Step up to the plate, third parties!!

I was half expecting him to say "What did you expect?  The N64 and Gamecube slowed to a crawl at the end, too."

Seriously, what he said kind of contradicts itself.  On one hand, he said that the gap between the WiiU and other next gen consoles would be less but on the other hand that they had to limit the hardware to keep costs down.  If MS/Sony don't have as much cost in their controller, are launching a couple years later, and are willing to take a loss on the hardware and/or charge more for the hardware, can they really know that they're not going to be far enough behind again that 3rd parties don't support the WiiU in the same way the other consoles are supported?  He might be right but unless he has sources inside MS and Sony, I don't know how he can say that with certainty.

I've read similar things from them since the GameCube days, only now I think they are actually in a position to keep more games flowing. When it comes to Nintendo I know the last year of their system will suffer a lack of titles because all the big teams are already working on the new system, which I am cool with. I don't view it as them just doing nothing. But since the stink of Yamachi's relationships have settled and it's only smart for 3rd parties to port everything I honestly think Nintendo will be getting good 3rd party games all the way up until the end. Well that is to say if the hardware gap isn't too crazy, even then all these new engines are scalable so I'm optimistic.

Well it's nice to see Iwata acknowledge the fear of a technology gap between the Wii U and future systems.  This is a big issue and I was actually wondering if Nintendo even knew it was an issue.  They sure didn't seem to let on that they did.

Though "well we had to make the hardware crappier for the controller" doesn't fly with me.  Well then your controller better deliver the fuckin' goods and not just be some lame gimmick that didn't amount to squat ten years ago on the Gamecube.  This is a big flaw with the Wii model.  These stupid marketting gimmicks aren't free.  SOMETHING has to be compromised for them.

Iwata states that "the technology gap between Wii U and future consoles released by competitors would not be nearly the size of the gap between Wii and it's current competitors." I would take that statement with a bucket of salt. Until Nintendo's competitors show off their new hardware there is no way for us to know what advancements will be seen in the next generation. It's good to hear Iwata acknowledge the issue though.

Iwata's other statement, however, seems kind of weird.

"As the structure of the product called the Wii U is as if we are including both a video game console and a handheld device, if we were not careful about how luxurious both of them were, we could end up having to offer the price of the two hardware systems combined, which would not be an acceptable price for the consumers. We had to design it by balancing the performance and the costs."

I do appreciate that including a controller such as the Gamepad is going to drive up the cost of the package, but my thinking on the Wii U has always been that Nintendo are now using technology which is equivalent to that being used by it's competitors 6 years ago in 2006. As such, the Wii U should be a relatively cheap system to manufacture. Not only that, the touch screen being used for the Gamepad is itself a relatively cheap piece of technology, with Nintendo foregoing the more versatile and expensive capacitive touchscreen. It is, as NWR staff have said several times, basically a larger DS screen.

Personally, I'm worried that Nintendo have cut too many corners to make this system profitable. I find myself in agreement with @rlse9, that there's a conflict between Iwata's two statements. Nothing about the video games industry at the minute is stationary, and Nintendo's competitors will no doubt be seeking to bring their own advancements when their consoles launch. The Wii U might be thought of as being an equivalent to the current Xbox and Playstation, but how can Nintendo hope to abridge the technology gap if they insist on adhering to the 'whithered technology' orthodoxy? I feel that come 2014/2015 we're likely to see a similar picture to that which we've seen with the Wii, wherein Nintendo's platform is considered to be lagging technologically compared to it's competitors. Which in and of itself means nothing, but the repercussions this can have for software development (particularly third-party) could be significant.

I'm going to be cautiously optimistic about the hardware and how it will affect future support. As long as 3rd parties support current consoles, Wii U will be supported. It's just too easy to port games over. Wii U should get at least 2-3 solid years then after that, it's anyone's guess. It depends on whether 3rd parties feel constricted by what current hardware offers and if Durango and Orbis really offer enough to justify increased budgets and a reset userbase. Not many of these companies are making Wii U games so that's not really as much of a problem. They get to port games with significantly less effort or risk.

Companies typically moved on to newer hardware when the current hardware constricted their vision. Is that the case here? Nintendo might be in a decent position to receive the latest of this generation and then earliest of the next before ultimately launching a successor.

The average development cost for PS2/Gamecube/Xbox games was between 3-7 million.  The average 360/PS3 game is between 15-30 million.  This is why I doubt the 720/PS4 will be that much more powerful then the Wii U because the industry can't afford it.  Current HD development cost is still way too high for most studio's and if the 720/PS4 were to be well above them like the 360/PS3 were over the Wii so the Wii U can't get any multiplatform ports, those systems would be unaffordable for most studio's since the average cost would be at least 50 million meaning the average game would need to sell around 2 million copies just to break even.

Of course if Microsoft and Sony do make their new systems this powerful, then it won't matter if the Wii U doesn't get multi-platform games because the 720/PS4 won't either.  Most companies that support the 720/PS4 will go bankrupt and close leaving those systems with a lack of games as well.

So Nintendo is in a good position with the Wii U.  They'll either get multi-platform support, or Microsoft and Sony will kill the rest of the industry with insane dev cost which will leave Nintendo the last man standing by default.

It is very refreshing to see Iwata being grilled by investors over the very same things that are frustrating gamers. Iwata may not care what gamers think, but he most certainly cares about what investors think so its great that investors and gamers are on the same page here, because this means the concerns of gamers are being delivered through a voice that Iwata can't really ignore.

It is also a relief that he is acknowledging that these problems exist, and is promising they won't be repeated. I'm not sure if we can really believe these promises though, because wasn't the same pretty much said about the Gamecube and the Wii? Seems like there were promises that those systems wouldn't end up with software droughts either, but that's exactly what happened despite the promises. So when he promises it won't happen on the Wii U there's a good reason why I'm skeptical.

Still, the fact he acknowledges the way the Wii was handled wasn't right is a very important step. Its not the only step, but its a good start towards making sure it never happens again.

I remember in the first few years of the Wii cost was used to predict better support for the Wii.  "PS360 games cost too much.  They'll all move to the Wii to stay in business."  Only it never happened.  Yes making even more expensive games might be a stupid move but that doesn't mean that third parties won't do it.  And companies like EA and Activision probably can make games like that because they're big and expect their games to sell a lot of copies.

Don't assume third parties won't make dumb business decisions.  That's not enough to give me confidence in the Wii U's longterm third party support.

Ian is right. The Wii was dirt cheap to develop for in comparison to the costly HD systems, but third party support for the Wii never really showed up... so Luigi Dude's argument that the Wii U is going to have better support than the PS420 is bullshit. Why would it happen with the Wii U when it didn't happen with the Wii?

Isn't the definition of insanity supposed to be repeating something and expecting a different result? Well, since this didn't work with the Wii, isn't it insanity to repeat this with the Wii U and expect it will work this time around?

And as far as 3rd parties going out of business or struggling, we've seen a LOT of this happening this generation... but that hasn't deterred them for going after the PS360 full throttle while at the same time more or less completely ignoring the more cost efficient Wii platform. So never underestimate a 3rd party's reluctance to support Nintendo. Even when their lives depend on it they still seem to rather commit financial suicide than support a Nintendo console. Why should this next generation be any different?

And furthermore, the Wii U is going to be an HD system, so it might not be that much cheaper to develop for anyway.

I think a lot of people seem to be underestimating how important Miiverse is to Nintendo. This isn't the first time Iwata seems to be offering up the social network's subtle game recommendations engine as a way to boost software sales by encouraging dormant consumers to purchase new titles that other people are playing.

I think that's the brunt of his answer here, not cost or power equations. I think Nintendo thinks MiiVerse will be a major factor in increasing software sales. I personally think it's a pretty interesting attempt to solve Nintendo's problem of "training" the segment of their consumers to start expanding their game tastes and trying new games.

I want to star by saying that more power doesn't actually mean more costly to develop for.

Now Miiverse has potential but if the online shopping experience anything like eShop that will be a problem.  The experience should be painless to go from suggestion to demo to purchase back to positive suggestion.

Yes that's true but if 90% of the third party studio's are dead in 5 years because 720/PS4 dev cost bankrupt them means those systems won't have good longterm third party support either.  Because that's what will happen if the 720/PS4 are so far above the Wii U games can't be ported to it.  Like I said, current HD cost are already dangerously high for much of the industry and to go well above that will be suicide.

So unlike the 360/PS3 whiched looked better these last few years because they had more games, the 720/PS4 will have just as many games as the Wii U because most of their support will be dead.

Will PS420 development costs be substantially higher than Wii U development costs? The reason why PS360 dev costs were so high was because of HD. The Wii U and PS420 will also be in HD, so I don't think there is going to be much difference versus the PS360.

The PS420 might be substantially more powerful than the Wii U, but this doesn't necessarily translate into being more costly to develop for. They are bound by the same 1080 graphical wall that the Wii U is.

If you're going to use the extra power it's going to require more development resources, whether that's people to program better AI or artists to do the models and textures of more things to go on screen. If you're not going to use the extra power, there's no point in making it for the new hardware that has a lower install base.

A development worth nothing though is that this generation has seen an increased use of outsourcing and middleware, which have the potential to reduce the cost and resources spent on games. If the the current generation is anything to go by, we're going to see increased budgets for what are considered 'AAA' titles and we'll see a growing market for lower budget and Indie games. If anything it will continue to be the 'B Tier' games that will be squeezed.

Remember when Iwata said that you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the Wii and the other systems when played on SD screens? Yeah, lots of salt necessary when they talk about comparisons like this.

This one at least might be true, although as far as I know he has no way of knowing that.

I just got access to an HDTV this year. There was a difference between PS3/360 and Wii games on my old SDTV - namely, I could read the text on the Wii games.

The fact that Wii momentum has dropped (and even Iwata acknowledges this) is why the Wii U needs a different name.  The momentum is gone, so keeping the Wii brand alive doesn't help but instead actually hurts the console's chances of succeeding. The same goes with Miis and all the other casual baggage from the Wii. No one cares about that anymore, and many people didn't even care for it to begin with.

*clap**clap**clap*

You've managed to turn 2/3rds market share into a hinderence. Bravo, sir. Bravo.

Regardless of how well the Wii has done, the point is its momentum is gone. However well it has done is all in the past now. For the last few years of its life its basically dead in the water, and even Iwata acknowledges this. The Wii has done really well in its prime, but its not 2007 anymore... and when the Wii U launches later this year its not going to be 2007 then either. It will NEVER be 2007 again. That ship is passed, and it would be wise for Nintendo to move on before they drown in the blue ocean.

The Wii U should have come out in 2009 when the Wii was still relevant, but now 3 years later its beyond too late.

That paragraph....is quite possibly the silliest thing I've ever read.

So your saying because of its market saturation and low software output during the final year of its existence, i.e. the Wii momentum drop, that the brand was a failure?

I'm not saying its a failure anymore than the Dinosaurs were a failure. The Dinosaurs ruled the Earth for hundreds of millions of years so no one can deny they were successful, but things change and the Dinosaurs are extinct now just like the Wii is extinct. Shit happens, and when it does its time to move on to the next big thing instead of drilling into amber looking for fossilized DNA to try to clone back the past. Remember in Jurassic park how some of the dinosaurs became sick because they couldn't handle eating the modern vegetation or cope with modern diseases? Something that thrived in 2007 isn't necessarily going to thrive in 2012 because everything is different now.

I was wrong.

That paragraph...is quite possibly the silliest thing I've ever read.

Seriously, take a basic business class before making statements like this that show you have no idea how the business world actually work because you are just making a fool out of yourself now.