DélioPT said:
DanneSandin said:
Yes, PS1&2 dominated because they had the bulk of the 3rd party support, and going in to this gen I don't see Wii U having that kind of support. PS3 and x360 arguably had the best and equal 3rd party support, and they have sold roughly the same amount of consoles, and I think we'll see a continuation of this going in to the next gen; PS720 having the bulk of the 3rd party support while Wii U is left on the side. This will mean that Wii U's sales will suffer, because all it'll have to offer is Mario and Zelda.
Just take a look at the very recent comment made by EA; they don't see Wii U as part of their internal gen 4; but PS720 is... PS720 will run engines that Wii U will not be able to, or at least not without compromises, and it is this that will hinder Nintendo to get good 3rd party support, and will cost them the generation. We'll be seeing GC all over again...
|
Last generation was unique. You won`t it repeating itself this.
There really isn`t a clear winner to be anticipated, like N64 was after Snes or PS2 after PS1 and PS3 after PS2.
It may happen that 3rd parties will be more inclined to support MS and Sony but that may change if Wii U does well in next financial year. If you look at software sales released, you will see that Wii U is selling better than VGC is saying - probably because of digital sales. Actually, the list of best sellers here is somewhat different from the one on eshop (excluding eshop only titles).
Wii U is selling a good number of software despite most of the big titles being ports or even late ports.
There`s more excitement for X than probably for any other game announced.
But there`s more!
Economics. If production costs rise 20% like EPic anticipates, do you think that big projects that fail to meet expectations won´t have a big effect? Look at Epic Mickey: a sequel that failed = end of studio.
The market in the last generation had an artificial growth on both sides. Consoles were so different that it made sense to buy more than one. Something that didn`t happen in previous generations where the winner console won hands down.
It remains, in my view, to be seen, specially on MS and Sony`s side how big their market really is.
If the market grew artificially, it will shrink. And if that happens guess who`s not going to like it? 3rd parties!
EA says it`s not. Team Ninja says it is. :)
|
Yes, last generation was very different, and the anomaly was the Wii. If we look at all the winners from previous gens we clearly sees that whatever system has the best 3rd party support wins. NES, SNES, PS1 and PS2. And if the market suffered from artificial growth, and the market will shrink, I think it's safe to assume that is because the casuals will be gone, and we will therefore go back to rely solely on core gamers. And if that's the case we go back to the old rules; best 3rd party support wins. BUT, since almost all games goes multiplat this rule is once more changed. So it comes back to 1st party games. And Nintendo rules this category. BUT, as we saw in the GC era, Nintendo don't do to well when all they've got is 1st party games. SO in conclusion; Nintendo needs 3rd party support, or they will sell below 25m Wii U's, and risking going 3rd party themselves. The only thing that kept them from going 3rd party before was GameBoy and DS, and then we have to ask ourself; how much can Nintendo rely on 3DS - and for how long?
Now, I don't really care if Nintendo wins this coming gen, or if they end up last - I just want 3 things from them; quality 1st party games, GOOD 3rd party support and for them NOT to go 3rd party themselves. I don't know how we came to talk about the rules of winning a generation, I'm pretty sure this all started with me being concerned that Wii U won't be getting good 3rd party support, right? At least I think that's where we started... And I'm still concerned that Wii U will be to weak to handle some of the games on PS720...
Essay Pro