Iwata Putting Nintendo In Position To Fail

  • 52 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#51 Edited by Chozofication (2727 posts) -

@Jaysonguy said:

@Madmangamer364 said:

Frankly, there's next to no evidence to back up your claim that a more powerful system is the solution

I would say there is.

What we're seeing with the two next gen consoles is that when it comes to third party games people are flocking to the one who delivers 1080p and a solid 30-60 fps.

Horsepower by itself sells games.

There has to be horsepower all around though. You need games to be technically proficient but you also need the online infrastructure to have horsepower too.

If Nintendo had a console that could do Battlefield 4 with 60+ players on a map and Nintendo paid for a special perk for the ones who played on their console people would go and buy it.

Big companies don't hate Nintendo, they'll gladly sell to anyone who makes them money. The thing is that having to scale back games or cut pieces out costs a developer money and why waste the time?

Horsepower builds a base.

The biggest factor of Nintendo matching/better the specs than their competitors would be cost?..wouldnt' it?..I mean Nintendo can't actually sell that the amount of loss that MS/Sony can do, (can they? or they just won't?)..so even if they do match the specs/better it, Nintendo system would be very expensive..then people would be saying "omg that's so expensive..screw that" ...Im going for MS/Sony.. :P

The Ps4 costs $381 to make atm, so Sony is close to making a profit or at least breaking even. They'll be making significant profit by the time they shrink the chip size down.

So Nintendo could easily make a much more powerful console if they wanted, albeit with no gamepad or other crazy big addition.

#52 Posted by Chozofication (2727 posts) -

@Madmangamer364:

You're somewhat missing the point. I'm not saying the audience who wants multiplats on Nintendo consoles is huge right now (though it is significant, just not compared to Playstation), but if they worked at making a console for 3rd party's, they could eventually build that audience. It's not just about power, that's just the start of things. Then Nintendo has to make the effort to work with 3rd party's, and then get the message out that they care about this, and their console is the place to go for multiplats. That's something Nintendo has never done, and that's why you can't use past consoles as examples.

But of course there's the matter of will all this happen or not. It won't happen unless there's a miracle, lol.

#53 Posted by Madmangamer364 (3586 posts) -

I would say there is.

What we're seeing with the two next gen consoles is that when it comes to third party games people are flocking to the one who delivers 1080p and a solid 30-60 fps.

Horsepower by itself sells games.

There has to be horsepower all around though. You need games to be technically proficient but you also need the online infrastructure to have horsepower too.

If Nintendo had a console that could do Battlefield 4 with 60+ players on a map and Nintendo paid for a special perk for the ones who played on their console people would go and buy it.

Big companies don't hate Nintendo, they'll gladly sell to anyone who makes them money. The thing is that having to scale back games or cut pieces out costs a developer money and why waste the time?

Horsepower builds a base.

Come now, Jayson. Since when has horsepower alone been enough to be that big of a factor? It certainly hasn't been the case the past couple of decades, as it seems like the most powerful console never wins out in the end, and in the case of the previous HD consoles, had to pay a heavy price out of the gate to get to where they eventually were. Is it even worth it at the end of the day? That's a question that can be heavily debated if we factor in all of the history and trends.

That said, I've no doubt that most major publishers would like to see their games succeed on all platforms, including Nintendo's, if possible. However, the idea that those who have made their gaming experiences at home on other systems would instantly jump ship if Nintendo had a top-of-the-line console is not one I'm convinced of, especially when at the end of the day, they would still more than likely have that experience well intact with their system(s) of choice. Furthermore, what does it actually say about the one year stint the Wii U had as the most powerful console on the market when it still only caused publishers to pull support and cut features in games, outside of the obvious fact that nothing was selling on the system?

Definitely, no one wants to have deal with the hurdles that come with weaker hardware, but I don't even think that's the issue here. If the Wii U had been successful in cultivating that audience where the AAA games could thrive, the attitude towards the system would be drastically better as we speak. However, what we've seen is that despite having the hardware closer to that which people have been demanding from Nintendo for years, things have only gotten worse for the health of those games on Nintendo systems. It's as if no one cares to acknowledge the obvious and come to the conclusion that maybe most of these games just don't work as well with Nintendo's audience, and if that's the case, the hardware isn't really going to make a huge difference on anyone's bottom line, except maybe Nintendo's.

@Chozofication

Nah, I get what you're saying. It's just that I don't find Nintendo's audience for AAA multiplats to be sufficient at all. Heck, I'll take it a step further and say I don't think the market for most AAA games is that big on Nintendo systems, period, whether they be exclusive or multiplatform, on consoles or portables. This is the whole reason why I questioned your remark to begin with. For a group of consumers who claim to want something, there continues to be more evidence to the contrary and even more excuses afterwards.

Could Nintendo jump through a few more hoops to reach out to third party publishers? Of course they could, but it doesn't guarantee that audience in and off itself. The fact that Nintendo has tried and failed in the past to do this, most specifically, with the GameCube, is why I think past systems is and will always be relevant when it comes to this discussion. After all, it's not as if third party publishers are ignoring the past each and every time one of their key games manages to sell below even already lower expectations on Nintendo consoles these days. It'll be important until something comes along to turn the trend on its head and have a meaningful, long-term run of its own. If that "something" actually exists, much like a number of unconventionally-made that became popular on the DS and Wii, they will come and find an audience, regardless of how powerful Nintendo's console is at the time.

Amazingly, the onus is always put on Nintendo is the situation to correct the matter, but they're really the middleman trying to figure out why two groups almost never see eye-to-eye. Both Nintendo fans and third party publishers know what they're getting into by now, and yet, they also refuse to learn from their mistakes and point fingers elsewhere. I've had no problem in recent years in challenging Nintendo when I felt it was necessary, but this isn't one of those times for me. It's just as important for third party publishers to understand who they're actually trying to sell their games to, and for fans to understand where they truly stand.

Funny thing is that I actually anticipated this would happen before the other next-gen systems even became a factor, and to me, this has proven that all of the talk about the Wii U becoming a better balance of first and third party offerings had no chance from the start, despite what was supposed to have been in the system's favor compared to past consoles. I think I've said enough for now, so maybe I'll see you guys again in another 5 years or so. :P

#54 Posted by superbuuman (2607 posts) -

@Madmangamer364 - hehehe..so have Nintendo given you a reason to buy a Wii U? :P