| RolStoppable said: I thought 3DTV adoption rates are abysmal, hence why Nintendo didn't want to bank on 3D with the Wii U. 3D is just a visual feature, so I don't think that Nintendo could produce such software in the first place. If they could, they would have tried already. People who buy a gaming handheld to watch films are obviously a niche, so that too isn't worth pursuing. Regarding the DS, its bestselling game could have been done without using any special features at all. What does that tell you? That games are more important to Nintendo's success than gimmicks. The 3DS doesn't need to prove that 3D is worth it. Nintendo just needs to make games and the sooner they stop trying to sell 3D at all costs, the better. |
First off, of course Nintendo is capable of producing software that utilises a visual effect. After all, the move from 2D to 3D in the mid-90s was " just a visual" effect, but they were able to produce software that capitalised on this capability. Secondly, you have absolutely no idea how 3D feature films would sell on a 3DS, or whether its worth pursuing or not.
Regarding the DS's software library, let's take a look at the system's top selling games:
1. New Super Mario Bros. - Doesn't use touch screen
2. Nintendogs - Touchscreen integral to gameplay
3. Mario Kart DS - Doesn't use touch screen
4. Brain Training - Touch screen integral to gameplay.
You see where this is going?
The inclusion of the touch screen was hugely important to the DS's success and to claim otherwise is to rewrite sales history to support some half-baked notions about what makes Nintendo consoles sell. The DS and Wii have proved that gameplay "gimmicks" are integral to how the company does business and wins consumers.
