The RFN co-creator gives his thoughts on the newest Nintendo console.
http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/editorial/26893
Nintendo unveiled their new home console, Wii U, which will launch at some point in mid-to-late 2012. Initial reactions from the gaming community during E3 2011 seem to be mixed, but the stock market is pretty unified in their view. They don't like it. Nintendo shares dropped 5.7 percent with the announcement, and have fallen another 4.6 percent since then amid fears that the Kyoto game giant will not be able to capture the game market with Wii U (and 3DS) the same way it did with the systems' predecessors. (Editor's Note: Mike originally wrote this shortly after E3. The stock prices have continued to decline, though not as sharply as they did at first.)
Expectations for the new console were surely sky-high, and Nintendo unveiled pretty much exactly what everybody thought they were going to unveil, so what went wrong? I'm guessing the stock drop is two-fold. First off, there's the old adage "buy on the rumor, sell on the news." Every company that is about to announce a hotly anticipated new product sees their stocks rise ahead of the announcement. Almost immediately after the reveal, the market starts to sell. Essentially, everybody buys up stock based on pie-in-the-sky expectations, and once it's announced, there's nothing left to inflate the price of the stock. You might think that a good enough product would prevent this drop, but history has shown that even the best product can't totally stop it. After the announcement of the iPhone 4 on June 7, 2010, Apple's stock took a dive right away, and didn't start rebounding until June 9.
So maybe Nintendo's stock will turn around in the next few days, but I actually doubt it. That's because I think this is a bit more than "buy on the rumor, sell on the news." Investors are skittish about Nintendo for good reason. Wii sales are slumping, and 3DS is not living up to its initial sales expectations. UBS Securities has even downgraded their stock rating from "Buy" to "Neutral." Nintendo needs a way to bounce back, and the market doesn't think Wii U is it.
Nintendo obviously does. Reggie and Iwata spent a lot of time hemming and hawing up on stage about how they are now going after "all gamers" again. They're not abandoning the Wii market, but are rather attempting to keep it secure while at the same time returning to the "hardcore" audience that they've left in the dust these past five years. There are a number of problems with this approach, and I'd like to go over two that I think are the biggest.
The Wii U strategy strikes me as extremely scatter-shot. Karl Castaneda brought up a very good point on the recent episode of NWR Newscast we were both on. The first thing you learn in the software business is that you need to find your niche and focus in on it with laser precision. All the best companies do this, even the big ones. When you focus on one area, you'll end up with fewer products, but they will be of higher quality. If you try to please everybody, you'll end up making a bunch of products that are good but not great. This is what I see happening to Nintendo.
History has shown that the first-party leads the way. If the console's manufacturer focuses on making big-budget, AAA titles, then the third parties will follow suit. This is why the Xbox 360 is the system for shooters and racing games. That's what Microsoft initially focused on, and the third parties followed suit. Nintendo has always focused on family-friendly games, including a lot of platformers and with the Wii, mini-game compilations, and the third parties have followed suit. Nintendo's never been known for making the big-budget, western-style games that their competitors make.
We all hate this name, but there's more to it than that. Wii's brand image may have a lot of positive mindshare with its current user base, but it has just as much (if not more) negative mindshare with the rest of the gaming community. By keeping that name front and center, Nintendo is essentially telling consumers that nothing has changed. This is still a Wii, and Wii's brand identity with hardcore gamers is about as bad as it can be.
To an enthusiast that truly cares about the games, that statement might sound like a bit much. But an average consumer is going to hear a brand name and instantly make a host of assumptions based on their prior knowledge of the brand. Based on those assumptions, they will make an initial judgment on whether or not they want to learn more. If they do, they'll likely move past the brand name and on to the system's merits. If they don't, they're going to stop their information search right there, and the sale is lost. This is a very real threat to the Wii U's success.
Nintendo tried to combat this by showing a host of M-rated third-party games at their press conference. But when it came time for them to show off their own ideas, everything looked like a Wii game. This reinforces the existing Wii brand identity. Zelda was the lone exception. That looked good. However, Mario, Metroid, and Zelda couldn't keep Wii relevant to hardcore gamers. Why should we expect them to keep Wii U relevant?
The name is important, but a bad name alone isn't going to sink a system. It's certainly going to make it a bit more of an uphill battle, but if Nintendo really can change their ways and break back into the hardcore market, the Wii brand will expand to encompass all gamers. If that happens, the Wii U name will become an afterthought.
If Nintendo wants to fix Wii's poor brand identity with the hardcore audience, they need to have at least one internally developed massive western-style game. They already have Mario, Metroid, and Zelda, but they don't have anything like Uncharted, Halo, or Gears of War. If they can't step up in this department, I don't think they'll successfully expand their audience.
My guess is Retro Studios is working on this title right now. They're Nintendo's only top-tier western developer, and they certainly have the talent to make this game. There's a chance it could be a Metroid game (the series has always been more popular in the west), but I'm personally hoping for something entirely new to help break the mold.
I also think there's a remote chance that this game could come from Silicon Knights. They've worked with Nintendo in the past on Eternal Darkness (and Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes), and they could definitely bring the kind of game Nintendo needs to the table. The question with Silicon Knights is if they can stay focused. The company is now notorious for Too Human, a project that was in development for nearly a decade. It ended up releasing on Xbox 360, and was not well received. Nintendo kept Silicon Knights on track in the past, and I think they'd be wise to court the developer back into their arms.
It's certainly an interesting time for Nintendo, and I'm anxious to see how this new strategy pans out. The company has always had tumultuous relationships with third-parties, and they'll need a real game-changer to bring them as well as the hardcore gamer back into the fold.
Actually yes. However I think Microsoft is in a better position here (slightly). Nintendo's existing market is fickle, and has basically stopped playing games. That's why they are trying to get back the traditional gamer. Microsoft is the opposite. They've locked down the traditional gaming market, and are trying to expand into the casual space. The big difference is that while Nintendo's casual market is not buying games, Microsoft's traditional market is. So if Kinect (and motion gaming in general) fails, Microsoft can fall back on that market. But if Nintendo can't successfully reclaim traditional gamers, their casual base won't lend them a soft landing.
I wonder why Sony's stock didn't fall. Vita price point is nice for the consumer, but Sony is going to be BLEEDING money with that high tech machine
I guess I'm an odd man for being really excited and not too worried how unfocused and unclear is everything for the Wii U at the moment? Wii U is going to unfamiliar and foggy territory and I'm eager to see where it goes.
I guess I'm an odd man for being really excited and not too worried how unfocused and unclear is everything for the Wii U at the moment? Wii U is going to unfamiliar and foggy territory and I'm eager to see where it goes.
How is it "foggy and unfamiliar"? Mechanically, it's just the DS again with one screen on the controller and the other being your TV, and I've already seen how little developers will "innovate" using touchscreens on the DS.
I guess I'm an odd man for being really excited and not too worried how unfocused and unclear is everything for the Wii U at the moment? Wii U is going to unfamiliar and foggy territory and I'm eager to see where it goes.
How is it "foggy and unfamiliar"? Mechanically, it's just the DS again with one screen on the controller and the other being your TV, and I've already seen how little developers will "innovate" using touchscreens on the DS.
Your right. They should have just called it the WiiDS.
(pronounced Wee Dee Ehss. not weeds)
I guess I'm an odd man for being really excited and not too worried how unfocused and unclear is everything for the Wii U at the moment? Wii U is going to unfamiliar and foggy territory and I'm eager to see where it goes.
How is it "foggy and unfamiliar"? Mechanically, it's just the DS again with one screen on the controller and the other being your TV, and I've already seen how little developers will "innovate" using touchscreens on the DS.
Why so negative? I feel like everyone's attacking the Wii U based almost purely on the name when we really won't know anything until a year from now when it comes out.
Why so negative? I feel like everyone's attacking the Wii U based almost purely on the name when we really won't know anything until a year from now when it comes out.
Well, if that's the case Nintendo brought it upon themselves. They didn't show a single 1st party Wii U game at E3, their demo reel was all footage from other consoles, and they didn't announce a single Wii game for this year besides Skyward Sword to fill in the waiting period for the new console. Nintendo didn't do anything to deter speculation and criticism of their mediocre E3 showing, such as bringing over games to satiate that audience. Had Nintendo announced that they were bringing over any of their Japan-exclusive Wii games or (heaven forbid) announced new Wii games for this final year of the Wii's life, it would probably be simple enough to brush off the Wii U until a later date.
Just because Nintendo didn't announce that many Wii games at the conference doesn't mean that they didn't the days and weeks after. Just because something doesn't get announced at the conference means that something isn't coming out ever.
I wonder why Sony's stock didn't fall. Vita price point is nice for the consumer, but Sony is going to be BLEEDING money with that high tech machine
Even on Nintendo's worst Wii year, it still sells 30% more Wiis that year than Gamecube sold its whole lifespan, and by this time Gamecube was down to $99
Just because Nintendo didn't announce that many Wii games at the conference doesn't mean that they didn't the days and weeks after. Just because something doesn't get announced at the conference means that something isn't coming out ever.
And when they finally get around to showing and talking about them, people will start focusing their attention on those. Until then, Nintendo's left them little else to talk about, and that's all on Nintendo. Nintendo didn't have to have these huge software droughts on the Wii, and several times promised we wouldn't. Now, they're suffering the consequences of their complacency.
Even on Nintendo's worst Wii year, it still sells 30% more Wiis that year than Gamecube sold its whole lifespan, and by this time Gamecube was down to $99
Sales, in and of themselves, mean nothing. Wii may still be selling way better, but it's still shaping up to be having as shitty a final year in terms of software support as the GameCube.
If I may propose a counter to your arguement regarding the name:
You bring up an interesting proposition that the Wii name itself carries a negative connotation within the hardcore community, and as such that would somehow negatively affect the image of the Wii U among hardcore gamers.
My proposition is this: what if among hardcore gamers, rather than the Wii, the more prevalent image is that of the Nintendo brand name, not the Wii. In such a case regardless of what the Wii was, and regardless of what the Wii U was named, the fact that Nintendo prioritizes price over performance in order to attain a larger market share, as well as their unfailing dedication to providing the best of the best 1st party titles would be foremost on the hardcore gamer's mind.
Those people (read: we) would be more inclined to base their decision on Nintendo's history than what Nintendo named the console either way.
Just food for thought.
Why so negative? I feel like everyone's attacking the Wii U based almost purely on the name when we really won't know anything until a year from now when it comes out.
Like a said in my Unanswered Questions feature (http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/feature/26816) (point 8.) I'm really concerned how they're going to market this thing other than what I suggested, literally have 2 separate styles for the core/casual crowds, but that just seems unwieldy and confusing.
What if a casual gamer saw a super hardcore (sorry) commercial for Wii U and got put off thinking it's not for them, vice-versa what if a core gamer guy saw a super-happy-fun-time commercial and thought the Wii U is "just the Wii waggle mini-game collection bullshit again".
Seriously how are they going to sell this thing to people other than us? No way our Mums are going to spend $250 on an new system when they got bored of Wii Sports after a few years (unaware it accepts more than the included shiny silver disk) and think the same thing would happen again with the Wii U.
Personally, I'd be fine if it was mainly a core gamer system with the occasional family game I could whip out from time to time, but that's not where the money is...
It's going to be an interesting 12 months!
Just because Nintendo didn't announce that many Wii games at the conference doesn't mean that they didn't the days and weeks after. Just because something doesn't get announced at the conference means that something isn't coming out ever.
Why so negative? I feel like everyone's attacking the Wii U based almost purely on the name when we really won't know anything until a year from now when it comes out.
I suppose my outlook is grim but I didn't intent it to be outright negative. I wanted to go over my thoughts on how brand identity plays into the Wii U. Everybody is saying "it's just a name, it doesn't matter" and I don't agree with that. It may have held true for the Wii, which was a totally new brand with no identity, but this time around the name has an existing identity that can't just be erased. Nintendo wants to get the hardcore gamer back, but they also want to keep their casual audience, and they don't believe they can do the second without the Wii brand. They do think that they can regain lost consumers in spite of the Wii brand. It strikes me as wanting your cake and eating it to.
I suppose my outlook is grim but I didn't intent it to be outright negative. I wanted to go over my thoughts on how brand identity plays into the Wii U. Everybody is saying "it's just a name, it doesn't matter" and I don't agree with that. It may have held true for the Wii, which was a totally new brand with no identity, but this time around the name has an existing identity that can't just be erased. Nintendo wants to get the hardcore gamer back, but they also want to keep their casual audience, and they don't believe they can do the second without the Wii brand. They do think that they can regain lost consumers in spite of the Wii brand. It strikes me as wanting your cake and eating it to.
Wii Sports, Wii Sports Resort, Wii Fit, Mario Kart Wii, New Super Mario Bros Wii-- Games that outsell anything on any other system and what does Nintendo do? nothing. Nintendo has been pissing in the wind for the last 2 years.But they Can. Most companies would love to be where Nintendo is but it makes a company that is in Nintendo's position a little less hungry.
Agreed. Nintendo has quite clearly demonstrated that they don't care about their customers and would rather piss in the wind than actually make the games that people want. That's what the WiiU is all about--pleasing developers so they can just shovel ports rather than actually put some effort into making awesome games for a Nintendo console. There's a reason that xbox or ps3 don't have any 20 or 30 million+ selling titles on their console--because devs won't or can't make games that have mass market appeal.Wii Sports, Wii Sports Resort, Wii Fit, Mario Kart Wii, New Super Mario Bros Wii-- Games that outsell anything on any other system and what does Nintendo do? nothing. Nintendo has been pissing in the wind for the last 2 years.But they Can. Most companies would love to be where Nintendo is but it makes a company that is in Nintendo's position a little less hungry.
Agreed. Nintendo has quite clearly demonstrated that they don't care about their customers and would rather piss in the wind than actually make the games that people want. That's what the WiiU is all about--pleasing developers so they can just shovel ports rather than actually put some effort into making awesome games for a Nintendo console. There's a reason that xbox or ps3 don't have any 20 or 30 million+ selling titles on their console--because devs won't or can't make games that have mass market appeal.Wii Sports, Wii Sports Resort, Wii Fit, Mario Kart Wii, New Super Mario Bros Wii-- Games that outsell anything on any other system and what does Nintendo do? nothing. Nintendo has been pissing in the wind for the last 2 years.But they Can. Most companies would love to be where Nintendo is but it makes a company that is in Nintendo's position a little less hungry.
Agreed. Nintendo has quite clearly demonstrated that they don't care about their customers and would rather piss in the wind than actually make the games that people want. That's what the WiiU is all about--pleasing developers so they can just shovel ports rather than actually put some effort into making awesome games for a Nintendo console. There's a reason that xbox or ps3 don't have any 20 or 30 million+ selling titles on their console--because devs won't or can't make games that have mass market appeal.Wii Sports, Wii Sports Resort, Wii Fit, Mario Kart Wii, New Super Mario Bros Wii-- Games that outsell anything on any other system and what does Nintendo do? nothing. Nintendo has been pissing in the wind for the last 2 years.But they Can. Most companies would love to be where Nintendo is but it makes a company that is in Nintendo's position a little less hungry.
Doesn't help that Call of Duty sucks up quite a bit of money.A few years ago (post-wii), Nintendo was a more valuable company than Sony or Honda, I don't know if that's still the case but they've raked in a lot of money. Maybe they think that not serving the Wii community that made them such a valuable company is a good strategy; I doubt it, though. I'm guessing people are going to remember that their Wii was the thing they used to stream Netflix rather than something they played their videogames on when the WiiU is launched. No one ever bought a Wii for Netflix and no one thinks they did. Maybe if people were still buying games for Wii, this wouldn't be a problem, but that's clearly not the case.
Nintendo cares about its customers. Just not more than themselves; which is understandable. At least, I had fun with Nintendo games last year. It probably helps that I only just got my Wii last year. Still, it is frustrating that Nintendo has always been a profitable and big company but doesn't use that money to make or help make more big games. Instead, the money either goes in to the war chest for safe keeping or in to R&D where small teams do weird and fanciful things, store them, and then do it over again. Or maybe Nintendo doesn't have as much money and people as we imagine it?
CoD and GTA are the ONLY big games not on Nintendo and even then, they clearly DON'T sell systems the way Wii Sports, Wii Fit, NSMBWii, or Mario Kart Wii did.
Nintendo isn't in good shape--it's last big seller came out 2 years ago. XBox and PS owners aren't going to migrate to the WiiU just because it has the same games as the machines they ALREADY own. Nintendo has already proven, with the last 2 years of the Wii, that they aren't interested in keeping their costumers. So who is going to buy the WiiU?Agreed. Nintendo has quite clearly demonstrated that they don't care about their customers and would rather piss in the wind than actually make the games that people want. That's what the WiiU is all about--pleasing developers so they can just shovel ports rather than actually put some effort into making awesome games for a Nintendo console. There's a reason that xbox or ps3 don't have any 20 or 30 million+ selling titles on their console--because devs won't or can't make games that have mass market appeal.Wii Sports, Wii Sports Resort, Wii Fit, Mario Kart Wii, New Super Mario Bros Wii-- Games that outsell anything on any other system and what does Nintendo do? nothing. Nintendo has been pissing in the wind for the last 2 years.But they Can. Most companies would love to be where Nintendo is but it makes a company that is in Nintendo's position a little less hungry.
Ports are better than nothing. Developers aren't willing to take chances outside the download arena, and Nintendo can't change that. What they can do is ensure that the third parties give the Wii U the same support as the other consoles. Then the decision is which platform has the best first-party lineup, and Nintendo's in pretty good shape in that scenario.
Too bad that half of those systems sold are made by Sony, though. Not that either company is good at selling videogames or systems the way Nintendo is--by making great games.CoD and GTA are the ONLY big games not on Nintendo and even then, they clearly DON'T sell systems the way Wii Sports, Wii Fit, NSMBWii, or Mario Kart Wii did.
I think Microsoft would beg to differ on that when it comes to Call of Duty.
Nintendo is in fine shape in terms of first party support compared to the other two companies, it's just that because they don't have big third party releases to space things out, we have great years like last year followed by dead years like this one. I'm not sure what you think came out in 2009 that was the big seller, but Nintendo has plenty of huge sellers, in addition to the decently selling games from last year like Kirby or DK, it's just that Nintendo's huge sellers appeal to a different kind of casual crowd than the other consoles.Nintendo isn't in good shape--it's last big seller came out 2 years ago. XBox and PS owners aren't going to migrate to the WiiU just because it has the same games as the machines they ALREADY own. Nintendo has already proven, with the last 2 years of the Wii, that they aren't interested in keeping their costumers. So who is going to buy the WiiU?Agreed. Nintendo has quite clearly demonstrated that they don't care about their customers and would rather piss in the wind than actually make the games that people want. That's what the WiiU is all about--pleasing developers so they can just shovel ports rather than actually put some effort into making awesome games for a Nintendo console. There's a reason that xbox or ps3 don't have any 20 or 30 million+ selling titles on their console--because devs won't or can't make games that have mass market appeal.Wii Sports, Wii Sports Resort, Wii Fit, Mario Kart Wii, New Super Mario Bros Wii-- Games that outsell anything on any other system and what does Nintendo do? nothing. Nintendo has been pissing in the wind for the last 2 years.But they Can. Most companies would love to be where Nintendo is but it makes a company that is in Nintendo's position a little less hungry.
Ports are better than nothing. Developers aren't willing to take chances outside the download arena, and Nintendo can't change that. What they can do is ensure that the third parties give the Wii U the same support as the other consoles. Then the decision is which platform has the best first-party lineup, and Nintendo's in pretty good shape in that scenario.
So who is going to buy the WiiU?