Kenny said:
Actually, I would argue that Nintendo went out on more of a limb than any other system has ever done in the past, up to and including the DS. By largely foregoing the march of graphical progress in favour of focusing on developing a totally different control scheme, they basically went all or nothing on this generation, and they are being rewarded immensely for it.
To some extent you're right. But I believe Nintendo has learned one thing. They have a hardcore, rabid fanbase that will buy a 'Nintendo' something almost every generation if only for (Mario, Mario Kart, Zelda, Metroid, etc). So yeah they went on a limb but most old school Nintendo buyers would have got one regardless of the control scheme.
As for going all or nothing on this generation? I disagree. They released several year old hardware and made sure their profit margins would be solid regardless of the system outcome. They know they can get by with brand loyalty and name, they just don't know if they can dominate the market (With big budget companies like MS/Sony).
Nintendo could have had a PS2 type of dominance (Software sales and support/Hardware sales) this generation had they released a comparable graphics system to 360/PS3. Instead, they will just take a moderate victory this generation.
As for producing an underpowered system, I think it was a well calculated strategy. In the event that the system declined into irrelevance, Nintendo always has the DS to continue making profit from. In the event they dominate, as they are now, third parties would be forced to either develop for them, or many would go out of business for want of marketshare.
It's a well calculated strategy to maintain adequate profit. It's not a well calculated strategy to destroy the market in terms of impact. Software/Hardware. (Like the PS2 did). Which is exactly why, I said Nintendo played it close to the vest (Like usual). Had they put themselves on more of a financial limb, they would have without a doubt the most popular system in terms of hardware sales, software sales and third party support.
We've seen the beginnings of the latter scenario in Factor 5 and Free Radical, and combined with the recession, the balance of power in the console wars threatens to swing violently in Nintendo's direction, unless something is done to stop third parties from hemorrhaging cash.
Third parties will simply make more of their games multi-platform between PS3/360/PC or require lots of extra money in order to maintain exclusivity.
I see this Factor 5 / Free Radical argument a lot but quite honestly what huge games has Factor 5 created? This industry is just like any other, if you make nothing but mediocre to below average games your company will go out of business. Factor 5 (Not that I know of has made anything of GREAT relevance atleast in recent times.
Free Radical was a good development studio, but let's face it even Time Splitters for PS2 (While a good game that was fun) was no where near the type of game that Halo for the Xbox was. It was a good game but there is a reason that Playstation series has notoriously lacked quality FPS titles. Timesplitters was a decent game on an extremely popular system.
I mean let's face it, Rare was excellent during the N64 days but they haven't found their footing this generation or even the prior generation nor has anyone that really came out of that mess. Things change. That's what keeps the industry moving forward.
|
