Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Well Iwata is the son in law of Yamauchi.
edit: Or is he not? I thought I had heard this.
edit: Or is he not? I thought I had heard this.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Iwata implies he may resign over poor business performance
- Thread starter Cheesemeister
- Start date
If he were a good CEO then he wouldn't be in a position to take a paycut...do you see?
Iwata has great skills to be a CEO. However, some of the decisions recently made are approaching hazardous levels for the company. Truthfully, the decisions are made as a collective. I think many of the "harmful" ones have root with Miyamoto, but ultimately Iwata has the final approval or veto.
Well I didn't say the 3DS was bombing outside of Japan. But clearly Japan is the only place it is "darn successful" as the poster I responded to implied.
JordanN
Banned
I judge more than one action.
Case and point, the handling of 3DS and Wii U (and its subsequent disasters) were in his hands.
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
I find it rather puzzling that you can articulate so well what is one of the most unhealthy and downright dangerous trends in the video games market, maybe even the entertainment market as a whole, and then condemn Nintendo for trying to go against this same trend.
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
It´s nice living in your own world. I mean it´s not like Nintendo said that the 3DS is under-preforming in the west or anything. It´s very cute how people are in denial even though the disappointment of the 3DS sales is coming out of Nintendo´s own mouth.
I agree with Pachter 100% on this.
If you watch the video he's NOT saying that Nintendo's going to exit the hardware business, he even highlights the reasons why they will most likely never do this. But, from a business perspective, I think he highlighted exactly why it doesn't make much sense with their current strategy. Nintendo traditionally makes money from hardware that is profitable (with large margins) day 1, and royalities from software sales. They don't seem to have EITHER THING this time around with the Wii U. The third party software situation is looking to be worse than other previous Nintendo device, so not much in the way of realities coming from that. And, thanks to the tablet controller, Nintendo's NOT making much money off the hardware. It also doesn't help that the Wii U has the perception of being priced too high, and if they cave in to pressure to lower the price to make the hardware more appealing, what little margin they may have now will be gone (and, thanks to Iwata's earlier royal fuck-up with the 3DS launch, even Nintendo FANS are expecting an imminent price drop).
If you're a Nintendo shareholder right now, you're concerned that Nintendo's two traditional ways of making money seem to be cut off this gen. You're not going to make any money. From the angle, it sure as hell doesn't make "theoretical" sense to stay in hardware. But they will.
And of course he's right about Iwata. People need to get over the decisions the man made damn-near a decade ago and realize that, THESE DAYS, pretty much every decision Iwata has made has been toxic to the company.
InsaneZero
Member
Reggie's just a figurehead whose only real responsibility is to showcase products NCL wants them to show. He has no real authority in the decisions of the entire company. That in itself is a symptom of Nintendo's insular corporate culture that I just mentioned.
They use the fact that it's missing sales projections by Nintendo as evidence that it's failing. Of course, missing projections =/= unsuccessful product. As of right now, I think the 3DS is a successful product outside and inside Japan.
There is an argument to be made that the Wii U and 3DS should not have stumbled out of the game like they have. 3DS is doing great in Japan but not so much in in EU and NA. Wii U has stumbled out the gate and fallen flat on its face.
I don't think he's a bad CEO, as a matter of fact I think he's pretty good. I just think the launches could have been handled better. And the little details even more so.
Let's keep in mind that the decisions come collectively from the board of directors. Shigeru Miyamoto, Genyo Takeda, Shinji Hatano, and like 8 other 60-70 year old Japanese men sit at this round table and make all the principal decisions. Thus, removing Iwata may not "fix anything".
I think Iwata is unfortunately in a position, where if Miyamoto or Takeda, suggest something, he respects them as his elders and "mentors" and tries to make it work. One of the biggest offenses is the poor first-party scheduling and coordination of the Wii U. Someone should absolutely be held accountable for that.
Apophis2036
Banned
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
It´s how public corporations work. Not meeting expectations means less money for share holders and less money for Nintendo. And lol at the bold.
Info ?.
I bet that GAME would survive and become a success again and bought £500 worth of shares...
H_Prestige
Banned
What could they have done differently about the launch?
The console is selling poorly because it was designed poorly. Tablet controller combined with ps3/360 equivalent specs and release date in 2012. These were marketing decisions made years ago. To improve the launch of the Wii U, Nintendo would have to go back in time and design a completely different machine.
Their first-party launch was the ultimate error. Nintendo Land and New Super Mario Bros. are good games, but there is certainly a lack of "core appeal" to the lost and potential Nintendo audience that has been watching the Wii generation from a far. Let's launch a new hardware with less first-party games than the Wii, and with the same type of software the Wii was known for. There should have been a new IP, F-Zero, Star Fox, or Metroid there just to grab some spotlight. Nintendo should have done a better job demonstrating this hardware would feature games different than the Wii. Then you have 4-5 months of nothing! Another no no.
InsaneZero
Member
The Wii U's biggest problem is not the hardware, it's the complete lack of software. And that problem stems from two issues: their inexperience with HD software development (causing the delays with their own software), and their historically rocky relationship with western third-parties (which were supposed to be filling in for Nintendo's delays).
He's not.
Graphics Horse
Member
No that's Reggie.
I disagree.
While I do believe that Nintendo operates as a "collective" up top, Iwata is the CEO. At the end of the day he bears ultimate responsibility and "blame."
Not to mention, just reading his interviews tells me that it's a lot of his own personal views of how Nintendo should function that's led to the position they're in now. He's not blameless, or a puppet.
So you mean they should have chosen the same strategy than was already proven unsuccessful with 3DS?
A new IP is definitely not a guaranteed success.
And the other franchises you mention are hardly system sellers even for Nintendo enthusiasts.
Honestly I find it hard to believe someone expected them to be enough to convince so called "core" gamers to buy the machine on day one.
Yes, totally reasonable thinking (in contrast to my trigger happy post you quoted
.But then again: times have changed, consoles seem to not sell like hot cakes in the 2010s out of the gate as when they were the hottest HiTec gadget and that is a lesson that Iwata has already learned. Let's see what happens to the other players when they enter market.
I guess/suppose selling dedicated gaming hardware is really challenging nowadays, and I am, in this light, just really impressed by the 3DS turnaround and judge Iwata's "performance" as a competent CEO primarily on this track record.
The little details, marketing, etc., pheww, yeah, not impressed either.
Still: I see Nintendo's results in the last 10 years as a dedicated VG company in the magnitude better than its competitors, which are much more diversified (read: flexible to VG failure).
The 3DS is certainly not the antithesis to my argument. The 3DS launch was uninspired.
You have to throw some coins in the slot if you want to hit the jackpot. Your point about certain franchises not selling on Nintendo's system, but the argument is that the demographic the hardware has not been viable for those games. Nintendo has to try to widen their user base, and it is going to take effort. Otherwise they can keep releasing Sin and Punishment 3s 4 years into the typical userbase and just watch it bomb.
H_Prestige
Banned
The lack of first party software is probably because of the HD development issues. The lack of third party software is because the hardware is not capable of running the software third parties are currently designing. Third parties are already well versed in HD development.
Does anyone think that if the hardware were up to snuff that guys like EA, Activision, SE, Capcom, Konami, etc. wouldn't put their next gen wares on it? It's not like MS had a superb relationship with a lot of publishers either but the 360 ended up with nearly every game.
pawelranger
Banned
Made a lot of money with the DS, Wii and even the GC, rescued the 3DS and then be called a poor CEO.
Nice logic guys.
Nice logic guys.
JordanN
Banned
I guess Ken Kutaragi was a really good guy if you ignore his $599 pricing plan and the years of corporate losses because of it.
No it makes no sense to be a third party dev
They would have to pay money to ms and sony for every software sold and would suffer much lower sales as the userbase does not buy the type of games they make. Look at sales of rayman or sonic racing. Those are all great games but sold a fraction of what mario kart wii or nsmbwii did. It makes no theoretical sense for nintendo to go the way of sega.
The way of sega did lead sega into an even worse shape and the same will happen to nintendo.
So, you're saying that the only reason Nintendo software is viable is because it has its own extremely limited ecosystem to play around in?
CoffeeJanitor
Member
You're glossing over the fact that the 3DS had to be rescued in the first place. Also, Iwata did not invest as much as he should have during the Wii/DS boom. They should have been more prepared for the following generation.
Knux-Future
Banned
I don't agree with everything there but Nintendo makes a ton of cash off of their hardware and fees from (what little lol) 3rd parties they have make games on their systems.
That is a shitton of cash to give up.
Software sales alone perhaps isn't that viable to keep them afloat.
and for as much as people whine about them re-hashing...3rd Party Nintendo would be even more safe. Mario and Zelda only (Pokemon would probably die because of the seemingly handheld only approach).
The 3DS' performance in the West has more to do with it being the first Nintendo handheld that's priced well outside the impulse buy range than the technology inside it, I think.
H_Prestige
Banned
I don't think Mario and Link fans would cease to exist if Nintendo went third party.
That's like saying COD isn't viable on the playstation because Killzone only sold a few million.
Honestly I think Nintendo is going to do great this year, maybe for no other reason than whatever NFC figurines they will sell with whatever game they are developing. I'm confident that Nintendo can make a more fun game than skylanders and Disney infinite so this could potentionaly be huge for them.
Well see though.
Well see though.
The games quality would decrease. Just look at Sega.
Sega's biggest mistake was that it shifted its most promising games to the XBOX and they promptly all flopped.
Jet Set Radio, Panzer Dragoon etc would have sold gang busters!
Knux-Future
Banned
But they would probably be the only games they make.
Sega took a lot less chances after going 3rd party.
Especially in this current market where one flop could kill you.
Sega was fucked for sure but even if Nintendo doesn't follow their lead..they would still make less money overall.
3rd party Nintendo would make them even more so reluctant to release games not named Mario or Zelda..
It would suck since some of my favorite games of theirs lately haven;t been from those two franchises.
I just think Nintendo will go 3rd party when they are in the worse possible shape...it doesn't make much sense to do so otherwise...to me at least.
H_Prestige
Banned
No they wouldn't.
It's my understanding that Sega was already having issues with game quality even before they went third party.
That's basically already the status quo for them so I don't see the problem.
We would only get Mario/Zelda/Animal Crossing games if Nintendo went third party. Does that sound better to you?
Knux-Future
Banned
lol then why do people want them to gi third party so bad?
That's my thing..what benefit is it other than one less console to buy (a plus for sure)?
They don't do it as much as they used to but losing their other games would suck a lot.
Fire Emblem Awakening and Kid Icarus Uprising more than likely wouldn't exist otherwise
Not having to buy subpar hardware solely to play Nintendo games is a really big plus.
Certain franchises might be invigorated and succeed. Zelda, F-Zero, Star Fox might do better with the PS/XBOX audience than they have on the Nintendo hardware audience. There certainly is a large amount of former NES, SNES, N64, GC gamers who might have left the Wii / Wii U camp long ago.
Maybe it's subpar to you but some people actually like some of the things that they do with their hardware. I feel like glasses free 3D is really awesome and having a whole big dedicated screen on a controller is really awesome also.
If they went third party we wouldn't get awesome stuff like that.
Of course they would. Think about what Nintendo develops, how they develop it, and why.
One of Nintendo's primary focusses when developing games is advertising the platform and strengthening the platform's portfolio. They'd have no reason to do either when developing for other platforms. You know why Sony develops and publishes niche games like Tokyo Jungle, Journey, the Team ICO stuff or Demon's Souls? For the very same reason. Why does Naughty Dog go the extra mile? Again: Same reason. For a first party, even an underperforming game can be a success. If a game managed to generate mindshare and/ or sell a few systems, and those new customers buy other games, it was worth it. For a 3rd party, every flop is just that: a flop.
I disagree. Sega had great output in the saturn and dreamcast days. The quality decreased a bit after they went third party but really hit rock bottom after they were bought by sammy.
Knux-Future
Banned
eh. wait until it gets dirt cheap then.
Buying a wii right now would be a great time to get all of the great games one might have missed out on.
I hear you tho.
I too wish that Nintendo didnt fuck themselves...again.
It works for handhelds because you dont need that much power there (Etrian Odysee looks pretty bad in spots...but who cares..it's a small screen).
I just see the negative outweighing the positive here. A gimped even more conservative Nintendo that will probably lose a lot of their big names (why stay on a sinking ship?) doesn't sound too great to me.
I am of the hope that everyone turns out great and that we get a ton of great games out of it. I hope Nintendo turns it around but also learns from this. The 3ds has become really awesome for me lately..Id like for that to continue.
The demise of SEGA wasn't because they went third party, it was because they had a huge overhead of R&D divisions and companies on the payroll and none of the IPs were selling enough to sustain it all. That is why the Dreamcast bombed, it was a great system, but the IPs were not viable or luring to the masses.
Sonic and a bunch of unrecognizable Sega stuff wasn't enough to sell hardware with it. Then, it wasn't enough to fund all the staff either.
Sonic and a bunch of unrecognizable Sega stuff wasn't enough to sell hardware with it. Then, it wasn't enough to fund all the staff either.
Similar threads
- Locked