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

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
Soundwave on 08 February 2017

Traditional consoles are just too much work for Nintendo as well. Look at pretty much all success home consoles (40 million or higher):

NES
SNES
Sega Genesis
Playstation
Playstation 2
Playstation 3
Wii
XBox 360
Playstation 4


8/9 of them have all the major third party developer support of their time or very close to all of it, XBox One will probably hit this threshold too so that would 9/10. The Wii is the only exception and that required a break through controller that completely changed everything and came with a completely untapped audience for its time.

Portable machines are much easier. You don't need as many games/genre types (lower attach rate) and you can get away with a more limited library scope. People just don't expect as much from a portable library.

For a home only console people expect a very wide gamut of content for differing situations or different moods they're in, Nintendo is not very good at catering to that post-SNES era. 

Sony and MS present too many problems for Nintendo because they're willing to spend a lot of money and Nintendo quite frankly was already having problems with Sega in the 16-bit days. Portable is just friendlier waters for Nintendo and people are more willing to accept more cartoony style games on portable screens, which favors Nintendo's library style. Console market is about big screen/edgier experiences these days, not so favorable for Nintendo. 

As Mr. Iwata even said, Nintendo is not very good at competing, which is crazy for a president to admit, but there it is.



Around the Network
zorg1000 on 08 February 2017

Can people please stop referring to everything new as a gimmick?



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

Lawlight on 08 February 2017
zorg1000 said:
Can people please stop referring to everything new as a gimmick?

But it's not really something new. They just took the PS Vita TV idea and made all the games compatible. The biggest complaint from people is that by going with a traditional console, they're missing out on key features and games.



zorg1000 on 08 February 2017
Lawlight said:
zorg1000 said:
Can people please stop referring to everything new as a gimmick?

But it's not really something new. They just took the PS Vita TV idea and made all the games compatible. The biggest complaint from people is that by going with a traditional console, they're missing out on key features and games.

Regardless, it's not a gimmick. When used in a negative way, gimmick typically means a special feature for the sake of having a special feature and that doesn't describe anything about Switch.



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

Soundwave on 08 February 2017
Lawlight said:
zorg1000 said:
Can people please stop referring to everything new as a gimmick?

But it's not really something new. They just took the PS Vita TV idea and made all the games compatible. The biggest complaint from people is that by going with a traditional console, they're missing out on key features and games.

No it's more like just a basic extension of the Wii U idea. This is basically what they wanted to make when they made the Wii U, it just wasn't technically possibly at the time and they were hamstrung by having to have backwards compatibility with the Wii (so had to have a disc drive). 

If the Wii U was made in 2017 instead of 2012 but the same idea, this is basically what you'd have, though being fully portable makes a lot of difference to Nintendo's market chances with said idea as they actually are decent at selling portable hardware. 



Around the Network
Hynad on 08 February 2017
Nem said:
Were they innovating?

Doesn't look like it to me. They definitly made the choice to bet on gimmicks, but i wouldn't call them innovations.

Motion controls died. The wii u gamepad never had its potencial tapped (perfect for mmo's). The gamecube had a handle? The N64 controller was a misfire. The only thing that stuck around was rumble.

So yeah, they should have gone for a powerful console.

Long-lasting isn't what defines innovation.



Lawlight on 08 February 2017
zorg1000 said:
Lawlight said:

But it's not really something new. They just took the PS Vita TV idea and made all the games compatible. The biggest complaint from people is that by going with a traditional console, they're missing out on key features and games.

Regardless, it's not a gimmick. When used in a negative way, gimmick typically means a special feature for the sake of having a special feature and that doesn't describe anything about Switch.

I'm didn't say it was a gimmick though.



Lawlight on 08 February 2017
Soundwave said:
Lawlight said:

But it's not really something new. They just took the PS Vita TV idea and made all the games compatible. The biggest complaint from people is that by going with a traditional console, they're missing out on key features and games.

No it's more like just a basic extension of the Wii U idea. This is basically what they wanted to make when they made the Wii U, it just wasn't technically possibly at the time and they were hamstrung by having to have backwards compatibility with the Wii (so had to have a disc drive). 

If the Wii U was made in 2017 instead of 2012 but the same idea, this is basically what you'd have, though being fully portable makes a lot of difference to Nintendo's market chances with said idea as they actually are decent at selling portable hardware. 

What's the difference between it being an extension of the WiiU and Sony's PS Vita TV?



zorg1000 on 08 February 2017
Lawlight said:
zorg1000 said:

Regardless, it's not a gimmick. When used in a negative way, gimmick typically means a special feature for the sake of having a special feature and that doesn't describe anything about Switch.

I'm didn't say it was a gimmick though.

Wasn't referring to you.



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

Soundwave on 08 February 2017
RolStoppable said:
Soundwave said:

No it's more like just a basic extension of the Wii U idea. This is basically what they wanted to make when they made the Wii U, it just wasn't technically possibly at the time and they were hamstrung by having to have backwards compatibility with the Wii (so had to have a disc drive). 

If the Wii U was made in 2017 instead of 2012 but the same idea, this is basically what you'd have, though being fully portable makes a lot of difference to Nintendo's market chances with said idea as they actually are decent at selling portable hardware. 

 

lol if you're going to say with a straight face there is no influence from the Wii U. 

Mr. Iwata even said when they designing the Wii U they experimented with putting the chip into the controller but it simply wasn't feasible for the time. 

Mr. Miyamoto said without the Wii U they wouldn't have the Switch. 

It's the same idea, it's just fully portable this time instead of semi-portable, and that's due to technology advancing. 

Being fully portable makes a lot of difference though so you don't have to be so uptight at the comparison, you are really obsessed with sales to the point where I wonder if you even enjoy a game knowing it doesn't sell well.