By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
RolStoppable said:
Soundwave said:

Eh the NES and SNES are 2/3 Nintendo's "successful" consoles, they gave third parties more or less what they wanted. 

Find me one single third party that wanted the Wii U's specs for 2012. They simply used outdated hardware again becuase of the "hey this worked for the Wii so lets just do that again" logic. 

Nintendo has been shut out of the traditional market because of their own poor decision making for the last 20 years with that market. It's like letting an invading army just walk into your country and take over and making multiple strategic errors. Give them 10-20 years and basically they will have your country, and that's what Nintendo basically did, they'd been thrown out of their own country. 

They needed to make a stronger stand with the GameCube at least to prevent Microsoft from gaining ground in the market, and if they were going to do the whole casual thing then they needed to at least keep that audience, but they failed at both. 

Successful in quotations? And do you seriously want to claim that the restrictions Nintendo put on third parties during the NES and SNES were what third parties wanted? Why again did third parties go to Sega and later to Sony?

Look, if third parties had had a genuine interest to port their 360/PS3 games to Nintendo hardware, they had the chance to do so. Most of them refused, some of them outright. It doesn't matter that later on the XB1 and PS4 were more powerful, because the 360 and PS3 continued to get games for more than two years after the Wii U's launch.

You are incredibly naive to think that Nintendo could have chased Microsoft out of the market. Microsoft lost $4 billion on the original Xbox, yet they stayed in. For Microsoft it was not about making money from video games, it was about stopping Sony from creating a convergence box that disrupts Windows as the provider of all sorts of entertainment. It's only because of Xbox being a strategic defensive move to protect Windows that a $4 billion loss could be justified, because Windows brings in profits every year that are multiple times bigger than that Xbox loss of several years. As such, if the original Xbox had sold only 10m units and lost $8 billion, Microsoft would have still stayed in the market because Windows is so valuable. Nintendo's sales did not matter in this equation. It's also why Microsoft never made a handheld. Nintendo didn't threaten Windows, so they could sell as many handhelds as they wanted because it would have no impact on Microsoft's core business.

I agree with you. But the least nintendo could do is adopt x86 to make games easy to port to. 



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.