Nintendo’s foresight into pivoting from Nintendo GameCube to Wii is still relevant

[JB2448]

View: https://twitter.com/jb2448/status/1789696868517036045

2006年12月7日 日本外国特派員協会 社長スピーチ概要（英語原文）

Looking back at the history of the video game industry, it used to be the mission for any new game machines to integrate state-of-the-art semiconductor technologies, as processing abilities advanced, in an effort to create games with rich graphics.

However, the fresh stimulation that gorgeous graphics could give players had reached it's saturation point and graphics were no longer appealing to an expanded audience. With "Gamer Drift" already taking place, we concluded that it would not lead us to further market growth if we simply went down the same path the industry had been traveling for years by simply creating more gorgeous-looking games.

Click to shrink...

Given the success of Nintendo DS, Wii, and Nintendo Switch, does this view of consumer behavior still ring true? Are tech specs and hardware prowess secondary to innovation and a focus on gameplay?

What do you think, Era?

 

[Truno]

What do you think, Era?

Click to shrink...

"I want longer games, with better graphics made by people who are paid less to work more and I'm NOT KIDDING"

 

[Derbel McDillet]

The thing that has always irked me about this conversation is the suggestion that it's an either or thing and we pretend that devs haven't accomplished both for the sake of picking a side. Hardware sometimes allows you to innovate. Like, what are we doing?

The Nintendo DS to this day is my favorite system, but are we not retrofitting games to remove the features DS and Wii games had for the sake of putting them on modern consoles so that makes some of this narrative even more confusing.

 

[Undeniablybiased]

"Power" has always been secondary to other factors like price and game selection. You can see it through the history of the industry. It didn't always seem that way back in the day because tech was in a constant state of progress, and you didn't necessarily have to choose between one thing or the other. But customers have never avoided games or systems because they were less visually impressive than others. And more often than not, games that take the world by storm are more gameplay focused like Tetris.

 

[Vic20]

I loved my ps3 and ps4, they had some of my favorite titles ever.


I know I'm advocating for the death of the industry with my liking of those consoles.

 

[Renna Hazel]

Focus on gameplay will usually be the most important thing. Hardware can allow for unique and interesting evolutions of gameplay so that matters as well. I think Nintendo's focus on gameplay is what will always allow them to endure any turbulence in the industry.

 

[Kouriozan]

I believe it, when Sony is making patents about "portion of games that plays for you" it send a message indeed.

 

[skeezx]

I don't know if it was so much foresight but rather a ditto move. obviously a "Game Cube 2" was a non-starter, or would need to get lucky

the DS however really was thinking ahead, they didn't even particularly 'need' it for their portable market at that time

 

[giapel]

Ultimately the Wii was a successful failure. It did well for itself but didn't expand the market not even for Nintendo.
The idea that the barrier of entry (both in terms of price and controls) need to be lower in order to grow the market is correct but mobile got there faster and is catering for that market.
So console is back being mostly for the seasoned enthusiast crowd.

 

[Yuntu]

I do think the industry needs a course correction and certain decisions won't work out longtime. And yea Nintendo had a certain foresight and made the correct choice imo.

Ultimately the Wii was a successful failure. It did well for itself but didn't expand the market not even for Nintendo.
The idea that the barrier of entry (both in terms of price and controls) need to be lower in order to grow the market is correct but mobile got there faster and is catering for that market.
So console is back being mostly for the seasoned enthusiast crowd.

Click to shrink...

Huh? It was, by far, Nintendos biggest home console til the Switch. How did it not expand their market?

 

[HardRojo]

Plenty of people are playing on PC, multiplayer games and all that, so… not really? Gaming is a varied medium, that's what's great about it. Plenty of the games I've enjoyed on Switch weren't really all that unique from a hardware perspective. It's weird to grant Nintendo that lol, especially in this age when tendencies can be dictated by what goes viral and what doesn't.

 

[skeezx]

Ultimately the Wii was a successful failure. It did well for itself but didn't expand the market not even for Nintendo.
The idea that the barrier of entry (both in terms of price and controls) need to be lower in order to grow the market is correct but mobile got there faster and is catering for that market.
So console is back being mostly for the seasoned enthusiast crowd.

Click to shrink...

imo a better way to put it would be that it did expand the market but that portion got swallowed up by mobile (along with facebook games and such) shortly after

 

[Advance.Wars.Sgt.]

I mean, the transition to Wii from the GCN was virtually Nintendo just applying their handheld strategy to their home consoles, so in essence Nintendo had already long proved that chasing power wasn't all that important during the handheld wars of the 90s.

 

[neptunez]

I think the Nintendo DS was more pivotal.

Remember that Nintendo themselves had a little hesitation in calling it their next main portable. Yamauchi called initially called it the "Third Pillar" that would exist alongside the GBA's true successor.

The success they had with the DS and the DSLite, made it more easier for Nintendo to take a chance with the Wii. What did they have to lose?

 

[YayYay]

I think the Nintendo DS was more pivotal.

Remember that Nintendo themselves had a little hesitation in calling it their next main portable. Yamauchi called initially called it the "Third Pillar" that would exist alongside the GBA's true successor.

Click to shrink...

Yea it's wild to think that it came out and was popularizing touch-screen gaming a few years before the first iPhone released, and then yet another year before iPhone started having apps and mobile games truly arrived.

 

[NukeRunner]

imo a better way to put it would be that it did expand the market but that portion got swallowed up by mobile (along with facebook games and such) shortly after

Click to shrink...

Sure a certain portion did, but as we see with Switch it just takes a certain kind of game to bring them back. Ring Fit and Switch Sports didn't put up crazy numbers from a bunch of 'core gamers' that's for sure. Games like AC and MK8 also were huge hits with that base.

As usual, make the games, people follow eventually. Whenever you cast a huge net like that you have to expect some will get away, but they grew their possible market share that's for sure.

 

[KeyChainDude]

On one hand, these days I get lazy to play something new because even the main menus of these GaaS are pure crap. So much garbage cluttered in a bunch of layers and sub-menus that I get turned off instantly. It really is becoming a roadblock for casual people unless they really know what they are going for.

On the other side of the spectrum, mobile gaming brought "acessibility" to a level no other console/portable ever could (when they don't suffer from the exact same problem above), but they are sometimes too simplistic and can't keep interest for long. Angry Bird and Jetpack Joyride were great for their time but I haven't found anything really groundbreaking that plays on a touchscreen for a while now (or maybe I'm simply out of touch).

 

[Risitas]

The most important thing is making very good games that people want to play

 

[Instro]

I feel like the level of foresight on Nintendo's part here is always kind of overstated tbh. In the sense that, if we consider how poor every surrounding and future decision was during that era, it's hard for me to see the brain trust as really forward thinking vs just taking a gamble because the business was in dire condition. Especially when one aspect of this amounts to cost cutting with a shiny veneer.

 

[Unicorn]

"I want longer games, with better graphics made by people who are paid less to work more and I'm NOT KIDDING"

Click to shrink...

Psychic damage.

 

[VoidShaman]

Nintendo's foresight from transitioning from the Wii to the Wii U is also relevant, I suppose.

 

[Jerm411]

I think the Nintendo DS was more pivotal.

Remember that Nintendo themselves had a little hesitation in calling it their next main portable. Yamauchi called initially called it the "Third Pillar" that would exist alongside the GBA's true successor.

The success they had with the DS and the DSLite, made it more easier for Nintendo to take a chance with the Wii. What did they have to lose?

Click to shrink...

Still think the Switch pivot is *the* one…

They were DOA after the Wii U….it could've went reallll bad and instead here we are. They were ahead of the curve with the Switch (esp. considering how the younger generation games now) and its paid big dividends and will continue to.

I'll always appreciate and respect them for not chasing the power buzzwords and just delivering a very compelling platform that gives you flexibility and is fun and an amazing 1st party suite of games.

Like they just get it…release good games that are fun to play, provide an ecosystem and platform that isn't overbearing or complicated, and let people enjoy themselves.

 

[Neiteio]

Nintendo's foresight from transitioning from the Wii to the Wii U is also relevant, I suppose.

Click to shrink...

Yep. Nintendo was so successful with Wii that they were able to easily survive the HD transition with WiiU and hit the ground running with Switch.

 

[VoidShaman]

Yep. Nintendo was so successful with Wii that they were able to easily survive the HD transition with WiiU and hit the ground running with Switch.

Click to shrink...

More like floundering.

 

[j7vikes]

I think it was brilliant and a sign that although they were still competing with Microsoft and Sony they were going to do it in a unique and less head to head way. It's largely been a huge success for them. Yes the Wii U was a towering failure but it's in the middle of two generations of absolute smash hits.

It's also (imo) allowed them to become a console maker that is bought a lot as a secondary console. How often do you hear someone say I have a PC and Nintendo. An Xbox and Nintendo. A PS5 and Nintendo.

While some own a series X and a PS5 these experiences are much more similar than owning a PS5 and a Switch. So I believe that gets Nintendo extra sales as well. Obviously the killer first party is the driver of all, but them being different has been huge.

 

[Neiteio]

More like floundering.

Click to shrink...

Even if you consider WiiU's four years "floundering," the point is that Nintendo's business practices allow them to experiment without endangering the company. Even at the end of the WiiU, they had enough cash in reserve to fail multiple times over and stay alive. And that's because they don't bet the farm on the arms race.

 

[Walnut]

I've been getting my Wii U setup again after Nintendo shut off the online services, and I've gotta say, I do not miss the Wii era at all. The Wiimote was a truly awful controller to actually play games on. It's so finicky with the distance you have to sit from your TV to read inputs, and the control scheme didn't really bring anything new to the table

The DS by contrast has some merit with the touchscreen and the dual screen, but I feel like most games didn't really do anything with it except displaying a map.

I think Nintendo could've looked into other ways to expand their reach without dipping into these awkward non-standard control schemes

ETA the Switch was absolutely brilliant and a culmination of all of those experiments so I think it was worth it in the end for what it's worth

 

[Advance.Wars.Sgt.]

Still think the Switch pivot is *the* one…

They were DOA after the Wii U….it could've went reallll bad and instead here we are. They were ahead of the curve with the Switch (esp. considering how the younger generation games now) and its paid big dividends and will continue to.

I'll always appreciate and respect them for not chasing the power buzzwords and just delivering a very compelling platform that gives you flexibility and is fun and an amazing 1st party suite of games.

Like they just get it…release good games that are fun to play, provide an ecosystem and platform that isn't overbearing or complicated, and let people enjoy themselves.

Click to shrink...

This type of analysis when juxtaposed with Nintendo's prowess as a handheld manufacturer will always be strange to me.

Yes, even with as much of a disappointment the 3DS was, it was still orders of magnitude a success to where it has never once made sense to characterize ALL of Nintendo as dire during that time. Y'all really need to get away from this conflation that the Wii U being a disaster meant that Nintendo as a whole had no audience to fall back on, or that Switch saved them from the brink of closing.

I will never understand this insistence to purposefully ignore the 3DS when it comes to Nintendo - the company MOST synonymous with handhelds.

 

[entremet]

Ultimately the Wii was a successful failure. It did well for itself but didn't expand the market not even for Nintendo.
The idea that the barrier of entry (both in terms of price and controls) need to be lower in order to grow the market is correct but mobile got there faster and is catering for that market.
So console is back being mostly for the seasoned enthusiast crowd.

Click to shrink...

They did expand the market. Was it sticky? Hard to tell. Many went to mobile after.

But back on Switch, it already outsold the Wii by 30M, not an easy feat, so maybe that did happen?

What about today, though? A good portion of the gaming audience just plays one game and that's it. Minecraft, Fortnight, and other Service games.

 

[qrac]

Iwata called it the blue ocean strategy.

 

[Siam Shade]

It's probably the company who knows best about the market and knows how to sell good games whitout breaking the wallet, which should be business 101 for the entire (western) industry.

 

[VoidShaman]

Even if you consider WiiU's four years "floundering," the point is that Nintendo's business practices allow them to experiment without endangering the company. Even at the end of the WiiU, they had enough cash in reserve to fail multiple times over and stay alive. And that's because they don't bet the farm on the arms race.

Click to shrink...

I don't know how having the lowest amount of consoles sold in their history, with the Wii's own popularity falling heavily at the half-way point, wasn't endangering the company. Trust, just as much as money, is an important currency, and they are very lucky people still had trust in them or wanted to trust them.

 

[louisacommie]

The switch, and switch 2 assuming the assumed specs are accurate, by the standards of handhelds at a reasonable price seem pretty top of the line for the year they released.
Which is counter to their handheld strategy prior to how long they just had the gameboy, before the gameboy color came out and then the GBA, the ds was reasonable for its price but they did not attempt to have a console that could have like downgraded gamecube sister games the way the psp was to the ps2.
Same with the 3ds to the Vita.

 

[neoak]

Given the success of PlayStation 2, Wii, Nintendo DS, and Nintendo Switch, does this view of consumer behavior still ring true? Are tech specs and hardware prowess secondary to innovation and a focus on gameplay?

What do you think, Era?

Click to shrink...

Why are you listing a non Nintendo platform?

PS2 was not a slouch, Sony went for tech specs on it.

 

[Hero]

I don't know how having the lowest amount of consoles sold in their history, with the Wii's own popularity falling heavily at the half-way point, wasn't endangering the company. Trust, just as much as money, is an important currency, and they are very lucky people still had trust in them or wanted to trust them.

Click to shrink...

Its simple because Nintendo has billions of dollars in cash on hand. They could have weathered Wii U years for a very long time.

 

[Neiteio]

I don't know how having the lowest amount of consoles sold in their history, with the Wii's own popularity falling heavily at the half-way point, wasn't endangering the company. Trust, just as much as money, is an important currency, and they are very lucky people still had trust in them or wanted to trust them.

Click to shrink...

They were still profitable even at the WiiU's worst. Currently, they are Japan's richest company with zero debt and a war chest to do the WiiU a hundred times over. Your concern is admirable, but I think Nintendo will be OK.

 

[LegendofLex]

I don't know how having the lowest amount of consoles sold in their history, with the Wii's own popularity falling heavily at the half-way point, wasn't endangering the company. Trust, just as much as money, is an important currency, and they are very lucky people still had trust in them or wanted to trust them.

Click to shrink...

Nintendo's total losses over the entire 3DS/Wii U era never exceeded any single year of profits from either the Wii or Switch eras.

They were in a weak position then, but never a "the company is in danger" position.

Also, Wii saw a fairly normal console curve - it's just that the numbers were larger because it rocketed so high early on, and then the software dried up starting in 2011 as they pivoted to 3DS and HD development.

 

[Mewzard]

It is wild how Nintendo went from one of their lowest points with the Gamecube to their highest point yet with the Wii to their lowest point with the WiiU to their highest point ever with the Switch.

Nintendo can really turn things around when they take chances.

 

[Justin Bailey]

The GameCube taught Nintendo that they needed to start swinging for the fences or they would whittle away as a niche console maker, since Sony and MS were beating them with their old strategy (Now you're playing with power!).

Now more folks are entering the handheld space so we'll see what happens with Switch 2. I think Nintendo could get away with one more generation making a Switch Successor, but my guess is they'll need to do something different after that since that space will get crowded.

 

[JB2448]

Why are you listing a non Nintendo platform?

PS2 was not a slouch, Sony went for tech specs on it.

Click to shrink...

It was the second weakest platform of its generation, save the Dreamcast.

 

[Spacejaws]

I mean, it waa great for the nanas but it really put me off Nintendo consoles. I pretty much was a Nintendo fan at the time and always got those consoles first but when I finally jumped into getting a 360 and a PS3 I couldn't believe what I had been missing and have nothing but regret for sticking with just the Wii for so long.

Been looking over metacritic top games for each console and Wii's is pretty dire. I do not have a great fondness for it at all.

 

[Hero]

Been looking over metacritic top games for each console and Wii's is pretty dire. I do not have a great fondness for it at all.

Click to shrink...

Do you play video games or do you just care about playing games that have a top metacritic score because this is such a weird statement to make.

 

[VoidShaman]

Its simple because Nintendo has billions of dollars in cash on hand. They could have weathered Wii U years for a very long time.

Click to shrink...

They could have. Not as certain the fans could have, but that is just my rambling.

They were still profitable even at the WiiU's worst. Currently, they are Japan's richest company with zero debt and a war chest to do the WiiU a hundred times over. Your concern is admirable, but I think Nintendo will be OK.

Click to shrink...

It is not concern bur more observation.

Nintendo's total losses over the entire 3DS/Wii U era never exceeded any single year of profits from either the Wii or Switch eras.

They were in a weak position then, but never a "the company is in danger" position.

Also, Wii saw a fairly normal console curve - it's just that the numbers were larger because it rocketed so high early on, and then the software dried up starting in 2011 as they pivoted to 3DS and HD development.

Click to shrink...

Good for them. But I can't agree that the Wii's curve can be said as normal.

 

[Spacejaws]

Do you play video games or do you just care about playing games that have a top metacritic score because this is such a weird statement to make.

Click to shrink...

Nah I was just curious because I've been playing a lot of old PS1 games I never knew about, following a youtube series about kinda obscure and forgotten games.

So I started looking at whats critically listed for a bunch of my old consoles and what I may have missed and been meaning to play. Kinda boring I suppose but I liked seeing stuff I might have only seen in a magazine, was interested in it and never picked it up or a cover I saw on a shelf. Metacritics just the easiest place I found to see that, each console has like 50 odd pages of games. Going down the wiki rabbit hole for some of those and learning the rise and fall of some of these 90s/00s devs.

So yea, the Wii one reaffirmed why it kinda dissapointment me back in the day. Still gonna play Conduit soon though.

 

[AmFreak]

They got constantly punched in the face and thus were forced to change their strategy. And this stuff sounds far better than "we got constantly punched in the face, so we had to try something different and to minimize our risk we resell you our current console with motion controls". They immediately contradicted themselves with their next consoles - 3DS and Wii U were a generation ahead of their predecessors. This does not solve any problem, it just delays it for ~1 generation. Besides that Wii U, Switch and even the Wii showed how wrong they were.

 

[Hero]

They could have. Not as certain the fans could have, but that is just my rambling.

Click to shrink...

Your statement was that they were endangering the company which is completely different than gaining or losing consumer trust. After the first year they released a lot of high quality titles for the Wii U while also still supporting the 3DS with similarly hit titles so I don't see where you're getting this notion from. If you need to see what erosion of consumer trust looks like then I would direct you to any of the numerous Xbox closing down studios threads.

 

[behOemoth]

The Wii hit the peripheral games with full force, which were also huge on the PlayStation 2 with Singstar, Eyetoy, Rockband. I think Iwata was right to call them "nongamers" or something like that. But imo it was very clear that they lost the will to produce high end "enthusiast" games, which they started again with the WiiU and very slowly achieved with the Switch.

 

[Advance.Wars.Sgt.]

The GameCube taught Nintendo that they needed to start swinging for the fences or they would whittle away as a niche console maker, since Sony and MS were beating them with their old strategy (Now you're playing with power!).

Now more folks are entering the handheld space so we'll see what happens with Switch 2. I think Nintendo could get away with one more generation making a Switch Successor, but my guess is they'll need to do something different after that since that space will get crowded.

Click to shrink...

Honestly, at this point we should probably stop overestimating the impact of handheld newcomers.

The only thing that came close to undermining Nintendo's market position was mobile - and in some respects you can say they did. But the fact Nintendo has not only survived, but have thrived selling a dedicated gaming portable hybrid in a post-mobile world is a testament to their brand strength.

In short: nothing has really changed since the 80s/90s; Nintendo is still top dog in the handheld/portable space and any competitor looking to sell a mass market equivalent has a tall task to follow. In fact, you can say the climate for other portable competitors is probably worse than back then because mobile has essentially taken away the technological superiority, convenience, and multimedia functionality selling points that would be market differentiators.

 

[404LinkNotFound]

The GameCube taught Nintendo that they needed to start swinging for the fences or they would whittle away as a niche console maker, since Sony and MS were beating them with their old strategy (Now you're playing with power!).

Now more folks are entering the handheld space so we'll see what happens with Switch 2. I think Nintendo could get away with one more generation making a Switch Successor, but my guess is they'll need to do something different after that since that space will get crowded.

Click to shrink...

I think your really overestimating the impact of pc handhelds. Era isnt a very good barometer for stuff like the steam deck cuz it has a way higher rate of ownership here than anywhere else irl

 

[Uncle Squingis]

It depends on many factors. For example, it has to be the right kind of innovation. Wii U was innovative after all. Meanwhile over at Sony, innovation doesn't seem to matter because they've got excellent third party relations.