Your Top 3 Zelda games

[curl-6]

Pemalite said:

curl-6 said:

Going with weaker hardware with the Wii allowed them to be more affordable than their competitors, plus with motion controls being such a gamble, cheap parts allowed them to avoid massive losses should their main party trick not have paid off.

When  the Wii launched it wasn't that much cheaper than the Xbox 360 here.
But you are just reaffirming my point that it removes financial risk by using cheaper components.

Which isn't the consumers problem either way.

curl-6 said:
Switch on the other hand was locked out of being as powerful as PS4 by its form factor.

The Switch could still have been faster than what it was though by adopting Pascal and using ULV LPDDR4 1866/2133 DRAM.

curl-6 said:
In both cases, I'd say that going with less powerful hardware paid off. I mean, if they'd made a power-competitive device it would have to be a traditional console, and there's really no room for a third one of those on the market.

Well. We just won't know now will we? :P

- Well, if Nintendo go bankrupt then they can't make games for us any more, so as someone who loves their work I'd rather they stay in business. :P

- Yes, it could have, but it still would've been behind PS4. It's hybrid nature precluded it being on par with the others power-wise.

- Well, there have been multiple instances of three red ocean consoles competing; SNES/Genesis/Turbografx, N64/PS1/Saturn, PS2/GCN/Xbox, PS4/Xbone/Wii U. Never once did all three thrive. Once you start splitting the market between three (relatively) similar systems, there just isn't enough to go around, it's like having three apex predators fighting for the same ecological niche.