Malstrom: "My purpose is to reveal and inform people about Nintendo."

[theprof00]

RolStoppable said:

puffy said:
Rol this is directed squarely at you.

Could you please explain what you meant by: "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"

The inference being that Nintendo operated at a profit with Wii and DS because consumers valued touch screen controls and motion controls and games didn't play any part?

No, games always play a part. The most important part.

The package of the DS and Wii was valued high enough by consumers for Nintendo to sell their systems at a profit. If the market doesn't value the package high enough, then a company is forced to correct the price to sustain a sufficient level of sales.

The stereoscopic 3D of the 3DS was supposed to be a great selling point for Nintendo's new handheld. But because it doesn't change gaming in any notable way (and it's highly unlikely that it ever will), it has little value to consumers. And something that has next to no value is something that people do not want to pay for.

Nintendo simply was not able to expand the market enough with 3d. There are plenty of viable venues for a 3d camera handheld and Nintendo has not pushed it's ability. Look at Kinect. It has shit games but sells a lot because it's useful in other applications. It doesn't have to be useful for games in order for it to be a good product. (Of course, this is the same shit I always talk when people say Kinect is a success...I remind them that it's only a success in alternate applications and not for games)

Nintendo has not done a good enough job showing us what can be done with the 3d in other applications. For example, with the wii, we had the balance board. Wii Fit is not exactly a game, but the tech in the system provided us with this new application. Nintendo has not done this with the 3DS.