About the last part of the show guys. That question about Nintendo staying old, that Miyamoto should go, that Yamauchi should die.
1.- I'm south American, then I'm a westerner, The entire world knows how the USA has influence it in all types of markets. So why wouldn't we value (in a global point of view) that a relatively small country (size) still contributes to the world in a meaningful way. We know how good animators they are, we know how good making videogames they are. The also make ok cars and electronics. So let's respect their decisions and their culture. If people feels they are taking bad decisions, if Nintendo disappoints you...you are feel to leave, to grow up. Nintendo has demonstrated that they can create new fans over and over. I am one of them, during college and grad school I didn't play Nintendo at all, I was raised playing the NES and SNES...then I grew up and enjoyed other things in life, and when I missed video games I started playing FPS on PC. It wasn't until the last years of the Wii when I was feeling some nostalgia and bought a used Wii...and man I loved motion controls...I loved playing FPSs with the Wiimote, I was supper happy with the VC too. Nintendo will be fine, it doesn't need a sudden change of company culture.
2.- From the consumer point of view, these are a great years for videogame consumers. The key word is DIVERSITY, and the 3 top console manufacturers are aiming to different consumers. I like that. If the dude who wrote the letter about Miyamoto is disappointed...then buy and stay playing other consoles!...I left Nintendo for some 8 years and came back, happier, richer and willing to spend more money in Nintendo.
3.- Let's don't forget, the entire Nintendo videogame history is filled with cheap old hardware. Every single console they have launched was developed under Gumpei Yokoi moto "sell consoles made with 5+ years old hardware". and they have done well. They OWN the handheld market (they pretty much invented it), and they have up and downs with the consoles. So many successes have reinforced this moto, that they can do ok with old hardware, as long as they squeeze every single bit of power from that machine. And Nintendo still maintains their "Seal of Quality" and the majority of their games. So please Nintendo stay the same. I would be happy with a couple of new IPs (Monolith may help them into this) but keep giving me the old franchises and keep learning and changing at the same slow pace. As long as every new console has better HW than the old ones, they are fine.
P.S: Nintendo is a slow pace company period. MS and Sony are so fast paced in adopted new technologies that their machines are getting closer and closer to PCs...then I can argue why Sony or MS don't go 3rd party and create software for PC?

Because it'll come up: The studio Jonny was thinking of was Pandemic, and the French Resistance game was The Saboteur.

What you guys said about Nintendo is how I feel at this point. I always planned to wait till all three consoles were out Now i'm looking at getting a PS4 this fall and getting a Wii U whenever X comes out.


Also I'd say not having third parties on the Wii U hurts Nintendo alot since they won't get the licensing fees that comes with those games right. 

I don't think Nintendo's problems stem from them being a Japanese company. Plenty of Japanese companies navigate their particular markets better than nintendo does. Korg is still a Japanese as shit company and have managed to figure out how to make waves in other parts of the world. It's different than video games, sure, but I think it's a bit reductive to place Nintendo's problems at being Japanese.  I also don't think they need specifically american influences either. I just think they need someone not from Nintendo and not someone who cater's to Nintendo's Board (who we understand know mostly nothing about video games from the questions they ask during investor's meetings) to take a look at some of their practices.

Aren't those Japanese reporters asking those questions? Surely when the board questions Iwata & Co., that is done at private meetings, not in public view.

There's no such thing as games journalism in Japan, not even by the incredibly loose interpretation of "journalism" that we have in NA.  If reporters ask any questions at these meetings, it's probably because Nintendo asked them to.

It's investor meetings Q&A.

Which means that it's when investor meet. And ask Questions. And get Answers.

Because it's investor meetings.

So I've finally gotten around to listening to RFN. One comment: is Johnny being a bit too mean to that loud dude... James Jones I think? They seem to make him out to be this incredibly annoying and loud guy, but he isn't that bad.


The way Johnny acts when James suggests something that he doesn't like kind of urks me.

Right, but it's Joe Schmo investor plus representatives of institutional investors asking the questions, right? It's not the Board itself asking Iwata questions, otherwise what would be the point of the, what I presume, is at least monthly meetings he has with them. Not to mention it would be embarrassing if the Board was that ignorant of the games business, as some of the investors seem to be.

One thing about the podcast episode's article: It's funny how James was not on the episode, but is listed along with Jonny, Jon and TYP, yet Gui was on the episode and is not listed!

^^Haha, thanks, this egregious offense has been corrected.

i have a feeling the intro was meant to be a role reversal to this one http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/rfn/16191

I think people pose so many video game industry/Nintendo business decision questions because it's a topic many gamers may not have a detailed perspective of, and as people who have been following Nintendo for years now, they expect a thoughtful and informative answer when they ask an email question to the RFN crew.

I'd be hesitant to think any specific person at Nintendo is to blame for the Wii U's woes (lack of compelling games, price, lack of 3rd party support) as much as it's a failing on several different levels, as well as being behind in some aspects compared to their competitors.  Miyamoto, discussing used game policy, stated software should act "like a toy company", meaning people should be able to use it how they want, when they want it.  The problem is that it seems like their design philosophy follows the same mindset, which makes some of their hardware, software, and UI feel antiquated way too quickly, instead of feeling like it's a state-of-the-art, brand spanking new console.

Nintendo's success with the Wii was them catching lightning in a bottle, and the continued scarcity for several years made their system have a status of an elusive, highly sought-after product.  For two years, the only way I could play a Wii is if I went to a friend's house and played with them, where I got a limited taste of motion controls.  This alone coupled with how hard it was to find one in stores made me want it all the more.  Nintendo isn't going to be able to replicate that success with the Wii U unless there is some compelling mass-market appeal software, and the price-point gets back down to $250 or less, where it was considered a decent impulse-buy.

if they are discontinuing the basic model then i don't think we will likely see the price of the deluxe go down to anything below $270.

I don't think the Deluxe price will go down anywhere below $300 for quite some time, I just think $250 might be the magic number price-wise for mass-market. 

Where are you getting the $270 number from?

if they discontinue the basic model then what we now know as the deluxe version will become the only model.

with that in mind going for the basic models $299.99 price point prevents the system from reaching mass market while going down to $269.99 will give the Wii U more then enough distance from the ps4 and allow it to scratch at that mass market pricing.