Wii: What's in a Name? - Editorials

What was Nintendo thinking?

Newsletter

Be notified of site updates. Sign-up for the Newsletter sent out twice weekly.

Enter E-Mail Address Below:

Wii: What's in a Name?

"The only thing worse than being talking about is not being talked about."

- Oscar Wilde

I remember way back when, the Earth was a bit greener and Microsoft engineers and philosophers were busily toiling on their new console, codenamed, Xbox. I remember reading mainstream media reports that put “Xbox” in quotation marks because they were sure the name would change. After all, it sounded like something that a 1930’s Flash Gordon would be trying to wrest back from Ming the Merciless before he could destroy the galaxy with it.

The obvious happened. The console was referred to as Xbox for so long that the decision makers at Microsoft caved in and officially named it Xbox. And as cool and hip as they tried to make it, I always had a vision of Flash fighting his was through Ming’s fortress before the power of the Xbox could be unleashed.

For almost two years Nintendo’s upcoming console has been known as “Revolution” – it was called that even before the non-traditional controller was revealed. In everything I’ve read, I have never come across anything attributed to a Nintendo executive stating that the Revolution moniker was the final name of the new console. But judging by the massive outpouring of gamer bile lambasting the new official name – Wii, pronounced “wee!” in the voice of a six-year old girl – a lot of people obviously liked the Revolution label, including AE’s own Mr. Nash (who is like our version of the old “Mikey likes it!” commercial). They thought Revolution would stick.

But what’s in a name? Wii is more about the logo and label than it is about the name. While my opinion on the name is kinda neutral – Nintendo could call it “Smelly Pile of Skunk Droppings” and I’d still be interested – the logo is something else. Trying not to think about the logo is tough. There’s something appealing about it even if it seems to be operating on a subconscious level at this point – I’m sure the answer will present itself in my dreams/nightmares during E3.

I think part of the appeal is that anyone could have come up with the logo. It has a stick man figure motif. Look closely. That’s definitely a stick man so expect much of Nintendo’s early advertising to feature stick men on a scale we’ve never seen.

Advertisement

The reaction at this point is to the name change. Though most of it has been negative, the ripples of that reaction have perked the ears of the mainstream media. How would I know this? My wife knows about the name change and not because I told her. She heard it on the radio.

Is “bad” publicity in the mind of gamers still good publicity for the company? Let’s use a made-up example. Lets say an Exxon tanker

Advertisement

crashes and dumps nearly its entire load of crude oil on an Alaskan beach – it’s all hypothetical at this point – the bad publicity generated would be enormous. Dead, oil-covered sea life and a blackened coastline should be enough to tarnish any company’s image. In this oh-so-fictional example, Exxon should be made to pay and enraged consumers upset with the company should form a boycott to bring the company down (at least a few notches). What were the profits for Exxon in the last hypothetical three months? 8.6 billion dollars, not-so-hypothetically. That’s profit mind you, and in the billions no less. One might take the cynical view that Exxon got so much coverage for its destruction of Alaskan coastline that the name “Exxon” instantly springs to mind when a driver glances down and sees the needle on the fuel gauge dipping too far to the left. It’s the same every Christmas when lists of violent, gory and/or soul-corrupting toys are released and McFarlane Toys nearly always rests near the top of the list. Has the toy division gone under? Nope. Still going strong.

Any publicity drives awareness of the product and in most cases generates sales. Just ask Grand Theft Auto.

So, what’s in a name? Nothing. Nintendo may be saving a lot of time, money, and effort in the localization of the console by labeling it with an all-encompassing name that’s quite a bit different than any other console even in the face of gamer backlash.

But the folks at the Wildlife Institute of India and the Washington Internship Institute must be pretty PO ’d about the announcement. Is stealing acronyms against the law?

Though my own reception of the name is fairly neutral, it makes me think of how unoriginal Sony has been in the name department. “Playstation” now actually confuses me and I’ve overheard many conversations at the local EB that mean I am not alone.

“I’m looking for a game for my son. He’s ten and has a Playstation.”

“The original Playstation or Playstation 2?”

“Uhm, is there a difference?”

Xbox hasn’t been much better with its naming structure – Xbox, Xbox 360 – but at least with its latest console, gamers have handily shortened it to the simpler 360, which is the kind of shortening Sony won’t be able to do with its Playstation 3 (which should really be called Fourth Dimension). It will be the old “PS#” formula. (Expect the same name changes when the PSP’s replacement is released.)

E3 is one week away. Will Nintendo suddenly have a change of heart and switch back to the Revolution name? Not likely, but the gaming community will be doing itself a favor if they can stop the yammering about how “Nintendo sucks!” and other less-kind proclamations, trying to play armchair financial/marketing/soothsayer and providing "insightful" analysis on why the name Wii makes or doesn't make sense. (We do that and I won’t mention Sony’s unoriginal naming process.) After all, it's better to be talked about than not talked about.

- Omni

(May 2, 2006)


PC \| Gamecube \| DS \| Wii \| PlayStation 2 \| PlayStation 3 \| PSP \| Xbox \| Xbox 360
News \| Reviews \| Previews \| Features \| Classics \| Goodies \| Anime \| Forums