Nintendo, One Year Later
ignorethecode.net
ignorethecode.net
Nintendo have good years and bad years. The Wii U wasn't the success they hoped it would be. But they took a chance with the Gamepad. That is what I like about Nintendo, they do things differently. Sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't.
Now give me a 1080p60 F-Zero game on the Wii U please :)
Only the Nintendo of recent years. They were famous for NOT innovating much before. The SNES was just another 16 bits console (albeit quite powerful), the N64 did not even ride on the CD technology, and the Gamecube did not have much points of differentiation versus the Xbox 1 or PS2.
- Nintendo experimented with a CD add on (with Sony) for the SNES. It eventually became the Playstation. - They released the Double Density Drive addon for N64 (probably a failure). - Mario 64 was the first really 3D platformer, and was groundbreaking. - The weird looking controller for the N64 had an analogue stick before anyone else. - Rumble packs - N64 came with four ports for four-way split screens
They're just off the top of my head.
Analog sticks ? Didn't Sega had the Nights controller with analog sticks around the same period, for the Saturn ?
Four ports... wow, that's innovation ! You mean, everyone else could do it with a peripheral, but because Nintendo suddenly integrates 4 ports on the console, they "invented it" ? You had 4 ports extensions for about every 16 bit console out there to play Bomberman, already. Nothing new, really.
Four way split screens ? Guess you never heard of Hired Guns? Yeah you can argue that was not real-time 3D, yet that was already four way, multiplayer split screen in the very early 90s. Way before the N64.
Seriously, consoles ALMOST did not invent anything, and if they did, it's usually Sega who was at the helm of innovation most of the time - they released a 16 bits 2 years before Nintendo did. They released a 32 bits 2 years before Nintendo did, etc...
In the cases where Nintendo "lagged" others, it was mostly for good reasons; an example is the shift to optical media, which Nintendo resisted because they didn't want the user to have to wait for load times. Ultimately, cartridges were proven to be untenable long-term, but that doesn't mean Nintendo was "not innovative" in their principled choice to prioritize user experience over giving game devs extra space.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_7800#mediaviewer/File:Ata...
If anyone is rewriting history here, that's certainly not me.
Most of the people I ask don't even realize that that the Wii U is different than the Wii. They think it's just a gamepad accessory for the Wii and don't understand that it's a different console. Really a shame.
Nintendo has always had trouble connecting with American audiences -- when they've done so, it's been basically by accident. It seems that while they like American money, they still build their products exclusively with the Japanese market in mind.
The GameCube is a similar tale of woe, a vastly underrated system that came in last entirely due to superficial considerations, like being purple.
Don't get me wrong, I think the Wii U is a console worth owning, and right now, it probably has the best games library of all current-gen TV consoles. I also think that poor marketing and misguiding naming play a role in its poor performance — why not call it the Wii 2, to clearly show that it is different and new?
But I don't think that its failure can be attributed solely to marketing.
I don't think the issues with the GamePad's usefulness turns people off too much. I agree that most games just use it as a mirror or inventory quick reference, but I think the GamePad is an overall minor part of a great system. Part of the marketing failure is making everyone think the GamePad is fundamental to gameplay instead of complementary and that the Wii U is some weird hybrid tablet-console thing. They've even failed to communicate this to some game developers who apparently feel like they have to make some contrived GamePad level.
I agree it was a somewhat slow start out of the gate with games, but at this point it should be selling like hot cakes. We have a really big holiday season coming up and a few of those games have already released (Hyrule Warriors, Bayonetta 2).
Nintendo has the best back catalog in the industry, and with today's microprocessors, emulation makes that catalog fully portable.
A pure white color is notoriously hard to manufacture well, even with expensive equipment, or so I've heard.
The strategy of Nintendo makes as much sense as Apple's, and anyway, I have always though that it is far more likely for Nintendo to launch an Android smartphone where you could play their games (And only there).
I think a Mario game played without guaranteed tight controls could hurt the expectation what Mario games are.
I'm curently thinking about getting a new console (very light/casual gamer).
I've got the PS3 mostly for playing Blu-ray and never found a compelling game.
The Wii U is extremely interesting, not only because of its price, but primarily because of the games.
I have no idea about the business case, but releasing the games elsewhere would certainly cannibalize their own console.
And while it may be profitable, I think a Nintendo without a viable console on its own would be in very dire straits.
That's why I have always seen the disappointing sales figures for the Wii U in the past with a crying eye, even though I was not looking to buy a console. The Nintendo empire is kind of precious.
So, do I think we will ever see Nintendo games on Smartphones? In my opionion not unless they build their own smartphone. Personally I'm happy about it, because Apple does not seem to really acknowledge gaming. They are still "apps" after all, and they don't really improve their gaming services. Their controller API seems like a second thought. Android's hardware fragmentation will make it virtually impossible to keep the quality you are used from Nintendo games (Even though I think Google takes gaming much more serious than Apple).
Sega is just yet another app and game publisher. As a kid from the 80's remembering the Sega vs. Nintendo wars, this is a sad state of affairs.
If you own the platform, you can really push your IPs. I don't think that Halo, which in my opinion was a rather generic shooter when it was first released, could have become this multi-billion dollar franchise without the help of MS.
John Gruber is very guilty of this. He understands Apple very well, knows how they work, and how they think. But every time he discusses Nintendo, I see the same mistaken thinking about the company that, were a similar mistake made about Apple, would earn a "filed for future claim chowder". Like Apple, Nintendo does things differently than its competitors. But that doesn't mean that they do things similarly; nor do they face the same challenges.
Even though it's still a tough sell for most Chinese (remember, no one pays for games here, at least not upfront), they'll come around.
I wonder if the tallies for the other games (e.g. NSMB-U, Nintendoland, Z:WW) include those sold as a pack in, or free download?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_Wii_U_vide...
I didn't want to pick Nintendo Land because the way it was sold is not entirely straightforward. For example, some copies were bundled with a controller.
I didn't want to use NSMB or 3D World as examples because Mario platformers are often outliers when it comes to sales. I guess The Wind Waker HD would have been a good example, because it sold really well despite being an HD remake of an older game.