I don't think there will be a next Nintendo console. I am assuming their next system will be a handheld/console hybrid. A handheld that can connect to the tv and be used with controllers.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
metalslimer
Member
They can have multiple consoles fail before being anywhere close to a Sega. Hell it took multiple failures to bring Sega down and they didn't have nearly the capital Nintendo has. Nintendo might stop making dedicated handhelds and consoles and merge the business because it might be easier to manage, but they aren't leaving the hardware business for a long time.
walking fiend
Member
OP, you and others, should stop putting the title of Forbes when the article is just from a contributor...
What rumor? Who is investigating it? I presume it's being investigated in the mind of writers like him apparently.
I wonder if we'll ever get to a point where people can correctly distinguish between Forbes' editorial and paid writing staff, and contributors.
Didn't the GBA blow pretty much everything out of the water at the time? I wonder if it could have been the best selling handheld (more so than the DS) if it had been given the same lifetime. It had an essentially 3 and a half year lifespan and still managed to throw up 82 million...
shinra-bansho
Member
popcorn.gif
That 6.4% should be disconcerting. Although presumably they were canvasing Western developers.
That 6.4% should be disconcerting. Although presumably they were canvasing Western developers.
dreamer3kx
Member
I want to see how the WiiU sells after Monster Hunter, just curious if anything.
Wyndstryker
Member
Nintendo has been doomed since the 1800's.
They survived World War 2. They ain't going anywhere with the warchest they got right now.
They survived World War 2. They ain't going anywhere with the warchest they got right now.
VistraNorrez
Member
The Wii U will not be the success the Wii was, duh, but it'll be fine.
Nintendo should launch their next home console holiday 2016 though. If they insist on not being cutting edge with console graphics, they should get off the cycle that the other companies are on. Im anticipating another long generation.
I could see them sort of merging the home and portable console someday though. The console would be the controller, that can be taken anywhere, but at home it streams through a small Nintendo device that will also do basic entertainment functions that doesnt require the rest of the console and would have to have a stripped down remote for basic functions. Sort of reversing how the Wii U works.
Nintendo should launch their next home console holiday 2016 though. If they insist on not being cutting edge with console graphics, they should get off the cycle that the other companies are on. Im anticipating another long generation.
I could see them sort of merging the home and portable console someday though. The console would be the controller, that can be taken anywhere, but at home it streams through a small Nintendo device that will also do basic entertainment functions that doesnt require the rest of the console and would have to have a stripped down remote for basic functions. Sort of reversing how the Wii U works.
Very possibly. The only thing that could have made the GBA better is if Nintendo saw fit to put 4 face buttons on it instead of 2.
Pachter said Nintendo had 30 years to blow their funds, before having to pack it up.
In Pachter we trust?
EDIT: Clarifying this post.
Pacther was talking about Nintendo going bankrupt in the post I cited above - NOT the state in which Nintendo has to change their business model/ what they do as a company. So it's not a rebuttal to what OP is talking about. I apologize for not clarifying that, and just making it a blanket statement.
As others have pointed out (even applying what Pachter said) - Nintendo could still move towards something like SEGA.
In Pachter we trust?
EDIT: Clarifying this post.
Pacther was talking about Nintendo going bankrupt in the post I cited above - NOT the state in which Nintendo has to change their business model/ what they do as a company. So it's not a rebuttal to what OP is talking about. I apologize for not clarifying that, and just making it a blanket statement.
As others have pointed out (even applying what Pachter said) - Nintendo could still move towards something like SEGA.
GBA keept selling well even after DS release, to the extend people were wondering why Nintendo
wasn't killing off GBA yet, because it ate into the DS sales.
I think that most/all Forbes writers are "contributors." Relevant/interesting article: http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/...-of-contributed-content-means-for-journalism/
metalslimer
Member
A game that is also on 3DS and not a particularly good selling franchise in general?
Even if Iwata steps down, I doubt that his successor would want to go a 3rd party route. Remember that it's unlikely that Nintendo would promote someone from outside to that position -- and I doubt that anyone at Nintendo wants to see the company downsizing considerably.
When you take into account that even Iwata has a programming background, it makes you wonder how many "suits" in the classical sense are sitting at Nintendo's board of directors. I think many of them are too emotionally invested to cut whole divisions that have been part of Nintendo for forever.
(It's also worth noting that the people hoping to play Nintendo games on more powerful systems, seem to forget that Nintendo going 3rd party would likely mean the end of many of their franchises -- if they don't have to push a console, why would they release risky games that traditionally don't make a lot of money like Metroid?)
And if they had the original release given a backlight + rechargeable battery.
Dave Meltzer
Banned
Not if their shareholders are dissatisfied with the direction.
It's absurd to think there's more than one possible console generation left anyway.
walking fiend
Member
Not much by a far stretch. MH Tri, which was the best selling MH in the west, sold ~1m on Wii in 2009, with an installed based considerable larger than Wii U; and that was mainline MH entry and not a variation.
Green Mamba
Member
Yeah, I don't know if I see this handheld/console hybrid thing people keep bringing up. Why would Nintendo want to have half the revenue sources than they currently do? Even if one fails they could invest in propping the other up. I just can't see them putting all of their eggs in one basket like that.
LiveFromKyoto
Member
Forbes is just blogspot now, anybody can post an article under their name. This is not "Forbes" saying this. Thread title should probably be edited to 'Random Guy With Blog: Nintendo, the new Sega?'
Charlatanized
Member
shinra-bansho said:
Not only were they western developers, 53 percent were indie developers -- PS4 and Durango clocked in at 11 percent, according to the same survey. Considering 43 percent of those developers are so indie that they employ 10 people or less, it has virtually zero impact on Nintendo's Wii U success. I'm not saying the Wii U has wonderful third-party support (because it doesn't), but it's as though this writer just saw "6.4 percent," thought that sounded good & then proceeded to type this article with his dick.
EDIT: Here's the survey, for reference: http://gamasutra.com/view/news/1872...e_of_indies_smartphone_games.php#.UTJosuuUzxa
If you skim this for 30 seconds, you'll have done more research than the writer.
Yes. It's from a questionnaire sent to GDC attendants. Most of which are smartphone and PC developers. To put things into perspective: PS4 reached 11%, PS3 12.4%.
i could see this happen, 3 years down the line PS4/720 level tech will have dropped substantially in cost and Nintendo would be able to get affordable entry point.
Unless it was preceded by Nintendo's own version of Sega CD, Nomad and 32X, the situations are in no way comparable.
Maybe that Gaffer who got banned for posting his wordpress "rumour" should have submitted it to Forbes for a false sense of legitimacy.
While I do agree that they should be judged by the content that is in their site...this should really be stressed.
Q
qizah
Unconfirmed Member
Sorry, I didn't realize the article was from a contributor. I edited the OP to reflect that and hopefully a moderator can take the appropriate action.
I didn't mean to make a troll thread or anything of that nature (if it comes off as one). Just thought I'd be interesting to see what people on GAF say about Nintendo always being pushed into doom and if they is any interest in seeing Nintendo go third party or if they'd benefit from doing so. I tried to say what my take was in the OP.
With their warchest, I think Nintendo has a lot more wiggle room than Sega did in the late '90s. I think it would take a full leadership turnover and then the new leadership launching a second failed system to bring about a scenario as dire as what your question proposes. If the Wii U is just an absolute unmitigated disaster after two years, I can see a new leadership team following up with another system meant to compete directly with the PS4/XboxWhatever in 2015. If that doesn't work, you're right, investor pressure may end up being a serious factor, especially if mobile gaming at that time is still the juggernaut it is today.
I feel like that is a possible scenario but not an entirely likely one. The Wii U's lack of momentum may have caught Nintendo off guard, but if there's one thing they have proven in the past, it's that they are surprisingly agile for such a large company and they generally have a Plan B. I think their E3 presentation this year will tel us a lot about where their head is at.
metalslimer
Member
If Wii U actually continues to fail at the level it is, it won't be a good sign for future Nintendo consoles unless they decide to massively change the strategy they employ and find a way to get 3rd parties aboard. Hypothetically if the console sector is unprofitable, it makes no sense to continue to lose money there.
Team Filler
Member
I was under the impression that only the name Atari exists, and that it is because Infogrames changed their name to Atari.
EDIT: Seems that way, anyways.
EDIT: Seems that way, anyways.
This number is still very disastrous for the Wii U: The PS4 and Xbox Durango are system that aren't available until Autumn, and are still unannounced for the most part. Only few select developers are clued into the exact details of the system and know their capabilities.
The Wii U is a console indies (as well as "big time" developers) can judge and release on right now: The fact that most seem apathetic about the system paints a bleak future.
Nintendo is a publicly traded company, there's no way shareholders would accept a long decline without any attempts at a different strategy.
GameCube has GBA to fall back on. 3DS is no GBA. In the west 3DS sales are nothing short of disappointing.
I seriously doubt that Nintendo sharholders are going to force them to stop making HW so soon. Even if this somehow ended up being their Saturn and their next console was their Dreamcast would it really matter when you think that consoles will be dead by then regardless?
Nintendo makes money because:
- they sell their systems near cost price
- their games sell really well.
It's really that simple. Everything else (like third party licenses) is a bonus, but Nintendo doesn't have to rely on it.
When the next Mario, Zelda, etc start bombing. That's when Nintendo should worry.
They still use paid writing staff for a lot of articles, you can see it just from perusing the front page of the site. But I would say that with how hard they're going in on the contributor model, that it's true the line is getting blurred. Especially since some contributors get paid for their work, and even those that don't have to be approved to write content for the website first.
However there is a clear difference in terms of editorial control, and there are some perverse incentives in their payment model for paid contributors. Though that is a separate issue.
You still need to get approved before you can be a contributor. Though once you are you can post what you want, pretty much.
For me you really need to give a console a few years before calling it. That's just me.
As for going 3rd party... I wouldn't mind. I see Nintendo's hardware as a piece of gear you only buy for 1st party titles. It would just mean I get to play Nintendo's games without an entry price. Not saying they don't have any 3rd party - but I get all those games and a lot more of them on beefier tech.
At the same time I dont think i'd want a gaming universe without Nintendo hardware - especially handhelds. At the same time I dislike motion/touch gaming so I find their peripheral design choices dont sit well with me. Sony's new controller at least wont pry my eyes from the screen but that doesn't mean I am fond of the touchpad (for reference).
I like Nintendo and LOVE how they try new things - even if I dislike something like waggle (also dislike Move/Kinect, ick) - I think the industry needs that kind of forward thinking no matter how it is received.
On my phone so my thoughts might sound incomplete.
Short version: Too early to call it and wouldn't mind but would mind.
As for going 3rd party... I wouldn't mind. I see Nintendo's hardware as a piece of gear you only buy for 1st party titles. It would just mean I get to play Nintendo's games without an entry price. Not saying they don't have any 3rd party - but I get all those games and a lot more of them on beefier tech.
At the same time I dont think i'd want a gaming universe without Nintendo hardware - especially handhelds. At the same time I dislike motion/touch gaming so I find their peripheral design choices dont sit well with me. Sony's new controller at least wont pry my eyes from the screen but that doesn't mean I am fond of the touchpad (for reference).
I like Nintendo and LOVE how they try new things - even if I dislike something like waggle (also dislike Move/Kinect, ick) - I think the industry needs that kind of forward thinking no matter how it is received.
On my phone so my thoughts might sound incomplete.
Short version: Too early to call it and wouldn't mind but would mind.
Dave Meltzer
Banned
Well that's the point really. There's no possible way there can be another console generation after the next one, hell even after this one seems kinda silly. So the idea that Nintendo can't go like Sega because they'll always have a profitable hardware business seems misplaced.
Surely someone has written an article about the model that Gawker uses.
metalslimer
Member
3DS is no GBA, but it is still highly profitable at this point even if sales are disappointing. Nintendo was routinely pulling in hundreds of millions in profit during that era. Even if Nintendo's profit margins shrink a good bit they won't be in horrible shape
Pretty much. Although they should be proactive enough to start worrying long before they siphon their warchest away.
Irrelevant.
Companies don't need to be one step before bankruptcy in order to change their business model.
Publicly traded Nintendo shares come without voting rights as far as I know. If the shareholders aren't satisfied, all they can do is sell their shares.
Pachter said Nintendo had 30 years to blow their funds, before having to pack it up.
In Pachter we trust?
I would bet he only said it because he read it on GAF, Nintendo's warchest isn't a secret and it isn't the first time it's brought up either.
andthebeatgoeson
Junior Member
Haha. Hahahaha. hahahahahahahahahahah. Oh man.
Dave Meltzer
Banned
And no one will want to buy them. Thus Nintendo will act.
Agreed. And even if it was true that they could last that long - they could still become software only.
Pachter was actually talking about bankruptcy in that post, not the state of Nintendo moving towards software only (or having to change their business model). And that is what this thread is about (comparing it to SEGA). So my apologies, I should edit my post and clarify a bit (it reads like a rebuttal to that specific point, and it isn't).
that's interesting...
The Wii U (a system that is returned to stores everywhere) losing out terribly in developer confidence against a platform at the end of its life-cycle as well as a platform for which dev kits aren't readily accessible (as much as they are ever accessible for console development) because it isn't available on store shelves or even fully unveiled yet: Not a good sign.