Play Nintendo - Announcing Nintendo @ E3 2014

[azoo]

I'm not really giving three dinguses about what the press sees Nintendo as (whether they conformed for it or not they still would've been undermined).

 

They got the crowd's attention to their online announcements thanks to the Tomadachi & Smash Directs as well as the Mega64 video. Regardless of having a physical presence at E3 for their presentation, they now have their own playing field; now all they gotta do is give people things worth talking about and it'll spread, especially on the show floor whenever they have their games up and running.

 

I too think they should've tried for a showfloor conference, but all the positive reception of these things building up to this point would actually be an ingenious move if they had enough goods to back it up.

[Mando-Whirl-Wind]

Honestly, I LIKE the fact that Nintendo is willing to mess around with the E3 format, the fact that they are shows that they are willing to be creative and inventive, and try to connect to the consumer, I mean this year they have even split it into four in depth and effective Segments:
A) Reveals: Nintendo Digital Event, allowing for a clear and unfiltered way to communicate the information
B )In Depth information and analysis on up and coming titles(Treehouse)

C) Connecting to the fanbase: The first ever nintendo hosted SSB Tourney, in a massive auditorium with hundreds of people, both press and the consumer present

D)Consumer experience: Playable Smash at Best Buys around the country allows more to have an open and free way to play

[VO.SUPER]

The Smash Bros. Direct was delivered by that game's director, and delved into the inner mechanics of the game, as well as its features. I absolutely loved it and want them to continue doing these kinds of videos, but an E3 Direct is fundamentally different in its presentation - while Charizard and the new modes featured were great surprises for the audience (Smash fans who came in knowing exactly what they wanted to see) that got the game trending at a time when there was nothing else to compete with for audience attention, expectations will be vastly different at E3.

 

Nintendo can't dwell on the features of any particular game for an extended period of time during an E3 presentation because they have to focus on making headlines and appealing to as many people as possible. All attempts to give this kind of presentation via Direct in the past have been rather lackluster and unfortunately not drawn much attention, and as such I'm not sure it's a good medium for them to get a substantial amount of attention. 

 

It's easy to get a big game trending on a random week in April, but doing so during E3, alongside tons of other games from dozens of developers, is a completely different task. Furthermore, as much as people hate the "boring politics" of E3... it's a press show at heart, and always has been. E3 isn't PAX or Comic Con. It's not an open convention focused directly on us. It's a closed event for the press that allows these companies to deliver their vision product pitches to the world - very similar to the conventions Apple and Google do for their own products. Playing the game so differently is detrimental to Nintendo's image because it gives the impression that they don't care to compete. They're the odd one out, and as such, are easy to brush off and brand irrelevant. 

 

There's a time and place for everything, and while I think the Smash Direct was nothing short of brilliant (in fact I'd love for Sony and Microsoft to follow suit with their games), I don't believe E3 is the time for it. They need to be confident and take their competitors head on to really raise investor and consumer confidence in them as a company, but they see themselves as above that. Their loss if it doesn't pay off, but I guess we'll see how it works out soon.

 

Edit - If you want an example of what people want and expect from a great show - Nintendo E3 2010. 

 

This isn't your standard E3 presentation though. This is a Nintendo controlled event which they do not have to share with anyone else, they don't have to share the space of this direct with stock information or other such nonsense. They control the time and information that gets out, so they are not playing the same game as Sony or Microsoft in this case, they don't have to follow that rule on headlines at all.

 

The press conferences they focus with investors and keep the gamers out of it so it's no big loss that those two portions are separating. Also, take into consideration that E3 is closed doors to the public, the majority of us will be looking at streams anyways. It's no different except that the press will also be watching a stream. 

 

And we've heard nothing of what Sony or Microsoft have planned for E3 yet aside from the usual conference, so Nintendo has the slight advantage by promoting this different turn of events far ahead of time. You can at least say no one will be caught off guard by this.

[PSI Wind]

Also, the Direct is shown to journalists at the Nokia theater without any lag whatsoever.

[VO.SUPER]

Also, the Direct is shown to journalists at the Nokia theater without any lag whatsoever.

 

It is? Then what makes this different from a press conference other than the men not standing on stage and no charts and business.

[Sami]

This isn't your standard E3 presentation though. This is a Nintendo controlled event which they do not have to share with anyone else, they don't have to share the space of this direct with stock information or other such nonsense. They control the time and information that gets out, so they are not playing the same game as Sony or Microsoft in this case, they don't have to follow that rule on headlines at all.

 

The press conferences they focus with investors and keep the gamers out of it so it's no big loss that those two portions are separating. Also, take into consideration that E3 is closed doors to the public, the majority of us will be looking at streams anyways. It's no different except that the press will also be watching a stream. 

 

And we've heard nothing of what Sony or Microsoft have planned for E3 yet aside from the usual conference, so Nintendo has the slight advantage by promoting this different turn of events far ahead of time. You can at least say no one will be caught off guard by this.

 

Well, yeah. That's the problem though, isn't it? 

 

They're playing a completely different game from Microsoft and Sony's, and that, in my opinion, reflects poorly on them. I don't personally see this as some revolutionary way to break new ground in the methods by which this content is delivered, I think it's just another instance of Nintendo being weird and different because they don't want to compete. 

 

If they were truly confident in their output and presentation, they would jump in toe to toe against their competitors, fighting for attention with all they've got. Instead, they're off doing something completely different, ignoring the fact that people have been calling for them to do an actual conference all year. 

 

 

Also, the Direct is shown to journalists at the Nokia theater without any lag whatsoever.

 

Did you not hear the complaints about it from the press last year? Giant Bomb in particular described standing in a crowded room full of sweaty, tired reporters staring at a single TV screen running a laggy stream. It wasn't a good experience for anybody.

 

Granted, they'll hopefully do a better job this year, but it's still in no way preferable to their 2010 conference.

[PSI Wind]

Could've sworn I read that on GAF.

[VO.SUPER]

Well, yeah. That's the problem though, isn't it? 

 

They're playing a completely different game from Microsoft and Sony's, and that, in my opinion, reflects poorly on them. I don't personally see this as some revolutionary way to break new ground in the methods by which this content is delivered, I think it's just another instance of Nintendo being weird and different because they don't want to compete. 

 

If they were truly confident in their output and presentation, they would jump in toe to toe against their competitors, fighting for attention with all they've got. Instead, they're off doing something completely different, ignoring the fact that people have been calling for them to do an actual conference all year. 

 

 

 

Did you not hear the complaints about it from the press last year? Giant Bomb in particular described standing in a crowded room full of sweaty, tired reporters staring at a single TV screen running a laggy stream. It wasn't a good experience for anybody.

 

Granted, they'll hopefully do a better job this year, but it's still in no way preferable to their 2010 conference.

That really comes down to how you perceive things then. You think it's bad that they don't want to compete, but you really haven't been watching much Nintendo since the Wii started if you think that's a new concept. And to say it reflects a lack of confidence isn't very fair. I bet even if Nintendo had the best output of materials they wouldn't have a conference. 

 

I think you're being a little too traditional man. 

 

As for the stream, you are not really saying how it's preferable. Especially if the stream avoids lag this year. The men aren't there along with the charts. Not much else.

 

(Oh, and sweaty tired reporters? Really? Not like any conference didn't lack those.)

[KHCast]

I'm a bit curious as to why the 3DS version will not be available at the Best Buy's. That's the version that's coming out first,(most likely a month or so after E3 would be my guess) So wouldn't they also want to show off that version as well so interest rises for it and more people potentially will want to also buy that?

[Mando-Whirl-Wind]

I'm a bit curious as to why the 3DS version will not be available at the Best Buy's. That's the version that's coming out first,(most likely a month or so after E3 would be my guess) So wouldn't they also want to show off that version as well so interest rises for it and more people potentially will want to also buy that?

Cause the wii-u is not only the better version, but its also the system that needs a MAJOR sales boost

[KHCast]

Cause the wii-u is not only the better version, but its also the system that needs a MAJOR sales boost

And you can raise interest in the Wii U version still. I'm not saying only show the 3DS one, I'm saying why not have both? That way people can play both versions, and see which one they like the most. 

[Sami]

That really comes down to how you perceive things then. You think it's bad that they don't want to compete, but you really haven't been watching much Nintendo since the Wii started if you think that's a new concept. And to say it reflects a lack of confidence isn't very fair. I bet even if Nintendo had the best output of materials they wouldn't have a conference. 

 

I think you're being a little too traditional man. 

 

As for the stream, you are not really saying how it's preferable. Especially if the stream avoids lag this year. The men aren't there along with the charts. Not much else.

 

(Oh, and sweaty tired reporters? Really? Not like any conference didn't lack those.)

 

The Nokia Theater is specifically designed to house hundreds of people, dude. There are actual seats and enough space to sit relatively comfortably. If it was nothing different they wouldn't have gone out of their way to describe it as a particularly miserable experience.

 

It's preferable to hold an actual conference because it shows that they are confident in their products and their output. This is how these events have always been held, not just for gaming, but for consumer electronics in general. E3 is a time to show what your brand is about. What the next year has in store for your company, and why consumers and investors alike should have confidence in your ability to deliver what they want.

 

Google:

 

 

 

Apple:

 

Sony:

 

 

 

Microsoft:

 

 

 

... And Nintendo:

 

It's a problem because year after year, Nintendo is fading into irrelevance. Less consumers are buying their products, and less people are actually caring about what they're doing. They need confidence and swagger to show that they know what they're doing, have a clear vision for the future, and have enough faith in themselves to take their competitors head on. Completely ignoring what people want them to do, as well as what their competitors are doing, does not give this impression. It arguably does the exact opposite.

[PSI Wind]

So, now we've moved on from who has the bigger e-peen in terms of their trophies or gamerscore to a real life version involving crowds?

[Sami]

So, now we've moved on from who has the bigger e-peen in terms of their trophies or gamerscore to a real life version involving crowds?

 

Sure, if you cover your ears, completely ignore the point being made, and try to be snarky about it.

[PSI Wind]

I'm not trying to ignore it. It seriously feels like that to me. 

[VO.SUPER]

So suddenly, their confidence is tied to how Nintendo works with their competitors? 

 

Dude, just accept the fact that Nintendo is not like Sony and Microsoft, and they've been leaning away from that sort of thing for years now. They've always had their own way of doing things not out of cowardice, but because they are quirky, stubborn, and looking to be different. 

 

Nintendo's been on this downward trend of irrelevance since they were struggling with the SNES, or the N64, or the GCN, even the Wii. Nintendo's consoles may fluctuate between failures and success, one console is not the company, or the brand, and the Wii U's irrelevance isn't reflective of the future, just like how the GCN wasn't reflective of the Wii.

[Sami]

I'm not trying to ignore it. It seriously feels like that to me. 

 

This isn't a new development... it really shouldn't come as a surprise that brand perception and image is extremely relevant in business. There are entire courses of study revolving around it. You do know that, right?

 

So suddenly, their confidence is tied to how Nintendo works with their competitors? 

 

Dude, just accept the fact that Nintendo is not like Sony and Microsoft, and they've been leaning away from that sort of thing for years now. They've always had their own way of doing things not out of cowardice, but because they are quirky, stubborn, and looking to be different. 

 

Nintendo's been on this downward trend of irrelevance since they were struggling with the SNES, or the N64, or the GCN, even the Wii. Nintendo's consoles may fluctuate between failures and success, one console is not the company, or the brand, and the Wii U's irrelevance isn't reflective of the future, just like how the GCN wasn't reflective of the Wii.

 

... I have no idea what point you're trying to make. Of course any company's mainline product is reflective of their brand at present and moving forward. What else are we supposed to base our predictions on? I myself have said that the Wii is proof that this approach can pay off, but is a very risky one. Segregating themselves so fiercely from the industry as a whole makes it hard to have a consistent market. The more they further themselves from the games market, the less that market will find them relevant to their needs. As a result, if their product doesn't catch on with another market like the Wii did, they're left with nothing. In my opinion, they should be using this time to really fight for the attention of the audience they once had way back then, if only so that by the time they announce a new product, the perception of their brand will be more positive than it is now.

 

Nintendo, ever since the launch of the 3DS, has been extremely reactionary, slow to act, and unclear with what their vision for their brand is moving forward. The brevity with which Iwata concocted Quality of Life as the brave new frontier for the company reflects this. 

 

I don't want Nintendo to be Sony or Microsoft. I want them to be strong, competitive, and confident. Like they were in the 80's and 90's. Consistently running away from the competition is not reflective of confidence, but possibly quite the contrary. Iwata just doesn't have the swagger and shrewd business sense of Yamauchi before him - this much is clear merely by observing the tenacity with which they competed with Sony in the 5th Generation in comparison to how they do so now.

 

This is, of course, not an all encompassing point only relevant to the means with which they deliver their presentation for E3, but it is an important gesture that is a major factor in how people perceive them, along other things.

[VO.SUPER]

... I have no idea what point you're trying to make. Of course any company's mainline product is reflective of their brand at present and moving forward. What else are we supposed to base our predictions on? I myself have said that the Wii is proof that this approach can pay off, but is a very risky one. Segregating themselves so fiercely from the industry as a whole makes it hard to have a consistent market. The more they further themselves from the games market, the less that market will find them relevant to their needs. As a result, if their product doesn't catch on with another market like the Wii did, they're left with nothing. In my opinion, they should be using this time to really fight for the attention of the audience they once had way back then, if only so that by the time they announce a new product, the perception of their brand will be more positive than it is now.

 

Nintendo, ever since the launch of the 3DS, has been extremely reactionary, slow to act, and unclear with what their vision for their brand is moving forward. The brevity with which Iwata concocted Quality of Life as the brave new frontier for the company reflects this. 

 

I don't want Nintendo to be Sony or Microsoft. I want them to be strong, competitive, and confident. Like they were in the 80's and 90's. Consistently running away from the competition is not reflective of confidence, but possibly quite the contrary. Iwata just doesn't have the swagger and shrewd business sense of Yamauchi before him - this much is clear merely by observing the tenacity with which they competed with Sony in the 5th Generation in comparison to how they do so now.

 

This is, of course, not an all encompassing point only relevant to the means with which they deliver their presentation for E3, but it is an important gesture that is a major factor in how people perceive them, along other things.

 

My point is that this isn't a sign of cowardice for them to do this. And it isn't necessarily a bad thing. This approach has only been experimented with once, using one bad streaming service which hampered a less than pleasant experience. You have no grounds to say how this will affect Nintendo's relevance in the long run. In all honesty, if it proved to be such a haphazard method that didn't prove worthwhile to attempt again, Nintendo wouldn't have tried again. When they dump a bad approach that is losing them money and viewers, they dump it fast to focus on the next. 

 

Yes, they've been slow and unclear, but that's just what the problem is. They are unclear with what they want or hope to even accomplish. The Wii was different, because Nintendo knew what they wanted and squeezed the Wii for what they wanted. Yes, it foregoed the fans, but they weren't focusing on fans back then, but focusing on the new market they cornered. They intended to replicate that with the Wii U and 3DS, but when both those showed signs of sinking, they had to basically think of a new approach on the spot, and this isn't something that is done quickly, general. If anything, this second approach to the conferenceless direct is a sign that they are still unclear. 

 

Experiments aren't necessarily a sign of them not being confident, even if you want to perceive it like that. In fact, it's a sign of them wanting to find something that works with what they want. Is it different, yes. But it's too soon to know if this approach is bad when it's only been applied once so far. This industry changes in strange ways, the Wii proved it, and we won't know for sure what this Direct will accomplish until it airs and the damage has been done.

[Kaze no Klonoa]

Wow. That video was hilarious.

 

While I do wish Nintendo could had done a simple confrence, i'm totally up for a chance to play smash bros at best buy. But it's normally around the time I have to do big tests, so it's highly unlikely

[Marcello]

It's a problem because year after year, Nintendo is fading into irrelevance. Less consumers are buying their products, and less people are actually caring about what they're doing. They need confidence and swagger to show that they know what they're doing, have a clear vision for the future, and have enough faith in themselves to take their competitors head on. Completely ignoring what people want them to do, as well as what their competitors are doing, does not give this impression. It arguably does the exact opposite.

 

They seem to be confident with this, though. They also seem to have the clear vision that doing E3 directly for the consumer is the best way to go.

 

"What people want them to do" doesn't matter when the people mostly clinging to it being live are a minority. Nintendo didn't "lose" E3 simply because they had a Direct (Which, by the way, we're not getting this time. Nintendo is calling it a Digital Event and are saying they're building from their ideas from last year) over a live conference, they lost because Sony and Microsoft had the bigger things to show (Their new consoles with their games). Nintendo still got coverage from the media and their NA stream had a live viewership of 1.5+ million. If Nintendo has a great lineup this year it then they'll get recognition for it. If they don't, it's not because it's not live.

[Sami]

They seem to be confident with this, though. They also seem to have the clear vision that doing E3 directly for the consumer is the best way to go.

 

"What people want them to do" doesn't matter when the people mostly clinging to it being live are a minority. Nintendo didn't "lose" E3 simply because they had a Direct (Which, by the way, we're not getting this time. Nintendo is calling it a Digital Event and are saying they're building from their ideas from last year) over a live conference, they lost because Sony and Microsoft had the bigger things to show (Their new consoles with their games). Nintendo still got coverage from the media and their NA stream had a live viewership of 1.5+ million. If Nintendo has a great lineup this year it then they'll get recognition for it. If they don't, it's not because it's not live.

 

Are you implying that last year's show was a bad lineup? Because the entire following year saw arguments about arguments over whether or not they were "actually at E3". 

 

Maybe this approach will pay off. I'm not trying argue that the absence of a live conference will result in instant failure, I'm just saying that it doesn't currently reflect well on them. Whether or not this is actually truly different from last year (which also saw big show floor demos and a Best Buy campaign) remains to be seen, and if so, I'll concede that point.

[Marcello]

I liked the line up last year. But, remember, right from the start 3D World got crap for not being Galaxy 3 (Not literally Galaxy 3, but you know what I mean. I think :/) and DK for being DK. More importantly, I think, they got overshadowed by the fact that it was PS4 and XBO's first E3.

 

And, yeah it might reflect badly on them thanks to game journalist being game journalists and reporting that Nintendo is skipping E3 despite that not being true. If they did their job right instead of going for the sensationalist article titles, things would be better.

 

That said, the people questioning whether or not Nintendo was there were a minority. Most people just check sites for news. They don't care about the rest. So both ways can work if you ask me, but the digital route is surely cheaper.

[VO.SUPER]

Are you implying that last year's show was a bad lineup? Because the entire following year was saw arguments about arguments over whether or not they were "actually at E3". 

 

Maybe this approach will pay off. I'm not trying argue that the absence of a live conference will result in instant failure, I'm just saying that it doesn't currently reflect well on them. Whether or not this is actually truly different from last year (which also saw big show floor demos and a Best Buy campaign) remains to be seen, and if so, I'll concede that point.

 

And I'll concede mine if it becomes another complain fest again, because I fully acknowledge that the experience last year was less than adequate. I'm just willing to give Nintendo the benefit of a doubt thanks to the recent Smash Direct being able to drum up a presence with a new and improved set of streaming options. So I want to see how that can play out, now that the new consoles are out and their hype has normalized; and with (hopefully) a stronger line up of reveals than last years. I'm also hoping this Smash event will help to draw more viewership in on the potential of their new game. Yeah, I am worried about many of the things you are, about irrelevance and all, but Nintendo pulls off strange things. However, I will never believe that Nintendo is doing this out of cowardice; they are anything but. They are stubborn mules that look for a thousand different ways to extort an old audience before moving on to a new.

 

Edit: (And mind you; I don't think that stubbornness is a good quality.)

[Blacklightning]

I think we can at least all agree that Nintendo will probably be the only hardware dev not hyping up their conferences with dubstep, and that they'll probably be better off for it.

 

Is that E3 Abridged guy still around? I can't wait to hear from him again.

[Ming Ming Hatsune]

While I liked Nintendo's video (something unique for the upcoming E3 as well!) I do not like Nintendo's approach on going Directs during E3.

 

E3 is all about live conferences from gaming publishers and console developers, this is traditional. There is this "charm" when I watch live conferences that I like...

 

Yes there is unnecessary dubstep, Usher and crew singing during a Xbox event, dry jokes and all that but let's not forget the live demos (which are the best part of the conference), the audience reactions, the stage presentations...this will all be missing in Nintendo Direct.

 

Speaking of Nintendo Direct in E3, it is nothing..."special" about it compared to other Directs we have monthly. Except this E3 Direct introduce new games.

 

When I discussed this with my college friends, they again think Nintendo copped out. That may not be true, but that's the message getting across.

 

Also last year was terrible for me. Absolutely terrible. One awesome thing about the live conferences is that if one feed (say GameTrailers) isn't working for me, at least I can switch to another one like IGN's which will work better for me.

 

For Nintendo, there's only one live stream for the Direct. ONE. Most likely UStream as well. When a million people try to connect to the same stream, it can lag terribly on my side and just ruin it for me. Then have no choice to avoid all gaming sites (can't join the SSMB conversation), Facebook and even turn off my phone (friends text me) until the Direct is up in Youtube or the UStream allows replays. And that pissed me off.

 

I certainly do not want that experience again. Otherwise I'll just ignore Nintendo Directs altogether throughout E3 in future.