"Nintendo outlined its plan to redefine itself as a health-oriented entertainment company in the coming decade."

http://games.yahoo.com/news/nintendo-ce … 23517.html

So, should we expect Super Mario Bros. Gym anytime soon?

Oh brother....

I think this once-proud company is being run into the ground by a moron. It's not going to work and even if it does, will anyone that cares about actual videogames give a damn?

This is Iwata's way of saying he doesn't know how to run a videogame company properly. The man got lucky with the Wii's popularity, now he is trying to duplicate that luck with an absolutely horrendous idea. Really, what does this say to Wii U owners, other than "we don't know what we're doing"

Hiroshi Yamauchi is squirming in his grave right now.

After reading Goldfish's reply I feel I shouldn't have edited my earlier post. It originally contained some similar sentiments... but I didn't want to come off as too heated.

As Goldfish says, nobody that cares about games is going to give a crap. I understand that the "core gamer" is not the group they are going after since that group *supposedly* abandoned them with the Cube but, quite frankly, I'm sick of saying they aren't targeting my demographic. Nintendo is a company that creates video games, they should be targeting people who play video games. It's not rocket science. Additionally, should they really try and target what may be another fad crowd? Targeting such a crowd is what screwed them with the later years with the Wii.

Again, it's been said time and time again... lack third party development which was (this time) probably the result of making a console without the input from the non-Nintendo studios and developers.

This whole thing pretty much reminds me of the crap-tastic, pointless article I read were Retro Studios said the WiiU was a great machine. Now I'm not saying the WiiU is bad or underpowered... and I LOVE some of the work Retro has done... but am I really going to take such an article at face value when Retro is owned by Nintendo? Like they are going to say it sucks or something....

This is basically what I think of Nintendo's consoles. I don't have anything against them, but I'd rather wait until the damn thing is obsolete and then buy it and all the good games. I honestly see no reason to invest until that point unless we're talking handheld.

It's funny you mention Yamauchi. A few months ago after his death there was an a article in my local paper about his death and - to anyone familiar with video games and the console wars - it was glossily inaccurate. Everyone knows that Yamauchi was a complete an utter dick and some of his decisions hampered Nintendo at certain points. But no... let's not mention that, not even in a nice and polite way.

I just did the short version of what I normally put. For everyone's sake.

But I don't hate Nintendo per se, I think what I hate is their guidance under Iwata. He makes awful decisions that trickle down to the rest of the company and the brand suffers as a result. I will give him motion controls, he got lucky on that and that probably helped Nintendo out a lot financially. But GBA Connectivity, leaving the Gamecube with virtually no software for 2 years on the US market (Twilight Princess fiasco), 3DS pricing, Wii U in general, the Virtual Console (seriously, how do you mess up something so ingenious and exclusive?), lack of 3rd party support and now this, I lay them all on this guy's shoulders.

Not to get off topic (that's probably hopeless tho) but what was the Twilight Princess fiasco?

It was announced for Gamecube, then delayed for about a year so it could be ported to the Wii as a launch title (with added effects like the bow coming through the Wiimote speaker). So the end result was Nintendo basically bowed out of the console battle for mostly all of 2005 and 2006, after the GBA Connectivity flopped in 2004. Granted, they were fighting for second place behind Sony, but they made things way too easy for Microsoft.

If Nintendo's mission was to convert their gamers into health nuts, that'd be a sobering point... but that's not what they're setting out to do. They're seeking to expand their consumer base, not covert or replace it. The company's done this for over a century. Many companies have.

Whether or not it will be a fruitful venture--and whether or not it negatively impacts Nintendo's role as a player in the video game arena--remains to be seen, but I think it's a bit too early to bemoan the end times. I'm also a little puzzled as to why gamers who've disavowed Nintendo long ago are taking issue with this. If you've already washed your hands of them, why does this upset you?

So what I'm hearing is this: Nintendo apparently does make good games that cater to your demographic, but you won't support these until it's too late to make a difference to Nintendo. So, is Nintendo not supporting core gamers, or are core gamers not supporting Nintendo?

Wait... so Twilight Princess was released for both consoles at (relattively) at the same time? I did not know that...

It's great to learn because knowledge is power!

Call it brand loyalty and the hope that they'll put forth effort into doing the right thing. I mean, "Okay, we screwed up, we'll get it right" is what I want to hear. That is essentially what Sega did after the add-on and Saturn fiascos and they brought out the Dreamcast, which had a short but amazing run. And then there's, "Well, we're getting beat and we're running out of ideas and we've made too many stupid decisions, so we have to make money some other way...our magic Wii Board sold tons, so we'll go in that direction". It just smells of desperation.

Also call it hoping the company improves once they wise up and throw Iwata out in the streets.

If a company you like is floundering, you'd rather see them stick to the guns that have failed them and die, as opposed to them branching out and possibly surviving? The very notion that "Nintendo is and must be ____ only" flies in the face of their entire history. Even if we back away from the video game angle a bit... the idea that a company should not do anything to improve its situation unless it strictly adheres to their status quo just seems unrealistic to me. Companies like The Gap, Paypal, or even Sony and Microsoft likely wouldn't be where they are today if they hadn't changed their course.

They do every so often (aka Metroid) ... but compare those few titles I want next to what PlayStation and XBox offer in the same time period? I admit I'm being spiteful and taking advantage of the situation but I should probably mention I buy next to nothing new anyway... so I don't really support any element of the game business when it is really prudent to them. I guess I'm not a real gamer, a horrible human being or some other junk because of that, right?

Also, why do you always pick what I say apart? I doubt you'd care as much if I took a swipe at Microsoft or Sony.

No, Ashley, I'm not one for such hyperbole. That said, it does seem a bit unreasonable to not support a business yet expect them to cater to you. it doesn't bother me if you buy used or new, but if you're going to rally for Nintendo to straighten up (as you see fit), what's in it for them?

Edit: I'm responding to you, not picking your words apart. If you were to attack Sony and Microsoft on the same grounds, I would have something to say about it, since expanding their horizons is what brought them both to the home console market in the first place.

Hey, I supported them PLENTY back before the damn 64. It's not my fault they can't maintain fruitful relationships and have anything other than first and second party games on their console. Sorry, but I'm not terribly interested in Mario anymore.

I think it's really interesting that video game companies can elicit such raw emotion from consumers even around twenty years after said consumers stopped supporting them. I can think of few other industries that inspires the same enduring fervor.

Ironically... I have to agree with this.

Let me ask you this...are YOU happy with the direction they're going in? No offense, but I can't tell if you're defending them or trying to argue their company line. From both a gamer's perspective and a business sense, the move makes no sense because the whole "health" thing can easily be copied and done better by a company that is 100% dedicated to the cause. It is a stupid idea. No one can copy Nintendo's development teams and IP's though, it's up to them to use them to their potential.

I understand capitalism perfectly well and I also understand when people will say or do anything to keep their job (as well as the general pigheadedness of Japanese corporations). The way I see it, they are not using their gaming resources to their fullest potential. They have a ridiculous backlog of games that span many generations. And they choose to release them, what, 3 a week if you're lucky? And most of them are already available for the Wii, they are just getting a 3D upgrade now. Just throw them on a cellphone already and let people download Super Mario Brothers for $3 a pop. And for the Wii U, one of their biggest holiday titles was an HD remake of a Zelda game that is one of the most polarizing and controversial ones of the series. Gee, no wonder Wii U sales are slow!

Also, funny you mention Microsoft, because they've screwed up royally recently. Seen the response lately to Windows 8? Did you see them try to backtrack on it by trying to move away from that stupid tile view (great for tablets, horrible for PC's) Did you see them backtrack after E3 (and Xbone is still $100 more than the PS4 because it has a piece of junk included) Those moves don't inspire confidence in the brand name. At least Sony is coming off as being consistent. Paypal is still Paypal, they're just expanding on their core business (aligning with ebay and offering sort of a pre-paid card that links to your account are two smart ways of extending what they do so well).

As someone whose passion for video gaming has waned over the years, I find it difficult to find hatred or delight in any video game experience anymore. That said, I have been generally receptive to what Nintendo's offered me so far. It's far from perfect, I readily admit, and there are plenty of things I wish were better... but I also enjoy some of what has been presented thus far, too.

It sounds like you're saying that the key to Nintendo's success should be rereleasing all of their old titles en masse... despite talking about using development teams to their fullest potential in the last paragraph, and knocking Nintendo for rereleasing an old title in the same paragraph.

Then, you go on to deride Microsoft for backtracking (which could also be called "listening to the consumer"). You were among those who balked at Microsoft original announcements, and now you're mocking them for repealing that which you balked at. You seem very hard to satisfy.

PLEASE tell me you can tell the difference between launching VC titles/cellphone titles of old classics to sell steadily and launching an HD version of a game that isn't even 10 years old and wasn't terribly popular to begin with to be a killer Christmas title for a floundering console. Two entirely different scenarios.

If the best Nintendo's development teams can do is re-release Wind Waker, maybe the company really is doomed and should move onto their "health" initiative full time. I'm going to assume they have more in them than that.

A company has 7-8 years to dream up brilliant ideas to launch their console and that is what they came up with!? The idea never should have seen the light of day and whoever thought it was smart deserves to be thrown out of Steve Ballmer's office window. They had to backtrack, they had no choice. Sony would have slaughtered them by now. I feel if the PS4 had not launched in the same window, they would have gone ahead with it, regardless of what consumers thought. And my point still stands: The console is still $100 more than the PS4 and comes with a piece of junk hardware that no one cares about.

Um, the way I read Goldfish's reply I don't think his backtracking comment was aimed at the initial XBox announcements. I think that portion of the sentence was aimed at Windows 8. The way that sentence was compounded I think there may have been some confusion.

Additionally, and I really don't want to start another fire here, but I was (and still am) personally a little irked how quickly the gaming community forgot what Microsoft tried to do when they threw all sorts of goodies at those purchasing the console (day 1 game and headset)... but I guess I shouldn't be surprised that people forget things when new and shinny things are put right in front of them.

Twice they've tried to go in new directions, both times were met overwhelmingly negative. That was my point. I just happen to have Windows 8 experience firsthand so that was the first thing that came to mind. What a clusterfuck that thing is...

I'm all for Nintendo experimenting with making health technology fun. If it works out and makes lots of money, that's great. If not, onto the next experiment. I think the anger and resentment people have with Nintendo stems from the fact that Nintendo was the video game company of their childhood and so Nintendo must ALWAYS be THAT Nintendo in people's eyes. The dominant Nintendo. The synonym for playing video games Nintendo. The platform of choice of game developers the world over Nintendo. The system that all your friends had, and the only system worth having. Anything less is a letdown, a waste of potential. This article touches on some of that: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/2097 … rsonal.php

Anyway, times have changed. The video game industry is bigger than ever, and games exist in all shapes, sizes, and business models. Nintendo is just a small piece of the bigger picture now, and that's ok. If Nintendo no longer releases games that interest you, don't worry about Nintendo. Play the games you love and be happy. If there's no games you love, find a hobby you love and do that.

As for me, I'd like Nintendo to be more successful for completely selfish reasons: the company makes some of my favorite games, games that have influenced my particular slice of gaming culture, and I would like that culture to continue and thrive. I'll be saddened if it gets marginalized, but at the same time, no amount of failure from the Nintendo of today can take away the good times I've had with the company's products over the course of my life. Those memories will always be there.

To be honest I'd rather have Windows 7 on my computer... but 8 came installed. Man, I really miss Windows XP. I hardly had any problems with it and I knew it like the back of my hand... but since Microsoft quit supporting it last year it was time to upgrade. Well, that and the fact my old desktop was so old that it didn't even have a milti-core processor. Yes, that thing was a dinosaur.

This is what I don't understand, guys; you get upset over the moves a company makes, and then when they undo them, you still hold it against them. GoldfishX in particular outlines a "damned if you do (Microsoft's wacky new policies are terrible for gaming!), damned if you don't (rescinding those wacky policies diminishes confidence in the brand!)" approach. You neither forgive nor forget. You'll never be content--with Microsoft, with Nintendo, whatever--if that's the position you maintain.

XLord007's sentiments really resonate with me; I agree with every point made.

Likewise, I can't quite figure out what your main argument is at all. It's like, you're getting upset/annoyed at us getting upset over stuff that is done by or retracted by the company. And then you're trying extra hard to find contradictions in MY arguments, which I find quite annoying. I'm not ignorant enough to tell people how they should think or act, but in my mind, anyone who cares anything about gaming should be FURIOUS at Nintendo (and especially Iwata) for going in the direction they're going in and for wasting limited resources on a stupid idea. Black and white, plain and simple, that's my stance on the matter. And they are NOT backtracking from this.

My response to Microsoft (who I REALLY don't care if they live or die at this point...I only brought them up because you used them as an example of successful change earlier): "A company has 7-8 years to dream up brilliant ideas to launch their console and that is what they came up with!? The idea never should have seen the light of day and whoever thought it was smart deserves to be thrown out of Steve Ballmer's office window."

I know how capitalism works, I know how office bureaucracy works and I hate seeing this crap filter down into my hobbies (and in the case of Windows 8, my day to day habits). I want to say no one is thinking, but the truth is, people at these companies dream up some awful ideas that get through many rounds of meetings and are signed off on by company execs and rightly deserve to be called out for it. A kiss and make up later doesn't quite cover it (although 20 free games does!...yes, I'll even hand you this contradiction, I rather like how Nintendo handled the 3DS price drop).

My main argument is this: that's very narrow-minded, and sorry to say, kind of silly.

So...essentially, you're saying people who care about gaming should be looking forward to Nintendo's new health initiatives? I'm confused.

I actually meant your main argument towards Nintendo or whatever company we're discussing. You're passive towards the companies (you say you really don't care either way, some good, some bad, etc), yet clearly passive aggressive towards the people that criticize them for their actions. I don't really think you have a point to make then if you're that concentrated on undermining my own opinion.

I think you're overlooking a few things here:

1) First of all, I'm really glad Goldfish brought up Microsoft because I wanted to show I have some contempt for a company other than Nintendo. I really want to drive home the point that none of the big three are guilt-free here.
2) You can take away from my comment that I'm still angry at Microsoft (well, not angry.... just annoyed) but I'm more annoyed by how the minute they reversed course gamers acted like everything was okay and nothing ever happened. I'm sorry, but I'm not bought off that easily.
3) If you think Microsoft reversed their decision out of the kindness of their own heart I believe you are sadly mistaken. As Goldfish stated they probably looked at their pre-orders, saw they were abysmal and said "oh freakin snap... we got to do something!" Money (making it, the lack of it), a LAWSUIT (losing it), PR (Puplic Relations and "charity") and the LAW are the only reason corporations do ANYTHING. Companies that aren't small don't have a collective since of consciousness. I'll even go further with a personal experience:

I remember when I got hurt at work late last year. I was using this tool (a MAKESHIFT tool the STORE PROVIDED - that was actually MADE BY the one manager - that was not standard issue) to complete a task. The tool broke due to faulty construction and I ended up being injured. I NEVER saw that tool after the incident and I GUARANTEE it was in the trash the very minute I left the building to go to the hospital. Days later when I was at work and explaining what happened to management when they were filling out the incident report I TRIED to drive home that "tool" should have never been used in the first place... but to be honest I don't think that ever made it into the report because they didn't seem too interested in that part. CYA man, CYA.

As for me, yeah, I could have made a real big stink over it... but four things kept me from pressing it: 1) losing my job, 2) the main piece of evidence - outside the video - was probably gone, 3) the company did pay for all the treatment and 4) outside a scar there was no permanent damage.

So sorry to go on with such a big story, but just tend to see corporations for what most of them are... and I see myself for what I am, a ever expendable cog that can be replaced. Cynical yes, but the only illusions I want are the ones involving myself.

No, I'm not saying that. It doesn't have to be one or the other. All I've been saying is that it's not a reason to cry that the sky is falling.

You're getting closer to my point, then. For me, it's not about pro-Nintendo, anti-Nintendo, pro-Microsoft, etc, etc--don't worry about what "party" I'm "affiliated" with. It's not even about people criticizing these companies. It's the mindset that a company seeking to expand its scope is not only a bad thing, but a reprehensible thing--in this case, that it's bad for gaming, and a shame on Nintendo. When you start spouting rhetoric about how "anyone who cares about gaming" should be appalled--insinuating that anyone who isn't appalled isn't a "true gamer," I suppose--you come across as alarmist, and seemingly threatened by Nintendo's actions. I've only been trying to say that that's an overreaction.

I said that Microsoft reversed some of their decisions due to "listening to their consumers," i.e. responding to the public backlash. I think we're on the same page there.

Nintendo had that stuff going for quite some time already, it just was never a focussed effort, and that's what actually turned out to be to the detriment of Nintendo: The Wii was seen as the Wii Sports/Fit box from the start and never recovered from that stigma. The DS had its successful casual entries in Brain Training, Prof. Layton, resurrection of light adventure games etc. While it avoided the stigma Wii got, Nintendo wasn't able to successfully carry over this niche to 3DS.

In my eyes this QoL announcement is Nintendo try at remedying the above issues by focussing more consistently on health related products while moving that effort outside of their traditional game development efforts. Best of both worlds, what's bad about that?

I'm probably bit out of loop, but what lawsuit and law? (If this is even about the DRM-thing, which was probably more pressured by game companies, and not Microsoft itself).

And I myself wouldn't mind if Nintendo wants to start improving gamers quality of life, let it be via small exercise, or with brain training etc. Sure Nintendo's way has been bit odd, especially with the Virtual Console, but not being on the company, it's hard to tell why they're doing the stuff in the way they do.

Perhaps they are reticent to move to smartphone gaming because they don't have the knowledge or resources to make adequate apps/games for them?  I mean this is the company that can't seem to get online multiplayer right and doesn't even look at their competition (XBOX Live/PSN) to see how it's done.

Nintendo is a brand that was tied to some of the best goddamn games of whatever generation I was in throughout my childhood and adolescence. Back then they didn't need novelty or motion controls or health/fitness to sell games or expand their consumer market, because they always had some good titles on the shelves. The quality of the games are what expanded the market, whether it was SMB3, Donkey Kong Country, Mario 64, Goldeneye, etc., there were always *several* (if not more) triple-A titles that would move systems and keep gamers happy for hours (and days... weeks...).

Unfortunately, that's not the case anymore, which is why stuff like this happens. Nintendo just can't keep up in the market doing the same things Sony and Microsoft do (which was starting to become clear back in the 'Cube days), so they turn to alternative means of widening their consumer base while trying to maintain their "old school" fans with games like NSMWU or SM3DW. Seeing them struggle and try to continually reinvent themselves with gimmicks over the past several years is kind of sad to watch, you know? But the argument also stands that when I was a ten year old playing Super Nintendo, technology and culture was way different than it is for ten year olds now (I was born in '82, btw). Not sure where I'm going with this, but it just kind of sucks.

Again, you don't seem to have a point, other than you're trying to patronize people who have a strong and clear cut opinion on the matter. Which really isn't going to make anything end well. This makes two threads now that I've dealt with you on the same matter and I still have no idea what your mysterious "point" is. If you REALLY want to patronize people for giving their opinions, go try the GameFAQs forums. Or go join an anti-(insert something here) group on Facebook and reply to the comments people leave, one by one. I promise that will keep you busy.

I never really cared. You don't have to be pro or anti anything to have an opinion on something someone does or to have valid concerns about their actions or motivations. I may be anti-Iwata (nothing this guy says or does is ever going to make sense to me at this point), but I'm not anti-Nintendo by any means. I just want to see them do well from a gaming perspective and I question their decision-making a lot (both from a business perspective and a gaming perspective). I wager there's quite a few Nintendo employees that are questioning this initiative as well.

Again...You're criticizing ME for my thoughts on the matter in a passive aggressive manner and it is downright obnoxious. If you want to discuss the decisions made by Nintendo or Microsoft or whatever and why they may or may not be good ideas, fine. But drop the "holier than thou" nonsense. You're wasting my time with it. Especially when you're so non-committal to the subject matter anyway. At least I seem to have an idea of what I'd like Nintendo to be doing with their time and resources.

Also, so we're clear, I prefaced that "anyone who cares about gaming" statement by saying, "I'm not ignorant enough to tell people how they should think or act, but in my mind..." because I KNOW not everyone shares that point of view. You're trying so hard to find contradictions/flaws in my statements and it's backfired every single time.

I think it's implied and understood among all of us that not everyone shares our points of view; I didn't think it needed to be explicitly stated. I also think I've expressed my point well enough that I don't need to articulate it a third time; I'm sorry that it's not clear enough for you, though.

I'm also sorry that you perceive my reaction to your opinion as patronizing. But you seem to think that once an opinion is expressed, it can't be questioned or otherwise, at least not negatively, and I disagree with that. Once you share an opinion, you're inviting reaction, even scrutiny; if you feel that shouldn't be so, I suggest not posting your opinion anywhere.

Since my stance on Nintendo apparently needs to be made clearer: I'm fine with, and supportive of, Nintendo's new endeavor. I don't see it as a threat to Nintendo's stake in the world of video gaming; their announcement does not infuriate me. I'm genuinely curious as to what ideas they bring to the world of health and fitness. I also really hope they find a way to make the Wii U Game Pad less of a ball and chain for games that don't require it, and dream of a Metal Combat revival.