Nintendo gets a pass Just because they're Nintendo That Sony Isn't Allowed To Have.

Imagine for a moment that Sony had come out at E3 2006 and announced that they were just releasing a budget console for $250.00 that was only a couple of times more powerful than the PS2 and they were going to stop making or having as many core games  like God of War, Tekken, Gran Turismo, Final Fantasy, and Metal Gear Solid on their next console, but instead that they wanted to concentrate on motion control sports, dance, and fitness titles.  What do you think would have happened to their stock prices, and their investors, and their reputation in the industry if they did that?  Basically they would have been dead in the water on that day.

However due to their failures in the N64 and Gamecube eras, Nintendo was able to step in with a new idea, get lucky with it, and apparently it's the best thing ever.

People tend to not realize that Nintendo just got lucky with the Wii this gen.  Meanwhile, Sony's done an excellent job with a console that cost $600 at launch.

I love mad fans.

I have no doubt that Nintendo's innovation with the Wii came about from losing the fifth and sixth generations with a decent console which was no match for the competition. They couldn't keep on making technically competent but ultimately unsupported consoles like they did with the Gamecube and to a lesser degree, the N64 (technically they could since neither of them made a loss, but it wasn't a very good business strategy).

At the same time, Sony managed to completely bugger things up with the PS3. If Nintendo had just made a Gamecube HD successor, I wonder how much success they would have had. Probably slightly more than they'd had before, at least.

But anyway, the combination of Nintendo up and Sony down led to where we are today. You're right that Sony have done a fantastic job of pulling things together, but equally I don't really think Nintendo got "lucky" with the Wii, they just brought around a batch of innovation that we needed at the time.

Also, I'm not quite sure what the point of this thread is.

All I read from this post is "whaaaaaaaaaa!! Nintendo is in first this gen and my beloved Sony is not! WHAAAAAAAA!"

I feel ya, nindendo failed for 15 years. Even the snes didn't sell near playstation 1 levels.
Then all the sudden the crap box wii comes out and some how they can't and have never done anything wrong.
Where were all these "fans" back in the 64 gamecube era? I was rocking the game cube hard last gen, right next to my ps2. Nintedo lost me when they went super casual.

Maybe I remember it wrong. I seem to recall the general feeling of the time being that the Wii was (and you can google this...) a "Dildo (or TV Remote depending on the source) with a breast pump attachment and it's going to cost Nintendo the generation."

They took a risk and got lucky. People were curious and intrigued. Sony could have done the same if the approached it right. This was the first gen where Sony went after the title of "Most Powerful" and Nintendo went the underpowered route (GC, N64, and Nes were all very capable in their time).  It seems to have worked for them.

Well, the point would be that after getting sand kicked in their face for two straight gens Nintendo did about the only thing they could do which was release a console aimed at people that weren't really interested in gaming because the people that were interested in gaming were not going to buy their console if they went that route, but that Sony went with the only viable option for them as well.  And people tend to think that by diluting gaming and bringing in the casual market that what Nintendo did this gen was somehow better than what Sony did.

Sony might not have had the sales they enjoyed in previous gens, but at least they didn't have to cater to nongamers to have the successes they've had this gen in what is supposed to be the gaming industry.

from all their fans that talk about how great their first party efforts are and how great Nintendo is when a lot of the success they've enjoyed this gen comes from things their fans never would have wanted in an earlier gen and probably wouldn't hype if Nintendo hadn't racked up 96 million in sales this gen.

You said yourself that Nintendo went for the non-gamers and "real" gamers (like you) left Nintendo's boat to join Sony (or maybe MS).

Now you talk about the fans actually not leaving Nintendo but loving them for something they wouldn't have loved in earlier generations (where the non-gamers weren't around apparently).

How does that work?

If you want to talk bad about any of the big three, at least try to not contradict your own posts right after another.

Last gen, Xbox, PS2, and Gamecube were going after the same audience and (though PS2 easily won) cannibalizing themselves. It's like there was an all you can eat buffet but everyone was fighting over the steak. Nintendo just said, "Okay. You guys can have the steak. We'll feast on the prime rib, the chicken, the roast beef, the fish, and everything else you guys are neglecting." Nintendo got very fat on the leftovers.

They spoke about this well before the launch of the Wii. I said that they got lucky but, looking back, it was a really smart way to approach the market. Had they launched a Super Nintendo II and went after the hardcore, Nintendo would probably be in last place as Sony and Microsoft dominated. They shook things up. It wasn't a pass or a free ride. If Nintendo gets a free ride, they wouldn't have lost to Playstation two generations in a row. The Wii's success was the product of careful planning, cunning strategy, market friendly pricing, and embracing a new way of thinking.

Being bigger, stronger, faster--there's other ways to win a battle.