By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Next-Gen: Nintendo Not #1

dunno001 on 13 November 2010

Hrm... looking at historical trends, I do think the Wii's successor will win next gen for home consoles. Since the beginning, the leading company changes every 2 generations. (Pong & Atari 2600, NES & SNES, PS1 & PS2, Wii & ??) And I do think there's a reason for this. The second successful system from a company has them sitting on their laurels. Somebody else notices this, and strikes into the weakness to disrupt them, almost taking the prior leader into near obscurity. (NES brought quality control, PS1 got disk media accepted, and Wii changed the gameplay.) Nintendo has seen what they've done with the Wii, and I think are actively working on how to keep their success going. Meanwhile, Sony and MS are looking at emulating the Wii's success, but by the time they start taking off, Nintendo's on to their next market.

Now, if you ask me about 2 gens out, I could see Nintendo not winning. But I'd like more info on the next gen, first...



-dunno001

-On a quest for the truly perfect game; I don't think it exists...

Around the Network
Squilliam on 13 November 2010
Killiana1a said:
Squilliam said:

Just in case anyone was wondering, if I was to take a bet out of the current 3 console manufacturers I would have to say Nintendo would be the most likely to win again. Theres nothing in the other consoles unique selling propositions which Nintendo cannot replicate whilst at the same time Nintendos own first party provides unique value which is unmatched by the competitions first parties or third parties.

Nintendo has Netflix, Nintendo will probably get other media service providers and offer similar streaming services. They can probably get all the games so long as the console is powerful enough. Given the fact that the first party developers for the DX9 consoles offer similar style games to the 3rd parties theres a degree of duplication there which isn't seen with regular Nintendo titles. So barring any major SNAFUs like the N64 generation say for instance if they don't properly support 3D and 3D is popular, given their lead in mindshare they are more than likely to take the lead once again. This is more likely than say Sony or Microsoft taking the lead from them outright.

Noted.

As I have said in a previous post, Sony and Microsoft compete for the same market demographic. A Red Ocean of dog-eat-dog, winner takes all competition.

The big question is how serious Microsoft and Sony will support Move and Kinect among the non "core" 25-30 year old, male demographic. If one of them or both go vigorously after what many consider Nintendo's Blue Ocean, then things can get interesting. From my point of view, only Microsoft appears to be semi-serious, while Sony with Move created Move because it was expected of them and they want to tie it in with their whole "3D gaming on 3D Sony television" line of business.

TL; DR: Sony and Microsoft currently resembles Super Nintendo and Sega Genesis. Doubts remain as to whether Sony or Microsoft is serious about the Blue Ocean with Move and Kinect. Microsoft with their $500 million ad campaign appears to be serious, thus semi-serious. Sony with Move created Move because the market expected them to do it, not because they wanted to. Sony will try to align their 3D television business and 3D gaming with Move.

Hardly a Red Ocean. If it were price competition would be a lot more fierce and any moves which increased sales for one would take away sales from the other. Even in the content market with a lot of publishers, if one releases a lot of great selling titles overall sales for the year tend to increase so even in that case it isn't a zero sum game where the numbers are just moved around. So you could argue there are plenty of fish in the sea and being a better fisherman means more fish are caught overall.

I can't say how serious each are about their motion control efforts. We will have to see with regards to their future plans for the interfaces. Obviously Microsoft has immediate short term goals for Kinect whilst the longer term goals for both are difficult to be certain about. If they are indeed serious then we would only expect to see the result of this effort with the next generation of consoles because this current generation is too far gone for the controls to have any significant effect on all but the late adopters.



Tease.

adsl on 13 November 2010
Killiana1a said:
adsl said:

 

“We were the disruptors twenty years ago and now we are so again."

 Reggie Fils-Aime concluding Nintendo’s 2006 E3 Press Conference.

Nintendo already created a blue ocean in console market two times. Now they have to create another one in order to win the next. The problem is: how can they do that? Well, I have no idea. 

You are already seeing it with the 3DS. I know we get busy and don't re-read up on the history of commentators, but I was arguing a few months back that the glassless 3D experience on the 3DS is mainly aimed at hurting Sony's 3D tv and gaming business. Expectations will change once the 3DS comes out.

A father will be looking for a new tv after buying his son or daughter a 3DS and after seeing Nintendo do glassless 3D on the 3DS, then why would he plunk down over $3000 for a Sony 3D televison that requires 2 pairs of 3D glasses at $100 a piece?

These expectations are what Nintendo is hoping to create with the 3DS.

Furthermore, Nintendo may take the technology from the 3DS and try to do it with their next console, thus finding a new blue ocean of potential gamers who want to experience a 3D glassless, console gaming experience. Then again, can a console enable a standard television to pump out 3D without the television itself having 3D capabilities? This is the big question.

I could be wrong and Malstrom could be exactly right in that the 3DS is going the route of the N64 in being a lazy system catering to the "core" that offers the 3D trick as the main purchasing point instead of a solid experience focusing on the games.


I'm not sure if the 3DS wil be a mega hit, it is too focused on hardware improvements. However according to Malstrom, a new generation is defined by software (not by hardware). And this is why he says that the PS3 and the Xbox 360 are "last gen" consoles while the Wii is the true "next gen" console in the market (which I mostly agree with). So in my opinion the 3D will win the next handled gen but will be hard to beat the DS sales.



Metallicube on 13 November 2010
Killiana1a said:
WereKitten said:
Killiana1a said:
Killiana1a said:

...

Furthermore, Nintendo may take the technology from the 3DS and try to do it with their next console, thus finding a new blue ocean of potential gamers who want to experience a 3D glassless, console gaming experience. Then again, can a console enable a standard television to pump out 3D without the television itself having 3D capabilities? This is the big question.

...


This doesn't make sense. Like, at all.

a) Nintendo did not invent parallax occulsion based displays. They are merely early adopters, and they can be early adopters because they only needed an extremely small display on a handheld console and that's the only size where the tech makes economic sense right now and where the existence of a single good direction of observation is not an issue.

b) What whould "try to do it with their next console" mean? That they would start making and selling TVs when this tech matures? I can't really see that.

On the other hand Sony among others will build such TVs - such panels are being demod by various  builders in bigger sizes. Various problems have to be solved first though, such as there being a good enough number of hot spots from where you can watch the screen and see a correct image. And guess what? Once such a TV exists, you will be able to connect your PS3 or 360 or PC to it and run any of the current and future 3D-enabled games.

c) There's no "big question", just ignorance on the subject. The only way you can have 3D out of a normal TV screen is by using the anaglyph technique (colored glasses). 3D means having your eyes receiving two different images, thus you have to separate them temporally (shutter glasses), by polarization (polaroid filter glasses) or by angle (e.g. the parallax occulsion or lenticular systems). The console generates the two images, it does not care about how the display delivers it, and it can't magically change how the display can deliver light to your eyes just because it's able to render two images instead of one.

Well, people were bringing up Nintendo finding another Blue Ocean if Kinect and Move turn out to be moderately successful with a hit title or two. This is why I theorized on it.

I just don't see another Blue Ocean unless Nintendo revives dead people and starts making games for them. Nintendo has the Disney of video games routine down pat. I don't mean this offensively at all because Disney is known for creating the most family friendly movies ever and those are some pretty damn good movies.

I am struggling to see the part where Nintendo pulls a Pixar and smashes the competition with a game equivalent to the magnitude of Toy Story.

Well nobody really sees the Blue Ocean market, at least most don't.. That's what makes it a blue ocean and not red. If everyone DID see it, everyone would be rushing to it. Most people didn't realize there was a market for many of the games Nintendo has made this gen.



Mummelmann on 13 November 2010

So Nintendo wins next gen by default? Is that what people think?



Around the Network
Khuutra on 13 November 2010
Mummelmann said:

So Nintendo wins next gen by default? Is that what people think?

Some, no doubt, but they're as wrong as the OP is.



tingyu on 13 November 2010

Uhhh, as far as I can see, the $500 million by M$ did not propel it to the Wii level, only coparable result with the Move which has minimum advertisement. So where does all this Nintendo is doomed come from?

And for 3DS, I can only imagine its crazy hype once it went on sale, PSP2 is already no match for it before unveiling.



NYANKS on 13 November 2010
TheSource said:

Given the recent strong sales of PS3 / X360 whats to stop PS4 / X720 from launching at $800? It isn't like consumers sent Sony and Microsoft a bad message here.


I'm pretty sure not losing ungodly amounts of money, especially for Sony, would be impetus enough not too make things pricier.  Right after the diehards bought the PS3 instantly, the PS3 went down in price pretty soon after.  They got the message alright.  Don't start that high.  I don't think Sony would mess that up again.  The highest I could see is 600, most likely 500. 



Serious_frusting on 13 November 2010

I said years ago. the is so many people that wil purchase a Wii and because of its price it will all come at once.

 

That now happened. People brought the Wii cause of motion. Then some of them realised that the game were not comming.

 

The next nintendo console will not run away so quick unless it shows it has "normal" games



Nobody's perfect. I aint nobody!!!

Killzone 2. its not a fps. it a FIRST PERSON WAR SIMULATOR!!!! ..The true PLAYSTATION 3 launch date and market dominations is SEP 1st

HappySqurriel on 13 November 2010
Mummelmann said:

So Nintendo wins next gen by default? Is that what people think?


I wouldn't say that ...

An individual buying a console in a generation is probably far more likely to buy the follow up console from that manufacturer than someone who didn't buy that console, and third party publishers will tend to support a system that is the successor to a more popular system. While these rules are not written in stone, it does indicate that the successor to the most popular system in a generation has a massive advantage.

Like all advantages this can be overcome, in particular if the manufacturer makes significant mistakes. Of course, when it comes to speculation about mistakes it is equally as likely (potentially more likely) that the manufacturer of a trailing console will make mistakes which hurt its success in the following generation.