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
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.

Around the Network
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. 



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.




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.



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?



Around the Network
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 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. 



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

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. 



Play-on-the-go is not a gimmick. It's a very good selling point. 3d and motion control, on the other hand, are just not worth the extra development cost. Does anybody really think pokemon needed to rely on 3d to succeed, or mario (except for galaxy series) and zelda needed motion control to succeed? I'd take a cheaper or stronger NSwitch with no gimmick over the current model



Soundwave said:

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. 

The only really new thing is HD Rumble, which doesn't change game play. 

With the Wii U's key selling points being two-screen-gameplay and asymmetrical multiplayer, and neither of these two being part of the Switch, it's safe to say that Switch is not an extension of the Wii U idea.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club