Iwata's pre-keynote interview
Dean
Takahashi from The Mercury News had a chance to talk to Nintendo president Satoru Iwata on Tuesday night to
discuss his GDC keynote. The first comment indicates that Iwata may hold off on most--if not all--new information on
the Revolution until E3 (what? no renaming?). However, Iwata did reassert his commitment to having the Revolution
playable for E3 attendees. Iwata did have some ambitious words to say about Nintedo's online service: "Our concept
is to get 80 percent to 90 percent of the players online"--a huge figure considering the Xbox Live service is used
by only around 10% of Xbox / Xbox 360 owners. Discussing the Xbox 360 shortage, Iwata told Takahashi that he believes Nintendo will not have the same problem: " I think I understand where their problems were. I don’t want to give an answer because I don’t want to give them any help." Iwata also noted that he had heard about Microsoft's rumored portable device, but that he did not have enough information and that "it doesn't have an effect on [them] this year."
If Iwata does, in fact, reveal the new name for the "Revolution" (or just makes the title official), Joystiq will break the news approximately 42 seconds after Mr. Iwata finishes his sentence.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
iceatcs @ Mar 23rd 2006 11:40AM
'Our concept is to get 80 percent to 90 percent of the players online'
Quite impossible unless if it is really some good offers. Like totally free and download free classic games. Or make all the games designed online only.
Prof-KOS @ Mar 23rd 2006 11:41AM
XBOX portable, Iwata probably peed himself when he heard that MS is thinking it. Great, another overpriced, over stylised, over hyped piece of crap with too many functions.
So, and Ipod/PSP/DS/Iriver killer. Got it. A nice clear and concise busness plan. Way to go.
Prof-KOS @ Mar 23rd 2006 11:44AM
Totally free is the plan. Make the games fun, easy to log on and start a match. Keep people playing each other by skill level. If it's free anyone that can will probably try it once. After that, if the experience is good, they'll probably be back.
James @ Mar 23rd 2006 11:45AM
"Joystiq will break the news approximately 42 seconds after Mr. Iwata finishes his sentence"
That's after the thousands of years of putting man power and resources into a machine that is capable of pulling off such a feat, correct?
pandlcg @ Mar 23rd 2006 11:46AM
I wonder if even downloading one classic game counts as having that player online.
JDS @ Mar 23rd 2006 11:53AM
What about all those Nintendo GO buyers that are dial-up users? Is the big N going all 56K on us? How can they be included in 80-90%?
I'll be in that % but thems fightin' words!
vidGuy @ Mar 23rd 2006 12:01PM
You want 80% online? Make it completely free, AND have a nice, concise service like XBOX live. The PS2's implementation of online gaming isn't the goal here. (Although I love MGS3:Subsistence online).
If they can pull this off, I could see them building a huge following. THEN they could charge a small fee, say $20 a year, to go online for their NEXT console (Ninty6) and I'd imagine they'd only lose about 10% of the consumers. THAT should be their plan.
AdamBot @ Mar 23rd 2006 12:28PM
Folks, are we forgetting how many Mario Karters went online?
Lazlo Falconi @ Mar 23rd 2006 12:32PM
Of course Nintendo's going to make it free, in case you haven't noticed, they already have. It is supposedly going to use the same WiFi service as the DS. Of course, it is quite possible that they'll use vidGuy's idea, charging next year. That would probably only work if they refined thier service, since it's not really that great at present.
SP @ Mar 23rd 2006 12:44PM
Revolution: $200 system, free wireless out of the box, no service charges, next generation control, looks great on your home TV set
PS3 and XBox 360: $400 system, $100 wireless, $50 per year online service charge, N64 generation control, graphical advantage with a $1000 HDTV set - otherwise very similar to Rev
Pretty clear choice to me.
"Everybody's getting a Revolution." - Diggnation
Pretty Obvious @ Mar 23rd 2006 1:42PM
How about
Revolution: $200 underpriced and underpowered system. Free online that may or may not be as good as the PS3's but will not compare to Xbox Live in the least. Gimmicky controller that may end up becoming innovative or may become the most annoying game mechanic ever released and lastly games that will look like crap in high def.
PS3 and XBox 360: $400 systems, you pay for what you get. Spanking new tech, though im spectible on the whole Blu-ray stuff. Multi-core processing, etc. Innovative online communities with Downloadable content. That content which not only consists of old school games but videos, music, everything in high def. Graphical advantages are obvious unless you are completely blind (Souped up Xbox or Super Computer), you dont need a $1000 HDTV set to enjoy this, how about a $200 HDTV set? Yes they have gotten that cheap.
Pretty clear cut choice if you ask me.
bladestar @ Mar 23rd 2006 1:42PM
#10
I am getting a Rev Regarless just because there are games that will not be on the PS3 (which I am also getting) or XBOX 360 which I have. But just remember some of us are not No single system fan boys, and we dont live with our parents or have to beg dad to buy it for us since we do work. Ask anybody using XBOX Live if they think $50 for 13 months or $3.80 is alot. Have you every try any MMORPG game? they cost more like $15 a month! and some of us play it.. go do some reasearch and ask how many people play FFXI now. Even if Nintendo or SONY give free online gamming which you can get playing most computer PC games today. They better offer a similar service with the same quality as XBOX live. If they can do that for free without affecting the game play with ads and banners then I give it to them. Till them XBOX live service is the best online centralized online game option. period!
And about the TV... Please! I have a 48' HD TV and I paid only $2,600 for it. eventually they will replace every tube tv... very soon... don't hate MS or SONY for making games HD games... You know how ugly games/movies/tv look when they are only in 480 dpi!
I know is good for them to look good on your tiny tv but please let it look good on HD big TVs!.
hitsthings @ Mar 27th 2006 1:56AM
Dude... "only" $2,600 for a TV? I know there's more expensive TVs out there, but there's just a hell of a lot of people who can't afford that. It's to that same demographic that Nintendo is marketing a sub-$200 system. Nintendo can probably afford to wait a generation before jumping to HDTV, since it won't be anything like prevalent for three to five years, probably.
http://www.shoplocal.com/default.aspx?Ntt=HDTV&Ntx=mode+matchallpartial&searchwithin=&keywordsearched=HDTV&r=632790171237211365755760953&N=133246&Ntk=ALL&adref=YahooTopKeywordBuy_TV&action=searchbroadreach&WT.srch=1&Ns=Price
I haven't been able to find an HDTV set for under $400, and my guess is those are hardly better than a normal set. A grand is a more typical figure, or way more of course.
Not everyone's hardcore. And I'm not sure the serious gaming demographic is where all the money is, either--maybe Nintendo is realizing this...
Damn, Nintendo has its work cut out for it, though... It better be able to deliver on all these promises it's making. I hope Nintendo's R&D department is as capable as its Marketing department.