RolStoppable said:
shakarak said:
Because imo he jumps to easily too assumptions. Although I'm not one that has read all of his posts/material based off this one post. I disagree with a ton of it.
I am hopefully revealing that Nintendo is interested only in making games on their terms. They should be interested in making games on the market’s terms. Making more 3d Mario, ‘Maternal Instincts’ Metroid, Aonuma Zelda, is not where the market wants to go.
Sales data just disagrees with a lot of his statements. While I do like what he has to say about Nintendo is setting up their audience for the future, a lot of his quotes like the one above just make no sense to me. Iwata isn't happy with sales in UK, lordy lordy lets forget about how the game is going to sell 10 million worldwide. Nintendo made 3d accessible for gaming. Electronics companies have yet to make 3d truly accessible mostly due to other factors (such as media companies offering 3d content, and cost contstraints of 3d technology). Whose to say the market doesn't want 3d, maybe we just want it to be more accessible.
|
Please, you should realize that sales data is only one half of the equation in business. Selling a lot of units doesn't mean anything, if you are operating at a loss. The fact that Nintendo had to operate at a loss makes it evident that the masses do not value stereoscopic 3D. The only thing that will sell the 3DS will be games which is why the major price cut in August didn't improve the situation all that much.
|
Help me understand a little bit better.
Selling a lot means nothing if at a loss? Why did Sony release a ps3 at a loss for an extended period of time then? Hell by this logic does this mean the masses are not ready for an hd handheld(vita)?
