sniddy said:
...Nintendo is on it's way out as a hardware producer
If this doesn't finish them off I'll be suprised - I expect a lurch back to handhelds with cooky mechanics and then silence - then Mario will be on the PS6
Ehhh, either that or just release a whole bunch of old IP on other Nintendo consoles, rebuild a warchest and try it again. Which might explain why they don't do see to begin with, now. Think of it as a means to recapitalize that they may need as insurance for one, big future project. Honestly, people should look at this in the form of market forces. If Nintendo dies, say goodbye to dedicated games consoles. You'll lose the only innovation of what the console market is if Nintendo goes. All you'll get is cheap Pc-wannabes that offset production costs by licencing games with far reduced mod support and a penchant for quantity over quality, with endlessly sequelized garbage as its only consistent cash cow.
This is what makes Nintendo an especially tragic a thing ... they're kind of the only company that is desperately trying to make the gaming console something which PC can't do.
And that's biting them in the ass ... but what else can they do? This is all they have. They don't have other divisions like Sony and Microsoft to offset costs. And even the games console divisions for Microsoft and Sony are struggling to make a steady profit. They'll never disappear because it's an extension of their brand.
I posit another argument, Nintendo isn't a bad game company. They're innovative, they have dedicated staffers, they have experience, and they have actual vision beyond being a cheap PC. While, sure, results matter ... but I'm also going to suggest what we all secretly know ... that if any company is going to make game consoles golden again it's going to be Nintendo. I think why people are so passionate about Nintendo is secretly because all of us want Nintendo to strike a rich veing of ore even as they dig themselves deeper into what feels like an evolutionary niche already tapped as far as it will go.
Nobody wats to see Nintendo go, because it will validate the idea gamers have never wanted innovation in the market.
As much as people may scream 'stop making gimmicks' ... at the same time, nobody really wants to scream 'never change videogaming.'
(Edit) That being said, I plan to get the Switch. There's some good games that are inevitably going to be good and stuff you won't get anywhere else and I think spacing out the games is better. It's not going to have the library of other consoles, but that's better than a decent launch and then a drought with the Wii U .... whereas with the Switch we know there's big games coming to it within 2017 ... as long as they give us a big title that will consume hundreds of hours, like something meaningful like Zelda, Xenoblade, Fire Emblem, Splatoon, etc with regularity ... if they can manage to co-ordinate with 3rd Party this time .... then I can see the Switch moving enough to be profitable on its own to make up dev costs within two years when coupled with effective licencing.
While people scream the tech is pricey, I feel like what you're getting makes up for the price of the console. But unlike the Wii U will they make the most of it? If they can make the most of it, then it won't suddenly be a gimick ... it will be something that has no other expression in the home console market.
Now ... this is
optimism ... but I am willing to
pay for the optimism that Nintendo can strike it big and redefine home consoles. They've proven that with portables ... can they do that again?
But at the same time I'm not going to hold it against someone not willing to pay for the optimism. I get why people are disappointed, and I can understand that as much as anyone who loves Nintendo products and will always see them as the only true console maker who is a bonafide
game console maker. Though I think Nintendo might be onto something here... I feel like they're hitting enough the right notes and as always, I think Nintendo has enough loyal fans by now that as long as they deliver on some of their promises they can at least break even... and try delivering us something new once more in 4 years time.
But Nintendo has to tread a fine line here. It has to secure 3rd Party ... while simultaneously saying to them; "And you'll be the big thing for at least two to three weeks at official launch."
If they can't compete with total variety, they need to compete with quality that also balances 3rd Party desires to have market attention for longer with potential fewer consoles sold .... that's difficult.
This is why I feel Reggie made this argument to begin with. If Nintendo can't compete with total volume, they need to manage big sales better. And that's where I feel like Nintendo isn't doing so well ... they're misreading the market by assuming they don't want dead volume of various hardware, by underproducing hardware ...
They don't want to oversaturate markets they seem to have no clear idea about the desireability of their products. While people seem critical about this, try to put yourself in their shoes. Games is everything about them, but at the same time the tech they want to sell is obviously far more expensive than the buy in ... just like any other console. So where does that leave one where your must balance your budget and projections with far more caution than something big like Sony or Microsoft?
Just like any console, it gets cheaper to reproduce as time goes on. The dream goal of Nintendo is to ship only exactly as much units as they ever need to. No dead volume with more expensive tech to produce at the time. And because they're a smaller player that needs to deliver on suitabily impressive or innovative tech to compete, they also can't be spending more on reproduction of the final amalgam of their tech as their competitors.
This is why Nintendo carries this stigma of underselling products. They're kind of frightened. It's a natural response when you're the small fish competing for the exact same market as big fish. You have to be careful and that means each sale made more costly by having to showboat or create self-sustaining monopolized trends, like motion controls ... and not oversaturating your own stock if it means you're paying far more than each sale and relying on licencing.
Not only that but limited stocks
drives consumption and a minor whisper of in the right journalist's ear means they come out with a headline like; "Better preorder if your want this..." when in truth you're probably going to meet demand, anyways ... it's just giving you more tools to assess
real demand over hype. It's a smart little trick that might earn you a bit of notoriety, but a bit of bad press isn't so bad press when your critics say; "You done stuffed up Nintendo, people actually want your console and you're not giving it to them! ..." because that's not
real criticism ... it's like stealth marketing.
This might seem sleazy and all, but try to put yourself in their shoes ... they're a small fish. Imagine you're the small fish ... what would you stoop to to compete?
At the very least it should be far more forgiveable for a small fish to do as such than a big fish. Or t put it into VG logic; "Blame the game ... not the player."
