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

Forums - Sales - Editorial (external): Nintendo’s Roaring Nine

Sqrl on 27 August 2007
misterd said:
Sqrl said:
misterd said:

If you're talking a minor push (on the scale of Wii over GCN or maybe a little more) then I think we agree.

But if you're talking another exponential graphical leap (as we've seen in all past generations), then we don't. I do think if either company does go in this direction they would have a hard time justifying it based on the Wii's success and the needless cost it would impose on the console and consumer. I think themain lesson they should learn is that people want it better AND cheaper, not "better at any cost."


Well it depends on who you are talking about... I think the the average consumer is going to expect the large graphical leap. But I don't actually think they will go down that road. Honestly the Wii has all but forced them to go with a $300 or less price point next gen, and that alone will make it impossible for them to achieve major graphical boosts.

 


I'm just not sure how much a "major" graphical boost will be able to show marked differences from this gen (esp late gen) games - at least to the point where someone will say "yeah, that justifies the cost."


 I don't either.....what I am saying is the mass consumer who is unaware of the industry nuance is going to expect what he has gotten every other generation and be looking for a graphical boost.  

I think Sony and MS will see that the effort far outweighs the benefits and try other things instead.  But it won't change the consumer expectation. 
To Each Man, Responsibility
Around the Network
Erik Aston on 27 August 2007

Nintendo has a situation where they can simply use the parts similarly priced to what they used last generation to build the new console. This will of course net them a significantly more powerful machine than the Wii. But they also have another benefit working for them, the fact that the Wii is a proven concept now will allow Nintendo to feel far more secure in their venture the second time around, as a result it is very likely they will feel more comfortable with a smaller profit margin on the console and as a result we could see even more power from the extra expenditures. When you add to that a generations worth experience gained from the motion controls you get a pretty good situation.

I think this thinking is way, way, way off base.

Nintendo is looking to become a perpetual disrupter. Wii is not one big single market disrupter that Nintendo wants to use to reinvent the market once to establish advantages, and then coast off those advantages even as the profits get thinner. They are not risk-adverse at all.

What you're describing is how Nintendo fell to third place in the first place. Trading profits for system power, and looking to perfect proven concepts instead of create new concepts. That describes SNES, Gamecube, GBA and N64 minus about 3 or 4 games.

Brain Age. Nintendogs. Wii Sports. Wii Fit. Does this look like a company that is happy to stick with a proven concept, or one trying to perpetually reinvent the market? A "WiiHD" which doesn't open the door for more radical new ways to play could well be dominant. But it would be an utter abandonment of what they've been doing for the last 3 years.



"[Our former customers] are unable to find software which they WANT to play."
"The way to solve this problem lies in how to communicate what kind of games [they CAN play]."

Satoru Iwata, Nintendo President. Only slightly paraphrased.

Sqrl on 27 August 2007
Erik Aston said:
Nintendo has a situation where they can simply use the parts similarly priced to what they used last generation to build the new console. This will of course net them a significantly more powerful machine than the Wii. But they also have another benefit working for them, the fact that the Wii is a proven concept now will allow Nintendo to feel far more secure in their venture the second time around, as a result it is very likely they will feel more comfortable with a smaller profit margin on the console and as a result we could see even more power from the extra expenditures. When you add to that a generations worth experience gained from the motion controls you get a pretty good situation.

I think this thinking is way, way, way off base.

Nintendo is looking to become a perpetual disrupter. Wii is not one big single market disrupter that Nintendo wants to use to reinvent the market once to establish advantages, and then coast off those advantages even as the profits get thinner. They are not risk-adverse at all.

What you're describing is how Nintendo fell to third place in the first place. Trading profits for system power, and looking to perfect proven concepts instead of create new concepts. That describes SNES, Gamecube, GBA and N64 minus about 3 or 4 games.

Brain Age. Nintendogs. Wii Sports. Wii Fit. Does this look like a company that is happy to stick with a proven concept, or one trying to perpetually reinvent the market? A "WiiHD" which doesn't open the door for more radical new ways to play could well be dominant. But it would be an utter abandonment of what they've been doing for the last 3 years.

Those two bolded words are very important. I was talking about the current situation going into the next generation. Not what I thought their actual strategy would be. I was simply trying to point out that from a financial and expectation standpoint Nintendo is in a great position.

Edit: The strategy Nintendo ultimately employs will be a lot more involved than just tech upgrades and taking advantage of past experience.  All three companies will have in-depth well thought out strategies for their new consoles, but they won't be starting on equal footing and right now it appears Nintendo will have a clear advantage. 
To Each Man, Responsibility