker in that there's nothing as on the level of Halo or PGR yet but Bayonetta 2 might be that game (EDIT: not sales wise obviously, but just as a classic game). It's an odd console, and I don't understand the appeal or what Nintendo are going for with it, but it's still so early in the machines life.

[Stolly]

Nintendo used to be a driving force of innovation and amazing new experiences, and has solely focused on churning out games for casual players on underpowered hardware for 2 generations now. We don't get excited by another Mario Kart, because we already played it 7 times before. We can't get excited about third party games on the platform because there hardly are any, and most of it is pap. We are disappointed because we want the good old Nintendo from the days of the NES, SNES and Nintendo 64 back.

This!

[Clipper]

But that is just the perception of one set of game players.

Nintendo on Wii certainly was a driving force in innovation and amazing new experiences.

They just weren't ones you specifically enjoyed

[Kryptonian]

It's odd that a company that made all sorts of ridiculous things like online play for the NES and a printer has become so conservative.

Nintendo didn't develop that modem though did they and it seems they actually knocked it back.

[Larsen B]

I knew I should have gone with R.O.B.

[Smitty]

In amongst all your wailing and nashing of teeth, you've agreed my point - Nintendo are getting on with things how they see fit - some 'hardcore' gamers personal view isn't going to affect that because they believe they are right.

Yes, but you're missing the point - I don't give a shit what Nintendo think is best, unless what they think is best happens to result in me getting the stuff I want as a gamer. Man, i've already said this - the number of people who like the WiiU or Mario Tax Collector doesn't feed into my enjoyment of it. That's why despite the Wii being wildly successful for Nintendo, it was a bust for me.

Also, Nintendo themselves (!) said they were courting the 'hardcore' audience much more strongly this time around.

[Transient Curse]

Nintendo have got so much IP that if they wanted to, they could release a fan favourite title every month for years. WiiU would have been THE console to have. Who could resist a launch with Mario, Metroid, Zelda and Mario Kart? Why don't they do it?

It's probably as simple as - making games to the quality we expect from those franchises takes time. If they rushed them to market at the rate you are talking about the quality would dip. They should do better than they are absolutely, but I don't think it's fair to assume they can turn out Mario or Zelda games to the quality that they do every year - I don't want them to move those titles to the CoD model because I don't think they'd be as good - having more stuff that's not as good doesn't interest me.

Well, I'm not going to comment on the quality that those franchises require but if you look at other companies and their key franchises, they manage to put big titles out much quicker Nintendo do. My point about hiring more people is that they could get games out quicker. Whatever the Nintendo method is, at some point they'll have to hire new staff because people will retire and so on. Obviously, nobody thinks their current workforce is the only staff who could make these games. They should hire more people and release more games. I'm not saying every x months I am saying more frequently.

2) Cheapskates.

Why don't Nintendo make hardware that represents an advancement of the form?

It's all about opinions. Your view here is that a leap in graphical power is the only real 'advancement of form'. Nintendo would say that they are delivering advances in other ways. Clearly we'd (as gamers) like something that's a mix of both, but that's our wish and not one that is based on any kind of knowledge of if that would keep them in business. It could also be said, that for a company which apparently doens't advance things, they haven't half brought a lot of things to the business - things which other have undoubtedly improved upon at times yes, but that's the way of the world. You can't deny that they take risks with their hardware, and if we don't benefit from their initial implementation we usually do when the v2 or v3 comes around later on from either themselves or another manufacturer.

I didn't say anything about graphic fidelity.

I specifically mentioned speed taken to download stuff from the shop, internet browsing and resistive screens. Every tech company in the world seems to want to make things smoother, more responsive, less effort. Nintendo use cheap components and let me pay for them by wasting my time waiting for stuff to happen. In every other market people groan when resistive screens are used, because they're not as nice as capacitive ones. Look at 3DS' low res screen. Etc, etc. I'm talking about user experience more than graphic fidelity. I don't have a WiiU but I do have a 3DS and I'm always left thinking about cut corners. I should note I've got the XL version, the revision that should have been nicer than it is. It's still nicer than the original though, don't get me wrong.

3) Cheapskates

Let's invest in new IP. They'd have to hire more developers, OBVS (not allowed - $$$) but assume that they have new people onboard. Here's a Nintendo press conference: Miyamoto strolls out and says "I am pleased to announce these brilliant new minds that I have been working with. They have brilliant games for you, I have been overseeing their ideas and I love them." They get the Miyamoto Seal Of Approval and their games will be out before the PS4 is on shelves. PANDEMONIUM. Miyamoto says these games are amazing?!!? Who knows games better than he?! I cannot wait. What does Miyamoto do now? Is he fully onboard with many games? How long until he retires? Nintendo need to get their eggs out of that basket and start promoting for the future.

Imagine a release schedule like this:

January: Metroid

February: New Miyamoto approved IP

March: Mario

April: Zelda

May: StarFox

June: Smash Bros

July: New Miyamoto IP

August: Mario Tennis

September: Rayman Legends (An authentic third party title, just for fun!)

October: Pikmin

November: F-zero

December: Pokemon Hue of Choice

Bit Better than

January: Relax, post Christmas

February:

Rayman (Delayed)

March: Cancelled.

April: Port of last year's PS360 hit with controller gimmick tacked on.

And so on, Isn't it?

Not possible? Why? Get the games made and out on shelves. Hey, Capcom, fancy making some money? Knock us up a Starfox will you? People want to buy it.

We'd all love that scenario, but surely we also see that's it's just not going to happen. Expecting it to is just fantasy - quite aside from development bandwidth, why on earth would they cannabalise the sales of their own titles by releasing something else the next month? And what would they do in year 2 - sequels to everything? That would go down well....

They clearly excected Rayman to come out around now, then they had Lego City and MH to cover shortly after that. Then they most likely have Pikmin and Wonderful 101 to come. Then they had E3 at which point I suspect we'd see what their big Q3 and Q4 titles were set to be - I strongly suspect either Mario Kart U or SMG-U will be with us before xmas.

Ok, I think I should have linked this a little bit more to my perception that Nintendo are squandering the one year lead they have on the other manufacturers. Because they've gone for a tech level of what is about to become previous gen hardware they've got a year to really build up an install base before their hardware starts looking a bit less attractive (yes, on a visual level). If they'd had a release schedule that looked more like my pie-in-the-sky list then they'd have a good chance of getting more people onboard.

I notice the PS4 was reported on BBC news at 6 yesterday. The WiiU is ALREADY old hat in some people's eyes, and it's got no games. Essentially, their one year lead is already gone.

To continue with your points, Nintendo if they had to release a big game every month for 2 years could probably do it without running out of franchises. They could probably wait until year 3 to start releasing the next batch of sequels, that's if they don't come up with new games and ideas, which would be nice.

People don't buy consoles to play Rayman.

5) Tight arses

How old's this game now? 25 years. How many times have people bought it now? About 5 times each. Hmm. How much shall we sell it on the E-Shop for? £12? Hmm. Let's go for £13.99. Nintendo sell everything from their back catalogue at "it'd be rude to" prices. Who wants this stuff enough to pay real money for them? As in, in significant numbers? Do I want to buy their system when I know I'm going to be paying top price for everything all the time? I'm not so keen. Will I get to keep those purchases? No, the account doesn't transfer and they want to charge me again later.

This is such a frustrating argument - they aren't forcing you to buy anything. If you think a VC title is too much, then don't buy it. I'm personally with you - I think the costs are too high, but that's their call and I don't think they are alone in not quite having the pricing right for digital content. Sony are no better - the PS4 looks like it'll have releatively limited BC and those PSN titles that are so lovingly tied to an account not a machine and not going to be making the transfer regardless so it's not like that's a magic fix.

I'll ignore the stuff about purchases across generations because as you say, other people aren't doing backward compatibility.

Of course they can sell games at whatever price they like. Unfortunately, what they're doing is robbing their console of the opportunity to have a real asset. Their back catalogue should be a real boon to their systems, instead people don't even think about it because the stuff's generally too expensive.

This thing they're doing with 30p games is cool though, I have to admit. If they did something like that regularly but charged more (much like the 360 XBLA sales) people would be looking out for Virtual console stuff to build a library of their favourites. As is, they're normally too expensive for people to bother and this is a landmark never seen before event.

The classic games should be cheaper than they are, given that they are 100% profit for Nintendo. There's no development costs. Really, MegaMan2 should not cost me the same as Mark Of The Ninja. One is definitely going to seem overpriced in 99% of people's eyes and just won't get bought ever, surely?

As an aside, why don't Nintendo get more ports of XBLA games? There are lots I'd love to see on my 3DS. They'd probably cost 3 times what I paid for them on XBLA and be in low res because of the 3DS screen. Maybe I wouldn't bother after all. That's how it stacks up in my mind.

Part of me is certain that the reason that games don't get ported across is because Nintendo want too much of a license fee and there are no sales on the platform. That's just a gut feeling thing, I've got no facts.

[rgraves]

I knew I should have gone with R.O.B.

Or Satellaview, or 64DD, or Virtual Boy, or Super FX Chip, or Super Scope, Or Rumble Pak, or DS - to say they are conservative is mental when you look at some of the crazy things they have tried in the past (with wildly differing degrees of success).

[McCoy]

I mirror most of the comments here. I loved much of the output of the N64 and Gamecube era and even appreciated them trying to do something different with the Wii but the Wii U just seems a complete mish map of ideas. God knows how many control schemes are supported by the console and why did they call it the Wii U when it really has nothing to do with the Wii's main selling point - motion controls.

More than anything I want to see Nintendo taking some risks and just using some common sense. I would like to see new franchises from Nintendo but I'd be equally happy if they just went outside the Mario and Zelda franchises more often. Wave Race, Star Fox, 1080, Pilot Wings, F-Zero are all franchises with a decent degree of affection held for them which have been allowed to languish over the last decade. Just imagine the interest and excitement just one or two updates of those games might have inspired if they had been there at the launch of of the Wii U. And please do something with Zelda, we're all bored of the same game being rehashed over and over now. Take it in a completely new direction, change the formula just anything so it's not a progression of new items which you use in the next dungeon and then a new item and then a new dungeon. Get rid of the whole dungeon and collecting item mechanic, give the player a streamlined selection of kit at the start and incorporate the dungeon mechanics into a living breathing game world.

And let's have some creativity on the Virtual Console front. Have it working on launch day and have a good selection of titles available. Get Mario 64 up but create just one new painting world with a few new stars in the original style of Mario 64 that comes as part of the download to get people excited about handing over £10 for it or charge it as an optional extra for a couple of quid. We're happy to give you money Nintendo but you have to firstly let us. Get F-Zero X on to the Virtual Console but include all the extras that appeared on the 64DD expansion pack - the extra tracks and the course creator which would actually work very well using the Wii U touch screen and which have already been created but only played by a handful of people. I'm sure it is not an impossible nor an expensive task to get a few people to do the coding required to get it all working on the Wii U.

I'm ready to buy a Wii U today, just give me even the slightest incentive so I don't think it's going to gather dust like the Wii did.

[Asura]

Get Mario 64 up but create just one new painting world with a few new stars in the original style of Mario 64 that comes as part of the download to get people excited about handing over £10 for it or charge it as an optional extra for a couple of quid.

You might want to be careful what you wish for. Last time they did that, we ended up with Super Mario DS.

[RubberJohnny]

Also a lot of the stuff in the cheapskates thing is just about good business - it's easy to knock, but it's why they've made shitloads of cash while the others have hemorrhaged billions. The two bits that are really justified complaints are the stuff about the three different online stores and purchases not carrying over, and the bits about the compromised experience.

The latter is the one that really gets me - people say that Microsoft is a software company playing at hardware, that Sony is a hardware company playing at software, that Apple do well at both and integrating the two for a whole thats greater than the sum of its parts. Nintendo are bad at both. Like, they're really good at making games, but if you ask them to make an interface they shit their pants and come up with per-app overscan settings and vestigial feature-sets that no-one else can use and they just abandon.

[Transient Curse]

Also a lot of the stuff in the cheapskates thing is just about good business - it's easy to knock, but it's why they've made shitloads of cash while the others have hemorrhaged billions.

How much are they making now with WiiU?

[McCoy]

Of course they can sell games at whatever price they like. Unfortunately, what they're doing is robbing their console of the opportunity to have a real asset. Their back catalogue should be a real boon to their systems, instead people don't even think about it because the stuff's generally too expensive.

This thing they're doing with 30p games is cool though, I have to admit. If they did something like that regularly but charged more (much like the 360 XBLA sales) people would be looking out for Virtual console stuff to build a library of their favourites. As is, they're normally too expensive for people to bother and this is a landmark never seen before event.

The classic games should be cheaper than they are, given that they are 100% profit for Nintendo. There's no development costs. Really, MegaMan2 should not cost me the same as Mark Of The Ninja. One is definitely going to seem overpriced in 99% of people's eyes and just won't get bought ever, surely?

Completely agree. All that effort they took to build a decent catalogue of old Nintendo games on the Wii, a process that took years to get the games actually out, and what did they do? Did they advertise it? Did they hold regular sales to get people excited and to buy games they wouldn't have normally bothered with? Did they reduce the prices either permanently or as a one off? Nope, they did diddly squat and let it stagnate without doing anything which might have been proactive in getting people to buy the games. And we are talking about a huge financial asset that Nintendo have at their disposal, they could be making good money off their back catalogue titles by just putting in the tiniest amount of effort. And perhaps they were hampered with the set up of the Wii but we now have the Wii U and the Virtual Console wasn't available at launch, it looks like it will be months or years until a decent selection of software is available. With the revenue that could be created Nintendo should have had a dedicated team making sure that the VC was ready to go at launch and supported by a large number of games. Not releasing F-Zero for 30p four months later. The first year of a console's life is difficult because launch games are often not fantastic, the release schedule is sparse and and there is not the breadth of content available yet to rely. They could have mitigated these quiet periods with a decent stocked Virtual Console for people to spend money on and occupy them until the games are released but for reasons known only to Nintendo they didn't bother getting it ready for launch and are going to drip feed games again. Saying nothing of the fact that they haven't even mentioned that N64 or Gamecube game will be supported yet. And I doubt it is a master plan that is guiding this, its because they don't have enough resources to get everything done for launch which is a direct result of everything we are complaining about here - Nintendo being mega cheap.

You might want to be careful what you wish for. Last time they did that, we ended up with Super Mario DS.

Apart from the controls not being suitable for the main game, I thought some of the extras for that were pretty good. Had the controls being better I think people would have looked upon it a lot more kindly.

[Yoshimax]

At the end of the day if they put out F-Zero, Monkeyball, Waverace, 1080 and Pilotwings or even just 3 out of the 5 I'll forgive them everything.

[scottcr]

Pilotwings has gone 'mii style'... so that'll probably be universaly derided regardless of amount of content and islands or locations to fly around.

Monkeyball hasn't been good since the first one.

But F-Zero is a must. They have to bring out F-Zero. It's ideal as a showcase - and people are hungry for it.

I'm worried though that Miyamoto isn't convinced as there's no where for the franchise to go (based on some recent comments he made).

Fundamentally, I actually think there's too much old thinking going on at the top of Nintendo. Some folks have tried to do some new stuff - for example, introduce a story into SMG... and Miyamoto hated it. He actually wants Zelda to be the repeat of the same story over the generations.

Someone has to take that tea table and throw it back at him...

[gizmo1990]

I think this is what everyone can agree on, that there is simply a culture of old thinking in Nintendo. They aren't embracing new ideas quickly enough,

[pulsemyne]

As tired as some of you maybe with things like mario kart you have to remember that the wii one sold 37million copies. That maybe not what you want to play but for a business like nintendo its a huge cash cow.

Also things take time. Developing games takes serveral years. It takes even longer when going from one generation to another. Give them time.

[Harsin]

How much are they making now with WiiU?

Wii U is supposedly sold at a small loss but is pushed back into profitability once an owner buys two games.

[McCoy]

As tired as some of you maybe with things like mario kart you have to remember that the wii one sold 37million copies. That maybe not what you want to play but for a business like nintendo its a huge cash cow.

Also things take time. Developing games takes serveral years. It takes even longer when going from one generation to another. Give them time.

It takes even longer than that if you're too cheap to hire staff or build additional external studios.

[CrispinG]

i've played games all my life and have at several points been what anyone would describe as a serious gamer. i have absolutely no clue what the WiiU is or why i should want one. Nintendo's adverts in this country are up there with Microsoft. i saw a 3DS commercial with the slutty one from Sex & the City... it was about Mario... what?

echoing the OP, i'm also sick of them releasing hardware that's not only a generation out of date but looks and feels cheap and plasticky. and there will never again come a day when i give a fuck about Mario/Zelda 5873827. get some new ideas. jesus christ.

[ryodi]

So are Nintendo soon to be the gaming equivalent of RIM, I mean Blackberry. Keep repeating what they've done before with half hearted attempts to feature match their competitors and before they know it market share has gone and they're struggling to survive.

[TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap]

What I don't understand is that they seem to be so out of touch with what's happening outside their own realm. When racers got popular, Nintendo came with Mario Kart. When fighters were popular, Nintendo had Super Smash Bros. These days it's all about Call of Duty and Halo and Battlefield, so why not take that, Nintendo-fy it and unleash it on the public? On these very boards there were ideas about 'Mario Paintball' or something like that. A third person non-violent shooter with Nintendo characters and Miis. Add some fun mechanic for vehicles Mario Kart or even Banjo Kazooie Nuts & Bolts style. A banana shooting Kong Chopper or something. Bring it online, have similar balancing and perks (in the shape of Pokemans or something) that made CoD so popular and you're laughing because you've sewn up the entire <18 years old demographic who aren't allowed to play the 'adult' military shooters.

But what do we get? Another Mario Kart. Yawn.

[Transient Curse]

So are Nintendo soon to be the gaming equivalent of RIM, I mean Blackberry. Keep repeating what they've done before with half hearted attempts to feature match their competitors and before they know it market share has gone and they're struggling to survive.

I think that's a pretty decent analogy really. Blackberry had a massive market share and all of a sudden iOS and Android took their core business (er, business) and then their casual market (kids using BBM) went there too. Blackberry's pretty much in a make or break situation now with their latest handset as far as I can tell. It's not hard to imagine Nintendo being in the same position with their next console. If there's another console generation.

Luckily for Nintendo, nobody's really challenged their handheld market, well, aside from the aforementioned iOS devices...

[Sprite Machine]

..with the exception of some more experimental non-games like Wii Sports / Fit / Music which are not very appealing to most 'serious' gamers.

This is pretty much the worst opinion ever written on rllmuk. Congratulations.