By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Legend11 on 13 April 2008
Edit Thread
the_bloodwalker said:

I'll start my post by asking you people to read this article first, from Sean Malestrom:

http://malstrom.50webs.com/birdman.html

 

As I see it, Microsoft is not looking at the whole perspective when it comes to understand the Wii. They are looking at the consoles success based on four aspects.

  • Marketting
  • Motion Remote-like Controller
  • Low price (development / consumer costs).
  • The "casual" audience

Concerning these three fact, I see Microsoft not being successful and may fail miserably. Because they are failing to see the real reason for Nintendo's success in the market. They simply can't reproduce what took Nintendo months or years of investigation, and their result was the Mistake Nintendo did with the gamecube at the begining trying to go on the success with the PS2 and Microsoft beat it too later on. They will gat some developers and makes will appear aimes to that peripheral, but what thet were aiming will not be accomplished.

  1. A new image begins with a New Console: Changing the image of one console is not easy, and mostly since the original one is the total opposite. Nintendo started with the Gamecube and understood this so they rather started all over with a new console. A consumer sees a relation between a new console with a new image or philosophy more reasonable.
  2. There is no casual market: Read the article at the begining of this post first.
  3. Pissed off fans: Console fans bought the console for the main image it presented to the consumers. Microsofty called many times the Wii a "Fad" or not a "next gen" console. With that move, many will see that Microsoft is "downgrading" the console and some may actually chage for the PS3.
  4. The "same but better" approach: With an image "we can do what the Wii does with better graphics" will be a sing of market desperation rather than innovation. "Sega does what Nintendon't...... or...... blast processing?"
  5. The Wii is more than the sum of it's parts: The low specs, the downmarket ("casuals" if you prefer), the low development costs and the marketting campaign are just the tip of the iceberg about Nintendo's new Strategy, making it more applealing than the copetition. When Microsoft trully understands this it will be too late for them.
Microsoft innovate with Xbox Live, that is proof that there are more ways to give new experiences in gaming. I believe Microsoft should focus on another innovation and winning rather than follow up Nintendo and failing. Besides, Nintendo nowadays keep everything quiet until they think it's time for them to reveal new things... that is another reason why Microsoft will be in serious trouble.

 I know some people here seem to love Sean Malstrom and think every word he speaks is gospel but I'm going to ignore his article simply because I hate the way it was written, very badly in my opinion, and because I disagree with him.

To address your points:

1. I understand why Nintendo didn't bring out their new controller for the Gamecube, that system had a reputation for being a toy (deserved or undeserved as it may be) and the very look of the console reinforced that.  The Xbox 360 has a reputation as a hardcore videogame system but there is nothing in the design of the system that reinforces that (aside from the controller).

Also I'd argue that the reputation of a console can change in it's lifecycle.  For example at the start of the Playstation 2's lifecycle the system was seen as one for hardcore gamers but by the end of it (or right now) it's also seen as a system for younger children and casuals as well.  


2.  I didn't bother to read most of Sean Malstrom's article but there is indeed a casual market (depending on the definition of casual).  It's the market that games like Brain Age and Wii Sports helped to draw in (my mother and one of my sisters for example).


3. Nintendo seems to have been able to keep their Nintendo hardcore fans happy (at least they seem to be based on the people on this board) so I see no reason why Microsoft couldn't do the same with it's hardcore.  As long as a lot of games are released that appeal to them, and there's no doubt that third parties will continue to help Microsoft in doing that, there shouldn't be a problem.


4. See my first post in this thread.  I'm agreeing that the "same but better" isn't going to cut it.  They need to market it very differently and use the strengths that the 360 has over the Wii to make unique game experiences. 


5. I'm not sure why it would take anyone (including the people at Microsoft) any time to understand why the Wii works, it's very obvious why it does.