EA Exec: Shigeru Miyamoto "Falling Down on the Job"
- Thread starter StewShearerOld
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'd say that's partly true. They do have DLC. But it would seem there is a drastic difference in its implementation. DLC on Nintendo devices - especially with respect to their first party properties - doesn't seem to beat the user over the head with it in the same way as other publishers and developers. And I have yet to see on-disc content held hostage. Full - disclosure, I'm not immensely familiar with every recent Nintendo title so I could be wrong in thinking this kind of brow-beating never occurs with Nintendo when it comes to DLC; but from what I have observed, if it does happen, it happens rarely enough that they correctly have the reputation for not being counted among the far more obnoxious peddlers.
Additionally, from what I've observed with respect to DLC from Nintendo, is that it is not essential to fully complete a game. I've not seen any DLC that makes the user feel that they must make an additional purchase, in order to experience the game as intended.
While the DLC is indeed there, it certainly does appear that because of the lack of prominence of it being referenced as you interact with the game, and because of the lack of on-disc content being held hostage to squeeze more money out of the user, and because of the lack of content needed to fulfill the experience as intended, Nintendo - moreso than others - still feels like a company that lets the user buy and play a game with little to nothing else to actually worry about.
That aside, this guy... seems like a jerk. Even if I agree that Nintendo could improve on many things including creating new first-party ip's, and even if I agree that they could do well to be more aware of what and where their competition is, he comes accross as an obnoxious, tasteless, hyppocrite.
Additionally, from what I've observed with respect to DLC from Nintendo, is that it is not essential to fully complete a game. I've not seen any DLC that makes the user feel that they must make an additional purchase, in order to experience the game as intended.
While the DLC is indeed there, it certainly does appear that because of the lack of prominence of it being referenced as you interact with the game, and because of the lack of on-disc content being held hostage to squeeze more money out of the user, and because of the lack of content needed to fulfill the experience as intended, Nintendo - moreso than others - still feels like a company that lets the user buy and play a game with little to nothing else to actually worry about.
That aside, this guy... seems like a jerk. Even if I agree that Nintendo could improve on many things including creating new first-party ip's, and even if I agree that they could do well to be more aware of what and where their competition is, he comes accross as an obnoxious, tasteless, hyppocrite.
Good Lord that was a funny joke...unless he was serious? Have you seen 3DS sales sir? Now for Wii U there is an argument to be made there are things wrong with it, but Nintendo doing poorly on the handheld front? Come on man, stop the trollin'.
This guy is making what I consider the absolute biggest mistake that major corporations make all the damn time. Don't TELL your customers what they want, LISTEN to what they want and then deliver.
Honestly even with my S4 I wouldn't use it as a gaming machine, fact is gaming chews up power and smart phone have enough issues trying to stay alive for a whole day without a videogame sucking up all the power. Typical stupid EA missing the point completly, atleast if my Vita or 3DS dies during the day from over use my phone still works :-/TheScottishMexican42 said:
and the next Monster Hunter comes over, and Zelda comes out, and ... you see where I'm going with this ^^weirdguy said:
Look like EA is feeling irrelevant again, better say some more shit to stir up controversy.
Seriously, lets treat this fellow as we would anyone else online: Largely ignore him and hope he shuts up.
Honestly, if this isn't a ploy for publicity (if it keeps your name in the news, it is publicity), then the way people keep trying to repeat this same garbage seems very much like the idea of repeating a lie often enough.
The biggest issue with the actual argument is the inability to distinguish between gamers as hobbyist and people who play games. They are close, and the line blurs a lot, but generally the hobbyist wants to invest into the hobby to explore it deeper. Kids tend to be good hobbyist in that regard for shorter bursts, but it is always a smaller subset that stick with a hobby as a hobby rather then as a passing interest. The ones who are buying apps on the other hand don't have the same sort of habits that sustain an industry. Nintendo knows this I have to imagine, as they have remained relevant for decades without changing their target demographic. Hell, if sales of the portable systems are any indication, they don't have any problems with getting and maintaining the demographic they are targeting and are able to keep a reliable audience, the very idea that the app market is often threatened to crash because of. Listening to this has me wonder what information has this guy seen, because looking at things myself, I see the most renowned handheld series in gaming with massive sales even today being claimed it is dying because of the habits of people playing angry birds on the can. That is like saying movies are dying because of the people who watch netflix.
Seriously, lets treat this fellow as we would anyone else online: Largely ignore him and hope he shuts up.
Honestly, if this isn't a ploy for publicity (if it keeps your name in the news, it is publicity), then the way people keep trying to repeat this same garbage seems very much like the idea of repeating a lie often enough.
The biggest issue with the actual argument is the inability to distinguish between gamers as hobbyist and people who play games. They are close, and the line blurs a lot, but generally the hobbyist wants to invest into the hobby to explore it deeper. Kids tend to be good hobbyist in that regard for shorter bursts, but it is always a smaller subset that stick with a hobby as a hobby rather then as a passing interest. The ones who are buying apps on the other hand don't have the same sort of habits that sustain an industry. Nintendo knows this I have to imagine, as they have remained relevant for decades without changing their target demographic. Hell, if sales of the portable systems are any indication, they don't have any problems with getting and maintaining the demographic they are targeting and are able to keep a reliable audience, the very idea that the app market is often threatened to crash because of. Listening to this has me wonder what information has this guy seen, because looking at things myself, I see the most renowned handheld series in gaming with massive sales even today being claimed it is dying because of the habits of people playing angry birds on the can. That is like saying movies are dying because of the people who watch netflix.
Hmm, let's see... Wikipedia tells me that the 3DS (in all its various configurations) had sold almost 32.5 million units from March '11 to June '13. If that's "falling down on the job", I'd like to throw myself at the office floor.
[small]You still mad about Dead Space 3's sales, EA?[/small]
[small]You still mad about Dead Space 3's sales, EA?[/small]
Richard Hilleman can suck our collective dicks. He's an ass hat...
and he's right. When I was a kid I played on my gameboy color, and when I was at home I had my N64. Now? My little brother plays on his phone, or on the family ipad. He sometimes touches the Xbox, but otherwise he uses the app store to play $1 games for long periods of time. I don't think mobile games will kill hardcore games, but there's no doubt that they're eating into the child market. That could be one reason, among many others, that there are so few kid games anymore.
and he's right. When I was a kid I played on my gameboy color, and when I was at home I had my N64. Now? My little brother plays on his phone, or on the family ipad. He sometimes touches the Xbox, but otherwise he uses the app store to play $1 games for long periods of time. I don't think mobile games will kill hardcore games, but there's no doubt that they're eating into the child market. That could be one reason, among many others, that there are so few kid games anymore.
I've had a different experience. Kids play Angry Birds and Minion Rush, but the gameplay is so unrewarding that they get bored very quickly. That's why they have to make so many Angry Birds. And AB: Star Wars is not aimed at kids. Sad to say kids don't give flying fowl about a nostalgia property like Star Wars.
Just a note to the conversation, cellphone games aren't a new thing that Japan picked up when everyone else did. They've been doing little rpgs on phones since 2004 or 2005. Square Enix in particular has been a big backer of it which is why Advent Children paid so much attention to everyone's shiny flip phones.WeepingAngels said:
He kinda looks like Steve Jobs actually if you shave the ridiculous receding mullet.
But there are a few points to agree on here, despite all the deaf-ears potshots at developers much MUCH more talented then him, and in the article posted his points are at a moreorless 50% success rate.
Nintendo is having problems. Their line of consoles and games are becoming increasingly restrictive, where main stress factors include the all-too-familiar list:
-High-innovation consoles that circle around Motion Control (Oh I know, that's a LOONNNNNNNGGG drawn-out argument that's been beaten and rebeaten, yet saddingly its incompatability still holds up for the Wii-U)
-Static IP either re-released or rehashed from previous property, either in the form of sequel's or third-party revisions
-Major incompatibility with third-party game developers, intertwining with point 2 as Nintendo is ever-forced almost to carry its game lineup by itself
-Decrease of multiplayer interest, again connected to point 2 and now point 1 where additional control is possibly subdued for financial reasons, and lastly
-Time lengths between content, which encircles all of the previous points.
Its shortcomings may have left opprotunity that are now being absorbed by iOS/Android/Allthatshit games. It is a cheaper, more conveinent alternative that doesn't require bigger inputs of money and skill, all divided by increasingly bigger blocks of time. Tolerance of these factors are becoming harder to achieve and more determinant of brand loyalty.
I also agree that focus in software over hardware development is the only way a gaming business can progress. Before it was typical that big producers overtook console production, and lesser companies there games. It's the grave nintendo has been digging since the Wii, where third-party compatibility/game production strugguled with the console innovation.
From a chief customer officer however, it is staggering how his better points are contradictory with EA's track record. They can't make Battlefield on every console, but they have been trying. His focus on software updates gives me haunting reminders of EA DLC, and then saying that'll scale back to reliance of physical sales is a headscratcher on their policy.
I also don't agree that customers looking for single fabrics of gameplay is a main concern anymore. I think that describes "Console Wars", and without wanting to open a whole new can of worms entirely the Internet and more multi-platform releases then ever are quickly dissolving arguments where my Xbox has more cylinders then your PS3 or whatever.
Oh, and he likes his phrases. "We are in continuous change" and "Key strategic resource for the future" are total psuedointellect backpocket bullshit that saucy up sociology papers.
So what's to take from this? He's right, he's wrong, he sounds outlandish and surreal, his arguments are against his company, and his suggestions are either old-news or have no precedence to working.
Phew. That's alot of words.
But there are a few points to agree on here, despite all the deaf-ears potshots at developers much MUCH more talented then him, and in the article posted his points are at a moreorless 50% success rate.
Nintendo is having problems. Their line of consoles and games are becoming increasingly restrictive, where main stress factors include the all-too-familiar list:
-High-innovation consoles that circle around Motion Control (Oh I know, that's a LOONNNNNNNGGG drawn-out argument that's been beaten and rebeaten, yet saddingly its incompatability still holds up for the Wii-U)
-Static IP either re-released or rehashed from previous property, either in the form of sequel's or third-party revisions
-Major incompatibility with third-party game developers, intertwining with point 2 as Nintendo is ever-forced almost to carry its game lineup by itself
-Decrease of multiplayer interest, again connected to point 2 and now point 1 where additional control is possibly subdued for financial reasons, and lastly
-Time lengths between content, which encircles all of the previous points.
Its shortcomings may have left opprotunity that are now being absorbed by iOS/Android/Allthatshit games. It is a cheaper, more conveinent alternative that doesn't require bigger inputs of money and skill, all divided by increasingly bigger blocks of time. Tolerance of these factors are becoming harder to achieve and more determinant of brand loyalty.
I also agree that focus in software over hardware development is the only way a gaming business can progress. Before it was typical that big producers overtook console production, and lesser companies there games. It's the grave nintendo has been digging since the Wii, where third-party compatibility/game production strugguled with the console innovation.
From a chief customer officer however, it is staggering how his better points are contradictory with EA's track record. They can't make Battlefield on every console, but they have been trying. His focus on software updates gives me haunting reminders of EA DLC, and then saying that'll scale back to reliance of physical sales is a headscratcher on their policy.
I also don't agree that customers looking for single fabrics of gameplay is a main concern anymore. I think that describes "Console Wars", and without wanting to open a whole new can of worms entirely the Internet and more multi-platform releases then ever are quickly dissolving arguments where my Xbox has more cylinders then your PS3 or whatever.
Oh, and he likes his phrases. "We are in continuous change" and "Key strategic resource for the future" are total psuedointellect backpocket bullshit that saucy up sociology papers.
So what's to take from this? He's right, he's wrong, he sounds outlandish and surreal, his arguments are against his company, and his suggestions are either old-news or have no precedence to working.
Phew. That's alot of words.
Nintendo might be doing pretty bad these days especially with the Wii U.. but i don't think it's fair to blame it on Shigeru Miyamoto.. it's the stubborn people in charge on Nintendo that refuse to change and do things to help the company, not Miyamoto. and to hear EA say this? it's like blaming a voice actor for the problems with the developer that made the game he did a voice in.
By mobile platform i assume he means smart phone apps? But despite the fact the Wii U is failing Nintendo is still turning a profit almost purely because of the 3DS, yh its still got a pretty strong market
Anecdotal evidence =/= "Everyone is in this situation".Sleekit said:
Both of my cousins have had iPhones and iPads since around the ages of 8-10, which was a fair few years now.
I always love these types of posts. It never fails to be hilarious when people hate EA and Call of Duty so much that they think the two are actually linked.Tanis said:
OT: I feel like the only reason people are being so dismissive about this is because it's EA. Or maybe the regular anti-Nintendo guys just haven't seen this thread yet, I don't know, but whenever you bring up Nintendo anywhere there always seems to be the legions of "Nintendo hasn't had an original idea in years!" guys coming out to do battle with the Nintendo Defense Force, so it's a tad amusing to me that because the first shot was fired from the likes of EA, suddenly the battle is entirely one-sided.
Anyway, his reasoning is stupid, but I don't necessarily disagree with the overall sentiment about Nintendo. Kirby is the only first-party property I really care about. I may buy Pokemon X/Y and I'll likely get the next Super Smash Bros. and Wind Waker HD if I ever get a Wii U, but even the other Zelda games haven't ever really interested me enough for me to finish them, and I'm not really sure how much less I could actually care about Mario or Starfox or F-Zero (that one mostly because I've never played one) or Metroid if Other M is any indication of where the stories are going to go in that franchise, or Pikmin or even Donkey Kong, which is arguably the only other Nintendo platformer I'm relatively fond of.
From the two games I've seen Nintendo DLC implemented in (Pokemon Mystery Dungeon and Fire Emblem) it's really easy to forget that the DLC even exists. They integrate them in such a way that they aren't in your way, and they feel like it is part of the game.vagabondwillsmile said:
In the mystery dungeon series, you can purchase DLC in game. However the DLC section is under the guise of an adorable Hoppip( or some other pokemon, I can't remember.) shopkeeper that is put way off to the generally less used area of the game.
The same with FE: Awakening. The place to get your DLC is covered up as another "secion" of the game titled as a portal, and once again, is put off to the wayside of the game. Half the time I even forgot it existed.
The price points are reasonable too. None of the DLC ever really exceeds $3.00. and the combo packs tend to be worth it at $4.00 seeing as how said packs usually contain 6 DLC in one.
Who the hell is this hippie Steve Jobs clone?
And why the hell should I care what a company that's notorious for producing shit games has to say?
Especially when he basically took a shit on the most respected developers of videogame history, by comparing him to somebody that's not even comparable to Miyamoto?
Bloody Christ, EA.
We get it. Your still sad that Nintendo didn't roll over for you and let you fuck up their Wii U with your shitty Origin online infrastructure.
And why the hell should I care what a company that's notorious for producing shit games has to say?
Especially when he basically took a shit on the most respected developers of videogame history, by comparing him to somebody that's not even comparable to Miyamoto?
Bloody Christ, EA.
We get it. Your still sad that Nintendo didn't roll over for you and let you fuck up their Wii U with your shitty Origin online infrastructure.