Nintendo President Says Competitors Must Respond to Wii U

[Shadow-Phoenix]

...

I think we are in for the first console generation in a while where games are aggressively being molded to gimmicks. Anyway, if things go the way you suggest, consoles will become gimmicky party stations while the PC becomes the one true gaming station. Honestly, I hope that happens.

Honestly I hope that doesn't happen because that would mean more gloating from the claimed "superior race" and not everyone is fantastic at using a K+M setup let alone with endless practice.

That and not everyone has the time and the place to install games and have the time to mess around with patches and files and cd keys and while some do some will also not like to.

I honestly don't mind all the consoles at all and quite like the Wii u and it's innovative and yes I did say innovative gamepad.

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

I honestly don't mind all the consoles at all and quite like the Wii u and it's innovative and yes I did say innovative gamepad.

Yeah...

http://www.gamesradar.com/750000-xbox-360-consoles-sold-last-week/

Looks like X-shaped controllers are still pretty cool.

That's all good and all but what exactly are you wanting from me or wanting me to say?.

I like the Wii U and the other consoles so I'm not exactly going to just shit on one while praising "domincance" over the other...

 

[Epona]

So with all of those sold out pre-order the new Wii U sold 200,000 less than the Wii in week one?

Yeah, this basically confirms that Nintendo is limiting the supply to create demand once again. There's no other reason for the sales to be one third less than its predecessor when they were touting sold out pre-orders so hard.

The mere limit of a product does not increase demand. The supply/demand interaction only affects prices. A shortage of consoles does not increase the price for Nintendo. They have no reason to purposely shortfall supply as there being less of them does no increase the price, so they are therefore hurting themselves by not having adequate supply. I'm just saying as it makes no sense for them purposely have a shortage. Oil companies claim peak oil because it allows them to raise prices. Antiques are expensive because there is not a large supply of a given item and it's rarity increases the value. There is no value increase for Nintendo to have less than an adequate supply.

A shortage creates hype and makes people more willing to impulse buy if they find one on the shelves.

 

[Baresark]

So with all of those sold out pre-order the new Wii U sold 200,000 less than the Wii in week one?

Yeah, this basically confirms that Nintendo is limiting the supply to create demand once again. There's no other reason for the sales to be one third less than its predecessor when they were touting sold out pre-orders so hard.

The mere limit of a product does not increase demand. The supply/demand interaction only affects prices. A shortage of consoles does not increase the price for Nintendo. They have no reason to purposely shortfall supply as there being less of them does no increase the price, so they are therefore hurting themselves by not having adequate supply. I'm just saying as it makes no sense for them purposely have a shortage. Oil companies claim peak oil because it allows them to raise prices. Antiques are expensive because there is not a large supply of a given item and it's rarity increases the value. There is no value increase for Nintendo to have less than an adequate supply.

A shortage creates hype and makes people more willing to impulse buy if they find one on the shelves.

That is simply not true. A shortage has nothing to do with hype, and people cannot impulse buy if they are not available. Impulse buying is only available with a supply surplus. The amount of people who want them outweighs the supply currently, therefore they are hurting themselves by not having enough units available.

 

[Epona]

So with all of those sold out pre-order the new Wii U sold 200,000 less than the Wii in week one?

Yeah, this basically confirms that Nintendo is limiting the supply to create demand once again. There's no other reason for the sales to be one third less than its predecessor when they were touting sold out pre-orders so hard.

The mere limit of a product does not increase demand. The supply/demand interaction only affects prices. A shortage of consoles does not increase the price for Nintendo. They have no reason to purposely shortfall supply as there being less of them does no increase the price, so they are therefore hurting themselves by not having adequate supply. I'm just saying as it makes no sense for them purposely have a shortage. Oil companies claim peak oil because it allows them to raise prices. Antiques are expensive because there is not a large supply of a given item and it's rarity increases the value. There is no value increase for Nintendo to have less than an adequate supply.

A shortage creates hype and makes people more willing to impulse buy if they find one on the shelves.

That is simply not true. A shortage has nothing to do with hype, and people cannot impulse buy if they are not available. Impulse buying is only available with a supply surplus. The amount of people who want them outweighs the supply currently, therefore they are hurting themselves by not having enough units available.

You don't know what an impulse buy is, do you?

It means that if a person is in a store and they see a WiiU on the shelves and if they know they are in short supply, they are more likely to buy it even if they had no plans to when they got to the store.

 

[VoidWanderer]

Is he not aware of the 5 GB mandatory update for the console? Is he not aware that if the power is lost during this update people have a $300+ brick?

And since this console is as powerful as this generation, shouldn't Nintendo keep playing catchup? Sony and Microsoft are currently working on more powerful consoles, which again, leaves Nintendo a step behind in terms of hardware.

 

[Lugbzurg]

I'm sure that Sony and Microsoft will find a market in those who want to play something other than Mario and Zelda rehash, like those who want Halo and Modern Warfare and Battlefield rehash.

Mario, I can understand. Zelda? Ha, ha, ha... NO. The closest that series ever got to a rehash was when Ocarina of Time got a sequel in the form of Majora's Mask. And we all know how that game still wows people to this day, and how different it is.

I wonder about the mentality of those who look at something like The Wind Waker, which was followed up by Twilight Princess three years later, and somehow can't tell the difference.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

So with all of those sold out pre-order the new Wii U sold 200,000 less than the Wii in week one?

Yeah, this basically confirms that Nintendo is limiting the supply to create demand once again. There's no other reason for the sales to be one third less than its predecessor when they were touting sold out pre-orders so hard.

Yep. 475,000 [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/120789-Nintendo-Shifts-400-000-Wii-Us-in-a-Week] - 400,000 = 200,000. Math sure looks like that.

Conflicts with this link kind of [link]http://www.flesheatingzipper.com/gaming/2012/11/wii-u-first-week-sales-on-the-light-side-down-33-from-wii-launch/[/link]

So either the Wii, on its 8th day after launch sold an additional 125,000 units (which would mean that 1 sixth of its launch sales came in the 8th day after launch, which would be odd), or one of the articles is wrong. Judging by the fact that your link goes to an Escapist article that throws the 475,000 Wii launch number out of nowhere (with the CNET link in that very article not mentioning that the Wii's launch sold 475,000 at all) I'd say that the 475,000 number is wrong considering there is no source for it for some reason.

So my point still stands.


EDIT:This link also shows that the original sales launch number of the Wii was 600,000 and not 475,000
[link]http://www.joystiq.com/2012/11/26/wii-u-sells-400-000-units-in-first-week/[/link]

in its first seven days [http://techland.time.com/2012/11/27/nintendo-says-more-than-400000-wii-us-sold-in-u-s/].

So, what we have is the difference between a company bragging about how well their product is doing immediately after launch vs. an independent entity researching what actually happened after enough time had passed to be sure.

I'm sticking with the independent entity.

Let me just say this. This 600,000 number is a quote from Reggie Fils-Aime.

So you can trust that NPD Group or you can trust the guy who runs the North America side of Nintendo. And considering that (as pointed out by another person) you yourself have reason to mistrust the NPD, I'd suggest taking Reggie's word for the Wii's 2006 launch sales.

 

[Warachia]

Yes, which is throwing down a gauntlet HOW?

As previously established, this is EXACTLY how PR people are told to speak.
1) Introduce your product.
2) Present what you feel is the right product for the consumer, given the modern market.
3) Express confidence in your vision and look forward to competition, having faith that you've presented the right product.

That is NOT the same thing as issuing a challenge to Sony or Microsoft and saying "we made the best thing ever, and you guys are totally on notice right now". What he said wasn't a challenge so much as stating the obvious: now that Nintendo has presented and released a new product, Sony and Microsoft will inevitably need to decide what they intend to do in response. This isn't a bold statement of bravado, it's common fucking sense as spoken through ordinary positive PR spin.

Don't be bullheaded about this and pretend that Nintendo's American branch president is somehow behaving abnormally and issuing 'challenges' when no such thing has actually occurred. I'll continue to "talk shit" so long as you continue to insist (wrongly) that this is anything other than the normal positive PR, the same kind that literally every other company uses.

"Our competitors need to react to what we're doing in the marketplace and need to figure out what their innovation will be", ""They need to react to what we've done" is saying Microsoft and Sony NEED to respond to them, THAT is throwing down a gauntlet, it IS a challenge.
Your three points are great, and It'd be fine IF they just did those, but as I pointed out they also called out their competition.
By the way, where in your points is "talk to/about competition"?

 

[UnderCoverGuest]

I shall respond to the Wii U by pointing and giggling before going back to my PC and playing awesome gam...

...what's that topic down there..."Intel Strategy Shuts Out PC Enthusiasts"? Oh of all the...

 

[Baresark]

snip

You don't know what an impulse buy is, do you?

It means that if a person is in a store and they see a WiiU on the shelves and if they know they are in short supply, they are more likely to buy it even if they had no plans to when they got to the store.

No, an impulse buy has nothing to do with there being a shortage. An impulse buy, for example, is the candy in the checkout isle at the store. You are standing in line waiting and there is a pack of M&M's. You didn't plan on buying those, but there they are staring you right in the face and you buy them.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

snip

You don't know what an impulse buy is, do you?

It means that if a person is in a store and they see a WiiU on the shelves and if they know they are in short supply, they are more likely to buy it even if they had no plans to when they got to the store.

No, an impulse buy has nothing to do with there being a shortage. An impulse buy, for example, is the candy in the checkout isle at the store. You are standing in line waiting and there is a pack of M&M's. You didn't plan on buying those, but there they are staring you right in the face and you buy them.

Wrong again. I myself bought a Wii as an impulse buy, when it was on shortage. I bought it and a LoZ Twilight Princess and No More Heroes. I bought it because it was available at the time and I knew that if I didn't buy it then, it'd have to wait an unknown amount of time before I could get my hands on one. With the money I had at the time I could have bought a 360 or PS3, but I chose the Wii because it was hyped as the next big thing, and none of my friends had one so I didn't have any idea of how it actually played. it sounded freaking cool.

And impulse buy can by caused by limited supply. That really can't be disputed. Not saying that the sole reason for an impulse buy is short supply, but short supply can be a massive factor as it was for the Wii.

The only reason that the short supply won't cause impluse buys for the Wii U is because the Wii U doesn't have the Wii's hype.

 

[Frezzato]

Bad mouthing Nintendo is like disrespecting your grandfather. It's rude, ungrateful and you wouldn't be where you are today without him. Remember Nintendo brought the industry back to life after it crashed in the early 80's.

And it paid its way out of trouble in the early 1990's. Perhaps you're a bit young to remember. I'm also aware that just about every company today is guilty of wrongdoing:
http://www.nytimes.com/1991/04/11/business/nintendo-to-pay-25-million-in-rebates-on-price-fixing.html


That being said, I look forward to getting a WiiU. It sounds like you already have one. If so, good for you man.

 

[Epona]

snip

You don't know what an impulse buy is, do you?

It means that if a person is in a store and they see a WiiU on the shelves and if they know they are in short supply, they are more likely to buy it even if they had no plans to when they got to the store.

No, an impulse buy has nothing to do with there being a shortage. An impulse buy, for example, is the candy in the checkout isle at the store. You are standing in line waiting and there is a pack of M&M's. You didn't plan on buying those, but there they are staring you right in the face and you buy them.

I said that people are more willing to impulse buy when they know there is a shortage and I stand by that.