6 ms·

My Prescription for Nintendo

12 points by webwielder 13y ago

gfodor 13y ago
Here's a real prescription, and one that is probably already bandied about in board rooms at Nintendo. You lost this generation, just like Apple lost the PC wars. Write it off, cut your losses, and go into R&D mode for the next wave just like they did with the iPhone. VR is next. Buy Valve. Buy Oculus. Or poach talent. Nintendo is the best company with the creative talent, playfulness, and penchant for risk-taking that is going to be necessary to rethink the gaming experience for VR. If they pull it off they will leapfrog MS and Sony and cement their legacy for another generation of gamers. Right now really feels like the opportunity that comes along once every 20-30 years in the tech industry where a few players thinking ahead make the right investments and file the right patents and absolutely dominate the next cycle.
- erikj 13y ago
  It's a great advice right here but I'm going to nitpick a little bit: > Buy Valve. Valve is a privately held company that displays zero desire to be bought by anyone. I don't think it is possible to buy them at all.
- ZenoArrow 13y ago
  Buying Oculus would be a great move for Nintendo, but I don't think they will for a couple of reasons: 1. They've already been burnt from trying to enter the VR market early with the Virtual Boy. I understand that times are different now, but the memory of the previous failure would definitely have some influence. 2. VR doesn't fit in with Nintendo's ethos of social gaming, which runs deep in the company. The idea that Nintendo seems to have with the majority of its products is to bring people closer together, here are some small touches that highlight this... Famicom (family computer), N64 (four controller ports), Gamecube (handle on console so can easily move, including to bring to a friend's house), Wii (all the casual games), I could go on. VR isolates us, we're physically there but our attention is not. Perhaps Nintendo will do something with multiplayer VR (requiring more power than single player VR), or with AR, but I do think it'll take more than just a shrewd business decision to get Nintendo back using VR.
  - erikj 13y ago
    Nintendo already bundles an AR-based game (which is called, er, "AR Games" [1]) with every Nintendo 3DS console since the launch, so it's definitely one of the directions Nintendo actively researches. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR_Games http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR_Games
protomyth 13y ago
A far better analysis occurs during the front part of this podcast http://www.shacknews.com/article/82702/weekend-confirmed-200-200th-episode-spectacular http://www.shacknews.com/article/82702/weekend-confirmed-200...
icarusmad 13y ago
It's a prescription that'd end up killing the patient.
- freshyill 13y ago
  Take the prescription and maybe die, or just sit there and bleed out.
vinceguidry 13y ago
Nintendo making games for other consoles? That's just giving up. Could you imagine having played Super Mario World on a Genesis? Super Mario 64 on a Playstation? I'm not saying the great guys at Nintendo couldn't make great gaming experiences for other platforms. But it would dilute the brand to virtual extinction. Better to fold up the business than throw away their dignity like that. Nintendo's been around for a really long time. At this point they're just having a few bad years. Let's not start dooming and glooming just yet.
- vinkelhake 13y ago
  > Could you imagine having played Super Mario World on a Genesis? Super Mario 64 on a Playstation? Sure, why not? Nintendo really are great at making games. I would have loved to play their more recent games on a 360 or PS3. As it is now, I just don't get to play them since I don't see much value in the Nintendo consoles. The only thing they have to offer on their consoles is a few games from their leading franchises. Don't get me wrong, those games are probably stellar, but it's not enough for me to buy a console just for those. How long can you sustain a console business on first party titles alone?
  - vinceguidry 13y ago
    > How long can you sustain a console business on first party titles alone? Nintendo can afford to play the long game here. They're still bringing in lots of revenue from their handheld systems. There's also still a lot of money in merchandising on their core franchises. One failed console isn't going to ruin them. In my opinion, Nintendo's console problem stems mainly from a lack of vision and a failure to execute. These failings say nothing about their ability to do so, just that they were unable to do so in this case. The answer is simple, cut their losses, and try a different approach. I don't think the concept of the Wii U is fundamentally broken, it just needs some work to entice third party development and to fix the hardware problems. They can turn it around. I think it's a good bet they will.
    - wvenable 13y ago
      I don't think Nintendo has the software experience it turn it around. I don't mean in making games; that they can do. It's all the other software: the operating system, the SDK, the store, the online component. Nintendo is used to developing for old school consoles; boxes with discs or cartridges and where people play together in one room. But when nearly every person has a connected smartphone, an HD TV, and broadband the expectations for a system are well beyond what Nintendo has proven they can do. Until they accept they don't have the skills to do that part properly or start to believe that it is actually important then they will continue to fail.
brianpgordon 13y ago
Satoru Iwata has said: > Our primary focus is to think about and actually carry out something which other company's hardware can never realize. We are trying to provide consumers gaming experiences that can only be available on Nintendo platforms. But except for Sports and maybe Skyward Sword, Nintendo isn't actually doing anything that other consoles can't provide. Everywhere else, motion controls or pointing is tacked on. If you took out Star Bits from the Galaxy games you would have the same game. Twilight Princess's "shake to attack" controls are pointless and equivalent to a sword button. The Wii U touch screen is an unmitigated disaster, with its pathetic battery life and no real compelling raison d'etre... the only time I ever use it is for those forced touch sequences in Rayman Legends. > "If I was to take responsibility for the company for just the next one or two years, and if I was not concerned about the long-term future of Nintendo at all, it might make sense for us to provide our important franchises for other platforms, and then we might be able to gain some short-term profit," he said. In other words, "we'd rather do our own thing than make money." We're talking about billions of dollars here, money that could prop Nintendo up for years while it sorts out its hardware business.
- xenophanes 13y ago
  Of course twilight princess controls are equivalent to buttons. it's a gamecube game that was ported to Wii. i'm not sure how casual gamers feel about it, but i find the motion controls extremely frustrating and they make games significantly worse, IMO. this might be more of a matter of opinion with better motion technology but for Skyward Sword the motion technology simply isn't good enough. i can test several motions to try to find the right one and do them carefully and both 1) struggle to do something successfully at all 2) find the identical motion gets variable results in game. Not fun. if the motion controls in Skyward Sword were equivalent to buttons at least they'd be simpler and I'd be able to mostly do the actions i want. And I say this as a fan of the Infinity Blade iOS touch sword fighting games. if the non-button technology is good quality and the game actually makes sense with the controls, then it's fine. skyward sword fails on both counts. Meanwhile in Link Between Worlds it breaks the flow of the game every time you want to change items or take the broom because you have to use the touch screen for those (which probably means pulling out the stylus since the touch screen sucks), and the whole rest of the game is buttons. the break in the action to grab your stylus, press twice, and set it somewhere again (on your shirt and hope it doesn't fall on the ground?) constantly interrupts you and does not add any fun.
malloreon 13y ago
The latest episode of Marco/John/Casey's "Accidental Tech" podcast covers this really well.
trollingineer 13y ago
Oh look - a compendium of poor advice gathered on one webpage! God bless the Internet!
hkmurakami 13y ago
John Siracusa's assessment of the situation is still the best synopsis imo. http://hypercritical.co/2013/09/02/nintendo-in-crisis http://hypercritical.co/2013/09/02/nintendo-in-crisis
- wvenable 13y ago
  The flaw with this analysis that it pins too much on the success of the Wii. The Wii was really a fluke. The problems that plagued the Gamecube also plagued the Wii and now the Wii U. The temporary novelty of motion controls sold a massive amount of consoles but those consoles are now mostly collecting dust. Both the PS3 and XBox 360 eventually caught up a sold more units.
  - r0s 13y ago
    You mean the PS3 and 360 combined eventually caught up. The stated strategy of innovative hardware is a hit-maker, the Wii nailed it. If it's a fluke, the DS wouldn't be where it is today. There is a history of intent and delivery, anyone betting against that is a fool in my opinion.
    - rm445 13y ago
      To be precise, the PS3 and 360 each sold around 80 million and the Wii around 100 million. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_video_game_consoles_(seventh_generation)#Sales_standings http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_video_game_consoles_...
apunic 13y ago
Good advice but is this 'prescription' and its explanations not obvious, long-known and could have been squeezed into one tweet instead a blog post? "Nintendo, stop building hardware, start being a publisher."
- ZenoArrow 13y ago
  If you change 'hardware' to 'console hardware', that's an accurate summary.
bly 13y ago
The post actually contradicts itself in many different ways and therefore I don't think the prescription can cure Nintendo at all. 1) I agree that Pokemon on smartphones will definitely be a hit, but I am very skeptical of Nintendo's capability to execute well against that particular platform. Mobile gaming is a very different beast from the packaged goods console gaming space in which Nintendo is currently comfortable. They not only lack the experience and expertise, but more fundamentally lack the willingness to adopt a new platform. This is actually a common trait among almost all established game publishers such as Activision and Ubisoft. I highly doubt an iOS Pokemon would be the success it needs to be. 2) Handheld is a declining market. Period. Continuing making handhelds is not going to dig Nintendo out of the hole they are already in. Putting Pokemon on iOS would definitely not help, as the franchise is likely the biggest hardware mover for them. This is where the original post contradicts itself: doubling down on handheld while making a move on smartphones is a very bad idea. 3) Stop making home consoles and make titles available on rival consoles? Really? The post is simply suggesting Nintendo to castrate itself of a core competitive advantage of theirs. The level of disingenuousness is simply appalling.
harunurhan 13y ago
If they made nintendo games for mobile and other consoles, there would not be any reason to buy a nintendo handheld or home console.
jrs99 13y ago
Buy Sega. Release Dreamcast 2 for hardcore gamers. Continue with Wii brand for younger/casual players.
- ZenoArrow 13y ago
  I understand the sentiment, but from what I can see the important ingredients that made the Dreamcast great have mostly been lost. To me, the Dreamcast was the swansong of arcade gaming culture, a culture that has largely disappeared. Sure, there were some games without that type of focus (I'm still hoping I'll kick Lan Di's arse one day), but I fail to see what the mere existence of Dreamcast 2 would do to encourage publishers to move away from making what works for them in the short term.

12 points by webwielder 13y ago

Here's a real prescription, and one that is probably already bandied about in board rooms at Nintendo. You lost this generation, just like Apple lost the PC wars. Write it off, cut your losses, and go into R&D mode for the next wave just like they did with the iPhone. VR is next. Buy Valve. Buy Oculus. Or poach talent. Nintendo is the best company with the creative talent, playfulness, and penchant for risk-taking that is going to be necessary to rethink the gaming experience for VR. If they pull it off they will leapfrog MS and Sony and cement their legacy for another generation of gamers. Right now really feels like the opportunity that comes along once every 20-30 years in the tech industry where a few players thinking ahead make the right investments and file the right patents and absolutely dominate the next cycle.

erikj 13y ago
It's a great advice right here but I'm going to nitpick a little bit: > Buy Valve. Valve is a privately held company that displays zero desire to be bought by anyone. I don't think it is possible to buy them at all.
ZenoArrow 13y ago
Buying Oculus would be a great move for Nintendo, but I don't think they will for a couple of reasons: 1. They've already been burnt from trying to enter the VR market early with the Virtual Boy. I understand that times are different now, but the memory of the previous failure would definitely have some influence. 2. VR doesn't fit in with Nintendo's ethos of social gaming, which runs deep in the company. The idea that Nintendo seems to have with the majority of its products is to bring people closer together, here are some small touches that highlight this... Famicom (family computer), N64 (four controller ports), Gamecube (handle on console so can easily move, including to bring to a friend's house), Wii (all the casual games), I could go on. VR isolates us, we're physically there but our attention is not. Perhaps Nintendo will do something with multiplayer VR (requiring more power than single player VR), or with AR, but I do think it'll take more than just a shrewd business decision to get Nintendo back using VR.
- erikj 13y ago
  Nintendo already bundles an AR-based game (which is called, er, "AR Games" [1]) with every Nintendo 3DS console since the launch, so it's definitely one of the directions Nintendo actively researches. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR_Games http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR_Games

protomyth 13y ago

A far better analysis occurs during the front part of this podcast http://www.shacknews.com/article/82702/weekend-confirmed-200-200th-episode-spectacular http://www.shacknews.com/article/82702/weekend-confirmed-200...

icarusmad 13y ago

It's a prescription that'd end up killing the patient.

freshyill 13y ago
Take the prescription and maybe die, or just sit there and bleed out.

vinceguidry 13y ago

Nintendo making games for other consoles? That's just giving up. Could you imagine having played Super Mario World on a Genesis? Super Mario 64 on a Playstation? I'm not saying the great guys at Nintendo couldn't make great gaming experiences for other platforms. But it would dilute the brand to virtual extinction. Better to fold up the business than throw away their dignity like that. Nintendo's been around for a really long time. At this point they're just having a few bad years. Let's not start dooming and glooming just yet.

vinkelhake 13y ago
> Could you imagine having played Super Mario World on a Genesis? Super Mario 64 on a Playstation? Sure, why not? Nintendo really are great at making games. I would have loved to play their more recent games on a 360 or PS3. As it is now, I just don't get to play them since I don't see much value in the Nintendo consoles. The only thing they have to offer on their consoles is a few games from their leading franchises. Don't get me wrong, those games are probably stellar, but it's not enough for me to buy a console just for those. How long can you sustain a console business on first party titles alone?
- vinceguidry 13y ago
  > How long can you sustain a console business on first party titles alone? Nintendo can afford to play the long game here. They're still bringing in lots of revenue from their handheld systems. There's also still a lot of money in merchandising on their core franchises. One failed console isn't going to ruin them. In my opinion, Nintendo's console problem stems mainly from a lack of vision and a failure to execute. These failings say nothing about their ability to do so, just that they were unable to do so in this case. The answer is simple, cut their losses, and try a different approach. I don't think the concept of the Wii U is fundamentally broken, it just needs some work to entice third party development and to fix the hardware problems. They can turn it around. I think it's a good bet they will.
  - wvenable 13y ago
    I don't think Nintendo has the software experience it turn it around. I don't mean in making games; that they can do. It's all the other software: the operating system, the SDK, the store, the online component. Nintendo is used to developing for old school consoles; boxes with discs or cartridges and where people play together in one room. But when nearly every person has a connected smartphone, an HD TV, and broadband the expectations for a system are well beyond what Nintendo has proven they can do. Until they accept they don't have the skills to do that part properly or start to believe that it is actually important then they will continue to fail.

brianpgordon 13y ago

Satoru Iwata has said: > Our primary focus is to think about and actually carry out something which other company's hardware can never realize. We are trying to provide consumers gaming experiences that can only be available on Nintendo platforms. But except for Sports and maybe Skyward Sword, Nintendo isn't actually doing anything that other consoles can't provide. Everywhere else, motion controls or pointing is tacked on. If you took out Star Bits from the Galaxy games you would have the same game. Twilight Princess's "shake to attack" controls are pointless and equivalent to a sword button. The Wii U touch screen is an unmitigated disaster, with its pathetic battery life and no real compelling raison d'etre... the only time I ever use it is for those forced touch sequences in Rayman Legends. > "If I was to take responsibility for the company for just the next one or two years, and if I was not concerned about the long-term future of Nintendo at all, it might make sense for us to provide our important franchises for other platforms, and then we might be able to gain some short-term profit," he said. In other words, "we'd rather do our own thing than make money." We're talking about billions of dollars here, money that could prop Nintendo up for years while it sorts out its hardware business.

xenophanes 13y ago
Of course twilight princess controls are equivalent to buttons. it's a gamecube game that was ported to Wii. i'm not sure how casual gamers feel about it, but i find the motion controls extremely frustrating and they make games significantly worse, IMO. this might be more of a matter of opinion with better motion technology but for Skyward Sword the motion technology simply isn't good enough. i can test several motions to try to find the right one and do them carefully and both 1) struggle to do something successfully at all 2) find the identical motion gets variable results in game. Not fun. if the motion controls in Skyward Sword were equivalent to buttons at least they'd be simpler and I'd be able to mostly do the actions i want. And I say this as a fan of the Infinity Blade iOS touch sword fighting games. if the non-button technology is good quality and the game actually makes sense with the controls, then it's fine. skyward sword fails on both counts. Meanwhile in Link Between Worlds it breaks the flow of the game every time you want to change items or take the broom because you have to use the touch screen for those (which probably means pulling out the stylus since the touch screen sucks), and the whole rest of the game is buttons. the break in the action to grab your stylus, press twice, and set it somewhere again (on your shirt and hope it doesn't fall on the ground?) constantly interrupts you and does not add any fun.

malloreon 13y ago

The latest episode of Marco/John/Casey's "Accidental Tech" podcast covers this really well.

trollingineer 13y ago

Oh look - a compendium of poor advice gathered on one webpage! God bless the Internet!

hkmurakami 13y ago

John Siracusa's assessment of the situation is still the best synopsis imo. http://hypercritical.co/2013/09/02/nintendo-in-crisis http://hypercritical.co/2013/09/02/nintendo-in-crisis

wvenable 13y ago
The flaw with this analysis that it pins too much on the success of the Wii. The Wii was really a fluke. The problems that plagued the Gamecube also plagued the Wii and now the Wii U. The temporary novelty of motion controls sold a massive amount of consoles but those consoles are now mostly collecting dust. Both the PS3 and XBox 360 eventually caught up a sold more units.
- r0s 13y ago
  You mean the PS3 and 360 combined eventually caught up. The stated strategy of innovative hardware is a hit-maker, the Wii nailed it. If it's a fluke, the DS wouldn't be where it is today. There is a history of intent and delivery, anyone betting against that is a fool in my opinion.
  - rm445 13y ago
    To be precise, the PS3 and 360 each sold around 80 million and the Wii around 100 million. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_video_game_consoles_(seventh_generation)#Sales_standings http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_video_game_consoles_...

apunic 13y ago

Good advice but is this 'prescription' and its explanations not obvious, long-known and could have been squeezed into one tweet instead a blog post? "Nintendo, stop building hardware, start being a publisher."

ZenoArrow 13y ago
If you change 'hardware' to 'console hardware', that's an accurate summary.

bly 13y ago

The post actually contradicts itself in many different ways and therefore I don't think the prescription can cure Nintendo at all. 1) I agree that Pokemon on smartphones will definitely be a hit, but I am very skeptical of Nintendo's capability to execute well against that particular platform. Mobile gaming is a very different beast from the packaged goods console gaming space in which Nintendo is currently comfortable. They not only lack the experience and expertise, but more fundamentally lack the willingness to adopt a new platform. This is actually a common trait among almost all established game publishers such as Activision and Ubisoft. I highly doubt an iOS Pokemon would be the success it needs to be. 2) Handheld is a declining market. Period. Continuing making handhelds is not going to dig Nintendo out of the hole they are already in. Putting Pokemon on iOS would definitely not help, as the franchise is likely the biggest hardware mover for them. This is where the original post contradicts itself: doubling down on handheld while making a move on smartphones is a very bad idea. 3) Stop making home consoles and make titles available on rival consoles? Really? The post is simply suggesting Nintendo to castrate itself of a core competitive advantage of theirs. The level of disingenuousness is simply appalling.

harunurhan 13y ago

If they made nintendo games for mobile and other consoles, there would not be any reason to buy a nintendo handheld or home console.

jrs99 13y ago

Buy Sega. Release Dreamcast 2 for hardcore gamers. Continue with Wii brand for younger/casual players.

ZenoArrow 13y ago
I understand the sentiment, but from what I can see the important ingredients that made the Dreamcast great have mostly been lost. To me, the Dreamcast was the swansong of arcade gaming culture, a culture that has largely disappeared. Sure, there were some games without that type of focus (I'm still hoping I'll kick Lan Di's arse one day), but I fail to see what the mere existence of Dreamcast 2 would do to encourage publishers to move away from making what works for them in the short term.