Ben-DutkaCome on. People are surprised at the news? Really ?
Nintendo says they're considering a "new business model" after the Wii U's dismal sales became even more public during a recent conference.
With less than 4 million units sold to date (and remember, the system has been out for well over a year), and drastically lowered sales expectations for the fiscal period, Nintendo is being forced to reevaluate.
Well, duh . Look, I'm no seer. I didn't expect the Wii to explode but then again, I had no idea what the Wii would do. I did know that if Nintendo successfully catered to the mainstream masses, from kids to senior citizens, the thing would explode. It was a gimmick, a fad, true enough. It was. And it received very little in the way of quality third-party support. However, it was a new electronic gadget that qualified as an "electronic gadget" in a world where gadgets rule. It wasn't just video games; it was the "next-gen" version of video games. Hence, it exploded.
I have always – and will always – applaud Nintendo for that move. It was ingenious. But how they could turn around and, mere years later, pull a total blunder like the Wii U is beyond me. I took one look at the details for that new system and just laughed. I was stunned. I thought it was a joke. The game company that will always occupy a very warm place in my heart, the one that proved all the naysayers wrong by doing the unthinkable and winning over the non -gamers with the Wii; this is what they did. A high-def version of the same gimmick, the same fad. Rule #1 of the marketplace: Fads have a lifespan, and it ain't long.
You can't gussy up the fad and expect it to work again. That just doesn't happen, especially if the competition has already implemented their own versions of your breakthrough. Sure, Sony and Microsoft stole Nintendo's idea with Move and and Kinect. No kidding. But it's done. And that singular feature that rocketed your previous product to immense success is no longer singular. Doing it again when you – and the competition – have already done it…makes zero sense. Nintendo also had to know that the PS4 and Xbox One were on the way, and gamers would be waiting on those systems. Not only was the Wii U's launch timing bad, it's outlook is terrible.
Your admittedly legendary mascots can only keep the ship afloat for so long. Nintendo expected to sell 9 million Wii Us by the end of March 2014. They now anticipate selling only 2.8 million. That's not just a lowered expectation, that's an absolute bomb. Even the 3DS is slipping. I'm not saying Nintendo is going out of business. I'm saying that from the start, I knew the Wii U was a horrendous idea…if I knew it, how the hell did Nintendo not know it?
Wii U is what Wii should have been. had they made it that way, things would be quite different. But no. Too much focus on their gimmicks.
There is apparently, something that Nintendo is going to learn from their failure with the Wii U, though.
People should read what David Jaffe had to say about Nintendo's latest debacle on his Twitter account.
He gives a bit of a fresh perspective among all the doom scenarios being described in this industry.
Wii u technology didn't exist back then. Something equivantly powerful (and that controller) would probably put the cost up to a grand back then.
Not to mention that nintendo made a ton of money from the wii.
@firesoul453 – They not only made a ton of money on the Wii (with both hardware and software sales – Wii Sports, Mario Kart, Smash Bros. etc.) but they're STILL making a lot of money from that console (still selling better than the Wii U) and also from the 3DS. The 3DS was the best selling system in the US in 2013.
They have to-date, 18 billion dollars in the bank. Their failure with the Wii U will not force them to disappear or become a 3rd party developer. They would need to have several Wii U disasters (for several decades & also avoid making any profits from their handheld division) to even go there.
EDIT: Just noticed something about Ben's editorial.
Ben says that the Wii U sold less than 4 million units to date. That is incorrect.
The 3.9 million figure that Ben is using in his editorial, actually comes from sales numbers from back in September 30th, 2013. That sales figure doesn't reflect how the system fared in the following months (November-December).
According to the NPD, this is how the Wii U performed in November and December just in the US:
November (Wii U): 220,000 units sold
December (Wii U): 460,000 units sold
Again, those numbers are just from the US. Not counting sales in the rest of the world. If you add them up to the 3.9 million sales figure, you end up with:
4.580.000 units sold to-date.
So Ben needs to edit his editorial on that. Because the Wii U is certainly not below the 4 million mark. In fact, considering how much it sold just in Japan last month (330,000 units), the Wii U is actually a lot closer to the 5 million mark. 🙂
Last edited by Bonampak on 1/18/2014 4:13:45 PM
Finally someone said the same thing I have been thinking for awhile now. But yet people are going crazy for a new Zelda or Mario Game. Even I knew the Wii U will sink just like the Wii did. I adored Nintendo as a kid. But sadly Nintendo is still stuck in child land. So many AAA games are coming out in 2014 the Wii U will never see. Sorry if I was the Ceo of Nintendo that would bother me and totally make me rethink how to create a better console. Nintendo has some great Devs. It's time to push out some new IPs. Get some new ideas into the mixture.
Yea many people know MS and Sony grabbed some ideas from Nintendo. And used them with out a second thought. But oh well. Now PS4 and Xbox One is here and everyone is going nuts. Meanwhile Wii U is lagging behind yet again. Even more so.
I like the fact Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft is around. But once again only two of them is pushing the other to do better. Nintendo is sitting there not even caring. When in truth they should.
I could go on and on but I won't it bothers me to see Nintendo not caring, if they are caring it doesn't seem so.
To all Keep Gaming.
I mean this as an actual question, but what great AAA games are you referring to?
The only AAA nonexclusive game I can think of is Watch Dogs, and that'll be on the Wii U. That is also the only game I am genuinely looking forward to, aside from Mario Kart 8 and Drive Club. (Which are both exclusives)
I must be getting old, but the game industry in 2013 and 2014 hasn't provided me with the same level of entertainment as the years before.
In 2014, I'm just getting two games; Watch Dogs and Mario Kart 8. Any other game purchases will be random, and likely only if they're on sale. The industry is no longer what it used to be. Fun has been replaced by dollars. I don't like that, and if this industry doesn't change soon, I won't be a part of it moving forward. Which is sad, as I've been a game journalist, a professional gamer, and am now a video game developer. In fact, I only became a developer so I could create games that are purely fun and imaginative. None of this big budget crap. Just pure fun with no greed attached. Kinda had a dream to change the industry by creating original ideas, possibly even a brand new gaming genre. Nintendo provides these creative capabilities. While most people are hating on the Wii U, I happen to know first hand just how capable the machine truly is. The developers turned the Wii into a gimmick, and they'll likely do the same with the Wii U. Nintendo is creating consoles intended for video game developers, but the industry has evolved into something else. Something evil and sinister. This industry is now creating entertainment products, with the Xbox One being a prime example of this. Nintendo has always been about the games, which traditionally, were essentially digital toys for ones enjoyment. That is what the video 'game' industry should be. Now? The game industry is is no longer a game industry. It is an interactive entertainment industry.
So, whenever I see someone irrationally hating on Nintendo, I can't help but to facepalm. Nintendo is the only company that still cares about the video game industry. In fact, they rely entirely on the game industry. Microsoft and Sony have nongaming divisions. They make televisions, computers, tablets, and other various forms of technology.
Nintendo is the only company that is actually attempting something different. They popularized motion control, which could have gone in any direction. It's unfortunate that the developers misused the technology, but Nintendo shouldn't be to blame for that.
Now, they're trying to create a second screen experience, which could completely change the way we play video games. So far, developers have misused this technology, turning it into a possible gimmick. However, the technology itself is outstanding, though this is probably the developer in my talking.
Speaking of, the Nintendo 3DS was another device that developers used to turn into a gimmick. The 3D could have completely changed the puzzle gaming genre. Adding multiple dimensions to a puzzle game. Imagine something along the lines of Echochrome, and how 3D could have completely enhanced the general gameplay.
All in all, the Wii U is not a failed device. It is simply a device that most current developers are unable to properly understand, either because they're used to creating entertainment products rather than games, or they're simply interested in the average shooter, and can't imagine anything even remotely creative to do with the technology.
If anything is a useless gimmick, it is the Dual Shock 4 controller. The light bar is unnecessary, and the touchpad has little real world use. There is nothing innovative here, and gaming innovation is provided by the way the player interacts with the game, and not the game console itself.
What he said. ^
XD
I'd also like to add that while I am a loyal Sony fan and applaud them for the risks they took with the PSVita, this same PSX post could have been written about it a year ago as it sold even less in a year than what the Wii U is expected to sell. But you won't see that here.
Last edited by Jawknee on 1/18/2014 12:13:55 AM
What's a Vita?
lol but no seriously. Wii u is a console that is supposed to compete against other consoles. Vita is a handheld competing in a very quickly transitioning market. If you were talking about the 3DS then I could agree more, but the 3DS is a complete powerhouse of awesome games while the Vita is bare bones. The wii u is just garbage compared to the 3DS. But once again, the Wii u is a console and not a handheld even though it literally is basically a handheld considering how its used.
What I don't want is for Nintendo to become a cellphone developer because all it would do is kill most of their massive fanbase. And by massive I mean the 3 million who shelled out money for the Wii u in the past year. Their "Ace" for the wii u is Hyrule Warriors. They released another great Zelda game for the 3DS, and are giving the wii u more crap.
Also I agree about the ps4 controller. The touchpad is dumb but I think the light thing is going to make stealth games pretty epic using it.
They need to release some big games in order to win anyone over, because at this point no one's buying a wii u anymore and Nintendo knows that. I do think, instead of them panicking, that they should make better games for the wii u. The mario games look fun, but they look like mario games. Metroid Prime, a New super mario game, Xenoblade 2, Super Smash bros, and mario kart would most likely give the wii u some push, but I don't think by much.
If there's anything thats dumb its trying to fuse handheld with console game time. Sony pushing that is dumb too, but they didn't go to the extreme extent as Ninty did with the wii u.
I don't like disrespecting the grandfather of video games, but I can't fanboy whats obvious. If this was Sony slipping up, I'd be happy to admit it. Defending something based on pride even when you know its wrong doesn't make you a hero. Nintendo nor Sony care about you. You're just a customer paying them for a service. Entertainment, and whether or not you enjoy said entertainment is up to you.
Denying Nintendo's dying console is as bad as the idiots who say the Vita is going to come back. They both had their shot, and its over now.
But really Nintendo, Cellphone games?
wiiplay: You completely invalidated everything you said by saying Nintendo is the only company that "still cares about the video game industry."
Based on what? Entirely on your 100% subjective views of what "fun" and "greed" are. You can hide behind the "oh, developers didn't know how to use it" all you want. Then you tell us the touchpad on the DS4 has "little real world use" and pretend that what you're saying is somehow universally true.
Give me a BREAK.
Jawknee: What a pile of crap. I've been one of the single biggest critics of the Vita for the past year, as anyone who actually reads my articles knows. We all know that because of your undying Ninty fandom that you only read the headline and didn't bother with the content.
Furthermore, saying the Vita has sold less than the Wii U in terms of expectations is flat-out false. 9 million Wii Us anticipated; lowered to 2.8 million. No chance in hell Sony had such high expectations for the Vita. None.
Obviously the point of my comparison went right over your head.
My point is the Vita is as much a failure(even more so to Ben's standards) as the Wii U yet you won't see him gloating over that as he is here. There is a double standard in the industry directed at Nintendo.
The Wii U is not for everyone. That's obvious. But a piece of garbage it is not. People pick their console of choice for its exclusives. Why should It be any different for Nintendo? It should but there's that double standard again.
Knightzane: Yes, what you're seeing here is the power of a decade-old bias. It blinds people so quickly and so easily, they'll spew a bunch of purely subjective nonsense all over the page and actually believe they made some sort of legitimate argument.
While everyone else who hasn't been infected by the aforementioned bias reads it and can't even comprehend how inaccurate it is. Nintendo has people like wiiplay and Jawknee in the palm of their hand; that company could launch a nuclear attack against the US and people like that would find some way to exonerate their precious Nintendo.
I love Nintendo, too. But I can't bring myself to be totally, ridiculously irrational.
Ben I searched for an article by you that says the Vita is dying. I couldn't find it. If you have one that carries the same arrogant tone as this one, I'd love to read it.
And I never said anything about projected sales. Company projections are wrong all the time. I 'm simply talking about the Vita's 1.2 millions first year sales vs the a Wii U's 2.9. Both are failures under that definition.
Jawknee, I got news for you: Nothing you say goes "over my head." You're not half as smart as you seem to think you are.
You can't even read. Nobody ever said the Wii U was a "piece of crap." I said it would be unsuccessful. I said it when it launched. I was hardly the only one and I was right.
The only "double standard" here is that you keep presenting yourself as an unbiased observer when every single person here has encountered your insane bias towards Nintendo AND Sony. So insane that you don't read anything, call people names, and then pretend that you managed to prove something.
Your resulting to petty insults so soon? That's a record I think.
Oh and I never said you said it was a piece of crap. Please point out where I did. My reply about it being "garbage" and the double standard stuff was a reply to Knightzane. So calm down.
You also can't find one where I said the Wii U is "dying." Doesn't say it here, either. I said it would be UNSUCCESSFUL and didn't understand why anyone would've thought otherwise.
If you're not going to read the article, don't respond to it. Especially if you have nothing new to say besides the same rhetoric that has never once passed muster.
Seriously? Did you forget you posted this on the main page?
"Nintendo is hurting and the Wii U is dying. But did anyone really anticipate another Wii-like explosion? What would lead one to believe that?"
I think an apology is in order.
Jawknee, you were the first to imply that I was bashing the Wii U and giving the Vita a pass. Never once have I done that. The implication is a baseless insult to my work here.
As usual, you have no idea how you come across to others when you're out-of-your-mind defending something that in your mind can do no wrong.
Wow. Don't even know the purpose of a tagline. I explain quite clearly in the article my stance, which you DID NOT READ.
Yeah, an apology is in order, and don't ever hijack one of my articles again with your agenda.
Wait, I thought you didn't say the Wii U was dying? So because it was a tagline, you didn't really mean it?
And what agenda? I disagree with you so I have an agenda? What's funny is I don't even disagree with the notion that the Wii U is doing bad. And I did read the article, I just chose not to dissect it because it's pointless when you're obviously so set in your thinking.
I was trying to determine if I should reply back, given the rather aggressive response from an administrator.
However, I feel as though you're not understanding my reasoning here, Ben. Specifically regarding the DS4 and the touch pad.
I am simply finding it hard to imagine the touch pad being used in any kind of innovative or revolutionary way, at least not one that directly benefits or enhances the gameplay.
The first thing that comes to mind is menu navigation. To be able to swipe your way through the various menu systems, or to make map navigation faster and more intuitive. (AC4 is a good example of this)
The touch pad can also double as a clickable button, but being in such an awkward location, and considering the amount of force required to 'click', it would become an awkward experience to use in combination with the traditional control mechanics.
The touch pad was an unnecessary extra that doesn't provide any current benefits. Same goes for the light bar, not because of the idea of using visual cues, but rather the location of the bar. It isn't easy to see in normal conditions.
As a controller, I believe it is one of the best ever to be created. It feels nice, has an even weight, and is all around responsive. However, Sony wanted to create an experience similar to the Wii U, but felt as though a full touch screen was unnecessary. If I recall, they claimed that a touch screen would be a distraction, and for the most part, they were right. However, I feel as though the light and the touch pad are on equal grounds to the Wii U gamepad, as they (to me) are equally as distracting.
As for my statement regarding Nintendo, and the video game industry? You mistook my opinion as some kind of biased truth. Quite simply, it is nothing more than my opinion, but it is one that I feel strongly about.
The video game industry is no longer the same industry. While the game industry of the 80's and 90's obviously no longer exists today, given the vast differences in technology and consumer trends.
Up until and even some time within the PS3 era of gaming, something changed. Developers started to focus on downloadable content, and while some DLC is well worth the purchase, and was intended to expand the game by a considerable amount, a vast majority of the downloadable content and expansion packs are created with the intention to make as much money as possible. To essentially sell less content, or content that isn't all that significant, yet still charge high rates to access this content. (skin packs, weapon packs, and other 'small' yet insignificant content that is sold for an average price of $1.99 – see Borderlands 2 for an example)
Some developers would include pack-in DLC, which was included on the retail disc itself. This is simply going too far.
Additionally, this last generation created the yearly release cycle of first person shooters, and other genres outside of sports. (Before, sports were updated yearly to ensure that the player rosters were always up to date. Currently, there's no real reason that the rosters cannot be updated through patches)
While releasing a new game each year can be beneficial to the franchise and the continuing story (Assassin's Creed is a good example) most franchises within the first person shooter genre offer little to no new experiences over game iteration, and they also tend to sell additional downloadable content packs that offer little value to the general experience.
The video game industry has become an interactive entertainment industry, and actively promotes the sale of additional content and micro transactions, such as those found within Call of Duty and the latest Gran Turismo title.
While I guess you could debate that both Sony and Microsoft are interested in providing a valuable gaming experience, I simply no longer see the value in the experiences that they are providing.
With Nintendo, when I purchase a game or a game console, I'm not bombarded by advertisements asking me to purchase the latest downloadable content. I simply buy the video game, and play it. I don't have to worry about paying $10 to unlock new modes or features. I make my initial purchase, and that's it. There are no extra charges. I'm not going to feel pressured to buy the latest series of map packs, all because the game itself is incomplete at launch. To me, Nintendo is the only game company left; that is a company which understands the value of a dollar, and won't charge me extra to access unneeded content. (Though Nintendo is now experimenting with downloadable content, they do not currently center their business around the DLC and micro transaction model)
Nintendo focuses on creating new experiences. To innovate the industry by providing new ways to interact with your games. Every Nintendo controller has evolved and innovated in some way or form. From the directional pad to the modern analog stick. Touch screens to motion controls, and now asymmetrical gameplay. Nintendo has been providing the tools to innovative the game industry since the original Nintendo Entertainment System. For the most part, their innovations are widely accepted and expanded upon by other parties.
I'm honestly not sure why people are unable to see the Wii U's potential. The system should be selling far more units, as, with the right games utilizing the right features, the Wii U would easily become one of the best and most unique video game consoles to date. Same can be said for the PlayStation Vita. Unfortunately, the average consumer seems to be uninterested in proper innovation, which both the Wii U and Vita provide. The Vita is a very capable machine, and deserves to have at least 20 million units sold. While I praise the 3DS, especially in regards to the 3DS's potential to enhance the puzzle gaming genre, the Vita is by far the more innovative system, with far more untapped gaming potential. Yet, the 3DS is selling far more, and most developers aren't even utilizing the 3DS in ways that enhance the experience.
Ben, I must express my opinion on this article. While it is obviously factual, and accurate, it doesn't really belong on a PlayStation fan site. If anything, it seems rather distasteful, and your comments further contribute to that.
You're actually belittling your readers by calling them names. I've been using this website since 2008, and have never seen you act so hostile towards those that voice their opinions publicly.
Now, I have nothing against you, or anyone else here. In fact, I greatly enjoy reading your articles, as they are normally quite fun to read, and are almost always informative. However, I just don't believe that this editorial was at all needed.
I am actually viewing this more as a rant, than an actual editorial. You're just too negative, and express your personal opinions in a way that purposely makes Nintendo look bad.
You even went as far as to call the new console a joke. Honestly, writing an informative article with a few opinions is fine, but this was just distasteful. Informative? Sure, but distasteful nonetheless.
Come on Ben. A little humbleness is sometimes in order.
You did say that the Wii U is dying, you're saying so on the very front page. Hell, it's even true. It IS dying.
Also, back when the first signs of failure were starting to show for the Vita you called everyone who pointed that out as just being "haters" and "biased against Sony", you even dedicated an entire editorial on it.
Sometimes, just sometimes a little humbleness is in place. Everything is not a battle.
Last edited by Beamboom on 1/18/2014 8:39:27 AM
I think at the very least it's fair to say the Wii-U was never going to experience a Wii-like explosion. I don't know about dying, but it certainly isn't going to be a strong generation for them.
Nintendo will always and eternally be capable of turning top notch games like Zelda, Mario, and Metroid. I don't think it matters, gimmick or not. They will always be capable of AAA quality for those titles. And the occasional exclusive like Xenoblade doesn't hurt either. I also think those types of games will have a strong following for eternity.
But they have a lot of work to do to regain relevance. Personally, I think the negative overall reception to PS Move and Kinect should have been a sign that the Wii-U should aim for something better than what they came up with. Then again, hindsight is 20/20 and maybe they believed they had the pigeonhold on movement-sensing gimmickry.
Anyways, I don't know how anyone could be offended by this article's ghost arrogance. And Ben, I'm kinda with beam on this one. Not because I think you're necessarily wrong, but because I think it's not worth it to argue with some people. Especially elitists who claim that just because you don't agree with them, you must not have been able to comprehend their argument.
i totally agree with ben, in my eyes the wii u is an will be very unsuccessful an they really do need to change there long term stragedy to survive, especially as the ps4 an xbox one are wiping the floor with it sales wise.
The article was fine (unless you love Nintendo) until Ben slipped in a few words about the 3DS. It totally came off as a jab to Nintendo. It was completely unnecessary and provided nothing for the article because it was about the WiiU. Mentioning the 3DS makes it about Nintendo. And to go on to say that mario, Zelda and the likes won't keep the systems around forever, is low too as it certainly appears that's exactly what's helping the WiiU out.
Nintendo has top notch games that gamers and the industry love to play and Nintendo will always have those regardless of the system.
Last edited by bigrailer19 on 1/18/2014 10:59:27 AM
If Nintendo hadn't cut the price of the 3DS and gave away a bunch of free games, I do believe that the PSVita would of sold more and probably dominated the 3DS. The initial sales can sometimes be the difference between life and death. That and the overpriced Memory Cards. That was a sucker punch to Sony right in the chin..
yah, nintendo has proven they can be a profitable and well-to-do business with most of their revenue riding on the backs of their well respected and established franchises and their vision for family entertainment. It wasn't until the last 2-3 years where they began to struggle financially. Which can be directly attributed to the Wii U itself, and the initial sluggish beginnings of the 3Ds.
So really, it's been proven they can do it pretty much alone, with the occasional enticing support titles like Xeno stuff, Last Story, Bayonetta 2 (will probably flop but I'm enticed =p ) and a handful of other third party developed content, like from SEGA. They still have a long long way to go before hitting the bottom and they can withstand this mishap just fine.
Beamboom: I've spent the last six months taking so many jabs at the Vita that people keep telling me I shouldn't work for a Sony-oriented site. So, what…just missed all that?
I also wrote several pieces explaining why Nintendo has done great things. I said it in this one, too. It is NOT my fault if everyone decides to gloss over the facts to prove something that isn't true.
There's a difference between humbleness and taking a stand when people are dead flat wrong.
wiiplay: Sorry, all of that is entirely subjective. All of it. That's your stance and that's fine, but you can't try to prove facts when you're not actually utilizing anything but opinion.
In defense of the touchpad on the duel shock 4 I believe Sony added on there as a means of offering more imput commands from a controller. If you played Killzone and Watframe you would see it can be useful. I'd also argue it's much more intuitive to use since I'm not removing my hand off the controller to touch the pad/screen.
Ben, I never tried to pass it on as fact, aside from the below quote, which is an actual statement made by Sony themselves.(Which you yourself reported on)
" However, Sony wanted to create an experience similar to the Wii U, but felt as though a full touch screen was unnecessary. If I recall, they claimed that a touch screen would be a distraction".
Also, just for reference, here is the official quote from Sony.
“A touchscreen was another idea that we had. We actually tested it, but [besides cost factors], our game teams felt like having to look down at the controller is not what they want to do. They want to have the consumers concentrated on the big picture that they show [on the TV].â€
Source: https://temp.psxextreme.com/ps4-news/754.html
If you check my wording, I specifically used phrases such as "personally, I" and "I believe". This is essentially the same thing as stating an opinion, though it's an educated opinion at that.
Additionally, it actually isn't as subjective as you would like to believe, and I made some logical references to the way that the industry currently operates. You can't deny that there is an increasingly heavy focus on the micro transaction model. This model enhances the profitability of a single product far beyond what it would normally be capable of making with the traditional buy and play model. Personally, this represents a larger interest in making as much money as possible, which is the definition of greed. (Greed: to selfishly want more, and more)
Also, my opinion regarding the DS4? While I still strongly believe that the controller is among the best ever made, if you were to hold it normally, the light bar is barely visible. If it were easily visible during normal gameplay, that is to essentially hold the controller in your hand, so the analog sticks are facing upwards at a slight angle, normally pointing just above the players forehead, the view of the light bar is obstructed by the curve of the touch pad. If there was nothing obstructing my view, the light would serve a proper purpose.
If you believe this to be a mere personal opinion, please go ahead and hold the DS4, and attempt to play a single player session of Killzone Shadow Fall.
Chances are, you will be unable to visibly see the light change in color, due to the curved design of the controller itself. (Though you may see it reflect off of your television, or possibly your fingers that are constantly hovering over L2 and R2)
Also, I do feel as though I should apologize for my earlier comment, stating that I was tired of reading these types of articles.
Honestly, this comment wasn't intended exclusively for PSXE, but rather game sites in general. Still, what I said is true, as I do rather dislike reading these types of articles. I also dislike reading articles about the Xbox One and the NSA. It seems as though every news site has at least one article about how the Wii U is a failure, and how the Xbox spies on you. What annoys me the most is when articles suggest Nintendo get out of the console business, and become a third party developer / publisher.
First article I read? Fine. Second? Sure, no problem. However, pretty much all of these articles are identical in content, and it's just too damn repetitive for me. I feel like I am reading the same article on multiple websites, normally starting the same source. (90% of the time it's a supposed professional analyst, which almost always happens to be Michael Pachter)
I'm not trying to insult you or your journalistic integrity, Ben. I'm just at a loss as to why you would even bother writing an article like this in the first place, on a website intended for PlayStation news.
wiiplay: The problem is that there's no way to support the statement: "Nintendo is the only company who actually cares about the video game industry."
Not only can't you prove it, I seriously doubt it's even remotely close to true. When you make statements like that, there are implications and insinuations which follow, and I have an issue with all of them.
Your love of Nintendo and of gaming is admirable. It's great to see someone so emotionally invested in something they love. You just have to realize that when you make such statements, it comes across as being, well…a little narrow-minded. It basically says Sony and Microsoft only hurt the industry now because they don't care about it.
You don't actually believe that, do you?
Ben, when I imagine a traditional video game console, I imagine a console that primarily focuses on the gaming experiences, rather than other forms of digital entertainment, such as film and music.
The Xbox One, for example. I do not consider it to be a video game console, but rather an entertainment and media hub, that happens to support gaming on the side.
Though, the PlayStation 4 is currently focusing primarily on the gaming experience, which is a pleasant thing to see given this media rich day and age, I still can't help but to imagine the PS4 as being a multimedia hub. Well, more like a stepping stone that sits somewhere between the media heavy One, and the game focused Wii U. This was a very good decision by Sony, and they appear to be prioritizing the game aspect, while also offering the same general media features on the side, but making them optional and less apparent to the consumers.
Even still, my opinion about Nintendo goes beyond that. They are the only significant company within the video game industry that relies entirely on the production of video game consoles and video game sales. They do not have any other significant source of revenue, which is why I referenced them as being the only game company left in existence.
That isn't to say that Sony or Microsoft are having any kind of negative impact on the game industry, though they have been making great strides to expand the general profitability of the video game industry, which can be considered a good thing, as well as a bad thing. (Depends on how you look at it)
For me personally, I feel as though we've gone too far. I'm fine with downloadable content, but prefer to see micro transactions phased out.
So, hopefully that's perceived as a logical and understandable response. Know that I am not a Nintendo fanboy, even though I do have huge respect for the company. The fact that something like Nintendo, a company known for creating what are essentially digital toys, is even remotely capable of competing directly with two of the largest companies in the world, is truly astonishing. Heck, it's beyond impressive, and we're unlikely to ever see such a rivalry again in our lifetime, from any industry. (it would be like a toy store competing against WalMart, and making more profit)
Wiiplay,
I don't agree with all you say but I think I see your point of view.
And I do enjoy reading your posts. I just wanted to say that. I am very happy that there are such elaborate and well expressed guys as you hanging out here. One can become a bit tired of the hard-headed, fully fuelled three liner commentators at times. No names mentioned, no new fuel ignited. 🙂
Last edited by Beamboom on 1/19/2014 4:08:34 AM
@Beamboom, I've been hanging around since 2008, but fairly rarely comment.
I'm honestly surprised to see so many familiar faces still around. You, World, Jawknee.Haven't seen Highlander for awhile.
I'm sure none of these old timers remember me, though.
Highlander disappeared after Sony didn't make the PS4 the way he wanted them to, I think.
I'll be honest and say that I didn't know it would be so dismal even after the E3 presentation. Why? Because Wii SHOULDN'T have been as popular as it was, even as a gimmicky gadget. It broke all the rules, so I wasn't ready to say that those crazy people wouldn't rush out and buy the next one.
Well now Ninty knows how Sega felt with the Dreamcast. The fact that Wii sold so well means they have a nest egg to survive on but yeah they need to do something totally new. If they want any ideas I'll be in my office.
You make it sound as if Nintendo never experienced failure before. Say hello to the Virtual Boy! 😉
Plus finishing dead last with the N64 and Gamecube had to be something quite humbling for them,I'm sure.
The thing to consider at the moment though, among all the doom and gloom predictions being made left and right, is that Nintendo has over 18 billion dollars in the bank. That's more than enough money for the company to still stay in business for nearly 40 more years.
So they can actually afford to go through several Wii U disasters for several more generations before that money runs out. And that's with them not making any more money from their handheld division (3DS and beyond) or their legacy library of games (which is rumored to be made available on mobiles in the near future, according to what Ninty President said recently).
So the reason Nintendo is even in panic mode, is because they're trying to save the sinking ship that is the Wii U. Not because they themselves are going under. Nintendo will survive this.
To be fair Virtual Boy wasn't the flagship, but one could draw some comparisons to Gamecube.
@Bonampak
Nintendo did not finish dead last in the N64 era… Sega did…
Sega finished so badly you don't even remember the Saturn! XD
Oh yay, another "Nintendo is doomed and they suck" article on PSX.
Yeah, I'm getting tired of these.
I come here for PlayStation news, not Xbox or Nintendo.
Ben, I like that you're covering all aspects of the industry, but do you mind keeping your articles on topic with the site?
Sony do what Nintendogs don't!
I think the Wii U bombed simply because hardly any notable games were released for it. I honestly don't think the Wii U was built on the same gimmicks as the Wii. Touchscreen on a gamepad isn't that bad of an idea. But Nintendo had a whole year to dump great games on the system but failed to do so. Why couldn't they hire more second party devs? Why do they take so long to release AAA first party games? I do think Nintendo is lost when the market around them is changing.
Yeah, why DO they take so long to make a game like Zelda? Any other dev would have that biatch out the door in 2 years.
Because they have one producer and focus on quality over quantity. Which proves to work as Zelda is a critical success time and time again. Not to mention they have to make Zelda games for two platforms. So they really don't take that long. It just seems that way because they divide their releases between their home consoles and handhelds.
Just don't click the article?
Oh yay, another predictable "I'm right and everyone else is wrong when it comes to Nintendo" post by Jawknee.
wiiplay: Tired of "these?" Yeah? Let me see…over 10,000 articles with my name on it in recent years……hmm….I see maybe 5 with Nintendo in the title. Three of which are DEFENDING the company.
The exaggeration of the century and a crappy memory, huh?
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 1/18/2014 1:12:14 AM
Lol! Ooooh you got me there Ben. Point where in my post you replied to I said everyone was wrong. Oh yea I didn't.
The part where you never concede a single solitary point about anything, defend Nintendo's every move, and then act like everyone else is just an idiot and doesn't "understand" what Nintendo is "all about."
That part.
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 1/18/2014 1:17:16 AM
Copy and paste where I've don't any of that in this thread. I'll wait…seems you're projecting my friend.