Ok my response is TL;DR so I'm just going to hit home the most important point in one sentence: The biggest mistake of the 3DS is that it's called a 3DS.
| Tizona said: Can you give me a source on the "not minority" who can't see Steroscopic 3D or have eyestrain? I just like facts is why. Dude. Don't question my "hardcore" card. I'm a Nintendo guy yes, but I'm also an adult. I full well know Nintendo can fuck up, and that they have in the past. 3DS may not sell as well as DS. But you can't have the argument both ways that PSP is not a failure cause it sold alot, even if not as much as the DS, but if 3DS does not outsell DS, it is a fail. It's silly. As for GBA selling more than Gamecube, First, handhelds have historically always outsold console for multiple reasons, not the least of them being general affordability. Second, Gamecube was not a great success, nor was it a great system, I agree. But do you honeslty want all the systems on the market to cater the "mass market" Isn't ok for one company to cater to a demographic, while another one caters to something different. I don't want your FPS' and WRPGS and race sims in my platformers and party games. If Nintendo went for the mass market, they would fail. Expecting a company to willfully go for a market they know they cannot dominate is not a well though out expectation. 3DS may or may not fail. I'm just asking you to let it do what it's gonna do, and try to enjoy if you want. BTW: I think this has just popped my "Video Game Forum Argument" cherry. Thanks! |
Something like 12% of adults in the UK (Brits may have shittier teeth than most people but eyes?) can't even see stereoscopic 3D properly. http://kotaku.com/5584737/12-of-british-people-cant-see-3d-properly That's a pretty big minority that you're alienating. That doesn't include the people that get eyestrain/headaches/ill from the 3D. It's not Nintendo's style (unless you count Virtual Boy) to be so "exclusive". I understand this is why Nintendo put in the 3D slider. But then the people that don't want the 3D (for one or more various reasons) will have to pay $250 for a 3D device when they're not even going to use the 3D. That is poor value. And for people that are fine with 3D, glasses-free 3D gaming on the go isn't exactly very convenient and the conditions aren't very ideal. I can't imagine that stereoscopic 3D would be very convenient while playing on a bus or in the passenger seat of a car for eg. And a lot of people have complained that glasses-free 3D on the small screen isnt quite like watching 3D with the glasses on a 3DTV/monitor or a theatre. Oh and once again, the "no children under 7 should be playing with 3D" warnings on the box are going to scare parents away from buying that stuff for their kids.
With all the stuff going against the 3DS, I just don't get why Nintendo couldn't have created someone without stereoscopic 3D (DS2 probably wouldn't be a good name because it would confuse people into thinking that it's just another DS and not a real sucessor), priced it at $180 and called it a day. I understand that Nintendo is afraid that business as usual would open them up to disruption (by Apple and Google). But what happens if Steve Jobs announces an iPhone with a stereoscopic 3D screen? Then what? They come out with an iPhone almost every year (I think iPhone 4 might be the first to actually last 2 years). Not every 5 years like a console. And they're already coming out with Android smartphones with glasses-free in the future. You can't rely on gimmicks to stay relevant. And as I've stated before, Ocarina of Time, Star Fox 64 and Metal Gear Solid 3, etc. are very much home console experiences and the mass market does not want home console experiences on the go. They want pick up and play. Also the added development costs of steroscopic 3D is offputting to small developers. By calling it a 3DS, the 3DS is pigeonholing themselves into the 3D thing. Much like the N64 and Gamecube were 3D obsessed for the most part (look at the N64 logo. It's 3D. The Gamecube logo. Cubes are 3D). It's cheaper for smaller Japanese studios to make a 2D RPG on the NGP (no one would bat an eye at that just like no one batted a eye at the countless 2D games on the Playstations) without the stereoscopic effects. If you don't put stereoscopic 3D in a 3DS game, what's the point? The whole point of making a 3DS game is the 3D. Even 2D Mario is going to have stereoscopic 3D effects.
3DS doesn't have to necessarily sell as much as the DS to be a success. But I see it taking a big drop from DS numbers and even go below GBA numbers. As for the PSP, it's pretty much the first real competitor to Nintendo ever. For a new player to the handheld market (Sony), I'd say Sony did a good job. They've been very competitive with Nintendo since the Monster Hunter boom (often beating the DS during several periods), practically tied with the DS in hardware sales in 2010 and as of late the PSP has been red hot in Japan. Sony's insistence on bringing home console gaming experiences to their portables is making me facepalm though and this is why the PSP lost a lot of ground in the west.
Also as Rol stated, handhelds didn't always outsell home consoles historically. The PS2 was on top for awhile. I'm not going to go on record saying the 3DS would sell at N64 or Gamecube levels. But it's not going to be mass market in the way that a GBA is, let alone a DS. It's not going to meet Nintendo's expectations. Nintendo expects that it'll outship the DS this fiscal year (Apr 2011 - Mar 2012). I don't see that happening. Nintendo expects that 3DS software shipments will come relatively close to DS software shipments for the fiscal year. Don't see that happening. I think some top execs at Nintendo are going to have a lot of explainin' to do to the shareholders next year. Nintendo is stuck with this 3D thing for at least 5 years. Honestly the single biggest mistake is that it's called a 3DS.
