Support NeoGAF

[EMT0]

I'm of the mindset of 'If not Iwata, then who?' I'm also of the mindset that some of the biggest critics in this thread are the ones who believe that stronger hardware in and of itself makes a better game experience.

I hate the Wii U. It does nothing for me at the moment; the hardware is outdated, the OS performance sounds terrible, and the lack of an account system reads like a bad joke to me. HOWEVER, I do know that Nintendo doesn't need the latest and greatest hardware to make a good game; if I want graphics porn, I've got a PC that cost me 1.4k to deliver.

As for Iwata, he don' fucked up. Marketing was terribad, the name was a poor choice, and the software lineup makes me want to wait till Smash Bros. at the earliest. But the thing is: Nintendo is a niche.

We see it on NeoGAF, we see it everywhere; people that reject Nintendo's games due to either 'kiddy, not for hardcore gamers, casual trash,' and so on. If Nintendo had truly gone to chase after this kind of audience(that already scorns Nintendo), what possible gain would Nintendo have made? Funny, how those same people are piling shit on Iwata for not catering to them, but wouldn't have gotten a Nintendo system for nothing less than 1-1 parity in 3rd party support and a big AAA IP that tries to be realistic(and fails terribly at it).

Iwata deserves reprimand, but to fire him? NeoGAF certainly doesn't know of anybody who could roll with Nintendo's philosophy, and I'm not quite sure who or what they hope to see a replacement do at this point(which, by all means, it appears that Iwata's ALREADY on the warpath to fix).

How quick is the internet to forget the Wii U Nintendo Direct, huh? As well as the fact that this is the guy that delivered the Wii and the DS, Nintendo's most successful hardware bar the original NES? Or that the 3DS, another bad situation, has been well and truly stabilized at this point and is on path to be a financial success?

 

[Stumpokapow]

My point was that bowing to fan-pressure to revive that dusty old franchise was a mistake.

They didn't "bow to fan pressure", don't flatter yourself.

 

[Tookay]

Iwata deserves reprimand, but to fire him? NeoGAF certainly doesn't know of anybody who could roll with Nintendo's philosophy, and I'm not quite sure who or what they hope to see a replacement do at this point(which, by all means, it appears that Iwata's ALREADY on the warpath to fix).

So because GAF doesn't know who could replace him, it's therefore a stupid idea to fire him? How people on GAF even knew who Iwata was before he stepped into his role? You're telling me there's no one with business experience within Nintendo who can step up to the plate, even people who aren't regularly featured?

How quick is the internet to forget the Wii U Nintendo Direct, huh? As well as the fact that this is the guy that delivered the Wii and the DS, Nintendo's most successful hardware bar the original NES? Or that the 3DS, another bad situation, has been well and truly stabilized at this point and is on path to be a financial success?

Just because he made some great decisions 7-8 years ago does not mean that he's fit for the market of today. Times change and he's made some huge mistakes since then.

And, for that matter, the 3DS has been "stabilized," but it's far from what Nintendo was hoping (hence why they've slashed their 3DS targets consistently) and its Western sales are particularly mediocre.

 

[effzee]

The question that keeps coming to mind is why after the harsh lesson supposedly learned from the botched 3DS launch did they repeat the exact same mistake?

WiiU tablet control might not have caught on and of course the system is under powered (only slightly better than PS360), but at least those are business decisions you can justify even if you don't like them. Why in the world did they launch the system with nothing available? Everything we heard from the first hints of the system (back in Spring 2011) mentioned Nintendo learning the mistake of not having software ready. Then even after the E32011 reveal we kept hearing about how they won't allow the same thing to happen, how easy it is to make games for this machine, and how everyone is on board.

And then fast forward to launch and post launch till now. Barely anything available for the system besides ports and a 2D Mario game. Granted the game and its previous iterations have been huge successes and this version itself is great but really this was their launch? Third party ports were actually decent this time around but Nintendo itself is nowhere to be found.

They had the head start, the tech isn't even new to the point that they couldn't have caught up to it, and now we find out things like they are struggling with HD and that all their teams are tied up? WTF? How do you not foresee these things? Why wasn't the money earned from the Wii success used to better arm themselves from these harsh market realities?

Even if they were dead set with launching an under powered system and tablet controls, they should have had at least 2-3 of their top guns ready at launch. Wouldn't have heard to finally have an internal team allow a different type of an IP, for example the insanely popular shooter genre which not only does Nintendo avoid but most all developers skip over when it comes to Nintendo systems. They needed something more and delivered less in every manner.

 

[Dennis]

Why did Crazy Ken have to be axed?

PS2 >>> PS3

 

[royalan]

Just because he made some great decisions 7-8 years ago does not mean that he's fit for the market of today. Times change and he's made some huge mistakes since then.

And, for that matter, the 3DS has been "stabilized," but it's far from what Nintendo was hoping (hence why they've slashed their 3DS targets consistently) and its Western sales are particularly mediocre.

Exactly.

And the worst part about it all is that Iwata seemingly thought he could find success by repeating the Wii's strategy to the very letter. It's like he gave no thought to the idea that the industry and desires of consumers could have changed in the last 7 years, despite this being the exact opposite of what he led shareholders to believe prior to the Wii U launch.

If that doesn't show a complete and utter lack of vision, I don't know what does...

 

[ShockingAlberto]

The question that keeps coming to mind is why after the harsh lesson supposedly learned from the botched 3DS launch did they repeat the exact same mistake?

WiiU tablet control might not have caught on and of course the system is under powered (only slightly better than PS360), but at least those are business decisions you can justify even if you don't like them. Why in the world did they launch the system with nothing available? Everything we heard from the first hints of the system (back in Spring 2011) mentioned Nintendo learning the mistake of not having software ready. Then even after the E32011 reveal we kept hearing about how they won't allow the same thing to happen, how easy it is to make games for this machine, and how everyone is on board.

And then fast forward to launch and post launch till now. Barely anything available for the system besides ports and a 2D Mario game. Granted the game and its previous iterations have been huge successes and this version itself is great but really this was their launch? Third party ports were actually decent this time around but Nintendo itself is nowhere to be found.

They had the head start, the tech isn't even new to the point that they couldn't have caught up to it, and now we find out things like they are struggling with HD and that all their teams are tied up? WTF? How do you not foresee these things? Why wasn't the money earned from the Wii success used to better arm themselves from these harsh market realities?

Even if they were dead set with launching an under powered system and tablet controls, they should have had at least 2-3 of their top guns ready at launch. Wouldn't have heard to finally have an internal team allow a different type of an IP, for example the insanely popular shooter genre which not only does Nintendo avoid but most all developers skip over when it comes to Nintendo systems. They needed something more and delivered less in every manner.

Under the assumptions that

1) They understood what was wrong with the 3DS launch
and
2) They had set plans to avoid that same issue with the Wii U and what is happening now is not something they had planned

The only logical answer is they intended something that never came to fruition. Maybe games were not shaping up well, maybe they thought they could get a Zelda off the ground faster than they did after Skyward Sword or that NSMBU would have looked nicer than it actually ended up looking. Whatever the reason, it was a massive miscalculation that is costing them minimum five months and maximum participation in the entire hardware generation.

 

[Knux-Future]

If they fire him...I only fear they would go in a even worse direction.

I have no stake in the company or anything but I'm okay with Nintendo being different from the other two..It would be sad to see Iwata step down and the next guy goes for a me too approach or worse the IOS approach.

Nintendo's problem is that they have to either be okay with their diehards and cater to them or find that new market because nothing they do can get that "core" gamer market ever...they just won't buy their stuff due to the ingrained belief that it's kiddy or rehashed. It sucks but it probably true. Even if they fix their shit (online, crazy long droughts, shitty OS), the Wii U never had a chance at being the system where everyone went for anything other than Nintendo games. It could have been just as powerful as the nextbox or ps4, it could of had the same 3rd party games but outside of some dudes here I don't think that would sway the "core" dudes to buy it over the other two.

That's the corner they put themselves in with the Wii (and the gamecube to an extent) sure but it's damn near impossible to get out of it.

So my fear is that if Iwata leaves, the panic move would to be to try to get that market when it's not likely.

Plus I like Iwata...he seems like a cool dude who actually cares about games and stuff.

I was a Sega guy growing up so I don't even have the same "nostalgia" glasses but I know it would suck to see Nintendo die and IMO if they drastically changed who they are it would be nearly the same. Hopefully they have stuff planned to "save" the Wii U.

We will see what they have up their sleeves.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

The question that keeps coming to mind is why after the harsh lesson supposedly learned from the botched 3DS launch did they repeat the exact same mistake?

WiiU tablet control might not have caught on and of course the system is under powered (only slightly better than PS360), but at least those are business decisions you can justify even if you don't like them. Why in the world did they launch the system with nothing available? Everything we heard from the first hints of the system (back in Spring 2011) mentioned Nintendo learning the mistake of not having software ready. Then even after the E32011 reveal we kept hearing about how they won't allow the same thing to happen, how easy it is to make games for this machine, and how everyone is on board.

And then fast forward to launch and post launch till now. Barely anything available for the system besides ports and a 2D Mario game. Granted the game and its previous iterations have been huge successes and this version itself is great but really this was their launch? Third party ports were actually decent this time around but Nintendo itself is nowhere to be found.

They had the head start, the tech isn't even new to the point that they couldn't have caught up to it, and now we find out things like they are struggling with HD and that all their teams are tied up? WTF? How do you not foresee these things? Why wasn't the money earned from the Wii success used to better arm themselves from these harsh market realities?

Even if they were dead set with launching an under powered system and tablet controls, they should have had at least 2-3 of their top guns ready at launch. Wouldn't have heard to finally have an internal team allow a different type of an IP, for example the insanely popular shooter genre which not only does Nintendo avoid but most all developers skip over when it comes to Nintendo systems. They needed something more and delivered less in every manner.

If you read a bit of the investor Q&A from the October before the Wii U launch, there's one where Iwata notes the now-traditional postlaunch drought for Nintendo hardware, then says that "overseas" third parties were going to pick up the slack this time, freeing Nintendo to push intended first-party launch games out of launch and into spring and summer, to try and avoid Nintendo front-loading the system's schedule.

It almost feels like Iwata was under a far greater impression of what third party support was going to be in the postlaunch period. I don't know if they honestly had numbers showing that third party ports were going to sell gangbusters, or if they didn't realize how many core gamers didn't see any need to buy a Wii U version, or if the promised third party support suddenly dropped off quietly around fall and Iwata hadn't gotten the memo yet.

Like, they understood what the problem was going to be, they made some sort of plans to deal with it, and those plans all crumbled underneath their feet before launch with no time or resources to fix it.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

If they fire Iwata, Nintendo will become more conservative and tread further in to social gaming like any big Japanese game developer would in this situation. They will take on GREE, not Microsoft and Sony.

A new President isn't going to go "Let's jump in to the market currently controlled by Microsoft and Sony, do exactly what they do, but fight harder than we did before for a third of the pie."

 

[Kai Dracon]

Under the assumptions that

1) They understood what was wrong with the 3DS launch
and
2) They had set plans to avoid that same issue with the Wii U and what is happening now is not something they had planned

The only logical answer is they intended something that never came to fruition. Maybe games were not shaping up well, maybe they thought they could get a Zelda off the ground faster than they did after Skyward Sword or that NSMBU would have looked nicer than it actually ended up looking. Whatever the reason, it was a massive miscalculation that is costing them minimum five months and maximum participation in the entire hardware generation.

Given how Nintendo tries to only announce top priority 1st party games less than a year from release these days, I'm willing to bet they fully expected Pikmin 3 to be out December in all territories.

Further, I think they may have expected everything in the pipeline to be ready 2-3 months earlier - given that Iwata has admitted that development was not up to speed until just before launch (with the caveat that it is proceeding normally now), and that they were apparently working on the OS and basic services until the last moment.

In other words, by the end of January or February: Pikmin 3, more eshop content and original eshop games, more apps, Lego City, possibly stuff like Wii Fit U and Wonderful 101.

I dunno. I've been watching this stuff long enough that it just smells like somebody had to push an emergency pause button on the operation. They were quite confident and talking a lot about everything they were working on up until, say, August 2012, or so? People should remember the sudden drought of information, lack of communication, even temporary suspension of regular Nintendo Directs. Until just before launch when they were certain stuff like Miiverse would be ready on time.

Edit: also what EmCeeGramr said.

 

[VegaNine]

Intrestingly Yamauchi is still the majority share holder.

 

[Fourth Storm]

^^^^^^

Cold but hilarious.

 

[Anticitizen One]

I want Yamauchi back

 

[Exterminieren]

If they fire Iwata, Nintendo will become more conservative and tread further in to social gaming like any big Japanese game developer would in this situation. They will take on GREE, not Microsoft and Sony.

A new President isn't going to go "Let's jump in to the market currently controlled by Microsoft and Sony, do exactly what they do, but fight harder than we did before for a third of the pie."

Precisely this.

Look at Square Enix. Look at All The Bravest. That's a significantly more likely outlook for an Iwata-free Nintendo than some muscular hyperbeast console being swiftly brought to market.

I want Yamauchi back

And people rag on Iwata for being out of touch with the market?

 

[Alcibiades]

To be fair to Iwata, having Black Ops II and Assassin's Creed 3 looked like they would provide that "AAA" filler that Wii was sometimes missing.

They had Madden, Call of Duty, and Mario at launch. All of them "full-blown" for the most part. A missing feature here and there perhaps, but no bobble heads and kiddie crap. The problem is no one is going to buy a Wii U just for these titles. They are great to fill up a launch schedule for initial buyers that want something to play on it (along with the other 3rd party games available).

If Wii U had something equivalent to a Mario 64 or Wii Sports, then I think all these third party titles would have been received a lot better than the infamous shovelware on Wii.

 

[Anticitizen One]

Precisely this.

Look at Square Enix. Look at All The Bravest. That's a significantly more likely outlook for an Iwata-free Nintendo than some muscular hyperbeast console being swiftly brought to market.

And people rag on Iwata for being out of touch with the market?

Yamauchi is a real businessman who knew how to stay competitive. He always made sure Nintendo's hardware was the biggest, badest motherfucker on the block and let them make games other than Mario and Zelda all the time.

 

[Gahiggidy]

... the problem with posts like these is that it's conflating two things said by very different groups of people into one, strawman, contradictory whole.

It's a totally lazy argument that's also disingenuous.

They didn't "bow to fan pressure", don't flatter yourself.

Post gone guys. I now think it was a lame attempt at 'wit'.

 

[Van Owen]

To be fair to Iwata, having Black Ops II and Assassin's Creed 3 looked like they would provide that "AAA" filler that Wii was sometimes missing.

They had Madden, Call of Duty, and Mario at launch. All of them "full-blown" for the most part. A missing feature here and there perhaps, but no bobble heads and kiddie crap. The problem is no one is going to buy a Wii U just for these titles. They are great to fill up a launch schedule for initial buyers that want something to play on it (along with the other 3rd party games available).

If Wii U had something equivalent to a Mario 64 or Wii Sports, then I think all these third party titles would have been received a lot better than the infamous shovelware on Wii.

There was also no incentive to play the Wii U versions. If the hardware was more capable, it would have been an easier sell.

 

[evangd007]

http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/pdf/2012/convocation_notice1206e.pdf

Page 34 for the directors.

Satoru Iwata, Yoshihiro Mori, Shinji Hatano, Genyo Takeda, Shigeru Miyamoto, Masaharu Matsumoto, Eiichi Suzuki, Tatsumi Kimishima and Kaoru Takemura

Intrestingly Yamauchi is still the majority share holder.

Yamauchi and his family hold a disproportionate amount of shares. That's why nobody ever seriously talks about Nintendo as an acquisition target: any deal would likely have to go through Yamauchi, and for every bit that Iwata is conservative and Japanese, Yamauchi is that x10, with a double helping of prideful. Nobody buys him out.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

Yamauchi is a real businessman who knew how to stay competitive. He always made sure Nintendo's hardware was the biggest, badest motherfucker on the block and let them make games other than Mario and Zelda all the time.

Are we ignoring that Nintendo hit some of its worst lows and by far its worst generation under Yamauchi or what

 

[Mandoric]

I think this nails it on the head.

The games market over the last few years has been migrating over to the west. Nintendo seem to be completely oblivious to this. Blinded by the blip of casual gaming during the Wii's peak.

In a sense Iwata and Kaz have a similar task at hand. Changing massive Japanese organisations into progressive modern thinking machines. For Kaz the job of dragging Sony's performance up is similar to reducing the momentum and turning an oil tanker. Very slow, but we are beginning to see signs that he has a plan and the Sony oil tanker is slowly beginning to turn. One thing for sure Sony have the right man, at the right time.

Do Nintendo?

Not to argue that flexibility is bad, but the western model hasn't exactly proven itself better at anything this gen except losing 10x as much money on 10x as many units sold. ATVI is the only consistently successful major, and MS would be nowhere near breaking even without the billion dollars a year of Live Gold revenue that's just as much socially-driven lightning in a bottle as the Wii fad.

 

[teiresias]

My point was that bowing to fan-pressure to revive that dusty old franchise was a mistake. We Nintendo fans can be a bit schizophrenic at times. Demanding the huge sellers at regular intervals, such as Smash and Mario Kart, yet nagging for the obscure stuff like F-Zero and Kid Icarus (Heck, people even want a Mach Rider game.) Not the mention the whining we do about no new IP while at the same time stomping our feet every time a classic franchise goes more than 3 years without a new game.

And a good deal of this could be dealt with if Nintendo would take some of this apparent mountain of Wii money they're sitting on and not investing and actually work on growing their development teams . . . both in number and in ability to cope with HD development. Of course, it's far too late to be just starting this endeavour and have it mean anything in time for the Wii-U.

 

[qizah]

There was also no incentive to play the Wii U versions. If the hardware was more capable, it would have been an easier sell.

Free online was a reason for me to get the Wii U version over the Xbox version of Black Ops 2, and having the map on screen for AC3 made me get that version over the 360 one.

I might be in the minority, but there are reasons beyond the hardware being more capable in the traditional sense.

 

[Glass Rebel]

I don't know how Iwata resigning now could fix their situation in less than ~2-3 years but the company desperately needs a shakeup.

During the Wii era it became increasingly apparent that third party support would not come in the way Nintendo or their customers wanted it to. The right course of action would have been forming exceptional business relationships like they're doing with Dragon Quest and Monster Hunter in Japan but most importantly also increasing their exclusive software output in areas their consoles don't cover. If any of the big three has to deliver when it comes to first party output, it's Nintendo.

 

[evangd007]

If you read a bit of the investor Q&A from the October before the Wii U launch, there's one where Iwata notes the now-traditional postlaunch drought for Nintendo hardware, then says that "overseas" third parties were going to pick up the slack this time, freeing Nintendo to push intended first-party launch games out of launch and into spring and summer, to try and avoid Nintendo front-loading the system's schedule.

It almost feels like Iwata was under a far greater impression of what third party support was going to be in the postlaunch period. I don't know if they honestly had numbers showing that third party ports were going to sell gangbusters, or if they didn't realize how many core gamers didn't see any need to buy a Wii U version, or if the promised third party support suddenly dropped off quietly around fall and Iwata hadn't gotten the memo yet.

Like, they understood what the problem was going to be, they made some sort of plans to deal with it, and those plans all crumbled underneath their feet before launch with no time or resources to fix it.

Perhaps you should post this in the "What went wrong with Wii U" thread. It makes far too much sense.

 

[Exterminieren]

Yamauchi is a real businessman who knew how to stay competitive. He always made sure Nintendo's hardware was the biggest, badest motherfucker on the block and let them make games other than Mario and Zelda all the time.

If any successor to Iwata is looking to restore Nintendo to the blinding heights they saw in, say, the GameCube generation, they're fucked before they start.

 

[Gahiggidy]

And a good deal of this could be dealt with if Nintendo would take some of this apparent mountain of Wii money they're sitting on and not investing and actually work on growing their development teams . . . both in number and in ability to cope with HD development. Of course, it's far too late to be just starting this endeavour and have it mean anything in time for the Wii-U.

Well, they are in the process of moving into that larger HQ across the street form their current digs. Could that be what's slowing development down?

 

[teiresias]

Well, they are in the process of moving into that larger HQ across the street form their current digs. Could that be what's slowing development down?

Moving right now into a new HQ has nothing to do with actions and planning they should have been doing for the past three to four years. This is a long-term planning failure.

 

[Duxxy3]

And people rag on Iwata for being out of touch with the market?

Would Yamauchi have allowed a $250 handheld or $350 console allowed to launch?

 

[Gahiggidy]

Disney has no hardware and makes a lot of money.

If we think Nintendo is slow at making games, just imagine how they'd be at motion pictures.

 

[evangd007]

Well, they are in the process of moving into that larger HQ across the street form their current digs. Could that be what's slowing development down?

It's pretty clear that they were having trouble coming to terms with the hardware. The Toki Tori devs discovered hardware features that save 100 MB of texture memory, info that should be in the support documentation. Either Nintendo was withholding it, which would be an incredibly dumb move if they want to have anything resembling an amicable relationship with 3rd parties, or they didn't even know how to use it.

 

[effzee]

If you read a bit of the investor Q&A from the October before the Wii U launch, there's one where Iwata notes the now-traditional postlaunch drought for Nintendo hardware, then says that "overseas" third parties were going to pick up the slack this time, freeing Nintendo to push intended first-party launch games out of launch and into spring and summer, to try and avoid Nintendo front-loading the system's schedule.

It almost feels like Iwata was under a far greater impression of what third party support was going to be in the postlaunch period. I don't know if they honestly had numbers showing that third party ports were going to sell gangbusters, or if they didn't realize how many core gamers didn't see any need to buy a Wii U version, or if the promised third party support suddenly dropped off quietly around fall and Iwata hadn't gotten the memo yet.

Like, they understood what the problem was going to be, they made some sort of plans to deal with it, and those plans all crumbled underneath their feet before launch with no time or resources to fix it.

So then maybe they messed up some relationships. Remember that back in 2011 almost all third parties were singing their praises. EA wanted to do everything with Nintendo.

The fact that less than two years later EA is nowhere to be found and most third parties have either cancelled their games for the WiiU or have no plans whatsoever to bring over their top titles shows that something happened that made that promise fall through. And it can't be as simple as the power of the system.

Its just sad to see this sort of incompetence. Even if it was to be under powered they could have aimed for better performance to at least highlight some difference visually. People walking into a store can't even tell the difference off hand between PS360 games and the WiiU. And the tablet controller hasn't been the must have feature they hoped for so the system doesn't grab an audience.

At least in years past they had a couple of really good 2nd party studios who filled the void in between the big 1st party titles. They really need more than Retro who for whatever reason can't seem to get their games out without spending 2-3 years of development. For Nintendo to succeed and attract some of that dudebro/western audience they need 2-3 Retro Studio caliber western developers as 2nd parties who can both fill the void between 1st party titles and provide the types of genres which are hugely popular but Nintendo refuses to develop themselves.

Who knows maybe finally they will wake up some how and decide they could use a killer FPS which is exclusive to their own system. Something like Goldeneye was for the N64. Or more adult themed titles. I mean something has to be done right? Probably won't see the results of these actions on WiiU but maybe on whatever next system they make. At least it won't be called Wii something.

Oh and that brings me to another point. The marketing for the WiiU was absolutely horrendous. The commercials looked like something out of the early 90s, failed to highlight the tablet feature, had some of the corniest music, and flat out failed to convey the must have wow factor. Its shocking how many areas Nintendo needs a kick in the nuts in.

And yet I eagerly await the reveals of the Retro game, any Metroid game, the next Zelda, Smash, 3D Mario, and Mario Kart...sign vicious cycle.

To be fair to Iwata, having Black Ops II and Assassin's Creed 3 looked like they would provide that "AAA" filler that Wii was sometimes missing.

They had Madden, Call of Duty, and Mario at launch. All of them "full-blown" for the most part. A missing feature here and there perhaps, but no bobble heads and kiddie crap. The problem is no one is going to buy a Wii U just for these titles. They are great to fill up a launch schedule for initial buyers that want something to play on it (along with the other 3rd party games available).

If Wii U had something equivalent to a Mario 64 or Wii Sports, then I think all these third party titles would have been received a lot better than the infamous shovelware on Wii.

All these AAA 3rd party games are good and even if they are ports, they are worthy ports especially at launch. They should be lauded. After finishing SMBU, my most played game is BlackOpsII. I have logged some serious time into it thanks to the online multiplayer. But problem is these games are not reason enough to buy a new system when you can play the same game with the same visuals on a system you already own. These would games would be amazing "...and also we have..." type games in addition to some killer AAA games from Nintendo itself which moved systems based on game-play and and their display of cool things the tablet can do.

 

[duvjones]

Would Yamauchi have allowed a $250 handheld or $350 console allowed to launch?

Yamauchi did allow for that. You honestly think that a product like the 3DS didn't pass the boards notice?

 

[Azure J]

Are we ignoring that Nintendo hit some of its worst lows and by far its worst generation under Yamauchi or what

There's a lot of misplaced good will and nostalgia towards that era of Nintendo because people only remember the output during that time and not the corporate culture or decision making at top levels that snowballed into a lot of Nintendo's current woes. Let's all not forget that as much of a pimp Yama is, he's also the reason for a lot of anti-3rd party practices going all the way back to the NES that still kinda pervade the image of working with Nintendo.

 

[timetokill]

Are we ignoring that Nintendo hit some of its worst lows and by far its worst generation under Yamauchi or what

Of course man dude was a boss, just look at those glasses

and also when i was a kid i loved nintendo stuff and didn't know about sales so they never seemed to be doing as bad as they are now lololol

 

[Kai Dracon]

Free online was a reason for me to get the Wii U version over the Xbox version of Black Ops 2, and having the map on screen for AC3 made me get that version over the 360 one.

I might be in the minority, but there are reasons beyond the hardware being more capable in the traditional sense.

Free online play may not do any good when it seems most enthusiast gamers and the press continue to parrot "Wii U's online is the worst out there and just as horrible as the Wii!" Though this is not true, it seems largely stated by people who have never touched a Wii U that's connected to the internet.

I wouldn't be surprised if many people, should they even realize that a comparable version of Black Ops II is on Wii U, think that it's some stoopid babby version. With PS2 graphics, 4 player matches, no voice chat, and three guns.

There is also the incredible phenomenon of Xbox Live as well however; where people will gladly pay for online multiplayer over any other possibilities.

and also when i was a kid i loved nintendo stuff and didn't know about sales so they never seemed to be doing as bad as they are now lololol

Ha ha! This point may be the source of many a Nintendo fan's woes.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Exactly. I think people are trying too hard to slam a console that can be turned around without too much effort.

lol. Okay.

 

[Sandfox]

The more I read the more it feels like people don't remember much about Nintendo pre-Wii lol.

 

[effzee]

Well the problem really isn't just one single person at Nintendo.

The problem is their whole philosophy. After Gamecube they realized they couldn't compete with Sony and MS in an arms race and decided instead to focus on motion controls. Took a huge risk by not improving the tech for graphics.

It worked. Brilliantly. To the point that Nintendo to the shock of everyone took the #1 spot.

But what did they learn from it? From any of their past? This is a constantly shifting and changing market. They couldn't repeat the same risk and expect the exact same results. MS and Sony both learned the harsh lesson that not only were people interested in motion controls but they are here to stay. They invested into it and even their new systems will have some sort of touch screen capabilities. They won't let WiiU get away with having that feature even if the system is no threat to them. Because they learned that they can't make that mistake again.

Nintendo foolishly expected to just see the same results. Doesn't work like that. Not when the systems people already own have motion control and produce the same visuals. Especially when you can't demonstrate why the tablet is the must have feature like they did with motion controls.

I felt that with the success of the Wii they finally got breathing room to now operate how they normally would. That the Wii was the departure they needed to get back into it. I was wrong. Apparently they felt they could just forever stay in that lane and expect to win every time.

 

[DragonSworne]

Well the problem really isn't just one single person at Nintendo.

The problem is their whole philosophy. After Gamecube they realized they couldn't compete with Sony and MS in an arms race

That's because they released a purple lunchbox and a controller lacking triggers.

I wonder if Miyamoto understands the importance of 2 sets of triggers now.

 

[Tiktaalik]

I would like to see things shaken up at Nintendo Japan and America, but I'd be scared to lose Iwata as he seems to have a lot of strengths and I don't know who else could replace him.

The positives of Iwata is that he recognized that Nintendo couldn't operate as usual and took the company in another direction, and as an ex-game developer he seems to have a great feel for getting great products from his developers. The negatives are that under his direction Nintendo has been unbelievably slow to build its online services (with no account system they're still incomplete) and he hasn't taken the steps to significantly expand Nintendo and reform the company into a truly global one. With his approach, it's unsurprising that the company is doing so much better in Japan than the rest of the world.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

The more I read the more it feels like people don't remember much about Nintendo pre-Wii lol.

It's like nobody remembers 2003.

 

[Trike]

Would Yamauchi have allowed a $250 handheld or $350 console allowed to launch?

Adjusted for inflation? Yes. Virtual Boy cost around $275 adjusted for inflation, and the SNES cost around $345. The N64 would be around $300, as much as the cheapest Wii U.

Not that the price really matters if you have games or whatever. The Original Playstation was $299 at launch, no inflation.

 

[Fourth Storm]

That's because they released a purple lunchbox and a controller lacking triggers.

I wonder if Miyamoto understands the importance of 2 sets of triggers now.

Yep, after N64's popularity in the U.S., Nintendo basically gave American gamers the finger with the Gamecube console/controller design. They actually had a hardcore following here, and they tossed it aside to appeal more to their home country.

 

[Sadist]

The more I read the more it feels like people don't remember much about Nintendo pre-Wii lol.

Srsly

With all the mass hysteria going on (some of the criticism is entirely fair) people seem to forget that Nintendo in the N64/Cube-era was a mess. After Iwata took over he had to clean up the Gamecube problem with some pretty severe measures. A mess created by his predecessor. The one who didn't offer any transparency whatsoever. It's baffeling to see people (I get some of you are being sarcastisc) mentioning Yamauchi. Honestly, that man was a typical and old fashioned Japanese business man.

Iwata on the other hand made Nintendo more approachable. That's one of the best things Nintendo (and Iwata) have done ever since he became CEO. I don't know about you guys, but I'd rather have this funny guy who wears a Luigi hat in a worldwide broadcast instead of (with all due respect) an older and rather stern looking man.

Iwata did make a few mistakes. He showed in the past he can fix those. Let 'em try.

 

[Kai Dracon]

The more I read the more it feels like people don't remember much about Nintendo pre-Wii lol.

As someone who was already 24 when the N64 came out, I recall three feels:

1. Mario 64 was amazing, WTF was this three-dee graphics omg.

2. Cartridges were kinda cool in that they already seemed retro but... games sure are expensive...

3. Sure is taking a long time for software to come out... and Playstation is getting all the cool stuff... and Square...

N64 was the end of the party really. It kinda blows my mind that so many people complain about the wii remote, or the Wii U pad, while hazy memories of the N64's batshit insane pitchfork pad was just the dumbest design ever, analog stick or not. For all no loading time is great, N64's vasoline graphics and fog got old quick, and its software library was depressing. The "hardcore" game world quickly steered around it and left it behind.

The Gamecube, by comparison, was amazing and not just because it had better graphics. It's easy to see how it could over-represent itself in people's memory, especially if you were younger when it launched. But the Gamecube era was marred by frustration, as well. It got a lot of 3rd party software, true, including a few leading games. But there was always the feeling that 3rd parties didn't care. Ports were usually mediocre in some way, no-effort. Looking back people like to point out Gamecube was superior to Wii because it got multiplatform games - but they don't mention that it often got the worst versions.

And most of the really desirable games passed it by. Even the Xbox got ports of games like GTA3 and San Andreas, if delayed.

There's a reason why I like the Wii so much. For all that Nintendo made a few errors IMO, such as lowballing the hardware just a tad (could have used 720p output for Dolphin-like graphics), Wii was actually a cohesive vision. Rather than trying and failing to compete with everyone else, it was a fully encapsulated Nintendo experience. Their own thing from top to bottom.

While it was missing a few star games from the GC, it more than made up for it with superior 3D Mario and Zelda games, a great Fire Emblem (so often forgotten), even multiple Kirby platformers and a Donkey Kong game. It got a lot of very nice niche Japanese games. Its two biggest problems were: not launching with motion+ to allow better games to be made from the start, and Nintendo getting their usual cold feet towards the end of a platform's lifespan. If Xenoblade, Last Story, and even Pandora's Tower had been released normally worldwide, perception of the Wii may have been a bit different for fans. Instead of nothing but frustration.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Adjusted for inflation? Yes. Virtual Boy cost around $275 adjusted for inflation, and the SNES cost around $345. The N64 would be around $300, as much as the cheapest Wii U.

Not that the price really matters if you have games or whatever. The Original Playstation was $299 at launch, no inflation.

You cannot apply inflation to consoles or, more generally, technology products as if they are bananas.

 

[DasMarcos]

You cannot apply inflation to consoles or, more generally, technology products as if they are bananas.

It helps reflect the reality and costs of the time though. It certainly is helpful in trying to ascertain the impact and cost of a video game console. I see nothing wrong with it.

 

[metalslimer]

I think most people don't see 300 dollars as an unbelievable price, don't really see Iwata dropping the wii U below the PS3's asking price anytime soon, but the fact that its selling that bad at a not unreasonable price shows how bad this launch was fucked.