Aeolus451 said:
Considering the prices of the 8th gen's consoles during their releases it's too expensive to "upgrade" to a new gen console every 5 years. You might as well buy a dedicated gaming computer or better yet, just buy a ps4 or xbox one for cheaper than a pc. The audience Nintendo would target would not be inclined to buy a dedicated PC. An XBox One or PS4 would be around the same price at that point. At any rate, consoles aren't that much more expensive than they were. The Wii U launched for the same price as the PS2 before adjusting for inflation. Nintendo also never really shoots for the moon with specs, so they could probably price it at $300 or so while being technologically on par with the PS4/One if not a little better off. And, with Microsoft and Sony probably not in a hurry to start the next generation until 2019 to 2020, Nintendo could be in a position where they have a system with a unique hook, comparable price, and comparable or superior graphics, with strong integration with a dedicated handheld. That's a big IF, but it could be a neat scenario. A new console ($300 to 500) and a couple of games ($180) to go with it every 4 or 5 years is just too damn expensive. That's not including the several or more games you would buy during that 5 year period. Most actual gamers will just stick with consoles that stay around longer and spend that extra $480 to 680 on new games. Of course, Nintendo wouldn't necessarily be encouraging people to upgrade. They'd be probably focussed more keenly on getting people who hadn't owned a system since the Wii, or never owned one. You're from Europe I presume? Games are less here in the US. At any rate, I don't think upgrading every five years is expensive. Factoring in the cost of games doesn't make sense. If they didn't upgrade, they'd just be spending that money on games for older systems anyway. Back in the day it was more tolerable for a console to have a short lifespan because the consoles and games then were cheap. No... they really weren't... Games were pretty similar in prices to what they are now, before adjusting for inflation, during the SNES era. During the NES, they were pretty similar with inflation. Things got a bit cheaper with CDs, but by the cube era, they were 50 dollars or so. With inflation, that's basically the same. As for console prices... http://kotaku.com/36-years-of-console-prices-adjusted-for-inflation-1485353267 Now, it's a different story. We're not the idiot cell phone consumers who buy overpriced rereleased cell phones (apple). I like to know I'm getting the most for the money I pay. Nintendo really can't get away with much on consumer confidence because it only has it's fan base keeping it alive. Look what happened to MS with trying to shaft us with no used games and online only. It lost a console war just because of that. No... we're not the idiot cell phone customers who buy overpriced cell phones. We're the idiots who buy remastered games at full price, buy season passes with no assurance of quality content, buy anual upgrades to Madden, continuously buy glitched out games at launch, and buy consoles before they have compelling software. Gamer's aren't some sort of super intelligent race carefully considering pros and cons. We like shiny new things as much as people buying iPads or the Galaxy Note Super 11. Nintendo can turn itself around with the wii u easily. First, it needs a price drop to $250 or less then make some actual adult games (5 or more) to entice the largest core gaming demographic to buy it. It's that simple. Kids games only appeal to a minority of gamers. No point in jumping out of a floating ship. Why would the core gaming demographic buy the Wii U for 5 or more "actual adult games" (whatever that means) when the Wii U has no third party support, and the other consoles have 3 times as many (to be kind to Nintendo) "actual adult games"? |
Aeolus451 said:
|
Because they have a machine with less powerful hardware than their competitors, a vastly inferior online interface, and no third party support. Even if Nintendo went suicidal and switched all of their resources to making Call of Duty, GTA, and whatever (which they are not equipped to do because they don't have the personel, and the budgets are too big for console exclusives on a console with such a limited install base), they still couldn't match half of the output that third parties could put out on the XBone and PS4, not to mention Sony and MS first party.
If I'm an "adult" gamer who wants "adult" games, why would I buy the Wii U over the PS4 or the XBox One in that situation? And in the process, Nintendo will sacrifice their hardcore fans who like their output, and the younger market.
Basically, you're suggesting that Nintendo do what Sony did with the Move and what Microsoft did with the Kinect, neither of which worked very well. Differentiating your experience is important.
