Nintendo's corporate culture part of the problem?

What's your version of fine. They have two very strong consoles and the pc all doing well. Nintendo's 1st party is also not doing the usual numbers. Nintendo also has the worst 3rd party support in their history and the online is last to put it mildly.

Nintendo IMO is on their way out unless they make a radical shift in the way the do things.

As in, the corporation is still standing.

If their "way out" is leaving games, so be it. Not like gaming will be going anywhere with them gone.

Did you?

"What does the elimination or reduction of inefficient managerial bureaucracy have to do with following popular trends?" was a direct response and inquiry to, "but if the power was to be handed over to younger folks, we could just end up with another company following popular trends and trying to be another Sony or Microsoft instead of doing its own thing."

That's a perfectly legitimate question to your statement given the context of the topic. I'd like to know how on Earth you went from discussion of management to Nintendo "following popular trends", frankly, and then further attempted to frame me as obtuse from your own inability to follow a simple line of argument?

young ppl today are sheep not innovators

Generalizations.

The sarcasm b/c you know its true.

US not even a lead innovator since 60s

Again generalizations do not hold weight in this discussion. In terms of US game development they are commanding a new lead along with Europe. Japan is declining and struggling to adapt to new hardware and more complex engines. Not to mention the Japanese market is becoming its own niche. Nintendo caters to the Japanese market above all else but most of its sales come from the West. The logical direction would be to start applying more features that Western market draw attention towards. Keep making the classic Japanese style franchises like Mario and Zelda, but also start building up Retro and commissioning more second party devs from Europe/US.

Who said I was talking about games? Ah right you did fail straw man is a fail straw man. He is talking about CULTURE as in people genius. The entire OP is addressing and showing insight into how a typical Japaneses company operates. OP is not discussing video games, market share, development, hardware, engines...you fail English? He is talking about how the the local work environment affects those things:

• as in corporate structure (like really dude its in the title lulz)
• horizontal or vertical
• conservatism
• decision making process
• group decisions?
• Laissez-faire
• self-actualization
• etc.

Products/ideas, um no. Did he briefly mention it yes. Is that the primary focus no.

Clearly Nintendo needs new leadership if it's to survive.

In case you did not notice, you were responding to my comment. Regardless of what the OP was saying, I was commenting on the ill effects of a narrow minded corporate culture, which directly affects everything all the way down to the creative and marketing levels of the company. That is an idea clearly expressed in the article and specifically referenced by the OP AS WELL though, so you are mistaken on both accounts.

'There is very little reason to try and push these ideas. Risk taking is generally not really rewarded," he said. "Long-term loyalty is ultimately what gets rewarded, so the easiest path is simply to stay the course. I'd love to see Nintendo make a more concerted effort to encourage people at all levels of the company to feel empowered to push through ambitious proposals, and then get rewarded for doing so.'

It was not briefly mentioned. His title of the thread says "Nintendo's corporate culture part of the problem?" Clearly talking about Nintendo's woes as a game company. They struggle to find consistent success and the reason for that is a bottleneck of creativity that is brought on by corporate culture. Many of those in charge at Nintendo were game developers in the past. Namely Iwata and Miyamoto.

I read that whole article and referenced it multiple times before this thread came out. I suggest you read more closely to what I am saying when I post, what the OP is saying when he made this thread, and what the article is saying as a whole.

This is not exclusively a broad observation of Japanese business culture....

You tell me, what does "the elimination or reduction of inefficient managerial bureaucracy have to do with following popular trends"? Because that has almost nothing at all to do with anything I said. But nice try at pulling a strawman fallacy out of nowhere.

Also, how convenient of you to forget to highlight the part just before that, "but if the power was to be handed over to younger folks," which should have already answered your question about "following popular trends". You almost pulled a quoting-out-of-context fallacy there (or rather, highlighting out of context). But if you seriously cannot make a connection between "if the power was to be handed over to younger folks," and "following popular trends", then logical reasoning clearly must not be your strong point.

And finally, just for the record, the "following popular trends" is a response to this part of the article:

" "At the risk of sounding ageist, because of the hierarchical nature of Japanese companies, it winds up being that the most senior executives at the company cut their teeth during NES and Super NES days and do not really understand modern gaming, so adopting things like online gaming, account systems, friends lists, as well as understanding the rise of PC gaming has been very slow," he said. "

Firstly, you accuse me of conveniently forgetting to highlight the part of the quote and out of context, yet that's precisely what you did in omitting, "we could just end up with another company following popular trends and trying to be another Sony or Microsoft instead of doing its own thing." in your initial response to me which was entirely relevant and the whole point of contention in my response to you? Practice what you preach.

Secondly, Nintendo's method of management is the issue. The onus is on you to demonstrate what discussion of that management has anything to do with following popular trends, something you brought it into the discourse, not me. Don't posit something, fail to substantiate upon it, and then try to point the finger at those who asks for it and instead accuse them of strawmans. Do you even understand what a strawman is? I did not misrepresent your argument and attacked it as such, I simply asked for an elaboration on your statement juxtaposed to the topic, which you failed to provide.

"I understand he doesn't like how Nintendo is controlled by older folks instead of younger folks, but if the power was to be handed over to younger folks, we could just end up with another company following popular trends and trying to be another Sony or Microsoft instead of doing its own thing."

My whole problem with this is that you seem to be implying that if Nintendo cleaned up its act and became better managed (regardless of age, that's not really my problem) that it would cease to be unique and would become a clone of Sony or MS. I would appreciate to hear your logic on this "logic" because you have provided none whatsoever. If you can't provide it or at least attempt an explanation, then don't bother.

@onesiphorus: not really. the games they have put out during the past 10 years have become the epitome of stale. not really a deciding factor anymore. the fans just don't realize their demise in game design because they start drooling all over the place as soon as a nintendo logo is stuck onto something - trying to relive their kiddy- and teen-days due to nostalgia - and not due to the actual prowess of a healthy global player.

I'm not even going to bother explaining.