• 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.

What would happen to Nintendo if the NX flops like Wii U?

jroc74

Phone reception is more important to me than human rights
They will be one step closer to going 3rd party. Or one step closer to exiting the home console business and doing handhelds only.

Just being realistic and rational.

I honestly cant see them doing another home console if it flops tho.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Well, according to Ubisoft and the CD Projekt guys, they are again after the casuals and the devs don't really care. Not only that but Reggie implied the machine will be not about power, which sounds like it will release outdated as the WiiU did.

So I think we are going to see what will happen to Nintendo.

That's not at all what they said.
 

J-Rzez

Member
Unfortunately they'd probably trying making some new gimmicky hardware a few more times until they finally did what so many want and go third party.
 
They could pull an emily rogers, go away for a while and then come back even more irrelevant but they are likely doing that already.
We need a wii2.
 

StAidan

Member
Edit: Some of you are acting like Nintendo has no idea what they're doing and learned nothing from the Wii U. Wrong. Because of the Wii U they have completely restructured their company. This year they announced they are making a transition to a Company with Audit and Supervisory Committee and introduce an Executive Officer System. Last year they restructured quite a few of their divisions and they are getting way more aggresive with their IPs OUTSIDE of gaming. They cannot compete with Microsoft and Sony currently when 95% of their revenue is from games and they know it. They are in a TRANSISTION PERIOD to a more diverse company.

The reason some posters are acting like this is because they (the posters, I mean) really have no idea why the Wii was successful, why the Wii U was a failure, or how Nintendo's design philosophies/approaches affected the outcome of the two consoles and how those philosophies are completely and totally different. I mean, come on, some of these people seriously believe one or more of the following:

(1) ... that the Wii audience jumped ship to mobile games and would never return to a new gaming console aimed at said audience.
(2) ... that the Wii U's problem was that it cost too much or wasn't powerful enough.
(3) ... that going third-party would be in Nintendo's best interest.
(4) ... that "statistical" performance figures on Nintendo's historical consoles are a clear indicator of future performance.

These are sincerely held beliefs that the simple application of logic can't easily dispel, because they are rooted in a long history of confirmation bias, a tunnel vision that only sees Nintendo in the light of the business strategies employed by Microsoft and Sony, and continued exposure to the headlines generated by an overeager Wedbush Securities employee.

If you were to reconstruct the NES-through-Wii U narrative from scratch based on the statements of Nintendo's own executives over the past 12 years -- without all the aforementioned baggage -- it would be obvious that Nintendo has addressed and invalidated each of those beliefs by any reasonable measure.

But when you're (for example) a gamer who's torn between exclusives across two or more consoles and who wants to be discerning with your gaming expenditures, it's all too easy to ignore all that and just assume Nintendo could be successful (and satisfied) with a third-party future. Those aren't Nintendo's values, and I *suspect* that Nintendo believes very strongly that abandoning its first-party roots would actually prevent it from building the gaming experiences that it wants to create.
 
They will be one step closer to going 3rd party. Or one step closer to exiting the home console business and doing handhelds only.

Just being realistic and rational.

I honestly cant see them doing another home console if it flops tho.

I'm honestly not convinced that the NX will be a home console. Time will tell though.
 
The reason some posters are acting like this is because they (the posters, I mean) really have no idea why the Wii was successful, why the Wii U was a failure, or how Nintendo's design philosophies/approaches affected the outcome of the two consoles and how those philosophies are completely and totally different. I mean, come on, some of these people seriously believe one or more of the following:

(1) ... that the Wii audience jumped ship to mobile games and would never return to a new gaming console aimed at said audience.
(2) ... that the Wii U's problem was that it cost too much or wasn't powerful enough.
(3) ... that going third-party would be in Nintendo's best interest.
(4) ... that "statistical" performance figures on Nintendo's historical consoles are a clear indicator of future performance.

These are sincerely held beliefs that the simple application of logic can't easily dispel, because they are rooted in a long history of confirmation bias, a tunnel vision that only sees Nintendo in the light of the business strategies employed by Microsoft and Sony, and continued exposure to the headlines generated by an overeager Wedbush Securities employee.

If you were to reconstruct the NES-through-Wii U narrative from scratch based on the statements of Nintendo's own executives over the past 12 years -- without all the aforementioned baggage -- it would be obvious that Nintendo has addressed and invalidated each of those beliefs by any reasonable measure.

But when you're (for example) a gamer who's torn between exclusives across two or more consoles and who wants to be discerning with your gaming expenditures, it's all too easy to ignore all that and just assume Nintendo could be successful (and satisfied) with a third-party future. Those aren't Nintendo's values, and I *suspect* that Nintendo believes very strongly that abandoning its first-party roots would actually prevent it from building the gaming experiences that it wants to create.

This is a very good post. It's also worth mentioning that some people who do hold those views don't necessarily do so because "it's cool to hate on Nintendo" or reasons like that, but because it takes a lot of time and devotion to actually follow the methodology of this company, as well as pay attention to every piece of information regarding their strategy that comes out. And a lot of people would rather spend their time elsewhere, which is fine.

But for people who actually have followed this company closely and understand the types of organizational moves they've made, we know exactly why the Wii and DS were such successes, and it had little to do with luck. Now, obviously the tech landscape has changed greatly but I wouldn't put it past Nintendo to come up with a strategy for once again expanding the gaming market which works. Maybe not Wii levels of success, although maybe more than that. We simply don't know enough at this point.
 
How much can the lack of power hurt them this time though? Microsoft and Sony have both expressed that Scorpio/Neo games need to be compatible with older hardware. If the NX is at least on par with PS4/Xbox One, then I don't see any reason for third parties not to port.

Plus Nintendo will probably continue until they find something that works. They aren't going anywhere anytime soon, even if consoles become niche and don't pull nearly as much financially.
 

TI82

Banned
eventually investors will steer the path, they want money. But honestly I think the new CEO is also changing the path the NX was already in development before he took over so afterwards it will be his ship and it might be a drastic shift towards modern times.
 

SeanR1221

Member
They should go third party at that point. Their smaller games haven't even been good so it's no loss if they only put their major releases on PS, Xbox and PC
 

Neff

Member
As soon as NeoGAF catches the faintest whiff of Mario on Sony/MS, people start limbering up for the mental olympics once more.

Probably third party.

It would be really bad for Nintendo

Then why on earth would they do it?

eventually investors will steer the path, they want money.

The majority controlling shareholder of Nintendo is Nintendo.
 

Aostia

El Capitan Todd
Is people claiming them going third party intentionally ignoring their portable business?
If the nx home console is going to repeat wiiu numbers the most logical thing is stay and focus on the portable side imho.
Especially if the nx portable is going to repeat the 3ds numbers, that will probably stay over the xbox one numbers in terms of ltd
 

Calm Mind

Member
Nothing against the OP or anyone actual putting some actual thought into their posts but the obvious praying on Nintendo's downfall from some is embarrassing. That being said, everything I have heard from Nintendo leading up until now gives me far more hope and confidence in what they're doing than the 3DS and Wii U ever did initially.
 

Red Devil

Member
As soon as NeoGAF catches the faintest whiff of Mario on Sony/MS, people start limbering up for the mental olympics once more.



Then why on earth would they do it?



The majority shareholder of Nintendo is Nintendo.

Is people claiming them going third party intentionally ignoring their portable business?
If the nx home console is going to repeat wiiu numbers the most logical thing is stay and focus on the portable side imho.
Especially if the nx portable is going to repeat the 3ds numbers, that will probably stay over the xbox one numbers in terms of ltd

Guys, guys, it's another Nintendoom thread...
 
What don't people get that even if Nintendo is hardly making anything on their hardware they still get to keep everything from the software sales and a cut from third parties? Sharing 20% of game sales profits with Microsoft and Sony and not having their own digital platform where they don't have to pay retailers would take a huge chunk of those potential profits.

GTA 5 sold 65 million copies because it was available on a multitude of platforms. Imagine if the new Zelda was available on ps4/xbone/pc. It would easily sell 25 million. Easily. It would likely sell even more buit instead its going to top out at like 5 million because of the platform. Nintendo Hardware is holding their sales back tremendously. They would likely sell 5 times as much software if they were 3rd party.

They would never reach their former glory as a third party publisher. I don't think share holders would like that either.

They will never reach their former glory. Wii was lightning in a bottle when and their portables weren't competing with smartphones. Times have changed.
 
It baffles me that people continue to not understand why 3rd parties don't make games for Nintendo consoles. "They just don't like Nintendo," "It's not powerful enough." Etc. While power plays a part (in adopters wanting power, and ease of develpment) the reason is because those games have not been shown to sell. It's that simple.

If Nintendo made Battlefield, they would get Call of Duty. If Nintendo made Assassin's Creed, they would get 3rd person action games. If they made Grand Theft Auto, they would get Mafia III. It's that simple. They have to have a user base who buys these games. Whether that's creating it themselves or getting key third party support. But it has to be consistent so people who like those game buy the system (and it's a system they want to buy, but usually that comes with having the games). That's the main thing.
 
GTA 5 sold 65 million copies because it was available on a multitude of platforms. Imagine if the new Zelda was available on ps4/xbone/pc. It would easily sell 25 million. Easily. It would likely sell even more buit instead its going to top out at like 5 million because of the platform. Nintendo Hardware is holding their sales back tremendously. They would likely sell 5 times as much software if they were 3rd party.

For the record the last Zelda game which launched with a console sold 9M total and was regarded as one of the worst Zelda games at the time (though aren't they all). BotW has seen almost universal praise from Nintendo fans and non Nintendo fans alike. I believe it will easily surpass TP lifetime sales, assuming NX isn't a complete trainwreck from the start.

Edit:

It baffles me that people continue to not understand why 3rd parties don't make games for Nintendo consoles. "They just don't like Nintendo," "It's not powerful enough." Etc. While power plays a part (in adopters wanting power, and ease of develpment) the reason is because those games have not been shown to sell. It's that simple.

If Nintendo made Battlefield, they would get Call of Duty. If Nintendo made Assassin's Creed, they would get 3rd person action games. If they made Grand Theft Auto, they would get Mafia III. It's that simple. They have to have a user base who buys these games. Whether that's creating it themselves or getting key third party support. But it has to be consistent so people who like those game buy the system (and it's a system they want to buy, but usually that comes with having the games). That's the main thing.

Agreed, and that's something that Nintendo has hinted at when discussing increasing their output both internally and in licensing out their IPs.

Honestly overall Nintendo has been saying all the right things, just a lot of people here don't seem to be listening.
 

Akiraptor

Member
Nintendo has more cash reserves than Sega ever had, even if NX fails they won't exit the console business.

But NX won't fail. It'll be weaker than PS4 and Xbox One, but will still turn a profit.
 
Obviously they need to start doing, yes. But the NX hasn't even been officially revealed yet. We can't know what they have been doing over the past 4 years until it is.

What's odd to me is the shocking lack of advertisement for anything but the largest 3DS titles. Wii U ads were abysmal and they haven't even tried to move units after the initial launch flop.

It's almost as if they immediately gave up and started working on something else. That's fine I guess but it's not exactly confidence inspiring to customers and investors.
 

TannerDemoz

Member
The reason some posters are acting like this is because they (the posters, I mean) really have no idea why the Wii was successful, why the Wii U was a failure, or how Nintendo's design philosophies/approaches affected the outcome of the two consoles and how those philosophies are completely and totally different. I mean, come on, some of these people seriously believe one or more of the following:

(1) ... that the Wii audience jumped ship to mobile games and would never return to a new gaming console aimed at said audience.
(2) ... that the Wii U's problem was that it cost too much or wasn't powerful enough.
(3) ... that going third-party would be in Nintendo's best interest.
(4) ... that "statistical" performance figures on Nintendo's historical consoles are a clear indicator of future performance.

These are sincerely held beliefs that the simple application of logic can't easily dispel, because they are rooted in a long history of confirmation bias, a tunnel vision that only sees Nintendo in the light of the business strategies employed by Microsoft and Sony, and continued exposure to the headlines generated by an overeager Wedbush Securities employee.

If you were to reconstruct the NES-through-Wii U narrative from scratch based on the statements of Nintendo's own executives over the past 12 years -- without all the aforementioned baggage -- it would be obvious that Nintendo has addressed and invalidated each of those beliefs by any reasonable measure.

But when you're (for example) a gamer who's torn between exclusives across two or more consoles and who wants to be discerning with your gaming expenditures, it's all too easy to ignore all that and just assume Nintendo could be successful (and satisfied) with a third-party future. Those aren't Nintendo's values, and I *suspect* that Nintendo believes very strongly that abandoning its first-party roots would actually prevent it from building the gaming experiences that it wants to create.

Is that you, Kimishima?

Seriously though, great post. Some of the arguments against Nintendo carrying on in the industry make me want to gouge my eyes out, and you're spot on with the transition period.

Everything Nintendo has said so far regarding the NX shows that they are fully aware of the flaws with the Wii U's release. I think the NX is going to be a big hit.
 

The Real Abed

Perma-Junior
I know it's probably been said but personally as long as I get more Mario and Zelda then a Nintendo console will never be a flop to me because it'll have served its purpose.
 
What's odd to me is the shocking lack of advertisement for anything but the largest 3DS titles. Wii U ads were abysmal and they haven't even tried to move units after the initial launch flop.

It's almost as if they immediately gave up and started working on something else. That's fine I guess but it's not exactly confidence inspiring to customers and investors.

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what they did! It's not always that bad of an idea, especially if their planning for NX began before Wii U even released (which I believe it did- the whole shared ecosystem idea). Keep in mind that the Wii U tanking was right on the heels of the 3DS tanking, so Nintendo likely had to choose one of the two to attempt to salvage and they chose the 3DS.

Is that you, Kimishima?

Seriously though, great post. Some of the arguments against Nintendo carrying on in the industry make me want to gouge my eyes out, and you're spot on with the transition period.

Everything Nintendo has said so far regarding the NX shows that they are fully aware of the flaws with the Wii U's release. I think the NX is going to be a big hit.

Very true, look below your post for instance :p
 

jdstorm

Banned
Of course it will be weaker than Scorpio, that thing is a monster. Neo seems to be only a little upgrade like the New 3DS.

NX will be somewhere around PS4/XOne level.

Power wise Neo is roughly a PS4x2, but Sony are looking at a way to bump the power to compete with Microsoft. The Scorpio is roughly 5xXbox One.
For the NX. We know there will be some kind of handheld that can likely be up to .4tflps. And if it has a home console equivalent that SKU will be at a multiple of that power level. The most likely numbers based on existing hardware are 1.2Tflps (Xbox One parity) 2.4Tflps (global illumination capable*) 2.8/3.2/3.6 Tflps (affordable industry leading chips with lower power draw then Sony/Microsoft)

*if the Nvidia rumour is true
 

i-Jest

Member
They'd break open that war chest and start playing for realzzies. They've always been conservative about how they spend their money, so Nintendo isn't hurting for cash the same way everyone else is.
 

Regginator

Member
So that means less than the Wii U sold now (~12 million). I hope one of two things:

1) Unlikely, but forget consoles. Go third party and release games on PC or/and other consoles. But keep manufacturing handhelds and continue to make dedicated games for it.

2) Forget the casual market and concentrate on the core/enthusiastic market. Compete directly with Sony and Microsoft, both in raw specs as well as a solid third party line up.


Despite Nintendo being incredibly stubborn, I really don't think they'd stay their current course if the NX manages to sell even worse than the Wii U.
 

Kathian

Banned
I don't think it'll go that wrong honestly. They are basically going to make a less risky cheap console with all their games. So basically a well priced 3DS.
 
Third party please!
Imagine Zelda on Neo and Scorpio!!
I guess Nintendont like $

If they went third party that would show they don't like $$ definitely. People don't seem to understand the amount of money having their own hardware gets them from licensing alone.

A third party Nintendo is an incredibly neutered Nintendo, and we wouldn't get anything close to Breath of the Wild or Splatoon from that Nintendo, so please give it up.
 

MK_768

Member
I feel like every Nintendo thread is like groundhogs day. Literally the same shit gets repeated all the time lol.

Don't y'all get tired of it?
 

MuchoMalo

Banned
She went out of her way to emphasize that those comparisons were based on raw power rather than real world performance. If we also adopt the Nvidia rumor in addition to the Emily Rogers rumor then that muddies the comparisons.

I still believe LCGeek's leak is the most trustworthy because it's not super vague and it comes from someone who has had access to such private information in the past. A >>>XB1/PS4 CPU wouldn't make all that much sense without a similarly powered GPU.

We can't say that for sure without a definition of the word "raw power." Besides that, the "performance per FLOPS" difference between Pascal and GCN (pre-Polaris) is only about 20%. If calling it close to Xbone is a "stretch," there's a very real chance that it's weaker, even noticeably weaker.

As for the CPU, it does make sense to have a stronger CPU paired with a weaker GPU if the SoC being used isn't really customized much and the CPU just happens to be that fast. Tegra X1 more or less falls into this category, and Tegra Parker definitely will.
 
Top Bottom