"Analysts: Nintendo facing its biggest challenge"

[jvd]

Any of them can just keep outright buying developers... I'm rather hoping they do less "game/library purchasing" and more hardware innovation, middleware supply and development assistance to increase third-party support and uniqueness, and heck, get their OWN in-house developers to work on showcase titles for their platforms and inspire others. (Obviously that last part doesn't apply to Nintendo. )

Nintendo needs a crap load of exclusive tittles not just from its own stables but from others. Thats why it makes good sense for them (or even ms really) to flat out buy sega. Yes the games aren't selling all that well but mainly because there is no one focus point for sega fans to go to and most of its old stuff just redone.

Imagine the n5 to be released with Mario , Sega gt online, zelda , Panzer dragoon , Virtual fighter 5 and all of the sega sports games and then for that xmas , Metroid , mario cart , Super smash bros and a new shinning force game . Toss in whatever 3rd party games that are made and that would be one of the greatest first years in a very long time .

 

[a4164]

I remember the talks of mega... how Nintendo was going to buy Sega, Namco and Capcom. Fill every bad spot in their line up. That would be awesome though improbable.

I think 3DO's failure was 3DO's failure. I am not suggesting a 3DO-II. I would not equate Nintendo to 3DO. I would envision a situation where Nintendo designed everything about the console, while Matsushita built, distributed and contributed to its marketing (someone else here proposed this, so I am not claiming to be the first to think this). The Panasonic image goes a long way. From a mainstream perspective, Panasonic is a CE maker that consumers know. Where as getting your next generation DVD player from Nintendo would raise the question, "Nintendo, aren't they a toy company". I guess I should have made it clear. Teaming up with Matsushita would be a good move if Nintendo gives into the market demand to not be just a videogame console. I actually want just a videogame console, but industry pundits have been calling for GameCube's failure because it did not match Sony/MS' features (even before launch - Forbes comes to mind here and here) . This, I fear, is an on going theme.

In any case, GC sales are picking up and Nintendo's image does not seem to prevent it from selling crap loads of GameBoyAdvances. So go Nintendo! Maybe I should not let industry pundits get to me and just enjoy Nintendo. But it is because I enjoy Nintendo products that its worth thinking about long term strategies that will keep Nintendo around for many generations more.

 

[cthellis42]

Snagging Sega outright might make EA pissed at them, though, and THAT could certainly be detrimental. Certainly there are good reasons for ANY of them to grab big developers with popular series, but I'd rather they remain separate entities than start a feeding/merger frenzy between all of them.

'sides, Nintendo working their relationship with Sega to the point of always getting the sports titles (they already have the prime batch, at least--just not the ESPN-labelled ones) and other popular typically-exclusives (such as VF or Panzer Dragoon) would help train them to inteact with all the publishers they're NOT on good terms with already. Sega, meanwhile, seems content to pitch their sports titles and other popular genres to all the platforms, and turn out a number of cool exclusives for each of them to have on their own.

 

[Tahir2]

I think 3DO's failure was 3DO's failure. I am not suggesting a 3DO-II. I would not equate Nintendo to 3DO. I would envision a situation where Nintendo designed everything about the console, while Matsushita built, distributed and contributed to its marketing (someone else here proposed this, so I am not claiming to be the first to think this). The Panasonic image goes a long way. From a mainstream perspective, Panasonic is a CE maker that consumers know. Where as getting your next generation DVD player from Nintendo would raise the question, "Nintendo, aren't they a toy company". I guess I should have made it clear. Teaming up with Matsushita would be a good move if Nintendo gives into the market demand to not be just a videogame console. I actually want just a videogame console, but industry pundits have been calling for GameCube's failure because it did not match Sony/MS' features (even before launch - Forbes comes to mind here and here) . This, I fear, is an on going theme.

This model of business is exactly what 3DO did. There was a 3DO II which was cancelled (M2). The Panasonic brand name does not go very far for a games console, like Nintendo's name does. Even Sony had to make a brand with Playstation. Panasonic already make a games console/DVD player with the Gamecube as well.

Are you saying that Panasonic will give Nintendo the financial power to compete with the marketting and spending budgets of Sony and MS? If you look at the fact that the GC is selling so well because of its price cut, what happens to the decision of pricing if Nintendo are not building and distributing the console? Nintendo designs the technology and games, and someone else takes the risk associated with hardware stock and distribution - this model doesnt work (hasnt worked in the past). Even MS suffered because of reliance of a key component designer.

Also I said earlier, Nintendo likes to do things on its own. Panasonic would probably spend even less on marketting on a games console. They pulled out once (twice perhaps) already. They are not in that market and their parent company doesn't need a venture like this, it is bigger than Sony.

 

[a4164]

3DO's vision and execution was lacking ($700 USD console, :rollseyes: please). I guess I am confusing my history again, I thought Matsushita bought M2 from 3DO because they were going to directly enter the market rather than license and produce a console under the 3DO moniker.

Also, if a company stopped trying after a few failures, where would that leave said company. I am sure Matsushita has been eyeing up Sony and the success they have had with PlayStation and are green with envy. If I were a Matsushita or NEC, and still wanted a piece of the pie (revenue bigger than the film industry for goodness sakes). Would I divide the market even more or go knocking on Nintendo's door whom I have a good relationship with. Nintendo of course being scorned by the mainstream media for not matching Sony/MS features.

I still believe you need an established name brand (e.g. Panasonic/Sony) if they (Nintendo) are going to enter the Consumer Electronics market with the intention of taking #1. The Q did not go anywhere because it was not a next generation videogame console. It was an overpriced DVD player that played GC games, a niche product from the start. Now that consoles are a mainstream commodity, put the Nintendo name and the Panasonic name on one, focused product (no market division a la Q and a $299.99 USD price tag) and you have something to grab the mainstream/mass market attention.

Of course if Nintendo makes a GameCube2 (pure gaming console) thats another thing all together. But, I do not think it is enough for Nintendo to stick to business as usual. In short, silence your critics. Its time to pull out all the stops and be as aggressive as possible; admit you are competing with Sony and MS directly would be a nice start. Take a run for #1 and cement your long term goals.

 

[Tahir2]

I agree the next console from Nintendo needs to be seen as more than a console and more like a games consoles that plays DVD's and music etc, not because this is something that most homes lack nowadays but to be seen as comparable to the competitions machines. I still think this lack of DVD capability initially hindered the GC and gave it that 'kiddy' toy image.

 

[Heretic]

Up until recently I had been positive GC not playing DVDs was a big mistake and had hurt sales. Now I'm not so sure it was such a bad idea with DVD players down to $29 US. From a parents perspective, a gaming console only status could even be considered a plus.

 

[cthellis42]

Eh... At this point, media-playing is "standard" for consoles. PS1 and Saturn and Dreamcast put in generic CD-playing functionality, and PS2 and Xbox have DVD's. Nintendo has remained outside of it because of their choice of media--cartridges up until GameCube, and straight into a proprietary disk format. I certainly can't see how having DVD-playing capabilities would be "detrimental" to it in the slightest. It's not necessary, certainly, but it's definitely added appeal and consumer value. From a parent's perspective, having a DVD player in a console means not having to buy your kid a separate DVD player or have them co-opt the main household one when they want to watch their movies. (Most kids will have separate/personal TV's where their consoles are hooked up anyway.)

 

[Heretic]

True. I imagined some parents would want to restrict DVD player use to family/living room so as to keep a close eye on content and viewing habits but now that I've thought about it a little, I don't suppose many Moms and Dads, if any, would view video games in the bedroom only as a solution to those types of worries. Still, I can't help but think a next gen console playing DVDs will be even less a selling point than last gens being able to play CDs.

 

[Sonic]

DVD functionality will probably end up being a non issue when it comes to the next generation of consoles. DVD's are pretty widespread now and those who don't have them now should be getting them rather soon. I'd imagine the media used in next gen systems will be of a higher capacity while allowing compatibility to use DVD's, CD's if there isn't that much data to fit on the disc.

Nintendo seems to have done well with the price drop. One thing I'm noticing on TV is a lot more advertising for th eGamecube. Much more than I have seen for the rest of the year, but I'm sure htat is because of the holiday season. Still, it would be good to think that Nintendo can keep it up in the marketing department even if it onlyhas half of the commercials on throughout the main part of 2004 that it does this holiday season. I think Nintendo stands a very good chance of increasing its audience with the price drop and that selling so many GCN's could have a positive effect on general consumer awareness and confidence in a next gen Nintendo system.

It seems Nintendo is getting a little competitive and has some sort of a new way of thinking. Still, the company needs a new attitude in order to make it in this business. The pride Nintendo has can be a very good thing if they use it as something of being pompous and showing gamers Nintendo is #1. I think what Nintendo has lost the most is the WOW factor and that's something that really pushed the N64. If they can somehow regain this then they would be in an even better position going into the next generation. Launch the system at the same price of the other two systems, hype the system to no end, and show games that will reinvigorate all audiences to the system. They can start by building new franchises with the GCN in its latter years then release sequels to the games.

I have a plan in my mind for Nintendo, I don't know how much of it the company will follow. All I know is that they need to keep making smart business moves and capitalize on the momentum the GCN has right now. Gamecube should be its main focus right now. Bring out some killer games that appeal to the masses and make gamers aware of how good Nintendo is once more. If they can do that, they will be much better off going into the next gen.

 

[cthellis42]

CD's weren't an issue at all in the first gen, because most people already had CD players in other forms anyway, and with better speakers than one's TV. DVD playing similarly is not an "issue" but is just handy, and a "why not?" feature customers would expect. (Meaning they'd still note a lack.) Certainly it makes it easier to just be able to toss a DVD into your console without having to have another machine nearby, meaning more cables and more switching around...

CD/DVD play will no doubt come as a matter of consequence with the higher-capacity formats. We can already see Blu-Ray players out now which play all the lower formats (though they are big and expensive machines. Might they have a 2nd laser to handle those? Would it translate over to more budget machines?), and I imagine anything that's coming will support CD and DVD the way DVD made sure to include CD before it.

Always good to have.

 

[Heretic]

I should have elaborated a bit more in my last post. Playing CDs was an okay feature last gen, the lack of which kept noone from buying N64. Next gen I think Nintendo could easily stick with a proprietary format and grow their fanbase. In my view backwards compatibility will be the only added feature it need have to be a solid hit.

eh... I've been wrong before

 

[Tahir2]

I think not being able to play DVD's is more of a deficit than backward compatibility.

Perhaps I am wrong. Anyone care to persuade me otherwise?

 

[Crazyace]

I tend to think that playing DVD's is an asset ( compared to just playing CD's last generation ) as CD's are normally played on stereo systems - not TV's
If you need another box to play DVD's as well as your game console under your TV you start to enter spaghetti city...

 

[Super Grafx]

I think 3DO's failure was 3DO's failure. I am not suggesting a 3DO-II.

This model of business is exactly what 3DO did. There was a 3DO II which was cancelled (M2).

there were a number of 3DO-designed game systems in the works.


-3DO Mark II aka Bulldog aka M2. the M2 would have been both an upgrade to the first machine and as a seperate stand-alone console.

-a DVD-based M2 was under concidration for 1998.

-MX was in development and completed. would have been M2's big brother, used as an arcade board. almost got sold to Nintendo to be used as 'N2000' the quick follow-up to N64. the MX finally ended up at Microsoft. its legacy could possibly make its way into Xbox2

-M3 and M4 were, at the very least, on paper, if not in actual R&D. 3DO maintained the right to design M3 and M4, even after it sold M2 to Matsushita for 100 million.


its a shame development ended with MX. the M3 or M4 would likely have been superior to the Playstation2, much like the M2 was superior to the PS1.

I still believe you need an established name brand (e.g. Panasonic/Sony) if they (Nintendo) are going to enter the Consumer Electronics market with the intention of taking #1. The Q did not go anywhere because it was not a next generation videogame console. It was an overpriced DVD player that played GC games, a niche product from the start. Now that consoles are a mainstream commodity, put the Nintendo name and the Panasonic name on one, focused product (no market division a la Q and a $299.99 USD price tag) and you have something to grab the mainstream/mass market attention.

Of course if Nintendo makes a GameCube2 (pure gaming console) thats another thing all together. But, I do not think it is enough for Nintendo to stick to business as usual. In short, silence your critics. Its time to pull out all the stops and be as aggressive as possible; admit you are competing with Sony and MS directly would be a nice start. Take a run for #1 and cement your long term goals.

I'm in complete agreement with this. we think alike ^__^

 

[Super Grafx]

Matsushita and it's company Panasonic have had a few tries already. They failed with 3DO and its successor pulling out completely.
Nintendo under Panasonic would be another disaster IMHO. Nintendo could not get on with Sony (or the other way around) - Nintendo's way of doing things is Nintendo's way of doing things.

disagree.

Panasonic has not really tried since the original 3DO of 1993. they aborted the M2 as a game console even though it was used in several other applications, and the Gamecube-based Panasonic Q was a half-hearted attempt.

I believe a full-force effort by Matsushita/Panasonic, Nintendo, and their hardware-software partners, would not be a disaster. In fact, I actually believe it would be a disaster for Nintendo to *NOT* try wholeheartedly with Panasonic in the forthcoming console cycle.

 

[Heretic]

I think not being able to play DVD's is more of a deficit than backward compatibility.

Perhaps I am wrong. Anyone care to persuade me otherwise?

Sorry, I didn't mean to disappear

I would argue that many consumers aren't comfortable with the idea a previous generations software automatically becomes worthless once the latest hardware is released, whether they honestly intend to make use of a dated library not. If the attitude in regards to DVD functionality next generation is going to be ‘why not?', when it comes to backwards compatibility it will be ‘why the hell not?!!!' (for some of us at least). The other negative of being non-B/C is the usual limited game selection at or near launch gives possible would-be buyers added incentive to hold off and wait to see what develops, good or bad.

Speaking strictly next generation, those in the market for a gaming console that don't already own a DVD player will be so far behind in the technology curve they'll probably buy PS2 or Xbox, the bargain basement prices will be just to hard to resist since they'll be way behind the times and a tight fisted lot to begin with.

 

[Clashman]

About the similarity to the 3DO business model:

I think what's being proposed here is significantly different from what 3DO did. 3DO basically allowed Panasonic, Goldstar, etc to build the console with their technology and sell it for a profit on the hardware, so that they wouldn't have to take the initial losses. This backfired, because in order to make a profit, Panasonic, et all needed to sell the 3DO for 700 bucks, relegating it the title of "Rich Boy's Toy".

The idea proposed for Nintendo, I believe, (correct me if I'm wrong), would be to allow Panasonic to build the machine and sell it for 250, 300 bucks. However, in this case Nintendo would pay for the cost defecit as well as for Panasonic's moola. In this way, Panasonic would make money on the hardware and Nintendo would make it's money on the games, (while at the same time paying Panasonic to keep the cost in line with other consoles). This would allow Nintendo to shed it's kiddie image, (while perhaps releasing another version of their own for the kiddies), and at the same time prevent them from falling into the same trap as 3DO. I'm not completely certain about it, but I think to simply brand it a 3DO II is unfair.

About having DVD functionality in the next gen consoles, (as well as in the present generation GC)

I think some of you are forgetting that large parts of the population of this country actually use their console as their main DVD player. When the console becomes obsolete, I'm guessing many will want their new console to do the same thing. To not include it would be a step back, in my opinion and the opinion of many others. And I don't see why an N5 couldn't both have DVD as well as play GC games, too.

And I do think not having DVD did in fact hurt Nintendo. When the consoles first came out many people were looking both to upgrade their consoles as well as find out what "that new fangled movies on a CD type thing" was all about. PS2 and XBox were both cost efficient ways to kill two birds with one stone. Yes, there are now 30-50 dollar DVD players now, but back then it wasn't so easy to shell out 200 bucks for a GC and another 70 to 150 for a DVD player that probably doesn't even have digital audio or prog-scan possibilities like the XBOX or PS2. Not to mention the fact that most people see 30 dollars for a DVD player and see a 30 dollar piece of shit, (which let's face it, the vast majority of them are).

 

[Clashman]

Also, I think one of Nintendo's main challenges for the North American market for the next generation should be to create their own line of sports games. I think that this might be why Nintendo didn't go over well with the sports fans this generation. They had nothing original to offer, and thus sports fans migrated to systems that did. If all you care about is sports games, and unfortunately there's plenty of people who fit that description, there's no compelling reason to choose Nintendo over Sony and Microsoft, as both consoles have everything Nintendo does in that department and more. If Nintendo developed its own original line of sports games, (preferably good), I think it could help woo more sports games, o, fans over to their system, and in the process make it a more desireable system for 3rd party sports games. Just a thought.

 

[Fox5]

And I do think not having DVD did in fact hurt Nintendo. When the consoles first came out many people were looking both to upgrade their consoles as well as find out what "that new fangled movies on a CD type thing" was all about. PS2 and XBox were both cost efficient ways to kill two birds with one stone. Yes, there are now 30-50 dollar DVD players now, but back then it wasn't so easy to shell out 200 bucks for a GC and another 70 to 150 for a DVD player that probably doesn't even have digital audio or prog-scan possibilities like the XBOX or PS2. Not to mention the fact that most people see 30 dollars for a DVD player and see a 30 dollar piece of shit, (which let's face it, the vast majority of them are).

They didn't have prog scan, and most people that were buying an xbox or ps2 as their first dvd player probably didn't have an HDTV. And I think the dvd was a much bigger selling point for ps2 than for xbox. Even if people hadn't been buying dvd players in that period before xbox game out, they were buying ps2s which could play dvds.

Clashman- didn't nintendo have a sports line for n64 and gameboy, and kept it for a little while on gamecube?(all that is left now is NST and their extreme sports games though)

And about the Panasonic Q, if Nintendo was selling gamecube for $200 at a minor loss, Panasonic probably could have sold it at $300 or $350 and made a profit, as there shouldn't be much new hardware to add.(I think the price may still be around $300 though)