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

[zorg1000]

superchunk said:

RolStoppable said:

It's also worth mentioning that there was already a Nintendo console that had hardware parity in the current Nintendo+Sony+Microsoft mix: The GameCube. A failure that was quickly abandoned by third parties at a time when game development was cheaper than it is today. From 2004 onwards multiplatform development shifted from PS2+Xbox+GC to PS2+Xbox.

But WHY did it shift from GC?

Maybe because sales of it sucked and unlike MS, Nintendo wasn't pouring out money to keep titles coming. (additionally Xbox was akin to PC so easier dev cycle)

Had gamecube not been a purple lunchbox with limited cd storage, Nintendo would of sold more. Instead its own physical appearance and focus pushed this kiddy image that pushed away nonNintendo fans and 3rd parties simply had no financial reason to port to it.

Since SNES Nintendo has had specific actions that drove 3rd parties away, especially considering they had the very profitable PS 1 and 2 to focus on.

On Wii EVERYONE was taken off-gaurd. They assumed a weak hardware following the GC would be pointless to even consider. By the time they realized they were wrong, they had 10s of millions of dollars in game engines created for PS360 that they simply couldn't put the focus into something that would work really well on Wii. So they used PS2/Xbox upped engines for minimal cost and put out largely meh titles with the rare exception of of a few. We both know had the focused on a proper Wii engine for their big titles in 2007 or 2008 at latest, Wii would have continued well past 50% marketshare.

Wii U had some momentum and some token initial support and engines made were already being designed with very flexible scaling in mind to include its lower specs. You're right that EA is just EA and likely walked away when closed-door meetings failed to push Nintendo to the same DRM based approach the others have. However other 3rd parties were partly there and had Wii Us launch been better, we would have seen that blossom.

Regardless, I still think time will show me right if Wii U fails to do any this Nov/Dec. If they don't deliver ~4m in these two months, we'll see a 4year console at best for Nintendo.

Nintendo needs a $300-$400 console, that is not pushing the limits of power, but close enough to not really matter. It needs to be distinct and the gamepad/wiimote ideas do that along with Nintendo specific IPs. You are right, that they need to focus on building and widening their own genre portfolio and I like the idea above about buying more western devs, but that also needs to be followed up with them not being tightly controlled by Japan beyond quality control. 

Had Nintendo spent just $50 more in hardware costs with Wii U they would have been so close to Xbone now that it wouldn't had mattered for 3rd parties costs as well as still been profitable with at least  $50 lower price than PS4 with a packed in game. They could've kept the CPU, ungimped the memory speed and moved to 4GB of RAM plus a upgraded GPU. Still retained Backwards compatabilty, likley moved to a larger casing but that would actually be good as it wouldn't look so much like a Wii and helped create a new / different identity.

HOWEVER, I'm willing to agree the Wii path isn't horrible as it was still highly profitable for Nintendo throughout the entire life cycle. But I don't think a repeat of that would result in greater marketshare or even unit sales. Definitely not a 100m unit machine again.

Having great third party support isnt going to instantly mean 3rd party games will sell well on Nintendo platforms unless they cater to the type of fanbase that buys Nintendo consoles. The major "hardcore" mainstream franchises already have huge fanbases on the competitors consoles, those games on a $400 Nintendo console with similar specs as PS4/One would still sell like shit.

Like Rol said, Nintendo needs to make affordable hardware sold at a profit and focus on making creative software that appeals to Nintendo fans, kids, families, etc. they dont need to cater to teen/20s males that already have PS3/360/PS4/One/PC to fulfill there needs. I dont know why everybdoy thinks we need 3 nearly identical consoles.

I like the gamepad, I think it offers some neat features and has potential but it shouldnt have been bundled with the console since it causes it to be sold at a loss. They should have released Wii U bundled with a Motion Plus and NSMBU for $249-299 or whatever price It could be sold at a small profit and had the Gamepad bundled with Nintendo Land for $99-129. It doesnt matter if Nintendo consoles sell a ton or win a generation since they usually sell hardware at a profit and there first party games sell a ton. They dont need a ton of multiplats since they wont sell anyway, instead when it comes to third parties try to get exclusive partnerships like they are doing with Platinum, Atlus and Sega.