freebs2 said:
And yet, the Wii had the best selling Zelda ever made, the best selling 3D Mario, the best selling Smash Bros, the 2nd best selling Donkey Kong, The 3rd best selling 2D Mario game. Those are not casual games.
The world is not black and white, there are multiple shades of gray. Nintendo could have tried to mantain a good share of the Wii "expanded" audience, but the WiiU did a terrible job at it. That's because Nintendo made bad decisions, not beacuse that market is "gone".
The Wii was specifically designed to "break barriers", to make games more accessible. The Wii had a purpose (a coherent market proposition) the WiiU hasn't. If they wanted Wii users to upgrade to a new console, they should have asked themselves: what the next console will offer to the expanded audience that the wii doesn't offer already? Some possible awnsers could have been: less expansive games (due to digital distribution), more games and variety (expanding 1st party studios), cross-buy games, amibos, more connectivity and social media integration, more services like netflix, etc. etc.
Of course the awnser shouldn't have been better graphics, plus a very expansive and complicate gamepad.
Now my point is not that Nintendo should have run after the more casual crowd at all costs. My point is Nintendo should have made a clear and coherent market proposition (like they did with the Wii - it's very affordable and accessible but if you liked the GC it still has Mario, Zelda and Metroid). If they wanted a more casual share of the market they should have made an accessible console, if they wanted a more hardcore fanbase they should have made their console more similar to Ps4/Xbone. Nintendo right now is stuck in the middle and doesn't really appeal to anyone, minus a share of their hardcore fans.
|