Nintendo_former_headquarter_plate_KyotoFollowing Nintendo's plans, or lack of plans, or speculated plans, seems to have the games media on edge for the better part of the last month (or more). It all started with them talking about "experimenting" with smartphones then announcing some pretty dismal financial news which got into some pretty nebulous territory in regards to Nintendo looking to leverage the new ways people are playing games on their smartphones to bring them back to the Nintendo hardware ecosystem.

Then, some firmer news came out of Big N that they were thinking of releasing "mini games" as part of their tablet and smartphone strategy. It made sense, as giving folks a taste of the latest and greatest Nintendo games on the device they've already got in their pocket could be a pretty good way to get them to go grab the full version of the game on the 3DS, or Wii U, or whatever.

Well, Engadget got a statement from Nintendo, finally putting the whole thing to rest:

"Nikkei's article contains information previously stated by Mr Iwata during past press conferences, including statements which relate to Nintendo's willingness to make use of smart devices to promote our products.

However during such past announcements Mr Iwata has also stated that Nintendo's intention is not to make Nintendo software available on smart devices and as such, we can confirm that there are no plans to offer minigames on smartphone devices."

smbJust when this story couldn't get any weirder, Nintendo totally shuts down the potential of mini games on smartphones and tablets. What they are going to release is still up for debate, as if it's not going to be anything that resembles a game, that still leaves the potential open for PokeDex-style companion apps, which we've often speculated on our podcast.

With or without minigames, it doesn't change the fact that Nintendo isn't doing so great these days. They're going to have to do something, and I'm not sure there's a single person on the internet who doesn't have a strong opinion on what Nintendo should be doing right now.

[via MacRumors]

  • BlueFalcN

    That's disappointing.....

    • cofunguy

      Then they wonder why their sales are down. Since it definitely appears that at the top of the company have different directions they want to go but at the same time they want to keep their own titles in house, Guess they will find out that keeping to one platform will be the death since Microsoft and Sony are branching out to other devices.

      • BlueFalcN

        TESTIFY!

      • TeddyNYC

        I just hope they act before it's too late. While I've owned every Nintendo console and portable since the N64 and Gameboy Pocket, I decided to skip the Wii U and 3DS. I don't think I'll be getting another Nintendo console, but I would definitely purchase Nintendo games for my PS4, iPhone, iPad, enhanced 2014 Apple TV with controller, etc.

        Maybe offering an app for iOS/Android that allows the purchase of older games as well as demos of new games where the full game is only playable on Nintendo hardware would be a good first step.

      • 61050

        and ive owned every console up until the gamecube, but my opinion is the same. i hope they figure out what they need to do. i just hope this doesnt turn into a "the last samurai" type of thing where the guys at the top refuse to adapt to modern gaming culture out of pride and then they all get massacred by a bunch of gnarly gatling guns.

      • xx99

        I'm not counting on it, but Nintendo still *could* do something clever to sell me their consoles. What if they sold a monthly subscription to their entire back catalog (everything from Wii/DS and back, or at least GameCube/GBA and back) for $15/month? That'd be pretty tempting, especially with cloud saves and the ability for the same subscription to work on both a Wii U and a 3DS.

        Will it happen? Probably not, but Nintendo's been clever before, they could come up with something else that's enticing. I'd love to see some wide-reaching changes, but even a slick Pokémon MMO or amazing Smash Bros 4 reviews could sell tons of systems single-handedly. Whether or not gamers like it, Nintendo does have some time to figure it out. I hope it's not all the way until next gen or the one after that, but it just might be.

      • iAjent

        I don't think Smash Bros. is enough to save Nintendo at the moment. Granted, the Smash games are great, but in terms of numbers of players/consumers I don't think it's enough. Nintendo need the equivalent of a CoD or GTA on their system. Or just something that appeals to the masses. At my place of work I don't know a single Nintendo owner, and whilst they will know about Nintendo I doubt they have any idea what Smash Bros. is.

        They have their Mario games, but the other platform holders have there own big IP's that (in terms of pure sales) sell just as well if not better (purely because of a larger install base).

        It doesn't matter how good the new Mario game is or Smash, if the most it can sell is 1.5 million units (UK, last time I checked that was the number of Wii U units sold in UK). And that's banking on every owner buying the games.

  • http://www.googlepants.com/ Wizard of Odyssey

    They will do it right or not at all. I respect that.

  • NOEN

    I don't think Nintendo really knows what they are gonna do.

  • JoeriD

    I do not necessarily have a strong opinion about what Nintendo should be doing. All they have to do is discontinue what they are doing now.

  • TrencH

    They are going to have to do what they have to to survive or they will get buried and be a lesson to other companies as to what is necessary to survive.

    They have been the first in innovation many times but they dragged their feet on disk media, internet connections, online gameplay, and other forms of gaming like mobile. Just like the Nintendo 64 (which did have some great games) had way too many turds and lots of 3rd party companies either did not want to work with them or ended up dropping support.

    I understand they want their games and machines to be kid friendly but they need to start bending because they don't have enough of their own games to survive by their talent alone.

    Some of their games don't belong on mobile...I understand that but some could and might have a better feel on mobile devices then their own hardware. Any of their rhythm games and timing games would be great. More companion apps like pokemon would fit great. Stuff like Pokemon Snap would be a good fit.

    They need to do something. Their current way of doing things is just not going to cut it. They need more great games and they need them yesterday.

    • xx99

      You're right except that they don't need to turn it around immediately. They are in it for the long game. With billions in cash, they can float for a long time before they are in deep danger. Are they becoming irrelevant in gaming (especially for younger gamers growing up on Minecraft and iPod Touches)? Probably, but they do have years, not months, to fix that.

  • Dailion Ando

    They will make minigames only for his systems. xD

  • H4nd0fg0d

    Have slipped deeply into obsolescence.

  • Kane

    Fantastic news! Can't wait to buy Nintendo hardware to play their games on... Way more convenient than using my smartphone which I use daily!

  • curtisrshideler

    Man I wish Apple would just buy Nintendo out, scrap their devices, and distribute their games on iOS and OSX for all to finally enjoy.

    • Xissoric

      As another person stated in a thread like this one: there is no way Nintendo would accept Apple buying them out. Do you really think that sounds like something that could happen?

      • Arcite

        This is N third straight year of no profit. At this rate, the company is on the way to ruin.

      • dawizerd

        They still have billions in cash on hand

      • Themostunclean

        Everyone in denial about Nintendo has this as their go-to response. It doesn't matter how much cash they have, N is a publicly traded company and if they don't pull a profit, the stock price tanks. When a company stops making their investors money because the products don't sell, no amount of cash sitting around will save it.

      • xx99

        Except that much of that cash is actual cash, not just stocks. Billions in cash does give them a cushion of time to figure out what the hell they are doing. Being publicly traded might actually save Nintendo, as it might force some leadership change if Iwata and gang can't provide results.

        It's no guarantee for the future of Nintendo, but it does mean they can be slow and methodical instead of making quick, rash reactions. Many are calling out what Nintendo "needs" to do very much like people have always said what Apple "needs" to do. Apple was once in dire straits financially (and without all that cash), too. They turned it around without listening to what everybody else was telling them they had to do. That doesn't guarantee anything for Nintendo, obviously, but it's proof that marching to the beat of your own drum and making radical change can work.

      • Edwin Ramirez

        RIM has been on that path for years and is still alive and kicking. Slipping into a grave but still alive and kicking.

      • MCOBigBen

        Actually, RIM is dead. The body is just twitching a bit still. Nintendo is not dead, they just can't go on the way they are.

        The idea that making their IP available on iOS will save them is kinda silly though. Like deciding you need more money, so instead of job hunting you sell your car. iOS revenue will never support a company that large.

        They'll do something else.

      • Edwin Ramirez

        What I meant is that RIM has been losing money for years and still exists. Nintendo won't be ruined for just 3 years in losses.
        And I totally agree with your comparison.

    • TrencH

      There is no way I would enjoy dragging my fingers all over a screen to play Zelda. You need a good interface to play that type of game and I am not spending 100 dollars just to get a game pad and then you have your battery juice to consider. Like I said, some games would fit...others no way!

      I am happy with both co existing. I just believe Nintendo can spread out a little on some games that can feel better on a device like iOS / android and make them more money.

      Right now my favorites are my iphone and 3ds. Both can do things the other just can't duplicate.

      • Brown Cow

        Have you not played Oceanhorn yet? It can be done.

  • Earth Vs. Me

    A full blown Pokemon game for Wii U is just the deus ex machina Nintendo needs to pull themselves out of the finincal ditch they're in right now. And just think if they made it an MMORPG...they'd outsell Sony and Microsoft combined.

    • CzechCongo

      The Game Dev Story is strong with this one.

    • Poo

      Nope..

    • Themostunclean

      That's insane. The number do voracious Pokemon fans is minuscule compared to the number of people loyal to Sony and Microsoft. Nintendo fans keep saying that "this next game will sell the Wii U, just wait and see", yet nothing has worked. When will people get the picture that software is not enough for Nintendo to pull itself up anymore?

  • ineptidude

    Not like Nintendo has a history of denying things right before they happen or anything >_>

  • Mess

    Any else notice they said that "there are no plans for minigames" (paraphrased).

    So that must mean there are plans for full blown games.

    After all 1 + 1 = a window.

  • JCman7

    The statement that Nintendo isn't doing so great is laughable, it should be changed to the Wii U isn't doing so great. Nintendo is still doing just fine and have a ton of money in the bank, more than Sony. It's too bad the Wii U isn't selling it really is a great console with some incredible games and even more incredible games still to come. Nintendo just marketed it wrong and made mistakes with it, companion apps or what not will help change that.

    • Themostunclean

      Money in the bank is not the sole indication that a traded company is doing well. Stock price and investor confidence are very important, and Nintendo is doing poorly in both areas.

      • JCman7

        Well a company's worth is definitely an indicator of how well off they are and if they can afford a console failing. Their stocks are actually doing quite well and have increased a lot last week. Investors continue to stand by the company it's just the media making a mountain out of a mole hill because the Wii U is not selling. Nintendo has had unsuccessful consoles in the past. The GameCube was not successful even though it is a fantastic console they still came out with the Wii next and it did wonderfully. Innovative companies sometimes fail because they try new things and this is the case. But Nintendo has enough in the bank to keep plugging along and create the next best thing for their company.

      • http://www.jv21.com/ John V. Keogh

        I wonder whether their shareholders know that Nintendo are ignoring the app market.

  • vonlipwig

    When are Nintendo going to realise that having this staunch 'only making games for kids' attitude isnt going to work nowdays?

    Know any 10yr olds with the money to buy games systems and games? thought not...the ONLY people buying games are a MUCH older crowd (20-40yr olds).
    And why would an older crowd,even parents, buy a machine with such limited scope and meagre hardware power, when they could buy a PS4 or XBone?
    Clearly they are not.
    After all, theres going to be plenty of kids games on those too, but with a choice to buy adult games of the highest quality on those systems.
    I love the first party software that Nintendo puts out (aaaah the SNES), but Nintendo need to realise that Mario n co are not going to make their system MUST-HAVE anymore. Game shops are NOT mainly full of kids..have a look..

    Gamings moved on Nintendo. Maybe you should try it.

    As for their software moving to tablets etc, i think Nintendos right, if they lose their exclusive games to mobile..what have they got left?

  • M M

    This is why we have emulators

  • dabossofu

    Doesn't Nintendo get paid monthly by Microsoft and Sony for using vibration in their controllers? Don't quote me but I think some years back Nintendo put its foot on Microsoft and Sony neck for that and Microsoft paid with no hesitation whereas Sony tried to be difficult and the PS3 almost had controllers with no vibration lol.

    • Themostunclean

      It was Immersion technologies that sued Sony, not Nintendo. And it was over the software used to control it, not the motor setup itself. So no, Nintendo does not have the added income of the other guys paying for haptic feedback tech.

      • dabossofu

        Thanks for clearing that up, I don't know why I thought Nintendo had something to do with it.

      • thatkidjrod

        It may be the fact that the Move is a blatant ripoff of the Wiimote. At least Kinect was different and had Dance Central.

  • falco

    I know its gona be shty demos you will have to pay, this really suck, sorry Nintendo this will not save you.

  • Chris Jones

    Please what is special about Nintendo's games. A Mario? A Zelda? A juvenile and utterly childish Pokemon? What exactly is special about all these titles that haven't been done on iOS already?

    God bless emulators. I just finished a bout of Tekken 6 and God of War Chains of Olympus running very smoothly on PSP emulator on my MIni Retina. Would switch to my PSX emulator to get a little Spyro III fun after I'm done taking a quick run of Oceanhorn and XCOM.

    Who needs a Nintendo and their childish, monotonous and overdone titles.

    • Atomos

      What's special is the unequaled quality control. Very few games on the iOS are as polished as almost any game Nintendo makes.

    • Olip96

      No blood =/= childish and monotonous.

    • Boony Tuesday

      You sound a little bitter and dishonest.

    • nini

      Yeah, what are they thinking. They should make games specifically for 11-35 males only, they're the only gamers which count clearly. Oh another FPS, yay!

    • thatkidjrod

      You say Nintendo IPs are monotonous and overdone yet cite Tekken 6 and one God of War out of a dozen? At least Nintendo tries to be different with each Mario, Zelda, Metroid game. How much does each Tekken, GoW, Uncharted, CoD differ from the previous one?

      If Nintendo "dies", so does gaming as we used to know it. Maybe I'm getting old but we live in a time where CoD and 5 hour interactive movies are "adult" and games like Wonderful 101 or Monster Hunter are childish.

    • Salt Abdullah

      I haven't owned a Nintendo system since the N64, so don't take offence to what I'm about to say. Their games, like "A Mario" or "A Zelda" offer a unique gaming experience that we haven't seen on Steam, Sony or Microsoft. Mind you, Microsoft did gobble up Rare and we're going to see a KI3 and possibly another Kameo type game. But Nintendo innovates with their games to create an experience that you'll only see on their systems. People bought Playstation 2s just for Shadow of the Colossus or the PS3 for Journey. And people buy Nintendo consoles for a limited selection of titles too. I understand what you're saying, but in the minefield of FPSes, RPGs and platformers - Nintendo still stands out on their own. Yes, they're in trouble right now.

      • Chris Jones

        I totally understand your point of view. See, I'm an early 80s kid and have been playing video games since God knows when and believe me, I have owned and played them all. So I don't think anyone can tell me much about video game because I grew up with atari, nes, snes, mario and all that in the 80s.

        That said, Mario, Zelda and those Nintendo titles are stale now, at least to me and many I know. I can't keep playing mario and zelda forever. If these titles are all that, why isn't the Wii U flying off the shelves since these titles are on them.

        What I'm saying is that without these titles, iOS gaming is fine so I do not understand all this begging of Nintendo like they are gods. Nintendo should move to the side please.

        And the notion that if you do not care about mario, pokemon and zelda, you are a call of duty head is just silly. I barely play FPS games, talk more of COD.

        And using Nintendo and innovation on the same line is laughable.

      • NinjaKitteh

        I do think Nintendo needs to work on newer IPs that target the aging gaming market. (Been a gamer since Atari 2600) How though, would you argue Nintendo isn't innovative in regards to hardware. The DS was the first handheld TOUCH based gaming console (3 years before the first iPod existed), when the Wii released both MSOFT and SONY laughed off and ridiculed movement based gaming and than went and copied it. As well as having the first analog stick in home consoles, a year before SONY jumped on that idea too.
        Nintendo does need to recognize other areas such as online multiplayer (which blows my mind that they still don't think of this basic staple of modern gaming), digital downloading and distribution, as well as offering a sub service for older games as someone earlier suggested.
        Saying Nintendo isn't innovative is sort of an ignorant statement though. Most of the major things we all take for granted were because of Nintendo.

  • Boony Tuesday

    Nintendo thinks of itself as a gaming hardware company, first. The software is there to compliment and sell the hardware. That's their identity.

    They have a lot of pride and a history in innovation, more than any console manufacturer. They don't need to make iPhone games. They'll make their own phone long before that happens.

  • readysetboom

    Aw well. Nintendo you could have had my money. I will never buy another console for handheld games now that I have an iPad and iPhone. U better partner up with someone because a Nintendo phone or tablet will still tank.

    • falco

      You will buy an iPad like just to play nintendo games only lol good for you.

    • Salt Abdullah

      Nintendo can't make enough money selling games on iOS for it to be a worthy venture. They aren't a couple of devs making a fishing game or flying birds into pigs. They have a business model that runs against iOS/Android. Their DS is earning more per game than they would on iOS - why would they cannibalize their profits for less money? How many people are playing on the DS for $30 a game versus selling that game for $0.99 on iOS? How much would they have to sell before they make that money back. Then they'd have to remaster that DS game for touch controls - it becomes too costly. iOS isn't for Nintendo - as much as I want to play Nintendo games on my 5S or Retina Mini. It's just not feasible. The only thing I can see Nintendo doing is making fresh games on iOS - possibly using their licensed characters, sure - but not porting games that would compete with their consoles.

  • Grummie

    Decided to switch from hardcore iphoning to casual 3ds gaming now

  • DtheGOPkiller

    Put classic NES games on iOS. And watch the insane just astronomical billions made off that alone. Just the classics. Why not? I would pay top $ for it. Those titles are not making them much money now. It's gold sitting right there. Low hanging fruit.

    • thatkidjrod

      I'd imagine most them them would control like ass though. Some games like Paper Mario, Fire Emblem, and Pokemon would work though.

  • imuddy

    Once and for all Nintendo should just come out and say we will not make x on y. These rumors then denying these false claims are hurting its image in the eyes of investors. At this point I as sick of hearing these junk as hearing about how much people think all the CoD games are alike.

  • gmattergames

    Refusing to to adapt your business model because it somehow infringes on a longstanding corporate vision is the shortest path to obsolescence, aka Nintendo.

  • MrAlbum

    This comment will be in multiple parts because of its length; I'm worried that it'd get truncated in the TA app.

    What would Nintendo realistically gain, to move towards developing for a third-party platform?

    Let's look at this, piece by piece, point by point. This is nowhere near complete, so I welcome any thoughts or comments on this subject.

    Benefit: larger audience of less picky gamers.

    This speaks for itself. Sure, we birch and howl at high prices/IAP, but for every dissenting voice there are, sadly, ten more folks who just want to have fun with what they have, even when it is sub-par. This makes for a voracious market for games, where outside of a technical failure, most anything will sell and sell well.

    Drawback: less hardware power.

    Even though the Wii U doesn't match the PS4 or XB1, it does completely outperform the iPhone AND iPad, even at their latest models. This means the games they make for iOS would also be scaled back on the technical side, just to ensure a decent gameplay experience. How hard would it be to make Super Mario 3D World, as a pure straight port, run at a passable 30 frames per second on the 5S, or the Air, without overheating it or maxing out the RAM? Contrast that with a visibly rich 60 frames per second on the Wii U with almost no glitches or technical faults, and you can see what I am getting at (I assume that the frame rate is 60 FPS on the Wii U, due to how smooth it appears to run. Would appreciate a confirmation on this).

    To be continued.

    • MrAlbum

      And now, continued:

      Benefit: iOS is a good place to shell out their rich back-catalog.

      So porting the most technically impressive, modern iterations of Nintendo's franchise to iDevices may not be possible without some serious technical compromises that could drastically affect said game's quality. What about their older stuff from their older, less demanding consoles? Definitely a possibility: Super Mario 64 would run smoothly on current iPhone hardware, easily. Heck, some GameCube/Wii stuff may even make the cut. And, as stated, the iOS audience is comprised of EVERYONE AND THE KITCHEN SINK, so it would be received well.

      Drawback: they may not have the rights to certain iconic games from the earlier eras.

      Chrono Trigger? Battletoads? Dragon Quest? Final Fantasy? Castlevania? Secret of Evermore? Earthbound? A TON of the most well-remembered games from the older consoles were not developed by Nintendo: they were either third-party devs, or in-house developers that are/were under Nintendo's umbrella, but with their own identity, style, and, maybe, business strategy from Nintendo proper. This may leave a core group of games like Legend of Zelda and Mario that Nintendo could immediately port, but that's just a fraction of the full library, which fans are most vocal about playing... and paying for.

      Just because a game came out on a Nintendo console does not mean Nintendo has the rights to release that game on a different platform, without the original dev's permission. This means that Nintendo may not actually have enough "old" games to directly port to make porting to a different console worth it.

      Benefit: previous drawbacks may drive Nintendo to innovate on iOS, since their older stuff may not be enough to be worth the effort to port them.

      Imagine a new game with a Nintendo "Seal of Quality" on the App Store, designed from the ground up for the platform. That is infinitely more appealing AND exciting than a glorified "graveyard" of older games set out to pasture before being devoured by the App Store nostalgia wolves. A brand-new, full game designed for iOS is all it would take for Nintendo to dominate the App Store and make oodles of money.

      To be continued.

      • MrAlbum

        And now, the conclusion:

        Drawback: being perceived as having "lost" the console fight, and getting stigmatized as "losers/sellouts."

        Imagine this: You are a woodcarver, who specializes in high-quality, hand-crafted wooden furniture. You spend years honing your skills and have made several designs that are wildly popular with customers. You are faced with the following decision, and you don't know which choice will keep your furniture business going:

        A.) Take your furniture to retail stores where they will compete with all the mass-produced, cheap, easy-to-assemble-and-move furniture, to take advantage of said stores' built-in audience.

        OR:

        B.) Build/buy your own store front and advertise its existence to as many magazines/outlets/news/advertising places as possible. Maybe do some trade shows, figure out how to ship your product yourself, essentially run your own storefront, with a potential physical AND online presence of your own.

        A.) would be easy, but it may make your product harder to sell. After all, handcrafted stuff is expensive, and requires a lot of care to get it installed and maintained. Thus, only the richest and most prepared of customers would realistically buy your furniture, and even if they are willing to buy it, there are cheaper and easier alternatives that are perfectly serviceable right there in the store. It is hard to deny the visibility of your product, though. The huge influx of customers may be enough to offset the relative lack of customer demand.

        B.) would be very hard, but the ability to define your own image and identity is very important. Being in control of all aspects of a business gives you a flexibility you would not have otherwise, and allows you to create a great experience for customers. It will be hard to get your stuff out to potential customers, but it will be easier to please them and give them the respect they deserve, which increases brand loyalty and encourages word-of-mouth. Thus, it is easy to carve one's own niche in the market and establish yourself as a great place to get handcrafted furniture, which lessens competition and focuses demand on that niche audience.

        A.) is easy. B.) is hard. A.) doesn't quickly build respect for your skills as a woodcarver. B.) defines you not just as a woodcarver, but also as a personality and style all your own, which will earn quick respect for your skills at your craft. Many folks do A.) because B.) is easy to fail at.

        Now, imagine that you are Nintendo.

        I think it is easy to see the path Nintendo took, if consoles are "stores," and Nintendo's games are "handcrafted furniture," to add context to the extended analogy above.

        Not only did they take the risky, high-stakes approach to this industry, but they SUCCEEDED at it. However, Nintendo isn't perfect; they slipped up in the past, and they have slipped in the present. They have defined themselves as this niche spot in gaming that is very different from their competitors, and they made smart decisions that cemented their personality and their high-quality games (at least, the games that have come directly from Nintendo, and not from some other third-party developer, who are usually hit-and-miss with quality).

        After succeeding for so long, weathering so many trials and tribulations, and after defining their own place in the industry... to then take their stuff and plop it on another console would be a massive blow to their image, their identity and their way of doing things. Sure, it may be pride talking, and change happens. Things shift and move, and what worked before may not work in the future.

        But all things require a balance. Just because things do not stay the same does not mean facts get rewritten "just because." Everything in this universe operates on cause and effect, even when we do not understand either the cause or the effect. With that in mind, would Nintendo sacrificing its identity, its commitment to a quality consumer experience and the core values that define Nintendo as a company, give Nintendo their desired effect? Would such actions make Nintendo not only profitable, but keep it in the industry sweet spot it has occupied for so long?

        Would they continue to be respected as Nintendo, instead of being "just another game developer"?

        I would make an educated guess and say no, they would not keep their current identity AND they would lose respect as "the video game developer that could."

        Look what happened to Sega. Sega survived as a company, but a lot of what defined them uniquely as Sega has been lost. They still make some cool stuff (and some stinkers, nobody's perfect), but they are not the company they used to be.

        Should Nintendo follow Sega's route, or should they retain their identity?

        This last point does go into an ethics/free-will/economics/public-relations/etc. debate rather than sticking to the facts, which is why it ended up so lengthy. I fully expect lots of discussion about this point.

        It's up to Nintendo. My guess is that they do have something planned to deal with this. Just because a company is silent (or doesn't SEEM to be dealing with a problem) doesn't mean they are not working on it. There are many solutions to this dilemma for the company, and I am certain that some kind of action will be taken.

        I look forward to seeing what they do, more out of curiosity than brand loyalty. I do adore the Mario and Zelda games, but I rarely play more than those core Nintendo staples (I play PC and iOS most of the time). I look forward to what I can do with my Wii U.

        Sincerely,

        Mr. Album

      • MrAlbum

        ARGH, let's try this again:

        After succeeding for so long, weathering so many trials and tribulations, and after defining their own place in the industry... to then take their stuff and plop it on another console would be a massive blow to their image, their identity and their way of doing things. Sure, it may be pride talking, and change happens. Things shift and move, and what worked before may not work in the future.

        But all things require a balance. Just because things do not stay the same does not mean facts get rewritten "just because." Everything in this universe operates on cause and effect, even when we do not understand either the cause or the effect. With that in mind, would Nintendo sacrificing its identity, its commitment to a quality consumer experience and the core values that define Nintendo as a company, give Nintendo their desired effect? Would such actions make Nintendo not only profitable, but keep it in the industry sweet spot it has occupied for so long?

        Would they continue to be respected as Nintendo, instead of being "just another game developer"?

        I would make an educated guess and say no, they would not keep their current identity AND they would lose respect as "the video game developer that could."

        Look what happened to Sega. Sega survived as a company, but a lot of what defined them uniquely as Sega has been lost. They still make some cool stuff (and some stinkers, nobody's perfect), but they are not the company they used to be.

        Should Nintendo follow Sega's route, or should they retain their identity?

        This last point does go into an ethics/free-will/economics/public-relations/etc. debate rather than sticking to the facts, which is why it ended up so lengthy. I fully expect lots of discussion about this point.

        It's up to Nintendo. My guess is that they do have something planned to deal with this. Just because a company is silent (or doesn't SEEM to be dealing with a problem) doesn't mean they are not working on it. There are many solutions to this dilemma for the company, and I am certain that some kind of action will be taken.

        I look forward to seeing what they do, more out of curiosity than brand loyalty. I do adore the Mario and Zelda games, but I rarely play more than those core Nintendo staples (I play PC and iOS most of the time). I look forward to what I can do with my Wii U.

        Sincerely,

        Mr. Album

    • Salt Abdullah

      I suggest you listen to John Siracusa on ATP (Accidental Tech Podcast) - he argues against Nintendo ever going on mobile devices. There are a plethora of reasons - chiefly they gain $40-60 per console game and get it for their top tier games (Mario, Pokemon, Zelda, etc.). People often buy the system just for those games. So then you ask yourself, how many $1 games can Nintendo reap before they start making the kind of profits that they do on their console system. Then look at implementing touch controls and updates - do they do free updates for their games in perpetuity or do they release newer versions at a cost? Do they bother going to their rolodex of games and release old titles? How much profit is in there given they have to remaster these games for touch support and then controller support? Then there's the idea that mobile games would cannibalize their NDS market. They make much more money per game on their DS version than they would on the iOS or Android platform - as they won't be able to garner those kinds of prices. People already balk at any title north of $0.99. I've even seen a fellow TAer in the forums whinging over the Room 2 not being free. Really? Really.

  • 21tigermike

    Ah, phew, what a relief. Nintendo is bowing out of the industry.

    What a weird announcement...?

  • Salt Abdullah

    Go home Nintendo, you're drunk.

  • salvee

    Nintendo phone! Called it! Pun intended

    • salvee

      Or tablet

  • Techead81

    I don't really care that Nintendo has billions of dollars in reserve. The basic fact is that they are trying to force people to buy their consoles, and I'm not going to buy a console with a controller that has a pathetic battery life. They do not have any games that have wowed me, the only thing they are doing right is their Mario platform games, and that's just not enough. I would rather buy old hardware to play the games I know and love than drop down a chunk of my paycheck for a poorly implemented console with a handful of games I *might* be interested in. There are tons of contenders for new, amazing ideas both in hardware and software implementation, and when Nintendo decides to play nice with others, then I'll be interested. Even Sony has changed their tune about PS Vita in other markets. Being intractable is not going to garner love for them. Until then, Nintendo who?

    • EvilAbdy

      100% Agree. I need more games from them as I won't buy the console just for Mario anymore.