The Guns of Navarro

  • 181 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#51 Posted by Winternet (8000 posts) -

Ninten-who?

#52 Edited by huser (1016 posts) -

Looking back on it, why didn't they just wait another year when there could be plenty of games available to play? They could have also improved the tech slightly in that time. I still have a little nintendo fan in me waiting to be reborn, but I need to see games to buy a system!

It was already delayed. Another one of a year would have had it directly facing new Sony and MS consoles.

#53 Edited by redgonzo (98 posts) -

@rudecubes: it could wii u turn around hahahah, seriously though I predict the segafication of nintendo

#54 Posted by huser (1016 posts) -

This is kind of scary right now as I really don't know what Nintendo can do to stay relevant in today's market. History tells what happens when Nintendo try to compete on a technical level and the most they can ever sell is around the 30 million mark.

Michael Pachter is right when he said Nintendo are two years too late, with hardly any strong first and third party games right now for the system why did Nintendo even bother launching this system earlier than their competitor's new systems when they're not even ready right now.

That's a little crazy talk. The video game market was entirely different in the NES and SNES eras. Nintendo almost singlehandedly bringing everything out of the ashes of the videogame crash of '83. I'm fairly certain if the market was as developed then as now, they would have been pulling Playstation numbers with those systems, Nintendo being synonymous with gaming for a decade.

Regarding Michael Pachter, well which is it? Either they were two years too late or came out too early.

But the final point is completely valid. They need to get in with a major tech company because this game is now too big for even flush with cash post DS and Wii Nintendo to keep up with.

#55 Posted by huser (1016 posts) -

@av_gamer said:

Nintendo Wii U buyers will be in denial, because they don't want to admit the mistake they've made, but Nintendo have drawn water from the well one too many times. Instead of spending the money to keep up with the demands of the next generation consoles, Nintendo always took the easy way out by releasing consoles a generation behind and banking to get by off their exclusives. They first did it with the Nintendo 64. Though whole graphically superior, they rejected the CD-Rom technology which was clearly the future, and many of their games suffered because of it. They then did it with the Wii--which was a upgraded Gamecude with a costume controller--and now they're doing it again with the Wii U. Trying to make current-gen console gaming trendy again. Well, this time people are hep to the gimmick and it's not working. And even if it did work, the console was clearly badly built--with its long load times, bad frame rate in current-gen games, and confusing console security features.

Many people claim this console might be the end of Nintendo in the console making market, like the Saturn was for Sega. The way things are looking now, it might be true.

I don't know if you remember, but PS One era games had load times for days. It might have been the future, but no way Ocarina would have been as cherished, or even possible with mid 90's CD-ROM tech.

#56 Posted by onanimasu (13 posts) -

I'll still be content as long as Nintendo maintains their performance with handhelds. As much as I love my console Zeldas and Smash Brothers, I'm not investing in another Nintendo console with an abysmal library after only really enjoying four Wii games over the life of the console. Of course, that's largely due to my personal tastes and the fact that Nintendo didn't capitalize on the franchises I liked the most. If Nintendo gives me word that they're rolling out a new Custom Robo, Star Fox, Fire Emblem (that isn't a strange SMT crossover, interesting as that sounds on paper), as well as vastly improved third party content in addition to standard Nintendo console staples, then I'll consider negotiating the space in my budget for a WiiU.

Basically, give the damn thing some good games. No, sub par ports of games that actually run better on consoles I bought 5 years ago don't count.

#57 Posted by Scotto (1166 posts) -

Nintendo need a changing of the guard in leadership, badly. And I even include Shigeru Miyamoto in that change, despite my respect for his accomplishments.

They are a company that seems to think they can keep competing, despite using 10 year old business plans. Their continuing half-hearted embrace of the internet (y'know, that massive network that virtually everyone uses these days), is just symptomatic of how tone-deaf their decision makers are.

They continue to make hardware, and then don't do enough to court 3rd party developers. The only reason to buy a Nintendo console, is to play Nintendo's own games. And even those legendary properties are starting to get fatigued from overuse.

The Wii was a gimmicky console that became the next Tickle Me Elmo, and caused Nintendo to spurn their core audience. Then when the fad washed away, they had nothing. The Wii's last couple of years were truly pathetic for game releases, and game sales. Then they made the mind boggling decision to release a new console that became immediately dated compared to Sony and Microsoft's upcoming offerings, which will only ensure continuing pathetic 3rd party support (since porting a next-gen game to previous-gen hardware is no simple task).

When is the last time Giant Bomb even quick looked a Wii U game? That should tell you something.

#58 Edited by ExZippo (31 posts) -

All the Nintendo wank always seemed weird as a non-american/non-japanese.

Here the 80s and 90s were filled with C64s, Amigas and Sega consoles.

#59 Edited by wsowen02 (317 posts) -

Excellent article, Alex

Online
#60 Posted by Cold_Wolven (2205 posts) -

@huser: Oh I didn't say they were too early I said they weren't ready, you can still be late and unprepared like the case is with Nintendo at the moment.

#61 Edited by Kael (32 posts) -

The news made me kind of happy. Not because I think Nintendo is too big for E3 or that their Nintendo Direct videos do anything more than preach to the choir; it's because this means they're in trouble. That they know they can't compete with the CURRENT generation of consoles, let alone the next. This means they're finally on track towards that wonderful future where people don't have to buy a whole other console -- a sub-par, badly (or "awkwardly" if you prefer)-designed, gimmick-centered console -- just to play the latest Zelda and Mario.

I'm not even going to exaggerate: for us enthusiasts, Nintendo's games have the highest barrier to entry because you can't just buy the game, you have to buy a whole console to play it on, and that console doesn't do ANYTHING as well as your main one does, so you'll play that Zelda or Mario and then let it sit there and collect dust for years at a time. That's all that Nintendo consoles have done for us for a decade or more. Screw that. For their own sake, they should just put the dang games out on the other consoles. Nintendo once said (in defense of the Wii's lack of power) that they aren't even trying to compete with Sony's or Microsoft's hardware. Why, then, are they still making hardware? They can't keep phoning it in, hoping for lightning to strike twice; either they make the best dang console money can buy and be a real, bona-fide competitor to Sony and Microsoft in every single way, or they drop the act, make good on what they said about not competing in the hardware space, and focus on the only thing they're actually good at: their games.

Seeing them practically bow out of E3 gives me hope that their console-making days are numbered. That perhaps soon, they can spend that hardware money on developing and marketing their games instead, and reap the benefits of an install-base you can only get by being multi-platform. When Nintendo finally drops out of the race they said they weren't interested in winning, everyone will be better off, even them.

#62 Posted by SatelliteOfLove (1369 posts) -

Nice article with a good point. They could be cautious or waiting for failure to occur, we'll have to see.

And if there's one thing I've learned about N, is that they're either way ahead or way behind the curve. We'll just have to see how it shakes out.

#63 Edited by Silver-Streak (1328 posts) -

@huser: Ocarina of Time came out around 6 months before Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver.

Soul Reaver had a fully streamed open world with no load times. In fact, it had /2/ fully streamed open worlds (Spectral Realm and Physical Realm) that you could swap between.

OoT could have easily been done on PSone era CD-Rom tech.

Edit: After more research, Ocarina would have even come out after Soul Reaver, if Silicon Knights had not tried to sue to stop SR's release.

#64 Edited by dvdhaus (354 posts) -

I am not worried about Nintendo yet. I am more curious about what they have in store. Hopefully the realize that they need to start rolling out more of their franchises on a regular basis. What is Retro Studios working on is one of the reasons I am still holding out hope. It would be great if it was a new 2D Metroid game. Super Metroid 2 sounds good to me. A new Zelda game for Wii U that is not Wind Waker HD is another reason. Just saw a report that they renewed the trademark for Eternal Darkness, another great step if they continue that franchise. But the main thing Nintendo needs to do is start releasing new games for the Wii U.

#65 Posted by Scarlet_Rogue (497 posts) -

@chadster said:

Bartleby the Scrivener? Anybody? Not a big Melville crowd here, huh?

It's not an easy read.

EDIT: Beaten!

@alex @rmack

I love you all for this. Each and every god damn one of you.

#66 Posted by rebgav (1429 posts) -

Both Nintendo and Microsoft could really benefit from some sort of partnership at the moment. MS needs a leg-up in the software department and some help with the Japanese market while Nintendo seem completely out of step on the hardware and networking side. They could both get up to speed on their respective failings while having two friendly platforms in the market to experiment on.

Of course it would never actually happen but, hey.

#67 Posted by JackSukeru (5897 posts) -

I'm secretly hoping that instead of announcing some big new 3D Mario game around E3, Nintendo takes the Year of Luigi thing all the way and brands it a Luigi game instead.

#68 Posted by Gildermershina (260 posts) -

I know what the Wii U is, and I don't want it. Most people don't know what it is, let alone why they should want it. If you want a console for casual fun at family get-togethers, and you buy a Wii U, you fucked up.

#69 Edited by PinstripeHourglass (12 posts) -

Nice Bartleby reference, Alex.

#70 Posted by SomberOwl (628 posts) -

Good Article! Sums up the whole Nintendo thing well.

#71 Edited by Drakkel (16 posts) -

People have been declaring Nintendo dead in the water for like 15 years now. They're the third biggest corporation in Japan. But they're not the 2nd Biggest, so clearly they're on the verge of bankruptcy.

Also declaring that a Nintendo system has "like 2 or 3 franchises you'll want and nothing else" is basically admitting that you don't even attempt to look for any games on the system.

Not saying the Wii U is doing fine, but I'm just tired of the games press saying Nintendo's a lost cause over and over again.

#72 Edited by Zor (653 posts) -

@drakkel said:

People have been declaring Nintendo dead in the water for like 15 years now. They're the third biggest corporation in Japan. But they're not the 2nd Biggest, so clearly they're on the verge of bankruptcy.

Also declaring that a Nintendo system has "like 2 or 3 franchises you'll want and nothing else" is basically admitting that you don't even attempt to look for any games on the system.

Not saying the Wii U is doing fine, but I'm just tired of the games press saying Nintendo's a lost cause over and over again.

Yeah, people really seem to want them to go out of business for some strange reason. I guess it comes down partly to the fact that people want to play their games, but don't want to buy their system.

#73 Posted by crusader8463 (14411 posts) -

@drakkel said:

People have been declaring Nintendo dead in the water for like 15 years now. They're the third biggest corporation in Japan. But they're not the 2nd Biggest, so clearly they're on the verge of bankruptcy.

Also declaring that a Nintendo system has "like 2 or 3 franchises you'll want and nothing else" is basically admitting that you don't even attempt to look for any games on the system.

Not saying the Wii U is doing fine, but I'm just tired of the games press saying Nintendo's a lost cause over and over again.

It's just people being idiots who like to talk out their ass. They are the same people who ran around screaming that PC is dead at the start of this current gen and how consoles were gods gift to gamers and the ruler of all future gaming dom and look at it now. Whenever these sorts of things hit hard times there's always a vocal group of fools to run around screaming doom and gloom and they are very rarely correct.

Now if Nintendos next outing is just as bad and poorly received as this one, then I think people would be in a better position to talk about that kind of stuff. But they are not going anywhere anytime soon, and they have a long road ahead of them to pull something out of nowhere to blow people away. They got a huge war chest from the Wii/DS to keep them afloat anyway.

#74 Edited by kpaadet (409 posts) -

@prestonhedges said:

I don't remember these kinds of constant "LOL THEY CAN'T DO ANYTHING RIGHT" articles when the PS3 was floundering. Or the XBox.

I hope you are being sarcastic because I clearly remember a shit load of doom and gloom articles about the PS3. Same with the 3DS (until sales rose) and Vita. Normally I think the critique is justified, if a console dosn't sell well there is usually a reason.

#75 Posted by agentboolen (1749 posts) -

#77 Posted by Fram (518 posts) -

Man, seeing those points listed out like that, and being old enough to remember all of them (and the press surrounding them) makes it startlingly clear that Nintendo deserves the benefit of the doubt.

@zor said:

@drakkel said:

People have been declaring Nintendo dead in the water for like 15 years now. They're the third biggest corporation in Japan. But they're not the 2nd Biggest, so clearly they're on the verge of bankruptcy.

Also declaring that a Nintendo system has "like 2 or 3 franchises you'll want and nothing else" is basically admitting that you don't even attempt to look for any games on the system.

Not saying the Wii U is doing fine, but I'm just tired of the games press saying Nintendo's a lost cause over and over again.

Yeah, people really seem to want them to go out of business for some strange reason. I guess it comes down partly to the fact that people want to play their games, but don't want to buy their system.

#78 Posted by daedelus (91 posts) -

It does look dark for Nintendo right now but who could have predicted their success last gen where they sold the most consoles of the three systems. I think there is good strategy to go for the casual gamer and budget market with their budget priced system (the ps4/nextbox will be like $600 right?). The system just needs more games for it and there is time for that to happen.

#79 Edited by yeah_write (214 posts) -

@kael said:

The news made me kind of happy. Not because I think Nintendo is too big for E3 or that their Nintendo Direct videos do anything more than preach to the choir; it's because this means they're in trouble. That they know they can't compete with the CURRENT generation of consoles, let alone the next. This means they're finally on track towards that wonderful future where people don't have to buy a whole other console -- a sub-par, badly (or "awkwardly" if you prefer)-designed, gimmick-centered console -- just to play the latest Zelda and Mario.

I'm not even going to exaggerate: for us enthusiasts, Nintendo's games have the highest barrier to entry because you can't just buy the game, you have to buy a whole console to play it on, and that console doesn't do ANYTHING as well as your main one does, so you'll play that Zelda or Mario and then let it sit there and collect dust for years at a time. That's all that Nintendo consoles have done for us for a decade or more. Screw that. For their own sake, they should just put the dang games out on the other consoles. Nintendo once said (in defense of the Wii's lack of power) that they aren't even trying to compete with Sony's or Microsoft's hardware. Why, then, are they still making hardware? They can't keep phoning it in, hoping for lightning to strike twice; either they make the best dang console money can buy and be a real, bona-fide competitor to Sony and Microsoft in every single way, or they drop the act, make good on what they said about not competing in the hardware space, and focus on the only thing they're actually good at: their games.

Seeing them practically bow out of E3 gives me hope that their console-making days are numbered. That perhaps soon, they can spend that hardware money on developing and marketing their games instead, and reap the benefits of an install-base you can only get by being multi-platform. When Nintendo finally drops out of the race they said they weren't interested in winning, everyone will be better off, even them.

THIS. People always ask (including those in these comments) why it seems like some want Nintendo to fail. This is why. This is the dream: To (legally) play a Nintendo game on a non-Nintendo system. Would I like to play the next round of Mario/Zelda/Smash Bros/Metroid/et al.? Of course! I'm a fan of great games. But what @kael said is true--many Nintendo consoles collect dust between those games, especially if you own other platforms. That's what happened with my Wii, Gamecube and my 3DS.

Going to a software-only model would probably be a last resort. I wonder if Nintendo's pride would even let it happen, no matter the circumstances. I would love it though. Imagine a Zelda game becoming an event again. With Bioshock Infinite levels of debate, criticism and tribute, all because MORE people got to play it. That's the dream anyway.

#80 Edited by Kosayn (452 posts) -

The WiiU would have carried over gracefully as a 'big DS,' two or three years ago. At that time, there was a vibrant market on PSP and DS for all the refugee Japanese PS2 developers that hadn't yet adapted to HD, and there were lots of innovators making dualscreen/touchscreen games. The WiiU could have inherited that audience at a point when it was strong. They could even do ports from the old DS, which has an awesome, underappreciated library.

But that's all changed. Apple took the casual and touch stuff. The Japanese developers nutted up and moved on to PS3. At this point, I'd say that nothing can save the WiiU besides a polygonal, HD Mario ready in time for Christmas. A lot of multi-generational fans would come back for a proper AAA game, the same way they came back for 64 and Galaxy. Retro Mario stuff can sell great, but it doesn't sell systems.

#81 Edited by Toothsaw (55 posts) -

Hey wait!!

Are you saying that the Wii U is a completely new console, different from Wii? I thought it was some sort of motion control accessory, like the Kinect o r Move, but couldn't sort it out because the Wii already has motion control!

And what's a Wii Mini BTW?? :O

#82 Posted by SathingtonWaltz (2053 posts) -

Looking back on it, why didn't they just wait another year when there could be plenty of games available to play? They could have also improved the tech slightly in that time. I still have a little nintendo fan in me waiting to be reborn, but I need to see games to buy a system!

There are A LOT of indications that Nintendo didn't originally intend to release the console until November 2013, but due to slowing sales of the Wii and pressure from shareholders they went for an earlier release date. Considering the circumstances surrounding the Wii U's launch these rumors do make some sense.

#83 Posted by huser (1016 posts) -

@eujin said:

@huser: Ocarina of Time came out around 6 months before Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver.

Soul Reaver had a fully streamed open world with no load times. In fact, it had /2/ fully streamed open worlds (Spectral Realm and Physical Realm) that you could swap between.

OoT could have easily been done on PSone era CD-Rom tech.

Edit: After more research, Ocarina would have even come out after Soul Reaver, if Silicon Knights had not tried to sue to stop SR's release.

I'll have to take your word on that one. Simply having an open world and being able to do what Zelda did at the time is not a given. I just remember using PS load times as commercial breaks.

#84 Edited by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

Nintendo is scared, simple. Them squeezing a conference between which is sure to be the Xbox and Playstation next gen reveal after reveal would make them look tired and old, they don't want those comparisons so they are hiding around the corner in the dark.

#85 Posted by Toothsaw (55 posts) -

Should i remind some of you that the PS3 had crappy sales most of its life, until about 2 years ago? And crappy game ports. The missing Skyrim DLCs drama has been resolved just a few months ago.

But it's Sony. Sooner or later people buys PS because it's PS, there's the franchise they are fond of.

I'd say give time to the Wii U. But most importantly: GIVE IT GAMES, DAMN!

Deus Ex HR Director's Cut in mid may. Ok, I didn't play it when it was released TWO YEARS AGO!

I'm thankful to Nintendo for bringing me this game in an updated version, but you can't live on this kind of releases! What do you have in mind? Unreal Tournament 2004 for this holiday season? Come on! We need new games! Any kind of game! Just release them!! First party games have all been delayed by MONTHS. Third party games are too old or crappy (Gearbox, you'd better have given the Wii U a port of Borderlands 2 than dishing out the-game-formerly-known-as-Aliens-Colonial-Marines-and-now-known-as-ThisGame'sATotalMess).

With all the titles announced for the time being on PS3 and X360 I only see a few of them available on the Wii U too. WHY?!?! Simply because publishers know that Nintendo console = small installed base = low profit = not worthy to work on a port. And those who are willing to port do so with so low a budget that the port is crappy, no one buys it and then they conclude Nintendo-console owners are not interested in that game on that console.

No, we are not interested in SHITTY games on nintendo consoles.

Now you have a console as much powerful as a PS3 or X360. Dish out some games as you did for the last 7-8 years. You don't have the excuse the system's not powerful enough now!

Why isn't there a Bioshock Infinite on Wii U? Or Dead Space 3? Or Crysis 3? Or Far Cry 3? Because publishers don't give a £$%@# damn about Nintendo consoles! And a console can't possibly stand only on first party games. Wii U needs the mass market, but nobody cares about Nintendo in the industry.

THIS is the real shame! There probably wouldn't be a gaming industry at all without Nintendo. Sure they made mistakes, like most other big majors have, but is this how you repay the one who started it all?

#86 Edited by PXAbstraction (313 posts) -

Very good article Alex. I agree with most of your sentiments but I think a lot of people out there forget that the Wii U's current challenges aren't exactly new for Nintendo. The DS didn't fly off shelves when it came out because no one understood it and wait for it, there weren't many good games. It's now the best selling dedicated gaming system of all-time if I recall. Similarly, the 3DS has a poor start and is now doing quite well, though as you say, it's missing projections (but so are a lot of things these days, the economy is still in the toilet lest we forget.) Even the Gamecube didn't have a great start and a rocky run overall but it was profitable for Nintendo.

Twits like Michael Pachter and the like drone on about how this is finally the end and Nintendo will have to join the chorus of people making crap iOS games if they want to survive. However, this type of launch is nothing new for them and they have overcome such challenges before. The Wii was a fluke success even Nintendo didn't plan on. I think even they know that the Wii U never had a chance of coming close to that. I agree they've bungled the messaging badly on it (it should be called the Wii 2, not the Wii U) but they have created a unique and very cool system that can provide gaming experiences literally nothing else can. They just have to court the right developers and most importantly, get their own amazing teams making games that show off why it's so cool. I'm convinced those titles will come and will ensure that the Wii U does find success. Not Wii success, maybe not even PS4 and Xbox 720 success (plus, who even knows what success will be for those systems) but I think it will make Nintendo money in the end and satisfy people like myself who invested in one. Don't listen to analysts, they talk out of their ass and controversy brings them attention.

tl;dr, there's a reason the phrase "never bet against Nintendo" exists. If people can wait a little bit, they'll make it work. But we always need something to hate on. It used to be Sony and Nintendo's it right now.

#87 Edited by huser (1016 posts) -

@fram said:

Man, seeing those points listed out like that, and being old enough to remember all of them (and the press surrounding them) makes it startlingly clear that Nintendo deserves the benefit of the doubt.

@zor said:

@drakkel said:

People have been declaring Nintendo dead in the water for like 15 years now. They're the third biggest corporation in Japan. But they're not the 2nd Biggest, so clearly they're on the verge of bankruptcy.

Also declaring that a Nintendo system has "like 2 or 3 franchises you'll want and nothing else" is basically admitting that you don't even attempt to look for any games on the system.

Not saying the Wii U is doing fine, but I'm just tired of the games press saying Nintendo's a lost cause over and over again.

Yeah, people really seem to want them to go out of business for some strange reason. I guess it comes down partly to the fact that people want to play their games, but don't want to buy their system.

What's really weird is the multiplat Nintendo going Sega dream. Not that one equates to the other, but when's the last time anyone thought Sega was all that great? So if the idea is hey they should go the Sega route because I want to be able to play their games...well that didn't turn out so well.

#88 Posted by Slag (3897 posts) -

@alex: I'm sure it's been said to you many times already Alex, but you've really found your stride with these weekly commentaries.

#89 Edited by DrDarkStryfe (1079 posts) -

The Wii U has the potential to be Nintendo's Saturn; a system that was a half a generation behind that did some very cool things, but it did not have a killer lineup of software and suffered a launch that can be in the conversation for all time worst launches. Seeing as we are only six months from the Wii U's launch, it is far too early to tell if it will sell N64/Gamecube levels, or Wii/SNES levels.

The Wii U going that route will not kill Nintendo, just like the Saturn did not kill Sega. The Saturn was the beginning of the end for Sega because the leadership did not do what they needed to do. Nintendo has has one of the best leadership groups, historically and today, in all of gaming. If the day comes that Iwata has to step down, there are a corps of capable men behind him that can do the job.

Personally, I think Nintendo will come out just fine from all of this. They have a treasure trove of material to make games from, and the best back library of games in the industry. If things turn south, they have the firepower to right the ship.

As for Nintendo not having a keynote press conference at E3, I think that might be more the sign of the times.

E3 has become what is wrong with the industry. The chase to be like Hollywood in content and marketing, the perception that marketplace is full of dudebros that dig violence and lady parts, extravagance and PR used to pull the wool over peoples eyes and the always present wall that hides the industry from the marketplace all are synonymous with what is supposed to be the premier event for the industry.

Add in the addition of television coverage and the experience has become a lot more homogenized These companies built their pressers around a strict time limit, and we have seen less and less of the fun and random moments that used to be the highlights of E3.

This trade show is a dinosaur, and the publishers are starting to agree with that idea. It is a lot easier to control your marketing message when you can present it in the form of the Nintendo Directs, or with a company run event like the PS4 reveal (which had a staggering amount of viewers, well north of 100k.) If Microsoft's event, which will also be streamed on XB Live, has the same amount of fanfare and excitement around it, I really beleive that we will see these companies moving towards the Nintendo Direct model of sharing information with the masses.

#90 Edited by CaptRocketblaze (173 posts) -

Ninten-who?

The guys who put out the waggle controller system that most people have in their closets. And they're the same guys who designed that new iPad thing with the buttons that doesn't access the App store.

#91 Posted by DG991 (1344 posts) -

Dear Nintendo,

Before you die make a Majoras Mask spiritual successor.

Thank you,

Earth

#92 Edited by o0o0Jack_Burton0o0o (9 posts) -

Hubris indeed, the belief that they could ultimately thrive without the core. A belief that was founded in an alternative revenue source known as the handheld market. The Game cube was a good piece of hardware and failed miserably because it was not given the financial support required to achieve success, Iwata admitted as much in his explanation of the 3DS price cut. They were making money hand over fist with their handhelds and decided the core was not worth the expense.

Then came the Wii strategy that was again predicated entirely on their handheld success. Take no financial risk on the core, claim that HD gaming is not worth pursuing because of diminishing returns. A complete and absurd lie. An HD Wii would have required a financial risk to give the core what they wanted and the core was again cast aside with a very poor lie. The Wii was created to capture the casual gamer and it did for a time, but in time, HD consoles with motion controls proved they were able to take and hold the casual and core gamers. The Wii began to die and the HD consoles anchored by the core, thrived.

Now the great handheld revenue stream that enabled them to abandon the core is faltering. The handheld market radically and rapidly changing with smartphones. Nintendo, has made another terrible decision with the Wii U. Not only have they shown their blatant hypocrisy by tepidly stepping into the HD gaming market of diminishing returns but also by wasting a great deal of capital creating and including a controller with a screen that no one needed or wanted.

Many including myself have wondered how on this earth Nintendo believed that releasing a console having the equivalent of 7 year old hardware at the time of launch with a severely limited tablet controller would be a success. We were right, it is not.

The formula is simple, so simple that Nintendo cannot figure it out. Create a console that is the hardware equivalent of your competitors, gain parity with third party software and maintain your fan base with first party software as always. Sadly, such simple and obvious advice has perhaps been ignored for the last time.

#93 Edited by huser (1016 posts) -

The Wii U has the potential to be Nintendo's Saturn; a system that was a half a generation behind that did some very cool things, but it did not have a killer lineup of software and suffered a launch that can be in the conversation for all time worst launches. Seeing as we are only six months from the Wii U's launch, it is far too early to tell if it will sell N64/Gamecube levels, or Wii/SNES levels.

The Wii U going that route will not kill Nintendo, just like the Saturn did not kill Sega. The Saturn was the beginning of the end for Sega because the leadership did not do what they needed to do. Nintendo has has one of the best leadership groups, historically and today, in all of gaming. If the day comes that Iwata has to step down, there are a corps of capable men behind him that can do the job.

Personally, I think Nintendo will come out just fine from all of this. They have a treasure trove of material to make games from, and the best back library of games in the industry. If things turn south, they have the firepower to right the ship.

As for Nintendo not having a keynote press conference at E3, I think that might be more the sign of the times.

E3 has become what is wrong with the industry. The chase to be like Hollywood in content and marketing, the perception that marketplace is full of dudebros that dig violence and lady parts, extravagance and PR used to pull the wool over peoples eyes and the always present wall that hides the industry from the marketplace all are synonymous with what is supposed to be the premier event for the industry.

Add in the addition of television coverage and the experience has become a lot more homogenized These companies built their pressers around a strict time limit, and we have seen less and less of the fun and random moments that used to be the highlights of E3.

This trade show is a dinosaur, and the publishers are starting to agree with that idea. It is a lot easier to control your marketing message when you can present it in the form of the Nintendo Directs, or with a company run event like the PS4 reveal (which had a staggering amount of viewers, well north of 100k.) If Microsoft's event, which will also be streamed on XB Live, has the same amount of fanfare and excitement around it, I really beleive that we will see these companies moving towards the Nintendo Direct model of sharing information with the masses.

First part is spot on. I think it's the same mistake too. Trying to oneup the last wars' methods and not fully realizing what the next wars' battlefield will be. I'm also not that troubled with the E3 thing. Not too long ago E3 was on the verge of dying. The idea it's an unassailable foundation of the industry is silly. I do think this is a symptom of larger problems at Nintendo. We'll see if the 3DS is enough to keep the ship going.

#94 Edited by Mexican_Brownie (201 posts) -

It's not been a good quarter for Nintendo but I'm sure they'll turn it around. People give Nintendo shit, and deservedly so, for a lot of things like their draconian digital distribution model, their reliance on nostalgia, their dismissal of western market and online mutiplayer. But they still are some of the best software developers in the business. And in the end, software is the most important thing in this industry.

They'll find that one game that manages through communicate the gimmick of the gamepad through the masses, and they'll make games that appeal to people who love games. They also need to market their stuff better, everything they have made so far has been trash at communicating to people why they think they should buy one.

This year will be a lot more positive, I'm sure. The 3DS will surely have a great holiday worldwide (Dat X & Y!). And 1st party games will surely kickstart some Wii U sales. But who knows. That 100 billion yen goal Iwata committed himself too makes me think they are confident about turning everything around or just fucking cray.

As far as E3 goes? I don't really mind Nintendo trying something else. The past couple of E3s have been very disappointing in general, press conference wise. So whatever, E3 will be super interesting for all parties involved regardless. Giantbomb's after dark podcasts have become the main attraction for me, and this year could potentially be GDLK!

I guess what I'm trying to say is......

Please, understand....E3 is going to fucking hype.

#95 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

As someone who hasn't owned a Nintendo console since the SNES, I always watch the Nintendo E3 conference just out of hope that they will show something killer, usually it's just to pass the time to the Sony conference but I am not going to go out of my way to watch Nintendo direct, have they just given up on getting me as a customer again?

#96 Edited by BD_Mr_Bubbles (1695 posts) -

The Wii U just needs games for it. Lots and lots of games, of all types, for all audiences, with a constant release schedule.

This, good read Alex

#97 Edited by President_Barackbar (3415 posts) -
@toothsaw said:

Now you have a console as much powerful as a PS3 or X360. Dish out some games as you did for the last 7-8 years. You don't have the excuse the system's not powerful enough now!

Why isn't there a Bioshock Infinite on Wii U? Or Dead Space 3? Or Crysis 3? Or Far Cry 3? Because publishers don't give a £$%@# damn about Nintendo consoles! And a console can't possibly stand only on first party games. Wii U needs the mass market, but nobody cares about Nintendo in the industry.

THIS is the real shame! There probably wouldn't be a gaming industry at all without Nintendo. Sure they made mistakes, like most other big majors have, but is this how you repay the one who started it all?

Developers aren't obligated to make WiiU versions of games they don't think will sell well. There is a legitimate business reason for why WiiU versions don't get made. Who cares if Nintendo saved the industry after the video game crash? How is that relevant to the bottom line of modern companies?

#98 Posted by Silver-Streak (1328 posts) -
#99 Edited by Orbitz (67 posts) -

Great article, Alex. Thank you.

#100 Posted by AV_Gamer (595 posts) -

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.