Enough with 'Nintendo is doomed'

[NoeL]

Which isn't what I said

But it's what the OP (you know, the one I was replying to) said:

Nintendo always has, and always will, dominate the handheld market.

I almost agree with what you've been saying this whole time, though I do think there's a slim chance someone could "out-Nintendo" Nintendo. Phones and tablets have way too much shit on them to ever be appealing to developers OR consumers, but if someone can make a closed system that gets the final say on what games can and can't be published for the system and is able to deliver a comparable gaming experience at a cheaper price point they could potentially dethrone Nintendo.

Comparing it to WoW isn't that legitimate because WoW is a social game. Players interact heavily with each other and form communities, and have an interest in seeing how the living world progresses around them. While there is an aspect of this with Nintendo regarding people that want to play and discuss what their friends are playing, a solo gamer has no reason NOT to move on to the better platform. While someone could and arguably has made a game that's better than WoW in every conceivable way you can't transfer that community piece by piece - either everyone goes or no one does. It's why Google+ never beat out Facebook (before you bring up MySpace, Facebook set itself apart by appealing more to adults than tweens, and when MySpace users grew up they became at home on Facebook).

 

[Shaun Chang-Time]

nintendo isnt doomed lol the sales they get from the 3DS,pokemon games and other DS games is enough to keep the cash flowing in. handhelds is where they have been making most of the money since the wii u was released

 

[Cid Silverwing]

They're not doomed, but they are surely struggling now that everyone involved in the company got their salaries sliced due to the marketing disaster that is the Wii-U.

Captha: don't waste time.

 

[Strazdas]

I think that everything all those uninformed people say is a load of bull. Especially the people that said that tablets and laptops would kill the PC.(hasn't happened) That Consoles would kill the PC.(hasn't happened) That casual games would kill hardcore games.(hasn't happened) That Nintendo would die.(hasn't happened) That no-one wants spacesims, point and click adventures, and true RPG's (Kickstarter tells us otherwise)...
So I don't really bother with those empty slogans.

laptops essentially killed PC for everyone but business and gamers. unless a person is a gamer he is most likely with a laptop. ive even seen gamers claim they can do perfectly well on a laptop. laptop sales have been higher than PC sales for years now.
As far as smartphones/tablets go, they have just reached 1 billion sales per year [www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/131720-Annual-Global-Smartphone-Shipments-Exceed-One-Billion-for-the-First-Time]. every 7th person in the world has bought a smarphone in 2013.
As far as consoles killing PC games, it depends on genres. In PC centric genresl ike strategy (i like strategy!) its all about PC. but shooters/fighters/racers its mostly about bad ports now. though it looks like this generation its going to be PC that kills consoles.
Casual gaming is multiple times more profitable than hardcore gaming. and while it hasnt killed it, there certainly is a lot of "Appeal to everyone" vibe going on.
Nintendo wont die. Not untill attrition eat away its cash balances, that are larger than MS and Sonys console division assets. Nintendo has more MONEY than Xbox division and PS divisions are worth put together, buildings and all. so yeah not going to happen any time soon.
So theres a lot of truth behind those obviuosly overblown statements.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Remember during the Gamecube days? Call me crazy, but I think we had this exact same debacle. In fact, we had this same argument a year or two after the Wii launched, when everyone said its sales would drop off and we'd never hear from Nintendo again. What's more, I bet we'll have this same argument again in a few years when they announce their new console. I had assumed that everyone recognized a pattern when they saw it, and that we'd never have this problem again.

IN the gamecube days, Nintendo wasn't poised to post three years of operating losses. They also didn't have to cut sales projections on the console by nearly 80%.

Next, handhelds. Nintendo always has, and always will, dominate the handheld market. As long as their handheld sales are strong, they can piss away however much money they want and still be financially sound.

Nintenod has never had a serious competitor in that space until the smartphone. Granted, I think the 3DS is a fine machine with plenty to love and will likely do fine for several years but continued dominance is a thing of the past. I'd like to see actual data on the subject (attach rates for example) but I'd wager the smartphone is probably absolutely dominating the 3DS when it comes to gaming.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, companies don't just collapse due to a single bad console. Nintendo didn't collapse because of the Gamecube.

The Gamecube was a financial success, actually.

Sony didn't collapse in the opening years of the PS3.

Sony has a host of other products that they sell including media players, televisions, etc.

Hell, Microsoft unloaded a whole clip into their balls during the Xbox One announcement, and they still sold well.

Which doesn't prove anything about Nintendo's current situation.

So far, the only recent company that has withdrawn from the race altogether is Sega, which has spent the last twenty years proving they had no idea how to run a videogame company.

Sega dropped out of the race after releasing a console a short time before newer and drastically more powerful consoles came to market. The lead time they had was insufficient to generate a sustainable user base. It's actually more or less exactly what Nintendo did with the Wii U.

And I wish we could learn from these constant misjudgments, but I suppose we'll just keep on supposing for years to come.

Because there is no cogent argument even from Nintendo regarding how this problem gets better. Your CEO falling on the sword isn't a solution. Swapping out management isn't a solution. What Nintendo needs to do is get people to buy Wii U and they apparently have no idea how to do that since their strategy for decades now has been "Release Mario, hope for the best".

P.S. For those of you saying Nintendo 'deserves to die,' I challenge you: Find a friend who has Nintendo Land and play it with them. Then, tell me the company that made that game deserves to go bankrupt.

A company that does not know how to make a profit deserves to go bankrupt. To suggest they be given a free ride because the made a good thing once is silly. If they want my money, they'll make something I want now; they don't get it because I really liked a Link to the Past.


Actually, they did get my money for that last one since I did buy a Link Between Worlds.

 

[Something Amyss]

Your original quote was that it must be getting hard to defend Nintendo.

And in any meaningful sense, that remains true. Since the criticisms relate to their success, not their recognisability, pointing out GOTYs is useless. Pointing out critical acclaim is useless.

If anything, it seems like a distraction argument.

 

[PopularitySays]

Sorry for answering this rather late, but contrary to the thoughts of some people, Nintendo has made new IP's. Xenoblade Chronicles and Wonderful 101 are examples within the last two years.

What would you guys rather have Nintendo make?

 

[Roxas1359]

Sorry for answering this rather late, but contrary to the thoughts of some people, Nintendo has made new IP's. Xenoblade Chronicles and Wonderful 101 are examples within the last two years.

What would you guys rather have Nintendo make?

Just so you know, Nintendo only published those IPs, they didn't make them and they are second party. The last franchise Nintendo EAD made was Wii Fit, the other new IP were made by other studios. Wonderful 101 was made entirely by Platinum Games and was pitched to Nintendo. Xenoblade Chronicles was made and developed by Monolith Soft, just like the other Xeno series games (Xenosaga, Xenogear, etc.)

Now Nintendo actually owns Monolith Soft in a similar way that Sony owns Naughty Dog, but people credit Naughty Dog for Naughty Dog games, not necessarily Sony. Oslo crediting Nintendo EAD for something Monolith Soft made isn't necessarily right, just like how crediting Sony Computer Entertainment for something Naughty Dog made isn't really right.

As fit Wonderful 101, that was made by second party, like how Ratchet and Clank was made by the second party Insomniac. Sony doesn't get credit for Ratchet and Clank, Insomniac does. As such Platinum Games should get the credit for W101.

Also, considering the fact that Nintendo didn't really have plans to localize Xenoblade Chronicles and GameStop has full distribution rights means not many people have the game without having to shell out about $90 for a "used" copy of the game, which is BS. As for W101, while it is fun, it flopped majorly in the market.