

Nintendo's pressure to make iOS games - iamclovin
http://www.marco.org/2011/08/14/nintendo-investors-want-iphone-ports

======
achompas
I'm shocked to see Marco criticize what is essentially the "Apple" of the home
gaming market. Both Nintendo and Apple have changed their industries on three
separate occasions:

>> Nintendo|Apple brought home gaming|computing to the masses with the
NES|Macintosh.

>> Nintendo|Apple revolutionized mobile gaming|phones with the Game
Boy|iPhone.

>> Okay I run out of steam here but Nintendo put out the Wii which halted the
home console race-to-the-bottom, while Apple changed portable music with the
iPod.

The above hints at how Nintendo and Apple play similar games. They're very
skilled at disrupting industries, they create products that appeal to
consumers' emotions (whether by nostalgia or design aesthetic), and they
_don't make dumb business decisions._

I'm not saying Nintendo is fine. It's clear that Nintendo faces stiff
competition, but that's true of any consumer electronics company. What,
Nintendo _only_ sold 4.3 million 3DSes in its first five months? That's not
much worse than the 5.27 million DSes they sold six months after launch
[0]...or the 4 million iPhones 2Gs Apple sold 6 months after a price cut. [1]

Nintendo is a great company. The 3DS price drop shows they're considering
their future place in consumer electronics. Marco's comments on their
situation aren't novel or insightful, so this is kinda-sorta a fluff article
(one of several we've seen recently from him and Gruber).

[0] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_DS_sales>

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IPhone_sales_per_quarter_s...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IPhone_sales_per_quarter_simple.svg#Data_and_references)

~~~
ugh
I’m really not sure why he shouldn’t criticize Nintendo because you think
there are similarities to Apple – similarities that are ancient by now. That
just doesn’t make sense on any level.

~~~
achompas
_similarities that are ancient by now_

The Wii came out in 2006, the iPhone was released in 2007. Both were created
with a simple user interface and slick design, and both changed their
respective industries.

Are their similarities really so ancient?

~~~
ugh
You were mostly talking about the NES and the Gameboy.

~~~
achompas
I mentioned each in one line, and decided to not discuss the merits of the DS
(which was amazing for its time in 2004).

Ultimately, though, I only talk about consoles to illustrate how Nintendo and
Apple develop their products in similar ways.

------
mathgladiator
I was thinking about nintendo the other day. It boiled down to this: If they
produce a new original zelda game on a new console, then I'd pay $300 for it.
They have me by the nostalgia balls so to speak.

If they made a Zelda game for iOS for $9.99, then I'd buy it.

Why would they sell something for $9.99 when they could sell it for $300?

What about secondary markets. Not everyone has an iPhone. Some kids are just
getting game boy advances. It's going to take a while for Nintendo's brand to
die off, and they have time to wow us with great games.

Fools like me will give them money for a chance to reconnect with my
childhood.

~~~
axian
Simple answer: Scale.

There are maybe 1000 people like you. About 80 million potential customers at
the 9.99 price point.

~~~
cageface
It remains to be seen if the app store model can support games with the kind
of production costs a game like Zelda incurs. So far it looks a lot more like
flash games for $1.

~~~
hboon
They could start with porting their existing games like Square Enix and others
did. But the question is whether they want their titles to remain exclusive.

I think if they want to remain a giant, they'd continue with what they do and
strive for a next breakthrough. Whether they will succeed is another question.

If they give up the exclusivity of their own titles and move on to software-
only like Sega (or maybe a combination of their own hardware platform +
publishing to other platforms), they might still be great in the industry, but
there'd be many alongside them.

~~~
ldng
Following the Sega path would not be a good idea IMHO. They would be like you
said one game editor among many, wouldn't have control over the platform and
loose intimate knowledge of the system games runs on.

And last but not least, they'd loose media coverage and brand power. There are
only three big console brand, they get free media coverage when they sneeze
while Sega happened to be talk about from time to time, when someone remember
they still exists.

Sega had no choice, it reconverting or die. Nintendo don't have to (yet) and I
hope they won't. IMHO, it's just typical handwaiving of greedy short-sighted
investor that want a higher ROI, now, regardless of what's better for the
company. Yeah the mobile game pie is larger then the console one but would the
marketshare achievable by Nintendo's game be bigger than on an exclusive
console ?

------
GavinB
I have a hard time believing that casual games are "the future" and that high
end gaming isn't going to continue being a major force.

We're really going to live in a future with incredible technology and not have
amazing total-immersion environments?

Casual games are reaching an untapped audience via iOS and facebook, but there
are hundreds of millions of people who want the most advanced games that are
available. Are we really going to be too lazy to put down the ipad and walk
down the hall to the holodeck?

~~~
bluedanieru
I think it's that casual gaming is a rapidly growing niche and the gold rush
is still on. So it gets all the press and the inevitable conclusion that there
must be something that it will _replace_ , which is true in the sense that
people have a finite amount of time to do things, but how many gamers do you
know who are playing little other than Angry Birds or whatever the hell else
these days?

Portable gaming might be a different bag though. Those are largely regarded as
time-wasters anyway, and some of the titles you see on Wii-Ware and DSi are
also available on App Store and Android Market (e.g. And Yet It Moves), so
clearly someone sees an intersection there. I regard portable gaming consoles
as mainly for kids personally, and I don't think there is _direct_ competition
but time will tell.

~~~
fiblye
>I regard portable gaming consoles as mainly for kids personally

I strongly disagree. Consoles these days are mainly about pushing polygons and
being a cinematic experience. Handheld games (as in DS and PSP) usually allow
developers to be a bit more creative while still offering an experience
similar to what we've come to expect on console and PC games: hours of content
with things like plot and heaps of content to motivate us to keep playing.

When you buy an iOS game, you can expect maybe 20 levels at 3 minutes each or
100 levels at 30 seconds each. There's no real reason to complete these games,
and you'll probably only beat them because you have nothing better to do. DS
and PSP games are probably best described as "toilet games". That is, they're
for when you have loads of time to waste and there's no rush to finish up. You
_want_ to keep playing these games, whereas iOS games are for when you want
whatever you're waiting for to start.

If anything, the indie game market on PC is comparable to the current handheld
market. They're full games that aren't meant to dethrone the big budget games,
but they're instead a good way to tide you over until the next big release,
with maybe a few spectacular titles in between. iOS and Android games are more
like flash games, and while they're extremely popular today, I expect the
market to decline without fully collapsing. People will always want to play
these little time-wasters, but they'll stick with what's familiar and not
actively search for anything new.

~~~
bluedanieru
I suspect you're right about the basic nature of iOS and Android, but only
half-right about portable consoles at least historically. Portable consoles
have also filled the 'nothing better to do' niche in the past (Tetris was
hugely successful on Gameboy) and this is where I expect they'll face stiff
competition from iOS and Android.

We'll just see less crap on portable consoles, and the players that put out
quality titles won't be affected a great deal.

------
jamesbkel
I certainly agree that the nature of games/gaming devices (especially
portables) is changing, but I question whether it behooves Nintendo to be a
follower.

I'm constantly annoyed by the fact that I can't use my Wii as a networked
media interface to my TV and that it doesn't support HD. But I've never
regretted purchasing the Wii, since there are so many games that are just
plain fun, many with nearly unlimited replay ability (Wii Sports:Golf).

Much like Apple, Nintendo has a legacy of software-hardware tie-in. It's
worked well and I can't see why they would easily cede the hardware aspect to
Apple.

~~~
alanfalcon
>Much like Apple, Nintendo has a legacy of software-hardware tie-in.

This is the most important point in a nutshell. Shigeru Miyamoto can decide
that the next Mario game should have a mechanic that allows little sisters to
point a wand at the screen and collect star bits while the older brother does
the "hard" stuff, and Nintendo can create the hardware to bring this to life.
(I'm not saying that's the history of the Wii, just that it's Nintendo's
competitive advantage.)

------
super-serial
Nintendo needs to make it as easy to make and sell games on their hardware as
it is for developers to make cell phone apps.

Without that, their small exclusive library won't be able to compete with an
army of developers making all types of games on iOS and Android. Developers
not only make games, but they promote a platform by showing their friends
their games/apps, and doing marketing to get sales. Anything that goes viral
is great advertisement not only for the app/game, but also for the platform.

Whoever controls the developers WINS. I thought Steve Ballmer also knew that,
but his actions(or lack of action in Mobile) speak louder than repetitive
words... <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMU0tzLwhbE>

------
foobarbazetc
This would be _the stupidest thing_ Nintendo could do. Ever.

There's a market for phones, and there's a market for consoles and handheld
games consoles. The games on each platform are also completely different -- as
they should be. Casual gaming is great, but the market for real games is also
great.

Not everything is a zero sum game.

~~~
axian
Same was said about Sega. Controlling hardware consoles and nurturing brand
new ecosystems is no longer a winning proposition in today's market. There's
too much competition and title lifespans are shorter. By the time Nintendo
releases a new gaming console it's already obsolete. They need to ship games,
not cling to outdated models.

~~~
sandGorgon
this is a solved problem - the PCIe interconnect for desktop graphics and MxM
for laptop graphics give an extremely tested and viable way to upgrade
graphics cards. Hell, even the latest Sony Vaio Z comes with an external
graphics card ([http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/sony-vaio-z-with-external-
graph...](http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/sony-vaio-z-with-external-graphics-
hits-the-us-14-07-2011/))

It is completely viable to create an upgradable platform that does not
obsolete itself by the time it is released - the problem is not technology
itself, it is the console manufacturer management notion that it is a good
idea to have planned obsoletion every 3 years or so to get people to buy new
hardware.

Give me an upgradeable PS3 with an SSD and Steam (rather than the 10 times
slower Bluray) - and tell me that it wont kill desktop gaming.

Nintendo, MS and Sony _will_ be killed by mobile gaming - the latest Kal El
pre-production silicon has a 12-core GPU and a 4-core CPU
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBvaDtshLY8&feature=playe...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBvaDtshLY8&feature=player_embedded#at=36)

Just a matter of time before Crysis 2 works on your big screen TV through mini
HDMI - what remains to be figured out are the controllers

~~~
illumin8
It won't kill desktop gaming. Upgradeable consoles have been tried before and
they don't work. When only a percentage of your customers upgrade you just
fragmented your market. Can you imagine how difficult it would be to buy PS3
games if you had to check the box to see which of 3 different graphics cards
were supported?

~~~
sandGorgon
this is _accepted_ practice. All games come with an indication of minimum
system recommendations ("nvidia 9800 or greater").

Customers already accept that they cannot play certain games (Crysis?) if
their system is not upto mark. Windows 7 has the notion of a graphics "score"
as well to figure out whether to turn on Aero.

The only reason why this is not done is forced obsoletion - the customer
behavior has existed for a decade or more.

------
msg
There's so much cool hardware on the way to sense-o-matic virtual reality and
the holodeck that I don't think Nintendo has anything to worry about. They are
gaining experience even from the relative failures (still early to call it for
3DS in my opinion) that put it generations ahead of the competition.

Would you advise Apple to drop everything and make software now that the
market is mature? Heck no, you would want to see what they're doing to create
the next hardware market out of thin air.

Nintendo is similarly specialized and it would be a big mistake to bet the
company outside its core competency. The hybrid HD/tablet experience they have
for the next generation will probably win again, and sell tons of hardware.

------
jsz0
Nintendo should hedge their bets and do both for now. As I see it there are 3
possible outcomes:

1) Dedicated gaming hardware/software sales decline

2) Dedicated gaming hardware/software sales remain flat

3) Dedicated gaming hardware/software sales increase

#3 is very unlikely. Most people just don't want to charge and carry around
multiple devices if they don't absolutely have to. For those who do chances
are they might also have a SmartPhone. Sell them Mario for $39.99 and $9.99 on
iOS. They'll buy it. Don't do straight ports. Make unique touch-centric iOS
games.

#2 isn't good enough. Nintendo just launched a new platform. Sales should be
increasing (dramatically) not staying flat. Developers probably aren't going
to flock to a fledgling platform just because it has Nintendo's name on it.
(GameCube, N64)

#1 is the most likely and Nintendo doesn't have a SmartPhone. They wouldn't
have released the 3DS if they had one in the pipeline. They're probably
several years away and no matter what they do it will likely not be able to
compete with Apple, Samsung, HTC, etc so it will have a small installed base.
The same problem the PSP phone has today. They also have an OS problem. They
would have to use Android, probably heavily customized, and launch their own
Android market app because you can't put Google's Android Market on a device
targeted at kids. Then what? It's not a great portable gaming machine and it's
not a great SmartPhone. Doomed to fail.

Doesn't hurt that Apple would probably throw a small fortune at Nintendo to
develop exclusively for iOS. Apple and Nintendo share a lot of the same
values. Seems like a perfect fit to me.

------
Tichy
Hm, interesting. Perhaps Nintendo could come up with something completely new.
I mean, I don't see them creating games for phones - they are not under
pressure to create a classical smartphone, so they can go completely crazy
with their devices.

That said, if I remember correctly they were already deep in trouble before
the Wii, and the Wii was mostly luck. Some engineer came up with the Wii
Remote and they changed everything in the last second.

~~~
primigenus
"Some engineer came up with the Wii Remote and they changed everything in the
last second."

Where do you get that from? That's not what happened at all. The Wii was a
result of a coordinated effort to redefine the user interface and had been in
planning stages for years. They spent months refining and iterating on how
they wanted their control to work, but the vision of motion control and a
pointer were a fundamental part of the Revolution project.

The Wii was certainly luck to some extent, but it was also a calculated move
based on a belief that there was a new way to excite ("delight" as Iwata calls
it) players in motion/pointer controls and that they should follow that path,
despite the competition going with HD graphics over controller innovation.

~~~
Tichy
Too lazy to Google, it is just what I remember from reading the news back
then. Maybe they really refined it for months, but the world had been waiting
for news from Nintendo for years?

------
systems
I personally believe Nintendo should make a larger portable game station or
tablet, that can also play movies and cartoons

The 3 years old kids of my sister, play puzzle games and watch toons My sister
uses here iPad to browse the net and watch movies

The iPad is an entertainment device (Games + Movies + Music + Internet)
Nintendo need to make an equivalent competitor that is also less fragile, I
would definitely buy one

~~~
illumin8
How would you make an iPad less fragile? It's already a pretty durable hunk of
metal. The only thing I think you could do would be to wrap it in rubberized
plastic like a toughbook, but then you'd end up with a 2" thick brick of
rubber that nobody would want to buy.

~~~
systems
Well, after I wrote my message above, I remembered the new nintendo console,
so i looked it up online and watched its demo videos on youtube

I now think the Wii U can be what I meant if they can make the portable screen
control play movie and browse the net, it will be exactly what I had in my
mind

And it does look a lot less fragile than in iPad, its a controller built for
abuse :)

The Wii U can really be the console that take me back to hardcore gaming

------
myspy
Almost all of you forget what the costumers want. That is to play games on the
device they carry around the whole day.

A handheld is as good as a big console. The phone in your pocket is the
market.

And quality and fun matters on an iPhone or Droid too. Nintendo could help
here with bringing games to the biggest market.

They won't kill themselves. It's either some cool ports for 10$ to the iPhone
or selling less games to the DS because of the high prices and pirate modules.
They can make new stuff for the DS and bring classics to the App Store or do
special versions for it.

Touch controls are no problem. Only because some hardcore gamers have a
problem with it doesn't mean to make no games with touch controls.

Zenonia shows how a Zelda game would be like.

I got nothing from Nintendo since the SNES because they suck so hard compared
to the rest. They lack creating beautiful devices, capable of creating
beautiful worlds.

Nintendo games always look like so much behind and that took the fun out for
me. My wife has a DS and the Zelda games lack gameplay and convincing worlds.
It's sad. So much potential but not used.

Nevertheless I see great potential when they would do something for the other
side. It could help them to improve their own hardware.

------
sliverstorm
There is a place for handheld game consoles. Hopefully people won't abandon
them because lower-quality phone games are cheaper, but in short- there's not
a single game I've ever played on a handheld that would NOT be MISERABLE on a
phone, touch-screen or no.

~~~
mathgladiator
Case in point, look at the recent final fantasy ports (I, II, Tactics). The
controls are terrible. Absolutely terrible. I nerd raged and wrote some code
to verify that multi-touch state machines are not that hard.

