Poll: Should Nintendo Stop Making Consoles?

[New Frontiersman]

No. God no.

I like my Wii, and I like my 3DS. I'm excited for the WiiU. I never really disliked motion controls or 3D.

I enjoy what Nintendo has done, I like their games, I like their systems, their games are still fun to me and I enjoy playing them on their consoles, and from a business standpoint they're still making shitloads of money.

I hope they keep making consoles for a long time to come so that when I have children, I can introduce them to the same quality of games I had as a kid, and maybe they can grow up enjoying video games like I have.

 

[CrystalShadow]

I'm currently enjoying the heck out of Skyward Sword, a game that is far better on the Wii with Motion Plus than it would be on another console. Granted, the Wii isn't perfect, but Nintendo makes games that use the hardware very well, and not just party games.

So, no. Don't assume all hardcore gamers hate Wii controls.

Hey, I know this sounds off topic, but does Skyward Sword require motion controls or can I use a classic controller as an alternative?

It's the reason I couldn't stand Twilight Princess on the Wii, but loved it on the Gamecube. It's just that I'm used to having my controllers having a precise and immediate response. Is the response any better than it was for TP or does SS have the same problem?

No, you can't use a classic controller.

You have to keep in mind that Twilight princess is a game with motion controls tacked on as an afterthought, while Skyward Sword was designed around it.

At times I look at it and try and figure out if you could realistically re-implement it using a traditional control scheme, but it doesn't really seem plausible to do so.

Several things would be impossible, or really awkward to do that way.

Whereas in twilight princess, the only thing that wouldn't work OK without motion controls is that little minigame in the fishing hole. (Not the fishing itself, just the minigame involving the ball in the maze.)

The swordfighting mechanics in Skyward sword can't really be replicated without motion controls. You'd need to dedicate an analog stick to it, as well as several buttons on top of that.
And even then you'd lose several moves you can do at the moment.

However, on the whole I assume you could have played it with a conventional controller if some of the game design had been altered.

 

[Al-Bundy-da-G]

OK you've sold me on it. I'll pick it used to try it out. If I like SS, I'll returned the used copy and buy a new copy.

However if I find the game unappealling someone shall pay dearly......

 

[Kyrian007]

Nintendo is the only company that actually released a console built to outlast its own warranty in the last 2 console generations. I prefer buying Nintendo products at release time because they actually still test their hardware to see if it won't brick a month or 2 out of the box. Microsoft has an excuse for shoddy hardware... that was always their software model. The first 6 to 9 months AFTER release are their beta test. "Just let consumers find our bugs and glitches." Sony predates that mentality, and they STILL switched to it for the ps2 and 3. Neither of which were stable consoles until the slim models were released. At some point Nintendo will jump on that development style (its industry standard these days) perhaps even as early as Wii U. But I won't want them to stop until they do. I own exactly ONE of each Nintendo console. And each of them still works. Sony and Microsoft can't say the same, I have had bricks out of each of their efforts (sometimes several.) And Nintendo is 2 console generations older than Sony, 3 older than Microsoft. Little props to Sega, I still have a working Dreamcast. But screw supposed shortcomings bandied about by the console fanboys out there, at least Nintendo products are built to last. I'll be enjoying Fire Emblem, Skyward Sword, and No More Heroes long after they are pawning their games to buy a working secondhand replacement console (or asking mommy and daddy to buy it for them.)

 

[Pedro The Hutt]

I think the real problem with the Wii were the lazy third party developers, they'd basically use PS2 games, slap some lazy or poorly conceived waggle controls on them and call it a Wii game. Too few tried to actually capitalise on what the Wii had to offer, both with its controller and even with the hardware, it might not be a 360 but it could certainly perform well above PS2 standards. So I think a lot more could've been done with the Wii if more third party developers actually bothered with it.

 

[Twilight_guy]

No. I want to stave off the day consoles are made by the gaming division of electronics companies and not game companies for as long as possible. Also, I don't think the PS3 and X-box apply to casual gamers (yet) as much as stuff Nintendo is doing. It's changing though.

 

[Grygor]

Although I personally don't have any interest in the Wii, and would love Nintendo to focus on xbox/ps3 games... No. It's the highest selling console, so there's actually more interest in that then there is xbox/ps3. Why would I want to deny others fun, especially when it barely impacts me.

Plus, I love their 3DS. Not to mention most of their classics wouldn't work well on the other consoles.

Yes, the Wii is the highest-selling console, but it also has the lowest tie ratio - i.e. people buy fewer games for their Wiis than for their 360s and PS3s (also note that the Wii's tie ratio is inflated due to Wii Sports being an unavoidable pack-in in most regions). In particular, the trend for the past year has been that the Wii is selling less software in total than the other 2 consoles, despite have a 50% larger installed base. And the Wii games that ARE selling well are overwhelmingly Nintendo-made. (Games published by Nintendo make up 9 of the top 10 best-selling Wii games, and 16 of the top 25; the first non-Nintendo game in the Wii best-seller list comes in at #10.)

This is what publishers really care about - and its publishers, after all, who control what games appear on what systems, and the tie ratio shows how easy it is to sell games to console owners.

---

Now it makes perfect business sense for Nintendo to stay in the console hardware business - they make lots of money selling hardware, and even more selling their own games on that hardware.

But I would argue that ultimately, as long as Nintendo uses hardware gimickry rather than JUST their library of exclusive titles to differentiate their systems from the competition, it's bad for Nintendo fans.

I think the real problem with the Wii were the lazy third party developers, they'd basically use PS2 games, slap some lazy or poorly conceived waggle controls on them and call it a Wii game. Too few tried to actually capitalise on what the Wii had to offer, both with its controller and even with the hardware, it might not be a 360 but it could certainly perform well above PS2 standards. So I think a lot more could've been done with the Wii if more third party developers actually bothered with it.

Motion controls are very hard to program, and take lots of testing to get right - in short, they are significantly more difficult to develop for than traditional controls or touch-screen controls.

Granted, a Wii game could ignore motion control altogether, but let's be realistic - if you're making a Wii game, you're certainly going to use motion control if only to justify your choice of platform.

 

[F4LL3N]

Yes, the Wii is the highest-selling console, but it also has the lowest tie ratio - i.e. people buy fewer games for their Wiis than for their 360s and PS3s (also note that the Wii's tie ratio is inflated due to Wii Sports being an unavoidable pack-in in most regions). In particular, the trend for the past year has been that the Wii is selling less software in total than the other 2 consoles, despite have a 50% larger installed base. And the Wii games that ARE selling well are overwhelmingly Nintendo-made. (Games published by Nintendo make up 9 of the top 10 best-selling Wii games, and 16 of the top 25; the first non-Nintendo game in the Wii best-seller list comes in at #10.)

This is what publishers really care about - and its publishers, after all, who control what games appear on what systems, and the tie ratio shows how easy it is to sell games to console owners.

---

Now it makes perfect business sense for Nintendo to stay in the console hardware business - they make lots of money selling hardware, and even more selling their own games on that hardware.

But I would argue that ultimately, as long as Nintendo uses hardware gimickry rather than JUST their library of exclusive titles to differentiate their systems from the competition, it's bad for Nintendo fans.

I think if Nintendo made a "proper", "hardcore (in comparison)" console, removing any "gimmicks", it would be a godsend for most gamers. But I doubt that'll ever happen. Nintendo's got that many strong titles to work with, with huge fanbases, even ignoring Mario and the likes... They could make some really sick games if they wanted to.

I'd love that. But really. They've got it in their head that there's a specific audience they must develop for, and I really don't think they've got any interest in appealling to anyone else.

Nintendo could steamroll Sony and Microsoft if they actually used those beautiful brains they've got. Why won't they use their brains? Guuuh!

 

[Soxafloppin]

YES! I want them to make there games for Consoles and PC

It'l never happen though, If you could get Nintendo games on other consoles then no one would buy there consoles.

Still Pokemon MMO!, Or a full blown AAA Metriod game!

I don't think the PS3 and X-box apply to casual gamers (yet)

I'd have to disagree, COD and FIFA are as casual as it gets.

 

[Zhadramekel]

Ok here's my take on things. Just because Nintendo are trying new things and not everyone likes them that doesn't make them bad ideas. Personally I'm looking forward to the Wii U and how they incorporate the touch screen controls into Wii Gameplay cos it's probably gonna be different to how they did it with the DS.

 

[Lukeje]

First it was the Wii with its clunky and frustrating controls that no hardcore gamer in their right mind would actually like.

Anyone who likes motion controls is obviously no true gamer. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman]

Did you not consider that one of the reasons the games are so great is that they are so intimately linked with the hardware?

I'd love that. But really. They've got it in their head that there's a specific audience they must develop for, and I really don't think they've got any interest in appealling to anyone else.

Ah, yes. I guess I must have just imagined their implementation of features [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Super_Mario_Bros._Wii#Super_Guide] that allow them to make their games harder to appeal to `hardcore' gamers.

 

[Lukeje]

Double post.

 

[Plumerou]

anyone who knows some of the history behind consoles will tell you this, never bet against nintendo, there is a reason they have been in this industry the longest, and while i dont believe motion controls are the future gaming should take, they have proved that there are games that can use this feature and work.

 

[Lev The Red]

they make great handhelds, but i don't particularly enjoy the Wii. don't get me wrong, i loved the N64 and the GameCube, but i didn't like the fact that the Wii depended on the motion controls so heavily. i hope the WiiU will be different, but i won't be buying one that i can't get dirt-cheap.

 

[everythingbeeps]

I've thought for a long time they should stop making consoles and just stick with games, the way Sega did.

But then I realized something: ever since Sega stopped making consoles, the quality of their games have gone largely down the toilet. I might worry about that with Nintendo.

Plus, Nintendo consoles have always had their own charm. So they may as well stick with it. The Wii U looks pretty gimmicky, and I hated the motion controls of the Wii, but beyond that I can't really complain.

Playing a Mario game on an Xbox would just feel wrong.

 

[Farther than stars]

No way. They're selling them, so obviously there are people who enjoy playing on Nintendo consoles. Why would they stop making fun things for those people if Nintendo are still making money off their sales. And after all, if you don't like one of their consoles, you don't have to buy it.
Personally, I would have to say that the Wii isn't my thing, but I remember having some really good times on their Gamecube. And who knows, maybe their next generation will be something for me again. I'd like to at least see what that future holds and I don't see any reason for them to stop now that they're still doing really well.

 

[Grygor]

anyone who knows some of the history behind consoles will tell you this, never bet against nintendo, there is a reason they have been in this industry the longest, and while i dont believe motion controls are the future gaming should take, they have proved that there are games that can use this feature and work.

And that "reason" is the handheld market, their dominance of which allowed them to survive 15 years of massive blunders in the console market without going out of business.

Let's also not forget that Nintendo's strongest grip on the market (the NES era) required anti-trust violations...

 

[ultrabiome]

i'd rather see microsoft drop out of the console market than ever see nintendo leave. nintendo brings the innovation (yes, motion controls and all) and sony the power. there is nothing on xbox that makes me want one and i think gaming took a major downhill turn when they entered the market - when major developers discovered that pandering to legions of FPS playing idiots with yearly trash was more profitable than spending the time creating masterpieces of gaming that will actually be remembered.