Nintendo join the 21st century

by Steve Parsons { Nov 26th 2004 at 6:48PM }

Hey, Nintendo. You see that in the distance? Want to know what it is? It's the boat you MISSED! Translated quotes from Shigeru Miyamoto, have him quoted as saying that Nintendo will move all their systems online within 3-4 years, which is when Miyamoto claims online play will be mainstream.

What are you? NUTS!? It seems with Sega gone from the console making business, Nintendo have decided to take up the mantle of making wrongheaded decisions. The fact that Miyamoto claims that online play is of no interest to the majority of consumers is mind boggling. Do you think all those monster sales for Halo 2 were for people going "WOOHOO! I want single player!" If online hadn't entered the mainstream, there wouldn't be Xbox Live commercials on TV.

Wonder how history will remember this Nintendo moment? Miyamoto is a legend, but really, there's some rather odd thoughts in the mans head!

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

josh @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

the only problem i've ever had with this website is the obnoxious mini-(see: antijournalistic) editorials.

SetupWeasel @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

At the time of XBOX Live's 1 millionth suscriber (July 2004), Microsoft had sold 15 million XBOXes. That means (assuming all of those suscribers were still active) only 7% of XBOXes were online.

Console online gaming is still a niche market, and it is nearly impossible to turn a profit on it. If Microsoft wasn't able to throw away millions of dollars every year, XBOX Live couldn't exist. Even with all of the Halo 2 sales this may be, and I stress MAY, the XBOX's first profitable quarter. Nintendo doesn't have that luxury.

Consider this as well: The PS2 didn't have integrated ethernet until the new revision, but the PS2's online killer app, Final Fantasy XI, is not supported in the new revision of the hardware.

Steve @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

I don't know. I guess you could make the case that Nintendo want to wait to do it WELL. Fair enough. It just seems like a strange attitude. I mean hey, maybe Shigeru is a seer and has called this right. It just seems like an odd business decision. Though maybe that's more a symptom of OTHER companies being boneheaded rather than Ninteod, by screaming "ME TOO!" and bounding into the melee, rather than picking their time to enter carefully.

Steve @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

Ninteod... LOL! Nintendo of course:)

Sean @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

What is Nintendo thinking?!? Dude, what are YOU thinking???

Nintendo doesn't believe that online gaming is of "no interest" to gamers, but they do believe that gaming over the internet is, at least for the time being, a niche market. And they're not wrong. Last year's NPD report on internet usage and videogaming showed that only a small percentage of console game players actually participate in online play on a consistent basis.

More than 70 million PS2 consoles have shipped since 2000, but fewer than 2 million network adapters have been sold. That means that at best only 3% of the gamers out there with the best-selling console even have the ability to take their play to the internet. Sure, most new games have online components or downloadable content, but it's only a small fraction of console gamers that take advantage of those features.

Unlike Microsoft, which is content to operate at a significant loss to gain or maintain market share, Nintendo remains profitable, albeit at times needlessly cautious. They aren't going to sink money into an unproven form of game play that shows no sign of turning a profit in the near future. What they will do, however is let Microsoft spend its resources to test the waters of online play. Judging from comments made by many Nintendo execs over the past couple of years, it's very likely they are working on bringing the internet to console gaming in a meaningful, valuable, and (most importantly for the Kyoto-based gaming giant) profitable way.

Player 1 @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

Oh, dear Nintendo. You were the last holdout for a great offline, single-player console gaming experience. Please don't lose focus on your charm, playability, uniqueness, and characters.

Please.

SetupWeasel @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

Nintendo's attitude toward internet gaming is: when we can make money, we will do it. That doesn't seem to me to be strange. The Gamecube has a 56K modem adapter and a broadband adapter in case online gaming takes off. To me that is less "We'll wait and see," and more "When it happens, we'll be ready."

The hardware is there, all people have to do is write the code. Why hasn't EA built online compatibility into GC games? They use their own system anyway, and they did it for the PS2.

Nintendo doesn't have a monopoly that it can exploit elsewhere to make a grand online system. They make games, game systems, and toys. For almost any other company Microsoft's move would be seen as reckless, but they can raise the price on Windows if they need more cash, and it doesn't appear this administration wants to enforce anti-trust laws. The XBOX is operating at a severe advantage in the capital department, and Microsoft can afford to take any risks they want.

Matt @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

So is the N-Guage mainstream they have more commercials than I have ever seen for Xbox.

Uncle Sam @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

I think God GameDesigner make wise decide to have Nintendo online since DS been introduce and it could help grow from DS to new next-gen Nintendo Online.

Steve @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

That's a very good point about Japan. I knew that for whatever reason, their connectivity over there isn't up to the same standard. Xbox only really care about North America (I'm talking in the NTSC zone here). Sony... Not sure they have any specific allegiance. If they do, it's probably to Japan, and I base that purely on the ham fisted assessment of the number of PS1 titles released there in the last few years, over this market.

I don't know. A lot of you have made very convincing arguments. I've never been a fan of Nintendo (much to my wifes chagrin), so I guess my opinion represents that of the "common people" with Nintendo. In light of all the information it makes the decision look sensible. It's just with so many games clamouring to be online, and online seemingly being the selling point of damn near every game these days, Nintendo's opinion flies in the face of all that.

WillBDrunk @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

online gaming is not, and will not, be an applicable market to a lot of games. besides FPS, and RTS games, most of what nintendo puts out are strictly one player only. and really....I don't want a phantom, and I am not on xbox live, and i don't have the network adaptor for my ps2. Online gaming is not something a lot of people want.

Tim @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

I used to think that Online gaming was nothing special until I used it. I will never buy another sports title now unless it has online support. Not so much for the playing of random people all over the world, but for the downloadable roster updates. The fact that games can be updated (and sometimes patched) is a huge step in quality control and for this reason makes online gaming something that has and will continue to revolutionize the industry.

Wupideedoo @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

You even brought up Halo 2 in your post. Looking at the facts there: 1 million Xbox Live subscribers; 5 million copies of Halo 2 sold.

That tells me that quite a number of people were going, "WOOHOO! I want single player!"

"I guess my opinion represents that of the 'common people' with Nintendo."
Did anybody else find this comment at all disturbing? The fact that he basically admitted to being uneducated (as the common person tends to be), but a lot of people will still use him as a source of gaming news and information.

If I were him, I would have changed my post a long time ago.

Paul Wiesler @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

That is very stupid of Nintendo. Think of how large Everquest is, then add world of warcraft, the people playing counter strike, xbox live players, ps2 online players, the people who play other mmorpgs, and you have a whole lot of people playing online games.

The thing I really don't like about thyis article is that he dissed sega. Sega was awesome, and great. Sega had the first online console game.

Oh well.

Steve @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

Paul: I'm a Sega NUT! I still have my Dreamcast hooked up and operational! It's just Sega did make a fair few boneheaded decisions. Just like Commodore did with the Amiga. And I'm STILL an Amiga nut too.

Just because I criticised them, doesn't mean I "dissed" them. I find it really depressing knowing there will probably never be another Sega console. I've loved every machine they've put out. I even bought a Mega CD!

I lament the passing of Sega into software only:(

JinFX @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

i agree w/ the half of these people that Nintendo is NOT making a mistake in waiting for online to be profitable

but even though online doesnt make money, it will make money in other areas. i'm sure there are people who bought xBox and single player xBox games b/c they MIGHT be able to buy multiplayer games later
that doesnt mean i think online will work for Nintendo right now, but i DO believe it has worked for ms

striegs @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

Someone asked if the N-Gage was mainstream. I could just scroll up and find the person's name, but laziness has its advantages. Anyway, the N-Gage community is relatively small, with between 1 million and 2 million sold worldwide. The reason you see all those commercials is because its parent company, Nokia, is a wireless giant with cash to burn.

Now, I've read interviews with Miyamoto where he says that he will only support a Nintendo network if it was free to everyone, like Sony's. Remember, Nintendo is not the world's richest company (Microsoft), nor do they produce films and music and manufacture digital cameras, TVs, mp3 players, and the like (Sony). Reading through their annual report they have at most $7 billion in assets. I'm guessing Sony and Microsoft have much more.

Nintendo played it safe this generation, but the cost has been losing mainstream focus. I've read hundreds of articles comparing the Xbox and the PS2, but few mention the Cube at all. Sure, they kept their soul, but they lost their sales.

I think going online would be a great idea, as long as you don't have to pay for it (I'm looking at you, GATE$). If you want to play, great. If you don't, then sit back and enjoy single-player bliss. It's all good.

james delaney @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

Online play is all very well, but what happened to multiplayer games on a single console?

Titles now seem to be ditching the traditional and arguably more fun 4-player splitsceen multiplayer games in favour of playing against some unknown stranger in an unknown place. It's not really the same.

I worry that the social aspect of gaming, laughing at your mates misfortune or gloating about kicking their ass when you've got everyone round for a few beers etc risk being lost.

Games publishers need to try not to lose this as it's what makes multiplayer games fun.

One word. Goldeneye.

Jeremy @ Dec 18th 2005 9:47PM

Well, trying to use Halo 2 to make your point is flawed to begin with. The reason why Halo 2 is flying off the shelves is NOT because of online, it's because it's a sequel to one of the most popular games this generation.

I'm not alone in saying online is more popular among those who frequent online sites because...well, they're online.