curl-6 said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:
A cool image does not sell hardware. Cool games do, but a cool image does not. The Genesis had the coolest image of any console and it still lost to the SNES, which had a kiddie image.
At this point we are talking in circles about game library though. I think the Wii HD would have gotten most of the multiplats that the PS3 and XBox360 had. You don't. It's kind of pointless arguing beyond that, because this is a hypothetical scenario and we'll never find out who is right.
|
DonFerrari said:
No problem as I don't think WiiHD costing 50 or even 100 more than X360 would be the key point of it doing worse or not than what you predicted anyway. Just pointed out because Liquid was so damn sure WiiHD would have price advantage against it. MS is much more willing to eat loss on HW than Nintendo.
I would probably prefer a WiiHD than what we had, but for Nintendo I believe Wii was a much better ideia, only if WiiU had done a better job =[
|
I think "Gamecube 2" is a better description of this theoretical console than "Wii HD". The Wii after all was largely defined by its motion controls and blue ocean approach whereas what we're talking about here, a standard HD console from Nintendo, would be more like a traditional successor to Gamecube.
|
The reason I decided to use HD Wii instead of Gamecube 2 is because I am assuming Nintendo's marketing would be on point for this theoretical gen unlike in the Gamecube era. Naming it Gamecube 2 would have been a disaster, due to the perception of Nintendo at the time. Of course this theoretical console would have had it's own brand, but I choose to use the stronger brand to better represent the superior marketing Nintendo had at the time.
