Malstrom: 'The Big Picture' problem underlying Nintendo's decline

[NightDragon83]

RolStoppable said:

NightDragon83 said:

I have no problem with things like the Super Guide, because it's completely optional, and comes up only when you'd actually need it, like when you die 10 times in a row in a particularly tough spot of a specific level.  What I do have a problem with is when the game I'm playing comes to a grinding halt to spell out exactly what I need to do and where to go next, as is the case with pretty much every Zelda game since Ocarina of Time.

Other than the motion and touch-screen controls with the Wii and DS, Nintendo hasn't really done much boundary pushing this generation.  Games like Kirby's Epic Yarn are less about pushing boundaries and more about Nintendo working around the limitations of its own hardware through different art styles, much like they did with the cell shaded style in Wind Waker on the GC before giving in to the fan boys and goint with the more realistic looking approach in Twilight Princess.

And I agree with the second part of your post as to why Nintendo's home console sales slipped every generation between the NES and the Wii, except on price (N64 and GC both launched at $100 cheaper than their rivals the PS1 and PS2, but that wasn't enough to hold off Sony in either case.)  But not only was it due to tougher competition in each generation, it was also due in part to Nintendo shooting themselves in the foot with some of the decisions they made... like sticking with carts instead of CDs for the N64 (which caused much of the erosion of 3rd party support end exclusives they had enjoyed for 2 generations), and a whole list of missteps with the Gamecube, from their refusal to embrace DVD playback and the rapidly growing online gaming community, to the actual look of the system itself and the reinforcement of their image as a "kiddy company".

And that image still sticks with the so-called "core" gamers that now primarily game on 360 / PS3 / PC, and Nintendo needs the support of the "core" gaming audience if wants to be successful next generation with the Wii U (which is off to a rocky start judging from this year's E3 presentation, not to mention the horrible "Wii U" name).

The only reason why Nintendo needs the core gaming audience you speak of for the Wii U is because they made the Wii U. They aren't going to get the Wii audience with this console, so they are dependent on 360/PS3/PC owners to take the plunge. This is going to work well for them...

But seriously, the economy in the coming years and the ever strengthening yen will make the eighth generation hell for Nintendo. They will possibly burn through billions of dollar.

Not sure why you think Nintendo won't get most of the Wii's existing audience with the Wii U (unless you were just being Rol there lol).  Cconsidering that aside from the 2 minute montage of 3rd party "core games" shown at their E3 show, Nintendo mostly focused on and demonstrated the types of software that the expanded or "casual" gaming audience has come to embrace for the Wii U like Wii Sports, Fit and Play mini-game fests.  They also focused on how the console will be backwards compatible with the Wii's library and will mainly utilize the Wiimote and nunchuk as main controller options besides the new "tablet" controller (which is a HUGE mistake if they limit the tablet's use to just one per unique console).  Reggie even talked briefly in a couple of interviews about having 2 separate SKU's of software for Wii and Wii U, where they can be played on both the Wii and Wii U but only the Wii U-specific version utilizes its enhanced controls, which really confused me.

They're going to have a much tougher time convincing the 360 / PS3 audience to drop another $300+ on a system that basically has the exact same 3rd party games they have access to now, with only marginally improved visuals and performance (judging from what we've seen so far), if that.