Nintendo cancels Space World

[Kool Moe Dee]

http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/news/0,10870,2871752,00.html

I guess since they've already released their one game scheduled for this year, they saw no point in having a show. :D




OK, OK, that was too easy. But still, kind of strange if you ask me...

[Jason Becker]

Nintendo 64: Part Two

[Mark Asher]

It's looking more and more like the Gamecube may be Nintendo's last big system besides handhelds. I just don't see them launching another one and getting slaughtered by Sony again.

How's this for a potential scenario? In another two years Nintendo and Sony work out a deal. Nintendo agrees to make the Cube their last TV system and promises future games will be PlayStation 3 exclusives, and in return Sony gives them a break on the royalty fees and agrees to stay out of the handheld market.

That would be a tough combination for Microsoft to beat.

[Jason Becker]

Maybe Nintendo should have taken that $25 billion MS were going to offer(or however much it was).

[Anonymous]

I know the gamecube hasn't sold as well as the ps2 by a long shot. It's also seeing a serious lacking of good software. Are they losing money though? I thought I read they were making money on every unit sold. Electronic gaming monthly even featured them as their cover story this month. A side note, now the next generation is dead is there any magazines out there that cover consoles that are aimed at adults? Egm irritates me at times with there focus.

[Mark Asher]

I know the gamecube hasn't sold as well as the ps2 by a long shot. It's also seeing a serious lacking of good software. Are they losing money though? I thought I read they were making money on every unit sold. Electronic gaming monthly even featured them as their cover story this month. A side note, now the next generation is dead is there any magazines out there that cover consoles that are aimed at adults? Egm irritates me at times with there focus.

It's probably more of an opportunity loss than anything. If they can sell a couple million Gamecube versions of Zelda next year, that might correlate to four or five million sales if it was a PS2 exclusive since the market's so much bigger.

Also, who knows how many company resources are tied up in the Gamecube? Maybe those resources would be better spent focusing more on games.

[Anonymous]

as a business though if they make money on every console sold then the royalty's are purely a bonus. Unlike sony's or microsofts business model where they have to make their profit off of games sold. With the majority of Nintendos' games being made by in house or first tier publishers every game sold is making them a lot of money. Add in their lack of company debt and they are in a far different position then sega was. They don't have to win the console war, second or third will keep them profitable and in business.

[GMicek]

It's looking more and more like the Gamecube may be Nintendo's last big system besides handhelds. I just don't see them launching another one and getting slaughtered by Sony again.

That would be a tough combination for Microsoft to beat.

What's interesting is the perception that the N64 was a big failure. Sure, it didn't rule the school like the NES did, but when all was said and done Nintendo had more cash assets then any of the other players in the console arena. Sure, most of it was probably because Pokemon, but money is money.

And yeah, I wouldnt be suprised if the GameCube was the last Nintendo console. Or maybe they'll expand on the idea of the Q. Having another company make the hardware and brand it with the Nintendo name while they just make the games.

[JT]

I'm not sure why Spaceworld being cancelled is such a bad thing. They just finished showing all their "A" titles at E3. Now they're supposed to display them again?

[GMicek]

I'm not sure why Spaceworld being cancelled is such a bad thing. They just finished showing all their "A" titles at E3. Now they're supposed to display them again?

I don't know about everyone else here, but i only went into Nintendos E3 booth for about 5 minutes. I had to leave because i thought i was going to pass out from the heat. It's a shame, Metroid actually looked pretty interesting.

[Mark Asher]

I'm not sure why Spaceworld being cancelled is such a bad thing. They just finished showing all their "A" titles at E3. Now they're supposed to display them again?

Spaceworld's in Japan, Nintendo's home market, and it's also something of a fan show too, isn't it?

To me the cancellation indicates they don't have much to show. Lack of upcoming product strikes me as a negative.

The problem is that Sony has such a big lead, and it gets bigger and bigger every week, that Nintendo and Microsoft are going to have more and more trouble getting exclusives. For example, I read today that an Xbox Warhammer game that was an exclusive will now be a PS2 game as well.

Sony's a snowball rolling downhill. The longer it takes Nintendo to get some hot exclusives to market, the faster that snowball rolls.

[Dave Long]

Nintendo doesn't play the game like Sony. They try to make money and don't worry about the consequences of not being a be-all, end-all entertainment provider. By focusing on their strength, games, and making sure they always have the best games on their own system, they consistently come out ahead. They have a lot of money in the bank, no debt and a consistent internal vision of where they want to be and need to be.

Sony is living on the success of others, really. They have to rely on third parties for the best games content or pay big fees to get it. That's their greatest strength, but if they end up with Microsoft's type of content (or lack of it) it could also be their greatest weakness. Nintendo won't get out of the hardware business because that distinct advantage (knowing your own hardware better than anyone and tailoring its design to fit your ultimate game making goals) are primary to their success. They make the best games for their own platform and always will. They also turn a profit while Microsoft doesn't. It's far more likely to see MS quit the business than Nintendo.

As far as Spaceworld goes, Nintendo already said that E3 is so international they really don't need to hold Spaceworld. That's especially true this year since they are considered the clear winner on content at the show.

--Dave

[Alan Au]

Clear winner on content? Sure, I liked their lineup, but I'm not sure what criteria to use when determining who "won" at E3. ;)

- Alan

[Mark Asher]

Sony is outselling Nintendo on a weekly basis in Japan by at least 10-1. In Japan!

There's no way in hell Nintendo is at ease about that, even if they do have billions in the bank.

I just looked at the most recent week of sales figures in Japan and the Gamecube had two games in the top 30, neither one of which was in the top ten. There were no Xbox games.

It's the Lakers vs. the Little Sisters of the Poor girls basketball team right now. Does Zelda have enough game for Kobe and Shaq?

[Anonymous]

I realize I may be coming off sounding like a huge Nintendo fan, but really they aren't in trouble at all. Dave stated it perfectly, they have money in the bank, they aren't in debt, and every game sold pays the majority of royalties right to Nintendo. They even adjust the hardware of their consoles to meet the visions of the game makers. How other companies are doing just don't matter to them, and it doesn't have to, they are an extremely profitable company. Now, I believe in April, Sony had an article in Forbes on how much trouble their in financially.

[Dave Long]

Just about every gamer who went to Nintendo's booth said they want to play Zelda, Mario and Metroid. Right there you've got three clear favorites for the Cube that will sell systems to those not already on board and more games to those that have a Cube. On the other two systems, there wasn't one or two games that everyone came out of E3 going "I HAVE TO PLAY THAT". There are titles that generated interest on PS2 and Xbox, but Nintendo's whole lineup of games, first party titles that will make money only for them, was considered to be a definite buy.

So that's why they're not in any real danger of going anywhere, along with their focus on games and not diluting their message with DVD movies and online pipe dreams (yes, they're pipe dreams in this generation of consoles). Everyone from kids to adults want to play the games Miyamoto has a hand in. Everyone knows who Mario is and whether they buy the game or not, they'll know it's out there. Nintendo doesn't have to sell 30 million systems in two years to be profitable and they know it. However, it looks like they'll almost certainly be the second place system worldwide and their lineup of games should cement that. N64 was profitable, SNES was profitable, Gameboy... cash cow... they're fine.

The people that own an Xbox are the ones that should worry about their game lineup going away. Microsoft is counting mostly on 3rd parties to give them games. If the system continues to tank, they'll either have to spend even bigger piles of cash to buy exclusives or they'll have to pack it in and work on the next system. At this point in time, just about everything on Xbox save ten or so games is coming to the other consoles and if the base doesn't increase, even less will be exclusive. Nintendo doesn't really need the third parties (and in fact, a lot stay away because Nintendo so roundly trounces them with their first party stuff), so they're playing from a position of strength.

--Dave

[DennyA]

This is the 21st century. Even if you make millions of dollars in profit every month, you are a failure if (1) your company isn't growing, and (2) you aren't number one.

An economy based solely on growth is nonsensical. But here we are. And you wonder why the PC hardware market crashed.

[westyx]

This may indeed be the 21st century, but if your company is solvent, money in the bank, no debt, a clear future and the team to get the company there, then the company *is* a success.

[Kool Moe Dee]

Just about every gamer who went to Nintendo's booth said they want to play Zelda, Mario and Metroid. Right there you've got three clear favorites for the Cube that will sell systems to those not already on board and more games to those that have a Cube. On the other two systems, there wasn't one or two games that everyone came out of E3 going "I HAVE TO PLAY THAT". There are titles that generated interest on PS2 and Xbox, but Nintendo's whole lineup of games, first party titles that will make money only for them, was considered to be a definite buy.

Paragraphs like that just make you sound silly. Seeing as how your sample size is one (unless you count your imaginary friends), I don't see why I should take any of your predictions seriously.


Everyone knows who Mario is and whether they buy the game or not, they'll know it's out there.


Definitely true, no arguments here. The only question is if those franchises will ever dry up -- look at the receding interest in Pokemon.


At this point in time, just about everything on Xbox save ten or so games is coming to the other consoles and if the base doesn't increase, even less will be exclusive. Nintendo doesn't really need the third parties (and in fact, a lot stay away because Nintendo so roundly trounces them with their first party stuff), so they're playing from a position of strength.


<Cynical>Ten exclusives is bigger than Nintendo's entire lineup.</Cynical>

Actually, the real reason developers stayed away from Nintendo is that the cost of producing games for their systems was astronomically high because of Nintendo's cartridge-based formats. But whatever.

[Met_K]

As long as Nintendo has developers like Rare, then they have no need to worry about other third parties. A few great third party developers, coupled with amazing inhouse, is all Nintendo needs. If they make money off their consoles, making money off their games, and still are the number two or three console, then they having nothing to worry about.

Nintendo is, and always will be, the sleeping giant.

[Jason Becker]

I guess they are happy being a comfortable second to Sony, and ruling in handhelds with the GBA.

Just hope Miyamoto doesn't decide to retire anytime soon.

[Enkidu]

This may indeed be the 21st century, but if your company is solvent, money in the bank, no debt, a clear future and the team to get the company there, then the company *is* a success.

Under these circumstances, if you are privately held, you are a tremendous success, and if you are publicly traded, your stock will take a large hit. Double standard, but one to which the markets are holding.

[Rob de los Reyes]

Also, if you believe those numbers from Informa Media Group that came out yesterday, sales in the handheld market are slipping. I don't know if Nintendo's new aversion to hardware development applies to handhelds as well as consoles. There may be yet be a fair number of absolute dollars in handhelds, but the market tends to favor growth over decline no matter what the totals.

[Brad Grenz]

You know, I'm not sure where Nintendo is heading with Yamaguchi stepping down. That guy was a hardass. But, yeah, Nintendo will always be comfortable even if they keep producing hardware. But you have to wonder what kind of numbers a Mario or Zelda game would do on a platform with a 70-100 million installed base. They could get incredibly favorable royalty terms for an exclusive agreement with Sony. Hell, if the prospect of collecting royalties for a game that sells 8 million copies wasn't so tempting, I'd tell Nintendo they could produce games royalty free based soley on the competetive advantage they would bring to the table.

Brad Grenz
(how come signatures aren't working for me?)

[Dave Long]

You're forgetting the key difference between Nintendo and Sony/Microsoft. Nintendo doesn't want to rule the world of entertainment, they simply want to make the best games. The platform is all about the games. The games are all about the platform. They're always talking about the best way to maximize their own hardware or simply to create a better game. Yamauchi was behind this as well. He tried early on to make possible other things like finance, etc. via services tied to Nintendo consoles in Japan, but way back then (NES days), they realized that the two didn't tie together very well.

So they reversed course and focused on games and games alone and that's probably what they'll continue to do for the forseeable future. While the others crave a box that can be their pipeline to your home, Nintendo only sees what online can do for gaming. Whether you agree with that or not, it's probably going to mean Nintendo is still here and making consoles 10 or even 20 years down the road. They primarily saw the device as a toy and they probably still do. As long as the content continues to trump the entire industry (just look at Eternal Darkness... from a 2nd party developer with some good but maybe not great games released before this), they're going to be a player and possibly a winner. They also make money in every generation. If they continue to have people like Capcom, Namco and Sega making games for them, they'll never go away.

--Dave

[Anonymous]

He is what's making the company right now, there is no doubt about it. He oversee's all of the in house development. If anything were to happen to him it would be interesting to see what would happen to the company.