| Soundwave said:
Nintendo doesn't have the resources to make games like that anymore, they release droughts would be several times worse than they are with the Wii U/3DS where both Wii U and 3DS owners are constantly bitching about not having enough Nintendo games to play. Nintendo supporting two discreet platforms was a helluva lot different with the Wii and DS when development costs were much lower and the Wii was basically just recycled GameCube, so there was literally no hardware transition. We've seen this generation that equation fall apart and it would get worse with even more powerful hardware. And no, Nintendo is not going to increase their workforce by 2x-3x just so Western consumers can have the same games with better graphics. Nintendo values being a small company, that way they can ensure the culture of the company and its specific style of game development can stay intact. That would fall apart if they expanded to be a bloated company the size of EA or something. And to be fair to Nintendo no one can support two modern platforms like that anymore. Look at how much trouble Sony is having with the PS4 ... this will be their third holiday season in a row without a big internally published holiday season game, and they completely gave up on the Vita, imagine they actually had to support the Vita too. It would be a complete disaster, nothing would get released on time. If the architectures are too similar and they're basically just assets traded up and down, then consumers will (rightly) start to feel like they're being ripped off, like they're being asked to pay twice to get all the content from the same engine game. That won't go over well either. If the handheld that I own can run the same engine more or less, why should I pay another $200 + $50-$60 to play basically more tracks from the same engine on the TV version. I think consumers would get angry at that. |
It's comforting to know you are always here to educate me, Soundwave :P It's funny you act like I don't get Nintendo needs to save resources: Of course they do and that's exactly why I think they'll do what I said in my original post. So to clarify I will list some ways in which Nintendo can save resources (and not have to "increase their workforce by 2x-3x") by having two architectually similar platforms - only in my humble opinion, of course:
- Virtual Console games will run on both platforms with one programming effort (resources needed cut by almost 50%)
- Game engines that can be modified and used between both platforms
- Not having to learn coding "from scratch" twice (this is what Iwata has been saying multiple times)
- Cross-Releases for some games (when it makes sense. Some games are better suited for a home console only, etc.)
- Maximising productivity of their workforce: Programmers can code for both platforms without needing special training
They can even use some sort of framework for less demanding games: Program it once and use the framework to make it run on both platforms, instead of having to develop two native versions. Couple that with a unified account system and Nintendo's plans to integrate their software teams instead of having them do stuff seperately and that's a lot of resources saved. They also talked a lot about "collaborations" and I assume that means partnering up with external development studios to increase game output.
I don't claim I know the truth, I'm just speculating. I assume your solution would be a Fusion console, right? But Nintendo never talked about a "Fusion" console and they don't have any plans to kill off either their home console or handheld line, so I assume they are going to maximise their game output by taking the aforementioned steps. It's perfectly fine if you disagree and think I have no idea what I'm talking about. But I distinctly remember when Nintendo talked openly about "Blue Ocean Strategy" and "Disruptive Products" and "Fun and motion in our next home console like you've never seen before" and instead of taking Nintendo's words at face value the internet speculated about all kinds of crazy things. In the end Nintendo was hiding its strategy in plain sight.
