Nintendo of America Boss George Harrison has lashed out at Sony and Microsoft claiming that they don’t have the DNA to understand what the gaming market wants. Speaking to the wired blog Harrison said, “So far, they haven't spent a lot of time focused on us. Now that we're having some success, they probably will. We can already see some of the things that they've tried. For last year's E3, at the last minute, Sony rushed out their Sixaxis controller as an effort to respond to the Wii remote. We saw Microsoft roll out Viva Pińata as their killer app for the Pokémon set. And neither of those worked really well.”
“We also have a belief that we can be, of this lifecycle, 40-45% of the hardware that's being sold. And that would be a phenomenal increase for us over the GameCube era. But on the other hand, we could get over 50%. And a lot of that depends on what our competitors do. If they only focus on the Grand Theft Autos and the Halos and things of that nature, they're focusing on a very tiny part of the market. The overall market is growing so dramatically that they're going to miss out on the opportunities that we're seeing in the expanded audience.”
Whether you believe Mr Harrison or not, you have to agree with him on one thing, Nintendo is kicking everyone’s ass.
News source: Wired
“We also have a belief that we can be, of this lifecycle, 40-45% of the hardware that's being sold. And that would be a phenomenal increase for us over the GameCube era. But on the other hand, we could get over 50%. And a lot of that depends on what our competitors do. If they only focus on the Grand Theft Autos and the Halos and things of that nature, they're focusing on a very tiny part of the market. The overall market is growing so dramatically that they're going to miss out on the opportunities that we're seeing in the expanded audience.”
Whether you believe Mr Harrison or not, you have to agree with him on one thing, Nintendo is kicking everyone’s ass.
News source: Wired
All my sympathy for the Underdog.
I sincerely hope that Sony and MS never enter that market. As a gamer I see nothing in the Wii that I would like included in HD consoles.
As a gamer I would prefer it if we weren't sold castrated console ports like Shadowrun and Halo 2 in the guise of PC games. If PC gamers wanted to play dumb console games, they would have bought consoles!
It is Nintendo that has the right idea with their console that isn't trying to be a PC. Consoles should be targeted at little kids, casual gamers, and dummies! Leave the hardcore HD gaming to PCs!
As a gamer I would prefer it if we weren't sold castrated console ports like Shadowrun and Halo 2 in the guise of PC games. If PC gamers wanted to play dumb console games, they would have bought consoles!
It is Nintendo that has the right idea with their console that isn't trying to be a PC. Consoles should be targeted at little kids, casual gamers, and dummies! Leave the hardcore HD gaming to PCs!
PC gaming is dead dude, grab a 360 and join in
As a gamer I would prefer it if we weren't sold castrated console ports like Shadowrun and Halo 2 in the guise of PC games. If PC gamers wanted to play dumb console games, they would have bought consoles!
It is Nintendo that has the right idea with their console that isn't trying to be a PC. Consoles should be targeted at little kids, casual gamers, and dummies! Leave the hardcore HD gaming to PCs!
PC gaming is dead dude, grab a 360 and join in
That why new video cards come out every 6 months, wow has 7+ Million users, and the MS Vista team showed how the current dx10 is better ability once hardware/driver is out that was "partial dx9-10" implemented then what the xbox360.
Console have there place, PC's have there place and there is room for overlap.
It a cycle, new next gen console > pc.... 6months one year ... pc > console in terms of ability.
I know of games that are played and enjoyed with things called "cards" and "dice". Board and card games lack the video output that you seem to require for entertainment, but you have to realize that entertainment doesn't come from pumping out more 3D-rendered pixels. It comes from the game play. And if you can get people to play interactively (like I am seeing in the Wii commercials) and have fun, then you have a winner.
Nitnendo are the ones who don't understand what he "gaming market" wants. they do however understand what the non gaming market or non gamer peopel want, a simple to use and understand machine that's also cheap, and somethign that anyone can use and enjoy. though I'mnot sold on it's longevity. and comparison can't easily be drawn between the DS and the Wii. Most hardcore gamers never cared for the Wii, or where intrigued but either lost intereste or bought one and play it occasionaly or when friends are over.
But the gamer want High def, they want nice graphic for their gameplay, and they don't care to wave their arms around and all that crap all the time.
The regular gamepad is a far better and more verstile controller still, it may not be as elegeant and simple as the Wiimote, and the wiimote is far more usefull for RTS games, except RTS players play on computer, and good gamepad RTS controls have been devleoped for pads that work really well. _As for racing games, a gamer will buy a proper racing wheel, not playt around with a pretend racing wheel int he air.
So what nintendo should have said "We understand what the non gaming people and paty gamers want out of a gaming system, and are creating new gamers out of this".
question is, where will these gamers go when they tire of the gimick control games of the Wii and the lackluster graphics, when adds on TV show photoreal HighDef graphics offfered on other platforms.
You are right, because Nintendo NEVER does this (paper mario, mario, metroid prime, etc).
You are right, because Nintendo NEVER does this (paper mario, mario, metroid prime, etc).
Thank you, ffs!! God. I do NOT want another Mario Party, I do not want more Mario. Zelda's fine, but one game isn't going to make me buy a console.
I just want to see some DECENT games for the Wii. Is that too much to ask? Get some third parties in there for crying out loud.
If you look at sales figures...you'll see from least expensive to most expensive is the same as the number of units sold. It's a price thing dummy.
The real correlation would be if all consoles cost the same, then we'd see the real difference.
But I wouldn't get all worked up about this...it's just because of price.
unlike Sony and microsoft who lost of money on each console.. So there now trying to fight for that money they've lost and nintendo don't got that problem at all..
So hands down i do agree with this artical 100%, since the company has been around for over 100 years now.
The Wii is only good for a door stop, my PS3/360/PC get far more use.
I've yet to see a Nintendo hallmark game that's made a good transition to 3D. Non of the 3D mario games have been what Mario was. the eagerness to go 3D killed the games. they complicate the games and remove the elegenace and atmosphere.
I've yet to see a Nintendo hallmark game that's made a good transition to 3D. Non of the 3D mario games have been what Mario was. the eagerness to go 3D killed the games. they complicate the games and remove the elegenace and atmosphere.
You're telling me Mario 64 was a failure? wow.
I've yet to see a Nintendo hallmark game that's made a good transition to 3D. Non of the 3D mario games have been what Mario was. the eagerness to go 3D killed the games. they complicate the games and remove the elegenace and atmosphere.
You're telling me Mario 64 was a failure? wow.
You're saying it wasn't? I have no idea how well it sold, but when I look compare it to the old mario games, it falls completely short. Paper Mario for the Wii is currently the only new Mario I am actually interested in.
I've yet to see a Nintendo hallmark game that's made a good transition to 3D. Non of the 3D mario games have been what Mario was. the eagerness to go 3D killed the games. they complicate the games and remove the elegenace and atmosphere.
You're telling me Mario 64 was a failure? wow.
Compared to previus Mario games Mario 64 wasn't only bad, it wasn't even a Mario game. The character was there.. sort of. but the game itself had no character, and it certainly was no mario game, it was the perfect example of goign 3D for the sake of going 3D.
Go back and play the last SNES Mario games, then play Mario 64, and tell me that Mario 64 even comes rmeotely close to what Mario was as a game, bad controls, graphics that could and should have been done so much better, lame gameplay(platformers never work in 3D), bad camera anc controls.
Imagine what they could have done had they not been so intent on the 3D aspect, we're only now seeing that witht he DS mario translations, notice how they're going back to 2D gameplay, but with 3D graphics. Sure for now they're recreating the old Mario games, because that's where the magic was, that's what sold. compared to the amount of consoles sold, I don't think Mario games has saturated their market nearly as much as the original mario games did. with the possible exception of Mario 64 because that was the first one to start the decline, and people where still in the "ooh look 3D, Cool!" stage.
When nintendo released the N64, that's when I sold my SNES and moved to computers, untill I bought a PS2 wich I sold and bought and xbox instead. the N64 was the end of nitnendo for me, the DS brought them somewhat back for me, but not untill they proved that the ual screen was more than a gimmick (incidentally, I remember Nitnendo sayign that the DS wouldn't replace the regular Gameboy when they launched it, it was a paralell product and was supposed to be gimicky). I still think Nintendo could have done better by going bigger higher res widescreen gaming with a analog stick like control rather than the DS, but I got my portable mario classic Mario gaming, I'll settle for that.
I've yet to see a Nintendo hallmark game that's made a good transition to 3D. Non of the 3D mario games have been what Mario was. the eagerness to go 3D killed the games. they complicate the games and remove the elegenace and atmosphere.
You're telling me Mario 64 was a failure? wow.
Compared to previus Mario games Mario 64 wasn't only bad, it wasn't even a Mario game. The character was there.. sort of. but the game itself had no character, and it certainly was no mario game, it was the perfect example of goign 3D for the sake of going 3D.
Go back and play the last SNES Mario games, then play Mario 64, and tell me that Mario 64 even comes rmeotely close to what Mario was as a game, bad controls, graphics that could and should have been done so much better, lame gameplay(platformers never work in 3D), bad camera anc controls.
Imagine what they could have done had they not been so intent on the 3D aspect, we're only now seeing that witht he DS mario translations, notice how they're going back to 2D gameplay, but with 3D graphics. Sure for now they're recreating the old Mario games, because that's where the magic was, that's what sold. compared to the amount of consoles sold, I don't think Mario games has saturated their market nearly as much as the original mario games did. with the possible exception of Mario 64 because that was the first one to start the decline, and people where still in the "ooh look 3D, Cool!" stage.
When nintendo released the N64, that's when I sold my SNES and moved to computers, untill I bought a PS2 wich I sold and bought and xbox instead. the N64 was the end of nitnendo for me, the DS brought them somewhat back for me, but not untill they proved that the ual screen was more than a gimmick (incidentally, I remember Nitnendo sayign that the DS wouldn't replace the regular Gameboy when they launched it, it was a paralell product and was supposed to be gimicky). I still think Nintendo could have done better by going bigger higher res widescreen gaming with a analog stick like control rather than the DS, but I got my portable mario classic Mario gaming, I'll settle for that.
Oh you're full of it. Mario 64 was one of my FAVORITE Mario games (Mario RPG aside). Just because it wasn't that same ol' 2D sidescroller doesn't mean jack! You don't judge a game by whether it's just like the old ones. You judge it by the quality of the game. If every game was like it's predecessor, Final Fantasy games would be BORING.
And if you want to go by sales, Mario 64 did great in sales. The only reason I believe it didn't sell as many games as it did in the NES years seems to be due to a wider variety of games. If you notice as the console generations progress with more systems than just an NES, there are less and less games being sold to a system. I mean, even the beloved Halo and Halo 2 games didn't sell as many as Mario 64 did.
Graphics do not make a game, sure. But that also works reverse-wise. Bad graphics do not make a game "good". Not that the old Mario's were bad, it's just the idea that Nintendo making Mario 2D will make it a "good game".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_64
While my gut instinct is to doubt the truthfulness of this statement, it may be true. However I know there aren't any around here and I know that it is still rare to see a Wii in the store, no matter where you are....except for wherever YOU are.
I'm not saying the Wii is "worse" or the games are not "good". I'm just saying my taste in videogames is different than what the Wii offers with it's exclusive titles. And, I completely agree that the Wii is wiping the floor with the "other 2".
Whoops, I'm a bad spellster
The Wii is:
Standard Definition
Low Price
Low Cost (to Manufacture)
Made with old Technology
Aimed at casual gamers
How can the "winner" be declared? Nintendo is winning on Price and the "novelty" factor of its console. Is it fair to place them in the same category that the PS3 and 360 are in?
They are? Not really. Games on the Xbox 360 and the PS3 look very similar, and the hardware specifications are not that different. PS3 has a faster processor, but is harder to code for than Xbox's and the Xbox has a superior graphics chipset. Xbox Live is also far superior to anything Sony have managed to come up with so far.
That said, all they really had to do was sell the idea to get everyone to buy their last-gen console. I swear, my personal "wii" could've spit something better than this. What's funnier is that they're even reselling their old games from previous consoles. Where's the revolution, Nintendo?
as somebody who has family and work commitments, i don't have the time to invest in a massive rpg epic - i just want to play something that's gonna kill a few hours on a rainy dull sunday afternoon.
there is no simple answer as to which is better, it depends on the games you want to play. i can't understand why people get excited about walking around a grey/brown map shooting things. it's boring, and nor can i understand why people think gran turismo or pgr are fun, sure, they look great, but really, driving around in a circle isn't really my idea of fun. but that's just my taste and the reason why i probably wouldn't buy a ps3.
They should not be the one's to talk about rehashed games considering all that is Mario, Zelda (though I do like this one), and Metroid, among others. They're no different in the games category, they just have a different way to play. I still think the Wii is going to be the console that collects the most dust at the end of the day on people's shelves.
-Spenser
I would suggest you re-read his comment. He's saying the 360 games look like games he's played before, not the Nintendo ones =].
I bet you you can't find me five games coming out for 360 this year that don't fit that criteria
I bet you you can't find me five games coming out for 360 this year that don't fit that criteria
while the game types available maybe be the same, seriously how many different types of genres are there?
mario party 8 is innovative how? metroid prime 3, other than using the controller, is innovative how? it is still going to be just a FPA game, mario is a mario game. smash brothers will be online...other than that new development what else could they possible do to make it not be a fighting game? pokemon is going to be online....wow, it's still a pokemon game.
you can't sit there and knock the 360 library and say it's the same game genres over and over again, when Nintendo's library is the exact same thing over and over again. you can't knock a game like Mass Effect and say yawn another rpg coming out, and not have the same attitude with pokemon and say yawn another pokemon game coming out.
You, members of the forum, represent a very skewed representation of America. Why go over the 10% of population of the market who want to HALO and GTA it up, when you can target the other 50% (assuming 40% isn't participating), which want to have a social experience. Moms and Dads looking for a family game for their young kids; the young adults looking to have some fun at a get-together.
The picture is much greater. The Wii appeals to a much larger spectrum of the consumer population of America. Add a low entry price, a high novelty concept, and the offer of what I would term "social gaming" ala "social drinking" and you'll see what they are doing. It's a genius step bringing the Wii into the living room, to provide a casual gaming experience unencumbered by cost and technology.
Just lately I've been playing on a few Nintendo consoles and am gagging to buy a GameCube and a DS, because of how interactive both consoles are (not going to get a Wii until more games come out for it and when I get my hands on some more space in my room :p). But I'm not going to get into a biased "console war" like everybody else seems to.
Stop moaning about the name "Wii", if you don't want the console, don't get it and don't moan about it, i don't like the Playstation 3 or Sony, but I'm still not moaning about them at all, people need to get their head around stuff before they go shouting at randomers over the internet, it's a bit lame.
Mayamaniac: of course it's to do with whether Nintendo knows more about gaming consoles, they know what the consumer wants, they don't just go for sheer power, that's why they know they don't need to make a powerful console. It's quite clear that they know it works, how do i know this? Because their console sales are going through the roof and they're making profits already.
Like I said, this is from the point of view of a Microsoft Xbox 360 owner, not a biased Nintendo owner.
Not trying to contradict myself, but I only see the Wii as somewhat of a novelty at the moment, until more games that are good come out, I'll be sticking with my 360 and saving up for a DS (a Gameboy Color for the time-being, yes Pokémon Blue is in it atm.)
coming from a Wii owner and I want a 360, I don't mean to contradict you but i feel you got that mixed up, Microsoft and Sony do know what the average gamer wants or did. People wanted a enhanced online experience, Microsoft listened, I'm not too familiar with the PS3's online ability's so i won't comment about them. People also wanted more graphics, Microsoft also listened.
EDIT: sorry i was in a rush to type this, Nintendo also changed the name of the system to a name no gamer liked? Wii come on, you can't say you liked the name when you first heard of it. They said the system will not support HD and the people who read that article said thats just dumb. Then the power of the system got leaked out and people didn't like that either.
Nintendo did a shot to see how the general public would react to a system that does not follow most things people want and nintendo hit a target. Thats all.
do you understand what i'm saying?
I don't have time to proofread this because its my sisters grad so i must be going, comment on it if you want. Those are my thoughts on 'what the consumer wants'.
Last edited by Dale on 30 May 2007 - 23:10
coming from a Wii owner and I want a 360, I don't mean to contradict you but i feel you got that mixed up, Microsoft and Sony do know what the average gamer wants or did. People wanted a enhanced online experience, Microsoft listened, I'm not too familiar with the PS3's online ability's so i won't comment about them. People also wanted more graphics, Microsoft also listened.
EDIT: sorry i was in a rush to type this, Nintendo also changed the name of the system to a name no gamer liked? Wii come on, you can't say you liked the name when you first heard of it. They said the system will not support HD and the people who read that article said thats just dumb. Then the power of the system got leaked out and people didn't like that either.
Nintendo did a shot to see how the general public would react to a system that does not follow most things people want and nintendo hit a target. Thats all.
do you understand what i'm saying?
I don't have time to proofread this because its my sisters grad so i must be going, comment on it if you want. Those are my thoughts on 'what the consumer wants'.
Of course I understand what you say, but I'll stick to my word, if Nintendo didn't know what consumers wanted, then people wouldn't be buying Wiis. Also, Nintendo has a lot of a repeat business, once you get onto Nintendos, then you're a hardcore fan for life and don't stop buying them. In my opinion, Nintendo has the largest customer base compared to Sony and Microsoft (Microsoft obviously has the smallest, because people haven't yet realised the potential of the 360 and would rather spend Ł300 extra to buy a machine which is only a little bit more powerful and only has one feature that is unique, blu-ray. Something that, in my opinion, can be likened to the mini disk generation.
Nintendo, stop talking like you own the place, you have not won yet. This type of superiority complex is what killed you in the first place.
Nintendo, stop talking like you own the place, you have not won yet. This type of superiority complex is what killed you in the first place.
I agree, they are slowly getting mouthy, thats not what I like in a company, microsoft and sony never took nintendo seriously and look whats happening.
If nintendo continues to be cocky bad stuff can happen.
Nintendo, stop talking like you own the place, you have not won yet. This type of superiority complex is what killed you in the first place.
Finally someone with some common sense!
Ladies and gentlemen, Nintendo has not won yet -- in fact, they are a long ways from winning. When they have games powered by Unreal Engine 3, and titles like Mass Effect, Halo 3, Gears of War, and Unreal Tournament 3, hen the Wii will be a threat, but Sony and Microsoft doesn't vision last-gen technology as a threat.
I give credit where credit is due, the controller system is nice -- well, it would be nice, if it worked how it was supposed to, all the time, instead of just when it wants to.
Consoles are currently and have been dominating the market for 2 years now. Open your eyes, and buy a next-gen console--whether it's Sony or Microsoft, they both have PC gaming on its knees ready to collapse.
When companies like Epic Games states it, then you know it's no joke. Mike Capps, President of Epic Games, says it all in this video.
What was once rumor and speculation is now a reality.
Consoles are currently and have been dominating the market for 2 years now. Open your eyes, and buy a next-gen console--whether it's Sony or Microsoft, they both have PC gaming on its knees ready to collapse.
When companies like Epic Games states it, then you know it's no joke. Mike Capps, President of Epic Games, says it all in this video.
What was once rumor and speculation is now a reality.
With Intel vs Amd, Nvidia vs Ati PC quickly out pace console's in term of tech and ability.
The leap pc's make in 1 year is huge. Console by there nature only refreshed every 3-5 years.
It's a cycle. I would call pc gaming collapse a bit pre-mature.
I feel like Nintendo has the right to be cocky. They've been treated as a second-rate video game company for a long time by graphics junkies.
When GTA was exploding, they didn't have anything that could match that. other than the Wii, nobody has ever said Nintendo's consoles aren't powerful. the gamecube was very capable, so was the n64, snes, and nes. the gamecube had a huge amount of potential that Nintendo itself failed to realize on. On the first day they had many different colors for the system but failed to release them in a quick time frame. They showed online ability but NEVER took advantage of it. Everything the Wii does now, the gamecube could have done then. So the only people Nintendo has to blame for their previous system being a failure is themselves, not the consumers.
What Epic Games says about the Wii is pretty straight forward, and well, honest. Here's a snippet of a less harsh version of the quote that Mark Rein used in an interview:
"Rein: Hey, we're in that space! Red Steel, Splinter Cell -- those use our previous engine technology. But it's not in our plans to bring Unreal Engine 3 to the Wii. It's really designed for next-gen, high-definition." In one interview, they worded it as, "Unreal ENgine 3 is for next-gen, high definition systems, not the Wii."
If I want last-gen graphics, I'll fire up my regular Xbox, or better yet, I'll put some regular Xbox games in my 360. People are into next-gen technology, and while graphics don't make a game, they can certainly break a game. No one wants to play a game with 2d graphics, or a game based on 5 year old technology, no matter what they say.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.