Seece said:
pokoko said:
If you think Nintendo is run by idiots, then there is nothing I can do about that. They wouldn't "pick one" for the same reason Ubisoft, Activision, or EA hasn't; the money is in multi-plats.
Besides, the whole premise makes no sense. Why would a Nintendo with as much power as you're giving them leave the console business in the first place? Let's suppose that the Wii U ends as a flop and the next Nintendo console ends as a flop, thus forcing Nintendo to abandon that market. You think they'd still have the same leverage as when the Wii was at the top? Not by a long shot.
No one is going to give their company away to win Nintendo. No one is going to offer Nintendo the kind of money they would get from multiple platforms just to be exclusive. It's not going to happen.
|
To add to that, if Nintendo software isn't powerful enough to sustain or support a home console, it's not exactly going to be a monumental shift for whoever got those franchises.
Fact of the matter is Nintendo software isn't as powerful on home consoles as people think it is. Look at Gamecube. It sold on Wii because it was the WII.
And once again the software is selling poorly.
There is a very dedicated fanbase for Nintendo software, but on home consoles it is not big.
|
Gotta stop you there. It did not "sell on Wii because it was on Wii", no, no, no. Games like Mario Kart Wii and NSMBWii *sold* Wiis. The immense hype machine behind Brawl also helped push the platform, albeit in a lesser way (this is discounting all of the "Expanded Audience" games as a wii-unique phenomenon), as did Galaxy 1. Console Zelda is smallish compared to other killer app franchises but given that there are no substitutes for the game, it too has a console-selling ability that is not to be underestimated.
Nintendo makes console killer apps that the competition *prays* they could make. Sony and Microsoft really only have one apiece that could go toe-to-toe with Nintendo's killer apps: Gran Turismo for Sony and Halo for Microsoft.
