Topic: ♥ Loyalty ♥

[Mop it up]

Recently I have seen some people claim that games such as the “Wii” series (Sports, Play, Fit, Music) and things like the New Play Control! series aren’t Nintendo being loyal to their fans. This is something which doesn’t make sense to me, because I’m not really sure what that means.

The way I see it there's no such thing as any company being "loyal" to its consumers, people are just taking a business relationship too personally. Nintendo will release products that attract the most sales, regardless of what that is or who they target. They've never promised to always cater to the same people, so they have the right to release whatever they want. As a consumer, people have a choice too, and if a company no longer offers them a product they want then they can go find a different company who will.

I’m probably missing something here though. Can someone explain to me what it would mean for Nintendo to be “loyal”?

[ThePerm]

well if your a loyal zelda fan than there should be a newer zelda. TP was good, but it was a gamecube game!

[GoldenPhoenix]

I really do not fall in line with this. I've always been a Nintendo fangurl since the late 80s. Even during the Wii generation I have taken a lot of their decisions as, well, business decisions not to mention the fact that I'm flexible enough in my gaming tastes to diversify myself to ENJOY games like Wii Sports. Nintendo under Iwata has been a fun thing to watch, and as someone who studied business in college I can appreciate what Nintendo is doing. Not to mention that, as you stated, Nintendo has NEVER been about a certain group, they've always crafted many of their games towards "everyone", and I do not see that shifting much with WIi. It may take on a new face but the way I see it they are finally accomplishing a goal they've been striving for well over 2 decades.

Now in regards to loyalty itself, there are so many choices now then EVER when it comes to reliable gaming consoles with some great choices of games that if you are somehow disgruntled by Nintendo you can pick up another console (Heck I recommend people picking up more then one console a generation anyway if they can afford it!).

[EasyCure]

I really do not fall in line with this. I've always been a Nintendo fangurl since the late 80s. Even during the Wii generation I have taken a lot of their decisions as, well, business decisions not to mention the fact that I'm flexible enough in my gaming tastes to diversify myself to ENJOY games like Wii Sports. Nintendo under Iwata has been a fun thing to watch, and as someone who studied business in college I can appreciate what Nintendo is doing. Not to mention that, as you stated, Nintendo has NEVER been about a certain group, they've always crafted many of their games towards "everyone", and I do not see that shifting much with WIi. It may take on a new face but the way I see it they are finally accomplishing a goal they've been striving for well over 2 decades.

Now in regards to loyalty itself, there are so many choices now then EVER when it comes to reliable gaming consoles with some great choices of games that if you are somehow disgruntled by Nintendo you can pick up another console (Heck I recommend people picking up more then one console a generation anyway if they can afford it!).

I know you'll HATE me for that GP but it HAD to be DONE..

I can't add any MORE to the topic at hand because i've ALREADY shared my view on this subject MULTIPLE times in OTHER threads. Nintendo hasn't changed a bit.

[KDR_11k]

I'd say it's the fans who weren't loyal to Nintendo considering their sales have been going downwards ever since the NES. No wonder Nintendo said "screw that, we're going for the mass market again". Of course it's hard to say they've abandoned the fans when their core titles still massively outnumber their new market titles.

[MoronSonOfBoron]

I believe it's been a point iterated multiple times by my brother, Kairon, but to put it simply, Nintendo is very obviously not like other companies in the way they approach the video game business, at least not in modern times. That said, a "fan" by the understood(?) traditional definition may find it difficult to appreciate Nintendo's output.

I'm staring at (or being stared at by) a Gene Simmons banner ad here on NWR as I write this post, and it struck me that the way people approach video game companies is much like the way they approach their other entertainment idols. They hold expectations about the overall persona, methodology, and philosophy represented or endorsed by their idols. In many cases, arguments break out over what, exactly, the "truest" or "best" persona of a particular performer/developer was or is. As an entertainment industry, it is a given that video games will have a talent pool constantly in flux, and thus new personas will become visible, challenging older ones to change direction or hold fast to a "core" fanbase's expectations.

And I don't think Nintendo wants to be the 60-year-old guys doing a reunion tour.

[Kairon]

I'll be a fan of Nintendo as long as they're loyal to one group:

themselves.

I don't owe Nintendo anything and they don't owe me anything. I'm responsible for my own fun, and they're responsible for their own sales. The beauty of being a fan is just how often the two disparate things intersect.

[UncleBob]

I don't owe Nintendo anything and they don't owe me anything.

Ding.  We have a winner.

[D_Average]

Brand loyalty to inanimate objects is a delusion and some of these people need seriously help.  There's actually a large numple of folks impacted by this, which is properly known as "Objectum Sexuals".  Many fanbois n gals from all over the spectrum carry a mild form of this disease.  Its sad.

[Peachylala]

Kairon pretty much hit the nail on the head. Nintendo does what they do best, but that doesn't mean I brand myself to their projects.

Quite a shame it happens to other fanbases alot. Quite annoying, but fanboy/fangurl-ism happens.

[Stogi]

Kairon's right but only to a point.

Nintendo OWES me. I was there in the beginning, and I will continue to be there as long as they cater to me.

It would be disingenuous if they simply packed there bags up and said "**** YOU STOGI" were done making Zelda, Mario, and Metriod. It's in our best interest to make Magaritaville blenders now.

Yes it's only business and money talks, but there's a commitment to fans that is morally binding.

[UncleBob]

Nintendo OWES me. I was there in the beginning, and I will continue to be there as long as they cater to me.

You were there in 1889?  Wow!  Amazing.  That makes you, what 120 years old or something?!?  Crazy.

[EasyCure]

Kairon's right but only to a point.

Nintendo OWES me. I was there in the beginning, and I will continue to be there as long as they cater to me.

It would be disingenuous if they simply packed there bags up and said "**** YOU STOGI" were done making Zelda, Mario, and Metriod. It's in our best interest to make Magaritaville blenders now.

Yes it's only business and money talks, but there's a commitment to fans that is morally binding.

I think what Stogi is trying to say is Nintendo should never abandon the people that made them money in the first place.

But the fact is, if they hold true to themselves and their original ideals (making money hand over fist, yes, but also by delivering a QUALITY PRODUCT that ANYONE AND EVERYONE can enjoy) they can never 'abandon' a fanbase because they're still doing what they've always done..

Your favorite band signing to a major label doesn't mean they're selling out unless they go from playing underground genre A to mainstream genre B.

[Spinnzilla]

I personally think Punch-Out!! and Sin & Punishment 2 are two "I'm sorry" letters to the people they disappointed at E3 2008. 

[Stogi]

Nintendo OWES me. I was there in the beginning, and I will continue to be there as long as they cater to me.

You were there in 1889?  Wow!  Amazing.  That makes you, what 120 years old or something?!?  Crazy.

All I am saying is, don't bite the hand that feeds you.

[UncleBob]

All I am saying is, don't bite the hand that feeds you.

But you're only feeding them so long as they do things you like.  It's not like you're giving them charity or anything.

Let's say Nintendo stayed the course and continued releasing products that catered to your likes.  Then, MicroSoft decides *woah* - maybe we should do that!  So they start catering to your likes as well - and they start doing a better job than Nintendo.

Would you *not* give MicroSoft money in exchange for making products you like?

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Nintendo OWES me. I was there in the beginning, and I will continue to be there as long as they cater to me.

You were there in 1889?  Wow!  Amazing.  That makes you, what 120 years old or something?!?  Crazy.

All I am saying is, don't bite the hand that feeds you.

You were one of those kiddie Pokemon consumer brat whores?

[Stogi]

All I am saying is, don't bite the hand that feeds you.

But you're only feeding them so long as they do things you like.  It's not like you're giving them charity or anything.

Let's say Nintendo stayed the course and continued releasing products that catered to your likes.  Then, MicroSoft decides *woah* - maybe we should do that!  So they start catering to your likes as well - and they start doing a better job than Nintendo.

Would you *not* give MicroSoft money in exchange for making products you like?

Well ya, as a consumer I would. But that's the point. They need to keep me on there side.

[UncleBob]

All I am saying is, don't bite the hand that feeds you.

But you're only feeding them so long as they do things you like.  It's not like you're giving them charity or anything.

Let's say Nintendo stayed the course and continued releasing products that catered to your likes.  Then, MicroSoft decides *woah* - maybe we should do that!  So they start catering to your likes as well - and they start doing a better job than Nintendo.

Would you *not* give MicroSoft money in exchange for making products you like?

Well ya, as a consumer I would. But that's the point. They need to keep me on there side.

Why *you*?  If a company could trade you for two other customers, why shouldn't they?

[NWR_DrewMG]

Why *you*?  If a company could trade you for two other customers, why shouldn't they?

Not arguing either side, but I suppose the answer to that question is because Stogi is a customer who is more likely to continue to purchase products in the future instead of just today.

[UncleBob]

But Stogi already said he'd easily give his money to MicroSoft if they started making products he liked better.

Strogi is ready to give his money to whomever makes the better products.  Is that really any different than a company designing their products toward whomever gives them the most money?

[NWR_DrewMG]

But he also said he will always support Nintendo products as long as they continue to cater to him, which they have historically done. 

He didn't say he would stop buying Nintendo products just because Microsoft began to make products he liked as well.

[UncleBob]

Money spent on MicroSoft is money not spent on Nintendo.

Should Nintendo make "Products for Strogi" and sell him one for $50 while he buys (and spends time playing) MicroSoft's products as well, or make "Products not for Strogi" and sell four to two people who are only buying products not made for Strogi?

Companies should make products for those who buy them.  People should buy products that they like, regardless of what company makes them.  Everything works out better this way.  Trying to make some kind of relationship that isn't there doesn't help anyone.

And I'm the biggest Nintendo whore there is.  If *I* don't think Nintendo owes me anything, why should "you"?

[NWR_DrewMG]

No, I don't disagree with you, UncleBob.

But if Stogi is more likely to buy Game A (released today), Game B (released in 3 months), Game C (released in 6 months) and Game D (released in 12 months) based on a history of purchasing Nintendo products, then he has bought four games.

There is no data on the new consumers, and no reason to believe that either of them will buy games B, C or D.

Thus, only two games sold.

So what this comes down to, from my perspective, is that Stogi is a longtime video game purchasing consumer and will continue to buy Nintendo products, even if Nintendo products are not the ONLY video game products he buys.

[NWR_DrewMG]

And to be fair, I don't think any corporate entity "owes" their customer base.  If they choose to change their target consumer, then they risk the consequences if the new strategy doesn't pan out.  I'm not convinced that Nintendo's recent change of strategy is best for them in the long term, but I also realize that this opinion is not largely shared amongst the Nintendo fan.

Brand loyalty makes you a blind consumer, but Corporations are wise to recognize that it exists.  Apple certainly does, and it's built them a fairly decent sized market for the iPod.