近来常常看到某些任青因为做了白日大梦被索饭捉住尾巴，自己却浑然不知

我想来提醒一下：做梦也得分个时候，该做的时候再做

所谓的“第三方传统大作”到底可不可以YY？我觉得是完全可以的，毕竟Wii的销量摆在那里，以后是可以期待的，只不过，这些东西到了Wii上就未必还是大作了。而且，现在还不是YY这些的时候

如果一线厂商要开发一款FF级别的作品，从开始立项、划拨人员、资金，到透露出实际的消息，刊登出确实的图片，到底要多长时间呢？我觉得至少是一年半到两年吧。拿星海4来说，它在开始立项，投入人员、资金的时候，Wii的情景是个什么样子呢？那个时候SE是否会把这样一款大作毫不犹豫地投向Wii呢？

有很多任青会告诉我：销量决定一切！

是的，我也认为销量决定一切，所以现在的销量是决定不了现在的“第三方传统大作”的。开发Wii上的作品确实划算，但是开发商也会去盘算一下：到底是在原有平台上继续开发划算，还是完全放弃所投入的所有人员成本、资金成本，重新在Wii上开发划算。如果要我来说的话，既然这个原来投入的成本已经足够大，就没有随便放弃的道理（“机能”仅仅是一个借口而已，可以参见DS那样的机能是如何“传统大作”的）。这个和FF7转投PS是不同的，那一次并不是单纯的销量问题。所以现在就开始YY那些“传统大作”基本就是痴人说梦，相反，跨平台开发XO版反而更有可能，因为这样做既不用放弃原有的努力，又不需要追加多少投资就可以获得不错的回报。因此就目前而言，软饭绝对比任青有更充分的理由来YY日式传统大作

很多人说第三方在Wii上不用心，为什么不用心呢？很显然，目前看到的第三方游戏，是第三方对06E3前后Wii的表现做出的潜力评价，那个时候的Wii还不能给第三方多少信心，第三方能用多少心来投入也是很明显的，基本都是用老素材重新包装一下就上了，比如那个Wii上的传说，而且参与的厂商基本都是GC时候的老关系

所以即使我们可以去YY所谓的第三方传统大作，也要等到08年下半年至09年初才可以。我还是那个观点，有销量能使鬼推磨，对于第三方，索饭可以期待08年，任青同样可以期待09年，之前的话，老任不靠自己力拼是不行的。这样看来，SCE已经做得足够好了，PS3的苦日子已经快到头了；而老任做得还不够，它需要再把现在的势头保持多一年才可以

总之，销量所产生的效应是需要时间去体现的，在这点上，恰恰是Wii与DS最大的不同——软件开发周期的长短，因此Wii就需要老任自己去坚持更长的时间，这才是真正决定成败的时间，同样，也只有老任的作品才能成为真正决定自己成败的作品

引用:

原帖由 silence 于 2007-9-8 23:37 发表
但是问题在于，广大的厂商未必跟得上任天堂的理念，没有硬件投入的他们也没有必要完全追随任天堂的理念。
技术的进化，表现力的增强，引擎的更新换代对于软件厂商来讲是更为重要的东西，因为它可以决定在今后生存的生命力。

别的不想多说了，谈谈这一点吧

“今后生存的生命力”到底是什么？

我看这还要由时代来决定，谁的朝代，谁来统治，什么人能够生存下去要看王的喜好

现在到底是不是一个变革的时机？我觉得还真不一定，画面和机能的进化其实并未进入一个瓶颈，但是老任选择这个时间点去变革，意外地没有被多数人讨厌呢。关键问题就是，到底有多少人希望变革，多少人无所谓，多少人害怕变革，玩家决定着变革的成败，而变革的成败又决定着厂商“今后生存的生命力”。

如果变革失败，仍然是光影机能的时代，那么很显然“技术的进化，表现力的增强，引擎的更新换代对于软件厂商来讲是更为重要的东西”；然而如果变革成功，那么学不会合理应用动作感应的大厂有可能比起步早的小厂更惨。别忘了日本一也是可以玩PS3的，因为小厂就算做不出好画面，销量也没多大影响，而大厂一旦站错了队就危险得多

这样来说，对于未来，大厂反而比小厂要考虑得更多，它们不但要抓紧跟进高清游戏市场，也不敢轻易放松Wii这个平台。什么才是“今后生存的生命力”，在没人能够看清的时候，只有双保险才是生命力。它们会选择“外传”这种方式来试水，既能保证一定销量，也可以保证试验的效果，积累经验，最终会不会有正传还是要看时代的大趋势是什么，哪一边赢了哪一边就是正统的编号，输了的就是外传

历史证明，新的流行一定会用旧的传统来血祭，有那么多SFC时代的经典在PS时代死去，又会有无数新的系列踩着它们的尸体登顶。如果这真的是个会变革的时代，那么就必然会有一批一线厂商因为选错了“生命力”而成为新时代的data east，如果你希望它们不要死，请每日祈祷老任失败

放弃Wii，本就不是想不想的问题，而是敢不敢的问题

所以对于Wii来说，所谓“正统”是要靠制造时代的趋势去抢的，抢到它怕了自然就到手，一切都在玩家的选择和老任自己的努力，而不是群体YY

引用:

原帖由 阿西达卡 于 2007-9-9 12:41 发表
wii是一个明明确确完完全全的“革新”么？
我的回答是不，显然其实差的非常远，所以所谓对游戏业的“颠覆”也是不可能的

在革新了一些因素之外，WII本质上还是非常传统的
却那么成功，这就是微妙之处

所以实际上把Wii当成一个纯玩具，认为它和PS3/XO没有交集，这实际就是误读

即使表面上看它们在对应人群上有不同，但是实际上Wii对PS3/XO的交集不在于此，而在于挤占开发资源上

试想如果日本一线厂商全部拒绝开发Wii游戏的话，富余出来的开发资源可以让PS3的软件阵容达到一个什么样的强度呢？

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/l ... es-victory-lap.aspx

Nintendo President Satoru Iwata Takes a Victory Lap, Humbly, With Level Up
（可惜不是levelup.cn ）


（聪哥这张够阴险的 ）

As the Wii continues its seemingly unstoppable march towards market dominance, and with the Tokyo Game Show just a few weeks away, we thought it appropriate to reach into our warehouse of as-yet-unpublished interviews for this conversation we had with Nintendo president Satoru Iwata during the July E3 Media and Business Summit in Los Angeles. During our interview, Iwata's slightly eager, schoolboyish persona was replaced by a more casually confident mien, displaying the quiet self-assurance of a man sitting on top of the world. We discussed the company's decision to focus on casual audiences with its press conference; why the Wii version of Zelda was a relative flop in his native Japan; and what it feels like to have the game industry now assume that Nintendo's initiatives will succeed rather than fail.

[B]So the first question is what was the strategy behind the series of announcements at yesterday's press conference? Because it seemed that other than Wii Fit, Nintendo didn't introduce any new franchises or new intellectual property. So what was the thinking behind having Wii Fit as the only new IP introduced at the press conference?[/B]

This year is sort of a streamlined E3. We want to narrow down our focus a little bit. So we decided to mainly mention the franchise series that would be coming out this fall, mention several titles that players will be excited to hear about. And again, we just decided that, plus Wii Fit matched our expectations of what we wanted to do with the show. However, we are definitely working on new franchises and we just didn't choose to talk about them yesterday. We really wanted to see how people would react to Wii Fit and how they would, and well again, we wanted to see the reactions of the people to our selection, Wii Fit.

Now, if we didn't feel that we had gained a lot of popular momentum and with success that it's shown so far, we might have tried to get out a little more information and do an upcoming products, again, just to build some excitement, but since we do have that momentum right now, we chose not to do so. After all, if we show too much now, too early, when those products are actually ready to come out, they won't seem very fresh if we just re-announce them later on. You have probably noticed this trend too, but I believe that the patterns in the past, you were able to announce things much earlier and have this gradual buildup, but I think that there's a desensitification--that's not a word.

Desensitization.

Thank you--and people aren't as patient with that information, to the span over which you can feed them information. It gets shorter and shorter.

You've spoken publicly about the fact that Zelda Twilight Princess has not done as well in Japan as you had hoped, nor has it performed as well there as it has in North America. When you look back at the span of time from when Zelda Twilight Princess was first shown to when it finally shipped, was that part of your thought process about why you now want to compress the amount of time from when you first introduce a product, show a product publicly and release that that product to consumer?

Well, you know, I believe as far as sales go in Japan, more so than the timeline of information dispersal, I think the impression that Zelda was a game that was too difficult for the average gamer affected sales. It was a bigger effect on sales. Now, however with Phantom Hourglass, we were successfully able to convey to the market that this is a Zelda that everyone can play and we've seen the results in the increased number of younger female gamers. We've also seen the return of previous players of the Zelda franchise who maybe played ten years ago or fifteen years ago on whichever system they once played and they sort of drifted away--we're seeing a resurgence of interest in the return of those players to the franchise.

And the pattern for games like Zelda in Japan is in that first week, there's a huge sales number and then that drops off immediately in the second week sales. However, with Zelda, we're not seeing that drop-off, and if it continues to sell as we have seen now, we definitely think that this could be a million seller. And the great thing about it is the buzz around the game: we are picking up new players who are then telling their friends and telling other friends. That's working very well in our favor.

Obviously the Wii is still new to the Japanese market, but it still seems that Japanese consumers are still very focused on the DS. Is that creating any challenge for Nintendo in Japan? Obviously the money still comes to Nintendo, but is this the runaway success of the DS in Japan causing Nintendo to have to shift its strategy with the Wii to figure out how to appeal to those people who are spending so much time on their DS?

Well, I believe it's been two and a half years since the launch of DS, and the software has sold fantastically. We have a very large library of titles. The third parties are now really confirming the success of the DS. They're looking at it and saying, "Okay, this is going to continue to sell," so they're really, really jumping on the bandwagon. A lot of people are very excited and putting a lot of energy towards making software for the DS. So again, that's something that's happened over the course of the last two and a half years. Wii has only been out for about six months now. So that's what we think is the difference.

You know when we of course--I think if you look at the general market again, none of the big publishers out there really expected Wii to be the number one hardware. So I believe perhaps none of the companies had placed all of their resources into developing software for Wii. But now that they see the success of the platform, they're really moving forward in that direction. It's probably going to take a while before we start seeing the results of that, where we see a boom our library, probably next year. So, for the rest of this year, you're going to see a lot of those people funneling their resources towards Wii development.

When I spoke with Mr. Miyamoto at the Gaming Developers conference, and we talked about why it was third parties weren't having as much success on the Nintendo platforms, and he said that he felt that a lot of third party publishers were putting their third and fourth string teams on Wii instead of their best teams. Is that anything that comes up in conversations when you talk to publishers about how you want them to support your platform, given that the DS is far and away the number one handheld, and the trend for Wii is that it's going to overtake Xbox 360 globally?

I believe that currently, the number of publishers who--or the feeling amongst publishers who want to put their best teams on Nintendo platforms and who want to make software for Nintendo platforms is the highest it's been in, say, the last ten years. However, six months ago, you know, I don't think the people out there were saying that Nintendo is done, they're going to roll over and vanish, but at the same time, I don't believe that there are too many people who thought we wouldn't be where we're at today. So I believe that a lot of people out there thought, "Okay, this is a fad. It's not something that's going to continue."

That attitude is not something that's going to change quickly. That, in addition to the fact that Nintendo was doing something that really kind of flew in the face of common industry practice and common industry knowledge. If you look at the common practices and the common way that games have gone in the industry in the past, it's "Okay, we focus on the high teen market, that core market, and then we let them disseminate game knowledge or game popularity. The better-looking the game is, the higher quality the graphics, the more we're going to sell." That sort of pattern is something that Wii was not following, and again, because we took that different approach, it caught a lot of people by surprise.

During the E3 press conference, Reggie mentioned that half of all games sold on the Wii are from third parties. But when I spoke to him at GDC, that number was two-thirds. So if you look at the trend, Nintendo's share is increasing and third parties' share is decreasing. Now you have a business to run, so you're trying to sell as much of your own software as possible. People are now starting to think now that perhaps the Wii isn't going to be a fad, but looking at the history of Nintendo platforms and how third parties have done, what's the number, what's the percentage share that will make you start to worry about how the third parties will look at this, and maybe start to say "Well, maybe the opportunity's not as good as it seemed," and start to return to their previous way of thinking.

I believe that third party publishers kind of look at the software titles that are being sold on Nintendo and they don't want Nintendo to have more than one-third, otherwise, Nintendo will be too strong. They want to have two-thirds of what's being sold on the platform. However, I believe that the job of first party software is to drive hardware. If you don't have a quick impact and quick dissemination amongst the audience, you lose momentum. If you don't have momentum, the third parties don't want to jump on your platform. So that's not a good situation to be in.

Actually, the same thing that happened to Wii, a lot of the same conversations took place when the DS was launched. And that's because Nintendo was really the only one that was very focused on that user expansion goal we've talked about so often and because we are creating unique software that no one else is creating, the phenomenon of Nintendo software selling was insane. So we had a very, very strong position and again, Nintendo was the only one really selling a lot of software. If you look at the beginning of this year, Nintendo-published software sales for the DS have slightly declined, and that's because third party has increased.

As far as the percentage of software for the Wii right now being first party software, we've been working towards this for a while, and I think it's unusual for Nintendo to have that strong a share at this point. However, I think that's a phenomenon that's going to be limited to this year alone. Next year, we're going to see a larger number of third party software. And I guess the impression of Nintendo is too powerful or too dominant will dissipate with again the increase in third party software.

Another thing we've learned at Nintendo is how to disseminate the information to third parties on how to build a successful software for the Wii. Last month, we had a developer's conference sponsored by Nintendo. One thing that happened: the Wii sports programmers put together information on how to better utilize the motion sensor and how they utilized it in Wii sports. We gave that information out at the developers' conference. We've heard some rough feedback, and what I have heard is that some people were surprised that Nintendo was willing to give that sort of information out to other people. I mean, up to that point, Nintendo had a reputation of being very, very closed mouthed and close-fisted with that sort of information: develop it on our own, keep it to ourselves, and not being very friendly to outside developers.

Now I have a development background myself, so I really understood. I thought to myself "Hey, people want to know how we're doing this." I convinced a lot of people at Nintendo to allow us to give out all this information. Now, of course, there's the possibility of being imitated, having ideas taken from us before we're able to use them ourselves. But at the same time, if the industry doesn't grow, then we can't grow and we don't feel that the industry--we have to have the industry to survive so we may survive as well.

What did you think of Electronic Arts incorporating the Wii sports style of play into its sports games?

Well, we looked at the content of the play of EA's sports games, and we thought "Hey, you marry this with our new controller, this is a good thing; a very good opportunity." We also believe that as far as making realistic sports games, EA was far and away better at it than we were. And we also felt that they were concerned with the fact that every year, they would bring out a new iteration of some of their franchises and one of the trends that we are seeing was that the difficulty level was increasing as far as the controls. We felt that EA was worried about that increased difficulty alienating new players. We thought, "Hey, as they grow older, so is their audience," and we really thought that they were running a risk of alienating younger audiences and not bringing them into the fold. We didn't make it on time for last year's launch, but we are going to this year, and we think it's going to be very beneficial for both companies.

I want to say also that when I read [Electronic Arts CEO John] Riccitiello's comments on the state of games, I was a bit surprised. I said, "Boy, that doesn't sound like an EA person speaking. That sounds like someone from Nintendo talking." [Laughs.] I feel that EA very quickly understood what we were doing and really understood that the way the gaming industry worked could change and came on board very quickly and in a very smart fashion.

There's some concern, I see it from people talking online that Nintendo is changing emphasis, that it's focusing on the expanded audience and ultimately, leaving the hardcore gaming audience behind. At the top of the interview, we were talking about the reasons why you didn't introduce the new IP aimed at that audience. What kind of balance do you think Nintendo needs or should want to maintain going forward to manage those two audiences?

In addition to the titles like Wii Fit, Wii Sports, Nintendo's spending a lot of time and energy and putting a lot of manpower behind titles like Zelda, Mario Galaxy, Super Smash Brothers Brawl, Mario Kart and, of course, Metroid Prime 3 as well. So we have no intention of abandoning our core players and the people who have been Nintendo fans over the course of our history. We really want to do a lot of unique things. So in the course of doing things that are unique, we're obviously going to, by the definition of the term, not produce some of the things people are expecting.

Looking at the titles that I just mentioned--Mario Galaxy, Smash Brothers and whatnot--those are hitting the latter phase of production right now. So we've already started moving manpower into new products, new titles, new themes. Still, we really believe that part of our mission is to make traditional games for our traditional audience.

Last question. Because the Nintendo 64 hadn't done so well compared to the Play Station and the Game Cube hadn't done as well compared to PlayStation 2 and Xbox, people even thought at one point maybe Nintendo would get out of making hardware. So when the DS was announced, there were a lot of people--myself included--that didn't think it would succeed. It succeeded extremely well. There were people who were initially skeptical about the Wii. The Wii is doing very well. So now when you introduce the Zapper, and the Wii board, the assumption in the stories I'm reading is that it's going to succeed. People like myself are thinking, "Wow, that's going to fit with the audiences that Nintendo has nurtured." So from your perspective, what's it like to have the perception of Nintendo, and the direction that it's going in, change from an assumption of failure to an assumption of success--from the media, from gamers and from third parties?

There were doubts, of course, when we first began this whole approach. Once we were able to show success with what we were doing, that's what brought about that initial change that you're speaking of. Being part of the entertainment industry, part of our job is to surprise our audiences. So actually, if you look at this pattern where we came out with these ideas, everyone said you're not going to succeed, and yet we overcome all these obstacles and we do succeed, there's sort of a drama in there that is very fitting for us being part of the entertainment industry. [Laughs.]

On the other hand, if we now say "Oh yeah, that's probably going to work out okay," there's no drama involved in that. And there's a danger that comes with that. Because if you're introducing these new things and everyone's saying, "Oh yeah, this is great," "We'll take that," "That's a great idea," it's very difficult to maintain within the company the energy it takes to be always looking forward. That's probably Nintendo's next obstacle is to not lose its internal energy and internal momentum. I believe my most important role right now is to prevent Nintendo from being in a company where people say, "Oh, Nintendo is arrogant," "Nintendo has let its guard down," or "Nintendo has lost its challenging spirit." We want to avoid all of the pitfalls that can come from losing one's momentum.

This time, we were very lucky and very fortunate that people were accepting and positive about the introduction of the Wii Balance Board and the Wii Zapper. Now, what we have to do, what's very important for us is to make sure that when those products are actually launched, we not only meet their expectations, but we surpass them so there's that gap--we thought it was going to be this, when actually it's here. We need to create that buzz. We need to create that word of mouth and that's our challenge. The prime example of that is Wii Sports. People saw it, looked at it and said "Oh, that looks pretty interesting." Then when they actually played it, that experience was so much more than they were expecting, that's what created again that word of mouth buzz that we enjoyed with the title.

Great. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Very nice to see you.