We store cookies, you can get more info from our privacy policy.
3DS

Nintendo Will Make 'Bold' Online Move 'When the Time Is Ripe'

by Pedro Hernandez - January 30, 2012, 4:07 pm EST
Total comments: 46 Source: http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/library/events/120...

The key to all of this might be in Nintendo Direct, as Iwata aims to "construct a seamless flow" that guides viewers through videos and demos.

Nintendo President Satoru Iwata wants to eschew the idea that Nintendo is "cautious, conservative, or even negative about business on a network," as he responded to investors at the recent Financial Briefing Q&A.

"Our answer [to that notion] is, in short, that we will make a bold attempt when the time is ripe," Iwata said. "Unless the timing is right, we will lose the consumers who do not have an Internet connection. We have not gone so far yet because our developers have a belief that our products should be available to as many people as possible."

This online strategy is furthered by the fact that the company's latest system, the 3DS, has a much higher connection ratio than their past handhelds. Even better, users in Japan watched the latest Nintendo Direct presentation on their 3DS systems. 

"If we can construct a seamless flow in guiding consumers to watch the Nintendo Direct presentation on their Nintendo 3DS and then voluntarily try 3D trailers and demo versions (that were introduced in "Nintendo Direct"), this is a fairly powerful and efficient system," Iwata said.

The implication is that future Nintendo Direct presentations will not only feature the streaming presentation, but also allows viewers to seamlessly move between the presentation, 3D trailers, and demos, making the presentations not just informative, but also interactive.

"We have a strong impression that the foundation for business on a network for us to take on various challenges on it has been steadily put into place today," Iwata added.

This process might have been slow moving, but it has been accelerating rapidly over the past few years. Nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto noted that Flipnote, an animation application on the DSi, has become a 'hidden hit' among children, revealing that "millions of children who do not communicate on the Internet use this software." (Editor's Note: I can vouch for this, my niece and her cousins use this like crazy.)

"We are taking on various challenges including how to operate the system of note exchanges by children freely in a safe manner," Miyamoto added. "In short, we trust the great potential of the network, but we are still in pursuit of originality through trial and error."

This all comes back around to Iwata's defense of Nintendo's online strategy. He finished his reply to a question about their online future by saying: "Furthermore, if the collaboration between the forum for communications and the place for new information on games starts to work well, we will be able to figure out a vital response to the concern you sometimes shared that Nintendo may be behind the social age."

Talkback

StrikerObiMike Sklens, Podcast EditorJanuary 30, 2012

Time was ripe 5 years ago. How can they possibly believe that they will lose users over this? The Xbox 360 and PS3 had robust online systems since launch and they are both more successful than the Wii. How could they look at that and say "nope, the time is not ripe yet."?  You can't hold out until 99%+ of your users are connected.

Jet PilotJanuary 30, 2012

Just like they'll introduce HD when the "time is ripe"...which of course is also about 7 years too late.

BlackNMild2k1January 30, 2012

They are gonna have to do something about their wireless communications and speed of storage or something, because there is no "flow" when it comes to having to wait 10 minutes to download a demo or 1 minute to load a video or even a website.

Maybe if they make the demos download automatically in the background while the video is playing, but then the video would probably lag since it's streaming and the whole experience would be a laggy mess.

I hope the Wii U doesn't have this slow ass wireless like the Wii & 3DS.

Chozo GhostJanuary 30, 2012

"Unless the timing is right, we will lose the consumers who do not have an Internet connection."

So they would lose about two consumers, big deal.

broodwarsJanuary 30, 2012

Quote from: Chozo

"Unless the timing is right, we will lose the consumers who do not have an Internet connection."

So they would lose about two consumers, big deal.

Well, it is an area of concern in more rural areas that don't have broadband support, and HD online play needs a broadband connection for stable play.  However, that doesn't mean you don't have an advanced online system on par with your competitors.

EnnerJanuary 30, 2012

I'm guessing however they look at their books, they would lose money if they went whole hog with online infrastructure. Beats me how that works out for them.

Quote from: Jet

Just like they'll introduce HD when the "time is ripe"...which of course is also about 7 years too late.

Weren't HDTVs really expensive in 2005? I didn't get the Vizio I have in my house until 2008.

TJ SpykeJanuary 30, 2012

Quote from: Jet

Just like they'll introduce HD when the "time is ripe"...which of course is also about 7 years too late.

Um, when Wii came out the HDTV adoption rate was was only 29% in North America in 2006 (6 years ago). In 2005, only 3% of homes worldwide had one, so 7 years ago was not "too late". Even now, the US rate is at about 68%.

Chozo, you do know that about 23% of Xbox 360 owners have never taken their system online? That is over 15 million systems just with the Xbox 360 alone.

MataataJanuary 30, 2012

Quote from: TJ

Chozo, you do know that about 23% of Xbox 360 owners have never taken their system online? That is over 15 million systems just with the Xbox 360 alone.

I can vouch for this. I've never used my Xbox online before- I've only ever had one system update because of a disc that came with Xbox magazine.

nickmitchJanuary 30, 2012

Why have you never your system online? That seems kinda silly. You miss out on features, games, game content, fun, etc.

Personally, I think Nintendo should take the following philosophy regarding users who aren't online: Fuck 'em. No offense to anyone, but you can't think you might alienate a fifth of your user base and wind up gimping everyone else out of features they wanted YEARS ago.

CericJanuary 31, 2012

You know how I read that.

We are waiting to do what Blizzard did with all there new games.  Making you be connected to play the game so they know you aren't pirating it.

Chozo GhostJanuary 31, 2012

Quote from: TJ

Chozo, you do know that about 23% of Xbox 360 owners have never taken their system online? That is over 15 million systems just with the Xbox 360 alone.

If I had a 360 I wouldn't take it online either, because you have to pay a monthly fee in order to do so. If you could play online for free I'm sure that percentage would be lower.

nickmitchJanuary 31, 2012

Are we talking never played multiplayer online? or never connected their Xbox to the internet? You don't need a gold account to buy/play xbox live arcade games. But I guess most people would rather use Steam these days. . .
Seeing this a more reasonable.

TJ SpykeJanuary 31, 2012

Quote from: Chozo

Quote from: TJ

Chozo, you do know that about 23% of Xbox 360 owners have never taken their system online? That is over 15 million systems just with the Xbox 360 alone.

If I had a 360 I wouldn't take it online either, because you have to pay a monthly fee in order to do so. If you could play online for free I'm sure that percentage would be lower.

The survey (which I think NPD did) was just of people who took their system online, not who subscribed to Xbox Live Gold. You can do stuff for free too, like downloading updates and buy most DLC and games.

NinSageJanuary 31, 2012

Quote from: StrikerObi

The Xbox 360 and PS3 had robust online systems since launch and they are both more successful than the Wii.

How are we defining success here?

I had a discussion with some friends yesterday about this, and while I do tend to side with the folks who say "LOL Nintendo sucks at online," you have to consider the battle they're fighting.

Microsoft and Sony aren't just game makers. Microsoft's success with Xbox Live can be almost directly tied to Windows, GFW, Windows Phone, etc. Plain and simple, Xbox Live is successful because Microsoft has resources and a goal of making their system not just a game system, but a media hub. Look at the new dashboard. They've done it.

Sony definitely had a lot more failings with their online system (and anyone who says that Sony is light years beyond Nintendo should honestly wait until they see what they're doing with Wii U before they damn Nintendo), but even still, they have the backing of Sony. While Sony doesn't seem to have the same synergistic goal, they still have more resources than Nintendo.

Is Nintendo the weak link in online? Yes, but I'd hesitate to dismiss them for their hesitancy with online. We (The NWR Forums) all might be connected, but the entire world isn't, and there are very real numbers (see above) that show that people don't take their systems online.

I believe Nintendo mentioned that the 3DS has about 60% of their users connected online. That's the highest a Nintendo system connection rate yet, and that's still missing nearly half of the user base.

broodwarsJanuary 31, 2012

Quote from: NinSage

Quote from: StrikerObi

The Xbox 360 and PS3 had robust online systems since launch and they are both more successful than the Wii.

How are we defining success here?

Besides being much more feature-rich than Nintendo's online service, I think Nintendo would have a very hard time proving that the Wii Shop has outsold XBLA or PSN, despite notable hits on WiiWare and the Virtual Console.

Ian SaneJanuary 31, 2012

What a smart company does is anticipate where things are going and get in at the start.  Nintendo has been a reactionary company since the N64.  They waited about optical discs, online gaming, HDTVs.  In those situations they were off of widespread adoption by like a year at best and then by the time their next system came out they were YEARS behind.

The internet isn't some fad.  This is not even the future, it's the NOW.  Nintendo until you are cutting edge only kids, casuals and diehard Nintendo fans will care.  Everyone else cares too much about current technology to take you seriously.  This is the era where little kids care around smartphones.  The world is incredibly tech-savy.

Yesterday I'm all excited about the Nintendo network and today Iwata complete sours my enthusiasm with this dumb comment.  That has been the Wii U this whole time.  One week you get good news and the next week they say something discouraging that undoes all that optimism.  I notice it is Iwata and Miyamoto that keep saying the stupid stuff that suggests that the Wii U is just more casual-focused nonsense like the Wii.  I wonder if there is disagreement within Nintendo about what direction to go in because there seems to be two very different descriptions of the Wii U going around.

BeautifulShyJanuary 31, 2012

Chozo that kind of attitude is why you are not running Nintendo.A  consumer is a consumer no matter how small. Nintendo is looking at the big picture. Nintendo has a giant instal base with the Wii they don't really want any people being left behind now do they?

Also I want to point out that I keep on seeing the same type of arguments being sent out on these arguments on these types of posts. It kinda gets tiring to read.

Ian SaneJanuary 31, 2012

Quote from: Maxi

Chozo that kind of attitude is why you are not running Nintendo.A  consumer is a consumer no matter how small. Nintendo is looking at the big picture. Nintendo has a giant instal base with the Wii they don't really want any people being left behind now do they?

If Nintendo was looking at the big picture they would look less at the five people in America who won't buy the Wii U because they're not online and more at the potential millions of people who are online and would potentially be turned off by an archaic out-of-date online implementation.  They can't have BOTH customers.  They have to pick one and these days the majority are online.  Fussing over the small minority that is not is ridiculous.

Nintendo's problem is that they assume that if someone CAN be their customer they will be.  They go for the lowest common denominator and assume that it excludes no one so everyone will be on board.  Adults and teens CAN play E rated games so focusing on that is less exclusive than offering M or T rated games.  People of any skill level can play casual games so everyone will want to play them.  These assumptions are embarassingly naive and it has bit them in the ass numerous times.  Nintendo sees it as expanding the potential audience.  It doesn't work that way.  It's more like a slider that moves.  If you go too much in the direction of the lowest common denominator you chop off people at the other end.

If Nintendo was aware of this they would never care about the small minority of offline users because the math just favours the online users.  But Nintendo is not aware of how it works.  They think the more broad you make something the more inviting it is to everyone.  This is just plain WRONG.

ThePermJanuary 31, 2012

to some extant its wrong, to some extant its oh so right. Nintendo is the Disney of video games not the Miramax. We were all hoping Silicon Knights could be Nintendo's Miramax, but alas that was not to be. Nintendo has been out of the position to have a real good chance for a Miramax, but with Wii U it has its chance again. This time nobody has a sharp enough edge on them.

like lets break it down from n64 years on

Nintendo had games like Turok, and Goldeneye, but was still labeled kiddy, even after releasing Conker which was totally subversive the opinion of the idiotic mainstream didnt change. I don't get it but it carried on to the next generation. I guess Cloud Strife was just too popular of an anti hero for the average joe to even consider the steps that were taken.
Nintendo wanted to shed their kiddy image with Silicon Knights and even more Perfect Dark, but Rare jumped ship. Silicon Knights provided the content, but after they heard what wii was like they ditched Nintendo. Nintendo got exclusives from Capcom, which became un-exclusives to the dismay of Nintendo. Capcom obviously betrayed Nintendo. Shinji Mikami was outraged and left the company. That guy was forced to make a bunch of stuff on platforms he didn't like. In an interview he mentioned how pissed he was because his PS2's laser went out immediately after the warranty expired and that was partially one of the reasons he actually wanted Resident Evil 4 on gamecube so bad. There were shooters on the gamecube, but none of them would ever be looked at in the bright light of halo.

With no more Silicon Knights Nintendo didn't have any first party mature games developers on hand during the Wii era. There were 2 metroid games and the Conduit, but that wasn't enough. Capcom had even more lax support this time as well, because they were both lazy releasing bad ligh gun games, and because wii is underpowered. On the other hand the majority of games that were popular were dusty war games like call of duty, which I have no desire to play. I loved the first Gears of War though.

Wii U looks to be pretty conventional, and I know I pretty much always enjoy the things Nintendo does with their controls, but in the long run I think 3rd party support is more paramount. That is unless Nintendo has something really good that's new on their hands.  I can just imagine this will be a lot better of a device in general as it may largley replace my PC in use. There was a window when my Wii was taking precedence over my computer even with its limited functionality. If Nintendo can use the tablet to expand upon this then it becomes super functional even if you are not using it for games. Nintendo never really talked about how they coveted the place of set-top box king, however, it seems they are positioning themselves to do just that.

broodwarsJanuary 31, 2012

Quote from: ThePerm

Nintendo wanted to shed their kiddy image with Silicon Knights and even more Perfect Dark, but Rare jumped ship. Silicon Knights provided the content, but after they heard what wii was like they ditched Nintendo.

Rare didn't "jump ship."  Nintendo sold them to Microsoft.  Silicon Knights likely left because the games they made on the GameCube (Eternal Darkness and MGS: Twin Snakes) were not big financial successes.

Quote:

Capcom had even more lax support this time as well, because they were both lazy releasing bad ligh gun games, and because wii is underpowered.

I thought both Umbrella Chronicles and Darkside Chronicles were excellent games with great production values and possibly the two best light gun games I've ever played, though they're certainly acquired tastes.  Were they great substitutes for Resident Evil 5?  To be honest, as someone who has played RE5 and didn't think it was all that great, I think they were.  Were they great substitutes for an original Wii-exclusive RE4-style Resident Evil game?  No, not really.

Chozo GhostJanuary 31, 2012

Quote from: broodwars

Rare didn't "jump ship."  Nintendo sold them to Microsoft.

It was my understanding that Rare turned to crap and that was the reason Nintendo gladly sold them to Microsoft. So if you look at it that way then you are both right. Rare jumped ship, and then Nintendo sold them afterwards.

TJ SpykeJanuary 31, 2012

Quote from: broodwars

Rare didn't "jump ship."

Not quite. After Nintendo declined the offer to become majority owners of Rare, they sold their 49% share in the company back to the Stamper brothers, who then sold all 100% to Microsoft. So the Stampers WANTED to sell the company to Nintendo, but Nintendo didn't want to buy them.

StogiJanuary 31, 2012

Quote from: Ian

What a smart company does is anticipate where things are going and get in at the start.  Nintendo has been a reactionary company since the N64.

Reactionary has ended up in profits every single time, unlike other companies.

But truly, Nintendo will never be like how you want them. The SNES generation is gone for good. Accept that.

What Nintendo is today is a company that wants massive appeal and not a corner of the market. They are a company that wants to explore uncharted waters rather than battle over a section of an island. And they will use technology accordingly.

Cheap and exciting hardware. Fun and addicting games. That's it.

Looking at Nintendo objectively, Iwata's comments aren't surprising in the least. Actually, they are right in line with their thinking. Until a majority of their consumers use it, they will not support. Plain and simple.

Chozo GhostJanuary 31, 2012

Quote from: Maxi

Chozo that kind of attitude is why you are not running Nintendo.

Are you responding to something I said?

motangJanuary 31, 2012

Hey Nintendo, I hate to say this but the time was ripe back in 2007!

smallsharkbigbiteJanuary 31, 2012

Quote from: Ian

If Nintendo was looking at the big picture they would look less at the five people in America who won't buy the Wii U because they're not online and more at the potential millions of people who are online and would potentially be turned off by an archaic out-of-date online implementation.  They can't have BOTH customers.  They have to pick one and these days the majority are online.  Fussing over the small minority that is not is ridiculous.

They can have it both ways.  Make games with good single player and local multiplayer games with the ability to play online and purchase additional content online.  This is how the other players do it.  I guess I'm just on the other side because I do live in a rural area.  The fastest internet I can get is 750k.  When I have to update GT5 on my PS3 I literally have to leave my PS3 on all night and then play the next day.  I would count in the online features because I use my Wii/PS3 online extensively.  But if too much online or online only games were required, I probably wouldn't buy that system because I don't see it as a fun experience. 

As a note, I live about 15 min from a city of >250,000 so I'm sure there are much more than a small minority that have sucky internet. 

Quote from: Stogi

Reactionary has ended up in profits every single time, unlike other companies.

But truly, Nintendo will never be like how you want them. The SNES generation is gone for good. Accept that.

Except this last year, when they lost about $845 million. 

The PS2 was very close(probably exceeded) to the SNES in terms of market dominance and getting the best multi-plat games.  The Wii seems like it should have been the natural successor, but Nintendo didn't capitalize on the hardware market penetration. 

NinSageFebruary 01, 2012

@Neal

I agree with nearly all you just said.

@broodwars

Then I think his sentence needed some restructuring.  It sounded like "due to their superior online, the PS3/60 were more successful than the Wii."  Where as your meaning is quite simply that the PS3/60 had superior online and thus its online endeavors were more successful.  Which, I would agree with.  Though, they probably couldn't prove it either, right?  ;)

NinSage - We should rejoice. This literally might be the only time we ever talk and not argue.

Ian SaneFebruary 01, 2012

Quote:

Looking at Nintendo objectively, Iwata's comments aren't surprising in the least. Actually, they are right in line with their thinking. Until a majority of their consumers use it, they will not support. Plain and simple.


I think we're there already.  This is the age of smartphones and iPads.  The majority already can use it.  It makes no sense to be conservative about this.  Nintendo's typical conservative attitude would also work a lot better if they were not in an industry where products are tied to five year lifecycles.  Apple for example can release a conservative iPod and then release a new one with new features two years later.  Nintendo can't do that.  A console has to be somewhat future proof.

Look at their "no HD" idea with the Wii.  Does that make ANY sense today?  I am literally the ONLY PERSON I KNOW who does not have an HDTV.  Having a videogame system that does not support HD resolutions just looks ridiculously archaic today.  It wasn't so much back in 2006 BUT it was clear that within less than five years HD was going to become very widespread.  If the Wii was only to last until 2008 or so not supporting HD would have been fine.  But it was supposed to last for at least five years and by then it was going to be archaic.  Nintendo has to plan within five year cycles.  I don't think the issues about internet access that they are concerned about now are going to be relevant at all even two years from now.  Any console maker has to make educated guesses on where technology is going within the next five years and that means sometimes having to bite the bullet on something is not quite ready yet.  Though at this point I strongly disagree with Nintendo's concern as I think the time was right years ago.

ThePermFebruary 01, 2012

Rare most definitely jumped ship, The stamper bros sold their share of the company before Nintendo did making 100s of millions of dollars. Nintendo had the minority stake in the company, they didn't want to have any stake in a company that was not going to do what they wanted so they divested their part of the company for 200+million. Its just spin that Rare was doing terrible and had to be dropped. There were rumors for months on whether or not they were leaving Nintendo or not. Rare is a shell of itself now, but there is only like a handful original people if any still with the company. Not even the Stampers are there. They are rich and retired(from Rare at least).

Silicon Knights is always in need of a pimpdaddy publisher, the only reason for leaving Nintendo according to them was artistic difference, which because Wii was underpowered and weird seems to be the reason given they were aware of it before it was announced. Had Wii been powerful, what reason would there to put Too Human on any other system or for that matter to turn an exclusive gamecube game into an exclusive xbox 360 game?

The Stampers did offer Nintendo the opportunity to buy their shares of the company, which Nintendo declined, most likely because Rare wasn't that good anymore. At that point, the Stampers sold to someone else. The Stampers jumped ship, and when they bailed Nintendo didn't care enough to keep the shell of the company around.

Ian SaneFebruary 01, 2012

Why was Rare considered no good when the Stampers offered Nintendo the opportunity to buy the shares?  When was this?  DK64 is iffy but in general I don't think they made an outright bad N64 game and Perfect Dark and Conker's Bad Fur Day, two of their greatest titles, were released close to the end of their Nintendo relationship.  They then released one disappointing Cube game (which isn't even THAT bad; it's at least competent), which may very well have been Nintendo's fault for shoehorning Star Fox into it.

At what point prior to the Stampers selling did Rare "suck"?

BlackNMild2k1February 01, 2012

Did you forget about the over extended development times, the fact that major talent had and was leaving the company and even the owners were trying to get out?

What was Nintendo supposed to hold onto exactly?

TJ SpykeFebruary 01, 2012

The owners were not trying to get out, they just wanted the company to be wholly owned. If the Stampers wanted to just get out, why did they not leave Rare until 4 years after Microsoft bought the company?

BlackNMild2k1February 01, 2012

If my memory serves me correctly, they had already backed off of most duties they had at the company's peak and probably stuck around to collect paychecks out of MS' pocket while they tried to figure out their next move.

They had talented people leaving and I think one of the Stampers took a leave of absence for a while too (but I could be wrong about that). The company was past it's glory days and both the Stampers and Nintendo saw the writing on the wall. Thankfully (for Nintnendo, The Stampers & Rare), MS didn't.

Chozo GhostFebruary 01, 2012

Nintendo's position with online "not being ready for the mainstream" seems to be at odds with other things they've done over the years. For example, was the mainstream ready for the introduction of the D-pad? Was the mainstream ready for the analog stick? Was the mainstream ready for motion gaming and so on? Nintendo didn't hold off on introducing any of those other things for fear the market wasn't ready for it, they just did it and it was successful. So this paranoia over online which has been successfully adopted by the competition for many years makes no sense.

Well, the only way it makes sense is if you figure Nintendo knows this but they are just trying to appease investors by lying to them with this bullshit excuse for why they haven't done something they should have done a long time ago. When you are supposed to do something, and you are lazy or whatever and don't end up doing it and then later on you get caught redhanded and are forced to explain yourself what do you do? You do what Nintendo is doing now and make up an excuse for why you didn't do it. That way you can shift the blame and you don't look as bad.

PlugabugzFebruary 02, 2012

Nintendo will make a "bold" online move, but in relation to who? To XBL/PSN or to themselves?

Given their history of "softly softly" with online the past 8 years i expect it to be bold for them which at the very most mean expect nothing thats at least accepted practice already.

LittleIrvesFebruary 02, 2012

Everyone having this conversation in this forum is tech-savvy. But this group constitutes a small percentage of Nintendo's hoped-for customers. It's easy to think a company should care only about whatever group you belong to and have them make decisions accordingly. But they are fishing in a much bigger pond, and we are but tiny minnows. Embrace it. Accept it. Enjoy the magic they offer, and get your tech fix elsewhere.

martyFebruary 02, 2012

Quote from: LittleIrves

Everyone having this conversation in this forum is tech-savvy. But this group constitutes a small percentage of Nintendo's hoped-for customers. It's easy to think a company should care only about whatever group you belong to and have them make decisions accordingly. But they are fishing in a much bigger pond, and we are but tiny minnows. Embrace it. Accept it. Enjoy the magic they offer, and get your tech fix elsewhere.

Memory might not serve me correctly but I think Nintendo stated 3 or 4 years ago that the vast majority (+70%) of Wii's sold had gone online.  To say that Nintendo is keeping pace with the ability of their customers, or the potential consumer base, seems very, very wrong in 2012.

Ian SaneFebruary 02, 2012

Quote from: Chozo

Nintendo's position with online "not being ready for the mainstream" seems to be at odds with other things they've done over the years. For example, was the mainstream ready for the introduction of the D-pad? Was the mainstream ready for the analog stick? Was the mainstream ready for motion gaming and so on? Nintendo didn't hold off on introducing any of those other things for fear the market wasn't ready for it, they just did it and it was successful. So this paranoia over online which has been successfully adopted by the competition for many years makes no sense.

The key is that this has been successfully adopted by the competition.  With those other examples Nintendo led the way and it was their idea.  But with online they were dragged kicking and screaming into it.  They did NOT want to do it on the Gamecube back when everyone else was and have been playing catch-up ever since.  Nintendo almost always screws up stuff that they themselves didn't come up with.  I don't know if it some weird pride thing where to do someone else's idea well would suggest that someone else can have a good idea or what.

If the market is ready for "bold" online then it suggets that Nintendo were wrong about holding off online on the Gamecube and screwing around with friend codes and having too small of storage on the Wii.  No good.

PlugabugzFebruary 03, 2012

Quote from: Ian

Quote from: Chozo

Nintendo's position with online "not being ready for the mainstream" seems to be at odds with other things they've done over the years. For example, was the mainstream ready for the introduction of the D-pad? Was the mainstream ready for the analog stick? Was the mainstream ready for motion gaming and so on? Nintendo didn't hold off on introducing any of those other things for fear the market wasn't ready for it, they just did it and it was successful. So this paranoia over online which has been successfully adopted by the competition for many years makes no sense.

The key is that this has been successfully adopted by the competition.  With those other examples Nintendo led the way and it was their idea.  But with online they were dragged kicking and screaming into it.  They did NOT want to do it on the Gamecube back when everyone else was and have been playing catch-up ever since.  Nintendo almost always screws up stuff that they themselves didn't come up with.  I don't know if it some weird pride thing where to do someone else's idea well would suggest that someone else can have a good idea or what.

If the market is ready for "bold" online then it suggets that Nintendo were wrong about holding off online on the Gamecube and screwing around with friend codes and having too small of storage on the Wii.  No good.

Having "too small" storage wasn't the problem really. If the Wi launched with SDHC card and USB hard drive support (and Wii's file system being able to recognise either of those are the primary location for all data) then all the "cleaning the fridge" related nonsense wouldn't have happened.

It was basically set setting limits and restrictions to things that they deem reasonable but weren't actually in reality because its an already established market.

ThePermFebruary 05, 2012

didn't Nintendo launch a satellite into space a few years back?

StogiFebruary 06, 2012

No that was me, Peter Perminski of 478 S. Minister drive, Tucson, Arizona.

ThePermFebruary 06, 2012

found this extremely old news article

http://news.cnet.com/MS,-Nintendo-launch-Net-satellites/2100-1023_3-215825.html

conspiracy!

nickmitchFebruary 06, 2012

Conspiracy indeed.

Got a news tip? Send it in!
Advertisement
Advertisement