You seriously think the Wii U is going to bankrupt Nintendo? Do you know how much they made on the Wii and DS?Johnny Novgorod said:I dunno, isn't it in their best interest to NOT go bankrupt?
You seriously think the Wii U is going to bankrupt Nintendo? Do you know how much they made on the Wii and DS?Johnny Novgorod said:I dunno, isn't it in their best interest to NOT go bankrupt?
I think those get lumped into the more general "console exclusivity is anti-consumer" threads. We haven't had one for a few weeks, but we also haven't had one of these "third party Nintendo!" threads in weeks.McMarbles said:So where are the threads demanding that Microsoft and Sony go third party? Where are the threads demanding that Valve make stuff for consoles?IceForce said:Making software available on more than one platform = Wider userbase and more customers
More customers = More money
Seems simple enough.
Yes, but I also know their newest console is a fiasco that didn't meet expectations in 2013 and whose ambitious 9 million sales forecasts has been knocked down 70% since the year began. They have a long way to go before they croak but they're going alright as it is. Resting on laurels never helped anyone.VG_Addict said:You seriously think the Wii U is going to bankrupt Nintendo? Do you know how much they made on the Wii and DS?Johnny Novgorod said:I dunno, isn't it in their best interest to NOT go bankrupt?
Living off leftovers isn't a terribly good business model and they should review their policies soon. Going third party, for example. I'm not saying it's their Obi-Wan Kenobi but it's a possibility.Sleekit said:having the reserves to be able to make mistakes and move on tho does.Johnny Novgorod said:Yes, but I also know their newest console is a fiasco that didn't meet expectations in 2013 and whose ambitious 9 million sales forecasts has been knocked down 70% since the year began. They have a long way to go before they croak but they're going alright as it is. Resting on laurels never helped anyone.VG_Addict said:You seriously think the Wii U is going to bankrupt Nintendo? Do you know how much they made on the Wii and DS?Johnny Novgorod said:I dunno, isn't it in their best interest to NOT go bankrupt?
I thought they were reviewing their policies. They're licensing their games to other companies, doing mergers and acquisitions, considering advertising on smartphones, and integrating handheld and home console.Johnny Novgorod said:Living off leftovers isn't a terribly good business model and they should review their policies soon. Going third party, for example. I'm not saying it's their Obi-Wan Kenobi but it's a possibility.Sleekit said:having the reserves to be able to make mistakes and move on tho does.Johnny Novgorod said:Yes, but I also know their newest console is a fiasco that didn't meet expectations in 2013 and whose ambitious 9 million sales forecasts has been knocked down 70% since the year began. They have a long way to go before they croak but they're going alright as it is. Resting on laurels never helped anyone.VG_Addict said:You seriously think the Wii U is going to bankrupt Nintendo? Do you know how much they made on the Wii and DS?Johnny Novgorod said:I dunno, isn't it in their best interest to NOT go bankrupt?
How has total control of their hardware been harmful? Sony and Microsoft control their hardware too.senordesol said:Here's a better question: why should Nintendo stay in the console market? Many of the properties it continues to lean on, while still popular, don't excite people as much as they used to. I personally don't care if I ever play Mario or Zelda ever again. I might be enticed to play a full-console adaptation of Pokemon, but Nintendo's old standards bore me (and many of the once-faithful) now.VG_Addict said:Why should they go third party, and thus change their business after ONE console failure? Wouldn't it make more sense to just make a better console next time around? It's not like they don't have the money to give it another try.
Their insistence of total control of their hardware has and continues to prove harmful (indirectly creating their own competitor, the Playstation, at one point) but they don't seem keen to change.
In short: what is there to be excited about from a new Nintendo system? If it's just the old titles warmed over, why does that necessitate a new console?
A great examination of this is MovieBob's Game Overthinker (http://www.screwattack.com/shows/partners/game-overthinker/game-overthinker-special-fate-nintendo) here he acknowledges that if Nintendo maintains its current trajectory, it's fate as a 3rd party is all but assured...and this is coming from a major Nintendo fanboy.
Nintendo nixed the 'Nintendo CD' in favor of proprietary cartridges for the 64. Nintendo was uncomfortable with CD-based system as they had less control as opposed to cartridges. In so doing, they gave a big 'F.U.' to Sony who was developing the hardware for the Nintendo CD at the time (and had just unveiled the NCD just days before). Rather than go home and cry, Sony created the Playstation and thus became a major competitor to Nintendo. I'd say that's pretty damaging.VG_Addict said:How has total control of their hardware been harmful? Sony and Microsoft control their hardware too.senordesol said:Here's a better question: why should Nintendo stay in the console market? Many of the properties it continues to lean on, while still popular, don't excite people as much as they used to. I personally don't care if I ever play Mario or Zelda ever again. I might be enticed to play a full-console adaptation of Pokemon, but Nintendo's old standards bore me (and many of the once-faithful) now.VG_Addict said:Why should they go third party, and thus change their business after ONE console failure? Wouldn't it make more sense to just make a better console next time around? It's not like they don't have the money to give it another try.
Their insistence of total control of their hardware has and continues to prove harmful (indirectly creating their own competitor, the Playstation, at one point) but they don't seem keen to change.
In short: what is there to be excited about from a new Nintendo system? If it's just the old titles warmed over, why does that necessitate a new console?
A great examination of this is MovieBob's Game Overthinker (http://www.screwattack.com/shows/partners/game-overthinker/game-overthinker-special-fate-nintendo) here he acknowledges that if Nintendo maintains its current trajectory, it's fate as a 3rd party is all but assured...and this is coming from a major Nintendo fanboy.
Nintendo has made new IPs. It's just that nobody bought them.
Not making Machines that make more Money then games = less moneyIceForce said:Making software available on more than one platform = Wider userbase and more customers
More customers = More money
Valve DOES make things for consoles...?McMarbles said:So where are the threads demanding that Microsoft and Sony go third party? Where are the threads demanding that Valve make stuff for consoles?IceForce said:Making software available on more than one platform = Wider userbase and more customers
More customers = More money
Seems simple enough.
More customers = more money, after all.
Why should Nintendo give up their exclusives? Exclusives have ALWAYS been a major selling point for consoles.lacktheknack said:Valve DOES make things for consoles...?McMarbles said:So where are the threads demanding that Microsoft and Sony go third party? Where are the threads demanding that Valve make stuff for consoles?IceForce said:Making software available on more than one platform = Wider userbase and more customers
More customers = More money
Seems simple enough.
More customers = more money, after all.
I mean, sure, DOTA2 wasn't on console, but that's for the same reason Age of Empires wasn't.
And Microsoft/Sony don't have a wide array of highly desirable exclusives. Nintendo does.
Because they aren't selling consoles, as shown by Wii U's lack of sold units.VG_Addict said:Why should Nintendo give up their exclusives? Exclusives have ALWAYS been a major selling point for consoles.lacktheknack said:Valve DOES make things for consoles...?McMarbles said:So where are the threads demanding that Microsoft and Sony go third party? Where are the threads demanding that Valve make stuff for consoles?IceForce said:Making software available on more than one platform = Wider userbase and more customers
More customers = More money
Seems simple enough.
More customers = more money, after all.
I mean, sure, DOTA2 wasn't on console, but that's for the same reason Age of Empires wasn't.
And Microsoft/Sony don't have a wide array of highly desirable exclusives. Nintendo does.
I only made one height thread on here.lacktheknack said:Because they aren't selling consoles, as shown by Wii U's lack of sold units.VG_Addict said:Why should Nintendo give up their exclusives? Exclusives have ALWAYS been a major selling point for consoles.lacktheknack said:Valve DOES make things for consoles...?McMarbles said:So where are the threads demanding that Microsoft and Sony go third party? Where are the threads demanding that Valve make stuff for consoles?IceForce said:Making software available on more than one platform = Wider userbase and more customers
More customers = More money
Seems simple enough.
More customers = more money, after all.
I mean, sure, DOTA2 wasn't on console, but that's for the same reason Age of Empires wasn't.
And Microsoft/Sony don't have a wide array of highly desirable exclusives. Nintendo does.
Here's a better question: Between the blasted height threads and these threads, why do you have to make the same thread over and over and over and over and over and over and over?
Worth pointing out that were it not for them managing to turn the 3DS around and make it a sales success, both of their consoles right now would be bleeding money. The Wii U is actually a complete and utter failure so far and they broke their once cardinal rule by selling it at a loss so they can't even just drop the price to try and boost sales. If I'm not mistaken, the 3DS may still be losing them money on every unit sold.VG_Addict said:Sega and Atari only left the console market because they were bleeding money from consecutive failures.
No, you made at least six.VG_Addict said:I only made one height thread on here.lacktheknack said:Because they aren't selling consoles, as shown by Wii U's lack of sold units.VG_Addict said:Why should Nintendo give up their exclusives? Exclusives have ALWAYS been a major selling point for consoles.lacktheknack said:Valve DOES make things for consoles...?McMarbles said:So where are the threads demanding that Microsoft and Sony go third party? Where are the threads demanding that Valve make stuff for consoles?IceForce said:Making software available on more than one platform = Wider userbase and more customers
More customers = More money
Seems simple enough.
More customers = more money, after all.
I mean, sure, DOTA2 wasn't on console, but that's for the same reason Age of Empires wasn't.
And Microsoft/Sony don't have a wide array of highly desirable exclusives. Nintendo does.
Here's a better question: Between the blasted height threads and these threads, why do you have to make the same thread over and over and over and over and over and over and over?
The games have nothing to do with it. I already said that Nintendo would be doing better if they made a competitive console.
Do you think this will be their last home console?Vivi22 said:Worth pointing out that were it not for them managing to turn the 3DS around and make it a sales success, both of their consoles right now would be bleeding money. The Wii U is actually a complete and utter failure so far and they broke their once cardinal rule by selling it at a loss so they can't even just drop the price to try and boost sales. If I'm not mistaken, the 3DS may still be losing them money on every unit sold.VG_Addict said:Sega and Atari only left the console market because they were bleeding money from consecutive failures.
The reality is that the Wii was a fluke of a console and since they haven't been able to replicate that success they're back to Gamecube level sales (or actually, probably a bit worse than that lately), and they no longer sell the machines at a profit.
It's hard not to argue for them at least ditching home consoles and bringing their software third party when they clearly have no clue what they're doing in that market.
You mean drop the only advantage they have over their competition: Having great exclusives you can't get anywhere else? Are you serious? It's a good thing you're not in charge of a business.lacktheknack said:No, you made at least six.VG_Addict said:I only made one height thread on here.lacktheknack said:Because they aren't selling consoles, as shown by Wii U's lack of sold units.VG_Addict said:Why should Nintendo give up their exclusives? Exclusives have ALWAYS been a major selling point for consoles.lacktheknack said:Valve DOES make things for consoles...?McMarbles said:So where are the threads demanding that Microsoft and Sony go third party? Where are the threads demanding that Valve make stuff for consoles?IceForce said:Making software available on more than one platform = Wider userbase and more customers
More customers = More money
Seems simple enough.
More customers = more money, after all.
I mean, sure, DOTA2 wasn't on console, but that's for the same reason Age of Empires wasn't.
And Microsoft/Sony don't have a wide array of highly desirable exclusives. Nintendo does.
Here's a better question: Between the blasted height threads and these threads, why do you have to make the same thread over and over and over and over and over and over and over?
The games have nothing to do with it. I already said that Nintendo would be doing better if they made a competitive console.
And yes, they would be doing better. Sadly, that's not where they are now. Therefore, it would be smart if they dropped exclusivity.
Not that I'm defending either side here, but you HAVE heard of emulators, haven't you?SidheKnight said:Because I want Nintendo games on PC.
I think he's talking about new games, not games from before 2005 that are glitchy, crashy, and poorly optimized, not to mention illegal unless you've actually bought the game in which case you probably already have the console to play it on.Racecarlock said:Not that I'm defending either side here, but you HAVE heard of emulators, haven't you?SidheKnight said:Because I want Nintendo games on PC.