| teigaga said: Its actually the most risky one hence the Wii U's failure. NES,SNES, N64, Gamecube all managed to balance power and affordability. Investing money in something there may not be an audience for is always more risky then going the traditional route where you just compete for a portion of already established pie. Provided they sell the system a breakeven at launch I think the traditional route is safest, but it has the least potential in terms of making tons of profit |
Like I've been saying since post #1 I too believe it is smart for Nintendo to aim at affordability when making their consoles. But I believe there is no risk for Nintendo in trying to come up with a new peculiar approach to gaming that could possibly seduce casuals into buying their new console, as they did with the WiiMote, because said console would be built within that same affordability, and even if they don't get that much sales, with whatever interesting new gaming concept they come up with, there wouldn't be much losses for Nintendo because as long as the console is affordable and doesn't bleed money: Nintendo lives another day, another generation to try again.
I know that the best strategy for Nintendo could be to (like I said previously) switch the tables drastically somehow and get to bring people from the Micro and Sony fanbase towards them. Easier said than done though, specially when Nintendo directors push down and look down upon gameplay mechanics and artistic visions of games that are popular for both of those fanbases.
Nintendo is selling their IPs to Microsoft and this is true because:
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=221391&page=1
