Support NeoGAF

[krizzx]

Sure, lets discount legitimate complaints by saying anyone displeased with Nintendo is an anti-Nintendo fanboy. Great.

You can do that if you wish, but what I'm pointing out is the exact thing that I said. Iwata is doing a 1000 times more good than bad. ie. this means that your complaints, no matter how legitimate you think they are, are dwarfed by the greater number of great things he has achieved and is still achieving as head of the company. The former owner of NIntendo chose him to lead out of everyone else in the world for a reason.

The company has never seen so much profit. What people are complaining about in this thread as the second poster said, something that is beyond "their" control. They cannot force WESTERN third parties to like them and give them unique support, but then western games have never been the most popular games on Nintendo consoles. Japanese third party games sell the best and they still have Japanese third party support.

 

[metalslimer]

You can do that if you wish, but what I'm pointing out is the exact thing that I said. Iwata is doing a 1000 times more good than bad. ie. this means that your complaints, no matter how legitimate you think they are are dwarfed by the great things he has achieved and is still achieving for the company.

By what metric?

 

[mclem]

No, thats not ok, and you explain why in your post. Microsoft and Sony can fall back on third party devs. Nintendo can't. Therefore, it is Nintendo's responsibility to put out games for their system at a consistent rate.

In other words, Nintendo needs to have a larger and more powerful software development team than than Microsoft or Sony? I can't help but think that that's fundamentally impossible. I don't think what you want is realistic without the involvement of third parties.

I do wonder if they had more assurances of third party development prior to launch that ultimately didn't come through, too.

 

[AOC83]

By what metric?

krizzx hates Nintendo.

 

[krizzx]

By what metric?

By the metric I pointed out.

 

[Tuck]

In other words, Nintendo needs to have a larger and more powerful software development team than than Microsoft or Sony? I can't help but think that that's fundamentally impossible. I don't think what you want is realistic without the involvement of third parties.

I do wonder if they had more assurances of third party development prior to launch that ultimately didn't come through, too.

Don't they have like a billion dollars in the bank? Maybe time to put some of that to use? So long as the games are profitable, its not like they'd be wasting money. They'd just have a smaller cushion to fall back on should things go sour.

 

[Shion]

He had an insanely profitable stretch during that period. Probably the best profits anyone has every achieved in the gaming sector. But you're right in many aspects. It's all been so cynical and calculated and at the expense of certain things that made Nintendo so great. I know it's during his reign that the impossible happened for me: I went from a lifelong Nintendo fan who put them above all other console companies, to just no longer caring. It was just constant disappointment to the point I've entered complete ambivalence towards the company.

I know many people, me included, who feel exactly the same.

 

[Jackano]

You can do that if you wish, but what I'm pointing out is the exact thing that I said. Iwata is doing a 1000 times more good than bad. ie. this means that your complaints, no matter how legitimate you think they are are dwarfed by the great things he has achieved and is still achieving for the company.

1000 times, fair enought, but in the most important 3 key points, he fucked up with 3DS and Wii U: Business performance, hardware sales momentum and software planning.
Doing 10 awesome Nintendo Directs and signing 2 Platinum Games games (haha) is not going to earn him many credits in front of the investors.

 

[gemoran4]

i like Iwata. He was involved in software that i loved in my childhood (kirby) and to this day (smash bros). He really did initially turn around nintendo at a time where they were sputtering a bit.

However I am in the opinion that he has outstayed his welcome, at least in his position. I think Nintendo's higher ups need to be revamped a bit. There is still a lot of talent in the company, and the software they do make is still of high quality. But as a hardware company they haven't been very good lately.

 

[Juken]

Great article. Funny/sad to see all of Iwata's quotes through the years beside each other.

One of the most obvious signs of poor management is having huge cash reserves and being unable to find a project with a positive RoI. Sitting on a "warchest" is not a wise strategy and not expanding enough during Wii's boom years is really going to cost Iwata now.

 

[mclem]

Don't they have like a billion dollars in the bank? Maybe time to put some of that to use? So long as the games are profitable, its not like they'd be wasting money. They'd just have a smaller cushion to fall back on should things go sour.

But how to use it? They could easily throw money at growth to a massive size, but the recent history of the industry is littered with the wreckage of dev teams that grew beyond their capability to financially support them in the long term. Just think how big a team they'd need to do more development than Sony. And then double (okay, probably multiply it by 1.5) it for the other platform they need to support.

 

[SmokedMeat]

It isn't, there has been a software drought with every Nintendo console since the N64, and Iwata has done nothing to solve the problem.

Nintendo had more Gamecube games on launch day than they have Wii U titles as of April. Hell, Smash Bros Melee was a launch window game, and by launch window I mean within a month.

The focus is entirely on 3DS, when there should've been a balance.

 

[krizzx]

1000 times, fair enought, but in the most important 3 key points, he fucked up with 3DS and Wii U: Business performance, hardware sales momentum and software planning.
Doing 10 awesome Nintendo Directs and signing 2 Platinum Games games (haha) is not going to earn him many credits in front of the investors.

Maybe not, but Nintendo is not American and does not work like an American company. Here, its all about pleasing the board of directors, investors and following set guidelines that, according to research, should yield more money. The west is about marketing and cash gouging in other words. Thats what led to so much unsubstantial DLC and so many micro transactions. Marketing, by nature, denies being creative and adventurous because the core format it follows is seeing what is already there then adapting it to your business model. If teen music is popular then make a game filled with teen music. If emo is popular then make a game with emo characters. This is how it works in the west. Little originality at all.

Nintendo is still focused on originality and creativity moreso than anytnhing else. They didnt make the Wiimote or the Wii U Gampepad because they were popular(unlike move and kinect). They made them because they want to do something new.

Even when investors were plying for Nintendo to start releasing their first party games on other systems, Iwata stood against them. That, more than anything else he has done, earned my respect. He didn't sale out for a quick cash-in that would lead to the inevitable demise of Nintendo as it has been for decades.

I like Nintendo specifically because it is "not" doing what Sony, Microsoft and all of the major American devs are doing.

 

[freenudemacusers]

Still don't understand the gamepad. Tablet = iPad, maybe Samsung. Three years ago this may have not completely been the case, but now? Late, late to the party. And don't forget that Apple dropped the iPad Mini right before the Wii U released. That must have been painful.

 

[krizzx]

Still don't understand the gamepad. Tablet = iPad, maybe Samsung. Three years ago this may have not completely been the case, but now? Late, late to the party. And don't forget that Apple dropped the iPad Mini right before the Wii U released. That must have been painful.

It would be if the Wii U was ever based on tablets or any form of an attempt to make money from them and/or copy what is popular. But its not.

The idea for using a touchscreen gamepad was set in stone in 2007 and the idea behind it was to make a controller that was like the NDS which predates the Ipad the last time I checked.

The Wii U Gamepad was not made to compete with Apple, Samsung or anyone else. Its not a tablet. This has been stated and explained a dozen times but people still insist on it.

 

[BowieZ]

Still don't understand the gamepad. Tablet = iPad, maybe Samsung. Three years ago this may have not completely been the case, but now? Late, late to the party. And don't forget that Apple dropped the iPad Mini right before the Wii U released. That must have been painful.

GamePad isn't about one screen, it's about two screens.

 

[Juken]

Maybe not, but Nintendo is not American and does work like an American company. Here, its all about pleasing the board of directors, investors and following set guidelines that, according to research, should yield more money. The west is about marketing and cash gouging in other words. Thats what led to so much unsubstantial DLC and so many micro transactions. Marketing, by nature, being creative and adventurous because the core format it follows is seeing what is already there then adapting it your business model. If teen music is popular then make a game filled with teen music. If emo is popular then make a game with emo characters. This is how it works in the west. No originality at all.

Nintendo is still focused on originality and creativity moreso than anytnhing else. Even when investors were plying for Nintendo to start releasing their first party games on other systems, Iwata stood against them. That, more than anything else he has done, earned my respect. He didn't sale out for a quick cash-in that would lead to the inevitable demise of Nintendo as it has been for decades.

I like Nintendo specifically because it is "not" doing what Sony, Microsoft and all of the major American devs are doing.

I think you have to separate your personal feelings of Nintendo games from this sort of analysis.

I love Nintendo's games too, but remember that Iwata's primary goal is to generate returns and growth for his investors, like any CEO. And also realize that their market cap is now lower than the end of the Gamecube generation, wiping out all of the gains made during the Wii years. It's hard to argue that his strategy/management has been adequate lately.

 

[mAcOdIn]

I think my main gripes with Nintendo all come down to what most of my gripes are in reality, managing expectations. It's like my job, we're constantly told we're going to get 40 hours a week and yet every week it's 60+. In a way 60 hours isn't bad, it's good money and if you're single it's pretty damn good, the problem comes from people who take your statement at face value and want to somehow go to school full time or have a family. If my job was upfront about the hours we'd just have people that are cool, or even want, 60 hour work weeks and everything would be better.

Nintendo's the same. I like a lot of Nintendo franchises and I probably always will buy their hardware at some point in its lifecycle. It would be cool if Nintendo was back in the game like during the NES and SNES era and a Nintendo system could conceivably be the only system I own but that's not reality. They're not making any real efforts to make it reality. So why the claims? Why the promises? Why the high expectations for units sold? Nintendo made money before the NES, they made money after their "downfall" from the n64 onwards, do they even need to really directly compete with Sony and Microsoft? Do they need to be considered a game console in the same breath as the other two? I always feel that if they set out as their aim to just be a Nintendo machine that would welcome others if they wanted to release a game on that system but mainly a Nintendo vehicle to sell their games, clearly conveyed that to their investors, their fans and everyone else that everything would be so much better. I think that fans expectations would be better managed. That investor expectations would be more reasonable. And I think their hardware R&D guys would be able to make better choices when they're not feeling like they need to directly compete with Sony or Microsoft. Just make the system they want, make their games, bring home some money, rinse and repeat.

I look at companies like Leapfrog that makes gaming tablets and shit, nobodies telling them since they make games that they need to get series and start competing with Sony. And of course, they're in a different market, but, why can't Nintendo also be in a different market? Which isn't to say the markets have no overlap, clearly the market Nintendo would be targeting would overlap some with Sony and Microsoft, does overlap with Roku and AppleTV, there is some indirect competition there, but again, no one's telling Roku their box sucks because it can't run Crysis 3 despite there being some overlap with the PS3's features.

 

[Darryl]

Still don't understand the gamepad. Tablet = iPad, maybe Samsung. Three years ago this may have not completely been the case, but now? Late, late to the party. And don't forget that Apple dropped the iPad Mini right before the Wii U released. That must have been painful.

the gamepad is a controller, not a tablet.

Is it just me or is the anti Nintendo thing in the industry really strong going all of a sudden?

it isn't just you. it's almost creepy.

I look at companies like Leapfrog that makes gaming tablets and shit, nobodies telling them since they make games that they need to get series and start competing with Sony. And of course, they're in a different market, but, why can't Nintendo also be in a different market? Which isn't to say the markets have no overlap, clearly the market Nintendo would be targeting would overlap some with Sony and Microsoft, does overlap with Roku and AppleTV, there is some indirect competition there, but again, no one's telling Roku their box sucks because it can't run Crysis 3 despite there being some overlap with the PS3's features.

agreed. i've always felt like they're competing in a different market personally. i bought my Wii U and i'm probably going to pick up one or both of the other two consoles. i don't believe people want what they're asking for when they want the device to directly compete with Sony or MS, unless what they really want is a bankrupt high quality game developer.

 

[freenudemacusers]

It would be if the Wii U was ever based on tablets or any form of an attempt to make money from them and/or copy what is popular. But its not.

The idea for using a touchscreen gamepad was set in stone in 2007 and the idea behind it was to make a controller that was like the NDS which predates the Ipad the last time I checked.

The Wii U Gamepad was not made to compete with Apple, Samsung or anyone else. Its not a tablet. This has been stated and explained a dozen times but people still insist on it.

Intention is not perception. Again, we have an OP clearly laying out household demographics indicating that the majority of them in the US and UK own more than one television. Correct me if I am wrong, but Nintendo did market the system having the capability to play games on the screen if someone is using the television, correct? So, what would the function of the gamepad be in this scenario? Aside from a tablet with buttons, limited functional range, few games, and short battery life, I mean.

 

[Juken]

the gamepad is a controller, not a tablet.

That's technically true, but it's also important how the potential consumer sees it.

I think people will see the Gamepad form factor and the Ipad and other tablets will spring to mind. And I don't think that's a particularly favorable comparison for the Gamepad or the Wii U itself.

 

[krizzx]

I think you have to separate your personal feelings of Nintendo games from this sort of analysis.

I love Nintendo's games too, but remember that Iwata's primary goal is to generate returns and growth for his investors, like any CEO. And also realize that their market cap is now lower than the end of the Gamecube generation, wiping out all of the gains made during the Wii years. It's hard to argue that his strategy/management has been adequate lately.

That is a presumptuous declaration, because I don't love Nintendo game at all. I've bought "almost" every Nintendo console but rarely ever a first party title. I buy the consoles for the unique third party games that they tend to get.

I said I like Nintendo "as a company", not as a developer. I prefer the way old SEGA made their games to Nintendo. No company makes them like that anymore.

You are still looking at it from an American business perspective, not a Japanese. Japanese business does not work like American. Just compare the amount Miyamoto and Iwata make to American business execs and top developers. Japanese business generally leans towards the creation of "unique" hits. This is what brings about things like Hello Kitty and Naruto. Just doing what is popular doesn't yield the best results of their. It yields middlig results.

Sure Iwata aim to please investors and so on, unlike American business, their are other things that take priority to that in the Japanese market.

 

[Village]

Wii/DS money.

3ds money now too, it has picked a Hell of a lot of speed.

 

[Juken]

That is a presumptuous declaration, because I don't love Nintendo game at all. I've bought "almost" every Nintendo console but rarely ever a first party title. I buy the consoles for the unique third party games that they tend to get.

I said I like Nintendo "as a company", not as a developer. I prefer the way old SEGA made their games to Nintendo. No company makes them like that anymore.

You are still looking at it from an American business perspective, not a Japanese. Japanese business does not work like American. Just compare the amount Miyamoto and Iwata make to American business execs and top developers.

I don't think it's that huge of an assumption to think fans of Nintendo like their first party output. You're definitely in the minority if you love Nintendo primarily for unique third party games (not that there is anything wrong with that, though).

And while I don't deny Japanese and American business are different, I think they're more alike than you think and particularly in the ways that matter here.

In both regions CEOs are tasked with generating returns for their shareholders. And if a CEO's strategy is failing to meet expectations over a prolonged period, he's not doing a good job no matter which side of the pond you live.

 

[Darryl]

Intention is not perception. Again, we have an OP clearly laying out household demographics indicating that the majority of them in the US and UK own more than one television. Correct me if I am wrong, but Nintendo did market the system having the capability to play games on the screen if someone is using the television, correct? So, what would the function of the gamepad be in this scenario? Aside from a tablet with buttons, limited functional range, few games, and short battery life, I mean.

You can take your UI to the tablet and have 100% of your 50" screen real estate displaying glorious HD.

That's technically true, but it's also important how the potential consumer sees it.

I think people will see the Gamepad form factor and the Ipad and other tablets will spring to mind. And I don't think that's a particularly favorable comparison for the Gamepad or the Wii U itself.

unless they start marketing it as a tablet, i don't believe the consumer will be confused. i think the only market that is confused are the people who game hardcore and haven't been bothered to play it themselves, so they skim the features and shrug it off.

 

[freenudemacusers]

You can take your UI to the tablet and have 100% of your 50" screen real estate displaying glorious HD.

I already have a PS3/Xbox360 for that, said the average consumer of videogames.

 

[MisterHero]

Intention is not perception. Again, we have an OP clearly laying out household demographics indicating that the majority of them in the US and UK own more than one television. Correct me if I am wrong, but Nintendo did market the system having the capability to play games on the screen if someone is using the television, correct? So, what would the function of the gamepad be in this scenario? Aside from a tablet with buttons, limited functional range, few games, and short battery life, I mean.

That would be an issue if OffTV was the only thing it could do. Wii U supports traditional gaming and motion gaming too.

It can also be a "big asset" to Wii U if social gaming truly matters. Just like the PS3's Share button, but with a big screen that allows typing, taking pictures, and chatting with other players.

 

[MarkusRJR]

Intention is not perception. Again, we have an OP clearly laying out household demographics indicating that the majority of them in the US and UK own more than one television. Correct me if I am wrong, but Nintendo did market the system having the capability to play games on the screen if someone is using the television, correct? So, what would the function of the gamepad be in this scenario? Aside from a tablet with buttons, limited functional range, few games, and short battery life, I mean.

The Wii U was clearly designed as a Japan centric console. It'a main feature (off TV play) is only really relevant to Japanese players (where it's common to only have 1 TV for a whole family) or portable gamers (who only play inside lol). The small size, the power saving design, the game partnerships (SMT x FE, DQ10, MH3G, Platinum games) and even their first party line up (NSMB because 3D Mario doesn't sell as well in Japan and because it's faster to develop). Apart from TVii (where the contractors had I contact NoA to get them interested) every part of the Wii U seems like a Japanese oriented device in a western dominated industry. It was doomed from the start and the lack of support from third parties and first parties made it worse.

 

[krizzx]

I don't think it's that huge of an assumption to think fans of Nintendo like their first party output. You're definitely in the minority if you love Nintendo systems primarily for unique third party games.

And while I don't deny Japanese and American business are different, I think they're more alike than you think and particularly in the ways that matter here.

In both regions CEOs are tasked with generating returns for their shareholders. And if a CEO's strategy is failing to meet expectations over a prolonged period, he's not doing a good job no matter which side of the pond you live.

That's another presumption. I'm no Nintendo fanboy. The only company I could say I was ,sort of, a fanboy for is SEGA back in 90s.

I'm primarily a PC gamer. I like "NIntendo as company" as in I like the way do business and try to keep bringing unique things to gaming. The main reason I became a PC gamer primarily is because I got tired of all of the stale, redundant titles on console and all of the baseless fanaticism. I don't like military shooters or gory hack and slash games. The saturation has become so much. The only person who can outst Iwata is himself and I would rather that don't happen, because I think he is doing a phenominal job.


If American and Japnese business were that much alike, then Iwata would have been fired when he refused to start releasing Mario games on the iOS, Playstation and Android. The investors hold all of the power in America. The company heads hold all of the power in Japan.

Sure, there is a game drought, but it will not last forever. We have seen with Monster Hunter that the sales will spike when the big games come out. I honestly thought it was common sense but there have been so many people who were insistent that the Wii U was dead and nothing can save with so much hope in their eyes that it would fail. We also know that many big games are coming whether people want them to or not. Now all there is to do is wait for the stream to come. I would personally like for them to release them faster but I still have a huge backlog of games for my PC I have not played, and 3DS game are still coming out in mass.

If the sales don't pick up by the end of the year "after all of the big games start to come out" I will say there is a problem. Iwata is doing a much better job than the gaming media is giving him credit for.

 

[Juken]

unless they start marketing it as a tablet, i don't believe the consumer will be confused. i think the only market that is confused are the people who game hardcore and haven't been bothered to play it themselves, so they skim the features and shrug it off.

I actually think the hardcore being confused is far more telling.

If people around these parts keep referring to it as a tablet, then why would you expect the average, less tech savvy consumer to make the distinction.

 

[mclem]

That's technically true, but it's also important how the potential consumer sees it.

I think people will see the Gamepad form factor and the Ipad and other tablets will spring to mind. And I don't think that's a particularly favorable comparison for the Gamepad or the Wii U itself.

To be fair, I think "Bottom half of a DS" is a more instinctive comparison than "Tablet". At least for me.

I actually think the hardcore being confused is far more telling.

If people around these parts keep referring to it as a tablet, then why would you expect the average, less tech savvy consumer to make the distinction.

I accept that this is happening, but I really don't get it. The parallel with the DS is overwhelming in my eyes, and I'd expect any 'hardcore player' to be familiar with the DS.

 

[Juken]

That's another presumption. I'm no Nintendo fanboy. The only company I could say I was ,sort of, a fanboy for is SEGA back in 90s.

I'm primarily a PC gamer. I like "NIntendo as company" as in I like the way do business and try to keep bringing unique things to gaming. The main reason I became a PC gamer primarily is because I got tired of all of the stale, redundant titles on console and all of the baseless fanaticism. I don't like military shooters or gory hack and slash games. The saturation has become so much.

If American and Japnese business were that much alike, then Iwata would have been fired when he refused to start releasing Mario games on the iOS, Playstation and Android. The investors hold all of the power in America. The company heads hold all of the power in Japan.

I think you should look up corporate structure and how the relationship between CEOs and investors work. It's the same structure everywhere and their duties are the same everywhere.

Iwata IS in trouble and he'll be gone if he can't turn things around.

To be fair, I think "Bottom half of a DS" is a more instinctive comparison than "Tablet". At least for me.

Yeah, agreed. I've always seen it as just a larger version of the DS concept. I was just talking about what the average person might see.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Iwata deserves credit for the success of the Wii, DS, and blue oceans strategy. He also deserves to be fired due to the Wii's bad final years, the 3DS's poor launch/underwhelming US performance, and most of all the utter failure of the WiiU. There are plenty of CEOs and company presidents who accomplished far more than Iwata and were fired shortly thereafter due to bad decisions that flopped.

Most of the bad decisions revolve around the same mistakes: inherent cheapness, a dismissal of tech, inability to read the market, and a severe lack of software. Nintendo isn't Sony or Microsoft, they cannot afford to take huge losses. But at some point they need to realize being cheap isn't the only solution to their situation, and it nearly always bites you in the ass in the long term (example: no next gen ports for the WiiU). The WiiU will be irrelevant soon due to a series of stupid decisions on its tech, from the shitty CPU to even audio stuff.

Nintendo spent much of this generation arguing HD was a fad and online gaming wasn't important. The WiiU fixes this to a degree in terms of HD but it's clear Nintendo still doesn't care about online, or matching their competition. Finally on software I find myself asking what the fuck were these teams working on during the Wii's final drought years, or during the 3DS launch; what are they working on now? Without third party support the WiiU is stuck in a quagmire that won't end until the holidays, only to begin again in spring 2014.

Finally I think it's safe to say the WiiU's launch and marketing campaign were the worse not just in recent video game memory, but in recent tech memory. People still don't know what it is, and the "tablet" doesn't offer anything extra that people don't get on their actual tablets. That casual market moved on years ago, yet Nintendo carried on and missed quite a blatant exodus. At this rate they won't figure out where the market is today until 2017.

 

[freenudemacusers]

If American and Japnese business were that much alike, then Iwata would have been fired when he refused to start releasing Mario games on the iOS, Playstation and Android. The investors hold all of the power in America. The company heads hold all of the power in Japan.

In what reality is this true?

 

[Somnid]

The Wii U was clearly designed as a Japan centric console. It'a main feature (off TV play) is only really relevant to Japanese players or portable gamers (who only play inside lol). The small size, the power saving design, the game partnerships (SMT x FE, DQ10, MH3G, Platinum games) and even their first party line up (NSMB because 3D Mario doesn't sell as well in Japan and because it's faster to develop). Apart from TVii (where the contractors had I contact NoA to get them interested) every part of the Wii U seems like a Japanese oriented device in a western dominated industry. It was doomed from the start and the lack of support from third parties and first parties made it worse.

You've just described every Western person who plays games on a handheld device.

But no, this analysis isn't quite right. There's significant benefits for being able to play off-tv, and significant benefits in having games that just don't work with current control schemes. If you don't see it, well, blame Nintendo because they're supposed to make you understand but do know that there's a fair bit more than that.

 

[we.are.the.armada]

Hmmm, could be a problem for Nintendo. The best way to own their systems is about 3 years after launch so you have enough games to justify the purchase and to avoid the buyers remorse that comes from a drought.

 

[krizzx]

Intention is not perception. Again, we have an OP clearly laying out household demographics indicating that the majority of them in the US and UK own more than one television. Correct me if I am wrong, but Nintendo did market the system having the capability to play games on the screen if someone is using the television, correct? So, what would the function of the gamepad be in this scenario? Aside from a tablet with buttons, limited functional range, few games, and short battery life, I mean.

You are skewing what it is. A "tablet with buttons" is the entirely wrong view and most tablets do have some buttons on them the last I checked.

Its a "gamepad with a touchscreen". Its a controller for a gaming console first an foremost.

That is the more accurate analysis of what the Wii U controller is. It does not serve any of the purposes of a tablet. It has no functionality whatsoever. There is no CPU, GPU, memory or software in it.

A tablet is an eletronic device that you can carry around with you to use just like...a tablet just as a notebook is an eletronic device your carry around to electronically mimic the function of a....notebook. They are named for how they were intended to be used. You don't put the Wii U Gamepad in your suitcase then take it out later and manage data. Its not a Tablet, its a controller. Nothing more.

For the purposes of offescreen gameplay, it would be a mini-tv with portable capabilities,

 

[Zajora]

I'm surprised there is so much hate for Iwata going on in here. I thought his Nintendo Directs and Iwata asks were both pretty popular.

Edit: Nintendo needs a business man or woman.

I thought that the general consensus was that he had better perspective because he is actually a programmer/game designer, as opposed to a business type. I don't understand why people are saying Nintendo should get a business-minded person as a CEO in order to be a better company for gamers, since that seems like it'd have the opposite effect.

...and why are people saying that Iwata is at fault for Nintendo not releasing games. Hasn't their policy always been to delay games until they're really finished, instead of just publishing unfinished games? The argument that "They should've just expanded until delays would never happen" seems a little flawed. For one, didn't they actually start expanding a few years ago?

A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad.

He may have faults, but honestly I think many alternatives could be a whole lot worse.

 

[Darryl]

I already have a PS3/Xbox360 for that, said the average consumer of videogames.

there is no way to take your UI and put it on the controller says the PS3/360

I actually think the hardcore being confused is far more telling.

If people around these parts keep referring to it as a tablet, then why would you expect the average, less tech savvy consumer to make the distinction.

because a few people made the connection here and parroted it until a bunch more people made the connection, and now it is repeated commonly whereas an average low information consumer would just look at the box and think "oh wow cool controller" and that's it

 

[Pociask]

Good and timely article. Hopefully articles like this will get people to stop saying, "B-b-b-ut Iwata said..." or "But Reggie said..." whenever Nintendo is criticized. They say a lot of things. Look at what Nintendo does, not at what what Nintendo says.

 

[Shikamaru Ninja]

Iwata, Miyamoto, and Takeda are the three main culprits of the lighting in a bottle success, and then the downward spiral of momentum. My theory is that they initially made good and horrible decisions, where the good managed to grab a somewhat temporary audience. Much of that audience has probably left for good. Those bad decisions are unforgivable now.

Let's also not forget Miyamoto has done a poor job at managing the EAD teams. What happened to them. They were once the king of the hill.

 

[JulianImp]

I thin this article's unecessarily harsh at times, even if some statements were true.

The biggest problem I see right now is that they've shifted their focus from crafting their own market to trying to fit into the PS3/Xbox360's, overspending in an attempt that probably won't attract users or developers to the WiiU too much.

PS3 and Xbox360 have been in the market for longer and the companies behind them have more of a background of working with 3rd parties as opposed to Nintendo. The Wii's games ran on worse hardware than its competitors, but did great because it distanced itself from them market-wise.

Nintendo slowly built a moat around itself, which I think led to interesting things, but now they're trying to undo all that, which will cost them lots of time and money; a fool's errand to get a slice of a last-gen market when most users would rather play their multiplatform games on the consoles they already own than purchasing a WiiU, and most developers don't care about the console's upgraded hardware since Sony and Microsoft's upcoming consoles are going to eclipse Nintendo's performance-wise again. It's even worse that their attempts to assimilate the PS360's features into the WiiU look like half-baked jobs.

 

[TalesOfWin]

My wii u has collected dust since december.

 

[evilromero]

It would be if the Wii U was ever based on tablets or any form of an attempt to make money from them and/or copy what is popular. But its not.

The idea for using a touchscreen gamepad was set in stone in 2007 and the idea behind it was to make a controller that was like the NDS which predates the Ipad the last time I checked.

The Wii U Gamepad was not made to compete with Apple, Samsung or anyone else. Its not a tablet. This has been stated and explained a dozen times but people still insist on it.

Consumers don't see it that way. Nintendo simply isn't the company they once were. Their output quality isn't the same nor is their timetable for releases. They still manage to make charming titles but the truth is they just aren't substantial in terms of depth and content. Games like Red Dead and Dark Souls are what I always imagined a future Zelda to be like when I was a kid playing A Link to the Past. Nintendo was still on the right track with their core software during the N64 era but since then they've slowly eroded their IPs by watering down the mechanics and alienating the audience that established them.

Let's also not forget Miyamoto has done a poor job at managing the EAD teams. What happened to them. They were once the king of the hill.

Exactly. I've been saying this for the past year that Nintendo has been poorly managing their internal teams, which has affected the number of releases and output quality. And you know it's bad when longtime Nintendo fans like myself are reacting negatively to the company's recent condition.

 

[Mandoric]

The problem as a whole--extending beyond Iwata, though it certainly involves him too--is a lack of strategic competence; lots of reasonable tactical moves are being made, but they tend to cancel each other out.

Being everything to everyone can't happen anymore without some major loss-leading; all these weak attempts do is create most of the losses with none of the improved market position. Nintendo needs to find a particular niche to attack from rather than putting out a console, that's also a tablet, that plays Mario, but also Mass Effect, and in doing so managing to be priced like a next-gen system while having the oomph of kit several years old.

 

[VanMardigan]

Last I checked, the 3DS(brought by Iwata) is still reigining as the number 1 selling piece of hardware on the planet Earth.

Is this true?

 

[Darryl]

Consumers don't see it that way. Nintendo simply isn't the company they once were. Their output quality isn't the same nor is their timetable for releases. They still manage to make charming titles but the truth is they just aren't substantial in terms of depth and content. Games like Red Dead and Dark Souls are what I always imagined a future Zelda to be like when I was a kid playing A Link to the Past. Nintendo was still on the right track with their core software during the N64 era but since then they've slowly eroded their IPs by watering down the mechanics and alienating the audience that established them.

you started out with an argument and then immediately devolved it into an unrelated rant, lol

 

[freenudemacusers]

A "tablet with buttons" is the wrong view of what it is.

Its a "gamepad with a touchscreen". Its a controller for a gaming console first an foremost.

That is the more accurate analysis of what the Wii U controller is. It does not serve any of the purposes of a tablet. It has not functionality whatsoever. For the purposes of offescreen gameplay, it would be a mini-tv. Not a tablet.

Work with me here for a second.... It can display content on the screen, has touch functionality, and can be run off of a battery... This is not a tablet in function? Yes, the 'gamepad' is not performing processing tasks; which is a meaningless distinction in terms of use. This is a major selling point of the Wii U, and while we can endlessly drill through all the reasons why technically it is not this or meant to work like that, products are not released in a vacuum. It will be compared to everything else in the product market. Right now, it is up against the 360/PS3 and tablets, and coming up short.

there is no way to take your UI and put it on the controller says the PS3/360

Please understand. There is no way to take all my cool PS3/XBOX games and put them on the Wii U. I also recall the dreamcast had a nice LCD display. I wonder why that didn't set the world on fire?

 

[Goodlife]

My wii u has collected dust since december.

Where as mine has been my most used system, ever.

 

[evilromero]

you started out with an argument and then immediately devolved it into an unrelated rant, lol

You can't be serious.