Nintendo's Miyamoto on poor sales and PS3

In all honesty, I'm really tired of every other game beings the "Halo Killer," or "Medal of Honor Clone."

I love first person shooters... but it seems every other game is an FPS and its trying to emulate Halo or MoH. And its really starting to get lame.

That said, some of these "beefed up games" are actually very good, but the Shiggy man is right. Variety and quality are really starting to dissipear. And it's dissapointing.

If there's a potential in the next-gen market to do some innovative and creative things, then why not? Look at brain flex, Nintendogs, elektroplankton, geometry wars, shadow of the collosus. These titles have attracted many new gamers to the market and enlightened veterans alike. I don't believe a small cartel of hardcore gamers should dictate what a game should be. The problem as i see it is the market is slowly reflecting that of a hardcore gamer, whose position in the market is slowly decreasing (i.e. 14-24 yearolds). While developers try to counter this by giving the hardcore gamer a haven of catered titles, Nintendo is opening different avenues to attract the large markets that are just getting foothold of the gaming rush.

Miyamoto-san is correct. I like the direction Nintendo is going. Why be another 'me too!' when you can blaze your own trail in another direction and take all the credit for it? I like Nintendo's direction, it's not a matter of wrong or right, but a matter of, 'how do you want to play?'

I absolutely agree with Miyamoto that developers should follow their own ideas rather than respond to gamer requests. If that's all they did, all we'd have are revisions of existing games.

I wish developers would follow his example. New games should be exactly that: new games.

Who to listen to really is a tough question to ask.

The gamers for instance. You are reallying looking at multiple factions of gamers. You have the casual gamer who will purchase the Maddens, RPG's, Action and Shooter games after they have been made popular by either the media or thru word of mouth. Then you have the hardcore group which is again segmented in to factions. We have the people who will play any game type looking for fun and innovation then you also have the Franchise fan, who will gush on revision after revision of the same overall game.

Did I miss some groups, yes. Did I over simplify of course. Getting into all the type of gamers would be next to impossible. The point is that these tend to be the most vocal of the gamers.

Should publishers listen to them or the precious few innovators of the game industry.

The simple answer is both, the gamers and innovators need to get the attention of the development houses. There are merits held by all of the factions, such as the casual gamer their purchases of the general titles kepp the game industry going. So it is important to keep their interest. The hardcore are the explorers of the new generations of games, controls and interfaces, our lust for new experiences can be an utapped resource for game developers. The series fans keep developers trying to find new ways to keep and old idea fresh, this leads to sometimes greater depth to titles which in turn leads to more immersion.

Of couse then there are the visionaries who think outside the box that strech our ideas of what games can be.

In the end game developers have many paths of information that they can draw from , the problem is that they don't utilize the gift of gamers. We are a crazy bunch. We want it all and we want it now but we also want it done right. Given the chance and some kind of open forum, I am pretty confident that developers could get more ideas than they would know what to do with.

Just my thoughts.

Weren't there 29 Mario games last year? I mean... yes Nintendo games are fun, but he really isn't taking his own advice.

im not sure how anyone from nintendo can comment on poor game sales tbh , its not like they have been releasing many for the gamecube .
im behind nintendo all the way, and along with the 360 i'll be buying a rev , but the game support they had for the gamecube was pathetic , they did more than let me down with the last gen of game consoles , i mean fair enough they had poor console sales , but thats no excuse for what they did to the people who bought the machine.
they should be ashamed of themselves for the lack of games they put out for the machine .

I don't think the industry can survive without a balance. Some gamers just want to play FPS's, and always want the newest, shiniest version. They are going to buy plenty of copies of Halo 3, Quake 4. Other people get bored, and will throw their support behind Katamari Damacy and Guitar Hero. If gaming goes all sequels or all innovation, one huge class of gamer will get sick of things and drop out.

I look at my Gamecube and wonder why what he says never really applied to that system....and I can't see why adding motion sensors to a remote is going to make any difference whatsoever in the coming system.

If you couldn't churn out triple A titles on a regular basis for the Gamecube, what makes me think that Nintendo is all of a sudden going to put out a ton of amazing games for the Revolution.

Software is what sells a machine, and Nintendo is just as bad at rehashing the same crap just as anyone else. Every time a new Mario Party game comes out, or some Mario sports title, it is them working the same old tired formula that they have been milking for decades now, but the fanboys act like the gaming gods have blessed us with mana from the heavens....sorry, I ain't buying it.

Nintendo is just as guilty as anyone else when it comes to going for a buck as opposed to innovation.

And before some fanboy tries to point out how "Innovative" the Revolution is going to be, let me just say that it is the same old motion based control scheme that has been tried again and again in the industry and has never caught on. There is no reason that all of sudden the industry will diverge off into that kind of area now after it has been tried again and again with the Powerglove, the Activator, the Eye-Toy and all the other motion based controllers in the history of video games.

Everyone who brags about how the Revolution is going to be their sole console...I hope you are looking forward to meager 3rd party support and an even smaller library of new titles than the Gamecube has.

Don't mess with a knight. Sir Shiggy is the man.

Their were a lot of Mario games last year, but the thing is is that they were of different genres, some fighting, some side scrollers, some racing, some tetris, etc.... Not a fanboy, just clarifying. Also, he is right. Every game coming out is pretty much the same, except the gun or story behind the gun changes a little. Innovation is what created the industry, and innovation is the only thing that can keep it alive. Hopefully the competition between these systems will spawn something as revolutionary as the first Mario or street fighter, or whatever the next genre will be.

"It seems (by recent game sales) that a majority of consumers still enjoy what's being dished out by publishers."

Casual gamers are sheep and they'll buy almost any sequel no matter what is or is not added to the previous title. It's also hard to rationalize anything (state of the industry) by looking at sales numbers when we all know that most of the top selling titles in the last few years were all sequels, primarily either sports games (*cough* EA yearly rehashes *cough*) or Grand Theft Autos. EGM covered this like 6 months ago and said that Fable was the only game in a top 25 best selling game list that wasn't a sequel.

"If so, do you agree with Miyamoto that developers should listen less to customers while the games industry faces a transitional period into next-gen?"

Yes because AGAIN casual gamers are sheep and they'll buy anything no matter what. The fact that we've seen...what...9 Tony Hawk titles (1, 2, 2X, 3, 3X, 4, UG, UG2, AW) to this date now is a testament to this fact. How many do we need before enough is enough? Apparently there is no limit. *shrug* But apparently just because the sheep buy them up, we get to endure another 15 and the series is milked some more.

Very disappointing.

I'm looking forward to Revolution for one reason - new experiences. They could sell them for $400 and I'd still buy one because for my $400, I'm guaranteed to be playing games in a way that I've never played them before, and also in a way that I'd never be able to play them on the other $400+ (?) consoles.

"Pikman"

It's "Pikmin" you big silly goose.

@ by:

Nintendo supported their console with fantastic games, so I honestly don't know what you are talking about. They provided two interations of a brand new IP, Pikmin. They gave us an exceptional and seamless evolution of an old franchise,also with two interations, Metriod Prime. They gave us an almost flawless fighting game that still stands up to most other fighters today, SSBM. Two, soon to be three, excellent adventure games staring their main IP's, Mario Sun Shine and LoZ:WW. All this while supporting the GBA and DS as well. There are plenty more games than that, but that's off the top of my head. No other company supports their own products with more phenominal first-party games than Nintendo. Period.

I have to say, I think that the average gamer is like a horse being lead to water. You can bring them there, but you can't make them drink. I think it is entirely up to the creativity of the developers to change the industry and make more money. I agree with Miyamoto, I think gamers are tired of "beefed up versions of existing games" but since it is what they know, they generally aren't going to stray away from that. It would be great if developers listened to original ideas from gamers, but most of the time it seems that they just take game reviews and what gamers are saying in forums and take the feedback to make SaidGame 2.0. I would love to see more creativity in the game industry, and I actually think XBLA is serving as a great portal for this. Nintendo, when they aren't just creating another Mario & Co. title, seem to come up with very innovative and creative games. Hopefully the Revolution will allow other developers to come up with very new and fresh ideas. I would like to see more games like Spore(http://www.spore.com) but unfortunately with a game like that it is either sink or swim, and unless the development studio has a lot of capital to work with, its too risky. The question here though: is it too risky to just continue the path of non-innovation? Lets face it, we can only have so many Tom Clancy based games (I do not intend to single out Rainbox Six or Ghost Recon or anything here). A few new moves/guns/characters, some new artwork, higher resolution, and a slightly different story... but they are all essentially the same game. Innovation is where the money is, and once the game studios realize this, it won't be a matter of Playstation 2 having the biggest library of games, half of which you would never play let alone pay money for. There will be slightly less games available, but much more fun and variety. That will be a gaming world that everyone will enjoy.

I have to agree with Gavin, Nintendo the company has certainly given us plenty of 'rehashes' and uninspired titles. The Sony platform is the probably the most guilty of the three, but I don't think it's fair to fault any development company for putting out a recycled piece of software. I blame us gamers.

It's a lovely polyanna thought that video game companies should be 'innovative' and truly creative, but tell that to your shareholders when you've posted a loss for the 3rd quarter in a row for not giving your core customers what they want. The reason why these companies release this kind of software is because we buy it and that means they can make money on it. Being idealistic in business is reserved for very niche companies like Apple, (or Nintendo).

Until the day when we gamers demand more from our video game developers, and stop buying the latest FPS that's just like Halo, the industry will continue to force this stuff down our throat. I only hope the Revolution does to the console market, what the DS has done to the handheld one.

Yknow, Im sick of people nay-saying gamecube games. The ratio of good to crap on the gamecube is FAR BETTER than any other system. Sure, theres less games, but theres also a smaller margin of crap.

And Im not talking less games equals less crap, either. Im saying the ratio is much better balanced with good-bad compared to the PS2 (look at all the garbage
nobody buys) and the Xbox.

Dont get me wrong, I actually own all three consoles, but my games library for the GC is much bigger than the Xbox or PS 2.

"If so, do you agree with Miyamoto that developers should listen less to customers while the games industry faces a transitional period into next-gen?"

Of course not! You listen to your customers and develop a product to meet their needs and wants... Marketing 101, people. But you got the point all wrong, he doesn't want the game developers to stop listening to the gamers, but just not be so focused to catering to the group that wants rehash after rehash. The way I see it, the games industry is getting more popular every day, and it's starting to turn into the movie industry, where the developers can't come up with any new ideas and are just redoing what's been done. But the remakes aren't what win Academy Awards... likewise, it won't be the Super-Killer Edition XVI that furthers the industry.

I'm looking forward to the new Mario and Zelda, new version of GTA and Halo, etc, but I'm most excited about the new IPs Nintendo is talking about. Hope we can have a new platformer character join the ranks of Mario and his friends.

Definitely being able to take thoughts from all groups of people would be the best way to go. Isn't that the way that all businesses and industries want it to be. We need to get a good cross section of all types of gamers in order to be able to bring new and fresh ideas to the gaming world. Miyamoto is right about innovating. I really think that through new ideas, the gaming industry can grow. We need to bring in non-traditional gamers. Although the industry is growing at a phenomenal rate, Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo are all clammoring to get into the non-gamer groups. It's billions of dollars just sitting there waiting to be spent, but no hardware or software producer has been able to grab it yet. I really feel that Nintendo is doing something right with the Revolution and that it is a pretty darn innovative piece of hardware. Yes, motion sensors are nothing new, but the way that it's implemented is going to be the difference. Remember that this stuff is straight out of the box and not a peripherial like every other time motion sensor hardware was made (as Gavin's post states). In order to make a game for the system, you're going to have to take advantage of it. I like what Nintendo has also done with the DS. Nintendo really is doing a good job with applying existing technologies and tweaking them towards to gaming industry. Innovation is the way to go. Rehashing titles is fine and good, but there really have been way too many of them out there. It's time to bring something new to the industry.

What he's saying reminds me of things I learned between naps in geology.

Imagine that the PS3 and the 360 are the giant dinosaurs (T-Rex's et al) and that Nintendo is the small mammal (lets call it a gopher... yeah, why not, gophers are nice :).

As my lecturer explained it to us: Here's why being big and powerful can suck...

Way back in the day the planet was dominated by dino's. Their reign was unchallenged and they had few competitors except aqmong themselves. There were smaller mammals knocking about but everytime they tried to walk freely they were killed.

Now, at that current time the weather (games industry) was perpect for the giants. They beat their chests alot, ate alot and fought alot. And there was always enough food etc for them to recover. The gophers on the other hand only needed a little bit of food to survive (a niche) and it didn't fight much either.

Now, here's where the fun started. One day (ok, more over a relatively short period of time) the weather changed! And suddenly there wasn't enough food (interest/money) to go around. And the giants got weak from battle and starvation until they died. This is when the gopher suddenly realised - "Hey, you know what? I can live in the new climate! It's not too harsh for me! And I can stay alive on next to nothing!" So as soon as the giants bit the dust, the mammals roamed freely and dominated the planet.

Moral - being big and powerful is good... only if you can last in that environment. If your the champ of hot weather, and an iceage suddenly comes and you cant adapt - your f*cked!

This is known as survival of the fittest.

It's not whose the most powerful that wins/survives, it's who can adapt to changes.

And changes always happen. Thats why we're hearing reports of people losing interest in curent gaming.

So far MS and Sony have (largely) failed to adapt. They only made themselves more powerful (and beat their chests about it alot). Which is good if thats all that people wanted.

But guess what - many people are complaining about lack of innovation.

Nintendo is the only company smart enough to get a bit stronger, but also bring a new pair of snow shoes and a warm jacket along as well.

They are prepared for new weathers/territories. The others are not. In the current atmosphere (attitude towards gaming) MS and Sony will survive. But lord help them if gamers want something new.

You can also apply this analogy to the large developers. The giants being those who continually hash out sequal after sequal, and the mammals being those who want to innovate.

This message was in no way endorsed in any way by Nintendo or the Geological Societ of Great Britain.

Kye

:)

krom bless nintendo. i want to have nintendos babies. i want a 3 way orgy with 360,ps3, and revolution. i'm hot for videogames.

"Yknow, Im sick of people nay-saying gamecube games. The ratio of good to crap on the gamecube is FAR BETTER than any other system. Sure, theres less games, but theres also a smaller margin of crap."

What fantasy land do you live in?

Go do a little research and look up how many top selling games in the world were on the PS2, and then go look at the same stats for the Gamecube. You will be amazed at what happens back here in the real world my friend.

Nintendo has had quite a few fantastic games on the Gamecube and while there have been dry spells, and dropped 3rd parties it is a good system. I own all three current gen systems and play the pretty equally, but what I've played the most recently is my DS. I, like so many other gamers are hungry for new games, new experiences, and more fun than we're having now. Now that Nintendo is embracing the online aspect of gaming (which for me was their glaring fault with the 'cube) I think they are prepared to have an amazing run in the next gen battle. Yet, whether they lead the battle or not is irrelavant, personally I hope that they do come out on top, but if not, I at least hope that it encourages the gaming industry to grow and become something more relavant, accepted, and enjoyed.

I'm not saying Miyamoto is wrong, but I would like to remind everyone that pushing the Revolution is his agenda, and he is going to say that the rest of the industry lacks innovation, because innovation is the entirety of Nintendo's platform.

"They have the hardware numbers. We have the controler innovation and unparalleled 1st party software." (Not a direct quote from anyone)

They are going to continue to hammer those ideas home. If you believe it, that's cool, but don't believe it because someone with a vested interest in Nintendo's success said it.

hehe good analogy.

That's how I see 'em.

Anyway the same game thing is a pretty big generalization, but true. I wish companies would lose money bringing new ideas to the market rather than lose money bringing the same 'ole clones to the market.

I think it would be better with publishers could mix these two things: ok, give players what they want, but in an innovative way. Listen to their preferences and tastes, but find another paradigm when producing the titles...Nintendo won´t stop making Mario or Zelda games...of course, that would be stupid. But they´ll sure surprise us with the gameplay and the way we interact with the things we see on screen...do graphics matter? Well, not that much for me.

I agree with vidGuy

But now something else is troubling me.
A bit off-topic but so am I :)

This whole marketing 101 thing.

I've heard that this room 101 thing is supposed to be that you face up to the thing [or learn the subject] of yout fears in room 101.
Not that the basics of the subject are taught there.

Which one's correct? As I always considered the former to be true, not the latter.

Eg. Tomorrow I've got Advanced Chemistry 101 :-s
(Me being damn nigh retarded in that field)

Please help.

Kye

I'm going to start a petition to stop the use of the word "Shiggy"

Kye i like your analogy, but its funny cause in fact your analogy can be reffered to sega and nintendo.

They were the dinosours, with the maegadrive/genesis and snes/nes but when gamers attitudes changed and they wanted something diffrent, nintenod kept offering the same mario but this time in tennis edition, party edition, golf edition and racing edition, and sega continued to not get 3rd party support onside.

They couldnt cope with the changing climate. Then the gopher, the playstation came and took over.

So yeah nice illustration but it has already happened once, and your right it might happen again. but the revolution wont be the machine that adapts to the new climate. in 3 years you will know what i mean.

"Too many game creators listen to requests from existing gamers who simply want beefed-up versions of existing games."

I think what he means is that game creators shouldn't always listen to gamers who want simply an improved version (most gamers aren't game creators). He's not saying don't listen to gamers completely. He's just saying that game creators shouldn't run from new ideas in favor of sticking with the same-old.

Uh people need to read, He isnt commenting on Nintendos sales, he is talking about the game industry as a whole.

And last time I checked, Miyamato makes games, and isnt the nintendo president, He really has nothing to do with how many mario parties get made. Nintendo is starting on a path to recovery, Things started getting alot better once Iwata became president. While it is regretable to see Cube dieing so soon, Nintendo is changing gears now, starting with the DS. Look at the support DS is getting from nintendo. I think they are getting ready to do that for rev.

If not, then what they hell are they spending their time on?

Gavin, Your sony fanboyish comments arnt needed, we already get that you are an idiot

Nintendo is improving in the area that makes the videogame industry unique from the other entertainment industries(The interaction between the user and the medium.) What other differences are there? None. Graphics, if you want to see the best CGI then go watch LOTR or Harry Potter. If you want to hear some of the best sound go to a to a live concert. But if you want the best interactive gaming experience then go Nintendo. They are the ones trying to erase the biggest barrier between the gamers and the games, the controller. The revmote basically becomes an extension of your hand into the virtual world, therefore, giving the user more control over their avatar's movements. Your own unique movements become the movements of your on screen character, not a button mash. But I digress, this is if everything goes according to nintendo's plans, and I am hopeful.

Actually Gavin, I think you missed the point.

I never said PS2 didnt have any games that didn't sell well, I said the RATIO was better on the GC. In this 'real world', by dropping the crappy 3rd party developers, Nintendo has managed to set the standards bar a bit higher.

I live in a real world, thank you very much. :)

Seriously. I've done the research, Ive looked at the games, Ive seen the stats. Nintendo really does have a higher ratio of mediocre to decent games compared to crap on the Gamecube than the PS 2 or the Xbox.

Its a policy thing, really. Nintendo has always had some sort of law in place where developers are only allowed to bring out a set number of games a year for the system. That, and the elitest approach to all third parties... if you fail or look poor, dont come back.

The upside of this is, that ratio I keep mentioning.

The downside is, well, as you've pointed out, theres never going to be a crazy amount of good high selling games because not enough stuff is put out for the system. There will be a hefty amount of good games, but until they start putting out the amounts of games the PS2 and the Xbox does, they will never be able to hit that mark.

But in the end, id rather have someone hand me 100 random nintendo games than 100 random playstation games. Theres a far likely chance those 100 random nintendo games are going to contain a better number of good ones than the 100 random ps games or xbox games.

"Go do a little research and look up how many top selling games in the world were on the PS2, and then go look at the same stats for the Gamecube. You will be amazed at what happens back here in the real world my friend."

top selling = good game?

Yep, I'm here in the real world and you know what? There are plenty of killer games that don't sell that well (Beyond Good and Evil) and some craptastic ones that sell like hotcakes (Enter the Matrix anyone?) and those were games available on all systems. Eternal Darkness was brilliant and suffered awful sales, yet EA has almost driven the Bond series into the groud with mediocre titles, but they still sell. The Gamecube had a much smaller install base than PS2 so obviously they are going to have less top selling titles, but that doesn't speak directly for their quality.

He is talking about the game industry through Nintendo colored glasses. He isn't the president, but he develops for Nintendo and only Nintendo. Nintendo pays him, and if he's going to devote his career to them, I'm pretty sure he's apt to believe in the company line.

He's pro Nintendo. Nothing wrong with that, just be aware of his bias. In fact, you should always take into account people's biases when evaluating their comments.

Random Guy...

Glad you liked the analogy.
Interesting spin you put on it. Kudos.

I agree the PS1 did come in and whoops ass.

But sadly I must disagree with (some of) the rest of what you said.

Change will always happen. Tastes and desries will evolve as we get older etc etc etc. And newer, (or older) stronger companies will woo us with their wares.

The revolution might be heading for the Sahara with a winter jacket on... But. They still are the only company this coming generation to step in a new direction.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

But thy art intruiged though to learn of what will cometh in 3 years. Doth thou haveth a seer stone? Maybe a palantir in which you can predicteth what gamers will want in 3 years? Art thou psycic or speaketh with the ghost of gaming future?

Please, this captures thy's interest. It may hold the key of success for many men.

Please shareth it with thee.

Sorry about ye olde english - just felt like it.

Btw, thanks everyone else for not making me feel like an idiot for the ratio thing Im talking about, apparently Im not the only one with the gifted eyes for seeing it... Gavin just had a little too much a**hole in the morning coffee, methinks. :)

Nintendo is improving in the area that makes the videogame industry unique from the other entertainment industries(The interaction between the user and the medium.) What other differences are there? None. Graphics, if you want to see the best CGI then go watch LOTR or Harry Potter. If you want to hear some of the best sound go to a to a live concert. But if you want the best interactive gaming experience then go Nintendo. They are the ones trying to erase the biggest barrier between the gamers and the games, the controller. The revmote basically becomes an extension of your hand into the virtual world, therefore, giving the user more control over their avatar's movements. Your own unique movements become the movements of your on screen character, not a button mash. But I digress, this is if everything goes according to nintendo's plans, and I am hopeful.

There is a big difference in "Same Franchise" and "Same Game".

Yes, Nintendo are milking their popular franchises. You can accuse them for this.
But...they have never taken the same game, upgrade the graphics a bit, add a few extra modes and "serve" it a year after the first.

Hey, i like sequels. Most people do. But lets face it, most are dejavu filled experiences that have the same old mechanics, the same old touch.
I can understand the feeling of security many people like, when they boot a game and they know all the moves, the combos, the controls. Its good to know that we will still be good on Fifa 2008. That we'll still be the best when Madden 2010 comes out. That we'll have the most kills on COD4. If the games change drastically, our hard-earned skills will go to waste.

Look at Zelda. Each game is unique in its own merit and this shows what the philosophy on Nintendo is. Its not only about new IPs, its about new ways to play them.
Nintendo's goal is to provide players with fresh experiences. And this can be expressed perfectly with Revolution.

Each game will boast a new control method. Most genres will change. We can forget our presumptions, even old games will be transformed.
Easier control, more intuitive,non-gamer friendly, totaly different than before. A person who plays video games for the first time can face off against a lan veteran. We can take our gaming history and throw it in the bin. We are all "virgins" again.

Kye, I always use (insert subject here) 101 to refer to something basic in a knowledge setting. That's the only way I've heard it used.

The class number refers to the first course (freshman level) in a subject, but most schools don't use that kind of designation anymore. I'm in beginning marketing right now (had it this morning-actually, and I'll tell you it is hard to pay attention with a hangover), but my school considers it a harder course than, say, English composition, which is a 100 level, so Principles of Marketing is 309 here.

You're mixing two different ideas, Kye. For many years, the most common numbering system for educational courses would start with 101, as your class does. To say you're taking Math 101 indicates you're taking the most basic course of a subject.

Completely unrelated is Room 101 from George Orwell's 1984, in which the loving main characters are taken and tortured with their greatest fears until they betray each other.

"'You asked me once,' said O'Brien, 'what was in Room 101. I told you that you knew the answer already. Everyone knows it. The thing that is in Room 101 is the worst thing in the world.'"

And Gavin, I don't think you really read the previous comments; he wasn't saying the cube had more, he was saying that the ratio of good games to bad ones was much better on the gamecube, which is my experience, as well. For every MGS2, there's five Everrings.

And for what it's worth, Nintendo has been pushing this idea for a while now, both in hardware and software. Donkey Kong Jungle Beat is a good enough game to warrant buying a GC alone, IMHO.

Notice how a simple game like Katamari Damacy suddenly took the world by storm? Shiggy's point is that right now, most video game companies are fighting over a diminishing market...they need to grow the whole market, not just the 18-35 year olds...because many of them are leaving gaming or reducing their gaming habits....and no one's moving in to replace them.

Bring back Sega! Bring back Sega!

19. "Yknow, Im sick of people nay-saying gamecube games. The ratio of good to crap on the gamecube is FAR BETTER than any other system. Sure, theres less games, but theres also a smaller margin of crap."

What fantasy land do you live in?

Go do a little research and look up how many top selling games in the world were on the PS2, and then go look at the same stats for the Gamecube. You will be amazed at what happens back here in the real world my friend."

Which of course has nothing to do with quality. Or is "Failure to Launch" actually one of the better movies released in 2006?? Or that Madden 200x really one of the best games made in any given year cause it pushes so many units??

How many units did Psychonauts push? Or Ico? Or Beyond Good and Evil??

And he said RATIO not aggregate. No one will argue the PS2 wasn't heavily supported...but a lot was crap. I'd rather it be that way for the GC, I trust myself to find the good out of the bad, but that was his point.

The games industry is due for innovation, we all certainly need it.
Miyamoto's webchat has finished check it out at webchats.tv or over at http://www.nintendoinfo.com

The main reason 2005 suffered a slump was because of the cycle to next-gen and it hasn't gone smoothly. I mean did you buy say Call of Duty - The Big Red One on the say the XBox or PS2, when you could see what you'd get with the 360 ( albeit COD2 ), I bet no. Then people couldn't even get hold of the only next gen console. But now look at the sales of GRAW on the 360, huge!

This cycle in game sales happen's every console generation. Shiggsy is just talking up that the Rev will be slightly different with that wand remote. But really they just don't like subsidising $700 consoles to the tune of $400, hence in comparison their low speed CPU and 512mb of Eprom storage space for $199!

Another thought to consider to the "Gamecube games suck" crowd:

A gamecube game has won Gamespot's Game of the Year award for every full year that the gamecube has been out except for 2004, when the PC WoW won.

Myamoto is right, Microsoft is sucking the market with only shooters and a crap console

I think Shig's argument is flawed in a couple of ways-

1) There are new comers to gaming all the time. A decent game, regardless of whether it is a beefier version of something already out there, is a good game to a newbie. If old-timers like it, that's a bonus.

2) I still like movies, and they haven't fundamnetally changed since I started watching them. Instead of new input and output devices, why not put *new* characters, effects, situations, stories, online elements and music into games to keep them fresh?

I'm not against all these revolutionary new games Nintendo will be surprising us with- just I don't think there as necessary as everyone thinks! Quality can be achieved without innovation, it's just harder :)

"If you have a good idea, we have the money."

I'm surprised nobody has commented on this yet. This is something that really excites me, because I love some of the stuff that gets done by small, upstart companies. Basically he's telling the little guys that he's got their back. And that's cool.

This may also increase third party support, if Miyamoto is serious about this position...but then again, maybe it's just talk.

I guess my only issue with it all is - it's not the developers fault, really. Simple business knowledge tells you that if there wasn't a market for these rehashes, shooters or not, they wouldn't be made. It's not MS's fault, nor Sony's, nor Nintendo's, et al. It's the consumers. And as I said earlier, as the gaming industry grows, the people that are easiest to sell to are the ones that suck this crap up like it was chocolate syrup. As long as those "gamers" dominate the market, game innovation won't be in high demand.

The games that are super-smash hits here in the US AND are different are the ones that are finally going to break this repeat-offense and get us new gaming experiences.