| Mummelmann said: But the 360 had massive 3rd party support, even better than the PS3 for most of its life. The odds that Nintendo can offer on their platforms what enticed buyers into getting an Xbox or a PS are slim to none, even if they choose the "hardcore" route. The 360 and PS3 were always going to appeal to the customer base, or potential customer base, of the PS2, but Nintendo hasn't really had a say in this market segment for at least two decades, likely more, and there is absolutely nothing to suggest they will get a say now with a new console. Especially coming off of a product line that have made them an obscure curiousity for said customer base. No, I maintain that this is a ridiculous strategy if they try it, and it would be their worst move in a very long time (even worse than the Wii U). |
lol, what? I think some of you live in a world where either something is a 100m record breaking success story or its biggest flop of all time. A traditional system for an established brand like Nintendo is the definition of safe. It'll comfortably grow they're audience beyond what the Wii U achieved but isn't garunteed to be a runaway success.
1. "No one will provide support out of goodwill". The reality of console launches is that the key publishers almost always lend their hand because its smart business, this is why COD, Assassins Creed etc were on Wii U at launch. This is why the unproven Wii was supported by Ubisoft, EA and Activision from day one. If a system has the potential to succeed the big publishers will contribute some support. If the NX mirrors PS4 in architecture whilst being notably more powerful, then it fits into most developers/pulishers and gamers pipeline and vision for the future (unlike the Wii U/Wii). For developers, even if they predict PS5 will enter the market in 2019 and dominate, the NX represents and expansion of that auidence and that future. An intelligent guess is that many devs will support the NX, especially the japanese if was release in 2017 with intention competing with the PS5 as its fairly weaker (but still a "generation" ahead of the PS4) rival.
Beyond that, developers really and truly care about specs. If they can take a game that is struggling to run at 1080p 30fps on PS4 and can easily get the same title running at 60fps and with all the bells whilstles on a brand new platform with hungry early adopters, you can bet they'd be paying attention to that new platform. The Wii U was dead on arrival, not built for the future yet not really alighed to the previous gen either with its weak CPU and campy marketing and branding. If Nintendo themselves provide a strong launch line up, and gear the system towards the core you have a system that is garunteed to surpass the Wii U in sales and third party support. I think many of you forget how the poorly the Wii U was conceieved and branded... Core third party titles were never going to succeed on this.
2. "Nintendo hasn't really had a say in this market for at least two decades" and yet the Gamecube made more profit then the PS3 and 360, lets look a success in meaningful terms. If Nintendo can profit, restore their image and build an audience above 20m they're on the right track. Their 1st party franchises continue to be the most in demand in the industry. Believe it or not there are tons of people who prefer Nintendo's exclusive offerings over Sonys/Microsofts (I'm one of them, yet I don't own a Wii U and never wanted to one). The games which semented the PS2 era (FInal Fantasy, Metal Gear Solid, Tekken, GTA) are no longer excluisve to sonys platforms and have largely been replaced with huge multiplatform annualised releases for which the PS4/X1 owe their success. Development across game platforms is now the most unified its ever been (unlike the hugely distinct PS2/Gamecube/Xbox trio) so Nintendo are in a good position to renter the market. For as long as there isn't another PS2 on the market (A dominating system arriving hot on the heels of its successful predeccessor, a year ahead of its competitors with a monopoly on all major third party titles) then I really don't see the huge "ridiculous" risk of Nintendo going the traditional route.
It doesn't mean selling at a big loss (the PS4 didn't at launch), it doesn't require that Nintendo "win" the generation, it doesn't require Nintendo pour tons of resources and marketing into an entirely unproven gimmick. It simply means Nintendo operate within a space where there is a known 150m+ audience, within the appeal of the gaming mass mass media, and where there is clear visible room for them to grow as a competitor. As opposed to getting lost like they have with the Wii U, in charge of gimmick no one cares for and with no realistic means to grow their audience.
3) If they have a powerful USP hiding under their sleaves, thats going attract Wii numbers and introduce a whole new pillar of games then thats of course preferable but as far as we're aware, they don't. In which case they either release a cheap box and sell themselves as a "me too!" 3 years down the road (Something thats never been known to work). Or they introduce themselves as future sent system, a generation ahead of what you've had a home for the past few years, the cornerstone of every successful home console minus the Wii.
