This thread is about the meta game that is the next generation console war. Which are going to begin in earnest about six months from now. Specifically how it is going to deviate from the previous generation console war, and what the effect of it will be upon this community, or on the particular camp you ascribe to, or you lean towards. If you don't subscribe to the notion that there is a game being played, and don't feel that you play the game. Then good for you, and I suppose that the change up that is coming wont effect you. Just please don't come in here claiming that these forums are, or ever were some passive agressive utopia. This site after all tracks console and game sales, and that has always made it prime fodder for console warriors.

What has me thinking about the shake up this community will probably see is a video I watched today on Youtube, and I will post a link at the bottom to show you what I am talking about. Long story short it was a particularly aggressive Sony fan. That was taking extreme delight in Nintendo's dwindling console sales, and to be honest he made some good points, but quite possibly in the most sadistic way possible. The most important of which would have to be that Nintendo supporters relied almost exclusively on sales numbers to back up their assertions about console superiority.

Which is really unlikely to be the case. Unless both Microsoft and Sony commit some incredibly bad self inflicted errors. In a lot of ways these forums have been both a bastion and a sanctuary for camp Nintendo for many years. Which is entirely logical given this sites focus on sales tracking, and if your argument really revolves around how good or bad the sales are. Then if your console is doing well in that department you want to be where your biggest gun is closest at hand. Which has me wondering how they will be handling the debate when their biggest gun isn't around anymore, and they really don't have anything to hang there hat on, and it definitely doesn't look like a repeat of Sony earlier in the past generation.

Where shit was pretty dark for the first year, but the console was able to start generating momentum. When the things that were dragging it down started to be addressed. We could point to what Sony could do, and what they needed to do, and the supporters could at least point to the bright spots on the horizon. That could signal a turnaround, but I don't have any clue as to where to start with Nintendo, and I don't think anyone else does either. I don't think that they as in Nintendo have a clue about what to do, and I don't even know what they were thinking.

How do you feel the prospects of the Wii U will play into the next generation console war. Will it just end up being ignored, flamed all to hell, or do you think the console has a valid argument to be made for it winning the console wars. If you do I would definitely be interested in hearing about it. A three sided war would definitely be better then a two sided one. Just for the entertainment value. Most importantly do you think we will see a deluge of new members on this forum who see things like the guy who made the video I am going to link.

Before you click the link, and watch the video. I don't agree with everything this person said, and I most definitely don't agree with the way he said it. Many of you will find what he has to say extremely agitating. What can I say. I think there is a strong possibility that a lot of people like the maker of the video will show up in these forums in six months time. I don't know how long they will be around before they get permabanned. Still if you feel like someone saying something awful about Nintendo and its fans on Youtube will upset you. By all means skip the video, and talk to the topic. Which is a pretty bland question about how you feel the console wars will play out given what we know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2n8SaY-YRnc

The Wii U will do find, the transition to the next generation will be a complicated one not only to the console makers but to the industry. Triple A games have gotten so big, there starting to cost then movie to make one.

So the Wii U could end up winning next gen just because its more affordable to the consumer today, same with the 3DS. Its cheaper but manage to have what gamers want in a handheld. So well see, I'm already hearing that the next Xbox is going to aim for 500 dollars....just think how much that will cost in other countries.

While I agree that price points are always a important consideration in console sales. It doesn't appear that none of the consoles in question will be mass market priced at launch, and the rate of console sales does dictate how fast their price points can be reduced. The Wii U effectively costs around three hundred and fifty bucks in the United States to get the machine and a game. When compared to that a five hundred dollar console doesn't really sound that unreasonable.

Despite all of that the Wii U really is comparable to the existing consoles with nowhere near the support that they are getting, or will probably get after their successors reach the market. So the Wii U is most definitely not in any kind of a sweet spot.

The 3DS wasn't making the numbers it needed to hit "mass market" price but it needed to go down along with getting games. The Wii U will do fine, it will not do what the Wii did but I don't expect any of the new console to reach that many people for various reasons. There will more than likely be a price cut for this upcoming holiday season to coincide with the next wave of games that are coming out.

The situation isn't as bad as it made out to be. The market is a very different place then it was in 2006, there are more things clamoring for the customer's money, and people do not have as much expendable money they did either.

The problems the Wii U is facing right now is a mixture of Nintendo being new to HD development and finding it does take quite a bit longer to produce the games, and the market itself. So it is not all self inflicted. I really do expect the PS4 and next Xbox to experience a similar sales dip the Wii U did, only not as long. After the die hards buy the console the "core market" will adopt the next gen at an excruciating low rate. Because of two things 1) They money isn't there and 2) after the launches of the 3DS, Vita and Wii U more core are going to wait until there are games for the system before buying a new system.

@BlkPaladin

I am familiar with this particular defense. It is a variation on the shrinking pond defense. Imply that the industry itself is shrinking, and that justifies Nintendo in its own shrinking. It doesn't really provide Nintendo with cover. It actually exposes the company to greater pressure. Not just in forums such as these, but in the industry as a whole. If the pond really is shrinking. Then the logical conclusion that the fish will reach. Isn't that everyone needs to go on a diet, but that somebody has to get out of the pool, and the unanimous consensus would be that Nintendo is that somebody.

They are actually redundant in being a manufacturer. The industry doesn't require three console manufacturers, and supporting three actually increases development costs. Toss in the facts that Nintendo isn't healthy, competes aggressively towards third parties, and wants to continually make hardware that is radically different from the other two players, and you get a pariah. That nobody will miss, and nobody wants to see around. If the market is radically shrinking. Then among the first things to go will be the seat at the table that belongs to Nintendo.

Arguing for an unhealthy market is effectively arguing for the demise of Nintendo. If the market is truly unhealthy, or just so unhealthy that these are the console sales that can be expected. Then Nintendo effectively becomes a luxury that the market cannot afford. The market would have to reduce to a two platform model in response, and the third console that is only a slew of minuses in the eyes of developers would be the one cut out of the loop. There wouldn't even be a argument one way or the other, because Nintendo effectively cuts itself out of the loop.

Personally I think the market is plenty healthy, but the expectations of some companies just aren't realistic. The industry just went through a boom town phase, and a lot of companies, and investors are still thinking like the expansion was going to be endless. It really kind of boggles the mind when a company expresses how terribly disappointed that they only made a few hundred million in profits last year. Like they are completely oblivious to the fact that most companies in most industries would give nearly anything to be that profitable.

Well, the fight is already over in the first theater. It was little more than a skirmish. Our victory will be downplayed by the other combatants, but it provides a haven for Nintendo fans to fall back on in case of emergency.

For this reason, I would argue that either Sony or Microsoft is the redundant manufacturer, since as you pointed out, they make practically identical hardware while Nintendo offers a different product.

but the redundancy in hardware means that effectively they will be ,even more than the "HD twins" of the 7th gen, actually seen and approached as a singular platform by devs, which means less development costs for a higher user base

@ op)

I think the Wii U will be "fine", yes, it will probably lose a good chunk of the market share the Wii had, maybe even more than the PS3 lost from PS2's market share, but in the end Nintendo games will make sure the platform remains "viable" for Nintendo-phile core and casual gamers. Ofcourse that includes the assumption that Nintendo is able to cut down their costs for the WiiU, so that they can sell it at sub $250 prices within the next 2 or so years and still make a profit per console at the end.

And I think there is an ace up Nintendo's sleeves with a potential Pokémon MMO. That's something atleast a good dozen of my friends would pounce on immediatly.

In terms of marketshare loss, PS2-3 will likely be second in gaming history only to NES-Super NES (which is only because the challenge to the NES was even more pathetic than the challenge to the PS2). PS2-3 reflects a 35% share loss. NES-Super was about 40%. Wii ended the gen at 40%, and if Wii U locks in GameCube levels of marketshare, that would only be a 25% drop

And if Nintendo barely has the resources to put out the lopsided (in a feast-or-famine sense) schedule they do, they surely lack the resources to run a Pokemon MMO.

@the_dengle

The redundancy I was referring to is the addition of cost without justification. When a person becomes redundant. They no longer have any intrinsic value to their employer, and are viewed as a waste of resources to keep on the payroll. Nintendo is redundant in that sense. There being radically different from the competition. Doesn't justify their existence. It actually promotes the mindset that they don't warrant support.

When Sony and Microsoft use similar architecture, or their consoles have similar capabilities. They basically create a two for one situation. Porting a game for one to the other. Only causes a small additional cost. It even makes it easier to develop the titles in tandem. The Wii U being so far away from the current consoles architecturally, and moving forward being so different as far as capabilities are concerned. Means that porting games to the platform is going to be extraordinarily expensive for developers.

I don't think people are appreciating that the disparity in real power doesn't translate into a one generation divide. The reality is that Nintendo is actually getting left farther behind. The PS4 alone is going to have seven times as much gaming memory as the Wii U. What that means is a two generation divide at least. The Wii U isn't anywhere near to being as odd a duck as the Wii was. Not is is a hell of a lot stranger then that.