I didn't say they would have to, but it seems like mobile would be the choice they make given the market. Nintendo and their content have little to nothing in common with the companies you mentioned and I don't see that changing even if Iwata is replaced.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Report claims Nintendo management scheming to get rid of Iwata
- Thread starter scytheavatar
- Start date
I didn't say they would have to, but it seems like mobile would be the choice they make given the market. Nintendo and their content have little to nothing in common with the companies you mentioned and I don't see that changing even if Iwata is replaced.
googleplex
Member
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Nintendo needs to create a Nintendo branded Android Tablet. It should have traditional controls its own skin and market place like the Kendel Fire.
Nintendo is probably the game company that could make the gaming tablet work.
Nintendo is probably the game company that could make the gaming tablet work.
Hey_Blinkin
Member
Mobile is king in Japan. Over there there's currently far more money to be made in mobile than handheld and consoles combined. I almost feel as if Iwata is one of the few people at Nintendo holding on to their roots. While I don't feel he has done a good job of adapting to the new climate of gaming, I feel he may be the lesser of two evils in this case. If he goes, they may just give up on consoles entirely and go chasing the mobile money. I have no evidence of this of course, just my gut feeling.
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
Hes will become a yes man.. and thats what everyone wants apparently.
Minus the android part, that's not a bad future. *sees username*.. oh.
boiled goose
good with gravy
THis is a great idea that i have always pushed for. There should also be a Nintendo app with miiverse for mobile. Nintendo is missing so many opportunities online.
Regarding android this is one area i actually really don't know what the best solution is. Nintendo needs to get developers to make gsmes for them. 3ds is getting close to no support despite its moderate success. They need to incentivize mobile devs to make games for their platform. Im not sure android is the solution but they need something.
I don't see gaming tablets ever taking off, and the only people that actually care about button are a small group, that will get smaller as more kids grow up with touch games.
HyruleGuardian
Member
So you're saying that Nintendo's only chance of survival going forward is on mobile platforms, while Sony and Microsoft are absolutely secure in their business going forward with no need to go mobile.
And you base this on what, exactly? Why do you not think that Nintendo could not make a successful home console again?
Corronchilejano
Member
Microsoft has the Surface and Windows 8.
Mysterious
Banned
To the people saying they should make a tablet:
Ignoring the tethering and limited range, most people I know (including Wii U owners who see/have no need for Off-TV Play) think this is convoluted, messy and hard to use.
Full tablet or full controller: pick one.
Ignoring the tethering and limited range, most people I know (including Wii U owners who see/have no need for Off-TV Play) think this is convoluted, messy and hard to use.
Full tablet or full controller: pick one.
Actually they would put their supposed store inside some Steam Machine from one manufacturer, so it would be a incentive to buy that brand. I don't think Steam Machines will be a success, just throwing an idea that doesn't involve mobile.
ArkhamFantasy
Member
Because Playstation is still making consoles.
boiled goose
good with gravy
To the people saying they should make a tablet:
Ignoring the tethering and limited range, most people I know (including Wii U owners who see/have no need for Off-TV Play) think this is convoluted, messy and hard to use.
Full tablet or full controller: pick one.
Yeah im not sure a dedicated tablet just for games will succeed.. but with a unified account they could have a much more diversified hardware strategy with less risk. The userbase becomes bigger instead of having to restart from scratch each gen.
A universal OS + Nintendo handheld(s) & console (with docking station) + Unified account for Miiverse | eShop | VC would be a better idea.
I think they could find themselves a spot on the market if they were to come up with a good approach to target families first and foremost rather than making something that will try to compete with Sony and Microsoft.
Oh definitely. I think Nintendo has already stated their intention to get MiiVerse and eShop working as mobile apps, but that, of course, has been slow as shit. Hell, you still can't buy eShop content on a browser. MKTV would also be great.
That's one option I guess, if Nintendo went the Amazon route and sectioned off its own entire store that Android developers could port to, and enact their typical content control policies in regards to price and quality. Doing that might improve discoverability for some third party games which could be a draw to developers. In fact no matter what platform Nintendo tries to make in the future, trying to have good discoverability for indie games could in itself be a draw for third party support.
Isn't that what Super Training basically is in Pokemon X and Y? I'm not far into the game, but instead of leveling up Pokemon it raises their base stats.
googleplex
Member
Googleplex is a mathematical concept.
KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
But that's not what a contradiction is... I don't think you get what I'm saying. I don't care about your claims of money hating by Sony. That's a completely different debate, and idk why you keep bringing it up. You still have not proven that Nintendo (of America) didn't have draconian practices. And saying "well American devs still supported the N64" doesn't cut it as any sort of proof of the contrary.
Until you can prove that NoA had radically different practices and outlook on game development than Nintendo proper, this back and forth is a waste of time.
Mysterious
Banned
Because only mobile is more popular than the 3DS in Japan, where Nintendo originates. If Nintendo gets the heck out of making gaming hardware, they aren't going to then support platforms that sell less in their home territory than their own! In addition, Nintendo's most popular franchises aren't suited for the Sony/MS audience. Doesn't even Skylanders, Disney Infinity, and the Lego games sell best on Nintendo platforms? Other than Minecraft, those are the premiere family friendly games.
ArkhamFantasy
Member
Where is this myth coming from? It needs to stop.
Bluemercury
Member
Yeah Microsoft, sure used Rare ips well, oh wait...
It isn't a myth. The audience on the current sony and ms platforms consist mostly of 18-34yo males who like to kill things violently and play "realistic" virtual sports.
The software support it receives proves that point.
Godzilla's Left Toe
Member
Since when. And boy oh boy
That's exactly what they've been doing since the GameCube.
It comes from the observation that third-party family-friendly retail titles sell best on Nintendo platforms. Why do you think Nintendo got three exclusive Sonic games and Lego City Undercover, as well as nearly having a lock on Rayman Legends and even then Rayman Legends sold best on Wii U? These third-parties would not just decide to be Nintendo exclusive with a game for no reason. As others have said, Sony and MS consoles appeal generally to 18-34 year old men which is why the biggest games on both platforms appeal to 18-34 year old men. Everyone else generally plays on PC, on Mobile, or on Nintendo platforms.
I'd bump Sakamoto from Nintendo in a heartbeat, motherfucker killed the whole metroid series with one game after three of the best entries in the series in a row.
Excluding the Wii, it seems like Nintendo has been putting the majority of their effort into getting the 18-34 demographic to buy their consoles.
That's not true at all.
Is there a demographic breakdown of the people who buy franchises like F-Zero, Fire Emblem, Animal Crossing, Star Fox, or Pikmin? Mario and Pokemon probably are mainly bought by kids, though both franchises would probably easily stand out on Sony/Microsoft platforms.
How is it not? With the gamecube they spent their money on the Capcom Five, Crystal Chronicles, exclusive Metal Gear, and games like Eternal Darkness, Metroid Prime, and even trying to make Pokemon look more mature with Colosseum.
With the Wii U its pretty easy to see that what that they were trying to target core gamers early on.
Dreams-Visions
Member
He just needs to be demoted. Or, "reassigned within the company."
But yea, Nintendo will be better poised to compete in the future with Iwata gone, imo.
But yea, Nintendo will be better poised to compete in the future with Iwata gone, imo.
nssdigitalchumps
Member
I think Yamauchi's track record is a bit stronger than Iwata's. Go back really far in time and then compare and see if you feel the same way.
MisterGrey3000
Member
Are you kidding me?
Have you seen the branding/marketing and software for the N64/NGC? (the two failure consoles)
Nintendo was definitely attempting to focus on getting teen boys/young men to buy their consoles in those two pre-Wii/DS eras and it worked out incredibly badly for them.
It's no coincidence that they were super successful when they started following the philosophies/principles behind the NES/Game Boy-line and putting the majority of their resources behind serving families/casual-gamers (people who actually like platformers, Kart Racers, and arcadey sports games)
edit:
Different demos; It's really not that hard to understand.
Young men and teen boys are incredibly hostile to Nintendo-like experiences (we have evidence; no one is pulling these observations out of their asses)
Sonic The Hedgehog's (or Rayman's or Banjo's) legacy didn't really help it get a leg up in that market, so it's not guaranteed that the Sony/MS demographic would care about a new Mario game.
nssdigitalchumps
Member
I'm not sure audience was Nintendo's issue with N64/GC.
The N64 was a cartridge-based system in an optical environment. The choice of carts over CD really hurt its chances because there was less cost in CD production versus cart. Carts were also very limited in comparison.
GC's mistake was the same mistake that the Dreamcast made -- lack-o-DVD. PS2 was as all-in-one entertainment center, GC was not. It also limited, much like the N64, the amount of space devs had to work with on a game.
Audience was the least of Nintendo's problems with those systems, it was all about the tech and the timeframe when they were both released.
HyruleGuardian
Member
No one is saying that Microsoft as a company is going anywhere, but whether or not they have a long term future in the console making business is a different matter.
For the record, I'm not saying they don't have a future in the console business, I just don't know what makes people think that Microsoft clearly has nothing to worry about for their future console business and that Nintendo clearly has no future in the console business.
...and so is Nintendo? I'm not quite sure I understand your point.
We all know that the Wii U is a significant financial failure, but Nintendo is still worth more than Sony as a company (18 billion vs 17 billion at last check), and I don't see why people are dismissing Nintendo's chances of being successful in the next generation. If Nintendo takes a lesson from this generation and decides going forward that they need their console to be as powerful as what Sony and Microsoft offer in the future, they could give third party developers every reason not to ignore their next console, and having all the third party games that Sony and Microsoft get to go along with their first party software seems to me like a combination that could have some success.
eddfromtheriver
Banned
So, you're telling me that all of the Nintendo fans wouldn't buy a PS4/XBO if all of a sudden the next Zelda game was coming out on those consoles if the Wii U is discontinued and no has no upcoming successor?, i think they would (even the hardest of the Nintendo hardcore guys).
Plus, i can bet you that a lot... A LOT of guys would buy Nintendo software on our PS4's/XBO's and that's without talking about Virtual Console games. Along with the casual guys who happened to buy a PS4/XBO.
So you have the Nintendo fans purchasing titles, and then you add a large size of the PS4/XBO population, plus the casuals and that is more attractive than just selling on their neglected hardware, companies make the most money on SW do they not?.
I vote and hope Nintendo goes third party (imagine Nintendo games on spec wise current gen hardware).
The overwhelming majority of games that generation weren't limited by 1.5gb. The few that were went multi disc. Just like some of the biggest games are multidisc on the 360.
They're not getting 3rd party support (short of paying big money for it) even if their system is identical, twice as powerful, or if each console was a damned server farm. Let it go. Third parties long ago decided what demographics Nintendo consoles serve, and that their current games aren't compatible/don't sell/etc. It's the same way that there's absolutely no evidence that nintendo's tonality/software types would sell on the ps4/xb1, because sony and Microsoft are almost singularly focused on courting young males to shoot, stab, and play football. The current major third party pubs have a similar focus and thus ignore Nintendo and likely always will. There's no mid tier willing to take risk, and the major pubs certainly don't publish much in the family friendly realm. They aren't bothering with 360 ports now, they won't bother with ps5 ports either. That is unless Nintendo stops making Mario and starts making battlefield of duty on a yearly basis and creates an environment of almost only 18-34yo males, like the other consoles. Being that insular and singularly-focused isn't healthy for the industry, mind you, but that's a seperate topic of discussion.
MisterGrey3000
Member
It's not a black or white thing honey; failures are often failures for multiple reasons.
The NGC/N64's marketing, branding, hardware design, third party support, game scheduling, and software ecosystems were all huge problems that hindered both consoles's success.
It's very rare for one negative aspect (like not having DVDs) to be the sole perpetrator in any one thing's failure.
Standard DVD's wouldn't have fixed the NGC's half-serving software ecosystem, unappealing hardware aesthetic, confusing branding, and obnoxious marketing.
nssdigitalchumps
Member
18gb vs. 1.5gb, which would you choose if you were a dev in 2001? Regardless of what your game turned out to be, the fact that you had enough real estate to make whatever you wanted by having a max of 18gb disc in 2001 was enough reason not to go the GC route.
Btw, you can't really bring 'multi-disc' into this comparison, as developers had not really thought about going beyond 18gb prior to the 360 generation. I'm pretty damn positive that people were thinking more than 1.5gb, though.
Also, the fact that the PS2 played DVD movies was a big draw over the GC. And don't misunderstand me, I love the GC that is sitting in my office right now. I still think it has some pretty spectacular games on it (RE4 for example), but when it was launched it was already behind the PS2 because Nintendo ignored the technology trends.
I mean when you see the Dreamcast go down to the PS2 because of the lack of DVD (and I know there was more issues than that, but that was a big reason), why would you NOT put a true DVD drive that played movies in your system? DVD was just hitting its consumer strides by 2000, so people really wanted that ability in a system.
nssdigitalchumps
Member
Actually, honey, the majority of things in this industry are very black and white. DVDs would have helped GC's chances quite a bit. Knowing the timeframe of the release (when DVDs were becoming a strong standard in the entertainment industry's mind) of tech and what a consumer is looking for is enormously vital.
Sometimes it can start with one very big reason and tumble from there. Nintendo certainly had other issues with the GC, but it started with the tech.
Good to know that somehow DVDs in your country were much larger than in mine.
Games like Zelda would probably sell(assuming Nintendo changes things so that it would be more like the games Ubisoft, Activision, and EA put out), but the concern would probably be their more family focused titles and whether mobile would be better fit for them and lead to more money.
Can you please show me these DVDs that hold 18GB of space, and were around in 2001?
DVD playback? probably, but the PS2 was already dominating them, so I doubt it.
The ability to play games stored on DVDs probably wouldn't have changed much of anything.
nssdigitalchumps
Member
Apologies, 15.9 (DVD-18).
Double sided dual layer discs.
nssdigitalchumps
Member
To be fair, it was 15.9gb on a Double sided/dual layer DVD disc. It was DVD-18, I had '18' on my mind.
Shikamaru Ninja
任天å ã® å¿è
I'm not sure the Nintendo 64 and GameCube belong together by any means. 33 million (n64) versus 22 million (gcn) may arguably not seem incredibly different, but the Nintendo 64 sold extremely well in North America, and more important Nintendo sold a ton of first-party software throughout a broad catalog of different intellectual properties.