By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
The_Yoda on 28 June 2017
Edit Thread
maxleresistant said:
The_Yoda said:

Oh no it's droubts

droubt
noun
noun: droubt; plural noun: droubts
a prolonged period of abnormally low output; an increase of doubt resulting from this.
hopefully you buy this as intent
Ok so say they gave us a home console capapble of 4k instead of the switch do you think third parties would come immediately?   If no then Nintendo would have to mostly rely on their own software (again). Do you think they could have kept up enough first party to move significant enough numbers of units to entice third parties ?

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Droubt  LOL of course you'll find that on Urban you need to look at gamerdictionary.nerd silly Max

I think Nintendo's strategy to come back with a powerful system is a strategy that can't happen in one generation. It's also a strategy that would require them to invest a lot, take the leash off NOA and NOE, and support third party games and publishers, like for example a Fifa Bundle, or help promote third party games etc.

All Nintendo needs to do, is have a powerful enough system to run third party games, and help those third party games sells well on their system, if they manage to do that, more and more games will come to the system.

The Switch strategy is cute, but it will not work long term.

"I think Nintendo's strategy to come back with a powerful system is a strategy that can't happen in one generation."  Are you saying they need to be on par with MSony for a few gernerations so that multiplat is always possible while building relations with third party? They would need price parity when they launched I would think. Being the third box I can see them maybe beating out MS (unless MS manages to throw enough money at it to turn things around).  Do you think they would gain marketshare through the droubts (yeah I'm doubling down on the word) , maintian, or lose?

 

"take the leash off NOA and NOE" not saying you're wrong but good lord I just don't see that out of Nintendo. It would be cool to have another Retro or three though.

 

"All Nintendo needs to do, is have a powerful enough system to run third party games" I could argue (albiet not well) that the WiiU could be used with a 'normal controller' and was more powerful in some aspects than the PS3 and 360 yet they still got more games and sold better at points than the U. Do you think they (could / would choose) to survive on a few generations of WiiU like sales?

 

Slighty off subject do you think people would pay an equal amount for a Nintendo system as they would for a Sony or Xbox.  I seem to remember people saying they would only pay 250 for the next Nintendo system while we were still calling it the NX. I'm not saying Nintendo didn't do it to themselves over a couple generations but people don't seem to value Nintendo hardware like they do software.  Are people unwilling to pay the same price (the $300 sweet spot as Reggie alluded to) as they are for a PSwhatever ($400 sometimes plus)?

 

Sorry man I haven't slept and my sentence structure is worse than normal as far as being easy to follow.