| RolStoppable said: The Wii U cannot benefit directly from Pokémon Go because it has no mainline Pokémon games on it. It has Pokémon Tekken, but that's not the logical choice for someone who played Pokémon Go. What is going on is that the decision is made to buy a mainline Pokémon title after experiencing Go. This requires a 3DS to play the game. Pokémon Go players don't opt for a handheld as their Nintendo machine because they are casual or confused, they do it because they aren't idiots. Don't make the analysis of a rising trend complicated when it's as simple as in this case. A side effect of the increasing 3DS hardware sales is that non-Pokémon games have also started to sell better on the 3DS. This includes first and foremost various Mario and Zelda titles, because those are typical go-to IPs when people purchase Nintendo hardware. The Wii U will only be able to benefit much later, because people are going to explore the 3DS library before they consider buying more hardware. Since the 3DS is over five years old, there's already a big back catalogue. It would take months to go through, even if someone exclusively played Pokémon, Mario and Zelda titles. So really, there's not much of a reason to believe that the Wii U will see noteworthy benefits in the near future, and with the NX reveal on the horizon, a lot of people who consider a home console purchase are going to skip the Wii U in favor of NX. Nintendo's two announced smartphone games for fall are Animal Crossing and Fire Emblem, both of which are IPs where the Wii U cannot be expected to receive a boost in hardware and software sales. What the NX home console needs to benefit from the synergy between smartphone games and dedicated gaming hardware is appropriate games. That shouldn't be a problem with Nintendo's strongly implied plan to make as many games as possible available for both the home console and the handheld. However, if Nintendo went ahead with a powerful home console for $400+ to compete with the likes of Neo and Scorpio, the positive effects of smartphone games on their core business would be greatly lopsided in favor of the handheld. Same Nintendo games, but significantly more affordable price for the hardware. Lastly, this idea that Nintendo has to cover everything is really an impossible task and would only lead to a product that has to make concessions and compromises for all possible demographics, and in the end wouldn't serve anyone really well. Sony and Microsoft don't cover all bases either, and nobody ever managed to do it. There's no period in time where PC gaming was extinct. |
I still don't see how my idea of have a 3 stepp program couldn't work, and wouldn't work better than what you propose. Nintendo don't have to cover all the bases by themselves, 3rd parties would cover up most of the core market for them. Nintendo could set of a daughter company to handle all the Western type of games, maybe releasing one or two games each year - or they could expand Retro Studios and let them handle it. There are a lot of gamers out there that would love to play Nintendo games, they're just not willing to scope up a second console, which the NX would be if it doesn't try to appease 3rd party support and getting quality ports and games. Nintendo will remain the second choice for a lot of gamers since it doesn't have 3rd party support, but what if it was the first choice instead?
Imagine a portable NX (NXP) with a price point of $200 and a stationary NX (NXS)for $350 which shares a lot of the same games but with a few exclusives. The NXP would be the entry console for new gamers that played Nintendo games on mobile, while the NXS would have much the same games but also a few exklusives for those gamers that would want a little bit more... depth from their gaming experience. While casual gamers would first and foremost turn to the NXP, more experienced gamers, "core" gamers, would pick up the NXS.
What would your scenario for the NX look like then?
I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!
Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.
