Deep Nintendological Thoughts #5: On Critical Mass and Turning Points

Share your perspective. Keep it thoughtful, welcoming and on topic.

1. I don't know about a turning point, but it now looks like I'm going to get my NCAA College Hoops on Nintendo again!

2. Until Microsoft leaves the industry and stop being so dishonest then I think you are jumping the gun here Jack. I think Electronic Arts is slowly starting to get Wii now and a lot more of the entertainment business in general. However; weither that will be the antidote in the well is doubtful for me and even if it is it will be much longer.

   Nintendo DS has one less thing that can hamstrung it: Microsoft has no real handheld to counter DS. And Zune does not count as direct competition.

3. @Gregory: Care to explain what you mean about Microsoft and how it applies to the Wii. Are you implying that Microsoft is strong arming games away from the Wii?

4. @Paul. Microsoft's "business model" with any platform is to 'court' developers (read: buy them off, or just buy them outright) by paying them more than the competing platforms, until the competing platform dies off due to lack of 'support'. (my 2 cents)

   As far as turning point….. it seems that way eh ? What with SEGAs lineup almost exclusively catering to the core this year. heck i cant think of a single first/second party title i actually want this year.

   Madworld, Deadly Creatures, Conduit, Monster Hunter 3….. all third party AAA efforts, and as a Wii owner, i'm happy. (in fcat im a little worried about my bank account).

   This has been a long time coming. I just hope we dont only see XB360 downports and casual/party games, and see some original IP specifically for the Wii.

   Madworld just stands out in my mind as the best example, unique, technically and artistically, looks fun both cinematically and gameplay wise…..aall round good entertainment. We need to see more creativity of this kind imo.

   Cheers

5. Stops being dishonest? Just cuz of the Red Ring?

   I don't think we're at the turning point just yet, as 50% more development could mean 45% junk and 5% stuff that's worth having. Hopefully though, like the DS, we'll see a lot more quality titles that keep the console in mind as opposed to an afterthought.

   A port like Dead Space though, screams "afterthought".

6. "I don't think we're at the turning point just yet, as 50% more development could mean 45% junk and 5% stuff that's worth having"

   Oh I completely agree. Nothing is set in stone yet, but this was an earnings call, not a lofty keynote, and that is encouraging to me, at least tentatively.

   And I agree on the Dead Space port too. It's dubious, given the game was designed ground up for a more powerful system, and I'm hoping is not indicative of EA's 50% Wii games development strategy.

   And in hindsight, I'm also a bit troubled about the EA Sports Wii tennis game he also mentioned on the call. It's "Wii first," then other platforms later, which doesn't gel well with me. A game like Wii Sports, for example, works because it can only be played on the Wii, and wouldn't feel right on other systems that don't have motion control. That this tennis game is coming out on a delayed release schedule for other systems, like Xbox or PS3, is troubling, because it means the motion controls might simply be replacements for button presses, which we know just doesn't work.

   Graphics argument aside, I think when we look back in five years at the truly successful Wii games, we'll see that they were mostly literal exclusives that could not be played on other consoles. Don't take that to mean I think the Wii is always better for gaming, it's just that the Wii Sports of the world are so incredibly successful for a specific set of reasons. Making your Wii version of a game a "delayed exclusive" is not one of them.

7. I just hope that EA does not charge full price for it, since their counterparts on 360 and PS3 will likely be under $40. Get a downgraded game, more than 1 year later and costing more than its other versions is asking to gather dust in the shelves.

   Best!

8. turning point? the wii is the best selling console by a mile. and the nontraditionals are pretty happy with what they have. if nintendo is just reaching critical mass, the other consoles will never get there.

   so what is turning…? is it being taken more seriously by 3rd parties? maybe. but one announcement does not make that. besides, this would have to do more with this forum's subjective desires for wii content, which is almost certainly more refined than the tastes of the blue ocean. of course, one announcement does not a trend make. nor does even EA's dedication of resources. this may just be EXACTLY what traditional gamers who have no interest in the wii have feared. after all, most games don't reach the wii's entire audience. few even seem to me to do better than a reasonably xbox sized audience.

   from my angle, last year was great. i thought both mirror's edge and dead space were slick use of the 360 power. this quickly is now worst case scenario. less development for systems i appreciate, whose power i do not want to give up just for waggle.

   so i'm back to the question of what is turning? that game companies are finally abandoning their traditional gamers? i hope not.

9. Not abandoning, which is forum spin, but repositioning. These "traditional gamers" you speak of are not large enough to support the development price tags their game tastes demand. So, they'll get fewer such titles, per year. This would therefore be more accurately described as a "balancing out" rather than an "abandonment." A further side effect of that is the Xbox 360 and PS3 are now officially going to be cannibalizing each other's sales for that other 50% from here on out. Probably a 60-40 split, or worse, in favor of the 360.

   So yeah, I suppose that's a turning point too, one during which the industry matures to support a more responsible–and lucrative–development model.

   And we're 50% in agreement on EA's 2008 effort. Dead Space was completely enjoyable all the way to the lackluster ending. Mirror's Edge, ironically given the marketing hype and latent potential, was at best a half-baked idea truly worthy of the much-maligned video game "tech demo" label.

10. Microsoft's dishonestly goes far beyond the Red Ring of Death and even the XBOX brand itself (dealings with charges by government officials of anti-competitive trade practices which I think is because government doesn't like competition from guys they think are acting like governments which they saw in Microsoft. Vista is in the toilet, the XP patching debacle, their dealings with the MPAA and RIAA on copyright etc.) to the point where Sony and Nintendo are virtual saints in comparison. Not really saints; but still the gap is very wide. A quick googling of Microsoft on these problems alone will get you some interesting results

    And yes I do imply that Microsoft's stragedy was to throw lots and lots of money to gain titles (which is fine); but with strings attached to prevent it from coming to Nintendo systems during the Gamecube era. Many develops had interest in Gamecube because the development cost were about the same back then and the install base was actually pretty close to XBOX's numbers. But they followed the money (cannot blame them for doing so of course) since Nintendo didn't want to pay them off (to protect their reputation) themselves. Of course now Microsoft is doing the same to Sony PlayStation 3. PS2 didn't have to worry about spending sacks of money (and they probably did that too) because they had the largest install base and thus earned the right to have all developers put the best games on their platform. Of course; at the rate that it's going and since the profits for their other divisions are getting smaller and smaller; that plan is going to bite them in the ass sooner than later.

    That's probably why Nintendo went the way they did with Wii: They knew that if they got into a HD Triplet battle; they would lose hard because Microsoft and to a lesser extent Sony would do the sacks of money concept to save themselves. Of course; neither of them cannot really do that anymore without killing what little profits they have left at this point.

11. MAN. I'm not even focusing on the Wii right now. There's a flood of good games that got released in the past months and more to come. No, what I'm really looking at is the Wii's little powerful, accident-prone kid brother, the DS.

    I beat all of the games I have on it and I'm looking for the flood of games to come for it this year. And it's shaping up to be good. A lotta RPGs, including a PokeMon game, Moon, the DSi… Man, we pushed the DSi under all of this Wii arguements, didn't we?

    So yeah. I'm not worried about the output Nintendo is accomplishing at home. I'm more worried about the stuff on the go. I needs more DS games ands the DSi, MAN!

12. And by accident-prone I mean the hinges. You probably didn't get it, so…just throwing it out there…

13. i can't say i care if game companies are pursuing a responsible and lucrative model. i just want the games i like to play to be made. maybe it would be more lucrative for all game companies to start making cosmetics. that would also suck.

14. its about time. 2009 is year of wii.

15. "maybe it would be more lucrative for all game companies to start making cosmetics. that would also suck"

    Now, while that statement is funny to read and very clever, it doesn't really apply here, and I think you know that. If video game companies started making cosmetics, they would undoubtedly fail, because there are already cosmetic companies that dedicated 100% of their resources to making cosmetics. So yes, we can agree again, twice in the same week: If EA started making lipstick, I agree, that would suck. We could also say the same of the sun setting in the east, or flying dolphins, or any number of other fake straw men that have literally zero chance of happening.

    "i can't say i care if game companies are pursuing a responsible and lucrative model. i just want the games i like to play to be made."

    From the sound of your comment, you should be very happy today: You'll be getting 50% of EA's attention, as their CEO said in the earnings call (i.e. 50% of titles will be 360/PS3). That's quite a bit of development effort, especially considering EA is the second largest publisher in the world. With that much attention and spending on the "games you like to play," why the negativity?

16. i understand this as a shift away from making the games i want to play.

    thus, sucking is sucking.

    also, in my cleverness, i assumed that it would be lucrative for them to make cosmetics. assuming or concluding otherwise violates this.

    they more they begin to ignore me, the more they justify the unjustified (?) fears from yesteryear of changes in investment, and the more sucking occurs from my perspective.

    the odds of "Desire, by Nintendo" happening miss the point. also, didn't really understand how it's a strawman. just illustrating how the i see sucking occur. not trying to prove to you that i really think there is sucking occurring. cause i do.

    also, flying dolphins would RULE. like, hardcore rule.

17. also, i like this whole partial agreeing thing. it's like we're entering a whole new era.

18. "flying dolphins would RULE. like, hardcore rule"

    Being bound to the water is the only thing keeping dolphins from taking over the earth. Therefore, flying dolphins would also suck.

    And just like that, we're back to disagreeing.

19. hahaha

    but they'd be beneficent rulers!! who has ever heard of an evil dolphin??

20. lol obviosuly deepthought you have never watched simpsons treehouse of horror X-something X-D they are evil becuz we forced them into water

This discussion is closed to new comments.