Without Iwata, what does the future hold for Nintendo?

Today the world lost a visionary leader, one who saw that games could be more than just mindless shooters built for teenage boys, and led the charge in bringing them to a far wider audience. With the launch of the DS and Wii, Satoru Iwata oversaw one of the most successful periods in Nintendo history, transforming games into things that didn't just entertain you, but that could improve your brain, and keep you physically fit.

[Abash]

Their plans for the future were already in motion before Iwata's death

[Neonridr]

agreed, if the man was battling cancer, much like Apple with Steve Jobs, they would have already had some plans in place in case of this outcome.

Sad to see him go, but I will be very interested to see who takes over and what new directions they take Nintendo.

like the Master Sword in Zelda, go and sleep Mr. Iwata... There will be a time for your magic once again, but for now, you rest.

[miyamoto]

Nintendo still has Shigeru Miyamoto.
Nuff said.

[porkChop]

I think Nintendo will be alright. They've got a new platform to launch, and will likely learn from their mistakes with the Wii U. Iwata was starting to really turn things around for Nintendo, and no doubt laid the groundwork for their future.

[curtis92]

Forgive the timing of this skepticism, and with ALL due respect, but what do you define as "Starting to turn things around"?

[KonsoruMasuta]

They're launching a new platform.

They made a deal with DeNA and are producing games for mobile platforms, something highly requested by investors. This move may not seem positive to hardcore gamers (even I don't like the idea), but it will probably be an extremely profitable venture in the future.

They're also expanding their brand and licensing out with companies like Universal and Disney.

[N4g_null]

Clearly their games are still great. It's just people believe the specs are not. A new platform and way to play and account system could surly be a turn around.

[jay2]

While nothing will change, if they want 3rd party support they need on-par hardware, don't expect that any time soon. but other plans are already set in stone, they'll continue.

[ABizzel1]

They don't need "on par hardware". They need architecturally similar and good enough hardware.

If the NX is a console and not a hybrid then they'll be off the same launch cycle as Sony and MS, which is the best thing for them (launch when PS and Xbox gamers are fully dived into their console and looking for something new).

It also means technology has jumped at least 1 generation since launch of the PS and Xbox console which means it's cheaper to get good hardware at a better price than the PS or Xbox console had.

That's the case with Nintendo here.

In 2013, the $399 price got you just under 2 TFLOPS of performance (PS4), and the $349 got you just under 1.5 TFLOPS of performance (XBO).

Well by 2016 / 2017 that's a generation jump, and similar PS4 hardware is now around $299 give or take, and XBO similar hardware in around the $279 mark.

Nintendo could also go with a completely entry level price of $199 and have a mighty little APU in there like an A10 7700 and have nearly 800 GFLOPS of performance (just under 2/3 the XBO) and get 3rd party support, have more than enough power for first party games, and have a price that reaches a mass appeal audience Day 1.

If I were them that's what I would do. It's playing it safe, but it's also playing to their greatest strength being a fun, affordable, gaming console for Everyone.

[OtakuDJK1NG-Rory]

Can we not worry about that now.

[superchiller]

He was an enormous force in the direction of the company, the premise of the article seems like a legitimate question.

[OtakuDJK1NG-Rory]

I know that. But at least let Nintendo have a week before talking about their future.

[ShrektheHulk]

that's not how businesses work. now, more than a week ago, they need to think about the future, both for their company's sake and to honor the memory of the man who worked so hard to keep the business running.

[OtakuDJK1NG-Rory]

It better for Nintendo to take their time to find their new leader. Taking on the job of a CEO isnt going to be easy for many folks at Nintendo.

[Antifan]

Hopefully more core games, less gimmicks.

[stragomccloud]

You say gimmick, I say innovations. All innovations were considered gimmicks at one point. Nintendo's dpad was a gimmick. Shoulder buttons were gimmicks. So was rumble. Heck, even Sega's analog stick was first considered a gimmick. Gimmick is just a dirty word used by people who don't understand the value of something.

[ShinMaster]

But not all gimmicks were innovations.

The D-pad was never considered a gimmick and neither were the shoulder buttons. Try again. They came about out of necessity and as a natural progression. They weren't impractical...

And they weren't the first to do rumble.

[stragomccloud]

I'll repeat. "Gimmick is just a dirty word used by people who don't understand the value of something."

Many have not understood the value of the innovations because too many "gamers" damn any kind of innovation or any ideas that break too far from the mold. It's human nature to be ignorant of what one doesn't understand, and to be fearful of change. Sadly, too many are incapable of evolving their sensibilities and understanding beyond their narrow walls of backwards thinking.

[JunMei]

There was nothing natural about the dpad or shoulder buttons. It was truly out of the box thinking. Anyway, most people make up their mind about Nintendo hardware, long before they actually try any of their products. It's hive mind mentality. It's popular to hate them, and countless people who call themselves gamers childishly and blindly follow suit like sheep following their shepherd.

[Neonridr]

when did the word gimmick ever represent something bad?

Go look up the word in the dictionary:

an ingenious or novel device, scheme, or stratagem, especially one designed to attract attention or increase appeal.

gimmicks are not bad, they are something new or different.

[ShinMaster]

@ JunMei

You kidding? The addition of shoulder buttons felt like a natural progression. Your fingers rest on the controller's shoulders without much effort. It was practical. It didn't get in the way.

Using the GamePad's touchscreen, for example, requires you to move, not just your fingers, but your whole hand in order to use it, while taking your eyes of the screen. It's a slower process.

The Wii Remote lacked buttons. Forced games to have either simplified controls or rely on the motion sensor. Have you played Other M?

[stragomccloud]

Oh my god! Gasp! You have to move your hand! I can't believe it! How dare they make you move your hand a few centimeters! That said, most of the time it's just being used for maps and quick select. Quick select items are always within thumb reach.

Anyway, the ones disagreeing are further proving my initial argument. Also, people like you made your decision long before actually spending real time with the Wii U. Thank god Nintendo still makes stellar software for the device even though people like you guys are so incapable of enjoying it. I truly pity you.

[ShinMaster]

"Oh my god! Gasp! You have to move your hand! I can't believe it!"
lol Calm down, no need to be so defensive. Do you honestly think the touchscreen is on equal terms as the should buttons?

"Quick select items are always within thumb reach"
I understand what you're saying. But if that was always the case, we wouldn't have much of an issue. We all know that's not the use of the screen that Nintendo is trying to push. No game was ever hindered by quick item selection.

Got nothing on the Wii Remote then? My point still stands.

Also I have a Wii and have owned a Wii U since the WWHD bundle came out and been playing it ever since.
Not every fan of Nintendo is a blind as you.

[stragomccloud]

I think you are the one being defensive about physical problems reaching buttons. I do think tiouch screens add as much as butons, because the layout and information for the buttons is not static. and let it be known, that I am a PC gamer first and foremost. The other consoles offer nothing but gaming laptop hardware and basically the same controller we've been using for 10-15 years. The Wii U is the only console that is offering something new and innovative.

I do think that the Wii remote was a good idea; however, the thing needed more buttons. And the first iteration of the device wasn't very great unless it was for FPSs that used the IR.

I'm not blind to flaws. I'm just open to new ideas and control schemes in a community of backwards people who want forever to keep things exactly the same by constantly insulting innovative and new ideas.

[ShinMaster]

"nothing but gaming laptop hardware"
Ok, you cannot use this line while defending the Wii U.

That said, just because Nintendo did something new or different with its controller, doesn't mean that it is practical.

And while the GamePad has added a new way to play on consoles, it has brought on more obstacles than solutions as well.
When they force second screen gameplay other than menu options/map/items/inventory, etc, we start to see the hit that the game takes performance-wise and the toll on the Wii U hardware, as apparent by Star Fox Zero.
The Wii U is supposed to be a bit more powerful than the 360 and PS3. That game should not be looking like that after so many years.
But wait, there's more!

They're forcing you to aim by looking through the first-person view on the GamePad and then have to avoid environmental hazards and incoming fire by looking at the third-person camera on the TV. Your accuracy when firing sucks if you only look at the TV. So while you're busy targeting multiple enemies on the GamePad, you could hit an obstacle or get hit by enemy fire that you couldn't see coming. They do things like this simply to justify the controller. This isn't practical or a natural progression of gameplay controls.
There's nothing about it that would only be possible with the GamePad. In other words, there's nothing that wouldn't be easier to do with the Pro controller.

Different isn't always better.

[JunMei]

Actually, I think he/she can use that gaming laptop argument, because Sony and Microsoft and its fans are the ones claiming their product are even close to even a mid range gaming PC. Nintendo has no delusions of grandeur.

While I may agree that different isn't always better, I would say that playing the same things in the same way over and over again is just plain boring.

Rather than fight new and innovative ideas, try experiencing it first. Though, it sounds like you've already made up your mind. Meaning you now have a psychological disposition towards automatically disliking it. You poor soul. It must be terrible living with such prejudgments in your hear. You've truly lost the ability to wonder, dream, and experience.

[ShinMaster]

@ JunMei

If you're going to jump in the conversation, at least take the time to read previous posts.

Whether some fans think XO or PS4 come close to a mid-range PC or not is entirely irrelevant to the subject we were discussing.

Standard controllers are not boring. Don't lie to yourself.
Maybe don't play the same thing over and over? Play a different game in a different genre with different mechanics and you'll see how different your experience is. Some games are a lot more fun than others, regardless of the controller.
What a silly argument. The extremes some people go to. Seriously, if you were already bored of using a normal controller for any game, then you are probably bored of gaming entirely.

No one ever said "Hey, I wanna play my games but with way more cumbersome controls".

And Star Fox Zero further proves my point. Have you even read about it?

If you can't be bothered to look up, I'll just repost what I said above:
They're forcing you to aim by looking through the first-person view on the GamePad and then have to avoid environmental hazards and incoming fire by looking at the third-person camera on the TV. Your accuracy when firing sucks if you only look at the TV. So while you're busy targeting multiple enemies on the GamePad, you could hit an obstacle or get hit by enemy fire that you couldn't see coming. They do things like this simply to justify the controller. This isn't practical or a natural progression of gameplay controls.
There's nothing about it that would only be possible with the GamePad. In other words, there's nothing that wouldn't be easier to do with the Pro controller."

I have owned every freaking Nintendo system including the Wii U. I've experienced it first hand for years now. It's sitting right next to me. I approached it with an open mind, which is why I bought it in the first place.

Maybe you shouldn't jump to the conclusion that because someone disagrees with something you like, they must've made up their minds before even experiencing it first hand. Such a knee-jerk reaction seems a little psychologically disposed, I'd say.

[DillyDilly]

This sucks that this happened. But Nintendo needs new blood making decisions

[MEsoJD]

I very much agree with this. Many of Nintendo's policies/ideology has been stuck in the past. They don't get it or when they do, it's either too late or not enough. This needs to stop with their next console or they might as well go third party.

[DualWielding]

agreed, I feel bad he died, but that doesn't change my opinion that his leadership was holding Nintendo back