Topic: Should Nintendo Stop Making Consoles?

No way! In all seriousness though how long is until everything is streamed via a tiny box full of powerful chips?
Everything is going to change and hopefully Nintendo are adapting first so maybe in 5 years time its PS and XB1 struggling?
It's really tough to call what will happen in the future but you have to love Nintendos efforts in bringing new gaming hardware and software styles to the arena.

yes nintendo need to stop makeing consoles there getting wack and games to... "GO HOUSTON ROCKETS"

@Grumblevolcano: I'd be somewhat tempted to agree with that sentiment. Just looking, for example, at the roster of PlayStation All Stars Battle Royal, it is a very uninspiring and largely forgettable cast of characters on Sony's part (Fat Princess, the Cat, Sir Daniel Fortesque (I love him but come on), Parrapa The Rapper) and padded out by even more forgettable 3rd party characters that Sony got the licences for on the cheap (Dmc Dante, Big Daddy, Raiden). Heck even the memorable and generally well known Sackboy, Nathan Drake, Ratchet & Clank have come nowhere near 'iconic' status, and their games have never been revolutionary, and are arguably milked just as much ash any 1st party franchises. If this is 'PS All Stars' then I agree with you, they really wouldn't be missed by the majority as much as Nintendo's if either were to just drop off the face of the planet.

Oh and PSASBR was a really bad game too so yeah, not even got that saving grace.

@Mr_Trill_281: grammar is your friend, my friend.

Uhm... some of you guys sound like you've never actually owned Sony or Microsoft consoles (though I do know for sure a few of you do based on other forums on the site).

But seriously - the whole thing about Microsoft not adding anything to the console space? How about introducing the most robust, stable, diverse console internet service available in the form of Xbox Live? Microsoft pretty much pioneered online console gaming, and to this day Live remains on top despite PS4 having a larger install base. How about Halo? What about Gears? What about providing an early vehicle for the success that was/is Call of Duty (because any PC gamer sure knows THEY didn't support the franchise) and MLG on consoles as we know it?

You're being a bit narrow-sighted, friends.

I got more enjoyment out of Microsoft first party than Sony, mostly because I have owned more Xboxs than Playstations. I think both have their place but mostly we need both to keep the other in check. Similar to how 360 kept the PS3 in check and PS4 kept the Xb1 in check. When one tries something anti-consumer, the other takes that advantage and it normally pays off.

I say yes that Nintendo should become third party without a console of their own. Nintendo have and always will make amazing games. Being on a future PlayStation or XBOX console won't change that. By not having to produce and sustain a console, Nintendo can then be free to concentrate on making amazing games. Its not the gimmicky controls that attract fans to Nintendo games, its the games and characters themselves. The Wii Zelda and Mario games would be just as popular if they were designed to play on a PlayStation or XBOX console instead, even without use of the Wii remote. Or Nintendo could make their own version of the Wii remote for PlayStation or XBOX consoles.

But the main reason why Nintendo should go third party is that Nintendo always under-powers their consoles compared to other consoles at the same time to make them more affordable. Now that they wouldn't have to think about the affordability of the consoles, they can enjoy dipping into the pool of power the other consoles offer. Plus, fans wouldn't be subjected to watered down years old ports of previous generation games like Nintendo consoles have been currently getting.

This topic again? I can't understand why people want less competition and less options in the market, each console offer you unique experiences the others don't (well, in theory). i agree with @Grumblevolcano, those RPG are the only thing interesting for me in Playstation, if they were on Nintendo consoles, they could get out of the business for all I care.

@Bass_X0: I don't think Nintendo could survive as 3rd party. They would be competing directly with other companies on those platforms. Those companies games are more desired on those platforms. Nintendo would have to change to meet the new market's expectations and that would affect the quality of their games. Since platform owners would get a cut o Nintendo's sales also, Nintendo might find it difficult to keep making profit. They would have less control over the features they can implement and have less ways of making their games unique. Streetpass can't be done on Xbox One, PS4, or PC. Not sure if you could make Smartphones able to do that either. With Nintendo having their own platform they have a lot more control and freedom, which is how they deliver such amazing experiences.

@Bass_X0: an odd thing for someone with an Ace Attorney profile picture to say. If Nintendo go full 3rd party and don't release another console after the NX, Ace Attorney is one franchise I would most certainly foresee dying an undignified and undeserved death, even sooner than some of the 'niche' Nintendo franchises like Fire Emblem and Pikmin. I can't foresee any PS/Xbox or even Steam users getting into that franchise at this point, so I'd say this issue goes beyond Nintendo and their IPs.

Microsoft has and continues to bring a lot to the console space. Even if you're not interested in their products, you should be very interested in the competition that they present to Sony, their main industry rival. Competition is good for consumers, as it pushes companies to innovate and serve their audience better. The PS3 at launch was a total disaster and only ended up being a good system after a few years because Microsoft lit a fire under their butts like they'd never experienced before. And we've seen the same thing from Microsoft. The reveal and launch of Xbox One was a train wreck, but they've done a lot to turn around and improve their product and service. These two companies exist in a relationship that can only benefit consumers.

Pretty much the only thing Microsoft pioneered was the idea that you should pay for online. I'll also give them unified friends lists because that did exist on the original XBox and PCs were all over the place before Steam. But everything else had either been done on consoles or PCs years before Microsoft did it.

Microsoft made it mainstream, they made it consumer friendly. They were the Apple of console gaming for lack of a better analogy. But they didn't pioneer much of anything.

@DarthNocturnal @skywake

Oh, don't get me wrong - I'm not arguing that online gaming wasn't AROUND before Microsoft, but Microsoft "pioneered," in my opinion, mass market, "mainstream" online gaming. Everything before that, including PC stuff, was relatively niche when compared to what Live would quickly do in terms of numbers. And Steam on PC at the time? I was there, and it was a thing - but it wasn't anything near what we have or call to mind today.

@rallydefault:
I only brought up Steam to point out how a unified friends list didn't exist on PC when XBox Live came along. Microsoft were the first to get it through their heads that we don't want to have a different list of friends for each game. Something which is taken as a given on every platform now, even Nintendo who were the last to work it out. So I'd give them that. But everything else was either done before XBox Live or in parallel.

@skywake: Yep. And I can somewhat buy the "in parallel" with PC stuff, but in terms of the console space? Xbox Live WAS revolutionary. Dreamcast didn't make it, and PlayStation simply did not offer a unified online service until quite some time later (and we all know Nintendo certainly didn't). Xbox Live was revolutionary in the console space, and since the console space really is the "mass market," "accessible" avenue for gamers, it was probably many gamers' first real online experience.

So my point remains that Microsoft deserves a heck of a lot more credit than what you guys are giving them. That's all. Feel free to carry on with the actual thread topic lol

no, but you should stop starting topics.

I remember just before the Wii launched when they revealed there was a friend code for the Wii itself. I argued online that this was the end of the complaints about Nintendo not understanding unified friendlists. Little did I know that they still had a friend code for every game. The 3DS was such a relief, the Wii U is now at the point where there's little to complain about. Hopefully the NX makes it cross-platform, finally, and at that point they'll be upto where everyone else was 10 years ago.....

@skywake: Yea, honestly, I'm quite happy with Nintendo's online service right now. No complaints, really. I've never had a friends list near maximum on Live or Steam or anything like that - I'm just sort of a solo player who enjoys hopping into games and being randomly paired up with other people. Even against my PS4 and Xbox this generation, my favorite game to play online has been Mario Kart 8. Stability of Nintendo's servers has been great for me, and adding some of my real-life friends wasn't too much of a pain. And I do really like Miiverse.

But it will be VERY interesting to see if these rumors of Nintendo offering a premium-level service like PS Plus or Xbox Live Gold are true...

@rallydefault:
I can honestly only think of three things Nintendo is "missing" in terms of online at this point. The first one would be some kind of universal account system, friends lists and purchases recognised across systems. I expect that's coming with "Nintendo Account" and it's about time. The other two are achievements and universal voice chat, neither of which I care about either way. Achievements I'll ignore, voice chat I'll mute.