Topic: Rovio Head Honcho Bashes Nintendo

[Penguin_Of_Thyme]

Rovio's Vesterbacka believes that it's a 'good sign' that Nintendo and others are worried about smartphone gaming.

http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/25912

In a recent interview, Peter Vesterbacka, holder of the ‘mighty eagle’ job title at Angry Birds developer Rovio, had some combative things to say about Nintendo and the console business in general. 

Near the close of his GDC keynote, Satoru Iwata voiced his fears about smartphone gaming and that cheap games with low production values could potentially harm developers making big budget games. "We produce value; we should protect that value,” said Iwata. Vesterbacka was not shy to respond to those comments.

“Of course, if I was trying to sell a $49 piece of plastic to people then yes, I’d be worried too. But I think it’s a good sign that people are concerned – because from my point of view we’re doing something right,” said Vesterbacka. 

In addition, Vesterbacka stated, “A lot of people in the games industry, they think the ‘real’ games are on consoles. You’re only a ‘real’ games company if you do a big budget game. But we don’t have that inferiority complex.”

Rovio does have prospective plans to bring Angry Birds to Wii and 3DS later this year.

[Stogi]

LOL at that last sentence. Don't bite the hand that has yet to feed you.

[Killer_Man_Jaro]

Honestly, I think both parties are in the wrong here. I feel it was short-sighted of Nintendo to dismiss the viability of the cheap downloadable games market on smartphones, while on the other hand, I see these comments from Rovio as ignorant, and in some ways, quite arrogant. Both distribution platforms are healthy, and there's no reason they shouldn't co-exist.

[Ian Sane]

Vesterbacka comes across too much like a one-hit wonder talking trash.  Let's see how you're doing once Angry Birds mania dies down before you start acting like a big shot.

Still I interpret Nintendo's message as "hey if you sell mainstream pandering casual games at $1 we can't sell them for $50."  Quality my ass.  They just know if this model takes off no one is buying the Wii Series anymore.

Nintendo struck gold with the casual market on the Wii.  Now companies like Rovio have found a model that appeals to casuals even more - low price games on hardware the target demo already owns for other purposes.

Of course $1 cellphone games is not a format that will work for anything, well, GOOD.  So Rovio shouldn't act like this is the new **** for videogames.  The model just does not work once you hit a certain level of depth and that's where dedicated consoles continue to make sense.

[Enner]

I'd imagine you can make good, simple action games on a smartphone that only require one swipe at any given time. I think strategy and management games that are turn-based or paced deliberately can really shine on iOS and Android.


I don't think Nintendo is too shy about having cheap games despite their Virtual Console and WiiWare pricing policies and their reluctance to drop price on their shelf games. Nintendo seems to be really scared/concerned of teaching a big part of the audience to expect cheaper experiences.


I can't believe how an artillery and physics puzzle game (Angry Birds) can get so popular. It's a shame that Team 17 (Worms) couldn't beat them to the punch.

[KDR_11k]

On the app store it's not just the casual games that are expected to cost a dollar.

[BlackNMild2k1]

I read a quote I liked a little bit ago that I will paraphrase here

"Rovio is trying hard to be a World Class Troll when all they are is a Newgrounds Thief"

I liked that statement, as Angry Birds does seem like many of the old flash games we used to play on the internet only dressed up divided into levels. But it's not always about who did it first as it is who did it right first. But it Nintendo has been doing it "right" for 25+years and it just kind of seems funny for Rovio to call out the VG legend just because they made their 1st million dollars from a game they practically gave away for free when Nintendo has made a few billion selling us games we've already bought several times before and beaten decades ago. (lol)

Rovio has every right to defend themselves, but let's keep it classy here. They haven't really created anything here as all they have done so far is "reskin a flash game". So let's see what they have to offer after they are done milking Angry Birds.

[NeoStar9X]

Honestly, I think both parties are in the wrong here. I feel it was short-sighted of Nintendo to dismiss the viability of the cheap downloadable games market on smartphones, while on the other hand, I see these comments from Rovio as ignorant, and in some ways, quite arrogant. Both distribution platforms are healthy, and there's no reason they shouldn't co-exist.

Nintendo never dismissed cheap downloadable games. Iwata said the race to the bottom and the conditioning of people (which is a result of the race to the bottom and free games)  to think all games should be that cheap was bad. That's what he was saying yet many people are choosing to completely ignore this.

[NWR_insanolord]

He's absolutely right in that regard. iOS gaming is doing well, but it'd be doing better, and have a much brighter and more interesting future, if people weren't conditioned to assume that every game will be 99c at some point and that they'd be a sucker to pay more than that. I know I fully intend to pay the $20 for the Final Fantasy Tactics remake on the iPhone when it comes out, and I hope there are many more like me.

Really, though, they need to meet in the middle. There needs to be more price flexibility across the board in games, and we need to stop seeing **** like EA charging $40 for what amounts to a 3DS port of the $6 iPhone version of The Sims 3.