|
thefncrow posted:The reason third-parties aren't developing for it right now is because it's not selling. The power issue has already exploded, in the form of the vast majority of the WiiU's potential buyers already having something comparable or something comparable being a better buy. Nobody is interested in paying hundreds of dollars for the privilege of playing ports of games that they could just play on the XBox360 or PS3. Even if all the multiplatform games of 2012 and 2013 were out on the WiiU, a potential buyer would still have to pass up a cheaper XBox360 or PS3, both of which have giant, cheap libraries of games that will keep them busy for a good long time (and the latter is a BluRay player). "It's not selling" undersells the depth of the third-party problem. It's really more like "there's absolutely no reason to."
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 00:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 04:33 |
|
|
Toady posted:Yes, people don't think it's reasonable to buy a $250 console for one or two games. The Wii U is selling at a loss, and Nintendo has demonstrated an inability to develop first-party software on a timely basis or market properly. Naturally, there's going to be speculative conversation about the pros and cons of a third-party Nintendo. Yes, people don't think it's reasonable to buy a $200 console for one or two games. The Playstation Vita is selling at a loss, and Sony has demonstrated an inability to develop first-party software on a timely basis or market properly. Naturally, there's going to be speculative conversation about the pros and cons of a third-party Sony. Except, wait, the Playstation 3 is a thing that exists. Just like the 3DS 
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 00:19
|
|
|
Bovineicide posted:Yes, people don't think it's reasonable to buy a $200 console for one or two games. The Playstation Vita is selling at a loss, and Sony has demonstrated an inability to develop first-party software on a timely basis or market properly. Naturally, there's going to be speculative conversation about the pros and cons of a third-party Sony. This is hilarious, because there have been multiple attempts by some posters in this thread to complain about how nobody is talking about Sony's financial issues and how unfair it is that Nintendo is getting focused on in this thread, despite the fact that people were doomsaying the PS3 pretty much throughout its first four years (especially around launch, and rightfully so), and if they care so drat much they could just start another thread on the forums about it. There's plenty to talk about, they do release statements every financial year, and I'm certain there could be vibrant discussion about how their failing TV lines will eventually force Uncharted onto the Wii U.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 00:55
|
|
|
Spiffo posted:It's not the only factor, but it's still a factor. I mean, you can at least see the logic of "I didn't like the last game they did, maybe I'll hold off on the next one." Yeah, Thousand Year Door is one of my favorite games ever, but after playing Super Paper Mario I haven't given the series a second thought. And more importantly, it adds up on a console-wide scale. If Other M, Skyward Sword, and Super Paper Mario weren't so disappointing, I would probably own a Wii U by now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 00:56
|
|
|
Super Paper Mario was the only Mario game I ever hated and ended up selling when I was done. I've been enjoying Luigi Dream Team on the 3DS. I wouldn't say one bad game means the next one will be bad, but the Paper Mario series isn't for everyone.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 01:26
|
|
|
It really seems like with the Paper Mario series, Mr. Miyamoto walked into the office one day stone drunk, saw the next Paper Mario being developed, and started shouting "WHAT THE gently caress IS THIS RPG BULLSHIT?" And he has every right, it's his character. He just seems to weirdly meddle in that series, which is odd since he doesn't seem to mess with the Mario and Luigi series.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 01:30
|
|
|
If they had Retro on the fuckin' ball ready to release some awesome poo poo at launch, I might be singing a different tune about the Wii-U. I'm probably just saying this because I grabbed Donkey Kong Country Returns off my shelf and it's everything that the current New Super Mario Whatevers need to be.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 03:51
|
|
|
fivegears4reverse posted:This is hilarious, because there have been multiple attempts by some posters in this thread to complain about how nobody is talking about Sony's financial issues and how unfair it is that Nintendo is getting focused on in this thread, despite the fact that people were doomsaying the PS3 pretty much throughout its first four years (especially around launch, and rightfully so), and if they care so drat much they could just start another thread on the forums about it. There's plenty to talk about, they do release statements every financial year, and I'm certain there could be vibrant discussion about how their failing TV lines will eventually force Uncharted onto the Wii U. Yes, it's almost like all of this doomsaying is kind of ridiculous. Don't get me wrong, I don't think there's a way for them to get back the momentum they lost with the Wii U, but all this talk of Nintendo leaving the hardware business hasn't changed since the '90s. It's an old and tired meme, and people forget about how much money they traditionally make off of handhelds. That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo decided to completely refocus on handhelds after the Wii U runs its course. They've made a lot of dumb decisions over the past couple of years, and I'm hoping that this whole debacle would get them to restructure and really think about what they've done wrong and what they've done right.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 04:12
|
|
|
Supercar Gautier posted:This is just a rephrasing of the same old "I would like it better than the way things are now, therefore it would be a good business decision", disregarding the rocky path from point A to point B. I'm not convinced that not wanting to buy a new console for $250 just to play one or two games is whiny or entitled. Bovineicide posted:Yes, people don't think it's reasonable to buy a $200 console for one or two games. The Playstation Vita is selling at a loss, and Sony has demonstrated an inability to develop first-party software on a timely basis or market properly. Naturally, there's going to be speculative conversation about the pros and cons of a third-party Sony. Because the Vita isn't doing well as the PS3, Nintendo should keep making home consoles? Uh...okay. I don't own a Vita either for the same reason.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 04:14
|
|
|
Bovineicide posted:Yes, it's almost like all of this doomsaying is kind of ridiculous. Don't get me wrong, I don't think there's a way for them to get back the momentum they lost with the Wii U, but all this talk of Nintendo leaving the hardware business hasn't changed since the '90s. It's an old and tired meme, and people forget about how much money they traditionally make off of handhelds. Nobody is saying they should stop making handhelds or that they're going out of business. Given the outlook, it's reasonable to discuss targeting other consoles or getting out of the console market. That's not a prediction that they'll do either. It's just armchair analysis, which I think is fine as long as it's reasonable. These criticisms come off like sour grapes from fans reliving old flamewars who picture it as some sort of defeat. I think the thread's been pretty reasonable and interesting, and I hope there are more "armchair analysis" threads in the future to talk about positive and negative things from an industry angle, which usually don't go over well in the regular threads.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 04:36
|
|
|
greatn posted:It really seems like with the Paper Mario series, Mr. Miyamoto walked into the office one day stone drunk, saw the next Paper Mario being developed, and started shouting "WHAT THE gently caress IS THIS RPG BULLSHIT?" He actually did do this. Which is really depressing. E: obviously not drunk/shouting, but Miyamoto is the reason for why Paper Mario Sticker Star turned out the way it did.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 04:37
|
|
|
Toady posted:I'm not convinced that not wanting to buy a new console for $250 just to play one or two games is whiny or entitled. You don't have to want to buy it! By all means, don't buy things you don't want! But when what you WOULD like Nintendo to do also happens to also be a very bad business decision, prepare for disappointment.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 04:53
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:No, I really do think that. Nobody's developing for it because nobody's buying it because nobody knows what it is because nobody's marketing it, because it's weak, so nobody's developing for it, so nobody's buying it, and on and on we go.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 05:33
|
|
|
PonchAxis posted:He actually did do this. Which is really depressing. To my understand it was like they gave him the prototype to try, he said it was basically thousand year door again, so they changed it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 05:36
|
|
|
Alteisen posted:To my understand it was like they gave him the prototype to try, he said it was basically thousand year door again, so they changed it. They go in depth about it in the Iwata asks. He's basically the reason why there are no original characters and only just random toads/enemies.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 05:38
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:You can't just pluck one reason out and declare it to be The Root Cause like that. The whole thing is hopelessly entangled. The problem is that those other causes are not actually meaningful. Yes, the Wii U is the weakest system, but developers do not only develop for the strongest system, nor do customers only buy the strongest system. Companies certainly would gladly develop for it if the market was there, if at bare minimum by porting 360/PS3 versions of games. This can and would bite them in a few years when those multiplatform games stop coming out but the Wii U would be 3-4 years old by that point. If Nintendo had gotten the Wii U with even a foothold in the door, then it would have been doing a lot better simply because it would be worth the time and effort for third parties to invest in. (Or at least moreso than they are now.) Third parties rarely care to make console exclusives these days unless they're given specific motivation to do so and so the best thing you can get from them is a good solid port of their multiplatform titles to suppliment your first party offerings. The Wii U is at the point where third party developers are not actually willing to put the time into porting their 360/PS3 titles and that's really loving bad. The problem Nintendo has is that they couldn't even sell to what should be their built-in audience and that is largely marketing failure, and it has snowballed from there. The other flaws certainly exist but the marketing can, and should, have been able to overcome them. They were unlikely to get another Wii level success out of it but it wouldn't be dead in the water the way the Wii U is. ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 05:55 on Sep 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 05:48
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:The problem is that those other causes are not actually meaningful. Yes, the Wii U is the weakest system, but developers do not only develop for the strongest system, nor do customers only buy the strongest system. Companies certainly would gladly develop for it if the market was there, if at bare minimum by porting 360/PS3 versions of games.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 05:51
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:On the other hand, the Wii sold exceptionally well, was underpowered, and had terrible third party support. The Wii was in the same basic situation generation-wise as the Wii U. It was a prime place to port the PS2 versions of games. The problem came when those ran out and then the console generation went on for an abnormally long time. When people stopped putting out PS2 versions of games, they stopped having anything to bother to port to the Wii, and in turn, they had to decide if it was worth it to create a single-console game. (Something that is increasingly not worth it to any company.) When you add in the fact that Wii sales were so massively inconsistent, it isn't really a shock the third party moved on. I mean don't get me wrong. The Wii U was going to run into this no matter what. The PS4 and the One were eventually going to shove it into a position where third party developers had to either make a Wii U game just for the Wii U or not make it at all. But they released early enough that they can and should have been able to ride of the dying waves of the PS3/360 generation. It was probably going to hit the Wii wall again by 2015, 2016 at the latest, but that would have at least been enough time to shore up the system with exclusives. ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 06:03 on Sep 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 05:57
|
|
|
With modern budgets and dev cycles, ease of porting to multiple platforms is a major consideration. It's looking right now like the XBone is about to get utterly stomped by the PS4 this Christmas, but I'd wager that you'll still see a lot of titles hitting both platforms anyway, because they're so technically similar that the cost of porting a PS4 title to XBone will be low. This is something Nintendo will have to consider more seriously when they build their next platform, and it's why I think an X86-based console release in 2016-17 is part of the answer for them. In terms of the current platform, obviously nothing can change with the hardware, but there's firmware and network improvements that are perfectly possible and can improve the system's value (and its reputation in the long run). Getting more volume, promotions, and functionality on the eShop should be a priority- they should leverage the Virtual Console much more effectively than they are right now, invest in indies to get smaller original titles up, and take a good hard look at how Steam and PS+ use promotions and discounts to strategically focus user interest/activity. And then make that service as directly continuous as possible with the next platform. Look at how many prospective PS4 buyers have never owned a PS3 but are attracted to the reputation of PS+. This might be getting a bit broken-recordish, but that's the kind of brand-salvaging strategy Nintendo needs. They should also hire someone that knows what they're doing to get a robust online play service going for when Mariokart and SSB release, one that integrates well with the main OS and is available to third parties. Even if the console's user base remains small, if the user experience is great then that's another reputation-builder for the long run.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 06:11
|
|
|
PonchAxis posted:They go in depth about it in the Iwata asks. He's basically the reason why there are no original characters and only just random toads/enemies. The strangest thing I found about Sticker Star was bowser. He didn't talk. The RPGs are the only games where you see Bowser have a personality so that really took me by surprise.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 06:26
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:The Wii U is at the point where third party developers are not actually willing to put the time into porting their 360/PS3 titles and that's really loving bad. Doing a Wii-U port right now though means going through all of the annoyances of doing an Xbox 360 version, plus redoing all of the controls, for 1/20th of the audience. OneEightHundred fucked around with this message at 06:38 on Sep 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 06:32
|
|
|
Bovineicide posted:Yes, it's almost like all of this doomsaying is kind of ridiculous. Don't get me wrong, I don't think there's a way for them to get back the momentum they lost with the Wii U, but all this talk of Nintendo leaving the hardware business hasn't changed since the '90s. It's an old and tired meme, and people forget about how much money they traditionally make off of handhelds. You keep bringing up their (semi) success in the current handheld market like it's some kind of ultimate trump card for Nintendo to just keep making ill advised home consoles, then you suggest that maybe they should refocus and only make handheld games. Why? I am really curious as to why you think it would be such a horrible idea for Nintendo to start publishing games on multiple platforms. How is shrinking their customer base to people who are buying their handhelds not the worst idea ever? There is also a good reason that people have wondered why Nintendo hasn't gotten out of the hardware business since the 90's. They have been getting destroyed since the N64 with the Wii being the only exception. The success of the Wii even seems like a fluke. If the Wii was actually part of some grand scheme to make gaming cheaper and more accessible they wouldn't have followed it up with a console that is basically an underpowered and overpriced 360/ps3 with no games.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 06:55
|
|
|
NESguerilla posted:You keep bringing up their (semi) success in the current handheld market like it's some kind of ultimate trump card for Nintendo to just keep making ill advised home consoles, then you suggest that maybe they should refocus and only make handheld games. Why? I am really curious as to why you think it would be such a horrible idea for Nintendo to start publishing games on multiple platforms. How is shrinking their customer base to people who are buying their handhelds not the worst idea ever? I...think you're being a liiiitle dismissive of Nintendo handhelds. They've basically owned that market since the GameBoy. The closest they've had for real competition was the PSP (which did really well worldwide despite doing poorly in North America). There's nothing "semi-successful" about the DS or even the 3DS line of portables. I mean sure, the 3DS is tracking lower than the DS, but the DS was like the PS2 of handheld gaming systems. The Vita is tracking worse than the PSP, which lost to the DS.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 07:33
|
|
|
fivegears4reverse posted:I...think you're being a liiiitle dismissive of Nintendo handhelds. They've basically owned that market since the GameBoy. The closest they've had for real competition was the PSP (which did really well worldwide despite doing poorly in North America). There's nothing "semi-successful" about the DS or even the 3DS line of portables. Not to mention the imminent release of Pokemon. The 3DS is pretty prolific now, but as soon as Pokemon is out, there won't be a single kid in the world who doesn't own one. Or the 2DS, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 07:45
|
|
|
I call it semi successful because of the rise of gaming on mobile phones and the extremely slow burn of the 3DS. Don't get me wrong, the 3ds offers games that completely annihilate most phone games in regards to quality and that is why they are still selling them, but those phone games are still steadily chipping away at Nintendo's sales. Could you honestly tell me that limiting themselves and their IP's to handheld systems would do anything but eventually bankrupt Nintendo? Edit: I'm not even calling into question that Nintendo should stay in the handheld market. I am just looking for one solid reason that they should stay in the home console market at this point. I want someone to give me a good reason to believe that they should keep making systems (or alternately just horde their IP's and release them on handhelds forever like Bovineicide suggested). I want to know how that isn't the worst idea ever from a logical business standpoint. veni veni veni fucked around with this message at 08:00 on Sep 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 07:51
|
|
|
NESguerilla posted:I call it semi successful because of the rise of gaming on mobile phones and the extremely slow burn of the 3DS. Don't get me wrong, the 3ds offers games that completely annihilate most phone games in regards to quality and that is why they are still selling them, but those phone games are still steadily chipping away at Nintendo's sales. Going full handheld certainly wouldn't bankrupt Nintendo, but the company would have to shrink accordingly. The potential lost profits would be bad, but not so bad they couldn't survive. You really are underestimating how well the 3DS is doing- it had a rocky start, but it's become a very popular system. Its sold at a profit, and it's got a fantastic library of games that are also selling very well. edit: They'll do everything they can to avoid going third part on home consoles- Once they do, there's no going back. It would certainly put them in a better position in the short term than sticking with the WiiU, but the lost confidence in Nintendo home consoles would be really difficult to overcome. Nintendo loves selling their consoles at a profit, and losing that is definitely not something they'll do unless they absolutely have to. And right now, they don't. THE FUCKING MOON fucked around with this message at 08:06 on Sep 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 08:02
|
|
|
NESguerilla posted:I call it semi successful because of the rise of gaming on mobile phones and the extremely slow burn of the 3DS. Don't get me wrong, the 3ds offers games that completely annihilate most phone games in regards to quality and that is why they are still selling them, but those phone games are still steadily chipping away at Nintendo's sales. If mobile phones are chipping away at their sales it doesn't show, the 3DS is selling faster than the DS did to this point in its lifespan. It's a total success and Nintendo is really lucky they were able to recover from their initial blunder. This should give hope for the Wii U... but no, it really doesn't. The competition is much stiffer and the system isn't priced as well or as nifty with few games to show for it. They absolutely shouldn't go handheld only though. That would be pretty silly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 08:12
|
|
|
One and the Same posted:edit: They'll do everything they can to avoid going third part on home consoles- Once they do, there's no going back. It would certainly put them in a better position in the short term than sticking with the WiiU, but the lost confidence in Nintendo home consoles would be really difficult to overcome. Nintendo loves selling their consoles at a profit, and losing that is definitely not something they'll do unless they absolutely have to. And right now, they don't. Why though? Why does protecting their brand always have to involve making consoles that people don't want and feel forced to buy because they want to play Nintendo games? Would a Mario/Zelda/Metroid game inherently suck more or sell worse because it was on PS/Xbox/PC etc? I don't get why it's such a horrible idea to just make your games more accessible and profitable if you clearly can't keep up with the other consoles.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 08:26
|
|
|
NESguerilla posted:Why though? Why does protecting their brand always have to involve making consoles that people don't want and feel forced to buy because they want to play Nintendo games? Would a Mario/Zelda/Metroid game inherently suck more or sell worse because it was on PS/Xbox/PC etc? I don't get why it's such a horrible idea to just make your games more accessible and profitable if you clearly can't keep up with the other consoles. Maybe they still have nightmares about the CD-I. Seeing as how the 3dS has turned it around it shows that games sell systems. Systems that we don't even want and wish the games would come to systems we do want.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 08:32
|
|
|
As others have pointed out, power is more closely linked to third party support than sales. Based on sales, the Wii library should have been the highest quality one of all time. It, uh...wasn't. Even if Wii U had been moderately successful (it was never going to replicate the Wii numbers), it would have been a relic as soon as the PS4/Xbone hit. Very few developers want to scale down their game for inferior tech. Anyone remember Modern Warfare: Shortbus Edition on the Wii? How about the Dead Rising port? That is why Nintendo screwed itself on third party as soon as they announced the specs. Nintendo went from having the most ludicrously successful system, to having no games for a whole year because the company literally did not know how to make modern AAA video games in HD. Sometimes I feel bad for them. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 08:34
|
|
|
NESguerilla posted:Why though? Why does protecting their brand always have to involve making consoles that people don't want and feel forced to buy because they want to play Nintendo games? Would a Mario/Zelda/Metroid game inherently suck more or sell worse because it was on PS/Xbox/PC etc? I don't get why it's such a horrible idea to just make your games more accessible and profitable if you clearly can't keep up with the other consoles. Because they give up control which pretty much never works in a developer's favor, except by offering wider exposure. Nintendo games have about the widest exposure you could want and so they gain nothing from it. That's basically the long and short of it. It doesn't benefit Nintendo, at least not of yet, not even after a Wii U level failure (assuming the Wii U never recovers at all.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 08:38
|
|
|
That Iwata Asks for Sticker Star explains so much about the game's development. After a survey showed that only 1% of people enjoyed the story to Super Paper Mario, they decided not to have one at all. Never mind that the first two games did have good stories, especially with TTYD's excellent translation, just focus on the reception of that weird spin-off. It's like Square Enix going "X was too linear, so let's make XII open! XII was too open, let's make XIII linear! XIII was too linear," etc. E: VVV New Super Mario Bros. sold well, so don't change a thing! That Fucking Sned fucked around with this message at 12:01 on Sep 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 10:27
|
|
|
That loving Sned posted:That Iwata Asks for Sticker Star explains so much about the game's development. After a survey showed that only 1% of people enjoyed the story to Super Paper Mario, they decided not to have one at all. They kind of did this with Zelda too. Wind Waker was too cartoons, not enough dungeons, make Twilight Princess grimdark with so many dungeons! Twilight Princess was too dark and the overworld too large and empty, motion controls tracked on, Skyward Sword no overworld, half cartoon, all motion controls ail the time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 11:32
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:The problem is that those other causes are not actually meaningful. Yes, the Wii U is the weakest system, but developers do not only develop for the strongest system, nor do customers only buy the strongest system. Companies certainly would gladly develop for it if the market was there, if at bare minimum by porting 360/PS3 versions of games. This can and would bite them in a few years when those multiplatform games stop coming out but the Wii U would be 3-4 years old by that point. If other causes were not meaningful then the Wii U would have gotten ports of Tomb Raider, Bioshock, etc. since those games were being produces before anyone knew the Wii U was a gigaflop. Sales are not the only problem. Bethesda even said so out loud. Devs are running on 2-3 year cycles and if Wii U's only problem was its sales it would be getting releses for its first 2-3 years, like GameCube did. It's not. MassRafTer posted:If mobile phones are chipping away at their sales it doesn't show, the 3DS is selling faster than the DS did to this point in its lifespan. It's a total success and Nintendo is really lucky they were able to recover from their initial blunder. This should give hope for the Wii U... but no, it really doesn't. The competition is much stiffer and the system isn't priced as well or as nifty with few games to show for it. 3DS sales are pretty stagnant dude.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 12:17
|
|
|
AdmiralViscen posted:3DS sales are pretty stagnant dude. This is factual incorrect.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 12:44
|
|
|
Also, let's not forget that Pokemon X/Y is coming out in just over a month..
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 12:45
|
|
|
MassRafTer posted:If mobile phones are chipping away at their sales it doesn't show, the 3DS is selling faster than the DS did to this point in its lifespan. It's a total success and Nintendo is really lucky they were able to recover from their initial blunder. This should give hope for the Wii U... but no, it really doesn't. The competition is much stiffer and the system isn't priced as well or as nifty with few games to show for it. A few months ago the 3DS got passed by the DS in equivalent lifetime sales (coinciding with the release of the DSLite) and it is never catching up. The DS had sold realllllly slowly from launch until that point, which is why the 3DS was tracking ahead of it despite it's own less than stellar launch. The 3DS is still doing well, no doubt, but the handheld market has shrunk a lot the last few years. In the US with the new Animal Crossing out the 3DS got a pretty big sales bump but looking at the equivalent months in 2006 it is selling pretty close to what the PSP sold, to say nothing of the DS and GBA which were both selling like hotcakes. We'll see where things stand after Monster Hunter and Pokemon, but right now it's pretty safe to say the 3DS will probably end up closer to the GBA's 80 million sold (a very good number!) than the DS's 150 million, and that's with no significant competition from a Sony handheld. e: Oh yeah this is a Wii U thread. The hardware sales bump from Pikmin is almost totally gone in Japan as the Wii U slumped back down to ~6k sales this week, nearing the 5k rock bottom it hit right before Pikmin. Crowbear fucked around with this message at 12:56 on Sep 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 12:47
|
|
|
Crowbear posted:it's pretty safe to say the 3DS will probably end up closer to the GBA's 80 million sold (a very good number!) than the DS's 150 million, and that's with no significant competition from a Sony handheld. But there is competition from a Sony handheld, whether it's significant or not reflects upon how well the 3DS is doing does it not? i.e. if the competition is not significant that would be a point in the 3DS' favor.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 12:58
|
|
|
Wandle Cax posted:But there is competition from a Sony handheld, whether it's significant or not reflects upon how well the 3DS is doing does it not? i.e. if the competition is not significant that would be a point in the 3DS' favor. The Vita was stillborn. Going up against the 3DS was part of that, but Sony's strategy from pricing to proprietary memory cards to lack of significant games didn't help either. The point I'm trying to make, though, is that the DS was selling better than the 3DS despite having 2 other handhelds cannibalizing its sales. If the handheld market hasn't shrunk (because of smart phones or something else, I don't know) you would expect the 3DS to be selling better than the DS, not worse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 13:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 04:33 |
|
|
NESguerilla posted:Why though? Why does protecting their brand always have to involve making consoles that people don't want and feel forced to buy because they want to play Nintendo games? Would a Mario/Zelda/Metroid game inherently suck more or sell worse because it was on PS/Xbox/PC etc? I don't get why it's such a horrible idea to just make your games more accessible and profitable if you clearly can't keep up with the other consoles. I like their consoles. Why would they want to pay the licensing fees to release their games on other companies consoles, and get no licensing fees from third party games to boot. Their games would have to sell extremely well to get the same return on investments that they are making now. Like it or not, I think Nintendo knows how to stick around and remain profitable, and part of that has been making hardware. It really isn't that they "can't keep up with other consoles". It has been a conscious decision to go with less powerful hardware. It's not like they tried really hard to make a powerful console and fell short somehow. Wii U is selling at a historically bad rate. No doubt. But they don't have to worry, panic, and start paying microsoft and sony just to be able to release their games on a console. They know this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:42
|
|