Ah, I wanna be like Shigesato Itoi.

Good stuff. :)

Precisely what I was thinking.  We're seeing what's happening to a certain developer who seems to be the antithesis of Iwata/Miyamoto's philosophy so hopefully for their sake they are reading this interview.  As for money, you know only Nintendo makes money on Nintendo systems .

I have to say it's really cool to see an interview with a video game exec where the exec doesn't engage in a pissing contest with his competitors.  The only such contest I noticed was Iwata seemingly saying, "hey Shiggy, you're games are a lot more popular than mine but now who's the boss biatch,"  in far more polite terms of course.

 I agree, and the first one (concept of using ideas) would be good for any product maker (not just for gaming)

Its great stuff.

If I have any "hero" (and ever have) it is definitely Miyamoto. My #1 desired job in life would be to work with Miyamoto on designing games for Nintendo. Maybe one day I'll apply there again :) [I applied to Retro many, many years ago - but didn't have the experience they were looking for :P].

These days I find it much more fascinating watching someone else play a game - than playing it myself. You watch their reactions, expressions, emotions - it really is fascinating. There is definitely a science to this - and no one has really cracked it yet (bat Miyamoto of course... :>).

I wouldn't say it's a "science" it's pretty much a qualitive consumer psychology approach... the only difference is he's doing it himself instead of paying some psychology expert a bunch of money to do it.

Companies do similar stuff with 1 on 1 focus interviews for some focus group stuff.  The brilliant part about using it in a videogame is that the output is readily visible. You can see on the screen what he gets and what he doesn't get.  Unlike other products where the consumer psychologist has to ask many measured and detailed questions, that have to be flexable enough to flow with what the subject is saying... because often times the subject doesn't really know what he missed or what's important to him.  You have to wrestle it out of him.

With a game it's easier, and much more cost efficient because you can see the reactions and like is aid... the output is right there.  Most companies don't do this because of the cost/time it takes for a few subjects that may or may not be representative of your target audience.

Some do however, and the ones that do are greatly helped.  I'm sure it helps Miyamoto that he works ina place where there were plenty of guineia pigs that he pretty much knew represented his target demographic.

Kasz,
What you actually mean is that with many products today (think shampoo) there isn't really any difference in the application of the product, so companies have to rely on marketing first and ask people woolly questions like if they feel more masculine when using this shampoo. If you want to test the function of a product (not the image) because your product actually has some unique features you can always do that hands-on.

4. On Management: "Enhance your Strength"

Itoi Do you remember the time I asked you the definition of management? It was around when I just started up Hobonichi, when you were president of HAL Laboratory. 

Iwata Of course. 

Itoi I would never have guessed you'd become president of Nintendo at that time. 

Iwata Neither had I. 

All (laugh) 

Itoi I remember the reason why I asked you that question. Having putting back together HAL Laboratory, I wanted to hear your opinion, thinking of the difficulties you went through, and partly because I didn't want to go through the same situation. 

Iwata I remember answering "You have to know your strength and your weakness. You need to lead your organization where you can enhance your strength, not where your weakness becomes exposed." 

Itoi You then sounded as if there could possibly be no other answers at all. 

Iwata You just have to stick to that until the end. I also remember talking about priorities. 

Itoi Yes. 

Iwata You have to set your priorities being aware of what you're good at. There are always so many things that you ought to do, but what you "can" do is limited. If you try to do everything you ought to do, you end up falling over. That's what I told you then as my own definition of management when I was wet behind the ears, but I still believe in this idea today.

Itoi Yes, I still see it in you. 

Iwata It's a theory that works. 

Itoi Those are probably the two things you taught me directly. I always kept them in mind when I discussed management with other people. I've been going over it again recently. I know vaguely our strength and weakness, but not so clearly. Actually, our employees are discussing our strength through e-mail right now. We've got like 150 opinions, but it's still not completely clear to us. I feel we're missing something.

Iwata I see. 

Itoi I think most of it has been said, but I feel we're still missing a whole lot. One of the strengths of HAL Laboratory was that it had a fantastic view, right?

Iwata "HAL Laboratory, Inc., the software vendor where you can view Mt.Fuji" 

Itoi Ha ha ha. That's a phrase I wrote on a sign in "MOTHER 2" (EarthBound). 

Iwata (laugh) 

Itoi HAL Laboratory was definitely specialized in programming. 

Iwata At the time, yes. 

Itoi It was partly because you were there. HAL Laboratory was definitely good at programming, not art. A company like ours, on the other hand, has difficulties when it comes to defining our strengths. 

Iwata I can assume that. 

Itoi We can come up with many abstract concepts, but it becomes unclear when you try to break it down into concrete concepts. To be extreme, you call something your strength when you want to nurture it even at the expense of investment. We haven't completely found that yet. I think it's an important task for us to find it, thus we've been searching for a long time. It would be nice if you can share some hints on how to search such strength, including how it was at HAL Laboratory. 

Iwata Let's see... First, it is ourselves that takes action. Then, the customers or our business acquaintances receive it and respond to it. This is the basic set of action. HAL Laboratory used to receive orders from Nintendo. In a way, the person in charge at Nintendo was our customer. Sometimes they were satisfied with our output, but sometimes not. The interesting thing is that this wasn't related to the amount of effort we put in. With the same amount of effort, sometimes we got 5 times the satisfaction than other times.

Itoi Interesting. 

Iwata I found out a pattern, observing this. To put it in short, when you are doing your job, there are times when you feel extremely exhausted and times when you feel it not so hard. Businesses are always accompanied by hardships and difficulties, needless to say. When you have completed a challenging job, if the customer's satisfaction level is not more than the level of the hard works you've been through, you feel even more exhausted. On the other hand, when the customer evaluates us highly, higher than what our hardship deserves in our analysis, employees become more encouraged and motivated to grow further. However, in bad cycles, the employees wear out, and the necessity of having to sit down and listen to their thoughts starts popping up. In summary, if they can feel that they were rewarded more than they deserve in the form of the customer's appraisal, it's the good cycle in which employees can voluntarily grow without the need of the management to intervene. That is something they are good at. If things cannot work out that way, these are not the things they are good at. I think that is how I have been distinguishing the two.

Itoi Ah, I get it. 

Iwata It's the same at Nintendo too. 

Itoi I think that's something I'm already doing. 

Iwata Yes, I think so. 

Itoi I don't want my people to go through meaningless agony. 

Iwata If it's too painful, just drop it. It's not what you're good at. 

Itoi Drop the painful stuff, quit the things you don't find interesting. 

Iwata You can say that again. 

Very good read... it could something that's applied to life, too, lol

Only somewhat.  Often times however, products can be applied differently in how they are done and with what.  For example Soda. Sure you only drink, soda.  But think about when you drink soda.  In the afternoon.  Very few people drink Soda in the mornings. (I do, but for most people it's an afternoon drink.)  If you had just invented Soda how would you know this?  You really wouldn't.  Even if you asked people when they would drink it, since it's new they might not really know.  After all that caffeine boost sounds like a good coffee replacement.  They've even tried to market Dr. Pepper as a coffee replacement by suggesting you warm it up. 

The George Forman Grill can be used to grill almost anything, but what does it seem to almost be exclusivly used for?  Hamburgers.  The other "options" go unused.

It's the same with the PS3 and 360, where the study has shown that many people who have it arn't even aware of it's HD capabilties, or if they are don't know how to use them.  That's an application they've just missed.

A lot of times a good number of functions, extra factors and options just go completly over peoples heads.  I mean I can only imagine how many people over 25 who have cellphones don't understand the concepts of things like texting.  Often times people will even buy a product and use it "wrong" if you don't do the right research to make sure that your product is presented in a way the consumer will understand.