Topic: Nintendo Versus Everyone!

[TMW]

http://www.buzzcut.com/article.php?story=2005053122342247


This is a very interesting article and a pretty good read.  While I've read most of the points he makes already in this forum, he does a very good job of stringing them all together and sounding very much the "Anti-Ian", in that if they keep doing exactly what they have been, they'll not only be fine, but come out on top in the end.  

Anyways.  Your thoughts?  

[Ian Sane]

Might as well respond to the "Anti-Ian" with the regular Ian.  

I read this on the Penny Arcade forums as they've had a pretty good discussion over there.  I'm kind of surprised that no one posted it over here until now.  I guess I could have.  Whatever.

He's right in that it's good business to make a profit.  In fact that's the goal of business.  There's just one big problem with this logic: it will only last forever if things stay the same.  Nintendo loses market share every gen.  They can't sell less console to less people every gen and still make a profit.  Eventually they will reach a point where the userbase is too small to support them.  If Nintendo can stabilize things or make their market share grow while bring in profits then they'll have a great business model.  But right now it's a bubble.  They'll do well in the present but with no change eventually they'll start posting losses and it'll be hard to come back.  "Hey we're not making a profit and no one likes us anymore.  Ooops."

There's also this assumption that Nintendo fans are perfectly content to own a "loser" console.  That's probably true for some but not all.  The Xbox stole largely from Nintendo's market share so obviously some people were pretty fed up with the situation.  I bought a Cube because I assumed that Nintendo was going to try to make up for the N64.  They tried to.  I don't feel they put in the level of effort I expected but there was some improvement in certain areas.  I'm interested in the Rev because so far Nintendo is showing desire to improve things.  If it became clear that Nintendo didn't care about making things better then I would lose interest.  Why should I support a company that's content with taking my money but has no desire to serve my needs?

A profitable console provides no real benefit to a gamer aside from assurance that the console maker is not going to go broke in a year.  A gamer really only benefits from market share.  If the market share is the sh!ts then that means dismal third party support and less shelf space at stores and rental places.  I don't rent Cube games because none of the rental stores in my area have any sort of relevent Cube selection.  I don't own an FPS on the Cube because there pretty much aren't any.  This lack of options and variety is what SUCKS about owning the last place console.  People only have so much patience and if Nintendo makes no effort to improve and just sticks to what they're doing eventually people are going to say "f*ck it".  That's why Nintendo's market share drops every gen.  Because things don't improve so people say "f*ck it".

Nintendo's focus on profit will only work in the longrun if they keep their market share at a consistent level or increase their market share.  To do this they have to get people to stick with them.  To get people to stick with them they have to show a desire to be the number one and thus provide their userbase with the perks that come with owning the number one console.  They can't do that if they just leave things as they are.

[Arbok]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
I don't own an FPS on the Cube because there pretty much aren't any.

*Gasp* I suggest you get Time Splitters 2 ASAP, picked that game up for a friend, as I already had it, for $10 at Best Buy as the third is out. I would rank it as one of the top ten games in my Cube library, honestly, fantastic game.

[stevey]

"I don't own an FPS on the Cube because there pretty much aren't any."

WHAT YOU DON'T HAVE METROID PRIME 1 OR 2:ECHO WHAT!!!  

[Ian Sane]

"WHAT YOU DON'T HAVE METROID PRIME 1 OR 2:ECHO WHAT!!!"

I do.  They're not first person shooters.

[jasonditz]

The Xbox doesn't have a much bigger market share than the Cube. If Market Share is all that matters, why is the Cube a "loser console" while the Xbox isn't?

[vudu]

Public perception and meaningful exclusives.

Note:  I don't feel this way, I'm just answering the question.

[jasonditz]

Jedi Outcast is also a worthwhile FPS, its not as good as the PC version, but the controls are acceptable.

[Ian Sane]

"If Market Share is all that matters, why is the Cube a 'loser console' while the Xbox isn't?"

The Xbox market share is growing.  The Xbox currently is routinely outselling the PS2, it just is far behind because the PS2 has such a huge lead.  As a result the Xbox has better third party support than the Cube.  Microsoft's market share in the console industry is growing while Nintendo's is shrinking.  That's a night and day difference.  The Xbox exceeded expectations while the Cube failed to meet them.

If you're a third party it's a good business venture to hop on board the Xbox bandwagon.  It's a very risky business venture to do the same with Nintendo.

[jasonditz]

If I'm a third party I'd be awfully careful before I jump on board a platform that's being replaced in 6 months with a successor with dubious backwards compatibility.

In fact, that whole attitude seems pretty backwards. For one thing, its deliberately biased against the people who spend the most money, namely the early adopters of the platform. Regardless of when they were actually purchased, the bottom line is that there are about as many Gamecubes in peoples' homes as there are Xboxes.

Second, late buyers are often getting a "second console", and those people tend to have a lower tie-in ratio. And that goes back to the same problem.

You're encouraging the third party to target the guy who bought the Xbox last week specifically to play Halo 2 and ignore the guy who bought the Gamecube 3 and a half years ago and bought 40-50 titles.

And that sounds like the "less risky" business venture to you?

[Mario]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"If Market Share is all that matters, why is the Cube a 'loser console' while the Xbox isn't?"

The Xbox market share is growing.  The Xbox currently is routinely outselling the PS2, it just is far behind because the PS2 has such a huge lead.  

Excuse me?

Sales in the US for 2005 thus far,

April:
PS2 = 332,000
Xbox = 153,000

March:
PS2: 495,000
Xbox: 227,000

February:
PS2 = 533,000
Xbox = 212,000

January:
PS2: 488,000
Xbox: 241,000

It's getting slaughtered.

[Artimus]

It outsold the PS2 last Holiday season.

[Arbok]

Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
It outsold the PS2 last Holiday season.

That's not routinely, though. Out selling a system For a few months and then losing the rest of the year doesn't really stack up.

[Ian Sane]

"It's getting slaughtered."

Oooops.  I guess that's what I get for using Microsoft execs as my source for that info.

[heinous_anus]

I think (correct me if I'm wrong, Ian) that by "loser" console Ian means something along the lines of "horrible third party support."  Every time another dev leaves Nintendo to go develop for another system, current or next-gen, a thread goes up here with the usual band of dudes going "oh, such-and-such left...but I don't care because Nintendo will still produce quality product for their system(s)." (the argument in a nutshell)

His point, from what I gathered, is that some of us are not content with that model, and "we" could be a large enough portion of Nintendo's fanbase (unhappy enough with the situation to either not play home consoles or buy a different system) that it could be incredibly risky for them to travel down such a path.

[RABicle]

I tend to agree with Ian here. I really miss the days when I could jsut take my controller round to my mates house and play multiplayer Goldeneye or Mario Kart or something. Or could chat about the latest releases with my mates. Because, we all played Nintendo. Now while a lot of them have lost interest in gaming, an equal number have jsut abandoned Nintendo. So now I have to buy all 4 controllers myself and my cube is treated as some kind of exotic object.Decent multiplayer matches no longer exist because all their skills are devoted towards Halo or (oh wait no such thing as multiplayer on PS2.)

In fact just on friday night a few old mates and myself all gathered for some multiplayer (after a trip to the pub of course). We played N64. We could've easily have played my Gamecube and played Melee instead of Smash Bros, or Timesplitters instead of Goldeneye or Mario Party 5 instead of 3. But we didn't, they chose the games we were all familiar with. There were six of us there, 5 N64 owners. Of those five, two have gamecubes. The others play PS2, Xbox or PC. So of my group of friends their market share is less than half of what it was. Heck, Nintendo was one of the common interests we shared which made us all great mates.

Another thing I miss the ability to just walk into a store, maybe try the demo unit and looka t the games. There are none. Oh sure that tiny  shop carries 4 games, but as if anyone cares. If I want to get Cube games these days, or even GBA or DS games, I have a 40 minute car journey minimun just to get to the nearest city. But more often now it's a 3 hour journey, or ordering online. I'm getting sick of this.

Also how can there be a worthwhile online gaming community on Revolution if Nintendo fails to capture more than 10% of the market? The pool of gameplayers would be too small and mostly just hard cores like us.

The article paints a pretty picture and yes Nintendo is a ehalthy company, but to stay that way they can't jsut sit there as the article suggests, we need marketshare and mindshare.

[KDR_11k]

Pfft. Whenever we meet here we play on the PC since I'm the only one with a console and you can pretty much forget about playing any game nobody else ever played before. The only thing people play is Soul Calibur 2 because that needs no previous knowledge to succeed in.

[jasonditz]

Well for one thing, Microsoft manages to have a worthwhile online community even though their online has fees and requires an extra purchase.... even though the Xbox only has slightly more market share than the Cube, and a very small percentage of those actually take part in online gaming.

Since the Rev is offering free online that's built in you're going to see a much bigger percentage of overall owners that actually do online. In fact, I'll go so far as to say so long as it remains free, even with an overly pessimistic market share of 10% this generation the Rev will have a larger online community than the Xbox had.

Besides, do you really need a pool of several million potential players? The Rev's entire online community could be just people from this forum (and maybe Reggie and Iwata) and I'm sure we'd have a good time with it.

[jasonditz]

Besides, how many third parties did we really lose? Seems like most of the ones that left did so because they went out of business. How much mourning are we really expected to do for Interplay's choppy PS2 ports or Acclaim's "It'll be a BMX game, but with titties" style games?

[KDR_11k]

Jason: The Xbox's only selling point is Live so it makes little sense to buy one when you're not going online. With the Rev you'll have lots of people who only buy it for the Nintendo games though perhaps the downloads might get those people out of their basement.

[jasonditz]

What percentage of Xbox owners worldwide are actually on Live though? 10%?

[KDR_11k]

Worldwide's a different affair. There are no XBox users in Japan and they pretty much killed their chances at taking Europe by requiring a credit card.