RolStoppable said:
That's not how it works. All the games that aren't listed in Nintendo's financial report by name are self-published by third parties, such as Monster Hunter Rise and Minecraft.
3. The PS3 also began to regularly outsell the Wii at the same time, but the PS3 had nothing as popular as Kinect. This has been explained to you a million times already, but you just won't admit that the Wii's release schedule from 2011 onwards was very weak for a console as highly successful as it was. There were holes in the release schedule that stretched months at times until something of note released again (first and third party combined, so I am not only talking about Nintendo games). The Wii's dry release schedule coincided with Microsoft's Kinect run, and the lack of new Wii games was the cause, not Kinect like you mistakingly believe. 4. I am speaking of the shareholders that asked precisely these questions about smartphones in Nintendo's Q&A sessions with investors. This is recorded history. None of them ever asked about the creation of a synergetic effect where smartphone applications will rise the awareness of Nintendo IPs and then sell the games that all remain exclusively to play on Nintendo's own hardware. Your strawman argument ("reaching some arbitrary hardware number so Nintendo fanboys on the internet can have meaningless bragging rights") is also pretty funny, because you happen to be guy who throws out all reason whenever the topic is about more powerful Nintendo hardware, going as far as repeatedly suggesting that Nintendo should prematurely put an end to a successful platform for no other reason than your personal desire to have more powerful Nintendo hardware. You were also all on board with the Wii U and having the Wii killed and look how that turned out: What you believed was the right business decision proved to be devastating whereas I said that Nintendo is doing it all wrong. Similarily, you made thread after thread during the Wii U era to make suggestions how Nintendo would become successful again, like collaborating with Microsoft on a console where Microsoft makes the hardware and Nintendo the software, emulating what Sony does and a myriad of other puzzling things. Ultimately, Nintendo didn't follow any of your ideas and that turned out to be the right way, even though pre-Switch launch you were convinced that Nintendo wouldn't occupy more than a niche space in the console market. That is to say that your track record on the topic of business isn't any good. |
The Wii killed itself because it was foundationally rooted in fad gaming trends, the sales were already declining by 2010 and in Japan it never really was that big of a hit to begin with (PSP easily outsold it, PS3 got close after a disastrous start) I don't think Japan ever really bought the hype on the system. MS and Sony having their own motion gaming controllers by 2010 just kinda cemented it.
You need to just get over that one already.
A company shouldn't have to release monster hits for a console every 3 months in its 5th year just to keep it from drowning to death and they did get a new Zelda even in 2011. You should by that point have hundreds (thousands?) of game titles along with several evergreens.
It faded because the people were getting bored of the concept, it was new and interesting in 2006, by 2011 it had been copied by everyone and done to death, it's not really that big of a shock.
And sure I'm glad the Wii died. Who the fuck would want to play Breath of the Wild or Mario 3D World on Wii's shitty hardware? Without graduating forward in hardware you'd be playing shittier versions of those games. The jump to HD gaming has been great for Nintendo's IP, so will the jump to a proper 4K console with a generational hardware leap. Why you view that as some kind of dreadful thing is just sort of laughable to me. Oh noez, you have to play better versions of games that might not even be possible on older hardware. The horror of it all.
Last edited by Soundwave - on 09 February 2023
