By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Smashchu2 on 13 July 2010
Edit Thread
jarrod said:
Smashchu2 said:
jarrod said:
Smashchu2 said:
jarrod said:

Honestly, looking at timelines I think it's likely Wii 2 will launch first (Wii fell in Japan in 2008 and hasn't really regained much ground since, and Nintendo always looks to their home market when planning launch cycles) and it may come as soon as Q4 2011.  In terms of hardware spec, Wii 2 will likely be just a normal generational upgrade, meaning there won't be as much pressure on Sony & Microsoft to push to their next cycles right away.  This will also likely benefit 3rd parties, as they'll now have 3 consoles to launch games across and share costs/risk with rather than just 2, though it might also result in the 3rd placer getting squeezed out GameCube-style as the gen goes on and Wii 2 gains ground.  Like with 3DS vs PSP, you can probably also expect Wii 2 spec to be a decent increase over PS3/360 capability, and probably with a focus on developer ease of use.

Microsoft's timeline I think depends entirely on how Kinect fares though.  They're in no hurry to rush the cycle, they've clearly shifted priority to profitability and MS PR has even espoused their own "10 year cycle" for 360.  Xbox 3 will probably launch alongside PS4, the only way I can see it launching earlier is if Kinect utterly bombs and the current 360 market basically dries up next year, in which case a Q4 2012 launch might be possible.  But that looks pretty unlikely imo.

I disagree a lot there. First, The Wii was never that strong in Japan. In 2008, it's best year, it sold 3 million. In 2009, it sold 2 million. It's a big drop in terms of relativity, but the system wasn't preforming that great overthere, esspecially when compaired to the US and Others. Nintendo will not launch unless they think Sony will launch. 2011 is far too early for even Sony. 2012 is most likely because it would be the most plausable for Sony to launch then.

As for Microsoft, don't try to tell their strategy. They change it every so often. They would only say "10 year life cycle," to copy Sony. They stole Reggie's 06 speech in their E3 09 conference. Kinect is going to kill Microsoft and the amount of talk from Microsoft on it is proof of that. Everyone thought their press conference was bad. And people from Microsoft keep saying how it's like Super Mario Brothers and will change everything. A fire broke out in their core market, and since Microsoft is retarded in the game business, they will not know how to put it out and will crumble.

Eh, "ever that strong" in Japan?  Until 2H 2008, Wii was actually outselling PS2 even launch aligned iirc, NO system has ever sold as well as Wii did upfront in Japan (not SFC, not PS2, not even DS).  The problem with maintaining that level of sales momentum was software support (both 1st and 3rd party), which is what directly led to the current Wii malaise in Japan.  Iwata's actually spoken on the issue at length.

At this point, I don't think Nintendo's even that concerned with Sony, even console side.  They'll launch Wii 2 next fiscal year for the same reasons they're launching 3DS this fiscal year; they can make more money with a new machine than the current one, piracy is steadily eating into their current bases and the timing gives them an opportunity to regroup and bring the 3rd parties back en masse.  Despite being huge worldwide, Nintendo also always looks to their home market first, and in Japan Wii definitely more than winding down (and basically abandoned by 3rd parties) now...

 

For Microsoft, I see Kinect as mainly a stall tactic and grab for some casual dollars.  They'll probably include Kinect in Xbox 3 as well though.   And despite their disasterous E3 conference, I don't think the hardcore are going to abandon MS overnight either... they'll wait for Sony because it's financially in thier interests to, for Nintendo it's basically the opposite.

I'm looking at the numbers. The Wii was going has been going down every year since 2007. Now, Iwata has probably talked about it before (I have not see anything myself), but the solution would not be "let's give up on the Wii and release a new console." Their solution would be to make more software, as it has always been. The Wii is also up YoY in May in the US and had it's strongest Christmas in 2009. It is doing very well. Why kill it now. "But the 3DS!" The DS lasted for 6 years from 2004 to 2010. The Wii will have only 5 years on the market despite it is a very successful console and there is no competition. Not to mention that Europe as an economy is crashing, so a system in 2011 will not be good.

Your reasonings for 2011 are not based on the current market happenings. What is going on is disruption. They are not releasing a new DS because it might make more money, They are doing it to disrupt 3D. Notice how Nintendo talked about "No more glasses," where Sony was all about them. It's not about making more money, it's about destroying Sony. They also launched the Wii right next to the PS3 and announced their price cut during Sony's TGS. The 360 was at $200 for a while and they only lower it aftre Sony's machine is $300. The name of the game is disruption and Nintendo is disrupting Sony. The Wii2 will only launch as a response to what they think Sony will do or if they have some controller or feature that will change the market. Otherwise, it makes little sense that a system is coming in 2011. Let's n ot forget the Wii came in 2006 and the DS in 2004, four years apart.

Microsoft is definatly not stalling. They have never been interested in the expanded audience, so why start now? They are a shooter console, not a fitness one. It's to stop Nintendo. Natal is (or was) possitioned to stop Nintendo's disruption. The reason they will leave Microsoft is because a fire broke out in their core market. Scott Anthony talks about it here. The fire broke out and Microsoft has to put it out. Seeing as Microsoft is incompitent, it will fail and Microsoft will not bounce back.

Nintendo has been making more Wii software, they had a giant initiative last year with three 10 million plus sellers and Wii's first price drop, and while that's helped, it hasn't really helped Wii regain it's previous foothold.  The problem is chiefly 3rd party content, and at this point Nintendo doesn't seem able to attract much new support after the high profile mixed 3rd party results last year (Monster Hunter, Taiko no Tatsujin and Momotaru Denetsu did great, FFCC, Tales and Sengoku Musou did... not so great).  It's not like there's this sudden decision to "give up" Wii, but they've been trying for awhile and they can't seem to really turn it around. More telling is that NCL's internal R&D has shifted almost wholesale to 3DS, leaving only two announced Wii projects on their table (Metroid this summer and Zelda next spring), you don't exactly have to adept at reading tea leaves to predict Nintendo's moving away from Wii, and really has been headed this direction for awhile.

I think you're misusing the concept of disruption (no, Wii's price drop was not "disruption", it was competitive, which isn't quite the same thing), and you're sort of missing that Nintendo's widened their net since the initial disruption strategies of 2004-2006.  3DS isn't so much a response to PS3/3DTV, which is what you're essentially painting is as.  The 3DS push combines several factors and competitive strategies really, and has multiple aims and looks to be a protective measure for Nintendo from a variety of competitors (from iPhone to PlayStation).  The development timeline alone though sort of gives away that 3DS isn't nearly as centered around Sony as you seem to imply here, as active work on the platform as is dates back to 2007/2008. The reason they're rushing 3DS now though, so soon after DSi, is pretty obviously due to software sales waning in Japan, and bottoming out in Europe.  Piracy's basically taken over the mainstream on DS, near everyone's spoken about it at length, and Nintendo's looking to get revenues back up to growth again.  If not for the alarming uptake in DS piracy, I honestly doubt we'd be seeing 3DS this year.

Also, DS and Wii were 2 years apart, not 4.  GBA and GC however even launched in the same year, and SFC was just a year and a half after GB, so it's not like Nintendo's uncomfortable with closer aligned console and handheld launches.  5 years would give Wii the same primary lifecycle as the two Nintendo consoles before it (and the planned SFC cycle, it got an extra year due to N64 delays).

And I think you misunderstood my use of "stall tactic" in regards to Microsoft.  They're using Kinect to try and artificially lengthen the natural generational cycle make a better return off the platform, that's what I meant by "stall".  Stall the cycle.  Sony's doing the same with Move, and interestingly this was also the original plan Nintendo had for the Wii remote (which was going to be Gamecube peripheral).

The problem is rather than saying why my point are wrong or why you're are a better fit, you assume you'res are the only ones and run with it. They sound silly as a result.

On Wii software: two of the three big hitters last year were sequals, which would not move systems. New Super Mario Bros Wii, however, did push systems, where it sold 4 million Wiis in a month's time. The last big seller that would move systems since NSMBWii was Wii Fit back in May of 2008 (and November 2008 in Japan). You can see the gap there. The problem has been a lack of software that would move the system. Sequals don't help. And Nintendo's 2008 holiday line up was a bust.

Also, the reason Nintendo might be moving away from the Wii is because they are about to launch the 3DS, which is obviously going to get most of the development support like any new system should. This, however, does not mean they are just going to make a new home console. They won't even be ready to focus on it for a while.

Disruption: No surprise, you mis-applied disruption. None of what you said makes sense if we consider Nintendo is using disruption on their systems. What does piracy and decline sales in Japan have to do with disruption? Why would Nintendo, a disruptor, defend themselves from competitors who are over shooting. And WHY do people keep saying they are respond, or doing anything, in reaction to Apple. Nintendo, themselves, have come out and said they are not focusing on Apple and if they did, it was false. Reggie stopped an interview at E3 for just that. They are not focused on Apple and nothing they have done implies that.

If you do not see the 3DS as a disruption, then you don't understand disruption. 3D is obviously overshooting the market. So what happens when overshooting takes place? A disruptor comes in, of course. To show Nintendo is disrupting

  • Nintendo constantly said "No more glasses." This means they are doing it different, rather than doing it better. This is the cornerstone of disruptive innovations
  • Nintendo mentioned a lot of problems with 3D. All of these were overshooting. Nintendo is saying "3D is not what you want. So have different 3D instead."
  • Nintendo has movies on the 3DS. Why the heck does Nintendo have movies on the 3DS. They never cared about this before?
  • Nintendo showed a video detailing the history of 3D in cinema. Nintendo is not a movie company, so why did it end with the 3DS?
  • Sony, at their conference, mentions "true 3D experience." Sound like 2007?

DS and Wii were 2 years apart: The N64 and the Gamecube are not compairable here. Both systems did not excell on the market, so naturally, they would have a short lifespan. The last years of the systems were dead years. The lifespan of a system is dependent on it's strength on the market. The Playstation systems have had long life spans because they were successful. This is why the Wii having only 5 years is silly. I have yet to hear a strong reason why Nintendo will launch in 2011 and why it's a good idea they should.

360 stall:This is where you assume your answer is right and that there isn;t another one. You're assuming it's a stall tactic, but there is no evidence of it. Microsoft and Sony both only started caring about the new market in 2009, almost 3 years since the Wii was on the market. Also, they have pushed their systems as "Hardcore machines." So why is grandma all of a sudden a priority? There is no reason to think it's a stall tactic any more then to think a magical fairy flew into their offices and gave them 10 million hamburgers if they made motion controls.

Them responding to a disruptor makes sense because this is why incumbents do. They ignore the disruptor until it is too late and fire back a counter attack that usually fails. Since Nintendo is a disruptor, it makes the most sense that they are protecting their market space.