Yeah, almost 10 million units worldwide in 2 and a half months. That is the sort of success we like to see
I guess. I go by initial launches though, and there was none in 2011.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Nintendo shares plunge 6% by Monday close after trading as low as -18%
- Thread starter GHG
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, almost 10 million units worldwide in 2 and a half months. That is the sort of success we like to see
I guess. I go by initial launches though, and there was none in 2011.
And also inspired mobile phone games..
Natureboy99
Banned
The general masses have spoken with their wallet. I'm a WiiU owner btw. But I'm an old Nintendo fan with disposable income. Most gamers aren't. If I was 17 there is no way I would own a wiiu. It only has 2 games I have enjoyed on it thus far, and neither of them had Mario in it. Is clear Nintendo needs to diversify both is hardware and it's software (no more Mario!!!!)
TIGER-COOL
Banned
Arguing that they have not set any monumental standard recently does not negate my claim that they have an undeniable history of doing just that. I would ask you what standards have been set in gaming in general in the last 10 years from any company? Like I said, you may not appreciate their current designs, but they are still attempting innovation, which is the only way new standards can be established. Can you say the same about their competitors?
Also, I believe their move towards motion controls in conjunction with local multiplayer has set a new standard for family and casual targetted gameplay in the industry. It may not be as substantial to you as, say, the analogue stick, but it's widened the margins of console gaming markets and ultimately aided the growth of the industry. Not their most significant contribution, but a notable one regardless.
They should have taken a cue from Sony and use their own studios to develop the types of games that they wasn't going to get from 3rd parties. That and/or actually be aggressive in acquiring companies.
I agree. Nintendo's innovation is not what it was.
Yamauchi's Nintendo was brilliant, its innovations were natural, immediately made sense, and we never gave up anything for it; thats why they are still ubiquitous. They existed to improve gaming. Iwata Nintendo's vision feels desperate -- they work well in a handful of games, but they barely inspire anything from developers (even within Nintendo) and they feel crow barred into most games. They exist to disrupt the market and sell to non gamers.
Fourth Storm
Member
It's gonna be tough to get competitive graphics out of a mobile GPU, though, which is why I don't think Nintendo are going all-in on a unified architecture yet. Something like that is a great choice for a tablet or low power device and it's almost guaranteed that Nintendo will be releasing multiple form factors/sizes of its next handheld. The home console, however, if it comes at all, will remain a separate entity.
When Iwata says he must analyze market trends better and whatnot, he must be seeing a few things: power and size are important factors in the handheld market, but not in the home market. Not in the U.S., and now unarguably not in Japan either. He also has to see the flop that is VitaTV. With the merging of their hardware divisions, Iwata divulged that one of their goals is a single OS and built-in apps that work across platforms. With the dual screen nature of both their current consoles, I wouldn't be surprised if we see some early fruit from this project in the form of a standard UI. I certainly wouldn't rule out their next gen systems all having ARM cpus, but I cannot fathom it being a good decision or very "Nintendo-like" to have a home console that is essentially a suped-up cellphone design sans screen.
On the other hand, when he talks of business structure, he must be looking at subscription services from companies like Netflix and Sony. He can't argue with the money coming in from Xbox Live and PS Plus, but knowing Iwata, he wants a fair value for the consumer to be there. If anything, we might see their eShop and VC become more mobilized,along with the introduction of subscription models and,I dare say, even cross platform. They've already got F2P lined up with Steel Diver and I'm sure they'll be ramping up those endeavors along with the long-alluded Smartphone apps which somehow help sell their dedicated platforms.
If they look at where home consoles are selling and decide to stay in that market, there are a few things I believe Iwata must take note of. The number one complaint from devs on Wii U was its low power and the CPU in particular. Of course, RAM is also a huge factor in preventing ports form PS4 and Xbone. While some devs may hold grudges, many were open to the prospect of Wii U development at first, but then the hardware proved a challenge, so some bailed, and the launch games didn't sell, so most others then bailed. If Nintendo pushes consoles, a decent percentage are bound to return. Outside of an unlikely gimmick (haven't heard of any in popular tech that doesn't cost a fortune still), the only way they are gonna sell home consoles is if they make a box with enough oomph to match or trump PS4/Xbone. There is such a thing as "powerful enough" but at this point in time for most third parties, Wii U is not that.
Price wise, I say take it even further than your suggestion. Handheld, I agree on $149, but home console is still too high. Besides Wii in the U.S. (which featured an insanely popular pack-in), Nintendo have not successfully launched a console over $199. That is their historical price point, and with consumer's current uncertainty towards their consoles, they can't afford to go above it. A late 2016 machine will benefit from a die shrink or two over PS4/Xbone. They should be able to design a semicustom chip that is competitive with the other two by then and doesn't cost a fortune. In the generation after that, if they find some success, Nintendo might think faster cycles if they choose a SoC archicture that is good for BC.
H_Prestige
Banned
Ignoring the fact that you can already play the vast majority of ps4 games on the xbone (and vice versa), it's crazy to suggest that since these companies have actual game platforms that generate positive cash flow through licensing, hardware profits, and yearly subscriptions.
Unlike Nintendo, Sony and MS would be throwing something away by going third party.
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
Wow did you guys not listen to what I just wrote.
Quit the CONSOLE sector and become third party and retain your hardware production in the HANDHELD sector. What other dedicated gaming devices are there in the handheld sector apart from Nintendo's line.......oh PSV lol.
People might be able to play Zelda and Metroid on PS4 and XB1 but Pokemon and Animal crossing can be tied to their hardware because even if the 3DS has shown a massive decline and is now more in line with the PSP in absolute terms it has still sold well.
Anyone who ignores the effects that brain age, nintendogs, wii fit, and wii sports had on the industry probably shouldn't be taken seriously.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Nintendo has a choice: they can either evolve or slowly take major financial loss after loss. Their strategy has essentially been "Mario will save us." Well it didn't work, now it's time for something else. The WiiU is dead in Europe, irrelevant in NA, and treading water in Japan. The 3DS is essentially in a long defeat situation where it's success slowly decreases as the market is eaten up by smartphone gaming.
Nintendo has plenty of brands that could do very well on mobile devices. It would make sense to ride out the 3DS for awhile considering it's making profits, but begin plans to support iOS or Android (or both).
The WiiU should be scrapped within the next year or two. It has some killer games but ultimately is not a good product, and is years behind its competitors tech wise. I just don't believe Nintendo has the talent, experience, or most importantly leadership to create s PS4 type system. I'd bow out of the market and go left: a streaming device. Dunno who they'd partner with.
Nintendo has plenty of brands that could do very well on mobile devices. It would make sense to ride out the 3DS for awhile considering it's making profits, but begin plans to support iOS or Android (or both).
The WiiU should be scrapped within the next year or two. It has some killer games but ultimately is not a good product, and is years behind its competitors tech wise. I just don't believe Nintendo has the talent, experience, or most importantly leadership to create s PS4 type system. I'd bow out of the market and go left: a streaming device. Dunno who they'd partner with.
Like I wrote in my comment on the last page. If Valve can release their games outside of Steam, Microsoft can release games on both PC and Xbox, and Sony can make mobile games and create PS Now. I don't see why Nintendo couldn't go third party and still be successful.
Justagamer80
Banned
Um... you believe that it was the DS that standardized touch screen interface? Um ok... What standardized touch screen wasn't the DS but the iPhone. Unless you want to argue that Apple based the iPhone on the DS lol.
Aquamarine
Member
With all this speculation? Not in the short-term, especially if you got in when TYO:7974 hit rock bottom in 2012.
And I don't call reliable dividends year after year "throwing money away."
Anticitizen One
Banned
dat drop
Iwata must love dubstep because that was a sick drop
How would Nintendo benefit from that?
Manmademan
Member
they'd have to buy out all outstanding shares, burning huge amounts of money. I can't see this being a good use of their cash reserves.
Aquamarine
Member
AKA: Nintendo would have to purchase 141.67 million shares.
I don't know how big is the pressure from investors to go mobile, so if it's big enough and there's a possibility they would force that, going private would eliminate that pressure. But I have no idea about this stuff which is why I asked
diablos991
Can’t stump the diablos
It would only mean they wouldn't have to announce their losses and failures to the world. Nintendo would still the the shamfur dispray they are today if they were private.
Time of release is irrelevant to the comment you responded to. Gamecube was released as a direct competitor to the PS2, and as such it was not underpowered in comparison to it. For all intents and purposes, all 3 systems were pretty much at parity with each other. There wasn't a giant gulf between them like we see with PS4/Xbone and Wii U or PS3/360 and Wii.
BoboBrazil
Member
I'd say they should go 3rd party for home consoles and maintain a handheld presence in the low end sector. There might always be a market for a low end handheld for kids who's parents don't feel comfortable with them getting a tablet or phone. If they do go third party they most likely would only support one system and that would be Sony's, since they can barely support their own home console. Nintendo is a very Japanese-centric company, so they would put that Japanese pride before supporting the Xbox and let's be honest. Going 3rd party doesn't mean bad things for Nintendo and it also doesn't mean you won't see new ips from them(do we really now in the home console sector?). There are tons of publishers out there that mix new ips and established ones like Activision, Ubisoft, and EA. They won't have to worry about dumping r&d costs into home consoles either anymore with this decision.
Also put old nes and snes titles on android and iphone. It's a low cost proposition for Nintendo that can reap big rewards. It doesn't mean they have to make the next Mario or Zelda for mobile phones, but they should be leveraging their old existing library to profit.
Also put old nes and snes titles on android and iphone. It's a low cost proposition for Nintendo that can reap big rewards. It doesn't mean they have to make the next Mario or Zelda for mobile phones, but they should be leveraging their old existing library to profit.
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
...you know what, nm, someone will take that as a request.
Calamari41
41 > 38
Yeah, almost 10 million units worldwide in 2 and a half months. That is the sort of success we like to see
I remember getting into an argument with someone here before the launch where he was saying that the game would hit 7-8 million lifetime if they were lucky.
Justagamer80
Banned
Because apparently Nintendo is different.
Randolph Freelander
Member
At least it got cheaper last night.
That's the strategy here, really.
1. Run the company into ground
2. Go private for cheap
3. ???
4. Profit
Well it's a little conjecture at moment. All we know right now is that it has sold at least 7.17 million units. 4 million in Japan, 3.17 in North America. No European/Australian details yet but it should be north of 2 million. These numbers are also not counting eShop downloads.
H_Prestige
Banned
That's a good point I never considered. Valve, MS, and Sony are all releasing games on other people's hardware in addition to being platform holders. Yet for some reason if Nintendo were simultaneously a platform holder (3ds) and releasing games on other people's hardware, it would destroy them.
Manmademan
Member
Time of release is not irrelevant, as I'm pretty sure the PC in 2001 was a competitor, and that's the basis of comparison I was using to gauge "how powerful is the hardware at release."
The PS2 was stronger relative to the PC than the GC or Xbox were at release. It was also much farther past the Dreamcast (released about a year earlier) than the GC or Xbox were to the PS2.
The GC/Xbox were closer to each other than the PS2- it was weaker by a good deal, no doubt. But again by the time those two launched the PS2 was almost 2 years old.
The Wii and WiiU are unique situations, since no one had ever been crazy enough to INTENTIONALLY release what was clearly last gen hardware against a next generation competitor.
I thought it was agreed that the PS2 was the weakest system.Graphically. the Gamecube and Xbox were superior to PS2 and all 3 systems were superior to what PC games were at the time.
It's not a good point, you would have one if we could get The Last of Us or Halo in the PC. Valve doesn't even count when they have barely entered the hardware business.
Besides, people are talking about Mario in the PS4 or X1, which is the equivalent of TLOU in the X1 or Halo on the PS4, that's never going to happen.
Bel_Air_Jeff
Banned
Time to remarket the nintendo brand.
Market as a true gamer's device. Throw money. Get exclusives. Sell consoles.
Market as a true gamer's device. Throw money. Get exclusives. Sell consoles.
Manmademan
Member
The PS2 was the weakest because it launched long before the other two. The hardware was definitely more capable than gaming PCs were at the time.
The Xbox and Gamecube weren't though. The Xbox was a stronger box than the GC. It could push 720p/1080i, and some games like Splinter Cell designed for it blew the PS2 and GC ports out of the water. the gap between GC RE4 and PS2 RE4 is miniscule compared to Splinter Cell Xbox and Splinter Cell PS2/GC.
The Xbox though was LITERALLY a PC in a funny box. Microsoft was using off the shelf hardware to make that box, which is half the reason it wasn't profitable. They didn't have the ability to scale costs down over time and ended up paying Nvidia a mint.
GAF would be down for 2 full years if Nintendo would give the casuals the middlefinger this E3 and go for the gamers again.
H_Prestige
Banned
Valve has their own games platform (Steam). Wouldn't make more sense to keep their games exclusive instead of putting them out on ps/xbox?
TIGER-COOL
Banned
It's unfortunate that you think any refuted idea is irrelevant, especially while ignoring the context in which it is refuted (in this case, a pro-Nintendo sentiment in an anti-Nintendo thread). That's a very limiting mindset, and I hope it doesn't hold you back too much in life.
Also, this is the last time I respond to you as you couldn't withhold from more personal attacks (an insulting assumption about my age). I genuinely think you should invest in a book on critical thinking, they can be helpful in constructing valid arguments without the use of fallacies like these.
Your entire argument is based on the common misconception that innovation equates invention. In reality, innovation equates meaningful, competent, and timely integration that leads to a paradigm shift within its environment (in this case, the videogame industry). While your history of videogame technology invention is informative and interesting, it is irrelevant. You see similar arguments about Apple, who did not invent some of the staples of their products, but presented them in ways that were more streamlined and significant in terms of integration and mass consumption. They completely changed the market, and sparked a "revolution", of sorts. That's what innovation is.
2spooky4me
Member
Well yea, because Nintendo's only asset is their 1st party software. It certainly isn't their sub-par hardware or their online services.
That's true, but Valve doesn't release their games on Origin, do they?
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
I think they definitely need a combo of rebranding and 3rd party support. The question becomes which has to happen first to make the other possible.
Branding-wise, the hurdle for them is that their consoles and games are seen by both older "casuals" and younger folks just starting to get deeper into gaming and who have limited perspective as little more than a gateway drug between iphones and "hardcore" consoles.
Justagamer80
Banned
He isn't talking about Valve has a hardware manufacturer. Valve's Steam service IS a platform in of itself. Valve sells their first party games on other services. The problem with Nintendo is they didn't prepare for this current era whereas the others have.
Sony is changing their Playstation brand from a piece of hardware into a service where they can sell their games on many types of hardware. Why? Because they have seen the writing on the wall. Microsoft is preparing something similar. Valve? Bringing streaming into the home. Nintendo? Yea... they just got around to offering up a nintendo network that is barebones compared to the competition and still lacks an actual account system.
Manmademan
Member
There is little significant difference between an "innovation" and an "invention" here. The platforms I mentioned were hardly obscure, and Atari was an industry leader. Seeing what did and did not work with the analog stick, the control disc, etc allowed later companies (Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft) to improve on them.
If you want to talk about taking the work of others and improving on it, and using market position to popularize it (as Apple tends to do) that's another argument entirely. That's not innovation AT ALL, and If you would like another lesson on Nintendo getting dragged into court over the anticompetitive practices they used to "change the market" in the 80s and spark their "revolution", I would be more than happy to discuss THAT one with you as well.
ChainThomp
Neo Member
I think Nintendo needs to embrace the idea of being a secondary gaming device... And with that comes the need for low prices and simple hardware. People don't want to drop two or three hundred dollars for one of the two Nintendo systems. The hardcore gamers have already dropped $400 - $500 on a PS4 or Xbox 1. The casual gamers have already dropped hundreds of dollars on iOS devices. If Nintendo still wants to sell hardware, which I believe they do... It needs to be in impulse buy territory. I'm talking about $100 - $200.
My idea is for them to design one simple ARM based architecture and release 2 or 3 hardware configurations for it. $120 handheld, $100 microconsole, and they can throw in a $180 or so XL style deluxe handheld. Maybe even make a $200 simple tablet version (with buttons). Keep in mind that I realize at least some of these would need to be staggered on release dates.
Make it game card and download based... Any game you buy works on any of the versions of the system. All of your development resources go into one type of architecture, but you still have "multiple hardware offerings" all of which are reasonably priced for an audience that already has high powered devices.. I mean why not drop $100 for the chance to play ALL Nintendo games that will be released in the next 4 - 5 years.
My idea is for them to design one simple ARM based architecture and release 2 or 3 hardware configurations for it. $120 handheld, $100 microconsole, and they can throw in a $180 or so XL style deluxe handheld. Maybe even make a $200 simple tablet version (with buttons). Keep in mind that I realize at least some of these would need to be staggered on release dates.
Make it game card and download based... Any game you buy works on any of the versions of the system. All of your development resources go into one type of architecture, but you still have "multiple hardware offerings" all of which are reasonably priced for an audience that already has high powered devices.. I mean why not drop $100 for the chance to play ALL Nintendo games that will be released in the next 4 - 5 years.
Here's a Voodoo 5 5500 playing Serious Sam 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5hIYfEbjnA
That card was released in 2000. Here are its technical specs:
http://www.cnet.com/graphics-cards/3dfx-voodoo5-5500-graphics/4507-8902_7-30111647.html
http://www.anandtech.com/show/580
Max Resolution 2048 x 1536 at 85.0 Hz
64.0 MB / 64.0 MB (max) SDRAM
Fill Rate (pixels) 667.0 million pixels/sec
Here is the PS2:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_2_technical_specifications
System memory: 32 MB Direct Rambus or RDRAM
Graphics processing unit: "Graphics Synthesizer" clocked at 147.456 MHz
Video output resolution: variable from 256×224 to 1920×1080 pixels
4 MB Embedded DRAM video memory bandwidth at 48 gigabytes per second (main system 32 MB can be dedicated into VRAM for off-screen materials)
Overall pixel fillrate: 16×147 = 2.352 Gpixel/s (rounded to 2.4 Gpixel/s)
Pixel fillrate: with no texture, flat shaded 2.4 (75,000,000 32pixel raster triangles)
Pixel fillrate: with 1 full texture (Diffuse Map), Gouraud shaded 1.2 (37,750,000 32-bit pixel raster triangles)
Pixel fillrate: with 2 full textures (Diffuse map + specular or alpha or other), Gouraud shaded 0.6 (18,750,000 32-bit pixel raster triangles)
Four passes = 300 Mpixel/s (300 Mpixels/s divided by 32 pixels = 9,375,000 triangles/s lost every four passes)[8]
Keep in mind that the Voodoo 5 was not the top end card of the time. As the anandtech article states, the GeForce 2 was up around 800 megapixels, with a 1.6 gigatexel texel fillrate.
The PS2 was nowhere near a high end gaming PC of the time though it may have been near an average gaming PC of the time.
H_Prestige
Banned
Do you think they are leaving money on the table by not doing so?
I mean, I get what you're saying. Valve isn't playing along with other similar platforms. But then Nintendo wouldn't be putting games on other companies' handhelds. They would be putting them onto devices they don't make.
Fourth Storm
Member
IMO, the idea of a microconsole needs to be let go. There's no proven market for them. VitaTV: flop. Ouya: flop.
They are until now a software developer, hardware is a different beast, it needs exclusives. Steam boxes will never lift off the ground if they don't get exclusives that make you buy the hardware. When talking about software, of course you would like your game in as many platforms as possible. Same goes for a sales platform, which is why steam is on Macs. If valve could they would put Steam on the PS4 and X1.
Manmademan
Member
The Voodoo 5 wasn't released until Summer of 2000- AFTER the launch of the PS2.
And IIRC PCs aren't floating video cards. What kind of CPU would a PC have been running in march of 2000? What kind of RAM? How much overhead did windows need?
There were no PC games on the market that outperformed launch PS2 games, and even DC games like Soul Calibur were turning heads. "Serious sam" above looks awful, frankly.
Buddha Beam
Banned
It is radically different for a company that has only built it's own hardware for decades. Again, it's a gross oversimplification to say, "here's a dev kit, have fun". You're talking about thousands of employees at all levels who have no idea how to communicate with outside organizations, have always had input on hardware development to best impact them, etc. So yeah... from Nintendo's perspective, almost EVERYTHING about Xbone and PS4 are radically different.
Again, look at Sega's output after they went third party. They went from making Dreamcast classics that everyone loved to absolute pieces of shit. It was years before they got their act together (and even then, they've never fully gone back to their former glory, but that's another topic).
Nintendo's final output might not be as lousy as Sega's was back in those transition years, but it's still going to be very bumpy. I guarantee it.
So... Nintendo puts out a few rough games. They aren't nearly as good as what they've been releasing on their own systems... buggy, rushed, etc. How does that impact them going forward? Their next round of games? Their employee morale? All of that.
Nintendo going third party isn't some minor undertaking. They're a giant company that, like all giant companies, are slow to react and change. You can give indies a dev kit and they'll churn something out quick and it might even be really good... but that's because indie studios are small and flexible by nature. They can turn and adapt on a dime. At a place like Nintendo though, it's like turning around a battleship.
It sucks sometimes working at a big place like that because you've got all this bureaucracy to move through. Ask anyone who has worked for a large company and they'll probably tell you the same. You've got people who have always done something one way, now suddenly they've got to do it another way. Sometimes you'll find stubborn people who don't want to do it different, or you'll find people who don't understand the difference, etc. That impacts people all the way up and down the chain of command (I can personally attest to that experience, unfortunately). That's part of what company cultures are.
I don't think anyone would be happy with Nintendo going third party. It would likely destroy the company. I doubt they could make the transition and still be the same Nintendo we've always known and loved.
- Status