| famousringo said: 1. Investors want a lot of things, and just because they want it doesn't mean it's a good for Nintendo, Nintendo's customers, or even investors themselves. Some investors simply want to ransack a company for as much as they can, then get out. 2. Fair enough point. But if gamers aren't giving Nintendo enough returns on their investment in games, seeking customers elsewhere makes sense, no? You seem to think Nintendo should seek out the extremely well-served customers on other gaming platforms, but why should health & fitness customers be off the table? They've made Nintendo a lot of money in the past while gamers on HD consoles were busy deriding Nintendo games as old and childish. 3. Giving away free things is a great way to attract people, but it doesn't pay the bills. How on earth is losing more money a solution to Nintendo's problems? 4. Nintendo's gone as far as they can to attract third parties without: A) Sacrificing the customer relationship (EA's Origin fiasco). B) Building the same console as everybody else, and thereby foregoing any value-adding differentiation. C) Simply throwing money at third parties, which is not the way to add value or make money. All of these options will accelerate Nintendo's irrelevance, not turn things around. All courting third parties has ever gotten Nintendo is compromised values and empty promises. There's not much point in asking a girl out if she already has a ring on. |
As for 3, a bigger installment base means more software sales which is what Nintendo wants primarily. The Wii U is, for all intents and purposes, a companion console to the big two PS3/PS4 360/XB1. Because it has virtually no third party support, it's basically a secondary console for people who want to play Nintendo games. Why should it cost almost as much as PS4?
