Miyamoto: Violence in games, Wii U's future, and the Games of the past

#31rudgerlightPosted 3/11/2013 2:51:46 PM
XSilverPhoenixX posted...
40Dribylf posted...
From: XSilverPhoenixX | #017
There is this system called the Sega Saturn, followed by the Sega Dreamcast that had the internet in mind prior to 2000.

And they both failed because of it.

SegaNet was the main reason Sega dropped out of the console business.

So yeah, I understand Nintendo's reluctance.


Nintendo wasn't focusing on those ideas at the time, and that was over 15 years ago starting with the Saturn. We're talking about the past 7 years up to present day.

Sony and Microsoft flourished because of their online component, Nintendo succeeded on a different spectrum due to casual focus and family. It doesn't mean having a bigger online presence would have limited their audience.


Nobody said otherwise. They said emphasizing online would have and this hasn't been rebutted. It would have meant significantly more resources put towards their online component meaning fewer resources towards other things - maybe they wouldn't have been able to make the motion controller, or the balance board, who knows. Assuming that they could have made a successful Wii and have had a robust online is purely an assumption. Obviously having more features would be better, but a company has to set realistic goals for what they can accomplish.

As to the SegaNet comment. I have never heard it argued that it was responsible for Sega dropping out of the console race. I'm not doubting it, but I would love to read up on it, so if you have a source, please provide a link.
#32SSJ3Goku222Posted 3/11/2013 5:14:00 PM
rudgerlight posted...
maxmansupa posted...
XSilverPhoenixX posted...
Q. Whatís most exciting to you about video games right now?

A. For a long time at Nintendo we didnít focus as much on online play because for many years doing so would have limited the size of the audience that could enjoy those features. But certainly now we see that so many people are connected to the Internet. It opens up a tremendous amount of possibilities.


it just goes to show how Nintendo is out of touch with reality. We didn't focus on online play because it would have "limited" the audience?

What a complete idiot. Only now they realize people are connected to the internet....

There is this system called the Sega Saturn, followed by the Sega Dreamcast that had the internet in mind prior to 2000. Nintendo is only realizing it now? The company is complacent.


Ignoring the fact that both consoled had failed miserably and had a focus on something that wasn't so common in households nowadays.


As a huge fan of those systems, I'm just gonna say "miserably" is a bit strong when the Saturn outsold the N64......in Japan
But you're right, the Dreamcast was the first modem for millions of American households. That fact still boggles my mind.

And to XSilverPhoenixX, if Miyamoto is wrong, why did the Wii sell perfectly well? He didn't say the internet didn't exist, just that it wasn't as important for selling a console, and focusing on it would be focusing on a specific (i.e. limited) demographic. By focusing on online features, you're basically saying you have no intention of selling your console in dozens of different emerging markets where high speed internet isn't the norm. Why do you think the 360 doesn't really sell outside of America and Europe while Nintendo sells in more territories and they plan to introduce the Wii (yeah, the old Wii) to even more markets? Microsoft's emphasis on online limits the countries they can actively sell to, and that's a legitimate choice they made that works for them. Nintendo made a different choice and it too paid off for them. Both models work and can coexist.


Hate to be pick but why do people use spoiler tags for useless things?
---
Sage as of 08/09/2011
X-Box Live GT: YoungReezy1337
#33SocranPosted 3/11/2013 7:39:29 PM(edited)
XSilverPhoenixX posted...
Sony and Microsoft flourished because of their online component


What? Microsoft, maybe, but Sony was at their peak back when their systems had no or merely bare-bones online components. If I recall, the PS1 wasn't online at all, and the PS2 simply had an ethernet port so you could enable online in the two or three games that used it. And the Gamecube was the same as the PS2 in that regard.

It was Microsoft who changed the game by adding a heavy focus to online, which Sony tried to outdo while Nintendo said "Sure, we'll expand our online capabilities, but no need to throw billions of dollars on the network when all that really matters is letting people connect their games." Incidentally, that was the generation where Sony came in third.
---
Socran's Razor: "Never attribute to massive stupidity by someone else, what could be explained by a tiny bit of stupidity on your own part."
#34AkaneJonesPosted 3/11/2013 8:19:02 PM
XSilverPhoenixX posted...

I stated that he's an idiot for saying that online would "limit" the audience when online does nothing but expand it. Nintendo is stuck on couch co-op and that is not how most people play games any more.


Final Fantasy X sales vs Final Fantasy XI sales(ignore profit from online fees). That's the mind set, not single player game with multi -lay having it's multi-player online. Most Online focused games have had there single player gimped due to multiplayer online focus. The standard of most western FPSs are no more than 10 hours of game play in favor of the online multi-player. Imagine if Donkey Kong 64 or Metroid Prime 2 had take that route focusing on their multi-player above all else.

Admitted ignoring online for certain multi-player option is a bit odd like Star Fox 64 3D. But seriously New Super Mario Bros. games didn't need it, let alone be synced right to play smoothly.
#35excitebike64Posted 3/11/2013 11:32:37 PM
It's obvious Nintendo wishes to wait till a larger user base can take advantage of certain hardware or features.

The WIi stayed SD because Nintendo knew more people had SD and it was not standard yet, everywhere.. for an example.

One day this tactic could backfire, but it is to appeal to the most people without risk of cost for either them or the consumer.

Nintendo has never cared to be "elite" with the one exception of the N64. Look what that got them. A couple great games that shaped history, but not the profits they were hoping for.
#36SplatterHouse55Posted 3/12/2013 12:01:03 AM
rudgerlight posted...
maxmansupa posted...
XSilverPhoenixX posted...
Q. Whatís most exciting to you about video games right now?

A. For a long time at Nintendo we didnít focus as much on online play because for many years doing so would have limited the size of the audience that could enjoy those features. But certainly now we see that so many people are connected to the Internet. It opens up a tremendous amount of possibilities.


it just goes to show how Nintendo is out of touch with reality. We didn't focus on online play because it would have "limited" the audience?

What a complete idiot. Only now they realize people are connected to the internet....

There is this system called the Sega Saturn, followed by the Sega Dreamcast that had the internet in mind prior to 2000. Nintendo is only realizing it now? The company is complacent.


Ignoring the fact that both consoled had failed miserably and had a focus on something that wasn't so common in households nowadays.


As a huge fan of those systems, I'm just gonna say "miserably" is a bit strong when the Saturn outsold the N64......in Japan
But you're right, the Dreamcast was the first modem for millions of American households. That fact still boggles my mind.

And to XSilverPhoenixX, if Miyamoto is wrong, why did the Wii sell perfectly well? He didn't say the internet didn't exist, just that it wasn't as important for selling a console, and focusing on it would be focusing on a specific (i.e. limited) demographic. By focusing on online features, you're basically saying you have no intention of selling your console in dozens of different emerging markets where high speed internet isn't the norm. Why do you think the 360 doesn't really sell outside of America and Europe while Nintendo sells in more territories and they plan to introduce the Wii (yeah, the old Wii) to even more markets? Microsoft's emphasis on online limits the countries they can actively sell to, and that's a legitimate choice they made that works for them. Nintendo made a different choice and it too paid off for them. Both models work and can coexist.


I always figured that the Wii sold incredibly well because it was the cheapest system of it's generation on the market. Sure, the Wiimote was interesting at the time, but if the Wii had cost $400, I doubt the curiosity would have sold half as well (online games or not). If you ask me, the Wii sold remarkably well because it had a great hook at the cheapest price. Without the hook, we might have had another GC on our hands.
---
Ever since I started working, every day has be worse than the last, so everytime you see me it's the worst day of my life. - Office Space
#37SplatterHouse55Posted 3/12/2013 12:10:50 AM
Socran posted...
XSilverPhoenixX posted...
Sony and Microsoft flourished because of their online component


What? Microsoft, maybe, but Sony was at their peak back when their systems had no or merely bare-bones online components. If I recall, the PS1 wasn't online at all, and the PS2 simply had an ethernet port so you could enable online in the two or three games that used it. And the Gamecube was the same as the PS2 in that regard.

It was Microsoft who changed the game by adding a heavy focus to online, which Sony tried to outdo while Nintendo said "Sure, we'll expand our online capabilities, but no need to throw billions of dollars on the network when all that really matters is letting people connect their games." Incidentally, that was the generation where Sony came in third.


The PS2 had much more than a "few games" that you could play online. It was the GC that literally only had a few games that you could take online. Making the PS2 and GC comparable on the online spectrum is simply silly. However, I do agree that it was MS that took the idea to the next level (with the original Xbox).
---
Ever since I started working, every day has be worse than the last, so everytime you see me it's the worst day of my life. - Office Space
#38overkillwfo1978Posted 3/12/2013 2:08:49 AM
Megagunstarman posted...
excitebike64 posted...
Tetris is violent?


You kill tons of lines in Tetris.


Kinda like I used to do in College. Nothing to do with video games.
---
But the PS4 has GDDR5 RAM. That's 2 more than DDR3! I bet PCs will take at least 5 years to catch up to this beast.
- SUPER3METROIDX
#39SocranPosted 3/12/2013 3:12:15 PM(edited)
SplatterHouse55 posted...
Socran posted...
XSilverPhoenixX posted...
Sony and Microsoft flourished because of their online component


What? Microsoft, maybe, but Sony was at their peak back when their systems had no or merely bare-bones online components. If I recall, the PS1 wasn't online at all, and the PS2 simply had an ethernet port so you could enable online in the two or three games that used it. And the Gamecube was the same as the PS2 in that regard.

It was Microsoft who changed the game by adding a heavy focus to online, which Sony tried to outdo while Nintendo said "Sure, we'll expand our online capabilities, but no need to throw billions of dollars on the network when all that really matters is letting people connect their games." Incidentally, that was the generation where Sony came in third.


The PS2 had much more than a "few games" that you could play online. It was the GC that literally only had a few games that you could take online. Making the PS2 and GC comparable on the online spectrum is simply silly. However, I do agree that it was MS that took the idea to the next level (with the original Xbox).


Their actual online capabilities were pretty much identical, though, and were summed up as "It can has internet". The PS2 just had a much larger library overall.
---
Socran's Razor: "Never attribute to massive stupidity by someone else, what could be explained by a tiny bit of stupidity on your own part."