Iwata on Nintendo Revolution

[StefanS]

On Tuesday G4 ran an interview with Satoru Iwata, conducted by Geoff Keighley during Tokyo Game Show 2005.
...

When asked about Revolution's graphical capabilities and High Definition support, Mr. Iwata claims that users not see a discernible difference between Revolution and Xbox360/PS3 games on standard definition sets. Although the president does not explicitly reconfirm the omission of HD, Iwata explains that Nintendo feels mainstream appeal is far more important than graphical prowess since current non-gamers have no interest in the visual quality of current games. In fact, he goes as far as to say Nintendo hopes those hardcore enough to care about the graphical differences and buy a PS3 or Xbox360 will also buy a Revolution, since the Revolution will provide unique experiences. A bold statement--one clearly demonstrating a shift in Nintendo's console strategy. Nintendo isn't trying to be number two: it is aiming for the top spot from a different angle--one that is profitable for both Nintendo and its partners.

Iwata also discusses Nintendo's recent interactions with publishers and developers. He explains that western publishers initially were wary of the freestyle controller, but quickly became receptive once Nintendo introduced the numchuck attachment. Iwata also reveals that Nintendo has approached publishers and developers with gameplay concepts, proposing how their established franchises could benefit from Revolution's controller. The spokesman claims that, "without exception," all third parties have responded positively to such "concrete proposals," and Nintendo has found the meetings constructive and enjoyable. He refused to mention any specific collaborations, but he promised many familiar titles and suggested the Revolution could have a large launch line-up "in 2006."

http://www.planetgamecube.com/news.cfm?action=item&id=6540

paradigm shift?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I was saying yonks back Nintendo are positioning the Revolution as 'the second console'. I got major abuse for suggesting such blasphemy on some other forums!

 

[pipo]

Didn't they already do that with the Cube?

 

[mckmas8808]

Soooo *looks around* Nintendo doesn't mind being number 2. Ok I guest it's a good [font=Nimrod,Georgia]strategy.

[/font]

 

[Refreshment]

"Didn't they already do that with the Cube?"

Well Nintendo did try to do it with the Cube. But this time we most admit that the difference here is substantial and not only limited to a "different game style" but also a different interface to interact with the software.

So you have Sony and Microsoft fighting for the control of the Ship while Nintendo takes the small boat down to money land.

 

[Sis]

Soooo *looks around* Nintendo doesn't mind being number 2. Ok I guest it's a good [font=Nimrod,Georgia]strategy.

[/font]

It works for Pepsi, though. Being number 2 can be very profitable.

.Sis

 

[speng]

In fact, he goes as far as to say Nintendo hopes those hardcore enough to care about the graphical differences and buy a PS3 or Xbox360 will also buy a Revolution, since the Revolution will provide unique experiences.

This is the exact reason why I'm getting a Revolution.

Speng.

 

[Acert93]

I was saying yonks back Nintendo are positioning the Revolution as 'the second console'. I got major abuse for suggesting such blasphemy on some other forums!

Yes, you did suggest this. You did a good job of extrapolating their goal for a different audiance and augmenting the current hardcore fans.

Their goal does seem pretty simple.

A. Get hardcore Nintendo Fans on board.
B. Be the 2nd console for hardcore gamers by offering a new experience not had available on the mainstream machines.
C. Market to a new audiance who is not as receptive to the play mechanics and input devices of the mainstream consoles (i.e. find new customers)

If their controller works well I can see them obtaining all three. Specifically, #3, is of interest to me. My mom ALWAYS moves the controller when she plays. Having a controller that REACTS to your movement is PERFECT for her.

Anyhow I HAVE to give you props on this one--you did call it. I am not sure I disagreed (pretty sure I agreed!), but still I remember you getting a thumping and it turns our you were right!

 

[Acert93]

It works for Pepsi, though. Being number 2 can be very profitable.

.Sis

Heck, #3 this gen was as profitable for Nintendo as it was for Sony at #1. And no need to mention MS in this context!

 

[Rodéric]

I have to say I wasn't interested in Next Generation consoles except technology wise, was too much more of the same with enhanced graphics, but the Revolution Controller definetly shifted my mind, now there's a next gen console I want.

 

[pc999]

What I always thought .

Soooo *looks around* Nintendo doesn't mind being number 2. Ok I guest it's a good [font=Nimrod,Georgia]strategy.

[/font]

I think that it is more like having a Home Cinema and PC able to do Home Cinema like features, they are diferent but they can easly coexist and hardly one can be caled Nº2.

PS: probably there is better examples but I think you can get the idea, from this one.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Soooo *looks around* Nintendo doesn't mind being number 2. Ok I guest it's a goodstrategy.

Future news article (just popped back from my time machine and grabbed this)

In the last great console war, two armies were amassed to fight for world domination. The forces of Sony were pitted against the forces of Microsoft as the two behemoths collided in a brutual power struggle of graphical prowess, hardware perforamnce metrics, cost effectiveness and big-named triple-A titles. To this day there is no winner. Sony have managed to keep ahead of their rival in the console base, but the XB360 has maintained a higher tie ratio for games and is gaining market perception as the platform of choice for smaller developers. This growth in small and medium scale enterprises looks set to encourage an ever-strengthening library that is drawing in more and more customers.

But to say there is no clear winner is to overlook the third army in this war. 'Third army?' I hear you ask. Well not so much an army, as a movement. A quite uprising. A discontent in the status quo, in the lack of console leadership, that has seen the masses choose to back a force that never set itself the lofty task of ruling supreme. What is this movement, you ask? Nintendo's little Revolution.

The recent release of annual sales figures prove categorically that Nintendo have managed to usurp the two behemoths with a smaller strike force. With less brute power and less reliance on a nuclear arsenal of triple A megabuck developments, Nintendo came into the market pitching themselves as the 'second console'. Many took this as acceptance of defeat; of throwing in the towel and resignation to a perpetual position in some rival's shadow. But it was perhaps the most subtle and deadly maneouvre in console marketting history.

Take a little look at our recent poll results. 62% of XB360 owners also have a Nintendo Revolution. 54% of PS3 owners also have a Revolution. And 23% of gamers with only one console have a Nintendo Revolution. By offering a second, different gaming experience, Nintendo has found the support of more gamers in total than either Sony or Microsoft in their desperate attempt for a no-survivors slaughter to achieve total domination. Growth of the Revolution, fueled by an ever stranger collection of eccletic and abstract games with their simpler, more intuitive controls, has grown 149% year on year, to the point where the Revolution is not only in more homes than either PS3 or XB360, but growing it's user base faster. It appears that regardless of whether a gamer will fight alongside the forces of PlayStation, or file in with the ranks of XBox, they don't mind doing away a little mercenary sideline will happily take up silent arms with the neutral, innocent, quite little Revolution.

The only area Nintendo have failed to secure over the past two years is in fact the position of 'second place'. With the increased userbase and subsequent emergence of an increasing number of triple-A titles on the Revolution, it appears the masses have chosen their true leader. Let the pretenders fight it out to the death; whoever's left standing from the PS and XB camps will look out from the final battlefield and see that while they were busy slaying their number one opponent, Nintendo's 'second console' clearly found its way to reign supreme for years to come.

 

[Acert93]

That is hilarious, in a good way. I don't see that exact scenario unfolding, but something close is not unthinkable. Sadly, I cannot afford 2 consoles. If/when the Rev hits $100 I could be in the market for one though, especially if the controller is as cool as it looks.

 

[Inane_Dork]

When asked about Revolution's graphical capabilities and High Definition support, Mr. Iwata claims that users not see a discernible difference between Revolution and Xbox360/PS3 games on standard definition sets.

Considering my dad could not tell the difference between NBA 2k5 and reality from a commercial, this is true of many people. The question is, will it be true of gamers? The "graphics are great" argument holds sway over many casual gamers. Even if they can't tell the difference (or the difference is opposite the claim), it's the "being cool" that's key.

Well, the GC held its own. The Rev probably will too.

Though, I should point out, he's basically conceding that on an HDTV everyone will see the difference.

 

[Cornman]

I was saying yonks back Nintendo are positioning the Revolution as 'the second console'. I got major abuse for suggesting such blasphemy on some other forums!

maybe because its not true?

 

[jvd]

That is hilarious, in a good way. I don't see that exact scenario unfolding, but something close is not unthinkable. Sadly, I cannot afford 2 consoles. If/when the Rev hits $100 I could be in the market for one though, especially if the controller is as cool as it looks.

May happen sooner than you think. The big buzz is a 200$ launch price for the rev . Putting it 200$ or more cheaper than the nearest competitor

 

[Ty]

Heck, #3 this gen was as profitable for Nintendo as it was for Sony at #1. And no need to mention MS in this context!

By "gen" do you mean period of time (i.e. you are including handhelds)? I didn't think that the GCN was any where near as profitable as the PS2 but hey, I don't pay close attention to the balance sheets. /shrug.

 

[Powderkeg]

Consoles live or die by their game selection.

You can make all of the claims you want, you can have the neatest controller, the best graphics, best online support, whatever. All that matters is your game library. Do you have the most games that people want to buy? If you have the most desirable games, you'll have the most desirable console.

Clearly Nintendo's 1st party games are not going to put them in first place. If that was good enough they wouldn't be in last place right now, and I haven't exactly seen a flood of 3rd party developers announcing Revolution games.

 

[pc999]

May happen sooner than you think. The big buzz is a 200$ launch price for the rev . Putting it 200$ or more cheaper than the nearest competitor

As cheaper as they can will be the best for them (and for us too) IMO, once if they want to be the sencond consoles it need to be cheap (usually a gamer how own a console only buy a second if cheap, on of the same gen), and for those which are not used too play only a few will give that money uneless they really in it trust which I doubt IMO will be more those how want to try it, those how think it should be fun et... (like we did with these/our consoles).

So price it is one of the fundamental point of their strategie IMO.

 

[Powderkeg]

As cheaper as they can will be the best for them (and for us too) IMO, once if they want to be the sencond consoles it need to be cheap (usually a gamer how own a console only buy a second if cheap, on of the same gen), and for those which are not used too play only a few will give that money uneless they really in it trust which I doubt IMO will be more those how want to try it, those how think it should be fun et... (like we did with these/our consoles).

So price it is one of the fundamental point of their strategie IMO.

Ehhh, that strategy didn't help them with the Gamecube, did it?