Nintendo: "We Have to do Better When We Launch NX"

[bluegate]

When Nintendo dies, gaming dies.

Looking at how many people actually care about Nintendo consoles compared to other consoles, I would say that you might be wrong.

Gaming seems to be doing just fine without Nintendo around.

Erm... You realize that the 3DS is THE most popular console of this generation, right? And that the Wii U is still outselling the Xbox One (granted, it has a time advantage)

You can't make the statement that "Gaming is fine without Nintendo around", when they're currently around.

The world sure is doing great now that the USA's no longer a country!

Sorry, when I say console I mean home console, I don't mean home consoles & handhelds, because then we might as well count all iOs and Android devices, because there seems to be a lot of gaming going on there.

Last I checked, the WiiU sits at around 13 million units sold and the Xbox One sits at around 20 million units sold, so even though the WiiU outsells the Xbox One in some monthly charts, it is only playing catch up to the Xbox One's total number, so yeah there's that.

Having stated this, I feel pretty confident that I can make a statement that gaming is doing just fine without Nintendo around, mind you, I am talking about the non-portable gaming industry here.

And as for why I say that they aren't around, this is because they aren't very impactful within the industry lately.

Sony, Microsoft, Ubisoft, EA, Bethesda, Bioware, Square Enix, Capcom and all sorts of developers and publishers that I can't be bothered to name seem to be doing just fine for themselves and the industry.

The statement that gaming were to die if Nintendo dies is more ludicrous than what I said.

 

[omega 616]

snip

ps4/xbox was released 3 years ago, so the scorpio and neo aren't brand spanking new consoles, just polished versions (that I don't give a fuck about).

I said I hope I am wrong, not "why would anyone want you to be wrong?" seriously, you need English comprehension. Not an insult but you keep getting the wrong end of the stick. Another example, I don't hate Mario or Link ... I just think Nintendo need to diversify their games.

I never said they do need to cancel it, I just think there is a thing as over saturating the market with the same game. People enjoy Mario and Cod and whatever else but people wont forget these franchises if they skip one release.

Again, to carry on from what I have just been saying. if out of 10 games 5 are Zelda or Mario, you need to diversify, it's like at the moment they think "we need an RPG!" and a lead designer says "So another zelda then?" or "we need another side scroller" and the same guy says "so another Mario then?" or "we need a kart game" same guy says "so stick Mario in it?" or "we need a sports game" ... "Mario?".

How about making a TPS with, I dunno ... squid people? And 'cos bullets and guns are scary, they use paint 'cos paint balls exist!

So "we at Nintendo are lazy as fuck! So we will just use the same assets again, just retexture to keep up with hardware". Which is what it is, indie studio's can knock out games at the same quality as Mario games these days.... look at "inside" game is fucking gorgeous ... looks better than Mario 'cos of all the lighting and particle effects, Mario is just stylised bright colours. There is something to be said for nice, simple, bright bold colours but in terms of being impressive other games (that aren't even AAA) leave Mario games wanting.

So why even have other characters? They put Mario in just about everything, so save even more time and just get rid of Zelda and Ash/Red and who needs Samus? Focus on gameplay? How hard is it to add a new suits and powers?

I honestly don't hate Nintendo, I just think they could be doing so much better.

 

[omega 616]

snip

You've shown me no examples of diversity, of any kind.

I think they are over saturating both, just how many mario karts, smash and 2D side scrollers does one company need?

It's called Bro's and unless you can tel me another pair of bro's, it's a Mario and luigi game.

Except every other dev house on the planet does these things you list, so yes, it is lazy of Nintendo.

In terms of everything they need to tell people, EXACTLY what they are selling. I've done marketing and courses on how to run a business, they need to do one as well ... you need to tell people what you're selling, why they need it, what benefits it provides etc they don't do any of these.

I don't really care why each one was created, you missed my point again. If reusing assets to save time and focus on more important things, why not just put Mario, with his art style in every game ... saved even more time.

I am bothered by the amount of games these two fuck knuckles are in, this is the point you consistently miss and I am not sure how you keep missing it. I am not bothered by Mario and zelda games coming out, I just want them to do what assassins creed did ... take a year off, develop another franchise or IP! I am not bothered how many COD games come out either, at least 3 different stuios work on them.

But they aren't new consoles, they are 0.5's ... NX is the NEXT Nintendo 'cos WiiU is a bigger flop than a breaching whale!

Do you want to keep talking about the word advertisement? You've brought it up like 4 times now and I've addressed it every time ...

I have said "I think" seriously, press CTRL + F then copy and paste "No, you're just not getting my point and I have said multiple times, it's my opinions and that I am not speaking for anybody else. Need to go and actually read what I said. Even in the first quote box "I think" it's not a statement of fact, it's an opinion." ... so I said that shit before your post and no, I haven't edited. You even have a post where you quote me saying "I think", I can't edit your posts, soooo....

 

[Yopaz]

You and Igor-Rowan should get together and form the "I don't understand sarcasm club". I am completely aware of that the GameCube with its relatively strong hardware was a disaster. The DS, 3DS and Wii were quite successful. You should take a look at this: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sarcasm I guess you also feel smart in correcting me?

Hey smartass, let me tell you a little internet secret. Sarcasm is pretty hard to get across on the internet through text. And considering that people are stupid enough to say what you said with a perfectly straight face and believe it, I don't know why you're surprised. Of course, other people might notice it easier than some, me being one of them that didn't notice. Either that's a failing on my part, or as I said... Sarcasm is not super easy to convey. Probably a lot of the latter, considering you wanna act funny that several users didn't see it

He was being facetious, he was sarcastically pointing out how Nintendo at its most gimmicky was the most successful, ala Wii, DS, 3DS while the GameCube sold like crap.

How come this many people missed the sarcasm? It's not like it isn't blatant.

See the above!

You're right, it is harder in written form which is why I made it painstakingly blatant. Also read the context, it might help you. The fact that you didn't get it doesn't mean it's impossible to understand, when a guy I do in fact disagree with and quite honestly I have been overly rude to agrees with me that this is blatant sarcasm then that might be an indication that you might have missed something obvious.

Congratulations on missing my point, join the proud group.

Given that apparently nobody understood your 'point,' perhaps you should spend a little more time communicating and a little less time condescending.

You do realize that you've grouped yourself with 2 guys who didn't understand blatant sarcasm, right? I called three fairly successful consoles failures and one unsuccessful one a massive success and they jumped in to "correct me". These are the guys you proudly make yourself a part of when you say "no-one understood my point". Also if you look back at the discussion you were butting into, do you see the guy I was discussing with mentioning games? Do you see me mentioning games? If I remember correctly we were discussing hardware, him saying it was important that they focused on hardware rather than gimmicks, me saying gimmicks had proven to be successful. That said, you are of course right that games are always the important selling point of any console. I would have moved on to that eventually, but I was trying to make my point that Nintendo's focus on strong hardware hasn't really given good results. The reason why I didn't go into this in that post is because you should always try to remain on the topic the person you're discussing with is talking about. Going off topic indicates that you have no suited counter arguments.

 

[chozo_hybrid]

How about you start by telling/showing people what it is? That's your first step to get people interested, find out too late and people may not have saved the money for it or whatever.

 

[Strazdas]

Large publishers have already been expressing much interest in the NX such as ubisoft, Rockstar(Take two?) and others. One would have to assume they already have access to development kits as is the course for new consoles. There must be something going for it.

Ubisoft and Rockstar was always interested in Nintendo console distribution. these two seem to want to be released EVERYWHERE (rockstar even re-releasing its old games on mobile phones now that they are powerful enough to run them). The thing is we see this every nintendo console launch, and they port a few titles to Wii/WiiU, they get shafted by Nintendo and then just give up. Hopefully thats not whats going to happen now, but i fear it seems to be the usual way things go.

Comparably, Nintendo as a company is doing well. The highest selling game on any onsole has been Nintendo 1P. And not merely by a small margin but a fuck-you sized margin. Which suggests that Nintendo hasn't lost the 'core gamer' nearly as much as people pretend it has. While you can criticise the lack of Nintendo IP ... its utter dominance in terms of handhelds is still going strong, regardless of mobile gaming. Even as there is a saturation in the latter.

Nintendo should totally still try to provide adaptive, innovative means to interact with the player. People can scream 'gimick' if they want, but it's far better than trying to merely copy what the competition has already. If you can improve development kits projects to new developers, they will at least view it as a new way to isolate and make their gamestand out in what is increasingly becoming a saturated marketplace.

Make it affordable, and future proof the NX so that it can make itself cheaper as new trends in hardware availability can be seen as to be on the horizon so that you can maintain price efficiency ... and you can compete on the ideal that you're providing an experience that won't simply be as if a cross-platform release and little else.

Wii Sports were in 2006 and i hardly see it being repeated again. Also if we consider cumulative sales for game, Nintendo is only 3rd place with that, After Tetris and Minecraft. If you want something made this decade however you need to look at 4th place - GTA 5 - a game thats not released on nintendo consoles at all.

Though i suppose the Wii Sports didnt even deserve that, as it only got so many copies "sold" because it was bundled with the console for ages.

The reason they dominate handheld is because they have a monopoly. Vita is absolutely unsupported and Sony seems to have given up on it completely. However if we look at actual handheld competition - mobile games - nintendo is being crushed.

The thing about innovative means to interact is that if you want to do them do something people actually like. Motion controls and Kinect failed not becuase they were called gimmicks, they failed because people didnt want to use them. On the other hand i see VR succeeding despite being equally gimmicky. Innovation for innovations sale is useless. It should be useful to your consumer.

The new hardware trends already hit the deck though. We got a 14/16nm GPU/APU technology and 12nm CPU technology is to become released this year. This is a huge leak from the old 22/20nm tech and i dont see another such leap in at least, say, 3 years. Given that both Sony and MS were forced to make use of this technology leap, theres not much nintendo could even do in terms of futureproofing above their competition. One things certain though, if they are going to use the old 22/20nm tech they are going to bleed money. MS and Sony didnt change to new tech out of goodness of thier hearts. they did because manufacturing lines are being regeared to new tech and producing old tech becomes exorbitantly expensive.

When Nintendo dies, gaming dies.

When Nintendo dies, I'm going all PC, indies are the only people who can be trusted to make actual games anymore, instead of "platforms" to sell content.

Nah, nintendo has became irrelevant to gaming long time ago. They are a niche market now.

And welcome to the PC, where actual gaming were going strong since 1985, independent of mercy of big publishers.

 

[Saulkar]

I am sad that I just cannot give a damn. No console appeals to me this generation and that is something I find genuinely disheartening. This has to be a real return to form for me to feel the slightest spark of interest but until then it will not be on my mind.

 

[McMarbles]

I mean, well... duh? This isn't a great insight here.

 

[RanceJustice]

I know this will meet with some opposition, but I think Nintendo needs a completely new trajectory. Claiming that they need to "explain the console better" seems to portend that it will be something "hard to understand" again which makes me think its going to focus on some sort of gimmick. At the moment, rumors suggest it will be a portable console with the ability to connect to a home entertainment center and/or comes with detachable controllers. The thing is... this isn't just that innovative (Everyone with an Android phone or any other devices can use wireless display technology), and so we come to the current conceit of my suggestion - its time to stop focusing on consoles entirely!

I personally feel that the idea of the gaming console - as a proprietary platform - has outlived its usefulness and does more to hurt the player base and industry as a whole than help. Decades ago, when general purpose computers cost thousands of dollars and had limited processing power consoles, though expensive for the time, provided a rather affordable way to get into gaming and required purpose built hardware to do so. Today, most modern consoles (ie PS4 / XBOne ) are simply locked down PCs and other devices, using very similar hardware to that provided off the shelf. Focusing more on Nintendo, they have been falling behind for several generations for a number of reasons, but ultimately it comes down to their focus on gimmicks that aren't that innovative or exciting. For instance, the single-touch resistive touch screen WiiU controller pad falls short in an era when multi-touch capacitive smartphones and tablets are widely available. For many gamers, there just isn't much compelling about Nintendo's hardware or ecosystem; the only thing they have is a handful of first party games. I didn't buy a WiiU or a New 3DS, even though I'd love to play Smash Bros, Zelda, Metroid, Fire Emblem, Bayonetta, Xenosaga, and other titles that are on the platform. However, I don't see them as justification to purchase a couple of $200-300+ consoles when I have a PC and mobile - platforms with many advantages! I'd buy all the titles listed above if they were available on PC and/or Android, assuming they were quality ports for reasonable prices, for instance.

Nintendo has fallen behind even the other console manufacturers for a number of reasons too long to assess in an already verbose post. If they have the fortitude to break with the traditional need for control and ownership of an entire platform, I believe they could profit by leveraging their strengths: their games and peripherals. Giving up the costs of running a console platform, mobile or otherwise, will save a considerable amount of money. They could invest it into developing/publishing for the PC and mobile.

It would be easier and cheaper to develop/publish on PCs and the market is growing considerably. Imagine being able to buy the latest Smash Bros on Steam (or Humble etc) and play it against all of your Steam friends remotely, or with others on the same PC. Likewise, sales via Android would be alluring as an alternative to all of the "mobile monetization garbage" out there by charging "3DS style" where a game is $10-40 or so and includes the complete game content (though post-launch development can of course result in expansion style DLC). I'd love to play Fire Emblem Awakening and Fire Emblem Fates on PC and/or my Android phone. Pokemon GO already shows the desire for a Pokemon game on Android (and iOS), with the main criticism against GO being that it isn't enough like a "real" Pokemon game, having an attenuated feature set and mobile monetization style. If they launched the next generation of Pokemon on Android/iOS, I can only see it as a huge success.

Complementing releasing their games on PC and mobile, Nintendo could also develop peripherals for these platforms. Their affection for so-called innovative controllers and other "gimmicks" could be explored as they could create the well-respected peripherals for which they've been known for decades. Furthermore, by developing these peripherals for PC/mobile use and focusing on open driver packages and standards like Bluetooth, they could faciliate offering peripheral / gimmick driven games for those interested as well as provide another entry to the PC controller marketplace with a solid history. This could also provide additional control schemes for gaming especially on mobile, such as a quality bluetooth "dock/controller" that would give gamepad style controls for gaming on mobile devices. Thus, the criticism that 3DS and NX style games would not play well on touchscreen only mobile devices could be mitigated, by offering another control option.

As much as I love many of Nintendo's properties, I can't see myself purchasing any more consoles - not from them, or anyone. I'm tired of platform exclusives, lockdown, and the inability to utilize existing hardware and focus on openness an player experience. If Nintendo can get past their intransigence and move beyond the console paradigm, they could bring their greatest strengths of games and peripherals to targeting the PC, I think they have the potential to break free of their lagging status and change the game entirely, profiting greatly by giving people a better choice.

 

[go-10]

"we have to do better when we launch NX"
...
...
you don't say? and here I thought you wanted to do worse. Well color me impressed this statement changes EVERYTHING!

 

[Vigormortis]

I doubt anybody is more critical of Nintendo than me, I think they are living off nostalgia, haven't released a great game since I'd guess Mario 64

Hey now! Metroid Prime was pretty great.

Granted, it was developed by Retro Studios, not Nintendo, but still. It kinda counts, I guess?

Mostly agree on your other points, though.

 

[WeepingAngels]

No, we know it's going to REVOLUTIONARY and INNOVATIVE and AMAZING and some other buzzwords, isn't that enough for you? I am annoyed that they haven't given us anything concrete to be honest, but I think I know why. If this console is a successor to the Wii U it will hurt Wii U sales from now and until the launch of NX (which might not be a solid launch considering fans feel betrayed by the quick transition to a new console). By giving us vague information they avoid that and still get us throwing money at the Wii U. What they should have learned form the Wii U is that giving vague information doesn't help them one bit.

Then they shouldn't have mentioned the NX at all.

No, the existance of the NX has been no secret. Nintendo is just guarding the details for whatever reason, maybe it's because the hardware is underwhelming.

 

[Yopaz]

No, we know it's going to REVOLUTIONARY and INNOVATIVE and AMAZING and some other buzzwords, isn't that enough for you? I am annoyed that they haven't given us anything concrete to be honest, but I think I know why. If this console is a successor to the Wii U it will hurt Wii U sales from now and until the launch of NX (which might not be a solid launch considering fans feel betrayed by the quick transition to a new console). By giving us vague information they avoid that and still get us throwing money at the Wii U. What they should have learned form the Wii U is that giving vague information doesn't help them one bit.

Then they shouldn't have mentioned the NX at all.

No, the existance of the NX has been no secret. Nintendo is just guarding the details for whatever reason, maybe it's because the hardware is underwhelming.

Not sure how this is a response to me, but honestly if they got no real information then they can keep it to themselves. Honestly I am sick of hearing what the NX isn't going to be and how it's going to be innovative and such. Also a console with underwhelming hardware? Stop the presses! All the consoles are lacking in hardware. If this had been 2010 then sure, the PS4 and the Xbox One would be decent, almost good. If you want good hardware you don't play console games.

 

[WeepingAngels]

No, we know it's going to REVOLUTIONARY and INNOVATIVE and AMAZING and some other buzzwords, isn't that enough for you? I am annoyed that they haven't given us anything concrete to be honest, but I think I know why. If this console is a successor to the Wii U it will hurt Wii U sales from now and until the launch of NX (which might not be a solid launch considering fans feel betrayed by the quick transition to a new console). By giving us vague information they avoid that and still get us throwing money at the Wii U. What they should have learned form the Wii U is that giving vague information doesn't help them one bit.

Then they shouldn't have mentioned the NX at all.

No, the existance of the NX has been no secret. Nintendo is just guarding the details for whatever reason, maybe it's because the hardware is underwhelming.

Not sure how this is a response to me, but honestly if they got no real information then they can keep it to themselves. Honestly I am sick of hearing what the NX isn't going to be and how it's going to be innovative and such. Also a console with underwhelming hardware? Stop the presses! All the consoles are lacking in hardware. If this had been 2010 then sure, the PS4 and the Xbox One would be decent, almost good. If you want good hardware you don't play console games.

You said you think you know why they have been tight lipped about the NX, it's so they don't harm the Wii U sales. I said that if they wanted that, they should have kept the NX a secret a long time ago.

Oh boy, you are one of those 'all consoles are weak compared to PC' people. Sorry to have disturbed you, carry on.

 

[Yopaz]

You said you think you know why they have been tight lipped about the NX, it's so they don't harm the Wii U sales. I said that if they wanted that, they should have kept the NX a secret a long time ago.

Not what I said. I said that being tight-lipped makes people uncertain and hesitant to buy the Wii U. It was a comment on the current state and the problem with Nintendo just giving us vague information. Right now we know next to nothing about the console. At some point it was even unclear whether it would replace the WiiU or the 3DS making it hard to justify buying either.

I'm sorry for the misunderstanding, I might have worded myself poorly. I do think that it would be better to not say anything at all than to give us vague information.

Oh boy, you are one of those 'all consoles are weak compared to PC' people. Sorry to have disturbed you, carry on.

Yes, I am one of those people who make conclusions based on quantitatively proven information rather than subjective experience. I'm not saying that consoles are weak, thus they are useless. I am saying that consoles are weak, thus we shouldn't really measure their worth based on hardware. There are plenty of reasons to pick a console over a PC, but hardware is not one of them. If you can dismiss the next Nintendo console based on hardware why can't I dismiss the PS4 based on hardware?

The answer is that it would be really stupid to dismiss anything based on hardware. The games are what matters, the functionality matters, the features matter and the hardware just needs to be 'good enough'. The PS4 is unable to run games at the same fps and resolution as my PC from 5 years ago and frankly I won't be impressed if the next console they will release manage that because by then my computer will be getting close to 6 years old at the very least.

But let's get back to the question here, why do you feel like you can criticize Nintendo consoles based on hardware when I can't criticize all consoles based on hardware?

 

[WeepingAngels]

You said you think you know why they have been tight lipped about the NX, it's so they don't harm the Wii U sales. I said that if they wanted that, they should have kept the NX a secret a long time ago.

Not what I said. I said that being tight-lipped makes people uncertain and hesitant to buy the Wii U. It was a comment on the current state and the problem with Nintendo just giving us vague information. Right now we know next to nothing about the console. At some point it was even unclear whether it would replace the WiiU or the 3DS making it hard to justify buying either.

I'm sorry for the misunderstanding, I might have worded myself poorly. I do think that it would be better to not say anything at all than to give us vague information.

Oh boy, you are one of those 'all consoles are weak compared to PC' people. Sorry to have disturbed you, carry on.

Yes, I am one of those people who make conclusions based on quantitatively proven information rather than subjective experience. I'm not saying that consoles are weak, thus they are useless. I am saying that consoles are weak, thus we shouldn't really measure their worth based on hardware. There are plenty of reasons to pick a console over a PC, but hardware is not one of them. If you can dismiss the next Nintendo console based on hardware why can't I dismiss the PS4 based on hardware?

The answer is that it would be really stupid to dismiss anything based on hardware. The games are what matters, the functionality matters, the features matter and the hardware just needs to be 'good enough'. The PS4 is unable to run games at the same fps and resolution as my PC from 5 years ago and frankly I won't be impressed if the next console they will release manage that because by then my computer will be getting close to 6 years old at the very least.

But let's get back to the question here, why do you feel like you can criticize Nintendo consoles based on hardware when I can't criticize all consoles based on hardware?

1) I, for one, am pretty sick of every conversation being about how the PC is superior in every way. It's to the point that I don't even want to talk to those of the 'master race'.

2) It is fine to compare console hardware to other console hardware. The reason why is because if the hardware is too weak, Nintendo won't get third party support again. This is relevant to make a purchase decision. They still may not get third party support due to some gimmick or shitty licensing terms but weak hardware hurt them this generation. No, it wouldn't be stupid to dismiss another Nintendo console based on weak hardware.

3) I don't see Sony losing third party support because it's weaker than PC. In fact, I would say that in many cases, PS4 is the lead platform.

 

[Yopaz]

You said you think you know why they have been tight lipped about the NX, it's so they don't harm the Wii U sales. I said that if they wanted that, they should have kept the NX a secret a long time ago.

Not what I said. I said that being tight-lipped makes people uncertain and hesitant to buy the Wii U. It was a comment on the current state and the problem with Nintendo just giving us vague information. Right now we know next to nothing about the console. At some point it was even unclear whether it would replace the WiiU or the 3DS making it hard to justify buying either.

I'm sorry for the misunderstanding, I might have worded myself poorly. I do think that it would be better to not say anything at all than to give us vague information.

Oh boy, you are one of those 'all consoles are weak compared to PC' people. Sorry to have disturbed you, carry on.

Yes, I am one of those people who make conclusions based on quantitatively proven information rather than subjective experience. I'm not saying that consoles are weak, thus they are useless. I am saying that consoles are weak, thus we shouldn't really measure their worth based on hardware. There are plenty of reasons to pick a console over a PC, but hardware is not one of them. If you can dismiss the next Nintendo console based on hardware why can't I dismiss the PS4 based on hardware?

The answer is that it would be really stupid to dismiss anything based on hardware. The games are what matters, the functionality matters, the features matter and the hardware just needs to be 'good enough'. The PS4 is unable to run games at the same fps and resolution as my PC from 5 years ago and frankly I won't be impressed if the next console they will release manage that because by then my computer will be getting close to 6 years old at the very least.

But let's get back to the question here, why do you feel like you can criticize Nintendo consoles based on hardware when I can't criticize all consoles based on hardware?

1) I, for one, am pretty sick of every conversation being about how the PC is superior in every way. It's to the point that I don't even want to talk to those of the 'master race'.

2) It is fine to compare console hardware to other console hardware. The reason why is because if the hardware is too weak, Nintendo won't get third party support again. This is relevant to make a purchase decision. They still may not get third party support due to some gimmick or shitty licensing terms but weak hardware hurt them this generation. No, it wouldn't be stupid to dismiss another Nintendo console based on weak hardware.

3) I don't see Sony losing third party support because it's weaker than PC. In fact, I would say that in many cases, PS4 is the lead platform.

First of all, I pointed out that you misunderstood me. Why is there no metion of that in your post?

1. I didn't say consoles are useless. I said consoles are quantitatively weaker. I said there are several reasons to play games on consoles, but you simply choose that my words mean "Hurr durr, PC MASTER RACE". I haven't once used the term PC master race until this point.

2. Basically saying "Hardware matters when I bring it up, not when you bring it up". I really should stop taking you seriously right there.

Then how about bring up console hardware and their success. Last generation the Wii had great success in the launch period despite basically belonging to the previous generation in all but marketing. Before that The PS2, the weakest console of the three main competitors crushed its competition. The PS1 was the victor of the generation before that despite the Nintendo 64 having a far better CPU (3 times faster), slightly more RAM and supported higher resolutions. The SNES was slightly more powerful than its competition in some aspects, weaker in some, but it was narrow. Overall the SNES was likely the more powerful, but I do not have benchmarks for any software to verify this. It was also the best selling console. I could analyze previous generations, but my point is that the most powerful console has rarely been the best selling one. Nintendo got problems they need to solve and it's more than just hardware.


3. Never said anything about that. This is however an example playing right into my hand as my point is that gamers do not care about the best hardware. They care about the games. Hardware needs to be 'good enough', a point I made in my previous post.

Lastly; stop getting annoyed at me for pointing out facts and stop inserting your own interpretation in my posts.