By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Pachter: "Wii U won't save Nintendo, phones took 35% of the market"

archbrix said:
Plezbo said:
Its hard to repeat the rabid success of the Wii. Doubtful it will happen again. Remember, Wii was IMPOSSIBLE to get for the first 18 months of its life, they were NOWHERE to be found in the US. I was actually able to turn a nice profit on several that I lucked into getting.

They weren't impossible to find, just incredibly difficult.  I was lucky enough to get mine on launch day but my friends weren't so lucky.  Stores would receive very small shipments of units trickling in here and there, and people would be lined up outside before the store was even open that day.  One friend actually got his the week before Christmas of '06 by waiting outside of Best Buy the night before they opened the next day.  Unless you just happened to show up right when a shipment arrived, this was par for the course for that 18 months.

With the Playstation 2 here in the US, however, it was literally impossible to get one for months, as Sony unloaded their entire stock in the first 24 hours, with no more units available at all to ship/sell until they made more.

With WiiU, Nintendo may not have that absurd 18 months that the Wii enjoyed, but we will undoubtedly see a similar situation this holiday.  The insane demand is certainly possible throughout next year, but is dependent on two main things:  The right price ($299-$349 would do it), and, most importantly, Nintendo having the right games to make the craze happen.


Impossible of course being hyperbole, but yes, as you said, unless you were there before the store opened, or very close to opening, NO WII FOR YOU.  I also got mine at launch, camped out in the Walmart parking lot til 6am because this Walmart wasnt doing the midnight launch thing, weak. 

I remember the PS2 launch well, several friends went to Best Buy and marched through school holding that blue box above their heads as they marched down the hall.  As I also remember, that launch had a pretty weak line up, but the graphics were so good for the time we didn't care.  

I do hope that Wii U is a smashing success.  I love Nintendo games, and want to be able to play them as they are meant to be played, on Nintendo consoles.  Can you imagine Microsoft or Sony allowing Mario to come out unfiltered on their platforms?  There would be online multiplayer and Yoshi Armor DLC tacked on.  Really looking forward to E3 so we can finally find out all the juicy details about this new beast.  

Around the Network
RolStoppable said:
Squilliam said:
RolStoppable said:

Indeed, it's no big deal.

Home console manufacturers aren't worried about PC software revenue, so why should handheld manufacturers be worried about pocket PCs (which is what smartphones are)? Especially when the pocket PC is almost exclusively used for low end gaming so far while an actual PC isn't a threat to home consoles depite being used for low end as well as high end gaming.

Where were you when Iwata said that they compete against all forms of gaming and every major form of entertainment from TV to Facebook?

Right, he said that. Does that mean you will be using box office numbers to show how Nintendo's business is in danger? Probably not, because you realize that they are in a different category of entertainment. The same goes for smartphones. When PCs couldn't make home consoles obsolete despite more horsepower and being multipurpose devices, then it's highly unlikely that pocket PCs will make handhelds obsolete or diminish their importance.

Try to come up with a convincing reason for why the relationship between pocket PCs and handhelds is drastically different than the one between PCs and home consoles.

1. Location of use:

Anywhere you would want to/can use a handheld gaming device you can use a portable tablet, smartphone or media player.

2. Competition for space:

You have limited pocket space, purse space available to carry devices around with you. If you have one device which can do both jobs adequately then why carry both? Do you wear a watch when you can tell the time on your phone? Also why carry two chargers when the one charger fits for both tasks?

3. Cost of games:

If you want to play something like Soduku to pass the time, do you want to buy it on your DS for $10-20 or iPhone for $1? There are plenty of old portable mainstays like Tetris which sold millions of Gameboys for instance which you can get for a few bucks each. Just because they are old or simple doesn't make them less relevant, see the time spent playing Solitaire to this day for instance.

4. Level of attention:

The average person with a smartphone already devotes significant attention to it. The phone itself can be just as likely to already be in your hand or close at hand.

5. Cost of the machines:

You can pay S179 + $20 for an iTouch and get between 10-20 decent games for it. The average person cannot walk out of the shop paying as little for a 3DS and get similar gameplay time.

6. Theres an App for that:

The utility of the other features are much higher, you have a better browser, media player and a variety of other functional utilities which you cannot get for handheld consoles.

If you're an avid game player then you probably won't care. However you ought to consider the original market for the Gameboy and the basic games which Nintendo sold to good effect on the DS as well. The core won't be catered for but the wider market can and will be. You can get an iTouch for your son or yourself instead of a 3DS and consider it to be a substitute. You wouldn't buy a laptop computer for $799 and say that it is somehow equivalent to a $299 Xbox 360 with Kinect for instance, even excluding price.


UncleScrooge said:
Squilliam said:

Actually what I'm saying is that you can't expect perfect performance from any company all the time. You can't simply say that Nintendo are losing X market and therefore it is all their fault, you have to also take into consideration the good performance of rivals. It is the exact same thing as not blaming Sony entirely for the better performance of Microsoft and especially Nintendo in the current generation, to do so would be disrespectful of Sony in that case and of Nintendo and Microsoft. Credit is due wherever you find good performance, so you can't absolutely say that Nintendo alone are 100% responsible for Nintendos performance. You have to take wider considerations into account.

I never said it is all their fault. I am totally aware smartphones eat into their market. Who would say such a stupid thing? What I said was that a lot of this is caused by Nintendo acting dumb over the last years. Just like that a lot of analysts talk and stuff people say on forums sounds like Nintendo is in 0% control of their sales and it is all "fate" or something which is plain stupid because you have to take into account that Nintendo of today is a very different company than Nintendo of 2005. It's actually pretty common for companies to get cocky once they see prolonged success. 

My observation is not simply based on "they are losing the mass market - it must be their faul".

UncleScrooge said:

You continue to post numbers but where is the proof these are actually connected? I can give you some nice "pirates are the reason for climate change" charts if you want (I actually can. My statistics prof collects that stuff like trading cards or something xD) And I think these numbers are very worrying just for different reasons.

What about Wii sales? Did the Wii also get killed by smartphones? Or maybe - just maybe - it was killed by Nintendo being unable to produce more mass market titles and focusing on the "hardcore" 3DS? No that can't be true... silly me.

Climate is a bad example as there are too many variables to consider such as the various natural climatic cycles. If in an expanding market one player remains stagnant or shrinks then you can give a strong argument that the increasing sales of a competitor have something to do with it. So whilst climate science is 9x% certain, you'd be picking at threads to argue a strong case against it.

I've got some other ones, haha. Pirates and climate is a classic. Anyways, the point here is the bolded part: "something to do with it". The way websites and analysts act makes it seem like competitors are responsible for 100% of Nintendo's lost sales. I maintain my stance that a good chunk of that is Nintendo's fault. Not all of it - again I'm not that naive. But quite a chunk of it.

I guess in the end we'll meet somewhere in the middle. Of course you don't think Nintendo's competitors are causing 100% of their recent downfall. And of course I don't think Nintendo is responsible for it all alone.


Nintendo could have done better, yes. I haven't denied their responsibility for some of their performance. It was quite likely that they didn't expect the level of success that they earnt with the Wii and of course in hindsight they didn't know that the Wii would be sold out for years and the average market price people were willing to pay was $299 when they were targetting for $199 with backwards compatibility which in the end likely did about nothing for their overall sales.

When you're at 100% of the market with the GBA or 70% with the DS it is extremely hard to go anywhere but down in terms of market share. One company cannot be everything to everyone all the time. It is hard to point to one action alone or even a group of them and say that in an ideal world had they done X and Y and Z differently they'd have ended up with a better result. Luck and timing both have significant roles to play, sometimes it is because the competitors action or inaction and others you just have the right product at the right time and ride a wave of popularity.

The market is just different now. It used to be if you wanted to play games on the move you had about one viable choice, Nintendo. Now you can choose between Nintendo, Sony and Apple with the possibility of more competitors becoming viable between Android and Windows 8 phone/tablets. The only time you can really claim 100% responsibility was when Nintendo had 100% of the market, then and only then do their actions dictate the overall direction and sales they can achieve.

Core gamers don't understand what 'good enough' means. If you're a core gamer you're far more likely to have more than one system and the fact one device can do an adequate job in one area doesn't mean anything because you also bought the device which is more than adequate there as well to compliment the overall experience. It never mattered to the 30 million Call of Duty players that the PC was the best way to play that game because keyboard and mouse was the best interface for shooters, analogue sticks and 640P graphics were 'good enough'. For the mass market, 'good enough' is the enemy of specialised devices.