Topic: In the event the console/handheld market dies or becomes niche, how should Nintendo respond (read first post)

I wonder if Nintendos next consoles will follow the tradition of replacing the previous generation. I can see how the lines between generations may get blurred. The 3DS and Wii U both kept backwards compatibility to an extreme degree with the 3DS maintaining all the unique features of the DS and the Wii U continuing to support Wii controllers.

Now we see the New 3DS coming and it seems to be that it will be a bigger difference that was between the DS and DSi families of handheld consoles. Could we see Nintendo simply refreshing their hardware with upgraded models like an Apple going forward? I guess I have trouble seeing them completely ditching the dual screeen touchscreen thing but it seems even the handheld tech is close to the saturation of diminishing returns in terms of processing power. The Wii U meanwhile looks great while allegedly not being too much more powerful than previous gen machines that had a 7 year cycle. With Nintendo games not necessarily caring about blowing people away with massive power and cutting edge graphics I could see them iterating on Wii U the same way they have with the New 3DS. Keep the Wii U alive and release a New Wii U that only certain cutting edge games will require in the same way.

That's definitely one of the many obstacles that is keeping microconsoles and streaming at bay. Though I'm with Extra Credits in that we don't need as much testing as curation.

Bad games are fine if they aren't making it harder to find good games. Thats what better curation can do, letting you know what's popular, what games you might like, and beyond that.

The 3DS has 40 million worldwide and the GBA has 85 million worldwide. The 3DS still has a few years left to go, so I think it could easily get 70 million.

I feel like if a market gets too flooded then it doesn't matter how good your systems to advertise "good" games is it will still turn players away. It is very difficult in the digital marketplace to standout when a market is flooded, even with a good game. Then with the game recommendations or popular games you do see much variety. There were some really good XBLIG and they had sections for highest rated and popular but those sections quickly got flooded with Minecraft clones. If those devlopers were limited to how many games they could release in a year (similar to what Nintendo did with the NES) the service probably would have been more of a success.

This is actually a long term concern of mine, I don't think the console and handheld markets will last much longer since most people are more than happy to stick with the PC and mobile markets which deliver on more than just games. To answer the question, IDK. They're certainly exploring other markets like the QoL and Amiibo, but I don't know if they can carve out a niche in those markets.

It makes total sense. While "true gamers" make up around 20 million, mass market is closer to 150-200 million. Which market do you think is going to give you more profits?

Bingo!

That's why the big holiday titles are typically Assassin's Creed, CoD, Battlefield, Madden, FIFA, Mario, and Pokemon. They are known by nearly everyone, and people who may only play 1 or two games a year are willing to spend money on them. I wouldn't call these people "casuals" because that term is vague while bringing up certain stereotypes, but they aren't dedicated gamers.

Shadow of Mordor, Bayonetta 2, and Sunset Overdrive, aren't going to sell as well, because they are meant for either hardcore gamers who buy most anything, or fans with specific tastes for those games.

I only just got into gaming and have been spending time reading about things mentioned here on the forums online. In an effort to find out why the Wii U is doing so badly ( I don't understand why as I love my Wii U) I have been reading a lot. I've come across at least eight different articles I won't link them as but they come up with Google search saying that "consoles are dead in Japan" and that they are moving or have moved almost entirely over to handheld consoles and smartphones.

Now I don't know if this is true I've never been to Japan or spoken to a Japanese person about this. I had no interest in gaming two weeks ago so my knowledge is near non-existent. From what I have read and seen online the DS consoles do very well in Japan, Sony handheld consoles do ok but not as well as Nintendo and smartphone games are very popular. All the young kids I know (I live in the UK) play Pokemon on their DS systems.

I very much doubt that the the handheld market well die off or fade way even in future I just can't see that happening. The consoles and games must be cheaper to manufacture than their non-handheld counterparts. They are small and portable saving space and come with a built-in display thus don't require a television or monitor . Yes there are downsides to the handhelds but they deliver a satisfying gaming experience for most people with a lot of benefits and they haven't been tarred with the same brush when it comes to the problems that the current "next gen" consoles have..

Edie x

Nintendo likes to disrupt, usually 50/50 to their own personal damage. Virtual Boy, N64 on carts, WiiU, they hurt them. Gameboy, DS, Wii were boosts. I don't see that trend going away as they're stubborn and don't like to or want to compete straight with the other fish. This generation of consoles has been not a new generation at all, more in tune with a parts upgrade inside of an old computer to do more and more better, nothing radically new. With things like Oculus Rift, I could see them want to go all Virtual Boy again and have their own head gear gaming with a controller in hand where you're in the environment far more. Look what has been done in test so far right down to that dude who redid the original Zelda in 3D on that thing. That would give them a lot of ammo, and they have experience in failing with goggles on VB already but even that is experience.

Handhelds I don't see going away unless tablet and phone makers start including little controllers as part of the device or included in the package so it's not obtrusive to keep it on the go. I think there will be a continued need for an ever increasing niche handheld gaming dedicated device because non-tactile screens can not replace a controller, it just can't, you can't feel where the stick and buttons are and hands drift and being digital it just has a sense of lag to it too. I think going forward you can see from the failing that the WiiU is doing and with them merging their console/handheld divisions in house to one group they may ditch having two devices. They love to go it alone, perhaps they'll copy what Sony does with PS4+Vita and what Neo-Geo X did and have an awesome $300+ handheld that comes with a dock and bluetooth controller where you can then play on the TV or off it. Android tablets do it now with an HDMI cable (my nexus 7 with a moga pro controller for example) as do those stand alone boxes from Ouya, Amazon and others. Nintendo may need to survive go down that road, but also finally extract head from donkey and allow developers to have the ease of licensing and distribution Google Play does in their own eshop and sell a bunch of freemium to .99 cent to $15 games on there on top of their full blown classicly developed gaming experiences for like $30~.

For gaming to do well in the long run I think the idea of a "console war" will go away. You'll buy a box and go to a store front from some company and buy games from them. Nintendo won't need to sell you a box to get a decent cut, they'll just need a store. Same with everyone else. They'll also need to work out that in order to keep the industry going they need to not sell trash and not give content away. Games for 99c and rushed releases are the quickest way to crush the industry.

So IMO Nintendo need to respond by doing the same things they're doing now in a way. Just keep releasing good content and they'll do fine especially as gaming becomes more and more platform agnostic.

I think there are two things at play here.

On one hand, microconsoles and streaming speeds look like they will be able to overtake home consoles in regards to the graphics and intensity of games at some point in the future.

On the other hand, we are getting closer and closer to an upper bound to console specs, such that diminishing returns is taking a huge toll. In regards to non-spec hardware improvements (motion control, 3D, VR, etc), we are coming to a point where the amount that can be done without requiring the player to physically wear something is limited. The prospects of bundling wearables to give them more use in games is murky, as not everyone is going to be too keen about having to wear a piece of equipment.

I'm just saying that the US is Nintendo's biggest market. The US makes up from a little less than half to more than half of consoles and handheld sold worldwide. I'm not saying that other countries don't exist.

It's not a matter of country, the DS sold better than the GBA (iirc 57m), you didn't look at the GameBoy, and you completely forgot to mention the fact that the 3DS is still selling. Even if the 3DS ends up selling less than the GBA, that doesn't mean the handheld market is dying. If you want to make a comparison of handheld sales in the US, you have to take in account all systems.

If streaming games is ever a reliable then "consoles" might become a thing of the past. I don't see that happening, at least not within the next 20 years or so. I feel like the "console wars" is healthy for the industry, especially when comparing it to the smart phone gaming industry. With Smart Phones new versions come out too quickly because the manufacture only makes money off their hardware. In the console gaming industry each console manufacture develops their own games (which they make money off of) and push their own platform (which they again make money off of). I think the Ouya is a good example of what happens to a console without 1st Party support.

@DefHalan
What I meant was that the idea of a vertically integrated system will fade away. Right now if you want to play something like Zelda everything from the hardware right down to the publisher is Nintendo. As we move towards a more digital age where it is possible for a piece of hardware to be inside a TV? There'll be less reason for a physical gaming box that you replace every few years.

I just don't know how good that would be fore the industry

If the console was inside the tv that would be bad for sony, nintendo and microsoft because that would mean they would stop making consoles or make tvs?

Plus that would limit what the big 3 can do with the system?

The main reason consoles exist is because it's the easiest way to get a platform out there that these guys can take a cut on. If they can do that without the huge upfront costs of physically manufacturing millions of consoles? Then that's where they'll go. I can see why guys like Nintendo or Sony want to have me buy their games from their store. I don't see why in the long run I'll have to buy their physical hardware which they're often selling at a loss to do it. As digital becomes more prominent that's the direction it could go.

I'm not talking next year, I'm talking in the next few decades. At which point the hardware in your TV will be enough to do pretty amazing things given that the push is and has been for power efficiency over the last few years. So it wouldn't be limiting. And yes, they would stop making consoles in this scenario. The "Nintendo console" would be like the netflix or youtube app on your smart TV

If we are talking about streaming games then yes each company having their own marketplace that can be accessed through different streaming devices could happen. I just don't think it will happen across the board. I personally don't want to have to stream games. If we are just talking about digital downloaded games then powerful hardware is needed in order to run bigger games. Who is going to make this powerful hardware? If it isn't the same companies making the software then how expensive is it going to be and how often will they come out with hardware revisions? With multiple hardware revisions how will consumers know what can play on their phone. At that point the console business sounds like it basically turned into the Smart Phone business and I don't think that is a healthy model to copy.

EDIT: I actually had a conversation with my co-worker a little while ago about this, we came to the conclusion that Sony and Microsoft might go this route but Nintendo probably won't. I think Nintendo likes being in control of the hardware they are working on. Sony and Microsoft since their hardware is basically a PC already and they both seem to be more interested in streaming games, they would probably be ok with releasing streaming boxes for a while and aventually just having digital store fronts for people to purchase games through

For portable consoles I think there will always be more than enough room for someone to make a closed platform. Because it's such a specialised and all-in-one device. You can't just take a phone and slap buttons and an analogue stick on it, people wouldn't buy that as their phone. For the home console though I don't think it's that simple. As tech keeps getting more efficient and cheaper it'll get to the point where a "gaming console" will be thought of in the same way as a little box you plug into your TV to playback media files. I think it's pretty much a given that eventually Sony will put it on their TVs. That'll happen. So the question is how will companies like Nintendo adapt to that sort of market?

And maybe it is a small little Apple-TV style box. I just think that it could equally be just a piece of software. If people already have the hardware they're not going to want to buy it again.

I'll probably never find out...seeing as by then I probably would've found a different hobby and stopped caring about gaming...