Adam Tyner

Are the games listed at https://club.nintendo.com/eligible-products.do ?

Codes expire after 4 years, so if the game was released after January 27th, 2011, you're unfortunately outta luck.

If all else fails, their customer support replies really quickly. http://www.nintendo.com/consumer/webform/index.jsp

fujishig

Hmm... I didn't realize codes expire after four years, I was going to dig up all my Wii and DS games and redeem them all. Oh well.

The Questyen

There system is also being overwhelmed. The few times I've entered coins and they didn't give me any additional coins after a day or so the coins showed up.

fumanstan

Nintendo's earnings call mentioned that they've sold 9.2 million consoles overall. They actually sold a bit less then they did over the holidays the previous year, which is a bit surprising to me. 1.91 versus 1.95.

They're making a profit though, which is what matters.

http://www.polygon.com/2015/1/28/792...fiscal-results

Adam Tyner

FWIW, this is shipped to retailers, not sold through to consumers, despite the way some news outlets are reporting these numbers. At least, that's my understanding.

At this same point in the GameCube's lifecycle, it had shipped nearly 14 million consoles. Ouch.

Unless something really dramatic happens, I'd have to think that Wii U sales have already peaked. 2015 is shaping up to be a spectacular year software-wise, but Zelda is the only one that looks to be a real system seller...and even then not in the same league as Mario Kart 8 or Super Smash Bros. I'd love to be wrong and see Splatoon become the breakout hit it sure looks like it ought to be. I just don't have a lot of confidence that Nintendo's marketing team will know what to do with it. I don't think a steep price drop would change the landscape all that much either.

I love, love, love my Wii U, and it's such a shame that Nintendo's been unable to get it in more hands. It is heartening to see that Nintendo's found a way to make things work financially, even with the Wii U struggling the way it is. It's also nice to see that their software sales are still really strong. Not a lot of people have bought a Wii U, but those of us that have are getting our money's worth.

My Other Self

Does anyone get the feeling that Nintendo might launch another system during the current generation of consoles?

Adam Tyner

My potentially dumb guess:

We'll see a new handheld previewed this year that's slated for a 2016 release. That might seem crazy so quickly after the release of the New 3DS XL on these shores, but then again, Nintendo released the DSi XL in March 2010 and showed off the 3DS at E3 something like 3 months later. It's not unprecedented!

We'll see a new console previewed next year that's slated for a 2017 release.

fumanstan

Looking at the actual report, it doesn't say anything about shipped and the numbers are under the heading "Consolidated sales units, number of new titles, and sales units forecast" along with Sales Units in Ten Thousands. So unless Nintendo always infers shipped units in these reports, actual sales might be accurate?

http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/pdf/2015/150128e.pdf

Adam Tyner

Admittedly, this could just be what I get for listening to people on NeoGAF (although other outlets are saying "shipped" as well, like VentureBeat and Joystiq). Nintendo isn't sending these consoles to retailers on consignment, so from their perspective, every unit a retailer is shipped is a sale, regardless of what happens after that. Nintendo knows at all times how many consoles have been sent to retailers, so they always have those numbers at their fingertips. Collecting worldwide sales to consumers is a much messier business. They know that number too (or something close to it), but I'm sure it'll lag behind. It's similar to the way gold and platinum records are awarded based on units shipped, not units sold.

I could very well be wrong, though.

fumanstan

Makes sense, as long as Nintendo is getting paid for the sale that's all that really matters. Well, except for us idiots on the internet discussing it

slop101

I'm looking forward to it too, and I loved the old DS version where you drew his platforms, but on this U version, I'm afraid that it'll be super annoying having to look down on the controller to draw his platforms for 90% of the game. I'm sure you can use the wand to draw on the TV screen, but I don't think that'll be half as responsive or accurate as drawing on the screen. Bummer.

slop101

Also, where the hell is Yarn Yoshi, or whatever the hell they're calling it now?

It's supposed to be Q1, 2015, but if that were the case, it would have an actual release date by now.

Adam Tyner

This went out with all the investor stuff this week:


First half of 2015 but apparently not in the spring. Summer, maybe? June?

stingermck

My Other Self

^I personally just feel the system is overpriced for what it offers in terms of the competition. It needs to be at $199.99 and I'm sure a lot more people would jump on board. It doesn't seem to be a top priority right now for Nintendo, though.

The Xbox One has slashed its price repeatedly to the point that the AC bundle is regularly $349. If Nintendo wants to actually compete they're going to have to get a little more in tune with what else is out there.

fumanstan

That would be a good reason why they sold less consoles this holiday then last, since they had to compete with Microsoft's aggressive price cuts. That said, I wonder how well Nintendo would/could even market a price cut these days. They seem really lacking in that regard.

RichC2

Drop it to $199, lose the Touchpad (which I initially loved, but got over it and it became a hinderence), replace it with two Pro Controllers. I'd buy it again.

Adam Tyner

I agree that it's overpriced. Not sure I agree that a lot more people would jump on board.

I suspect you'd get a brief spike but that things would quickly level out to more-or-less where they are now (minus their current, higher margins). The difference between the Wii U and the Xbox One is that there are tons of people chomping at the bit for the XB1 but are being deterred by price. Fundamentally, Nintendo hasn't made a console that people (outside of their very dedicated core fanbase) want. If someone doesn't want a Wii U, it doesn't matter if it's $200 or $300; they don't want it.

I'm expecting a price drop this year, but I'm also expecting it to be on the higher end of things ($249?) rather than $199. We'll see what happens!

stingermck

I don't know if this has been discussed before, but is it possible the Nintendo audience is just aging out? The ones who grew up on it in the 80's have the nostalgia, but just not enough time to play anymore? Maybe the characters don't have the broad appeal anymore like modern games? Those characters just are not enough to support a system anymore?

Just random thoughts.

mattysemo247

I think that's a big part of the problem, they are having a difficult time finding a new audience. I also think that price and 3rd party support are huge factors as well. I say it time and time again, I think if Nintendo would get out of the hardware game and just put all of their focus on making games (something they are great at already), it would easily put them at the top compared to other studios like Activision or EA. If a Mario game came out on XB1, PS4 & Steam, it would sell gangbusters.

If they do stay in the hardware business, they need to kiss and make up with Amazon. Not having your systems available to purchase through the largest online retailer can't be good for business.

Adam Tyner

That's a factor. After all, with the very notable exception of the Wii, every Nintendo console has been less successful than the one before it. Depending on when Nintendo pulls the plug on the Wii U, we're probably looking at somewhere around 15-16 million consoles when it's all said and done.

I'd say part of the problem is that going into the Wii U, Nintendo didn't know what its audience is or what audience it even wanted. It found this perfect storm of a console that didn't appeal to core gamers (which Nintendo did say they wanted to attract), didn't appeal to kids, didn't appeal to families, and didn't appeal to the casual audience they attracted with the Wii. Nintendo developed a console it couldn't market with a slate of games it couldn't/wouldn't really market either. They keep going back to the same franchises so often that unless you're a rabid fan, you could get your fix on a 3DS. Many of the same franchises with very similar gameplay are already on a system that better differentiates itself from MS/Sony, has less expensive hardware and software, and is probably already in your hands. I know the usual argument is that Nintendo was trying to cash in on the tablet craze with the Wii U, but to my mind, it's mimicking the DS/3DS instead with the dual-screen approach.

I know I've said this a bunch as well, but I just don't think that would be the case at all.

Nintendo owning their own ecosystem gives them a lot of flexibility that they'd lose by playing in someone else's sandbox. They have room to experiment. A desperate need to fill gaping holes in the schedule has had them funding games with partners that otherwise would have no reason to exist. If a game under development isn't where they want it, they can push it back as long as they want to get it right.

If Nintendo were kicked out of their sandbox and forced to play in someone else's, I'd expect them to double down on their "safest" franchises and largely abandon any experimentation. New IPs would be even fewer and farther between. They'd be far less prolific overall, and I definitely don't want Nintendo to produce fewer games. Marketing pressures might compromise the quality/polish of their games since they'd have to make more release dates. Someone in the Nintendo ecosystem is going to buy a bunch of Nintendo games; lose that ecosystem and introduce a lot more competition, and the Nintendo faithful will be less faithful. Nintendo's games are relatively inexpensive to develop, and they'd be directly competing against games with staggeringly huge budgets. Their margins would be thinner (paying for certification, gateway fees, and stuff), and they'd obviously lose hardware revenue and what little third party licensing they get.

Playing armchair capitalist, if Nintendo-style games would be such runaway successes on the Xbox One and PS4, why aren't any other companies trying to cash in on the vacuum? I know having Mario involved is a marquee draw, but I'd argue that these sorts of games fail on the MS/Sony platforms because the audiences for those consoles don't really want them. If Nintendo were to just be a Zelda / Smash / Kart / Mario platformer factory, I think they'd do well enough as a third-party, but a lot of their Nintendo-ness would be stomped dead.

stingermck

I don't know. Every one of my gaming friends (all in their 30's who grew up with NES) says they want to play Mario games, but don't want to buy a Nintendo system.

I know personally I would toss my Wii U instantly if Mario Kart was on PS4.

fumanstan

I think a lot of this wouldn't be an issue if Nintendo had hardware that was more comparable to what Microsoft and Sony were doing. I get the costs involved with building a more powerful console are a detraction, but relying on gimmicks and stabs at being innovative can be hit (Wii) or miss (Wii U) and if it doesn't work sets them back quite a bit. And as is, it's not worth 3rd parties putting the time when PC's, XBox, and PS4 are all x86 and Nintendo is the only one still using PowerPC.

Nintendo properties still sell; the numbers for Smash Bros and Mario Kart are an example of that, as is the continued success of handhelds. It's just not enough for most of the gaming audience to buy a $300 console solely for them.

Adam Tyner

(Sorry for posting so much. I'm caught in a longstanding holding pattern at work, and future-of-Nintendo is pretty much my favorite topic. It's a very dangerous combination.)

It all really comes down to third parties and what race Nintendo wants to run. A strong case could be made for Nintendo using themselves as the differentiator (rather than the gamepad, motion controls, etc.), and adopting a similar architecture as the Xbox One and PS4. Significant additional power under the hood would really be for third parties, so they would have to be onboard. There'd also need to be a balance between price, power, and being forward-looking. If Nintendo were to match/slightly exceed in 2017 what Sony and Microsoft are doing now, it'd be outdated a couple years later when the competition's next consoles drop. If Nintendo's were significantly more powerful, that'd come at a premium (potentially turning too many people away), it still might struggle by comparison to what Sony and Microsoft do a couple years later, and it'd require additional effort by developers to take advantage. It'd basically all be about third parties, and if there were significant gaps in support (or just late/undersupported ports like the Wii U had at launch), it'd be a wasted effort.

The possibly unrealistic fantasy scenario I have in my head is that Nintendo march to the beat of their own drummer again, just in a less destructive way. The hardware would be unremarkable but easy to develop for -- basically, just the power Nintendo needs to make the kinds of games they want, and nothing more. The architecture/OS would be shared between portable and handheld. It'd be buy once, play anywhere. A dedicated/separate effort would be required by third parties vs. XB1/PS4 development, but the appeal would be a common audience instead of "here are our console users, and our handheld users are over there". Reaching a larger audience with one product would be the selling point to third parties, and less powerful hardware could mean less development resources, lowering risk. This has its own sets of challenges, such as media distribution, technical compromises to get a game to work on both handheld and console, gameplay challenges to ensure that something's as fun to play on both size screens/form factors, finding a price point that makes sense for software (since handheld games are typically so much less expensive than console games), etc.

We know Nintendo is planning on shared architecture/OS, but Iwata has never said or even suggested anything about "buy once, play anywhere". I suspect that handheld and console will be very similar, and there'll be cross-buy for a number of titles, but it's more about streamlining development of two separate SKUs as opposed to a single SKU that works on multiple devices. No matter what winds up happening, a shared architecture would reduce the droughts that the 3DS and Wii U have suffered from, but "buy once, play anywhere" is a hell of a differentiator and a huge value proposition for devs and consumers alike. All they have to do is, um, overcome about eight jillion hurdles.

PowerPC is a dead-end, although I would not be even a little bit surprised if Nintendo goes for it anyway. (If Iwata's comments that "we are going to create a system that can absorb the Wii U architecture adequately" suggest what it sounds like they do...) Japan's tiny marketshare makes it clear that Nintendo shouldn't be designing hardware with their home country in mind, at least as far as consoles go.

stingermck

Yeah without 3rd party support the Wii U has just become a Mario machine. It's hard to shake that stigma, and justify a console for a few of those titles. Especially when gamers are already juggling multiple systems.