shinra-bansho
Member
But a threat to portables is a threat to Nintendo first and foremost.It's a threat to portables, not consoles.
But a threat to portables is a threat to Nintendo first and foremost.It's a threat to portables, not consoles.
If the alternative is selling Wii U numbers or even worse, then it's better to pay the 20% royalty. At least they'd be bringing in profits that way.
Bu bu but "Nintendo is the bigger company then Sony"!
lol
Even with Nintendos current shares plunge, Sonys market capitalization isn't (that) far away.Bu bu but "Nintendo is the bigger company then Sony"!
lol
Even with Nintendos current shares plunge, Sonys market capitalization isn't (that) far away.
Sony: 1.83T Yen
Nintendo: 1.76T Yen
Man, you were waiting for this, weren't ya?
Bu bu but "Nintendo is the bigger company then Sony"!
lol
That's only the percieved market value though, based on projected return of investments more than anything else. It's not really representival of the size if either of those companies.Not to mention the fact that Sony's value is for their entire company inc. laptops, TVs, ovens etc. and Nintendo's is just gaming.
I assumed they meant move resources onto a potential new platform, not can what's currently in development - some of which likely won't see the light of day anyway until 2015.(S)He said that Nintendo should stop supporting Wii U this year.
That really seems completely untenable. You really think that Nintendo can essentially be absent of any real position in the console space for half a decade (2017) or longer (2018) and still remain a viable competitor in that space?a new console for 2017-2018
Their legacy software (NES, GBA, SNES, N64, maybe even GCN) should be available from any device anywhere in the world.
Login, play the game. Cloud save states, online multiplayer for select games.
This should be an app that runs on devices and consoles that people log into.
C'mon iOS Virtual Console with MFi Nintendo Pro Controller!
I'd ask, who in 2006 would buy a system for which the predecessor was for the last 5 years that thing that no one wanted, that no one made games for, that barely had any market presence and was relegated to the back of the store or pulled from shelves completely in many locations.
The same thing happened to Sega when they went third party. Almost everything they released for nearly a decade was pretty bad. You're talking about taking the entire development team of all of Nintendo and putting them on radically different hardware that they have no control over and little experience in asking for assistance. They won't have those connections to Sony or MS in the beginning and it would take years to establish a good working relationship that speeds things along quickly. It's just the way these huge companies work. Everything is very bureaucratized and getting those bureaucracies on the same page isn't as easy as "here's some dev kits, get to it!"Cuz xBros would totes destroy the franchise, bruh. (Fanboyism)
I think Nintendo games would do fine on other hardware. They could keep their core teams working on game development, so there would be little change in terms of game design/quality. I don't understand the argument that their games would automatically change (for the worse) if they started development for PC, PS4, XB1, etc.
Another assumption that I don't understand is that Nintendo games wouldn't sell on other platforms (tablets included). Nintendo is a household name. Their games have high production values. Is there any reasoning behind the assumption that no one would buy their games on tablets?
Even with Nintendos current shares plunge, Sonys market capitalization isn't (that) far away.
Sony: 1.83T Yen
Nintendo: 1.76T Yen
They could leapfrog into it with an acquisition. Multiple cats could be put amongst the pigeons.
The same thing happened to Sega when they went third party. Almost everything they released for nearly a decade was pretty bad. You're talking about taking the entire development team of all of Nintendo and putting them on radically different hardware that they have no control over and little experience in asking for assistance. They won't have those connections to Sony or MS in the beginning and it would take years to establish a good working relationship that speeds things along quickly. It's just the way these huge companies work. Everything is very bureaucratized and getting those bureaucracies on the same page isn't as easy as "here's some dev kits, get to it!"
Bu bu but "Nintendo is the bigger company then Sony"!
lol
PS4 and XB1 are radically different from Wii U? They're the same exact kind of device, just better.
To be a company in such dire straights as Nintendo, you couldn't ask for a better get out of jail free card.
If some small indies can easily make games for those platforms, I'm sure Nintendo could find a way. You're making it sound way more complicated than it actually is.
The GameCube is really no comparison, you're well aware. I think the Wii U is probably tracking to sell something like 13-16M units globally; that may even be a tad optimistic at this stage.Fixed.
Joking aside, how do you see their launching schedule for the next handheld and console?
Nintendo aren't in dire straits just yet. Still a long, long, way to go before that card has to be played. Sure, the Wii U is struggling, but Nintendo's woes are far from dire.
They'd have to port over each title to play with touch controls. If they can't even get simple ROM dumps on the VC, then forget this ever happening.
And it would be pointless even if they could. Anyone with an android device or a computer can already run NES/SNES ROMs. Why would people pay?
You clearly don't know what you're talking about. When have they ever shown off game footage at an Investor Briefing?
The GameCube is really no comparison, you're well aware. I think the Wii U is probably tracking to sell something like 13-16M units globally; that may even be a tad optimistic at this stage.
Regarding your question, I don't really know. Although, thankfully it's not my problem to solve.
I could say simply don't release both a handheld and a console; I don't think they really have the resources to launch and support both, and I also don't think the situation you outlined is a practical one. And in such scenario I would probably suggest becoming a handheld only company.
But the problem with that scenario is that they'd be the dominant (and really only) fish in the pond. But the pond is progressively shrinking in Western markets.
I don't personally really like the idea of a hybrid - as it's essentially just a more powerful handheld with TV out - but I can't see much else they could do. Or at least building both on a similar architectural basis for dual development of titles. Then they could consolidate their software development onto said hybrid platform/architecture, so they'd have regular releases even in the absence of third parties to pad the software schedule.
Although, this of course comes with the downside of potentially halving software revenue.
Nintendo has never had a history of seeking out cutting edge hardware.
Don't forget insurance, Hollywood, music publishing, the entire Michael Jackson and The Beatles catalogue, all electronics, and of course, online and computer entertainment.Not to mention the fact that Sony's value is for their entire company inc. laptops, TVs, ovens etc. and Nintendo's is just gaming.
One of the issues is see with the hybrid console is that Nintendo love to sell two entries of their main franchises per gen, one n handheld and one on console. I do not believe that the increase in installed base from separate devices will be large enough to make up for losing half of their major game releases.
While the hybrid console is a nice idea, the practicalities have yet to be worked out. I do not feel Nintendo have the resources or approach to make it work without a significant downsizing of their first party output or suffering from sequelitis like Sony and MS.
I think another problem with the hybrid is that the hardware capability (raw power) is giong to fall behind even more compared to Next Gen Sony/MS, because it "also" needs to be a handheld in the end.One of the issues is see with the hybrid console is that Nintendo love to sell two entries of their main franchises per gen, one n handheld and one on console. I do not believe that the increase in installed base from separate devices will be large enough to make up for losing half of their major game releases.
While the hybrid console is a nice idea, the practicalities have yet to be worked out. I do not feel Nintendo have the resources or approach to make it work without a significant downsizing of their first party output or suffering from sequelitis like Sony and MS.
One thing they should do is cut the prices they charge for software, especially on the e shop. Its crazy that first party software are still up for £50 in the UK.I wonder if this will mean Nintendo is going to moneyhat 3rd party games and franchises for exclusivity on Wii U.
Releasing in 2014 with DKC:TF, FE X SMT, Yarn Yoshi, Smash Bros 4, MK8, Bayonetta 2, X alongside exclusive 3rd party titles they paid for that won't be on another system.
I think them getting exclusive AAA games like COD (with no other COD coming to another system in 2014), Bioshock, Borderlands, and Assassin's Creed could pump up the Wii U sales. Completely exclusive, not coming to another system, Bayonetta 2 kind of deal.
Either that or revive some old 3rd party franchises. Viewtiful Joe 3, Shenmue 3,somehow buy back Banjo-Kazooie franchise and make a 3rd game
In an attempt to be objective here, I honestly think Pokemon on mobile would make a lot of money, and be much easier to accomplish and less offensive than Mario on there.
As upsetting as all this news is for Nintendo fans like myself, a part of me is excited to see what Nintendo will do to try and fix things. They've never been in this dire of a situation before, and it's clear they can't keep going the way they have. All the bad choices they've made in the last decade are finally catching up to them, and they need this failure to push them in the right direction (or, at the very least, a DIFFERENT direction).
I think that selling handheld and console versions of games is a thing of the past, thanks to the expectation of having one piece of software work across multiple devices established by smartphone ecosystems.One of the issues is see with the hybrid console is that Nintendo love to sell two entries of their main franchises per gen, one n handheld and one on console. I do not believe that the increase in installed base from separate devices will be large enough to make up for losing half of their major game releases.
While the hybrid console is a nice idea, the practicalities have yet to be worked out. I do not feel Nintendo have the resources or approach to make it work without a significant downsizing of their first party output or suffering from sequelitis like Sony and MS.
I think another problem with the hybrid is that the hardware capability (raw power) is giong to fall behind even more compared to Next Gen Sony/MS, because it "also" needs to be a handheld in the end.
Heart and soul? dude. Sony made a great console but it's still just a box from a huge corporation that doesn't really care about you.The other alternative is to put your heart and soul into the system that you're trying to sell, like Sony is doing with the PS4. Put out something that people will want to buy. I agree though that if they aren't up to that task, then they might as well go software (or even handheld) only.
I do think the hybrid idea is bad, though. A unified platform, however, would have a lot of potential if executed properly.
Heart and soul? dude. Sony made a great console but it's still just a box from a huge corporation that doesn't really care about you.
That's also a reason why I abandoned the hybrid idea (yeah, I was a fan of that! XD) and I'm embracing the "portable + home supporting games of the handheld, with more raw power than the portable device for extra resolution / effects" concept, and / or wsippel's "Nintendo family" concept.
A F2P Pokémon game on iOS would bring in a trully insane amount of money. That and it would addict kids to Pokémon all over again in countries where Nintendo's brand is very tarnished.In an attempt to be objective here, I honestly think Pokemon on mobile would make a lot of money, and be much easier to accomplish and less offensive than Mario on there.