The Wii's success dictates that motion controls are the future of gaming. To say otherwise is foolish. All that matters now is to understand why it happened in the first place:
With their high-end gaming, Sony and Microsoft and the rest of the game industry snubbed low-end gamers and potential gamers with their consoles and games. This gave Nintendo an opening to cater to those shunned customers, hence the DS and the Wii. Their success shows that Nintendo knows how to do business in the longterm, whereas we are now seeing that Microsoft and Sony completely fail to do that.
Whereas Sony and Microsoft and most third parties cried and pouted and pontificated at the notion of making games for the masses, Nintendo saw it as an opportunity, and they took it all the way. You don't make customers by ignoring them, and you don't keep customers by treating them like shit and looking down on them. It's like that in every business, so why should it be any different for the game industry? The answer is that it is not, and the industry is suffering for looking down on "non-gamers" and "casual gamers" because they priced themselves out of the market, and with the economy in decline, nobody is willing to spend money on HDTVs to play their hardware. They see no difference in the graphics, so they choose the one that offers the most entertainment value for the least amount of money: The DS and Wii.
Nintendo isn't "competing" with Microsoft or Sony because competition means competing over the same values, in this case Microsoft and Sony are competing over the same customers and the same values (HD graphics and processing power), whereas Nintendo has disrupted them by changing those values (changing the context by which we interface with our games). Nintendo didn't zap customers with some kind of evil Hypno-Ray to brainwash customers to buy their hardware and software. The customers liked what Nintendo was offering, and they gladly gave them their money because they saw that the price was right for the entertainment value that the Wii offered. Not to mention that it offered an experience that the other two consoles could not offer.
The "game industry's" response to the Wii and the new market was to deride it. To mock it. But time has vindicated Nintendo and their business strategy, as it has put them ahead, while Microsoft and Sony rush to make their own motion controls to "exploit" this new market. However, this may all be for naught, since there is something that needs to be taken into consideration:
Nintendo has always sold their consoles in the green. Sony has been selling their consoles at a loss (as has Microsoft). They may have gotten away with just "throwing money at the problem" during the tidal wave of economic growth, but now that it's receded, we're beginning to see that neither of these companies are the financial geniuses they've made themselves out to be. Customers are not buying into HD Gaming, and that means they are not buying into their games. As a result their games are quickly losing market value.
Grand Theft Auto 4 cost 100 Million dollars to make, yet today you can buy it for less than 30 dollars new, or for much less used on Amazon. This is happening to most of the HD Games. Nintendo's first-party games (and a fair amount of third-party Wii and DS games) have managed to retain their full retail value for a long time, and some still do. That means their games are still selling for full price. That means that customers value those Wii and DS games more than most (if not all) of Microsoft and Sony's HD games. That means over time they will outsell their HD counterparts because they will sell more over time while retaining their full retail value. As anybody with half a brain would expect, you don't cut your prices when you are winning. The market is saying that don't care about HD Gaming. If they won't buy into what Sony and Microsoft are selling, then the idea of "Hollywood Blockbuster" games with outrageous costs and spending is unsustainable. Eventually the bubble will burst, and core gaming as we know it will collapse, leaving only the new market as a brand new frontier of gaming.
So I think it has become pretty obvious who has shown their business chops this generation. Microsoft and Sony's fickle spending is coming back to bite them in the ass, and with core gaming on the decline, both their gaming divisions may very well go under before they can do anything of merit with their attempts at trying to cash in on the market that Nintendo has created. The next few years (hell, the next few months even), are gonna be very interesting to watch.
|
Are you kidding? A lot of current Wii games abandon full motion controls, and just because Microsoft and Sony are joining in on the fad, that doesn't mean the death of traditional controls. The ultimate solution is the option for both, not the absence of either.
The Wii's monumental success (but not all of it by any means) has been from the casual market buying them for various uses/impulse buys, then leaving them in a corner to rot until the next blockbuster. Think about it: if the core market is saturated, why did the Wii sell so well? Young kids/Elderly people bought it, but after all their fun was had, they'll just wait until the next big thing comes out (after Wii Fit plus, what else?).
There will always be a place for core gaming/traditional controls. The incredible success of Uncharted 2, the advent of 10 million seller Modern Warfare 2, and the recent saturated sales of the Wii is just the beginning of a swing back towards a focus on hardcore gaming again.
And what's the big issue here? There's certainly a place for both. I agree that Nintendo is in it's own league at this point in terms of pure sales, there's no doubt about that: but to say that Sony and Microsoft have been making "all the wrong moves" is just ludicrous. Look at the overwhelming success of Xbox Live and the PSN, compared to the awful Wii online service. Nintendo isn't doing everything right by any means.
Honestly, why do you do this to yourself?? Just open your eyes and see that it is Nintendo that doesn't care about you, not Sony and MS. Just about every single business decision they make is just them watching out for their own back, regardless of how it effects their fans. How can you call yourself a gamer and demand that more casual games need to be made. Not that I have a problem with them, they have a place in this industry. But you really need to stop hoping that Nintendo validates your hobby to the public and stop caring people think. Nintendo fans are way too self-conscious.
And besides the Wii is still runner-up to the PlayStation 2, a gamer's console.
WAHHHHHHHHH MY CONSOLE CHOICE IS BETTER THAN YOURS WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Also, what Magnalon said. Cus he's awesome (:
http://www.destructoid.com/prints-less-money-nintendo-s-first-drop-since-2004-152527.phtml
“The Wii's success dictates that motion controls are the future of gaming. To say otherwise is foolish. All that matters now is to understand why it happened in the first place:”
So because the Wii sold more than the HD consoles, that means standard controls no longer have a place in gaming? How would you explain PC gaming that has survived off of a keyboard and mouse and shows no signs of dying?
“With their high-end gaming, Sony and Microsoft and the rest of the game industry snubbed low-end gamers and potential gamers with their consoles and games. This gave Nintendo an opening to cater to those shunned customers, hence the DS and the Wii. Their success shows that Nintendo knows how to do business in the longterm, whereas we are now seeing that Microsoft and Sony completely fail to do that.”
So you’re saying that all gamers were unhappy with what Sony and Microsoft offered? How do you explain those that decided to get a 360 or a PS3 instead of the cheaper Wii? How does not selling as many consoles as Nintendo mean that Microsoft and Sony have completely failed to do business?
“Nintendo isn't "competing" with Microsoft or Sony because competition means competing over the same values, in this case Microsoft and Sony are competing over the same customers and the same values (HD graphics and processing power), whereas Nintendo has disrupted them by changing those values (changing the context by which we interface with our games). Nintendo didn't zap customers with some kind of evil Hypno-Ray to brainwash customers to buy their hardware and software. The customers liked what Nintendo was offering, and they gladly gave them their money because they saw that the price was right for the entertainment value that the Wii offered. Not to mention that it offered an experience that the other two consoles could not offer.”
Are you seriously using the tired argument that Sony and Microsoft only care about graphics and not good game play? Nintendo didn’t brainwash their customers while Sony and Microsoft did? Nintendo marketed their console in a way that sounded like the next must have thing like an iPod. Not brainwashing since they didn’t force anyone to buy the Wii, but they did reach out in a way to reel people in. How does your argument of customers liking what Nintendo offered and paying because they saw the price was right for the entertainment value not apply to the 360 or PS3 as well? I only have the consoles I have now because I thought they would be worth having, because otherwise, I wouldn’t have gotten them. As for getting experiences that the 360 and PS3 doesn’t offer, tell me what game on the Wii can offer the experience that a game like LittleBigPlanet can offer with its very deep level editing and sharing. Just because the HD consoles use standard controls doesn’t mean unique experiences can’t be had.
“The "game industry's" response to the Wii and the new market was to deride it. To mock it. But time has vindicated Nintendo and their business strategy, as it has put them ahead, while Microsoft and Sony rush to make their own motion controls to "exploit" this new market. However, this may all be for naught, since there is something that needs to be taken into consideration:”
Oh yeah, I’m sure the developers that made games for the Wii were busy mocking it as well. Gamers are not the only ones that make up the game industry you know, otherwise, without publishers and developers, how would the game industry exist? There may be some truth to Sony and Microsoft following from Nintendo’s lead to bring in motion controls, but are they really gonna reach the market that the Wii has already won over?
“Nintendo has always sold their consoles in the green. Sony has been selling their consoles at a loss (as has Microsoft). They may have gotten away with just "throwing money at the problem" during the tidal wave of economic growth, but now that it's receded, we're beginning to see that neither of these companies are the financial geniuses they've made themselves out to be. Customers are not buying into HD Gaming, and that means they are not buying into their games. As a result their games are quickly losing market value.”
You do realize that Nintendo’s financials lives and dies by gaming alone right? Sony and Microsoft have business outside the gaming market, so they can take a lost on their consoles and make it back through other means. If customers are not buying into HD gaming, than how do you explain the hype and the millions of sales that various 360 and PS3 games have gotten?
“Grand Theft Auto 4 cost 100 Million dollars to make, yet today you can buy it for less than 30 dollars new, or for much less used on Amazon. This is happening to most of the HD Games. Nintendo's first-party games (and a fair amount of third-party Wii and DS games) have managed to retain their full retail value for a long time, and some still do. That means their games are still selling for full price. That means that customers value those Wii and DS games more than most (if not all) of Microsoft and Sony's HD games. That means over time they will outsell their HD counterparts because they will sell more over time while retaining their full retail value. As anybody with half a brain would expect, you don't cut your prices when you are winning. The market is saying that don't care about HD Gaming. If they won't buy into what Sony and Microsoft are selling, then the idea of "Hollywood Blockbuster" games with outrageous costs and spending is unsustainable. Eventually the bubble will burst, and core gaming as we know it will collapse, leaving only the new market as a brand new frontier of gaming.”
Oh yeah, the market is saying they don’t care about HD gaming with the sale figures of the 360 being about 30 million and the PS3 being about seven million behind that. Saying that core gaming will die is like saying 2D gaming would have died when 3D gaming started becoming popular. Are you so caught up in your fanboyism as to really think that this new market will do away with the old market?
“So I think it has become pretty obvious who has shown their business chops this generation. Microsoft and Sony's fickle spending is coming back to bite them in the ass, and with core gaming on the decline, both their gaming divisions may very well go under before they can do anything of merit with their attempts at trying to cash in on the market that Nintendo has created. The next few years (hell, the next few months even), are gonna be very interesting to watch.”
Core gaming on the decline, how have you proven this? How are there any signs of Sony’s or Microsoft’s gaming divisions going under? Where are the signs that the next few months will lead to Nintendo being the supreme ruler of the gaming market?
I know this was very long for a comment and likely not to be read even by the c-blog poster, but I was bored and 20 minutes of my time isn’t much to debunk this ignorance. Not to mention Magnalon covered this a lot better than me with far fewer words. I rather fap to his comment if that would possible than to this c-blog entry.
Well said Magnalon.
Your GTA4 example is actually pretty shitty too. That game sold over 10 million copies at the 60 dollar price range so clearly for some games price isn't an issue. Also, right now motion control sucks shit! I am unimpressed by the wii's motion control before and after motion plus. I hope to god a regular controller wont go away until motion control becomes exact and is implemented in games properly instead of being just was waggel fest.
Another thing on a similar note, this is the thing about motion control that ticks me off. Do you think its harder to map an action to a hand motion or a button? I dont know much about making games, but Ill assume the button is the correct choice. So longer development time due to controls means more money and (sometimes) shabby controls. A regular controller wont go away and Im glad.
So Vanor, where did you get your Masters in Business? You should consider getting your cash back for having such a misguided, close-minded view of the way these companies do business. Last time I checked, Microsoft's XBox division was doing pretty well for itself, and after the release of the PS3 slim and the price cut, Sony's sales have really shot up.
The argument that core gaming is dead is a mindlessly stupid one, one that ignores a lot of the facts (as Mag pointed out, Uncharted 2 and MW2, alongside AAA titles like Assassins Creed 2, most likely Dragons Age and surprisingly even Demons Souls and Borderlands, both of which are new IP's doing very well) in favor of a panicked and fox-news-esq fear-mongering article about how Nintendo does everything right and the other two do everything wrong.
The argument for GTA IV is also a moot point, as the game is a top seller, selling millions of copies. When the game drops down to $30 new, it isn't because it is bad, it is actually, wait for it, a BUSINESS STRATEGY. That's right, it is something done to older games (Or sometimes, as in the case of Valkyria Chronicles, newer titles that arent selling well due to lack of exposure) to give consumers an incentive to purchase these games if they havent before, revenue which will be made up for when people go ahead and purchase the $20-a-piece DLC for it.
As for the red-selling argument, Sony did it with the PS2 and it worked out for them. Its another BUSINESS STRATEGY used when you need to get a product to the market, make up for the red sell with quantity of products sold. But your business school apparently didn't teach you that so I will forgive you. Regardless, as Sony continues to make their products, the components will be cheaper, and the systems will no longer be made for a loss. If I recall correctly, the 360 is already under cost, so that's a moot issue.
So I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with your analysis that Sony and Microsoft dont understand business.
Core games are still and always will be a hot commodity regardless of the influence of casual titles. Evolution doesn't arise from shoehorning in a gimmick. It's the expansion and conditioning of something that already exists.
Nintendo creatively searched for a solution to their sales problem, and they definitely found it. They wanted to expand their market by making something so cool, so new, that you just have to show all your friends. MS and Sony clearly missed that opportunity, and are now obviously backpedaling and glancing over their shoulders at what Nintendo is doing...
Core gaming will not die, that's a fact. I don't think I need to explain this.
Also, one last point that Wii-bashers fail to understand: It's not Nintendo's fault that there's so much freakin' shovelware. It's something that's never been done before, you can't expect every publisher to know how to use it yet...especially considering half of the Wii's audience is more comfortable "waggling" than pushing buttons.
No one is bashing the Wii in here, they are just rebutting Vanor's ignorant statements.
The games I played the most on the Wii - Super Smash Bros Brawl, Tatsunoko vs Capcom, and Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn - featured no motion control at all. Considering two of those games were made by Nintendo, that tells me that even they know that motion controls shouldn't replace traditional ones.
The only thing Nintendo has succeeded at doing with the Wii is creating a great marketing campaign. A marketing campaign that made it seem like a great way to lose weight due to 'being active' while playing. They continued to capitalize on this with the Wii Fit series. It's also a marketing campaign that focused on it being the cheapest console by a wide margin - that's, honestly, the whole reason I bought it over a X360 and PS3 initially.
(The also must have tapped into whatever magic is making people buy iPods and iPhones by the gallon. I assume the secret lies in at least one lower-case 'i's in their product's name.)
Nintendo has struck gold with the Wii, but it didn't benefit the pre-existing gamer at all. In targeting new customers, they have ignored their older customers, only occasionally throwing them a bone - a bone that has been getting thrown less and less as time goes on.
It should also be noted that, at this point, Nintendo has lost the "Cheapest Console" benefit and is now running solely on "Being Trendy", which is also starting to wear off. For the same price, you can get an HD console that features an infinitely better selection of games and a lot more of them. For $100 more, you get an HD system that also has Blu-Ray playback and so many other features that it may as well be the techno-equivalent of a Swiss Army Knife.
Even with the reduced price of $200, the Wii is very overpriced considering what you get. That Wii price drop shouldn't have been a $50 drop, it should have been a 50% price drop - especially considering that's how much the X360 and PS3 have dropped since they launched.
Now, of course, as a hardcore gamer, I'd take the Xbox 360/PS3 any day, but bear in mind that casual gamers far, far outnumber the hardcores. Thus increased sales. People I would've never expected to buy a games console did - the Wii. It was (is?) cheaper than both options, is family friendly and, well, different.
Understand that while many of us know the differences between the consoles (hardware, tech, games, what have you), many people don't. In fact, they couldn't care less.
I congratulate the poster on his trolling skills - apparently, it worked.
You're the ones being reactionary. For too long I've heard everyone mock and deride the expanded market, who are really arcade gamers. People who played pinball can appreciate what the Wii represents, even if they never touched a console or PC game in their lives. But maybe you all are up in arms because deep down, you know what I'm saying is true. Things couldn't keep going the way they would forever. Nothing stays the same forever. Things change, and not in the ways we expect. Nintendo has shown us a new way of doing things, and with Microsoft and Sony trying to jump on the bandwagon, motion controls are undoubtedly the future.
To say otherwise is foolish.
You're acting like a crazy soothsayer, saying "HARDCORES WILL DIE!" Both will live! There isn't a problem here!
this made me laugh. a game that was $60 and sold 2 million copies means what now?
my 2nd grade math skills makes that out to be $120 million dollars. Now that its still selling at retail for $30 a profit is still being had. That's also not including DLC like Ballad of Gay Tony which didn't cost 100 million to make which uses the same engine and content as GTA4.
"But maybe you all are up in arms because deep down, you know what I'm saying is true."
Are you trying to kill whatever little creditability you have? You don’t win arguments by acting like you know what people are thinking. You hardly gave any proof that what you say is truth. When you say things change and don’t stay the same forever, you make it sound like core gaming will die. If various genres in other types of media could survive and stick around today, than how will core gaming suddenly die? Just because motion controls is a new way of doing things doesn’t mean it’s the only way of doing things. You act like gaming was going to have a crash like back in the 1980s and that the Wii was the savior. Even Nintendo doesn’t force motion controls for all their games on the Wii. Core gaming will always have a market, even if that market is smaller than the non-gamer market.
To say otherwise is foolish.
I await a direct response; not another straw man argument.
Sony and Microsoft are in deep shit.
I think you're the one in this thread who's ignorant to even the basics of business. I find it difficult to believe it's even possible for you to believe what you're saying. I still think you're honestly just trying to troll - nobody could be as closed-minded and ignorant as you are appearing.
To say otherwise is foolish.
The only fallacy being perpetuated here is "hardcore" games can't exist in the marketplace anymore, and you are the one beating that drum.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA. You don't price cut when you are making money. And right now Sony and Microsoft have not been expanding gaming. Why do you think they are making their own motion controls?!
"Alright, and now is when we start ignoring you, everyone just move along this guy is nothing more than a troll or a close minded retard. Just ignore anything he says from here on out."
If you don't like what I have to say then just ignore me, I'm not forcing you to read what I write. I'm speaking from the viewpoint of someone that is disenfranchised with the direction that the "game industry" is going, and if you are not interested in my misgivings, which you should be because they are going to affect the future of the industry, then just put your fingers in your ears and continue to ignore me. Just don't forget about me when the current industry collapses in on itself.
So which is it? Are you am intelligent troll who wanted to stir up some shit on Dtoid for an afternoon, or are you an idiot fanboy with a moderate vocabulary and the ability to punctuate?
Not worth arguing with him. After this statement, he's obviously a troll.
First of all, no, Nintendo games have not retained their full retail value. They just haven't had price drops. Not the same thing. Nintendo knows they can get away with continuing to charge their original prices because their primary market is too stupid to know any better. Or, alternatively, they retain their value because people who want to build a good library can really only choose from a couple of blockbuster titles, which means they are willing to pay the same amount of money for three-year-old games as they would for new ones, whereas people who own the PS3 and Xbox 360 continually have great new games coming out to compete for gamers' money, which means older games have to lower their prices to be able to continue selling against the wave of newer titles.
Also, Microsoft and Sony are both making more money than Nintendo, because they aren't limited to video game consoles. Sony makes fine products in virtually every single category of consumer electronics, from phones to televisions to cameras, and Microsoft makes Windows, the most widely used operating system on the planet. So, yeah, I'd say they understand business quite well. And they're in no danger of going bankrupt.
In addition, core gaming is not on the decline. Casual gaming is on the rise. You don't see any core gamers quitting their hobbies. And casual gaming is not a "brand new frontier of gaming". It's a bunch of people who think of video games as toys instead of forms of expression or art, and who still label core gamers as nerds. The Wii wasn't successful just because it was innovative, it was successful because it wasn't nerdy. It played off of the general public's disdain for geek culture by distancing itself from what they thought of as a hobby for fat nerds.
It's really sad how often Wii fanboys, in defense of their console choice, point out Nintendo's financial success, as if that has anything at all to do with how good the Wii is as a gaming console. What is popular is not always good, and what is good is not always popular.