41 replies to this topic

[3Dude]

Isn't it also true though that working with less powerful hardware can take far more development resources. It really depends on the ambition and scope of the game and whether the software is a good fit for the hardware.
 
When wolfenstein was developed for the ps2 and original xbox it took something like 9 months to get it working on ps2 but about 2 weeks on original xbox because the hardware of the original xbox was more powerful.
 
The wii was not a powerful console and actually took huge effort to get some of the more ambitious 360 and PS3 games to run on it often with major features stripped out and graphicss downscaled.
 
Ultimately I think this is just about Nintendo trying to apologise for the lack of great wii u games at the beginning of its life. I think the wii u hardware will bring both advantages and disadvantages with regard development time. Its likely Nintendo didn't realise how much they needed AAA titles at launch and were hoping it would sell well on the wii name alone.

ps2 was a ridiculous frankensteined system architecture to try and learn, with horrible tools and support, which was why people (who think like you) originally thought the ps2 was weaker than the dreamcast, as many dreamcast to ps2 ports featured sub par geometry, textures, and frame rate performance on ps2 compared to the original dreamcast versions.

The xbox was an off the shelf x86 pentium 3, with a standard direct x nvidia programmable shader gpu, with fantastic tools and support.

It had absolutely nothing to do with power. It was much much easier to work with than ps2.

[Nintyfan86]

ps2 was a ridiculous frankensteined system architecture to try and learn, with horrible tools and support, which was why people (who think like you) originally thought the ps2 was weaker than the dreamcast, as many dreamcast to ps2 ports featured sub par geometry, textures, and frame rate performance on ps2 compared to the original dreamcast versions.The xbox was an off the shelf x86 pentium 3, with a standard direct x nvidia programmable shader gpu, with fantastic tools and support.It had absolutely nothing to do with power. It was much much easier to work with than ps2.

I will make a side point that very loosely connects to the Dreamcast/PS2 example, and it is fitting to MorbidGod's very valid point about Nintendo counting on third parties at the U's launch.

The hardcore gamer saw, outside of Zombie U, really no reason to upgrade. I use that term loosely, because in my mind, the typical hardcore gamer is a sheep that does what GI and IGN tell them to do. The real hardcore gamers play games, etc.

Anyway, the sheep needed that indisputable power leap, or at least all launch games at native 1080p in addition to improvements in every way imaginable over the HD Twins, or they needed compelling gamepad uses from the software along with exclusive reasons to purchase the software from third parties.

Power is still in the background, but, unfortunately, Nintendo has not really done a good job of showing off why this console is a must have yet. It will be in December, but that is another can of worms.

[MorbidGod]

Remember, it is ultimately a business. This means developing strategies, and implementing them. Now, the Wii was the GCN, but it had massive returns. How there was not training and simulated development structured to simulate the transition, I will never know.

You building a PC without being in the business for the sole purpose of increasing a firm's intrinsic value is not comparable in this case. If Nintendo did what you would rationally expect, they would have the easiest transition to HD development.

Please do not misunderstand me, I desperately want them to succeed. I also believe there are answers to those initial questions that are unexpected.

You misunderstand me. All I am saying is simple: Nintendo's mistake is not giving themselves enough time in between 3DS and Wii U launches. They should have given at least two years, similar to what they do with the original DS.

If they did that, we would have had more launch titles and the Wii U would also be a little bit more powerful (launching this year). Instead, they gave themselves less than two years and thus, made the same mistake as they did with the 3DS (believing third parties can sell a system). That mistake, however, is being corrected this year. I am confident the Wii U will sell to current Nintendo owners. And that's all they need to do.

ps2 was a ridiculous frankensteined system architecture to try and learn, with horrible tools and support, which was why people (who think like you) originally thought the ps2 was weaker than the dreamcast, as many dreamcast to ps2 ports featured sub par geometry, textures, and frame rate performance on ps2 compared to the original dreamcast versions.

The xbox was an off the shelf x86 pentium 3, with a standard direct x nvidia programmable shader gpu, with fantastic tools and support.

It had absolutely nothing to do with power. It was much much easier to work with than ps2.

I totally forgot about that. But exactly. The original Xbox would be easy to develop for, just like the new systems.

[Nintyfan86]

You misunderstand me. All I am saying is simple: Nintendo's mistake is not giving themselves enough time in between 3DS and Wii U launches. They should have given at least two years, similar to what they do with the original DS.
If they did that, we would have had more launch titles and the Wii U would also be a little bit more powerful (launching this year). Instead, they gave themselves less than two years and thus, made the same mistake as they did with the 3DS (believing third parties can sell a system). That mistake, however, is being corrected this year. I am confident the Wii U will sell to current Nintendo owners. And that's all they need to do.

I totally forgot about that. But exactly. The original Xbox would be easy to develop for, just like the new systems.

I see. Nintendo was in a hard spot. The Wii market deflated with outside competition, and the games in development were using the HD Twins as their target platforms. After the 3ds strategy to rebuild 3rd party relations backfired due to the price, I would presume Nintendo would have been more willing to work out the potential kinks in the Wii U launch scheme.

I do not know how the multiplats were not placed side to side, or how Nintendo felt there was the ability to launch when they did. However, they cannot compete directly with Sony or Microsoft, yet they want the same partners. To do this, you need the audience that buys the games.

Iwata's answer was correct; give 3rd parties the chance to sell the system. The price gimped the strategy on the 3ds, and the Wii U now has to go back to the old formula. Whatever Third party support it does have comes against a big first party offering each month. With the typical business cycle for 2/3 of of the market being shorter, the third parties are not going to be happy regardless if this goes as predicted.

On the other hand, third parties could have capitalized on then drought and released software that would have sold.

In short, Iwata is really in a no win situation it seems.

[MorbidGod]

I see. Nintendo was in a hard spot. The Wii market deflated with outside competition, and the games in development were using the HD Twins as their target platforms. After the 3ds strategy to rebuild 3rd party relations backfired due to the price, I would presume Nintendo would have been more willing to work out the potential kinks in the Wii U launch scheme.

I do not know how the multiplats were not placed side to side, or how Nintendo felt there was the ability to launch when they did. However, they cannot compete directly with Sony or Microsoft, yet they want the same partners. To do this, you need the audience that buys the games.

Iwata's answer was correct; give 3rd parties the chance to sell the system. The price gimped the strategy on the 3ds, and the Wii U now has to go back to the old formula. Whatever Third party support it does have comes against a big first party offering each month. With the typical business cycle for 2/3 of of the market being shorter, the third parties are not going to be happy regardless if this goes as predicted.

On the other hand, third parties could have capitalized on then drought and released software that would have sold.

In short, Iwata is really in a no win situation it seems.

No, third parties can't sell Nintendo platforms. That's the mistake they made. The 3DS price wasn't a problem. The newer 3DS is the same price and people are still buying those. It's about the games they have now. People are willing to pay a high price for games they want. Unfortunately, third party developers don't make good enough exclusives for Nintendo to sell the platform Nintendo makes.

Look at Sony and Microsoft. They have their own first party exclusives they use to get people to buy an Xbox One or PS4.

Nintendo has fixed this mistake. They are getting tons of new and amazing games and if Iwata is to believed they have other games in the works we still don't know about.

[Nintyfan86]

No, third parties can't sell Nintendo platforms. That's the mistake they made. The 3DS price wasn't a problem. The newer 3DS is the same price and people are still buying those. It's about the games they have now. People are willing to pay a high price for games they want. Unfortunately, third party developers don't make good enough exclusives for Nintendo to sell the platform Nintendo makes.
Look at Sony and Microsoft. They have their own first party exclusives they use to get people to buy an Xbox One or PS4.
Nintendo has fixed this mistake. They are getting tons of new and amazing games and if Iwata is to believed they have other games in the works we still don't know about.

I wonder if the small 3ds would have sold @ $250 with the holiday 2011 games at launch? Anyway, with Sony/Microsoft, third parties can make one game, split it across virtually identical demographics, and then do it again next year. The same game is, for whatever reason, always missing something. In the GC days it was online. Now it is achievements I guess, and the DLC, or whatever people complain about.

I guess my point is that Nintendo keeps designing the secondary console in the eyes of the GTA crowd. I am wondering if they can truly maintain originality while offering a box that people see as a direct alternative to Sony and Microsoft's offerings? I thought they were not trying to, but then again, it seems like they are at times.

[MorbidGod]

I wonder if the small 3ds would have sold @ $250 with the holiday 2011 games at launch? Anyway, with Sony/Microsoft, third parties can make one game, split it across virtually identical demographics, and then do it again next year. The same game is, for whatever reason, always missing something. In the GC days it was online. Now it is achievements I guess, and the DLC, or whatever people complain about.

I guess my point is that Nintendo keeps designing the secondary console in the eyes of the GTA crowd. I am wondering if they can truly maintain originality while offering a box that people see as a direct alternative to Sony and Microsoft's offerings? I thought they were not trying to, but then again, it seems like they are at times.

You are missing the point. Nintendo needs to attract the Nintendo crowd. They need former DS gamers, former Wii gamers, current 3DS owners, to buy Wii U's. That's what they need. Going after the GTA crowd as you call them would be suicidal at this point. They had a chance last year. They tried with ZombiU. Sadly, they should have made their own exclusive game that's mature instead of banking on a third party.

No, at this point they need to focus on what Nintendo is good at. Once they have a larger install base then the other consoles developers will try again. But, at some point, Nintendo needs to attract those gamers. But first they need to get current Nintendo owners to buy a Wii U. That should be, and right now actually is, their focus.

[Nintyfan86]

You are missing the point. Nintendo needs to attract the Nintendo crowd. They need former DS gamers, former Wii gamers, current 3DS owners, to buy Wii U's. That's what they need. Going after the GTA crowd as you call them would be suicidal at this point. They had a chance last year. They tried with ZombiU. Sadly, they should have made their own exclusive game that's mature instead of banking on a third party.
No, at this point they need to focus on what Nintendo is good at. Once they have a larger install base then the other consoles developers will try again. But, at some point, Nintendo needs to attract those gamers. But first they need to get current Nintendo owners to buy a Wii U. That should be, and right now actually is, their focus.

With all due respect, if they go after the Wii/DS owners, we are looking at shovelware, a few exclusives, and something to do between PSXBox releases, yet the handheld side will be awesome.

I hope the majority of Wii owners stay away. You do not want low attach rates for third party support, unless gimped versions are you're thing.

[MorbidGod]

With all due respect, if they go after the Wii/DS owners, we are looking at shovelware, a few exclusives, and something to do between PSXBox releases, yet the handheld side will be awesome.

I hope the majority of Wii owners stay away. You do not want low attach rates for third party support, unless gimped versions are you're thing.

And the 3DS gamers. Nintendo needs an install base. ALL NINTENDO PLATFORMS there are low third party sales. That's because ppl buy Nintendo for Nintendo games. They don't care about those other games. If they did, THEY WOULD BUY an Xbox or PS4.

It's a math game at this point. And, it's entirely possible third parties will be smart and make exclusive games Nintendo fans will enjoy. Doubtful, but possible.

We just need Nintendo to sell some units. Once that happens, Ubisoft and others will be forced to try to sell games on Nintendo platforms.

[Nintyfan86]

And the 3DS gamers. Nintendo needs an install base. ALL NINTENDO PLATFORMS there are low third party sales. That's because ppl buy Nintendo for Nintendo games. They don't care about those other games. If they did, THEY WOULD BUY an Xbox or PS4.

It's a math game at this point. And, it's entirely possible third parties will be smart and make exclusive games Nintendo fans will enjoy. Doubtful, but possible.

We just need Nintendo to sell some units. Once that happens, Ubisoft and others will be forced to try to sell games on Nintendo platforms.

The part in bold is what they are trying to change. No friend codes. Miiverse. Bayonetta. Wonderful 101. The ability to add 4 TBs of storage (!). The indie program they have going. The gamepad itself is really, if you think about it, the biggest innovation for the hardcore gamer since the keyboard and mouse. 

 

But...somehow they let the development tools remain in a sorry state, and were unprepared for HD development. We agree that this was due to the 3ds's troubles (personally, I do not think a $250 dollar dedicated handheld console will sell to anyone outside of people like us in the smartphone era). 

 

However, you could get everyone that buys the console for exclusives on board, and the attach rate will still be abysmal for third parties (like Sega's Madworld and HothD). I am wanting this gamepad concept to really take off with Watch Dogs, Assasins Creed, Batman, etc. I am also wanting people like me, with crossfire rigs 5 feet away from the Wii U to pick the Wii U version.

 

The numbers game scenario would be great, but, we know the outcome for a third party game like COD:

 

Xbone 3m

 

PS4  2.8m

 

WiiU  .7m

 

Which version will be the afterthought on this path? 

 

Back to this Pikmin delay. What is really unfortunate is that in NA, you have 6 weeks between it and Wonderful 101. I know the games are not similar, but they appear similar. Even though W101 is really niche, and its' numbers would be similar either way, I believe it would be better if it came as the first big release, or rather, if we already had Pikmin. 

[3Dude]

You are missing the point. Nintendo needs to attract the Nintendo crowd. They need former DS gamers, former Wii gamers, current 3DS owners, to buy Wii U's. That's what they need. Going after the GTA crowd as you call them would be suicidal at this point. They had a chance last year. They tried with ZombiU. Sadly, they should have made their own exclusive game that's mature instead of banking on a third party.

Guh, Can you imagine if wii u launched with X?

[Nintyfan86]

Guh, Can you imagine if wii u launched with X?

I think that buttons everything up nicely. 

 

The games that will drive the install base for the benefit of third parties just do not seem to be coming in time. If X came first, that audience would be built in, and Nintendo would have had a decent shot at parity from that department with MS and Sony. 

 

My perspective is not how to enhance the situation as is, but rather, to expand Nintendo's wonderful 'everyone' philosophy to include the 'so called' hardcore just as much as they do with the repeat Mario customer.  

[MorbidGod]

The part in bold is what they are trying to change. No friend codes. Miiverse. Bayonetta. Wonderful 101. The ability to add 4 TBs of storage (!). The indie program they have going. The gamepad itself is really, if you think about it, the biggest innovation for the hardcore gamer since the keyboard and mouse.

But...somehow they let the development tools remain in a sorry state, and were unprepared for HD development. We agree that this was due to the 3ds's troubles (personally, I do not think a $250 dollar dedicated handheld console will sell to anyone outside of people like us in the smartphone era).

However, you could get everyone that buys the console for exclusives on board, and the attach rate will still be abysmal for third parties (like Sega's Madworld and HothD). I am wanting this gamepad concept to really take off with Watch Dogs, Assasins Creed, Batman, etc. I am also wanting people like me, with crossfire rigs 5 feet away from the Wii U to pick the Wii U version.

The numbers game scenario would be great, but, we know the outcome for a third party game like COD:

Xbone 3m

PS4 2.8m

WiiU .7m

Which version will be the afterthought on this path?

Back to this Pikmin delay. What is really unfortunate is that in NA, you have 6 weeks between it and Wonderful 101. I know the games are not similar, but they appear similar. Even though W101 is really niche, and its' numbers would be similar either way, I believe it would be better if it came as the first big release, or rather, if we already had Pikmin.

They tried to change that. It didn't work out for them, did it? Third party developers didn't bring any exclusive content, left us with less content. ZombiU wasn't big enough to get people to buy the Wii U.

They could stand by and battle Sony and Microsoft for their customers, and loose because they don't have enough consoles sold yet. Because right now developers -- EVEN UBISOFT -- are pulling back on support and waiting to see what happens this Christmas. They all expect it to sell, thanks to a strong first party line up. But if they tried it your way, they would end up with less sales and the Wii U would be outsold.

How do I know this? Simple. Any gamer who wants COD isn't going to buy the Wii U since it isn't clear if its coming to the Wii U. Plus, even if it does, they aren't getting all the DLC the PS4 and X1 will have.

So Nintendo has a choice. They can fight a loosing battle, like you want them to. Or attract current 3DS owners. Think about it. If they do that, that's 30m+ gamers to buy a Wii U this holiday season. They won't sell that many, sure. But with games like Pikman 3, Wonderful 101, Sonic and Mario Winter Games, Sonic Lost Worlds, DK, Mario 3D World and many, many more that I am forgetting. Nintendo is playing towards those gamers who are pro Nintendo. Something they should have done from day one.

Guh, Can you imagine if wii u launched with X?

It would have been nice, but realistically the graphics wouldn't be as good as they are now.

I think that buttons everything up nicely.

The games that will drive the install base for the benefit of third parties just do not seem to be coming in time. If X came first, that audience would be built in, and Nintendo would have had a decent shot at parity from that department with MS and Sony.

My perspective is not how to enhance the situation as is, but rather, to expand Nintendo's wonderful 'everyone' philosophy to include the 'so called' hardcore just as much as they do with the repeat Mario customer.

Fans of JRPG's aren't necessarily fans of FPS. Even if Bayonnetta 2 launched with Wii U, the original didn't sell well on the other consoles, which is why Nintendo had to pick up the game.

Nintendo has made a lot of mistakes. But right now they aren't making those mistakes. This is what they should have done from the start. Have their own first party games along with the third party titles. They shouldn't of had a drought of new games. But they did. And now that drought is over.

Look, sooner or later you will understand what I am saying. Nintendo can fight for the "hardcore" gamer as you call them. And abandon their customers they do have. Does that sound like a good plan? Let's just forget the 30m+ gamers who love Nintendo and try to get the people who just won't buy our consoles?

Their chance was last year. They blew that. Now they need to go after THEIR OWN CUSTOMERS.

And let me be clear: I'm not saying they should give up on those gamers either. That, too, would be foolish. But Nintendo has to prioritize with something. And right now third party developers want more Wii U's sold. Well, they are going to get that.

Next year, with more Wii U's sold, hopefully Nintendo successfully launches X, Bayonnetta 2, Mario Kaer 8 and SSB4. All of those games will attract hard core fans. Bayonnetta 2 hopefully will fair better than it did previously.

And hopefully that's not all the games Nintendo has in store for us. Hopefully they have more. If they do -- which it's a safe bet that they do -- then they will be set.

One thing we do need to hope and pray for this holiday season is that Watch Dogs does well on Wii U. If Watch Dogs does, then Ubisoft will be happy because that's one of their new IP's. Which, that game was made for the Wii U GamePad.

[DéliopT]

As expected.

I too don`t think the tool won`t be used for the big games, but could be used for Nintendo eshop games/F2P games.

[3Dude]

It would have been nice, but realistically the graphics wouldn't be as good as they are now.

PFFFTTT, if IM imagining it, Its graphics are going to look the same as they will when the game releases next year, which will be a dramatic improvement over the e3 teaser, just like the e3 teaser was a dramatic improvement over the reveal teaser.

[Socalmuscle]

Nintendo needs to reorganize.

 

A dedicated mobile division and a dedicated home console division.

 

The two can collaborate, but it's obvious they mix and match too much.

 

They also need to staff up and beef up their operations.  

 

It's a hard pill to swallow for a company that is extremely lean and efficient.

 

but the income will scale with the larger staff as well, simply because they will have much better products that many more people will buy.

 

it's always a risk, but it's a risk sony and Microsoft started taking years ago. Nintendo got off easy with the Wii, which quite honestly was a miracle as it was a huge risk to sell such an underpowered console against tech behemoths at the time - with nothing more than a little waggle to show for it.  At the time, it was right for the market, so they could get away with GameCube budgets and rake in the cash.  But now, the casuals are on their 3DS, iPhones and iPads. People buy a dedicated "magic box" to punch up visuals on their big screen TV that no tablet could ever hope to aspire to.  Yes it costs more.  but as we are seeing with the PS4 and even the Xbox One, people will pay more to get more.

 

The Wii U itself is a genius little console.  It packs a big punch when coded for and it does so at a bargain price.  The CPU, GPU, and RAM are all perfectly balanced and perform very well even in the face of more powerful 8 core CPU competitors. factor in the GamePad too and it's actually very impressive.

 

BUT... Nintendo needs to make big budget, AAA games all the time for Wii U.  Super Luigi U isn't going to cut it.  that's more suited for 3DS.  Mario 3D World looks awesome graphically (though possibly lacking the gameplay fun that the Galaxy series had), Mario Kart looks to be one of the better graphical games on any next gen console and the still in development (and looking better every day) X looks epic.  Retro has increased its staff and has pooled together some impressive talent. More Nintendo studios need to do this. For example, a new Metroid game given the Super Luigi treatment would kill it.  It's supposed to be a tour de force. AAA.  Make it so.  Same with Zelda. don't spare any development effort.  It's going to sell like hotcakes and it's going to move systems.  A Zelda game that looks like what Skyrim only dreamed of becoming in the future is going to win over even detractors and will win their money too.  but not if they don't have the staff to make beautiful geometry, crisp, high res textures, tight gameplay, a great UI, extensive marketing, etc.

 

Twice the human resources is a good start.  But really it's not news.  If anything, it's an admission that after bing in the lead for decades, they have been behind for years.  Nintendo was getting by with half of what they should for a while now.  time to make investments again. It will pay off later. they made big investments in N64 and that lasted a long time.  New era.  Time to plunk down the cash now and reap the rewards both now and later.

[Nintyfan86]

They tried to change that. It didn't work out for them, did it? Third party developers didn't bring any exclusive content, left us with less content. ZombiU wasn't big enough to get people to buy the Wii U.

They could stand by and battle Sony and Microsoft for their customers, and loose because they don't have enough consoles sold yet. Because right now developers -- EVEN UBISOFT -- are pulling back on support and waiting to see what happens this Christmas. They all expect it to sell, thanks to a strong first party line up. But if they tried it your way, they would end up with less sales and the Wii U would be outsold.

How do I know this? Simple. Any gamer who wants COD isn't going to buy the Wii U since it isn't clear if its coming to the Wii U. Plus, even if it does, they aren't getting all the DLC the PS4 and X1 will have.

So Nintendo has a choice. They can fight a loosing battle, like you want them to. Or attract current 3DS owners. Think about it. If they do that, that's 30m+ gamers to buy a Wii U this holiday season. They won't sell that many, sure. But with games like Pikman 3, Wonderful 101, Sonic and Mario Winter Games, Sonic Lost Worlds, DK, Mario 3D World and many, many more that I am forgetting. Nintendo is playing towards those gamers who are pro Nintendo. Something they should have done from day one.


It would have been nice, but realistically the graphics wouldn't be as good as they are now.


Fans of JRPG's aren't necessarily fans of FPS. Even if Bayonnetta 2 launched with Wii U, the original didn't sell well on the other consoles, which is why Nintendo had to pick up the game.

Nintendo has made a lot of mistakes. But right now they aren't making those mistakes. This is what they should have done from the start. Have their own first party games along with the third party titles. They shouldn't of had a drought of new games. But they did. And now that drought is over.

Look, sooner or later you will understand what I am saying. Nintendo can fight for the "hardcore" gamer as you call them. And abandon their customers they do have. Does that sound like a good plan? Let's just forget the 30m+ gamers who love Nintendo and try to get the people who just won't buy our consoles?

Their chance was last year. They blew that. Now they need to go after THEIR OWN CUSTOMERS.

And let me be clear: I'm not saying they should give up on those gamers either. That, too, would be foolish. But Nintendo has to prioritize with something. And right now third party developers want more Wii U's sold. Well, they are going to get that.

Next year, with more Wii U's sold, hopefully Nintendo successfully launches X, Bayonnetta 2, Mario Kaer 8 and SSB4. All of those games will attract hard core fans. Bayonnetta 2 hopefully will fair better than it did previously.

And hopefully that's not all the games Nintendo has in store for us. Hopefully they have more. If they do -- which it's a safe bet that they do -- then they will be set.

One thing we do need to hope and pray for this holiday season is that Watch Dogs does well on Wii U. If Watch Dogs does, then Ubisoft will be happy because that's one of their new IP's. Which, that game was made for the Wii U GamePad.

I think we are having a failure to communicate on some level. I take responsibility, as written communication about Nintendo, third parties, and their subsequent problems is not my strong point. Let me try this another way.

 

What I think we all want is the option to buy the AAA rated games on a Nintendo platform, and have them treated with the same respect that the other versions get with regard to promotion, DLC, and attention to hardware optimization. I believe we do not want another Wii situation, even if we are getting the 360 port, as we know the hardware can do much better. I am intentionally not mentioning the obvious, we all want, first and foremost, the unique exclusives. However, I am wanting the console pushed to its fullest potential by all developers. Do we share this hope? 

 

You have cited the reasons as to why Nintendo is left without a choice but to push out the first party games and drive an install base. Third parties will publish games then, as noted. My fear is that they will utilize the 'budget' scenario, and utilize limited resources for the ports. I hope not, but, all we really have to go off of is history, and that history is ripe with the install base Nintendo is left to manufacture this year. I believe they have a self fulfilling prophecy set up for next year, where the guaranteed sellers will be back on the system, but publishers will not consider bringing over the higher beta projects. 

 

I honestly do not know what Nintendo could do to help third party sales. Even if it had a perfect port of the PS4 version of Assassin's Creed 4, with gamepad features, I doubt the customer base would be interested (bad example I know, but insert that game the real Infinity Ward is making that was so popular at E3, or Bungie's new game, and it would probably be the same deal). 

 

That last point ties into Watchdogs, and you have illustrated this perfectly. 

 

Now, I will attempt to tie this into Mr. Miyamoto's comment. How could they not anticipate HD development taking twice the human resources? We have discussed several aspects of what led us to this point, but please allow me to present another:

 

Large companies like Nintendo have long range plans corresponding with both industry and economic business cycles. Midway through, they would be testing certain aspects of operations out during profitable times to invest in the future. How a small game was not developed in 2007, on test hardware, in full HD, just for comparison purposes, as part of the Wii U's R&D is what shocks me. I, in no way, meant to make the first post sound insulting. I simply have trouble understanding how they are having such a difficult transition. 

 

I speculated that the Wii U would use 2007-9 hardware, customized, and have the benefit of being in R&D for the entire period MS and Sony were killing each other. Quite frankly, Nintendo's difficulties come as a shock to me on this front. I also thought all launch games would easily fit 1080p at their current state, and 720p at something like X's visual level. It is just a little odd. 

[MorbidGod]

I think we are having a failure to communicate on some level. I take responsibility, as written communication about Nintendo, third parties, and their subsequent problems is not my strong point. Let me try this another way.

What I think we all want is the option to buy the AAA rated games on a Nintendo platform, and have them treated with the same respect that the other versions get with regard to promotion, DLC, and attention to hardware optimization. I believe we do not want another Wii situation, even if we are getting the 360 port, as we know the hardware can do much better. I am intentionally not mentioning the obvious, we all want, first and foremost, the unique exclusives. However, I am wanting the console pushed to its fullest potential by all developers. Do we share this hope?

You have cited the reasons as to why Nintendo is left without a choice but to push out the first party games and drive an install base. Third parties will publish games then, as noted. My fear is that they will utilize the 'budget' scenario, and utilize limited resources for the ports. I hope not, but, all we really have to go off of is history, and that history is ripe with the install base Nintendo is left to manufacture this year. I believe they have a self fulfilling prophecy set up for next year, where the guaranteed sellers will be back on the system, but publishers will not consider bringing over the higher beta projects.

I honestly do not know what Nintendo could do to help third party sales. Even if it had a perfect port of the PS4 version of Assassin's Creed 4, with gamepad features, I doubt the customer base would be interested (bad example I know, but insert that game the real Infinity Ward is making that was so popular at E3, or Bungie's new game, and it would probably be the same deal).

That last point ties into Watchdogs, and you have illustrated this perfectly.

Now, I will attempt to tie this into Mr. Miyamoto's comment. How could they not anticipate HD development taking twice the human resources? We have discussed several aspects of what led us to this point, but please allow me to present another:

Large companies like Nintendo have long range plans corresponding with both industry and economic business cycles. Midway through, they would be testing certain aspects of operations out during profitable times to invest in the future. How a small game was not developed in 2007, on test hardware, in full HD, just for comparison purposes, as part of the Wii U's R&D is what shocks me. I, in no way, meant to make the first post sound insulting. I simply have trouble understanding how they are having such a difficult transition.

I speculated that the Wii U would use 2007-9 hardware, customized, and have the benefit of being in R&D for the entire period MS and Sony were killing each other. Quite frankly, Nintendo's difficulties come as a shock to me on this front. I also thought all launch games would easily fit 1080p at their current state, and 720p at something like X's visual level. It is just a little odd.

I think the problem is, I think in what is possible and realistic at this point in time. I realize their mistake means they don't have many options.

Of course, though, in a perfect world Nintendo will get the same game with the same features and maybe even exclusive features. But that's not going to happen this year.

So, I point to what will happen, and explain what Nintendo should be doing. And they are doing exactly what they should be.

With that said, however, in a perfect world the games being released this year would have been released last year going into E3. If that happened, Nintendo would have easily sold nine million units by now.

But we can't go back in time and change those choices made. We can only hope going forward they take their future in their own hands and don't trust third parties to sell their systems. It failed with 3DS, failed with Wii U. And will continue to fail going forward.

[Nintyfan86]

I think the problem is, I think in what is possible and realistic at this point in time. I realize their mistake means they don't have many options.

Of course, though, in a perfect world Nintendo will get the same game with the same features and maybe even exclusive features. But that's not going to happen this year.

So, I point to what will happen, and explain what Nintendo should be doing. And they are doing exactly what they should be.

With that said, however, in a perfect world the games being released this year would have been released last year going into E3. If that happened, Nintendo would have easily sold nine million units by now.

But we can't go back in time and change those choices made. We can only hope going forward they take their future in their own hands and don't trust third parties to sell their systems. It failed with 3DS, failed with Wii U. And will continue to fail going forward.

I certainly agree. Before I begin, I want to thank you for this fantastic exchange. You do not often see this on forums, and it is a testament to the strength of this community. 

 

Personally, after thinking about your previous post, I am combining those thoughts on Nintendo's current strategy with the evidence showing  a short term contraction in the console gaming business. I do not think this is due to aging software, especially when compelling software is still available. I do think casual fans of all three companies have moved on, and demographics have changed.

 

The Wii U's software drought is certainly the problem with the hardware sales, this is certain. I would expect Pikmin to move units, and then momentum will pick up right up until December. The previous point is actually a bright spot, and the games being showcased during this period might actually go far in attracting the remaining market, which will not be the typical Nintendo fan as I keep categorizing us.

 

If the cross gen games are not current gen ports, we could actually see sales, because the games Nintendo is putting out are actually pretty hardcore. In addition, Somehow I see a Mario Kart 8 demo hitting before the year ends as well, and possibly a new bundle/price drop. Although, the price drop is not as likely. 

 

Anyway, contracting market + inflow of software/diminishing returns=higher attachment rate. What do you think? 

[MorbidGod]

I certainly agree. Before I begin, I want to thank you for this fantastic exchange. You do not often see this on forums, and it is a testament to the strength of this community.

Personally, after thinking about your previous post, I am combining those thoughts on Nintendo's current strategy with the evidence showing a short term contraction in the console gaming business. I do not think this is due to aging software, especially when compelling software is still available. I do think casual fans of all three companies have moved on, and demographics have changed.

The Wii U's software drought is certainly the problem with the hardware sales, this is certain. I would expect Pikmin to move units, and then momentum will pick up right up until December. The previous point is actually a bright spot, and the games being showcased during this period might actually go far in attracting the remaining market, which will not be the typical Nintendo fan as I keep categorizing us.

If the cross gen games are not current gen ports, we could actually see sales, because the games Nintendo is putting out are actually pretty hardcore. In addition, Somehow I see a Mario Kart 8 demo hitting before the year ends as well, and possibly a new bundle/price drop. Although, the price drop is not as likely.

Anyway, contracting market + inflow of software/diminishing returns=higher attachment rate. What do you think?

First off, no problem. I love debating, and that's what keeps me coming back to this forum. Yes, Desert Punk, I am talking about you as well ^_~.

Second, to the bold text, I agree. Marketing matters. Having something to market matters. So yes I agree with that equation.

Nintendo needs to reorganize.

A dedicated mobile division and a dedicated home console division.

The two can collaborate, but it's obvious they mix and match too much.

They also need to staff up and beef up their operations.

It's a hard pill to swallow for a company that is extremely lean and efficient.

but the income will scale with the larger staff as well, simply because they will have much better products that many more people will buy.

it's always a risk, but it's a risk sony and Microsoft started taking years ago. Nintendo got off easy with the Wii, which quite honestly was a miracle as it was a huge risk to sell such an underpowered console against tech behemoths at the time - with nothing more than a little waggle to show for it. At the time, it was right for the market, so they could get away with GameCube budgets and rake in the cash. But now, the casuals are on their 3DS, iPhones and iPads. People buy a dedicated "magic box" to punch up visuals on their big screen TV that no tablet could ever hope to aspire to. Yes it costs more. but as we are seeing with the PS4 and even the Xbox One, people will pay more to get more.

The Wii U itself is a genius little console. It packs a big punch when coded for and it does so at a bargain price. The CPU, GPU, and RAM are all perfectly balanced and perform very well even in the face of more powerful 8 core CPU competitors. factor in the GamePad too and it's actually very impressive.

BUT... Nintendo needs to make big budget, AAA games all the time for Wii U. Super Luigi U isn't going to cut it. that's more suited for 3DS. Mario 3D World looks awesome graphically (though possibly lacking the gameplay fun that the Galaxy series had), Mario Kart looks to be one of the better graphical games on any next gen console and the still in development (and looking better every day) X looks epic. Retro has increased its staff and has pooled together some impressive talent. More Nintendo studios need to do this. For example, a new Metroid game given the Super Luigi treatment would kill it. It's supposed to be a tour de force. AAA. Make it so. Same with Zelda. don't spare any development effort. It's going to sell like hotcakes and it's going to move systems. A Zelda game that looks like what Skyrim only dreamed of becoming in the future is going to win over even detractors and will win their money too. but not if they don't have the staff to make beautiful geometry, crisp, high res textures, tight gameplay, a great UI, extensive marketing, etc.

Twice the human resources is a good start. But really it's not news. If anything, it's an admission that after bing in the lead for decades, they have been behind for years. Nintendo was getting by with half of what they should for a while now. time to make investments again. It will pay off later. they made big investments in N64 and that lasted a long time. New era. Time to plunk down the cash now and reap the rewards both now and later.

I have been saying for a while Nintendo needs new studios. They don't need to make them. They should buy Sega, Capcom or some other developer.

They also need a new IP, hopefully we'll get one this generation. (X might be a new IP ... We don't know yet).