Iwata wants to continue the legacy and heritage of nintendo  and i think thats great. but and a big but, nintendo needs to listen more to the consumers and what they want.

 Sometimes, a competitor presents a large amount of risk in simply providing a consumer what they want (through traditional means of customer utility-or rather, currently defined mechanisms).

 

At this point, Nintendo has to go through 2 large companies for the retail royalties from third parties and overall platform sales (which translates to software sales from first party).

 

Basic financial principles dictate that they must strive to at least make a return equal to the risk free rate+the risk premium if they were going to invest capital in a project (otherwise Nintendo would be better off investing in the stock market to make that minimal return on retained earnings).

 

In short, looking outside the box, or how Nintendo can be a part of everyone's life in addition to a PC, Playstation, Xbox, Smartphone, or tablet is a very encouraging strategy. I cannot wait to see what they come up with. 

 

To respond to you directly-Nintendo could listen to consumers, but make under the required rate of return for investors through several periods. This plan will have this possibility, but internal predictions will show one or the other being the best bet, or providing the highest probability, of having the highest return over time. 

With today's climate, your right end of the bell curve consumer is only buying a console for exclusives. The people in the middle have different reasons, yet would want more than that.

Nintendo has an oppertunity to put the real games out. I am referring to the franchises we have not seen that could appeal to the middle of the bell curve on sight alone. If we had X, Bayonetta, Hyrule Warriors, Fzero, an Earthbound remake or sequel, Metroid, Punch Out, etc. on the shelves, the first party line up would be devastating to the competition.

Now people are buying the system for more than just a handful of games (presuming Nintendo's other franchises are not met with with bias).

Until Nintendo can get the games out, their system will be a 'wait and see'. Instead, their IP has the power to make it a first purchase in today's market, yet it is not really utilized.

I thought this was going to be the benefit of having weaker hardware- stay a gen behind and lower development costs.

Anyway, no saving it now without courting hardcore gamers that will give you a solid attach rate.

Making fun of a people on this website is probably the reason why no one is checking for this forum. Anyway, the reason why Wii U is slacking is due to predictability of games and not adapting to hardware desires.

I can agree with your first point, but software wise, I am still playing W101. I have not really gotten into Infamous, and I traded in Titan fall. I agree with your point from a market standpoint, but right now the Ps4 and xbox one keep dust from my sli titan rig.

This is OG naughty dog staff wise. I would set your sensors more on Jak and daxter 1 and 2 rather than uncharted.

I wish I had a chance to play those. I like what I have heard though. Gotta say-I am just so tired of interactive movies.

I think if sales haven't picked up by the end of 2014 then wii u is probably never going to be what people would call a success.
That is if smash, mk, hyrule warriors and bayonetta are out by then.

Because if any game is going to "save" the wii u mario kart 8 is that game.

I agree in terms of direct competition. Although, Wii U seems to be a niche product at this point, and I hope overall profitability can be achieved, while at the same time utilizing the console as a launching pad to different concepts.

I have always agreed with the Blue Ocean strategy. However, the tablets disrupted Nintendo's market. I would like to see them use the console to build something different for those of us that are tired of AAA garbage. In a sense, this is happening. Yet, as you point out, they need more software with timely releases ( Bayonetta and Hyrule Warriors can coexist with MK and Yarn Yoshi).

I guess my point is this: whoever is the first to challenge conventional thinking within the market with regard to current customer behavior will be the most successful. I will cite Steam as an example that catered to a certain customer, and we see how it turned out.

I am looking forward to these. The freshness available in these games is very desirable.

I am anticipating Assault Android Cactus the most. I have taken a break from the Steam early access version to wait for the finished product. I am gonna double dip for Wii U.

Oh, and Shovel Knight...enough said.

Then you have Racing games from Shinen, Slightly Mad, and that 90's Arcade racer. Can't wait.

I would like to see it, but with a different take on subject matter. FC3 was disturbing.

I just hope that this does not feel like generic adventure game in the style of Knack. I do hope it offers some compelling gameplay, and builds on the good found in Sonic's previous outings.

Somehow, I expect Uncharted with a Sonic mod to come from this. Throw in generic combat, and voila.

I think the overall goal was to provide offscreen play and solutions in a smartphone/tablet environment. Of course, the tv is an added benefit, but being able to play off screen would be huge. Or so they thought.

Instead, the habits of consumers did not migrate to this from a use standpoint, yet the idea is theoretically sound.

Just like anything else, all unsuccessful ideas are bad in hind sight.

I guess they view the consoles audience in a bubble. Or they do not want to send it out against Mario Kart.

Maybe, just maybe, this is on the up and up. On the other hand, canceling it later will make less of an impact.

I am excited for more of the Kenway story. That said, it would be a better book than game at this point.

With the gameplay, I would like to see more Dues Ex scenarios. This linear stuff, while story driven, is terrible for replay ability. The only point to replay the game is for collecting items and being better equipped. It can be fun, but it can also be a whole lot better.

Well considering Nintendo's ben around longest, won last generation in both portable and console market, won this generation in portable market, and was releasing their console at least a year before cmpetitors, I would have for the Wii U.

 

There is no way to dispute numbers, however when the PS4 outsells the Wii U (or comes close, whichever) in a small amount of time by appealing directly to the audience that did not leave for smart phones, can we really say Nintendo won anything last gen (from a long term perspective)?

 

Look, I love Nintendo hardware. I want to see people buying it in the same way they purchase other systems. I also want to see the system receiving a library that reflects the industry as a whole. No, I am not talking about power and the like. I am talking about finding a way to truly appeal to everyone, include those that fall for AAA marketing. 

 

The customer is clearly saying that they want Nintendo software, but they also want parity with third parties (the current handheld situation shows, in some aspects, how the first party situation would be an advantage over other platforms). 

 

To answer my question from the prior post:

 

I would look at market conditions, find the appropriate demographic for the proposed titles, and look at the multiple variables surrounding the release. If the Wii U game was able to be offered at $40 with a 1 million breakeven, I would probably consider it too risky right now if the game was anything outside of categories Nintendo dominates. I would hate this prospect, but choosing the other platform would probably increase the probability of sales based on the current demographic split. 

How? Most of these third party games don't do well because they either straight up suck, or suck in comparison games, so people don't want to waste their money. The only "solution" I can see would be to make their games more crappy or to help other companies make games. Neither of those options make sense.

OK, let me try this another way:

 

Think back to the SNES era, an era where we had games coming to either that or the Genesis. The Neo Geo would be so lucky. Nintendo was relevant in the marketplace at this point, or rather, the audience was large enough and demographically diverse enough to enjoy more than a few genres. 

 

Without the correct approach to get that audience, you have results like Batman: AO losing the DLC, and the next game apparently skipping the console altogether (in fact, I found a deal on that game from Amazon the other day. I played it on PC, but wanted it in my console collection. Anyway, I received a launch edition of the game. I realize this happens to other consoles, but I have never seen the pre-order game come in place of a price-slashed version). 

 

Anyway, we had to wade through garbage in the SNES era (LJN=All terrible licensed games today), too. However, the SNES was like the PS4 with regard to market relevancy. 

 

Let me put this another way:

 

If you worked for a publisher, and you were in charge of green lighting a project, and there was an incredible Wii U exclusive option, or an incredible PS4 or Xbone exclusive option, which of the three install bases would you bet your job on?

 

Everyone already wants Nintendo's Software. the gap is in the hardware that will provide the base required to get more than low budget ports. 

I do not think that they have wronged publishers. I do think that it is very hard to sell certain games on the Nintendo platform versus other platforms. Nintendo needs to help third parties mitigate risk if they want to enhance the audience for these third-party publishers. Again, no wrong doing just risk mitigation.

Of course, Nintendo could attempt to make games that appeal to those gamers that purchase these third-party games, but it appears as though it would be quicker to follow something Described earlier.

In a way, they made the same mistakes as Nintendo. They misread the market and presumed the Kinect casuals would re-purchase, and the hardcore would remain loyal. I have to cut it short, but there it is. 

 

If it had better hardware, this conversation would probably be different. 

Repairing relations with third parties is an obvious first step. Nintendo needs an incentive for third parties that benefits both the publisher and platform holder. I talked about reducing risk for third parties in a prior post. You would do this by charging for the disc and setting royalties only if a specific amount of copies sell. In exchange, all DLC and quality requirements of the other versions come with it. If it bombs, Nintendo gains revenue by way of the proprietary disc format, yet loses nothing (the games we are talking about would not come to Wii U any way). 

 

However, this is really not enough. We all agree on advertising, and yes, Nintendo should high lite the main features of a system (show the Miiverse, and show someone seamlessly using a strategy guide without getting up, etc.) 

 

Again, not enough. 

 

Nintendo needs to represent staying power. Their brand power should be appealing to all ages, and this should be explicitly shown in the form of a person playing from cradle to grave. In other words, the message to the core audience should be, "Nintendo-with you from the beginning, with you until the end."

 

But...we need the games to prove this. X, Smash, MK 8, and Bayonetta are great starts. However, we should know about a new Metroid, Starfox, F Zero, Zelda, Eternal Darkness, etc.

 

Off Topic but- 

 

I guess I am saying that the Wii U should be looked at as a conversion and welcoming home for everyone that did not start gaming with a plastic guitar, phone, or motion control of any sort.

 

In the end, I would be happy with a brand spin off for stuff like Bayonetta. Sort of like how DC Comics had Vertigo for their adult content. Nintendo could have a 'hardcore' label for games that require more than 3 brain cells to play. 

Stop playing pansy carp like CoD and it's clones and play some real games then.

 

Edit: I am 2 of these sales. PC and Wii U. 

Sadly, the innovative thing about the PS4, other than the controller, appears to be Sony asking this question:

 

What do we need to give core gamers and developers, from a hardware standpoint, to create the maximum amount of utility within this budget for hardware?

 

Valve is the only company that seems to do this on the PC side. 

 

Microsoft and Nintendo tried to control demographics, and Sony catered to them. 

I have been playing DK:TF lately. That game has me thinking of actual gameplay, and not looking for graphical items to compare. 

 

Platinum makes the same types of games-the kind that take you back to a period of time to which you were oblivious to this stuff. Ikaruga and Assault Android cactus do this for me as well. 

 

I guess I am suggesting that this concern over resolution is a bit like wondering how a bourbon was aged, and becoming a snob about it. When you were younger, you drank and had fun, but when you became a liquor snob, the inherent joy was lessened. 

 

The same thing appears to be happening with the gaming community. 

 

Sorry for being off topic. I guess I can always play Bayo 2 on my PC to get my graphics fix-oh wait...

If the Xbox division was a big money spinner like you are suggesting (you're wrong as per usual by the way) then explain to me why an ever increasing number of investors want to get rid of the division?

 

It makes Microsoft no money whatsoever and if it does make Microsoft money in the future it will be a very small amount.

Did the 360 recover the original Xbox's costs? 

 

Ordinarily, you write off sunk costs when starting a new project, but it would be interesting to see if the original investment has been recovered. 

 

After that, you have to see if the division held up against the firm's WACC through those periods (2001-2014). 

 

We can subtract the Xbone from this for obvious reasons. 

 

There are several other considerations for the valuation of the division, but this is the place to start. Do you know of anyone who has already compiled the information? I do not really have time to go through 13 years of K-10's to figure it out. 

How is it prostitution?
It's gambling.

I see the same thing...

 

Genius idea. Gambling through consoles should come next. I mean, games made for it. I would not play them (I would rather gamble on the market), but many would. 

 

Imagine gambling on your finish position in Mario Kart. 

Gameplay wise, I do not know what I am looking at. It looks like an rpg met an action game and had a baby. 

 

Outside of Xenoblade, does anything else compare to this sort of gameplay mechanic? 

It probably would have done just as badly, because games from Platinum never do well. Viewtiful Joe is the exception, and that was only on the Gamecube. It tanked on the PS2. Okami didn't do well on either the PS2 or the Wii (not sure how Okami HD did), God Hand caused Capcom to close down Clover Studios (which would become Platinum Games). Madworld didn't do well even though it got a lit of attention (this is the only game that probably would've done better on other systems, except Anarchy Reigns didn't do well either), and no other publisher expect Nintendo would fund the sequel to Bayonetta. The only game that I can think of that was a complete success was Metal Gear Rising Revengence. Their games are almost never a financial success.

Great points. Before I begin, please remember that my intention is to only figure out what is correct. I am not interested in finding out who is right (even if I am wrong).

 

OK, I have not pulled release data for all of those titles with respect to the time frame. I am only going to suggest that we ignore Clover/Platinum titles launched within 2 years of a system launch. My argument depends on a small library and the market segments. 

 

W101 came out in August, after Pikmin 3. At this point, it would be fair to suggest the Wii U was in a drought that the PS2/Wii/360 did not experience. We can discount the PS2 due to the changing industry factors (the influence of social media and marketing tactics changing accordingly). 

 

My theory is that the core customer, the person that has a PS4 but will not buy a Wii U for a handful of titles, but will buy tons of software for the PS4, would gobble up W101 in January and February of 2014. 

 

Again, I am presuming a 1:1 situation. I realize Platinum games are niche, all great software is these days. However, if the Wii U remained vigilant with monthly releases, targeted toward people like us during the launch window, the audience could have been there for the game. Rather, the advertising could have been there for the game. 

 

Instead, Nintendo takes us for granted, presumably thinking we will be there despite their constant ignoring of our desires. They throw us scraps to chase the 'Blue Ocean'. 

 

If you have actually read that book, you will naturally see a Blue Ocean forming among core gamers-those who want more than me-too clones of AAA franchises. 

I don't tend to trust reviews as much as I used to. User reviews seem to reflect a game's worth more accurately.

I always presume they either cater to what users want them to say, or they go with what they are paid to say. 

 

User reviews are much better than someone who is playing on a deadline anyway. 

Yes, they are all released.

2d platformers (and in this case, sm3dland) are casual games, whilst marios like mario 64 are not. This came straight from shiguru miyamotos mouth as well, I will provide a summary first, and then the actual quotes. And this needs to be stated first and foremost, being a casual game is not a declaration of quality, just of game design and purpose.

Its actually pretty obvious, mario 64 is actually NOT a platformer, like a 2d mario is. Its an adventure game. The difference comes in how the game is designed, as succinctly stated by Shiggy himself: 3d mario's like mario 64 are too intimidating, too daunting for casual players to try, mario 64 is an adventure game, when you enter a level, you have to find a star that can be hidden anywhere. In 2d mario, and 3dworld, you go from the beginning of the stage, and head right until you reach the flag pole. Thus, 3dworld is the 'missing link' that will get casuals to play a 3dmario.

Miyamoto: "When we made Super Mario 3D Land, we thoroughly discussed what the definitive difference was with the 2D New Super Mario series4, and what they shared in common. This time, we pushed ahead further with that concept-the concept of making a 3D home console Super Mario game that people who like the New Super Mario games can also enjoy. "

3dworld was specifically targeted at people who would play 2d marios, but not mario 64 style.

Hayashida: "We have worked on 3D Super Mario games the whole time from Super Mario Sunshine2 to Super Mario Galaxy 2. Usually, you would just move Super Mario Galaxy to the Nintendo 3DS system the way it is, but I thought, "Would that really be all right?" So the first thing I said to the team was, "Let's reset." "

They SPECIFICALLY aknowledge they are not trying to appeal to the established userbase for the mario 64 style games. They dont want the 7-10 million 3d mario fans, they want the 20-40 million who will by 2d style marios.

Hayashida: "I live a few stations away from the station nearest from my home to the company's, so at first I thought I should aim for light courses that you could clear in about that time and stop playing whenever you got off the train."

They specifically mention removing the need for player investment from the game.

Iwata "That's a big difference with the Super Mario Galaxy series."

They specifically state this is a big difference compared to games like galaxy/64. They are targeting casual design.

Hayashida "Yes. To me, Super Mario Galaxy 2 is like the Manchu Han Imperial Feast."

The analogy to food is spot on, casual games, with low entry barriers, and no investment/commitment requirements, are very much like small snacks. Casuals can live off of small snacks no problem. Core gamers enjoy snacks, a little candy, some cheese poofs, its good, its fun. But we cannot survive off of snacks, and it is very clear we are starving.

Dont take my word for it.

"It's the kind of game that says, "There's all this laid out before you, so eat whatever you want!" To eat it all takes hours, so when you finish eating, your stomach is full. We put in everything that had built up since Super Mario Sunshine and made Super Mario Galaxy 2 to be a game that has everything."

"Yes. So this time, I wanted to make a compact game that, rather than the Manchu Han Imperial Feast, was lighter, like a hamburger you could just gobble down. I decided to start thinking from there."

This, is the design mindset for casual games. Snacks, you can gobble down, and then leave. There is no investment.

You can play for 10 minutes, have a gaming session, and stop, because you really have no investment to continue. You didnt anything new, nothing interesting has been revewaled, their isnt anything you have to know what happens, there are no permanent power ups for you to investigate on uncharted areas of the world. Ten minutes can be just as good as an hour. There is no investment.

So, lets look at these games.

Mario and sonic at the olympics. Well, its a minigame collection. The very definition of a casual game design. Snack sized gaming bites.

2d mario, you go level by level, beat one level, you are allowed to move to the next spot on the map. One level is just as good as 10, if you stop after just 2 levels you arent going to need to remember where you stopped or where you were going. Snack sized gaming bites.

Mario strikers, a sports game. Played by matches, matches are a few minutes each. Snack sized gaming bites.

Core gamers, people who play zelda, mario, xenoblade, etc, look SPECIFICALLY for that worthwhile mental investment. Nintendo, has been SPECIFICALLY ignoring them. You can tell as much just listening to what they have to say.

Hayashida: "Another task that arose because of Super Mario Galaxy 2 was the divide between fans of 2D Super Mario and fans of 3D Super Mario. "

They KNOW mario 64 style players, and 2d style mario players are NOT the same people.

No, they seriously KNOW, im not putting words in their mouth.

"Yes, there are people who say, "I play 2D Super Mario, but not 3D Super Mario. The reason I suggested including the instructional DVD called Super Mario Galaxy 2 for Beginners3 with Super Mario Galaxy 2 was because the distance was growing between people who were familiar with 3D Super Mario and those who weren't, and many were saying "I can't play those!" before they had even played a 3D Super Mario game. That's really too bad for people like you who have worked so earnestly on Super Mario in 3D."

They Know 3d mario players will play 2d mario, but 2d mario players wont take the time to learn how to play 3d mario. WHat they didnt know was how much abuse those core gamers could take, how long they could starve on gaming snacks, 'junk food' before theyve had enough. Hopefully, they now know. Because the casuals, have been complete no shows. And NOT for lack of quality games targeted at them. They dont CARE about quality, because they dont look for any manner of investment, just something to waste the time.

Nintendo has made it very clear, what they consider casual, and what they consider core games. Core games are feasts, that you play until full. Casual games, are bite sized snacks you can gobble down, and leave at any time.

Nintendo, has made it very clear, that 2d mario, and Mario 3d world and land, of their own purposefull design, are casual games, targeted at the audience who wont buy the wii u. While the people who HAVE bought wii u's, are left starving scavenging scraps of junk food between meals every six months.

Damn, Checkmate. This is why your the forum MVP. 

 

Anyway, this post makes it clear to everyone-Nintendo has been trying to please an audience that does not support this industry from a complete perspective. What do I mean by that?

 

Bayonetta will release and probably bomb in contrast to the quality the game represents. The Wonderful 101 was a great case study on how these games perform with Nintendo's targeted demographic. 

 

If 100% of the potential consumers of these things are split to where 80% of game players are not the 'core' gamers, or rather, the people that will give you repeat business and recognize quality, then it only makes sense to go after the remaining 20% that will. 

 

Of that 20%, Sony and Microsoft have been courting to them for a generation. Nintendo, as proven by this post, has dedicated scarce resources to this group. 

 

I ask everyone who disagrees to consider W101 as a PS4 title in the same position as it was for the Wii U (second big exclusive). Just consider the game 'as is', and predict the sales of it on the PS4. Again, the core demographic would be represented en mass, and would not be asked to buy a console for a handful of games.