Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Nintendo Businesses Wii XBox (Games)

Mixed News for Nintendo, Microsoft 155

If you were to just look at downloadable content this week, Wii and 360 owners would have a lot to cheer about. Virtual Console downloads include the (under-appreciated) Legend of the Mystical Ninja and the original Castlevania. Xbox 360 owners can finally sink their teeth into the board-game spectacular that is Settlers of Catan. Classic titles Millipede and Centipede will also be on offer via Xbox Live Arcade. Unfortunately, there are some less cheery things to discuss as well. Virtual Console sales are down, apparently, and some analysts are questioning whether Nintendo's success may be bad for the industry overall. As for the 360 ... the Elite may be bringing back some old problems. 'Red Rings of Death' have already been reported with the just-released consoles, and DRM issues with Live Arcade titles on the 'upgraded' system are making some new owners frustrated.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mixed News for Nintendo, Microsoft

Comments Filter:
  • by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Monday April 30, 2007 @02:07PM (#18930321) Homepage Journal

    some analysts are questioning whether Nintendo's success may be bad for the industry overall.

    What? From TFA in question, ""Nintendo has not only increased the size of the market, but it has also re-segmented it in its own favor, in our view," Mitchell wrote. "Nintendo is dominating software sales on its popular hardware platforms, leaving the publishers with a smaller slice of an only somewhat incrementally larger pie."" What this sentence says to me is that the market grew, so it's good for the industry overall, but that the current players in the market are less innovative than Nintendo and so they have a smaller slice of this generation - which is good for the consumer.

    "He continued, "Moreover, we feel that the likely shorter product cycles of Nintendo's platforms puts the publishers in a permanent catch-up mode. We think the upcoming releases of Super Mario Galaxy and Metroid Prime 3: Corruption will highlight this phenomena [sic] this holiday season."" Interestingly, Microsoft had the short generation this last time around. Not Nintendo.

    "What Mitchell alludes to is the tendency for Nintendo-published titles to overrun the top end of sales charts on Nintendo platforms, leaving third party publishers out of luck sales-wise." Also known as the tendency for third-party developers to be worse at making fun games than Nintendo is.

  • by wframe9109 ( 899486 ) <bowker.x@gmail.com> on Monday April 30, 2007 @02:10PM (#18930377)
    The whole "It's hard to make money because people only buy 1st party Nintendo games" schtick is really, really obnoxious. People buy quality titles (for the most part). Nintendo makes quality titles. The few third parties that do make quality titles sell well. It's not like I picked up Zelda because it was made by Nintendo; I picked up Zelda because it has gameplay that I enjoy, great artistic direction (vs. throwing mounds of polygons at you), and has proven a dependably excellent quality series. I also picked up Rayman, despite the fact that it's a third party title, because it looked to have some excellent off-beat humor and gameplay, and it lived up to that expectation.

  • A few thoughts... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Gothic_Walrus ( 692125 ) on Monday April 30, 2007 @02:11PM (#18930397) Journal
    "Nintendo is dominating software sales on its popular hardware platforms, leaving the publishers with a smaller slice of an only somewhat incrementally larger pie."

    How is this a new trend? Unless I'm mistaken, I believe Nintendo has always dominated the sales charts of their own platforms, and deservedly so - why buy a generic licensed platformer when you can get a Mario title that's been polished to near perfection?

    He continued, "Moreover, we feel that the likely shorter product cycles of Nintendo's platforms puts the publishers in a permanent catch-up mode. We think the upcoming releases of Super Mario Galaxy and Metroid Prime 3: Corruption will highlight this phenomena [sic] this holiday season."

    Shorter product cycles are a bad thing? Since the Wii is less powerful than the PS3 or the Xbox 360, I'd have to imagine that any experience the publishers get on those platforms would carry over nicely to the Wii's eventual successor. Besides, it looks like - for the time being, at least - Nintendo's "less powerful hardware for lower price" strategy is working far better than Sony's "buy it now for $600 and we'll support it in ten years, we promise" plan of action.

    Moreover, Mr. Todd Mitchell seems to be missing something key here: while this may not be the most favorable trend for third party publishers, Nintendo is going to make buckets of money from all of this. Since he's an investment analyst, you think he'd want to point out the bright side there, that being that Nintendo is going to make you rich and that, perhaps more importantly, Nintendo succeeding in this generation - even if entirely due to their own titles - means there will still be some form of a gaming industry in five years instead of the supposed game industry crash [slashdot.org] that is supposed to happen in the near future.
  • by Zaphenath ( 980370 ) on Monday April 30, 2007 @02:17PM (#18930535)
    Agreed.

    So Nintendo is good at making really fun and well-polished games....and they make a big profit....they increase the amount of people who might call themselves a 'gamer'....this is a bad thing?

    I think the whole argument is flawed because it says to me "Nintendo makes great games, they sell well, are fun, and get new people to play them. This is a bad thing because third party developers can't sell their crappy games, and have to spend more time and resources to compete by making decent games."

    Maybe the fact that Nintendo makes some good stuff shows that a lot of games/developers suck? I don't know, perhaps it is the phenomena of "wrecking the curve".
  • In other news... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MMaestro ( 585010 ) on Monday April 30, 2007 @02:20PM (#18930587)
    What Mitchell alludes to is the tendency for Nintendo-published titles to overrun the top end of sales charts on Nintendo platforms, leaving third party publishers out of luck sales-wise.

    In other news, analysts made the shocking discovery that the Nintendo Gamecube had the least amount of support from third party publishers leaving Nintendo-published titles to overrun the top end of sales charts on the Gamecube.

  • by zerocommazero ( 837043 ) on Monday April 30, 2007 @02:22PM (#18930625)
    "What Mitchell alludes to is the tendency for Nintendo-published titles to overrun the top end of sales charts on Nintendo platforms, leaving third party publishers out of luck sales-wise."

    This is because Nintendo has been the underdog in the last couple of system releases and didn't merit the attention of the more polished hits. Who wants to put the effort in releasing a stellar game for a system with a limited audience? Nintendo had to put more effort into their first party games to keep themselves afloat. If they didn't, they wouldn't be around this long because most of the third party games were just trash and rehashes. Now that the Wii is selling so well, we may finally start to see an influx of quality 3rd party software. And they will sell well as long as the games are exclusive.

    Truth be told, Nintendo dominates the software sales because their games are that good. Did Resident Evil 4 sell badly?

  • by EnglishTim ( 9662 ) on Monday April 30, 2007 @03:11PM (#18931485)
    But it's not quite that simple; Nintendo has an advantage over the third-party developers in that they also designed the hardware. For the first games of their big brands that can be very useful as they get much longer to play with the hardware. For instance, Mario 64 actually drove many of the design decisions behind the N64. That's not to diminish the ability of Nintendo's dev teams; they are excellent and have been much more successful than the other first-party dev teams.

  • Nintendo becoming the biggest player is only good if you like nintendo games.

    That's not true. It's also good if you like the way Nintendo does business, or if you like the way Nintendo makes controllers, or if you like the way Nintendo makes systems. Because if they are on top, everyone will want to emulate or out-do them.

    When one player who has been on the bottom gets on top, it usually leads to change.

    Some change, at this point, could only be positive. The games industry is in a serious state of stagnation.

    IF HD-TV takes off then the Wii might age a lot faster then previous consoles.

    HDTV acceptance doesn't affect the Wii significantly for a number of reasons. The first reason is that the Wii is not an HD player, while still being cheap enough to purchase alongside one. The second reason is that HD might go nowhere, as you say. The third reason is that game consoles typically make shitty video players with the included software; for example the PS2 was an amazingly horrible DVD player (slimline is better but still not very good.) And in the case of the Xbox it's an external peripheral. External peripherals for video game systems have never succeeded. Even if it sets new records in that regard it will be an extremely niche product.

    Sure, you might claim that this market is big enough, but Nintendo itself seems to think it needs third party titles to reach that audience that its own games cannot.

    I don't see the problem here. Third parties ARE making Wii games, and they are more interested in making games for Nintendo in this generation than they have been of late, largely because of the Wii's massive popularity. And they are less interested in developing for Sony than ever before, largely because of the way Sony has totally blown their attempt to capture this generation so far. Whereas Microsoft is still a hit-and-miss sale to developers. They like the tools, they fear doing business with Microsoft, both very logical stances.

    Blizzad created a huge success with WoW BUT it also can be seen as bad for the industry as all that money is NOT going to other publishers and ultimately this leads to fewer games and less choice.

    It can only be seen as bad for the industry if you don't ask Blizzard.

    If the market grows, it's good for the industry. "Good for the industry" doesn't require that it's good for all the players, you know. If it truly led to a monopoly that would be one thing, but we all know that's not happening here.

    Also, no one with a fucking clue can seriously argue that Nintendo has only slightly increased the size of the gaming market. The GBA SP and later the Wii (and the DS lite of course) have done more to legitimize adult gaming than anything all the other console manufacturers put together have done since the dawn of time (as we measure it on game consoles anyway.)

    Does it help if you replace Nintendo/Blizzard with Microsoft and talk about the OS market instead to see the light?

    This is a stupid argument and you are stupider for having suggested it, and I am stupider for having read it. Microsoft has a monopoly position, Nintendo does not, stop using this stupid argument, thank you.

    What the game industry does NOT need is a monopoly. Not by MS, not by Sony and certainly not by Nintendo (especially the US half of it).

    There is too much money for anyone to give up and unless the other players deserve to die, they will figure out that some innovation is what is required in the market.

    Microsoft will probably be there for at least one more generation. There is no reason for Sony to give up at this point. Nintendo will not have a monopoly by the end of this generation, or the next. I am not an atomic playboy.

  • by dunezone ( 899268 ) on Monday April 30, 2007 @03:31PM (#18931799) Journal
    The prices are unjustified on the Virtual Console. NES games should be a dollar, if they were a dollar I wouldn't mind dropping 10$ easily in one sitting for ten games. But the current price tag of 5$ is just ridiculous, the game is already finished. Its either emulated or modified to run on the Wii, which more then likely takes little to no time to do. Yet I sit here looking at Super Mario Brothers for the price of 5$, and the majority of us already purchased the game in our life time (if not several times). I feel like I'm getting screwed by buying games on the Virtual Console.
  • by Millennium ( 2451 ) on Monday April 30, 2007 @03:37PM (#18931893)
    So let me get this straight... Nintendo is dominating software sales on its platform because its fans aren't tolerating the relative crap put out by the third parties, and this is a bad thing?
  • by MeanderingMind ( 884641 ) on Tuesday May 01, 2007 @11:50AM (#18941795) Homepage Journal
    He didn't call any games stupid, he just stated he personally disliked many popular genres. He then moved on to discuss what he did like, and how the genres and types of games he liked were maligned by the big publishers.

    I don't believe that he was implying at any point his game taste was "superior", but he was implying that it was largely forgotten. His conclusion is that one of the reasons Nintendo is doing so well is because they are releasing games that target all those gamers whose tastes were not being served by the big publishers.

    Lastly, attacking him back by implying his "fun" was stupid doesn't help your arguments.

    Your comment didn't deserve a redundant, but it didn't warrant any acclaim either.

This file will self-destruct in five minutes.

Working...