| Mr Khan said: True, but the issue is that if Nintendo wants this slice of gamers, they're not only going to have to do it, they're going to have to do it better. One studio making one game every 2-3 years is not going to pull them away. Besides, the way spemanig describes all of this is pretty foreign to Nintendo's software strategy anyway. We rarely see them make games just to "appeal to a market." They have plenty of games that end up that way, but it's not what drives them to tell studios what to do. |
I wasn't making a prediction; I was making a suggestion. I wasn't saying "I can see Nintendo doing this;" I was saying "it would be in Nintendo's best intrest to do this." This is also not a very foreign suggestion for them. It's the reason Retro was created in the first place.
I was also not saying that Retro should be the only attempt at this audience. I made it extremely clear that they should only be the starting point, specifically outlining a plan where they commision the creation of new, first party IP to independant western studios during the first year and a half of their next platform while Nintendo builds more/buys more western studios in house to create them themselves. I talked about how doing this early on would cultivate an early audience that would buy third party content not usually bought on Nintendo consoles, helping to retain third party support as the audience who buys their games continues to grow on the system. It's not simply "one studio pulling them away."
It's not that they have to do it better. Better will always be too subjective for something like this. They have to do it well enough to get the ball rolling.
