Current vs Last, a Console Sales Story (COMPLETE!)

[Osc89]

RolStoppable said:

And all the while you are doing that, you begin to plan for the next generation and build strong launch games for an affordable system that launches in time for the holidays of 2017. What the big third party publishers demand won't matter one bit, because Nintendo can be successful without them. Nintendo needs to build a console that consumers want to buy (like the Wii) instead of a console that developers might want to develop for (like the Wii U). Also, it doesn't matter what Sony and Microsoft are doing at that point (2017). Since the industry doesn't want Nintendo, Nintendo is free to do what's best for them and best for their customers. Specs comparisons, what will the big third party publishers do, those are questions that have no relevance. Nintendo's success is not measured by what other companies do and say, but by what Nintendo's bottom line shows.

I don't understand this part of the argument. Why is going for cheaper hardware good for the customers? Selling hardware for a profit is definitely good for Nintendo, but obviously gives the customer less for their money. Also cheaper hardware with short lifecycles will cost you as much as more expensive hardware but with longer lifecycles.

I think it is probably safer to go for the longer generation cycle anyway, as you attract the enthusiasts early on who buy for the hardware. They drive the cost of producing the console down and give third parties a reason to start producing games for the console, all while there are few games that are actually available for them. Plus if you are close to what the competition are doing, you get third parties.

Do you really think the success of the Wii dependant on the price? I think that if it had been pretty much a 360 but with Wiimote and the same Wii games, it would have done as well but with a better last couple of years. And we wouldn't have got the Wii U, which would have been too early and too weak.