Topic: Grand Master Billy speaks on the Wii.

[Deguello]

Does it matter how much marketshare their challengers take away from them?  Again it's not Nintendo's fault that their competitors brought Egypt's Ice Hockey team to the Olympics.

They do have an effective monopoly on handhelds, but one earned in blood through constant competition, some might say to the expense of their console market.

[BigJim]

Yes marketshare matters. That's part of what defines a monopoly. More marketshare means more market control. And one entity having overwhelming control is just a hop and a skip from a monopoly.

I'm not disagreeing with how they got there. I know a monopoly is not illegal or unethical in and of itself. But it is a monopoly. Having challengers doesn't mean they're not.

[zakkiel]

Quote
But the point is not about specific games.

Why yes it is. If you say there will only be w,x,y, and z games for the Wii to assuage the hard core, when in fact there are also a,b,c, and d games, it is very much about the specific games. You're trying to avoid discussing or including them because you know your position isn't tenable. The vast majority of people on this forum are pretty selective in their video-game choices (or they wouldn't be posting here), and RS is repeatedly cropping up in launch lists, and the other three have been tried and proven popular with core gamers.

If you're going to ground your argument in the number of games released in the next year, you need to be accurate about those games and demonstrate that the 360 had significantly more in its first year, and that Sony plans to have more. Myself, I don't see what Nintendo could do to get more games out aimed at core gamers, and I the Wiis lineup stacks up pretty darn well with the competition. Especially since its games all offer an experience unique for home consoles.

[trip1eX]

No matter what platform you bought you missed out on alot of great games.  So I don't think only Gamecube owners suffered.  Every console owner suffered if they sat there and counted the number of great games that didn't make it to their platform.  

The bottom line is did you enjoy your Gamecube experience?  (Or were you too busy counting the number of games you couldn't get?    )

Did you not enjoy your Gamecube experience so much so that you won't be buying a Wii?  

I mean I don't think (again) that a single person here doesn't wish that their platform had every great game known to man and had those games being released week after week.  Every single gamer wants that.  And you know what?  No gamers get that.  

So I think folks need to look at the reality and accept it.  If you're so concerned about not getting your share of 3rd party titles then buy another console and don't buy Nintendo's.  Or buy both.  You're sending the wrong message if you bitch, but keep buying Nintendo's products.
 

[Deguello]

BigJim it's hard to say how much marketshare those old handhelds got.  Nobody really cared about marketshare back then.  The Wonderswan gained some headway in Japan for a while,a dn then it failed.  The Neo Geo pocket was selling ok for a while in America and then it failed.  It was probably never more than 5-10% at the very most.  Which is a sizable chunk of the market, enough to create consumer choice.  It's just too bad they were too flaccid with it after launch.  To choose a famous Reggie quote, their troubles are "not my problem."  What is Nintendo supposed to do?  Help them compete against themselves so that they have competition?  The consumers always had a choice in handheld game players and they just chose the Gameboy most of the time.

And notice I said the myth was that Nintendo had "no competition."  They do.  they always had competition int he handheld sector.  They tend to squash them immediately, but they do.

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim And considering they've explained quite clearly that our parents and sisters are their primary target next gen, it sounds like that's the way it's going to be.

They've said that, but it would take an idiot to not realize that they're already not doing that.

How many "non-games" does the Wii's launch lineup consist of? I see an awful lot of core gamer games in there and I'd only count Wii sports as a semi-casual game.

And again, LOOK at the DS's track record: once the DS proved itself in the marketplace (and there was a time period when many developers refused to create games for it because they didn't know if it would succeed), devs started pumping out games for it.

The progression has been like this: Nintendo system with an innovative new idea launches, people buy it up like crazy, devs start creating piles of games for it.

With this success, you get your Castlevanias, your Final Fantasies, the 3rd party support which the GC lacked in order to maintain a solid release schedule throughout the year.

And for the record, the Xbox suffered from the same stigma: garbage ports released most of the time and every so often a gem (which is what the 360 is REALLY seeing right now).

[BigJim]

Quote
Why yes it is. If you say there will only be w,x,y, and z games for the Wii to assuage the hard core, when in fact there are also a,b,c, and d games, it is very much about the specific games.

You don't seem to get the point. Releasing random a, b, c, d core games does not an assuaged core gamer make. By virtue of releasing them it doesn't mean they'll be games anybody wants to buy. (i.e. crappy ports and such.) I've made it as clear as I can that I am talking about flow and quality *of* those core games -- consistent flow of ample high-quality support overall throughout the system life with games that people actually want to buy.

And that is why I said specific games are not the point. I merely sited obvious examples of games we can safely say will be good and sell well. Just because a, b, c, and d might also be good and sell, it says nothing for the flow or quality for the lifetime of the unit. It only means hardcores might have a good first year, IF they are in fact titles that are up to the same standard that people want to buy.

Quote
The bottom line is did you enjoy your Gamecube experience?

For the first 2 years. That is what I want to avoid this next generation. They distinctly made a left turn in their release lineup after that point. If they can avoid shafting some of us halfway through, I will be as happy as a lark.

Quote
Did you not enjoy your Gamecube experience so much so that you won't be buying a Wii?

No. Nintendo's new direction on non-gamers (and Iwata's outright suggestion) has given the nod for hardcore gamers to consider another console. Despite the company's new mission, and Iwata's own suggestion, some people here are still so damn defensive about the idea that some people want more than they're likely to get out of the Wii.

Yes, I'll get a Wii, but it would be desireable to not have to get another console to be fully satisfied. And that is the basis of my discussion here. Just because I say I am an old-school hardcore gamer that wants more of a certain type of content that is contrary to the company's mission statement, others want to go apeshit, like Iwata was lying. They should relax and accept (or at least tolerate) a contrary opinion, as their opinion isn't the only correct one.

Quote
To choose a famous Reggie quote, their troubles are "not my problem." What is Nintendo supposed to do? Help them compete against themselves so that they have competition? The consumers always had a choice in handheld game players and they just chose the Gameboy most of the time.

I don't really understand the point of the handheld topic. The title of the myth was "Myth: Nintendo has always had a marketshare monopoly on handhelds with no competition." Then it cited a list of competitors as the reason why it wasn't a monopoly. I was just trying to correct it because the definition of a monopoly doesn't entirely exclude competition. They had competition, but they were still a monopoly due to their marketshare dominance. Nobody is demonizing Nintendo for having a monopoly either. They are allowed to have it because it was created and maintained legally as far as anybody knows. More power to them.

Quote
They've said that, but it would take an idiot to not realize that they're already not doing that.

What we see now is not necessarily proof of what we'll get later. Non-gamers aren't going to buy it fresh off the assembly line. That'd be like if TV manufacturers made 20" HDTVs before the 50" ones. You go for your core/enthusiast market first and then branch out as your costs/prices come down. Additionally, GameCube's second half was the pits compared to its first half, IMO.

Quote
And for the record, the Xbox suffered from the same stigma: garbage ports released most of the time and every so often a gem

Yeah, more or less. But I would also hope for and expect more out of Nintendo/GameCube. (Is that wrong to expect more from them than Xbox?) It might interest some to know that on GameRankings, 16 GCN games, 38 PS2 games, and 22 Xbox games have scored 90% or greater since 2001. Xbox didn't do so hot either but I think there's room for improvement as far as "AAA" titles go. But we'll see. here's hoping.

Rick, I know you are sitting back and reading this but I'd like to see your input eventually as well. LOL.  

[Kairon]

I think if you don't trust Nintendo to go all 4-5 years on this thing, then there's not much argument to be made.

It's as simple as hardcore gamers believing that we've got a Gamecube 2 on our hands and/or we've got the more unappealing half of the DS in the Wii.

*shrug*

I'm not sure what the future holds so I'm not going to make any promises, but I'm getting it at launch. If you have doubts as to the worth of your purchase, then you should do what smart gamers have done forever: wait until the Wii has enough appealing games released at the present to be worth your purchase. Do what Iansane so sensibly does and wait for a clear reason (i.e. killer app) you have to own a Wii, or do what smart PS3 owners will be doing and wait until a price drop or larger library makes the Wii look like a worthy deal from the first day you buy it.

Edit: Billy already said he's getting it on day 1. The pull of Zelda TP is just too much for him. He still expresses his reservations and that's perfectly fine, but evidently he still believes that the system is very much worth at least $300 worth of expenditure at launch.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[zakkiel]

Quote
You don't seem to get the point. Releasing random a, b, c, d core games does not an assuaged core gamer make. By virtue of releasing them it doesn't mean they'll be games anybody wants to buy. (i.e. crappy ports and such.) I've made it as clear as I can that I am talking about flow and quality *of* those core games -- consistent flow of ample high-quality support overall throughout the system life with games that people actually want to buy.

Which flatly contradicts your earlier statement

Quote
any accounts I'm reading/hearing is that Red Steel is way too early, for example. But the point is not about specific games.

It is about the specific games, and whether they're good or not. Oh, there's a another game I should add to the list, while we'er at it: BWii.

You're assuming at least five separate games will be bad with no justification other than apparently some rumor about RS. So, really, there's no point in this conversation, because you're determined to believe that hardcore gamers are being somehow wronged. Some people just need to feel like victims, I guess. I'm done.

[BigJim]

Any "contradiction" is on you for taking snippets out of context and filling in your own blanks with words that never came off my fingers.

I will copy and paste it again.

I've made it as clear as I can that I am talking about flow and quality *of* those core games -- consistent flow of ample high-quality support overall throughout the system life with games that people actually want to buy.

Running down lists of launch, launch window, and scattered 1st year titles proves nothing of *flow*... *quality*... and *consistency*  for the *life of the system.*

I could run down a list of a dozen awesome (or what we thought would be awesome) launch and first year games for GameCube and it still would not be hard to find people that thought it crashed and burned 2 years in.... err, except possibly some of those in the bubble of a Nintendo forum.

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
Running down lists of launch, launch window, and scattered 1st year titles proves nothing of *flow*... *quality*... and *consistency*  for the *life of the system.*

But that's the best evidence one can ask for with regards to the future. The only better way to determine the future is...well... to know it.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[GoldenPhoenix]

What is really all this whining about the old school gamers being left out? I mean lets go to back to N64, we had Zelda, Mario, Mario sports games, Mario Kart, Star Fox etc. On the Wii we are getting: Zelda, Mario sports games, Mario, Metroid, and probaly Mario Kart along with Star Fox. I think the argument that Nintendo is forgetting hardcore gamers is ridiculous if you compare this to N64 (or even SNES), we are still getting the EXACT SAME series of games in addition to new franchises, and the so called "Non-games". I'm failing to see how Nintendo is forgettng the so called "Hardcore" gamer unless you are going to argue they have since the N64 days. If anything NIntendo is branching out more while maintaining the games that made them great, it is a freaken Win-Win! They are also trying new types of games, unlike the competition which is about as mainstream as you can get.

[IceCold]

And to top it off, we're getting some great new "hardcore" IPs - more than the GameCube, I'd say..

[trip1eX]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
I think if you don't trust Nintendo to go all 4-5 years on this thing, then there's not much argument to be made.

It's as simple as hardcore gamers believing that we've got a Gamecube 2 on our hands and/or we've got the more unappealing half of the DS in the Wii.

*shrug*

I'm not sure what the future holds so I'm not going to make any promises, but I'm getting it at launch. If you have doubts as to the worth of your purchase, then you should do what smart gamers have done forever: wait until the Wii has enough appealing games released at the present to be worth your purchase. Do what Iansane so sensibly does and wait for a clear reason (i.e. killer app) you have to own a Wii, or do what smart PS3 owners will be doing and wait until a price drop or larger library makes the Wii look like a worthy deal from the first day you buy it.

Edit: Billy already said he's getting it on day 1. The pull of Zelda TP is just too much for him. He still expresses his reservations and that's perfectly fine, but evidently he still believes that the system is very much worth at least $300 worth of expenditure at launch.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

Exactly.  

And yeah the Billy guy got treated so badly by Nintendo the last 2 generations he's buying a Wii at launch.  
:lol:

What a waste of space that article was.

[BigJim]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon

Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
Running down lists of launch, launch window, and scattered 1st year titles proves nothing of *flow*... *quality*... and *consistency*  for the *life of the system.*

But that's the best evidence one can ask for with regards to the future. The only better way to determine the future is...well... to know it.

There is a middle ground where I happily sit. I ran out of unchecked Nintendo faith a few years ago. I don't predict Nintendo's death (at all), nor do I assume a default position that every first year hardcore game are automatic must-haves for everybody and proof positive of a perpetually satifying lifetime of Wii hardcore AAA-game awesomeness until they're not.

But I guess that's what makes me an emo. Woe to me. I suffer.  

[Artimus]

I'm in the middle, but lean towards faith. I wasn't very pleased with a lot of stuff until I saw some of the games. I still think WiiSports' character design is stupid, and they could've created a FAR more pleasing character setup without resulting to Playskool. I also feel that Nintendo games often lack polish on the overall presentation, and that a lot of them could do better with more care in that department.

At the same time I am super-hyped for Wii and have had faith since the controller was shown.

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: BigJimWhat we see now is not necessarily proof of what we'll get later. Non-gamers aren't going to buy it fresh off the assembly line. That'd be like if TV manufacturers made 20" HDTVs before the 50" ones. You go for your core/enthusiast market first and then branch out as your costs/prices come down. Additionally, GameCube's second half was the pits compared to its first half, IMO.

If the DS is any indication, they'll be fine.

The DS has had plenty of non-gamer software as well as games aimed purely at the hardcore Nintendo fan. All it takes is to give 3rd parties some incentive and the rest is cake.

[BigJim]

Hope so.

Art, for what it's worth I am also very excited about Zelda, Mario, MP3, and Rayman so far. I think they have the best chance of making the wiimote really immersive. I'm not too heavy on those games that make the wiimote out to be a tennis racket, golf club, etc. either. But most of those games probably "aren't made for us" anyway I guess.

It'll be interesting to see how the whole controller issue turns out in a year from now. The DS had a learning curve in philosophy to some degree, and once it clicked it turned out well overall.

[Kairon]

Yeah, but I agree that there is good reason to be skeptical even when looking at the DS, as that was a veeeeeery loooooong learning curve. Thankfully the PSP basically fell flat on its face as well.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Nick DiMola]

I think I'm going to have to agree with VGRev and Kairon above. Though the company's mission statement has changed they are still cranking out the usual titles and then some. If anything I'd say it looks like Nintendo is covering all grounds. When they grab hold of new marketshare of course they want to get people interested in their franchises that way they stay faithful to Nintendo and maybe go buy a DS and all of Nintendo's future consoles for their games (much like most people on these forums have done). As far as needing to get another console for a full gaming experience, it's always been that way. You are missing out by ignoring the competitors. I enjoy buying all the consoles and enjoying all the great games released (though it'll be a VERY LOOOOONG time before I get a PS3). Games like Katamari Damacy and Psychonauts would've been passed over in the most recent generation had I not bought a PS2 and an XBOX. Of course I want my Nintendo system before all, but no single system can (for a hardcore gamer) satisfy all bases.  

[ShyGuy]

I see that Billy and his article are mentioned in the blog at  Penny-Arcade today. PlanetGameCube is mentioned too, but they don't hot-link it, the jerks.

[Ian Sane]

Billy seams to fall into the same very small category of Nintendo fans that I do.  We're longtime fans of Nintendo but we're just really frustrated by Nintendo's underachievement in the last ten years, particularly since many of their failings seem to be based more on poor decisions on their part instead of a great decisions by the competition.  Most Nintendo fans these days seem to be of the "Nintendo can do no wrong" variety as it seems most of those fed up by Nintendo has just left outright.

I became a Nintendo fan because I liked what I felt they stood for at the time.  Their philosophy was quality.  They made the best hardware and the best games and they never rested on their laurels.  This commitment to quality meant they didn't take shortcuts and virtually each game was significant.  There were no throw away titles for a quick buck or cookie cutter sequels.  Looking back my view of Nintendo at the time was a little sensationalized.  They didn't quite follow those principles completely but they were still pretty good at it.

I used to see Nintendo's future as simple.  Nintendo did well when they were competent and when they screwed sh!t up they did poorly.  The Cube was incredibly frustrating to watch as they seemed to screw up pretty much everything they could.  The sad part was that whenever they made an iffy decision it was spotted as a potential problem on this board.  Forumers could spot problems that Nintendo couldn't?  You know how if you're a fan of a sports team you always tend to play armchair GM.  Sometimes a team makes a trade and you think it's a poor trade.  Being a Nintendo fan on the Cube was like spotting a poor trade and then watching your team fail to make the playoffs... for the next five seasons.  It's hard to specify exactly what they needed to do right but it was easy to spot when they did things wrong.  I get some flack for contradicting myself but sometimes it's hard to explain exactly what I think would be the right thing to do.  I know I would know it if I saw it.

What I wanted Nintendo to do was fix all these little problems.  This wasn't going to be easy but I figured that if Nintendo stopped being their own worst enemy they could get their marketshare increasing again (or at least not shrinking) and please their fans better.  You don't have to be number one, but you can at least satisfy your userbase.  The Genesis and Xbox weren't the market leader but at least their fans were happy.  Plus I figured that by being competent then at the very least they could tough it out and if Sony screwed up they would have a chance to grab the ball.  Interestingly enough this gen was the perfect time to do that since Sony is totally fumbling.

Some people argued that I was asking for Nintendo to compromise their principles to increase their marketshare.  The "Mario shooting hookers" comment came up a lot as if asking Nintendo to make some games that aren't all super-fun-happy-world would require such a drastic change.  I figured that Nintendo couldn't increased their marketshare if they compromised their principles so it didn't matter.  They could never get ahead by trying to copy the competition.  The key was to not screw things up, create a level playing field, and let the superior games give them the advantage.

This non-gamer stuff was something I never saw as a possibility.  The idea that Nintendo would target people who don't play games at all was just so odd and unexpected.  My thinking was limited entirely to the current game market.  This creates the possibility of Nintendo regaining their marketshare and doing so in a way that excludes me.  That's not a very comforting thought.  In fact it's downright scary.  How does one react to that?

The "Nintendo is always awesome" fans have no problem adapting to it obviously.  That small group I'm in can't cope quite so easily.  I agree with Rick in that Billy doesn't really care for this change.  A way to deal with it is to criticize it like he's doing.  Predicting failure makes for a better arguement then "I don't like this because it excludes me."

I honestly thought the DS would fail and was really surprised that it didn't.  I initially thought the Wii would fail but with Sony charging $600 I don't think that anymore.  The best I can wish for I guess is that I actually really like the Wii when I try it.

[Kairon]

Wow, excellent post Iansane. It's actually interesting to find out that you're more of a principled idealist than I consider myself to be.

Would it be accurate to say that if you actually end up not liking the Wii, then none of the existing consoles would actually really satisfy you?

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Avinash_Tyagi]

See I would be concerned about the Wii leaving me behind if it weren't for the fact that games like MP3, Zelda, Mario, all sound like they'll play great on the Wii, even third parties are coming out with more "traditional" games for the Wii, like Red Steel (hopefully Ubi can get the controller issues ironed out by launch), really the more I hear about Wii the more i'm convinced this really is the system for everyone, gamers and non-gamers

[couchmonkey]

All right, here we go!  I'm going to skip right to the Wii arguments Billy makes:

- Underpowered
I am slightly concerned about the lack of HDTV support.  It doesn't matter now, but in three to four years, who knows?  As for the general lack of power, I think it's a calculated risk, and judging by the response at E3, the risk has not turned off hardcore gamers.  It's also possible that Nintendo will lose the casual gamers due to the power issue but I think E3 went a long way towards calming that fear.
Cause for concern: 6 pucks out of 10

- Launch Lineup
The launch lineup has weakened, which is disappointing, but I think it will do fine. Billy seems to argue that Zelda will only appeal to the hardcore, but I believe Ocarina of Time was extremely popular.  Nintendo also has something like six first party games scheduled to come out between January and April.  That's awesome!
Cause for concern: 2 pucks out of 10

- Virtual Console needs to include enhanced games
Eh, I don't think this is going to be a huge issue.  Certain hardcore gamers are not going to think the games are worth it because they already own them, or because they can emulate them, but I think the target audience will eat the VC up, enhanced or not.  (Edit: Though the initial lineup of 30 games is kind of weak).
Cause for concern: 0 pucks out of 10

- Third party ports
Billy tears this argument down before he even gets started.  Madden, Red Steel, Rayman, Super Monkey Ball, Trauma Centre 2 and Tony Hawk are all built from the ground up.  Yes, it would be bad if the system becomes too "porty", and yes, there are a lot of ports announced, but there are lots of original titles announced too.  I'd say more than N64 or GameCube had at this point in their lives.
Cause for concern: 3 pucks out of 10.

- Online
It's coming.  Nintendo has already announced three online games (Metroid, BWii, and Mario Strikers) and not only is Wii going online, it's all free, which I personally find way more appealing than Xbox Live.
Cause for concern: 1 puck out of 10.

I see why Billy's worried.  Billy and the casual gamers may not totally buy into the crazy controls (although I didn't even notice him mentioning that very much in his article).  I'm also a little worried that casuals will be turned off by the whole graphics thing.  Overall, though, I'm confident Wii is going to be a success.