Topic: The Console Wars: Game On - Article in TIME Magazine

[Procession]

ARTICLE HERE.

I think the article is dead-on and fantastic. From what (little, admittedly) i've seen of Iwata, I don't think much. Although Yamauchi was the butt of many jokes around the internet, he clearly was a shrewd businessman, making Nintendo what it is (was?) today. Although he did perhaps fall away from the times in his last few years, with a few silly mistakes, he seems to have been a strong, great leader. Perhaps they should have looked outside the company for a successor. Nintendo does need to get with the times, and Iwata quote in the article about online makes me think he isn't seeing the big picture - you may not make money off online directly, but knowing it is an option will make more people buy your console, and in the long term I suspect it will pay off for Microsoft (and Sony to a lesser degree). I agree with the slant the author is pushing of Nintendo needing to get with the times, the lack of DVD playback on the Gamecube, the cartridges on the N64, the mini-DVDs (fantastic as they are result in the Gamecube missing some games, i'm sure) as well as the lack of built in networking in the Cube and optical audio output all IMHO, mis-steps. I hope Iwata learns the lesson from this time: people want extra functionality, people want the standard, and people don't like purple. Gamecube may not contain extra functionality because it is meant to play games, according to Nintendo. But it appears people want more than to play games - so they should a) Team up with consumer electronics companies (ala 3DO), b) Start delivering more-in-one, matching Sony and Microsoft or c) Get out of the hardware game.

Anyway, what do others think of the issues this article raised?  

[Kyosho]

good article.  I wish nintendo had more 3rd party developers and stopped gettin shafted on the quality of the multiplatform games.

[Ocarina Blue]

The day Nintendo conforms to Sony and Microsoft's production values are the day they lose my business. Nintendo makes good games and good consoles. The day they stop doing that, coincidentally, is also the day they lose my business. The games are unbeatable (in my opinion), and the consoles are cheap and powerful. They own the handheld market. They are second in the 'console war' or whatever it's called worldwide. Most importantly of all, I enjoy playing a GC much more than a PS2 or X-Box. Nintendo has a loyal and robust core fanbase, the market for their products might shrink, but if Nintendo suddenly switched it's target audience, they would lose what they already have. That's not to say, of course, that Nintendo could be doing alot better if they made some different decisions.

I agree that constructive criticism is good, but Nintendo's share from the media (particualy the mansteam media) is ridiculous compared to what Microsoft or Nokia get for being extremly unsucessful. It's almost as if some sort of competing company has paid them to slag off their every move.

[Bloodworth]

This is the problem with trying to analyze the games industry from the outside.  The date on that is for next week, but some of the facts and claims are from two or three months ago.  Saying that it is unlikely Nintendo will have a good rebound this Christmas is ridiculous because they have already done it.  

Besides that, this article is little more than a rehash of the same Nintendo criticisms that come up in every other article.

[Mario]

Maybe someone who plays games should write an article about Nintendo and discuss the innovations and creativity found in Nintendo games, and compare them to movie cash-in games, sports games, and "mature" crap like BMX XXX, Turok, Tomb Raider etc, games that have little to no creative inspiration what-so-ever, and the "Oh hey, this movie/sport/flavour of icecream is popular, lets make a crappy game out of it!" attitude that comes from the developers when they conjure up these magical idea's for games. But no, that wouldn't be cool, would it?

[Procession]

"Saying that it is unlikely Nintendo will have a good rebound this Christmas is ridiculous because they have already done it."

The article does say: "While those reductions have boosted marketshare and promise to move more units during crucial holiday weeks". I believe the author is talking about a rebound on a wider scale.

"Besides that, this article is little more than a rehash of the same Nintendo criticisms that come up in every other article."

Perhaps, but just because the criticisms are tired, does it mean they are no longer true?

"The day Nintendo conforms to Sony and Microsoft's production values are the day they lose my business. Nintendo makes good games and good consoles. The day they stop doing that, coincidentally, is also the day they lose my business."

As mine. They make superb consoles, with great architecture. As well as being the best developer in the world, period. They could reconsider the form in which they distribute their hardware though...

[WesDawg]

I think Nintendo's doing fine right now.  The article makes it sound like its all over for 'em. Cube's are selling good though. I don't really even believe the 75% marketshare for PS2 (lots of PS2 owners have upgraded to an XBox or GC, or had to buy a second PS2 by now, but they're still considered part of that userbase), but whatever. It does seem weird that, while BigN and M$ are locked in a battle for #2, and Microsoft is loosing money on the XBox, M$ never gets criticised for it. In fact, XBox is a success in everyones mind it seems. I hardly think you can call one a success and the other an "unmitigated disaster" when they're both in the exact same place.

Based on his quotes about the N-Gage being a threat to the GBA, I doubt the guy knows what he's talking about, or at least he's got an agenda. Anyways, I think most people's complaints about the Cube are kinda silly. DVD playback has, in about one years time, lost its selling point. I don't know anyone who watches movies on their console, same as no one listened to CD's on their PS1. No consumer I know hated the N64's cartridge format, just some developers, and I haven't heard any of 'em complain about the mini-DVD's. DVD's seem to be used mainly to add movies as bonuses in the end. Yippee! a movie of skating footage. Yeah! The N64's main problem was apparently that it was a pain to code for and its lack of Squaresoft. I figure they'll include built-in broadband on the N5, but I really don't think that Nintendo specifically would have that strong of an online presence even if they had. M$ has spent tons of money building Live in order to make it semi-successful. They've got what <10% of owners have bought it, to say nothing of the number that use it.

[BlackCap]

Before I make these comments I want to clear one thing up. I'm not an XBox fan in the least. What is typed below only amounts to acknowledging the facts.

"It does seem weird that, while BigN and M$ are locked in a battle for #2, and Microsoft is loosing money on the XBox, M$ never gets criticised for it."

That's because most people understand that the XBox is a capital investment for Microsoft. Microsoft knew they weren't going to be number one going in, but future returns almost always change things, especially when you have Microsofts money. Even if you count in diseconomies of scale, the current losses are a drop in the bucket for the big boys at M$. For an example, look at Internet Explorer as a browser, back in the early-mid ninties almost no one believe that it would overtake Netscape. Strangely enough, it did.


"In fact, XBox is a success in everyones mind it seems. I hardly think you can call one a success and the other an "unmitigated disaster" when they're both in the exact same place."

Not quite. If you count in who can afford to take more losses (Nintendo is technically gaining profits but losing market share in the long run), Microsoft is actually doing better than most people predicted.

As a side note, to my mind Microsofts entry into the video game market gave it a boost it wouldn't have gotten otherwise. Their excessive advertising drew more people into consumption, even if it may have been for other systems. In Network Economic lingo, I'd say that they "fed the net". Strangely, this observation is almost always absent from mainstream publications like the above article.

[Oldskool]

Funny, they make little mentions to whether or not Sony and MS gained or lost money... I wonder why they made a silly little mistake like that?

[KDR_11k]

I think there were a lot more consoles than just the ones made by Ninendo, Sega and Sony. However, while I believe some might actually have sold quite a few units, I don't remember a single one. I have a strong feeling that Microsoft will do the same as those unknown casualties: Retreat after the first (or the second) disaster. What games will people remember five years on? I doubt many of them will be XBox games.

[Ian Sane]

From the article:

"Meanwhile, other companies, especially mobile-phone makers, are hoping to beat Sony to the punch by converting millions of cell-phone users into game addicts via their handsets. Nokia just debuted its N-Gage phone-plus-games gadget, while many 3G mobile phones available in Japan already rival Game Boy in graphics and playability."

This is where a lot of "mainstream" journalists trip up.  They make the assumption that just because one portable has better graphics, and 3D capabilities, and all sorts of extra features that it can compete with the GBA.  The Gameboy has beaten several "superior" handhelds over and over again and will continue to do so until someone else clues in on why it has survived so long.  There are two very important issues with portable gaming that a lot of people overlook: price and battery usage.  Adding all sorts of fancy hardware just raises the price up and this isn't usually a small $30-50 difference, it's much bigger.  Big enough to make people choose price over features.  And with batteries, well no one cares about graphics when they can only play a game for two hours at a time.  In my opinion handhelds have never really taken off.  The Gameboy has taken off which is different.  One cannot half-ass it (Nokia) and hope their handheld conquers because people don't just accept ANY handheld.  The author is making the assumption that by merely adding stuff other companies can beat the Gameboy.

"What people want, Iwata says, are simpler, more accessible games that are easier to play and solve—think thumb candy for dummies."

Iwata has been saying this a lot (though he's likely being paraphrased here) and it's freaking me out because it IS a change in Nintendo's traditional game design and is the sort of thing that would make me lose interest in them.  I don't know where this "simple game" crap is coming from because it's a sharp contrast to what has normally brought Nintendo success.  Look at some the huge sellers on previous Nintendo consoles: Super Mario Bros 3, Donkey Kong Country, Pokemon Red/Blue, Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time.  NONE of these games are simple.  They all are quite complex for the time period and have great graphics and sound (again for the time and hardware).  They are all ambitious projects.  Pokemon is hugely successful and it's an RPG with 150 creatures each with unique abilities and moves.  The game is huge.  Now I agree that accessibility is important (it always has been a staple in Nintendo games) but making games easier to play and solve is ridiculous.  They're already easy enough and no one wants games with no depth or challenge that can be beaten in a day.

Ironically enough Nintendo seems to be going the opposite route with the GBA, where pick-and-play games make more sense.  Sure they released Warioware but this year they also released Pokemon Ruby/Sapphire, Golden Sun 2, Advance Wars 2, FFTA, Mario & Luigi and Fire Emblem.  Those are all complex games that appeal more to hardcore gamers.  Why are they releasing these game on a portable while going simpler on their console?

If simple games are really the future then why are games like Pac-Man Vs and Tetra's Trackers being included with other games?  Because no one will ever pay full price for them on their own.  Since Nintendo seems to know that why are they going in this direction?  Easy to access games that are hard to master are what make Nintendo great.  Simple controls for complex gameplay is what makes Nintendo games great.  Simplifying complexity is what makes Nintendo games great and right now it seems Nintendo has forgotten the second part.

[Smashman]

Everybody seems to think GameCube is crap compared to previous console. Untrue. I think GameCube is better than N64 and NES, and ALMOST SNES. Great system.

The day Nintendo leaves the business is the day I lay board games as my type of gaming. lol.

[eylor]

I hate these types of reports, spelling doom and gloom for Nintendo while saying that Sony and MS are ruling the roost. With what? I thought business was about making money, not loosing it. And that's all Sony and MS seem to be good at. Sure, they get hardware out there and they're great at marketing but in the end, if you don't make any money, what's the point?

I've never understood how that can make sense, especially considering that in order for the games industry to continue to grow, each sucessive generation of consoles will have to be sold at a lose. The XBox division at MS is bleeding at the seems and Sony, well let's not talk about Sony. And these analysts say Nintendo should get out of the market, for making money in it, and leave it to the so-called "big boys" who are willing to flush money down the toilet without any return. Microsoft and Sony are getting almost nothing out of this industry, except one thing: A new market.

Think about it... In Japanse, DVD sales skyrocketed because Sony piggybacked the hardware into peoples homes in the PS2. MS is trying the same thing with broadband, which isn't succeeding too well but it is creating the backbone of a future online network that they will control. Who cares if they lose money now, as long as in the long run they get what they want. Games are just an afterthough, a means to an end. And when they're done using them to their own means, they'll drop them like a hot potato.

Imagine a few years down the line when the PS4 and the XBox 3 are released, with the abilities to go online, have DVD and CD playback and recording, a built in Tivo style unit, wireless interconnectivity with your PC and any other wired devices in your household. Oh, and it just happens to play games too... maybe. But since Sony and MS make more money off of people paying for their online services and bloated expensive hardware, you won't see them advertising that much, if at all.

It's the dawn of the set-top-box people and even though games are a part of that future, they're only going to hold a minority stock. Or else why do you think Sony and MS don't really make many games of their own?

*end of rant*

Sorry... Had to get that all out. It's just, with these people, logic just doesn't make any sense.

[KDR_11k]

Ian: People seem to think that "more simple" means "no more complex than a Wario Ware minigame". Keep in mind that the creators of GTA refer to it [GTA3] as a simple game. I think Iwata doesn't want to simplify the already simple games like Mario but the more complex ones. How many people have you heard complaining about Metroid Prime's controls?

[Berny]

Do they even realize how low the production cost of the Gamecube is? That Nintendo is making LOTS of money off their price cuts? That they are now in a solid second place? And Christmas will only fill Nintendo's pockets even more. Dear Lord, why can't someone write a decent article about Nintendo's SUCCESS? The Cube will never surpass the PS2, but the Gamecube is in solid second place and has plenty of fans ready to snatch up the next Nintendo system.

[mouse_clicker]

Quote
As mine. They make superb consoles, with great architecture. As well as being the best developer in the world, period. They could reconsider the form in which they distribute their hardware though...

Nintendo's business practices are perfectly fine, exemplary even- you do realize they've only lost money for one quarter since going public some 40 years ago? Most other companies could never dream of being able to make a claim like that. The problem is, as I have said all along, the third parties. Nintendo makes the best games in the world- even if you don't care for their style, you have to admit their games are some of the best made and most polished pieces of software on the planet- it's not a coincidence they have such an incredibly loyal following. This poses a conundrum for 3rd parties- when sitting on a shelf next to a world class Nintendo game, who's going to want to buy a mediocre 3rd party game that's riding more on image than quality? 3rd party games rarely do well on Nintendo consoles as of late because of the simple fact that most owners of Nintendo consoles would rather lay down their hard earned money for the assured quality of a Nintendo game as opposed to taking a gamble on a 3rd party game, which can range from being true gaming gems to little more than excrement hastily slapped on a disc. This used to not be a problem, back in the NES/SNES/Genesis days, and there's a very good reason for that- the only consoles 3rd parties could develop for were made by extremely talented 1st parties, which forced the 3rd parties to match that level of quality in order to catch the attention of the consumer and convince them to buy their game. Again, it's no coincidence that some of the best 3rd party games ever made were released during those two generations, and the bad ones nearly always floundered.

Then along came Sony- not to disrespect the advancements Sony has made for the industry, and they are improving, but they created a console (the Playstation) completely devoid of a stellar 1st party, or really a good 1st party at all, which meant half-assed crappy games could sell much better than before simply because the consumer didn't have a choice. Conversely, 3rd partiers left Nintendo, whose consoles it was now difficult to garner sales for, requiring at least as much effort as Nintendo puts in their games. When they left Nintendo, all that was left was Nintendo, and, by association, Nintendo fans. Gone were the people who enjoyed a few of Nintendo games but enjoyed the diversity their consoles offered. Indeed, gone was the diversity altogether, gone to the Playstation. It's truly a testament to Nintendo's quality that their hardcore fans alone could not only support them but turn an enormous profit as well. When we moved into the next generation, Microsoft released the XBox, which is based on the exact same principle as the PSX/PS2, that without the high quality 1st and 2nd parties, mediocre 3rd parties can thrive.

That's why I truly believe that it's not competition between multiple consoles that brings the best out in developers, but competition between each other on one console, at the very most two if both have extremely good 1st parties. I say this because it forces the 3rd parties to rise to the level of quality of the 1st party to catch the buyer's eye.

Basically, the point I'm trying to make is that Nintendo is doing all they can do- yes, sometimes they make some bad business decisions, but so does every company (especially Microsoft with the XBox- why no fortellings of doom for the console currently in 3rd place worldwide?), and Nintendo makes far less than most. It's the industry that needs to change, not Nintendo. Sony's 1st parties are gradually improving, but both the PS2 and the XBox are making it okay for 3rd parties to shove half-assed games out the door because they actually SELL. Eventually, though, when image and graphics no longer matter (when the the difference in graphical ability between consoles is indistinguishable), actual game quality will be what drives sales, and it's then when Nintendo will rise once again.
 

[Berny]

Quote
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
Eventually, though, when image and graphics no longer matter (when the the difference in graphical ability between consoles is indistinguishable), actual game quality will be what drives sales, and it's then when Nintendo will rise once again.

lol. We await the Return of the One. Or the Return of the King. When Nintagorn will once again weild Mariosil and smite the forces of Morcrosoft and Saurony. Wow. That took like five minutes to think up.
 

[Luciferschild]

You can complain about the mini-disks all you want but if nintendo's next console isn't backwards compatible I'm going to be very freaken upset. That's really the only thing that concerns me. About the dvd thing, I just don't think anyone buys a console for a dvd player. If I wanted a dvd player I'd go buy a dvd player. Who doesn't already have a dvd player anyway. It's a waste to put one on a console imo. About online play, isn't that what pc's are for. I don't care 1 cent about online play and I don't think many people do either. I like nintendo's approach in just making a console for games that is affordable. About the color purple though, you've got to be out touch with everything on this earth to make your console purple. What were they thinking?

[mouse_clicker]

You personally shouldn't be upset- you can play your Gamecube games on your Gamecube. I do agree that the N5 needs to be backwards compatible, though- that was a huge selling point for the PS2.

[Ian Sane]

It's entirely possible for Nintendo to use full size discs on their next console and still make it backwards compatible.  They can add DVD support too if they want (they should if Sony and MS do so they don't look inferior).  The Panasonic Q can play both DVDs and Cube discs so I think it's fair to assume a full sized disc drive could read both.  As for not featuring online all together that's just idiotic.  The hardware should be there just in case, even if Nintendo doesn't ever use it.

"About the color purple though, you've got to be out touch with everything on this earth to make your console purple. What were they thinking?"

NCL over in Japan viewed purple as a regal colour and thus thought it would be a good idea to make that "Nintendo's colour".  For all I know purple is a perfectly fine colour in Japan so I don't really have a problem with that.  NOA should be blamed for either being too spineless to go against NCL and use a different colour or too stupid for not realizing that such a colour wouldn't be very popular in North America.

"People seem to think that 'more simple' means 'no more complex than a Wario Ware minigame'. Keep in mind that the creators of GTA refer to it [GTA3] as a simple game. I think Iwata doesn't want to simplify the already simple games like Mario but the more complex ones. How many people have you heard complaining about Metroid Prime's controls?"

The way Iwata (and Miyamoto in other interviews) talks about it it's worded in a way that they want to move in that direction.  IE: Nintendo games aren't simple enough already and thus should be made even simpler.  They also tend to use games like Pac-Man Vs and Kirby Air Ride as examples all the time which suggests that that's the type of game they mean.  If they said "we should make more simple games like Zelda" then I'd be cool with it but they don't.  They always use a really easy crap game as an example.

[mouse_clicker]

Quote
NCL over in Japan viewed purple as a regal colour and thus thought it would be a good idea to make that "Nintendo's colour". For all I know purple is a perfectly fine colour in Japan so I don't really have a problem with that. NOA should be blamed for either being too spineless to go against NCL and use a different colour or too stupid for not realizing that such a colour wouldn't be very popular in North America.

I don't know about everyone else, but I certainly don't want Nintendo pansying to people who base their console decisions on appearance. That's EXACTLY what I'm saying is the problem with the industry right now, that image alone can bring success, which is wrong. I see the purple Gamecube more as a weeding out of the insincere gamers, as a means of insuring the people who buy a Gamecube will be open minded and more accepting to Nintendo's games. Maybe I have an elitist attitude, but the day Nintendo plays into the hands of people who care about little more than image and appearance is the day they've lost my business.

[Ian Sane]

Making a more neutral colour as the base colour isn't exactly compromising Nintendo's views on game development.  If promoting black instead of purple results in more sales who cares?  You still get the same games and the console is a little more successful which benefits all Cube users.

I have no problem with "insecure" gamers owning the same console as long as Nintendo releases the same quality games.  I figure they would so it's not a problem.  I want Nintendo to be on top again so I can get a SNES-style variety of games to choose from.  If minor stuff like making the case look "cooler" does that I support it.

[yellowfellow]

Quote
I don't know about everyone else, but I certainly don't want Nintendo pansying to people who base their console decisions on appearance. That's EXACTLY what I'm saying is the problem with the industry right now, that image alone can bring success, which is wrong.

i agree with you 100%, is there anyother reason why xobox is viewed as being "the best"... when in so many different ways, its not?

Quote
I see the purple Gamecube more as a weeding out of the insincere gamers, as a means of insuring the people who buy a Gamecube will be open minded and more accepting to Nintendo's games. Maybe I have an elitist attitude, but the day Nintendo plays into the hands of people who care about little more than image and appearance is the day they've lost my business.

here's where i do and don't agree with you.  nintendo has always had a little place in my heart for their specific style of games and so long as they continue the trend, i will be a happy happy man.  however, iwata was stated several times that the next round they will compete head-to-head and for them to do that they will have to make some serious changes.  consumers are fickle and thus a battle will be have to be waged on the PR side as well.  

[mouse_clicker]

Quote
Making a more neutral colour as the base colour isn't exactly compromising Nintendo's views on game development. If promoting black instead of purple results in more sales who cares? You still get the same games and the console is a little more successful which benefits all Cube users.

Saying NOA doesn't have the spine to stand up to NCL and change the color isn't exactly taking the "neutral" position- I don't want Nintendo changing the color of their console for the sole purpouse of getting sales. I want Nintendo to use a design that is visually appealing, yes, but not one that is based upon image. Regardless of whether or not Nintendo still makes the same games, I don't want people buying a Nintendo console because it looks good. I want them to buy a Nintendo console because of Nintendo's games.

Quote
I have no problem with "insecure" gamers owning the same console as long as Nintendo releases the same quality games. I figure they would so it's not a problem. I want Nintendo to be on top again so I can get a SNES-style variety of games to choose from. If minor stuff like making the case look "cooler" does that I support it.

The ends do not justify the means, my friend- I want Nintendo to succeed because people recognize the quality in their games, not because it's "cool" to like Nintendo now. I don't want people buying Nintendo consoles for the wrong reasons, because it means Nintendo has compromised something. Nintendo is perfectly fine the way they are right now, and don't need to change at all to get buyers. It's simply a matter of waiting for the consumers to make buying decision based on quality, not image.

[manunited4eva22]

I think it would have been smarter for NOA to go with the spice console, it stood a far better chance.  Purple is stereotypical, fickle or not, it really is a subconsious thing in America.  Most guys pick up a console and get into a game later down the road, not get into a console and play games later.

As for the mainstream guys, I have nothing against them at all.  I mean I still have talks with guys about how fun mario bros, mario kart, battle toads, they all love them.  Since they have moved onto PS2, assumingly because it was what was cool, but the mainstream can have good taste.  It just depends on how well they are led to buy your product.