• 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.

How can Nintendo win back marketshare with their next home console?

GoldChain

Member
If they offer a good product people will buy it.

Wii proved that already, practically nobody owned a GameCube.

Edit:

I could imagine Nintendo being able to finally grasp online gaming would be a huge boost.

I imagine a chat room, similar to the PS4 party system, except on Nintendo's system you are in a little enclosed Super Mario Bros lvl.

Each player can jump around and smash blocks or collect coins while you wait to launch whatever game you are actually going to play, or just simply chat. The party leader has choice "sandbox" theme. It would make waiting for that last friend to join your party less monotonous, and something I think Nintendo could really nail.

To this day the WiiU friend system feels lonely. The first screen you see should have your friends on it. To have to click and load menus deep just to see if someone is online really discourages me from even adding friends at all on
this system.

Of course competitive hardware is a must. But Nintendo has also been known to take risks, I wouldn't be surprised if they announced that the next console was VR only.
 

Owwari

Banned
Nintendo's biggest concern should be their own diehard fans haha, they just don't buy anything but 1st party IPs.

Like seriously, what's wrong with you people?
 

sörine

Banned
They still had a lower amount of consoles sold, meaning their base was lower for that product. Every product they have released has shown a base that continues to drop.

Other than Wii/DS being the oddities. I get what your saying, and somewhat agree but the overall amount of people who played GBA is lower than those whole played GB. Considering the mobile market and similar patterns with the home consoles it seems the trend will likely continue in my opinion.
GBA had an artifically truncated lifespan and was the only Nintendo handheld not to recieve a midcycle upgrade like GBC, DSi or n3DS (each of which could technically be considered to be new platforms). Ignoring context doesn't give you an argument, it just makes you look ignorant.

Also, regarding your number of players argument there are approximately as many devices out there capable of playing GBA games as there are GB games.
 

CANLI

Member
Nintendo's biggest concern should be their own diehard fans haha, they just don't buy anything but 1st party IPs.

Like seriously, what's wrong with you people?

When you see how mass effect and fifa are made + the rayman game fact, why do i have to buy other garbages?
 
sörine;151158353 said:
GBA had an artifically truncated lifespan and was the only Nintendo handheld not to recieve a midcycle upgrade like GBC, DSi or n3DS (each of which could technically be considered to be new platforms). Ignoring context doesn't give you an argument, it just makes you look ignorant.

Also, regarding your number of players argument there are approximately as many devices out there capable of playing GBA games as there are GB games.
]

I'm not ignoring the context, I understand the point your making. Im simply saying the overall platform totals still dropped for their respective families.

Regardless of cross capability or shortened life span. Just look at the numbers, their base is shrinking. It's not particularly an issue with their mobile segment yet but their home platforms have finally reached a point where he average drop historically over each generation is now in line with what the Wii U will sell through its lifetime.

What that means I have no idea I'm just pointing it out. There have been a few articles floating around covering it.

It ignores overall profitability for each generation, software attach rate, etc. it's just an observation.
 

Hiltz

Member
Nintendo's biggest concern should be their own diehard fans haha, they just don't buy anything but 1st party IPs.

Like seriously, what's wrong with you people?

I don't think this is true for many of us on GAF. It would seem a lot of people that own a Nintendo home console likely already own a PlayStation and/or Xbox console as well. Of course, the sales don't lie, so there is truth that for other Nintendo fans, they tend to be far more supportive of its own software over third parties. Personally, I buy as many, or almost as many third party games as I do 1st party on SNES, N64, Wii and GameCube, Gameboy Advance and DS Lite. Of course, I have only owned Nintendo consoles.
 
So I'm 17 pages and hundreds of posts late to this.

Typically I see threads like this turn into the same bleak "doom and gloom" threads (even though Nintendo isn't going out of buisness for years even if they're next console sells as bad as the Wii U but that's besides the point) so I'll say these things:

-Market share for the console market hasn't mattered since the Snes/Genesis days it's all about making money.

-Third parties aren't coming back to Nintendo consoles unless Nintendo wants them to make games exclusively to them.

-Nintendo is not interested in making the most powerful super computer and that won't change come next generation.

-You can't expect what Nintendo is up too.

Ultimately as long as Nintendo retains its fanbase it has, cultivates new ones, continues to try out new ideas, grows their presence on social media continues to make quality games, that will be the key to whatever success it has and people going to buy them anyway even if Sony has more marketshare.

Nintendo's biggest concern should be their own diehard fans haha, they just don't buy anything but 1st party IPs.

Like seriously, what's wrong with you people?

How is this a concern for them again? Maybe to you because "lol what losers" but a group of people continually buying their games is more of a good thing isn't it.
 

Josh5890

Member
Nintendo's biggest concern should be their own diehard fans haha, they just don't buy anything but 1st party IPs.

Like seriously, what's wrong with you people?

I own AC 3 (launch day) and 4, Batman Arkham City, Rayman (launch Day), Sonic Racing (Launch Day), and Zombi U all for Wii-U. I did my part.
 
Nintendo's biggest concern should be their own diehard fans haha, they just don't buy anything but 1st party IPs.

Like seriously, what's wrong with you people?

I bought darksiders 2, and Zombie U at launch. I also bought monster hunter and batman arkham origins. I think we do buy third party titles, there just aren't a lot of us.
 
I think there's essentially two paths forward for Nintendo:

1) Go big. Build a more expensive console that's more like the competitor's consoles in terms of performance, controls, online, etc (though on top of that base they can layer on whatever Nintendo weirdness they like). Make it an easy port-target for normal cross-platform games, so that it if it's someone's only console, they can still play all of the third-party games they expect. Then, they may be able to compete directly with Sony and Microsoft.

2) Go small. Make a console that's so cheap that nobody will be put off buying it, even if they already own a console. Target only first-party development, plus select third-party exclusives. Don't even try to compete with other consoles, but become the second device that everyone has in addition to their "real" console.

(1) is simply not in Nintendo's DNA anymore, and hasn't been for a long, long time, so success really just comes down to how well they execute on (2). The problem with the Wii U is that it is basically on path 2, but it costs too much, and is too complicated. There's games I would like to play on the Wii U, but the combination of the price and the sheer amount of stuff you need in your living room (the gamepad is enormous and has a cradle that needs to sit on a table all the time, then there's wiimotes, nunchucks, pro controllers, the sensor bar, etc). It's just too much commitment to play a handful of Nintendo games.
 
My initial thought was "nothing, they wont gain market share," but as I thought about it, I think I have good idea of how they can fix things the next go around.

1. Dump everything they have so far and adopt a modern, commonly used architecture. There's a reason the third party exclusive is pretty much dead between the Xbox One and PS4, and it's not because devs NEED to sell to both markets. It's because porting between the two costs virtually nothing. A lot of people here gave devs flack for not putting their Xbox 360 and PS3 games on Wii U when they had comparable hardware, but the truth is the Wii U's architecture is so different in comparison that it takes devs significant effort to port their games to Wii U. Combine that with the lower sales, and it just isn't worth it.

2. Invest in an actual online infrastructure. This is honestly the hardest step because it's pretty clear that Nintendo has no idea what they're doing in this category, but when several of the biggest games last year were online only, you know they have a problem. Nintendo needs to take a look at Xbox Live and PSN and see why those work and the Nintendo Network doesn't. Maybe hire some new blood to work on their servers and network. This is usually bad advise, but this time it's okay: COPY THE COMPETITION.

3. Make partnerships. I don't mean your typical gaming partnerships, EA Activition, ect.
I mean entertainment partnerships. Disney, Marvel, WB, ect. get the games that most appeal to kids on there console and the more "core" franchises will follow when your console is easy to develop for.

4. Ads Ads Ads. Like it or not, the PS4's ad campaign did wonders for the console. It played to nostalgia, sold you a lifestyle, and all around just worked. Kids showing their parents a power point presentation isn't going to work.
 

Josh5890

Member
4. Ads Ads Ads. Like it or not, the PS4's ad campaign did wonders for the console. It played to nostalgia, sold you a lifestyle, and all around just worked. Kids showing their parents a power point presentation isn't going to work.

I would say it was a combination of marketing, super horrible press for Microsoft, and a lower entry price is what did it for Sony and the PS4. They are safe in the lead for the rest of the generation unless they royally screw up.
 

Bumhead

Banned
Price.

It HAS to be cheap.

Nintendo's position in the market as a "secondary system" isn't even a bad one. It can even be embraced. But they need it to be cheap enough to hit that impulse territory price point that will get those who are already investing in Sony, Microsoft or PC to bite.

The DS and Wii launched at £99 and £179 respectively. Those are absolutely killer price points right out of the gate, and I think it's often underestimated just how important that is.
 

TheMoon

Member
I think there's essentially two paths forward for Nintendo:

1) Go big. Build a more expensive console that's more like the competitor's consoles in terms of performance, controls, online, etc (though on top of that base they can layer on whatever Nintendo weirdness they like). Make it an easy port-target for normal cross-platform games, so that it if it's someone's only console, they can still play all of the third-party games they expect. Then, they may be able to compete directly with Sony and Microsoft.

2) Go small. Make a console that's so cheap that nobody will be put off buying it, even if they already own a console. Target only first-party development, plus select third-party exclusives. Don't even try to compete with other consoles, but become the second device that everyone has in addition to their "real" console.

(1) is simply not in Nintendo's DNA anymore, and hasn't been for a long, long time, so success really just comes down to how well they execute on (2). The problem with the Wii U is that it is basically on path 2, but it costs too much, and is too complicated. There's games I would like to play on the Wii U, but the combination of the price and the sheer amount of stuff you need in your living room (the gamepad is enormous and has a cradle that needs to sit on a table all the time, then there's wiimotes, nunchucks, pro controllers, the sensor bar, etc). It's just too much commitment to play a handful of Nintendo games.

(1) = Wii U, GCN
 
I would say it was a combination of marketing, super horrible press for Microsoft, and a lower entry price is what did it for Sony and the PS4. They are safe in the lead for the rest of the generation unless they royally screw up.

I would agree, but the ads still did help. I remember in my marketing class my professor talked about "Otaku" which according to him were just enthusiast. He said with everything, no matter how big the market is, you sell to the Otaku first and you get the mass market after that. If you're seeling a car, you get gear heads to love it, and then everyone else does, same with Cell phones, any other tech, and yes video games. The PS4 was the top console among the gaf crowd and that spread to the mass market.
 

Calamari41

41 > 38
Nintendo should by all means try to court third party devs for AAA multiplats, but the most important thing for their future is to implement a strategy whereby they aren't needed. This means that Nintendo needs to have regular game releases of their normal high quality, and across as many genres as possible. It means more deals like those that brought Hyrule Warriors, Bayonetta, Monster Hunter, and Dragon Quest exclusively to their systems. But most of all, it means implementation of the hinted-at "cross device and cross generation" OS/architecture.

If you look at the game releases for the Wii U and 3DS since each launched, you get a bunch of truly all-time great games but with severe droughts. If you combine both release schedules into one, you get an absolute juggernaut.

Not even considering how many more systems would be sold with a combined library like that, just think about game sales. How would NSMBU have sold if it were available to the Wii and 3DS install base? How would Skyward Sword have sold if it had launched with the ability to be played in HD on the Wii U? Would Tropical Freeze be struggling to hit a million worldwide if you could play it on 3DS as well?

These are just examples using past systems and releases. Apply those to the next system launches, and it's a very exciting prospect.

Even Iwata has said, and I agree, that the "reset to zero" upon every hardware transition is a massive liability. Nintendo could throw pretty much any game onto the Wii even toward the end of its life and a million in sales at least could pretty much be assumed. Then, just a couple of years later, we see how a lot of these releases fare on the Wii U. Tropical Freeze struggles to hit that million just a couple of years after Returns easily sold over 5 million. This method of carrying over game compatibility across devices and generations means that they never have to reset to zero again.

The other benefit to this method is that they can release more hardware. Think New 3DS but with bigger jumps. Every couple of years, a new hardware revision releases. So this year, a new handheld comes out the brings performance a big step closer to the console's quality, then a couple years after that a new home console revision comes out that brings everything to a whole new level. And all games are playable at different graphical fidelities across all of these devices. The big benefit? Say they launch something that crashes and burns like the Wii U. In this strategy, it's not nearly as big of a deal because they can just write the system off while still providing the same games to those people who bought it and to those who didn't. And they can try again in a couple years without suffering nearly as much as they have these past three years.
 

sörine

Banned
]

I'm not ignoring the context, I understand the point your making. Im simply saying the overall platform totals still dropped for their respective families.

Regardless of cross capability or shortened life span. Just look at the numbers, their base is shrinking. It's not particularly an issue with their mobile segment yet but their home platforms have finally reached a point where he average drop historically over each generation is now in line with what the Wii U will sell through its lifetime.

What that means I have no idea I'm just pointing it out. There have been a few articles floating around covering it.

It ignores overall profitability for each generation, software attach rate, etc. it's just an observation.
The issue is you don't seem to grasp that GBA wasn't representative of a shrinking base, it fact it sold faster than any other Nintendo handheld (DS included) and enjoyed software support for over 3 years after it's successor had launched. Your entire "shrinking base" narrative is built off pure misinformation, GBA actually marked an increase in annual handheld sales.
 
Nintendo's biggest concern should be their own diehard fans haha, they just don't buy anything but 1st party IPs.

Like seriously, what's wrong with you people?

Eh. I buy whatever comes out that looks interesting and reviews well. I'd say it's an even split between first and third party games, with a tendency towards indies. I'm first and foremost a consumer, and my intention is not to sponsor every backwater port job of a game I may or may not already own, just because it came to a Nintendo console. I think the whole "Nintendo fans only buy Nintendo games" scenario gets blown way out of proportion. Nintendo hasn't had a "primary/only" console for many since the GameCube. As a direct result of this, sales of multi-platform titles on Nintendo consoles are going to get eaten up. They could very well step back into that ring, with the right strategy and a dump truck full of cash, but I'm not sure that's where they're going (or necessarily need to be). If we entertain the arguably more concrete assertion that "people buy Nintendo consoles for Nintendo games", and look at the Wii U sales figures as a direct result of that - that's still a decent baseline for them to expand upon and say "what else can we sell to these people?". The amiibo initiative is a short-term realisation of such a thing.
 
I don't think you understood my point.

I don't think you understood mine. You think Nintendo should "do what iOS did," but iOS was able to do what it did because people were buying tons of iPhones for the hardware/UI rather than for the app/game ecosystem. For Nintendo to duplicate Apple's success at attracting third-party developers it would need to duplicate Apple's success at making people want to buy its products for their non-gaming utility.
 
All Nintendo should do is stay profitable, the others will have to change tact to stay in the game or leave

8GsvPek.gif


Nintendo might not even get to 15 million units sold with the Wii U, regardless of if Nintendo themselves are profitable on their home console, the other two console makers will have sold at least 50+ million units of their consoles to consumers this gen. Hell, Sony already hit almost 20 million units in ONE YEAR, and Microsoft isnt too far behind in the larger sales picture. Nintendo is rapidly dwindling in market share to the point that their potential sales could be in the single digits when it comes to their home console market. if the trend of Nintendo loosing a large portion of its user base from one gen to the next continues, they could realistically be looking at under 10 million untis sold for their next console. when your market share is that small, the profit margins cant be that much or that worthwhile to keep investing and releasing new home console to such a small audience.

im also not getting your attitude that somehow Sony and MS will have to make drastic changes to stay relevant when they both have large instlll bases and are the only two competitors that sell consoles that have 1st, 2nd, and 3rd party games. both Sony and MS dont have to do much in terms of change except deliver on what they already have and update features in future iterations of consoles.
 

TI82

Banned
All Nintendo should do is stay profitable, the others will have to change tact to stay in the game or leave

Joke post? Sony's gaming division is doing well nowadays and is one of the biggest earners within Sony. Microsoft isn't yet but they are in the long haul and can afford to.
 
sörine;151169495 said:
The issue is you don't seem to grasp that GBA wasn't representative of a shrinking base, it fact it sold faster than any other Nintendo handheld (DS included) and enjoyed software support for over 3 years after it's successor had launched. Your entire "shrinking base" narrative is built off pure misinformation, GBA actually marked an increase in annual handheld sales.

Annually yes, yes it did. It was selling very well but the point is that it still sold less units. It was put into fewer hands of Nintendo customers.

I'm on my phone but the sales totals were posted earlier for all of them. Overall support for any given Nintendo platform from a sales perspective has declined every generation since the NES and Gameboy (outside of Wii and DS).

Overall time on market and annual sales is irrelevant because regardless of product family they keep shrinking. If the original game boy sold 100 million in 4 years (theoretical) and the game boy advance sold 90 million in 3 years when the NDS shipped it still means Nintendo lost 10 million potential customers.

Yes they could have seen growth, but they didn't. They released a new product which was hugely successful, but now outside of that outlier they are on track to lose just as much as they did from the transition from Gameboy to GBA. That's the same thing we are seeing with their home consoles only the numbers are now very troubling for those.

They don't go up and down or stay the same sometimes. With the exception of the Wii/DS they just go down and by a significant margin.
 

TI82

Banned
Yeah, I've been trying to tell people about the downward trend of Nintendo consoles/handhelds for a while now but no one listens. I guess the reapers have come for the harvest now though because Jesus its bad. To go from the highest selling console in your history to the lowest selling in your history in one blow... Its surreal. Think the same thing happened with Genesis to Saturn...
 

SMattera

Member
Also, while I don't think Nintendo plans to chase the casuals (Wii strategy) they will continue to innovate when it comes to hardware. Different controllers, different input mechanisms, different screen types, whatever. Maybe not motion controls. Maybe something else.

But those hoping for a Pro controller-based system going forward are going to be disappointed. This is obvious if you've read recent interviews with Shiggy.

If they were going to take that route, then they should've bought Gaikai, not Sony. Why go third party when you can just sell Nintendo-as-a-service? That would've made the most sense.

But it's clear they continue to believe in differentiated hardware.
 
Also, while I don't think Nintendo plans to chase the casuals (Wii strategy) they will continue to innovate when it comes to hardware. Different controllers, different input mechanisms, different screen types, whatever. Maybe not motion controls. Maybe something else.

But those hoping for a Pro controller-based system going forward are going to be disappointed. This is obvious if you've read recent interviews with Shiggy.

If they were going to take that route, then they should've bought Gaikai, not Sony. Why go third party when you can just sell Nintendo-as-a-service? That would've made the most sense.

But it's clear they continue to believe in differentiated hardware.

then they already failed with their next console. they have no chance of grabbing market share from Sony or MS if they keep releasing unconventional controllers. with where gaming is at, the average gamer isnt interested in an unconventional controller. the casual market sure as hell isnt coming back to Nintendo for a new controller experience, nothing gets more casual and intuitive than touch screens on smartphones and tablets. Nintendo lost the casual market and plans to continue to alienate the core gaming market by releasing consoles centered around unconventional controllers.
 

DizzyCrow

Member
It's sort of the HBO philosophy.

Anyway, I don't think Nintendo cares about competing with Sony and Microsoft. They've been very explicit about, actually. I also don't think they care about going after casuals after the Wii/DS fallout.

At this point, their goal appears to be to build a base of Nintendo fans that will remain loyal for years or decades, and that they can consistently make money off of. They'll look to grow this base slowly over time through partnerships with other media companies -- ie, some kid watches the Zelda Netflix show, decides to buy a Nintendo console.

They'll go for a Steam-like system, eliminating discs in favor of digital games bound to an account playable across a wide range of Nintendo hardware, with backwards compatibility extending basically forever. They'll look to lock you into the Nintendo digital platform this way, as once you've bought X number of games, it becomes hard to leave (the strategy Apple/Google have used with apps/books/etc.). They'll further monetize the Nintendo platform with things like Amiibo.

They'll grow their business with other ventures. The "post-wearables", and all that.

Agreed, I think they should use the handheld as base for the next systems since it's selling a lot better than the console the same way Apple does with the iPhone and iPad, the latest iPad uses a better version of the same SoC of the latest iPhone with more cores, higher clock, better GPU with more memory bandwidth, more RAM, etc.

Going all digital would allow them to price the games lower, I imagine without logistics and the retailer cut handheld games and console budget games could cost around $25-$30 and traditional console games $45-$50. Making both run most of the same games, they can use the resources spent developing duplicated games (MK, NSMB, 3D Mario, DKC, etc) to develop new games in other genres or franchises. If you buy a game in the handheld you could get either cross-buy with the console or a discount depending on the console exclusive features (local multiplayer for example), buying the console version would always be cross-buy.
 

TI82

Banned
then they already failed with their next console. they have no chance of grabbing market share from Sony or MS if they keep releasing unconventional controllers. with where gaming is at, the average gamer isnt interested in an unconventional controller. the casual market sure as hell isnt coming back to Nintendo for a new controller experience, nothing gets more casual and intuitive than touch screens on smartphones and tablets. Nintendo lost the casual market and plans to continue to alienate the core gaming market by releasing consoles centered around unconventional controllers.

"Come to Nintendo we have the wild and wacky controller emporium. Your games have never felt this cumbersome and forced before!"
 

SMattera

Member
then they already failed with their next console. they have no chance of grabbing market share from Sony or MS if they keep releasing unconventional controllers. with where gaming is at, the average gamer isnt interested in an unconventional controller. the casual market sure as hell isnt coming back to Nintendo for a new controller experience, nothing gets more casual and intuitive than touch screens on smartphones and tablets. Nintendo lost the casual market and plans to continue to alienate the core gaming market by releasing consoles centered around unconventional controllers.

So the Dualshock 4 and the Xbox One controller are really the peak of gaming?

Really? This is as good as it's ever going to get?

This just seems to close minded to me. Yes, the Wii U tablet was a colossal failure.

But there's still room for experimentation and new ideas. What is Oculus Rift?
 

jozero

Neo Member
Make it barely more powerful than a wii u. No controller gimmicks. Sell it for $150 out of the gate so it super affordable and can be thought of a secondary device. Don't expect 3rd parties to join in. If they do great, if not $150 is fine as a "Nintendo box"

Then make the portable connect to it like a wii u (stream to its screen). Make it stand alone as well, sell it for $150.
 
I feel like if nintendo went just all out console for gamers like PS4, they'd absolutely dismantle sony/MS ... this means getting their online right, having a system that can play the latest monster third party titles & rolling out their first party titles ...just simple basic consolenomics
 
So the Dualshock 4 and the Xbox One controller are really the peak of gaming?

Really? This is as good as it's ever going to get?

This just seems to close minded to me. Yes, the Wii U tablet was a colossal failure.

But there's still room for experimentation and new ideas. What is Oculus Rift?

no, im sure Sony and MS will continue to make small incremental improvements and evolve what the traditional controller is. BUT Nintendo is just making unconventional controllers for the sake of making something different, not better. while the Wii Mote and Gamepad were cool ideas, they failed to be better than Sony's and MS's traditional console on a basic level. sure Nintendo's first pary games utilized the Wii Mote in a cool and unique way, but most third party games that were released on the Xbox360 and PS3 at that time offered more refined and articulate controls using the standard controllers.

as far as Oculus Rift goes, its a niche device and my opinion is that no head mounted device will ever catch on big in console gaming. much like with 3D televisions, consumers dont want to wear things on their head to enjoy tv or gaming. sure there is definitely a market for people who do, but its not big enough to alter the status quo.
 

axisofweevils

Holy crap! Today's real megaton is that more than two people can have the same first name.
Nintendo's biggest concern should be their own diehard fans haha, they just don't buy anything but 1st party IPs.

Like seriously, what's wrong with you people?

For me... I buy quality games, no matter who makes them.

However, with Wii U, most third party games were really taking customers for a ride - half the content of other consoles at twice the price. Take Sniper Elite 2, for example:

sniper_elite_v2_compared.jpg


This didn't exactly help matters.

Then there's cases of developers actively scuppering any chance of Wii U success.

Exhibit 1 - Mass Effect 3 - third part of a trilogy known for having your choices carry over. (Weird choice to begin with, but maybe people will buy it to play something different....)
Then EA put the nail in the coffin by...
...announcing that it won't be getting future DLC
...releasing a trilogy for the other platforms
...ensuring that this trilogy is actually cheaper than ME3U.
...constantly badmouthing the Wii U in the press.

Exhibit 2 - Ubisoft delaying Rayman for 7 months, annoying the Wii U userbase. Despite the boycotts and the lack of sales this caused, the Wii U still ends up the best selling version, while Rayman is almost completely consumed by GTA hype on the other platforms.
 

cireza

Banned
Nintendo does not care. They don't need to have a bigger market share. They will make a profit anyway. Whatever the situation. Selling only 10 millions consoles ? Still making a profit.

Nintendo has always been thinking this way. Their consoles + their series alone will, for a very long time, be enough for them to make a profit and continue existing on the market.
 

boyshine

Member
I feel like if nintendo went just all out console for gamers like PS4, they'd absolutely dismantle sony/MS ... this means getting their online right, having a system that can play the latest monster third party titles & rolling out their first party titles ...just simple basic consolenomics

Except the FIFA-generation is all PlayStation. The reason for PS4s early success in Europe has very little to do with 1st party, it's FIFA. Advertising and bundle deals with Microsoft doesn't matter. PlayStation = FIFA, FIFA = PlayStation. Call of Duty is the same, but I think that's a little harder for americans to understand, where it's much stronger for Xbox. It's also an IP in decline, so FIFA is the stronger example. You can't get those to switch to Nintendo. You just can't. They already know now, that the next console they buy is a PS5.
 

Calamari41

41 > 38
Joke post? Sony's gaming division is doing well nowadays and is one of the biggest earners within Sony. Microsoft isn't yet but they are in the long haul and can afford to.

Didn't Nintendo bring in more profit this past quarter than SCE? They saw half the profit of Sony as a whole, on a tenth of the revenue. I would be a lot more worried about Sony than Nintendo, to be honest.
 
For me... I buy quality games, no matter who makes them.

However, with Wii U, most third party games were really taking customers for a ride - half the content of other consoles at twice the price. Take Sniper Elite 2, for example:

sniper_elite_v2_compared.jpg


This didn't exactly help matters.

Then there's cases of developers actively scuppering any chance of Wii U success.

Exhibit 1 - Mass Effect 3 - third part of a trilogy known for having your choices carry over. (Weird choice to begin with, but maybe people will buy it to play something different....)
Then EA put the nail in the coffin by...
...announcing that it won't be getting future DLC
...releasing a trilogy for the other platforms
...ensuring that this trilogy is actually cheaper than ME3U.
...constantly badmouthing the Wii U in the press.

Exhibit 2 - Ubisoft delaying Rayman for 7 months, annoying the Wii U userbase. Despite the boycotts and the lack of sales this caused, the Wii U still ends up the best selling version, while Rayman is almost completely consumed by GTA hype on the other platforms.

Isn't the lack of multiplayer due to the limited online functionality?
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
As much as I'd like to see them put out a powerful console, I really think they're going to go try and go after families again by returning to the Wiimote and a cheaper hardware, and I think they're going to fail.
 
As much as I'd like to see them put out a powerful console, I really think they're going to go try and go after families again by returning to the Wiimote and a cheaper hardware, and I think they're going to fail.

this is family gaming with children and parents in 2015. Nintendo cant capture this market anymore.
tablets-2.jpg
 
So the Dualshock 4 and the Xbox One controller are really the peak of gaming?

Really? This is as good as it's ever going to get?

This just seems to close minded to me. Yes, the Wii U tablet was a colossal failure.

But there's still room for experimentation and new ideas. What is Oculus Rift?

Not the peak but rather the most efficient way to play a wide variety of games using the mediums that we currently have.
 

Calamari41

41 > 38
I agree. That's why I said I think they'll fail.

It's why I don't think they'll go after them in the first place. I mean, they haven't done anything to get them since the Wii U launched. Wii Party, Wii Sports U, and Wii Fit U were all planned before launch. They released those, and haven't made a peep in that direction since.

They're going after the kids in that picture now rather than the parents.
 
this is family gaming with children and parents in 2015. Nintendo cant capture this market anymore.
tablets-2.jpg

And yet they still have more of a chance of succeeding there than they do of competing with Sony/MS on the core end of the market. But ultimately, they're probably still fucked.
 
It's why I don't think they'll go after them in the first place. I mean, they haven't done anything to get them since the Wii U launched. Wii Party, Wii Sports U, and Wii Fit U were all planned before launch. They released those, and haven't made a peep in that direction since.

They're going after the kids in that picture now rather than the parents.

but the kids dont care about Nintendo, they want Minecraft, Dispicable Me flash games, and Five Nights at Freddy's on mom or dad's tablet or phone. older kids want to play GTA V and CoD. its a lose lose for Nintendo to try and go after kids who dont want the games on their system. if kids want to play Nintendo games theyll go and dust of the Wii that they already has.
 

Anth0ny

Member
And yet they still have more of a chance of succeeding there than they do of competing with Sony/MS on the core end of the market. But ultimately, they're probably still fucked.

I don't think they do. I really, really don't.

Mobile games are free. 99 cents. Full of in app purchases or advertisements to generate profits. Nintendo will never go down that road with their games. Or, if they do, it would be a massive shift in their style of game development. FAR more massive than just getting on par with Sony/MS and making games in the more traditional fashion.

Competing with the mobile market would cripple Nintendo. It's just way too different of a beast. The people that bought a Wii have moved on from console/traditional portable gaming and are not coming back. They don't need to get their fill anymore with Wii Sports or Guitar Hero. They can play their shitty iphone game on the bus or crush some candy for free and get their fill.

I think Nintendo would find far more success just going after the core gamer. To do that, you need games. All of the games. COD. FIFA. Minecraft. GTA. Nintendo would be insane to release a console at this point without securing those games, along with other third party support. A Wii situation is never going to happen again.
 

Calamari41

41 > 38
but the kids dont care about Nintendo, they want Minecraft, Dispicable Me flash games, and Five Nights at Freddy's on mom or dad's tablet or phone. older kids want to play GTA V and CoD. its a lose lose for Nintendo to try and go after kids who dont want the games on their system. if kids want to play Nintendo games theyll go and dust of the Wii that they already has.

So what's your suggestion? Padlock the doors at Nintendo HQ? This thread is about discussing ways they as a company can come back. Everybody already knows Nintendo is currently in their least successful period in their history. It's not interesting to point that out for the eight thousandth time.
 

sörine

Banned
Annually yes, yes it did. It was selling very well but the point is that it still sold less units. It was put into fewer hands of Nintendo customers.

I'm on my phone but the sales totals were posted earlier for all of them. Overall support for any given Nintendo platform from a sales perspective has declined every generation since the NES and Gameboy (outside of Wii and DS).

Overall time on market and annual sales is irrelevant because regardless of product family they keep shrinking. If the original game boy sold 100 million in 4 years (theoretical) and the game boy advance sold 90 million in 3 years when the NDS shipped it still means Nintendo lost 10 million potential customers.

Yes they could have seen growth, but they didn't. They released a new product which was hugely successful, but now outside of that outlier they are on track to lose just as much as they did from the transition from Gameboy to GBA. That's the same thing we are seeing with their home consoles only the numbers are now very troubling for those.

They don't go up and down or stay the same sometimes. With the exception of the Wii/DS they just go down and by a significant margin.
Well it depends on how you delineate family totals. Do you do it this way?

GB: 119m (1989-2002)
GBA: 82m (2001-2007)
DS: 154m (2004-2014)
3DS: 50m+ (2011-now)

Or this way?

GB: 69m (1989-1999)
GBC: 50m (1998-2002)
GBA: 82m (2001-2007)
DS: 111m (2004-2014)
DSi: 43m (2008-2014)
3DS: 48m+ (2011-now)
n3DS: 2m+ (2014-now)

Really your reduced userbase/perpetual decline narrative means nothing in context. Because in any real meaningful market sense, GBA wasn't a decline. It was an increase.

Now 3DS, there's a clear and fast decline here. But the handheld line overall? It only grew from the Poké-fueld GB rebirth in the mid 90s until the DS peak in the late 00s. No real way around that.
 
Top Bottom