Soundwave said:
It doesn't even matter if the home console is a minor upgrade, if your portable is PS360 as you say in your post, that's pretty much the end for the old Nintendo hardware model.
The costs/dev resources/project scope for portable games becomes much larger once you cross into the threshold of PS360 level visuals.
That's effectively *two consoles* ... Nintendo can't even support the Wii U and 3DS as is without dissapointing people 1/2 the time, they simply cannot go any futher with natural hardware progression and be able to support it.
It was stupid anyway ... imagine spending $200 million on a Star Wars movie and then forcing it into a type of theater where only 25% of the fans can watch it. Would you say that's a smart business model?
This is basically what Nintendo does. 75% of their hardware base this generation will never play Splatoon or Zelda U or Xenoblade X or Bayonetta 2 or Pikmin 3 or Mario 3D World. Why? Because they didn't buy the Wii U.
At some point I think it's smarter to stop lecturing people on what hardware they should be buying and just let them have access to the games, in other words enough with the hardware worship. All this was ever about was letting people have access to the games (where the real money is made).
So why not have a rethink of what constitutes a hardware platform? Why are we stuck with rules that were invented for the 1980s gaming market? Which of these rules even benefits Nintendo any longer?
|
