Nintendo’s Little-Known Product Philosophy: Lateral Thinking with Withered (“Weathered”) Technology
Nintendo’s Little-Known Product Philosophy: Lateral Thinking with Withered (“Weathered”) Technology
by AdamOtaku
9 Comments
[deleted]
By little known I assume they mean known by anyone with slightly more than a passing interest in the history of Nintendo.
roto_disc
GUNPEI!!!!!!!!
cheat-master30
And this is also Nintendo’s issue. Being original, thinking laterally, etc… doesn’t always pay off. Circumstances dictate you sometimes have to be more conservative with your ideas, but Nintendo desperately searches for ‘originality’ even when it’s not really needed.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
Am I the only one irritated by the fact that they used Oculus Rift as an example of this theory being applied in modern tech? Yes, it uses a “cheap smart phone screen and a pair of fifty cent lenses,” but that price is hardly mainstream, especially after you factor in the fact that you actually DO need a pretty good computer rig to be able to use it; that $350 turns into $1350. If you want the VR controllers they’re making for it, that’s even more money. Yes, they used cheaper parts for certain things, but that’s hardly the same as the philosophy employed when making the Game Boy.
CleanlyManager
People seem to be confusing innovation with gimmicks. Creating the d pad is innovative, it’s a new EFFECTIVE way to control a game in a similar way that the thumb stick and shoulder buttons were when they were released on the N64 and Super Nintendo respectively. Motion control was a gimmick. How many games today are still using motion control? By the end of the wii’s lifespan most games had you just hold the wiimote like an NES controller or sit still with a wiimote and nun chuck. Motion controls also took away from a lot of games. Skyward sword is a perfect example. The controls only work about 85% of the time. Meanwhile buttons work 100% of the time unless a games programmed poorly. The game pad is a gimmick. Pausing to see a map was never a huge inconvenience that it had to be the main selling point of a console. I say it’s a map screen, because what has the gamepad been used for? There was nothing wrong with mini maps. Why do my eyes have to come off the screen to see the track in a high speed game like mario kart. I can’t even play mario 3d world without having to tap the screen or blow into the microphone. That’s not fun that’s a gimmick. The only game in my opinion to effectively use the gamepad has been pikmin 3. That’s innovative. It took the gameplay from pikmin 1 and 2 and added features that helped the game play smoother and allowed fora more effective way to play the game. If third parties supported the wii u a little better we might actually see a good RTS on console. That’s the only real use I see out of the game pad however.
Innovation also isn’t exclusive to hardware, we also can see it in gameplay. Super Mario bros wrote the book on making a 2d platformer and then they did it again with the 3d platformer with mario 64. Zelda practically invented open world games. Mario 64 invented a way to control a camera in a 3d space to allow for more freedom of movement. Pikmin had 100 + 3d models walking on screen each with their own AI with little to no slow down. Ocarina of time created a targeting system that is used in almost every 3d game to this day. I can go on but I think the point is clear.
We also need to stop acting like Nintendo is the only company that has ever innovated in video games. One could even argue that Sony and Microsoft have innovated more than nintendo when it comes to innovation in modern gaming. The dual shock controller perfected the video game controller and created a standard for all controllers afterward. Don’t believe me, just look at all of the controllers available today, they all have 4 face buttons, start, select (although select is being phased out), a d-pad, 2 joysticks, and 4 shoulder buttons. How many consoles are using memory cards? The Xbox was the first console to put a hard drive in for memory. Playing games online is also fun, Xbox popularized online gaming on consoles. Nintendo isn’t a synonym for innovation, they just do it a lot but limiting your consoles hardware for gimmicks isn’t innovative.
GVman
As someone that took part in engineering back in high school (and now mentors and interns in similar fields), Nintendo’s philosophy is one I’ve always found to be inspiring. Innovation is a tough thing to do, but so is refining and re-interpreting something that’s already been developed and (seemingly) run its course. I’m not gonna pretend like more power isn’t necessary for new game consoles, but the problem arises when there’s too *much* power; where’s the challenge then? Where’s the restrictions that give way to clever thinking or programming, where’s the neat tricks that could only come from knowing a system so well, you(informal) know how to break it without **breaking** it?
MrWiizard
I like how the article doesn’t even mention the concept by its true name and rather tries (and fails) to come up with its own… The Blue Ocean concept is something Nintendo’s used and talked about for so long, this article and its perceived originality hurt my brain
DigRatChild
Ahh, Gunpei Yokoi. Miyamoto had the dreams, the ambitions, the ideas. Iwata was a programming genius, with a great attitude to boot. And Yokoi was a hardware wizard and ruled over the company with an iron fist. Together, these 3 men shaped Nintendo into something amazing.
9 Comments
By little known I assume they mean known by anyone with slightly more than a passing interest in the history of Nintendo.
GUNPEI!!!!!!!!
And this is also Nintendo’s issue. Being original, thinking laterally, etc… doesn’t always pay off. Circumstances dictate you sometimes have to be more conservative with your ideas, but Nintendo desperately searches for ‘originality’ even when it’s not really needed.
[deleted]
Am I the only one irritated by the fact that they used Oculus Rift as an example of this theory being applied in modern tech? Yes, it uses a “cheap smart phone screen and a pair of fifty cent lenses,” but that price is hardly mainstream, especially after you factor in the fact that you actually DO need a pretty good computer rig to be able to use it; that $350 turns into $1350. If you want the VR controllers they’re making for it, that’s even more money. Yes, they used cheaper parts for certain things, but that’s hardly the same as the philosophy employed when making the Game Boy.
People seem to be confusing innovation with gimmicks. Creating the d pad is innovative, it’s a new EFFECTIVE way to control a game in a similar way that the thumb stick and shoulder buttons were when they were released on the N64 and Super Nintendo respectively. Motion control was a gimmick. How many games today are still using motion control? By the end of the wii’s lifespan most games had you just hold the wiimote like an NES controller or sit still with a wiimote and nun chuck. Motion controls also took away from a lot of games. Skyward sword is a perfect example. The controls only work about 85% of the time. Meanwhile buttons work 100% of the time unless a games programmed poorly. The game pad is a gimmick. Pausing to see a map was never a huge inconvenience that it had to be the main selling point of a console. I say it’s a map screen, because what has the gamepad been used for? There was nothing wrong with mini maps. Why do my eyes have to come off the screen to see the track in a high speed game like mario kart. I can’t even play mario 3d world without having to tap the screen or blow into the microphone. That’s not fun that’s a gimmick. The only game in my opinion to effectively use the gamepad has been pikmin 3. That’s innovative. It took the gameplay from pikmin 1 and 2 and added features that helped the game play smoother and allowed fora more effective way to play the game. If third parties supported the wii u a little better we might actually see a good RTS on console. That’s the only real use I see out of the game pad however.
Innovation also isn’t exclusive to hardware, we also can see it in gameplay. Super Mario bros wrote the book on making a 2d platformer and then they did it again with the 3d platformer with mario 64. Zelda practically invented open world games. Mario 64 invented a way to control a camera in a 3d space to allow for more freedom of movement. Pikmin had 100 + 3d models walking on screen each with their own AI with little to no slow down. Ocarina of time created a targeting system that is used in almost every 3d game to this day. I can go on but I think the point is clear.
We also need to stop acting like Nintendo is the only company that has ever innovated in video games. One could even argue that Sony and Microsoft have innovated more than nintendo when it comes to innovation in modern gaming. The dual shock controller perfected the video game controller and created a standard for all controllers afterward. Don’t believe me, just look at all of the controllers available today, they all have 4 face buttons, start, select (although select is being phased out), a d-pad, 2 joysticks, and 4 shoulder buttons. How many consoles are using memory cards? The Xbox was the first console to put a hard drive in for memory. Playing games online is also fun, Xbox popularized online gaming on consoles. Nintendo isn’t a synonym for innovation, they just do it a lot but limiting your consoles hardware for gimmicks isn’t innovative.
As someone that took part in engineering back in high school (and now mentors and interns in similar fields), Nintendo’s philosophy is one I’ve always found to be inspiring. Innovation is a tough thing to do, but so is refining and re-interpreting something that’s already been developed and (seemingly) run its course. I’m not gonna pretend like more power isn’t necessary for new game consoles, but the problem arises when there’s too *much* power; where’s the challenge then? Where’s the restrictions that give way to clever thinking or programming, where’s the neat tricks that could only come from knowing a system so well, you(informal) know how to break it without **breaking** it?
I like how the article doesn’t even mention the concept by its true name and rather tries (and fails) to come up with its own… The Blue Ocean concept is something Nintendo’s used and talked about for so long, this article and its perceived originality hurt my brain
Ahh, Gunpei Yokoi. Miyamoto had the dreams, the ambitions, the ideas. Iwata was a programming genius, with a great attitude to boot. And Yokoi was a hardware wizard and ruled over the company with an iron fist. Together, these 3 men shaped Nintendo into something amazing.