John Harker
Definitely doesn't make things up as he goes along.
This posted yet? This is just the REVOLUTION part of interview, not whole thing.
GameSpot and Geoge Harrison.
GS: So let's start off. You guys obviously have the advantage of being last. You've seen what the other guys have got, you've seen Sony's next-gen console and Microsoft's. So how do you think the Revolution is going to stack up to those?
GH: Oh, Revolution I think will have really no problem standing up to them. Sony spent so much time focused on technical specs, it's like they threw in the kitchen sink trying to compete with Microsoft. So for us, we're going to have plenty of power and plenty of capability in the Revolution, but the real thinking and the real value come in the creative game development, and that for us is what's really going to separate the three consoles.
GS: They are putting a lot of emphasis on power. But USA Today said that the Revolution is only going to be two or three times more powerful than the GameCube. Can you give me those details?
GH: Yeah, well we haven't released any of the technical specs. We're working with IBM and ATI, so certainly all the capability that we need is there right in our development partners. We try to figure out how to strike a balance between giving the developers everything that they need to make great games, and not having it be so much that they have to spend inordinate amounts of money. In the end it has to be a business. Publishers have to be able to create the game and sell it effectively, and be able to then support the next game.
GS: So do you think that's really going to ramp up more third-party support for Revolution? The fact that it's going to be easier to make games for than the Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3?
GH: Well, we hope it will and, in fact, it's really important to us. There's some games that we do extremely well, our game franchises obviously, but there are others that we don't do. I think if we look at the GameCube and say, "OK, what's one of the things we missed in this generation?" Well, we really didn't have the Grand Turismos or the Grand Theft Autos, so those are the things that the publishers with their particular expertise can really fill in the gaps on, and that's important to us.
GS: So do you think that's Revolution's most compelling aspect from a development perspective--will it be just the cost-effectiveness or the ease of it?
GH: Well, I think those two things go hand in hand. Ease of development reflects on how many people it takes and how much time it takes those people to make the game, but [it's important to] make the point that not every game has to be an epic, photo-realistic game--there are many games that can be entertaining, enjoyable, and a great value to consumers that aren't pushing against photo-realistic graphics.
GS: Speaking of photo-realism and such, traditionally you guys have said that basically game consoles should be for games, and now you've added DVD functionality to it. What was the prime motivator behind that?
GH: I think at this point that's a fairly low cost add-on for the DVD player, but we're certainly not trying to turn into a multimedia center the way that our competitors are. They have different corporate motivations and we look at that and think that that's fine for them, but it really is not the heart of what we do. The heart of what we do is try to bring great games to people who own and play their console intensely for maybe three to four years, and as a result are looking to upgrade every three to four years.
GS: How are you planning on a transition between formats from GameCube to the Revolution? Are you going to phase out the GameCube over time? Are you going to make dual versions of it?
GH: Typically one console will sell for a year and a half maybe after the next one is introduced, and I think that will be fine. In this case, the Revolution is backwardly compatible right out of the box. You can just put your GameCube disc right into the slot. So we'll have to just watch the transition there and see what the consumer interest is.
GS: You guys haven't decided any price point at all so far, right?
GH: No, we haven't, and we're really in a good position in that we don't have to declare ourselves first. Microsoft is going to launch this fall. They'll probably have to tell people where they are by, we think, August. That will give us a good chance to understand what they think they can sell it for and also to estimate how much money they're going to lose on their box.
GS: Now, what exactly is so revolutionary about the Revolution? Is this still kind of a state secret at Nintendo?
GH: That will be a number of things. I mean, certainly the virtual console concept we describe with the ability to download the past Nintendo games is going to make it very unique. Not that someone else couldn't add that function, but they certainly can't add that kind of library and that kind of archive.
GS: Do you plan on having like a per-download pricing model along the lines of the microtransactions that will be used in the next-gen Xbox marketplace?
GH: Well, we can use it in a variety of ways. We've used some of the older games already as little bonuses, either as bonus gifts or hidden in levels of games. Certainly for the first-party titles we'll be making some of those available. We haven't really talked about whether we would sell them. The third parties can make their own decision whether they want to sell them, or maybe they will add it on as sort of a free benefit when you buy a current version of the game.
GS: To continue with what's so revolutionary about the Revolution...
GH: Well, I think certainly being wireless out of the box is revolutionary. People sort of picked on us for not jumping in prematurely into online or Internet gaming, but we just looked at it, the way it was evolving, and just felt that it was not time to jump in. But certainly with the next console it would be, with a couple of important changes like eliminating the access fee so there's not really a monthly subscription, and making use of first-party games, downloadable for free. That to us will be really revolutionary. Right now the estimates are anywhere between six and maybe 10 or 12 percent of console owners are playing online. You know, if you really have people embrace it and enjoy it, we think that should be well over 50 percent. I think I heard Nintendo president Mr. Satoru Iwata, and Nintendo vice president of sales and marketing, Reggie Fils-Aime, say this morning as much as 90 percent is the goal for DS online, which is a great goal, rather than keeping it a niche aspect of gaming, to make it a broad-based application.
GS: So do you have any plans on maybe making just one standard for an online service or is it going to be two-tiered like they're doing with Xbox Live?
GH: Right now we're not looking to have a two-tiered service. So for first-party games it would be free, and for third party, I think they just have to determine it for their own game. Not any kind of general access fee again, but for their own game, it's fine if they want to charge them that kind of a price for that.
-----------------
I don't feel like selectively bolding anything, but it seems to me from various things they are kinda backing down a little on their "one amazing revoltuionary" thing, mainly the controller.
He's saying: wireless is revoltuionary, wi-fi is revoltuinary, size and ease for development is, being able to download all that 20 years of content is....
Seems to me he's trying to soften the blow a little bit when the controller is revealing, taking a "ALL OF THIS COMBINED IS REVOLUTIONARY" approach.
You know.... in case we don't dig the controller.
GameSpot and Geoge Harrison.
GS: So let's start off. You guys obviously have the advantage of being last. You've seen what the other guys have got, you've seen Sony's next-gen console and Microsoft's. So how do you think the Revolution is going to stack up to those?
GH: Oh, Revolution I think will have really no problem standing up to them. Sony spent so much time focused on technical specs, it's like they threw in the kitchen sink trying to compete with Microsoft. So for us, we're going to have plenty of power and plenty of capability in the Revolution, but the real thinking and the real value come in the creative game development, and that for us is what's really going to separate the three consoles.
GS: They are putting a lot of emphasis on power. But USA Today said that the Revolution is only going to be two or three times more powerful than the GameCube. Can you give me those details?
GH: Yeah, well we haven't released any of the technical specs. We're working with IBM and ATI, so certainly all the capability that we need is there right in our development partners. We try to figure out how to strike a balance between giving the developers everything that they need to make great games, and not having it be so much that they have to spend inordinate amounts of money. In the end it has to be a business. Publishers have to be able to create the game and sell it effectively, and be able to then support the next game.
GS: So do you think that's really going to ramp up more third-party support for Revolution? The fact that it's going to be easier to make games for than the Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3?
GH: Well, we hope it will and, in fact, it's really important to us. There's some games that we do extremely well, our game franchises obviously, but there are others that we don't do. I think if we look at the GameCube and say, "OK, what's one of the things we missed in this generation?" Well, we really didn't have the Grand Turismos or the Grand Theft Autos, so those are the things that the publishers with their particular expertise can really fill in the gaps on, and that's important to us.
GS: So do you think that's Revolution's most compelling aspect from a development perspective--will it be just the cost-effectiveness or the ease of it?
GH: Well, I think those two things go hand in hand. Ease of development reflects on how many people it takes and how much time it takes those people to make the game, but [it's important to] make the point that not every game has to be an epic, photo-realistic game--there are many games that can be entertaining, enjoyable, and a great value to consumers that aren't pushing against photo-realistic graphics.
GS: Speaking of photo-realism and such, traditionally you guys have said that basically game consoles should be for games, and now you've added DVD functionality to it. What was the prime motivator behind that?
GH: I think at this point that's a fairly low cost add-on for the DVD player, but we're certainly not trying to turn into a multimedia center the way that our competitors are. They have different corporate motivations and we look at that and think that that's fine for them, but it really is not the heart of what we do. The heart of what we do is try to bring great games to people who own and play their console intensely for maybe three to four years, and as a result are looking to upgrade every three to four years.
GS: How are you planning on a transition between formats from GameCube to the Revolution? Are you going to phase out the GameCube over time? Are you going to make dual versions of it?
GH: Typically one console will sell for a year and a half maybe after the next one is introduced, and I think that will be fine. In this case, the Revolution is backwardly compatible right out of the box. You can just put your GameCube disc right into the slot. So we'll have to just watch the transition there and see what the consumer interest is.
GS: You guys haven't decided any price point at all so far, right?
GH: No, we haven't, and we're really in a good position in that we don't have to declare ourselves first. Microsoft is going to launch this fall. They'll probably have to tell people where they are by, we think, August. That will give us a good chance to understand what they think they can sell it for and also to estimate how much money they're going to lose on their box.
GS: Now, what exactly is so revolutionary about the Revolution? Is this still kind of a state secret at Nintendo?
GH: That will be a number of things. I mean, certainly the virtual console concept we describe with the ability to download the past Nintendo games is going to make it very unique. Not that someone else couldn't add that function, but they certainly can't add that kind of library and that kind of archive.
GS: Do you plan on having like a per-download pricing model along the lines of the microtransactions that will be used in the next-gen Xbox marketplace?
GH: Well, we can use it in a variety of ways. We've used some of the older games already as little bonuses, either as bonus gifts or hidden in levels of games. Certainly for the first-party titles we'll be making some of those available. We haven't really talked about whether we would sell them. The third parties can make their own decision whether they want to sell them, or maybe they will add it on as sort of a free benefit when you buy a current version of the game.
GS: To continue with what's so revolutionary about the Revolution...
GH: Well, I think certainly being wireless out of the box is revolutionary. People sort of picked on us for not jumping in prematurely into online or Internet gaming, but we just looked at it, the way it was evolving, and just felt that it was not time to jump in. But certainly with the next console it would be, with a couple of important changes like eliminating the access fee so there's not really a monthly subscription, and making use of first-party games, downloadable for free. That to us will be really revolutionary. Right now the estimates are anywhere between six and maybe 10 or 12 percent of console owners are playing online. You know, if you really have people embrace it and enjoy it, we think that should be well over 50 percent. I think I heard Nintendo president Mr. Satoru Iwata, and Nintendo vice president of sales and marketing, Reggie Fils-Aime, say this morning as much as 90 percent is the goal for DS online, which is a great goal, rather than keeping it a niche aspect of gaming, to make it a broad-based application.
GS: So do you have any plans on maybe making just one standard for an online service or is it going to be two-tiered like they're doing with Xbox Live?
GH: Right now we're not looking to have a two-tiered service. So for first-party games it would be free, and for third party, I think they just have to determine it for their own game. Not any kind of general access fee again, but for their own game, it's fine if they want to charge them that kind of a price for that.
-----------------
I don't feel like selectively bolding anything, but it seems to me from various things they are kinda backing down a little on their "one amazing revoltuionary" thing, mainly the controller.
He's saying: wireless is revoltuionary, wi-fi is revoltuinary, size and ease for development is, being able to download all that 20 years of content is....
Seems to me he's trying to soften the blow a little bit when the controller is revealing, taking a "ALL OF THIS COMBINED IS REVOLUTIONARY" approach.
You know.... in case we don't dig the controller.
