Fusioncode on 08 September 2013
| JWeinCom said: Ugh. Too tired for a full response but here's my brief thoughts. Nintendo is not Microsoft. They are not Sony. They are not a large company who can afford to take losses for several years on their gaming division. They are not a company that can rely on third party sales to carry them. They're a company that needs to make money basically every year, and the way they make most of their money off of their own software. Look at how their software sells relative to how their hardware sells, and then look at the same thing for Sony and MS. If Nintendo wanted to do what third parties ask, the DS would have likely had one screen and no touch. The Wii would have been more powerful with the pro controller as its standard. The Wii U would be a console that would be just like the XBone or PS4 because that makes life easier for developers. And what benefit would there be for Nintendo? Fans of the other fans are going to suddenly switch sides because Nintendo has the multiplatform games that they can already get from a company they like better? Probably not. If Nintendo was to follow third party leads, then you'd get a console that's made with Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed, and Madden in mind. You'd get a quote unqoute hardcore gamer machine, which wouldn't make sense for Nintendo who doesn't make quote unquote hardcore games. Sony fans and MS fans who do buy a Wii or a Wii U are doing so as a secondary system anyway. Nintendo is going to live or die based on their first party stuff. That's their advantage, and that's what has to take priority, even if that costs them with their parties. There are of course, places where they could compromise, but the number one objective is how to make Nintendo's games stand out. |
Nintendo did want the WiiU to have strong 3rd party support. That's why EA had such a strong showing in the reveal of the console. Nintendo meant for this to be an inclusive system but the majority of 3rd parties have jumped ship.
Sigs are dumb. And so are you!
