Game Radar's Top 7 Nintendo mistakes [Archive]

7th lutz

04-09-2007, 11:56 PM

http://www.gamesradar.com/us/wii/game/features/article.jsp?articleId=2007040911262588028&releaseId=20060308165433320026&sectionId=1003&pageId=20070409115711693039

7 - Creating the Wii

Can the same magic that made the DS an international phenomenon happen with a console? Nintendo's betting on it. Betting it all, really.

Because what do you do next? Five years from now, when the PS4 and NextBox show up, they're going to jump in hardware power again. And then Nintendo's left with a machine that looks two generations old instead of one. The motion controls, now considered somewhere in between "the best damn thing that's ever happened in the world" to "gimmicky stupid childish nonsense," will be super played out and exploited. Unless there's some other gameplay innovation on the horizon, Wii could be viewed as a fad, susceptible to the same fickle emotions that killed snap bracelets, pet rocks and Sega. And if Nintendo bites the bullet and gives the machine a visual kick in the pants, well there goes its whole mantra that graphics don't matter. There's just enough steam with this idea to last one generation, and none after that.

Today, the Wii is insanely popular with almost every audience. But if this wave of good vibes ever ends, Nintendo's gonna be stranded. Casuals will be tired of Wii Sports, with no interest in shelling out $50 for a Wii Sports 2, and the typical gamer will me more interested in playing something with a normal controller, one you don't have to clear the room for.

Sure we love Super Paper Mario and can't wait to see Super Smash Bros. Brawl, but do either of these games have anything to do with the Wii Remote's primary function? Nope. And most third party games that find their way onto the system have control setups that baffle even the most hardcore of gamers. Hold B while flicking up to swing a punch? Please. Nintendo better have some crazy unique ideas coming up or we'll have to start clutching our DS systems even closer.

6 - The Virtual Boy

"Eye Advisory: Virtual Boy is for players 7 years and older" - Virtual Boy box

No list of mistakes would be complete without mentioning the world's favorite piece-o-crap gaming device. Launched in 1995, just as the SNES was fading and a year before the N64 would arrive, this "portable" machine was stricken from memory the moment it hit the shelves. For some reason, Nintendo thought people would actually want to strap their heads into a clunky headset that only displayed red visuals on a black background (and caused incredible eye strain after moderate use). The faux-3D images looked like a Game Boy trapped in a crimson-laced Tron nightmare, never once offering the supposed "32-bit" processing power promised on the box.

It was ugly, It was heavy. It was uncomfortable. It was confusing. It was almost 200 damn dollars. Within a year you could find these things for $25, games for $10 and eager merchants desperately trying to get this abomination out of their stores. In a way, the Virtual Boy was the true beginning of the end for Nintendo's unquestioned dominance, the first bizarre misstep in a series of horrible mistakes. Some came before, sure, but they were obscured by the fact that Nintendo was the only game in town. In '95, Sega had chewed up half of the audience and Sony was ready for the rest - a product as ill-conceived as the Virtual Boy couldn't have struck at a worse time.

Virtual Boy's creator, the late Gunpei Yokoi, resigned from Nintendo following this disaster. It's a shame he left (or was forced to leave, as some surmise), as Yokoi is also the father of the gazillion-selling Game Boy. Who knows what other joys he could have brought to this world if he hadn't left the company?

7th lutz

04-09-2007, 11:57 PM

5 - An ongoing battle against online gaming

"Customer's don't want online games." - Nintendo president Satoru Iwata, 2004

"More than six million people are Xbox Live members." - Microsoft press release, 2007

While this quote from Japan Economic Foundation may sound inaccurate today, what with Nintendo's Wi-Fi Connection and all, but three years ago the company couldn't have been more anti-online. While Sega Saturn offered a modem, Nintendo never even approached the idea with the N64. A few years later, Dreamcast had a modem built in, the Xbox shipped with broadband support and PS2 rolled out its own way to take the system online. What did GameCube provide? A half-assed broadband adaptor that supported Phantasy Star Online games with zero first-party backing. If you wanted to game online, you did not play with Nintendo.

The rationale, for the time, wasn't without reason - most Japanese players got online in public places, not their homes. Even though the rest of the gaming world goes the other way, Nintendo was more concerned with its homeland than appealing to any other audience. Fair enough, but this led to Microsoft dominating the market with the attractive and easy-to-use Xbox Live.

And once Nintendo finally embraced online gaming, what did we get? Horrendous 16-digit Friend Codes that must be traded before you can play another person. Oh, and these codes aren't system specific - there are different codes for every game you buy. Who needs clever, easy to remember Gamertags when you've got a string of forgettable numbers to trade with each new title? Maybe they're safe for kids; maybe they're total pains in the ass too.

Even with the Wi-Fi Connection going strong on DS, there's still very little effort being put into Wii's online presence. When was the last time you sent a message to someone? Why do we have to wait six months before playing one damn Wii game online in the US (and when we do, it'll be Pokemon Battle Revolution )? If Nintendo had just embraced online gaming when it was in its infancy, it could be the one monopolizing the internet gamer community. As it is, that crowd belongs entirely to Microsoft, and with PS3's Home on the way, we need more than some cutesy Mii people running around to convince us of Nintendo's commitment to one of the fastest growing aspects of modern gaming.

4 - Censorship and the unshakable "kiddy" image

If you're trying to sell video games to kids in the '80s, the last thing you want to be seen as is "uncool." But for a while there it seemed like Nintendo was going out of its way to look and act like a parent desperately trying to protect his children from the outside world yet also appear hip and "with it." Initial censorship, like removing overt religious icons or scenarios from Japanese games, made sense. Scantily clad women would often receive a few extra strands of clothing, that's nothing too crazy either. But the constant badgering of third parties to remove references to Hitler or words such as "devil," "death" or "hell," had to be grating. Even more so when Nintendo's main rival, Sega, didn't seem to really mind a lot of the same content. Sega also left the precious blood in the first home port of Mortal Kombat - Nintendo saw fit to force publisher Acclaim to replace the blood with sweat.

With this one act, the thought that Nintendo was a little too family friendly came out into the open for all the playgrounds and college dorms to see. We can't rip off someone's head in the Super NES Mortal Kombat? Fine. See you at Matt's house. He has a Genesis.

Once Mortal Kombat II came to the SNES, the blood was a go, due to the verbal and sales thrashing Nintendo received. But this problem isn't about lost sales, it's about perception. After this point, it wasn't "cool" to like Nintendo anymore. All the fanatics of the '80s were ga-ga over Sonic the Hedgehog, and all the mushroom-eating plumbers in the world couldn't make the company seem as edgy as Sega. To top it all off, once the videogame violence topic hit congress, Nintendo brought its own version of MK to prove how "safe" its version was compared to Sega's uncensored Kombat. Essentially, Nintendo was tattling on Sega. If there's a better way to simultaneously look like an asshat and make the other guy appear cool as hell, we'd love to hear it.

Nintendo, once the epitome of cool, was surpassed by Sega, then by Sony and astonishingly fast by Microsoft (the Xbox went from non-issue to major player in about a month). And whenever it tried to cover this image up with the "in your face" ads of the "Play It Loud" era, kids across the country were smart enough to tell the difference between real cool and real stupid.

7th lutz

04-09-2007, 11:57 PM

3 - Pissing off the third parties from day one

There's no denying that Nintendo brought the videogame industry back from the brink of disaster. You also can't deny how much it used this leverage to lord over anyone who wanted to use the insanely successful NES to make money. If you could get a game published on the first Nintendo system, you had it made. But first you had to jump through whatever hoops Nintendo laid out for you. And you did it with a big fake smile on your face.

First you had to place an order for Nintendo-made cartridges - minimum of 10,000 - and Nintendo makes money off of each sold cart. Then you had to submit your game and all its related aspects (commercials, artwork, all of it) to Nintendo for approval. If it wanted to, Nintendo could censor whatever it liked.

The best part is the strict limit Nintendo placed upon its software rivals. No matter how many games you'd like to sell, you could only produce five games per year on the system. The thought was, if you can only make five per year, they're bound to be good, right? Not a bad idea... unless you're trying to make back the costs of buying all those blasted NES carts. Oh, and you couldn't release the game on any other platform for two effing years. That kinda stung too.

As game prices rose in the mid-'90s, Nintendo was able to put out its own games at reasonable cost - meanwhile, third parties, still paying cartridge royalties, had to bump their prices up to break even, causing another rift between the money Publisher X gobbled up versus the vast riches Nintendo usurped. With a near-90% stranglehold on the videogame marketplace, anything the company wanted, it got. Until congress got wind of this, that is.

After a hailstorm of bad press and allegations of monopolistic practices, Nintendo was more or less forced to ease up on its restrictions. Publishers could freely put their games on rival platforms (ensuring the Genesis' success) and could also finally control their gaming orders and inventory. But the point is, it took the actions of Washington to make it happen, and once it did, software publishers were all too ready to hand out their once-exclusive titles to someone else.

Cut to today, when Nintendo's allegedly not giving third parties access to its all-important Mii code, or info on how to take a Wii game online. The past two Nintendo platforms, N64 and GameCube, started strong with third parties, then fell flat after the first two years. Will the Wii be any different?

2 - Pretty much everything involving the Nintendo 64

Remember those pricy cartridges we mentioned earlier? Imagine having to continue paying for them in a time when Sega and Sony both went to CD, an immensely cheaper medium that also allowed much greater storage capacity. That's what publishers had to deal with during the entire run of the N64 (1996 through 2001). As the rest of the gaming world switched to an established format, Nintendo stuck to its proprietary-formatted guns, ensuring slightly higher prices for games and lesser quality sound for an entire generation. Count how many memorable soundtracks there were on the PlayStation. Then look at the N64. Pretty grim, eh?

But it wasn't about sound, obviously. Developers wanted to use these fancy new 3D graphics to tell stories, to show players worlds that just weren't possible on the Genesis and SNES. The N64's power was fine, but the limited storage space and high price of an N64 cart prevented games like Metal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy VII from even being possible on the system. Squaresoft was once an all-Nintendo publisher, giving the company its valued Final Fantasy series exclusively. Once Square jumped ship and ran to Sony and its lovely CD format, the console war was already over. Hello cutscenes, hello CD-quality music, hello beautiful presentation.

But before the war had even begun, Nintendo was pissing people off. Instead of courting as many third party developers as possible, it tried to focus on a small number of hand-picked developers to keep its system afloat. Nintendo actually had the balls to call it a "dream team," basically saying to everyone else, "if you you're not part of our clique, oh well." As a result, the bountiful support Nintendo enjoyed on the SNES was drying up, and its own titles were trickling out too slow to pick up the slack.

We're still not done. The N64's controller was the most ghastly thing the world had seen since the Virtual Boy. Yeah, the analog stick was revolutionary, but did you look at the rest of this beast? Did you ever see a non-gamer or even a casual player try to hold it after playing a PlayStation game? It was painful. Hell, even us seasoned gamers couldn't get over the plastic trident, clearly designed to work with Mario and Zelda alone. Third parties had a constant battle to map controls that made sense onto the controller. It was especially unfriendly to fighting games, so no Tekken, Street Fighter or Soul Edge for us. Even more titles lost to Sony.

Then there's the 64DD, a laughable add-on that answered a question nobody ever asked. The re-writable discs were yet another Nintendo-owned property it could charge for, and its key titles were... wait a second, there were no key titles. Let's just move on. It's like Nintendo didn't watch add-ons kill Sega a few years earlier.

The N64 may have spawned some of the best games ever made, but honestly, how many systems can make the same claim? Sure we adore Ocarina of Time, Goldeneye 007 and Super Mario 64, but most of the other titles are crap. This entire console generation was like watching a king get quartered in front of the entire village. And you know what? Our number one mistake explains why it's all Nintendo's fault.

7th lutz

04-09-2007, 11:58 PM

1 - Opening the doors to PlayStation

If there's one moment in time that forever changed the videogame world, it's the day Nintendo stabbed Sony in the back in front of the whole world.

Multimedia isn't much of a buzzword these days, but back in the early '90s, it was everything. Entire libraries could fit on a disc, symphonies could finally sound crystal clear and even educational games could be played all off of one disc. CD-ROM supporters wanted this medium in as many hands as possible, and Nintendo was the best possible way to get it there.

Electronics superstar Philips decided to ally itself with Nintendo and bring a CD attachment to the Super NES. With Nintendo's clout, Philips' CD tech could reach millions in record time. It seemed like a mutually beneficial setup - except for the fact that Nintendo had already signed a contract with Sony in 1988 for pretty much the exact same thing.

This contract had Sony creating a "Play Station" that would feature an SNES cartridge port and a CD slot for new, enhanced games. Problem was, this contract gave Sony complete control over any CD-based games that touched the system, Mario included. Once Nintendo's president, Hiroshi Yamauchi, realized that he would not have the final say on something with Nintendo's name on it, he demanded a solution that put Nintendo back in the saddle. The result was announcing the new partnership with Phillips during the 1991 CES trade show, despite the fact that Sony had just announced the Nintendo-powered Play Station the night before.

This slap in the face was unheard of for several reasons. First, a Japanese company ditching another for a foreign rival was unspeakable. Second, such blatant disregard for contracts made the company appear like a power-hungry monster, always trying to get its way regardless of who it has to humiliate or crush. Third, how the hell did Yamauchi's signature get on that Sony contract in the first place? Nintendo had made its vast fortune on licensing games, so hearing that it gave Sony the rights to any and all future CD titles was appalling.

The three giant companies did finally work out a crazy m�nage a trios agreement, but wouldn't you know it, the whole deal fell apart. Nintendo went its own way, Philips carried on with its terrible CD-I system and Sony, while briefly considering abandoning the venture altogether, decided to make the Play Station a standalone system that played Sony-branded games. Thus, the PlayStation was born. Nintendo effectively created its own worst enemy.

Sony's CD resources led to the defection of Square, countless exclusives that Nintendo never saw and for the first time ever, a sound beating at retail. Sega's own inept ability to provide gamers with quality products essentially left the whole industry open to Sony's powerful charge. After a bit of back-and-forth in 1995 and 1996, the PlayStation jumped ahead in 1997 and has been on top ever since. It's crushing blitz forever buried Sega and put Nintendo on perpetual defense, a position it never once had to consider.

So now, the publishers and developers of the world had a viable alternative to consider. No more expensive cartridges, no more Sega bumbling its tacky add-ons, no more insane restrictions. Games became part of pop culture, and the PlayStation went on to become one of the best-selling objects in electronics history. If Nintendo had merely tried to rework that original Sony contract (something Sony probably wouldn't have gone for anyway), things could have been much different.

But, after all the ludicrous profits of the '80s, the slow and steady downfall of the '90s, and the gradual regaining of trust and cool factor going on today, the company is poised to be back on top again. The DS, a seemingly mental design decision, turned out to be the clear winner of the current systems. And Wii, well, if the momentum lasts, Nintendo's got nothing to worry about. Let's just hope it remembers its own history and steers clear of any more jerkholish moves.

7th lutz

04-09-2007, 11:59 PM

Your thoughts?

I felt they had the wrong order.

The wii is too soon to be mentioned as a failure.

My top 7 is top 7:

7.) Game Cube not having the Dvd format
6.) Nintendo not having the "playstation" As a cd Attachment
5.) Nintendo's Censorship and the unshakable "kiddy" image
4.)The virtual boy
3.) Nintendo's lack of online gaming
2.) The N64
1.) Nintendo's treatment of 3rd parties during the 8 bit and 16 bit era.

I felt the playstation was only 6th ranked on my list due to the fact Attachments are not sucessful. You can look at the turbo cd, sega cd and the 32x as examples of being attachments and being failures. The only reason it is not 7 due to the fact Sony was the leader by far during the 32/64 era and the 128 bit era.

The N64 is 2 due to the fact it used the cartridge, expensive game prices, and the format scared off 3d parties and Allowed games like Final Fantasy 7 to be released on other game consoles as a result along with the fact the system caused the playstation to be number 1 in sales.

Neil Koch

04-10-2007, 12:11 AM

I agree with you that it's way too early to declare the Wii a failure. A lot of the same things (the games are too gimmicky) were said about the DS early on, and it's gone on to become very successful.

It will be interesting to see how things pan out, though - a lot of "hardcore" gamers seem to be getting a bit bored with it, and I don't see the super-causal "non" gamers giving any long-term support.

And I don't think the lack of online is a huge factor. But if they are going to be doing online, they should follow MS's lead and get rid of the stupid "friend code" thing.

TurboGenesis

04-10-2007, 12:15 AM

I feel Nintendo's biggest problem with both the Nintendo64 and the Gamecube were their proprietary formats (cartridge and little disc respectively). 3d party's had to go through the Big N to get media to publish a game and the price was not good for the 3rd parties. Sony offered a common and cheap format and developers were able to realize profit. (Also helped that PS1/PS2 had high install base) Sega had fault with proprietary format in the Dreamcast as well with the GD-rom.

Now Sony have big risk and issue with proprietary formats in the PS3 and PSP (Blu-ray and UMD respectively). IF Blu Ray is successful (I have opinions suitable for another topic) then that the only way PlayStation 3 will benefit major success over the common and simplistic DVD format.

diskoboy

04-10-2007, 12:17 AM

EXCELLENT article!! Why do I say 'Excellent!'?

Because everything that was said is 100% true.

And another thing they totally overlooked: Nintendo's support for their own addons. For example - The Zapper, ROB, Superscope, etc...

BocoDragon

04-10-2007, 12:24 AM

Number one is definitely correct.

It basically goes like this... Until 1997, Nintendo was my world. Post-FFVII, not so much.

Kitsune Sniper

04-10-2007, 12:26 AM

I still believe the N64 was Nintendo's greatest failure.

Niku-Sama

04-10-2007, 12:40 AM

i totally agree with this article aswell how ever i am pretty sure that the Wii is going to help fix the stupid mistake they made in 1991.

i like nintendo and all, but they have always done some pretty dumb things

Melf

04-10-2007, 12:41 AM

Vinnysdad

04-10-2007, 12:45 AM

I completely agree with #1. The Sony add-on probably would have failed and Sony would have forgot about video games completely but they got screwed and had something to prove. Crushing Nintendo in the process.

Penguin

04-10-2007, 12:52 AM

Personally I think all game systems should stick with carts, no load times, and they don't get scratched up and break easily, and with the advancements in technology massive amounts of data could now be stored on little cartridges, just my opinion thou and everything seems to be heading onto disc, but honestly if you step on a cd and a NES cartridge, which do you think is still going to work. :P

CreativeOnlineSurname

04-10-2007, 01:06 AM

Jeez, that's actually a serious article? It reads more like a blog than journalism.

Two things I didn't like:

The comments against Sega (it being a "fad" and not being able to procude quality products) are both stupid and incorrect.

Also, it's far too early to judge the Wii as a failure.

I think the fad part is entirely incorrect. Sega knew how to market the Genesis and its games as a viable alternative to Nintendo, and succeeded for a good while... Which leads to the second part. Quality products may be referring to the "too much, too fast" point of view regarding Sega's hardware releases. Which were ridiculous. As soon as they released a new add-on they forgot about it while working on the next one. This was their undoing, as most people would agree. Sega CD had very little innovation (Joy of joys, grainy FMV games! I mean, I know LUNAR debuted on Sega CD, and they gave us Sonic CD, but still, most of it was crap.) while the Game Gear just struggled with ludicrously low battery life and subpar games. Next up, the CDX... Anyone want a Genesis / Sega CD that you can use as a portable CD player? And most likely break from mishandling? Oh, yeah, and it's effing $400.00. In this sea of worthless hardware releases, we find a gem... The Nomad! Awesome concept, horrible implementation. It, too, suffers from horrendous battery life. Then came the 32X, which I don't think anyone anywhere really even wanted. Followed almost immediately by the Saturn? Why even waste time and money developing the 32X? The Saturn was great, but by the time it came out, it was just too late. Consumers were burned out on buying useless, unsupported add-ons that no one asked for. Oh yeah, the Nomad, too. Awesome concept

I'll be the first to say, though, that the Dreamcast was simply terminated unnecessarily. Amazing system, and I've got nothing but love for it.

As for this article, I agree with pretty much all of them. The Wii really is pretty much it if it flops. Then Nintendo gets to contradict themselves to try and keep up with XBox 720 and PlayStation 4. They lose face or they lose customers, either one is a no-no. I believe number one is definitely in the right place... They nailed their own coffin. No amount of GoldenEyes or Ocarinas of Time could compete with the PlayStation.

Edit: I forgot about the CDX and Nomad, which kinda proves my point about the systems being useless and forgettable. Hm.

smork

04-10-2007, 01:30 AM

Push Upstairs

04-10-2007, 01:54 AM

And another thing they totally overlooked: Nintendo's support for their own addons. For example - The Zapper, ROB, Superscope, etc...

I'd add that one too.

As much as the N64 makes my stomach turn over, I would put both "Censorship" and "Third party treatment" above it....make them tied for #1 even.

udisi

04-10-2007, 02:05 AM

I'd add that one too.

As much as the N64 makes my stomach turn over, I would put both "Censorship" and "Third party treatment" above it....make them tied for #1 even.

+1 to that. Nintendo knows how to make money whether winning or losing.

This is gonna be a very exciting system generation to see how it all pans out. What happens if Xbox wins and the americans are in control of the video game industry for the first time since before the great crash?

GillianSeed

04-10-2007, 07:40 AM

5 - An ongoing battle against online gaming

"Customer's don't want online games." - Nintendo president Satoru Iwata, 2004

But doesn't the success of the Wii so far kind of bear this comment out? If online was all that important, why is it flying off store shelves? Sure message board geeks are having fits about this, but does the average Wii buyer care? I don't think so.

"More than six million people are Xbox Live members." - Microsoft press release, 2007

And yet there are 11-12 million 360s out there, and countless original Xbox units. And how many of those 6 million are Gold accounts that enable online play?

klausien

04-10-2007, 07:42 AM

Captain Wrong

04-10-2007, 08:47 AM

I thought it was an interesting read (though I don't think you needed to cut & paste the entire article 7th Lutz! We can click the link man. :P) I don't see how this is anymore blog like or less journalistic than any other of the millions of features gaming web sites have run similar to this.

CreativeOnlineSurname

04-10-2007, 08:56 AM

Melf hit the nail on the head. This is a blog masquerading as journalism, though it could be argued that all "video game journalism", outside of direct news reporting, is really just paid opinion.

This article is a so-so read with the Wii commentary thrown in there for shock value. Regardless of all of these assertions, Nintendo's profitability has always been its true strength; whether they"re percieved to be #1 at the time or not.

Waste of time.

So Nintendo hasn't had any failures? Regardless of whether this sounds professional, it's (mostly) accurate. And I don't think it can be argued that the Virtual Boy was profitable in any way, shape or form.

I strongly agree with the assertion that the Wii is pretty much riding the hype train right now. I haven't touched my Wii in two weeks or so. Yes, it was intentionally phrased that way. Beyond first party titles, it just doesn't have much going for it. Lazy, half-assed ports with a half-assed control scheme thrown in at the last minute for the Wii. Kids' games. Shitty first person shooters. Sonic, whose games might as well have a seal on the box guaranteeing a waste of $50.00 and time since about ten years ago. I mean, really, I've got Wii Sports, Twilight Princess, WarioWare and Trauma Center. Notice that 75% of those are first-party. And look, today we're getting Super Paper Mario. First party. That's the only really exciting thing on the horizon until Resident Evil 4 (port), Metroid Prime 3 (first-party) and Sadness (apparently not in development anymore).

Suffice it to say that I would not be so bored if I had an XBox 360. But, to be fair, they've had plenty of time to earn their head start.

CosmicMonkey

04-10-2007, 08:59 AM

You have to admit though, had the N64 been CD based and come with a pad like the Hori Mini as standard it would have done a lot better. Maybe even given the PSone a proper run for it's money. That would of course depend on Nintendo licensing some more adult titles and not going on their daft 'Dream Team' mission with certain devs.

It would also probably mean that the resulting Gamecube would use standard DVDs, and be backwards compatible with N64 CDs.

GillianSeed

04-10-2007, 09:23 AM

Personally I think all game systems should stick with carts

Carts do have load times, they're just exceedingly fast.

And if you thought next-gen games were expensive now...

GillianSeed

04-10-2007, 09:25 AM

I strongly agree with the assertion that the Wii is pretty much riding the hype train right now. I haven't touched my Wii in two weeks or so.

So what? It's not targetted at the leet hardcore gamer that sits up all night, every night playing games online. Do you have a pack of playing cards at your house? Have you used them in the past two weeks? If not, are they a useless failure?

Suffice it to say that I would not be so bored if I had an XBox 360. But, to be fair, they've had plenty of time to earn their head start.

Exactly. What did the 360 have five months out from launch? Basically nothing.

suppafly

04-10-2007, 09:51 AM

swlovinist

04-10-2007, 10:00 AM

Oh, we forget what a train wreck Perfect Dark Zero Was. The Wii in five months has done what the other two have done a poor job at...bringing in new gamers. My wife wont touch my 360, which woos to geeky men over the top. For the 360, there is little reason for my wife to touch it. I finally got my Wii yesterday and my wife has been playing Cooking Mama and Wii Play. Of the 65+ consoles I have at home and being married 5 years, this is the first one my wife is excited to play on. Hell even my mother in law wants to play it!. The comment about the Wii fad dying is false. Yes, the impulsive buyers might be playing less, but unless Sony or MS does something to cater to a different market(and less gender bias) I dont see the Wii selling train dying for a long time.

Nature Boy

04-10-2007, 10:15 AM

This article is a so-so read with the Wii commentary thrown in there for shock value.

My thoughts exactly. How can you call a console a failure based on what you *think* will happen to it? I'm not a fan of the Wii at all either, for pretty much the same reasons, but I'd never go as far as calling it a failure.

Nintendo could easily use all the positive momentum from the Wii to launch their next console quite successfully, which seems far more likely.

bangtango

04-10-2007, 10:19 AM

If Nintendo hadn't produced some of those systems which are supposedly "failures" then where would some of their first party games which are actually good have appeared?

People talk about the 64, Game Cube and the Wii being "failures." So Nintendo should have just laid down after 15+ years of making video games and ported the Zelda, Mario or Donkey Kong series onto Playstation or Dreamcast? Please.

The "blog" was written by just another Sony fan. He seems to know a whole lot about the history of gaming but Atari was never mentioned, unless you read into the comment on how gaming was "brought to the brink of disaster." As for Sega, they weren't given a lick of credit. Gaming started with Sony as far as that writer was concerned.

Funny how people who discredit Nintendo as a kids company or a company who "keeps losing to Sony" won't even admit they've made a good game here and there over the past 20 years. This article mentions the 64 had some great games on it then uses "but" in the same sentence. Enough said. I see we are dealing with a gamer who has probably been playing since late 1995.

Gentlegamer

04-10-2007, 10:34 AM

Nintendo is always profitable, though -- don't forget that! They've never really taken a financial risk and sold consoles at a loss, unlinke MS & Sony.

Sure, they've made alot of missteps, but it's hard to argue with being consistently profitable!This is an important point to remember, even regarding media formats. One reason they have stuck with proprietary formats is to avoid paying licensing fees to other companies. In the case of N64, I think that if CDs had been used, Nintendo would have had to pay Sony for each disc manufactured.

Poofta!

04-10-2007, 10:43 AM

my opinion on order of biggest mistakes, from biggest to least:

1.) Nintendo not having the "playstation" As a cd Attachment
2.) The N64
3.) Game Cube not having the Dvd format
4.) Nintendo's Censorship and the unshakable "kiddy" image
5.) Nintendo's lack of online gaming
6.)The virtual boy
7.) Nintendo's treatment of 3rd parties during the 8 bit and 16 bit era.

the PS was the first mistake, it shoudlve been corrected with the n64, it wasnt, GC was fucked too. those are the top 3, everything else is just putting salt on a gushing bleeding hole where the guts ought to be.

cyberfluxor

04-10-2007, 10:45 AM

Carts do have load times, they're just exceedingly fast.

And if you thought next-gen games were expensive now...
It's really not that bad. The problem is they keep pushing for disc storage when there are quite a few other options, though sometimes more expensive it's actually wise. When you have a large game you add an extra disc or so, if you have a cartridge system you just add another memory chip to the board. Access times are drastically higher and keep going up, I can't stand writting software and having to access a harddrive let alone a disc drive. Bleh.

GillianSeed

04-10-2007, 10:49 AM

When you have a large game you add an extra disc or so, if you have a cartridge system you just add another memory chip to the board. Access times are drastically higher and keep going up, I can't stand writting software and having to access a harddrive let alone a disc drive. Bleh.

I'll take a few seconds load time over $90-$100+ games anyday. And before you say that's an exaggeration, recall that FFIII for the SNES was what, $70-80 new? Yes storage capacity has increased dramatically, but so has the size of the average game.

Captain Wrong

04-10-2007, 10:59 AM

And the fanboy dogpile starts in 5...4...3...

Oops...too late.

GillianSeed

04-10-2007, 11:33 AM

And the fanboy dogpile starts in 5...4...3...

Oops...too late.People with 8,566 posts on a video game message board should be very careful when throwing the term "fanboy" around.

FantasiaWHT

04-10-2007, 01:07 PM

Number 8:

Nintendo`s greedynes when selling old NES games for GBA.

While Sega offered several carts for GBA with 4 games each, nintendo thought it would be cooler to get 20 dollars for EACH game thats 20 years old..

How is that a failure? You might not like it but it's been a massively successful (and profitable) venture.

Captain Wrong

04-10-2007, 01:10 PM

People with 8,566 posts on a video game message board should be very careful when throwing the term "fanboy" around.

fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy

Azraelscross

04-10-2007, 02:11 PM

I'll take a few seconds load time over $90-$100+ games anyday. And before you say that's an exaggeration, recall that FFIII for the SNES was what, $70-80 new? Yes storage capacity has increased dramatically, but so has the size of the average game.
That was back then though. And since it wouldn't be a huge technology change it would probably actually be cheaper if nobody had abandoned them for CDs and kept developing new ways to cut costs and up the memory. For all we know we could have 10+ GB cartridges that cost the same as a CD or DVD to make. On the flipside though it could also go horribly wrong. Horribly, horribly wrong. But we'll never know.

and you make me chuckle Captain Wrong

CreativeOnlineSurname

04-10-2007, 02:35 PM

So what? It's not targetted at the leet hardcore gamer that sits up all night, every night playing games online. Do you have a pack of playing cards at your house? Have you used them in the past two weeks? If not, are they a useless failure?

Exactly. What did the 360 have five months out from launch? Basically nothing.

One, you misunderstand. Two, you make a very poor comparison. Almost as poor as "Do you have food at home? Are you anorexic? I guess your food is just pointless and dumb then, huh?". My point is that the Wii is still a new system, and I should be excited by it. But I'm not. And if a hardcore player gets burned out on it easily, what are the chances a casual player might?

Don't kid yourself about who and what things are marketed to. It seems you've missed the Virtual Console, which appeals to hardcore players just as well as it does to the thirty-year-old guy who wants to run through Super Mario Brothers like he did when he was little. And with their attempts to bring in games such as Resident Evil 4 (again) and Manhunt 2, they're trying to broaden their installed base by appealing to as many people as possible. They don't just want casual players' money... They want everyone's money, if possible. That is business.

Also, I'd like to chime in about Nintendo's software record. It has almost always been quality. I'm never afraid to pay full price for a game developed by Nintendo. They've always had excellent software, but their hardware has not always been up to par.

YoshiM

04-10-2007, 04:41 PM

So what? It's not targetted at the leet hardcore gamer that sits up all night, every night playing games online. Do you have a pack of playing cards at your house? Have you used them in the past two weeks? If not, are they a useless failure?

You might want to rethink that comparison. A deck of cards goes for about a couple bucks or less vs a $50 Wii game (not including the deck and controllers). If you don't play you deck of cards you're only out that two bucks. Don't like the Wii game you bought...do the math.

It IS too early to say the Wii is a failure. It's in the same category the DS was when it first came out: a few gems, tech demos and titles that try to use the new control scheme but turn out looking like gimmicks. Once developers pulled their heads out of the butts and started to make FUN games for the DS, well its track record speaks for itself. One of the positives of the DS is that you can still develop "traditional" games (like a Castlevania for example) thanks to the DS's control layout (D-Pad, four buttons). The main game of New Super Mario Bros hardly uses the touch screen at all. The developer isn't necessarily forced into using the touch screen.

The Wii, however, is in another category of its own. No matter how the Nintenfaithful may say that Wii is all on its own, in everyone else's eyes they still have to compete with Sony and Microsoft for third party titles. The Wii controls are not overly favorable to "traditionally controlled" games. True the buttons can be mapped to motions but games like Marvel Ultimate Alliance can attest that such a control scheme isn't always the best for this type of game. There are other buttons on the remote but that means your grip has to change when playing titles that use the remote and 'chuk. This kinda forces developers to either get REALLY creative with porting their 360/PS3/PS2/Cube games (and hope that the controls are playable and fun) or create a Wii exclusive title. The former hasn't been overly grand for third parties and at the moment party games and the latter has been hit and miss except for Nintendo (of course) and a couple of Ubisoft's early games.

Kid Ice

04-10-2007, 06:39 PM

fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy
fanboy

Dude don't Shandling this thread.

Back on topic, it's funny to me how Nintendo is deemed a "failure" because they don't totally dominate the industry like they did at the end of the 80s. That was a fluke. With the DS selling like hotcakes and the Wii selling out everywhere, it's an awfully strange time to be reflecting on Nintendo's "failures" (like the N64 that sold like a gazillion systems when it came out)

Why do hotcakes sell so well, anyway?

geneshifter

04-10-2007, 07:03 PM

Dude don't Shandling this thread.

Back on topic, it's funny to me how Nintendo is deemed a "failure" because they don't totally dominate the industry like they did at the end of the 80s. That was a fluke. With the DS selling like hotcakes and the Wii selling out everywhere, it's an awfully strange time to be reflecting on Nintendo's "failures" (like the N64 that sold like a gazillion systems when it came out)

Why do hotcakes sell so well, anyway?

Sony marketing FTW!

Sweater Fish Deluxe

04-10-2007, 07:09 PM

Dude don't Shandling this thread.

Back on topic, it's funny to me how Nintendo is deemed a "failure" because they don't totally dominate the industry like they did at the end of the 80s. That was a fluke. With the DS selling like hotcakes and the Wii selling out everywhere, it's an awfully strange time to be reflecting on Nintendo's "failures" (like the N64 that sold like a gazillion systems when it came out)
Ding ding ding!

Why do hotcakes sell so well, anyway?
Because they're delicious.

...word is bondage...

Garry Silljo

04-10-2007, 07:23 PM

Carts do have load times, they're just exceedingly fast.

Yes, carts definately have load times. Want to hear something sad? My bro and I once raced the Jaguar and Sega CD versions of Pitfall the Mayan Adventure side by side. The cart lost.

nebrazca78

04-10-2007, 07:26 PM

This article is a so-so read with the Wii commentary thrown in there for shock value. Regardless of all of these assertions, Nintendo's profitability has always been its true strength; whether they"re percieved to be #1 at the time or not.
Waste of time.

This is the thing almost no one pays attention to. Nintendo MAKES MONEY selling video games. Sony LOSES MONEY selling video games (all but one year since 2001). Correct me if I'm wrong, but Micro$oft isn't even close to making money yet, although I can see it in their future.

So if Sony sells 200 million PS3s and then goes out of business, what exactly did they win? Sounds like they should get the booby prize to me.

Personally I think PS2 mediocre, kind of a failure. Sony lost money every year of the PS2s existence except one. Yes they sold more systems than anyone, ever. But I can imagine if I opened a new car dealership where I sell cars for less than invoice it would be a smashing success! And then abruptly go out of business.

The Wii is almost a guaranteed success. Nintendo is already making money. As parts become cheaper they will only make more. As for Sony and M$, maybe in a year or two they can actually start making money on systems.

geneshifter

04-10-2007, 07:50 PM

This is the thing almost no one pays attention to. Nintendo MAKES MONEY selling video games. Sony LOSES MONEY selling video games (all but one year since 2001). Correct me if I'm wrong, but Micro$oft isn't even close to making money yet, although I can see it in their future.

So if Sony sells 200 million PS3s and then goes out of business, what exactly did they win? Sounds like they should get the booby prize to me.

Personally I think PS2 mediocre, kind of a failure. Sony lost money every year of the PS2s existence except one. Yes they sold more systems than anyone, ever. But I can imagine if I opened a new car dealership where I sell cars for less than invoice it would be a smashing success! And then abruptly go out of business.

The Wii is almost a guaranteed success. Nintendo is already making money. As parts become cheaper they will only make more. As for Sony and M$, maybe in a year or two they can actually start making money on systems.

See, that's what i never get about this industry. Who the heck cares if they sell the most consoles if they are taking a loss on each one!? Especially compared to Nintendo that makes a profit every console?! I just do not get what Sony is bragging about.

theshizzle3000

04-10-2007, 08:04 PM

I definitely agree with number one, but I can't say the same for the Virtual Boy I love my system. I think people only hate it now adays because it eludes many collections.

chicnstu

04-10-2007, 08:21 PM

Problem was, this contract gave Sony complete control over any CD-based games that touched the system, Mario included. Once Nintendo's president, Hiroshi Yamauchi, realized that he would not have the final say on something with Nintendo's name on it, he demanded a solution that put Nintendo back in the saddle.

I don't see what's wrong with this.......even after reading the stuff after it.

If I had a company that made quality software all of the time, I wouldn't want someone coming in taking over, especially Sony. Mario would probably be using guns now and not using the mushrooms like he used to.

DreamTR

04-10-2007, 09:17 PM

Few things of note:

About Sega being a "fad", please realize this, the only successful hardware they had was the Mega Drive/Genesis. The others were promises and ended up being lies.

I do not like buying 32X/Sega CD/Sega Saturn/Sega Dreamcast in the store and getting owned up because they can't support their hardware, and I am out of my hard earned money.

I don't dislike their games, but Sega was never a player beyond the Genesis days. At that point, you needed both a SNES and Genesis because certain games were better on certain systems (Side scrollers, RPGs, action = SNES, Sports, Fighting, SHooters= Genesis)

Nintendo's products "failed" if you can call it that by not pulling in tons of money like the NES and SNES and Game Boy did, but Mario 64 still sold a hell of a lot. Sounds like the system still did well with Zelda/Mario regardless. Hard to fight against a company with impossible licenses.

About Sony PS1/2, regardless of the company "losing" money on hardware, they rake it in where it counts (software) and 1,000+ titles for each system and royalties on each seems like SOny is pretty stable to me.

Captain Wrong

04-10-2007, 10:48 PM

Dude don't Shandling this thread.

*chortle*

And who doesn't like hotcakes?

Umm...hotcakes...aghghghghghghg...

Nintendo Gamer

04-10-2007, 11:02 PM

.....

Melf

04-10-2007, 11:36 PM

About Sega being a "fad", please realize this, the only successful hardware they had was the Mega Drive/Genesis. The others were promises and ended up being lies.

You need to take the whole thing in context though. The Master System was supported worldwide a lot longer than it was in the U.S., and even the poor Saturn had a three-year run here. Sega's only "successful" hardware was supported for almost a decade, which is hardly a fad. The lack of success the Mega Drive had in Japan was completely reversed by the Saturn's success over there, so there was an established and continued company presence in both territories.

I do not like buying 32X/Sega CD/Sega Saturn/Sega Dreamcast in the store and getting owned up because they can't support their hardware, and I am out of my hard earned money.

The 32X and Sega CD were add-ons that weren't needed to enjoy the Genesis, so I don't see how that applies really. Yeah, the 32X should never have been, and the Sega CD was a victim of "wrong place, wrong time," but neither diminishes the impact the Genesis made in America or the impact Sega made on American culture.

I don't dislike their games, but Sega was never a player beyond the Genesis days. At that point, you needed both a SNES and Genesis because certain games were better on certain systems (Side scrollers, RPGs, action = SNES, Sports, Fighting, SHooters= Genesis)

This has nothing to do with the fad reference though. A fad is something that dies out quickly, and Sega was in the hardware business for a decade and a half, being in the arcade industry even longer. The fact that it's still around making games, and that its franchises are still successful prove that the company was much more than just a flash in the pan.

Many of Sega's hardware platforms could be considered "fads," but not the company itself.

Gentlegamer

04-11-2007, 12:00 AM

See, that's what i never get about this industry. Who the heck cares if they sell the most consoles if they are taking a loss on each one!? The money is supposed to come from licensing fees paid by companies producing games for the system.

Fuyukaze

04-11-2007, 07:26 AM

At first I wanted to believe this blog list was a serious write up, then I realized it had to be some april fool joke and damned if I didnt start laughing. It was funny like that time I made up that imaginary web page on 7 ways to get your girlfriend to dress up like Laura Croft for her parents aniversary or that odd dream where Sega and Sony decided to merge with Nintendo, Microsoft, and Disney to form a huge Voltron gaming system.

I have to lay off the coffie.

Nature Boy

04-11-2007, 09:24 AM

See, that's what i never get about this industry. Who the heck cares if they sell the most consoles if they are taking a loss on each one!?

And I don't get why people care if a company is losing money on their consoles or not. To say nothing of the fact that people love throwing this 'fact' around and yet never support it with any actual *proof*.

Company A makes games I like. Company B makes games I like. Company C makes games I like. Just because I can only afford to purchase one of those machines doesn't make my decision any more 'right' or the others 'wrong' - it's just a machine I can buy games for.

PentiumMMX

04-11-2007, 10:44 AM

I think some of it was wrong (Mainly everything involving the N64 (Except the controller)). Anyway, here's my take on it:

7: Gamecube's lack of online play (Other then PSO, which is on Dreamcast)
6: Censorship (No blood in a vampire game? (Super Castlevania IV))
5: Gamecube's lack of anything worth playing other then SSBM
4: N64 Controller (I admit, Gamecube beats N64 here)
3: Super Mario Sunshine (Another example of how crappy Gamecube is)
2: Creating their own worst enemy (PlayStation, which crushed Gamecube)
1: Gamecube in general

As you can tell, I hate Gamecube. N64 was better

appaws

04-11-2007, 10:53 AM

There always seems to be an assumption in these discussions that Nintendo is "wrong" for not doing the same thing that the other companies do...why???

If instead of Wii, we right now had a high-powered, HD, DVD-based $400-500 dollar machine from Nintendo, with many of the same games as the 360 and ps3...why would gamers be any better off??? We already have those things, so it is good for gamers that Nintendo has gone a different route.

As far as the "censorship" issue. If you want blood, gore, and sex mini-games like in God of War...can you get them? Yes, of course from Sony and Microsoft. So again, why should Nintendo just do the SAME thing as the other two? We already have those things, so it is good for gamers that Nintendo gave us something different and appealed to a new demographic.

Gillian Seed

04-11-2007, 11:36 AM

As far as the "censorship" issue. If you want blood, gore, and sex mini-games like in God of War...can you get them? Yes, of course from Sony and Microsoft. So again, why should Nintendo just do the SAME thing as the other two? We already have those things, so it is good for gamers that Nintendo gave us something different and appealed to a new demographic.

I think that, by definition censorship is deleting, removing, or blocking something that already was or should have been there. So trying to spin, not having blood in a violent game like a Vampire game or a fighter as something revolutionary or original is a bit warped.

appaws

04-11-2007, 12:10 PM

I think that, by definition censorship is deleting, removing, or blocking something that already was or should have been there. So trying to spin, not having blood in a violent game like a Vampire game or a fighter as something revolutionary or original is a bit warped.

I'm not calling it revolutionary or original. Just different from the other two major players in the industry. Nintendo is aiming for a different demographic than the other two, and I don't think that is a mistake.

Gillian Seed

04-11-2007, 01:10 PM

I'm not calling it revolutionary or original. Just different from the other two major players in the industry. Nintendo is aiming for a different demographic than the other two, and I don't think that is a mistake.

The thing that bothers me is, that with Nintendo we aren't even given a choice. Like if you want to play a cutesy mascot adventure game on the PSX. There's Spyro, there's Rayman, there's Crash Bandicoot, and a ton more. But if you want a good racer, shooter, or anything darker or more adult, there's that too.

With Nintendo however, it's a much bigger ratio of childish fluff. I mean there were like elevendy billion pokemon games for the N64. Undoubtedly though, when Mario Galaxy is released, I'll be seduced into buying another Nintendo console. But I truly hope that when I do, other good games are released, so that I don't experience that feeling of frustration I felt with the N64 & GC.

Push Upstairs

04-11-2007, 02:13 PM

6: Censorship (No blood in a vampire game? (Super Castlevania IV))

Nintendo only allowed blood when it was financially good for them a.k.a. "Mortal Kombat 2"....which (to me) made them look worse. "We have standards that say no blood or gore, but since sales are on the line...we'll allow it."

exit

04-11-2007, 03:18 PM

The guy loses all credit when he calls Wii a failure. My store has had a PS3 sitting in the back for about 2 months and nobody's even bothered to ask if we've had any. As for the Wii, they can't stay in the store for more than 10 minutes.

Sweater Fish Deluxe

04-11-2007, 03:38 PM

PentiumMMX

04-12-2007, 12:05 AM

...I mean there were like elevendy billion pokemon games for the N64.

OBJECTION! There are only 4 Pokemon games on N64 (Staduim (Jap. 1), Stadium 2 (US 1), Stadium GS (US 2), and Snap). Clearly a contradictuon!

(Sorry. Too much Pheonix Wright...)

Sweater Fish Deluxe

04-12-2007, 03:09 PM

OBJECTION! There are only 4 Pokemon games on N64 (Staduim (Jap. 1), Stadium 2 (US 1), Stadium GS (US 2), and Snap). Clearly a contradictuon!
Overruled.

You forgot Hey You, Pikachu!

Pokemon Puzzle League is also vaguely Pokemon related.

...word is bondage...

jajaja

04-12-2007, 04:05 PM

Saying that Wii is one of Nintendo's biggest mistakes, thats just bullshit. Its WAY to early to say anything about that. So far the numbers are saying the complete opposite :)

Snapple

04-12-2007, 04:59 PM

The article does make some good points, but it's far overshadowed by clear anti-Nintendo spin which is trying to paint the whole company as a bunch of goofballs. And the Wii part was just stupid.

I wonder if there's an objective article out there anymore. It seems impossible for many people to give all three companies a fair look instead of trying to pigeonhole them into visionaries and dumbasses, whether it's pro-Nintendo/anti-Sony or pro-Sony/anti-Nintendo or pro-Microsoft/anti-Gizmondo or whatever.

Gillian Seed

04-12-2007, 06:11 PM

OBJECTION! There are only 4 Pokemon games on N64 (Staduim (Jap. 1), Stadium 2 (US 1), Stadium GS (US 2), and Snap). Clearly a contradictuon!

(Sorry. Too much Pheonix Wright...)

Overruled.

You forgot Hey You, Pikachu!

Pokemon Puzzle League is also vaguely Pokemon related.

...word is bondage...

I mean they made a friggin' Pikachu N64, I think that pretty much says it all.
http://www.vidgame.net/NINTENDO/Nintendo/N64/pikachu_sys.jpg

Sweater Fish Deluxe

04-12-2007, 06:37 PM

I mean they made a friggin' Pikachu N64, I think that pretty much says it all.
http://www.vidgame.net/NINTENDO/Nintendo/N64/pikachu_sys.jpg
Hah, I never noticed that the reset button on those systems is Pikachu's right foot. That's really not a clever design at all.

...word is bondage...

udisi

04-12-2007, 09:39 PM

Hah, I never noticed that the reset button on those systems is Pikachu's right foot. That's really not a clever design at all.

...word is bondage...

The best part is the cheeks light up when you turn the power on :)

As for all this bickering about mistakes nintendo has or hasn't made.

1)Yes Nintendo could have not let sony become number one, and could have done a lot of things that would have made some gamers happier, BUT

2)Nintendo has made money on almost everything it's ever put out. The only exception I think is the VB. other than that Nintendo nearly prints it's own money while having a buisness plan very different from it competitors. Who's to say anything that people call mistakes weren't intentional? A lot of people thought the GB in monochrome was a terrible idea but it out sold any other handheld. The DS was something people thought would fail, and it's the most popular handheld. Nintendo has a way of making money on anything it touches. They made money on the N64 and the Gamecube.

GuyinGA

04-12-2007, 10:22 PM

The article was OK until you realize what it are called 'failures' are actually smart moves.

For one, Nintendo to me has ALWAYS been innovative with their controllers. The NES controller was shocking when it first appeared because most people at the time were familiar with a one-button or two-button controllers (Atari) or a key-pad controller (IntellVision). Four buttons (select, start, A & B) were revolutionary. SNES was the next step, followed by N64 (which introduced analog sticks & rumble packs that are common place today). And so forth. So the Wii controller is a natural evolution of that. I wouldn't be suprised if a PS4 (if Sony is still going to make one) or a X-Box 720 will have Wii-like features.

Their 'quality over quantity' demands are appreciated when you look at it now. There are three system available so how would one version of a game be any better than one on a different system? It's up to the player to decide. Also, Nintendo probably didn't want to run into the problem of the market being oversaturated, which Atari was happy to do (E.T. anyone?). I wish they would have more games on their systems (N64 and GC) but I like their limiting their games. The good-to-crap ratio will obviously be lower (whereas PlayStation and X-Box has a lot of crappy games amongst the gems of Ninja Gaiden Black, Final Fantasys, Metal Gear Solid, etc.). The drawback to it is Nintendo will be least likely to have the 'cool' games (like Dead Rising, Grand Theft Auto, etc.) than the other systems.

There's NO way to defend Nintendo and the debacle over videogame violence. That's just ridiculous. Their family-friendly games make them different from Sony, Sega and now Microsoft, but trying to fool Congress isn't cool. They are too easily fooled as it is.

The Virtual Boy, even though it's way ahead of its time, wouldn't work today. Even if they made a color version that's like a portable Nintendo 64 (which might be really cool).

The online resistence I think is OK too because not everyone has the $$$ to not just buy a system but to also pay to play online. Online game subscriptions aren't cheap (even $5.99/mo on X-Box Live is a bit expensive). Until one of them offer a free online game service, then I think more people will be involved. I'm sorta glad Nintendo hasn't plunged all the way into online play.

I'm not a Nintendo fanboy by any stretch (I grew up with Sega but liked Nintendo for their SNES system), but give them some credit for taking risks.