This truly is an exciting time for those of us involved in this industry beyond simply "playing the games." Technology just keeps getting better, faster...and with it, the competition grows bigger and stronger. Indeed, each console generation that comes before us brings with it even more excitement, more intrigue, and more questions that seek answers than that of the generations before it.
The future of Nintendo is one such question that is sitting idly on many of our minds. Listen closely. I'm here to officially tell you:
Past the Transparency
The majority of us were first introduced to video games on the archaic Nintendo Entertainment System. In less than a decade, the 2-D gaming experience became fulfilled in our eyes with the dawn of the Super Nintendo and Sega Genesis. Then with the introduction of the Nintendo 64, Sony PlayStation, and Sega Saturn, we were shown first-hand the beauty of three-dimensional graphics. Today, courtesy of the Nintendo GameCube, Sega Dreamcast, Microsoft Xbox, and Sony PlayStation 2, 3-D gaming is on the verge of being perfected. On top of that, online is becoming an essential part of the gaming experience and even our daily lives.
It's difficult for some to even begin to ponder the possibilities of the next generation and the features and innovations that the market will support. Will online gaming become the standard? Will we be seeing the first glimpse of a viable virtual reality?
The future is clear for those willing to look.
We have nearly two decades to draw knowledge from and reflect upon. Lessons have undoubtedly been learned. The answer to these questions is quite simple and can be summed up in one word: games. The future of the video game industry has and will always be decided by the one with games that produce the greatest impact on gamers. What games make an impact? And what games are merely ordinary? That answer changes from one generation to another on account of the evolution of hardware. Changing technology allows developers to express new subjects and convey new ideas. Thanks to Nintendo, this upcoming generation will be no different.
Seismic Gaming
If you look at the current movie industry, you clearly see that the ideas that used to be a movie's main "draw" are now becoming more stale than an Old Country Buffet dinner roll. Whether it's the fighting in the Matrix or the big battles of Braveheart -- seeing these countless times and again -- they are no longer unique. The epic battles in the recent movie Troy are "ho-hum" compared to the reaction you had when you watched the adrenaline-drenched Braveheart for the first time. After eating a bag of popcorn through The Lord of the Rings, The Mummy and countless other films featuring epic battles, you can't help but get the overwhelming and justified buttery-feeling of, "Been there, done that." This phenomenon is similar to the monotonous purring of your air conditioner. After a while, your senses simply become numb to it.
...Until now, better graphic-producing hardware has been the main avenue used to create innovation in games...
What happens when all of these big, beautiful graphics and expansive game worlds become a de facto standard in video games? They are already on the verge of it, afterall. Grand Theft Auto can't use its gigantic worlds and free-form gameplay as its main sell forever. Just look at the Tomb Raider series for an example. Lara Croft's voluptuous breasts weren't enough to entice gamers to purchase her latest excuse-for-a-game. Gamers grow to demand more *cough* Dead or Alive: Extreme Beach Volleyjugs *cough*. This is one of the reasons we've seen the introduction of the first-person view in football games. The consumption of more and more extravagance and excitement is necessary for us to grow as individuals. You didn't stop learning mathematics after addition and subtraction, right? Eventually Grand Theft Auto and all games in its mold, will become a standard for video games in a similar way no one today would dare omit a storyline from an RPG.
Innovative hardware breeds innovative software. Until now, better graphic-producing hardware has been the main avenue used to create innovation in games. While the template of using better graphics and speed hasn't nor will it ever be retired, it is reaching a plateau. These elements have become the standard to build upon as we progress into the future, but presented alone, they are no longer enough to distinguish you from others.
That's one of the points I was trying to get across in my recent "Existing Visibly Invisible" article. Every generation, the way games are presented, has changed. And with the upcoming generation, we'll see that change again.
This is just a part of the reason why I see such a successful future for Nintendo. The company is really looking at all this from the perspective of "How will you play games?" rather than its competitors' arbitrary viewpoints of "What platform/software will you play games on?"
With Nintendo's innovations (Revolution and Nintendo DS) that essentially force developers to create new games and gameplay, Nintendo will be in the best position out of the three to have the next "killer app" appear on its console(s). Look at it this way. Microsoft and Sony are providing a tray of drab paint and a traditional white-rectangle canvas for developers to paint on. Meanwhile, Nintendo is providing a glamorous three-dimensional canvas in the shape of a cube or pyramid -- it's your choice -- with oil and water paint, crayons, pencils, glitter -- again, it's your choice. Which tools do developers have a better chance of creating something new and exciting with? That answer should be clear to you.
There's a lot on the line in this upcoming generation. You have Sony who thinks it can become the standard god of entertainment. Then there's Microsoft who thinks it will become the standard for the showcase of future video games. Both are pretty similar goals.
Meanwhile, with the Nintendo DS and upcoming Revolution, Nintendo is truly exploring a new path and new frontier. It's almost like what Nintendo set out to do with the original Nintendo Entertainment System and Game Boy - these markets were, for the most part, completely unexplored with zero competition.
While Sony and Microsoft use only their flashy graphics to try to win over the eyes of increasingly desensitized consumers, Nintendo will open up and establish a completely new market...first.
So how exactly, you might be wondering, do the competitor's and their philosophies stack up?
Sony's Institute of Chemistry
Sony wants to own everything, from the content creation platform (Cell workstations), to the content delivery system (UMD and Blu-Ray discs), to the content platform (PS3, PSX3, PSP) and much of the software market (Sony Pictures, Sony Music, SCE's publishing divisions).
Sony currently has this blind pursuit of convergence not unlike that of which Nintendo and Hiroshi Yamauchi once had with the original Nintendo Entertainment System. Scientists know that the mixing of elements doesn't always provide desirable results...but what mixes and doesn't mix in the video game industry is still not yet clear. Sony however, intends on taking the risk to find the answer with its next-generation home and portable consoles.
The disc format for the PlayStation 3 has been confirmed as Blu-ray - a format heavily invested in by the company. With 27-54 GB of available storage on these discs, it's clear Sony will try to use its PlayStation 3 console as a means to different ends.
Sony's PlayStation brand name has become synonymous with the word "video games" over just the past decade. Sony is using this leverage to sell its DVD players, it's music players, and other media and entertainment hardware and software. After the dismal acceptance of it's all-in-one DVD recorder/player dubbed "PSX", it's starting to become clear that Sony might just be losing sight of why people bought the PlayStation in the first place - to play video games.
Microsoft's Institute of Cosmetology
Microsoft has done an admirable job of covering up the fact that while it might be selling more Xbox consoles each month in North America compared to Nintendo's GameCube, it's also losing millions, perhaps billions of dollars running its Xbox division. People point and laugh at the fact that Nintendo is in third-place in home console sales in North America. But the question needs to be asked, is it fair to name a company who's profitable a loser?
Surprise, surprise, but what brought Microsoft it's "success" this generation -- it's ability to spend, spend, spend -- will not be available to it with the next generation. The Xbox division must begin making a profit. If it doesn't, what hope do Microsoft's shareholders have that it will ever become profitable? The definition of success is profit. Microsoft has no right to claim its Xbox is a success until it can prove that it can retain and grow its Xbox userbase while maintaining a profit.
I could start my own business of selling Girl Scout Cookies. Lets says I give monetary incentives to frosting makers to make frosting for my cookies. I also sell my cookies at supermarkets across North America for cheap -- at a price below that of which it takes to manufacture them. After all is said and done, I'm in the red a billion dollars. But wait! At least I can claim I own a whopping 15 percent of the market. Whoop-di-doo. But this still begs the question, how worthwhile is my business if I'm not making any money from it?
The only thing Microsoft has going for it then is mindshare - people's perception of the Xbox name. But just ask Sega and Nintendo about what can happen to consumer's perception in just a single generation and you come to realize that mindshare can only do so much. And with only 15 percent of the market, it's not as though the Xbox actually has anything to brag about. Yes, it's true the GameCube and Xbox's marketshares are about even. But in terms of video games, Nintendo owns half the market. People claim that, "But wait, Nintendo's Game Boy doesn't count!" Listen up. It's a bonified video game player sold on the same shelves and in the same aisle as the Xbox. Besides, competition can come from anything and everything that distracts people from buying the Xbox. So yes, Microsoft is facing competition from the Game Boy, television and even Kentucky Fried F&@$ing Chicken. Even Bill Gates wholeheartedly agrees that the recreation of playing with your chicken consumes the Xbox audience.
But, Microsoft does deserve some slack. At the end of the day, the next generation will truly be a fight for the best software - the killer application. Fortunately, for Microsoft, it's strategy for the next generation is to create the reference design that developers will use to develop game software. It very much has its head on straight in that regards.
"Microsoft XNA propels us ahead of Sony in the next-generation games race because the future of gaming is in software, not hardware."
- Microsoft
No way! A software company actually said that? Where's my static stick... It's an undeniable fact that hardware and software go hand-in-hand. Tisk, tisk. Unfortunately for Microsoft, the company must omit some technology in its next console in order to finally make it profitable. Some would argue Microsoft's "power" edge and hard drive this generation are what made the Xbox so attractive for both developers and users. So now we have the company going from touting the Xbox hardware -- hard drive, graphics chip, online capabilities -- this generation to claiming the savior is software alone? Microsoft, stuck in it's software world, is forgetting that there are still hardware innovations on the horizon.
Microsoft's unprofitable Xbox hardware has forced the company to change it's tune. Perhaps for good reason too... Would I be naive for suggesting that the Xbox would have fizzled out long ago had it not been for Halo? Of course, you have the people who will jump on board by brand name alone, but I think the majority of people, the mainstream, require a killer app to make a console purchase worthwhile. With the help of XNA, will the company get lucky and come upon another killer app on the level of Halo? Unfortunately, the chance of this happening becomes much smaller when the company limits the canvas for developers to create their work on.
Console userbases are built with these so-called killer apps - the groundbreaking titles like Super Mario Bros. 3, Sonic the Hedgehog, Donkey Kong Country, Final Fantasy VII, Goldeneye 007, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Gran Turismo, Halo, Grand Theft Auto 3 and a few others. These are the titles that hook and lure the mainstream audience in to make their first console purchase. Meanwhile, all the other barrage of titles that are released each year for consoles act as filler material and help retain and keep satisfied the system's audience until the next killer app comes along. The unfortunate catch about these system-defining titles is that each one attracts a specific audience.
It should be pointed out that there is no such thing as "appealing to everyone". This is Nintendo's motto for the games it creates. Is there such thing as a flavor of ice cream that appeals to everyone? Of course not.
Nintendo's Institute of Plumbing
I mean, Nintendo has always said, "We make games for everyone." We know that's not 100 percent accurate, but rather just a company motto - a mission statement for Nintendo to aim for when developing its games.
What Nintendo's goal is, no doubt, is to create a variety of titles in such a manner that the greatest diversity of people can find enjoyment from them. It's similar to how an ice cream parlor can offer a selection of vanilla, chocolate and strawberry ice cream, and appeal to 90 percent of the market.
Although the intentions are there, recently Nintendo has failed in delivering a variety of games, and more specifically, killer apps that appeal to a diversity of tastes. It has done a fantastic job giving Mario-platformer-aficionados their Super Mario Sunshine and Metroid-adventure-fanatics their Metroid Prime...but what it hasn't done, is given Halo first-person shooter lovers their Halo or Grand Theft Auto free-roaming admirers their Grand Theft Auto 3. Unfortunately for Nintendo, the two aforementioned titles are the ones that have proved to be the games that have appealed to the greatest number of people this generation and helped to establish the userbases of the Microsoft Xbox and Sony PlayStation 2.
While Nintendo can't fill in those specific holes - the Halo scratch and the Grand Theft Auto abyss - it is attempting to expand its audience in its own way with titles such as Geist, Advance Wars: Under Fire and Donkey Konga. It's not yet known if these titles are destined to be system-defining ones or instead the filler material that merely completes a console's game library. But it can't be denied that Nintendo's developers, led by such visionaries as Shigeru Miyamoto, Eiji Aonuma, Yoshiaki Koizumi, Takashi Tezuka, and Yoshio Sakamoto are some of the best, if not the best, in the entire games industry.
...Nintendo is moving us closer to virtual reality than anyone else...
Because they are so valued, people flip out when Nintendo president Satoru Iwata says
the company intends on making its games "simpler". Look at it this way, Mario can be
described as a simple game -- you frantically run and jump -- but it can also be much more
complicated -- you dodge enemies, find secret items, save princesses. Nintendo is looking
to make games that are "simple" run-and-jump but also feature that hidden depth.
Therefore, there will be something, an aspect, that can be appreciated by all. If you
break down Grand Theft Auto into its basic gameplay -- it's pretty simple. You can drive,
shoot, or run around aimlessly. It's the same premise and a formula that has always
worked.
If you think Nintendo meant simple games as within the children's Barney-sing-a-long genre, you're absolutely wrong. Just look at The Legend of Zelda, Metroid Prime 2: Echoes, and Geist and it's blatantly clear Iwata is talking about something else - that his perspective of a "simple game" is not at all the same as ours.
Through games like Mario Party 6, Wario Ware, Donkey Konga and others, Nintendo is trying to attract the "non-gamer". This is true. But it's also a guarantee Nintendo will try and be successful at retaining the "gamer" at the same time.
And thanks to the necessity of appealing to the "gamer", backwards compatibility (the ability to use existing/past types of play) is not something to be worried about with Nintendo's next home console. Just look at the Nintendo DS, the Game Boy Advance, and even the GameCube Game Boy Player. If that's not clear enough of what Nintendo thinks about backwards compatibility, I don't know what is. It's almost a guarantee that the Revolution will be compatible with not only the Nintendo GameCube but also the Game Boy line (whether it's wireless or actually integrated into the system or accessible via a peripheral, I suppose we'll just have to wait and see). And therefore, if a developer wants to create a brand-new traditional video game for it (or port it from another console), the option will be there.
I read this article a while ago about an experiment that removed the enemies from Super Mario Bros. People reacted by forming new ways to play it -- whether it was to race to the end or turn the stage into a dance floor -- it was still a game. There's obviously an underlying formula that makes a game a game, a genre a genre, etc. Who's to argue that Nintendo can't manifest a different way of playing a video game and not still retain the essence of a video game?
If anything, it sounds like Nintendo is moving us closer to virtual reality than anyone else (which is arguably the ultimate destination for video games). With the Donkey Kong bongo drums for example, you're involving your body in the game. That is stepping you even closer to actually being able to perform a collaborative bitch slap with your left and right hands across Ganondorf's ugly face. Then you have the voice recognition in Mario Party 6... Alienate traditional video games players? Not possible. Unless you have a particular handicap, a gamer can do and enjoy this "simple" stuff too. In fact, any human being should feel right at home doing it. This, I think, is the direction Nintendo is moving in. Look at the voice recognition functions in the Nintendo DS for another example.
And if the games appeal to the market, the industry will have no choice but to follow Nintendo's direction.
"...There is the TV set, here is the controller, (held) in both hands. We should not hesitate to crash through the system Nintendo itself created..."
- Satoru Iwata
Nintendo is very aware of risks. It launched the NES in North America after the market was obliterated by Atari. It launched a handheld phenomenon with the Game Boy. It's launched hundreds of game franchises and nearly all of them have become admirable success stories. And while not all of its risks have been successful -- the Virtual Boy or its attempts at online gaming -- the company has only become stronger from its experiences.
And sure, Nintendo still has some work to do. Giving Nintendo Power a makeover, releasing a non-purple Revolution, and giving us the beautiful Legend of Zelda in 2005...but overall, the company has or will be making all of these changes. Changes that will, for lack of a better word, change Nintendo's image for the better.
It's also essential that we remember the fact that the purple GameCube was a part of Hiroshi Yamauchi's legacy. The stylish Nintendo DS is via new president Satoru Iwata's approval. You can expect such mainstream-oriented appeal from all future Nintendo products.
Remember, the GameCube had an incredibly rough birth. It was an especially difficult transition period for Nintendo. Key executives such as Nintendo Co., Ltd. president Hiroshi Yamauchi, Nintendo of America president Minoru Arakawa, Nintendo of America executive vice president of sales and marketing Peter Main, Ken Lobb and others departed and/or retired from Nintendo. These are men who had been with the company for ten to twenty years. It would be an understatement to say that they weren't valuable or had a huge effect on the productive environment at Nintendo.
Adding to the stress was Nintendo's developer support. During the Nintendo 64 generation, Nintendo would rely on its partner Rare to develop some extraordinary games but as the generation came to a closure, it became clear that Rare had lost something. Instead of providing Donkey Kong Racing, Kameo, and Star Fox Adventures for the GameCube at launch or shortly thereafter as originally planned, Rare managed to release only Star Fox Adventures after nearly a year delay. Nintendo sold its shares in Rare because the company simply wasn't meeting its expectations (and if Grabbed by the Ghoulies is any indication, Rare still hasn't found its mojo).
Meanwhile, Nintendo's other second party studio Left Field Productions did deliver a basketball title however it was largely overshadowed by competitors. A sequel to 1080 Snowboarding was also being handled by Left Field but apparently the company and Nintendo couldn't agree and weren't satisfied with each other on the proper direction of the title. A sequel to Excitebike was also left in the closet. Nintendo officially concluded its relationship with the company in September 2002 and 1080 Avalanche, developed internally at NST, didn't appear for another two years. Then there's the infamous Retro Studios saga. The company was supposed to have four titles in development -- a Football game, an off-road racing title dubbed Thunder Rally, an epic RPG named Raven Blade, and Metroid Prime. Due to the incompetence of it's executives at managing their teams, three of the titles lagged behind in development and showed little progress. Those three titles were eventually cancelled in favor of salvaging Metroid Prime. And finally, we have Silicon Knights, a company who should've had its psychological-thriller Eternal Darkness ready for the November 2001 launch, but ultimately didn't have the product ready until June 2002.
Indeed, all of these titles would have gone a long way to establishing a broader audience for the GameCube. This was Nintendo's intention afterall. Nintendo's strategy all along was to target the GameCube to an older demographic. This is why we saw the company partner with Capcom to make the Resident Evil series exclusive. Unfortunately, the blunders of managing its second-party studios resulted in a very lopsided market. Had Nintendo been there to establish markets for football games, rally-racing games and western RPGs, today's landscape of lacking third-party support on GameCube would likely look dramatically different.
Fortunately, Nintendo's future again looks incredibly bright. The company will not be making the same mistake twice. Iwata has put a new and dependable strategy into effect. Nintendo has been pursuing partnerships with proven third-party developers. The fruits of this have already been seen this generation with titles such as F-Zero GX, Resident Evil 4, Tales of Symphonia, Donkey Konga, Baten Kaitos, Star Fox, Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes, Advance Wars: Under Fire and Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles.
Nintendo's relationship with third-party developers Sega, Namco, Capcom, Square Enix, Electronic Arts, and others has never been better and will go a far way to defining the desired audience for the Revolution.
The Future?
All three are taking risks, but I think Nintendo might be taking the largest. It doesn't seem to be conforming to what the current market expects (pretty graphics of the PSP) and is instead intent on telling the market that they should be interested in a new direction...just like it did with the NES, the Nintendo 64 rumble pak, the Wavebird wireless controller, and many other innovations. This is the Nintendo we remember. And to its return, I must say:
Welcome back, Nintendo.
"...we need to let people rethink gaming, and make gaming more and more important for them. But to do that, we need to do something bold and brand-new, or the total market may shrink. And if we are just fighting against our competitors to be at the top of a shrinking marketplace, it doesn't make that much difference in the public eye. So thinking about the big picture, we want to make changes so that people realize what we are making is truly innovative and fascinating."
- Shigeru Miyamoto; Sep. 12, 2003
Want to beat me unconscious with a Chiquita banana? You can reach me at glen@n-sider.com.