Miyamoto wanted Pikmin 3 closer to Wii U launch, new IP vs. established characters, comparing 1980s to now
A portion of a Time interview with Shigeru Miyamoto...
T: The launch window lineup for the Wii U was light on titles starring mainstream Nintendo characters, which was actually kind of refreshing given all the off-the-beaten-path alternatives like ZombiU, Nano Assault Neo, Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate, Toki Tori 2, LEGO City Undercover, Pikimin 3 and The Wonderful 101.
SM: If you look back at the launch of Wii, we were able to prepare a game like Wii Sports, which at the time was clearly a new game, and launch that alongside a Zelda game. With the Wii U, we took a similar approach by launching Nintendo Land as well as a Mario game — though we’re working on Zelda for Wii U, that’s going to take us a little big longer.
From my perspective, I think ideally it would have been nice if we’d been able to release Pikmin 3 closer to launch, but the Wii U — though it shares the Wii name — is obviously a brand new system, with new chips and graphical capabilities. It can do a lot more, and in the process of developing a lot of the features and functionality, the resources required to best utilize those features drew on some of the same resources that might have been spent developing games, thus we weren’t able to bring quite as robust a lineup initially.
At the same time, we still have new things to learn about how to leverage the features and functionalities of Wii U in ways that create fun and interesting new ways to play, including new gameplay systems. As we become even more familiar with the hardware, we’ll be able to do more from a software standpoint. That’s an area we’re currently devoting resources to.
T: With series like Pikmin and others like Nintendogs or Steel Diver you’ve been at the forefront of new IP for Nintendo. That said, most of your games involve taking existing IP and retooling it for new gameplay ideas. Are you more inclined these days to want to develop new IP, or to retool existing material?
SM: Whenever I start working on something I always start with creating new gameplay. After that gameplay becomes more concrete, we look at which character is best suited to the gameplay. So I guess from my standpoint, the ideal situation would be that we’re creating an experience that’s so new and so unique that we can present it to consumers with a new character or IP in a way that would be easiest for them to really understand the concept and enjoy the gameplay. But it may also be that in some of those cases it makes more sense for it to involve some of the characters that are more familiar to our fans.
When we created the original Wii Sports, we could have done it as a “Mario Sports” game, but we decided not to. Similarly with Wii Fit, that could have been a “Mario Fitness” game, but in both of those cases we ultimately decided that introducing those games as new IP or new franchises was a better approach. Because those games don’t have specific characters associated with them, people may not view them as new IP, but certainly when we created those games we intended them to be new franchises. It may be that in the future, as we’re generating new ideas, we’ll come across an idea that makes the most sense to release with a new character.
T: Would 1980 Shigeru Miyamoto in his wildest dreams have anticipated what’s happened over the past three decades?
SM: I don’t think I could have imagined where we’ve ended up. At the time in the 1980s, games fell categorically somewhere between toys and technology, and I think what I didn’t imagine happening over time was that gradually games began adopting more and more of the latest technology, to the point where games today are at the very forefront of technology and something everybody seems to be paying a great deal of attention to. The other thing I couldn’t have foreseen back then is that — particularly today when you look at the state of the consumer electronics industry, which had been where some of the most advanced technology was being used — that you see a number of the companies in a tough situation in a way that hasn’t hit gaming.
T: The launch window lineup for the Wii U was light on titles starring mainstream Nintendo characters, which was actually kind of refreshing given all the off-the-beaten-path alternatives like ZombiU, Nano Assault Neo, Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate, Toki Tori 2, LEGO City Undercover, Pikimin 3 and The Wonderful 101.
SM: If you look back at the launch of Wii, we were able to prepare a game like Wii Sports, which at the time was clearly a new game, and launch that alongside a Zelda game. With the Wii U, we took a similar approach by launching Nintendo Land as well as a Mario game — though we’re working on Zelda for Wii U, that’s going to take us a little big longer.
From my perspective, I think ideally it would have been nice if we’d been able to release Pikmin 3 closer to launch, but the Wii U — though it shares the Wii name — is obviously a brand new system, with new chips and graphical capabilities. It can do a lot more, and in the process of developing a lot of the features and functionality, the resources required to best utilize those features drew on some of the same resources that might have been spent developing games, thus we weren’t able to bring quite as robust a lineup initially.
At the same time, we still have new things to learn about how to leverage the features and functionalities of Wii U in ways that create fun and interesting new ways to play, including new gameplay systems. As we become even more familiar with the hardware, we’ll be able to do more from a software standpoint. That’s an area we’re currently devoting resources to.
T: With series like Pikmin and others like Nintendogs or Steel Diver you’ve been at the forefront of new IP for Nintendo. That said, most of your games involve taking existing IP and retooling it for new gameplay ideas. Are you more inclined these days to want to develop new IP, or to retool existing material?
SM: Whenever I start working on something I always start with creating new gameplay. After that gameplay becomes more concrete, we look at which character is best suited to the gameplay. So I guess from my standpoint, the ideal situation would be that we’re creating an experience that’s so new and so unique that we can present it to consumers with a new character or IP in a way that would be easiest for them to really understand the concept and enjoy the gameplay. But it may also be that in some of those cases it makes more sense for it to involve some of the characters that are more familiar to our fans.
When we created the original Wii Sports, we could have done it as a “Mario Sports” game, but we decided not to. Similarly with Wii Fit, that could have been a “Mario Fitness” game, but in both of those cases we ultimately decided that introducing those games as new IP or new franchises was a better approach. Because those games don’t have specific characters associated with them, people may not view them as new IP, but certainly when we created those games we intended them to be new franchises. It may be that in the future, as we’re generating new ideas, we’ll come across an idea that makes the most sense to release with a new character.
T: Would 1980 Shigeru Miyamoto in his wildest dreams have anticipated what’s happened over the past three decades?
SM: I don’t think I could have imagined where we’ve ended up. At the time in the 1980s, games fell categorically somewhere between toys and technology, and I think what I didn’t imagine happening over time was that gradually games began adopting more and more of the latest technology, to the point where games today are at the very forefront of technology and something everybody seems to be paying a great deal of attention to. The other thing I couldn’t have foreseen back then is that — particularly today when you look at the state of the consumer electronics industry, which had been where some of the most advanced technology was being used — that you see a number of the companies in a tough situation in a way that hasn’t hit gaming.
