PixlBit

As it stands, my biggest beef with Nintendo lies in the complete lack of games for the WiiU. My Wife and I got the console back in December, and once we finished with ZombiU and Super Mario Bros. U, the console has sat around collecting dust. Unless they make a push to get the software out there for the hardware, it's simply going to continue to collect dust.

It's a major bummer too because I can see a lot of potential within the system. It may not be the best console in terms of graphics, but the WiiU Tablet Controller brings a lot to the table in terms of innovated gameplay.

I'm in the same boat.  I play Wii more than Wii U.  It'll turn around, but these few months have sucked.

The only thing keeping dust of my WiiU is Monster Hunter 3, which saddingly is just a port with bells and whistles. Also that new Rayman app with daily game updates- but it's still a demo. 

That sounds like a great idea. By pulling the best games from its history and adding online multiplayer, Nintendo could basically have as many killer apps as they want. I share your pessimism, though. They're doing some additional stuff with VC releases on Wii U (and charging more for them) but I'm not sure what it all entails and doubt online play will be one of those things

I'm glad you like the idea.  Maybe "Operation Multiplayer" should become a reality.

I wonder how making Link to the Past in the vein of Four Swords would ... actually, wait, was Four Swords in the LttP world? Never actually played it for myself.

Anyway, this is a great idea. Only problem is figuring out how to create enjoyable multiplayer experiences, which, how many of those does Nintendo have now? I'm not sold on their execution. Again though, I'm not speaking from experience, having only owned a Gamecube and DS most recently, and I'm just going off hearsay ... an internet universe full of hearsay.

The Zelda Anniversay edition wasn't set in aLttP, but the graphics style was.  Never played the original, either.

Corporations giving people what they want?!? I wish!

To be honest i dont think Nintendo wants to out do Sony or Microsoft and if you think about it there success is very sneaky the Wii has sold more units then any other system in the numbers game, and they are successful just in an off the spotlight kind of way, theres no question that Nintendo could blow away the competition if they wanted to, with all the talent and second and third party developers at there beckon and call but i think there just flying under the radar for whatever reason. They have the hand held market and could probable release another snes type next gen system and rule but thats not where they want to be at present time but we all know there fully capable.

Well, Nintendo's a publicly traded business, so, basically, their bottom line is cash.  If aligning their self as indirect competitors to Sony and Microsoft is what it takes to make people believe they're doing the right thing, then that's what they'll do.  The moment someone buys a 360 or PS3, or anything else vid-game-tainment related, that is money that is not going to Nintendo. 

Yea but who knows what there long time strategy may be.

I don't them out at all, despite my rant.  Just frustrated at some of their decisions, and want them to succeed at giving me all my gaming apples in one basket, so to speak.

Yea i know what you mean they are capable of being so much better, but dont, and why is beyond me.

Imagine if the world of videogame developers were set out like 'Game of thrones'. You'd have hot headed new kings wanna be's like Apple making plans to take on generals of experience (who would make better kings than the one currently sat on the throne) in the liking of Microsoft and Sony (you know the characters, the two high rankers who plot against each other and the king at the same time) and of course the king himself. Nintendo. The king sits there not because he is the best, but because he was. He still relies on stories of old battles and successes and whilst he may have glimmers of his old brilliance his methods are truly outdated and eventually lead to his down fall.

 A touch long winded perhaps but thats what Nintendo are at the moment. Their biggest mistake is that they seem to believe that they have the 'casual and family' market covered at the moment.... and they do but not for long. Apple are the real masters of family interactivity, their I pad has revolutionised the way families use technology and the casual gamer can pay much less for games on Apple products than they can on Nintendo's offerings. Nintendo only peddle their last strong holds and flag ships, Mario and Zelda.

I totally agree with you here, they are quite simply missing on Billions of dollars of Revenue by holding out on classics that quite frankly people would buy again and again, myself included. They are loosing on the experienced and hardcore gamer by ignoring this simple proposition you are making. I used to love Nintendo to pieces, they are still capable of producing amazing games but a system needs more than 10 odd titles that are seriously worth playing now a days and Nintendo has lost the confidence of third party development and their loyal followers.

They will die evetually, probably as they sit on their throne by their closest aide.

Great blog by the way.

Nice analysis (I watch GoT), and thanks for the compliment.  I agree with most of what you say, except I don't see Nintendo completely failing as a console manufacturer (assuming that's what you meant by "die").  I think, instead, the console market will change drastically, perhaps reach top-end.  I think it will play out in the next 10 years.  We'll see.  I have a hard time envisioning the PS5 or Xbox 1440, or the next next generation, if you will.

ha ha yeah, think I was being a bit over zealous in my analogy there, I think Nintendo are too innovative to 'die' completely, they really do like sticking two fingers up to their loyal fan base though. It's strange because if you look at the game cube era they were out of the loop for sometime, these guys have a knack of pulling a 'Rocky' though, think they are down and out and then boom they KO you.

The biggest problem with adding online multiplayer to older games is cost.  These games were not designed with online multiplayer in mind and would require quite a bit of re-tooling.  The cost of this would be passed on to the consumer (a reason why those upgrading to Wii U versions of virtual console games they already have on the Wii).  Would consumers be willing to fork over extra money for an online version of River City Ransom, ExciteBike or others? 

I honestly don't think the market is there for these games, as cool as it would be.

My biggest gripe is the wait between releases.  I find it shocking that the Wii U virtual console, a service we have been waiting for, only has a few titles out for it.  And don't get me started on proper releases.  By the time Pikmin 3 comes out, It'll have been 9 months since the last major releases at launch!

Wholly concur with this.

Nintendo operates like any other business: it puts out a product with the expectation that it'll see a return on that investment.  They've had a delightfully interesting track record of releasing games that nobody thought they'd ever want--Animal Crossing and series like Brain Age come to mind.  Nostalgia is an easy cash-in for anyone nowadays, and they've been able to make some good money on releasing old ports on all of their recent systems.

However, retooling some of these games for modern features, especially online multiplayer, takes effort that they probably don't consider worth the risk.  Sure, Excitebike probably would be pretty cool with that addition, but Nintendo would have to ask if that would be a worthwhile cost.  To my understanding, emulating old games for current-gen systems can actually be more difficult than many of us may think; a lot of of old NES/SNES games used proprietary sound and graphics chips built into the cartridges themselves, not into the console hardware.  That problem in itself has led to some games never seeing a digital release, or having to see "special" releases on services like Virtual Console (if I'm not mistaken, this was the case of one of the NES Castlevania games).  HD remakes are probably a closer version of what we could expect for some of these titles; in that case, the Excitebike "remake" for the 3DS was definitely a missed opportunity.

And then there's the issue of adding these features to old games whilst trying to release the newest installments of those franchises.  In Nintendo's case, they'd be potentially messing with their market success if they re-released Super Smash Bros. for the N64 with online play when they're planning to release the newest version of Super Smash Bros.  There's a little too much risk of the former negatively impacting the sales of the latter.  Hackers, homebrewers, and tinkerers can get away with this, sure, but they don't have nearly as much on the line as the businesses.  Not to mention that NES clones on the App Store don't really stay on there too long, anyway.

Despite my slight disagreements, good blog!

@ caeser, my reply to Jesse is also to you, jointly.  

This is where sales data of VC games and other digital downloads would come in handy.  I understand the risk/reward argument, and would argue that some of Nintendo's previous risks (N64 cartridge, Gamecube minidisc) didn't reap the potential for their respective generations had they just went mainstream and used CD's/DVD's.  

I can't argue with the success of the Wii, and likewise of their spinoff niché games like Animal Crossing, Pikmin, WarioWare, etc.  They are great risks that paid off.  And, for the record, I believe Nintendo is quite professional with hard-working analysts weighing their options.

The basic vibe I get from Nintendo is that of minimilistic maximization, and when it works, it works.  I can't argue with their success, I really can't.  And I understand the argument about re-tooling cartridge games; each contain their own respective "emulation shell" from what I understand.  And about undercutting new releases by beefing up classics.  Great points, actually.  I just think it could be done, if focused.  

Who knows, Nintendo might actually be planning it, but for a time when the profit margin is there.  That's how Nintendo rolls.  As a Nintendo everything owner, though, I don't see myself spending another dime on VC releases, since I've already done so on the Wii, DS, 3DS and realized they are mostly the same experience I could get with rom hack.  If every VC release on Wii U implemented my ideas, which would solve self-competition of online vs offline price points of the same title, people would have no choice but to pay a little more, (as they now do), and it would be justified.

Considering how little classic games tax a cpu, I imagine a peer-based server could handle the task.  I know it's not the ideal way to go about online multiplayer, but I think it would suffice for classic games.

Anyhoo, great discussion.  Thanks for replying.

"The basic vibe I get from Nintendo is that of minimilistic maximization, and when it works, it works."

Pretty much.  A lot of people have claimed that Nintendo doesn't think outside of the box nearly as much as they really should, or at least where it matters most.  Motion-based consoles and 3D-enabled handhelds aren't necessarily poor ideas, and they surely ended up working out for them in the end.  But their biggest problem may be playing it too safe with the software which moves that hardware off the shelves.  Mario and Zelda are sure winners, but Nintendo has been sitting on a rich, unique treasure of franchises and ideas that only they have.  They're finally releasing Earthbound over here for the first time in about 20 years, and I think that's a step in the right direction; hopefully after this they can learn to stop playing with their cards so close to their chest.

I'd rather they simply make good modern renditions of these classics with the online multi-player included. As much as I love the classics it's not always a bad thing when they get modernized. (Again, I stress when it's done "right"!)

This would work, too.  Kind of like the 3DS 3D remakes.  Just the 3D alone, with no HD, isa worthy upgrade, IMO.  I really liked the Bionic Commando remake, and SFII wasn't so bad, although I sucked more than usual at it ;/

Yeah I really enjoyed Ocarina of Time and Starfox on the 3DS, seeing more of these realised in 3D would be a dream come true, just ashame we'll never see Goldeneye on the 3DS. That would quite possibly be my one wish if I could have one for gaming.

I gave up on VC a while ago. I prefer the PSOne classics on PS3 really. 

True.  Free PS classics helped make my year of PS+ enjoyable.

I actually liked the "3D" versions of Nintendo classic games but they stopped making those for some reason? Bummer.

Most of the games I, and most other gamers, want on Virtual Console have already been released. The rest are obscure third-party games that will likely not be released due to lack of interest in them. Earthbound was a pleasant surprise, given the apparent legal hassles involved. I wish Nintendo had completed the Nintendo 64 version of Mother 3 myself. It looked pretty cool.

Would the inclusion of online multiplayer and leaderboards compel you to buy some of them again?

Not really, with rare exceptions like Balloon Fight. Most of the really good NES and SNES games were strictly single-player games (Balloon Fight was a rare example of a good multiplayer NES game), and I find online leaderboards to be meaningless. The top players hacked their way to the top (99,999,999 points? 999,999 wins in two days? Seriously), and being buried in a sea of a hundred thousand other nonsensical gamertags. doesn't really stir my competitive juices.

I don't feel left behind just yet on the Wii U. Like the Vita I now own,games are kind of scarce. But that should get better. I used Virtual Console on Wii and bought a few games recently. It left me wanting a bit more,though. Then the dude at GameStop tells me they don't make the redeemable points cards for Wii anymore. He's misinformed I think. Found a big stack of them at K-Mart the next day.