zorg1000 said:
Initially many people thought 3DS was nothing more than a DS revision with 3D screens and the only big title to release for 3DS from April to October of 2011 was Ocarina of Time 3D, a remaster of a 13 year old game. 3DS would have been much better off if there was no consumer confusion and it had a steady stream of solid releases post-launch even with a $250 price tag. I do think it would wise for Nintendo to stay sub-$200 for handhelds though. |
3DS had so many issues really. For starters the 3D effect while neat was honestly underwhelming. I thought the images would pop out more from the screen, but it was more like looking at a depth hologram.
The original 3DS also had very small screens, not befitting a premium priced product. The AR stuff was underwhelming and dull. The 3D photos were useless because the camera was awful.The software was weak as has been mentioned. The 3D effect also initially could cause your eyes to hurt a bit until they got used to it, so it didn't create a very good first impression.
Though I think in hindsight Nintendo overreacted by cutting all the way to $169.99 and incurring a massive loss. They could have just dropped to $199.99 and gotten probably more or less the same boost. I think they were even then starting to panic a little bit about mobile encroaching into their market space and figured being able to amass a massive userbase quickly would insulate them down the line.
You can sell a product at $250 ... you just can't sell a souped up small screen DS at $250 with no games on the back of a optical effect novelty that A) hurts 50% of the people's eyes when they first try it and B) doesn't change the gameplay in any fundamental way.
