Topic: Can Nintendo survive not being #1

[Round Eye]

Does Nintendo really need to be number 1?  It seems to me that they are doing OK as it is right now.  They are still turning a profit at number 3, so if they can pull out a second place in the next round Nintendo should be fine.  Ganted they have had the success of the portable business unit to back them up, but they are a smart conservative company that knows the value of a profit.  That is the reason they have not jumped into the online arena yet, *sigh*.

I think they will be alright with a stronger showing in the next generation.  As they said before the graphics of the next consoles will be about equal and it will then come down to the games.  Nintendo has the definite advantage there.  Also, Nintendo has been working very hard to establish relationships with some quality third party support.

As the Xbox and PS move into the complete home etertainment area, Gamecube might actually have less competition in the game console arena.

Also, the video game industry is making more money than the movie industry, so a company might not need a big share of the market to still be profitable.

Nintendo still cannot rest on its laurels.  In the next generation they might not have as much of the portable pie as they are used to, with sony releasing the PSP.  So they are going to have to take a bigger share of the console market.  They need at a least a strong second to be comfortable.

[thecubedcanuck]

Quote
As they said before the graphics of the next consoles will be about equal and it will then come down to the games. Nintendo has the definite advantage there.

If that were the case then nintendo would still be No 1 as the N64 was far supior graphically to the PS1 and had all the Nintendo games.

Everyone here thinks Nintendo games are so so much better because they are huge Nintendo fans, this doesnt mean everyone sees them in the same light. I personally dont like many of Nintendo's recent offerings, and I have always been a huge Nintendo fan prior to this generation.

Quote
As the Xbox and PS move into the complete home etertainment area, Gamecube might actually have less competition in the game console arena

As long as the new sony machine plays games it will always be competetion.
To think otherwise is very niave.

Quote
Nintendo still cannot rest on its laurels. In the next generation they might not have as much of the portable pie as they are used to, with sony releasing the PSP. So they are going to have to take a bigger share of the console market. They need at a least a strong second to be comfortable.

BINGO. Can they do it? I really wouldnt bet on it.

[Round Eye]

Opps, posted the same topic twice.  Sorry, I did'nt think this one went through.  Man I retyped it and everything.  

[Hostile Creation]

thecubedcanuck does not like what Nintendo has given us recently, whereas I like it a great deal (if only I had more money. . .).  I think that there are two main reason that Nintendo is behind: they released their console too late (most people will get the next gen console that comes out first, no matter how crappy it might be.  I'm not saying PS2 is crappy, but that's why it has such a large user base) and something has given the world the idea that their system is not the "cool" system.  And maybe it's not.  In my opninion it's by far the best, and I really think that a lot of other people would buy the cube if they weren't so misguided and brainwashed.  The fact that Nintendo makes really good games doesn't seem to matter anymore.

I better clear this up; I'm not saying you're a brainwashed idiot, cubed; I have a grudging respect for you, actually.  I was just going to talk about matters of opinion and stuff, but changed my mind.  Sorry if it might sound like that.

[Round Eye]

Cubed Canuck-

The reason the N64 did poorly was Nintendo's choice to use cartridges instead of CD's.  The cartridge format was much more expensive for developers.  Also it was more risky because of the higher costs associated with it.

The reason why I said that Nintendo could have less competetion in the game console is that Sonys machine will continue to be more expensive.  While, Nintendo can produce a higher powered gaming system for less.

Quote
Originally posted by: thecubedcanuck<br
BINGO. Can they do it? I really wouldnt bet on it.

Someone did'nt eat their corn pops this morning.

 

[AgentSeven]

I'm sorry, these "Nintendo's Doomed"  and the "can Nintendo survive" threads are getting old, seriously old, and boring.

Canuck, and others like him seem to forget the most important FACT.  Although $ony and M$ make more money as corporations, Nintendo makes the most money on games and systems, period.  They also  have the lowest cost of goods
.
Where M$ still loses over $100 per system and the Ps2 only recently started to "break even" on the hardware front.

I also think that Nintendo's recent offerings are some of their best ever!  This isn't the 1980's anymore, people need to stop living in the past.  

[Ian Sane]

Nintendo doesn't need to be #1 to survive.  However being in a distant third isn't going to keep them alive forever.  You can talk about how Nintendo makes more money and whatnot but there's still a big problem that Nintendo has right now that they've never had before: the sales of their big titles are being limited by the amount of consoles sold.  The N64 wasn't a smash hit but at least it had a pretty decent sized userbase.  When a big title was released it sold huge and easily beat the million copies mark.  Now major Nintendo releases are just breaking 1 million if they're lucky.  Games like Zelda, Mario, and Metroid are still selling very well within the Gamecube userbase but the userbase is too small.  As a result minor titles on the PS2 are outselling Zelda because their just aren't enough people with Cubes to give Nintendo games huge sales.  That's not a good situation to be in.  Plus at the rate Nintendo is going they are becoming less and less popular and that's eventually going to catch up to them.  You can't remain in last place too long or people are going to stop buying your console.  Nobody wants their console of choice to be in last place all the time.

While Nintendo doesn't need to be number 1 they should at least try to be number 1.  This laidback approach they've been using just isn't aggressive enough.  The ideal situation is for them to be a strong number 2.  Kind of like the Genesis to Sony's SNES (boy does THAT analogy sound weird).  That way they still get most of the third party games and they can have a good sized userbase.  That can only improve game sales.

Seriously if Nintendo continues a "we're in last place and we don't care" approach how many people are going to continue buying their console?  Like it or not how popular a console is plays a lot how well it sells.  People just don't like having the "loser" console.  Plus being in last results in less games and less availability of games.  How many of us have complained that we can't find such-and-such a Gamecube game for rent (or sometimes even for sale)?

[Round Eye]

I think Nintendo will be fine.

I was just trying to make the point that a lot of people are always talking about how can Nintendo regain the number one spot again?  What I am trying to say is that Nintendo does'nt really need to be number one to be succesfull.

I think a lot of doom and gloom thinking stems from Segas exit from the console industry.  People tend to think if you are'nt the number one seller you will soon be out the door.  Well Nintendo is not Sega.  Sega never had a dominating console in its history.  Nintendo had two.  Sega never had any of the handhold market.  Nintendo owns it.  

And now I think that there is a lot more to go around at this point in the gaming industy.  If you can pass the movies, you know you are getting into some serious coin.

Nintendo  has a large extremely loyal fan base, which they cater too.

Most important of all, like you pointed out Agent7, is that Nintendo is making money.  I think its pretty hard to go bankrupt when you are profitable.

[Ian Sane]

"Most important of all, like you pointed out Agent7, is that Nintendo is making money. I think its pretty hard to go bankrupt when you are profitable."

Well yeah Nintendo is profitable now but the issue is whether they will stay profitable if they continue doing everything the way they're doing it now.  My arguement is that Nintendo's current approach is hurting their image and eventually people are going to stop buying their consoles if Nintendo becomes known as the big loser of every console generation.

Think about it this way.  Imagine an average gamer who likes Nintendo games and has always bought a Nintendo system but isn't a diehard Nintendo fan that will follow them everywhere.

In 1985 they buy an NES and after a few years they think "wow this is great.  Every game I ever want is on this system".

In 1991 they buy a SNES and after a few years they think "well there are some really great games on the Genesis but this system still has a lot of great exclusive third party games and fantastic first party titles.  All my genres are covered and I get most of the games I want so I'm pretty happy with my purchase."

In 1996 they buy an N64 and after a few years they think "hmmmm, a lot of games I'm really interested in are going to the Playstation.  The first party games are still really good though and are much better than anything on competing systems.  Sadly there aren't many RPGs.  Although it's not the number one console it's still pretty easy to find games in stores and I can rent practically any title I want.  It's a disappointment but Nintendo is switching to discs so that'll bring back third parties."

In 2001 they buy a Gamecube and after a few years they think "well I'm getting more third party games but a lot of them are poorly translated PS2 ports that are full of bugs.  A lot of multiplatform titles are also going to PS2 and Xbox but not the Gamecube (particularly mature titles).  The first party games are still great and there are some really good third party games too.  Unfortunately there still aren't many RPGs and some publishers have been cancelling games due to poor sales.  Some of the stores in my area aren't getting their Cube games in right away or they only get a few copies.  None of the rental stores in my area have decent Cube rental sections.  Plus I want to play online games and there's only one online game on the console with no more in sight."

Now is that person going to for sure buy the next Nintendo console in 2006?  Maybe, but if things slowly get worse and worse with each console generation are they going to get a Nintendo console in 2011 or 2016?  If Nintendo doesn't try to be number one (and thus improve things for it's fans) people are going to be less interested in their consoles which means less sales which means less profit.  

[mouse_clicker]

I think this is the most concise answer once can offer to such a question as does Nintendo need to be #1: no, they definitely don't need to be #1 as they've proven time and time again that profitability can come no matter what your ranking, but if Nintendo WERE to achieve the prestigious #1 spot, the benefits would be boundless and said profit would skyrocket. Okay, maybe that wasn't all that concise (although it wasn't exactly an essay), but what I basically mean is Nintendo's fine at #2 but would be better at #1.

[Oogle]

<sarcasm>Well, let's see... Honda is #2 in Japan.  They'll go bankrupt soon.  Hmm, and ABC is #3 in the ratings.  They're gonna go bankrupt too.  Disneyland or Busch Gardens?  Hmm, tough call.  One thing's for sure: One of them is gonna go bankrupt.</sarcasm>

[Termin8Anakin]

Nintendo doesn't need to be #1, since we're all used to them where they are since the SNES days.
I like how Iwata-san said that being in 3rd place is making them more determined to make great games.
He says that they WILL be #1, and I don't doubt that, but I do agree that it's gonna be a long road.
The thing with Sony and MS is that they are slowly making the average gamer think that all those extra features are what's needed in gaming consoles, and so NIntendo will be crap to them.
I know that technology is making everything smaller, and we can fit all these things in, but seriously.
It's not needed.

I read somwhere that the PS2 was/is sold, and has sold best as a DVD player.
I want to see Sony and MS make games-only machines for the next generation, and see how they REALLY perform compared to Nintendo. Internet can be included.
PSX was cool cause you could listen to your CDs in it.
No more of that. Games only, and the best anti-pirate software you have.

Let the games begin, I say.

[Nintendo Gamecube]

Nintendo makes the most profit out of the three companies, so it's surviving the best. 'Nuff said.

[joeamis]

Quote
Originally posted by: thecubedcanuck

Quote
As they said before the graphics of the next consoles will be about equal and it will then come down to the games. Nintendo has the definite advantage there.

If that were the case then nintendo would still be No 1 as the N64 was far supior graphically to the PS1 and had all the Nintendo games.

Although the N64 was graphically superior, the cartridge not only costed more for developers but it also resulted in much less textures, giving the PSone the advantage.  It also resulted in worse sound and music (not saying N64 had bad music, just saying PSone's "sound quality" was better, and they had games like Gran Turismo and Tony Hawk that contained music with vocals from popular bands, something not possible on cartridge unless they upped the size of the cartridge and in turn lost more money from the cartridge format)

I agree that the next generation of consoles will probably not come down to comparing graphics as much as the consoles do now.  This gives Nintendo an edge.  However, I see the "PS3" and "XBOX2" will probably have tons of extras that the next "GC" might not have, for instance a DVD burner (don't say no they won't do that because of piracy because Sony has already finalized the specs and features on its new PSX and it has a dvd burner)  So all these extra features will give M$ and Sony the edge... interesting to note that it's basically what's already going down now, with M$/Sony having features Nintendo does not.  

I can't wait to see the next generation battle in store for us all, it will probably be the best yet.

[Ocarina Blue]

I think alot of people here are just looking for something to blame for Nintendo's fall. Like Sega, Nintendo fell pray to a few bad descisions, it was Nintendo that scrapped the deal with Sony, and it was Sony who built the Playstation. It was Nintendo's fault that they fell, and it will be them that climb on top of the rubble again.
       

[Termin8Anakin]

Oh well.

I just want Sony and Microsoft to NOT have any extra features, and create GAMES-ONLY machines, so that we can see for REAL which console can really survive.
NO FEATURES, not even MUSIC CD playback. JUST games, and internet gaming (no surfing the net)
If they lose money cause they're not putting in these features, or people start openly complaining about it, then tough. They should't have relied on them in the first place.

[thecubedcanuck]

Quote
just want Sony and Microsoft to NOT have any extra features, and create GAMES-ONLY machines, so that we can see for REAL which console can really survive.

Please dont tell me you think the PS2 has done so well because of "EXTRA" features?

Fooling ourselves a bit arent we?

[Mario]

Why else has it done well?

[Termin8Anakin]

That's the main reason why it's done well.
Back in the initial PlayStation days, did you ever come accross a person who DIDN'T say how cool it was that PSX could play CDs? Retailers advertised this in their catalogues, and even said the coolest feature on the PSX was the fact that it could play CDs.
When PS2 was launched, the sales-pitch around the crap launch titles was that you could play DVDs. "Oh, don't worry about waiting for Dolphin. PS2 can play DVDs too." And NOW that it has lots of games, they add that into the sale. "Oh, don't buy a Gamecube. PS2 can play DVDs, and it has lots of games. That's much cooler."
I've heard that too many times.

And if you think that it went well not because of theDVD playback, why don't YOU suggest to Sony (and MS) to ditch all the features and make a games-only machine?
They might have lots of games for the games-only PS3, but the console sales will be much lower than the DVD-playback PS2.

[thecubedcanuck]

oh man, you guys have got to be kidding.

The PS2 as did the PS sells because of the games, is has the largest selection of games in every genre, simple as that.

Can we please try and be a bit more objective.

[Termin8Anakin]

i know that, but the hype surrounding it was all about the playback features.

[Uncle Rich AiAi]

Quote
Originally posted by: thecubedcanuck
Please dont tell me you think the PS2 has done so well because of "EXTRA" features?

Fooling ourselves a bit arent we?

When the PS2 was released in Japan, it was the cheapest DVD player at the time.  Don't tell us the "extra" features sold it.  It did.

[egman]

I agree with TheCubedCanuck. Extras played a small roll--the fact the PS2 had a constant steam of must have games is what proprelled it, with GTA as the exclusive to solidify Sony's place.

This has been Nintendo's biggest weakness this gen. They have a stack of amazing games, but none of them generated that must have excitement that Mario 64 and Zelda: OoT had in the last generation. You can chalk that up to a combination of embarrasing promotions and the reality that these games just do not have the same appeal anymore. Nintendo doesn't have the kids market anymore, Sony has, so I think the best thing for them to do now is what they have begun doing in the last few months. They need to offer a broad range of titles rather than putting the burden on their usual suspects and assuming that the kids market is in their hands. I love their design philosophy, but truth be told this is no longer a family market.

A good illustration of this point is the Henry Hill thread that was posted  awhile ago. While I feel Nintendo should be proud that can still design games that can appeal to wide range of people, even a harden criminal--the sad fact is Henry Hill does not buy games. His son buys games, and he clearily stated his feelings on how uncool Animal Crossing is. That one interview most clearly shows that battle Nintendo is fighting.

Nintendo doesn't have to be in first place, they have shown that in two generations. But I don't think it's good to be in 3rd either. I have been looking at 3rd party sales, and I have been confused as to how some titles still sell low even with a userbase that is supposedly bigger than Microsoft's. Part of it is fans that prefer Nintendo's offerings, but another than I don't see too many of us talking about that needs to be factored in is number of people that have the GC as a secondary system. I'm willing to be that a good part of that "40% are over 18" number that Nintendo presented at E3 are multi console users. Combine this with the fact that multi-platfrom titles usually get a weak treatment on the Cube, then you have the beginning of the blame cycle. I still think 3rd parties can sell on the Nintendo consoles, but you can only apply a multi-platform strategy in the rarest occasions. The problem is, people are buying Cubes for exclusives games while the rest of industry is moving towards an EA model for software sales. Exclusive titles are becoming an endangered species.

Nintendo can't stay in 3rd place if this is where the industry is headed. I think they realize this and now have a lot things going on behind the scenes for their next gen offering to insure that they are firmly in the 2nd spot rather than playing a who's who game with MS again. Iwata has recently made statments about finding new franchises, so I think they realize that Mario and Zelda will no longer carry them.

[thecubedcanuck]

great post egman, I agree 100%

[Round Eye]

The one thing that I really like about what Nintendo is doing right now is how they refuse

to follow.  They have clearly set their focus on quality gaming.  And continue to innovate

with creative titles like Pikimin and AC.  Nintendo could have started running around and

tried to copy games and strategies that have worked for other companies *cough* GTA

*cough* DVD.  Staying true to their roots and releasing a pure game machine keeps me

happy.  Maybe others can't see the benefits such as price/performance the fact that they

showed some engineering ability to fit it all into a tiny package.  Unlike Microsoft who

decided to just throw a desktop computer into the system, hence the size.  I think some

of the current fads will fade, and we will see a return or people to quality innovative titles

like the ones Nintendo has consistintly produced.