Nintendo says it's responsible for 99% of 2008 industry growth

Yeah, no joke! And just don't even try to imagine what is Interplay percent!

how incredibly smug. i thought sony was the only ones that could make such outlandish claims.

seriously tho nintendo isnt helpful to the industry at all. its now acceptable to not make sophisticated games with severely lacking hardware, and making games as gimmicky as possible.

Well at least their modest about it

I just think that Nintendo is a little big headed. The wii is fun and all, but, I don't think Nintendo is 99% for the growth. I think it's more 50% Nintendo, 50% Microsoft. Console sales don't mean growth to me since there are plenty of people who will buy the wii and never play it more than once.

Nintendo is 50% and so is MS? How is this possible? You're telling me that when the xbox 360s were being stacked like legos in stores because they weren't moving that year that it's had just as much change in the market?

I guess what bothers me most though is your utter complete disregard for Sony. Say what you will, but PSP is tops of the charts in japan all the time and last I checked, the 360 isn't fairing too well against the PS3 there.. or for that matter, even the old replaced DS lite.

I have no idea what the percentages should be.. but neglecting one of the main competitors and giving MS and Nintendo the same amount even though they are completely different companies is a bit....off putting.

Yep, you called it, Wayne.

@Orion $ony has done nothing for the industry so don't go saying what about $ony. They haven't been moving the industry forward like MS and to a lesser extent Nintendo.

i dont think everyone understands their statement.

what i take from it is the growth of the industry (as in the extra money and consumers brought in recently) have been from Nintendo. and with their focus on casual, for-everybody games, i dont think that is too far fetched of a claim. maybe not 99% but they are certainly the ones bringing in the majority of new customers to the video game industry.

how many stereotypical "non-gamers" do you know that have a 360 or PS3? cause i know a couple with Wii's and DS Lite's.

Nintendo is using flawed math to come up with this 99 percent figure. I actually blogged about this myself, but I'll try to recap it here.

Nintendo's argument seems to be this:

1. Revenue for the entire video game industry grew by $3.35 billion in 2008 over the previous year.

2. Revenue at Nintendo grew by $3.31 billion in the same time period.

3. $3.31 billion is 99 percent of $3.35 billion.

4. Therefore, Nintendo accounted for 99 percent of the industry's revenue gain last year.

But this line of thinking is bogus. Here's why. While it's true that the entire games industry saw revenues from the sales of hardware and software rise by $3.35 billion, that figure lumps together all the companies that saw their revenue go up with the companies that had revenue decline. You just can't lift Nintendo's numbers out of that, lump the other successful companies in with the losers and conclude that no one but Nintendo had a successful year.

I've also got an example showing what Nintendo did, and how it's incorrect at gamewit.pressdemocrat.com

"@Orion $ony has done nothing for the industry so don't go saying what about $ony. They haven't been moving the industry forward like MS and to a lesser extent Nintendo.
2 hearts"

You left out your sarcasm tag. Sony has done infinitely more for gaming than Nintendo, who is actually bringing games BACKWARDS

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU JUSTIN?

HOW COULD YOU!!!!

What's wrong with nostalgia?

How about everything?

Its gray in Europe only.

zeldazeppelin, get your facts straight.

http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/11/26/new-gray-nintendo-logo-is-for-us-too/

Nintendo, it's a helluva drug!

gat damn right it is......my wife felt the need to buy all these Wiimote attachments and like 12 games......damn shame......

They grow cocaine in Washington DC?

Or did you mean ColOmbian cocaine?

ooohhh

Yea...Sorry I had DC on the Brain.....

Yea just like every other consoles do not have Shovelware. I.E.: PS2.

Lots of consoles have Shovelware, even the NES does. But since it's the Wii you have to dog on it like it's killing gaming.

"But since it's the Wii you have to dog on it like it's killing gaming"

I'm starting to think that it is. Nintendo's snubbing of their longtime fans at E3, and their lack of compelling software speaks volumes as far as I'm concerned.

I haven't bought a game for the wii (outside of the VC) since SSBB, which is coming up on a year ago. Nintendo doesn't care... until it starts to hurt them.

The DS has shovelware, but at least they have a fairly steady stream of good games to counteract it.

Ah yes, E3, it's easy for those opposed to Nintendo's current plan to point fingers at E3, and it's even easier for them to forget about the October Press Conference where Nintendo basically gave their core everything they wanted, sans better online play and a Zelda game

Oh how hypocritical the E3 argument is. Let us take a trip down Memory Lane to a simpler time, the year 2006:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH2w2l1JTs4&feature=related

"and it's even easier for them to forget about the October Press Conference where Nintendo basically gave their core everything they wanted, sans better online play and a Zelda game"

Only because people went Apeshit. After E3, Reggie even said he had no idea why people reacted the way they did. Only a couple weeks later did they admit (mostly to appease those who made a fuss to begin with) that their E3 was (to be kind) unimpressive. Also, the only thing they did was acknowledge our existence, which is a start I suppose.

"Let us take a trip down Memory Lane to a simpler time, the year 2006:"

And your point is? Nobody ever said Sony has never made any mistakes. In fact, as you so clearly pointed out, people still hold that against them.

All things in life work in a cycle format. The gaming hierarchy and industry isn't difference to the rest of the world.

Now Nintendo is cycling back to being more of the arrogance we saw with them before when the 64 was coming out. Now we are seeing Sony being humbled by force from reaction to the PS3.

I don't know that I understand how Nintendo can say they are responsible for essentially all of the growth for 2008. Maybe I am misunderstanding something here.

There are more somewhat decent titles than you think .
The Wii do have its share of shovleware but its does have plenty of titles that are good just unfortunately most people just pass as shovleware .
My Wii game collection contains many of those overlooked titles that i enjoyed but you won't find anything like petz or crapz in there just good old plain & simple fun .

"Only because people went Apeshit. After E3, Reggie even said he had no idea why people reacted the way they did."

So wait silverwolf761...

What do you think is more believable...

That the whole time Nintendo planed to showcase their expanded market games at E3, they also had plans to showcase their more traditional games at their OWN sho in October?

Or

That Nintendo held an October Press Conference to showcase their "hardcore" games because a few people bitched on the internet?..
That going into E3 they had no plans at all of giving their core games their own show, but after reading forum posts on the internet by people like Killjebus or Tmac, Nintendo decided on a whim to just grab whatever they had in development and hold a big ol press conference right?



Hmmmm.

What would be a better place to show off new and exciting games? E3? Or an October press conference? I don't think Nintendo was planning to show of their better stuff at some press conference and thats why their E3 was abysmal.

You've got to be kidding Quattro!

How can Nintendo on one hand be this supposedly arrogant company that ignores the cries of its true fans.. but on the other hand rush out and set up a big October conference because a few people complained on the internet?

How can you expect me to believe two opposing truths at the same time without getting a nosebleed?

Nintendo knew exactly what they wanted to do, and they did it.

"How can you expect me to believe two opposing truths at the same time without getting a nosebleed?"
By Nintendo being Nintendo. They acted to E3 the same way they acted about 3rd party crap and the "hardcore" demographic; by not really giving a damn and putting out their own stuff.

Xera, comparing the Wii's software lineup to the PS2's is a joke. Comparing ANY system's software lineup to the PS2's is a joke.

See, the PS2 also had a TON of great games. 63 of them rated above 90% on metacritic.

The Wii has 8.

I do like the Wii, but if there's one thing I absolutely will not defend, it's the freaking software.

Yea because it happens to be Nintendo.

If it was M$ no one would care huh? Seriously lets take in this consideration. The PS2 also had Shovelware too didn't it? But since it had "many" good games no one cared.

You have to look for the good Wii games, not expecting EGM, IGN, or GI to advertise it for you. Look damn it, don't expect to be Spoonfed.

Are you retarded?

Shovelware on the Wii isn't being made by Nintendo (Save for Wii Music, I'll give you that), but by the third party publishers that everyone was so worried wouldn't get on board with the Wii when it came out.

That's why you have to look for your games.

You can't expect someone to hand you Guilty Gear: Accent Core unless you look. There are good games for the Wii, it's that they are not advertise as heavily as say Brawl or even Mario Galaxy.

"Shovelware on the Wii isn't being made by Nintendo"

No, it's not but Nintendo has to approve every shovelware game that gets put onto their system.

If you think Microsoft or Sony wouldn't have approved every single game currently released for Wii, you're delusional

What is Nintendo supposed to do in this situation? Think of what would happen if they said "Hey Ubisoft, make one more Petz game and we're taking away your license" Nintendo risks losing the people at Ubisoft who actually care (Montreal, Paris) and risks losing games like Prince of Persia, Shaun White 2, Assassins Creed, etc.

OK..OK i take it back. Their only resposible for 98.99%, happy now :P.
Telling me i have to search really hard to find good games isn't much of an answer to the problem.

My only point is that Nintendo is responsible for what games get released on their system.

"What is Nintendo supposed to do in this situation?"

I don't know, maybe what Sony and Microsoft have been doing all this time?

- Buy exclusivity
- Help fund titles
- Help with advertisement

Moptimus, like you mentioned, Nintendo is on this position in which they risk losing support, but that is because they don't really support/aid them to begin with, their support is very small in comparison to what Sony or Microsoft do.

Right now studios are not sure about the Wii so they keep releasing titles hoping that something sticks to the wall, thus far minigame compilations are the most popular ones and that's what driving their support for it. Although many fans want to see them try harder, the thing is, said games are expensive and the risk is higher since it is an unproven market.

Releasing a Mirror's Edge or Dead Space on the Wii is not the same as releasing it on the PS360, the risks are much much higher.

The only escape of this situation is Nintendo funding games to test the waters, but knowing Nintendo, the chances of that happening are very slim....

so yah, I guess we'll have to wait for Monster Hunter

Don't absolve Nintendo of blame here. Developers have consistently complained about Nintendo's lack of support and help for 3rd party companies on the Wii.

MS and Sony gives developers help when they're developing a deep, programitically complex game on their system, while Nintendo doesn't even tell 3rd party developers about peripherals they're releasing even if they'd fit perfectly into a developers game (motion plus/lightsaber debacle anyone?).

If Nintendo isn't going to give these companies the resources to develop the console to its fullest potential, then companies aren't going to take risks to do so only to be left high and dry by Nintendo when they need a hand, but rather will just shovel out the easy stuff that they don't risk getting stuck on.

@Kodros: Then your only point is wrong - or else, misplaced. As far as I'm aware, Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony all have the same policy: if your game gets a (non-AO) rating and passes basic QA then it can go on the system. Why should Nintendo have a different policy from anyone else?

And I don't see why anyone here should care if there's a lot of shovelware released for the system. (Which there is, so much so that you would in fact need more than a shovel; excavatorware?) If you read this site you're well-informed enough to not buy that shit. So what is all this anger in aid of... is it genuinely out of some kind of empathy for the poor parents (mostly) who misguidedly purchase crappy games just because they're cheap and on the shelf? If that's the case, I'm totally with you - it's pretty unfortunate for those parents who may not have realised that basic quality checks are easily available online at metacritic.com or wherever. I'm not primarily blaming Nintendo for it - they're just taking the license cash as a result of a no-censorship policy I certainly approve of, but game stores giving prime placement to these 'because it's cheap' titles seem like a more significant candidate here, not to mention the actual publishers.

So if you're feeling for the poor parents who pick up Crappy Racing Game 16 rather than Mario Galaxy, that would be nice. But 'hardcore gamers' and 'empathy' kind of go together in my mind like PETA and foie gras. That's not really happening, is it? Must be some other motive...

"- Buy exclusivity
- Help fund titles
- Help with advertisement"

But this isn't a charitable thing. It's a rate of return issue. It's not like Sony and MS are helping advertise 3rd party games out of charity or because they "care about gamers". They help advertising them because they know that the titles they pitch in to help will be big enough to ensure that they make their money back and then some.

As it stands, there have been NO third party Wii games that would really merit Nintendo helping out, because publisher expectations for sales weren't high enough to justify it.
If Capcom, for example, doesn't have enough faith in Zack & Wiki to advertise it...why on Earth would Nintendo??

When third parties start putting their AAA material on the Wii as they do on PS360, then you'll start seeing Nintendo help out...they've already said they would with Monster Hunter and DQX.

remember the last time Nintendo bought exclusives? Didn't really work out. Unless you were CAPCOM, in which case it worked like a charm.

And yes Vcize, I do remember Motion+. But then again, I also remember how Ubisoft acknowledged they knew about it and had been using it for Red Steel 2 and how EA said they had already been sent development tools for it. LucasArts is a truly fucked up company that will go the way of Infocom if they don't get their shit together soon.

And don't tell me Nintendo doesn't advertise for 3rd Party games. I've seen more commercials for the Wii version of World at War than the PS3/360/PC versions. Why isn't it selling? Because stores don't carry it. Which leads to another problem, stores like Wal Mart and Target would rather buy 50 copies of Party Gamez 35 for $5 than 20 copies of Zack and Wiki for $15 or whatever the price is that retailers buy games off of publishers for. Not everyone is willing to go to GameStop just to buy Okami or Battalion Wars 2.

For those of you with short attention spans, let me sum it up for you: This is a multilayered problem.