Iwata: Nintendo Isn't Afraid of Failure

[shrekfan246]

However the same thing can be said for their recent W101. Everyone cried for a new IP, and nobody actually went out of the way to buy a new IP.

You're certainly not wrong, and that's one of the biggest things I hate about the current 'gaming culture' or whatever it's supposed to be called right now.

But seven years is still a perfectly long time for word-of-mouth to start getting around.

Contrast against a game that is a third or fourth re-release of a game people likely owned for years, which outsold it two-to-one. Sure, it's got more exposure to the general populace, but it's all still just a tad silly in my eyes.

 

[Dragonbums]

However the same thing can be said for their recent W101. Everyone cried for a new IP, and nobody actually went out of the way to buy a new IP.

You're certainly not wrong, and that's one of the biggest things I hate about the current 'gaming culture' or whatever it's supposed to be called right now.

But seven years is still a perfectly long time for word-of-mouth to start getting around.

Contrast against a game that is a third or fourth re-release of a game people likely owned for years, which outsold it two-to-one. Sure, it's got more exposure to the general populace, but it's all still just a tad silly in my eyes.

Word of mouth does play a part.
They tried again with Okamiden, however they once again botched it by making it a release on the DS. Which was not the adequate platform to fill the shoes of it's predecessor...like..at all.
Of course, who could blame them? Capcom likes to tote around the Okami franchise in their Marvel vs. Capcom games, but weren't willing to adequately fund any new ventures with the series. Then again, this is the same company that shut down Megaman, which resulted in half the team leaving, putting up a Kickstarter to Mighty .09 and becoming the third most funded game on Kickstarter. Effectively embarrassing Capcom on a public level seeing how many fans were willing to dish out money for the a Megaman clone.

It is silly I agree. However it's a lot more serious than silly.
This is the very mentality that has lead us to half the big games being nothing but dulled grey color palettes with shooter gameplay. We want new variety, yet we aren't willing to actually vote with our wallets.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

I geuss the whole 'make new thing' talk happened two decades ago because they've been mining the same properties for that long if not longer.

As per his example, Pokemon, just NOW going full 3D. You'll probabky get that MMO you're hannkering for in the next decade or two once they've filled up the pokedex to 1, 000. Man I remember when they used to have 'Gotta Catch em' All' as a tag line, then the event shit started happening and everything started going down hill from there, at least if you were good at Pokemon Stadium you could get a Mew, but now; "get your ass down to our big marketing stunt hoooo". Fuck.

 

[Pickapok]

Iwata cites the Pokemon franchise as an example of Nintendo making a strange call that paid off in the end.

It would be an even better example of a "play it safe" Nintendo franchise that's terrified of change and innovating in any way whatsoever. It's pretty much Nintendo's COD.

Except Nintendo doesn't develop Pokemon and it HAS made changes in each and every generation to bring more to the formula and give players a new experience. Generation 2 gave us breeding and all that came with it. Generation 3 gave us the Physical/Special Split, abilities and Double Battles. Generation 4 gave us Internet Play and Internet Events. Generation V gave us Triple and Rotation battles, adding another layer of strategy to the system. And you can't walk a mile in the Pokemon section of the internet without hearing about all Generation VI is bringing to the table.

That's Nintendo's strategy. Establish a formula, something that works and works well and provides a solid experience on its own, then find ways to bend and twist that formula with innovative design decisions and calculated risks. I challenge you to find two Zelda games that play exactly alike with no noticeable differences between the two.

 

[BabySinclair]

I give Nintendo much more praise than Microsoft and Sony because Nintendo does take more risks than the other two. While I saw the PS3 and 360 are pretty much the same thing with different exclusives the Wii was a completely different machine. I would say the same about PS4 and the XBone but Microsoft did a really good job of kneecapping themselves.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

the thing about Nintendo is that they're not afraid of failure because they're also a lot smarter than everyone else. People say that taking a risk is a good thing, but only if it's worth taking in the first place. A lot of stuff other companies do isn't brave or bold, it's just stupid.

 

[Lightknight]

the thing about Nintendo is that they're not afraid of failure because they're also a lot smarter than everyone else. People say that taking a risk is a good thing, but only if it's worth taking in the first place. A lot of stuff other companies do isn't brave or bold, it's just stupid.

Risk particularly suited Nintendo in the 7th generation. Sony and Microsoft have ties to hardware companies that leave Nintendo poorly prepared for the console market. If they didn't take a big risk, they'd likely get crushed by the competition. The gamecube, though many people don't know this, was one of the most powerful systems of the 6th generation despite being the cheapest and it still sold the worst (dreamcast not considered though it sold only around twice as well). Risk is a survival tactic in that situation, it isn't a business strategy for people with a clear vision for success.

Personally, I think the Wii found their calling for them. The risk paid off. They should work to provide a casual gaming machine for home entertainment that is family friendly and affordable. That's not a bad place to be in and is why they sold over 100 million consoles. $250 for a fun console? Great! Especially when the other consoles were $400-600 out of the gate.

Nintendo games don't require incredible specs to play. So it fits their brand really well. They just need to own this and they'll do great. Trying to straddle both fronts just got them here.

 

[Brian Tams]

Iwata cites the Pokemon franchise as an example of Nintendo making a strange call that paid off in the end.

It would be an even better example of a "play it safe" Nintendo franchise that's terrified of change and innovating in any way whatsoever. It's pretty much Nintendo's COD.

Except Nintendo doesn't develop Pokemon and it HAS made changes in each and every generation to bring more to the formula and give players a new experience. Generation 2 gave us breeding and all that came with it. Generation 3 gave us the Physical/Special Split, abilities and Double Battles. Generation 4 gave us Internet Play and Internet Events. Generation V gave us Triple and Rotation battles, adding another layer of strategy to the system. And you can't walk a mile in the Pokemon section of the internet without hearing about all Generation VI is bringing to the table.

That's Nintendo's strategy. Establish a formula, something that works and works well and provides a solid experience on its own, then find ways to bend and twist that formula with innovative design decisions and calculated risks. I challenge you to find two Zelda games that play exactly alike with no noticeable differences between the two.

While I agree with everything you posted, Generation 3 didn't give us the Physical/special split; that was Gen IV. Gen III gave us the Pokemon Powers, but it was still doing "Physical can only be this type, and Special can only be this type" (or, at least I think that's what you're saying). *ahem*

OT: Nintendo has always tried to innovate in terms of gameplay instead of game IPs, which I'm very grateful for. I mean, you can craft a new story, in a new world, with new characters, but I'm still going to be bored as hell if they're all just the same boring Military Shooters. Nintendo will instead staple the IPs onto new gameplay to try and ensure sales, which I also have no problem with. If its a Mario game, the Mario crowd are happy because its Mario, and I'm happy because I get to play a game with all new gameplay.
And, while they're raking in the cash from those titles, they do experiment with new IPs now and again (like W101).

 

[Eri]

Is that why they made the Wii, the almost failest console of all time?

(inb4 people say because it made money it was a success despite failing in all other regards)

I don't see where the Wii was a failure, except maybe graphics.
It was the best console of the previous generation.

That seems really subjective. You can't declare that the Wii is the "Best" console of it's generation like it's a fact. In my opinion, it was the worst console with a crappy gimmick, no games I wanted, and tons of really bad games (especially when they did get Cross Platform games). At least the N64 had games I wanted.

I wouldn't call it a failure. But I certainly wouldn't call it the best console of it's generation. I mean it sold a lot of consoles at a profit. So, that was a thing.

Also, motion controls suck. So does 3D.

I was using the same type of arguments he did. So maybe he understands how to argue properly.

If motion controls suck, why are there thousands of gamers that prefer to play with the wheel than classic controller in Mario Kart Wii?

Except it's a fact that it was worse than the other two. The hardware was objectively worse. Perhaps you could argue the games were good but even if they were, they were hampered by crap hardware, and would have been much improved using newer tech.

 

[Olas]

Is that why they made the Wii, the almost failest console of all time?

(inb4 people say because it made money it was a success despite failing in all other regards)

I don't think "failest" is a word.

I'd probably say the same after releasing that pile of crap The Wii, Other M, Skyward Sword, the 'NEW' (of all the fucking buzz words) Super Mario Brothers a couple of times, the other extremely safe titles, etc. Not to mention you have defenders everywhere that you don't need to pay.

Oh well. I hope they do better with the Wii U.

Other M was made by Team Ninja, not Nintendo R&D. Skyward Sword received mostly critical acclaim, regardless of your opinion of it. The Wii was a very successful console, with design decisions that nobody would describe as "safe".

Maybe Nintendo wouldn't have so many defenders if it wasn't almost constantly being attacked for next to no reason.

 

[Nazulu]

I'd probably say the same after releasing that pile of crap The Wii, Other M, Skyward Sword, the 'NEW' (of all the fucking buzz words) Super Mario Brothers a couple of times, the other extremely safe titles, etc. Not to mention you have defenders everywhere that you don't need to pay.

Oh well. I hope they do better with the Wii U.

Other M was made by Team Ninja, not Nintendo R&D. Skyward Sword received mostly critical acclaim, regardless of your opinion of it. The Wii was a very successful console, with design decisions that nobody would describe as "safe".

Maybe Nintendo wouldn't have so many defenders if it wasn't almost constantly being attacked for next to no reason.

Other M did have a story written by a certain someone from Nintendo, and Team Ninja were permitted to be the first to introduce Samus in that new light. I suspected it wasn't going to go so well from the beginning.

Popularity has never been an indicator for a quality product, regardless of your opinion of it. The Wii may have sold well but I still had a million problems with it unlike every single console I owned before hand. And I do call it safe because the gimmick wasn't even executed well while they pumped out rubbish such as all Wii mini games and shovel ware. I wouldn't have even that much of a problem with it if it allowed me an option to use a gamepad to boot up the Wii and use for most of the games.

Also, no reason? Really? I know one thing a lot defenders do is turn a blind eye to most complaints to what they're a fan of, like it's their love child or something and to ignore it's faults. Telling me it's popular doesn't solve anything. It just shows you will use cop out answers because you don't give a fuck about the complaints. Ignorance is bliss I'm guessing.

 

[Olas]

Is that why they made the Wii, the almost failest console of all time?

(inb4 people say because it made money it was a success despite failing in all other regards)

I don't see where the Wii was a failure, except maybe graphics.
It was the best console of the previous generation.

The Wii failed in a few more aspect than just graphics.

The Wii was a failure for melting away the last of a relationship that Nintendo had with a lot of 3rd party developers. The Wii also failed to implement its motion controls properly. The only game worth mentioning that used the motion controls well was Skyward Sword. Most of the other worthwhile games that used motion controls were released in the first 2 years of the Wii's life span.

Most of the Wii's library of games that isn't shovelware don't even bother with motion controls. Hell, most Nintendo titles barely had motion controls barring games that used the Miis. The Wii's online was also a complete mess with the friend codes.

Not using motion controls isn't a sign of failure if that particular game didn't need them. For lots of games motion controls are unnecessary, or even a hindrance. However some games implemented them properly and were better for it. Red Steel 2 and Metroid Prime 3 for example both used motion controls to great effect. I personally hate aiming with joysticks, so I was happy to see Call of Duty 4 and RE4 both get good Wii ports. Otherwise I probably wouldn't have played either.

As for losing third party support, I feel it's less a mistake on Nintendo's part and more an inevitable result of Nintendo wanting to move in a different direction than most third party developers. The only way Nintendo could have kept their support is by basically trying to be identical to the PS3 and Xbox, and if they had tried to do that they would have failed miserably.

 

[Austin Manning]

Okay, two things I would like to point out:
1) They bring up an example of Nintendo doing something new and use Pokemon, a series that has been ongoing since 1996. A series that, while fun, has used the same core gameplay and story elements of start with one monster, collect more as you beat up gym leaders and thwart the machinations of the evil Team (insert name here), since its inception.

2)While we're all posting snarky fan art of ripped Pokemon, does anyone else remember this guy from generation one?
http://cdn.bulbagarden.net/upload/thumb/8/8f/068Machamp.png/260px-068Machamp.png
Yeah, Nintendo hedged their bets in the "muscled monster" regard.

 

[Olas]

Snip

Other M did have a story written by a certain someone from Nintendo, and Team Ninja were permitted to be the first to introduce Samus in that new light. I suspected it wasn't going to go so well from the beginning.

Popularity has never been an indicator for a quality product, regardless of your opinion of it.

I didn't state my opinion. However, when discussing something subjective like whether the Wii is a good console, popularity is about the closest thing you have to a quantifiable measure of value.

The Wii may have sold well but I still had a million problems with it unlike every single console I owned before hand.

Then say what they are. Or am I supposed to take it on faith that you had lots of problems with it?

And I do call it safe because the gimmick wasn't even executed well while they pumped out rubbish such as all Wii mini games and shovel ware.

Wow, where to begin? First of all, how does failing to execute the "gimmick" well make said gimmick 'safe'? Safe is when you stick to something tried and true, something low risk. Something Sony and Microsoft, and most developers of AAA titles love to do.

The Wii had a controller radically different than either its own predecessors or its competitors, it was the first mainstream controller to have motion controls. Regardless of how well it was executed you cannot reasonably argue that Nintendo was playing it 'safe' with that decision.

Also, you can't blame Nintendo for the shovelware that came out for the Wii. They didn't make it. It's what happens when you have a popular console owned by lots of naïve children.

I wouldn't have even that much of a problem with it if it allowed me an option to use a gamepad to boot up the Wii and use for most of the games.

What about the classic controller?

Also, no reason? Really? I know one thing a lot defenders do is turn a blind eye to most complaints to what they're a fan of, like it's their love child or something and to ignore it's faults. Telling me it's popular doesn't solve anything. It just shows you will use cop out answers because you don't give a fuck about the complaints. Ignorance is bliss I'm guessing.

I don't turn a blind eye to complaints. Nor do I deny that the Wii had problems. But 90% of the time I hear people on this site blasting Nintendo it's over complete nonsense, like your comment. Defending the Wii from nonsense complaints isn't the same as saying it's perfect, it had a number of issues.

For example you were right about the Wii having weak online multiplayer. It was a legitimate weakness of the console. Then again at least they never charged money for it.

The Wii also had an obnoxious amount of additional peripherals that it tried to sell. Most of which were optional, but still heavily pushed or bundled with games raising the price. This was a shameless attempt by Nintendo to try and cash in on the console's success and the popularity of such gimmicky controllers. If you had mentioned this as a problem with the Wii I would have agreed with you. Instead you chose to mention a handful of games that you thought were bad.

 

[Nazulu]

Snip

Other M did have a story written by a certain someone from Nintendo, and Team Ninja were permitted to be the first to introduce Samus in that new light. I suspected it wasn't going to go so well from the beginning.

Popularity has never been an indicator for a quality product, regardless of your opinion of it.

I didn't state my opinion. However, when discussing something subjective like whether the Wii is a good console, popularity is about the closest thing you have to a quantifiable measure of value.

The Wii may have sold well but I still had a million problems with it unlike every single console I owned before hand.

Then say what they are. Or am I supposed to take it on faith that you had lots of problems with it?

And I do call it safe because the gimmick wasn't even executed well while they pumped out rubbish such as all Wii mini games and shovel ware.

Wow, where to begin? First of all, how does failing to execute the "gimmick" well make said gimmick 'safe'? Safe is when you stick to something tried and true, something low risk. Something Sony and Microsoft, and most developers of AAA titles love to do.

The Wii had a controller radically different than either its own predecessors or its competitors, it was the first mainstream controller to have motion controls. Regardless of how well it was executed you cannot reasonably argue that Nintendo was playing it 'safe' with that decision.

Also, you can't blame Nintendo for the shovelware that came out for the Wii. They didn't make it. It's what happens when you have a popular console owned by lots of naïve children.

I wouldn't have even that much of a problem with it if it allowed me an option to use a gamepad to boot up the Wii and use for most of the games.

What about the classic controller?

Also, no reason? Really? I know one thing a lot defenders do is turn a blind eye to most complaints to what they're a fan of, like it's their love child or something and to ignore it's faults. Telling me it's popular doesn't solve anything. It just shows you will use cop out answers because you don't give a fuck about the complaints. Ignorance is bliss I'm guessing.

I don't turn a blind eye to complaints. Nor do I deny that the Wii had problems. But 90% of the time I hear people on this site blasting Nintendo it's over complete nonsense, like your comment. Defending the Wii from nonsense complaints isn't the same as saying it's perfect, it had a number of issues.

For example you were right about the Wii having weak online multiplayer. It was a legitimate weakness of the console. Then again at least they never charged money for it.

The Wii also had an obnoxious amount of additional peripherals that it tried to sell. Most of which were optional, but still heavily pushed or bundled with games raising the price. This was a shameless attempt by Nintendo to try and cash in on the console's success and the popularity of such gimmicky controllers. If you had mentioned this as a problem with the Wii I would have agreed with you. Instead you chose to mention a handful of games that you thought were bad.

90% of the time I get responses like yours. You don't make a good point at all.

Popularity is what you judge something on. Are you kidding? Yeah, lets say the most popular are the best. Wii Sports must be the best game on the Wii, and I know games like Tetris are played more than most games so that makes it better than any Nintendo game. I also heard Sonic 06' sold pretty well, so forget all the problems with that because popularity fixes everything. Hallelujah! You know what, just fuck console and computer games because I'm sure those mini games on facebook and on all our phones probably beat everything.

Also, I don't have to say what problems I had because that wasn't what the thread asked, and I'm not obligated to point out anything to you either. If you want to know then just ask. You quoted me, get it?

As for gimmicks. I was expecting them to integrate the Wii waggling well into the games. Most of what I played either just had me do a little shake to perform a certain move or attack, which I fail to see how that immerses me into the game more. And the other thing is how there were all these pathetic little mini Mii games built around basic sports and what not. I found Mario Paint more create over than any of those.

The controller you brought up couldn't start up the Wii on it's own, and games like Mario Galaxy and some others, the ones I really wanted to play didn't have an option for other controllers. I call that a bust.

As for the other problems you mentioned, you should automatically factor that in. You started this and you were trying to make me look like I didn't know what I was talking about, instead of asking why. Because if you haven't noticed, I don't care what random people I meet online think. I've already made up my own mind, that's why I hardly quote people on their opinions. If you want something, you ask.

 

[Pickapok]

The Wii was a good console with a poor library made up of mostly shovelware. You don't have to have the best hardware available or the sharpest graphics to be good. You just need a solid, reliable system with an adequate number of entertaining titles to play on it and that is exactly what Nintendo had. I've gone through three Xbox 360s but only ever needed one Wii.

And for that Wii we have games like the Bit.Trip series, TWO Zelda games, the Mario Galaxy games, Brawl, Muramasa: The Demon Blade, Monster Hunter Tri, Metroid Prime 3/Metroid Prime Trilogy, Xenoblade: Chronicles, a vast amount of classic games available through Virtual Console, No More Heroes, Red Steel 2, Mario Kart, Wii Sports, an Okami port, Mad World, Wario Ware: Smooth Moves and a variety of other fun, successful and genuinely good titles.

Calling a system bad just because it's specs weren't up to snuff and it didn't have QUITE as many AAA titles that made all the money is just plain silly.

Also, the reason why it took so long to get a solid use of the motion controls was because developers had no idea how to incorporate them when the system first released. It was something brand new that they had to adapt to, hence why you don't see many multiplats on the Wii.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

Also, the reason why it took so long to get a solid use of the motion controls was because developers had no idea how to incorporate them when the system first released. It was something brand new that they had to adapt to, hence why you don't see many multiplats on the Wii.

especially since 3rd parties obviously didn't get the point that if you want something to work well YOU HAVE TO PUT EFFORT INTO IT. However, they were utterly lazy and stamped their feet when their halfassed efforts were called out. For all their whining about wanting to make new and exciting games, most designers are just all talk.

 

[Lightknight]

However the same thing can be said for their recent W101. Everyone cried for a new IP, and nobody actually went out of the way to buy a new IP.

You're certainly not wrong, and that's one of the biggest things I hate about the current 'gaming culture' or whatever it's supposed to be called right now.

But seven years is still a perfectly long time for word-of-mouth to start getting around.

Contrast against a game that is a third or fourth re-release of a game people likely owned for years, which outsold it two-to-one. Sure, it's got more exposure to the general populace, but it's all still just a tad silly in my eyes.

First off, bear in mind that the W101 is the 26th best selling game on the WiiU. So WiiU software in general isn't doing so hot.

Next, recall that the W101 developer complained of the utter lack of marketing for their game a month before released. Apparently, if you aren't in the "know" like most of the posters on this forum are, you knew next to nothing about this game. Say what you will about marketing, but it sales games and silence does not.

Nintendo has failed in marketing their product for several generations. I'm not even sure I'd say they marketed the Wii properly despite its success. But I clearly recall Wii ads where I don't recal gamecube or WiiU ads.