the_dengle said:
On the contrary, I am a consistent Nintendo customer who buys most of their hardware. I also do own a mobile device, though it is not a phone. The reason I have no interest in buying a smartphone is because I don't see the value to 3G. I don't want to pay to have internet access that I never use for fear of exceeding my data plan. Anyway, if this hypothetical Nintendo phone does not appeal to the people who play Nintendo games, it will have to appeal to people who use smartphones. And in that market its competition is simply massive. Nintendo cannot compete with Apple or Google in the smartphone space any more than an Android machine can compete in the home console space (hint: Ouya). So their only buyers would be the subsection of their already existing (and admittedly small, in the grand scheme of things) fanbase who also want a new smartphone. There is virtually no reason for this product to exist. |
You put out hurdles for this not to exist, therefore you do not see the product. I do see someday the hurdles will be jumped. My point is, Nintendo is not in the field where it can jump those hurdles you've mentioned, but for them to be relevant, they may need to. There are companies out there who are better in position to do so. With the ever growing importance the mobile field is garnering with gaming, it is not out of the question for the accepted gaming mobile to exist.
And no, it doesn't have to appeal simply to those who use smartphones. You're thinking to small and too early. The progression of handheld gaming leans on the side of what takes less space in your pocket. Or else you would have boomboxes still booming quaint neighborhoods. The natural progression will be a combination of the two. Who owns a walkmen and a flip phone and carries them everywhere? No, that's backwards. When the hurdles are jumped, we'll have an acceptable mobile gaming device that will be a phone.
