RolStoppable said:
Soundwave said:
They are married to smartphones in a sense actually because smartphones are integral to their day to day life. They don't need (and never really did need) a gaming machine.
Nintendo is closer to Sony and Microsoft than they are to the type of basement development/fad based gaming that defines the casual gaming trends of today.
A lot of people who work for Sony/MS either started at Nintendo or grew up immersed in Nintendo games and draw inspiration for them. The difference really is that Sony/MS are far better at marketing than Nintendo was and took advantage of some mistakes that Nintendo made in the late 90s/2000s to force Nintendo into an uncomfortable position. But they're not exactl reinventing the wheel, they just took what Nintendo did with the NES/SNES and took it to its logical conclusion (if you liked games at age 12, you'll probably still like them at age 22).
Casual gamers don't make me "angry" either, I'm just pointing something you yourself actually have pointed out too ... there is a "disconnect" (your own words) between Nintendo and so-called casual audience. That's because Nintendo never was a casual company to begin with, Wii Sports is not really indicative of the general type of game they've made the last 20-30 years. And casual gamers weren't interested in the standard type of Nintendo game.
Using the girl analogy, does a guy really have a right to be mad at a girl for not falling in love with him? If she's in her college years and just wants to party ... I don't begrudge her, just be happy you hooked up with her once, dude, but she's not down for a relationship either. You were never really her type, you just made her laugh and were the token "fun guy at the bar that night" that she decided to hook up with. Enjoy it for what it was, and move on when its over, lol.
The problem for Nintendo though is that cheap/casual gaming culture on phones/tablets is killing their future audience with kids too. That's where it really hurts.
|
That still wasn't an answer to my question. Let's refresh the context:
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=6479727
Your last paragraph in that quote, the question at the end of my post.
|
Well I guess in response to that I'd say "how different is Nintendo from Sony and Microsoft really?"
They're not really. The main difference between the companies is Nintendo opts to tailor their business philosophies first and foremost as a family game provider. Not because they give a sh*t about raising your kids, but because it's been a reliable business tactic for them since the 1980s.
Sony's philisophy is to tailor their marketing from the 21 year old onwards with the belief that younger kids tend to want to play the same games their older brother is playing.
People who are still obsessed with console wars don't get it. They don't get what's happening with the industry. These are petty pissing matches that even the companies themselves don't do anymore. Nintendo does not take shots at Sony and Sony does not take shots at Nintendo, I mean for crying out loud MS ran a 'what's your favorite Zelda game' on their official Twitter account during E3.
What do I think about people who think Nintendo needs to be more like MS and Sony? Well in a broad sense, I think they are probably living in a different decade if they still think that dynamic is what defines the game business today, because it's not.
As far as competition goes though, you should never be too proud or arrogant as a company (I don't care what company you are) that you feel you can't learn anything from anyone else or that your sh*t smells like perfume. Don't ever believe your own hype in other words. There's nothing wrong with Nintendo learning a thing or two from Sony or MS, no one company in this business has a monopoly on all the good ideas.
