daredevil.shark said:
Nope. By unique (first one) I meant to say what people refers Wii U's current library. As for the second I already gave an example. |
You didn't clarify anything with that statement, lol.
I LOVE ICELAND!
daredevil.shark said:
Nope. By unique (first one) I meant to say what people refers Wii U's current library. As for the second I already gave an example. |
You didn't clarify anything with that statement, lol.
I LOVE ICELAND!
It´s kind of ironic that despite this constantly reappearing topic. It seems that it will be actually Sony that is abandoning a segment of the dedicated videogame market with PSV maybe beeing their last handheld.
kristianity77 said: Personally, I just think the console scene has matured so much in the last half a decade or so to become much more than something to play games on. Yes, primarily that is still their main function, but these days most people want so much more from their consoles. Netflix, Spotify, Sky Go, TV on demand, Youtube, Internet, Media Player, etc. This is where its been headed for a while and will continue to head in that direction. I don't personally mind it, provided games stay at the forefront of what these consoles are |
Well Wii U does have many of those things, Youtube, Netflix, Hulu Plus, Amazon Instant Video, arguably the best Internet browser and they even launched with Nintendo TVii.
I'm not convinced Nintendo games would sell exceptionally better on PS/XB. Zelda sold better on N64 than it did on NES/SNES which had much larger install bases. Metroid sales have remained relatively consistent despite the console it appears on, it's simply a niche franchise. I can't see games like Kirby, Yoshi, Donkey Kong, Paper Mario, Mario Party, Pikmin, etc selling that much more since they aren't aimed at the type of audience who buys PS/XB consoles.
When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.
KungKras said:
Wii sure accomplished what it was designed for. Gamecube was probably the most well-designed console of all time in terms of hardware, it was X-box level powerful for a sliver of the manufacturing costs and the most dev-friendly platform of the gen, with a solid controller. Nintendo engineers know their shit. I don't get what you're trying to say. Are we talking hardware or are you trying to blame Nintendo for third parties ignoring their platforms? |
In regards to wii, it's the only nintendo home to sell 100 mil when the rest of nintendo consoles can't even sell past 80 mil. Those closest one was the NES. The gamecube honestly sold like dirt. My point is that nintendo sucks at making home consoles and should stop making 'em but instead focus on just making games for all gaming devices. Why? Because not many gamers want to buy a nintendo console and nintendo can't figure out why. Eventually, they will be forced to go third party one way or another.
Aeolus451 said:
In regards to wii, it's the only nintendo home to sell 100 mil when the rest of nintendo consoles can't even sell past 80 mil. Those closest one was the NES. The gamecube honestly sold like dirt. My point is that nintendo sucks at making home consoles and should stop making 'em but instead focus on just making games for all gaming devices. Why? Because not many gamers want to buy a nintendo console and nintendo can't figure out why. Eventually, they will be forced to go third party one way or another. |
The problem is that every statment you make has counterexamples. They suck at making consoles because? The hardware? GC is the best designed hardware of any gen. Not many gamers want to buy their systems? Wii sold like hotcakes. NES sold about PS1 levels in the gaming markets that were developed at the time (IE not europe and developing economies), SNES did really well.
All you have left is "They suck because I think they suck".
I LOVE ICELAND!
We don´t know what NX will be but if it ends up beeing more powerful than PS4, we´ll certainly see ridiculous attempts at moving goalposts by the usual suspects.
Aeolus451 said:
In regards to wii, it's the only nintendo home to sell 100 mil when the rest of nintendo consoles can't even sell past 80 mil. Those closest one was the NES. The gamecube honestly sold like dirt. My point is that nintendo sucks at making home consoles and should stop making 'em but instead focus on just making games for all gaming devices. Why? Because not many gamers want to buy a nintendo console and nintendo can't figure out why. Eventually, they will be forced to go third party one way or another. |
Out of dozens upon dozens of home consoles to release over the years, only 3 home consoles have sold over 100 million, of which 2 barely managed to pass that, and only 5 have sold over 80 million. Those are insanely high numbers to use as ur threshold for good/bad sales. This isn't even taking into account marketshare, NES only sold about 60 million which by ur standards is bad but it had something like 80% marketshare, SNES only did about 50 million yet it was the market leader. Half of Nintendo home consoles have won their generation.
When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.
KungKras said:
The problem is that every statment you make has counterexamples. They suck at making consoles because? The hardware? GC is the best designed hardware of any gen. Not many gamers want to buy their systems? Wii sold like hotcakes. NES sold about PS1 levels in the gaming markets that were developed at the time (IE not europe and developing economies), SNES did really well. All you have left is "They suck because I think they suck". |
Do I really have to spell it out? They suck at making consoles because their consoles don't sell well. They don't sell well because the consoles often don't appeal to that many consumers. It's true that a console is for playing video games but it's a product that is designed to sell to consumers. It's not free to play. Nintendo needs their products to sell.
I can understand that to you ,the GC is the best designed hardware of any gen but to the vast majority of gamers, it's definitely not. The GC as a product failed to appeal to consumers and sell even decently.
If you still don't get what I mean after this post then oh well. I don't have any more patience to keep going in circles.
The gaming market was much smaller in the 80s and early 90s, so it's not a fair comparison. NES's 60 million would probably mean at least 100 million nowadays. SNES' 50 million would be around 80-85 million.
---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---
Aeolus451 said:
Do I really have to spell it out? They suck at making consoles because their consoles don't sell well. They don't sell well because the consoles often don't appeal to that many consumers. It's true that a console is for playing video games but it's a product that is designed to sell to consumers. It's not free to play. Nintendo needs their products to sell. I can understand that to you ,the GC is the best designed hardware of any gen but to the vast majority of gamers, it's definitely not. The GC as a product failed to appeal to consumers and sell even decently. If you still don't get what I mean after this post then oh well. I don't have any more patience to keep going in circles. |
But you're wrong. Their consoles do sell well. 50% of all their consoles disprove you. The median lifetime sales for consoles is about 30 mil, only two of their consoles doesn't pass that. See, I can make arbitrary standards for what it means to "sell well" just like you.
All I did was to tell you that the Gamecube was fantastically engineered. It was, you can't dispute that because there are real world factors that disprove you. Just like the Commodore Amiga and the Apple 2 line that was ditched in favout of the macintosh. Great engineering can underperform in the market.
And using market performance to try and disprove that point is just sad. You just don't get what I was saying. I bet you were one of the people yelling "SALES DON'T MEAN QUALITY!!!!!!" last gen.
I LOVE ICELAND!