Real talk: Nintendo is(or was. depending on how direction might end up changing due to a new blood) way more interested making experimental consoles, rather than straight forward PSXbox[insertNumber]. Nintendo knows they can't compete with Sony/MS in the uber-powerful console race, so they promptly stay out and do their own thing.
Nuff said.
Everyone says this, but I'm not so sure it's as clean cut as that. I mean, the Gamecube was the only real time they tried the super powerful console thing. But they made it look like a lunchbox/child's toy. I think if they had the proper marketing, they could definitely compete. But it's Nintendo, and it's out of their comfort zone of child friendly gaming, so I don't expect it to ever happen.
(The N64 I think was also more powerful, but stuck with an antiquated cartridge system, losing many third parties in the process and probably sealing their fate. Imagine if FF7 had stayed on the N64 as it was originally planned)
I think part of the issue is that Nintendo as they stand aren't capable of designing anything remotely like the PS5. Their knowledge of online and social gaming is so far behind that they would struggle to include the proper features. They also have far less interested in supporting other media. I still believe the lack of Blu-ray DVD capabilities hurts them, as being able to have that function without multiple devices is nice. Lastly, Nintendo has been the affordable system for 4 straight generations now. Dropping that would be a huge business risk.
From a pure money perspective, they probably could make a more traditional system that succeeds, but not with the talent currently working there.
Currently Playing: Steamworld Heist, The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, Tales of Graces F
I mean, the Gamecube was the only real time they tried the super powerful console thing. But they made it look like a lunchbox/child's toy. I think if they had the proper marketing, they could definitely compete. But it's Nintendo, and it's out of their comfort zone of child friendly gaming, so I don't expect it to ever happen.
Face it, the Gamecube was precisely the Nintendo console everyone always says Nintendo should make. The Wii U wasn't too far off either. But nobody cared. They cared far more when they made a cheap system that came with a magic stick. Also I'd argue that the Gamecube was not the first time they tried that strategy. The Gamecube was the last time they tried the super powerful comsole thing. The NES was the first time they tried it, then the SNES, then the N64.
I still believe the lack of Blu-ray DVD capabilities hurts them, as being able to have that function without multiple devices is nice.
Dude, I respectfully disagree. Even as someone who is a huge defender of physical media for movies. Just no. It's not an issue. Go back to 2008 if you want to argue that this matters. Because it really doesn't. Nobody cares.
I still believe the lack of Blu-ray DVD capabilities hurts them, as being able to have that function without multiple devices is nice.
Dude, I respectfully disagree. Even as someone who is a huge defender of physical media for movies. Just no. It's not an issue. Go back to 2008 if you want to argue that this matters. Because it really doesn't. Nobody cares.
I don't think it's a dealbreaker like it was with the PS2, but I do think it matters. Most people have a DVD player, but not everyone owns Blu-ray player (my family just bought one last year), and among the people that do, some people may have a limited number of HDMI ports, and may not be interested in buying a receiver to expand their capabilities. I myself am moving to an apartment this year, and I'm really happy I'll have a PS3 to run movies.
For all these people, there is absolutely an added benefit to having Blu-ray capabilities on the system, and Nintendo loses in that area.
Currently Playing: Steamworld Heist, The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, Tales of Graces F
@iKhan: I don't think anyone would ever buy a console due to Blu-ray support. Like skywake said, that might've been a selling point ten years ago, but nobody cares anymore. Besides, digital movies are the fastest growing bussiness in the entertainment industry, most people rather get their movies by downloading them or through a subscription service.
I mean, the Gamecube was the only real time they tried the super powerful console thing. But they made it look like a lunchbox/child's toy. I think if they had the proper marketing, they could definitely compete. But it's Nintendo, and it's out of their comfort zone of child friendly gaming, so I don't expect it to ever happen.
Face it, the Gamecube was precisely the Nintendo console everyone always says Nintendo should make. The Wii U wasn't too far off either. But nobody cared. They cared far more when they made a cheap system that came with a magic stick. Also I'd argue that the Gamecube was not the first time they tried that strategy. The Gamecube was the last time they tried the super powerful comsole thing. The NES was the first time they tried it, then the SNES, then the N64.
I still believe the lack of Blu-ray DVD capabilities hurts them, as being able to have that function without multiple devices is nice.
Dude, I respectfully disagree. Even as someone who is a huge defender of physical media for movies. Just no. It's not an issue. Go back to 2008 if you want to argue that this matters. Because it really doesn't. Nobody cares.
And the NES and SNES were extremely successful. The gamecube seems like the only time that their more powerful console method failed and they STILL made a profit off of it. Ugh, that "face it..." is so condescending. How about you face it, they failed (if you can even call it that) a single time and now are so terrified of it happening again that they pretend to not compete with the others when that never has or will be the case. And people do care about multi media features. I can't say it would make or break a system but it is a huge plus when shopping for consoles for the family. There's simply no denying that.
I agree with iKhan. They probably just don't have the talent necessary to compete like that anymore.
I don't think anyone would ever buy a console due to Blu-ray support. Like skywake said, that might've been a selling point ten years ago, but nobody cares anymore. Besides, digital movies are the fastest growing bussiness in the entertainment industry, most people rather get their movies by downloading them or through a subscription service.
Purely for Blu-ray? No, but I do think it's a factor in decision makings. If all else were equal between a Nintendo console and a Sony console, the presence of Blu-ray functionality could push the Sony console ahead.
Digital moves are growing fast, but Blu-ray versions still do appeal in certain cases. I bought Justice League: Gods and Monsters on Blu-ray over digitally because it was both cheaper and came with a bunch of bonus content.
Currently Playing: Steamworld Heist, The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, Tales of Graces F
When the PS3 launched a Blu-Ray player was about the same price as a PS3. The same was true of DVD players when the PS2 launched. People were literally buying them for the DVD/Blu-Ray playback and the fact that they also played games was a bonus. At those points it mattered. It matters less now.
The PS3 launched in 2006, in 2007 Netflix started their streaming service, in 2010 they left the USA. They've been pushing into Europe for a few years now and this year they're starting their service in Japan. Along the way they've also created competitors and an entirely new method of distribution that didn't exist in 2006. That combined with the fact that Blu-Ray players are about the same price as a single game? They're cheap enough that stores use them as deal sweeteners when you're getting a new TV. I don't think it's anywhere near as big a deal as it was.
The point about HDMI ports? Good luck finding something other than a PC monitor that doesn't have three. Most have four. And how many things can you connect to a TV before you don't need one of the other things? On my main TV I only have three things connected: a Wii U, a Blu-Ray/PVR combo and a Chromecast. Even then I technically don't need the chromecast because it does nothing the other two (and technically my TV) don't also do. It just does a better job of it. Everything these days is trying to do everything. I don't think a console that doesn't also do everything is going to suddenly mean that you can't do all of the things on your TV.
As I said, I'm as big a defender of physical media for music and movies as there is (less so with games). I have basically an entire corner that's just CDs, DVDs and Blu-Rays, some of them I brought very recently. Even I think the writing is on the wall. I don't think people care anywhere near as much as they did even five years ago let alone ten. Not in the age of deciding what movie to watch on your TV using your phone and watching movies lying in bed via a tablet.
And the NES and SNES were extremely successful. The gamecube seems like the only time that their more powerful console method failed and they STILL made a profit off of it
And they failed with the N64 while doing pretty damn well with the Gameboy and DS lines. Also I'd wager that the Wii U has more in-common with the Gamecube than it does with the Wii. Purely in terms of content the Wii U is a gamers console. And it failed. I think at this point it's clear that we can't be trusted in saying what type of hardware we want. Because we change our mind every few years.
Physical discs is a dying format and since no one is complaining about the Wii U lacking the player, I doubt it will have one. It would be a waste of money that can be used on the gimmick/hardware.
And the NES and SNES were extremely successful. The gamecube seems like the only time that their more powerful console method failed and they STILL made a profit off of it
And they failed with the N64 while doing pretty damn well with the Gameboy and DS lines. Also I'd wager that the Wii U has more in-common with the Gamecube than it does with the Wii. Purely in terms of content the Wii U is a gamers console. And it failed. I think at this point it's clear that we can't be trusted in saying what type of hardware we want. Because we change our mind every few years.
No one asked for a giant tablet controller that raised the price $90 and power that's only a light notch above last generation's. I really don't see people changing their minds "every few years". Nintendo has been taking the safe route of low-cost and low-powered hardware. While the Wii U is a nice console for Nintendo gamers, it is an afterthought for gamers in general. It was not designed for gamers like us or people that own other consoles, it was designed to attract casuals from the wii and children who can't always use the TV. Despite what they said, what little marketing they did have pointed to such.
So yes, I don't think it's fair to say that just because the Gamecube didn't do as hot as they hoped, that they should never try again or that they can't.
Also, it's funny to see someone here say the Wii U "failed" when if I ever mentioned it suddenly it's "it didn't fail because it's a profit at this point". So is it a failure even if it profits Nintendo overall?
@Operative:
The Wii U failed in the same sense that the Gamecube and N64 failed. I wouldn't shout doom from the rooftops, I don't think they'll go bankrupt from it, I'd agree with others when I say they'll probably ultimately make money from it. What I was saying was that the Wii U failed to capture the market in the way that it could have. Something which I don't think anyone would disagree with. And if they do they're delusional.
Also I don't agree with your conclusions about the GamePad. It's easy to make that conclusion in hindsight but that's not at all how I think it was. And yes maybe I'm saying this from the perspective of someone who likes off-TV play, maps, inventory and the other things a second screen can deliver. Case and point Splatoon. And sure, maybe I'm slightly annoyed that you suggested those features were for "children who can't always use the TV". But I don't agree.
The controller is far more traditional than the WiiMote was. They gave us a secondary controller that is almost literally a 360 controller with slightly different stick positions. They fixed pretty much all the issues people had with online. They took away all of the stupid little limitations on the digital store front that existed on the Wii. They came out of the gate with a launch lineup that included CoD, Assassin's Creed and a port of Arkham City from the year before. While people were complaining about paying for PSN Nintendo was sitting there offering a free service. They gave us everything and threw in the ability to play games on the can. Nobody cared. People brought PS3s and 360s instead. By the time the PS4 launched the Wii U was already old news.
Whether or not you agree with what I said about the features doesn't matter, I'm talking about their marketing of it. Mainly children. I love those features and I'm not a child. But they were designed for people who didn't always have access to a television all the time. And those people are mainly kids.
Yes the Controller is more traditional, but it still lacked features that most gamers want. The Pro Controller is great, but it doesn't have a jack for head sets. Neither controller have analog triggers. All those games were 1) Old or 2) lacked features/DLC or 3) Buggy and glitchy. That isn't attributed to Nintendo of course, more the developers that expected people to buy old, full priced versions of games that are cheaper and better supported elsewhere. So no duh nobody cared. I don't think being able to play while pooping is as huge a selling point as you seem to claim.
It wasn't because the games were old, a fair chunk of them were just released. It had just as many "gamer" games as the PS4 had at its launch. You say that it's games were old and yet ignore the fact that the PS4's best games so far are stuff like Tomb Raider and GTA. The main problem wasn't marketing or the content at launch. Because that stuff was directed more at the core gamer when you compare it to the Wii. The main problem was that people already had 360s and PS3s which did all of that and more.
When the PS4 launched its selling point was that it could play some of those year old games and a few of the new ones. But that it was also an upgrade. A new system that will get more of these games as time went on because it was a Playstation. With the Wii U the argument was the same except there wasn't any confidence from the consumer that it would continue to deliver.
I waited outside an unopened Walmart on launch day of the Wii U. It was going to be the first Nintendo hardware I would but day 1. When I finally got to the electronics department I saw the Wii U demo station and the gamepad for the first time in real life. Even though I was there to buy the Wii U no matter what, I was underwhelmed at first sight of the gamepad. I thought it looked really bulky with an unimpressive display. I was dissapointed a bit because the gamepad is the part of the console I wanted being mostly a handheld gamer. Of course Off-TV with console games made the system worth it to me, but I knew on launch day that my overriding desire for Off-TV features was not going to be the experience of the average shopper. So from day 1 I was not surprised to hear the Wii U was not flying off shelves after launch day.
As I said earlier, it's very easy to say stuff like this in hindsight. There's always a sceptic for every product just as there are people who immediately get it. And obviously once the jury is out conveniently only the sceptics remember what they thought for less successful products. Only the people who were impressed remember what they thought of the hits.
Me for example? If I'm being brutally honest I wasn't sure of quite a few devices that ended up doing well. Based on my initial thoughts I wasn't at all sure about the iPhone, iPad, DS, PSP or XBox 360. But then on the other side of things I thought the Wii U, PSPGo, XBox and Gamecube were all good ideas. But of course I will only bring up my initial thoughts when they proved to be correct. Like my early scepticism of the Vita or the fact that I understood the appeal of the Wii from the start. Or I'll take something I was sceptical about and make it sound like I wasn't. Like how I wasn't sure about the DS concept or the 3DS concept... but eventually got them after being convinced
For example now I'm fairly sure that PC gaming will eventually scale down to portables. I'm also fairly confident that portable consoles are not dead. Then I'm also fairly sure that VR will take off a bit but will always be just a small niche market. I'm also pretty sceptical about wearables. Come back in five years and I'll probably be right on about half of those and completely wrong on the others.
Last time I checked every BluRay player sold gives a cut to Sony. You really think that Nintendo is going to sell a console and give Sony a per unit cut because there's some people out there who might get rid of their existing player for it? And everyone doesn't care about that anyway. I've never owned one of those things and I haven't owned a standalone DVD player for years. Hell even my mother uses Nextflix rather than buying DVDs and she's nearly 65! It just makes no sense to even think about supporting other media playback in a games console now. I didn't see the point of a music player in the DSi either - any kids who would have cared had iPods by that point.
The one thing I don't get about the PS4 is paying for PSN. I assume that's just for online play, but if you need that to access their online store, wow is that lame.
@Sean_Aaron: you don't need PS+ to access the store. you can use all the features such chats, video streaming, buying, downloading DLC, etc etc. for free. the only thing you cant do is play online. plus when you you have PS+ you get discounts and free games. hell i got rocket league for free! thats a 20$ critically acclaimed game for free!
When I read Iwata's quote, I don't see a "third pillar" mentioned like the DS back in 2004. He means that Nintendo is starting something fresh instead of the Wii U or 3DS all over again. Similarly, he means that Nintendo isn't going to make a PS4, which is the PS3 with more horsepower and prettier graphics.
Current games: Everything on Switch
Switch Friend Code: SW-5075-7879-0008 | My Nintendo: LzWinky | Nintendo Network ID: LzWinky
Last time I checked every BluRay player sold gives a cut to Sony. You really think that Nintendo is going to sell a console and give Sony a per unit cut because there's some people out there who might get rid of their existing player for it?
There are licencing fees for all sorts of tech. Not to mention that there are other companies behind Blu-Ray. It's Sony, Phillips, Panasonic, Pioneer and a few others. So when you go back the reason Sony pushed Blu-Ray wasn't because they could do it "cheaper". It was more because they wanted Blu-Ray to beat HD-DVD and they were willing to lose money on the PS3 to get there. Because HD-DVD was backed by Toshiba, NEC and Sanyo.
Infact pretty much all standards are the same. Go across the board, if it's a fairly standard thing? Odds are a group of companies backed the idea and there's a licence fee. And if it's something to do with media consumption there's a good chance Sony is one of those companies. And I'm not sure on the exact nature of all of the different things but the Wii U does have a few of them. HDMI I know is one, and Sony is in the picture again. I think the same is true for most, if not all, of Bluetooth, WiFi, SD cards and USB.
I don't think Nintendo decided that they wouldn't "do Blu-Ray" because they didn't want to give Sony money. I think it's probably more a case of them thinking Blu-Ray playback wasn't necessary. Because they didn't think people really cared about the feature. And in not having it they could be more cost competitive. And on the other side of things there's Sony, who puts in in there because they want to push Blu-Ray.
edit: also if you to to a Wii U teardown you'll see pretty important components made by Broadcom, AMD, IBM, Panasonic, Samsung and Texas Instruments. Something by Sony? Wouldn't at all be a stretch and it has happened in their past consoles. Companies don't really hold grudges like that, it's more about whoever does it best. For example Apples products regularly have Samsung components. It's not at all strange.
Forums
Topic: What if Iwata Wasn't Lying About Project NX?
Posts 61 to 80 of 84
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.