RolStoppable said:
My argument is that Nintendo shouldn't invest in things that are counterproductive to their core business. Making games for non-Nintendo hardware is just that, hence why it should not happen. Nintendo needs to invest in making their own ecosystem better. What you propose is invest in non-Nintendo platforms to subsidize Nintendo platforms. How about fixing the actual problems instead of trying to apply band-aids?
How do you imagine mobile games to offer a taste of what a REAL Nintendo console has to offer? That's the big assumption you work with, that mobile games are going to work as an appetizer. But how is that going to work? You either end up with crappy versions that will make people laugh at the idea of buying dedicated hardware to play (assumed) bad games or you end up with good games tailored to mobile gaming that make people content with what they have while the console versions play nothing alike; therefore there is no real incentive to buy dedicated gaming hardware either.
Why should Nintendo turn down the opportunity to cash in in the short term? Because the resources you propose to be spent on mobile games could be just as easily spent on Virtual Console which, if implemented correctly, is going to be something that stays with all Nintendo hardware in the future. As such, it would be a big asset to have, for Nintendo and consumers alike. If Nintendo's immense back catalogue (plus selected third parties') carries over to every future Nintendo system, then that would be a big incentive for consumers to buy new Nintendo hardware, because even if the new games aren't anything to brag about, there is still the digital library to play.
|
Can you please explain to me how it's counterproductive of Nintendo to reach out to a market share that they once had a firm grip of, but that's moved away en masse from dedicated gaming devices. They seem pretty satisfied with only gaming on their smart devices these days, and the likely hood of them returning to a console is pretty slim. But I agree with you that Nintendo need to address their HW problems. But we need to face the very real situation here, that we're getting fewer and fewer devices over all, and sooner or later Nintendo will need to adapt. This picture is quite telling (and kinda fun):
Mobile games can work as an appetizer, if done right. Like with that Pokémon example, give the mobile market a taste of the game, but make it an extansion of a real Pokémon game, so to get the whole experience you have to have a Nintendo console. How that'll be done, I don't know since I'm no game dev. But what needs to be done in this case, is to offer a GOOD, but limited/small, game that ties into a bigger experience/game. Some will be satisfied with the mobile version, and some will want more. Right now, there's faaar more kids playing on mobiles than there are kids playing a Nintendo console. And some just wont be interested in that kind of game, and it's for those people Nintendo should make Brain Age and Nintendogs like experiences on the mobile.
I don't think that the VC will be a big deal for new costumers; it wont be a big seller for people that's never played Nintendo games before. And would couldn't Nintendo expand the VC AND make mobile games at the same time? The VC could easily be handled by 3rd party studios. I agree that Nintendo need and should expand the VC library, and should be an integrated part of all their future HW, it won't make new costumers actually buy the systems. That's what NEW games do. Nintendo has a core audience, but let's face it; it's an AGING audience. I'm willing to bet that the average age of Nintendo fans are quite high, and that's not good for Nintendo in the long term; they need new and younger fans as well, and these kids don't game on consoles to the same extend as previous generations did.
Putting certain games on mobiles can definitely benefit Nintendo, but I agree that with you that their BIGGEST problem is their own HW, which they need to solve.
