Should Nintendo's next console be a microconsole?

[zorg1000]

spemanig said:

zorg1000 said:

More like Wii, but that's besides the point, price+library is more important than graphics for the non-AAA blockbuster fanbase. The more profitable part comes from Nintendo being able to pump out more games by having all development being focused on one central platform and not having a console sell at a loss.

Wouldn't 3D World, Tropical Freeze, Mario Kart 8 have sold much better by being on 3DS+3DS TV instead of being confined to the small install base of Wii U? Lower budget+higher sales=more profit per game. Also games like Smash Bros would be able to release much sooner if they didn't have to make 2 seperate games simultaneously.

A Vita TV costs $99, $129 with a controller+memory card+game. A TV version of 3DS could easily retail for the same or even lower. A $99 3DS TV with a controller+a bundled game like NSMB, that allows Nintendo to pump out more games at a faster rate for 3DS would be more profitable for Nintendo than a $299 console sold at a loss with low software sales and splits development up between two seperate platforms causing software droughts for each device.

...I was talking about success, not power. The failure of what you're talking about would make the Wii U look like it was the best selling console in the world. That's how bad it would do. Struggling to reach 1m in it's first year, bad.

They would have literally only sold on the 3DS, because no one but you would have bought the 3DS TV. No one wants that product. There is no market for it. They'd have lost a shit ton of money from all the R&D they wasted launching a product destined to fail monumentally worse than the Wii U has as their "next gen" console, and that's saying a lot.

The Vita TV has no market. 60K in the US so far. 60K. It didn't fail because the Vita failed; it failed because NO ONE WANTS A MICRO CONSOLE. No one wants to play a game that looks like Mario Kart Wii again on the TV in 2015. In order for it to be profitable, people would need to buy it first. No one will buy a cheap TV plug in handheld. People except the 3DS' lack of power because, and only because, it's a handheld.

Nintendo would absolutely still have a shared library with a $299 console. There wouldn't be low software sales. Same shared library, much more powerful tech. That tech allows for exclusive benefits only the console version has while the handheld would have exclusive features that suit portables better, like Street Pass and such.

But the only place you'll ever see a Nintendo microconsole is in your dreams. Nintendo isn't making a move that unfixably bad, especially not after the Wii U.

U were clearly talking about power, since u said it would look like PS2.

Why are u so certain a $99 3DS TV would sell so bad? Some people simply don't like playing on handhelds, but they do want to play games like Pokemon, Kid Icarus, Luigi's Mansion, etc.

Vita TV has no market for multiple reasons, not just because it was a microconsole. Also just because one thing fails doesn't mean every similar idea will fail. That would be like saying the iPhone was destined for failure simply because the N-Gage failed or that iPod was destined for failure because there were a bunch of unsuccessful MP3 players in the late 90s. Just because Vita TV and other microconsole haven't hit it big yet, doesn't mean there will never be a successful microconsole.

Just like u can't seem to imagine a low-cost console that plays the same games as the handheld becoming successful, I can't see a $300 console that plays the same games as the low-cost handheld being successful.