Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Should Nintendo Stop Innovating And Make A Traditional Console?

So, what do you think?

No, not at all. Innovatio... 122 33.42%
 
Not really, but I'd like... 92 25.21%
 
Don't know. Time will tell? 11 3.01%
 
Yeah, more less. Traditional is good. 47 12.88%
 
Absolutely. PS4 and Xbox ... 52 14.25%
 
What's "traditional" anyway? 19 5.21%
 
Show me the answers! 22 6.03%
 
Total:365
zorg1000 said:
Cloudman said:

Ninten hasn't gone with traditional since the gamecube, and while the Wii was a big success, the Wii U was a big failure, while Sony still remaining mostly the same has continued to do well, and with how the industry is currently going, perhaps going with the more powerful console is a safer bet. But I still do love Nintendo and the things they've done and continue to do.

"It works for them, it will work for us!!!" is a horrible way of thinking.

Copying another companies successful strategy does not mean you will be successful, an example Wii Remote & Playstation Move. Wii Remote was a huge mass market success, PS Move was a moderate success at best. Other examples, Smash Bros vs PS All Stars or Mario Kart vs LBP Karting.

The point of a powerful console+traditional controller strategy is primarily get the big multiplatform 3rd party titles so the question is how many of the people who buy consoles for these games will choose Nintendo over PS/XB? Will current PS4/XBO owners jump ship to play these games on Nintendo? Not likely, they already have a console to play them. Will future buyers choose Nintendo over PS4/XBO? Perhaps some but most will choose the consoles with already large libraries and online communities that their friends are playing on.

The most likely result is that the majority of people who buy this Nintendo console will do so to play exclusives and multiplats will be an afterthought.

Well, it's not really that it's copying so much as it's just how stardard gaming is like, with the console and a controller, and Nintendo originally used to do that. And it's not really about doing what Sony and MS is doing, but just assuring it's a console that can get as many games as possible. If a large library is there, then likely more people are going to buy the system, whether as a primary or secondary.

But yeah, whether they go the safe route, or the innovative route, I just want Nintendo to succeed, and which one is the better route, I'm not really sure.



 

              

Dance my pretties!

The Official Art Thread      -      The Official Manga Thread      -      The Official Starbound Thread

Around the Network

From my perspective they should, i really enjoyed N64 and Gamecube and i really disliked Wii and Wii U. From their perspective on the other hand they shouldn't because when it comes to traditional home consoles Sony's been dominating since PSOne and there's nothing they can do but to offer something different (it worked with Wii).

That's when it comes to home consoles, with handhelds they are doing fine (Switch is both handheld and home so let's see how they do).



Cloudman said:
zorg1000 said:

"It works for them, it will work for us!!!" is a horrible way of thinking.

Copying another companies successful strategy does not mean you will be successful, an example Wii Remote & Playstation Move. Wii Remote was a huge mass market success, PS Move was a moderate success at best. Other examples, Smash Bros vs PS All Stars or Mario Kart vs LBP Karting.

The point of a powerful console+traditional controller strategy is primarily get the big multiplatform 3rd party titles so the question is how many of the people who buy consoles for these games will choose Nintendo over PS/XB? Will current PS4/XBO owners jump ship to play these games on Nintendo? Not likely, they already have a console to play them. Will future buyers choose Nintendo over PS4/XBO? Perhaps some but most will choose the consoles with already large libraries and online communities that their friends are playing on.

The most likely result is that the majority of people who buy this Nintendo console will do so to play exclusives and multiplats will be an afterthought.

Well, it's not really that it's copying so much as it's just how stardard gaming is like, with the console and a controller, and Nintendo originally used to do that. And it's not really about doing what Sony and MS is doing, but just assuring it's a console that can get as many games as possible. If a large library is there, then likely more people are going to buy the system, whether as a primary or secondary.

But yeah, whether they go the safe route, or the innovative route, I just want Nintendo to succeed, and which one is the better route, I'm not really sure.

That doesn't really address the issue, the audience for mainstream, western focused software is simply not on Nintendo consoles and hasn't been for 15-20 years.

You didn't answer the questions at all, why would people who already own a PS4/XBO buy a Nintendo version of those consoles? Why would people looking for a new console to play AAA 3rd party titles choose Nintendo over PS4/XBO?



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

zorg1000 said:
Cloudman said:

Well, it's not really that it's copying so much as it's just how stardard gaming is like, with the console and a controller, and Nintendo originally used to do that. And it's not really about doing what Sony and MS is doing, but just assuring it's a console that can get as many games as possible. If a large library is there, then likely more people are going to buy the system, whether as a primary or secondary.

But yeah, whether they go the safe route, or the innovative route, I just want Nintendo to succeed, and which one is the better route, I'm not really sure.

That doesn't really address the issue, the audience for mainstream, western focused software is simply not on Nintendo consoles and hasn't been for 15-20 years.

You didn't answer the questions at all, why would people who already own a PS4/XBO buy a Nintendo version of those consoles? Why would people looking for a new console to play AAA 3rd party titles choose Nintendo over PS4/XBO?

And why should it continue to be that way? I don't think it should really, and Nintendo should try to push more for those games on their consoles. And I'm not looking at it as "Why people should choose Nintendo over PS4/XBO", but why people should choose Nintendo. Perhaps portability of the Switch is the way to go, although it'll be lacking some big games from other consoles, or maybe a standard console that can play those multiplatform games and Nintendo games is. I don't know, and that's where I'm torn. I'm not really saying either one is right.



 

              

Dance my pretties!

The Official Art Thread      -      The Official Manga Thread      -      The Official Starbound Thread

Cloudman said:
zorg1000 said:

That doesn't really address the issue, the audience for mainstream, western focused software is simply not on Nintendo consoles and hasn't been for 15-20 years.

You didn't answer the questions at all, why would people who already own a PS4/XBO buy a Nintendo version of those consoles? Why would people looking for a new console to play AAA 3rd party titles choose Nintendo over PS4/XBO?

And why should it continue to be that way? I don't think it should really, and Nintendo should try to push more for those games on their consoles. And I'm not looking at it as "Why people should choose Nintendo over PS4/XBO", but why people should choose Nintendo. Perhaps portability of the Switch is the way to go, although it'll be lacking some big games from other consoles, or maybe a standard console that can play those multiplatform games and Nintendo games is. I don't know, and that's where I'm torn. I'm not really saying either one is right.

Because thats the way it works. Nintendo doesnt exist in a vacuum people are generally going to either choose between Nintendo PS or Xbox



Around the Network
mZuzek said:
Einsam_Delphin said:
I actually think the Switch is their most "traditional/conventional/standard/normal" system since GBA/GCN. Normal controller (in terms of inputs and layout), no second screen, no touchscreen controls in games, and while there's still motion controls they aren't the focus of every game (only one or two so far, optional or unused otherwise) and aren't compromising the controller i.e. Wiimotes. The gimmick this time doesn't affect the games or their design themselves, just where you can play them. You don't have to waggle or look down at another screen, Switch games are played the same as they would be on Sony/Microsoft systems or older Nintendo systems, you can just take them anywhere now is all.

But the Switch is underpowered compared to the competition, therefore it is totally a gimmick!

Yeah but other than that, which is only somewhat relevant for getting AAA 3rd party games, it is a standard system, atleast much moreso than DS, 3DS, Wii, and Wii U.



Rather then making "innovative" hardware they should double their efforts to innovate on software, that's what we desperately need now, and it certainly doesn't have to be simply a different form of input or worse relegated to a micro-game tech demo compilation.



Cloudman said:
zorg1000 said:

That doesn't really address the issue, the audience for mainstream, western focused software is simply not on Nintendo consoles and hasn't been for 15-20 years.

You didn't answer the questions at all, why would people who already own a PS4/XBO buy a Nintendo version of those consoles? Why would people looking for a new console to play AAA 3rd party titles choose Nintendo over PS4/XBO?

And why should it continue to be that way? I don't think it should really, and Nintendo should try to push more for those games on their consoles. And I'm not looking at it as "Why people should choose Nintendo over PS4/XBO", but why people should choose Nintendo. Perhaps portability of the Switch is the way to go, although it'll be lacking some big games from other consoles, or maybe a standard console that can play those multiplatform games and Nintendo games is. I don't know, and that's where I'm torn. I'm not really saying either one is right.

Getting those games doesn't mean anything if people don't buy them, Gamecube had solid 3rd party support and Wii U did as well initially and it did almost nothing for them and are Nintendo's two worst selling consoles.

In order for those games to sell well and move hardware for Nintendo, they need to steal the audience for those games away from PS/XB so I ask again, what will cause existing and prospective PS4/XBO owners to get a similar Nintendo console?

If you can't come up with a reason why these people would choose such a device than you have no reason to think they will.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Barkley said:
Rather then making "innovative" hardware they should double their efforts to innovate on software, that's what we desperately need now, and it certainly doesn't have to be simply a different form of input or worse relegated to a micro-game tech demo compilation.

Arms is innovative. Super Mario Odyssey is unlike anything we've seen from the Super Mario franchise. Breath of the Wild is unlike anything we've seen from the Zelda franchise. Pokémon Sun & Moon finally did something other than gym battles. Snipperclips is unlike anything I've seen as well. 



"The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must" - Thoukydides

Barkley said:
Rather then making "innovative" hardware they should double their efforts to innovate on software, that's what we desperately need now, and it certainly doesn't have to be simply a different form of input or worse relegated to a micro-game tech demo compilation.

 

I disagree, we just need good games. If a good game happens to be innovative aswell then cool, but a game should never be made with the sole purpose of being innovative even at the cost of quality imo. We don't need more Skyward Swords and Starfox Zeros.