What should the GBA2 be?

[jarrod]

Wrong. PS2's EE was unveiled in Feb. 1999 at ISSCC 1999 (the published clock speed was lower than final one though). The processor itself had to be taped out before it. It's said that PS2's release was delayed because of the shortage of RDRAM which was supplied only by Toshiba back then (NEC rejected the request).

Regardless, GameCube was delayed primairly for software reasons, not hardware. Nintendo could've had machines on market earlier had they wanted, I'm not sure the same can really be said of PS2. In terms of technology GC is about a year older than PS2 and Xbox is roughly two years older than PS2. PS2 had a much longer R&D process though, it started in 1996, while GC started in 1998 and Xbox started in only 2000.

So what? SCE invested the money they earned with PS1 into PS2's plants and R&D. Very simple and clear. Nintendo invested into... what? Where did the huge money they earned with N64 vanish into? If you say the cheap price of GC is the answer, as a consumer I would like to buy something more polished with technical refinement rather than mere business decisions.

Actually, it seems an unkown amount of upfront investment was transferred directly to Sony Electronics, we still aren't really certain if PS2's recouped it's initial investment or not given Kutaragi's creative financials. And it terms of actual chipset, GameCube is about as "polished with technical refinement" as they come. It's such a marvel of efficiency and performance, it convinced Microsoft decided to follow someone else's lead for a change.

Nintendo also sunk a notable amount of cash into NEC's Chinese fabs iirc, as well as ordering 50 million GOD drives from Matsushitsa upfront (oops!). It's not like GameCube saw no investment, it just wasn't the massive initial loss route Microsoft and Sony took. Nintendo can't afford that sort of risk and they don't have other divisions to hide/eat costs, games are all they do.

 

[one]

Actually, it seems an unkown amount of upfront investment was transferred directly to Sony Electronics, we still aren't really certain if PS2's recouped it's initial investment or not given Kutaragi's creative financials. And it terms of actual chipset, GameCube is about as "polished with technical refinement" as they come. It's such a marvel of efficiency and performance, it convinced Microsoft decided to follow someone else's lead for a change.

But Microsoft won't copy the cheap price of the GC as the Xbox2 will be able to debut without competition. MS just learns efficiency and will use it to release a massively powerful machine. There the paradox of GC lies - Nintendo estimated that with the price of the GC many potential customers they had in mind (mainly schoolkids) could afford it. But to the actual main customers (young adults) perception, it looked negatively. This business decision of Nintendo as a toy manufacturer had made people think that the GC is a cheap hardware without added technical value. And unfortunately it is, in absolute comparison with other consoles when you omit its internal economy (ordinary consumers never care about how Nintendo efficiently make a console - they just judge end products).

Nintendo could take a risk as a company with far better financial status than Sony (SCE had been the Sony's only profitable division these years until Spiderman could bring some profit) and SEGA, but didn't take it. Alas it may be too late for Nintendo to steer otherwise, PSP comes in shortly.

 

[jarrod]

But Microsoft won't copy the cheap price of the GC as the Xbox2 will be able to debut without competition. MS just learns efficiency and will use it to release a massively powerful machine. There the paradox of GC lies - Nintendo estimated that with the price of the GC many potential customers they had in mind (mainly schoolkids) could afford it. But to the actual main customers (young adults) perception, it looked negatively. This business decision of Nintendo as a toy manufacturer had made people think that the GC is a cheap hardware without added technical value. And unfortunately it is, in absolute comparison with other consoles when you omit its internal economy (ordinary consumers never care about how Nintendo efficiently make a console - they just judge end products).

As always, perception seems to be Nintendo's big stumbling block. At least in the console arena, it's been that way since 1990.

Nintendo could take a risk as a company with far better financial status than Sony (SCE had been the Sony's only profitable division these years until Spiderman could bring some profit) and SEGA, but didn't take it. Alas it may be too late for Nintendo to steer otherwise, PSP comes in shortly.

Wait, you don't see DS as a risk? Is essentially accelerating the natural GB model technologically (like PSP) really all that risky a concept by by comparison? You people act like Nintendo's doing nothing at all simply because DS isn't a spec for spec PSP counter...

 

[Phil]

Again, I don't think you have a solid grasp on costs here or how quick technology advances. 3 years is an eternity for semiconductors.

In short... neither you nor I have exact numbers that would show for a fact what's possible for Nintendo in 3 years or isn't. I suggest we just "wait and see"

Once more, this is only really necessary if Sony can convince their PS2 base to buy into a $199 supplementary handheld.

Of course, this has already been established. No one claimed the PSP will - the proposition is what if PSP does open a new market and what impact this would have on Nintendo.

I have named various reasons that suggest Sony is going after an older audience already. Further views and comments:

Nintendo, Sony Square Off in Handheld Game Market[/url]]Asked about Nintendo's DS pricing, Sony Computer Entertainment (SCE) president Ken Kutaragi said: "We expect PSP to create a new market, helping expand the entire game market. But (direct competition is unlikely as) PSP and the DS will probably have different roles in the market."

...

Expanded Market

Some analysts, however, expects Sony's PSP, which is scheduled to be launched by the year-end in Japan and by March next year in the United States and Europe, to give Nintendo a run for its money.

"My simple prediction is that Sony will expand the market by about 1.5-fold by appealing to a different age group -- above 20 years old -- from Nintendo's focus, which is young children," said Takeshi Tajima, analyst at BNP Paribas.

"Then both Nintendo and Sony will each have half of the market."

The entire point was from the beginning that Sony won't be competing primarely for GBA and DS consumers money - but for a crowd that yet is not targeted by what Nintendo is offering. The question is, when and if PSP successfully opens a new market, what options Nintendo still has left 3 years down the road to face this new kind of competition - hence the reason why I brought up last [console] generation in which Sony, with similar tactics (different appeal, content, 18+ userbase), grabed the market, making gaming mainstream accepted as it is today.

Attempting to justify Nintendo's lost opportunity by saying things like "With PS1 they didn't pull ahead until 1997 really, 3 years after launch." really doesn't change the fact that they lost their number 1 position and could be doomed eventually losing their spot in the handheld market as well if they continue with the same passiveness/stubbornness and PSP follows PS1's success in opening a new market and assimilating the current one in the process.

If PSP does successfully target this new 'untapped' market, then your proposition of DS stealing any 'thunder' will indeed remain very questionable as it clearly doesn't have what's necessary to appeal to anything other than its own targeted [younger/hardcore, GBA] audience - which in that case would ultimately give Sony that 3 year head-start [in their new market] if Nintendo does decide to react with a GBA successor. And if they would even want to [go after the same market] remains questionable as seen by their current choice of strategy with GameCube althogether - which btw is losing them market -share and -recognition as we speak.

 

[jarrod]

In short... neither you nor I have exact numbers that would show for a fact what's possible for Nintendo in 3 years or isn't. I suggest we just "wait and see"

Well I'd say some have better ideas than others.

Even eschewing all the technological particualrs and just looking at Nintendo's handheld record, we've seen a (comparable to consoles) generational shift from them every 3 years in handhelds since 1998 while maintaining low price points... what's keeping them from continuing that trend exactly? What's this insurmountable obstacle that Nintendo can't possibly hope to pass in 3 years that Sony seems to have today?

Of course, this has already been established. No one claimed the PSP will - the proposition is what if PSP does open a new market and what impact this would have on Nintendo.

I have named various reasons that suggest Sony is going after an older audience already. Further views and comments:

The entire point was from the beginning that Sony won't be competing primarely for GBA and DS consumers money - but for a crowd that yet is not targeted by what Nintendo is offering. The question is, when and if PSP successfully opens a new market, what options Nintendo still has left 3 years down the road to face this new kind of competition - hence the reason why I brought up last [console] generation in which Sony, with similar tactics (different appeal, content, 18+ userbase), grabed the market, making gaming mainstream accepted as it is today.

Erm, then isn't that where the previous idea of a premium Game Boy comes in? Nintendo's holds on to their youth focused market with GBA/DS and goes for PSP's directly with the next GB? Really it depends on how quickly PSP builds userbase, but I'd expect a much more modest climb than PS2 in all likelihood. And DS could always be refocused against PSP more directly in terms of content (NOA is already attempting this).

Attempting to justify Nintendo's lost opportunity by saying things like "With PS1 they didn't pull ahead until 1997 really, 3 years after launch." really doesn't change the fact that they lost their number 1 position and could be doomed eventually losing their spot in the handheld market as well if they continue with the same passiveness/stubbornness and PSP follows PS1's success in opening a new market and assimilating the current one in the process.

Oh please, I clearly wasn't "attempting to justify" anything with that response. Don't read too deep, your snotty leftfield parallel deserved shooting down, that's all.

And again, I'd say DS is a sign Nintendo's not simply resting on their laurels. They're grabbing whatever developer/media/industry/consumer support they can upfront before they can assemble a competitve counter to PSP, and DS also has the advantage of testing new potential GB features for them. This is hardly N64 strategy here, it's the opposite.

If PSP does successfully target this new 'untapped' market, then your proposition of DS stealing any 'thunder' will indeed remain very questionable as it clearly doesn't have what's necessary to appeal to anything other than its own targeted [younger/hardcore, GBA] audience - which in that case would ultimately give Sony that 3 year head-start [in their new market] if Nintendo does decide to react with a GBA successor. And if they would even want to [go after the same market] remains questionable as seen by their current choice of strategy with GameCube althogether - which btw is losing them market -share and -recognition as we speak.

Again, the likeihood of PSP actually carving out a GBA/PS2 sized adult handheld market seems rather slim I'd say... I don't think the risks are too certain there for Nintendo and their course of action seems pretty safe considering. And while I agree that DS seems aimed at the kids/hardcore in terms of content (especially for killer apps like Pokemon, Yu-Gi-Oh, Final Fantasy III, Mario 64 or Jump Super Stars), I don't see what would keep Nintendo from courting older audiences with it either really. They've already got EA lined up with Madden, Goldeneye & NFSU... what if Nintendo managed to get versions of Halo or GTA on DS? Being the market leader has it's definite advantages, Nintendo has far more leverage in this market than Sony upfront. I'd say their only real problem is not being as agressive as needed in terms of pricing so far ($150 is just too high, they need to target that casual $99 price point). They should be trying to bleed PSP as much as possible.

Nintendo also needs to foster some better communication between divisions though, DS is clearly being aimed at an older audiences in the west off the bat (advertising and launch lineup really support that), but Japanese content is almost all kid stuff (as they're aiming right at their GBA base there, as oppossed to complimentary targeting in the west). That could be a problem as it has been for GameCube, but then Nintendo's really in the driver's seat here in terms of market presence and pull. It's their market to lose after all, at they're not making the same mistakes they did in 1996.

 

[Phil]

Even eschewing all the technological particualrs and just looking at Nintendo's handheld record, we've seen a (comparable to consoles) generational shift from them every 3 years in handhelds since 1998 while maintaining low price points... what's keeping them from continuing that trend exactly? What's this insurmountable obstacle that Nintendo can't possibly hope to pass in 3 years that Sony seems to have today?

I think you're reading too far into my replies. I never stated that Nintendo can't pass Sony technological wise - the question I'm raising is at what costs can they compete - and ultimately if it would jeopardise their "profit" model that they have maintained in the past. These factors IMO will influence Nintendo's decision in what a GBA successor will offer far greatly than just by what's technically available to them.

Again, the likeihood of PSP actually carving out a GBA/PS2 sized adult handheld market seems rather slim I'd say...

That's where we obviously differ. While I do see there are reasons supporting both scenarios, I for one think Nintendo is playing it a bit too safe with this one if things go extremely smooth for Sony and PSP.

Being the market leader has it's definite advantages, Nintendo has far more leverage in this market than Sony upfront.

Of course, but Nintendo is only the "market leader" within its own GBA market - a market that the PSP won't be targeting primarely anyway. With the market PSP hopes to target, I'll be damned if most of those people wouldn't see the PlayStation brand as somekind of "market leader" (- of videogames!) if any. Having that said, it will be interesting how Nintendo will play out its position and how much leverage they will effectively have outside their core market. IMO: Little to none.

And again, I'd say DS is a sign Nintendo's not simply resting on their laurels. They're grabbing whatever developer/media/industry/consumer support they can upfront before they can assemble a competitve counter to PSP, and DS also has the advantage of testing new potential GB features for them. This is hardly N64 strategy here, it's the opposite.

While they can influence content, I will be very suprised if they manage to get past their younger-targeting image. GameCube has shown how challenging it is - though admittedly Nintendo did make mistakes and it remains to be seen if they can change that with DS.

Despite content though, one has to acknowledge that DS won't be also fighting its own image, but against claims of being a generation behind as well. Mature content will only get you that far when going for a new market on older hardware, especially when the competitors handheld nextdoor is showing off all the new and unsurpassed graphical and gameplay features with nothing at the horizon that can challenge it for quite a considerable time.

It's not just their market to lose (which is something I haven't really touched on really) - it's about the market they're potentially missing out on and neglecting with DS that could eventually force their market to becoming a niche one.

they're not making the same mistakes they did in 1996.

IMO they are. They missed the opportunity to widen their audience on their own. Then as Sony announced the PSP specs and features (and grabing the opportunity Nintendo didn't), they should have pulled along with similar hardware (GBA2?) and not with what is the DS. Acknowledged though, opinions do differ and we'll all be the judge in a few years time on who's strategy ultimately worked out better.

 

[jarrod]

I think you're reading too far into my replies. I never stated that Nintendo can't pass Sony technological wise - the question I'm raising is at what costs can they compete - and ultimately if it would jeopardise their "profit" model that they have maintained in the past. These factors IMO will influence Nintendo's decision in what a GBA successor will offer far greatly than just by what's technically available to them.

I agree with all that, but then this argument's getting rather circular. The next Game Boy's fate really depends on how both DS and PSP fare... though given Nintendo's handheld record, I don't see a $99 PSP spec Game Boy really being a problem by 2007 should they go that route. Maybe even better in terms of capability and featureset if they're willing to follow Sony's premium model.

That's where we obviously differ. While I do see there are reasons supporting both scenarios, I for one think Nintendo is playing it a bit too safe with this one if things go extremely smooth for Sony and PSP.

You said it yourself, only "if things go extemely smooth for Sony and PSP".

I'll agree to disagree then.

]Of course, but Nintendo is only the "market leader" within its own GBA market - a market that the PSP won't be targeting primarely anyway.

Correction, Nintendo's the market leader in the handheld gaming market. For the final time, Sony's intended market is fantasy until/unless they can make it a sizable reality. Which is currently open to speculation at best.

With the market PSP hopes to target, I'll be damned if most of those people wouldn't see the PlayStation brand as somekind of "market leader" (- of videogames!) if any. Having that said, it will be interesting how Nintendo will play out its position and how much leverage they will effectively have outside their core market. IMO: Little to none.

Then again, if Sony only manages an Xbox sized market for PSP in it's initial years (which would be pretty decent really, it'd mean PSP outsold iPod over 3 to 1) while DS inherits the GBA base, it won't really matter. Nintendo will still call the shots, the larger userbase always wins in the end.

Targeting their casual PS2 base with a supplementary product like PSP is far riskier than you expect, especially with the next generation of high end home consoles looming less than a year later (for which hype will start ramping up when PSP's set to release). There's a good chance this whole thing could backfire... which for some reason no one seems willing to admit. Leveraging the PlayStation brand helps immensely, but it also has drawbacks. I think some consumers could be confused by the fact that this "PlayStation" can't play their other PlayStation 1/2 games for example. And if PlayStation 3 comes in mid 2006, it might hurt consumer confidence in PSP feeling the need to buy yet another expensive "PlayStation" so soon. Brand's a tricky thing and consumers are easily confused, being a "PlayStation" hasn't helped PSX much after all.

While they can influence content, I will be very suprised if they manage to get past their younger-targeting image. GameCube has shown how challenging it is - though admittedly Nintendo did make mistakes and it remains to be seen if they can change that with DS.

I'd say GBA SP and the NES Classic campaigns are a better sign of where Nintendo's headed with DS. At least in the west, Nintendo doesn't seem to have much problems reaching out to adult markets with handhelds. In fact, the core of the original Game Boy market was businessmen (before Pokemon revived it in the mid/late 1990s).

Despite content though, one has to acknowledge that DS won't be also fighting its own image, but against claims of being a generation behind as well. Mature content will only get you that far when going for a new market on older hardware, especially when the competitors handheld nextdoor is showing off all the new and unsurpassed graphical and gameplay features with nothing at the horizon that can challenge it for quite a considerable time.

I agree, which is why Nintendo really needs to get more aggressive on pricing. DS should launch at $99, no question. Then it'll not only put pressure to drop further faster, but it'll break that casual price barrier as well right out the gate. 3DM gives them some nice room for dropping software pricing too, and development costs being so much lower for DS versus PSP is another issue Nintendo should be pushing. Bleed PSP like Sony bled Saturn in the mid 1990s. Use Sony's same tactics against them.

It's not just their market to lose (which is something I haven't really touched on really) - it's about the market they're potentially missing out on and neglecting with DS that could eventually force their market to becoming a niche one.

I dunno, even a weaked Pokemon brand has managed to outsell hot shit like GTA and Halo this generation. Kids count, the youth market will likely never be niche on it's own... just look how well GBA and PSone have sold since 2001.

And really, Nintendo's trying to make DS appealing to adults as well design wise (GBA SP was a step in this direction too). If they can supply the right content (Metroid & EA games being a good start) then I don't really see the problem.

IMO they are. They missed the opportunity to widen their audience on their own. Then as Sony announced the PSP specs and features (and grabing the opportunity Nintendo didn't), they should have pulled along with similar hardware (GBA2?) and not with what is the DS. Acknowledged though, opinions do differ and we'll all be the judge in a few years time on who's strategy ultimately worked out better.

Going the loss taking, high end route right now was out of the question for Nintendo. They're not Microsoft, and they can't afford to follow Sony's footsteps... there's more than one solution here, we'll see if Nintendo's going the right way. I think their base plan is fine (and upholds their historical advantages in the arena) but they need to just get more aggressive and hit Sony where it counts (pricing structure, market leverage).

N64 actually had a sizable college base thanks to multiplayer hits like Mario Kart and GoldenEye... similar to Genesis before it and Xbox today. Nintendo's mistakes with N64 revolved mainly around their draconian 3rd party policies and astronomical media costs driving away support. This is about as far from where they are today with DS as imaginable. Still, I bet either Sony or Nintendo would kill to ensure their handhelds managed to move the 35 million units N64 did.

 

[PC-Engine]

I posted this in another thread, but thought it was also a fantastic idea to add onto GBA2's feature list.

Nintendo can easily turn a GBA SP into an iPod competitor with a few minor tweaks. It would have to have some kind of flashcard adaptor that allows you to plug an SD/MMC card for example into the game cartridge slot using said adaptor. SD cards are really small so the card can easlily and completely fit inside a GBA cartridge sized adaptor. They would also have to bundle the headphone jack adaptor with all new SPs. And finally they might have to add a high S/N ratio Sigmatel audio decoder chip into all new SPs. BTW SD cards are really cheap nowadays. I just purchased a 1GB Sandisk SD card a couple days ago for $50. 8)

Nintendo could even sell their own GBA flash cartridges instead of SD/MMC flash adaptors. Personally I like the adaptor idea better as I can reuse the SD cards in other devices that accept SD/MMC/CF media. GBA SPs pocket sized format is really a perfect fit for playing MP3s etc. not to mention the dirt cheap price of $80.

8)