Nintendo's future?

[Shifty Geezer]

Can we accept that games are a form of entertainment, like movies?

Wierd choice of analogy, seeing as the movie industry constantly recycles the same names. These days computer animations have to headline a dozen Hollywood A-grade superstars as the voice talent, despite the actors never being seen. 'Oh loook, this film has John Cleese and Mel Gibson and Catherine Zeta Jones and...I'll go watch it.' It's not like there's not a million other people that couldn't do the job as well, but being unknowns Hollywood feels they wouldn't draw in the crowds (like that ws a problem was Star Wars Episode 4 ). But then I know people who go to see a film because they're a fan of the actor. I think the only reason we don't get 13 films in 4 years is because they take a long time to produce. If Mario could only be added to one game at a time it'd be the same for Nintendo. And if Brad Pitt could star in 13 films in 4 years without suffering from exhaustion and wanting to (Nintendo need to ask Mario to star in another game, neither does he get tired of appearng in games) I'm sure Hollywood would do it, and don't know if people would complain. I do already at the recycling of actors and lack of interest in finding new talent, but everyone else seems pretty okay with that in the main.

 

[StefanS]

anyway the problem may be more lifestyle changes than games really loosing their appeal, at least for me, as there are a lot of games i would gladly play on my gamecube if i had more time for it. yes they are some people who only have a gamecube and that are more than satisfied with what it offers, maybe because they do have not much time for gaming.

I can really relate to that as my GCN is currently collecting dust because I don't want to game for hours. It is pretty interesting that I use my NDS more frequently: On public transport, 20min breaks, etc. Games like Meteos, Osu Tatakae Ouendan etc. are the ideal time killer. Easy to pick up, play for 10min and enjoy.

 

[Powderkeg]

Wierd choice of analogy, seeing as the movie industry constantly recycles the same names.

Why is that weird?

The problem, these studio leaders and other industry experts seemed to say, was not only that a steady diet of formulaic plots, too-familiar special-effects vehicles and remakes of television shows has, over time, left the average moviegoer hungry for better entertainment.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/24/m...28e216626&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

Is it really that strange of an analogy to compare Hollywood which is suffering from a bad case of "too much of the same" with Nintendo, who literally has hundreds of games with the exact same cast of 1-3 core characters?

 

[V3]

Just a musing...Nintendo's whole idea of shifting the paradigm of what a "game" can even be is right on for targeting people who aren't playing games. These people aren't gaming because they can't/don't want to/don't know how to game as we know it. Moral of the story: find something they will want to do. Play with puppies. Work your brain. Make music. New markets need new ideas, not just doing what's already been done with even greater fidelity. The iPod/Discman parallel was genius. I thought of one other parallel: think about how arcade gaming has virtually died b/c people can just do it on home consoles. Well, someone hit on the bright idea of putting those trivia/puzzle/card game machines in bars, and they're doing quite well. Instead of trying to make a better Virtua Fighter, they redefined what an arcade game could be.

Nintendo shifting paradigm is mainly to avoid the skyrocketing development cost. Development cost is rising and titles are selling less and less, that's going to spell trouble for the industry sooner or later, if not for the industry, for Nintendo own bottom line.

The market is growing but it isn't growing fast enough to support the budget that will maximise next gen system (Outside a few established titles). Nintendo isn't taking a huge gamble with Revolution, they're looking for a way out because in the end Revolution will be easier on Nintendo bottom line than going the XBox 360 or PS3 route (which would be a huge gamble for Nintendo).

 

[mckmas8808]

Nintendo shifting paradigm is mainly to avoid the skyrocketing development cost. Development cost is rising and titles are selling less and less, that's going to spell trouble for the industry sooner or later, if not for the industry, for Nintendo own bottom line.

The market is growing but it isn't growing fast enough to support the budget that will maximise next gen system (Outside a few established titles). Nintendo isn't taking a huge gamble with Revolution, they're looking for a way out because in the end Revolution will be easier on Nintendo bottom line than going the XBox 360 or PS3 route (which would be a huge gamble for Nintendo).

QFT!! End of thread. V3 has really hit the nail on the head. And if anybody thinks that Nintendo's reasons are different they need to get a reality check.

 

[Powderkeg]

Nintendo shifting paradigm is mainly to avoid the skyrocketing development cost. Development cost is rising and titles are selling less and less, that's going to spell trouble for the industry sooner or later, if not for the industry, for Nintendo own bottom line.

The market is growing but it isn't growing fast enough to support the budget that will maximise next gen system (Outside a few established titles). Nintendo isn't taking a huge gamble with Revolution, they're looking for a way out because in the end Revolution will be easier on Nintendo bottom line than going the XBox 360 or PS3 route (which would be a huge gamble for Nintendo).

I can agree with that, but I still think what Nintendo really needs is a revolution in their game designs. Variety is the spice of life, and it's what keeps gaming interesting. It's also what Nintendo lacks the most.

 

[pc999]

QFT!! End of thread. V3 has really hit the nail on the head. And if anybody thinks that Nintendo's reasons are different they need to get a reality check.

If Rev sell well and cost significant less to make games (eg no HD content) many dev (specialy small/gameplay focus companys) may prefer going with Nintendo, and not compet with HD gfx/budget.

 

[mckmas8808]

If Rev sell well and cost significant less to make games (eg no HD content) many dev (specialy small/gameplay focus companys) may prefer going with Nintendo, and not compet with HD gfx/budget.

Of course that is 100% correct. Too bad Nintendo has a bad habit of selling less consoles with each new generation. If they can stop that 100% happens everytime past of theirs your quote may come true.

 

[Magnum PI]

Of course that is 100% correct. Too bad Nintendo has a bad habit of selling less consoles with each new generation. If they can stop that 100% happens everytime past of theirs your quote may come true.

you can't really speak of an habit when something just happened two times in a row..
and while it applied to N64/gamecube, did it apply to the handheld line ? nobody could happen..

i agree with V3 too, some nintendo rep. used to say that some time ago, a lot of the forumers where laughing at him/them, but this was an interesting idea and still is.

how the industry thinks the expected increase in budget will be amortized on the same market ?

only a few titles would be profitable.
so in the end we could have less releases.
=> less choice, and a more consensual titles.

some titles could go with a budget that is not enough to make a good title
budget enough for some pretty graphics, not enough for polished gameplay, level design.. licence-xploitation..
=> disappointing titles

the exacerbed technological competition b/w sony and MS could no only hurt them but also the industry. anyway who knows, nintendo could profit from this context like they did from the crash of the 80s.

 

[Powderkeg]

you can't really speak of an habit when something just happened two times in a row..

NES = 60 Million
SNES = 45 million
N64 = 32 million
GCN = <20 million

That's a bit more than 2 times in a row. In fact, Nintendo has never had a console sell more than it's predicessor, ever.

 

[mckmas8808]

NES = 60 Million
SNES = 45 million
N64 = 32 million
GCN = <20 million

That's a bit more than 2 times in a row. In fact, Nintendo has never had a console sell more than it's predicessor, ever.

Thanks Powderkeg. I knew I wasn't going crazy. So is the Revolution projected to do 14 million units next-time out?

 

[Magnum PI]

NES = 60 Million
SNES = 45 million
N64 = 32 million
GCN = <20 million

That's a bit more than 2 times in a row.

I didn't check your numbers, and as usual you do not give your sources but it seems you are right as I forgot the snes sold less than the nes.. And I have to say it hurts being proven wrong by you

In fact, Nintendo has never had a console sell more than it's predicessor, ever.

WRONG

The NES sold more than the first nintendo home console, the Color TV Game 6:

http://www.planetnintendo.com/nindb/ctv/g6.shtml

 

[Magnum PI]

Thanks Powderkeg. I knew I wasn't going crazy. So is the Revolution projected to do 14 million units next-time out?

Even if nintendo sales lose steam three times in a row, it's a trend more than a rule, and it's not enough to predict the future sales. It would be at best unscientific.

I don't know either, maybe revolution's sales could be abysmal, GC-level or better..

What you make so sure about that ? The same reasoning that made some of us predict DS's demise against the PSP ?

 

[Powderkeg]

I didn't check your numbers, and as usual you do not give your sources but it seems you are right as I forgot the snes sold less than the nes.. And I have to say it hurts being proven wrong by you

I pulled the numbers from the top of my head, and when I checked, I was a little off.

NES = 62 million (As of 1999)
SNES = 48 million (As of 1999)
N64 = 30 million (As of 2001)
GCN = 19 million (As of July 2005, based on wikipedia)

http://www.nintendoland.com/home2.htm?funfacts/stat.htm

 

[OtakingGX]

Virtual Boy sold <800,000 units.

 

[mckmas8808]

Even if nintendo sales steam three times in a row, it's a trend than a rule, and it's not enough to predict the future sales. It would be at best unscientific.

I don't know either, maybe revolution's sales could be abysmal, GC-level or better..

What you make so sure about that ? The same reasoning that made some of us predict PSP's demise ?

Oh you are 100% correct it is not a rule. Just going by past history the Revolution will not be a gang busters selling console in relation to the competition. But at the sametime the Revolution can actually be just that, a revolution. It could sell more than the PS3 and Xbox 360 combined.

 

[Branduil]

Oh you are 100% correct it is not a rule. Just going by past history the Revolution will not be a gang busters selling console in relation to the competition. But at the sametime the Revolution can actually be just that, a revolution. It could sell more than the PS3 and Xbox 360 combined.

Hey, here was another trend: Sony systems always outsell similar Nintendo systems. But that trend was broken with the DS, so who can know what will happen next?

 

[Powderkeg]

Hey, here was another trend: Sony systems always outsell similar Nintendo systems. But that trend was broken with the DS, so who can know what will happen next?

Don't confuse 2 different products in 2 different markets.

Consoles are consoles, and handhelds are handhelds. There is no comparing trends between the two because they are marketed to 2 different demographics of gamers.

 

[Branduil]

Don't confuse 2 different products in 2 different markets.

Consoles are consoles, and handhelds are handhelds. There is no comparing trends between the two because they are marketed to 2 different demographics of gamers.

Then you can't compare past trends to the Revolution either. After all, it's being marketed to a different demographic.

 

[winstonsmith1978]

reasons that revolution will outsell Gamecube

Gamecube: Purple -------- Revolution: White/black
Gamecube: looked like a womans purse-----------Revolution looks stylish and cool
Gamecube couldn't fit in most peoples tv cabinets----------revolution does
Gamecube no online-----------revolution has great online
Gamecube not alot of games-----------rev has alot of games:nes, snes, n64,gamecube,rev
Gamecube small disk format---------rev dvd format as good as x360's
Gamecube not very innovative------rev very innovative
Gamecube bad timing------rev good timing if it makes it to market before ps3 around june
Gamecube no killer game at launch------rev: possible mario and mp3 at launch, and ssb
Gamecube no hype-------Rev already has had more more hype
Gamecube no 3rd party-----------rev 3rd party is atleast excited, except that idiot at epic
Gamecube old president who retired around GC launch---------rev first console under Iwata

Any more?