Would You Be Angry If Nintendo Released A New Console But Still Supported Wii U?

[Dr.Henry_Killinger]

TheLastStarFighter said:

The OP isn't unrealistic at all.  You can say it's unlikely, but it is completely within the relm of realism.  

Its unrealistic because it suggests that Nintendo could just produce a new consoles within in such a small timespan.

Part of it is actually alluded to, with Iwata merging hardware departments and stating that in the future their games will likely be multi-Nintendo platform.  We've already seen the first in Smash Brothers.  The only things that could be called a stretch here are Nintendo making a new system soon, and to a lesser extent that it would be powerful.

How well is this working for them? Considering they're philosophy of software sales hardware it doesn't make sense and it looks like they are trying to increase their software sales by making their games on multiple platforms.

The problem isn't systemic.  There are multiple reasons that Nintendo doesn't get 3rd party support, and some of them have changed from gen to gen.  Choices in media format, choices in system power, system architcture and so on have caused third party trepidation.  There is also the issue that certain 3rd parties (such as EA) do not want Nintendo in the hardware business.  

Which are all just different forms of the same thing, Nintendo's desire for control. Bethesda put it best when they said Nintendo designed the Wii U for themselves but not third parties. Claiming that EA doesn't want Nintendo in the hardware buisness is ludicrous. EA desires to make as much money as possible and to do that they release on as many platforms as the can. The problem that the Wii U inherted from the Wii, is that dev costs aren't made up software sales of the system so its just a money sink for them. Many people on this forum complain about EA not making games for the Wii U, but they also claim they wouldn't buy them if they did so EA isn't going to waste money on a port that wouldn't sale.

The proposal is that Nintendo management, seeing the dire situation that Wii U is in, desides to change strategy to remain relevent in the console space.  They consult 3rd parties, build a system that is easy to port to and provide 3rd parties with incentive to bring their titles there.  None of this is rocket science, it's exactly what Sony and MS do and Nintendo could do it too if they wanted.

Again building a console is not something that can be done in this timespan and have adequate results. PS4 and XB1 Dev started a lot earlier. Its really isn't just about courting publishers, if publisher's don't see the user base, then Nintendo is going to have to money hatt to make up for it.

The issue with money-losing hardware has been a problem in the past.  However, it is no longer.  Sony and MS now sell their systems beyond $800 a unit (including subscription fees) and consumers are completely accepting of this.  Nintendo could adapt this strategy and make powerful hardware while still making money.  This is a trend they have missed with Wii U.

No its not. The PS4 and XB1 are still posting losses even though their dev costs are significantly lower then their predecessors. Also with a 1 year subscription fee and a game the XB1 is 620$ so I don't know where ur getting your 800$ a unit from. 600$ PS3 basically failed cause they had to price cut it for viability, and the $500 XB1 is struggling with its price as well. Nobody in their right mind would buy a console for 800 when they could get a pc for the same price.

Your comment about launching a system early shaking consumer confidence is completely unfounded.  There is no example of an early launch killing consumer confidence, however there are multiple examples of an early launch capturing it.  Sega Genesis increased the Sega marketsare dramatically by launching early and cutting the Master System life very short, XBox 360 did the exact same thing to XBox, with sales increasing over 4X.  If no one is buying your product anyway... you make a new product.  The 6 million people who have a Wii U already are Nintendo nuts and would gladly pick up the new system.

The Sega Dreamcast is the best example, wonderful system, destroyed by consumer support. The 360 was a next generation console and the Xbox was late to the party. Realising a new nintendo console damages credibility with consumers and sure you might get the niche, maybe even some of the mainstream, but you will lose the informed consumer and definetly the hardcore.

Besides, the whole point is that it is Nintendo taking on a more i-Thing approach to products.  Wii U is still supported, but a new supperior model is made available.  Apple does it every year, and older products are still supported.  Nintendo doing this is not only possible, but likely.  As an owner of a Wii U, I'd be perfectly fine with Nintendo taking this approach.  As long as my product doesn't become instantly obsolete, I love the idea of having the option of upgrading when it works for me.

I don't know why people think the Mobile market is even relevant to how the console market operates. Smartphones != Consoles. We're talking about something that sells in the billions, has global development support, and is seen by the mainstream as a neccessity, versus something that sells in the tens of millions, developed by a single manufacturer, and seen as a Luxury.

Gaming is a hobby, nobody needs consoles even for gaming, so there will be zero incentive to get a Wii U if the new console comes out, because the new console will do everything the Wii U can, but better, supporting the Wii U would be pointless, just like buying it would be pointless. Not to mention new consumers would be warry about it because of its lifetime. Only those looking to play the next mario or zelda would get it.