Anti-Nintendo Articles

[SotS]

....I'm not going to lie, I'm so completely flabbergasted by this response that I can't reply to it in any other way than point by point.

I actually do play third party games:... ...BTW I'm not a hardcore gamer.

I'd say that you don't have to be a "hardcore" (jeez do I hate that label) gamer to enjoy 80% of the games I listed. Monster Hunter, Dark/Demon's Souls, and Dota 2 are really the only "hardcore" games in my 36 game list.

I can't afford more than one system per generation.

That's been me for most of my time in this hobby. Starting from 2010 however I became a multi-system owner, when my brother and I got Black Friday PSP's for Christmas. 2011 I purchased an Xbox 360 for $100, and later that year, my brother and I went half and half for a $200 Black Friday PS3 (which was bundled with two games!). What I'm trying to say is that while your position is very common, and in fact what I would suggest anyone not really into gaming stick with, it is possible to get systems on the cheap. I'm pretty sure you can land PS3's for >$150 nowadays on eBay/Amazon/Craigslist/etc, and that gives you access to a whole new library of titles.

Not saying that's what people should do, by the way. My general rule of thumb is, "If there aren't at least five already released games you want on a system, don't buy that system."

For that matter I only get a game if I really want it and not by suggestion from someone else. I usually don't like to try new things and when I do, I get bored quickly which is why I prefer to stick to what I'm already familiar with.

Okay, forgive me for the wording in these next couple of paragraphs. Not sure how to say them without sounding rude.

This sounds like more of a problem with you, not with the state of gaming. If people suggest you listen to some music do you turn them down because you don't like to try new things? When a friend offers you to go somewhere you've never been do you reject because you've never been there? How about movies? Art? Do you never try different art styles because they're not what you're used to?

Of course, if you only meant to apply the bolded towards games only, that's a bit different. At least you're not flat out saying you prefer to never change anything. But even if this IS the case, what sets games apart from movies, music, art, etc.? The price? The time spent to experience them?

I'd be interested in hearing you expound on this a bit; it sounds a lot like me from a few years ago. I didn't like any games that wanted to change the status quo because, well, I hated change in anything! And I'll be honest, I still dislike change, but I realize that a life that never sees any different experiences past a certain point would be a boring life indeed. We have so much time on our hands... spending it all on the same things for dozens of years just doesn't even sound like a "life."

I did rent Skyrim and played 2 hours before I got frustrated.

Yeah, I honestly wasn't a big fan of Skyrim. I think I played it for thirteen hours (over two months) before realizing that I just wasn't captivated enough to continue. The lore was amazing, and the world the developers created was deep enough to spend countless hours exploring, but that's not what I want out of my time spent in games.

I just listed it as it is heavy on gameplay, which goes against the "Nintendo games = only gameplay games" argument. Whether that gameplay is fun or not, well that's up to you to decide.

I'm also not big on home consoles at all, so I spend most of my gaming time on handhelds.

I love my handhelds. From the age of five I had already settled on the opinion that handhelds were one of the best ways to experience games for me. Playing Super Mario World on my older brother's SNES was great, but playing Pokemon Crystal on my Gameboy Color was... Different. It was almost like that was my experience. It wasn't being broadcast to everyone, it wasn't on a "large" (remember, this was more than ten years ago when 20 inch TV's were pretty big for common people, lol) screen. It was for me, and only me to see. The world and characters felt closer, both literally and figuratively!

Also impatient kid + long car rides = godsend handheld

As for puzzle games, I still think Tetris is the best. I can play Tetris for longer periods than other games like Cut the Rope.

I never much cared for Tetris, personally. My sisters all love it, and my older brother quite enjoys it, but it never worked for me. Different strokes for different blokes and all that.

I did have a PS2 and 360 but got bored with them quickly.

So you still have a 360? Fez, Bastion, Runner2, Terraria and Spelunky (among a few others from my list) are all on the 360, and are all $15 or less.

It's not that I'm a Nintendo fanboy since I don't even play games like Animal Crossing, Fire Emblem, Pikmin, or Metroid. I only buy games that interest me the most.

I didn't mean to imply you were, apologies for if it came off that way.

Also I think your comment is a troll comment because you're listing games I don't even care about.

I don't even know how to respond to this. When I first read it I thought it was a joke, and I'm still holding hope that maaaaaybe it is? Please stand back and read this again. Replace the word comment with opinion, and the word game with art or animation. Look at how that sounds. Makes you seem a bit silly, no?

It's not a very appropriate comment especially on Pokébeach where we're all Pokémon fans and because of that, we all play Nintendo systems. (unless you use illegal emulators.)

I'd just like to point out that you don't have to eternally do *insert thing here* just because you've done *insert thing here*. I visit an Animal Crossing forum daily, and have for years. But for two or three years after I got bored with the game Animal Crossing: City Folk (A horrible addition to the series, I hate to say) I didn't even touch the series. Didn't mean I had to leave the forums, of course. Just because the forum is named after Animal Crossing doesn't mean that's the only discussion that may happen there.

Oh and what makes it not very appropriate here? I'm highly confused with your use of that phrase in regards to what's being said.

My real passion is animation and art.

I wish you luck. As a child I always wanted to become an artist, but over the years I realized that wasn't who I wanted to be. Though, I still don't know who I want to be. There's no real passion I'm actually working toward. I'm glad you have an idea with where you want to go in life. Wondering constantly like I do is a strange feeling.

The last thing I want to say is that I apologize for the lower quality of this post compared to my last. I'm working on a bit of a time limit here, so I had to write a lot hastier.




Mods, if you'd prefer I PM any further responses, as I do realize that I am veering pretty far from the topic at hand, let me know. I've no qualms with doing so.

 

[8bitCelebi]

This sounds like more of a problem with you, not with the state of gaming. If people suggest you listen to some music do you turn them down because you don't like to try new things? When a friend offers you to go somewhere you've never been do you reject because you've never been there? How about movies? Art? Do you never try different art styles because they're not what you're used to?

Of course, if you only meant to apply the bolded towards games only, that's a bit different. At least you're not flat out saying you prefer to never change anything. But even if this IS the case, what sets games apart from movies, music, art, etc.? The price? The time spent to experience them?

I'd be interested in hearing you expound on this a bit; it sounds a lot like me from a few years ago. I didn't like any games that wanted to change the status quo because, well, I hated change in anything! And I'll be honest, I still dislike change, but I realize that a life that never sees any different experiences past a certain point would be a boring life indeed. We have so much time on our hands... spending it all on the same things for dozens of years just doesn't even sound like a "life."

Mods, if you'd prefer I PM any further responses, as I do realize that I am veering pretty far from the topic at hand, let me know. I've no qualms with doing so.

For me it only applies to games and foods. For food I get sick when I taste something I don't like.

As for games, It's about the price and how interesting it looks to me. I don't have Gamefly and there's not a good selection of games at Red Box so I prefer to buy games that I know I'll play a lot. I can't afford to buy a game that I won't play too much.

I am open about trying new movies specifically animated movies, mostly because they air on TV all the time. And I'm actually really interested in seeing new artwork.

So I am interested in trying new things, just not for games.

 

[8bitCelebi]

I think SotS already made the point better than I could, but just to finish this, mortal kombat (hey! another great game not made by nintendo! who knew?) style.

Look around the page thread: their editorial line is clear, all ipads and stuff, a little PS4 news shortcut up there and at first sight nintendo this, nintendo that, two articles about how nintendo will inevitably fail and it's doing everything wrong is the best and only producer of quality games, while sony, microsoft and indies produce garbage, and nintendo needs to get on their level to compete.

So, just... let them be stop. Those guys you want the console war, because that means business their side, their choices are correct and superior, and they can't stand that this time there isn't such a clear winner (PS4 nintendo) so they try to start shit.

When I first wrote that, the guy was obviously trying to get traffic (and subsequently money) by dissing nintendo. Now that I quote that, you're doing the same thing, but not for money; as far as I know, the original article's writer didn't even care about consoles, and just wrote what would bring the most traffic.

“He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster... When you gaze long into the abyss the abyss also gazes into you”

He, was trying to make money; what's your excuse?

Think about it.

Okay let me start with when I first got exposed to these articles.

In late 2010 through mid 2011, I was hungry for news on the newly announced 3DS. I wanted to know anything I could as soon it was announced. So I relied on 3DS Blog for news and updates.

In July 2011 however a posting came up saying the 3DS isn't selling well. And that Nintendo lost almost $1 billion that year. I was worrired about Nintendo because I wanted them to do well. But I couldn't do anything about it but hope the 3DS would do well. I didn't think sales and finances would be posted on a site like that.

So since I heard that I've been following Google News just to make sure Nintendo is doing well. I didn't think Google News would have opinion based articles. I thought it was all fact based. So I came across the article I mentioned and was mad there wasn't any comment mentioning the 3DS so I posted my own.

To be honest I just wasn't experienced with articles like that. Before 3DS Blog and then Google News, I always kept track of news from Nintendo Power and Bulbapedia which never mentioned financial problems.

Sorry I waste your time posting garbage threads like this. I have aspergers syndrome and I sometimes over-react to issues that aren't that big of a deal. There are definitely news articles that are much worse such as,"A plane crashed into X City!"

 

[professorlight]

Okay let me start with when I first got exposed to these articles.

In late 2010 through mid 2011, I was hungry for news on the newly announced 3DS. I wanted to know anything I could as soon it was announced. So I relied on 3DS Blog for news and updates.

In July 2011 however a posting came up saying the 3DS isn't selling well. And that Nintendo lost almost $1 billion that year. I was worrired about Nintendo because I wanted them to do well. But I couldn't do anything about it but hope the 3DS would do well. I didn't think sales and finances would be posted on a site like that.

So since I heard that I've been following Google News just to make sure Nintendo is doing well. I didn't think Google News would have opinion based articles. I thought it was all fact based. So I came across the article I mentioned and was mad there wasn't any comment mentioning the 3DS so I posted my own.

There is no "fact based" media, simply put. Every media outlet has a bottomline, be it economic or editorial, the most you can do to stay informed is to see all possible sides of the subject by all possible outlets.

To be honest I just wasn't experienced with articles like that. Before 3DS Blog and then Google News, I always kept track of news from Nintendo Power and Bulbapedia which never mentioned financial problems.

As I said up there; there is no "fact based" media. Of course nintendo power wouldn't report any failings on nintendo's fiscal year, or decreases in sales; it's perjudicial to the brand recognition and outside of its audience's inmediate interest.

If you were to show me that article you posted and complained about it mentioning that nintendo power didn't say anything about it, I would be very inclined to believe the article on a technology and business blog rather than the absence of an article on a gaming magazine that holds the affected party's name on its cover.
And bulbapedia may not have much to do analyzing sales and gaming trends, honestly. As I said, look for other sources.

Sorry I waste your time posting garbage threads like this. I have aspergers syndrome and I sometimes over-react to issues that aren't that big of a deal. There are definitely news articles that are much worse such as,"A plane crashed into X City!"

You didn't waste anyone's time; I was just trying to continue SotS's correct appraisal of your (and others's, I might add) position and point out that you were guilty of a slight hypocrisy. Calling out people who bash nintendo, yet, at the same time bashing that same people for their choices on gaming, as justifiable as yours.

I hope you do realize that stuff like this:

Also I think your comment is a troll comment because you're listing games I don't even care about.

Is not only narrow-sighted, but also can be interpreted as an argument for the sake of an argument; you were talking about gaming in general, saying that retro games felt more like games; and that's true, retro games were pure games. But as SotS said (in other words) "games" is a misnomer today; you have many different types of games, with many different purposes and styles; you have the pure games, like mobile games, or internet flash games, or mario. or you have cinematic games, like MGS, or The last of us, or mass effect; or perhaps art games, like journey, portal, braid or pathologic.

The point being; if SotS were to, as you pointed out, list only games that you like, that wouldn't add much to the discussion, right? it would only reinforce your belief of retro games being the only worthy games out there.
If anyhting that contradicts your worldview is a troll comment.. well... why even bring this to discussion in the first place?

Based on what we posted so far, SotS and I are trying to tell you that you (and others) need a broader perspective. Even if you don't like to play any non-retro game, or any non-nintendo system, you can still inform yourself about them, and other people's opinions on them, instead of dismissing them inmediately.
Maybe such perspectives are indeed due to your aspergers, but that doesn't mean you can't try, right?

 

[8bitCelebi]

Based on what we posted so far, SotS and I are trying to tell you that you (and others) need a broader perspective. Even if you don't like to play any non-retro game, or any non-nintendo system, you can still inform yourself about them, and other people's opinions on them, instead of dismissing them inmediately.
Maybe such perspectives are indeed due to your aspergers, but that doesn't mean you can't try, right?

I could try all those games but I don't want to spend much money doing so. I'm just not that rich.

Also I understand there are so many different types of games out there but I'm just not interested in Cinematic, flash, or mobile games.

---

Is not only narrow-sighted, but also can be interpreted as an argument for the sake of an argument; you were talking about gaming in general, saying that retro games felt more like games; and that's true, retro games were pure games. But as SotS said (in other words) "games" is a misnomer today; you have many different types of games, with many different purposes and styles; you have the pure games, like mobile games, or internet flash games, or mario. or you have cinematic games, like MGS, or The last of us, or mass effect; or perhaps art games, like journey, portal, braid or pathologic.

The point being; if SotS were to, as you pointed out, list only games that you like, that wouldn't add much to the discussion, right? it would only reinforce your belief of retro games being the only worthy games out there.
If anyhting that contradicts your worldview is a troll comment.. well... why even bring this to discussion in the first place?

Based on what we posted so far, SotS and I are trying to tell you that you (and others) need a broader perspective. Even if you don't like to play any non-retro game, or any non-nintendo system, you can still inform yourself about them, and other people's opinions on them, instead of dismissing them inmediately.
Maybe such perspectives are indeed due to your aspergers, but that doesn't mean you can't try, right?

Sorry, I didn't mean to be rude, I just didn't like how he listed so many games I'm not interested in, almost as if he's forcing me to try them.

 

[professorlight]

Based on what we posted so far, SotS and I are trying to tell you that you (and others) need a broader perspective. Even if you don't like to play any non-retro game, or any non-nintendo system, you can still inform yourself about them, and other people's opinions on them, instead of dismissing them inmediately.
Maybe such perspectives are indeed due to your aspergers, but that doesn't mean you can't try, right?

I could try all those games but I don't want to spend much money doing so. I'm just not that rich.

Also I understand there are so many different types of games out there but I'm just not interested in Cinematic, flash, or mobile games. And many modern non-Nintendo games don't have any charm unlike retro ones do.

---

Is not only narrow-sighted, but also can be interpreted as an argument for the sake of an argument; you were talking about gaming in general, saying that retro games felt more like games; and that's true, retro games were pure games. But as SotS said (in other words) "games" is a misnomer today; you have many different types of games, with many different purposes and styles; you have the pure games, like mobile games, or internet flash games, or mario. or you have cinematic games, like MGS, or The last of us, or mass effect; or perhaps art games, like journey, portal, braid or pathologic.

The point being; if SotS were to, as you pointed out, list only games that you like, that wouldn't add much to the discussion, right? it would only reinforce your belief of retro games being the only worthy games out there.
If anyhting that contradicts your worldview is a troll comment.. well... why even bring this to discussion in the first place?

Based on what we posted so far, SotS and I are trying to tell you that you (and others) need a broader perspective. Even if you don't like to play any non-retro game, or any non-nintendo system, you can still inform yourself about them, and other people's opinions on them, instead of dismissing them inmediately.
Maybe such perspectives are indeed due to your aspergers, but that doesn't mean you can't try, right?

Sorry, I didn't mean to be rude, I just didn't like how he listed so many games I'm not interested in, almost as if he's forcing me to try them.

---

That's the point, he's not forcing to do anything. nor am I. We're just telling you to inform yourself, you have internet... read reviews, watch playthroughs... you don't need to buy a thing to know what's out there. information and an open mind, that's all we're saying.

As I said, he listed all those games because they illustrate his point that there are many, many good games out there, retro or not, regardless if you like them or not. No one is discussing your taste in games here; we're discussing gaming in general.

 

[8bitCelebi]

That's the point, he's not forcing to do anything. nor am I. We're just telling you to inform yourself, you have internet... read reviews, watch playthroughs... you don't need to buy a thing to know what's out there. information and an open mind, that's all we're saying.

As I said, he listed all those games because they illustrate his point that there are many, many good games out there, retro or not, regardless if you like them or not. No one is discussing your taste in games here; we're discussing gaming in general.

You're right. I actually can watch reviews or playthroughs but that's the most I can do for a game I don't want to spend money on. I thought trying them just meant playing them, but I can still experience a game just by watching them. I do watch reviews and playthroughs because I am curious about how those games play like.

 

[8bitCelebi]

When I said I can't get anything that's not Nintendo, I meant I can't get into anything that's not on Nintendo systems. I do play 3rd party games like Sonic, Tony Hawk, Spongebob, and Theme Park. Just wanted to clear that up.

Also I'm fine with competition as long as the competitor is fair. I'm fine with Sony and Microsoft competing because they make dedicated game systems with retail and download games just like Nintendo. I just can't stand competition from Smartphones and tablets. A dedicated gaming handheld competing with a phone or tablet isn't a fair competition.

 

[Card Slinger J]

Of course it's not fair competition when the 3DS seems to be solely focused on games where smartphones and tablets focus on more than just games such as TV, Internet, Music, Movies, and Call/Text. If the 3DS had more features in terms watching your favorite shows, movies, calling your friends/family, or listening to music with a pair of headphones than just access to games and Internet it probably would've sold way more units than it's currently selling right now. Not trying to be a stick in the mud just stating the obvious is all.

I've noticed some gamers are getting bored with Nintendo rehashing their IP's in the last 20 years or so and because of those games getting rehashed they get stale over time because it's the same formula over and over again. Just look at how many Mario, Zelda, and Pokemon games have been released even other developers and producers are just as guilty with companies like Capcom releasing rehash after rehash of Street Fighter and If it's not a rehash it's a reboot of something that was successful before similar to what Hollywood does with pop culture franchises but as a means of a cash grab than anything else.

Gamers will still play those rehashes because they enjoy them regardless of originality or innovation. I'm not saying nostalgia is bad for gaming, but perhaps the real root of the problem here isn't Nintendo but our own reluctance to try new games and genre's in general. While I do believe the FPS genre has already run it's course gamers will still buy FPS games without a second thought. It seems as the real heart of gaming nowadays lies in Indie titles, Kickstarters, and cheap games that don't cost as much as a standard Triple A title for $30-40 retail in a bad economy.

What you're seeing now is that games are going through the same transition music went through in the last decade where we were stuck having to buy Music CD's at a local store for $30+ to get specific songs on a album when nowadays you can buy songs for $0.99+ each or buy full albums online for half the amount you would pay for. By making Triple A games as affordable as purchasing songs on iTunes or Rhapsody that helps ease the pressure of investing too much money on games that have the potential to become successful with a big budget. If the game isn't successful then the cost won't end up hurting developers and producers to produce something better in the short-term rather than the long-term like how the gaming industry is right now.

 

[8bitCelebi]

I can understand "rehashes". Maybe you want to play a new game with a new challenge or story but prefer to stick to gameplay you're already familiar with. For example if you really enjoyed New Super Mario Bros. on the DS, you'd want to get the sequel on the 3DS for new levels, and sometimes new features. Also some franchises have spin off games which have completely different gameplay than the main series. Which means a franchise with spin off games won't get as stale as one without spin offs. Spin offs just make a game series more interesting.

And speaking of rehashes or reboots of games, they can apply to the film industry as well. Have you noticed that there are several Disney movies that follow a very similar plot concept? The concept is a young male or female following a quest or dream and he or she meets up with a another male or female and then there's some filler, a villian pops up to destroy their world, the protagonist defeats the villian, And a happy ending where the protagonist gets engaged with the boy or girl they met (They sometimes get married at the end). For example in Aladdin, He's a poor boy who wishes to be rich, he falls in love with Jasmine. He asked the Genie to make him a prince just so he can have Jasmine. There's some filler, Then Aladdin fights Jafar, defeats him and Aladdin marries Jasmine. I've seen this kind of concept in Cinderella, Little Mermaid, Lion King, Hercules, and Tangeled just to name a few. Maybe it's one of Disney's favorite plot concepts and they want to get as many people hooked on it as possible. So they make a movie with that same concept with different themes, settings, and characters that appeals to ones taste. If you love the ocean then you'd watch Little Mermaid. And if you love Greek Mythology you'd watch Hercules.

Also studios are usually make revivals of their older cartoons or whatever. Disney is still making revivals of Mickey Mouse and Warner Bros, still makes revivals Looney Tunes and Tom & Jerry. Maybe revivals or reboots are supposed to appeal to younger generation.

Anyway I agree that $30-40 can be pricey, which is why I only buy games I know I'll play a lot. I try to get the most out of games I own. The reason why I still like to pay $30-40 for a game is because I just can't let go of Mario, Zelda, or Pokémon. I have an iPhone and played 100's of games on it but all those games combined entertained me far less than Pokémon Y alone. Besides the eshop has cheap games as well. They're not as cheap as on the App Store as most App Store games are usually free to $2. On the eshop, most games are $2-$10 but I think $2-$10 is reasonable considering it's less than what a typical board game would cost. Sure downloaded games on the 3DS aren't as accessible as phone apps, and I'm not saying the eshop is as good as the App Store because it isn't. But it is a cheaper alternative for people who do own a 3DS and want a new game but is on a budget.

 

[Zapydos2]

And speaking of rehashes or reboots of games, they can apply to the film industry as well. Have you noticed that there are several Disney movies that follow a very similar plot concept? The concept is a young male or female following a quest or dream and he or she meets up with a another male or female and then there's some filler, a villian pops up to destroy their world, the protagonist defeats the villian, And a happy ending where the protagonist gets engaged with the boy or girl they met (They sometimes get married at the end). For example in Aladdin, He's a poor boy who wishes to be rich, he falls in love with Jasmine. He asked the Genie to make him a prince just so he can have Jasmine. There's some filler, Then Aladdin fights Jafar, defeats him and Aladdin marries Jasmine. I've seen this kind of concept in Cinderella, Little Mermaid, Lion King, Hercules, and Tangeled just to name a few. Maybe it's one of Disney's favorite plot concepts and they want to get as many people hooked on it as possible. So they make a movie with that same concept with different themes, settings, and characters that appeals to ones taste. If you love the ocean then you'd watch Little Mermaid. And if you love Greek Mythology you'd watch Hercules.

The Hero's Journey might have something to do with that. It's all over, not just Disney.

 

[8bitCelebi]

Sorry to bump. Just wanted to say one more thing. My actual concern is that Nintendo isn't getting enough attention that it deserves right now. If Nintendo is doing worse than the competition, i'm fine with that as long as Nintendo is getting enough attention. I prefer it when Nintendo gets almost as much attention as its competitors. To my surprise, I'm actually noticing that Xbox and Playstation are being less discussed as well. These past few months, I don't hear many people talk about Xbox and Playstation very much anymore. Because of that, I really don't care anymore.

From now on I'll just rely on Nintendo's YouTube channel for any news. I''ll try as much as I can to stay away from click-bait articles. I also promise I won't make threads like this again because I make my own click bait doing that.

 

[Card Slinger J]

That's probably because today's society views Nintendo as "outdated" or too "kiddy", the way I see it they're focusing more on smartphone and tablet technology for their next new console/handheld whatever it may be while their competitors are too focused on Virtual Reality which Nintendo themselves failed upon 20 years ago with the Virtual Boy. Perhaps this is Nintendo's punishment for not being transparent enough with gamers in North America and Europe like Sony has, the thing is If Nintendo teamed up with Sony in the early 90's for what could've been the PlayStation which was a 16-bit console instead of the 32-bit console we got in 1994 they probably wouldn't be in the mess they're in right now. I'm sure Sony wouldn't mind buying out Nintendo If they really wanted to but Nintendo brought this on themselves and we didn't understand the full impact of it until now.

Satoru Iwata might end up losing his job as Nintendo CEO this June, thing is Nintendo has a shareholder meeting every June and at that meeting they hold a vote and Iwata's approval rating has dropped for the past 3 years in a row. In 2011 Iwata's approval rating was 92.9% but last year it dipped to 77.3%, investors are also angry because it seems like Nintendo has been incapable of finding new ways to make a profit. Iwata changed Nintendo's forecast saying the company expects a net loss of 25 billion yen instead of a net profit of 55 billion yen, at the same time the President of Nintendo also slashed the Wii U sales forecast for the fiscal year from 9 million to 2.8 million. Because of the crappy sales forecast and how poorly the company is doing as a whole, Iwata took a 50% pay cut in his salary earlier this year.

Iwata might not get re-elected come June even with the 50% pay cut in his salary because shareholders might not think it's enough although he's said in the past that he won't resign telling investors earlier this year, "There will be no major management shake up in the short-term." For the sake of Nintendo as a whole Satoru Iwata should resign as CEO, but If he doesn't get re-elected as CEO of Nintendo where his approval rating drops it won't be enough because an upper management shake up at Nintendo of America is needed since their current business model isn't working. The Wii U is a perfect example of this however the 3DS is doing substantially well in today's handheld market which is slowly being integrated onto smartphones and tablets which explains their next direction in the video game industry while as I said before their competitors are now investing in Virtual Reality headsets probably as a means of getting Nintendo to become a third-party developer like what Sega did for Nintendo when they bought them out. What this means is that If there isn't an upper management shake up with Nintendo's company soon then they'll become the next Sega.

 

[professorlight]

Here's a handy tip:

When you see someone posting things like this:

I have aspergers syndrome and I sometimes over-react to issues that aren't that big of a deal. There are definitely news articles that are much worse such as,"A plane crashed into X City!"

Or this:

I'm not trying to troll anyone but I need to say that i'm too scared to play Pokemon X and Y or any Nintendo game in general because I keep thinking about how Nintendo might be losing popularity even from handhelds.

It's not a wise thing to jump and tell them that all their f****** fears are completely reasonable and they should be afraid, very afraid.

This is not the economist; you're dealing with someone who is proven to not take the exact kind of news you just brought up very well.

 

[Athena]

That's probably because today's society views Nintendo as "outdated" or too "kiddy", the way I see it they're focusing more on smartphone and tablet technology for their next new console/handheld whatever it may be while their competitors are too focused on Virtual Reality which Nintendo themselves failed upon 20 years ago with the Virtual Boy. Perhaps this is Nintendo's punishment for not being transparent enough with gamers in North America and Europe like Sony has, the thing is If Nintendo teamed up with Sony in the early 90's for what could've been the PlayStation which was a 16-bit console instead of the 32-bit console we got in 1994 they probably wouldn't be in the mess they're in right now. I'm sure Sony wouldn't mind buying out Nintendo If they really wanted to but Nintendo brought this on themselves and we didn't understand the full impact of it until now.

Satoru Iwata might end up losing his job as Nintendo CEO this June, thing is Nintendo has a shareholder meeting every June and at that meeting they hold a vote and Iwata's approval rating has dropped for the past 3 years in a row. In 2011 Iwata's approval rating was 92.9% but last year it dipped to 77.3%, investors are also angry because it seems like Nintendo has been incapable of finding new ways to make a profit. Iwata changed Nintendo's forecast saying the company expects a net loss of 25 billion yen instead of a net profit of 55 billion yen, at the same time the President of Nintendo also slashed the Wii U sales forecast for the fiscal year from 9 million to 2.8 million. Because of the crappy sales forecast and how poorly the company is doing as a whole, Iwata took a 50% pay cut in his salary earlier this year.

Iwata might not get re-elected come June even with the 50% pay cut in his salary because shareholders might not think it's enough although he's said in the past that he won't resign telling investors earlier this year, "There will be no major management shake up in the short-term." For the sake of Nintendo as a whole Satoru Iwata should resign as CEO, but If he doesn't get re-elected as CEO of Nintendo where his approval rating drops it won't be enough because an upper management shake up at Nintendo of America is needed since their current business model isn't working. The Wii U is a perfect example of this however the 3DS is doing substantially well in today's handheld market which is slowly being integrated onto smartphones and tablets which explains their next direction in the video game industry while as I said before their competitors are now investing in Virtual Reality headsets probably as a means of getting Nintendo to become a third-party developer like what Sega did for Nintendo when they bought them out. What this means is that If there isn't an upper management shake up with Nintendo's company soon then they'll become the next Sega.

[citation needed] --^

---

While I appreciate your point of view, you are making a lot of assumptions and jumping much too far to your conclusions.

Also, for the record, Iwata wasn't the only one who took a salary cut; other executives did as well. It doesn't really mean anything in regards to their financial situation but is seen as an apologetic gesture. Iwata also took a 50% pay cut as an apology for poor sales of the 3DS back in 2011.

 

[Card Slinger J]

professorlight I wasn't trying to scare 8bitCelebi If that's what you were getting at, besides Nintendo will be fine since they have enough money in the bank that will last them for the next 50+ years even If they fail with the Wii U since they're not even in the same financial position that Capcom is right now. Even If Nintendo stopped making consoles and handhelds they'd still be developing games for what we have available in the video game industry or what lies ahead in it's future. As for my point of view on what I was saying earlier yeah I was jumping to conclusions without thinking through.

I'm sorry If I angered you professorlight, and you're right that all these Anti-Nintendo articles on the Internet are best taken with a grain of salt. As for Satoru Iwata needing to resign I still feel that someone who has a different mindset that knows where the video game industry is heading toward needs to take over his position, probably someone younger maybe. I forgot about those posts you mentioned as I got carried away with what I was talking about, and I deeply apologize for that to both you and 8bitCelebi. You can go ahead and lock this thread Athena, I've already caused enough trouble on here as it is. -___-

 

[professorlight]

Oh, I wasn't angered at all.
As I said, it was just a tip. I also didn't think you were trying to scare anyone on purpose.

I should probably have told you that through PM, so sorry.

 

[MrSquarepants]

I have found complaints about new Nintendo games being too easy absurd in some articles.

"Oh the Fire Emblem Awakening dual team support makes things so cheap!"
"Ohhh man 2 hearts for Donkey Kong?! This game sucks!! Too easy!!"
"WTF?!?! Super Guide??!? Golden Feathers?!? This is BS!!! Games are too easy!!!"

Games are made to attract folks around all ages, especially CHILDREN. Games can be too difficult for a child who just started and the child may lose interest if he or she can't win. And thus easier modes are created to get them hooked. Super guides are there to help them progress. Oh and by the way they don't appear unless you die a certain amount of times. And there are always harder difficulties to choose from. You also are not forced to use it...

I hate when people try to use these excuses to bash Nintendo. It's poor argument.

 

[Card Slinger J]

Oh, I wasn't angered at all.
As I said, it was just a tip. I also didn't think you were trying to scare anyone on purpose.

I should probably have told you that through PM, so sorry.

That's okay I forgive you.