Topic: Nintendo Will Make 'Bold' Online Move 'When the Time Is Ripe'

[NWR_pap64]

The key to all of this might be in Nintendo Direct, as Iwata aims to "construct a seamless flow" that guides viewers through videos and demos.

http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/29129

Nintendo President Satoru Iwata wants to eschew the idea that Nintendo is "cautious, conservative, or even negative about business on a network," as he responded to investors at the recent Financial Briefing Q&A.

"Our answer [to that notion] is, in short, that we will make a bold attempt when the time is ripe," Iwata said. "Unless the timing is right, we will lose the consumers who do not have an Internet connection. We have not gone so far yet because our developers have a belief that our products should be available to as many people as possible."

This online strategy is furthered by the fact that the company's latest system, the 3DS, has a much higher connection ratio than their past handhelds. Even better, users in Japan watched the latest Nintendo Direct presentation on their 3DS systems. 

"If we can construct a seamless flow in guiding consumers to watch the Nintendo Direct presentation on their Nintendo 3DS and then voluntarily try 3D trailers and demo versions (that were introduced in "Nintendo Direct"), this is a fairly powerful and efficient system," Iwata said.

The implication is that future Nintendo Direct presentations will not only feature the streaming presentation, but also allows viewers to seamlessly move between the presentation, 3D trailers, and demos, making the presentations not just informative, but also interactive.

"We have a strong impression that the foundation for business on a network for us to take on various challenges on it has been steadily put into place today," Iwata added.

This process might have been slow moving, but it has been accelerating rapidly over the past few years. Nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto noted that Flipnote, an animation application on the DSi, has become a 'hidden hit' among children, revealing that "millions of children who do not communicate on the Internet use this software." (Editor's Note: I can vouch for this, my niece and her cousins use this like crazy.)

"We are taking on various challenges including how to operate the system of note exchanges by children freely in a safe manner," Miyamoto added. "In short, we trust the great potential of the network, but we are still in pursuit of originality through trial and error."

This all comes back around to Iwata's defense of Nintendo's online strategy. He finished his reply to a question about their online future by saying: "Furthermore, if the collaboration between the forum for communications and the place for new information on games starts to work well, we will be able to figure out a vital response to the concern you sometimes shared that Nintendo may be behind the social age."

[StrikerObi]

Time was ripe 5 years ago. How can they possibly believe that they will lose users over this? The Xbox 360 and PS3 had robust online systems since launch and they are both more successful than the Wii. How could they look at that and say "nope, the time is not ripe yet."?  You can't hold out until 99%+ of your users are connected.

[Jet Pilot]

Just like they'll introduce HD when the "time is ripe"...which of course is also about 7 years too late.

[BlackNMild2k1]

They are gonna have to do something about their wireless communications and speed of storage or something, because there is no "flow" when it comes to having to wait 10 minutes to download a demo or 1 minute to load a video or even a website.

Maybe if they make the demos download automatically in the background while the video is playing, but then the video would probably lag since it's streaming and the whole experience would be a laggy mess.

I hope the Wii U doesn't have this slow ass wireless like the Wii & 3DS.

[Chozo Ghost]

"Unless the timing is right, we will lose the consumers who do not have an Internet connection."

So they would lose about two consumers, big deal.

[broodwars]

"Unless the timing is right, we will lose the consumers who do not have an Internet connection."

So they would lose about two consumers, big deal.

Well, it is an area of concern in more rural areas that don't have broadband support, and HD online play needs a broadband connection for stable play.  However, that doesn't mean you don't have an advanced online system on par with your competitors.

[Enner]

I'm guessing however they look at their books, they would lose money if they went whole hog with online infrastructure. Beats me how that works out for them.

Just like they'll introduce HD when the "time is ripe"...which of course is also about 7 years too late.

Weren't HDTVs really expensive in 2005? I didn't get the Vizio I have in my house until 2008.

[TJ Spyke]

Just like they'll introduce HD when the "time is ripe"...which of course is also about 7 years too late.

Um, when Wii came out the HDTV adoption rate was was only 29% in North America in 2006 (6 years ago). In 2005, only 3% of homes worldwide had one, so 7 years ago was not "too late". Even now, the US rate is at about 68%.

Chozo, you do know that about 23% of Xbox 360 owners have never taken their system online? That is over 15 million systems just with the Xbox 360 alone.

[Mataata]

Chozo, you do know that about 23% of Xbox 360 owners have never taken their system online? That is over 15 million systems just with the Xbox 360 alone.

I can vouch for this. I've never used my Xbox online before- I've only ever had one system update because of a disc that came with Xbox magazine.

[nickmitch]

Why have you never your system online? That seems kinda silly. You miss out on features, games, game content, fun, etc.

Personally, I think Nintendo should take the following philosophy regarding users who aren't online: **** 'em. No offense to anyone, but you can't think you might alienate a fifth of your user base and wind up gimping everyone else out of features they wanted YEARS ago.

[Ceric]

You know how I read that.

We are waiting to do what Blizzard did with all there new games.  Making you be connected to play the game so they know you aren't pirating it.

[Chozo Ghost]

Chozo, you do know that about 23% of Xbox 360 owners have never taken their system online? That is over 15 million systems just with the Xbox 360 alone.

If I had a 360 I wouldn't take it online either, because you have to pay a monthly fee in order to do so. If you could play online for free I'm sure that percentage would be lower.

[nickmitch]

Are we talking never played multiplayer online? or never connected their Xbox to the internet? You don't need a gold account to buy/play xbox live arcade games. But I guess most people would rather use Steam these days. . .
Seeing this a more reasonable.

[TJ Spyke]

Chozo, you do know that about 23% of Xbox 360 owners have never taken their system online? That is over 15 million systems just with the Xbox 360 alone.

If I had a 360 I wouldn't take it online either, because you have to pay a monthly fee in order to do so. If you could play online for free I'm sure that percentage would be lower.

The survey (which I think NPD did) was just of people who took their system online, not who subscribed to Xbox Live Gold. You can do stuff for free too, like downloading updates and buy most DLC and games.

[Chocobo_Rider]

The Xbox 360 and PS3 had robust online systems since launch and they are both more successful than the Wii.

How are we defining success here?

[NWR_Neal]

I had a discussion with some friends yesterday about this, and while I do tend to side with the folks who say "LOL Nintendo sucks at online," you have to consider the battle they're fighting.

Microsoft and Sony aren't just game makers. Microsoft's success with Xbox Live can be almost directly tied to Windows, GFW, Windows Phone, etc. Plain and simple, Xbox Live is successful because Microsoft has resources and a goal of making their system not just a game system, but a media hub. Look at the new dashboard. They've done it.

Sony definitely had a lot more failings with their online system (and anyone who says that Sony is light years beyond Nintendo should honestly wait until they see what they're doing with Wii U before they damn Nintendo), but even still, they have the backing of Sony. While Sony doesn't seem to have the same synergistic goal, they still have more resources than Nintendo.

Is Nintendo the weak link in online? Yes, but I'd hesitate to dismiss them for their hesitancy with online. We (The NWR Forums) all might be connected, but the entire world isn't, and there are very real numbers (see above) that show that people don't take their systems online.

I believe Nintendo mentioned that the 3DS has about 60% of their users connected online. That's the highest a Nintendo system connection rate yet, and that's still missing nearly half of the user base.

[broodwars]

The Xbox 360 and PS3 had robust online systems since launch and they are both more successful than the Wii.

How are we defining success here?

Besides being much more feature-rich than Nintendo's online service, I think Nintendo would have a very hard time proving that the Wii Shop has outsold XBLA or PSN, despite notable hits on WiiWare and the Virtual Console.

[Ian Sane]

What a smart company does is anticipate where things are going and get in at the start.  Nintendo has been a reactionary company since the N64.  They waited about optical discs, online gaming, HDTVs.  In those situations they were off of widespread adoption by like a year at best and then by the time their next system came out they were YEARS behind.

The internet isn't some fad.  This is not even the future, it's the NOW.  Nintendo until you are cutting edge only kids, casuals and diehard Nintendo fans will care.  Everyone else cares too much about current technology to take you seriously.  This is the era where little kids care around smartphones.  The world is incredibly tech-savy.

Yesterday I'm all excited about the Nintendo network and today Iwata complete sours my enthusiasm with this dumb comment.  That has been the Wii U this whole time.  One week you get good news and the next week they say something discouraging that undoes all that optimism.  I notice it is Iwata and Miyamoto that keep saying the stupid stuff that suggests that the Wii U is just more casual-focused nonsense like the Wii.  I wonder if there is disagreement within Nintendo about what direction to go in because there seems to be two very different descriptions of the Wii U going around.

[BeautifulShy]

Chozo that kind of attitude is why you are not running Nintendo.A  consumer is a consumer no matter how small. Nintendo is looking at the big picture. Nintendo has a giant instal base with the Wii they don't really want any people being left behind now do they?

Also I want to point out that I keep on seeing the same type of arguments being sent out on these arguments on these types of posts. It kinda gets tiring to read.

[Ian Sane]

Chozo that kind of attitude is why you are not running Nintendo.A  consumer is a consumer no matter how small. Nintendo is looking at the big picture. Nintendo has a giant instal base with the Wii they don't really want any people being left behind now do they?

If Nintendo was looking at the big picture they would look less at the five people in America who won't buy the Wii U because they're not online and more at the potential millions of people who are online and would potentially be turned off by an archaic out-of-date online implementation.  They can't have BOTH customers.  They have to pick one and these days the majority are online.  Fussing over the small minority that is not is ridiculous.

Nintendo's problem is that they assume that if someone CAN be their customer they will be.  They go for the lowest common denominator and assume that it excludes no one so everyone will be on board.  Adults and teens CAN play E rated games so focusing on that is less exclusive than offering M or T rated games.  People of any skill level can play casual games so everyone will want to play them.  These assumptions are embarassingly naive and it has bit them in the ass numerous times.  Nintendo sees it as expanding the potential audience.  It doesn't work that way.  It's more like a slider that moves.  If you go too much in the direction of the lowest common denominator you chop off people at the other end.

If Nintendo was aware of this they would never care about the small minority of offline users because the math just favours the online users.  But Nintendo is not aware of how it works.  They think the more broad you make something the more inviting it is to everyone.  This is just plain WRONG.

[ThePerm]

to some extant its wrong, to some extant its oh so right. Nintendo is the Disney of video games not the Miramax. We were all hoping Silicon Knights could be Nintendo's Miramax, but alas that was not to be. Nintendo has been out of the position to have a real good chance for a Miramax, but with Wii U it has its chance again. This time nobody has a sharp enough edge on them.

like lets break it down from n64 years on

Nintendo had games like Turok, and Goldeneye, but was still labeled kiddy, even after releasing Conker which was totally subversive the opinion of the idiotic mainstream didnt change. I don't get it but it carried on to the next generation. I guess Cloud Strife was just too popular of an anti hero for the average joe to even consider the steps that were taken.
Nintendo wanted to shed their kiddy image with Silicon Knights and even more Perfect Dark, but Rare jumped ship. Silicon Knights provided the content, but after they heard what wii was like they ditched Nintendo. Nintendo got exclusives from Capcom, which became un-exclusives to the dismay of Nintendo. Capcom obviously betrayed Nintendo. Shinji Mikami was outraged and left the company. That guy was forced to make a bunch of stuff on platforms he didn't like. In an interview he mentioned how pissed he was because his PS2's laser went out immediately after the warranty expired and that was partially one of the reasons he actually wanted Resident Evil 4 on gamecube so bad. There were shooters on the gamecube, but none of them would ever be looked at in the bright light of halo.

With no more Silicon Knights Nintendo didn't have any first party mature games developers on hand during the Wii era. There were 2 metroid games and the Conduit, but that wasn't enough. Capcom had even more lax support this time as well, because they were both lazy releasing bad ligh gun games, and because wii is underpowered. On the other hand the majority of games that were popular were dusty war games like call of duty, which I have no desire to play. I loved the first Gears of War though.

Wii U looks to be pretty conventional, and I know I pretty much always enjoy the things Nintendo does with their controls, but in the long run I think 3rd party support is more paramount. That is unless Nintendo has something really good that's new on their hands.  I can just imagine this will be a lot better of a device in general as it may largley replace my PC in use. There was a window when my Wii was taking precedence over my computer even with its limited functionality. If Nintendo can use the tablet to expand upon this then it becomes super functional even if you are not using it for games. Nintendo never really talked about how they coveted the place of set-top box king, however, it seems they are positioning themselves to do just that.

[broodwars]

Nintendo wanted to shed their kiddy image with Silicon Knights and even more Perfect Dark, but Rare jumped ship. Silicon Knights provided the content, but after they heard what wii was like they ditched Nintendo.

Rare didn't "jump ship."  Nintendo sold them to Microsoft.  Silicon Knights likely left because the games they made on the GameCube (Eternal Darkness and MGS: Twin Snakes) were not big financial successes.

Capcom had even more lax support this time as well, because they were both lazy releasing bad ligh gun games, and because wii is underpowered.

I thought both Umbrella Chronicles and Darkside Chronicles were excellent games with great production values and possibly the two best light gun games I've ever played, though they're certainly acquired tastes.  Were they great substitutes for Resident Evil 5?  To be honest, as someone who has played RE5 and didn't think it was all that great, I think they were.  Were they great substitutes for an original Wii-exclusive RE4-style Resident Evil game?  No, not really.

[Chozo Ghost]

Rare didn't "jump ship."  Nintendo sold them to Microsoft.

It was my understanding that Rare turned to crap and that was the reason Nintendo gladly sold them to Microsoft. So if you look at it that way then you are both right. Rare jumped ship, and then Nintendo sold them afterwards.

[TJ Spyke]

Rare didn't "jump ship."

Not quite. After Nintendo declined the offer to become majority owners of Rare, they sold their 49% share in the company back to the Stamper brothers, who then sold all 100% to Microsoft. So the Stampers WANTED to sell the company to Nintendo, but Nintendo didn't want to buy them.

[Stogi]

What a smart company does is anticipate where things are going and get in at the start.  Nintendo has been a reactionary company since the N64.

Reactionary has ended up in profits every single time, unlike other companies.

But truly, Nintendo will never be like how you want them. The SNES generation is gone for good. Accept that.

What Nintendo is today is a company that wants massive appeal and not a corner of the market. They are a company that wants to explore uncharted waters rather than battle over a section of an island. And they will use technology accordingly.

Cheap and exciting hardware. Fun and addicting games. That's it.

Looking at Nintendo objectively, Iwata's comments aren't surprising in the least. Actually, they are right in line with their thinking. Until a majority of their consumers use it, they will not support. Plain and simple.