By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
happydolphin said:

It's sad to think that some don't realize this basic fact.

What attracted consumers to Angry Birds and Farmville is very similar to what attracted consumers to Pokemon. It's affordable, it's addictive, it's viral. To think this kind of social effect has no impact on consumers' perception of Nintendo's offerings is denial at best.

While people can't play WiiU on the go, they can certainly play Angry Birds at home.

Having said all that, of course, Nintendo games have their own value that some customers will understand. But to say that none will come to choose Angry birds over Nintendo offerings in certain cases is absolute denial.

this.

i get the part people say, phones and tablets aren't being bought for games exclusively.  but unlike games consoles that are only viewed as a luxury phones are not.  the consumer, when posed with the choice will view the phone as a must have and a game console as not a must have.  

now i didn't except to find this to be true but it did happen...once that iphone was in my pocket already and the games were good -- my DS suddenly had no perceived values.  why pay more money and have more crap to carry when a~1/4 of the games on my DS were also on my iphone and the nintendo exclusive games have pretty damn good third party knock offs??