Topic: "A single game saved the GB (Pokemon), it could save the Wii U too” Iwata said

[Luigi Dude]

I really doubt that Nintendo would be a Pixar.  Instead they be a Disney.


Whatever Nintendo does remember 1 thing.  Nintendo will always be the Top of its corporate food chain.

Yeah anyone who thinks Nintendo will give up their power to make their own decisions doesn't know Nintendo.  If Nintendo was to merge with anyone the final outcome would be one that still heavily Nintendo with Iwata still in charge and the majority of the Board of Directors still Nintendo people.

Even though they've had a bad year, Nintendo is still far from being in a position where they'd allow themselves to be bought by a larger company like Disney.

[Mop it up]

It baffles me that they weren't doing more of this during the Wii era when they had all that money. I know it ain't easy, but still...

[nickmitch]

I'm not sure if Nintendo's investors or even leadership would want a western company owning Nintendo.

[the asylum]

For all the **** I give Iwata, if he were to outright buy Interplay (or at least secure exclusive publishing rights to Earthworm Jim), and finally gave the world a real sequel to Earthworm Jim 2 (since EWJ3D was horrid), I will immediately forgive him of his various sins.

[BranDonk Kong]

When I was at Disney World a couple of months ago I was thinking about how the only company that could buy Nintendo and get it right would probably be Disney.

[Stratos]

It could give us a good Epic Mickey.

[Shaymin]

You think Nintendo's VC trickle is bad now? Throwing those games into the Disney Vault will *not* help.

Still, if they did a Saving Mr. Banks with Pokemon I'd be all over that.

[nickmitch]

Saving Pokemon Bank?

[Spak-Spang]

I don't think Nintendo investors know what they want.  The problem with investors are that most do not care about the company or their product.

There used to be a time, when investing in a company was done, because you believed in the company and the product.  You were buying shares to sorta be a partner with the business vision.

Now, it is just about making a profit with stocks...which I am not saying is bad...but it means that many investors don't really care what Nintendo does as long as they make money off the stock.  They don't understand Nintendo's vision or business at all.  This is why they see smart phone games as the same thing as console and handheld games.  A game is a game...and if the market for games (potential buyers) is larger then you take your games there.  They don't understand what damage to the Nintendo brand that COULD cause.  Or what effects it will have on the long term health of the company.  They don't really care, they want their profits now.

I have been reading Nintendo's response to the investors and their financial reports, and I am impressed that Nintendo is finally acting and beginning to see a need for change.  I am hopeful that Nintendo will strive for Nintendo style change and not pushed to something different. 

If acquisition can be made that benefits Nintendo and keeps Nintendo, Nintendo then it should happen.  So for instance, Nintendo buying 2-3 small Western developers in the US and Europe then allowing NOA and NOE to run those development houses that would be a positive change. 

If Nintendo would have a more aggressive release schedule allowing more games to come out each year either through publishing games from partners or 1st party releases that would be good.

If Nintendo Merged with a company that would allow Nintendo to be Nintendo but gave them a distinct advantage going into the future be it with IPs or hardware or Operating Systems, then Nintendo should do it. 

I do not know what the future for Nintendo holds but I am more hopeful now than ever before.  Nintendo always appears to be an underdog...but they have a big bite to them.

[BlackNMild2k1]

You think Nintendo's VC trickle is bad now? Throwing those games into the Disney Vault will *not* help.

Still, if they did a Saving Mr. Banks with Pokemon I'd be all over that.

Disney would be a complete and total package if they were to acquire Nintendo.

Cartoons, they would take over Pokemon and all the Nintendo character cartoons. move to Disney XD with Marvel stuff
Movies, animated and live action
Comics - Marvel took over Star Wars and would handle all other Disney related print
Videogames - Nintendo would oversee such things as Epic Mickey, Ducktales, etc etc. Of course, if they were gonna do that, they should probably pick up a few other studios to fill in Nintendo lack of expertise in FPS, Fighting and/or RPG games (Capcom & SE would go good with it - Marvel vs Capcom & Kingdom Hearts)

That's all not gonna happen though, but it might not be so bad if it did.

[Spak-Spang]

Disney has acquired too  much recently.  Although Nintendo would be a great purchase for them, and would give them an instant IN to another media source it just won't happen.

But if Nintendo and Disney were smart a merger would be fantastic.

1) Disney could use some new and known IPs.  Imagine a cool Nintendo themed Amusement Park, and animated movies and such. 
2) Disney would have a successful and known company to launch all their games from and corner the market.
3) Imagine a console with a single stop source for all Star Wars, Marvel, Disney, and Nintendo characters.  A system with an already family friendly approach and name to gaming.  You think that wouldn't sell units?  Of course it would.  4) Disney could even acquire the rights to republish all classic SNES games under their franchises for instant Virtual Console sales to help ease the merger costs.

[BranDonk Kong]

We'd probably get decent Metroid and Legend of Zelda movies.

[Spak-Spang]

Zelda Maybe...Metroid...probably not.

I think both franchises are really hard to make movies out of.  They are both fetch quest games.  Go to this dungeon/level get a power up and kill a giant monster and move on.  It would be very hard to expand those to full movie universes.

The Legend of Zelda is the easiest.  As you can limit the movie to be about an adventurer proving his courage to gain the triforce from overcoming 3 tasks/challenges (keeping the theme of 3) and then battling the evil Gannondorf. 

But you would really need to write Zelda to be a wise princesses, because she would need to already have the triforce of wisdom.

[Oblivion]

I fail to see how Metroid would be hard to make a film. Especially when Metroid has the most story and an easy timeline of events.

[smallsharkbigbite]

Now, it is just about making a profit with stocks...which I am not saying is bad...but it means that many investors don't really care what Nintendo does as long as they make money off the stock.

Nintendo only cares about making profit too.  Did Nintendo reinvest all those Wii/DS profits back into game making?  It appears to me they were too busy high fiving each other and approving big bonuses for their work.

I have been reading Nintendo's response to the investors and their financial reports, and I am impressed that Nintendo is finally acting and beginning to see a need for change.  I am hopeful that Nintendo will strive for Nintendo style change and not pushed to something different.

Can you really have your cake and eat it too?  You're saying it's all the investors fault and then you say that you are impressed that Nintendo knows they need to change?  I guess the difference between me and you is I'm not impressed at all with the ways Nintendo is coming up with change. 

Investors get a bad rap.  Yes, alot are idiots (as are alot of people that we all know), but by far the largest portion of investments are for retirements which means investors are incentivized to consider the long term outcomes of a company.  Almost daily there is an article about Nintendo being out of touch or irrelevant to gaming.  Or an article about how much Nintendo is missing sales and profit targets and may need to start laying off employees.  The industry doesn't believe in Nintendo, how can you expect investors?  Heck, Nintendo doesn't even believe in themselves stating that they need to keep bringing irregular hardware to the market.  Why should that matter?  People love the games, not your hardware.  Your hardware is part of the reason you're in this predicament. 

Nintendo has had something like 4 straight years of operating loss from core products and warned that their will be a fifth year.  The last couple years of the Wii were a disaster and the Wii U is a failure.  Those failures are on management, not the investors.  If Nintendo had sold 9 million Wii Us this year, investors would be happy kittens not concerned with mobile devices.  It would appear to me that due to their recent financial failures, Nintendo is both a short term and long term investment risk. 

I love Nintendo games.  I've always hated their business practices.  That's why I think it's interesting that Nintendo fans are always adamant that Nintendo is doing it the right way and they better not change their approach.  Nintendo is less consumer friendly than Apple and certainly is less consumer friendly than competing consoles.  The reality is I've dealt with them because I spend way to much on video games and I love their games.  If they are forced to be more consumer friendly I won't shed a tear.  Anybody who acquires Nintendo IPs will know how important it is to get those games right or lose the value of the investment as the Nintendo fans leave and nobody is left to buy the games.  Miyamoto is going to retire soon anyway.  I can't really think of another person at Nintendo who has star power and will ensure that Nintendo's development future is bright.  I'm unsure of Nintendo's future (especially their future in my household).  And I bought a Wii U even knowing that it was tanking badly at $350 before the pricedrop. 

I'm their target audience and I'm becoming disenfranchised with their decisions.  Nintendo management and their investors should be scared at their future.  I mean what are we talking about here?  Movies, fitness equipment?  I get Nintendo's a business and needs to make money, but I don't care about anything they do unless it's related to video games.  If they have to find another way to survive they might as well not survive.  I mean let's be honest here.  If Nintendo moves into fitness and makes money over there, but continues to lose money in the console business, do you really expect them to subsidize the console business so you can get your games?  I certainly don't. 

[Spak-Spang]

I didn't mean to imply it is investors faults.  Actually, I never accused blame at all.

The decisions of a company are solely the responsibility of the leadership running the company, and investors do not run the company.  They never do.  So the decisions made that put Nintendo into this situation are the decisions of Nintendo Management. 

My comments on Nintendo investors is simply that many investors do not know the business they are investing in, and demand change without truly understanding the changes they are asking for.  I believe this truly represents the Nintendo investors.

Now, about Nintendo fans and the company.  I have been on these forums for over ten years.  I have read many opinions from Nintendo fans.  Most do not approve of their business practices, and most do not feel that Nintendo is infallible.  What I think Nintendo fans appreciate are Nintendo's games.  Nintendo has a certain style about their games.  Some people hate the style and call it kiddie.  But those that appreciate Nintendo's games love the style, quality, and just overall craftsmanship Nintendo usually puts into their games.  Now you can argue that has been changing over the years and have been progressively getting worse.  But Nintendo still keeps its style, and I never want to see that go away. 

Unfortunately, you have to take the good with the bad.  Last generation if you wanted to have the best online console experience you had to pay for it with Xbox Live.  Everybody complains about it...but not it is a reality with both PS4 and Xbox One you pay for online. 

Well, Nintendo has its quirks as well, and some/many of them are not that great for gamers and are frustrating, but others give you that pure Nintendo magic that when it works...it works beautifully. 

[Spak-Spang]

I fail to see how Metroid would be hard to make a film. Especially when Metroid has the most story and an easy timeline of events.

Because the story elements of Metroid are usually the elements gamers hate about the series.  The atmosphere and exploration of a hostile alien planet are what we love.  Further though, most people agree the feeling of alone and a sole explorer is important.  Along with the dread of the unknown from your weakness and slowly growing in strength to overcome. 

In movies you almost never get that loneliness.  You have to have a cast and banter.  You have to build likable characters that play off each other.   Basically, the best they could do with Metroid is a PG-13 Alien/Aliens knock off.  That ends with Samus exploring and trying to survive the planet alone.  I just don't see it working at all.

[Nemo]

Because the story elements of Metroid are usually the elements gamers hate about Metroid: Other M.

Fixed.

I liked the story elements in other Metroid games... just not Other M.

[Spak-Spang]

Because the story elements of Metroid are usually the elements gamers hate about Metroid: Other M.

Fixed.

I liked the story elements in other Metroid games... just not Other M.

Fair.

[BlackNMild2k1]

I love Nintendo games.  I've always hated their business practices.  That's why I think it's interesting that Nintendo fans are always adamant that Nintendo is doing it the right way and they better not change their approach.

Uh, what!?
The main thing we complain about with Nintendo is the way they do EVERYTHING.
Always trying to reinvent the wheel by doing things the "Nintendo" way.

[BlackNMild2k1]

One software platform to rule them all right now. Hybrid may come later.
http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/library/events/140130qa/02.html

Investor:

You have explained your concern about users being divided by hardware. Currently, you have both a handheld device business and a home console business. I would like to know whether the organizational changes that took place last year are going to lead to, for example, the integration of handheld devices and home consoles into one system over the medium term, or a focus on cost saving and the improvement of resource efficiency in the medium run. Please also explain if you still have room to reduce research and development expenses.


Iwata:

Last year Nintendo reorganized its R&D divisions and integrated the handheld device and home console development teams into one division under Mr. Takeda. Previously, our handheld video game devices and home video game consoles had to be developed separately as the technological requirements of each system, whether it was battery-powered or connected to a power supply, differed greatly, leading to completely different architectures and, hence, divergent methods of software development. However, because of vast technological advances, it became possible to achieve a fair degree of architectural integration. We discussed this point, and we ultimately concluded that it was the right time to integrate the two teams.

For example, currently it requires a huge amount of effort to port Wii software to Nintendo 3DS because not only their resolutions but also the methods of software development are entirely different. The same thing happens when we try to port Nintendo 3DS software to Wii U. If the transition of software from platform to platform can be made simpler, this will help solve the problem of game shortages in the launch periods of new platforms. Also, as technological advances took place at such a dramatic rate, and we were forced to choose the best technologies for video games under cost restrictions, each time we developed a new platform, we always ended up developing a system that was completely different from its predecessor. The only exception was when we went from Nintendo GameCube to Wii. Though the controller changed completely, the actual computer and graphics chips were developed very smoothly as they were very similar to those of Nintendo GameCube, but all the other systems required ground-up effort. However, I think that we no longer need this kind of effort under the current circumstances. In this perspective, while we are only going to be able to start this with the next system, it will become important for us to accurately take advantage of what we have done with the Wii U architecture. It of course does not mean that we are going to use exactly the same architecture as Wii U, but we are going to create a system that can absorb the Wii U architecture adequately. When this happens, home consoles and handheld devices will no longer be completely different, and they will become like brothers in a family of systems.

Still, I am not sure if the form factor (the size and configuration of the hardware) will be integrated. In contrast, the number of form factors might increase. Currently, we can only provide two form factors because if we had three or four different architectures, we would face serious shortages of software on every platform. To cite a specific case, Apple is able to release smart devices with various form factors one after another because there is one way of programming adopted by all platforms. Apple has a common platform called iOS. Another example is Android. Though there are various models, Android does not face software shortages because there is one common way of programming on the Android platform that works with various models. The point is, Nintendo platforms should be like those two examples. Whether we will ultimately need just one device will be determined by what consumers demand in the future, and that is not something we know at the moment. However, we are hoping to change and correct the situation in which we develop games for different platforms individually and sometimes disappoint consumers with game shortages as we attempt to move from one platform to another, and we believe that we will be able to deliver tangible results in the future.

Please read the whole thing, I would bold more, but I'm on a tablet.

So Nintendo wishes to make ONE software architecture that will span all their future devices, making cross buy and cross play not only possible, but really easy.

Something that absorbs the Wii U's architecture.... I'll assume they mean will be backward compatible with the Wii U OS, not the hardware. like the Windows 7 to the Wii U's Vista.


It is important to recognize that these changes start on the Wii U as all the efforts they put into bringing software and fixes to the Wii U OS/architecture, will carry forward onto the next console and/or handheld(/hybrid) too.
So if they manage to do the big fix to the VC using a universal emulator, that same VC service should be 100% forward compatible with whatever hardware Nintendo releases after the Wii U, meaning your paid library and the entire released catalog should still all be available for all hardware running the N2.OS (or NOS²?)


Now assuming they were also talking about a hardware architecture, which I also assume they meant (same family of processors, same family of GPU scaled for need of hardware ie. n7 uses a ATi HD7500 and the 4DS uses a HD7500m, same family, similar features, different power and level of specs), I would think that Nintendo would do all they can to shrink the Wii U hardware down to something that would fit in a portable system. whether they want to keep it strictly portable or go the home synced hybrid route is a whole different discussion, but a Wii U portable, would fall in line with Iwata wanting to "absorb the Wii U architecture" essentially recouping on Wii U's initial investment, leaving plenty of room to push power with it's home console to more in line with competing hardware at reasonable cost.

[Adrock]

Nintendo next console and handheld could be both ARM or X86-64. I suppose sticking with IBM would allow Nintendo's successors to "absorb the Wii U architecture adequately." However, Nintendo's handhelds already use ARM (Wii and Wii U both have an ARM "security processor" as well) and PS4/One joined PC/Mac with X86 so those would be better choices. Given Nintendo's weird obsession with energy efficiency (as well as cost), I kind of feel like a future ARM-based home console is a possibility. Seeing some of what's possible today, ARM has made some significant leaps in power, but they're not touching X86. At the same time, I read that Intel has made major inroads with energy consumption so that's something to keep in mind. My understanding is that Haswell was a big step up in terms of higher performance and better energy consumption.

And of course, sharing an operating system like iOS between iPhones and iPads would certainly help.

[BranDonk Kong]

PS4 has an additional ARM processor too.

[ShyGuy]

A combined operating system platform would with the majority of games releasing on both would solve a number issues, especially software droughts. Imagine if every big title that came out on the 3DS last year also released on Wii U.

[Ceric]

I just finished reading this page.

Stock is nothing more than an Opinion poll.  Always has been Always will Be.  You could be losing Billions and if people still have a favorable opinion about your future and your company your stock will rise.  You could be growing like Gangbusters with a bright future but, if people have low opinion of you company your stock will fall.

Metroid would easily make a better movie than Zelda.  Just base it off the Super Metroid Comic in Nintendo Power.  Bam!  Awesome movie.

For a performance edge Nintendo staying away from x86 would be better.  x86 is not a good chipset.   Its just the defacto standard.  Even Intel was going to be fully away from it by now in there original Roadmap in early 2000.