Nintendo should not start making games for iOS—yet
Nintendo has unveiled the 2DS. The console is essentially a cheap version of the 3DS, lacking the 3D capabilities and the hinge. From a design perspective, it’s not the prettiest device in the world (the screen alignment is particularly grim), and the clamshell was one of the best things about the DS hardware, protecting the screen and also making it more portable. By contrast, the 2DS looks unwieldy.
That said, I find it curious people are using the 2DS as some kind of proof Nintendo is doomed. Apple pundit John Gruber said on his blog:
It’s $129. I say they should just give in and start making iOS games. They’re not going to win this battle.
This is a nonsensical argument, especially from someone who has a habit of publicly slamming people who’d say anything remotely similar about Apple. I might think the 2DS is ugly and might not be that nice to hold, but that doesn’t make it a dumb idea. It’s cheap and very obviously positioned for holiday sales. It’s $100 cheaper than the cheapest iPod touch (i.e. about half the price), which immediately places it in a totally different market. And it’s pretty clearly a stop-gap—Nintendo doing its usual thing of wringing out the last drops of income from a hardware line before a refresh. We saw the same thing with the Game Boy Advance—although I’d argue the Micro was a smarter-looking device than the 2DS.
After presumably getting some stick online, Gruber elaborated further:
“Isn’t this like telling Apple to give up on hardware and license Mac OS to other PC makers?” numerous readers have asked. Maybe a little, but it’s a bad comparison. The main thing is it never seemed to me — never — that Apple was incapable of producing excellent industry-leading hardware. They just needed focus and better execution. Nintendo, to me, looks incapable of producing handheld hardware that can compete with the iPhone or iPod Touch.
The question is whether Nintendo wants to compete and whether it needs to. Anecdotally, I hear an awful lot of people telling me their kids no longer bother with Nintendo hardware, and instead use iOS devices; similarly, many teen and adult gamers have ditched Nintendo handhelds for smartphones and tablets. Also, Nintendo’s financials of late haven’t looked nearly as rosy as in the past. Still, I also hear from various parties that the 3DS line has sold very well, and that Nintendo is starting to get the message regarding working with indies and pricing games more sensibly. Last year, I figured that rather than leap to iOS, Nintendo really needed to place more emphasis on digital, embrace more devs, and link with the wider world; I still believe that.
Gruber instead made a more common argument for what Nintendo should do:
I think they’re out of the game and might never get back into it. If they can do it, great — where by “do it” I mean produce a device that’s a better buy for $250 or so than an iPod Touch. But I don’t think they can do it. And if they can’t do it, their next best bet is is to expand to making iOS games. I’m not saying drop the DS line and jump to iOS in one fell swoop. But a couple of $9.99 iPhone/iPad games to test the water wouldn’t hurt.
There’s certainly a possibility that with the new iOS games controller APIs, Nintendo could create a custom controller for iOS, giving relevant iOS Nintendo titles the precision that they’d need to not end up being somewhat unplayable on the platform. I still question this as anything but an absolute last resort. For some reason, Gruber either ignores or dismisses that Nintendo is the Apple of the gaming world—it has succeeded through controlling everything, not just through the games it creates. To say Nintendo should create games for iOS is little different from suggesting a less fortunate Apple should rapidly get iLife and iWork on to other platforms. Even testing the water would be an admission of failure, which would damage the brand.
Perhaps Nintendo’s long-term future is as another Sega, crafting games for hardware that it doesn’t make itself. But the 2DS certainly doesn’t make the case this should happen now. Really, it’s what happens next that will seal Nintendo’s fate. What follows the DS line and the Wii U will be critical for the company, and although plenty (including, at times, me) have largely written off the company, Nintendo has also shown in the past how it has the ability to create something new and innovative seemingly from nowhere, thereby securing its survival and success. This sounds rather like a certain other tech company, and is why certain pundits should know better than to entirely dismiss Nintendo’s future chances.
Further reading: Nintendo, by Lukas Mathis.
I don’t think the 2DS is akin to the Micro. We’re probably only about halfway through the 3DS’s lifespan. I think the 2DS is meant to lower the perceived cost of Nintendo’s portable consoles.
Kids will tell their parents that they can get a Nintendo handheld for 130 bucks. Then, in the store, they’ll be upsold to a 3DS for only 40 bucks more (“look, it has an amazing 3D screen, and the hinge will make sure that the screens don’t get scratched when the kid throws it in her backpack!”).
I think that’s one of the 2DS’s main roles.
Also, Nintendo doesn’t need to keep making hardware that sells 100 million units. For the longest time, Nintendo sold hardware that sold 20-60 million units at a small profit, and made tons of money selling software for its hardware. Even if Nintendo doesn’t follow the Wii U with another Wii-type seller, but with another N64-type seller, the company will be fine.
MG Siegler is saying similar things about Nintendo. It really is weird hearing these things from the Apple faithful, who would be saying “you don’t understand their strategy” if the subject were on their usual beat. They really should know better.
You’re dead right about how showing any weakness would dilute their brand. Ten dollar, touch-only apps in the iOS App Store are not the answer, and no one has even asked the right question. Nintendo doesn’t need to “beat” smartphones or iPod Touch devices in volume in order to be successful, no more than BMW needs to sell more cars than Toyota. In case we’ve forgotten, the top-tier Nintendo games still cost $30+ and they last a long time. They aren’t discounted to 99 cents, nor are they given away with subscription bundles (like Playstation +). The cheap 2DS is a means to selling more games, and in my opinion, it’s a perfectly reasonable way to do it.
Nintendo in 2013 is a long way from Sega of 2001 or BlackBerry of the present day. Perhaps they’ll stumble and turn into a software company, but that’s not the only possible outcome. I seriously doubt they’d go down without a fight.
The overall HERP-DERP coming from folks like John Gruber and Garrett Murray is staggering. Up to the point where I’m coming up short trying to explain why two ‘smart’ guys can’t see this scenario for what it is. I can’t believe they aren’t being eviscerated online in the same way they openly mock people for sloppy reporting on Apple’s market reach and financials. Is it too much to ask that they act consistently and hold themselves to the rules they’ve set forth for others? Hypocrites. Maybe Nintendo pivots and maybe they don’t. True, the odds are stacked against them as very few companies can thoroughly disrupt and reinvent themselves strictly through internal means. But to slag off all the details and suggest Nintendo test the water with a 9-10$ iOS title? Stupid and wrong-headed nonsense. App Store prices would kill Nintendo. Lack of a controller would kill Nintendo. Does anyone with a cursory understanding of who and what Nintendo is expect them to turn over their secret sauce game controller experience to someone like Apple? It would be like Apple making Garage Band for Windows.
The “Nintendo should go software only” advocates sound like all those who believe the TV and Film companies should get on board Apple TV, despite having no real need to do so. These other companies see what happened with the music industry and how apps have killed the ability to make healthy margin (unless you cripple your game with freemium – something I’m sick of already and want no part of). Why run to something that may happen, some years down the road?
I thought the 2ds was a wind up, however it seems to strip the expensive parts from the 3ds, allow far greater margin, sit far more comfortably with parents and looks pretty tough, something you’d want in what is a kids toy. Nintendo always sell hardware at a profit, they have a core of 8-10 games that ther fans will come out for and, always come out for. Pokemon X and Y launches the same day as the 2ds, thats the test, thats where we see if they can still shift major amounts of hardware and games.
Oh, if Nintendo do start publishing for ios, I’m sure that they’ll publish some of the games they’ve been licensing lately rather than their own top franchises, you’ll see packages like a pokemon guide etc. rather than the game itself.
@MotherHydra You’ll note I did not, in fact, say Nintendo should start making iOS games. What I said was that Nintendo is building absolutely garbage hardware and that they should consider putting more time and energy into making excellent software, instead of releasing sub-par 2D versions of the 3DS console. The Wii U is a flop—Nintendo has basically destroyed itself in the living room console market for this generation (and, likely, for the next unless they pull a miracle out)—and they can’t make games fast enough to solve the problem. I don’t think it’s “HERP-DERP” to say that Nintendo is headed downhill, and I don’t think it’s stupid to say they need to focus on their core asset which is their game IP.
Most of the commentary I read is, ‘Nintendo is doomed, they need to beat iOS’. I have a phone, the app store sells games at 69p, gaming is quick, easy, cheap. To get in to the Nintendo camp I’d have to buy a 3DS and then shell out £30 a game. I’m not going to give up my phone, so it’s a 2nd device. It seems like a sound argument. I’m 30+, grew up with the SNES.
Again this is a working argument for parents with teenagers. Teenagers want a phone, most 14/15+ year olds have one. Nintendo becomes an extra device… probably for ‘proper’ gamers.
But on a recent holiday I can see exactly where Nintendo’s market is, ‘kids’. A 5 & 8 years old both had DSs. They played on them constantly, and wow – the amount of abuse they dished out! The DS may look a bit ugly but they can take a proper beating. The iPad/iPhone was a treat. One where they had to sit down, hold it properly and not finger smash the screen. Previously they did have a handed down 3GS just for gaming, 1 drop and the screen was cracked (sisters fault but hey).
Parents need a toy they can trust, a £200+ touch that get’s broken in 5 minutes is a lot less attractive than £100 brick with Mario.
The casual cheaper games are still Nintendo’s weakness but if they can sort that their handhelds have strong markets for the 25+ ‘serious’ gamer and pre-11 year olds.
[…] future — some of which have attracted the attention of other noted tech bloggers, including Craig Grannell (a seasoned gamer but also a big Apple fan) and Lukas […]
@Garrett Murray
Give it up. Your comment on Nintendo’s hardware is subjective to your own opinion. I also don’t see why you care what hardware Nintendo releases, because they make more money with their games and least on hardware. Is 2DS, and 3DS for that matter, that much of a threat to iDevices that you’ll go to that length and call their hardware garbage? Why even bother comparing two totally different devices? If you’re going to compare the two, compare them by their games. In this case, iDevices wouldn’t even stand a chance. You can argue that the app store has a large library of games, but it’s full of garbage in comparison to the eShop. I also find it quite interesting how you called the Wii U, that hasn’t even reached its one year mark, a “flop.” Again, you’re looking at it in a different view. Dedicated gaming hardwares’ relevancy are not the same as iDevices. What I mean is that gaming consoles last an average of six to seven years before a new hardware comes out, unlike iDevices that releases every single year. By the time a new console from Nintendo comes out, about six or seven new iDevices already came out. My point is that you shouldn’t make the judge whether a dedicated gaming console is a failure or not base on its first few months. Have you forgotten about the PlayStation 3? The system took at least three years to finally start going. In fact, the Wii U’s initial sales are better than both the PS3 and Xbox 360. Heck, its initial sales are a lot better than the Apple TV. So, are you saying that Apple TV “flop” because its initial sales are lower than the Wii U’s? I’m pretty sure that you would disagree with that. So, why compare these two totally different products for two very different market? Which brings me to my next point: Nintendo is targeting everyone, not just children! Why would they release teen and mature-rated games if their main target market is children? In fact, according to vgchartz, Resident Evil Revelations sold more on the 3DS than those on the home consoles, which proves more points that adults also play the 3DS. I think you should start arguing with facts, rather than opinion.
*sigh* Apple fanboys…