Azelover said:
They don't need to develop too much of that internally.
People, stop thinking in old market ways, save yourselves from the disappointment. How do you think the Balance Board came about?
This is for their disruptive sword, it's for new forms of interface. And by the way, let me just tell you all games Nintendo does are mass market, if you're talking about making distinctions between Zelda and Wii Sports, then all I can say is get ready, because soon enough there will be little distinction between the two. Laugh it off now, just wait and see until you see, how their core titles(which just means old market brands) embrace and dive into the new market.
The meltdown this year, which will be probably bigger than last year's, will be related to these franchises. A lot of people think they just want Nintendo to make new Zelda and Mario games, but that's not the case. They want Nintendo to make Mario and Zelda games in the ways they want them. Wait and see. |
Seems you're the one thinking in the red ocean by infering that all I meant was internal specifications. How do you think the Wii and DS were realised? Glitter and Miyamoto's blue piss? (yes that's where they got their strategies name from - not the book)
They'll have focus groups and product testing for a wide range of things in R&D including 3D projectors and things that'll never make it - just for patents sake really. Then they'll have their market research and relative spec design to see what works and what keeps cost down. So they'l work on WiiHD system spec, controller specs, interface and memory, wifi infrustructure etc. They'll also work on DS2 and whether a multitouch display or two touch screens or even going back to one screen works and what's best and most cost effective.
They'll also look at what drives sales of Wii Sports, Wii Fit, Mario Kart Wii and Wii Play and what lead to the lower than expected sales of Wii Music and research and develop those kind of games - ones they think will really move hardware and sell well.
