superchunk on 27 April 2014
| RolStoppable said: It's simple, really. Everytime Nintendo decides to fight over the existing market, their sales decline. That's because they turn off a good chunk of their audience in the process. The Wii only looks like the only anomaly, because the NES is the starting point. If the NES were in the middle, it would be an anomaly too. Both the NES and Wii were about making gaming more popular, so the hardware and software was designed accordingly. With the other four systems Nintendo didn't bother to ask how they can get more people to play video games. The most recent one, the Wii U, was all about winning third parties and the hardcore gamer back, i.e. the existing market (see E3 2011 reveal). You can apply the same thing to the handheld market. Nintendo's sales kept rising as long as they didn't get into a fight with other companies and let them dictate how things are done. The GBA sold only 80m, but it did it in six years as opposed to the 120m of the GB/GBC in twelve years; and the DS did 150m in seven years. But then came the 3DS and Nintendo was all about going after the PSP market; suddenly it wasn't about making video games more popular, but getting a bigger chunk of the teenager demographic which was Nintendo's weakest point (and Sony's strongest). The irony is that while Nintendo succeeded at taking notable chunks of Sony's market (Monster Hunter exclusivity being an important piece of the puzzle), they are losing out everywhere else, hence the decline. That should make you realize how important the DS was. Sony was readying the PSP, yet Nintendo decided that they won't go to war. They didn't fall into that trap, even though the threat was immense. What all this means for Nintendo's future is that any calls for Nintendo to serve third parties and hardcore gamers have it completely backwards; that will kill Nintendo. What Nintendo has to do is design systems that are like the NES, Wii, GB or DS. Mission statements that are about making more people play video games. Ironically, even if that goes against the wishes of third parties, it's actually more beneficial for them as the Wii and DS have proven. Significantly larger installed bases for Nintendo hardware inevitably result in bigger sales for third party software. Lastly, I expected a steep decline (at least 60%) from Wii to Wii U for all of the aforementioned reasons. However, I didn't expect it to be this steep. Regardless, performing worse than the GC fits right in with Nintendo's history. Predicting the success or failure of Nintendo's next video game system should be an easy task, because all you need to do is listen to what they say when they reveal it and look if the presented software matches what they say. |
Anyone arguing against this is wrong. I used to argue with rol on this at the beginning, but facts of sales and Nintendo focus all point to this conclusion.
Nintendo needs another game console that focuses on new players. Not core.
