Question About Nintendo

[go-10]

actually most of the argument I see from friends is that if Nintendo allowed their games to be released on more powerful consoles the graphics would look much better and other publishers would be able to get away from the kid friendly image they have
one of my friends even says that if Zelda were to come out on PS4, it wouldn't have to put up with all the kiddy stuff and it would be like a God of War + Skyrim game that looks next gen, because currently Nintendo is working with last gen graphics.

to me this would signify the end of Zelda series as my favorite series since a lot of the things I like about it mainly revolve around the fact that it stands on its own and doesn't try to copy any other games. Same goes for Mario, Metroid, etc.

so yeah from what I have gathered:
1. better graphics
2. more violent/graphic content would be allowed... I guess Pikmin would burst into puddles of blood and guts instead of little ghost?

 

[Lightknight]

So, do most of you think Nintendo SHOULD go third party?

I don't think it'd be in Nintendo's best interest, yet. But I don't have a God's eye view on their market position and their strategy going forward. They have a huge stockpile of money and if they pump that into developing a console that can actually compete with the big boys then they can have Nintendo + full 3rd party support and a comparative cost. Nintendo stands to make a lot of money if they hit another successful console. We saw the N64 and gamecube losing significant amounts of market share and it was the Wii's innovative control mechanic that saved them. So maybe their first party software is no longer good enough for adults to continue to purchase. That being said, I also think that Nintendo found their niche last generation. They had a really cheap console that was easy to understand and use. That opened it up to all kinds of gamers from the elderly who hadn't even been considered a target market to casual gamers who prefer the excellent party lineup Nintendo provies. With the WiiU, they made the thing more complex with the gamepad and more expensive because of the gamepad (it's $140 to make the gamepad by itself). They meant it as a differentiator but it turned out we just didn't need or want it and developers didn't figure out a reason for it to exist which explains why it has become a glorified minimap in so many games. I think they could drop the gamepad and do a bit better going forward with a price reduction and patches to support software made so far.

I think making some of their older titles available on pc and other consoles may be nice. People steal them on PC anyways, so they might as well sell games older than the gamecube elsewhere (selling software that is too new may cannibalize sales of titles that are just coming out). Since those games hold up so well, it could serve as advertisement to get more gamers into Nintendo products.

As things are right now, maintaining the console isn't all that beneficial to them. The ps3/360 markets can generally play the games that Nintendo has made so far (Nintendo games aren't traditionally graphically demanding). That's only important because those markets constitute something like 160 million consoles compared to the WiiU's 5 million. A 10% attach rate for the WiiU would be 500k units sold. A 10% attach rate for the 360/ps3 would be 16 million units sold. If Nintendo can't get enough market share in the console market then it will be worth their time at some point. New Super Mario Bros has a crazy high attach rate on the WiiU of around 65% as the consoles biggest seller. On the WiiU that's 3.46 million units. It wouldn't have gotten 65% in the overall market. But like I said, just 10% would sell 4.6 time what it sold on the WiiU and I don't think it's unreasonable to think that 10% of gamers would purchase that game if they had the chance.

The question is how much money that translates into vs how much money Nintendo gets from all the non-first party. If the equation is more for them to be 3rd party and is likely to continue to be more then it does suit their needs. However, if they make another console in the near future that sells like the Wii, then they'd likely make a ton of more money and going third party in the meantime would weaken the demand for future Nintendo consoles (hypothetically, it could also just increase demand since their games ARE good). But this generation they're taking a hit on every console they sell and aren't selling very many units of software (they have only 4 games that have sold over a million and one more that is close to it). The best selling non-Nintendo game is ZombieU which was a launch title and has only sold just over 620k units. That's not good, fyi, and is why companies aren't supporting the WiiU. For most of the year, Nintendo only had two titles over a million. Both of which were included in major bundles for the console and one current major bundle has actually been including two games that are in the top five (New Super Mario and Luigi). Compare that to the PS4 which has only been out for a couple months and already has 5 titles at over a million. Personally, I think Sony's launch was relatively weak. But the 3rd party software has really propped it up as only one of those IPs are Sony (Killzone, which is a beautiful game).

For Nintendo fans, them switching to third party would be excellent. There is no downside for us as fans to be able to purchase the Nintendo Software brand on our PCs, PS4/XBOs. There's a reason why people buy a WiiU even though third party support is near null. So there is a demand for it.

I think the Wii U's 2014 lineup looks good, with X, Bayonetta 2, DCKTF, Smash Bros, and MK8.

It looks ok. It's like they spread out the previous generation's first year into two. If someone has to choose between a console that only has Nintendo products vs a console that has first party games and the wealth of 3rd party games then they really should go for whatever console 3rd party developers are producing. There's just so many more 3rd party games because that's hundreds if not thousands of studios making games whereas Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft are only one big publisher each. With Sony doing as good of a job at first-party development as Nintendo while also having 3rd party support, I would never buy a WiiU for myself if I could only get one. I would buy a WiiU for a young kid though. I think Nintendo has a really good niche with the young, elderly, and casual community. They largely damaged their niche by pursuing the hardcore market so heavily this generation and the way they did it.

Likewise, I'm one of those old Nintendo fans that have been playing since the beginning. Frankly, I'm a little tired of the same old cast. The games are still fun, but I'm not nearly as excited about MK8 than I was about Pikmin 3. A game which I won't be purchasing until the number of games I want makes sense to buy the console. I'm not even cash strapped, I'm just not willing to make a bad deal. Whereas, if these games were available on the pc or other consoles that I own, I'd buy it right now.

 

[Lightknight]

actually most of the argument I see from friends is that if Nintendo allowed their games to be released on more powerful consoles the graphics would look much better and other publishers would be able to get away from the kid friendly image they have
one of my friends even says that if Zelda were to come out on PS4, it wouldn't have to put up with all the kiddy stuff and it would be like a God of War + Skyrim game that looks next gen, because currently Nintendo is working with last gen graphics.

to me this would signify the end of Zelda series as my favorite series since a lot of the things I like about it mainly revolve around the fact that it stands on its own and doesn't try to copy any other games. Same goes for Mario, Metroid, etc.

so yeah from what I have gathered:
1. better graphics
2. more violent/graphic content would be allowed... I guess Pikmin would burst into puddles of blood and guts instead of little ghost?

It's a bit more than that.

It's not that we necessarily want more graphic content. It's that the average console gamer is in their 30's (the most recent average age dropped because it included iOS/android gamers). I'm up for the occasional kiddy joy that is most Mario games just like I'm up for some cartoons (I love me some Last Airbender). But the majority of my entertainment is catered to my age. At my age, I enjoy more adult themes. I don't mean nudity or anything crass (though people who do want those are entitled to them). I just mean adult in that the themes are entended for a mature audience about the evils and struggles of this world and overcoming them. Whether that be murder or war or whatever. Comedies like Community, dramas like Breaking Bad, etc. Things kids typically wouldn't enjoy or shouldn't watch. But still things that can be fun.

The better graphics are nice. It adds a wow factor that is impressive and anyone who looks at a beautiful scene and says "Ugh, graphics" is generally just following a social trend against the average view. But it's not that we want Nintendo's existing IPs to be made graphic. We like those IPs. It's just that we want the WiiU to cater to our needs too and it simply isn't. It's only a family friendly console for the vast majority of the time with a few outliers thrown our way.

But, honestly, a dark and brooding Mario storyline would be interesting. Imagine an stubbly Mario detective trying to track down a kidnapper/murderer whose current victim is Madame Peach and it's only a matter of time before she's murdered. A modern take on the traditional storyline for sure. It could be very interesting. I'm not talking about replacing the other IPs, I'm talking in addition to them.

But graphic violence? That's just one of many things that a mature audience that is the average console gamer may want. So don't pidgeon hole us into one category. Dr. Seuss is lovely and all, but I'd go crazy if that's all I had to read.

 

[VG_Addict]

So, do most of you think Nintendo SHOULD go third party?

I don't think it'd be in Nintendo's best interest, yet. But I don't have a God's eye view on their market position and their strategy going forward. They have a huge stockpile of money and if they pump that into developing a console that can actually compete with the big boys then they can have Nintendo + full 3rd party support and a comparative cost. Nintendo stands to make a lot of money if they hit another successful console. We saw the N64 and gamecube losing significant amounts of market share and it was the Wii's innovative control mechanic that saved them. So maybe their first party software is no longer good enough for adults to continue to purchase. That being said, I also think that Nintendo found their niche last generation. They had a really cheap console that was easy to understand and use. That opened it up to all kinds of gamers from the elderly who hadn't even been considered a target market to casual gamers who prefer the excellent party lineup Nintendo provies. With the WiiU, they made the thing more complex with the gamepad and more expensive because of the gamepad (it's $140 to make the gamepad by itself). They meant it as a differentiator but it turned out we just didn't need or want it and developers didn't figure out a reason for it to exist which explains why it has become a glorified minimap in so many games. I think they could drop the gamepad and do a bit better going forward with a price reduction and patches to support software made so far.

I think making some of their older titles available on pc and other consoles may be nice. People steal them on PC anyways, so they might as well sell games older than the gamecube elsewhere (selling software that is too new may cannibalize sales of titles that are just coming out). Since those games hold up so well, it could serve as advertisement to get more gamers into Nintendo products.

As things are right now, maintaining the console isn't all that beneficial to them. The ps3/360 markets can generally play the games that Nintendo has made so far (Nintendo games aren't traditionally graphically demanding). That's only important because those markets constitute something like 160 million consoles compared to the WiiU's 5 million. A 10% attach rate for the WiiU would be 500k units sold. A 10% attach rate for the 360/ps3 would be 16 million units sold. If Nintendo can't get enough market share in the console market then it will be worth their time at some point. New Super Mario Bros has a crazy high attach rate on the WiiU of around 65% as the consoles biggest seller. On the WiiU that's 3.46 million units. It wouldn't have gotten 65% in the overall market. But like I said, just 10% would sell 4.6 time what it sold on the WiiU and I don't think it's unreasonable to think that 10% of gamers would purchase that game if they had the chance.

The question is how much money that translates into vs how much money Nintendo gets from all the non-first party. If the equation is more for them to be 3rd party and is likely to continue to be more then it does suit their needs. However, if they make another console in the near future that sells like the Wii, then they'd likely make a ton of more money and going third party in the meantime would weaken the demand for future Nintendo consoles (hypothetically, it could also just increase demand since their games ARE good). But this generation they're taking a hit on every console they sell and aren't selling very many units of software (they have only 4 games that have sold over a million and one more that is close to it). The best selling non-Nintendo game is ZombieU which was a launch title and has only sold just over 620k units. That's not good, fyi, and is why companies aren't supporting the WiiU. For most of the year, Nintendo only had two titles over a million. Both of which were included in major bundles for the console and one current major bundle has actually been including two games that are in the top five (New Super Mario and Luigi). Compare that to the PS4 which has only been out for a couple months and already has 5 titles at over a million. Personally, I think Sony's launch was relatively weak. But the 3rd party software has really propped it up as only one of those IPs are Sony (Killzone, which is a beautiful game).

For Nintendo fans, them switching to third party would be excellent. There is no downside for us as fans to be able to purchase the Nintendo Software brand on our PCs, PS4/XBOs. There's a reason why people buy a WiiU even though third party support is near null. So there is a demand for it.

I think the Wii U's 2014 lineup looks good, with X, Bayonetta 2, DCKTF, Smash Bros, and MK8.

It looks ok. It's like they spread out the previous generation's first year into two. If someone has to choose between a console that only has Nintendo products vs a console that has first party games and the wealth of 3rd party games then they really should go for whatever console 3rd party developers are producing. There's just so many more 3rd party games because that's hundreds if not thousands of studios making games whereas Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft are only one big publisher each. With Sony doing as good of a job at first-party development as Nintendo while also having 3rd party support, I would never buy a WiiU for myself if I could only get one. I would buy a WiiU for a young kid though. I think Nintendo has a really good niche with the young, elderly, and casual community. They largely damaged their niche by pursuing the hardcore market so heavily this generation and the way they did it.

Likewise, I'm one of those old Nintendo fans that have been playing since the beginning. Frankly, I'm a little tired of the same old cast. The games are still fun, but I'm not nearly as excited about MK8 than I was about Pikmin 3. A game which I won't be purchasing until the number of games I want makes sense to buy the console. I'm not even cash strapped, I'm just not willing to make a bad deal. Whereas, if these games were available on the pc or other consoles that I own, I'd buy it right now.

I'm pretty sure most Nintendo fans are AGAINST them going third party. If Nintendo went third party and put their games on other consoles, there would be NO reason to buy their consoles.

 

[Lightknight]

I'm pretty sure most Nintendo fans are AGAINST them going third party. If Nintendo went third party and put their games on other consoles, there would be NO reason to buy their consoles.

Do you want Nintendo's games or do you want Nintendo's consoles? I love Nintendo's games. I'm not a fan of their consoles. Why would I need a reason to buy their consoles?

That's the point.

 

[VG_Addict]

I'm pretty sure most Nintendo fans are AGAINST them going third party. If Nintendo went third party and put their games on other consoles, there would be NO reason to buy their consoles.

Do you want Nintendo's games or do you want Nintendo's consoles? I love Nintendo's games. I'm not a fan of their consoles. Why would I need a reason to buy their consoles?

That's the point.

Except Nintendo offers an alternative to Sony and Microsoft's consoles.

 

[Roxas1359]

Except Nintendo offers an alternative to Sony and Microsoft's consoles.

And Sony offers an alternative to Nintendo, Microsoft offers an alternative to Sony, and PC offers an alternative to other consoles. The thing is, all platforms of gaming offer an alternative, and while yes there are 3rd parties on both, there are first parties that aren't on each others consoles, or some third parties that aren't available on the other platform.
It again comes down to what LightKnight asked, do you want Nintendo's games, or do you want their consoles?

While I don't think they should go third-party, I can see why some might want it that way. People said the same thing back in the day when SEGA was a console manufacturer, they didn't want SEGA's consoles, but they wanted the games they had.

 

[VG_Addict]

Except Nintendo offers an alternative to Sony and Microsoft's consoles.

And Sony offers an alternative to Nintendo, Microsoft offers an alternative to Sony, and PC offers an alternative to other consoles. The thing is, all platforms of gaming offer an alternative, and while yes there are 3rd parties on both, there are first parties that aren't on each others consoles, or some third parties that aren't available on the other platform.
It again comes down to what LightKnight asked, do you want Nintendo's games, or do you want their consoles?

While I don't think they should go third-party, I can see why some might want it that way. People said the same thing back in the day when SEGA was a console manufacturer, they didn't want SEGA's consoles, but they wanted the games they had.

Nintendo is perfectly capable of making great consoles AND great games, as seen in the SNES era.

 

[Roxas1359]

Nintendo is perfectly capable of making great consoles AND great games, as seen in the SNES era.

I'm not doubting that, but the thing for many is, that when they are going to buy a console they more than likely can only get one. So then you've got this predicament, get the console that has what is mainly only first party games (Wii U), or get one that has many 3rd party titles, with some first party titles as well (Xbox One, PS4, PC). For many it's a trade off really. I mean honestly the Wii, while it had some good titles, those titles were buried under so much shovelware that people didn't either a) know of some of the really good titles, or b) at that point no longer cared.

Right now, the Wii U is built on many promises that the titles will come out this year and hopefully without any delays, but that's really it. I mean Pikmin 3 was supposed to be a Wii U launch title, and look at how long that got pushed back. A person's patience can run out after a while.

 

[Lightknight]

I'm pretty sure most Nintendo fans are AGAINST them going third party. If Nintendo went third party and put their games on other consoles, there would be NO reason to buy their consoles.

Do you want Nintendo's games or do you want Nintendo's consoles? I love Nintendo's games. I'm not a fan of their consoles. Why would I need a reason to buy their consoles?

That's the point.

Except Nintendo offers an alternative to Sony and Microsoft's consoles.

So? Computers do too. so are steam boxes. Microsoft and Sony are also alternatives. Why does Nintendo's console need to exist specifically?

Nintendo is perfectly capable of making great consoles AND great games, as seen in the SNES era.

Yes, as seen before the 7th generation. How does that help us now? The gamecube even saw them produce the most powerful console for the cheapest price and it sold fewer than any other mainstream console they've made (until the WiiU, perhaps). Now that consoles have become so complex and x86 environments, Nintendo no longer has a special edge.

Frankly, the day Nintendo broke their agreement with Sony and prompted Sony's entrance into the market was the day they spelled their doom. The only thing they have going for them is their amazing handheld division and that $50 billion in cash that will prop them up for decades if they so desire. Just remember, whether or not they are capable of making good consoles, the WiiU IS their 8th generation console. A device that's not much more powerful than the 360 but nowhere close to the 8th generation competition while being almost as expensive and having relatively few games. I don't care about what they could hypothetically do. I do care about what they've done and what they will do.

 

[Lightknight]

People have been forseeing Ninetendo's doom for years.....yet it has'nt happened yet.Nintendo has over a billion dollars in their bank account and could raid several game devs if they wanted to.Fancy hardware does'nt make a good game and a great game dev can work inside and around the limitations that a average console imposes on them,which is probaly the reason some games refuse to make anything for the Wii U because they don't want to put as much effort in developing games for the system when the PS4 and XBONE makes it easier for them,

Like I said in the post you just quoted of me. Nintendo has something like $50 billion in cash (technically yes, "over a billion", but realistically much more than your statement indicates which wouldn't be that much in reality, but 50b is). They have the ability to ride out quite a few storms.

So my point certainly isn't tha they're going to die away. My comment is that unless they create a legitimate console that can cater to a wider demographic's needs then consumers would be better off with them going third party and they may actually make more money as a 3rd party developer in the interim.

I also agree that fancy hardware doesn't make a good game. But a shitty console can prevent good games from being ported to them and a shitty console can also make obstacles large enough to prevent even fantastic developers from easily side stepping the issues. Point and case, Sony purposefully made the ps3 difficult to develop for. They made developers split up their assets into various categories and if any of the categories got too bloated the system would crash. The problem is, games like Skyrim have a bloating issue (that's why Skyrim on the ps3 crashed for the first four months after an hour of play) and games like Rage sometimes have particularly large assets (Rage had a huge texture asset that loaded all at once for some reason).

Again, we lose nothing by being able to play Nintendo games on more capable machines. But the WiiU robs us of being able to play major 3rd party games. Yes, Nintendo's best interest would likely to be to cling to having their own consoles. No, that doesn't mean it's best for us. Shame on them for making such an underpowered machine. They had to have known that the XBO and PS4 were aiming higher. Or maybe they didn't do any research about their competition and just put out whatever they wanted to.

 

[VG_Addict]

People have been forseeing Ninetendo's doom for years.....yet it has'nt happened yet.Nintendo has over a billion dollars in their bank account and could raid several game devs if they wanted to.Fancy hardware does'nt make a good game and a great game dev can work inside and around the limitations that a average console imposes on them,which is probaly the reason some games refuse to make anything for the Wii U because they don't want to put as much effort in developing games for the system when the PS4 and XBONE makes it easier for them,

Like I said in the post you just quoted of me. Nintendo has something like $50 billion in cash (technically yes, "over a billion", but realistically much more than your statement indicates which wouldn't be that much in reality, but 50b is). They have the ability to ride out quite a few storms.

So my point certainly isn't tha they're going to die away. My comment is that unless they create a legitimate console that can cater to a wider demographic's needs then consumers would be better off with them going third party and they may actually make more money as a 3rd party developer in the interim.

I also agree that fancy hardware doesn't make a good game. But a shitty console can prevent good games from being ported to them and a shitty console can also make obstacles large enough to prevent even fantastic developers from easily side stepping the issues. Point and case, Sony purposefully made the ps3 difficult to develop for. They made developers split up their assets into various categories and if any of the categories got too bloated the system would crash. The problem is, games like Skyrim have a bloating issue (that's why Skyrim on the ps3 crashed for the first four months after an hour of play) and games like Rage sometimes have particularly large assets (Rage had a huge texture asset that loaded all at once for some reason).

Again, we lose nothing by being able to play Nintendo games on more capable machines. But the WiiU robs us of being able to play major 3rd party games. Yes, Nintendo's best interest would likely to be to cling to having their own consoles. No, that doesn't mean it's best for us. Shame on them for making such an underpowered machine. They had to have known that the XBO and PS4 were aiming higher. Or maybe they didn't do any research about their competition and just put out whatever they wanted to.

"It's not best for us to have Nintendo's IPs on their consoles"? Entitled much? Nintendo is a business, of course they're going to do what's best for them as a company.

 

[Artaneius]

It all boils down to saving money for the consumer. If Nintendo put their games for other consoles, then people wouldn't have to buy another console just to play a couple games. Not to mention the Wii was only successful because the mobile market wasn't really a thing at that point. Motion sensing allowed non-gamers to play. Nintendo has slowly been going losing its popularity since the N64. Nintendo is just too slow to adapt to change. Reminds me how the baby boomers get mad about losing their jobs but don't want to do anything in order to keep them. If your not willing to learn new skills you no longer become relevant.

 

[VG_Addict]

Frankly, the day Nintendo broke their agreement with Sony and prompted Sony's entrance into the market was the day they spelled their doom.

What? So, prompting Sony to enter the console race, where they lost $6 BILLION last gen, spelled Nintendo's doom? A Sony exec even said the PS4 isn't allowed to be a failure.

 

[Supernova1138]

Frankly, the day Nintendo broke their agreement with Sony and prompted Sony's entrance into the market was the day they spelled their doom.

What? So, prompting Sony to enter the console race, where they lost $6 BILLION last gen, spelled Nintendo's doom? A Sony exec even said the PS4 isn't allowed to be a failure.

And Sony absolutely crushed Nintendo between 1996 and 2006 in terms of home consoles with Nintendo only leading in the handheld market. Sony screwing up royally with the PS3 isn't exactly relevant to this discussion. Sony has also had all sorts of other problems aside from the PS3 eg. the HD TV market hitting the saturation point, motion picture flops, etc. It's possible that Sony could collapse in on itself because of all these issues, but it isn't exactly a win for Nintendo as they still have a console with a small install base, that no third parties want to develop for. Nintendo simply cannot churn out enough games to support a console all by themselves. At best, Nintendo might pick up more third party support from a Sony collapse if they released a new system that was more competitive technically with Xbone and PC.

 

[Roxas1359]

snip

Don't forget that Sony's biggest revenue comes from the insurance sector they have as well. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they were to drop out of the HDTV race though since Samsung is trouncing them a lot, and I could see them possibly dropping the movie sector depending on how well the Ratchet and Clank movie does. The Playstation sector is actually one of Sony's remaining profitable areas, and with the investment that it's CEO has put into it I don't think they'll be dropping that soon. Even then things are possible to turn around.
The difference between Nintendo and Sony on the Stock market is that Nintendo only has to factor in it's gaming sector for the stocks, while Sony has a lot more which is why even though the PS4 is rising really well it won't be able to keep the entire company afloat. I'm sure changes will be made soon on that front.

 

[VG_Addict]

So, do most of you think Nintendo SHOULD go third party?

I don't think it'd be in Nintendo's best interest, yet. But I don't have a God's eye view on their market position and their strategy going forward. They have a huge stockpile of money and if they pump that into developing a console that can actually compete with the big boys then they can have Nintendo + full 3rd party support and a comparative cost.

Nintendo is frustrating, because they could EASILY make a console that could go toe to toe with the competition, and MK8 and Smash Bros would be amazing with good online.

As things are right now, maintaining the console isn't all that beneficial to them.

Are you saying Nintendo should drop the Wii U?

 

[Lightknight]

"It's not best for us to have Nintendo's IPs on their consoles"? Entitled much? Nintendo is a business, of course they're going to do what's best for them as a company.

Ok? I have clearly and eloquently explained why it is better for Nintendo as a business to pursue their own console market if they are capable of producing one that can compete in the overall market. My hope is that the WiiU's dismal performance has blackened their eye enough to help them learn from their mistake. They leaned heavily on the WiiMote last generation under the premise that they aren't competing with Sony or Microsoft. That ended up to be true. But both Sony and Microsoft adapted and created their own viable option. Hell, every playstation 4 controller is a Sony Move controller and the Kinect can be amazing if Microsoft can keep themselves from over-reaching with it. Where the WiiMote was an explosion of innovation that set it apart, the WiiU is directly competing with them now and that's a problem when the console itself comes up so wanting in addition to the lack of software support.

I am explaining that unless Nintendo creates a console that is worth having, it is not in OUR best interest to have Nintendo software tethered to their console. I made no other presumptions other than that statement. Sorry if you somehow translated that into me saying that we deserve or are entitled to it somehow. That'd be silly.

What? So, prompting Sony to enter the console race, where they lost $6 BILLION last gen, spelled Nintendo's doom?

Sony didn't fail in the previous generation because of anything Nintendo did. Sony defeated itself and then Microsoft gained significant ground by just being the next best thing and not screwing up so blatantly from the gate. Sony failed with a $600 opening price point. As for $6 billion. I've seen rumors on this but not numbers. Do you happen to have the article link handy? I'm not questioning you as I've heard it before but I can't find it anywhere on the internet and I do actually like facts and the articles I'm seeing have different values. I see ones saying 5, I see ones saying 4. It looks like the 5B estimate has the most information behind it. Anyways, moving on.

Do you have any idea how close Nintendo was to the brink before the Wii? The N64 was meant to be a disk-based device that Nintendo had collaborated on with Sony. Instead, Nintendo publicly embarrassed Sony and breached contract with Sony at a conference, announcing plans to partner with another company despite Sony haven't already done most of the leg work. Then, Sony had this device they'd already worked on and no way to make a return on their R&D without using it. So the ps1 was born. The N64, despite being revered today as one of the greats, lost huge swaths of market share. The SNES had sold nearly 50 million units which was huge for the time. But suddenly the ps1 shows up and sells more than 102 million units (just a bit more than the Wii for a console made in the 90's) in the 5th generation and the N64 which "everyone" seems to remember, only sold 33 million. Successful, yes, but in a downward trend. The PS1 literally took away almost 40% of Nintendo's previous market share, 80% of Sega's, and found more untapped customers. The 6th generation saw the ps2 come in at 154 million units (the most a console has ever sold) which solidified Sega's death as a console maker and dropped Gamecube's numbers to 22 million. Even the Xbox showed up and managed to grab more than Nintendo then with 25 million. Even more embarrassingly here for the gamecube, which people don't often seem to know about the tiny purple box, is that it was more powerful than the competition and cheaper.

So what was different with the Wii? Just the WiiMote. It was an innovation that people were waiting for. The existing Nintendo IPs did not save them. It was the WiiMote. It also probably helped that Microsoft and Sony went Nutso with their pricing and jumped to $400 and $600 respectively when the Wii hit $250.

So, now that the big innovation isn't there, why do you think that their same ol' lineup is going to protect them going forward if they don't step up the motivation to buy a console. I can't even play DVDs on the WiiU. Bluray players at least justify around $100 of the cost of the other consoles by itself.

Nintendo is going to have to reinvent itself. That's something I believe it CAN do and that I believe its $50 Billion dollars in stockpiled cash will allow it to do. But allowing Sony into the market like it did absolutely dealt them a fatal blow. That they survived it was nothing short of miraculous. Like a patient shot in the brain who not only relearns to talk but actually functions perfectly well.

And Sony absolutely crushed Nintendo between 1996 and 2006 in terms of home consoles with Nintendo only leading in the handheld market. Sony screwing up royally with the PS3 isn't exactly relevant to this discussion. Sony has also had all sorts of other problems aside from the PS3 eg. the HD TV market hitting the saturation point, motion picture flops, etc. It's possible that Sony could collapse in on itself because of all these issues, but it isn't exactly a win for Nintendo as they still have a console with a small install base, that no third parties want to develop for. Nintendo simply cannot churn out enough games to support a console all by themselves. At best, Nintendo might pick up more third party support from a Sony collapse if they released a new system that was more competitive technically with Xbone and PC.

Sony really wouldn't collapse in on itself as far as I can tell. They have $151 billion in assets and their financial unit alone accounts for around half of their income which would explain why their financials would look particularly shitty over the past five years, especially when their brand is a more expensive brand which is a luxury when more affordable comparable models existed during a market downturn. But I wouldn't buy a Sony HD TV. Why would I when there are completely legitimate TVs that work just as well (as far as I can tell) at hundreds or even thousands cheaper than Sonys? I'm interested to see how they adjust going forward though. I wonder how they posted $458 million in net income over the last fiscal year.

 

[Lightknight]

Nintendo is frustrating, because they could EASILY make a console that could go toe to toe with the competition, and MK8 and Smash Bros would be amazing with good online.

Well, I don't know if any company would have an "easy" time making a competitive console. Especially when Sony's forte is specifically hardware and Microsoft has deep ties in x86 infrastructure and hardware companies. But yes, I believe Nintendo has the ability to make a console that is at least in the same competitive sphere as the others. See, you don't have to be neck and neck to get 3rd party support. You just need to be close enough in power and easy to port to. Unfortunately, the WiiU is the last console not to go x86 which makes porting more difficult and it's much closer to the 7th generation tech than its 8th generation peers. Sad but true.

As things are right now, maintaining the console isn't all that beneficial to them.

Are you saying Nintendo should drop the Wii U?

I'm not entirely sure. I'd need a better view of what they have planned. As of right now they're losing a LOT of money per console and the software sales are dismal. It's pure loss to them. If they have plans to turn things around that I just haven't thought of then they should try those at least. I would personally drop the gamepad which is $140 of the hardware cost and could potentially drop the price by $100 (would have to be replaced with another controller like the wiiU pro). It just isn't seen as worth a purchase at its performance level even at $100 cheaper than the ps4 which is the most powerful system by far from what I've read.

If more software and cheaper price points don't save it, they will have to stop selling it. They can't just eat hundreds of dollars per unit with no hope of profit. They're currently on track to sell less than the dreamcast in the same amount of time. As the generation progresses, the power disparity will only increase between the WiiU and its counterparts. They may benefit more from a mid-generation relaunch but then they only have 3 good years.

Honestly, they're in a really tough spot. It's possible that opening up some Nintendo IPs to other units could give them a huge boost of software sales and encourage new fans. But the software would have to be old enough not to cannibalism their current lineup (e.g. if someone could get all the Wii games on their ps4/xbo, why would they buy a WiiU if they hadn't played any of the Wii games?). I mean, Mario Kart 7 vs MK 8? Huge difference besides the graphics? Likely not.

Worst case scenario, they have a really blistering 8th generation and try to reenter the race come the 9th generation. The best case scenario is if they figure out any way to turn things around even a little in the meantime.

 

[VG_Addict]

Sorry, I guess I misinterpreted what you said.

Like I said earlier, Microsoft STILL hasn't made a profit on the XBOX division. There's even talk of them selling the XBOX division.

I could see Nintendo next gen being like Sony this gen and fixing all their mistakes.