Support NeoGAF

[Aaron Strife]

1. Buy a Nintendo console if you are a Nintendo fan. Well, there are a ton of Nintendo fans that simply put don' t get the specific software they are looking for anymore. You buy a Nintendo and you don't exactly get guarantee of a diverse line up of sequels from the NES, SNES, and N64 (Starfox, F-Zero, Pilotwings, WaveRace, Punch Out, Earthbound, etc) nor do you get a stream of high production core IPs like SONY either. What a betting man counts on is an 80% fill rate of Mario IP based games.

I like how all of those games you've mentioned, except for Wave Race, have received a new entry in the last ten years.

And while there's some merit to the idea that Nintendo relies too heavily on Mario, you also have Pikmin, Zelda, Donkey Kong, Smash Bros., Bayonetta, Wonderful 101 (NEW IP LOOK), and X (NEW IP LOOK) to look forward to in the near future.

2. Buy a Nintendo console for families. Well most families aren't interested in owning multiple consoles. If dad wants to play EA Sports, Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, and the plethora of other leading titles then he can just buy Little Big Planet, Sly Cooper, Lego Marvel Heroes, or the other high quality children's games that exists in the market.

None of those games have the clout as a new Mario or Pokemon game. Nintendo has the family market for home consoles cornered.

 

[Snowden's Secret]

high production core IPs

Gotta move those goal posts.

an 80% fill rate of Mario IP based games

Two points here: why even use a percent number when you know it's full of shit (and gross hyperbole) when you know you're going to get called out for it; and what is "Mario IP based" even mean? What is "Mario IP?" Is Mario Kart the same IP as Super Mario Bros the same as Smash Bros? Mario and Metal Gear Solid are the same IP because both have shared characters in the same game?

More to your second point:

The point isn't having games for dad, another set of games for mom, and another set for the kids; it's to have the same game everyone can play and enjoy. With a few exceptions, only Nintendo does this.

 

[mantidor]

This is brilliant

who is making that kind of prediction?

the original joke was actual absurd numbers for ps3 and 360 from someone who indeed didn't had a clue.

 

[Azure J]

I just hope Nintendo rides this thing out, whatever the sales end up being. By 2005, it was pretty clear Nintendo thought the GC was a bust and kinda washed their hands of it and started focusing on the Wii. They had one last big push in first-party software in 2004 (Pikmin 2, Metroid Prime 2 was rushed to the holidays, Jungle Beat came out in Japan, Paper Mario 2, Four Sword Adventures) and...that was it from Big N. They're lucky to managed to get RE4 as a time-exclusive in Jan. 2005, because it was a barren wasteland of first-party titles, with the GC slooowly limping to it's death until the Wii launched in late 2006. They even delayed TP long enough just so they could have a big game to launch with the Wii, tacked-on controls be damned.

Nintendo, this is the system you've chosen. God only knows why, but this is what you're gonna be making games for during the next 5 years. Make the best of it.

Pretty much. They have to ride it out for at least 4-5 years because lord knows the alternatives all have very bad precedents (Dreamcast hard tagging in while Saturns were still all over the place) and would only make the gen beyond this one a tough sell for anyone on Nintendo.

 

[Heyt]

I don't think they will ride it all the way regardless of the sales. If it's not profiteable by holydays 2014 I really don't think Nintendo is going to stick to this console.

In fact if they don't perform good enough this winter I would discontinue the thing and focus on 3DS completely, put their WiiU games into a can and use them as release games for their next console with the proper visual updates.

Their buiness would be much better if they went full on 3DS meanwhile they prepare a truely appealing console to make a comeback to the leavinroom.

I really don't thing anything can save WiiU. You know something is going wrong when a new console falls into irrelevance just two months after release.

 

[Lupin the Third]

In fact if they don't perform good enough this winter I would discontinue the thing and focus on 3DS completely, can their WiiU games and use them as release games for their next console with the proper visual updates.

Their buiness would be much better if they went full on 3DS meanwhile they prepare a truely appealing console to make a comeback to the leavinroom.

Yes, because they'll keep all that core Nintendo audience and win even more fans by Dreamcasting it. If Sega had killed Dreamcast when they did, but instead of announcing their third-party move, instead waited three years to release a new home platform, much like they already had with Saturn, do you think people would be excited to bite? Only the most diehard Sega fans. (Yes it's a somewhat flawed comparison because Sega didn't have their own handheld, but they could have put their titles on GBA in the meantime just like they ended up doing anyway.)

 

[Aaron Strife]

I don't think they will ride it all the way regardless of the sales. If it's not profiteable by holydays 2014 I really don't think Nintendo is going to stick to this console.

In fact if they don't perform good enough this winter I would discontinue the thing and focus on 3DS completely, can their WiiU games and use them as release games for their next console with the proper visual updates.

Their buiness would be much better if they went full on 3DS meanwhile they prepare a truely appealing console to make a comeback to the leavinroom.

I really don't thing anything can save WiiU. You know something is going wrong when a new consolo falls into irrelevance just two months after release.

Abandoning Wii U for a new console this early would be the worst possible thing Nintendo could do for their business.

 

[Kuramu]

Haha, love it

 

[jvm]

Not sure if y'all would consider it worth a new thread, so I'll just drop this here. I wrote a column for Gamasutra on Nintendo's predicament. I'm not very optimistic. Happy for your comments. Thanks.

http://gamasutra.com/view/news/195808/

A picture of the releases in the U.S. so far, that I put together for the column:

Edit: While I've got y'all here, I have a question: Why has Activision stayed off the eShop? Does anyone know? Practically every other big publisher has embraced the eShop, but not Activision.

 

[Rebochan]

I legitimately have no idea how Nintendo is going to pull out of this one. They're too early in the gen to successfully launch a new platform. They're too late to turn this one around.

Anyone seriously suggesting "Third-party time!" is an idiot - Nintendo is a hardware maker and that's what they see themselves as. They'll take their ball and go home if they can't put their games on their hardware. And frankly, third-party hasn't ended well for Sega, so there's not much incentive.

But I sincerely question how Nintendo intends to pull themselves out of their latest nosedive into hell because they've been crashing for a few years now and I think frankly that most of the industry is done with them.

 

[mrklaw]

I will say ZombiU was cool, but it just seemed like a title that would release in the summer. Similar to Shadows of the Damned where it looks great and is pretty fun, but doesnt really feel like anything that would make you want to buy that system.

PS4 and Xbox One both look like they'll have interesting futures, but Nintendo still has a really good chance to turn things around leading into the holiday. Both systems really dont have anything that interesting at launch aside from improved third party titles (Infamous and Killzone look pretty cool, dunno what Xbox One is launching with since Titanfall is down the line...Dead Rising 3 probably isnt going to move systems), so they should go for a huge marketing push.

Seriously though, Nintendo needs to start pulling out some high quality, interesting commercials for its exclusives. And yes, moneyhat some exclusive developed titles and put serious marketing behind those too (did ZombiU even have commercials? Probably was too niche to really drive sales anyway).

I hope so. But they've basically squandered an entire year head start which they could have spent doing what you said

 

[Daingurse]

Not sure if y'all would consider it worth a new thread, so I'll just drop this here. I wrote a column for Gamasutra on Nintendo's predicament. I'm not very optimistic. Happy for your comments. Thanks.

http://gamasutra.com/view/news/195808/

A picture of the releases in the U.S. so far, that I put together for the column:

Edit: While I've got y'all here, I have a question: Why has Activision stayed off the eShop? Does anyone know? Practically every other big publisher has embraced the eShop, but not Activision.

Fasinating chart man, and to answer your question . . .

I got nothing.

I'm pretty sure the Wii U is already profitable, Nintendo doesn't ever sell hardware at a loss. After the success of the Wii people seem to have an unrealistic expectation of how many units Nintendo needs to sell to make money. The GCN didn't sell up to expectations but it was still profitable for Nintendo, I'm sure the Wii U will follow a similar trajectory.

The Wii-U is sold at a lost, which is unprecedented for Nintendo.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-10-25-nintendo-admits-wii-u-to-be-sold-at-loss

 

[Gucci Messiah]

I don't think they will ride it all the way regardless of the sales. If it's not profiteable by holydays 2014 I really don't think Nintendo is going to stick to this console.

In fact if they don't perform good enough this winter I would discontinue the thing and focus on 3DS completely, can their WiiU games and use them as release games for their next console with the proper visual updates.

Their buiness would be much better if they went full on 3DS meanwhile they prepare a truely appealing console to make a comeback to the leavinroom.

I really don't thing anything can save WiiU. You know something is going wrong when a new consolo falls into irrelevance just two months after release.

I'm pretty sure the Wii U is already profitable, Nintendo doesn't ever sell hardware at a loss. After the success of the Wii people seem to have an unrealistic expectation of how many units Nintendo needs to sell to make money. The GCN didn't sell up to expectations but it was still profitable for Nintendo, I'm sure the Wii U will follow a similar trajectory.

 

[SmokedMeat]

I'm pretty sure the Wii U is already profitable, Nintendo doesn't ever sell hardware at a loss.

How could that be possible? Does anyone ever factor in the research and development that went into making the system, as well as all of the produced systems sitting unsold in stores? It's not like it's flying off shelves and raking in royalties from third parties.

 

[Linkstrikesback]

Nintendo doesn't ever sell hardware at a loss.

Wrong

Nintendo said it hopes to sell 5.5 million Wii U consoles this fiscal year, and senior managing director Yoshihiro Mori confirmed that Nintendo will take a loss on each system sold. “Manufacturing costs are expensive, and we priced the machine at a level customers would accept,” Iwata said. “It’s important for us to develop a healthy business next fiscal year by combining sales of hardware and software.”

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2012/10/24/nintendo-will-sell-wii-u-at-a-loss

The gamepad is probably driving costs up.

 

[Heyt]

I'm pretty sure the Wii U is already profitable, Nintendo doesn't ever sell hardware at a loss. After the success of the Wii people seem to have an unrealistic expectation of how many units Nintendo needs to sell to make money. The GCN didn't sell up to expectations but it was still profitable for Nintendo, I'm sure the Wii U will follow a similar trajectory.

As mentioned avove, Nintendo is selling WiiU at loss. That would not be bad if they were selling a lot of games to compensate for the consoles sitting on stock, but sadly there hasn't been games for the console in a long while and the relaunch campaign consists on one game or two per month with the excepcion of November. So, I think they are just losing money.

It's not about expectations. Is about Nintendo not getting their money back because no one is purchasing WiiU products.

Yes, because they'll keep all that core Nintendo audience and win even more fans by Dreamcasting it. If Sega had killed Dreamcast when they did, but instead of announcing their third-party move, instead waited three years to release a new home platform, much like they already had with Saturn, do you think people would be excited to bite? Only the most diehard Sega fans. (Yes it's a somewhat flawed comparison because Sega didn't have their own handheld, but they could have put their titles on GBA in the meantime just like they ended up doing anyway.)

The core Nintendo audience will benefit of having a surrealistically good 3DS (console they already own) offering of games with a Nintendo that already mastered the system and that's dedicating to it almost full time.

As for WiiU owners, it would be a bit harder for them, but just announce that they will get special treatment when Nintendo releases their new console and do and embassador program for that instead. When the new console releases they could have a reserve of canned-but-upgraded WiiU games that could release steadily to maintatin the console's momentum. But releasing games on a platform nobody cares about, nobody understands, nobody wants to play and that has been irrelevant half a year now is sending them to die on a platform that will hardly rise with the other two companies doing everything they can to have a successful launch.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

I'm pretty sure the Wii U is already profitable, Nintendo doesn't ever sell hardware at a loss. After the success of the Wii people seem to have an unrealistic expectation of how many units Nintendo needs to sell to make money. The GCN didn't sell up to expectations but it was still profitable for Nintendo, I'm sure the Wii U will follow a similar trajectory.

We've never gotten an exact figure, but at launch, Reggie stated that they were selling the Wii U at a loss. His phrasing at the time was that it wasn't a big loss, as "one game" sale made it profitable, but it also wasn't clear what he specifically meant by that, either. Would selling one third-party title at retail tip the scales to profitability:

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articl...akes-one-game-sale-to-make-a-wii-u-profitable

"The business model doesn't change dramatically, in that as soon as we get the consumer to buy one piece of software, then that entire transaction becomes profit positive,"

Is it profitable now? I don't know.

 

[Pitmonkey]

The Wii U is sold at a loss, but makes money back with the sale of it's first game from my understanding.

 

[Of All Trades]

We've never gotten an exact figure, but at launch, Reggie stated that they were selling the Wii U at a loss. His phrasing at the time was that it wasn't a big loss, as "one game" sale made it profitable, but it also wasn't clear what he specifically meant by that, either. Would selling one third-party title at retail tip the scales to profitability:

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articl...akes-one-game-sale-to-make-a-wii-u-profitable

I thought the one-sale thing was later corrected and found to be untrue.

 

[Gucci Messiah]

It boggles the mind that "manufacturing costs are expensive" when the tech under the hood isn't all that impressive. The gamepad must be the culprit.

 

[Gucci Messiah]

Wrong

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2012/10/2...ii-u-at-a-loss

The gamepad is probably driving costs up.

As mentioned avove, Nintendo is selling WiiU at loss. That would not be bad if they were selling a lot of games to compensate for the consoles sitting on stock, but sadly there hasn't been games for the console in a long while and the relaunch campaign consists on one game or two per month with the excepcion of November. So, I think they are just losing money.
.

We've never gotten an exact figure, but at launch, Reggie stated that they were selling the Wii U at a loss. His phrasing at the time was that it wasn't a big loss, as "one game" sale made it profitable, but it also wasn't clear what he specifically meant by that, either. Would selling one third-party title at retail tip the scales to profitability:

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/article...i-u-profitable

Is it profitable now? I don't know.

Ok but who buys a Wii U and no software? We all know that Nintendo games sell on Nintendo systems; if the purchase of one game makes Wii U profitable Nintendo makes their money back pretty much immediately and is in the green. It's not like there's a variety of quality 3rd party games competing for consumer dollars.

 

[OG_Original Gamer]

Nintendo problems just doesn't start and end with thirdparty publishers, but retail as well. Go to your local GameStop or BestBuy and you won't find Injustice or NFS:MWU in stock. Chances are you may have a hard time finding a copy of WatchDogs or any other pending release from thirdparty devs over the next 6 months.

Its bad and seems to be getting worse, so unless 101 and Bayonetta 2 does gangbusters. The WiiU will be a HD GC.

 

[Rebochan]

Its bad and seems to be getting worse, so unless 101 and Bayonetta 2 does gangbusters. The WiiU will be a HD GC.

Even the Gamecube had better support than the Wii U is getting.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

I thought the one-sale thing was later corrected and found to be untrue.

I vaguely remember that as well, but I didn't have a lot of time to Google hunt. For all I knew, I might have dreamed that up in a drunken haze, but if you're thinking the same thing, then perhaps I'm not crazy.

 

[-COOLIO-]

You say this as though families don't exist. People who have children live under the same roof and couples are having children every single day. Nintendo has a huge market to sell the Wii U to that want to play videogames together in their home. Because you've outgrown it or other people who are still gaming past the age of 18 have outgrown it doesn't mean there aren't still millions who haven't!

Honestly, I don't think Nintendo appeals to teenagers these day's. It kind of did in the past since they grew up with the n64 and snes but not so much anymore. If Nintendos only target is sub 9 year olds then things are grim. They need to step their online game up. No question about it.

 

[mooseman]

Whether sold at a loss or not, it would benefit them to lower the price ($250 at least) just to get more consoles out in the wild so that when they do actually start releasing games, they will (possibly) sell more games plus eshop games. I see all third party support leaving if they don't do well this Christmas.

And to all the people that say "no one buys a Nintendo console for 3rd party games", parents and families might. They want just one console for the FAMILY to play all their games. If Nintendo doesn't have that big Madden game that the son and dad like to play, they'll grab the PS4 or XBONE instead.

I don't want to see Nintendo fail at all, but I'm afraid that's where they are heading with the Wii U.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

0% chance they can the system.

Sure, they had that Ambassador program for the 3DS but this would be ENDING a product that some people have and there's no way they could do that and save face.

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

Two points.

1. Buy a Nintendo console if you are a Nintendo fan. Well, there are a ton of Nintendo fans that simply put don' t get the specific software they are looking for anymore. You buy a Nintendo and you don't exactly get guarantee of a diverse line up of sequels from the NES, SNES, and N64 (Starfox, F-Zero, Pilotwings, WaveRace, Punch Out, Earthbound, etc) nor do you get a stream of high production core IPs like SONY either. What a betting man counts on is an 80% fill rate of Mario IP based games.

Am I interpreting your post right in that you're saying that 80% of Nintendo games are Mario based?

2. Buy a Nintendo console for families. Well most families aren't interested in owning multiple consoles. If dad wants to play EA Sports, Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, and the plethora of other leading titles then he can just buy Little Big Planet, Sly Cooper, Lego Marvel Heroes, or the other high quality children's games that exists in the market.

The average household that owns a console owns two consoles. (in the US)

Little Big Planet and Sly are also not nearly the same family friendly-style (not children's, unless you actually believe the Nintendo games for babies meme) games as those on Nintendo systems. Sales alone should be able to tell you that.

 

[brigadeer]

The problem is that while handhelds are not only remaining popular in Japan, but gaining in popularity there even... consoles are primarily western at this point. Look at the biggest games announced by both Sony and MS at E3, and they were almost all western-developed.

I'm not saying no one cares about Japanese games any more... but to sell the system Nintendo has to firmly entrench itself as a system that western devs want to develop for.

Ironically enough........ EA actually has a point (yeah, I am in utter shock also). Online IS a huge deal in western gaming... and for every step nintendo takes forward in it (Miiverse is... brilliant?) they take a step back (we STILL don't have a Live/PSN-level unified service from them).

I honestly don't think it's too late for Nintendo.. if they can drop the price this fall right before the new systems launch, in theory they could have a $100-150 price advantage over the PS4 (and $200-250 over XBONE). That is a pretty staggering difference.. And a $249 basic console with say NSMBU (or a third party hint hint) would make a big difference for the console. If they can actually generate 3rd party sales and keep their online infrastructure moving forward.. there's no reason the Wii U can't continue on forward as a budget system..

hell, IMHO the graphic differences aren't even going to be anywhere near as severe as PS360->Wii.. hitting that 1080p hurdle was really the big step.. if devs can lower LOD, pull in draw distances a little and blur up the textures a bit.. it COULD be feasible for someone to just own the WiiU, still have great looking games, etc.

Great post man, and completely spot on. I agree with just about everything you say. Obviously we don't yet know the true power of the upcoming PS4 and Xbox One, but I think it's very safe to say that we are at a point of diminishing returns given the fact that Wii U can crank out 1080p and 60 FPS (not necessarily together) games.

 

[Possum]

Multiplatform Nintendo incoming.

 

[jmls1121]

I don't think they will ride it all the way regardless of the sales. If it's not profiteable by holydays 2014 I really don't think Nintendo is going to stick to this console.

In fact if they don't perform good enough this winter I would discontinue the thing and focus on 3DS completely, can their WiiU games and use them as release games for their next console with the proper visual updates.

Their buiness would be much better if they went full on 3DS meanwhile they prepare a truely appealing console to make a comeback to the leavinroom.

I really don't thing anything can save WiiU. You know something is going wrong when a new consolo falls into irrelevance just two months after release.

This post is LOL ridiculous. Nintendo hasn't released games for this thing yet.

The same people proclaiming doom in this thread were the same ones urging Nintendo to scrap the 3DS when it went through a crappy launch as well.

 

[Heyt]

Ok but who buys a Wii U and no software? We all know that Nintendo games sell on Nintendo systems; if the purchase of one game makes Wii U profitable Nintendo makes their money back pretty much immediately and is in the green. It's not like there's a variety of quality 3rd party games competing for consumer dollars.

The thing is they initially expected to sell 4 millions of WiiUs to as for March 2013, wich is 4/5 of the stock they shipped up to that point.

Today it has sold a about 2.9. Nintendo gets some money if you purchase a system and a separate game but they still have a 6 month old shipment that sold little more than half what they were thinking. The other half is wasted money that is not coming back until they release their heaier hitters... if they are able to get some attention from the public.

This post is LOL ridiculous. Nintendo hasn't released games for this thing yet.

By Holydays 2014 they sure will have had released some games. If not it's because they dropped the consoler earlier or their management staff is more incompetent than anybody would imagine it could be.

 

[Bombadil]

Multiplatform Nintendo incoming.

If Nintendo and Sony can put aside their differences, they can make very good partners.

Nintendo dominates on the handheld front and Sony on the console front, so they can work together to make the best of both worlds.

 

[jmls1121]

Even the Gamecube had better support than the Wii U is getting.

People buy Nintendo systems for Nintendo games, by and large.

 

[brigadeer]

If Mario Kart, Mario 3D World, and the rest of the games coming out soon can't turn WiiU around then it's done forever.

If people won't buy it to play those games then there will be nothing that can save it.

Panic Mode Nintendo will soon arrive to save gaming one more time.

This is the flip side of the coin. Although I think Nintendo has a good chance of turning things around with a price cut and a set of GREAT games coming out at the end of the year, IF they don't get any measurable traction this Holiday season, a reasonable person would have to be open to the possibility that nothing is going to be able to save it.

Move a year out, and Nintendo is really going to be in trouble with probable price cuts (probably small) on the PS4 and Xbox One and an entire year of development time to start releasing their first party system sellers such as Halo 5, Destiny, and whatever other big PS4/Xbox One exclusives that aren't coming to mind at the moment.

Either way you slice it, I think the WiiU is going to come in third this generation. What's up for discussion at this point I think is by how much. I think if Nintendo really focuses and consistently churning out high quality first party titles of their own, and really make a commitment to their online service, they can at least make a go of it this generation and set themselves up to be more competitive next generation (with a firm and robust online service in place).

 

[Possum]

If Nintendo and Sony can put aside their differences, they can make very good partners.

Nintendo dominates on the handheld front and Sony on the console front, so they can work together to make the best of both worlds.

Mario Kart for PS Vita, featuring some characters from popular PlayStation franchises -- yum!

 

[Heyt]

People buy Nintendo systems for Nintendo games, by and large.

That doesn't mean that's ok for them just to offer Nintendo games. People don't like having to buy two consoles because Nintendo is unable set a good buisness for Third partys on their consoles.

Nintendo's incompetence can cost $400 or $500 depending on what platform you choose to complete what Nintendo could offer but is not providing because they are completely clueless about it. A high price to pay for mistakes that are not yours as a consumer.

 

[evangd007]

Multiplatform Nintendo incoming.

You think Nintendo would not sell their exclusivity to one or the other for more money than you could comprehend?

HA-HA-HA-HA.

 

[The Horror the horror]

If Nintendo and Sony can put aside their differences, they can make very good partners.

Nintendo dominates on the handheld front and Sony on the console front, so they can work together to make the best of both worlds.

Except Nintendo would be forced to subscribe to Sony's console design philosophy. You might be okay with that, but some of us are not.

 

[Sendou]

If Nintendo and Sony can put aside their differences, they can make very good partners.

Nintendo dominates on the handheld front and Sony on the console front, so they can work together to make the best of both worlds.

And potentially halve profits. I can only see this happening if they both started magically to stumble at the same time.

Spoiler

Doesn't make it any less awesome though

Except Nintendo would have to subject themselves to Sony's console design philosophy. You might be okay with that, but some of us are not.

PS4 with something like GamePad is a match made in heaven. 3DS is so inferior to Vita as a piece of hardware that I'm not sure why you feel negative about Sony's console design philosophy. It's the best this industry currently has.

 

[Heyt]

Except Nintendo would be forced to subscribe to Sony's console design philosophy. You might be okay with that, but some of us are not.

The only thing I see as a downside of Nintendo games on Sony platforms is that it would take another while to Nintendo to adapt to a new machine, wich is an issue they are still having with WiiU.

But I'm interested in your opinion, what turns you off about Sony's hardware in regards of hypothetic Nintendo games running on it?

 

[Combichristoffersen]

Except Nintendo would be forced to subscribe to Sony's console design philosophy. You might be okay with that, but some of us are not.

You'd rather have outdated, overpriced hardware from Nintendo than Sony's current design philosophy with powerful hardware sold at an affordable price? If so, I've got a Gameboy Color for sale for $300. Throw in an extra $100 and I'll include a game.

 

[mantidor]

You'd rather have outdated, overpriced hardware from Nintendo than Sony's current design philosophy with powerful hardware sold at an affordable price? If so, I've got a Gameboy Color for sale for $300. Throw in an extra $100 and I'll include a game.

The hyperbole never stops.

Nintendo hardware isn't overpriced, playstation hardware is not something I would call "affordable".

 

[Bombadil]

And potentially halve profits. I can only see this happening if they both started magically to stumble at the same time.

Spoiler

Doesn't make it any less awesome though

.

They can halve the profits but they can also halve the risks.

If they split the costs, then it wouldn't hurt them.

 

[Heyt]

You'd rather have outdated, overpriced hardware from Nintendo than Sony's current design philosophy with powerful hardware sold at an affordable price? If so, I've got a Gameboy Color for sale for $300. Throw in an extra $100 and I'll include a game.

He's talking about sellign hardware for less money than their competitors (outdated or not) and exploring new interfaces and control methods. He's not paying $300 for your gameboy, I'm affraid.

 

[jmls1121]

That doesn't mean that's ok for them just to offer Nintendo games. People don't like having to buy two consoles because Nintendo is unable set a good buisness for Third partys on their consoles.

Nintendo's incompetence can cost $400 or $500 depending on what platform you choose to complete what Nintendo could offer but is not providing because they are completely clueless about it. A high price to pay for mistakes that are not yours as a consumer.

Sure its OK. They are offering a unique console and there is nothing stopping third-parties from releasing games on the system. If you don't like the value proposition they are offering, you are free not to buy it. There should be room in this industry for different types of consoles. Some people do not want to pay an arm and leg to play video games (factoring in the cost of the console plus online fees, etc.) If third-parties would rather chase graphics with AAAA games that need to hit 10 million sales to become profitable, that is their decision, not Nintendo's.

And calling it "incompetence" is pretty ridiculous. Nintendo made the decision after the GameCube that it was not smart business to release graphical powerhouse consoles and eat losses for the majority of a console' s lifespan. Judging by their financials compared to the financials of Sony and MS's gaming divisions, they made the right choice.

 

[Combichristoffersen]

The hyperbole never stops.

Nintendo hardware isn't overpriced, playstation hardware is not something I would call "affordable".

The Wii U is overpriced for what it delivers, which its sales reflects.

As for the PS4 being affordable, considering the hardware inside its pricepoint is definitely not too shabby, especially when comparing it to the Xbone.

He's talking about sellign hardware for less money than their competitors (outdated or not) and exploring new interfaces and control methods. He's not paying $300 for your gameboy, I'm affraid.

Ah, thanks for the clarification.

 

[royalan]

Except Nintendo would be forced to subscribe to Sony's console design philosophy. You might be okay with that, but some of us are not.

I fail to see the problem with this. We aren't talking about the PS3 anymore. The PS4 has been nothing but a slam dunk in terms of philosophy and design.

Meanwhile, Nintendo is stuck with a $350 console that offers no discernible improvement over last gen hardware. And why? Because they made the mistake of thinking anyone would give a shit about low power consumption.

 

[Linkstrikesback]

Ok but who buys a Wii U and no software? We all know that Nintendo games sell on Nintendo systems; if the purchase of one game makes Wii U profitable Nintendo makes their money back pretty much immediately and is in the green. It's not like there's a variety of quality 3rd party games competing for consumer dollars.

Don't move the goalposts. Even if one piece of software puts them back in the green, that's still less money than if they didn't have to put up with the drain the console is causing.

 

[jmls1121]

You'd rather have outdated, overpriced hardware from Nintendo than Sony's current design philosophy with powerful hardware sold at an affordable price? If so, I've got a Gameboy Color for sale for $300. Throw in an extra $100 and I'll include a game.

Nintendo hardware is not overpriced.

Sony's hardware is not what I would call affordable, once you factor in all the costs to have a somewhat decent gaming experience (online fees, memory sticks, etc.)