Will Nintendo ever catch up in graphics and hardware?

[thekitchensink]

RolStoppable said:

thekitchensink said:

RolStoppable said:
SNES, Nintendo 64, Gamecube.

For the future: When they need to because the market demands it. Unlikely though, most people seem to be already satisfied with sixth generation graphics.

Not to mention that the DS and GBA were/are the most powerful handhelds available at the time of their respective launches.

 

Nintendo was on the brink of being forced out of making consoles, SEGA-style, and they couldn't afford to blow billions of dollars on a loss-leading strategy when they didn't know how popular the system would be.  That's the only reason Wii isn't in the same realm of graphical power as the PS3 and 360.

 

Like Rol said, Gamecube was roughly as powerful as Xbox and much more so than PS2 and Dreamcast, the N64 was the most powerful of its generation, and so was the SNES.

The DS and PSP launched within weeks of each other. I am not an expert myself, but I have heard that the PSP is much more powerful than the DS.

Nintendo wasn't doing as bad as you think, they made always profit. They also could have afforded a loss leading strategy that costs billions of dollars. The question is: why should they if they were convinced (and they really were) that such powerful hardware isn't needed because the majority of the market doesn't care about it?

That's really flawed thinking which I see quite often: "Nintendo didn't make a powerful console because they couldn't afford it and because they can't compete with Sony and Microsoft on that level". It's like saying that a man is stupid because he doesn't jump from a bridge like the other two men to impress a woman who doesn't care for men who jump from bridges.

Everytime the power discussion comes up, it's put in a light where Nintendo is the stupid company and the loser. In reality, the opposite is the case, because Nintendo has read the market better than the other two companies who were more focused on impressing each other.

I may have to work on my analogies...

You seem to have misunderstood me.  I never said that they lost money on the 'Cube--I know for a fact that they made a few billion.  However, they were outsold by both of their biggest rivals, and the GameCube didn't really have the mass appeal that the PS2 did.  They would likely have been forced into becoming a third party if they kept going on the same route, as before the Wii they'd never had a console that outsold its predecessor.  Selling 15 million when their rivals are both likely to pass 40 million at least would not have been a strategy they'd have liked to follow, so they tried something different and it's been a roaring success that's changed the industry, like Nintendo has done many times before.

I did say that they probably WOULD have lost money on the new console if they followed the same route as Microsoft and Sony this generation, and that's why they decided to take a gamble with this new path.  I don't think Nintendo is stupid at all--the Wii has been a fantastic success, and they are by far my favourite console manufacturer.

About the DS comment, I simply meant that the DS is quite a powerful handheld (the first of its kind to even think about a polygon).  Unlike the Wii, the DS was a generational leap from its predecessor.