6 ms·

Nintendo, One Year Later

• WoodenChair 12y ago
  Nintendo (IMHO) is missing out on a huge potential revenue source by not releasing its old IP on a Windows/Mac/iOS/Android version of the virtual console. Sega seems to have been at least mildly successful re-releasing Genesis era games on these platforms. Do they really feel re-releasing something like say Super Mario Bros. 3 (NES) for iOS would detract from Wii U sales? Nintendo has the best back catalog in the industry, and with today's microprocessors, emulation makes that catalog fully portable.
  • jzelinskie 12y ago
    I'm fairly certain that Nintendo is simply scared to release their IP on a platform that they do not control. The last (and only) time they did was the Phillips CDI which they now entirely cease to acknowledge. That and the fact that their IP drives the sales of their hardware.
    • Apocryphon 12y ago
      It's almost as if Nintendo and Apple have very similar cultures that cause them to always act as iconoclasts, choosing formats and channels different from their competition, and betting big on innovation. It's remarkable how both the original Wii and iPhone were both released within a year of each other. What I don't understand is why both companies like to use the same distinctive off-white color. Maybe it makes their products look like porcelain, something classical and timeless.
      • Synaesthesia 12y ago
        Well it's clearly a strategy which has worked for them, and they stick to what they know works. A pure white color is notoriously hard to manufacture well, even with expensive equipment, or so I've heard.
      • Thimothy 12y ago
        Yeah, I have always chuckled at the irony that the apple followers criticize Nintendo for not releasing its IP on other platforms. Because, of course, I can install OS X on my custom computer and Safari on my Android. The strategy of Nintendo makes as much sense as Apple's, and anyway, I have always though that it is far more likely for Nintendo to launch an Android smartphone where you could play their games (And only there).
    • rocky1138 12y ago
      CDI may have been the last time they released their IP on a platform they do not control, but they have done this more than once. An example would be Mario Bros. and Donkey Kong for the Atari 2600.
      • LukasMathis 12y ago
        Nintendo also released PC software, e.g. Mario Teaches Typing. And they've released a Pokédex for iOS.
  • LukasMathis 12y ago
    I think they can keep the prices for their old games up by keeping them on their own platforms. On iOS, Super Metroid would look expensive at 8 bucks. On the 3DS, that's just what games cost.
  • mushishi 12y ago
    One reason could have to do with very strict sense of quality. If the games would run on wide variety of platforms, Nintendo couldn't make sure that the experience for user is exactly what they want it to be, unlike when games are played in their own specific emulation hardware and gamepads. I think a Mario game played without guaranteed tight controls could hurt the expectation what Mario games are.
  • Tomte 12y ago
    I'm not so sure. I'm curently thinking about getting a new console (very light/casual gamer). I've got the PS3 mostly for playing Blu-ray and never found a compelling game. The Wii U is extremely interesting, not only because of its price, but primarily because of the games. I have no idea about the business case, but releasing the games elsewhere would certainly cannibalize their own console. And while it may be profitable, I think a Nintendo without a viable console on its own would be in very dire straits. That's why I have always seen the disappointing sales figures for the Wii U in the past with a crying eye, even though I was not looking to buy a console. The Nintendo empire is kind of precious.
  • emsy 12y ago
    To me, Nintendo is the Apple of the Gaming world. They want to control the experience and the hardware it runs on. They are also very secretive and try to control what information reaches the press (for example how cautios Reggie Fils-Aime answers questions or how they controlled what Dan Adelman, their indie spokesperson, tweeted). But above all, they seem very conservative, technically as well as policy wise. They were late to acknowledge indies, their digital distribution seems old fashioned and the hardware usually follows the "withered technology" paradigm. So, do I think we will ever see Nintendo games on Smartphones? In my opionion not unless they build their own smartphone. Personally I'm happy about it, because Apple does not seem to really acknowledge gaming. They are still "apps" after all, and they don't really improve their gaming services. Their controller API seems like a second thought. Android's hardware fragmentation will make it virtually impossible to keep the quality you are used from Nintendo games (Even though I think Google takes gaming much more serious than Apple).
  • kitsune_ 12y ago
    At least Nintendo is still Nintendo. Sega is just yet another app and game publisher. As a kid from the 80's remembering the Sega vs. Nintendo wars, this is a sad state of affairs. If you own the platform, you can really push your IPs. I don't think that Halo, which in my opinion was a rather generic shooter when it was first released, could have become this multi-billion dollar franchise without the help of MS.
    • hoggle 12y ago
      I would love for SEGA to really push on their tradition of delivering pure arcade experiences and build out-of-this-world adrenaline pumping VR spectacles now that we have the right technology for it.
• Rapzid 12y ago
  Hahaha, I'm going to read the rest of the article but am I the only person having trouble taking the author seriously after the opening sentence where the other takes seriously the idea that Nintendo just make iOS games? Enough so to lead a post by addressing it?
  • msherry 12y ago
    You do realize that the second sentence was "I thought, and still think, that this would be bad for the quality of Nintendo’s games, and bad for their bottom line", right? Or are you trolling?
• eden-san 12y ago
  Consoles are very likely to thrive for the next generation. China finally lifted the ban on game consoles and I'm starting to see Xbox One / PS4 being sold in different retail stores. Even though it's still a tough sell for most Chinese (remember, no one pays for games here, at least not upfront), they'll come around.
• bithush 12y ago
  In a would where companies just release their old (very successful) games on mobile devices with awful touch screen controls hacked in I am so glad Nintendo do not do that. Sure it would make them some money to sell Mario on the iPhone but god damn is it a horrible experience IMHO. Nintendo have good years and bad years. The Wii U wasn't the success they hoped it would be. But they took a chance with the Gamepad. That is what I like about Nintendo, they do things differently. Sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't. Now give me a 1080p60 F-Zero game on the Wii U please :)
  • ekianjo 12y ago
    > they do things differently Only the Nintendo of recent years. They were famous for NOT innovating much before. The SNES was just another 16 bits console (albeit quite powerful), the N64 did not even ride on the CD technology, and the Gamecube did not have much points of differentiation versus the Xbox 1 or PS2.
    • ZeroGravitas 12y ago
      Could you expand on what you consider "innovation" because I'm struggling to see how old nintendo, with their invention/pioneering of basically every part of the standard modern controller doesn't fit into my definition.
      • ekianjo 12y ago
        Are you just focusing on controllers? Like nothing else matters?
    • LukasMathis 12y ago
      I think this is a little bit revisionist. In hindsight, much of what Nintendo did seems common, because it has become common. Back then, stuff like the rumble pack or the analog stick or a controller that has directional control on both sides actually was innovative.
      • 12y ago
• jtruk 12y ago
  Mario Kart 8 is an curious example to cite. The game was sold with a free download of another game - and choices included many top tier first-party titles. That's a very unusual tactic. It's a great game, but I'm sure this will have been a big driver for sales. I wonder if the tallies for the other games (e.g. NSMB-U, Nintendoland, Z:WW) include those sold as a pack in, or free download? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_Wii_U_video_games http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_Wii_U_vide...
  • LukasMathis 12y ago
    You're right, I forgot about the fact that it was "bundled" with an additional game. Personally, I only found out about this after I bought it; I'm not sure how much the bundling helped Mario Kart's game sales. But it's a fair point. I didn't want to pick Nintendo Land because the way it was sold is not entirely straightforward. For example, some copies were bundled with a controller. I didn't want to use NSMB or 3D World as examples because Mario platformers are often outliers when it comes to sales. I guess The Wind Waker HD would have been a good example, because it sold really well despite being an HD remake of an older game.
• mcphage 12y ago
  > I think it’s fair for Apple writers to complain about the fact that a lot of people who have no clue about how Apple’s business works make crazy pronouncements about what Apple should do. But I do think that they should measure their own expertise by the same yardstick. John Gruber is very guilty of this. He understands Apple very well, knows how they work, and how they think. But every time he discusses Nintendo, I see the same mistaken thinking about the company that, were a similar mistake made about Apple, would earn a "filed for future claim chowder". Like Apple, Nintendo does things differently than its competitors. But that doesn't mean that they do things similarly; nor do they face the same challenges.