Nintendo and/or their fanboys seem to think that just because some game was succesful in the past means it has inherent value. That's just absurd.
What defines success is just as much the context and environment at the time, just as much as the product itself. Super Mario or Pokemon are just not ahistorically inherently valuable. Pokemon was a phenomenon in a certain time period. To expect that it always will have superior value is a joke. The prime market for Pokemon has since grown up, and children now of that age group have no real investment in the Pokemon phenomenon. Further, expecting that one franchise will bring about significant change in the platform's prospects is absurd. Wii U having NFC just isn't a DIFFERENCE vs. the multiuse devices already present in THOUSANDS of times more consumers' hands.
That said, it seems like Nintendo has identified a few 'low hanging fruit' that they can reasonably spin into some profit with little risk, even if it doesn't change the prospects for Wii U as a whole. And Nintendo management, unlike fanbois, seems realistic about that prospect, that's why they are not emphasizing Wii U but their undefined plans to go into totally new realms outside the current console business model.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
