The latest Penny Arcade news post points out a little article over at joystiq.com which, in so many words, explains why you'd be foolish to buy a Wii over an Xbox360 or PS3. Their rationalization? Microsoft and Sony will lose money on every system they sell whereas Nintendo will be making a profit for every Wii sold. They claim that Microsoft and Sony take losses on their consoles because of their confidence in the product, whereas Nintendo is too insecure to accept a loss.
Mwuh? In what other industry would such an argument hold up? I read it as just the opposite. If Microsoft and Sony were so confident in their incredible systems, wouldn't they charge more? This article doesn't take into account that Nintendo has never taken a loss on any hardware. They've never had to, because as a company run by intelligent people, they develop new hardware that is both advanced and reasonably cost-effective to produce. Microsoft and Sony, on the other hand, in their never-ending race to one up each other in processing power, create monster systems that cost a lot of freaking money. Those companies have always considered better graphics the sole definition of next generation gaming. Nintendo always uses the next generation as an opportunity to make new steps in innovation. They invented controller rumble features and anolog control sticks, ideas which were quickly implemented by Sony (and Sega, at the time). They are now considered standard for video games. Notice how after Nintendo revealed the motion sensor nature of the Wii's controller, Sony comes out after a long silence and says, "oh yeah, us too," revealing a much more primitive level of sensitivity.
The Nintendo DS opened up a lot of new gameplay possibilities. Gamers seem to appreciate that, seeing as how DS sales are putting Sony's PSP to shame. This demonstrates Nintendo's philosophy vs. Sony's. Innovation vs. more of the same. Remember the original hype around the PSP? Now, unless you go to a PSP-specific website you're not likely going to hear much about it in the gaming community. It's not a terrible system. There might be a few decent games out for it. But it is being stomped by a system that is graphically two generations behind. Remember how many other handheld systems came and went, defeated by the simplistic pea-soup colored graphics of the original Game Boy?
Now this Joystiq article basically calls the Wii a glorified Gamecube, based on the fact that the processing power isn't into the next stratosphere like its rival systems. It manages to ignore the fact that the play mechanics are brand new, meaning types of games never before possible in addition to more traditional style games. That is a claim Nintendo alone can make in this generation. Also unique to Nintendo is the Virtual Console (almost the most exciting feature of the Wii, if you don't include any of the new games), and the ability to play your friends online for free. No subscription fee for online play. How come the people jawing away about Nintendo's profit greed never mention that? And since when did Microsoft and Sony obtain the status of the friendly mom-and-pop companies, trying to save the consumers a buck or two (never mind the fact that Nintendo's system is the cheapest by far, almost a third the price of PS3). Sure, Nintendo's making a profit. They're a business. One of the most successful businesses in Japanese history. They've never been in the red, despite Japan's troubled economy. As a Nintendo stockholder, I for one find that comforting.
If you read these articles carefully you might begin to wonder what Sony reprogramming camp the author spent the week at. How are PS3 devotees pointing fingers at Wii's price tag and crying fowl? I believe it comes down to the fact that Playstation fans have a $600 price tag ahead of them, and many of them are secretly beginning to wonder exactly what they're getting for their money. Sooner or later you have to start rationalizing, at which point you start to make arguments like, "I'm slightly annoyed that Nintendo is so uptight about taking losses when it is pretty much standard in the game industry" (taken from the comments of the article linked above). Well, it's never been standard to Nintendo and they've been around longer than anyone. Hmmm, coincidence?
Addendum: This guy at eToychest has written a very similar article, with the same idiotic point of view: "This is not to say that Nintendo should not be making money off the Wii, but it is clear that Nintendo is doing something very radical with their approach to the industry." Again, this is clearly written by someone whose outlook on the gaming industry has been mired solely in Microsoft and Sony for the past five years. How is Nintendo being radical by following its exact same successful business philosophy since 1889? How have these people run popular gaming sites for so long with such a limited (and cynical) view of the industry they claim to love? It's like listening to people explain why they still wholeheartedly stand behind their vote for President Bush.
No comments:
Post a Comment