-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Eurogamer: NX is different, and different is Nintendo's best option.
- Thread starter BY2K
- Start date
- Status
The comment being responded to wasn't only about consoles, in fact the poster even mentioned 3DS.
Also, NX isn't a console either and yet it's in the graph. Really it seems more like "add an unrelated graph to this response that's more unflattering for Nintendo please".
The post said the WiiU was their only misstep since the GC. I would argue most of the decisions Nintendo has made in the console space over the last few decades are missteps. Look at the decline in relevance in that graph. It's almost a completely perfect slide into the gutter with the one exception of the Wii.
Nintendo made more than just consoles in the last few decades. And it's not like everything else was even a rousing success either (hello Virtual Boy) but by all means keep excluding relevant data in service to your strawman.
LegendofLex
Member
You completely missed what I'm saying, which was that even with a perfectly good reason to make those games - to broaden the appeal of their platforms - they still didn't place a high priority on making those games. The "value of the IP" doesn't matter if the creators don't value the IP.
This will not improve when they no longer have the incentive to broaden the appeal of their platforms. They will have more reason to place a high priority on bringing the games that sell lots of software units to as many platforms as possible, because making profitable software will be the full extent of their video game business.
That their biggest stated reason for ignoring these franchises is that they feel creatively burned out on them is actually going to get worse when the only metric for these games' business performance is software sales and not whether they give their platform greater prestige. They'll have no creative or financial reason to make them.
You're deluding yourself if you think that incentives have nothing to do with results.
How is it a strawman to discuss only consoles when I am literally discussing Nintendo's presence in the console space. If I am discussing iPhones and their market success, why would I start talking about macbooks? Does Pokemon Go being popular right now mean the WiiU isn't a complete failure?
Skittzo0413
Member
Because you posted in response to a person claiming that the DS and 3DS were not missteps, and that the Wii U was the only misstep since the Gamecube, which your chart actually confirmed.
You're being intentionally obtuse.
Edit:
Confused you with who originally posted the chart, apologies.
NX isn't only a console, so why are you purposely excluding relevant data in a thread about it? Do I need to define what a strawman is for you?
chillybright
Banned
Yep. In this day and age casuals are already captured by smartphone games. A handheld gaming device, no matter how cheap or innovative, does not make phone calls or offer enough f2p games.
...or, does it?
darkhunger
Member
Not everyone falls within broad demographic indicators like "casuals" or "hardcores", you know. The point is to find the niche in between the mobile space and the console space, while leveraging Nintendo's existing fanbase and brand power as well as their expertise in creating handhelds to try to carve out its own audience, as well as using mobile to build up their brands and cause a bit of a "spillover effect".
I never said the NX was only a console. I merely said Nintendo has severely mismanaged their console business. Their collapsing console marketshare likely helped push them toward the hybrid route. As the article states, the NX is different in part because it has to be given what they look like in the console space these days.
I won't pretend to have some deep insight into the modern handheld market. We haven't really seen one launch in the age of smartphone saturation.
I still question whether Nintendo wasn't treating Wii U as a stopgap from the beginning. This move to a single-stream of development has been a long time coming, but it was always planned for 2014 and never would have been ready in time for the pipeline of software for the Wii's successor. Perhaps the whole thing was a punt, not that they expected it to do as badly as it did (they would've just kept the Wii alive longer if that was what it took), but that their expectations were more subdued than they let on.
Then why is NX included in that irrelevant "consoles only" graph you're defending? And why bother with the misleading console only arguments anyway when the subject was very clearly Nintendo as a whole?
You might be right but I think the PS is the best bet for Nintendo in the event of a NX failure. Nintendo is not going to work out on the PC. The PC crowd is used to games plummeting in value after release. Nintendo does not do that and it would lead to rampant piracy of their IPs. MS has the money to make a great deal with Nintendo but Xbox sales are really poor world side. That leave Sony who would welcome this it would really help with family and casuals. There are plenty of Nintendo IPs that don't work on mobile. Those would be on the PS platform and would raise brand awareness to sell those mobile games.
pinkurocket
Member
The big question that remains is of course.. Will it have faceplates?
ForsakenLotus
Member
It's true that Nintendo can't do what Sony and Microsoft are doing, but that's not an excuse for poorly thought out "different" consoles. They need to be both unique and well designed, appealing to the mainstream as well as offering games for the core gamer, and they need to be reasonably priced. I imagine that's not going to be easy to achieve.
Council Pop
Member
This article brilliantly argues as to why Nintendo shouldn't try and compete with Sony and Microsoft. I've yet to see an articulate and informed argument as to why Nintendo should try and compete on that level, apart from "well they were competitive in 1995!!" etc, or people having some kind of 'gut feeling' that if Nintendo released a really powerful console and tried to butter up loads of third party publishers, they'd instantly end up with a PS4-beating machine.
Are you implying I made a graph another poster used in their comment? I'm sorry the graph isn't tailored to your specifications. I probably would have chosen one without the NX, but it's not like it matters. The presence of the NX makes absolutely no difference to the content of the graph overall.
Moving to handhelds then, it's not like the 3DS is some crowning achievement considering its launch was a fucking disaster and it's sold half of what it's predecessor did. And that's half of the DS' sales in a market with far less mobile saturation than today, so a more favorable environment for a handheld.
Hell, even Nintendo's most recent success was associated with a significant stock slide after it was announced they're not making that much off Pokémon Go. And that's to go along with the delay of the Go accessory, missing the height of the game's popularity.
Regardless of where you look, it's not hard to find some hilarious missteps on Nintendo's end.
Making profitable software is the point of anyone's video game business. Nobody releases a game to lose money.
Why is anyone assuming that they need to release niche, or smaller, or "creative" games to "broaden the appeal of their platforms," or that that is the sole reason why they would consider releasing such games? If you are a software company, why wouldn't you release those kinds of games anyway? What logic says that Nintendo wouldn't release those kinds of games if they didn't own a hardware platform? Are you suggesting that only Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo are capable of releasing these sorts of games (because they are the sole owners of the hardware platforms), or that they are taking any less of a risk releasing those sorts of games versus third parties?
What really gives a platform greater prestige? Sales. That's the reality of the current market. The shareholders don't care how much creativity is on Wii U, they want to see numbers.
Maybe I really am completely missing what you're saying. I just don't see why going 3rd party should or would mean that huge swaths of their creative catalog would disappear completely.
Well, this would be the best way to utilize the shared library, no?
...
If it was a handheld and a home console with a shared library, then that would be a benefit production side that we would see as less game shortages.
As a hybrid, it suddenly becomes a gimmick. You don't need to buy both to have the versatility benefits; they come packed in. This is the concern people were airing about "perhaps they should launch at the same time, and bundled," but the cost seemed prohibitive.
Sacrifice power at the TV to make it a pack in gimmick? That seems to be what Nintendo is doing, and it is the most elegant way to achieve the vision.
...
Also, it shows handheld-leading thinking, which makes sense given Wii U/3DS sales and Nintendo's obsession with the Japanese market since the GCN.
...
If it was a handheld and a home console with a shared library, then that would be a benefit production side that we would see as less game shortages.
As a hybrid, it suddenly becomes a gimmick. You don't need to buy both to have the versatility benefits; they come packed in. This is the concern people were airing about "perhaps they should launch at the same time, and bundled," but the cost seemed prohibitive.
Sacrifice power at the TV to make it a pack in gimmick? That seems to be what Nintendo is doing, and it is the most elegant way to achieve the vision.
...
Also, it shows handheld-leading thinking, which makes sense given Wii U/3DS sales and Nintendo's obsession with the Japanese market since the GCN.
Wii 101 million sold
DS 154 million sold
3DS 60 million sold
Wii U 13 million sold
That's a 75% success ratio over their last four consoles and a better hit to miss ratio than MS has with Xbox.
Not just Nintendo but also Sega (SMS, Genesis, Game Gear) and Konami (TG16) have working 3DS emulators for their classic systems. Additionally other platforms lke C64, 2600, Colecovision, MSX or NeoGeo also have official emulators for other devices using ARM.
There are also ARM based systems like 3DO, GBA or DS which might be facilitated on VC thanks to their CPUs. I think the big question for VC going forward will be later higher powered consoles (besides N64) like GC, Wii, DC or Saturn. Also more niche later portable systems like VB, NGPC, Wonderswan or Pokemon mini.
Enter the Dragon Punch
Banned
Bring back the classics
Banned
This article is spot on and I think and bet that Nintendo will put out the NX for a really cheap price but will romp home with sales due to innovation and pure gameplay within their games!
Nintendo are craftsmen in the industry they don't follow they LEAD!
Nintendo are craftsmen in the industry they don't follow they LEAD!
This is the only part I don't agree with. It's a pipe dream that "third party Nintendo" is ever going to happen. They are going to ride or die with their own hardware; it's what they do. No one working at that company has any interest in developing for other companies' hardware. And NX is certainly not their last stand, succeed or fail.
Stilton Disco
Member
They've tried the high power, third party 'friendly' (in that they had full third party support) approach twice, with the NES and SNES, and found success both times.
They then tried to be different and ignore market trends 4 times from the N64 to WiiU and had one success, with an entirely different audience who fucked off before that generation was even over.
Meanwhile, as the WiiU tanked the PS4 aimed for the traditional enthusiast market and saw huge success, and the XO went full Wii audience aimed multimedia casual device and completely fucked themselves.
So why do Nintendo and it's hardcore defenders keep insisting not competing for the market they're actually in is a good idea? Just the one fluke win of the Wii?
Because this bullshit self deluding, slow marketshare suicide, is infuriating as a lifelong Nintendo fan.
They then tried to be different and ignore market trends 4 times from the N64 to WiiU and had one success, with an entirely different audience who fucked off before that generation was even over.
Meanwhile, as the WiiU tanked the PS4 aimed for the traditional enthusiast market and saw huge success, and the XO went full Wii audience aimed multimedia casual device and completely fucked themselves.
So why do Nintendo and it's hardcore defenders keep insisting not competing for the market they're actually in is a good idea? Just the one fluke win of the Wii?
Because this bullshit self deluding, slow marketshare suicide, is infuriating as a lifelong Nintendo fan.
Mexen
Member
Is it though? Don't you think Nintendo's best option is pumping out a good number of titles that fully utilize its platform? What if the NX controls brilliantly but has like, 4 titles? What's the point? Now consider that but with great 10+ exclusives and 10s of third party games including Indies in its early years. That is what is Nintendo's best option imho.
Because as stated in your reply they did that successfully thirty years ago with a totally different competitor landscape and nowadays there are other companies way better suited for that approach.
That approach would probably force them going the sega route today with the substantial difference of them having still a profitable portable division that in fact will probably,y be their main focus in the dedicated device segment.
From a consumer point of view btw I prefer having something different considering how I already own a ps4 with power and third parties. Of course the difference must be interesting and find success to see support but if that happens I vastly prefer a Wii lineup alongside my ps4 one than a wii u one.
Multi platform and ports are worth just if you don't have other consoles imho.
Edit
Plus you are counting their outputs as home console when no will primar,y be their next portable. In that space it is indeed proved that they found many successes with their approaches, winning over the competition despite a less powerful system and gimmicks
So if no will be different, in the portable space it seems to me that they nailed it almost every time they tried, so...
lo zaffo
Member
Perfectly thought and written. I agree.
And if N64 had CD it would have sold WAY better. Smash hit.
NES success was also built on everyone else flying away of the console market because of the 83 crash. They lost half of the market with SNES against Sega, and Now Sony and MS are much stronger opponents that Sega ever was.
You mix "having a console which is good for Third Party" and "having an actual third party support"
NES wasn't third party friendly at all... It was a totally different from other architecture of the time and Nintendo was a lot more strict about the number of game which can came out from one editor. SNES was more laxist (maybe because of competitor ?) even if the architecture was once again completely different (so not that "friendly") and N64 was actually like the SNES in that aspect... But it didn't even success so that dug that "at least, our first party game are great !" grave. The N64 was actually meant to be very powerful and the PLaystation was just ready before with a better nose about what technology was most interesting (so CD versus stuff like anti aliasing chip) which made a cheap console with a lot of game for a more casual crowd... It reminds me a lot of the Wii actually...
The Gamecube really wanted to be Third Party Friendly and it actually worked at some extend... And we all know it was disappointing. Nintendo always did what they wanted to do with handlet and everyone followed. The Wii is the first really huge departure from the rest of the market and we all know it was a success. The Wii U is the only console where they did something very different and it didn't worked.
Nintendo ALWAYS had that mentality of "I do what i want to do, follow me" instead of "Oh, we have this nice console, could you please go on it ?" apart from the Gamecube era. So don't tell they only tried the "high power/third party friendly" combo only twice with success, it just doesn't make sense for me.
Always-honest
Banned
I certainly don't buy a Nintendo machine for the same multiplats as all the others have.
But if it's a popular machine third parties can make a lot of exclusives for Nintendo.
Not sure why you are so certain. Or maybe you are just riding the waves of negativity.
Anyway, just Nintendo first party games would be enough for me personally to justify buying the NX. But that's because i think these games are almost always from a really high quality.
That's pretty much why I buy Nintendo systems I don't plan to ever sell my PS4. Multiplatform games don't excite me as I play those on PS4. Though 3rd party exclusives and more first party games will make me more tempted to buy a NX than just Mario and Zelda.
I'm with you on this 100%. There is a MASSIVE audience of enthusiast gamers (Maybe 70-100 million) and Nintendo has basically given them the finger for 2 generations.
I won't be worrying because unless they prove they have good Western third party support, I refuse to buy their consoles any more.
LordRaptor
Member
Nintendo have never made a device that they've pushed as a multimedia machine, so your attempt to label the Wii as such to somehow explain the Xbox Ones launch failures as being an attempt to copy Nintendo is way off base.
What really? I think that is way overblown.
If the console market suddenly introduced machines of equal power:
Nintendo
Sony
Microsoft
I don't see how Nintendo would pull the audiences away to make theirs the primary console.
Both Sony and Microsoft have incredibly attractive ecosystems that lie outside of just brute power of the machine. This is incredibly hard to chip away at. Digital catalogues, friends lists, hell even controller preference are enough to sway people to a console, the uphill battle Nintendo would have to face is huge.
With that in mind, you'd end up with Nintendo being a very expensive first party software 2nd console for everyone (because why play third party games on your second console? I certainly didn't when I ran with PC and PS3).
Unique selling point is the only avenue Nintendo have here and it is a valid one.
Possumowner
Member
Different is what I expect from Nintendo,its also what I want,whether that's enough for sucess I'm not sure it is,it needs to be fairly universally attractive to gamers
Wrong thread and wrong week. This was posted 10 days ago.
Android did it vs the iPhone, Palm, BB and MS. And that was with offering mostly free and low priced apps. Granted Nintendo cant sell their consoles as cheap as some Android OEMs, but it shows one can get into/back into a market and have success.
Another thing about Android's ecosystem is family of devices. Games, apps can basically be played on any other Android devices all things being equal.
Nintendo might need to go the multiple device route to get back in the game.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll