Iwata is talking. Let us hear what he is saying:

Nintendo’s earnings report today showed the first drop in profits the company has seen in four years. For the six month period ending September 30, the Kyoto giant’s operating income fell 58.6% from the same period last year to 104.3 billion yen. The Wii platform took a major hit, its sales falling 43% from last year to 5.75 million units. Nintendo ended up lowering its Wii sales forecasts for the full year from 26 million units to 20 million units.

Mainichi Shimbun reports that Iwata, speaking at a press conference in Osaka today, said “Wii has stalled. We were unable to continually release strong software, and let the nice mood cool.”

I have received many angry emails over the course of the year. These emails did not like my negative tone on Nintendo and their recent business decisions. Most memorably, one email scathed how dare I say that Wii Music and Animal Crossing Wii were not doing their job and then Iwata says the same thing days later at the Investor Conference. Of course, I try to live in reality. And the reality was that Nintendo was not putting out the correct software to push the Wii. I am not a “sunny day” person who writes on the business only when it is nice and sunny. If it rains, I do not say it is still sunny or go inside.

Business is the “real world”. Most people live in sanctuaries their entire lives. They live from someone else’s business, someone else’s financial structure. I love reality so I love learning all about this. Most people would rather just immerse themselves in entertainment, a fantasy world in between sleep and job whether it is digitally constructed or artificially made from bars/restaurants/concerts/whatever.

The Nintendo profit drop is being misreported on one very important point: a good portion of the Wii sales are in America. And while Wii sales have dropped in America (from being constantly sold out), the bigger problem is the collapse of the dollar. Yeah, you don’t hear our “journalist” friends at Reuters mention that. They make up stories saying it is from the iPhone or PlayStation 3 or whatever.

The dollar is collapsing. The trillions of dollars being spent and printed by Congress do not come from a moon beam from the heavens. Capital is being frozen. Much of this is being done intentionally (as no one is THAT stupid to spend trillions).  But that is for another post.

Of course, falling profit is still profit. In this macro-environment where we are moving into a depression, the course of the river’s current is to pull all companies’ profit down.

It does seem that Iwata has a positive outlook for the Wii, though, thanks to the September price drop. According to a Reuters report from the press conference, Iwata said of the decision to lower Wii’s sales targets, “With the price drop, sales returned to a certain level, but they just did not reach the level of last year around this time. We decided that it would be difficult to sell enough to recover from the poor performance of the first half of the year.” On the new 20 million target, he said, “In order to reach it, we’ll have to move quite a large quantity, but it’s a figure we released after having felt the momentum returning [based off the price drop].”

This is the first time ever we have witnessed a console company being defensive about its price cuts. Nintendo of America’s president vocally defended the price cut and now Iwata. This is very interesting because you never see the president of Sony or Microsoft or any other console company in history defend a price cut. The course of game consoles has always been lower prices.

The price cut is a reaction, not an action. It is a reaction to software not doing its job (of pushing momentum), not an action itself to push momentum (though it may appear that way). If the software had done its job, there wouldn’t have been a price cut at all.

So I see the price cut as the door shutting on the “User Generated Content Era” of the Wii, not as a door opening to something else. Whatever Iwata and all were doing in 2008 didn’t work and, in my opinion, actually backfired. When software comes out that you do not like, you just ignore it. But with something like User Generated Content or software that uses the person’s “creativity” for its entertainment (Wii Music), people do not just dislike it but can have hostile reactions to it. It is like a restaurant who is not just serving food you don’t like, but is asking the people to cook their own food. No one goes to a restaurant to cook their own food. This is what Nintendo was trying to do hence the Wii excitement vanishing and hostility even begin to appear.

So, in general, this is one way to characterize the Wii:

2006-2007 (Era of Interface) Wii split itself by making Gamecube 2 games for their Core audience (Mario Galaxy, Twilight Princess, Super Paper Mario) while making games that use the interface to cut down the barrier between gamer and non-gamer (Wii Sports, Wii Fit, Wii Play).

2008-2009 (Era of User-Generated Content) Both the core and expanded market games rely on the users’ “creativity” as the content of the game or as important additions. Wii Music relies entirely on the player’s “creativity”. Animal Crossing Wii grafts many “user created parts” for the game like the player making a new hair style for himself. These games did not create any excitement. With Motion Plus delayed, Wii Sports Resort was delayed as well.

2010-? (Neo Classical Era) Nintendo appears to be shifting towards expansion towards the retro type gamers. Games like Punch-Out!! were an important “test game” in a sense to this direction. NSMB Wii carries the torch further. Recently, Excitebike World Rally continues this.

Will this Neo Classical approach work? Well, yes and no. It will not create the hostility that “User Generated Content” did. Neo Classical games are far more in line with what made the Wii successful in the first place of “getting back to basics”.

However, there will be problems. Neo Classical games give the impression that Nintendo is just “milking old games”. It also doesn’t get to the heart of the problem which is brand new content. A common criticism of Twilight Princess was that “we have seen this before”. A common criticism of “Punch Out” is, “we’ve seen all these fighters before.”

Regardless of all these expansion ‘phases’ Nintendo goes through, the end destination is going to be arcade style gaming. Arcade style gaming has the unique interface (per game), has the quick to play, has the social gameplay in it (remember Gauntlet or Street Fighter 2?), and the gameplay lasts and lasts. The Neo Classical approach is a step in the right direction, but it isn’t there yet. Note that all of Wii’s successful games really did nail that arcade style approach: Wii Sports, Wii Fit, Mario Kart Wii, some parts of Galaxy, even Wii Play and its Tanks.

There are some people who say people do not want to play the Arcade approach anymore. It is said that they are a niche, that people today want games with big stories and cinematics. These fools cannot see the DS and Wii explosions before their eyes and also cannot see the flash games that are all over the Internet.

Arcades might have died, but the love of arcade gaming never did. Let us remember that arcade gaming is the core of the 8-bit and 16-bit eras. Arcade gaming is also the core of PC Gaming. It is the core of FPS gameplay as well as RTS gameplay.

People did not leave gaming. Rather, gaming left them.

I wonder when Nintendo will begin making the games that Wii buyers purchased their Wii for: for making cool new games that utilize the Wii’s strengths best. For example, while swordfighting in Zelda is cool and Wii owners would expect Zelda Wii to have swordfighting, what about other new games that use the interface well? Why does the Expanded Market have the monopoly on good motion control games? There is a large potential for FPS, strategy, and other games that marry the motion controls with quality content. For example, imagine a four player Gauntlet or Golden Axe type of game where people use the Wii Sports Resort controls like arrow shooting, frisbee throwing, or swordfighting to attack monsters and dragons.

Nintendo ought to take advantage of their lower production values of Wii gamers to produce more games. This is contrast to PS3 or Xbox 360 where that audience expects rich production values in every game. In other words, Wii owners would appreciate a 2d platformer while the HD Twins would be more resistant to it. Nintendo has the advantage to produce more content with the same amount of budget due to no HD, so Nintendo ought to take advantage of that. The HD games do feel watered down and content restrained due to the art assets needed for HD.

Let me use a real world example. Two RPGs came out at the same time. Ultima 9, which had the advantage from being the conclusion to the oldest RPG franchise, and Planescape: Torment. Ultima 9 used cutting edge 3d and, despite complaints, the 3d world was well crafted together. Planescape: Torment kept the traditional 2d type view. The market result was that gamers flocked to Planescape and left Ultima 9 out to dry. The complaints about Ultima 9, despite requiring so much effort to create the beautiful world, ended up only with less content. Gamers flock to the content, not to the “technology” or “graphics”.

The dilemma isn’t that 2d is better than 3d or vice versa. The dilemma is the downfall of high production values is when they eat away at the content of the game. Gamers would rather play a larger, richer, and more imaginative game on a less powerful system. It is why the less powerful consoles always ended up outselling their more powerful competitors.

Content, as defined by gamers, is “how much game is there”. This does not mean the number of levels or the length of time it takes to beat it. Gamers would rather have a shorter game if that means cutting out scavenger hunts and wandering in circles or going through endless corridors.

Mario Kart Wii, one of the Wii’s great success stories, succeeds due to the game’s content. There is much game inside there. NSMB DS is another example despite criticisms of it. There is tons of game inside it. Why does Bomberman keep selling? There is tons of game inside it. There are many ways to play the game and keep playing it. Wii Sports Resort is yet another success story on this. And no one ever wants to sell these games.

The “Game Industry” is filled with drama queens if nothing else. After an unprecedented run of the Wii being sold out for years, it comes down. Wii is still in the best financial position than the other consoles (i.e. profitable). It is also in the best position to attack the flood of disinterest that the depression will be unleashing on the game consoles.

Analysts and everyone else needs to realize that the “Game has changed, and the way to play the game has changed as well” concerning the business of gaming. The old ways will not return. Disruption is indeed afoot, and the “Game Industry” can either fight it and die or embrace it and thrive.

Next time you hear anyone speaking excitedly about “The Cloud”, listen and/or link to this. The song puts the “Game Industry” next technocrati fad, Cloud Gaming, into perspective.

Whenever someone mentions “The Cloud”, I’m going to link to this song to just show how ridiculous their ‘excitement’ is. They might as well be singing this song.

And we will fly…

Hi, Sean.

I know you’ve been busy this days but I couldn’t help myself to sending you these stories.

First, EDGE’s review of New Super Mario Bros. Wii. Now, I know games are personal experiences and I even don’t care for reviews – but I DO care when I read something that has no real meaning and the shows how some people in the ‘industry’ just want to get attention.

They don’t need to like the game; I’m fine with that. But talking about innovation, Mario Galaxy 2 level designers? I for one loved Galaxy and I know your opinion on that, but I’m way more interested in 2D Marios (hell, I grew up with then!).

http://gonintendo.com/viewstory.php?id=101809

The second story is about digital distribution and how many gamers do, in fact, buy products digitally. I think the best part here is that some websites don’t seem to look closely to the graphic and just say “43% of gamers buy digital games”. If they did look closely, they would see that just 16% usually buy and download DIGITAL games. The 43% correspond to something more like ‘Have you ever downloaded a game/level/demo in your life?’. (and Xbox Live, WiiWare or PSN games count, by the way).

http://gamerinvestments.com/video-game-stocks/index.php/2009/10/26/study-40-of-u-s-console-gamers-buy-games-extra-levels-via-direct-download/

What I don’t understand is why anyone would pay for Edge. What horrible writing.

As for the gamerinvestments, you bring up an illustrative example. All these people going, “Digital distribution is looking interesting!” are generally seeing what they want to see.

The “Game Industry” has done this before with ‘High Definition’. We were told that Nintendo was doomed because “all TVs sold will be high definition” and what an idiot Iwata was. I believe Matt Cassamassina cried (or something like that) when it was announced that the ‘Revolution’ would not be ‘High Definition’.

They focus on the numbers they like and ignore everything else! And we wonder how such financial monstrosities like the Xbox 360 and PS3 were made!

What a load of crap:

“While the core gamer side of the business has held up relatively well, sales of other titles with mass-market appeal have been impacted, particularly on the Wii. We saw this with Madden NFL 10 (unit sales down 13 percent year over year-to-date) and we believe the impact has beeneven more pronounced with the music genre. We still believe that DJ Hero will be an important part of Activision Blizzard’s music franchise strategy, but we think it may take a few versions of the game for it to reach its full market potential — similar to the original Guitar Hero.” – Cowen Group analyst Doug Creutz

- http://www.gamasutra.com/news?story=25798

Yeah, sure.  Because Madden, of all titles – freakin Madden – is somehow a gauge of expanded audience purchasing.  Flocks of “casual” gamers just can’t wait for Madden.  FREAKIN.  MADDEN.

Good god.  How insane are these analysts?

OK Mr. Analyst.  So then explain Wii Fit Plus hitting #1 in Japan during its release.  Explain Wii Sports Resort staying at #2 on the sales charts in September along with Wii console sales nearly doubling over the last month.

Yep, I guess those “casual” gamers are leaving left and right.

What is amazing is that everyone knows that the music games downfall came from Activision and EA visiting the well too many times. This is a classic case of Scorched Franchise. Everyone knows this except the analysts and the “Game Industry”. Amazing.

When consumers refused to pay $600 for the PS3, “analysts” and the “Game Industry” were surprised by this. In what world do these people live?

Interesting news story on the death spiral of the print newspaper
business, though of course the author doesn’t point that out
explicitly. Of particular interest is the focus on compensating for
losing readership by raising prices (and even charging for online
access to stories).

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091026/ap_on_bi_ge/us_newspaper_circulation

Watching the death spiral of newspapers and TV news is very entertaining. However, not as entertaining as watching the death spiral of the “Game Industry”.

Not all newspapers are dying. There are some growing. But they are very ‘alternative newspaper’ types. In other words, they are offering content people want to read.

My local paper, the Houston Chronicle, decided to save money by eliminating the business section on Monday. They say that no one wants to read the business section because they lost their money in the stock market. But we all know that business matters are their least favorite thing to write about (which also explains their financial difficulty).

The conventional wisdom is that the Internet and “User Generated Content” is goring the newspapers and TV news. But this is ignoring the rise of other alternative media such as radio. More Americans get their news from radio then they do from TV news. And radio is supposed to be dead. The places where people get their news on the Internet are definitely better than their newspaper contemporaries. For example, a piece of legislation would be characterized on the TV in platitudes where on the Internet it would be dissected by lawyers and presented to the people so they can understand it. There is no ‘magic’ to the Internet or “User Generated Content” (the most overblown term this generation since ‘High Definition’). The only magic is that the traditional news outlets have let their content collapse leaving consumers to search for alternatives.

Or to use this site as a more microcosmic example: business writers and analysts on gaming completely dropped the ball on Nintendo and their business strategy. They could only use platitudes and slogans like “Casual Gaming! Durr! Durr! Durr!” I know people don’t read here because of my wonderful self but because this site provided an answer to their business strategy and sought to explain disruption and “Blue Ocean Strategy”.

Nothing has been more heartwarming this generation than seeing gamers quoting Clayton Christenson or the “Blue Ocean Strategy” and seeing the ‘business suits’ of the “Game Industry” become tongue tied! The gamers know more about the business than the business people do! Hah!

The “Game Industry” gets away with so much of their garbage since they say, “This is business. We need to raise prices, create revenue streams, and all. We are genius business people. You are the lowly consumer. Mind your place, lowly consumer!” Now, I think the tide has turned. When someone from the “Game Industry” tries to use the “I’m-a-business-wizard” card, gamers protest and declare they don’t know anything about the business and quote business articles and books justifying their position. It is glorious to watch.

For example, when it came out that Modern Warfare 2 would not have dedicated servers, there were people who tried to pass it off as, “You guys are niche, but you must behold how this is a glorious business decision.” Gamers rejected this. I think it is becoming clear that business is not about making revenue, it is about making customers. All this bad business education is having these suits, like zombies, employ scorched franchise tactics (that end up destroying the franchise) and trying to squeeze as much revenue as possible. They are trained to do this which is why they declare themselves geniuses. But everyone, even the hardcore, can see they are pushing away customers (which will collapse their revenue). This is why industries accelerate in revenue right before entering the shadow of decline.

Like with Modern Warfare 2, the focus should be to make as many consumers as possible. Instead, it was to get as much revenue from existing consumers as possible. In the end, they end up blowing up their consumers’ trust.

These guys aren’t half as smart as they think they are.

I stumbled across this article from 2007 where the author discusses the problems with the video game journalists.  Since he is a journalist he defends himself after he says something bad but it was an interesting read.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/issues/issue_106/1286-Cant-Wait-Till-Tomorrow

It isn’t saying anything we don’t already know. What I always find striking is that these writers don’t feel ashamed that they are part of this Pavlovian monstrosity. I’d feel damn ashamed to be so easily manipulated.

Of course, the rub is that the game journalists do not feel manipulated. Rather, they feel like they are the manipulators (i.e. of us).

A choice is coming for the game journalist. Do they tie their boat to the “Game Industry” or to the gamers? One has a future, the other does not.

You’re probably pretty busy in real life, so I’ll make this short and sweet: As a PC gamer (or a former one), what do you make of the removal of dedicated servers from the PC version of Modern Warfare 2?

It is old news. The FPS games have dumped PC gamers overboard for ‘consoles’ and trying to force the ‘console’ vision onto PC gamers. Perhaps Modern Warfare 2 was such a high profile example that has woken up PC gamers that these so-called “hardcore game companies” are not your friends, and that they see you only as a revenue pie to slice. After all, “hardcore” is a marketing creation devised to maximize peeling money from gamers. “No, you aren’t a nerd. You are a HARDCORE GAMER! Yes, buy the limited edition pack with the cheap China plastic item inside for 20% more money.”

When I say, “I am not paying for peer to peer online,” which is what Xbox Live is, I am said, “You are not hardcore enough!” I’m not going to submit to your little revenue scheme. It is incredible to me that so many have, though.

King Kotick makes a decree outlawing dedicated servers. However, I am more paranoid about King Kotick’s decree outlawing LAN gaming for RTS.

You realize that single player gaming isn’t dying? It should be obvious to everyone, including the hardcore, that the “Game Industry” is trying to close its fist on your neck to force your head underneath the fountains of ‘downloadable content’ and ’service fees’. They want every game to become like WoW. But every game is not a MMORPG, so they are doing their hardest to graft MMORPG things onto all games so they can start charging.

Single player doesn’t NEED any of that. And no PR in the world can excuse an internet connection for single player. Even Blizzard had to allow single player offline, and they didn’t seem too happy about it. Single player games are becoming a huge problem to this technocrati dream of you never owning the game but only have continuous revenue streams. This is why single player games are being declared ‘dead’ everywhere not based on any numbers but based entirely on the desire that it is so. The “Game Industry” loves seeing things that are not there such as the grand “High Definition Generation” that was supposed to occur years ago.

I heard gamers complain about what Tycho, from Penny Arcade, said about this. I found that curious since Penny Arcade was supposed to be the same as the gamers. So this is what Tycho said:

Everywhere the discussion takes hold, the conversation surrounding Infinity Ward’s decision to forego dedicated servers is an absolute fuckfest. I understand why it would enrage that contingent. It’s an aggressive assertion that the universe is not as they claim.

On Four Zero Two, Robert Bowling’s clearing house for Infinity Ward PR, the thread quickly reached one hundred and nineteen pages. The petition at the core of the conversation, entitled “Dedicated Servers for CoD:MW2,” has (at the time of this writing) reached 143,991 signatures.

To read such lamentations, you’d get the impression that PC gamers still think they are the focus of the industry, when that hasn’t been true for awhile. Indeed, hardcore gamers in general – and the dedicated PC enthusiast, which is a subset – haven’t been the object of their desire for some time. I was under the impression this was well known, but it does require a willingness to perceive factual information, which is not a universal trait among cultists. Maybe if you had just put out, instead of becoming a signatories to a vow of consumer chastity, the old twinkle might return to his eye.

I guess Tycho doesn’t know the difference between “Game Industry” and gaming. The relationship of the “Game Industry” to gaming is the relationship of the parasite and the host. Crippling a standard PC gaming feature is just yet another symptom in this long decay. (Also, Tycho is dead wrong about PC gaming not being an apple in the “Game Industry”’s eye. Look at the Sims. Look at WoW.)

Alas. I wonder if Penny Arcade has become nothing more than just a cog in that “Game Industry” machine. Weren’t they selling “Penny Arcade” gamer tags on Xbox Live?

Put out? Twinkle in the eye? The analogy is more like PC gamers want a divorce from the “Game Industry”. And guess who is going to take the house with them?

Miyamoto says:

“I tend to forget those games [laughs]. I’m a big fan of the ‘Star Fox’ games. Every time we make a ‘Star Fox’ game I’m hoping people will enjoy it as much as I do. Of course the goal every time is to try and make it more and more fun but, at least in Japan, the people that purchase the ‘Star Fox’ games has decreased over the years. But we still try to make them more fun and hopefully people will see the appeal in those games.”

I don’t quite know how to make the above comment. Japan doesn’t like 3d Mario, yet that doesn’t stop Nintendo from cranking 3d Marios out like candy. We know that Nintendo developers *love* making such a game so that is why it is made. They don’t make 2d Mario, despite the massive, massive demand for it, for one reason: Miyamoto just doesn’t want to make it. There is no explanation that can excuse twenty years of Nintendo ignoring the game that made the company to what it is (and not understanding the steep decline of “Mario games” with 3d Mario).

Am I to believe that Starfox is so loved by Miyamoto and Nintendo that they farm it out to a mediocre third party company? Is Starfox so loved that Nintendo passes on making it to make yet more 3d Mario (Mario Galaxy 2) or a soap opera about Samus Aran (Metroid: Other M)? Is Starfox so loved that they forced it on Rare’s “Dinosaur Planet” and effectively made the franchise a big joke? Is this the love that Miyamoto has?

What a funny way of showing this love. You would think Nintendo didn’t care about Starfox and wasn’t concerned that they ran the franchise into the ground. You can’t imagine such mediocre third party games of Starfox being made as they would be with, say, Zelda or Metroid.

Starfox was, primarily, to show off new 3d technology with the FX chip and later the rumble pak with Starfox 64. Starfox was a fantastic game when it came out and still holds up pretty well today (but god, does that 3d look dated). Starfox 64 holds up well too (though I am no fan of the ‘fly anywhere missions’).

Starfox DS is an interesting creature. It is interesting because it tells me that the old farts at Nintendo have too much power. Starfox DS was made SOLELY so the old farts at Nintendo could put out their precious “Starfox 2 gameplay idea”. Starfox DS was not responding to the market as it exists TODAY. It was a game based on a fifteen year old idea.

Nintendo is like a factory of gameplay ideas. These gameplay ideas are stored in their refrigerator. Just as you have a desire to throw out old gameplay ideas in the refrigerator because it is annoying to you, the same seems to go for Nintendo and their gameplay ideas.

Whatever the gameplay idea is, they warp the content around that.

If anything, Starfox should illustrate that the way how Nintendo has been doing things is ending up destroying their franchises. Take Zelda. I remember when a Zelda, on handheld or console, was greeted with huge hype and enthusiasm. With Zelda: Spirit Tracks, i.e. the Choo-Choo Train Zelda, you don’t see any real excitement about the game. Nintendo made the game starting with the gameplay idea first (trains and tracks) and then warped the content afterward.

Look at what happened to Mario. Mario used to be huge back in the 80s and 90s. Now, no one really cares about him. What happened? Nintendo went the “gameplay idea” first and warped content afterward. I figure that Nintendo hates 2d Mario mainly because they cannot come up with many “gameplay ideas” for it as they can with Mario Galaxy. Now, the content of Mario Galaxy makes no sense whatsoever. As the Eurogamer review put it, something seems very wrong especially with Mario doing un-Mario things like lighting four lamps with fire as in a Zelda game.

Starfox is an illustrative example of this. Gamers want a Starfox game like the SNES or N64 where you fly around and shoot stuff. They don’t want to be on a Dinosaur Planet picking up nuts. They don’t want to fly around in circles and not doing much as the Starfox DS version had. Starfox games are a game of action and intensity. Starfox is not a strategy game or an RPG or a soap opera. The fans have indicated their desires very well, yet they are constantly ignored.

The process of gameplay trumping the content of gameplay is why Starfox is where it is today. People don’t want the wheel invented. They want that good old Starfox gameplay. But they don’t want to play old levels in a retro way. They want a brand new adventure with the same gameplay skeleton.

Mario Kart succeeds because it doesn’t change its gameplay skeleton. It adds new cars, new racers, new tracks, new tricks, new thrills, etc. But the game doesn’t suddenly morph into Pilotwings where everyone is racing planes or an RPG where everyone is trying to collect tires.

For consumers, changing the gameplay is not important. Does the gameplay of Tennis, Football, Baseball, or Basketball change? No.

Back to basics means more than being production efforts focused. Back to basics means going back to why people played the game in the first place.

And no one will deny, not even the hardcore, that the reason why people play Starfox is due to the simple-yet-intense space ship shooting that the SNES and N64 versions had.

That and its kickass music.

Above: Even the control screen had better music than games do today!

To those outside America, it may not be apparent that American Journalism has collapsed. By “collapse”, I mean the people inside no longer trust it and actively avoid it. Alternate news sources are sought such as the Internet. American news has been in decline for quite some time, but we are now witnessing the floor opening up from them. Have you seen the ratings from CNN?

Historically, people do not pay for information. People do pay for financial information. This is why financial papers used to be colored so they couldn’t easily be copied. This is why analysts get paid an obscene amount of money. If I were a journalist, I would focus more and more on the business side of things. Business side of things always matters. People will pay for that. People will not pay for the “social side” of things.

Another major problem is that all American journalist schools teach Woodward’s work on the Nixon administration to be the ‘pinnacle’ of journalism where it is actually the opposite. All Woodward did was be manipulated and led around by “Deep Throat”. Any journalist who is easily manipulated is no journalist at all.

Why do people hate journalists? It isn’t so much that they hate journalists as they hate news writers being manipulated. It is the manipulation they hate. When someone can “buy a favorable review”, readers are going to hate the journalist because he/she showed how easily manipulated he/she is. If the journalist tries to manipulate the readers, that is also a main cause for resentment.

Before the Internet, we thought these newspaper writers and all were actually reporting and writing many of these stories. What we discovered, with the Internet, is that many just took the wire from AP and just “re-wrote” it.

Then there was the Jayson Blair scandal where a New York Times reporter just “made up” stories.

So with that said, take a look at this story from Reuters:

Nintendo launches new DSi

Nintendo Co (7974.OS) plans to launch a new version of its DSi hand-held videogame player with a larger screen in Japan as early as this year to kick-start sluggish demand, the Nikkei business daily said on Tuesday.

This is a news story on what another news story says. Now, there is nothing wrong with that except to point out there is more and more news stories on news stories. Note that the business daily is making the news here.

Nintendo, which cut the price of its popular Wii video game console last month, has been looking to bolster demand for the DSi, whose monthly sales have slowed to a third of their peak levels following its launch about a year ago.

You would read that and think DSi sales are collapsing. Of course sales slowed from its launch. Every hardware’s sales slowed from its launch.

Nintendo unwisely cutting the price of the Wii has just thrown gasoline on the “Nintendo is doomed” division. The Wii price cut has nothing to do with the DSi, but note how the article writer throws it in. I think the Wii price cut did hurt the Wii’s image.

Nintendo’s hand-held, which now has a 3.25-inch screen, is struggling against competition from Apple Inc’s (AAPL.O) iPhone, whose screen is about the same size.

There is no source for this. The writer thinks it is happening, therefore it must be happening. Remember when the DS was “struggling” against the PSP?

“A bigger screen alone does not count for much,” said KBC Securities analyst Hiroshi Kamide, adding that Nintendo needs better graphics quality and a more powerful chip to run multimedia-type games and become more competitive.

“Nintendo is under pressure from iPhone and iTouch.”

Kamide is worse on Nintendo than Pachter is. You might ask how this is possible. Here is Kamide a year ago:

Casual gaming growth has been the primary driver for the industry over the last three years, the key player being the Nintendo DS. We believe DS hardware demand has now peaked globally. A downturn in software demand is likely to follow, as casual gamers are ‘happy with their lot’ and do not need to consume more. We feel that the same predicament awaits the Wii console with its similar market expansion angle. Titles such as ‘Brain Training’ and ‘Wii Fit’ do not act as ‘gateway drugs’ to turn non-traditional gamers to core repeat users. We feel this is a structural industry issue that cannot be easily changed.

What does Kamide know about Nintendo and the DS? Nothing apparently. The DS is most certainly not collapsing in Japan.

The larger screen size to make it easier for older adults fits Japan (who is rapidly aging) does fit the pattern Nintendo has taken with the DS. The larger stylus in the DS Lite was also to make it easier for older adults.

The problem is not the analysts as it is the journalists who quote them. Kamide clearly doesn’t know what he is talking about because his comments to reporters are not his job. It is, in fact, outside his job. He is just a bean counter. (Bean counters do not run businesses, they cannot see into the future). The problem is the journalist who takes the analyst’s opinion, which is totally outside his field, and put it on a pedestal as an “expert analysis”.

It would be like asking a biologist his opinion on the change of orbits of the moon and putting this opinion on a pedestal because “he is a scientist!” Yeah, but he is a scientist of biology, not physics you idiot. The same goes with all the quoting of “analysts” from pretty much any industry.

As someone who doesn’t play his DS because I get worn out fast looking at the tiny screen, I welcome the new DSi. I haven’t bought a DSi because of no Virtual Handheld. I might re-consider now.

In this Iwata Asks interview, Iwata asks the development team what is Zelda. Iwata declares that Zelda is practically ‘undefinable’. How preposterous it is to make a game that you do not know the definition of! Perhaps that explains Twilight Princess’s eccentricities.

Here are the definitions the Zelda Team gave:

• Iwata:

  There is definitely an action-game aspect to Zelda, but it’s a little different from the type of game where the player simply learns by repeating the movements over and over again.

• Nishimori:

  Up to now I have known Zelda as a player, and what I have always admired about the essence of Zelda games is that when the player wants to see what will happen when they try something, there is always an appropriate response to it in the game. For example, there might be a switch in a dungeon that looks like it should go down if something heavy is placed on it, and the game meets those expectations. Because the game lets the player experiment with so many choices, it doesn’t feel like you are being forced to do things. This gives the player the sense that they are making progress in the game by virtue of their own experiences and working things out on their own. For me, the essence of a Zelda game is that feeling the player gets when they are able to solve puzzles in their own way. This is what I kept in mind when I was working on this project.

  • Miyagi:

    This is a question that I have also struggled with. I even once asked this question to one of the most senior developers in the company who has years of experience with Zelda. You know what I got for an answer? “If the Zelda staff made it, it’s Zelda!” (laughs)

  • Iwata:

    It’s like a Zen riddle! (laughs)

  • Tominaga:

    Apart from what everyone else has said, but I would say that it’s the realism of the game world. In other words, whether or not the player will be able to enjoy the story without feeling that it is unnatural. This is something that Miyamoto-san mentions frequently, but I don’t mean the kind of realism where each individual strand of hair is accurately depicted, but rather the fact that a shop owner is not likely to give a hearty welcome to a child that comes into their shop in the middle of the night.

• Kyogoku:

  I think you can say the same thing Tominaga-san just said about what the characters in the game say. For example, hearing something unexpected when you talk to a character you haven’t talked to in a while, or being surprised when a character gets angry at you for something you casually did. If you overdo it, then it will be a nuisance to players, and there’s also no point in putting something in that no one will ever notice. That’s why I was always trying to think of subtle things that might or might not be noticed by players. These things are silly in a good way, and I tried to put in as many of them as possible.

• Iwata:

  Well, I now understand what Zelda means to each of you. As far as my own opinion is concerned, I have a strong feeling that there are as many definitions of Zelda as there are people. But these definitions are not completely different from each other. Rather they all overlap to some extent with one another. That’s why I feel confident that it will come together nicely in the end. Taking it one step further, I think the fact that there isn’t a perfect definition that can be expressed in words is the reason that Zelda games offer such a rich and rewarding experience.

___________________________________________

What a lame answer Iwata gave at the end. “Zelda cannot be defined.”

Reader, I now hereby declare myself “Honorary Member of Zelda Team”, and I will answer Iwata’s question so hopefully he doesn’t ask it when he does the Iwata Asks interview for Zelda Wii (since it will be sufficiently answered with this beautiful blog post, so amazing this post will be that people will be making screenshots of it and framing it on their walls, yes sirree).

Zelda is a crucible.

What does this mean?

All Zelda games are composed in two distinct parts: the Overworld and the Dungeons. The interaction between the two is what is key.

In the Overworld, the world is at war with you in some way. Even if the enemies are just going in circles shooting rocks. In Zelda II, black figures would appear and try to catch you. In Link to the Past, the guards were after you and later Ganon. The point is that the Overworld is not a nice place to Link.

Link is overwhelmed with the Overworld. The Overworld is more powerful than Link is. Link cannot go anywhere and will be killed pretty fast in many areas. Like Icarus, if he flies too close to the sun, he burns.

This is why the dungeons exist. The dungeons are crucibles for Link to grow. Dungeons are all filled with nasty and devious traps. In many ways, the dungeons aren’t even “fun”.  Link goes through this crucible to get the treasure and the power-ups.

The “moment” of Zelda is when Link exits a completed dungeon and feels the sun of the Overworld. It is then that the player can’t wait to explore his new powers in the Overworld, to explore new places.

The definition of Zelda is in the dungeon/overworld as crucible/world. Link grows in ability and power not in the pleasant overworld but in the dungeons. It is not so much the feeling of growth as it is the feeling of crucible. Link goes through the “hard adventure” for the reward of exiting the dungeon and having that new overworld experience.

This reveals where Zelda games have gone off track. The modern Zelda game is one dungeon after the next with the Overworld being nothing more than road to the next dungeon or a cave to another piece of heart.

Think of the original Legend of Zelda. The Overworld, then, was very vast. Every time Link came up to the surface with a new heart, a new item, or a new upgrade, the overworld changed. Of course, the Overworld did not literally change. It was the same exact Overworld. But Link changed. He can’t wait to re-visit the Overworld again after his “transformation” the dungeon caused him. Zelda games are these crucible and then transformation experiences again and again, one after another.

Think of Zelda II. Finishing a palace guaranteed you at least a new level. Levels were very important in Zelda II since the game was like Dragon Quest in that lower levels limited where you could go. New items opened up new geographical locations.

Think of Link to the Past. While the Overworld in Zelda III was very weak, Nintendo put in two Overworlds. Getting the hammer changed Link. He could now explore the Dark World far more than he ever could. Getting that damn duck really changed Link. He could zip around in the Overworld.

Ocarina of Time. Wind Waker. Twilight Princess. Similar situation but with rapidly shrinking Overworlds. The problem with the shrinking Overworld is that players are going to wonder what the point is to finish a dungeon. Zelda is more than just one dungeon after another.

No other game truly has this crucible/world type thing going back and forth as Zelda does with its Overworld and dungeons. Metroid doesn’t have it. Mario doesn’t have it. The really old RPG games might have had it, but they clearly don’t now.

The only game that comes to mind that does have this crucible/world would be World of Warcraft and perhaps Diablo. The Instance dungeons and Raids are not fun by any means. However, they are designed as crucibles. The player spends time torturing himself in the Raid or Instance for the great loot at the end and during the journey. It is not the Raid that is enjoyable but the transformation that comes when the player returns to the surface.

Ironically, frustration and non-fun are why Zelda is Zelda. It wouldn’t be a crucible if it is easy. And this is perhaps why fans complain about how easy recent Zelda games have been. The complaints about the Overworld also work because a weak or small Overworld diminishes the crucible. Why march into a nasty dungeon to torture oneself to defeat the Evil Monster if the world outside is nothing but a road? Or an ocean?

So when you are watching the credits of “Zelda: Wii” and see: “Honorary Member of Zelda Team: Sean Malstrom for defining Zelda for us” do not be surprised!

Above: Malstrom has declared himself “Honorary Zelda Team member”. Hardcore go bonkers.