Topic: Adam Sessler thinks Reggie and Iwata should be fired

[sweetfeathery]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_184702&feature=iv&src_vid=2T7FKOiTP_U&v=esRMX0gbyQ8#t=31m43s


Skip to 31.44 to hear Sessler.


Thoughts?

[Kytim89]

I do not think that they need to be fired. However, I do think that they need to be called into the principal's office and be given a set of guidelines to straighten the Wii U out.

[UncleBob]

Thoughts?

I think Sessler is a leftover hack from a failed network who now judges a reality show and works as the "executive producer" of the arm of the arm of the freaking Discovery Channel.

Remind me again why anyone should care about his thoughts on how a multi-million dollar international company with a legacy that spans over a hundred years should operate?

[Shaymin]

Wake me up when he suggests who not only would, but COULD replace Iwata given Nintendo's corporate structure.

[Adrock]

Adam Sessler (and Dan Hsu) made better points other than calling for Reggie and Iwata to be fired. They're also the same things we've already talked about on NWR. Nintendo launched with New Super Mario Bros. U and still hasn't released another major first party game (no, I don't count Game and Wario as major) and won't until Pikmin 3 which, as Sessler said, won't sell consoles. Honestly, The Wind Waker HD should have been a launch window title (yes, alongside NSMBU). I have no idea what could possibly be taking that game so long, especially considering Aonuma has stated there won't be new dungeons. It is frustrating as Nintendo fans to sit here knowing that we all buy Nintendo consoles to play Nintendo games yet listen to Nintendo say they weren't ready or prepared to develop HD games. If you don't have games to sell, don't launch a console until you do. After early adopters buy the thing, who's left? I understand games take time to develop, but once 3DS started struggling, Nintendo should have reconsidered their strategy with Wii U.

[Kytim89]

Reggie and Iwata should not be fired, but Nintendo needs to change its habits.

[NWR_insanolord]

I firmly believe the real problem with Nintendo is the shareholders. Iwata's hands are tied because he feels forced to show a profit in the short term, which he's getting by poor long-term planning. If you replace him you'll only get someone more beholden to them.

And who is the president of Nintendo of America really isn't relevant to these kinds of discussion. As much as I'd love to see Bill Trinen in the position, until Nintendo's internal culture changes the NOA President doesn't have enough authority to matter.

[Oblivion]

Thoughts?

I think Sessler is a leftover hack from a failed network who now judges a reality show and works as the "executive producer" of the arm of the arm of the freaking Discovery Channel.

Not his fault the network sucks. Honestly, we've talked about the same thing here before and I'm sure you weren't this biased against Ian Sane or Broodwars.

[Kytim89]

Over the years of watching Adam Sessler display some of his opinions about Nintendo it appears that he sees them as being archaic. Granted that Nintendo has allowed themselves to be in a situation where they have poorly adapted to the current trends of the gaming industry.

[Luigi Dude]

Calling for Iwata to be fired is always pointless since it's not going to happen.  The only person with enough power is Yamauchi and he isn't going to do that.  Hell, one of the biggest reasons he loved Iwata so much in the first place was because Iwata was able to radically improve HAL after becoming president of that company, which made him impressed with Iwata's ability to lead.  Considering Iwata was able to improve Nintendo after becoming President with the DS and Wii, and turned around the 3DS after its terrible early months, it's pretty clear Yamauchi views Iwata in a favorable light because he's continued to do what Yamauchi loved so much about him.

Without Yamuachi, there isn't a single major shareholder with enough power to be able to call for Iwata's resignation.  The only other way is for the Board of Directors to fire Iwata and that won't happen considered Iwata is loved by them with many on the board are people Iwata has worked with at Nintendo for along time and good friends with.

[shingi_70]

I'd much rather see NOA get a new president (despite it not mattering) and see Miyamoto take step back from being so involved.




Nintendo just needs someone with a clear thought on the Philosophy of the Wii U and execute it as well as the company can, since right now they seem to be all over the place.


Nintendo touts a strong online system but has no games that directly take advantage of online multiplayer and won't until next year. Nintendo touts miiverse as being a way to communicate with friends but most games lack leaderboards.

[nickmitch]

I firmly believe the real problem with Nintendo is the shareholders. Iwata's hands are tied because he feels forced to show a profit in the short term, which he's getting by poor long-term planning. If you replace him you'll only get someone more beholden to them.

This right here is the problem. Remember when the 3DS launched: right before the end of Nintendo's fiscal year. I think we all can agree that was too soon as there weren't enough games at the launch. That was clearly an investor driven decision. Had Nintendo waiting even a few months, at least Zelda would've been there.

I think the same thing happened with the Wii U, but it was also coupled with the fact that Nintendo was struggling with making HD games. Although, waiting until maybe March might not have had a huge impact on games at launch. Maybe it could've kept Rayman in the window (and exclusive).

[ThePerm]

one of the big problems is peoples levels of patience. As of today, i don't care that much. I have a wii u, its not being used. It will get used though. I just hope output increases within the next 2 years. Last year pikmin 3 looked great, this year X, smashbros, and mario kart looked great. Everything else did not impress much. Hopefully this is a learning curve they get over, and stay over. What frustrates me is they should have been developing HD games starting six years ago. They may not have had a system that was HD, but all the competitors did. So while they may not have been able to release some games, they could have in the background queued some HD games and had them ready for launch.

Now I understand Nintendo focuses on two systems at a time, and this is a problem. I've mentioned before that one day I hope they just have a handheld/console hybrid. I probably wont get a 3ds, but the thing after that will probably be swell.

as far as Nintendo ever going 3rd party...at some point hardware is going to be ridiculously powerful. At that point it might be better to only have one console on the market. If Nintendo got behind another console it would surely be the dominant console at that point. Nintendo would lose a ton of licensing money though. The question is would they make up for that in online sales of old games...or would that just be ruined by piracy?

[UncleBob]

I firmly believe the real problem with Nintendo is the shareholders. Iwata's hands are tied because he feels forced to show a profit in the short term, which he's getting by poor long-term planning. If you replace him you'll only get someone more beholden to them.

This right here is the problem. Remember when the 3DS launched: right before the end of Nintendo's fiscal year. I think we all can agree that was too soon as there weren't enough games at the launch. That was clearly an investor driven decision. Had Nintendo waiting even a few months, at least Zelda would've been there.

I think the same thing happened with the Wii U, but it was also coupled with the fact that Nintendo was struggling with making HD games. Although, waiting until maybe March might not have had a huge impact on games at launch. Maybe it could've kept Rayman in the window (and exclusive).

A lot of this.

I'd also like to add that a lot of the shareholders are people who jumped on board when Nintendo's stock was flying high during the Wii/DS bloom.  They saw big money and thought now is the time to get in.  They're short-term investors interested in short-term profits.

[Kytim89]

one of the big problems is peoples levels of patience. As of today, i don't care that much. I have a wii u, its not being used. It will get used though. I just hope output increases within the next 2 years. Last year pikmin 3 looked great, this year X, smashbros, and mario kart looked great. Everything else did not impress much. Hopefully this is a learning curve they get over, and stay over. What frustrates me is they should have been developing HD games starting six years ago. They may not have had a system that was HD, but all the competitors did. So while they may not have been able to release some games, they could have in the background queued some HD games and had them ready for launch.

Now I understand Nintendo focuses on two systems at a time, and this is a problem. I've mentioned before that one day I hope they just have a handheld/console hybrid. I probably wont get a 3ds, but the thing after that will probably be swell.

as far as Nintendo ever going 3rd party...at some point hardware is going to be ridiculously powerful. At that point it might be better to only have one console on the market. If Nintendo got behind another console it would surely be the dominant console at that point. Nintendo would lose a ton of licensing money though. The question is would they make up for that in online sales of old games...or would that just be ruined by piracy?

I do have a lot of patience for the Wii U. However, I find it depressing to see so many quality third party titles not coming to the Wii U, and the fact that it is not selling gang busters. I just want to see all of the good third party games come to Wii U.

[alegoicoe]

Xbox lover typical comments. I don't mean to be cynical but what does Nintendo gain by doing such thing, its just plain stupid to suggest that in the first place, cause if you keep going down that train of thought whats next, break up the company and go the Sega way!!!, come on

[Spak-Spang]

The question is what is the problem, and how can Nintendo fix it? 

If anybody doubts there has been a problem starting as early as the Gamecube then they are in denial.  However, each problem Nintendo has tried to solve with a very Nintendo answer.  And each Nintendo solution unfortunately brings up different problems.

I like how Nintendo thinks differently, and tries to create solutions focused on a "fun user friendly experience."  However, Nintendo often ignores the industry standard that works, for a Nintendo solution that only half solves the problem.  What is annoying is that often Nintendo solutions could be incorporated into the Standard...so that you don't create those additional problems out of lack of foresight. 

This is what Nintendo needs to change, and they need to change it by having bold leadership that will not be tied to shareholders and be visionary forward thinkers.  I do not know if Nintendo can achieve this by replacing Reggie and Iwata.

[sweetfeathery]

The question is what is the problem, and how can Nintendo fix it? 

If anybody doubts there has been a problem starting as early as the Gamecube then they are in denial.  However, each problem Nintendo has tried to solve with a very Nintendo answer.  And each Nintendo solution unfortunately brings up different problems.

I like how Nintendo thinks differently, and tries to create solutions focused on a "fun user friendly experience."  However, Nintendo often ignores the industry standard that works, for a Nintendo solution that only half solves the problem.  What is annoying is that often Nintendo solutions could be incorporated into the Standard...so that you don't create those additional problems out of lack of foresight. 

This is what Nintendo needs to change, and they need to change it by having bold leadership that will not be tied to shareholders and be visionary forward thinkers.  I do not know if Nintendo can achieve this by replacing Reggie and Iwata.

More than anything I liked the points that Sessler brought up. But you are right. What does Nintendo do about it NOW? Well, what they SHOULD have done 4 years ago was knocking on every big dev team and offered them a Nintendo IP to work on. How about letting a dev team like Criterion Games make a F Zero? Or give Team Andromeda the funding to make a Wii U Star Fox? I could keep going on and on but you get the idea.
[/font][/size]

[nickmitch]

People by Nintendo systems to play Nintendo games. The company lives and dies by this. The best thing for Nintendo to do is deplete cash reserves, scoop up studios, and do their best to manage them to greatness.

Or at least good-enough-ness.

[Spak-Spang]

There are tons of different things Nintendo COULD have done.  I like your idea Sweetfeathery about giving 3rd parties the right to develop 1st party games under the careful supervision of some of the original design teams.

Imagine for a second this happened with the Wii U.  You could have had a launch year called the year of Nintendo and launched 10-12 Nintendo franchises on the system.  3-4 of them at launch 2 big brands and 2 lesser brands or 1 and 2.  Then trickle Nintendo franchises throughout the year.  Start Wii U off with a huge bang, then year two start creating new IPs and funding pet projects, and still release a few other classic franchises. 

Nintendo needs to be aggressive and fight for this generation...and really every generation.  I have no doubt Wii U year 2 will be fantastic, but year 1 should have been fantastic.

[smallsharkbigbite]

How are investors the problem?  The Wii was losing money and a new round of consoles was starting.  It was inevitable they would release a console and releasing a year before the competition has long been considered an advantage in the console wars. 


I don't think shareholders caused the lack of games to be available.  I think Nintendo mismanaged their resources because they didn't have games available.  They should have been building up teams 3 years ago to work on Wii U games and they didn't.  I don't think that is because of shareholders. 


The other problem they have is the way they treat third parties.  Again, I'm not sure how being harsh with third parties draws short term profits. 


A generation lasts 5-7 years.  That's short term for most businesses.  So I think this is the one industry where you can say that short term goals = long term goals.  People like to point to the Wii as an example of a short term strategy instead of a long term strategy but I don't think that's true.  They could have made the Wii HD and gave it a "pro controller" option and not forced motion controls on standard games.  That wouldn't have hurt short term profits.  Those options as well as poor third party support hurt Nintendo long term.  But I don't think they had anything necessarily to do with Nintendo's short term Wii success.  They were first to the market with motion controls and casual games and that sold.  Reaching out to casuals doesn't have to hurt your core market unless you let it.  Microsoft and Sony are moving forward with new Kinect and Eye cameras and are looking for the next big casual title but people don't think they've hurt their market. 

[smallsharkbigbite]

When I think of Japanese companies I think of the Olympus scandal. The company spent billions of dollars on companies with little to no revenue without the knowledge of their CEO. When the CEO questioned the board president, he told him to mind his own business and do what he's instructed. When the CEO pushed further the board unanimously fired him.

I think its hard to say Iwata has been effective but I think its hard to know how much power he has either. I think Japanese companies in general make decisions as if they are completely in control without regard for shareholders concerns.

[UncleBob]

I think Japanese companies in general make decisions as if they are completely in control without regard for shareholders concerns.

That's how it should be.

The CEO should run the business for the long-term health of the business.

Shareholders can have wildly different goals.  Therefore, if they don't like the way their money is being invested, they should simply sell and be done.  To expect the CEO to cater to shareholders (who may or may not be at all interested in the long-term health of the business) is folly.

[Ian Sane]

Reggie doesn't know videogames like at all.  I wonder if they guy has ever played one outside of a public demo.  I can't think of anything positive he offers to Nintendo.  His famous "kicking ass and taking names" speech is the highlight of his Nintendo career.  I don't like where Nintendo has gone under Iwata but the guy is a games guy.  He has the relevant experience in game development and years of service under Nintendo.  Reggie has nothing so he should be considered expendable.

I think Nintendo's biggest problem right now is their conservative nature.  They don't seem to want to exist in the present, clinging to outdated hardware and stale gameplay in old franchises.  It feels like if Nintendo was like this during the NES days they would have never gone beyond the single screen games of Donkey Kong and Mario Bros.  I think Nintendo's management has become OLD.  Iwata and Miyamoto used to be the young hot shots pushing gaming in new directions and now they're the old boardroom execs bossing around the young guys and molding the product to be conservative and safe and thus dull and unessential.  Yamauchi gave his young guys more freedom.  He let Miyamoto cut loose and try new things and that built Nintendo into a videogame giant.

Nintendo needs their leadership to move them into the future and that means keeping up with the contemporary practices of the industry and then lead from that position.  Nintendo tries to "lead" the industry when they're five years behind everyone else.  It's really silly actually.  If Iwata is going to keep his company in the past then he needs to go.

But I figure Nintendo will just promote some other guy ingrained with all the same bad habbits that have become part of Nintendo's corporate culture.  And the Wii U's outdated hardware completely handicaps it.  Anyone new coming in would never be able to get anywhere with it.  They would either need to replace it immediately or weather the storm for the next few years and then get the "real" fresh start with the next console.

[ThePerm]

It feels like Wii U is in the grasshopper position when you would expect Nintendo to take the ant position.