Nintendo: Apple's Latest Prey

[FrozenTomato]

Nintendo: Apple's Latest Prey

Sales of Nintendo Co.'s most important new gaming device have plunged since its release, the company said Thursday, prompting the videogame pioneer to slash its profit forecast and scramble to deeply discount the gadget to revive sales.
The unexpectedly weak demand for Nintendo's 3DS hand-held player, which displays 3-D games without glasses and was launched with much fanfare earlier this year, are a setback for a company that had been betting on a new hit to turn around its waning fortunes. The company cut its profit forecast for the year ending in March by more than 80%.
In Japan, investors reacted with alarm. After the first hour of trading on the Osaka Securities Exchange, the shares were down 20% on the day to ¥11,350 ($146.04). Nomura Securities lowered its rating on Nintendo to neutral from buy, saying the company will need to "radically change its tactics."
Nintendo's disclosure that it sold just 710,000 3DS devices in three months, down from 3.6 million the prior quarter, comes as the videogame industry undergoes a painful transformation. Consumers are favoring devices from Apple Inc. and cheaper games that can be played online or easily assessed and played with friends via smartphones.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904888304576473493285312436.html

 

[KingCrimson]

Wow from 3.6 million to 710K year over year. The iPad is probably the single biggest reason given flat iPod Touch sales. Kids prefer playing on the bigger screen with super graphics. The lack of tactile controls is not a problem, kids adapt!

 

[*LTD*]

The writing was on the wall like two years ago.

 

[Liquorpuki]

This is what happens when financial analysts don't understand the products they get paid to write about. They end up plagiarizing a bunk idea (Apple is destroying Nintendo) that makes no sense.

Nintendo's stock dropping has nothing to do with Apple forcing them out and everything to do with Nintendo making poor decisions. In trying to beat Sony to market, they put out a new device with a crappy launch library. The end result is people asking where the games are and not buying, which is why sales are low. It's all about the lack of games, and sales will be low until around Christmas time, when you finally have 3DS games on the market that people are actually excited about.

The price drop was a stupid move. Without adequate games on the market, it's not gonna sell many more units anyway. Since the price drop was so big, they had to lower the earnings forecast to compensate. That plus the fact the price drop was so wierd made NTDOY drop 12% yesterday. I'm guessing they did it as a symbolic move to shareholders, but it had the opposite effect. So today the CEO tried another symbolic move by halving his salary, which raised the stock a few percentage points.

Can Nintendo recover? Of course, but now it's entirely dependent on the games and how well the Vita does. Apple has nothing to do with it because the experience of waiting 4 hours for your carrots to be done on your virtual farm doesn't replicate the experience given by a $50 game with cinematic production quality. Thinking Apple will kill Nintendo is like thinking if a dollar store opens up in your neighborhood, Target will go out of business.

 

[*LTD*]

This is what happens when financial analysts don't understand the products they get paid to write about. They end up plagiarizing a bunk idea (Apple is destroying Nintendo) that makes no sense.

Nintendo's stock dropping has nothing to do with Apple forcing them out and everything to do with Nintendo making poor decisions. In trying to beat Sony to market, they put out a new device with a crappy launch library. The end result is people asking where the games are and not buying, which is why sales are low. It's all about the lack of games, and sales will be low until around Christmas time, when you finally have 3DS games on the market that people are actually excited about.

The price drop was a stupid move. Without adequate games on the market, it's not gonna sell many more units anyway. Since the price drop was so big, they had to lower the earnings forecast to compensate. That plus the fact the price drop was so wierd made NTDOY drop 12% yesterday. I'm guessing they did it as a symbolic move to shareholders, but it had the opposite effect. So today the CEO tried another symbolic move by halving his salary, which raised the stock a few percentage points.

Can Nintendo recover? Of course, but now it's entirely dependent on the games and how well the Vita does. Apple has nothing to do with it because the experience of waiting 4 hours for your carrots to be done on your virtual farm doesn't replicate the experience given by a $50 game with cinematic production quality. Thinking Apple will kill Nintendo is like thinking if a dollar store opens up in your neighborhood, Target will go out of business.

What's this farm and carrots game? Sounds cool.

I probably never heard of it because I was too busy playing Dead Space on my iPhone 4 and iPad. Sadly, it doesn't have any carrots.

 

[Liquorpuki]

What's this farm and carrots game? Sounds cool.

I probably never heard of it because I was too busy playing Dead Space on my iPhone 4 and iPad. Sadly, it doesn't have any carrots.

It's a game called Farmville, from some big company called Zynga that Jobs brought up on stage at one of those dev conferences you usually quote from every other day.

You sure you weren't cutting a rope, throwing a bird at a pig, or playing some flash game that starts with the word Doodle like 99% of the other iOS gamers? Because if you weren't, you must not be a bored housewife and should buy a handheld.

 

[LethalWolfe]

I probably never heard of it because I was too busy playing Dead Space on my iPhone 4 and iPad. Sadly, it doesn't have any carrots.

My condolences. I thought Dead Space played horribly on the iPad compared to the console version. FlightControl HD though... I can lose hours to that game. I've just never been impressed w/the attempts at trying to shove a game designed to be played with a multi-button controller onto a touch interface. I always feel like I get a water down experience littered w/inaccurate controls that remind me of how much more fun I could be having playing the 'real' version of the game on my console.

Same thing w/RTS games on consoles and FPS's prior to last gen consoles. I know everyone puts Golden Eye on a pedestal but, jeesh, every time I played it I always thought how much better it would be w/a keyboard and mouse. FPS games on consoles have evolved though and do a lot to avoid the limitations of using a controller vs a KB/M.

The games I most enjoy on mobile devices are games that offer me experiences I can't get w/a console. Star Wars: Falcon Gunner for example or the previously mentioned FlightControl. Onlive + a BT controller could be a Trojan horse though. It all of course hinges on how the actual performance is and whether or not people will accept the subscription based model.


Lethal

 

[*LTD*]

My condolences. I thought Dead Space played horribly on the iPad compared to the console version.

Meh. We manage ok.

 

[LethalWolfe]

Meh. We manage ok.

I won't apologize for having high standards.


Lethal

 

[maflynn]

I heard that people using the 3DS kept getting nauseous due to the 3d

 

[Alaerian]

I heard that people using the 3DS kept getting nauseous due to the 3d

I'll vouch for this. After seeing one in person, I won't be buying one. Ever.

 

[*LTD*]

I won't apologize for having high standards.


Lethal

Don't ever!

We can still agree on that.

 

[KingCrimson]

*LTD* - you are forgetting the basic ergonomics of gaming. There is simply no substitute for having the screen parallel at 18" distant and a keyboard/mouse at waist level. Having to press on-screen controls is a basic violation of human anatomy,

 

[Liquorpuki]

Check it out - this guy at Forbes actually has a clue

 

[KingCrimson]

I see gaming going mostly 3 ways in the future:

hardcore PC gaming, iPad and X-Box

 

[CorvusCamenarum]

I'll vouch for this. After seeing one in person, I won't be buying one. Ever.

I tried one out while having a look around one of my local GameStops debating whether or not to give the PS3 Tron game a try (I've heard that either it's awesome or it sucks). Some iteration of Street fighter was the demo game; after a couple minutes I had to stop playing with it. Trying to describe the experience, it was as though the video was trying to get my eyes to focus on one place then another in rapid succession, but not so rapid that you couldn't notice, to generate the 3D effect.

Apple has nothing to do with it because the experience of waiting 4 hours for your carrots to be done on your virtual farm doesn't replicate the experience given by a $50 game with cinematic production quality.

Carrots in FarmVille take 12 hours, not 4.

 

[*LTD*]

*LTD* - you are forgetting the basic ergonomics of gaming. There is simply no substitute for having the screen parallel at 18" distant and a keyboard/mouse at waist level. Having to press on-screen controls is a basic violation of human anatomy,

I'm violating human anatomy. Along with millions upon millions of touchscreen gamers (tens of millions? Hundreds of millions?.) We all are. And we keep doing it. And the publishers of these games (in some cases very big names) keep making money, and we keep wanting more.

It looks like an entire gaming industry is growing up around human anatomy violation. It seems these folks (myself included) accept this gaming ecosystem for what it is and enjoy it to such a degree that this very segment is hijacking our standard notions of gaming and challenging the console segment in popularity, revenue, and pace of development.

The gaming industry and publishers seem to fully support our human anatomy violations. And here's the kicker: it's rampant and growing at an exponential rate.

Now what?

The reality is that we *aren't* violating human anatomy. If we were, the entire touchscreen gaming model just wouldn't work and it wouldn't be making the massive inroads that we're seeing. But the model does work. Because it's implemented the right way, and we know what we're in for when we use it.

(Want to see real human anatomy violation? http://www.digitgeek.com/hp-touchsmart-all-in-one-desktop/)

 

[KingCrimson]

http://appyzilla.com/2010/11/kids-love-ipad-more-than-gaming-consoles/

Safe to say Gen Z is the "ipad generation". They are growing up on the iPad instead of Atari/Sega/X-Box/PS. Some will grow up and want high-end gaming on a PC or console, but most will not. The big advantage of the iPad is no wires, no power supply, no controllers. You just plop one in front of a child and it's ready to go with finger painting. The world does not revolve around "Call of Duty".

 

[ChazUK]

http://appyzilla.com/2010/11/kids-love-ipad-more-than-gaming-consoles/

Safe to say Gen Z is the "ipad generation". They are growing up on the iPad instead of Atari/Sega/X-Box/PS. Some will grow up and want high-end gaming on a PC or console, but most will not. The big advantage of the iPad is no wires, no power supply, no controllers. You just plop one in front of a child and it's ready to go with finger painting. The world does not revolve around "Call of Duty".

To me, the data in that survey looks flawed and potentially worthless. Look at the Wii for example, way down in the chart for "interest in buying".

By September 2010, Nintendo had sold 35 million Wii's (75 million Wolrdwide) in the U.S alone. At that time, there were only 7.4 million iPad's out there worldwide in October 2010.

Undoubtedly other consoles had higher market penetration than the iPad at the time also, so no wonder children wanted the iPad more than all of the current gen consoles/handhelds at the time.

You're less likely to want/buy the same hardware if you already own it.

 

[KingCrimson]

Undoubtedly other consoles had higher market penetration than the iPad at the time also, so no wonder children wanted the iPad more than all of the current gen consoles/handhelds at the time.

You're less likely to want/buy the same hardware if you already own it.

Small children aren't playing X-Box or PS3. Their first exposure to video games is likely the iPad. They will be hooked on Apple for life now.

 

[ChazUK]

Small children aren't playing X-Box or PS3. Their first exposure to video games is likely the iPad. They will be hooked on Apple for life now.

You don't think children are playing DS and Wii? That'd be my first guess for a child's first gaming experience. Of course the "grown up" 360 and PS3 will fare worse.

With over 140 million DS's out there I very much doubt you're right. Every time I've taken any of my children to my doctors I've seen children with DS's in their hands, never have I seen them with an iPad.

 

[KingCrimson]

You don't think children are playing DS and Wii? That'd be my first guess for a child's first gaming experience. Of course the "grown up" 360 and PS3 will fare worse.

With over 140 million DS's out there I very much doubt you're right. Every time I've taken any of my children to my doctors I've seen children with DS's in their hands, never have I seen them with an iPad.

On the contrary, children I've seen playing DS's are now only playing on iPads. DS's lie collecting dust, because children realize all the things they can do on an iPad besides games. Like fingerpainting.

 

[ChazUK]

On the contrary, children I've seen playing DS's are now only playing on iPads. DS's lie collecting dust, because children realize all the things they can do on an iPad besides games. Like fingerpainting.

Nothing I say can refute your own personal experiences but from what I see, the DS still rules. We've got another case of "wait and see" to see where mainstream gaming goes.

 

[iOSWriter]

The thing is why would you want tonlay on a small cheap resistive screen (well not cheap in terms of 3d but in terms of touch tech) when you can game on a beautiful portable display with the iPad? Plus it has a much longer battery life and if you buy an iCade it is the ultimate portable retro arcade machine.

But I get what some of you guys are saying and zive been syaing it all along too, why are so many games ported from other consoles to the iPad casualized, dubbed down or what the devs always call it "made accessible to everyone?" why did they take away the strategic port and city take over in sid meiers pirates and added cannon bombing and even take modes away that existed in the wii version?

Until Jeff Vogel released Acadon, and has had great success with it despite its high price, there were no even serious western rpgs on the platform. Why is this? The answers to all of this has nothing to do with apple or the actual hardware of the pad, it is all the blame on developers and publisbers. No one is forcing them to play the game of chasing for the bottom or the dollar, they choose to. There is a hardcore market or one could form if they just took some risks. So quit blaming theplatform or apple people. Its not their fault things are the way they are, its the take no risk mentality. Im sick of ign articles or others cobstantly blaming the device when any game on it could work if the right approzch was taken.

Jeff vogel even said there is a huge number of ppl thanking him for finally bringing something like avadon to the platform.

http://jeff-vogel.blogspot.com/2011/06/our-first-game-is-out-for-ipad-hooray.html

"The genesis of the iPad version was a few months ago, when I said, "Hmmm. I have a few weeks free on my schedule. I think I'll port Avadon to the iPad. That'll be good for a laugh!" I've long known that there was a demand on the device for old school gaming, free of ads, in-game purchases, cute animals, zombies, and farming.

But, it turns out, the demand was far greater than I'd ever guessed. My fan mail since the release has been very instructive. Gamers weren't just disappointed by the lack of deeper games on the device. They were downright irked.

But that is the Magic Power of the Indie developer. Find an underserved market and serve it."

 

[iOSWriter]

I'm violating human anatomy. Along with millions upon millions of touchscreen gamers (tens of millions? Hundreds of millions?.) We all are. And we keep doing it. And the publishers of these games (in some cases very big names) keep making money, and we keep wanting more.

It looks like an entire gaming industry is growing up around human anatomy violation. It seems these folks (myself included) accept this gaming ecosystem for what it is and enjoy it to such a degree that this very segment is hijacking our standard notions of gaming and challenging the console segment in popularity, revenue, and pace of development.

The gaming industry and publishers seem to fully support our human anatomy violations. And here's the kicker: it's rampant and growing at an exponential rate.

Now what?

The reality is that we *aren't* violating human anatomy. If we were, the entire touchscreen gaming model just wouldn't work and it wouldn't be making the massive inroads that we're seeing. But the model does work. Because it's implemented the right way, and we know what we're in for when we use it.

(Want to see real human anatomy violation? http://www.digitgeek.com/hp-touchsmart-all-in-one-desktop/)

So howcome gMing, out of every other computing activity out there, makes owning an iPad violate human Anatomy? What about doing productivity work or word prodessing on an iPad? Does it also violate human anatomy? What about the fact tablets didnt exist on the market in a big way before apple and relied mostly on a stylus? Is steve jobs wrong when he says "whats the point?" at them or does he like to violate human anatmomies?