Nintendo Nintendo - Ziele und Visionen/ Bue Ocean

[Nihilist]

Okay... was hier folgt sind einige Postings aus dem Neogaf von einem gewissen "Lapsed". Aufgrund seines 'seltsamen' Diskussionsstils hat er dort einen permaban bekommen (angeblich hat er sich zu elitär verhalten, hat sich scheinbar nicht an den Diskussionen beteiligt,).

Ich hingegen fand seine Beiträge sehr erhellend (auch wenn er manchmal etwas extrem ist). Aber als ich heute die Rede von Reggie gehört habe, hab ich mich wieder an Lapsed erinnert...und er hatte recht.

Ich finde, so oder so, das seine Beiträge eine gute Diskussionsgrundlage darstellen. Viel Spaß beim lesen:

Reggie:

"We don't consider Sony and Microsoft as our only competitors. We're competing with other leisure time entertainment. If people stay at home and play wii bowling instead of going to the movies, we win."

Alles nachfolgende ist von Lapsed

Juli 2006

Video games are in the entertainment business.

Video games are NOT in the technology business.

If the PS3 is going to outsell its competitors, it will be because of its library, of it delivering a better user experience.

It will have nothing to do with the technology.

With the exception of the SNES, every console 'winner' of the generation had less power than its competitors.

Hell, black and white Gameboy clearly outsold the Atari Lynx and Sega Game Gear (which both were in color!).

The console's true power is its library.

No one buys a console to play polygons and horsepower.

The technology is unnoticed by most consumers.

The problem with this analyst is that he is analyzing the wrong business.

Repeat after me: video games are in the entertainment business, not the technology business (I've seen them make the same mistake for twenty years so why not another twenty?).

Repeat after me: All else being equal, better technology can create a better user experience.

And since I seriously doubt the PS3's software library will suffer by comparison to its competitors in the way that the Lynx or Game Gear libraries did next to the better-supported Gameboy line, I think the analyst makes a valid point.

14.1.2007

Let us take a look the 'bible' for Nintendo's business strategy:

What consistently separated winners from losers in creating blue oceans was their approach to strategy. The companies caught in the red ocean followed a conventional approach, racing to beat the competition by building a defensible position wihin the existing industry order. The creators of blue oceans, surprisingly, didn't use the competition as their benchmark. Instead, they followed a different strategic logic that we call value innovation. Value innovation is the conerstone of blue ocean strategy. We call it value innovation because instead of focusing on beating the competition, you focus on making the competition irrelevant by creating a leap in value for buyers and your company, thereby opening up new and uncontested market space.

Improving existing genres would not grow the industry. But focusing on eliminating disinterest and creating new value in games, Nintendo was able to grow the market. A good example are the Brain Age games which are valued entirely different than other games (just as non-fiction books are valued differently than fiction books).

Value innovation places equal emphasis on value and innovation. Value without innovation tends to focus on value creation on an incremental scale, something that improves value but is not sufficient to make you stand out in the marketplace. Innovation without value tends to be technology-driven, market pioneering, or futuristic, often shooting beyond what buyers are ready to accept and pay for. In this sense, it is important to distinguish between value innovation as opposed to technology innovation and market pioneering. Our study shows that what separates winners from losers in creating blue oceans is neither bleeding-edge technology nor "timing for market entry." Sometimes these exist; more often, however, they do not. Value innovation occurs only when companies align innovation with utility, price, and cost positions. If they fail to anchor innovation with value in this way, technology innovators and market pioneers often lay the eggs that other companies hatch.

The last line signals why someone else just cannot tack on the touch screen (or Wii-mote) onto another system. Brain Age and Wii Sports are more value innovations than technology demonstrations.

Interesting, the PS3 and PSP could easily fit the above definition of being 'technology-driven' and overshooting what buyers are ready to accept and pay. The Xbox 360 definately fits someone focusing on 'market entry timing' to create an industry foothold.

We can easily classify the companies' strategies as:

Playstation = Industry standard
Xbox 360 = Red Ocean
DS, Wii = Blue Ocean

One more quote:

Value innovation is a new way of thinking about and executing strategy that results in the creation of a blue ocean and a break from the competition. Importantly, value innovation defies on of the most commonly accepted dogmas of competition-based strategy: the value-cost trade-off. It is conventionally believed that companies can either create greater value to customers at a higher cost or create reasonable value at a lower cost. Here strategy is seen as making a choice between differentiation and low cost. In contrast, those that seek to create blue oceans pursue differentiation and low cost simultaneously.

Many observers (and some analysts) point that cost is the primary difference between the consoles. They believe that once the Xbox 360 and PS3 come down in price, its sales will go up. In their analysis, they are forgetting about value. People don't buy a 360 or PS3 today not just because of the price but because of low value (due to the limited game library). Once the game library increases, the value of the system goes up (this is true for all systems).

Nintendo has been trying to break the cost-value relationship. If PSP had a price drop, would it suddenly begin outselling the DS? Most likely not because the DS is generating new value that is pulling in non-customers.

Blue Ocean Strategy continues with an interesting example of the wine industry. The demand for wine had been flat but competition and supply resulted in price wars, overemphasising prestige on the bottles, and becoming intimidating to non-wine drinkers. Wine drinkers would debate over the subtle differences of taste that noncustomers couldn't grasp. If a noncustomer complained, the wine drinkes would stick out their pointy finger while sipping their elaborate drinks and declare the non-customers as unsophisticated.

A new wine designed to combat the problems of the industry called Yellow Tail was introduced. The wine was non-intimidating, cheaper, tried to be 'fun', and drew in non-customers. Many regular wine drinkers "went down" to Yellow Tail's level. But many wine drinkers did not and snorted dissatisfaction at it. They considered Yellow Tail as a 'non-wine'. As Yellow Tail exploded in popularity where the company couldn't keep up with the demand, these wine drinkers believed Yellow Tail would destroy the wine industry.

The same parallels can be made with the gaming industry. When hardcore gamers debate textures, game designers, their home theater set ups, 1080p and framerates, I am reminded of wine enthusiasts debating over subtle tastes of wines which are invisible (and intimidating) to the mass market. Wine drinkers believed their industry was mass market when it was actually niche (just like gamers), and that they, the wine drinkers, were more sophisticated than regular people.

Those who complain about 'non-games' are really complaining at the lack of 'sophistication' those games have. Brain Age has no graphics. Animal Crossing has no 'ending'. When a hardcore gamer complains that Wii Sports isn't a game because "it is not sophisticated", this is exactly the point. Wine drinkers lost sight that wine was supposed to be fun to consume, not some symbol of sophistication. Imagine a hardcore gamer trying to upset a Wii Sports (or even Wii Play) party by saying, "Stop! That game is unsophisticated! It is not a true game!" Everyone would laugh at him.

The traditional gamer value games based on their sophistication. But the non-customer will value games differently. To non-customers, Wii Sports and Brain Age are the most sophisticated video games ever made.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=140646&page=12

1.2.2007

I don't think Iwata's speech was about saving the industry, it was about disrupting the industry. And while there's some irony in Nintendo making a big deal that they disrupted an industry that they had a 100% marketshare on before the DS/PSP war started, it's what they're trying to do.

Most people miss that Nintendo sacrificed Gameboy on the altar of disruption. Glad you caught it.

When someone writes the seventh generation of consoles, it will start off with the question: "Nintendo took the best selling and most identifiable game system ever, the Gameboy, and killed it. Why?" It would be like Sony killing the Playstation. Why on earth would a company do that to their most successful product line? The answer alone explains everything that Nintendo is doing. Success is the breeding ground to failure. Nintendo had to destroy Gameboy in order to save it.

Quote:
The industry doesn't need saving - Nintendo needed to break through and disrupt the console market, get back on top.

And sure, the industry has a number of things wrong with it - the reliance on sequels and yearly versions is certainly obnoxious. But Nintendo seemingly has no interest in getting them to actually stop that. They still want Madden 200X on whatever they're producing at the time.

Nintendo has no interest in becoming dominant in the traditional market. I tend to cringe when I see graphs (especially in Media Create) of 'marketshare' which is the three consoles in a pie chart. While Pac-Man closes his mouth and GAF whoops it up, Nintendo is definately not celebrating it.

In Nintendo's perspective, the PS3 and Xbox 360 are completely irrelevant. The only real competitor is disinterest. Say the DS has penetrated 20% of households. 1/5 of all households have a DS, isn't that awesome? Not to Nintendo. Disinterest still dominates the market. How would sell DSes to that 80%? In Nintendo's dream world, they would like a Wii next to every TV.

Disruption isn't a market dominating tactic. It is using a technological innovation to branch out for pure growth. The DS's touch screen and Wii's controller allow untraditional demographics access to playing games.

Let us see what Miyamoto said:

Quote:
Chris Zimmerman: Hype is already building surrounding the next-generation console war. How do you see the battle shaking out between Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft?

Shigeru Miyamoto: What battle? What war? I think the press has made upcoming changes in the industry out to be something more than they really are. I don't even like using the term "next-generation." I prefer to say that it’s a new generation of console that Nintendo is working on with the Wii. We don’t see things the same way as everyone else.

Chris Zimmerman: But of course. Between games like Chibi-Robo and Nintendogs, you don't have to convince us of that. Still, you have to admit things are going to get pretty ugly out there in the marketplace soon…

Shigeru Miyamoto: Maybe so. But we're giving people something they can't get anywhere else – a change in thinking and major cultural shift. We're trying to take the next big step for gaming, and bring it to a whole new level. Nintendo won't simply be taking the same type of games you're already familiar with and giving them a new coat of paint and feature upgrade. We're looking to push boundaries and attract new admirers. Women, girls… They're only the beginning. Unlike competitors, Wii's audience is much bigger than the one for a typical gaming system.

Household penetration of consoles hovers around 33% in America. If Nintendo successfully gets the Wii to, say, 50%, of course it will sell more Nintendo consoles than ever. Game industry would go crazy at the news, celebrating at the 'huge popularity'. GAF would go all kermit. But Nintendo's response would be, "Only 50%? Then half the nation doesn't like our product. We have lots of work to do."

The only competitor of marketshare Nintendo sees is disinterest. And, so far, disinterest still dominates the market.

Originally Posted by Iwata:
...we are battling public disinterest

2.2.2007

Meanwhile, at Nintendo :

http://wii.ign.com/articles/760/760751p1.html

The modesty of this man and his constant down-to-earth attitude never stops to amaze me, frankly.

It has nothing to do with modesty and nothing to do with 'keeping it real'. A day or two ago, I made a post that Nintendo, even if they become market leader, would still view themselves as failures.

Imagine how you would have to think when selling the very first video game system. Think of how Bushnel searched for a mass market title (Pong), and later the Atari trying to sell video games to people who didn't know what video games were. That mentality is a far cry from the typical 'console war' mindset we have been getting from all the console companies the last couple of decades. What exactly was Atari competing against? Fairchild quit with their Channel F system, and there were other competitors that would eventually enter, but the goal was always expanding the market. Nintendo had that same mentality when it first made the Famicom and when it brought the NES to America. Console penetration to households kept rising and rising. Then, somewhere during the 16-bit generation, the stupid 'console war' mentality arose and hasn't stopped yet. In terms of absolute popularity, gaming hasn't become more popular since twenty years ago. Not even the PS2 can breach that household percentage penetration established decades ago.

Originally Posted by IGN:
Finally, the site made a comment suggesting that Nintendo would from this year on be the industry leader, with others chasing from behind. "That's not the case," replied Iwata. "So long as we continue the fight against the lack of interest in games from the general consumer, Nintendo will always be the challenger.

Make a pie chart but take the total of DS or Wiis sold and make a percentage of that and the number of households in Japan (or America). The pie chart would look like Pac-Man except Pac-Man is disinterest and the teeny tiny wedge in his mouth would be Nintendo. This is how Iwata views the marketshare and why he cannot consider Nintendo to be 'market leader'... at least not until a Nintendo system is in 51% of households. Iwata wants to break that 'ceiling' of 33% which console gaming has been stuck at for the past twenty years.

Nintendo is using a different measurement of marketshare than the press is. You could say that Nintendo wants to take over the market that disinterest has seized. And disinterest will be the market leader for quite some time. If the Wii does what Iwata wants and breaks through that 33% ceiling, it would be growing the 'tiny wedge' that is Nintendo against the monstrous Evil Pac-Man of Disinterest.

Iwata isn't being modest here, he's being ambitious. He has a further goal in mind than merely outselling the other consoles. Or, perhaps I am mistaken, and Iwata is focused on growth merely due to fears of an industry demise. But I'm leaning towards the ambition side since Iwata has said he thought Wii could outsell any console ever made before. Here's what he said about the controller:

Originally Posted by Iwata:
Well, of course, the idea is that the Revolution will sell and sell and sell so it [the controller] becomes the standard in the industry. [Smiles]

More from Iwata:

Originally Posted by IGN:
Microsoft leader Bill Gates recently said that Nintendo would be a "niche player" in the next-generation wars. Iwata responded to this statement. "Talking about the definition of the niche, or niche market, I really have the completely opposite opinion. The people the other companies are targeting are very limited to those who are high-tech oriented, and core game players. They cannot expand beyond that population," Iwata said. "We are trying to capture the widest possible audience all around the world. In other words, we are trying to capture the people who are even beyond the gaming population. So for that kind of company, we don't think the term "niche" is appropriate."

"Also, we really feel that we need to create something that is very unique and different from today's gaming -- something that can stimulate interest from those who are not playing today's games. ... What Nintendo is trying to do, therefore, is to create a new interface and new theme of gaming that can really address the needs of the current non-gamers,"

3.2.2007

Lapsed, concerning your 'Nintendo aims to sell to everyone' argument, doesn't seem a bit suspect when Nintendo itself appears completely unprepared for the massive DS success in the first place? They can't produce enough DSLs, they can't keep up on cart production, causing games to have wonky print runs, they even had a plastic game case shortage at one point.

I mean, what they say doesn't seem to match up with what they planned for.

Would you rather have retailers demanding more of your product or saying they have too much? It's an interesting contrast to Sony and Microsoft's approach of stuffing the inventory full of product. This allows Nintendo much more leverage over retailers. But it is also more profitable.

It should be clear to anyone that Nintendo's priority is a strong balance sheet. If it comes down to a choice of losing marketshare or some demand and having a healthier balance sheet, they'll choose balance sheet every single time. A great example is Sony shipping PS3s over planes and Nintendo shipping Wiis over boats. Both products are in high demand (for PS3, a month ago let's say). But using boat costs far less than plane. And, even though Wiis are sold out, Nintendo feels no need to spend that money to get Wiis in a little earlier.

When the Wii launched, Shop Channel and VC were ready because that made Nintendo money while Weather Channel, News Channel, and Opera browser did not. (You can see where the priority is.) Nintendo can delay online at launch (except to Shop Channel naturally) because it makes them no money (though they have to deliver eventually or the console's reputation suffers).

When one of Nintendo's console engineers was interviewed, he explained why Nintendo took such care to make sure their hardware and controllers were reliable and wouldn't fail. Nintendo wants you spending your entertainment dollars on more software (which is very profitable) instead of replacing your hardware (which is not that profitable).

In the Wii interviews, a female artist working on Twilight Princess explained how she spent lots of time on a particular shop. Iwata got on to her about how expensive that was. When IGN interviewed Miyamoto about a new Kid Icarus, Miyamoto's first question was, "Would you buy it?" The question to Nintendo isn't whether a new Kid Icarus should be made, but whether a new Kid Icarus would sell.

The 'it prints money.gif' is perfect because that is what Nintendo gets excited about. A 'it increases marketshare.gif' or 'it is getting non-gamers.gif' wouldn't be as funny because, while true, that's not what Nintendo's ultimate goal is. They want more profits, and they chose their business strategy not because it is 'winning', but because it is the most 'profitable'.

Increasing production is not pressing a button of 'high speed'. It costs money and time to ramp up production. It costs money to keep a large inventory. Nintendo has increased production (such as the DS), but they appear to increase it incrementally. Nintendo will never flood the market with hardware except right before a holiday season (or Pokemon release). And, after coming from the Gamecube, it is going to be a while to ramp up production of Wiis.

Nintendo isn't interested in making video games. They are interested in making money printing presses. Entertainment dollars are equal from both the gamer and non-gamer.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=137705&page=14

 

[Nintenflow]

Geiler Thread!
Gefällt mir was da steht.
Hab das vorher schon im War-Forum mitverfolgt.
Is zwar nix weltbewegend neues aber vermittelt den Geist von Nintendo schon sehr gut.

 

[Arbiter Elite]

Nintendos Siegeszug war keineswegs Glück oder Zufall. Nur geschicktes und bis ins kleinste Detail ausgeklügeltes Kalkül.

 

[Nihilist]

Ok, hab jetzt noch diesen
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=5465072&postcount=110

und diesen Text hinzugefügt
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=5476712&postcount=479

Ein eigener thread, weil sowas gerne untergeht.

 

[Nintenflow]

Vom: 18 Februar 2005

The Nintendo Minute: Vol. 5
Is Nintendo the "sleeping dragon" of the games industry? George Harrison, Senior V.P. of Marketing at Nintendo, chimes in


http://wii.ign.com/articles/589/589048p1.html


Ich finds so krass! Als ich das damals gelesen habe dacht ich mir nur "Oha da kommt was großes mit dem "Revolution".
Aber sowas wie jetzt hätte ich damals nie erwartet.
Spätenstens bei der Enthüllung des Wii-Controllers wußte ich das Nintendo alle ownen wird.
Die Leute meinen immer dass Nintendo so der liebe Familienetrieb ist, dabei ist Nintendo der ärgste Industriedampfer der den "blauen Ocean" durchpflügt. Und selbst wenn man ihn nur noch am Horizont sieht wird sein Fahrtwasser noch einiges durcheinander wirbeln.

 

[RaideeN]

meine fresse, was für freaks! wer macht sich denn bitte solche gedanken zu dem thema? schon fast unheimlich...

 

[Nihilist]

Ich finds so krass! Als ich das damals gelesen habe dacht ich mir nur "Oha da kommt was großes mit dem "Revolution".
Aber sowas wie jetzt hätte ich damals nie erwartet.

Hat wohl keiner, aber das muss man den Jungs eben lassen, mittlerweile wissen sie genau was sie tun und sie tuns richtig, frei nach Tony Montana in Scarface:

Do it first, do it yourself and keep on doing it!

meine fresse, was für freaks! wer macht sich denn bitte solche gedanken zu dem thema? schon fast unheimlich...

aber interessant oder nicht? Das ist doch das was wir gerade erleben, einfach mal nett zusammengefasst (und n bissl Pathos schadet nie )

 

[Nintenflow]

meine fresse, was für freaks! wer macht sich denn bitte solche gedanken zu dem thema? schon fast unheimlich...

Wieso? Ich finde es gar nicht so ungewöhnlich.
Schon allein wenn man die ganzen "Die Non-Games machen zukünftige Halo`s kaputt" Typen in dei Schranken weißen will is es schon ganz nützlich.

Man merkt aber schon dass der Typ etwas elitär is wenn er den Weinmarkt als metapher verwendet.

 

[RaideeN]

Wieso? Ich finde es gar nicht so ungewöhnlich.
Schon allein wenn man die ganzen "Die Non-Games machen zukünftige Halo`s kaputt" Typen in dei Schranken weißen will is es schon ganz nützlich.

Man merkt aber schon dass der Typ etwas elitär is wenn er den Weinmarkt als metapher verwendet.

ja, nicht wahr? schlürf...

 

[RaideeN]

das nintendo profit machen muss(was natürlich auch eine kapitalistische grundvoraussetzung ist), liegt wohl auch daran, dass iwata vom yamauchi das förmlich in den kopf geprügelt bekommen hat.

und wer würde yamauchi schon widersprechen?

 

[Nihilist]

Man merkt aber schon dass der Typ etwas elitär is wenn er den Weinmarkt als metapher verwendet.

hehe, das hat er aus dem BLUE OCEAN Buch das er so gerne zitiert

 

[City_Hunter]

Hat wohl keiner, aber das muss man den Jungs eben lassen, mittlerweile wissen sie genau was sie tun und sie tuns richtig, frei nach Tony Montana in Scarface:

Do it first, do it yourself and keep on doing it!

Trifft grob und ganzen auf die Firmenpolitik Nintendo's!
Anfang Juli kann man passend auf Wii seine Kettensäge ölen... :wink4:

Seit der Zeit als das Unternehmen noch Karten produziert hat, kamen anschließend die ersten Arcade-Automaten und das erste Handeld überhaupt (Game&Watch) von Big-N heraus.

Danach, als man sich im eigenen Land etwas etablieren konnte fing der Siegeszug - elektronisches Entertainment auch für die eigenen vier Wände bereit zu stellen - mit dem Nintendo Unterhaltungs System allmählich an.
Der gute uralte und immer noch laufende Gameboy gab dem Ganzen den Rest und es ist alles geschichtlich fest verankert...

Ich denke die Generation, welche damals was mit diesem neuartigen Medium anfangen konnten, werden's nie vergessen und auch wenn sie (wie ich z.B.) die letzte (PS-)Generation im Videospiel-Buisness übersprungen haben.
In der laufenden Lage zollen wahrscheinlich viele Gamer der alten Garde ihren Tribut an Nintendo, da sie mich z.B. zumindest wieder für mein etwas vernachlässigtes Hobby begeistern konnten.

Der Grund war nicht der Gamecube, sondern schlicht und ergreifend der sang und klanlose Niedergang der besten und visionärsten Konsole in meinen Augen: der prägende Dreamcast.
Ich war wirklich entsetzt, wie einfach es ist mit großen, vollmundigen Versprechungen sein Produkt zu vermarken und solche, die nicht die Möglichkeiten dazu haben... einfach in den Boden eingestampft werden...

Marketing ist alles, aber letztendlich ist doch der persönliche Geschmack wichtig und wenn ich mir von klugen Köpfen der PR-Abteilung irgendwas aufschwatzen lasse, ist mein Urteilsvermögen wohl schon flöten gegangen!

Um wieder zurück zu Nintendo zu kommen: Neben Sega war schon immer Big-N die Vorreiter in Sachen Home Entertainment Devices und aktuell beiweisen letztere mit dem NDS und Wii diesen Status eindrucksvoll.

Und es dürfte auch jeden Sehgeschächten bewusst sein, dass der Erfolg nicht der überlegenen Hardware zu verdanken ist, sondern der Aufwand neue Käuferschichten zu erreichen und frischen Wind in die Videospiel-Industrie reinzubringen.

Ein Großteil dieser Entwicklung ist sicherlich Iwata-San zu zu schreiben. Ich nehme an er vergnügte sich schon lange Zeit mit Nintendo Produkten und verfolgte deren Verlauf mit Argus-Augen und wachem Geist!

Nachdem der GC sich dem Kommerz geschlagen geben musste, war ihm sofort klar, dass es in einer anderen Richtung weitergehen muss - denn alle die jetzt aufgrund der schwache Leistung des Wii ihr Mund aufreißen, hatten zuvor kaum Gelgenheit dazu, da Nintendo's Heim-Systeme nie das Schlusslicht gebildet haben...

Und als er sich endlich bis zur Führungsposition im Ninten-Dojo voran gearbeitet hat, setzte er mit dem NDS den ersten Gang zum Imagewandel in Bewegung - was natürlich den Kompromiss in der technischen Ausführung nach sich ziehe.

Für mich sind Hardware-Updates nebensächlich, wenn's danach gehe würde ich im PC-Bereich mein dasein fristen, aber mir geht es um die leidenschaftliche Idee, welches hinter gewagten Projekten im doch etablierten Gamesmarkt stecken.

Das ist unter anderem ein sehr trifftiger Grund, wieso ich hinter Nintedo stehe. Sie sind mit Sega die einzigsten Spielehersteller für mich, die nicht nur schwarze Zahlen groß schreiben, sondern vor allem eine Philosophie verfolgen, woraus letztendlich der Spieler letztendlich womöglich mehr was davon hat, als die eigene Kasse.
- Das merkt man stark an der New-Generation von Nintendo Systemen...

Abschließend hoffe ich, dass das Risiko-reiche Unterfangen seitens des traditionellen Unternehmens nicht aufgrund von Ignoranz und Schwarzmalerei untergeht, sondern alle bewandten und auch potentielle Gamer der Welt die Gelegenheit haben werden - elektronisch Unterhaltung mit anderen Augen zu betrachten...
:smile2: :cyclop: :eek6: :love5: :happy2: