nintendo admits why they sucked at 2009

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/27812/Miyamoto_Nintendo_Products_Werent_Fun_Enough_To_Grow_Sales_In_09.php

nintendo admitted they made some bad games and it's the reason why they weren't able to make hot crazy sales of the wii in 2009 as opposed to 2008. this is something you have to love and appreciate from such a company as they are blaming themselves for the lack of sales and not the consumers nor the economy. if you look at third parties, all they do is blame the consumers and the hardware maker [nintendo]. where the hell do companies like capcom, sega, electronic arts and the likes come up with these excuses. games by third parties aren't selling because they suck. they don't want to admit to it because they would have to face reality and reality bites hard.

sales of hardcore games don't sell, yet these third party companies don't lash out at the hardware maker nor the consumers, which according to many are gamers and yet as gamers the games aren't selling. yet on the wii it's a total different story.

 

XD i knew it would be you that posted this topic

 

If this was Jack Tretton, he would say along the lines of "The other companies suck, we rule, and this is Sony's actual plan for the PS3. We will own them eventually because our company is sent by God."

 

They love to blame pirates as well... Would they have bad sales if they focused on translating stuff like Tales of..., Kimi no Yuusha, new FF DS games, Element Hunter, Blood of Bahamut, Kaijuu Busters... stuff like that. (For US,not JP)

 

Since I'm a game dev and a dreamer, the games I've downloaded for the DS this year make me go meh. When I think about the at least decent games I've played for it, I see a copyright date of like 2005 or 2006, not 2009. If they want my money in 2010, they have to do something big. The only purchase I might do is another DS for my wife or a GBA-SP for my 3 year old, plus more slot 1s. No software sales at all, because ya know I don't pay for my own time loss if I can help it. That money should go to clothes and a new house fund.

Sales should always be from new hardware, ads, and useful peripherals (which is hardware).

 

Most companies make a loss on their hardware. Also most software manufacturers also make no money from hardware/peripherals, so what you're saying is you're basically a leech on the games industry.

On a separate note; what kind of games are you developing?

 

No, I'm a amateur personal critic. If I don't like something, I don't buy it. I've bought several games in the past, but it starts to get old when you pay over and over for the same thing because they refuse to let you create backups, or make it near impossible. I've bought Diablo 2 twice, simply because I had no idea what backup meant back then.

On the separate note, I have about 40 game designs that would go gold if I had more people to throw at them. They range from as simple as a tycoon type game to as complex as what I call a "triple rpg". Not one is designed to abuse the player with boredom, fluff, or needless annoyance. I tend to stop playing games soon after I find any of those 3 things.

 

Huh, okay.

 

So you're a self-righteous "critic" who thinks his ideas have a chance at getting anywhere in the industry? You think you can just sell your idea to a dev studio and rake in the dough? Worse yet, you don't understand that the industry operates on software sales more than anything else. So by justifying your piracy with "they should make good games", you're a leech that is not contributing toward the games that you _do_ like with your own money.

Here's a word of advice to you: Ideas are worthless. You've got 40 AAA-worthy game designs? Awesome, how about you choose one to work on and produce it? Get a few hobby developers and artists together and make something happen. Your ideas are not worth anything until they are brought to fruition. In this context, a game needs to be made. Then you can pitch the idea at a publisher and get money that way.

As far as the quality of games goes, have you considered taking up a hobby that brings you more enjoyment?

Summary: lol

 

They blame the pirates... but tell me how a gigantic corporation like nintendo can get hurt by those minimal pirates... and most of the nintendo ds sales on games and platforms are coming from japan and china... and we all know how much pain in the butt are the laws in the u.s.... They have to make more mature rated games for the hardcore gamers... games like GTA, metal gear, A decent final fantasy... instead they keep putting the same formula... POKEMON-MARIO-ZELDA... we are tired of it... at least me.

 

you say minimal...ok

I agree with you they must release more mature games for the DS and wii......
and I think they are planing that in their 3ds...

but I think piracy is not minimal in the consoles and handheld games...

 

they are not minimals. but they wont going to hurt nintendo sales... nintendo sells millions on a year basis. the pirates downloads not surpass the half million. and most of the downloads dont' work because of the anti-pirate software they put on several videogames.

 

I assume you're not familiar with the sales numbers of "mature" games on Nintendo platforms. They're nowhere near the same numbers as that of MS or Sony's. The "mature" audience on Nintendo consoles is very small, and many Nintendo fans (like myself) are not interested in any of the "mature" games. If you want a "mature" game, play a different console. People stick with Nintendo because they like the core franchises like Mario, Zelda, Metroid, etc.

 

Nintendo has to do something regarding it... they releasing the 3DS because they knew that Sony is taking a lot of pride with their PSP. and you have to accept that the DS is a nice handheld device but when you go and try to compare both consoles on graphics and multimedia capabilityes tell me who take the upper hand? the same goes for the Wii comparing it with the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3. However don't get me wrong i love both DS and Wii. But sooner or later nintendo has to really get on the Hardcore gamers needs.

 

Not really...

The problem is that the hardcore gaming population is fairly low and a good amount of them probably pirate software, whereas the casual market is still expanding and is even now bigger than the hardcore gamers. That's why Sony and MS are beginning to venture into the casual market; that's where the money is.

 

Is it me, or did the definition of "hardcore gamer" somehow change since I've been gaming? (1987 for those who care)

A hardcore gamer, last time I checked, is simple an avid player of video games. They put effort into learning more about a game's engine, for instance, or are deeply engrossed in the competitive aspects of the game. Or maybe games just dominate their life. Regardless, playing games is a part of a hardcore gamer's lifestyle.

That moniker has nothing to do with the graphics or media functionality of a system. I think today's gamers are misled to believe that graphics are the end-all, be-all of gaming. A few generations ago, it was the bittage of each console... and there was some actual root in truth; After all, a 16-bit processor has a large instruction set size, so it can process the extra information needed for better graphics and music.

Pretty soon, consoles settled on 32 and 64-bit procs, and gamers shifted to media capacity. The PS1 dominated that at first; 700 MB on a disc as opposed to 128 MB on a cartridge. Then it became an argument of online capabilities; the Xbox had the clear upper hand last generation.

My point? I'll bold it for people who prefer scanning: Focusing on graphics or media functionality doesn't make you a hardcore gamer. It makes you superficial, trendy, or casual. A hardcore gamer cares about the games. That's it.

Answer me this; what makes Nintendo's good games _not_ appeal to the hardcore? Am I not hardcore because I enjoy Zelda, Pokémon, and Mario but don't care for Call of Duty, God of War, etc? This seems to be a clear case of a new generation of gamers coming in and severely marring the existing semantics.

 

My definition of a hardcore gamer would be someone who devotes a significant amount of time to gaming/gaming related activities. The reason I say the DS and Wii are focused on casual gamers is that many of the titles released are boring after a few hours or are only fun because they use some gimmick which once the novelty has worn off becomes boring.

 

I think this involves the Wii, considering that the really good games on the Wii besides the Nintendo made ones, sell poorly. Since the 'hardcore' fanbase is considered as small. I bought the No More Heroes, Mad World, Dead Space Extraction and the other good Wii games that I'm interested in and are genuinely good. My definition of a hardcore gamer is someone who genuinely cares for good games being made, with little prejudice for graphics or whatever. And I just got into video games when Animal Crossing on the GC came out. Although my opinion about the Wii is not a good one, I'll still play the good games that come out on it, the merits of the system should be on the games themselves, not the system.

 

Agreed. The only thing I have against the Wii is the same thing I have against the Xbox 360; they are dishonest about their prices. By which I mean, you have to but so many little addons to utilise the system. I would also say that Nintendo have been focusing on the casual gaming market, leaving the hardcore games for the most part to the other two consoles.