Was Nintendo right to opt out of the graphics arms race?

[OlfinBedwere]

Depends from system to system really, but in broad terms yes.

DS was the right call, as having a less powerful graphics chipset might have cost them Monster Hunter and a couple of other PSP titles, but it probably would have only given them a couple of million extra system sales.

Wii on balance was the right decision, though perhaps more by luck than design given that Nintendo probably hadn’t banked on the PS2 lasting so long and thus helping the Wii along as well. Had Nintendo combined motion controls with something nearer the 360/PS3 in graphics terms, the system would probably have held up better later on in the generation.

3DS was another one where it was the right call, as it didn’t need the extra power to beat the Vita, and would have achieved little beyond giving the system much worse battery life for not enough return.

Wii U was the one case where the strategy just completely bombed, although even there the problem was more because it combined a lack of power with a system architecture that was just absolute garbage in every regard; if it had at least been possible to quickly port PS4 and Xbox One games over then I think developers would have done so.

Switch and Switch 2, they basically did as well as they could have done without it turning into a repeat of the Sega Nomad, eg something that barely qualified as handheld and had terrible battery life. And it’s hard to argue with the sales they’ve had.