Nintendo’s Reggie Fils-Aime Explains Why Nintendo Needs To Keep Making Consoles

As a company, they produce innovative products. So therefore it's shortsighted to suggest they should close up shop simply because you don't like their latest iteration of product. It's not expected that a company come out with a new technology every single fucking time they have a product launch!
 
Babbster said:
The only thing truly innovative about the Switch is their plan to offload a large portion of the online experience to a separate device, and that's some really shitty innovation.
Click to expand...

I'm looking forward to how Nintendo tries to convince people to pay for that online experience.
 
mope54 said:
As a company, they produce innovative products. So therefore it's shortsighted to suggest they should close up shop simply because you don't like their latest iteration of product. It's not expected that a company come out with a new technology every single fucking time they have a product launch!
Click to expand...
That's fine. But when people (including Nintendo) are saying that the Switch is innovative, and that this is a selling point, then the question of whether it really is becomes a valid one.
 
Babbster said:
That's fine. But when people (including Nintendo) are saying that the Switch is innovative, and that this is a selling point, then the question of whether it really is becomes a valid one.
Click to expand...

You're making the mistake of thinking that even 1% of the games on those other tablets you mentioned are actually worth playing for more than three minutes or so. I'd rather pay $60 for a Nintendo game or $15-$30 for a good indie on their system than $3.99 for a piece of app store trash. (or go to Steam but I'm trying to compare the mobile side you mentioned)

And yes there are a few decent mobile games out there but nothing like something that will be on an N system. And N has their shovel-crap too but the ratio is NOT the same, and you simply can't get games like N's on those other mobile platforms.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was expecting a lot from the Switch, but everything I've heard recently is really putting me off.

Too expensive
Paid multiplayer
Archaic chat system
Launch lines of 2 games, one of which is a glorified demo

Third party support is going to be critical, and while I don't presume to know what's going on in the minds of developers, I'm not particularly optimistic.

Maybe when it hits the 300 mark (Canadian) I'll reevaluate.
 
NeoNemesis said:
I was expecting a lot from the Switch, but everything I've heard recently is really putting me off.

Too expensive
Paid multiplayer
Archaic chat system
Launch lines of 2 games, one of which is a glorified demo

Third party support is going to be critical, and while I don't presume to know what's going on in the minds of developers, I'm not particularly optimistic.

Maybe when it hits the 300 mark (Canadian) I'll reevaluate.
Click to expand...

I think the launch lineup is up to like ten games now, but a lot of them are older titles. Zelda is still the only big stand out title for March though.
 
J3RK said:
You're making the mistake of thinking that even 1% of the games on those other tablets you mentioned are actually worth playing for more than three minutes or so. I'd rather pay $60 for a Nintendo game or $15-$30 for a good indie on their system than $3.99 for a piece of app store trash. (or go to Steam but I'm trying to compare the mobile side you mentioned)

And yes there are a few decent mobile games out there but nothing like something that will be on an N system. And N has there shovel-crap too but the ratio is NOT the same, and you simply can't get games like N's on those other mobile platforms.
Click to expand...

Pretty much the entire WiiU library is worth playing if you remove the typical dance revolution shovelware. Every Nintendo 1st party or 2nd party (Game developed by 3rd party w/ Nintendo IP) title is outstanding, and even the large majority of the 3rd party titles are worth playing as well.
 
mope54 said:
As a company, they produce innovative products. So therefore it's shortsighted to suggest they should close up shop simply because you don't like their latest iteration of product. It's not expected that a company come out with a new technology every single fucking time they have a product launch!
Click to expand...
Actually it is 4 counting the Switch. N64 was the last Nintendo console that hyped me up. The Game Cube was a solid system that didn't have many good games. They also handicaped capped themselves by not using full size DVDs. That the thing it's not new technology but gimmicks.
 
Mchart said:
Pretty much the entire WiiU library is worth playing if you remove the typical dance revolution shovelware. Every Nintendo 1st party or 2nd party (Game developed by 3rd party w/ Nintendo IP) title is outstanding, and even the large majority of the 3rd party titles are worth playing as well.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The Wii U situation is unfortunate. There really are a healthy amount of good games for it. There should have been a LOT more fo sure, but it's a solid system with some really nice games. Between it and my PC there was pretty much zero reason for me to buy an XB or PS. My daughter has an XBOne and uses it for Netflix and then plays games on Steam on my living room PC. My son has a PS4 because he plays sport-O games with his sport-O buddies :D and that's what he likes. He has a nice gaming PC with a respectable set of shooters to play with me (id games, Borderlands, etc.) but if you look at overall usage in my house? It's PC by a longshot, Wii U, PS4, then various 3DSes and misc. That says to me that the Nintendo console is right where it should be, second in line to the almighty PC. All is right in my world and that will continue with the Switch.

Kinda reminds me of the TG16 actually. Cool system if a bit underpowered in some ways compared to the competition, but some cool innovations in hardware (CDs for one) and a good set of really good games, but just not quite enough.

Side note: Meanwhile in Japan the PC Engine dominated the market with some incredible games. I still have my original copy of Chi no Rondo. I also like to play some of the Japanese games and SuperGrafx games under emulation that I just couldn't get a hold of back then too.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok so the only real point he makes is that Nintendo being innovative prevents the gaming industry from stagnating. So lets talk about the innovations that are exclusive to nintendo that actually changed gaming in the long term.

1) Motion Controls - Nope, fad ended quickly.
2) VR - Nope, not a Nintendo thing and their version is the most reviled version ever. Also Fad that will end quickly. Hell it has barely started and is already falling off the radar.
3) 3d - Nope, died just as fast as it came. Hell even the super popular 3ds most people just turn the 3d off.


I really can't think of any thing else because nothing else innovative has attempted to "prevent gaming from stagnating". They dominate the handheld market, that is something they do better than everyone else. They don't push the industry forward in any other meaningful manner. So Sorry Reggie, your entire argument is bullshit.
 
Wii was pretty cool. Its simplistic appeal to consumers marked a notch of success on Nintendo's belt. Then the Wii-U launched, and it seemed that consumer perception chalked it up as simply a re-hash with a very complicated controller. They probably should have simply named it Wii 2 (to follow the Xbox and PlayStation naming conventions that everyone is used to) while making that clunky tablet-controller an separately available optional accessory.

Their NES Classic mini console has been sold out since launch day, and it seems like they still haven't thrown much extra effort into digging into that vein of gold. Talk about a major missed opportunity for large amounts of quick revenue...
 
You would think the NES Classic Mini selling so well they would understand people just want a console to play Nintendo games on without all their gimmicks. Some companies rely on campaign slogans, others gimmicks, others keep working to make things better. Nintendo falls into this gimmick category that leaves people like me and what seems like most people here hoping for a Nintendo console to come out where they focus on games. It's been so long I don't even remember what the last Metroid game was.
 
You guys have to be much younger than I am to think the NES wasn't chock full of gimmickry if you think the current stuff they do is gimmicky. It launched with a light gun, then there was a controller for a single game (arkanoid), a power glove, a robot, a game genie for cheats, Nintendo Power subscription, paid hotlines for game tips, and that was just the popular crap. I'm sure a list exists somewhere on the internet for all the other worthless shit even I can't remember.
 
mope54 said:
You guys have to be much younger than I am to think the NES wasn't chock full of gimmickry if you think the current stuff they do is gimmicky. It launched with a light gun, then there was a controller for a single game (arkanoid), a power glove, a robot, a game genie for cheats, Nintendo Power subscription, paid hotlines for game tips, and that was just the popular crap. I'm sure a list exists somewhere on the internet for all the other worthless shit even I can't remember.
Click to expand...
All of which was optional unless you played Duck Hunt. And Game Genie wasn't made by Nintendo.
 
Armenius said:
All of which was optional unless you played Duck Hunt. And Game Genie wasn't made by Nintendo.
Click to expand...
So the issue is that you don't understand the definition of "gimmick?" That's why you guys are throwing it around willy-nilly?
 
mope54 said:
So the issue is that you don't understand the definition of "gimmick?" That's why you guys are throwing it around willy-nilly?
Click to expand...
Just pointing out that things like the motion controls on the Wii were not optional. The Switch being a handheld isn't optional.
 
mope54 said:
You guys have to be much younger than I am to think the NES wasn't chock full of gimmickry if you think the current stuff they do is gimmicky. It launched with a light gun, then there was a controller for a single game (arkanoid), a power glove, a robot, a game genie for cheats, Nintendo Power subscription, paid hotlines for game tips, and that was just the popular crap. I'm sure a list exists somewhere on the internet for all the other worthless shit even I can't remember.
Click to expand...

Welcome to 1983.

...and at the time, who was Nintendo competing with in the console segment when the first NES came out? A bunch of late 70's tech carry-overs in the form of Atari, Coleco, and Intellivision...and NONE of them had the consumer perception of being cutting-edge while remaining simplistic/kid-friendly like the NES did. Anything gimmicky that Nintendo released for the NES was treated like gold and created an absolute frenzy. Everyone wanted to have that light gun, power glove, advantage controller, or the host of others that were released.

Coleco or Intelli? Nope...both had been out for 1-3 years when the NES launched, but had very limited game libraries and seemingly complicated controllers that scared away almost everyone.
Atari? Nope...everyone had already been there done that with the 2600, so hardly anyone invested in the 5200 (which didn't have jack shit for games, wasn't natively backwards compatible with the extensive library of 2600 games, and also had perceivably complicated controllers).

Nintendo owned every facet of the home gaming console market on the entirety of planet Earth and enjoyed absolute dominance...until the Sega Genesis came out in 1988/89. But Nintendo fired right back in 1990 with the SNES, and reclaiming any lost market share was as easy as blinking our eyes. The stragglers along the way never really were a threat, such as the TurboGrafx and a host of others trying to get on the console bandwagon.

Then the Wii happened. It was just the thing Nintendo needed to keep themselves as a household brand: price leader, simple, easy to use, immersed players by getting them up off the sofa and actually using their bodies to play games, some added features/function like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime streaming, while breathing life into fond classics like Mario Brothers and Zelda. The Wii outsold both the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3.

Then Nintendo made the fatal blunder of stepping down the same decades-old path that Coleco, Intelli, and 5200 carved out by releasing the Wii-U with a stupid, clunky, complicated controller...but only one of them, so fights amongst siblings, friends, SO's, or spouses were sure to ensue about who got to have the bigger, shinier, and newer controller...even though the reality was that NO ONE wanted to use that horrid monstrosity. So the most action Wii-U's get is occasionally having their packaging dusted off while they continue to sit on store shelves and feeling another new tear rolling down their cheeks as they watch their Xbox One and PlayStation 4 brethren getting loaded into cars to go home with their new owners.

Welcome to the present day.
 
Last edited:
vegeta535 said:
Actually it is 4 counting the Switch. N64 was the last Nintendo console that hyped me up. The Game Cube was a solid system that didn't have many good games. They also handicaped capped themselves by not using full size DVDs. That the thing it's not new technology but gimmicks.
Click to expand...

N64 and GC had superb 4-player. GC was a little light on games but not terrible.

Wii was a wasteland and WiiU barely made a blip on the radar.

Switch has promise, but Nintendo seems hell bent on fucking it up.
 
DejaWiz said:
Welcome to 1983.

...and at the time, who was Nintendo competing with in the console segment when the first NES came out? A bunch of late 70's tech carry-overs in the form of Atari, Coleco, and Intellivision...and NONE of them had the consumer perception of being cutting-edge while remaining simplistic/kid-friendly like the NES did. Anything gimmicky that Nintendo released for the NES was treated like gold and created an absolute frenzy. Everyone wanted to have that light gun, power glove, advantage controller, or the host of others that were released.

Coleco or Intelli? Nope...both had been out for 1-3 years when the NES launched, but had very limited game libraries and seemingly complicated controllers that scared away almost everyone.
Atari? Nope...everyone had already been there done that with the 2600, so hardly anyone invested in the 5200 (which didn't have jack shit for games, wasn't natively backwards compatible with the extensive library of 2600 games, and also had perceivably complicated controllers).

Nintendo owned every facet of the home gaming console market on the entirety of planet Earth and enjoyed absolute dominance...until the Sega Genesis came out in 1988/89. But Nintendo fired right back in 1990 with the SNES, and reclaiming any lost market share was as easy as blinking our eyes. The stragglers along the way never really were a threat, such as the TurboGrafx and a host of others trying to get on the console bandwagon.

Then the Wii happened. It was just the thing Nintendo needed to keep themselves as a household brand: price leader, simple, easy to use, immersed players by getting them up off the sofa and actually using their bodies to play games, some added features/function like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime streaming, while breathing life into fond classics like Mario Brothers and Zelda. The Wii outsold both the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3.

Then Nintendo made the fatal blunder of stepping down the same decades-old path that Coleco, Intelli, and 5200 carved out by releasing the Wii-U with a stupid, clunky, complicated controller...but only one of them, so fights amongst siblings, friends, SO's, or spouses were sure to ensue about who got to have the bigger, shinier, and newer controller...even though the reality was that NO ONE wanted to use that horrid monstrosity. So the most action Wii-U's get is occasionally having their packaging dusted off while they continue to sit on store shelves and feeling another new tear rolling down their cheeks as they watch their Xbox One and PlayStation 4 brethren getting loaded into cars to go home with their new owners.

Welcome to the present day.
Click to expand...
You're forgetting Sega. In my opinion Sega Master System was superior to NES, but NES had the bigger game library.
 
Armenius said:
You're forgetting Sega. In my opinion Sega Master System was superior to NES, but NES had the bigger game library.
Click to expand...

No...I didn't forget it. Sega had two consoles prior to the Genesis, but they flopped in the market because of the NES's dominance.
 
mope54 said:
Whether something is a "gimmick" doesn't have anything to do with it being optional or not.
Click to expand...

Pfft yea it does when in the context of selling the whole platform. That's the point you very widely missed.

Switch = bought for the Zelda game.
 
Dahkoht said:
Genuine question , why do they insist on being behind in graphics fildelity , speed,etc overall ?

It's not like the Switch is going to be cheap in any way especially by the time you add accessories , so why not put 50-100 more onto the cost of the main console and actually be up to date with the network / graphics / etc department.

The die hard fans who are going to buy it for the games regardless will still buy it , and you'd likely pickup more buyers who want 1080p , real online etc.

Just curious if they've ever given a reason they always design their hardware to be "behind" at launch.
Click to expand...

I'm sure they'll never admit this, but I believe they refuse to sell hardware at a loss. They're either breaking even or making profit at launch.
 
And there are enough people in the world that don't care or even notice that the graphics are a generation behind.
 
MisprintedLies said:
So like the Windows 10 of consoles? Nintendo Ten?
Click to expand...
If they gave away the switch as an upgrade for those who bought a wii u, then maybe?
But no, people with decent phones are looking at that and saying, my phone's hardware is faster than this bulky controller console. Why would i want to buy it?
The answer is always the exclusive games. But most of the time you get like 3-4 must have games and it becomes a door stop.
 
TripleAgent77 said:
I'm sure they'll never admit this, but I believe they refuse to sell hardware at a loss. They're either breaking even or making profit at launch.
Click to expand...

That began at the Gamecube. I think that came from a few factors. One was that it was the first one that they were actually able to sell without a loss on each unit, and I think they found that to be more valuable than working the "classic" way of making money off of software and licensing and later console revisions. From that point forward, I think they made it an actual practice internally, and I think you're right. At this point they don't want to go backwards. I also think they know what position they're in on the software side of things, and that less 3rd party devs are going to make them money off of licensing these days. They also used to be pretty tyrannical in the NES days about licensing, so many devs STILL don't have a good feeling about it just from that.

However, I do also think that Nintendo has become comfortable with their position. In many ways that's a good thing. They know what types of things they do best, and they focus on it. They also like to experiment a bit with new ways of playing their games, and while not everyone likes everything they do, they're pretty consistent on quality, and software quality in particular. With their developer base being smaller, operating without heavy hardware losses, and working into a pretty special niche, I think while it may not have been their intention pre-Gamecube, it's actually made them a bit more interesting. Definitely not to everyone's tastes, but they're different than the PS/PC/XB set, which is actually a good thing. Why do we NEED another PC/PS/XB when we already have three.
 
Hypergreatthing said:
If they gave away the switch as an upgrade for those who bought a wii u, then maybe?
But no, people with decent phones are looking at that and saying, my phone's hardware is faster than this bulky controller console. Why would i want to buy it?
The answer is always the exclusive games. But most of the time you get like 3-4 must have games and it becomes a door stop.
Click to expand...

Maybe your average baseline idiot. Anyone who actually cares about the games they play though, are not actually saying that. Not to mention I probably have 20+ good games on the Wii U that I actively play still off and on, and had a blast playing when they were released. And it was a very poorly selling system in comparison to others. I think your 3-4 must-haves is off the mark a bit. I do get what you're saying, and it does SEEM like there weren't a lot of games on the last couple of systems, but there actually were quite a few good games. I would seriously hate to see it shrink to those levels though.
 
Honestly the only things gravitating me to the Switch is Zelda and Gamecube classics right now. But then I remember how awesome Dolphin is at this point in its development.
 
Armenius said:
Honestly the only things gravitating me to the Switch is Zelda and Gamecube classics right now. But then I remember how awesome Dolphin is at this point in its development.
Click to expand...

Dolphin isn't bad at all these days. I still don't play Wii games on it really, because even with their recent improvements to the controller interfacing there are still some issues I don't have time to deal with. Gamecube games though as spot-on.

I still want a Switch though... :D
 
You really ought to get a Wii U now that they are cheap used. You can play three generations worth of Nintendo games natively. You can't read GC discs, but the system will play them by loading roms off the SD card slot using hacked Wii channel.
 
Mchart said:
You really ought to get a Wii U now that they are cheap used. You can play three generations worth of Nintendo games natively. You can't read GC discs, but the system will play them by loading roms off the SD card slot using hacked Wii channel.
Click to expand...

I completely agree! They are more than worth it even now that they're basically end of life. The Wii releases are nice too on it. I still have a Wii in the house, but I grabbed a few favorites for the U anyway.

It's a shame they seem to be shying away from that with the Switch, but if you ask me they're just being vague while they figure out what they want to do (aside from GC). They'd be really smart to have a GBA virtual console for the Switch IMO. The games suit the format, they'd probably use very little power for emulation, etc.
 
J3RK said:
It's a shame they seem to be shying away from that with the Switch, but if you ask me they're just being vague while they figure out what they want to do (aside from GC). They'd be really smart to have a GBA virtual console for the Switch IMO. The games suit the format, they'd probably use very little power for emulation, etc.
Click to expand...
Blown-up GBA games don't look too great, though. I had the GBA peripheral for the Gamecube and even at 480p (I had gone to a fair bit of trouble getting the "digital" GC audio/video cable) GBA games were kind of a bummer visually. They were fine on the DS because the screen was still small.
 
Babbster said:
Blown-up GBA games don't look too great, though. I had the GBA peripheral for the Gamecube and even at 480p (I had gone to a fair bit of trouble getting the "digital" GC audio/video cable) GBA games were kind of a bummer visually. They were fine on the DS because the screen was still small.
Click to expand...

True... Unless they add some scalers maybe, or allow it to be played at actual GBA size. Which granted, kinda sucks, but still gives you access to a ton of potentially cheap filler material to round out the native game library.
 
J3RK said:
True... Unless they add some scalers maybe, or allow it to be played at actual GBA size. Which granted, kinda sucks, but still gives you access to a ton of potentially cheap filler material to round out the native game library.
Click to expand...

No one wants to play a videogame that only used 4 inches of their tv's screen. Lol that's so dumb.
 
ZodaEX said:
No one wants to play a videogame that only used 4 inches of their tv's screen. Lol that's so dumb.
Click to expand...

It's a mobile device. Who said anything about them being played unscaled on a TV? On the TV there are Switch and possibly GC games. A lot of GBA games were very enjoyable, and they'd be decent on the mobile screen. I didn't think that was a huge leap, but I guess I need to be VERY specific.
 
J3RK said:
It's a mobile device. Who said anything about them being played unscaled on a TV? On the TV there are Switch and possibly GC games. A lot of GBA games were very enjoyable, and they'd be decent on the mobile screen. I didn't think that was a huge leap, but I guess I need to be VERY specific.
Click to expand...

You were responding to a person talking about the Gameboy Player, not the Switch. Pay attention.
 
ZodaEX said:
You were responding to a person talking about the Gameboy Player, not the Switch. Pay attention.
Click to expand...
Whoa, take it easy. While what I said is true, it certainly is less true if one is talking about the Switch's built-in screen. Blowing up a GBA to that size wouldn't be that horrible.

That said, I don't think adding GBA compatibility would be interesting to pretty much anyone buying a Switch. Buying hardware to play GBA games (and of course the games as well) is as easy as going to almost any used game store - local or online.
 
Babbster said:
Whoa, take it easy. While what I said is true, it certainly is less true if one is talking about the Switch's built-in screen. Blowing up a GBA to that size wouldn't be that horrible.

That said, I don't think adding GBA compatibility would be interesting to pretty much anyone buying a Switch. Buying hardware to play GBA games (and of course the games as well) is as easy as going to almost any used game store - local or online.
Click to expand...

Possible. I actually would grab a few, but probably not a lot of them if they were offered. I've liked the ability to have most of my favorites in the VC of this or that franchise in the past. (say Minish Cap, Ocarina, Twilight Princess, Windwaker, (and the rest really) on the Wii U all at the same time) Still, not strictly a necessity by any means. (and it doesn't look like they want to do a full VC type system this time anyway)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top