Network now...FEATURE
Nintendo's Wii 2 Dilemma
By Rob Crossley
February 1, 2009
See also:
Related Articles:
“Nintendo takes each generation as almost a new race. If you look over the years, from SNES to N64 to Gamecube to Wii, you see Nintendo taking a radically different approach each time. I mean, the PS3 has pretty much the same interface as the first Playstation, whereas the N64 and Wii are completely different ideas.”
A global base of 45 million Wii owners – amassed in the space of two years – leads to only one possible conclusion: Nintendo was right all along. The doubters and the doom-mongers, each and every one, were wrong.
Yet a company can only look so far ahead. Can the Wii-trick be repeated? Are the very foundations of the Wii’s commercial success as strong as they appear? Would a Wii 2 work?
It seems so far in the distance now but, for years prior to the Wii’s launch, many predicted Nintendo would abandon the hardware market entirely; ‘do a Sega’. At the same time, the Kyoto-based company was making its own predictions; observing how the business was recycling one kind of demographic, and how unlikely it is for more than a single console to succeed in this circumstance.
It was on May 9, 2006, when Reginald Fils-Aime walked onto centre stage at the Kodak Theatre in California to open Nintendo’s E3 media briefing. On that day, standing in front of a mélange of sceptical, optimistic, and puzzled faces, Fils-Aime prophesised how the Wii was going to penetrate a vast, lucrative, and largely untapped market.
“Do you know anyone who’s never watched TV, never seen a movie, never read a book? Of course not,” he said. “Do you know someone, maybe even in your own family, who’s never played a videogame? I bet you do.”
If the industry wanted to grow, he said, this scenario had to change. And in defending the Wii against the many commentators who were already deeming it a fad, in rebuking suggestions that the console was too much of a misguided and risky prospect, Reginald Fils-Aime said these words: “The graveyard of any industry is filled with the headstones of companies who decided to keep doing things the same old way.”
While his speech couldn’t quite silence the voices of concern that hung around the Kodak Theatre, today, some 33 months later, Fils-Aime (and, more to the point, Nintendo) are now widely respected for taking one of the most commercially astute, forward-thinking directions in the modern game industry.
“If you want to get an idea of how successful the Wii has been for Nintendo,” says Jesse Divnich, Director of Analytical Services for Electronic Entertainment Design and Research, “then look no further than this statistic: If you split the total profit made from the Wii into the whole of Nintendo’s workforce, you would see that each Nintendo employee represents $1.6 million in profit. That’s ‘each’ – every single one.”
At least, that’s the story so far. Nintendo has demonstrated that there’s an ocean of casual gamers to pursue; that they can be allured by a $250 console; that they can enjoy videogames. But the company’s theory won’t be fully tested until a great gaming tradition arrives.
Contact Us / About Us / Advertise With Us / BeltwayBlips / TechBlips / MassiveBlips / GamerBlips / FAQ
Subscribe To Edge Magazine / Corrections / Terms & Conditions / Privacy Policy
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW
England and Wales company registration number 2008885
Subscribe To Edge Magazine / Corrections / Terms & Conditions / Privacy Policy
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW
England and Wales company registration number 2008885
I see no problem with games like Super Mario Galaxy, Mario Kart, Metroid Prime 3 and Resident Evil 4 running on my HDTV. I use component and the games to me look perfectly fine (ie: really good), especially those running at 60fps, like the Mario games. They have smooth, fast and solid visuals. To me this is fine. Even Resi 4 looks good and is aging rather well, as are the Gamecube games. On the other hand, the PS2 games look shite and that can be on either a normal TV or not. My PS2 rarely gets played now.
What I'm trying to say is, that all this HD gaming blah blah means nothing. If someone can see the graphics are 'good' or even 'good enough', then they're not going to care. I've been playing games for nearly 20 years now (how time flies!) and to me the Wii is prefectly fine. But it is a shame too many devs are cashing in on its success, hence there's loads of crap. But the same was true of both the PS1 and PS2, so why is there such a huge fuss about the Wii having loads of crap?
To be honest, there's loads of junk of the other machines too. And then there are games that people consider 'great' like CoD or FIFA or UbiSoft's range of boring drivel. These games in their respective categories, are pretty much interchangeable. CoD is a flash in the pan yet people lap it up. Its also become a yearly rehash yet people seem to praise it. Its total bollocks if you ask me.
I'm a sucker for Hi Def visuals but more so when it comes to movies. With games, as long the title does the job, I have no qualms with it. So for me, and many others out there, the Wii does the job
I agree with your point to some extent, but I'm puzzled at the "Ubisoft's range of boring drivel" remark. Could you care to elaborate?
Spot on. I own both a Wii and a 360 and own all the big 'core' games like RE4 Metroid Prime 3 and Mario Galaxy. With time and effort, developers can make eye-catching games that look great on component cables on an HD tv. Not Gears great, but good enough.
Personally, I don't think (other than the IR pointer), that the accelorometer technology is that fantastic. It's so innaccurate and clumsy: just look at the lack of cracking sports titles on the console since Wii Sports. This is clearly the reason for the motion+ add on coming this year, and in the future, it'll be refined along with one other big weakness - online.
What I'm imagining for Wii 2 is this: imagine an extended Wii-Sports/wii Fit combination, with hundreds of hours of gameplay and a seamless, always on-online community, and Wii-motion-plus built in as standard into the Wii remotes ... a sort of huge sports MMO if you will (oh and no disc either).
This is what I see Nintendo doing. Online is clearly the future, you've only got to see XBLA abd Wii-Ware for that. Nintendo won't bother with re-entering the graphics race. Wii-2 will probably be nearer the 360 in power, but only incrementally so. It'll take all that's best about the console and get right all the things that were wrong (awkward controls, poor online, poor storage etc). I hope they don't leave gamers like me behind, but lets face it: there's only so many franchise re-hashes that you can do and Zelda, Metroid, SSBros are getting pretty tired.
What I want to see are those big titles EVERYONE remembers, like Goldeneye ... I had so many friends at Uni who didn't game anymore, but brought N64s back just to play games like those.
As for now, I'm hoping Madworld and No more Heroes 2 and Conduit prove that Wii has the best variety.
I agree with both of you.
Though I think the next system will be as powerful or a notch more powerful than the 360 because it would be far more financially feasible to have a system that powerful on the market 4 or 5 years from now - i.e. they won't bleed money on each unit sold and HD development will be a bit more cost effective.
I too think that in the games department the Wii does a great job. Yes the visuals of many of its titles may not be up to standard when compared to the likes of the PS3 and Xbox 360 but when they play as well as SMG and Okami who really cares.
Visuals are an important part of any game and should never be overlooked, however there are cases (especially on th Wii) where the gameplay itself is sufficient enough to warrant a purchase.
No More Heroes is one example of a game where creativity and flair simply out shine its graphical prowess. LoZ;TP is another example.
The Wii's diverse range of games is probably its greatest strenght, however this is a factor that is only really appreciated by the 'core' (or hard core) gamers who comprise Nintendos fanbase. Because the Wii aims at the casual audience this fan base will ultimatley suffer and this is what I think is the Wii's biggest challenge.
How can it win over both markets?
Maelstrom really trashed this article:
http://seanmalstrom.wordpress.com/2009/02/04/edge-online-talks-nintendo-...
And he's bang on the money.
Features/Benefits.
Only one of the above sells anything.
I just wanted to throw some of my ideas out there.
I would consider myself loyal to nintendo, almost to a fault. If Nintendo decides in there infinite wisdom to release the console with a new shiny look and a handful of new features then I will seriously resist buying it. It is not because I don't want these things but just that I do not believe that USB storage would be a problem, and if Nintendo feels it is acceptable to allow (I believe) Wiiware or Virtual Console games to be run directly from an SD card then they should unlock USB storage in general.
Now that I have that out of the way I also want to comment on maybe Nintendo's lack of attention to the product being released on its system. I unwittingly bought a wiiware game after looking at Nintendo's entry about it on the internet. This game is crap but I won't bother naming it because I'm sure there are others like it. The controls were terrible the explanations and instructions were incomplete. Last but maybe not least, because I did see some screenshots, the graphics were almost bad enough that they could've passed as N64 quality. Now I know these are small developers with limited budgets, but come on Nintendo, surely you can demand some kind of standard for 3rd parties? Again this is only Wiiware which doesn't even touch on the regular disc games that are shoveled onto the Wii.
About the Wii 2, I have read some ideas about how the next generation may include full 3D body tracking or some rudimentary mind control system. This is extremely appealing because the writers of these articles think that he new controller might have just one button, which is what attracts the casual gamer. With this in mind I know that this would suck for core gamers but if the controller is so simple then I'm sure new accessories or add-ons to the controllers could increase the functionality of the system to new heights. Maybe this is just a misguided dream of some people but I know that I would be compelled to buy it (as long as it is Nintendo quality).
Good article Rob.
Another danger for Nintendo is the fickleness of the mass-market consumer.
Right now the Wii is the entertainment du jour for a large portion of consumers. Who knows what will be next, it could be a return to 1970s key parties, or the next hula hoop, or anything. Following up on any all-conquering formula is difficult and your lightning-in-a-bottle product is almost impossible to follow up.
For examples, look at Motorola and their Razr. They started approaching Nokia in worldwide marketshare but has since been unable to come up with a successor and have tumbled.
Dunkin Donuts was THE sinful treat of millions until some calorie-bomb from Starbucks took its place, and now Starbucks is in trouble.
Atari was in Nintendo's shoes in the late 70s and Nintendo was in these shoes in the 1980s. It took four systems before Nintendo once again reclaimed anything close to its market share in the 8 bit era.
When people say "Wii is a fad" they usually mean it will run out of steam sooner rather than later. When I say it's a fad, I mean it's replacement will not be quite so successful, because the device itself is the novelty. Those 'fickle, mass-market consumers' will not be as open armed with the 'Wii-2' because there will be another fleeting fad to replace that of the Wii, as there was with the hula hoop and rubiks cube.
Wii is like Disco music. You see Disco musics audience was the cause of it's eventual downfall. The people that listened to Disco thought they were the 'cool' kids, there for wanted to stay on the cutting edge. When disco ran it's course they left and went to the next cool thing. I believe this will happen to the Wii.
Will that be a more technical console or a surfboard? who knows.
That's why Nintendo are smart and aim to innovate with each new product so we don't lose interest. When they are out of ideas for Wii, they may invent a new way to play games once more.
I don't think we can predict Nintendo's next hardware by looking at the past, so I wouldn't guess their next gen console will use a more accurate remote and play the same kind of games with better graphics. For all we know, the new controller might be a pair of sunglasses.
I agree, and then i don't: The Wiimote is so dramatic a difference from gaming that i don't think it has been milked for what it has. But then the wiimote isn't the only controller on the wii, the balance board and the standard game controllers are there. What makes the wii isn't the controller, it goes a long way, but there is more to it.
The graphics are not awesome ... well some are worse than others. No More Heroes looked like pixel vomit and Paper Mario looked simple but nice. Okami, Mario Galaxy and Zelda although definitely not 360 or PS3 in quality get the job done. There is more to the games than just graphics, but at the same time so many games are junk. Casual gamers i would argue just don't know any better and accept it. I don't want to say that their taste's are less refined, but there is a greater acceptance of flaws ... 'that control grates but hey it's a game, that's how they are ... right?' is an attitude i seem to observe when friends showed us Mario and Sonic at the Olympic games (or whatever the title). The game is painful to play and it isn't a fitness issue... i don't know a single sports game of that persuasion that hasn't been on par with movie tie ins ... except you know the events will be boring, and it's the controls that really turn your stomach. But my friends think it's an awesome party game ... and i have to admit ... it is cute and fun in that setting. I have also yet to bring myself to play Mario Kart Wii on my own... it just does not appeal to me in that way...
One way or another, if they updated to a new system NOW, after only so short a time, i would feel a little betrayed... AU$350 isn;t that cheap...
Personally, i can't see next gen systems being radically different to what we have got just now.
This gen isn't a massive step beyond the previous generation. Both Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo will have to go down the Strange Days path to offer anything considerably better than their previous offering.
I've actually just written a blog on the future (if one exists) of video games and the industry. If you've got time on your hands give it a read. Anyway I cant see the industry moving anywhere from here. Right now the technology thats on offer to developers and publishers alike is first rate. We are at the stage now where any moves forward could potentially sink Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo alike.
They dont need to move forward (at least not for another ten years thanks to Sony's claims that their machine is 'future proof') so why don't we just be happy with what we've got now?
Strange Days, awesome movie (and some cool music in the movie, too).
Well, Nintendo has the most waggle room (sorry, bad pun). They can make a pretty good jump in technology while Sony and Microsoft will have to play the whole R+D game all over again to improve on what they offer.
It would be pretty easy to say that Nintendo will upgrade to at least 720p (That would be the HD resolution that would be the most inclusive as not all tvs support 1080p) They could add a larger storage base and possibly support usb storage. They could incorporate their Motion Plus into the actual remote. etc.
But you know, all except the 720p could be either a firmware update or an addon. It would take a simple firmware update to add support for larger SD cards and SDHC. It would be a firmware update and possibly a Nintendo branded hard drive to add usb storage support. It would take only a new Wii Remote to come out.
They could even come out with their own Wireless Nunchuck solution.
I could easily see Nintendo making these minor upgrades before a new system came out that included all of them and more.
there is a big bullet hole in Nintendo's foot. Not sure what they will come up with next. A Wii with a shit camera slapped in it.. maybe call it the Wiii...
N/M
At the last E3 sony gloated that most games were only using 30% of the spu's in the ps3. I'm not sure how this transfers onto the 360 but its go to be something similar as they can manage the same graphics, so they'll be going for a while. However the wii looked dated from the moment it was released, and if the casual gamers get a glimpse of the abilities of the other consoles they may choose to switch. especially because now sony and microsoft have started advertising their consoles and the casual games that come with them more and more. if this happens nintendo will be forced to release a more powerful console as sony and microsoft get a larger and larger share of the market.
1. Pretty graphics don't sell casual games.
2. Pretty graphics don't impress casual gamers.
Read James' comment further down, while we can all see there's a massive difference between the graphics of wii and 360/ps3. To people who aren't as obsessed with gaming they really don't look that different.
What you've done here is make the mistake of assuming the casual gamers think like you. They don't. All they want to do is play a game that's simple and fun, which is where gaming began.
That was a really great article. I would love to know what Nintendo are going to do next.
Giving how nintnedo treats the DS, surely another sort of wii is on the way in time (perhaps th Wii HD!), however, I find the question of 'will another generation come?" applicable to all the consoles...they do HD now so where else do they have to go, technically speaking?
Who said Wii 2 had to be a riiplacement?
In the collective organisational clusterfuck that made up the Saturn -> Dreamcast era we lost the transitional period that saw the Master System and NES still supported with new titles a while into the MegaDrive and Super Nintendo era.
If Nintendo were to continue to accept new developments for Wii following the release of what we're hypothetically calling Wii 2, than that format itself could stay the course as a pure casual console, allowing developers to continue to create casual minigame shovelware on the cheap for that market, while Wii 2 becomes a more 'traditional' console for more 'traditional' gamers, allowing developers to continue to make hardcore first person shooter shovelware on the expensive for that market. And allowing Nintendo to make even more obscene amounts of money.
This would require retail to continue to stock Wii titles at the same time as Wii 2, as opposed to just binning one in favour of the other- but given the expanded number of retailers that are stocking games thanks to Wii, that's probably not unfeasable.
In just that 3rd paragraph you have describe what Sony is doing. Keep the PS2 around for developers to make cheap games and the PS3 for not so cheap games.
Retailers have no problems stocking both PS2 and PS3 games, so I don't see them having a problem stocking both Wii and Wii2 games. Gamers wouldn't have a problem as long as the Wii 2 is backwards compatible.
Aha! Then we have a solution.
A very interesting article, and one that reminds me how pointless analysts really are.
I think the Wii 'brand' has become a very lucrative and powerful beast, and I wonder whether this is what SEGA envisioned for the Dreamcast.
Let's not forget that Nintendo didn't start off in the console/gaming industry, so they have every right to move into a totally new direction if they so choose. I've had plenty of fun with Nintendo's offerings, but the company owes me nothing.
"Opinions are like belly buttons. We all have them, but they don't hold much water."
I worry about the eerie parallels betwen Wii and Atari and fear that the Wii's success is going to result in another video game industry collapse. Like the Atari, publishers are lured by it's dominance and success. Also like Atari, Nintendo is more than happy to accept licensing fees for any piece of crap a publisher is willing to release for the system. This is a double-edged sword as most of these are failing miserably - which will eventually result in these publishers pulling Capital from our industry again.
Also like Atari, casual consumers will grow increasingly disappointed with the preponderance of crappy titles cluttering the shelves, and since they're casual they won't bother checking reviews sites to see what to avoid and will just avoid buying games period when they've been burned a few times (something the Wii is already experiencing as their software sales increase last year was a pale reflection of the hardware increase).
Of course, there are bad games on every console ever released, but Nintendo is so desperate to appear friendly to third-parties (or just so greedy they don't care) that they're approving titles MS and Sony would never approve for their respective consoles. The signs are already there if you look for them (almost every million seller on Wii is a Nintendo title) and while this is great news for Nintendo it is terrible news for everyone else in the industry. Factor in the pitiful state of the global economy and still hard to secure financing and we have the perfect storm.
I'm not quite sure why you're comparing the two situations. I suggest you (and anyone else reading these 'comments') reads up on this issue:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_crash_of_1983
It's a Wikipedia article so take some of it with a pinch of salt.
Interesting article, but I'm surprised you cited it to contradict my statement as it only confirms what I've already stated. For example, this is from the opening comments in the link you cited:
"There were several reasons for the crash, but the main cause was oversaturation of the market with dozens of consoles and hundreds of mostly low-quality games."
Isn't that saying essentially the same thing I said in my original post ("casual consumers will grow increasingly disappointed with the preponderance of crappy titles cluttering the shelves")?
Over saturation doesn't mean too many games over all but too many of the same thing. People buying Brain training won't buy Halo in most instances. So there is no over saturation.
However releasing nothing but except GTA clones, FPS games and sports games from every 3rd party is over saturating those genres because most people don't need 20 different types any sort of game.
As the article mention the lack of quality had a lot to do with it too. The technical quality of Wii/DS games are generally higher because you can't patch but some do get through. The glut of low technical quality releases will be found on the other systems that allow patching because there's less of a need to release something decent and a lot of game reviewers lack the balls to call out most titles for their bugs especially big titles.
You have totally lost me now. The article doesn't confirm what you already stated! I suggest you re-read your original statement and re-read the article again very, very carefully, and not focus on just one statement to back you up!
More than happy to re-correct you via any replies you post to this thread.
The video game crash, had a lot to do with all the mass quantities of first party Atari games being returned and them having to eat the huge costs. Yes consumer opinion did play a role in it, but there were other factors.
I don't think it's likely that there would be a complete implosion of the game market in this day and age. For one thing, there's a large enough population of more hardcore gamers which would continue to buy games, and this would ensure that MS and Sony wouldn't feel much of an impact, if a Wii-shovelware apocalypse was to happen.
Any sort of backlash is purely speculative at this point, but if one does happen, no doubt Nintendo will be the one that gets hurt the most (with their heavy casual direction). As of right now they're the one benefiting the most, so if something negative does go down, it'll at worst be balanced out by their success.
If there's a re-release of the ET game on the horizon anytime soon, then may be worry is justified.
I totally agree with you, grognard. The way I recall it, it was Nintendo's demanding "Seal of Quality" what allowed the NES to distance itself from the tons of shovelware that flooded Atari's shelves. Apparently that Seal of Quality is worth close to nothing these days, hence all the Elf Bowlings and other assorted crap being awarded it.
The seal of quality wasn't worth a damn then either. The NES had LOADS of shovelware - deny that and I'll spam your e-mail account with infinite AVGN videos right this instant. The only difference is that the NES had innumerous, timeless GEMS that we all still have fond memories of and that is what the Wii lacks. By the end of this gen, we'll look back at the Wii and see plenty of quality software amongst the shovelware - just give it time. It happened with the DS.
Fair enough, even though Nintendo isn't the Nerd's sole focus ... but yeah, who can forget Ghostbusters. Now, please Nintendo, can you give us the Wii's gems already, and improve your duds-classics ratio?
You think Nintendo's model would bring on a crash and not the old model of focusing on a very small segment of over all consumers which has caused a lot of companies to go under, the cost of hardware/software to rise and limit the number of genres available?
I think you're afraid that companies will make something other than shooters.
Exactly, the Sony/Microsoft model is what will destroy gaming because it's woefully unsustainable. This is what Nintendo learned in the Gamecube days. Competing with same values - dumping loads of cash into HD development, promoting the lastest brown or grey shooter to the same - albeit EXTREMELY vocal - core gamer segment, will only lead to a tailspin of disaster.
If you watch closely, it's already happening. How many videogame companies have posted loses recently? How many HD games bombed and have their publishers laying off staff? If this keeps up, it'll only be a matter of time before the industry crashes.
You've got it exactly right: the success of the Wii has also been largely based upon the economics of developing for the console, a factor which was curiously absent from this article. More innovation (and more crap) has been seen on Wii, XBLA, and PSN than in AAA titles for the 360 and PS3, because the relatively low development costs make it easier to get funding for more risky game concepts.
As long as the development model for HD games remains the way it is, in which labor-intensive asset creation is undertaken anew for each title (yes, you can use the Unreal engine, but you're still making all of those polys and textures for your Abrams tank on your own), these costs will still be so high as to discourage innovation or punish AAA developers for trying to innovate (cf. Mirror's Edge). Adding more horsepower to the console only makes this worse, as it increases resource requirements. Nintendo is trying to foster a sweet spot where development costs are low, the audience is large, and creativity is encouraged. As more developers and publishers overcome their initial reticence toward supporting the lower-powered platform, we'll see more and better Wii titles, with no need or desire for an HD upgrade.
Don't get me wrong, I love HD games, but the economic factors which drive their creation are going to be much harder to handle in the current (and worsening) climate. Luckily, the next batch of HD consoles (1080p, for real this time, not upscaled pseudo-HD) will probably hit a little while after this global economic downturn swings back up, when there will be enough money around to fund HD game development and when game developers will have learned how to make more with less. Meantime, Nintendo's going to make a lot of money.
Toadwarrior - You seem to forget that the video game console market was growing at a very healthy clip already before the Wii even launched. The "old model" of selling to "hard core" gamers works just fine as the number of "hard core" gamers has grown exponentially in the past 10 years (not even factoring in the Wii). There are always companies that will fail in this industry for a variety of reasons.
I'm not sure why you would assume that I only play shooters. Is that supposed to be a dig at 360 owners (I also have Wii/DS/PS3/PSP/PS2)? You do realize that PS3 has the highest percentage of shooters on its console this generation, don't you? For the record, my 400+ games collection (at present) consists of sports, music (Rock Band/Guitar Hero), Western RPG's, wargames, turn-based strategies, RTS, Arcade, Adventure and racing games to name a few - as well as shooters.
Wii has not increased the number of genres available. On the contrary, Wii has the least diverse game library of all three current systems, further increasing the risk I have noted above.
No it wasn't. The 360 launched before the Wii. A year in fact and guess what the hardware cost more than the previous generation and so did the software and why? Because they couldn't get by on the old costs and they still lost money per console despite the higher cost. That proves teh industry was not growing fast enough to cover their costs.
In fact Microsoft's whole argument as to why they're winning the battle is that the Wii is a completely different market. So if they are a different market then how can they have any bearing on what happens to the 360 or PS3?
The fact is gaming has grown much more because of Nintendo. As it was pointed out in the article you can ask virtually anyone if they've read a book, listened to a CD or watched a movie and get a yes but you certainly won't get that with games. There is no reason the market can't grow and include lame games like the Sims, Nintendogs, etc. If books, movies and music can cater to everyone why can't video games?
It's only because some people think gaming is some sort of "old boys" club that shouldn't include everyone because it is a tiny fragile industry and they're afraid of resources being spent on games they don't like. Which is the sort of thinking that leads to failure.
The fact the PS2 is still around and getting new games proves there is an untapped market and why shouldn't it be tapped to increase revenue so we can have more games and more variety?
2D fighters are disappearing, side scrollers, shooters, flight sims will probably disappear. Racing isn't that healthy either seeing how there is zero innovation there. For a industry that was supposedly growing we seem to be losing variety and that's because the old model is too risky to allow any sort of risk. Where as Nintendo's model does allow risk so they can release things like Brain training or books on the DS. Both of which I think are shit but I encourage those sorts of things because growing the market means more money and more games for everyone.
The market crashed previously due to a lack of control meaning anyone could release anything but now all companies work under a model invented by Nintendo. Meaning anyone could release anything and they would release broken shit like E.T. Where do we see people release broken games to be patched later? Not on the Wii. That is more likely to crash the current gaming market.
It's this release games and patch 'em later mentality found on other systems. It killed consumer's perceived value of games on the PC and it'll do it on the consoles as well and once consumers think they aren't getting their money's worth they won't play games or just pirate them just like on the PC and gaming will tank.
I can easily seen the Wii becoming some sort of example for us in a business studies class. It broke totally new ground in the games industry, showing a wholly different method of approaching the market.
I'm not sure exactly what Nintendo will do next. If it were me, I would launch the Wii 2 with high-def graphics, better storage capacity, better online infrastructure and backwards compatibility. But I'm not Nintendo, and if the next console doesn't provide something that is immediately appealing to the casual audience then there is a possibility that Nintendo's market might not react to it favourably, as this article has pointed out.
When my wife first saw Ninja Gaiden Sigma running on a large hi-def screen at the local games store, she asked me what the difference was between it and Ninja Gaiden Black on the original xbox (which she has seen many, many times). I pointed out the higher res, the individual petals on the blossoms etc.. and she asked if the gameplay was the same and why I would want to spend $1000 (NZ) on a ps3 for what is merely a cosmetic change. I couldn't really find an answer. I now have a 360 and have found only one or two games that are not just prettier than their last gen counterparts (eg: more infected in L4D than last gen console could have dealt with). Are there any more?
This, and controllers that my wife refuses to use to play dvd's with (wtf all the buttons she says) are the reason Nintendo are so successful.
The sooner the industry changes the better I reckon, and there will still be halos&metalgearslugs&ninjas, there just wont be a hundred "me too" "hardcore" games. Just a few really good ones. If I never see another gurning man with gun again it'll be too effing soon.
rant over.
I think Nintendo has completely rewritten everything and in doing so potentially hosed themselves. If they are smart they can figure out a way to appeal to everyone, but I fear we will see a return to the 32X/SegaCD model where you sell hardware upgrades to your current device.
At the same time, who is to say the Wii won't be the device that throws off the shackles of limiting consumers to only one of your consoles? If people want Blu Ray, they buy a Blu Ray player. Lots of people are satisfied with standard DVDs. If someone wants the Wiilite (Wii + elite) they can buy the beefier system, otherwise their standard Wii will suffice.
Hopefully everyone is paying attention to the lessons we learned this generation. If so, then gaming can move beyond what it is today, although personally I fear what it may become, much like when country music of the 60s and 70s gave way to a musical paradigm designed to lure women to the genre.
Brian Woods
www.brianwoods.com
That wasn't all that country music became though, there are many different facets to it, unlike the gaming industry today.
btw, no relation.
(c:
I love(d) you in Shark!
I liked him as a pimp in Casino.
I feel my best role was as a jaded journalist in Salvador.
One of my former journalism colleagues rated Salvador as his favorite film. I think it will make him happy to hear you say it's your fave, too!
Salvador from 1986 huh? I just added that to my Netflix Que, I'll have to check that one out.