RolStoppable said:
The reason for the drought was Nintendo's misinterpretation. Someday late in 2009 or early 2010 they decided that it's time to move on to the next console, because they thought of the Wii as a mistake. So their development teams would finish their Wii games and then work on Wii U games to be prepared for a launch in 2012. The market segment Nintendo should definitely surrender are the self-proclaimed hardcore gamers which include the majority of video game journalists. Firstly, catering to these people would drive up the cost of Nintendo's console (needs more horsepower). Secondly, these people usually do not want to play games on a Nintendo system anyway, so it's wasted effort. Thirdly, these people do not want to share their console with someone else. They feel offended by the idea that someone other than them plays video games. Much of the hate the Wii got is because its message was one of equality, but at the same time this was the reason why the market loved the Wii. If you didn't play video games before or haven't done so in a long time, you weren't treated like a lesser human being. Instead you were welcome, even encouraged, to try it out. And as the Wii demonstrated, the hardcore gamers' approval isn't needed in the slightest to be highly successful. |
I know you don't want me to talk to you, so you don't have to read this.
I believe your understanding of his claim is in itself a misinterpretation, but please hear me out before turning off your "earphones"...
"However, we could not adequately create the situation that such new consumers played games frequently or for long, consistent periods. As a result, we could not sustain a good level of profit."
The few points I'll offer you are these:
1) The gamers which made Wii successful bought a few games, in very high quantities (from what I remember). This could be attributed to the nature of the mainstream market. They flock to titles (COD, MK, etc.) This you can easily refute if you have the data to support a counter-argument. Please use 2009 and earlier data if you choose to do that.
1 corollary) For that reason, many games did not get the attention they deserved, since the big titles hogged the spotlight.
2) If you remember correctly, 3rd parties were supporting both markets, but were much more successful on the "skilled gamer" market. The reason is likely strongly bound to point 1, but also bound to the desire of 3rd parties to make games for "skilled gamers". If they want that, there is so much you can do to change their minds. Sometimes you have to work with what you have. (Maybe his sentence is relative to the "skilled gamer" market)
3) "Skilled gamers" amounted to almost half the console sales this gen, and a very large amount of "skilled gamer" software. What does that tell us about lost opportunity and marketshare? (Again, maybe his sentence is relative to the "skilled gamer" market)
4) By definition, casual players and non-gamers are gamers who don't have the time to dedicate the hours of gameplay a solid business usually expects. Hence the large volume of sales for select titles. The same can't be said about the other market. Fewer sales, but much more regular.
Is it possible that both you and Iwata could be right at the same time? Maybe he isn't saying that he did the right thing to discontinue Wii support. Maybe he's just saying he aborted the Wii strategy earlier than expected to kick-start the new strategy, which is one that caters to both Core and Casual, enjoying profits from both markets at once. Since the casual only need a select number of evergreen titles (by nature), there should be no problem for Nintendo to allocate resources accordingly. Add to this fact that casual games generally require less development expense... You get the idea.
I understand where you're coming from, I just think you're reading into what he's saying that which he isn't, given the quote.
And I don't expect you to reply, don't worry.
