Can I smack Iwata yet?

[cthellis42]

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?section_name=pub&aid=3725

I mean, he's looking at basically a clone of MnG4 with subscription-only (500 yen/month still, I think?) online play enabled (and considering built-in broadband adaptors weren't an option yet--its availability pretty much coincided to MnGO's thus adding to the cost-of-entry), requires the hard drive (ooh, bigger entry!), and by comparing it to sales of the original game, and with that he comes up with "proof that customers do not want online games?"

How about "most customers do not wish to pay the extra money for connection to the Internet," where Internet connectivity just gets more and more intrinsic with each passing day. (Not sure how the situation is in Japan itself, though. I know there are prohibitive costs with some of it.)

Xbox Live does comparatively well considering both its installed base and prohibiting factors (subscription/broadband-only), and certainly people are in no way afraid of taking advantage of games without subscription and hard drive requirements...

Argl.

Basically, I'm just glad to see the DS looking to online features, else I'd think "Revolution" will come out with something similarly pathetic to the GameCube while Sony and Microsoft storm ahead with big ventures into the online arena.

 

[Qroach]

If he's downplaying the need to have online support right now, then I doubt they will do anything online with revoloution, considering how they want to show something at E3 next year. Jeez, I can recall many arguments with people in this forum that simply wouldn't accept that nintendo didn't have ANY online plans for the gamecube, so they will probably ignore this as well.

 

[jvd]

I do believe they will have lan support right out of the box this time around . I don't know how many games will support it but i've heard of two that are currently being made for the n5 that are "mario" games

 

[Goldni]

I could care less about online gaming. I love my Xbox and dont have Live. When I see something truly innovative and revolutionary for online then I may change my mind. Until then online is for forums and news.

 

[Rodéric]

I could care less about online gaming. I love my Xbox and dont have Live. When I see something truly innovative and revolutionary for online then I may change my mind. Until then online is for forums and news.

I too don't care about online, I have a broadband connection for years, and I've not even played Half-Life mods, Quakes or Unreal Tournament....
I just don't care, LAN is more to my taste.

 

[Teasy]

I like playing online.. for free on my PC

 

[cthellis42]

Gaming is moving in the DIRECTION of seamless online use, though. Pick-up any-type multiplayer, games that can be added to as you go along rather than having to wait for the sequel, having a functional community built around it rather than just talking about a game on a message board... Heck, if nothing else it'll just because easy voice/video communication between people through their consoles, like IM'ing is to PCs.

It's not the most popular thing ever, and it's certainly below the PC experience now, but it IS nothing but extra good times. (Just so long as haxx0ring and viruses don't start hitting the consoles. )

You also don't attract squat of the MMO's people want without having an online system that developers can see as functional, desirable, and supported, so that counts most of them right out. (I guess "customers don't want them" either. )


Teh suq

 

[j^aws]

Can I smack Iwata yet?

Permission granted!

They seem as stuborn to jump onto the online experience as they were to drop cartridges...

Personally, I'm going to slap him with a kipper just to 'see' his reaction!

 

[cthellis42]

I prefer a nice, big flounder. It delivers a more satisfying "thwap."

 

[Ty]

Completely shortsighted. If he's drawing that conclusion from the sales (or lack thereof) of a single product than he's a pretty big moron. I mean, they are interested in WiFi connectivity which is great, so why would players be against (not want) connectivity through the very same medium that PCs use?

Teasy, one needn't pay for online usage of consoles - witness PS2 and Xbox hacks.

 

[cthellis42]

Teasy, one needn't pay for online usage of consoles - witness PS2 and Xbox hacks.

...and since when do you pay for online usage of the PS2, except for things you can't hack like MMO's? (So far as I know we haven't gotten anything else like Minno no Golf Online yet in the US.

Unless by that you meant "witness PS2 and also Xbox hacks."

 

[wazoo]

Completely shortsighted. If he's drawing that conclusion from the sales (or lack thereof) of a single product than he's a pretty big moron. I mean, they are interested in WiFi connectivity which is great, so why would players be against (not want) connectivity through the very same medium that PCs use?

Teasy, one needn't pay for online usage of consoles - witness PS2 and Xbox hacks.

He is not looking at the sales of 1 product only. He was quoting HSG because it is a huge franchise in Japan with a online version that flopped badly.

Gaming forums posters (and so more likely to be online gamers) can cry all they want, they are a very small but vocal comunity. The last company listening to them and building its strategy based on their wishes was Sega and they are in a very bad situation right now. nintendo does not want to follow that destiny and has to be very careful.

They said that online would not be important this gen, and it is not. A lot of online only games are cancelled at this moment (last one are ultima X and TFLO), the killer aps of Xbox live did perform very badly last christmas (PGR2, CS, Top Spin). At least they did not show any strong sales that would mean online is a big push for sales. More, there is no proof that online added solo games (like Madden) are seeing more sales with or without their online component.

Finally, he is talking about Japan, which has a very different online situation than in the Us. He could also talked about Europe where online gaming is a joke, especially on ps2.

 

[cthellis42]

He is not looking at the sales of 1 product only. He was quoting HSG because it is a huge franchise in Japan with a online version that flopped badly.

He was using--as a primary example--a game where customers were being asked to pay, again, for almost the same game they already had (just with online features), one of the only subscription non-MMORPG's, and also REQUIRES the hard drive to play online and using it to state to the effect of "proof that customers do not want online games." (There could always be translational differences.)

You don't see anything wrong with that?

Heck, he even puts it in terms of "fails to match the sales of its offline predecessor"--rather than in perspective of other online titles and traits--which could have FFXI pointing to an "online failure" as well.

Gaming forums posters (and so more likely to be online gamers) can cry all they want, they are a very small but vocal comunity. The last company listening to them and building its strategy based on their wishes was Sega and they are in a very bad situation right now. nintendo does not want to follow that destiny and has to be very careful.

Interesting... That's a new one. Hadn't heard Sega's failure blamed on forum posters before.

They said that online would not be important this gen, and it is not.

...but this gen is the foundation of next gen. Or are you saying that online games will be unimportant FOREVER? ...and comments from Iwata like this can muddy everyone's feelings of the entire next generation--thinking Nintendo will handle it the same way they are now--which is to say, not at all.

A lot of online only games are cancelled at this moment (last one are ultima X and TFLO),

...because they're finally realizing that "creating a MMORPG" does not equal "instantly making a cash cow." In the same amount of time, other games come out that keep broadening the market.

More, there is no proof that online added solo games (like Madden) are seeing more sales with or without their online component.

...but they will each need it to remain competitve to one another, and from this date through an ENTIRE next generation, gamers' attitudes about online features will change--a lot. There are plenty of games and genres on the PC where it's just plain suicidal to come out without multi-player (which equals "online" for PC's) features. Certainly online interest and community is what keeps a game longer in the public eye and more in its interest--for that game and more importantly for its sequels. Console gaming will get the same way too, probably within the next generation.

Finally, he is talking about Japan, which has a very different online situation than in the Us. He could also talked about Europe where online gaming is a joke, especially on ps2.

...and yet if this is going to be Nintendo's attitude in their home territory, what hope is there that they will provide--or be embraced by other developers--a good online community in the others, rather than being swallowed whole by Sony and Microsoft?

...and heck, what was that "preferred ISP" deal with AOL all about?

 

[Fox5]

I think that preferred AOL thing was for phantasy star online....which I don't think works with PSO.
They also had some kind of gamespy tools that they apparently never used. Maybe Nintendo of America started to move towards online but NCL shot them down?

BTW, nintendo rereleases games and adds far less than online support, charges full price, they're inferior to what you can get for free(roms) or what you can get on another console, and they still sell well enough that nintendo keeps doing it.

 

[wazoo]

Gaming forums posters (and so more likely to be online gamers) can cry all they want, they are a very small but vocal comunity. The last company listening to them and building its strategy based on their wishes was Sega and they are in a very bad situation right now. nintendo does not want to follow that destiny and has to be very careful.

Interesting... That's a new one. Hadn't heard Sega's failure blamed on forum posters before.

That is not what I meant. Nintendo sees online as a niche (despite a lot of forum gamers are online interested, they are only a tiny fraction of the market) and this gen is is a niche. They do not want to allocate money to a niche market, when offline games sell 10 times more. You could question if their current attitude will embarass them in the future, but this is a hard question considering we do not know what they are doing secretly.

...but they will each need it to remain competitve to one another, and from this date through an ENTIRE next generation, gamers' attitudes about online features will change--a lot.

You are coming from the future ?? I have the same feelings as you but this is really an assumption.

There are plenty of games and genres on the PC where it's just plain suicidal to come out without multi-player (which equals "online" for PC's) features.

Multiplayer on console has a different meaning which until now puts more sales than PC games could dream of. I do not see Nintendo being overly impressed by the PC model where games are selling in few quantites (unless a select few).

Certainly online interest and community is what keeps a game longer in the public eye and more in its interest--for that game and more importantly for its sequels. Console gaming will get the same way too, probably within the next generation.

I do not think the Counterstrike/Battle.Net free business model is the way online console gaming is heading. On consoles, online will have a price and thus takes more time to take off.

 

[cthellis42]

That is not what I meant. Nintendo sees online as a niche (despite a lot of forum gamers are online interested, they are only a tiny fraction of the market) and this gen is is a niche. They do not want to allocate money to a niche market, when offline games sell 10 times more. You could question if their current attitude will embarass them in the future, but this is a hard question considering we do not know what they are doing secretly.

Hence why I don't like seeing comments from Iwata like this--just makes me nervous. Meanwhile, though, the Dreamcast's online endeavor was one of the better high points of the console, got them great press, and on the whole was decently-represented and could have led to bigger and better things if only they had the ability to keep up. But hey, they were listening to foolish forum posters or something, ne?

I kid, but I'm still not sure what you were getting at with your comment. But in regards to Nintendo, this "when offline games sell 10 times more" makes no sense. That's again looking ONLY at Minna no Golf Online as the example. Will they be FORCED to for some reason split their games between online and offline versions? If Minna no Golf 4--the widely popular game the online component is being compared TO--had had the online functionality included, would it have been anything but MORE popular and MORE likely to draw in subscribers? This is also to mention that even in regards to MnGO, there is additional revenue coming in from the subscription, so looking only at "copies sold" is foolish; how does their PROFIT compare? Like MMORPG's, games can "sell a lot less" and still be wildly more profitable--especially in the long run; much longer than regular game sequels.

He's have been much better off looking at a LOT of different game types to make his point. As it stands, he doesn't really have one.

You are coming from the future ?? I have the same feelings as you but this is really an assumption.

Of course it's an assumption. But it's an assumption having watched the history of gaming on PC's, the ramping up of online support on consoles this gen, and the growing connection that we get in all other ends of of the technical spectrum. (Including something that the DS itself will be pushing, hm?)

I think it's a safe bet that the 2005/2006 start and 2010/2011 "conclusion" of next generation will see serious growth in connectivity--especially through online feature support.

I also think it's a safe bet that few people on here would disagree with. Seemingly not even yourself.

Multiplayer on console has a different meaning which until now puts more sales than PC games could dream of.

...which also means that consoles need to see a far smaller percentage of people picking up on the online components to create as much and more effect.

I do not see Nintendo being overly impressed by the PC model where games are selling in few quantites (unless a select few).

That's just because of the nature of PC gaming public. And yet what games sell the most? Where's the most activity? Discounting the kid's titles and certain phenomenons in their own right like the Sims, it comes from the online community. The multiplayer. The thriving mod community. The booming MMO's.

Hell, the REAL money from "PC gaming" isn't even "gaming" the way we thing, but is STILL focused around the online component: gambling.

I do not think the Counterstrike/Battle.Net free business model is the way online console gaming is heading. On consoles, online will have a price and thus takes more time to take off.

On that the answer is "depends." PS2's business model is currently structured the same way as PC's. Xbox's is subscription-based but offers more "service" than you'd usually get, and its own fee isn't too much to swallow. Everyone's model is looking for ways to score profit--though currently the only real one to succeed is the MMO--but in the meanwhile they all still get extra marketing points, extra attractions, more longevity for the title, and the ability to build a bigger audience waiting for the sequel. (And with the consoles everybody pretty much HAS to buy the game, too--no LANning off one copy or easy copying--so it's a built advantage for them over PC-dom.

Certainly they'll still be looking for places to profit on, but then the public gets to show how much it doesn't really care to pay for minor details, and their competitors get to prove how THEY are better for NOT charging you... Gotta love it. We'll see a bit more "paid content" for a while, but I don't see a monumental, industry-wide model change coming--not while we still use OUR bandwidth 99.9% of the time.