• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Red Herring article on next-gen console war

A

argon

Member
Not much we don't know, but its interesting to see the mainstream perspective. I thought I'd pass the link..

http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=14543&hed=Xbox+360+Heads+New+Console+War

Again, analysts openly mock Nintendo's efforts...

Nintendo, the distant third runner in the race, is expected to fall even further behind with its Revolution, likely the last new console on the market next year. Critics say the company has missed the target market of the older, hardcore gamer who plays the bloody first-person shooter games, dominant on the PS2 and the Xbox. Nintendo President Satoru Iwata debuted a TV-remote-inspired wireless controller at the Tokyo Game Conference in September, which could cause more confusion with developers instead of boost the company’s market share. “Nintendo’s Revolution will be its last console,” says UBS Investment Research analyst Michael Wallace. “It’s a two-horse race now.”

That’s good news for Microsoft, although the company has enough money to take on another game competitor. Microsoft’s entire entertainment business, including game console sales and other products, accounted for less than 8 percent of its annual revenue. The entertainment division actually lost $391 million while the entire company gained $14.5 billion. But Microsoft won’t reveal how many 360s it will have to move to bring in game-specific profits. The company only says that its game division is not currently profitable but is expected “to turn a profit over its lifecycle.”
Click to expand...

Even if Revolution is Nintendo's last, how would that make it a two horse race now? Nice logic.
 
These "analysts" HAVE to be bribed to say such things. It really saddens me that these "professionals" get paid to say this shit. Hell, most of GAF could give more accurate predictions.
 
"Mr. Allard says, “the critics all panned Halo when it came out in 2001. So what does that tell you?”"

So..we've gone from "heh, remember Halo at E3 2001?" to "the critics all hated Halo when it came out"? One of these things is not true.
 
Critics say the company has missed the target market of the older, hardcore gamer who plays the bloody first-person shooter games, dominant on the PS2 and the Xbox. Nintendo President Satoru Iwata debuted a TV-remote-inspired wireless controller at the Tokyo Game Conference in September, which could cause more confusion with developers instead of boost the company’s market share.
Click to expand...

Wow, more analysists who know nothing whatsoever about video games. The Revolution will have "bloody" FPS on it, thanks in part to the amazing controller. Ubisoft has two FPS in development for the system, and even Gearbox has shown interest in the system as well. *shakes head*

I doubt this will be Nintendo's final console. If the Revolution does worse than the Gamecube, which I wouldn't be suprised at, Nintendo will still rake in millions; the download service alone could make them a bundle. That being said, I truly believe the Revolution will come in dead last in the US. Imo it's going to give the PS3 a lot of competition in Japan.

Nintendo have spent a lot of time saying the Revolution is going to attract "non gamers", but I think they should go after another ignored demographic as well. The Revolution controller will allow similar controls to a mouse, which in turn will make FPS and RTS games translate perfectly to consoles for the first time. Nintendo should try to attract PC gamers (and developers) to the Revolution. The controller will allow them to get software that just couldn't be played on the other systems. Getting Molyneux, Will Wright (SPORE on the Revolution anyone?), and other great developers to support the system could be huge.
 
Critics say the company has missed the target market of the older, hardcore gamer who plays the bloody first-person shooter games
Click to expand...


:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

I guess they're not talking about game critics, or even did any research whatsoever on the controller. When Iwata put EXTENDED emphasis on the importance of FPS's, and how the Revolution controller would be perfect for them.
 
Nintendo's gonna make a killing off their back catalogue alone even if the controller turns out to be a failure.
 
When Nintendo takes time off from being 3rd place I hear this is what they enjoy doing the most.

wscrooge.jpg
 
The funny thing is, these people get paid to make comments like that. You guys are in the wrong jobs obviously.
 
m0dus said:
I think the issue with devs is the fact that the decidedly out-of-the-box design for the controller raises some issues and concerns for ports and multiplatform releases. As in, how much extra development is it going to take to make one style of gameplay implementation work satisfactorily on the PS3/X360 pads vs the Rev controller? this, keeping in mind the fact that the standard-controller-shell-adapter thing is a separate peripheral that must be purchased (I'm assuming at this point-correct me if I'm wrong here), it seems like some devs might feel its more trouble than its worth (extra cost + added port time). Does this reduce the overall quality of the system's library? not hardly. But it presents, in my mind, a barrier to 3rd party profitibility, to a certain degree. Which holds the possibility of affecting its overall popularity among casuals, down the road.
Click to expand...
lol great minds think alike, you should get a job as an analyst so you could get paid for all your fanstastic analysis.
 
m0dus said:
I think the issue with devs is the fact that the decidedly out-of-the-box design for the controller raises some issues and concerns for ports and multiplatform releases. As in, how much extra development is it going to take to make one style of gameplay implementation work satisfactorily on the PS3/X360 pads vs the Rev controller? this, keeping in mind the fact that the standard-controller-shell-adapter thing is a separate peripheral that must be purchased (I'm assuming at this point-correct me if I'm wrong here), it seems like some devs might feel its more trouble than its worth (extra cost + added port time). Does this reduce the overall quality of the system's library? not hardly. But it presents, in my mind, a barrier to 3rd party profitibility, to a certain degree. Which holds the possibility of affecting its overall popularity among casuals, down the road.
Click to expand...
Nintendo is trying to ease developers into this though. There's an interview with Miyamoto I think (maybe Iwata too) where he discusses how Nintendo is looking at each genre to figure out how the controller might best be used for it. Everybody automatically "gets" FPS and RTS titles, which might be an incentive for PC developers to move further into the console realm, but adventure and fighting games are more of a challenge. I imagine Nintendo will be sharing this information with developers.

Furthermore, Revolution might be the easiest/cheapest to develop for (given it's apparent similarity to GCN development, and perhaps lower horsepower) which will offset costs of potential time spent making it work with the controller.
 
Oh geez, people are going from one extreme to another. Nintendo WILL have another console next gen. The Rev is an EXPERIMENTAL machine like the DS, even if it fails, Nintendo can go back to their traditional roots.
 
Monk said:
Oh geez, people are going from one extreme to another. Nintendo WILL have another console next gen. The Rev is an EXPERIMENTAL machine like the DS, even if it fails, Nintendo can go back to their traditional roots.
Click to expand...

Zuh? All Nintendo would need to do is stop using the new controller.
 
I agree with all of the analyst's points. Nintendo is so far behind the others this generation it isn't even funny. They've missed the biggest target market and given it to Microsoft and Sony. Developers don't want anything to do with the remote and it's just going to push them all to work on high end games for Sony and Microsoft. Next gen will bankrupt Nintendo with a failed console that no one wants, and it will be the end of Nintendo as we know it.
 
I'd hate to be the guy who always mentions Nintendo's infamous "6 Billion dollar warchest" but its certainly something they can fall back on if the shit goes bad.
 
If we all argue about this in this very thread long enough and loud enough, then maybe we'll come to a definite answer as to how the future will unfold.
 
argon said:
Even if Revolution is Nintendo's last, how would that make it a two horse race now? Nice logic.
Click to expand...

Umm I think he's saying that Sony and MS will be the only 2 horses left in the race no?

Though yeah he's wrong because it's not a horse race when Sony is overlaping MS by about 10 laps and Nintendo has already quitted the race.
 
Oogami said:
Though yeah he's wrong because it's not a horse race when Sony is overlaping MS by about 10 laps and Nintendo has already quitted the race.
Click to expand...

Another funny guy :lol
 
When did the 'hardcore mature' gamers become the only demographic? Jesus.. someone has to make games everyone can enjoy. Someone needs to fill that void.. or the market would feel lifeless.
 
BorkBork said:
I agree with all of the analyst's points. Nintendo is so far behind the others this generation it isn't even funny. They've missed the biggest target market and given it to Microsoft and Sony. Developers don't want anything to do with the remote and it's just going to push them all to work on high end games for Sony and Microsoft. Next gen will bankrupt Nintendo with a failed console that no one wants, and it will be the end of Nintendo as we know it.
Click to expand...

:lol :lol :lol

Also, Nintendo is barely behind MS by a few million. Hardly anything to worry about.
 
Oblivion said:
Zuh? All Nintendo would need to do is stop using the new controller.
Click to expand...
I think that was Monk's point when he/she said that "even if it fails, Nintendo can go back to their traditional roots."


BorkBork said:
I agree with all of the analyst's points. Nintendo is so far behind the others this generation it isn't even funny.
Click to expand...
Only in terms of marketshare. They're the most profitable when just looking at the money factor, and meanwhile MS lost millions with the X-Box.
And yeah, I know. The argument goes that if Nintendo's marketshare continues to decrease, eventually they're going to die off--but that's a presumptive "if."
 
I like how they say "distant third-runner" as if there's been so many console races that have been closer than 3 million consoles between any given competitors.
 
Jiggy37 said:
I think that was Monk's point when he/she said that "even if it fails, Nintendo can go back to their traditional roots."


Only in terms of marketshare. They're the most profitable when just looking at the money factor, and meanwhile MS lost billions with the X-Box.
And yeah, I know. The argument goes that if Nintendo's marketshare continues to decrease, eventually they're going to die off--but that's a presumptive "if."
Click to expand...

Fixed. About 4 of them, in fact.

Yeah, Nintendo has proven time and again that it doesn't even require growth to remain healthily profitable. I'm sure analysts find this frustrating, as any normal industry can equate market share to profit, but the fact that it's become such a loss-leader, overly speculative mess means that with a few solid games a year and a weak yen, Nintendo can rule its own little roost just fine.

No doubt the Revolution will be just as much a failure as the DS is to the PSP. If there were no prior branding issues in the "handheld versus console" realm, I don't see how those comparisons aren't being drawn. The situations are very similar.
 
Drensch said:
Do analysts understand the "making money" thing?
Click to expand...

You need a good userbase to make money. Milking your userbase and scaring them off each time doesnt help things for the future. Based on that its kinda hard to justify giving Nintendo the thumbs up till they prove themselves.
 
I love Nintendo games as much as you guys, but some of you sound real offended by what these so-called analysts are saying. You can't deny that the Revolution could be Nintendo's last console, because it's possible, or even pretty likely they'll lose enough marketshare that it'll just make more economical sense to develop for Sony and/or MS.
 
Nintendo is not missing the 'bloody shooter' market or whatever you want to call it. They've DROPPED it. Microsoft and Sony are spending all the cash they have competing for that market and Nintendo knows it can't win so they're going for another market and creating their own. That's the whole point of revolution. Whether they succeed or not doesn't depend if they get that market sony and microsoft are after but if they create the new markets for revolution.
 
rs7k said:
I love Nintendo games as much as you guys, but some of you sound real offended by what these so-called analysts are saying. You can't deny that the Revolution could be Nintendo's last console, because it's possible, or even pretty likely they'll lose enough marketshare that it'll just make more economical sense to develop for Sony and/or MS.
Click to expand...
You can't back this statement up. Nintendo makes money hand over fist with their current business model. Even when they are a 'distant' third they make a helluva lot more money in the game industry than either Sony or Microsoft.

The Nintendo is doomed, going third-party crap is retarded. Keep at it. It's not a waste of time at all. Seriously.
 
Jiggy37 said:
I think that was Monk's point when he/she said that "even if it fails, Nintendo can go back to their traditional roots."


Only in terms of marketshare. They're the most profitable when just looking at the money factor, and meanwhile MS lost millions with the X-Box.
And yeah, I know. The argument goes that if Nintendo's marketshare continues to decrease, eventually they're going to die off--but that's a presumptive "if."
Click to expand...

Damn people! My whole post was supposed to be sarcastic. :( I expected to be trolled too. Guess I was too subtle.
 
rs7k said:
I love Nintendo games as much as you guys, but some of you sound real offended by what these so-called analysts are saying. You can't deny that the Revolution could be Nintendo's last console, because it's possible, or even pretty likely they'll lose enough marketshare that it'll just make more economical sense to develop for Sony and/or MS.
Click to expand...

Will people ever understand that Nintendo will never go third party? They are not a software company, they are a toy company. Even if they decide selling video game consoles is no longer profitable, they will move their IPs to some other form of entertainment like those pokemon light wands, electronic e-reader style card games, VR/AR laser tag equipment or some other bizarre kids toys.
 
PkunkFury said:
Will people ever understand that Nintendo will never go third party? They are not a software company, they are a toy company. Even if they decide selling video game consoles is no longer profitable, they will move their IPs to some other form of entertainment like those pokemon light wands, electronic e-reader style card games, VR/AR laser tag equipment or some other bizarre kids toys.
Click to expand...
WTF.

Proclaimed by... you? Nice try.

So you are saying that Nintendo manufactures more toys than they develop software titles? :lol
 
Gaia Theory said:
WTF.

Proclaimed by... you? Nice try.

So you are saying that Nintendo manufactures more toys than they develop software titles? :lol
Click to expand...

Read a bit of their history, before the NES (and after making card games for a hundred years) they made a lot of crazy stuff, like remote control vacuum cleaners, extendo arm things, baseball pitching machines, turning bowling alleys into light gun arenas, etc. This is why the NES had stuff like the Light Gun and ROB. You can already see them going back to those roots with the DS and the Revolution, pushing new fun ways to interact via the hardware. My guess is they'd continue creating weird fusions of electronics and toys, and use the wildly popular IPs they've built up to sell them, well before they decide to settle down making 3rd party stuff. If you expand the definition of video game beyond a box that plays cartridges under your TV (which Nintendo helped create in the first place) you can imagine a lot of other ways a company like Nintendo could branch out without having to follow Sony's (or anyone else's) lead.
 
BorkBork said:
Damn people! My whole post was supposed to be sarcastic. :( I expected to be trolled too. Guess I was too subtle.
Click to expand...
your GC distance 3rd and Revo controller's a gimmick totally captured the imagination of millions of xbox fans :lol :lol
 
BorkBork said:
Damn people! My whole post was supposed to be sarcastic. :( I expected to be trolled too. Guess I was too subtle.
Click to expand...

You were sarcastic? Damn. Sorry, guess it's kinda hard to tell sometimes since many people actually think the way your post described. :lol
 
rs7k said:
I love Nintendo games as much as you guys, but some of you sound real offended by what these so-called analysts are saying. You can't deny that the Revolution could be Nintendo's last console, because it's possible, or even pretty likely they'll lose enough marketshare that it'll just make more economical sense to develop for Sony and/or MS.
Click to expand...
Wow... are you saying that the Rev will take up less marketshare in its respective generation than the Cube? Rev will something like triple Cube's sales in Japan alone. They'll go gaga for the wiggle/waddle things there.
 
rs7k said:
I love Nintendo games as much as you guys, but some of you sound real offended by what these so-called analysts are saying. You can't deny that the Revolution could be Nintendo's last console, because it's possible, or even pretty likely they'll lose enough marketshare that it'll just make more economical sense to develop for Sony and/or MS.
Click to expand...

Dood, Nintendo makes a profit on hardware as well as software. They're not making AS much money as they used to (because of hair brained ideas this entire gen), but the point is, they're still making money. Oddly enough, more than Sony and MS. Hey whaddyaknow? It took Sega several billion in the red before they gave up. Nintendo's still healthy as a monkey and they've got a long way to go before they even think about turning 3rd party. Hell, if they didn't make ANY money at all from this point, they could EASILY last 2 more generations (starting with the Rev). In short, analysts are dumb. :)
 
rs7k said:
I love Nintendo games as much as you guys, but some of you sound real offended by what these so-called analysts are saying. You can't deny that the Revolution could be Nintendo's last console, because it's possible, or even pretty likely they'll lose enough marketshare that it'll just make more economical sense to develop for Sony and/or MS.
Click to expand...
Game sales on Nintendo systems are more heavily weighted towards first party games than is the case on a Sony or Microsoft machine, but still the majority of games sold are third party games, and would be a major bit of income to just drop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

I will boycott next-gen consoles if they are digital-only, what about you?
2 3 4 5 6
262
263
Gexxy1 replied
NateTheHate on Red Dead Redemption 2 next-gen: “As far as I know, its this year”
Opinion Rumor Platform 
48
1K
Zimmy68 replied
Thought: Only Sony mastered how to compete in the console war even using a weaker console.
2 3
122
159
Bondo replied
[Windows Central] EXCLUSIVE: New details on Xbox's next-gen console(s) — and Microsoft's most ambitious gaming plans ever
10 11 12 13 14
695
4K
Ozriel replied
The next-gen version of Red Dead Redemption 2 won't come until late 2027
Rumor Platform 
11
528
MidGenRefresh replied
Top Bottom