Nintendo games and Project Cafe

[comradesnarky]

problem is: nintendo has always been a company that has played it as safe as they could hardware wise & they always charged monsterfees for their shit exept for the wii (don't get me wrong, I like nintendo & have owned ever console exept the nes since my parents gave me an msys back in the day). however; if it weren't for sega bringing out the megadrive, we'd all prolly still be playing our nes consoles, as they're lazy when it comes to bringing new shit out, (although they should, coz its mostly all good; not as innovative as sega used to be, but thats just an opinion off course) they always seem to wait for the competition & then bring something out a little later thats a teeny weeny bit stronger (this is prolly why they're still in business & sega isn't )

so I'm guessing why would they take that risk now? ok, the Wee sold like hot cakes & they made tons off it, so I guess if they bring something out first & the competition brings their teeny weeny better thingy out a little bit longer nintendo will still be able to take the beating, but still...why?? haven't they learned enough from the(ir own) past? videogame business is a risky one, to say the least...

I think there's probably a multitude of reasons why they're doing this.

-They've completely lost relevance with the "core" gaming crowd. As much as I hate that core term, there's truth to it. Nintendo skewed way too far to the casual crowd and it has really hurt their reputation. Personally, I think this is why the 3DS launched at such a high price. I'm sure it had very high R&D costs, but I doubt the actual components amount to a $250 price tag. They want their consoles and handhelds to carry a prestige to them for the hardcore crowd, and I think that $350-$400 for the new console will be in line with that. If you price something too low, its image becomes cheapened. It's marketing 101.

-The Wii is no longer sustainable. It still sells plenty, but I'd imagine the attach rate is still hovering slightly above 0. Last time I read the attach rate was about half a game for every console. It's pretty evident that no one wants to make games for the system if they're not selling. Everyone who's buying the system is fine with Wii Sports and nothing else.

-They can have a huge advantage here. The PS3 and 360 are by no means struggling. The market is growing stale, though. Developers want new hardware (Yves Guillemot said a few weeks ago that they felt limited by the hardware) and I think that gamers do too. While I'm entertained enough with my 360 and Wii, they're old. I think Nintendo knows there's a general sense of "when are we going to move on?" and they want to capitalize on it. Its been almost 6 years since this generation kicked off. Technology has changed and it's time to get that into the market. This touch screen controller idea also gives them a big in with the hardcore crowd. I think on a handheld it becomes a gimmick, but as I said in the first post, it becomes a dream on a console controller for inventory reasons among other things.

It's a risk Nintendo hasn't made before, but I don't think they can drag the Wii's carcass around for a few more years while Sony and Microsoft ready their consoles. I think they'll have a healthy line up of Wii games for this year (maybe The Last Story, PLEASE!), and then that'll be that pretty rapidly. I don't think it's going to have any sustained life like the PS2 did.

[MrSega]

problem is: nintendo has always been a company that has played it as safe as they could hardware wise & they always charged monsterfees for their shit exept for the wii (don't get me wrong, I like nintendo & have owned ever console exept the nes since my parents gave me an msys back in the day). however; if it weren't for sega bringing out the megadrive, we'd all prolly still be playing our nes consoles, as they're lazy when it comes to bringing new shit out, (although they should, coz its mostly all good; not as innovative as sega used to be, but thats just an opinion off course) they always seem to wait for the competition & then bring something out a little later thats a teeny weeny bit stronger (this is prolly why they're still in business & sega isn't )

so I'm guessing why would they take that risk now? ok, the Wee sold like hot cakes & they made tons off it, so I guess if they bring something out first & the competition brings their teeny weeny better thingy out a little bit longer nintendo will still be able to take the beating, but still...why?? haven't they learned enough from the(ir own) past? videogame business is a risky one, to say the least...

These aren't good signs. Nintendo preparing to launch a 384-bit mid range system for $350? I certainly WONT be buying no mid range machine for $350. Also Nintendo usually doesn't usaully launch a console until 2 years after the project is annouced Ultra 64 was annnouced in 1994 it launched in '96, Dolphin was annouced in 1999, Gamecube launched in '01, Revolution was annouced 2004 Wii launched in '06, only a year in a half this time?Not good.

Also, AMD GPU would mean the cost of developing games would still stay the same henceforth games will still cost $60-70. No thanks.

I seriously hope SEGA isn't listed as one of the publishers for this thing. It would be a waste of investment for them to.

Sorry, but my hopes for CAFE just diminised.

[stu]

I think there's probably a multitude of reasons why they're doing this.

-They've completely lost relevance with the "core" gaming crowd. As much as I hate that core term, there's truth to it. Nintendo skewed way too far to the casual crowd and it has really hurt their reputation. Personally, I think this is why the 3DS launched at such a high price. I'm sure it had very high R&D costs, but I doubt the actual components amount to a $250 price tag. They want their consoles and handhelds to carry a prestige to them for the hardcore crowd, and I think that $350-$400 for the new console will be in line with that. If you price something too low, its image becomes cheapened. It's marketing 101.

-The Wii is no longer sustainable. It still sells plenty, but I'd imagine the attach rate is still hovering slightly above 0. Last time I read the attach rate was about half a game for every console. It's pretty evident that no one wants to make games for the system if they're not selling. Everyone who's buying the system is fine with Wii Sports and nothing else.

-They can have a huge advantage here. The PS3 and 360 are by no means struggling. The market is growing stale, though. Developers want new hardware (Yves Guillemot said a few weeks ago that they felt limited by the hardware) and I think that gamers do too. While I'm entertained enough with my 360 and Wii, they're old. I think Nintendo knows there's a general sense of "when are we going to move on?" and they want to capitalize on it. Its been almost 6 years since this generation kicked off. Technology has changed and it's time to get that into the market. This touch screen controller idea also gives them a big in with the hardcore crowd. I think on a handheld it becomes a gimmick, but as I said in the first post, it becomes a dream on a console controller for inventory reasons among other things.

It's a risk Nintendo hasn't made before, but I don't think they can drag the Wii's carcass around for a few more years while Sony and Microsoft ready their consoles. I think they'll have a healthy line up of Wii games for this year (maybe The Last Story, PLEASE!), and then that'll be that pretty rapidly. I don't think it's going to have any sustained life like the PS2 did.

I'd agree that the Wii is no longer sustainable, even Nintendo themselves are admitting that they and other developers can no longer "suprise customers) with original games and novel ways of using the Wii remote. Satoru Iwata, Nintendo's CEO has even gone on record saying as much.
(source: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011- ... oject-cafe)
As for life after Cafe is launched, I'd expect the Wii to quietly fade away once the new machine is released, since the release of the Nintendo 64, Nintendo has tended to kill off support for the older systems once they are replaced (eg the Nintendo 64 was dropped once the Gamecube was released, the Gamecube similarly was dropped once the Wii was released) this may be because these 2 systems weren't as popular as Nintendo's previous systems, but since the Cafe is rumored to be compatible with the Wii, it would make sense to drop the older system in order to concentrate on the new one.

[comradesnarky]

These aren't good signs. Nintendo preparing to launch a 384-bit mid range system for $350? I certainly WONT be buying no mid range machine for $350. Also Nintendo usually doesn't usaully launch a console until 2 years after the project is annouced Ultra 64 was annnouced in 1994 it launched in '96, Dolphin was annouced in 1999, Gamecube launched in '01, Revolution was annouced 2004 Wii launched in '06, only a year in a half this time?Not good.

Also, AMD GPU would mean the cost of developing games would still stay the same henceforth games will still cost $60-70. No thanks.

I seriously hope SEGA isn't listed as one of the publishers for this thing. It would be a waste of investment for them to.

Sorry, but my hopes for CAFE just diminised.

Nintendo seems to have far longer internal development cycles than they make publicly known if some of their statements are to be believed. I think there was an "Ask Iwata" a while ago where he said that Wii concepts and development had began soon after the Gamecube had launched. They seem to be changing their business practices lately.

The AMD GPU really isn't the culprit of high game pricing, also. It's simply the fact that for high definition games you have to use far larger textures which take more time to make. Think of it sort of like animation. If you want to draw Family Guy, it's going to take you a few minutes. If you want to draw something highly detailed (I can't think of a good reference cartoon), then it's going to take you a few hours.

[MrSega]

These aren't good signs. Nintendo preparing to launch a 384-bit mid range system for $350? I certainly WONT be buying no mid range machine for $350. Also Nintendo usually doesn't usaully launch a console until 2 years after the project is annouced Ultra 64 was annnouced in 1994 it launched in '96, Dolphin was annouced in 1999, Gamecube launched in '01, Revolution was annouced 2004 Wii launched in '06, only a year in a half this time?Not good.

Also, AMD GPU would mean the cost of developing games would still stay the same henceforth games will still cost $60-70. No thanks.

I seriously hope SEGA isn't listed as one of the publishers for this thing. It would be a waste of investment for them to.

Sorry, but my hopes for CAFE just diminised.

Nintendo seems to have far longer internal development cycles than they make publicly known if some of their statements are to be believed. I think there was an "Ask Iwata" a while ago where he said that Wii concepts and development had began soon after the Gamecube had launched. They seem to be changing their business practices lately.

The AMD GPU really isn't the culprit of high game pricing, also. It's simply the fact that for high definition games you have to use far larger textures which take more time to make. Think of it sort of like animation. If you want to draw Family Guy, it's going to take you a few minutes. If you want to draw something highly detailed (I can't think of a good reference cartoon), then it's going to take you a few hours.

Actually, Nintendo usaully starts seeking out a chipset and concept 3 years ahead of its launch. 2 years in advance they start publicly talking about the project, The Wii concept probably started off in '02 as a GC assessory, but Nintendo probably decided in '04 to just take GC and just reintroduce it with the concept.

[stu]

Actually, Nintendo usaully starts seeking out a chipset and concept 3 years ahead of its launch. 2 years in advance they start publicly talking about the project, The Wii concept probably started off in '02 as a GC assessory, but Nintendo probably decided in '04 to just take GC and just reintroduce it with the concept.

From what I have read on the subject it would seem that comrade is correct, Nintendo normally starts the development of their next system once they have released a system. I really don't really think that the slightly shorter period of time between the revealing of the system to the eventual release will really have any negative impact on how successful it is. I think it mainly is to do with the fact that Nintendo realizes that the Wii is looking rather out of date and that an update is needed sooner than later.

The news that Sony and Microsoft are delaying the launches of the PS4 and next Xbox no doubt pleased Nintendo as well since it will give them time to build up an established user base. Nintendo tends to operate very much independently of what Microsoft and Sony do. The standard life span of a Nintendo console seems to be around the 5 year mark, unlike Microsoft and Sony who try to stretch that out a bit.

[Hiryosuke]

Here's a question...since this new console is supposedly using blu-ray does that mean they'll be puttin money in sony's pocket for every disc sold?

[comradesnarky]

Here's a question...since this new console is supposedly using blu-ray does that mean they'll be puttin money in sony's pocket for every disc sold?

I looked into this since it seems to be a favorite topic on this board for some reason.

The licensing fee is split three ways: Panasonic, Sony and Phillips.

As of 2010:

The license fee on each BD disc is 4 cents.

The license fee on each player is $4.50.

This has surely gone down since Blu-Ray has only grown even larger, and I'm sure that Nintendo could pay even less using BD if they had a player that didn't play back movies.

They could also probably avoid the fee by using a unique format that is stored on a BD disc and uses the blue laser technology like they did with the Wii's discs.

So to answer your question, they'll give Sony a miniscule amount of money.

[MrSega]

Actually, Nintendo usaully starts seeking out a chipset and concept 3 years ahead of its launch. 2 years in advance they start publicly talking about the project, The Wii concept probably started off in '02 as a GC assessory, but Nintendo probably decided in '04 to just take GC and just reintroduce it with the concept.

From what I have read on the subject it would seem that comrade is correct, Nintendo normally starts the development of their next system once they have released a system. I really don't really think that the slightly shorter period of time between the revealing of the system to the eventual release will really have any negative impact on how successful it is. I think it mainly is to do with the fact that Nintendo realizes that the Wii is looking rather out of date and that an update is needed sooner than later.

The news that Sony and Microsoft are delaying the launches of the PS4 and next Xbox no doubt pleased Nintendo as well since it will give them time to build up an established user base. Nintendo tends to operate very much independently of what Microsoft and Sony do. The standard life span of a Nintendo console seems to be around the 5 year mark, unlike Microsoft and Sony who try to stretch that out a bit.

The concept for Ultra 64 started in 1994. Super Famicom's development was in 1988. There's little evidence that Nintendo concepts most of its consoles more than 3 years before.

Now thier handhelds take much longer. 3DS has been in development since 2007. Nintendo had concepted GBA as early as 1995 when Yokoi wanted to launch a SNES based handheld instead of Virtual Boy. The old Game Boy's design dates back to the mid 1980s around 1985.

[stu]

The concept for Ultra 64 started in 1994. Super Famicom's development was in 1988. There's little evidence that Nintendo concepts most of its consoles more than 3 years before.

Now thier handhelds take much longer. 3DS has been in development since 2007. Nintendo had concepted GBA as early as 1995 when Yokoi wanted to launch a SNES based handheld instead of Virtual Boy. The old Game Boy's design dates back to the mid 1980s around 1985.

The Nintendo64 was first announced under the "Project Reality" name in October 1993 and work had already been started in ernest in August of 1993. The Chipset itself had already been developed and had originally been offered to Sega, however due to some early issues with the hardware and some undefined deficiencies Sega turned the chipset down.

As for the amount of time Nintendo works on a hardware project I would imagine it varies depending on the project, also something else to consider is that even Nintendo themselves have said that a lot of their hardware projects are very secretive, in fact some of them are never really spoken of until a representative of Nintendo refers to them.
Therefore this "3 year development period" you are referring to may just be from when the gaming press start to receive information on it in the form of rumors and informed speculation, overall though I really don't see why a shortened gap between the unveiling and the releease would matter.
I'm sure the top dev teams have already received their dev kits and since games on the PS3 and Xbox360 are supposedly quite easy to port over to Cafe I doubt there will be any shortage of games at launch.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see.