SKMBlake said:
The problem with all of what you said is that this is exactly what they did with the Wii U and 3DS |
Not even close. The WiiU was most definitely not a Wii2. It’s about as far removed from that experience as you can imagine. 4 folks playing motion gaming in a living room becomes one gamer staring down at a gamepad and looking up at the tv, often going back and forth between the two. I love the WiiU, but it definitely doesn’t have that same open, inclusive feeling of the Wii.
The 3DS was a transition searching for a gimmick and most folks were already nonplussed by 3D graphics. The AR stuff was definitely interesting, but not WiiSports or Nintendogs interesting.
Both the DS and the Wii were built on casual audiences. Folks that didn’t necessarily buy a lot of games or play a lot of games. They were also folks who could easily transition into mobile experiences. And I do think a lot of the Wii audience, folks that had just come into gaming, “graduated” to the more typical gaming experience with the PS4.
The Switch avoids these pitfalls. Its audience is core by and large. They buy plenty of games in a variety of genres and the Switch provides a standard gaming experience when docked with a Pro Controller. Nintendo has iterated on many of their most beloved franchises, creating some of the best reviewed and best selling titles in their history. At this point the transition is Nintendo’s to lose. If they do what the previous poster recommends they will find success. It will be contingent on the software and the newness of each experience.
All that being said, this is Nintendo and they could do what you are claiming the previous poster said: they could burn the Switch to the ground, replace it with a newfangled concept that while fun and interesting alienates or confuses the established audience and fails to truly communicate this new experience or deliver software that underwhelms in its execution.
