mrstickball said:
|
He's referring to the 2D Super Mario games; you know, the ones that sell millions upon millions? I love Super Mario 64. It was of major importance IMO, as it showed how Nintendo could successfully achieve 3D gaming. But the N64 and the Gamecube both lacked a side-scrolling Mario game which (in addition to their 3D counterparts) would have undoubtedly made them sell even better and made their respective libraries more well-rounded.
Your arguments about the future of handheld gaming are well founded but your conclusion is a bit over dramatic. Just as there will always be people who are content with simple, 10 minute fun with their "app" games, there will always be people who want real handheld games for a richer experience. One doesn't ultimately have to replace the other. Yes, a lot of people own smart phones, but not everyone who owns a phone plays games with them... and who buys one just for gaming? That's a pretty big risk for say, Capcom to release their next Street Fighter only for smart phones and ignore the latest handheld system completely... especially if it's made by Nintendo.
As great as Angry Birds' 100m downloads are, it hasn't stopped NSMB from selling over 25m at around $30 a pop no less. And AB is a rare exception compared to the goliaths that are Mario Kart, Pokemon, Nintendogs, Brain Age and countless others that also perform very well. My conclusion is there is room for both the smart phone market and handhelds simply because they really do cater to different demographics for the most part.
And if for some reason the market does dramatically sway away from a dedicated handheld device, as you said, Nintendo would ultimately find a way to adapt. 







