Support NeoGAF

[Mysterious]

Just wondering - why would simply switching to a high definition resolution require more than 2x the amount of staff? The assets, for the most part, look similar to the Wii games (except more polygons, better resolution textures). So why would they need significantly more staff? I mean, the AI, would be the same in SD and HD right? Game physics as well?

 

[Bombadil]

Just wondering - why would simply switching to a high definition resolution require more than 2x the amount of staff? The assets, for the most part, look similar to the Wii games (except more polygons, better resolution textures). So why would they need significantly more staff? I mean, the AI, would be the same in SD and HD right? Game physics as well?

I have no idea.

 

[Buggy Loop]

No, but it shouldn't take 8 years, either.



So 2008? Okay, why on earth was Nintendo not reacting in 2008? I mean, they had already explicitly stated that they knew how bad the transition to HD was going to be (again, one of their primary justifications for sticking with PS2-esque graphics with the Wii), and even if they forgot that lesson somehow, by 2008 the painful costs of HD development were clear: Sony, Microsoft, and EA were all bleeding billions at that time.

Why would they not have gotten started in 2008? Why did they wait until 3-4 years later, at the end of the Wii's lifespan?

Well what i am saying is they probably started in 2008. That building did not start from scratch when it was announced, it doesnt work like that.

I would also say that saving 3DS costed more to Nintendo's WiiU output than the preparation for HD

 

[Buggy Loop]

Just wondering - why would simply switching to a high definition resolution require more than 2x the amount of staff? The assets, for the most part, look similar to the Wii games (except more polygons, better resolution textures). So why would they need significantly more staff? I mean, the AI, would be the same in SD and HD right? Game physics as well?

You kind of answered your question? If polygons and texturing didnt factor into manpower required to output games, then their N64 staff would be enough. And fish AI! Although N was ahead of its time in that regard.

 

[Darryl]

In a general sense there is nothing wrong with missing estimates occasionally. I mean, part of what separates smart companies from less intelligent ones is the ability to anticipate future events, but even the best mess up sometimes.

The reason this oversight by Nintendo is particularly galling, however, is because of two factors:

1) Nintendo called it. In 2005, let alone 2006. It was one of the primary reasons they went with the Wii in the first place! "Hey guys," said Nintendo, "these development costs are getting way out of hand. Maybe we should slow it down and develop our systems more gradually." They were absolutely right. So why, if they could see the problems HD development could cause in 2005, could they not expect it in 2013?

2) Nintendo now has lots of empirical evidence in front of them to show them just how brutal the transition will be. Other companies may not have been as smart as Nintendo in 2005, but they didn't have a lot of examples to look to because HD development was still on the horizon, a thing of the future. By contrast, 2013 Nintendo had about 7 years of evidence to look back on -- to see the losses, to see the struggles, to see the closing studios -- which should have made it pretty clear what was going on.

So even if Nintendo somehow forgot their own wisdom from 2005, the painful 8 years for HD consoles between then and now surely should have reminded them. If you're heading up the plate without a helmet and you get hit on the head, that was pretty dumb, but perhaps you didn't think the pitcher you were facing was going to lose control. But if you go up to the plate without a helmet and also you already know the last 2 guys that came to the plate were hit right in the head, then you aren't just dumb, you're really dumb.

I just don't see what information we could be going off of that says they completely forgot that it was going to be a difficult transition. They cut off Wii support quite early, much earlier than Sony or Microsoft - they could've kept making games another year and it would've been quite profitable. Obviously they had some forecast around that point that in order to transition onto the next console, they would need to nix the support of that other console earlier. All this article is saying was that they underestimated Wii U development. Underestimated which part of development?

Is it really just as simple as "HD development", you bulk up once and it's done? Has HD development gotten even more complex as time has gone on? Is making a game for PS4 as easy as PS3 because they're both HD? Are the games coming out towards the end of the PS3 more expensive then the ones closer to the ones at launch? Nintendo is competing against games that are much prettier than launch 2006 games. I don't see why we would assume they just forgot it was going to be difficult to make new, more complex games. There are other alternatives. Pikmin 3 looks like it has been held back for graphical touch-ups. It looks to me like they were off in the consumer expectations department and each game would need to remain in the oven a bit longer then they expected.

 

[Elfforkusu]

So 2008? Okay, why on earth was Nintendo not reacting in 2008? I mean, they had already explicitly stated that they knew how bad the transition to HD was going to be (again, one of their primary justifications for sticking with PS2-esque graphics with the Wii), and even if they forgot that lesson somehow, by 2008 the painful costs of HD development were clear: Sony, Microsoft, and EA were all bleeding billions at that time.

Why would they not have gotten started in 2008? Why did they wait until 3-4 years later, at the end of the Wii's lifespan?

It's awfully hard to develop software for hardware that doesn't exist yet.

 

[soulassssns]

no shit

how long are we going to have to hear these excuses from nintendo

Unless you are an invester then it was not for you.

 

[Lunar15]

Y'know, in the last investors meeting, someone asked about a previous statment by Iwata that said that the company had large cash reserves (which it does) to carry the company across "transitional periods". Not much of that cash had really been since Nintendo's stock had declined due to profit losses. The investor was asking in regard to Nintendo refusing to issue any new dividends, but really it begs another question: If Nintendo knew a transitional period was coming up, why didn't they invest heavily in preparing themselves? They barely touched their cash reserves. Sure, they built some new facilities and made a few new partnerships, but they only scratched the surface of what could be used to reinvent themselves in preparation for a new challenge.

 

[Opiate]

It's awfully hard to develop software for hardware that doesn't exist yet.

I don't mean develop the software for it. I mean put the infrastructure in place to prepare for it -- e.g. new HQs, facilities, and staff as needed. Begin building an engine to prepare for the new generation in 2010 or 2011.

If they started ramping up, then clearly they did not ramp up enough, by their own admission, despite having ample evidence at their disposal just how much ramping up was needed. They could have looked at any of their competitors (i.e. Sony and MS) or their partners (e.g. Ubisoft) to get a general sense of what they needed.

 

[Elfforkusu]

I don't mean develop the software for it. I mean put the infrastructure in place to prepare for it -- e.g. new HQs, facilities, and staff as needed. Begin building an engine to prepare for the new generation in 2010 or 2011.

If they started ramping up, then clearly they did not ramp up enough, by their own admission, despite having ample evidence at their disposal just how much ramping up was needed. They could have looked at any of their competitors (i.e. Sony and MS) or their partners (e.g. Ubisoft) to get a general sense of what they needed.

They've missed the mark by a year, which is a lot, but it'd be substantially worse if they were addressing the problems as they encountered them. So I'd say they clearly did ramp up, and indeed clearly didn't do so enough. But to get specific -- games like X and Mario 3D World began development in 2010 and 2011, so they were indeed working on HD titles at that point.

However... I'm not sure that "ramping up enough" was ever possible, since it implies a level of clairvoyance that no one possesses. Business strategy is one thing, as is saying "new HQs, facilities, and staff". But how do you incorporate that explosive growth into your development structure without sacrificing your core development principles? It's a hard question to answer even after you've done it.

They took a guess. Their guess was on the low side. The only thing they've really squandered in the process is some cross generational 3rd party titles over the last year and next year, and whatever marketshare that would've netted them (probably not much, if we're honest). There were much worse possible outcomes than this.

 

[drspeedy]

all dem human resources

 

[royalan]

In a general sense there is nothing wrong with missing estimates occasionally. I mean, part of what separates smart companies from less intelligent ones is the ability to anticipate future events, but even the best mess up sometimes.

The reason this oversight by Nintendo is particularly galling, however, is because of two factors:

1) Nintendo called it. In 2005, let alone 2006. It was one of the primary reasons they went with the Wii in the first place! "Hey guys," said Nintendo, "these development costs are getting way out of hand. Maybe we should slow it down and develop our systems more gradually." They were absolutely right. So why, if they could see the problems HD development could cause in 2005, could they not expect it in 2013?

2) Nintendo now has lots of empirical evidence in front of them to show them just how brutal the transition will be. Other companies may not have been as smart as Nintendo in 2005, but they didn't have a lot of examples to look to because HD development was still on the horizon, a thing of the future. By contrast, 2013 Nintendo had about 7 years of evidence to look back on -- to see the losses, to see the struggles, to see the closing studios -- which should have made it pretty clear what was going on.

So even if Nintendo somehow forgot their own wisdom from 2005, the painful 8 years for HD consoles between then and now surely should have reminded them. If you're heading up the plate without a helmet and you get hit on the head, that was pretty dumb, but perhaps you didn't think the pitcher you were facing was going to lose control. But if you go up to the plate without a helmet and also you already know the last 2 guys that came to the plate were hit right in the head, then you aren't just dumb, you're really dumb.

Posts like these are why I fantasize about you.

Anyway, the thing that gets me about all this is just how casually Miyamoto admits this, like there's no way in hell that anybody in that investor Q&A is going to hold it against them that they clearly didn't prepare for something that was obviously coming and now the entire company is suffering. Which begs the question, why AREN'T investors hammering them about this?

I dunno...

 

[jett]

Nintendo really does live in a vacuum, doesn't it.

 

[Snowden's Secret]

No, but it shouldn't take 8 years, either.

So 2008? Okay, why on earth was Nintendo not reacting in 2008? I mean, they had already explicitly stated that they knew how bad the transition to HD was going to be (again, one of their primary justifications for sticking with PS2-esque graphics with the Wii), and even if they forgot that lesson somehow, by 2008 the painful costs of HD development were clear: Sony, Microsoft, and EA were all bleeding billions at that time.

Why would they not have gotten started in 2008? Why did they wait until 3-4 years later, at the end of the Wii's lifespan?

What would this staff be doing in 2008, exactly?

 

[royalan]

What would this staff be doing in 2008, exactly?

Building a nice, shiny HD engine for starters.

 

[AzaK]

Good thing they anticipated this and spent the years before the Wii U's release to hire new developers and prepare for the launch.

Absolutely. I'm a Wii U owner and I'm so spoilt for choice with what to play on the system!

 

[AzaK]

:lol at all the comments saying welcome to 2006. Nintendo have been hiring a fuck ton of people leading up to Wii U development, and built a huge new R&D centre. I think they realised this beforehand, Miyamoto's just highlighting how they're not used to it and took time to adapt.

Thing is, they should have started moving on it in 2008 when it was obvious and have been rocking along by 2011.

 

[bomblord]

If Nintendo hadn't prepared for HD development at all we would have got games that looked like call of Duty 2. Growing pains are expected no matter how well you prepare you'll always run into roadbumps.

 

[shouamabane]

The HD era has to represent the single most difficult technological transition Nintendo has had to make since entering the video game industry.

Based on what?

 

[Suikoguy]

Based on what?

Yeah, that's an odd statement, I would think the SNES->N64 was far more difficult.

 

[Snowden's Secret]

If Nintendo hired all this extra staff mid-Wii, that would mean they would have been spending as much money as HD developers but while producing SD games.

 

[royalan]

If Nintendo hired all this extra staff mid-Wii, that would mean they would have been spending as much money as HD developers but while producing SD games.

Yes. And they would have been a lot more prepared to support the Wii U with games, features and services. This would have likely prevented the Wii U from becoming the giant clusterfuck of failure worthy of mockery that it is today.

Preparing for the future...how does it work...?

 

[MadraptorMan]

Maybe I'm just ignorant on the subject, but...why does a mere change in resolution require so much more manpower?

EDIT: nm, someone already asked this question. Still seems strange to me, though.

 

[ctothej]

What exactly was Nintendo doing the last two years of the Wii's lifespan?

 

[Portugeezer]

Why are we hearing this in 2013? Should have been known well before Wii U's release.

 

[sphagnum]

What exactly was Nintendo doing the last two years of the Wii's lifespan?

Focusing on the 3DS.

 

[Darryl]

If Nintendo hired all this extra staff mid-Wii, that would mean they would have been spending as much money as HD developers but while producing SD games.

The transition in the end would hit them just as hard as well because they'd have even more employees needing to go through re-education to work on the more complicated games. It may have even hit them harder. The world isn't always Batman, sometimes foresight can't completely solve problems.

 

[Teletraan1]

:lol at all the comments saying welcome to 2006. Nintendo have been hiring a fuck ton of people leading up to Wii U development, and built a huge new R&D centre. I think they realised this beforehand, Miyamoto's just highlighting how they're not used to it and took time to adapt.

LOL at your comment. Where the fuck are the games then?

 

[clem84]

Welcome to 2006, Nintendo.

Dat first post.

 

[Face it Tiger..]

Sounds like Nintendo needs an ICE team.

 

[ElectricKaibutsu]

Way to go Nintendo, good luck next gen.

 

[Lijik]

Way to go Nintendo, good luck next gen.

Nintendo 2022 "Hey have you guys heard about this cloud thing? And streaming games? Totally crazy, we didn't anticipate that"

 

[TKM]

Nintendo developed on DX7-class hardware for over a decade. Leaping to DX10 is a huge jump. Even PS2 developers got experience with shaders on the VUs. Nintendo's tools were on fixed-function hardware for too long.

 

[bomblord]

Nintendo 2022 "Hey have you guys heard about this cloud thing? And streaming games? Totally crazy, we didn't anticipate that"

Nintendo is already looking into the cloud to offload processing.

 

[Lijik]

Nintendo is already looking into the cloud to offload processing.

shhh dont ruin my joke with your facts

 

[faceless007]

If Nintendo hired all this extra staff mid-Wii, that would mean they would have been spending as much money as HD developers but while producing SD games.

I don't have anything to reply to this post, I just noticed that your username has become pretty interesting.

 

[Zombie James]

Nintendo 2022 "Hey have you guys heard about this cloud thing? And streaming games? Totally crazy, we didn't anticipate that"

Cloud processing? Streaming games? Fuck, they need to figure out how a network account is supposed to work, first.

 

[Aquamarine]

Posts like these are why I fantasize about you.

Anyway, the thing that gets me about all this is just how casually Miyamoto admits this, like there's no way in hell that anybody in that investor Q&A is going to hold it against them that they clearly didn't prepare for something that was obviously coming and now the entire company is suffering. Which begs the question, why AREN'T investors hammering them about this?

I dunno...

Some investors care solely about Nintendo business / financial performance. That is, their anger or praise is exclusively result-driven.

The fact of the matter is that Iwata's corporate strategy has yet to pan out. They just need more time before forming appropriate opinions on the matter.

 

[EVOL 100%]

They did prepare, they've been hiring a lot more people than they usually do during the last few years and set up a new R&D department.

But the 3DS's fucked up launch probably threw a wrench in their plans and ended up draining resources intended for HD development. Then when the third party support turned out to be as lackluster as it had with the Wii, that's when the droughts started again.

That said, they've been fucking up spectacularly with the Wii U. They're not DOOOMMMED but they're obviously going to face some trouble if they can't salvage the Wii U.

 

[royalan]

Some investors care solely about Nintendo business / financial performance. That is, their anger or praise is exclusively result-driven.

The fact of the matter is that Iwata's corporate strategy has yet to pan out. They just need more time before forming appropriate opinions on the matter.

The bolded...I really don't see how any of this pans out for Nintendo and their plans as we know them.

 

[A Human Becoming]

Just wondering - why would simply switching to a high definition resolution require more than 2x the amount of staff? The assets, for the most part, look similar to the Wii games (except more polygons, better resolution textures). So why would they need significantly more staff? I mean, the AI, would be the same in SD and HD right? Game physics as well?

From my understanding, assets are the most expensive part of modern game development. Artificial intelligence can be vastly improved with better performing technology as can physics.

 

[Kai Dracon]

From my understanding, assets are the most expensive part of modern game development. Artificial intelligence can be vastly improved with better performing technology as can physics.

A lot of people seem to underestimate assets in Nintendo games due to Nintendo's consistent art style. There's lots of talk about "uprezzed" Wii and 3DS games and stuff. It's misleading.

Nintendo's "simple" styles aren't necessarily so simple. They sweat over design a good deal and maintaining quality. For example there's been a lot of disrespect towards Nintendo Land and NSMB U by people who do not like the style or think they look like Wii games. But there is petty meticulous attention to art direction detail in those games and Nintendo Land especially is a good preview of Nintendo experimenting with crafting their traditional style within the requirements of higher production values.

Edit: oh, and a gift for the Retro conspiracy theorists.

 

[POWERSPHERE]

Poor blokes shoulda had a cheeky chat with their mates a few years ago, eh.

 

[Dead Man]

The transition in the end would hit them just as hard as well because they'd have even more employees needing to go through re-education to work on the more complicated games. It may have even hit them harder. The world isn't always Batman, sometimes foresight can't completely solve problems.

This is true, but even if costs would be the same, by having games ready, income would be increased.

 

[Replicant]

It's like they were completely blissful in ignorance when 2006 happened. And continue to do so until the rude awakening that happened this year.

 

[lordchompy]

This is just more Nintendo PR spin to explain why Nintendo continues to put in less effort and resources than Microsoft and Sony. You are telling me NSMB: U required so much more manpower than the Wii original? A team of indie developers could have made something similar with a staff of 20 in six months.

 

[flipswitch]

Only twice as much? I thought the difference was bigger.

It would have been if it were a ps3

 

[Mariolee]

They did prepare, they've been hiring a lot more people than they usually do during the last few years and set up a new R&D department.

But the 3DS's fucked up launch probably threw a wrench in their plans and ended up draining resources intended for HD development. Then when the third party support turned out to be as lackluster as it had with the Wii, that's when the droughts started again.

That said, they've been fucking up spectacularly with the Wii U. They're not DOOOMMMED but they're obviously going to face some trouble if they can't salvage the Wii U.

This seems like what happened considering the 3DS is getting incredible games this year while the Wii U has to wait til later in the year. Not only does Nintendo have to stretch its resources for HD gaming but advancing handheld gaming as well. Its not as if Sony is having an awesome success with the PS4 AND the Vita. Though I am impressed at the continuing PS3 support in the future.

 

[state_vector_collapse]

Surely they know from the Gamecube era, as an example, that different powered consoles require different amounts of staff. They must have been aware back then that making a GBA game required less work than a Gamecube game for example.

They have always had two very different spec machines on the market, yet are caught out by the fact that a step up in power requires more time and effort to develop for?

 

[Haines]

why do so many people forget that they are also busy making games for 3ds.