Let's talk frankly about Nintendo

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

Nintendo is, as has always been, a company that doesn't seem to want to jump on bandwagons. They do their own thing, and yes rehash a lot of their success to which I say they DO keep succeeding with more than failing. They're first and foremost a Japanese gaming development company, and what may drive them more, despite the US and western markets being a sizable profit location, is the demand and love by the Japanese people.
I commend Ninty for keeping their roots, and not trying to play by way of copying the "more successful" consoles. Why? ATARI is gone, SEGA is gone as developers, Sony is only recently profitable and as a whole has spent a LOT of money attempting to standardize a media format under their patent and only recently succeeding with BluRay, much thanks to the PS3 for that.
Microsoft is the most recent challenger and while having had missteps is doing OK.
Nintendo has had a LOT of innovations succeed, the Game Boy (which pioneered the way for the DS and its iterations) is a prime example. Consoles of the non-mobile variety will never rival the Wii, but they're far from sinking the company. I believe Nintendo is playing a LONG game for itself and doesn't exactly care about being in 3rd place or first place, they want to be there at the finish line with a lot of grave markers on the side of that long race. They've succeeded in being around since before I was born, and I still have Nintendo products in my ownership.... that says a LOT about them in my view. And I'd like for them to keep their identity and not try to play the console wars games any more than they already have.
Sony and Microsoft are duking it out, Nintendo may be quite content to sit it out and watch the other two exhaust themselves.

That's definitely another way of looking at it. People like to chide Nintendo for not getting into online for instance, but considering how many pitfalls companies had last year concerning that, one might say that Nintendo just let the entire industry beta test it for them. Same thing with the shooter genre; instead going into it, they sat back and observed to see whether or not it was worth getting into or it was going to be a flash in the pan that had little lasting impact. And when they DID finally do something along those lines with Splatoon it was essentially ripping the TPS to shreds and making an entirely unique experience around it. It's how they approach any genre. You have to make your moves carefully. We like to romanticize "innovation", but most of time it's just idiots making boneheaded decisions and trying to force things before they're ready.

 

[Dragonbums]

Where are these threads? Where is all this Nintendoom people are talking about? No one is saying this . At least no one is making threads about it on the escapist. You are fighting a nonexistent war.

Well once upon a time before the whole [debate that will not be named.] ravished the forums and made this site a barren wasteland there were at least a couple of notable users who always made threads whinging about people whinging about Nintendo.

You were put into what's his name's place after he fell silent, elected to counter any negative Nintendo threads! But there hasn't been any recently, I've missed you.

I was sort of unofficially elected as the new NDF official. I have let jeffers down

Sorry for not posting on here as much. I'm not totally dead but the Escapist has just felt hollow in recent months (that and I kind of want to lower the bar on my warning meter.) I tend to lose sight that some peeps enjoy my posts. I'll try to make an effort a bit more often. But I think the days of mega discussions are all but gone in me.

 

[Dragonbums]

Wait, why does Dragonbums get to be the new NDF Leader? I thought I got that.

I guess I was the second most active Nintendo fan user on this site Or maybe I'm just more noticeable.

OT: Maybe you're confusing other sites for this one? Because lately the number of Nintendo...anything articles or OP topics are at an all time low. That being said, I do agree that Nintendo tends to get the short end of the stick compared to the other two in other sites.

Honestly the Escapist has mostly been on the dead end of forum sites lately. And it's possible that most of the Nintendo centric people either got banned because of [topic that shall not be named here.], broke too many rules in general and got the ban, or they simply left for elsewhere.

Aside from the common Nintendo was a poopy pants to a YTuber article and amiibo stuff, news about the company in general hasn't been all that dramatic.

 

[Las7]

To me Nintendo is largely a software company, hardware they make are simply the form of subscription a person needs to pay to play those games. That's how I view things - it used to be they had a monopoly on consoles but since that they have been inking a profit thanks to the software. Western 3rd Parties have never really embraced any Nintendo HW. It's still a very important avenue for Japanese studios to stay in business but how many of those would be left standing as the mobile market drives they out of business unless they focus completely on it. Wii U entirely Nintendo supported ecosystem there are indies and certain published games from 3rd parties but that's it. Nintendo has failed to win over the next generation in the West with the 3DS and Wii U. The 3DS has done alright but handheld is still a major market dissapearing with a new convenient devices that can do multiple things that are enough for casual audiences.

So it's the overall number of titles they publish - how much they sell - additional avenues to sell to their most loyal customers, like Amiibos and other merchandise. In terms of software considering the install bases Nintendo has done alright to keep the revenue in the plus side since eating up all the initial loss from the Wii U/3DS launch years. Splatoon and SMM look like the next multi million sellers on the Wii U and on the 3DS between their titles and some 3rd party games they have several multi million sellers per year.

Cost of development, while other studios are mainly focusing on huge titles with huge production/marketing budgets. Nintendo does release those lower development cost games or handheld games which don't take up much cost but generate great return.

With longer dev cycles for major IPs on consoles they have also figured out there are ways to keep new iteration fresh via more content in the for of paid/free DLC.
Personally I think that unless the development teams for handheld and console development are combined Nintendo won't be able to support their next hardware. Their next handheld is probably going to do worst in the West - unless they figure out how to win some of the audience they lost to smartphone gaming. I don't see that happening unless it's very cheap and is subscription based:
Example: "Play all your Nintendo console games at lower res and other classic handheld games for a monthly fee and low hardware cost"
There would still be exclusives but those would be few and far between and mainly from Indie/3rd party publishers.

Next console needs to be released only when enough games are ready for it, another drought of games will kill any sort of enthusiasm for the next console they could be making. So a 2017 release might be the best time for that with at least a dozen of the big hitters being released at the launch.

Whatever they do they fans need to abandon the idea that some how 3rd parties would flock to it and no one should be basing their decision on console purchase on such hopes. I don't see them going 3rd party until the console business completely disappears.

 

[Callate]

I think the one big bad boo I have with Nintendo right now is the way they've been claiming everything on YouTube.

But conversely, Satoru Iwata (God rest his soul) refusing to lay off Nintendo employees as a short-term panacea to the company's financial woes... Well, frankly, we need more of that from high-level corporate brass. And it excuses a lot of sins in my book.

In a sea of brown-and-gray crapsack world shooters, Nintendo has been the champion of color and fun for a long time, and if some people need to slag on that to prove how conversely "mature" they are, to hell with them. I hope Nintendo sticks around to provide contrast for decades to come. Long live Mario, Donkey Kong, and Kirby.

 

[DanteLives]

My only gripe with Nintendo is that they're not doing enough with the inactive IPs they have at their disposal.

Sure there's a new Star Fox and Earthbound in development, but that's not enough to make me consider getting a Wii U.

They'd need to announce a new F-Zero for me to consider getting one. My inner petrolhead craves fast paced racing action with no silly items, something that I can't get from Mario Kart, which gets boring real quick for me.

Other than F-Zero, there's plenty more Nintendo can announce that can revive my interest in their products. 2D Metroid, Ice Climbers remake, Golden Sun remake to name a few.

 

[Danbo Jambo]

A single anomaly does not rule out the overall pattern. It'd be like claiming a game company is failing when each of their seven released games sells more than the previous one, except for the fourth game, which sold less then all the others.

The Wii was a crazy success that no one predicted, not even Nintendo. It made them complacent and they expected the WiiU to sell just as well on the name alone, but at that point the craze had ended and the huge casual base that had made the Wii an explosive success wasn't buying.

I will admit the OP should have mentioned Nintendo's handheld division, as it is practically a monopoly and is probably raking in the money for them, but that wouldn't be in line with the intended "Nintendo hate" thread, would it?

No, but it does highlight that said pattern is only 1 perspective.

I could easily see a pattern where Ninento release a successful console, spend several more console's experimenting with various aproaches, then release an even more successful console building on many things they learned.

The many truths lie in which truth you're choosing to see and which perspective you're looking at things from.

I just find it funny how threads like these crop up on the eve of a major Nintendo release hitting store shelves (Super Mario Maker in this case). Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if they weren't always so repetitive. Considering how Nintendo isn't going anywhere I don't see what there is to discuss, especially since how they're run is none of our business.

Aye. I've never got how folk can get so attached or dettached to a company. If they release something you like buy it, if not don't.

.....lol. Never I seen a finer example of seeing what you choose to see.

What, you mean not choosing to ignore a downward trend in favour of a single data point? That's the finest example of seeing what you choose to see?

Whether you ignore said pattern or ignore said Wii sales, my point is it's down to perspective, and that neither holds a definitive answer.

Wow. I think I'm speechless.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and explain the point of the data I posted. Each Nintendo console sold considerably less than the previous generation. The Gamecube sold roughly a third of the systems that the NES did. There's an obvious trend that does not favor Nintendo in the long run, if we look at the NES to the GameCube.

The Wii was an anomaly, and I even offered a theory as to why it sold so well. The Wii U looks like it will be doing well to outsell the GameCube at this rate, and seems to be inline with the unfortunate trend. This is especially bad as both competitors overtook it and it had a year advantage. At this point, handhelds may be the only thing keeping Nintendo relevant in truth.

Be honest. Did you even read the post? Or did you latch on to some "intellectual dishonesty" and decide that one thing somehow invalidated any point I might have had?

It just made me chuckle, I've no real opinion per say, I just think that your whole point is based on an untrue perspective.

For example, the statement "handhelds may be the only thing keeping Nintendo relevant in truth." doesn't account for a potential technological shift in focus (2-D to 3-D, Arcade to Console etc.) which may or may not happen, and that it also ignores things such as what's trendy etc.

I remember many not buying a Gamecube because the Playstation & Sony were just cooler. You could play them in nightclubs a lot of the time, and they snagged the older market. Who's to say Nintendo won't hit on something like that?

You're coming from quite a narrow POV IMO. that's not to say you haven't got a point, it's just a point based purely on simple A to B logic, which isn't how things often work.

Simply put, if Nintendo do something good - by chopice, luck, fashion or whatever - they'll do well. If they don't they won't. What's happened previous doesn't really matter, and the Wii's booming sales prove that - again, it's about perspective.

 

[Something Amyss]

Whether you ignore said pattern or ignore said Wii sales, my point is it's down to perspective, and that neither holds a definitive answer.

And my point was, as well as still is, the fact that you're wrong. And I and others have explained exactly why.

The downward trend is mathematically sound. Choosing to rule by anomaly may indeed count as a "perspective," but it by no means a useful or credible one.

Hey, there was a thunderstorm here last December. That didn't suddenly make it June, no did it make it a valid and equal perspective to claim so.

Oh, and to be clear, we're not "ignoring" the Wii's sales. We just understand how tends and patterns work. If the Wii U didn't immediately fit in with the prior pattern, you might be into something. The fact that it did, the fact that in one of the best-selling console gens ever it's struggling, would indicate that you are off-base.

But ignoring a trend for a single, easily explained point of data? That's not a sound argument. And if you were really coming from the point of "no real opinion" that you claim, I imagine you'd see that. We don't measure anything else in this format, because it's not sound from a logical or mathematical sense.

 

[Danbo Jambo]

Whether you ignore said pattern or ignore said Wii sales, my point is it's down to perspective, and that neither holds a definitive answer.

And my point was, as well as still is, the fact that you're wrong. And I and others have explained exactly why.

The downward trend is mathematically sound. Choosing to rule by anomaly may indeed count as a "perspective," but it by no means a useful or credible one.

Hey, there was a thunderstorm here last December. That didn't suddenly make it June, no did it make it a valid and equal perspective to claim so.

Oh, and to be clear, we're not "ignoring" the Wii's sales. We just understand how tends and patterns work. If the Wii U didn't immediately fit in with the prior pattern, you might be into something. The fact that it did, the fact that in one of the best-selling console gens ever it's struggling, would indicate that you are off-base.

But ignoring a trend for a single, easily explained point of data? That's not a sound argument. And if you were really coming from the point of "no real opinion" that you claim, I imagine you'd see that. We don't measure anything else in this format, because it's not sound from a logical or mathematical sense.

All that post comes from a logical mathmatical perspective, which if life worked like that you'd be a multi-millionare living off winning bets, but it doesn't. Logic & maths are a handy perspective, but tell as many lies as they do truths and can't predict the future, no matter how much people try to kid themselves that they can.

Like I said, all that matters is the choices which Nintendo make going forward. If they make a boat load of good ones, or even just get lucky, then it'll be good, if not it'll be bad. History may gives us a few clues to how they operate and what certain possible outcomes are, but there's far more to it than just that.

 

[BaronVH]

I think the only reason that Nintendo appears to be losing ground is the change of video games to the dominant form of entertainment. Hear me out: Nintendo has a very specific market, usually kids aged 5-15. They are always going to do well with this market, and parents will make many of these purchases. The market for all other games (not including the unholy casual Candy Crush market) is for people 15 and up. This demographic increases all the time. It was rare to see people in their 40's playing video games. Now, there is a sizable number, which is why you see the PS4 doing so well, and the Xbox One doing fine. That demographic is steadily increasing since gamers are getting older, yet the teenagers rabidly eat up anything PS4 or Xbox related. Also, not many 10 year olds have Steam accounts. I think that is perfectly OK for Nintendo. Focusing on Akimbos, DSes, and consoles for the younger market is great. On the other hand, I will say there is a lady in my office that is in her late 60's that cannot get enough of anything Nintendo. That being said, Nintendo has a very loyal customer base, and I believe they have done very well knowing who they are.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

All that post comes from a logical mathmatical perspective, which if life worked like that you'd be a multi-millionare living off winning bets, but it doesn't. Logic & maths are a handy perspective, but tell as many lies as they do truths and can't predict the future, no matter how much people try to kid themselves that they can.

Like I said, all that matters is the choices which Nintendo make going forward. If they make a boat load of good ones, or even just get lucky, then it'll be good, if not it'll be bad. History may gives us a few clues to how they operate and what certain possible outcomes are, but there's far more to it than just that.

Or, if just getting into proper analysis, numbers without context are just a bunch of static. They mean nothing by themselves which is why proper analysis is needed to truly understand them. You need to analyze the atmosphere at the time, the rates, demographics, all sorts of data to get a proper idea. Just throwing out numbers is amateur. Heck, even Nintendo's new president (who has a business background) said trying to run a business just on numbers is stupid.

 

[Doom972]

I think that they have been going downhill ever since the Wii. It was a nice toy for non-gamers, but they got over it, and only dedicated Nintendo fans still care about Nintendo. On the handheld side, Nintendo seems to have missed the fact that people are using smartphones and tablets for handheld gaming, and still insist that people buy a separate handheld just to play their games.

Their hardware is bad and they should feel bad. And also go third party.

 

[sageoftruth]

The most recent complaint I've heard about is Nintendo's attitude towards copyright and the internet. Apparently, Nintendo is way behind the other consoles when it comes to opening its doors to online coverage, and will stamp out any attempt to show footage of their games online unless they are paid a hefty sum for it. In the past, this has even extended to them blocking online footage of Smash Brothers Tournaments in eSports. It's their choice, but as someone who first and foremost turns to online footage when trying to decide what to buy, I think they're really shooting themselves in the foot with this choice.

 

[VoodooRocker]

Nintendo has a Niche market, but their 3rd party support has been falling over the years. As someone said above they have a 5-15 audience base about and plenty older. They are comfortable with that niche which is great, but the quality outside of their own titles for the most part has been on a decline. I think if they don't bump up the quality of the others titles their will be no reason to own a nintendo except for smash, mario, pokemon and zelda. I'm not including those mostly because those aren't regular titles that release every 3 years. I'm wondering even with their success would they being doing something differently if not for the license to print money that is pokemon. They are basing their market mainly around those with little else supporting it. Makes wish for the days of the 16 Bit Wars where companies were constantly trying to put out their best and pushing to make the other's better. They really isn't much difference anymore that makes 1 better over the other except for a small handful of titles.

 

[Hades]

My only main complaint about Nintendo is their readiness to put franchises on decade long holds, rather arbitrary to if you ask to me. Metroid, DK and starfox each had a long time of inactivity for little reason. These games aren't as big a seller as Mario, Zelda or Pokemon but they are big names with proven success behind them. People buy Nintendo consoles for their Mario and Zelda but these second tier Nintendo games would make it just a little more enticing to adopt a console. If Nintendo did so then perhaps the starting line up of the Wii U would not look so bleak.

Metroid sat the N64 period out and since that disaster experiment on the Wii we have yet to hear from it since(except that slap to the face).
DK, one of Nintendo's founding franchises was all but ignored the whole gamecube era and only late in the Wii's life did it see a revival.
Star fox also did not see a game for the entire last gen.

You also have you C tier Nintendo games like F zero which I suspect Nintendo would prefer if we forget it ever existed.