Nintendo: Where Do We Point the Finger of Blame?

[Wisenheimer]

It does matter when the future games that are going to be released for those other systems are going to need to be dumbed down to run on the Wii U. It's going to be the Wii all over, you remember all the crappy ports the Wii got because of it's weaker hardware, the same thing will happen with the Wii U. In my opinion, Nintendo don't stand a chance unless they release a console that matches one of their rival's consoles, if not both of them, hardware wise.

Look at it this way, if you were going to buy a gaming computer, which would offer you the best experience, the high end computer or the low end computer? Well, the same can be said for gaming consoles too, if you were going to buy a gaming console, which would offer you the best experience, the high end console or the low end console? Most of the true gamers out there don't want sub-par hardware to game on.

Actually, the Wii U is strong enough computationally that ports should not suffer that much if developers take the time to do them correctly. The Wii U CPU is, in single threaded performance, in the same ballpark (perhaps even faster) than the Jaguar CPUs. The difference in GPU speeds between the Xbox 1 and Wii U is similar to the difference in speed between the Xbox 1 and PS4.

By contrast mean, the Xbox 360 GPU was putting out something like >10 times the single preceision FLOPS as the Wii. That was a dramatic difference, plus it had a much faster, multicore processor. Both the PS3 and Xbox 360 were poorly engineered attempts to fit as much raw power in a small case as possible, resulting in a thermally disastrous design.

After learning from their mistakes, Sony and Microsoft designed the Xbox 1 and PS4 more like the Wii, with a thermally efficient, low power design. They are not making the kind of power leaps that they did in the last generation. The Wii GPU is noticeably slower, but not dramatically slow. Between the Wii U and the PS4 there is about a (5 x) difference in GPU single precision FLOPS. Between the PS4 and a high end PC GPU set, within a few years (when developers really start taking advantage of the new consoles' specs) there is going to be a 50-100 fold difference.

Most of the actual improvements will be in the software. Ports to PC's that are 100 times as fast as the PS4 will not look 100 times better. They will look more similar than different. Same with ports to the Wii U. You'll be able to notice the difference, especially between a PC port running in 4K and a Wii U port, but it will not likely be that dramatic if developers do their jobs right. It will be nothing like hte awful Call of Duty ports for the Wii.

 

[UltraMew]

Point the blame at that banana Iwata is holding.

 

[XDel]

I can't remember the name, but there was a Eurogamer article recently about a developer's experience working on the Wii U game. There's one anecdote where the guy was told point blank not to reference Xbox Live, PSN, Steam, etc. because none of Nintendo's engineers had any personal experience with the competitions' services.

That attitude, the belief that you don't need to worry about the other guys, that you have nothing to learn from them, is more damaging than any one person.

Sony had that same exact attitude going into the last generation, and... well, look at the PS3's early life to see how that went for them. Sony managed to wise up in time to turn the PS3 around. It's doubtful that the Wii U will have the same sort of luck, but I can only hope it serves as a serious wake up call.




Hype is meaningless without sales. You could have the most hyped console in history, but if nobody buys it, you've still failed.

Also, when it comes to the Wii U, all of the popular stories are either "Wait, you mean it isn't a controller?" or "Wii U sinking harder than the Lusitania!" I don't think I'd call that hype.

Very true, but buzz leads to curiosity and sometimes that curiosity leads one to paying more attention to something, getting enticed, and then consuming.

I dunno, despite their damned sweat shop factory policies, I really do have a soft spot in my heart for Nintendo and their whole angle on pretty much everything. I dunno, I don't follow modern gaming trends, so I guess I've nothing to be let down about, I just like experiencing what ever it is Nintendo is going to do next. Alas, something I'm not cynical about!!!!

 

[stomp_442]

Actually, the Wii U is strong enough computationally that ports should not suffer that much if developers take the time to do them correctly. The Wii U CPU is, in single threaded performance, in the same ballpark (perhaps even faster) than the Jaguar CPUs. The difference in GPU speeds between the Xbox 1 and Wii U is similar to the difference in speed between the Xbox 1 and PS4.

By contrast mean, the Xbox 360 GPU was putting out something like >10 times the single preceision FLOPS as the Wii. That was a dramatic difference, plus it had a much faster, multicore processor. Both the PS3 and Xbox 360 were poorly engineered attempts to fit as much raw power in a small case as possible, resulting in a thermally disastrous design.

After learning from their mistakes, Sony and Microsoft designed the Xbox 1 and PS4 more like the Wii, with a thermally efficient, low power design. They are not making the kind of power leaps that they did in the last generation. The Wii GPU is noticeably slower, but not dramatically slow. Between the Wii U and the PS4 there is about a (5 x) difference in GPU single precision FLOPS. Between the PS4 and a high end PC GPU set, within a few years (when developers really start taking advantage of the new consoles' specs) there is going to be a 50-100 fold difference.

Most of the actual improvements will be in the software. Ports to PC's that are 100 times as fast as the PS4 will not look 100 times better. They will look more similar than different. Same with ports to the Wii U. You'll be able to notice the difference, especially between a PC port running in 4K and a Wii U port, but it will not likely be that dramatic if developers do their jobs right. It will be nothing like hte awful Call of Duty ports for the Wii.

Hey, Activision did wonders to get the call of duty titles working on the Wii. It's too bad none of the rest of the third party devs did work like that. The thing is, Nintendo is known for not producing the strongest console, and that's why it's not selling well. Even if the Wii U is just a little weaker that the xbone, then that's reason enough for the xbox kids not to get a nintendo console. With out a userbase, Nintendo will suffer. One way to improve the userbase, build the best console of the generation. The NES was a perfect example of that. My first console was a magnovox odyssey2, so I've been around for almost all of the gaming consoles. Nintendo needs to stop it with the gimmicks, and build a straight forward gaming machine that out performs the competition. The gamepad shouldn't be the selling point of the Wii U, it should be treated like like an add on.

It also seems that Nintendo has done enough to piss off some of the third party game devs, they need to fix that too. Nintendo needs that third party support, and getting that back would help them out alot.

 

[Wisenheimer]

Hey, Activision did wonders to get the call of duty titles working on the Wii. It's too bad none of the rest of the third party devs did work like that. The thing is, Nintendo is known for not producing the strongest console, and that's why it's not selling well. Even if the Wii U is just a little weaker that the xbone, then that's reason enough for the xbox kids not to get a nintendo console. With out a userbase, Nintendo will suffer. One way to improve the userbase, build the best console of the generation. The NES was a perfect example of that. My first console was a magnovox odyssey2, so I've been around for almost all of the gaming consoles. Nintendo needs to stop it with the gimmicks, and build a straight forward gaming machine that out performs the competition. The gamepad shouldn't be the selling point of the Wii U, it should be treated like like an add on.

It also seems that Nintendo has done enough to piss off some of the third party game devs, they need to fix that too. Nintendo needs that third party support, and getting that back would help them out alot.

Again, that reasoning does not make sense to me. The PS2 was the slowest console of its generation (besides the defunct Dreamcast), but it sold more than double the much more powerful Gamecube and Xbox combined. The Wii was dramatically under-powered compared to the poorly engineered and overpowered competition (which led to huge overheating problems), but it quickly outsold them. The Vita and PSP were greatly outclassed by the 3DS and DS.

If you look at what made the NES so great, it wasn't the power. The Sega Master System was noticeably better. Nintendo just had really good policies to promote quality software, and they made some great first party titles for the NES like the Super Mario series, Zelda, Metroid, et cetera.

And, the Xbox kids are already buying a console with an under-powered GPU compared to PS4. I don't think they would have flocked to the Wii U if it had a 2 TFLOPS GPU. I think Nintendo made a number of mistakes with the Wii U, but in and of itself, being less powerful than the competition was not one of them.

 

[assassinz]

Nintendo just needs to stop using Mario and Zelda, etc. as safety nets. They need to develop new characters and new gaming worlds and environments that they havent used before. Just mention any of these Nintendo franchises and you pretty much already can tell how the next installment of the game is going to look, play, and sound regardless of any new storyline.

And 3rd party developers just releasing WiiU versions of games from PS3 & 360 isnt helping either.

Nintendo had better let their game programmers and developers have more input and freedom to develop some new games/franchises instead of making them develop more games with Mario and the gang. The 16-Bit era was the best because we had more genres of game types to play. Nowadays it seems its either a Mario game, Zelda game, Pokemon, FPS, some zombie type game or Superhero title, and sports games that are major releases.

Kid Icarus Uprising was their freshest gaming idea in a long time.

Right now none of the next gen consoles have enough variety to offer gamers. I think Microsoft and Sony will be having their own "Iwata" moment later on.

 

[stomp_442]

Again, that reasoning does not make sense to me. The PS2 was the slowest console of its generation (besides the defunct Dreamcast), but it sold more than double the much more powerful Gamecube and Xbox combined. The Wii was dramatically under-powered compared to the poorly engineered and overpowered competition (which led to huge overheating problems), but it quickly outsold them. The Vita and PSP were greatly outclassed by the 3DS and DS.

If you look at what made the NES so great, it wasn't the power. The Sega Master System was noticeably better. Nintendo just had really good policies to promote quality software, and they made some great first party titles for the NES like the Super Mario series, Zelda, Metroid, et cetera.

And, the Xbox kids are already buying a console with an under-powered GPU compared to PS4. I don't think they would have flocked to the Wii U if it had a 2 TFLOPS GPU. I think Nintendo made a number of mistakes with the Wii U, but in and of itself, being less powerful than the competition was not one of them.

We could keep going on forever, I think it comes down to Nintedno loosing their userbase over the years. Nintendo has been behind the other consoles since the N64 due to their slow adaption of new technology, hardware and software wise.

 

[JPhantom]

quite frankly traditionally nintendo has lived off their first party and their exclusive games. very rarely has a game been released on a nintendo system and a competitor's system where the nintendo version was as good as the other. They also rely on their gimmicks to make a lot of things work for their console that cannot possibly work for the competition. I think Nintendo will occasionally hit duds with their gimmicks it happens it was unfortunate they hit it with both there console and handheld. nintendo should not have tried to focus on the casual gamer to the extent that they did with the wii u as the wii still satisfies them. however i don't think that nintendo needed to meet the competition on specs as that is not where they shine. there is no need for specs for them to create simple yet challenging gameplay and interesting storylines. i really think they don't need to focus on being able to play mass effect 3 as well as the others cause i don't think nintendo can really make those games uniquely their's and tat is where nintendo thrives. on making games that are unique. they'd probably be faring better if they refused to allow any multi platform games because nintendo needs games that were written for their systems to really differentiate themselves

 

[WhiteMaze]

they need the money from the franchises they know are likely to sell.

Those franchises that apparently sell so well, haven't been nearly enough to keep the Wii U from flopping.

It's overused. It has been done and redone. They may make money. But they won't make money off the same snake oil forever.

The proof is this topic itself.

Nintendo either gets with the times, or will continue to dig it's own grave.

And apparently, Nintendo is not that stupid after all. It took a major system flop for them to start doing it, but finally, they are: http://gbatemp.net/threads/nintendo...game-development-studios.361489/#post-4906030

 

[Wisenheimer]

Those franchises that apparently sell so well, haven't been nearly enough to keep the Wii U from flopping.

It's overused. It has been done and redone. They may make money. But they won't make money off the same snake oil forever.

The proof is this topic itself.

Nintendo either gets with the times, or will continue to dig it's own grave.

And apparently, Nintendo is not that stupid after all. It took a major system flop for them to start doing it, but finally, they are: http://gbatemp.net/threads/nintendo...game-development-studios.361489/#post-4906030

Nintendo is first and foremost a software development company. A game like the 2-D and 3-D Mario platformers is going to sell very well and net them a tidy profit for their investment. Some of these games, like the side-scrolling Mario platformers, have been making money for thirty years and are still very profitable. Of course, they cannot make money off them forever; nothing lasts forever. The earth is not going to be around forever, but based on current evidence, they will make money off them for a very long time.

And calling it "snake oil" is libelous. Nintendo is not being deceitful in their sales practice. You don't buy a Mario or a Zelda game and find out halfway through you have to buy $100 of DLC to finish it.


The hardware side of things is a whole other issue. They have made a lot of mistakes with the Wii U console, but making new entries in some of the best selling video game franchises in history is not one of them.

 

[Ryukouki]

Sure they can make money off of the same old 2-D/3-D Mario platformers, but at the end of the day, they're losing their audience and losing it fast. They're trying too hard to cater to the children and forgetting the gamers that have long since grown up.

 

[Foxi4]

What Hanafuda said. That's the thing with casual gamers I think... Nintendo targeted them with the Wii, and it worked. Lots of people got one.
But they are casuals... definitely not the kind of person that readily spends hundreds just for renewing their gig, especially when the new gig doesn't do much more than the previous one, and that the old one still works.
I'm not too surprised that the Wii U hasn't been so much of a success like the Wii was back in the day.
The 3DS sells but I think the "3D effect" craze has died down a bit, hasn't it? not exactly a selling point anymore...

I personally think that the whole casual crowd simply moved on. The Wii sold great to the so-called "family gamers" who don't actually exist, "casual gamers" who now have smartphones to satitate all their minigame Bejeweled cross waggling cross screen-swiping needs and the "healthy" crowd who bought the Wii Fit. Most of those customers are irreversibly gone and targeting them now is pretty much pointless, all things considered.

The 3D effect craze has died down and Nintendo reacted to it by releasing the cost-effective 2DS. I personally like to occasionally turn the 3D on, but it's not like it's the defining aspect of my gaming experience - it's a cool gimmick, but that's where the benefits end. Moreover, there's somewhere around 20% of people out there who can't even see it, not sure what the exact figure is, so those people probably don't want to pay extra for a feature that'll only make the screen blurry for them.

As for the whole "finger-pointing" blame game, Nintendo's doing the traditional Japanese "disgrace to famiry" move where the executives take the blame for everything that happened and cut their own stomachs open with a kata--, I mean, they cut their own paychecks... wheras the truth of the matter is that the entire company is to blame - the research and development department failed to recognize contemporary trends and developed an underpowered machine with a tablet controller that's not really a tablet since you can't walk around with it, the marketing team marketed it poorly and the software development teams failed to utilize the strong points and the key selling points of the system in their software - it's a blunder all-around and pointing at each other doesn't help - the situation needs to be mended by means of co-operation of all departments. Sure, each company has a head and each department does as well, but what failed was the ecosystem, not one particular person.

 

[Wisenheimer]

Sure they can make money off of the same old 2-D/3-D Mario platformers, but at the end of the day, they're losing their audience and losing it fast. They're trying too hard to cater to the children and forgetting the gamers that have long since grown up.

Hmm, the demographic data I have seen, at least in the US (every country is different) does not support that contention. It was back in the early days of the last console generation (good data is hard to come by), but the Wii was actually just about the most balanced across genders and ages, being only significantly over-represented in the College-age market (18-24).

The Xbox 360, by contrast, was heavily overrepresented in the young male demographic (tweens, teens, and young adults).

The PS3 was under-represented in the college age and under market and overrepresented in the older adults (45+) market.

I don't think Nintendo specifically has a gross demographical problem in the US, as they are actually more balanced than their competition, especially Microsoft. I think that their problems with the Wii U stem specifically from a lot of issues specific to that device and how they marketed and developed for it and their relationships with third party publishers and independent developers.

 

[RodrigoDavy]

I am happy with Nintendo... Only thing that is bothering me is that they still didn't release the Flipnote Studio 3D in America (the continent).

Nintendo 3DS is doing very well and its 3D is definetely not a gimmick by the way.
Wii U not doing so well, but I am pretty sure they will support it through its whole lifespan. After all, they're not Sega.

And I remember everyone was saying that Sony was not going well, having huge losses and even had to sell some building one or two years ago. They are better now.

If anything, this crisis will motivate Nintendo to make better choices.

 

[mightymuffy]

Nintendo's in a sticky situation right now, and we can point the finger at a host of reasons, and argue until we're blue in the face about why 'my reason's made more of an impact than yours has' and so on..... I think it's good to see they fully acknowledge the situation they're in (rather than ignoring it - 'we've got enough in the bank to cope' etc), let's see just what they do from here on to turn things round. Personally I think it'll be interesting to see what steps they take: my inkling is they've already planned to switch to 3rd party - not that they're gonna tell us that for a good couple of years of course! Then again I could be way off the mark anyway!

 

[Nismax]

It's not Nintendo's fault that people think twiddling thumbsticks is still fun, and are obsessed with wanna be realistic graphics while gameplay is left to die.

People are morons. Electronics are going through a seriously gay Fisher Price phase targeted at computer illiterates. Video games are now marketed towards shallow minds that don't even remember what it's like to play a fun game that is actually challenging or requires skill. All anyone cares about is simulation, even though real life is right outside.

 

[Mr_Pichu]

If Nintendo had been able to sell the core Wii U unit for $100, with the fancy video controller sold as a $50 add-on, I think they would have had another hit. I think the high price point was the real killer here, Nintendo should have really put more consideration into the price point. At $150 the Wii U would have been an easy buy, thus ultimately leading to greater developer support.

 

[Wisenheimer]

If Nintendo had been able to sell the core Wii U unit for $100, with the fancy video controller sold as a $50 add-on, I think they would have had another hit. I think the high price point was the real killer here, Nintendo should have really put more consideration into the price point. At $150 the Wii U would have been an easy buy, thus ultimately leading to greater developer support.

I think the initial price point was a small part of the problem, but I don't think that would have been a good solution. The Wii U, as it is today, includes about $150 in parts alone in the console itself, and I doubt Nintendo would be willing to take such a massive loss on each Wii U.

Add to that the controller, which contains about $80 in parts and would likely retail for $100+. Who is going to buy a $100 controller for a $200 console? Probably very few, and then what is the point of the controller if developers cannot rely on customers having it?


If they had decided to go the route of a traditional controller in the first place, they probably would have been better off spending that extra $80 to upgrade the RAM and the GPU and set the price at $300 from the beginning.

Honestly, I think there biggest mistake was the timing. They either should have waited a year and could have come into the market with technology that was a year newer at a time when the "next generation" video consoles were all being hypes by the media and shown all the great things you could do with the new controller or they could have come into the market a year before everyone else and been the only "next generation" system, but thinking that third parties would just randomly decide to make games for the Wii U, they could have worked with them ahead of time to ensure that they would release some games that would fully realize the Wii U's capability, as well as coming into the first year with some really strong titles like, for instance, Pikmin and Mario 3D World at launch and a major Nintendo first party title dropping every month.

But they didn't give third parties much help in making games that made unique use of the gamepad. They didn't have any good franchises at launch. They didn't have third parties making lots of exclusives for the Wii U. They basically wasted their year head start.

 

[Wisenheimer]

It's not Nintendo's fault that people think twiddling thumbsticks is still fun, and are obsessed with wanna be realistic graphics while gameplay is left to die.

People are morons. Electronics are going through a seriously gay Fisher Price phase targeted at computer illiterates. Video games are now marketed towards shallow minds that don't even remember what it's like to play a fun game that is actually challenging or requires skill. All anyone cares about is simulation, even though real life is right outside.

I just picked up a PS3 for $12 and was playing the uncharted demo. After playing PC and Wii shooters that used a mouse or Wiimote to aim, I forgot how frustrating a traditional controller is.

 

[LWares87]

Nintendo needs to be more original, instead of just releasing first-party remakes and ports of previously released games (some people may disagree with this, but it's probably true).

Also... there's too much Shovelware (games that no-one will buy, let alone play) nowadays being released from third-party developers and not just for the WiiU!

Edit: it's just a good job that we haven't got JLN about anymore making crappy games, as they used to... lol :L