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 said:

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

It's the same idea, it's just fully portable this time instead of semi-portable,

Lol "semi-portable". The Wii U was just about as portable as a fridge.



Around the Network
Soundwave said:
RolStoppable 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. 

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. 

Considering he's an Etrian Odyssey fan, I would say he doesn't care too much about sales when picking games.



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

mZuzek said:
Soundwave said:

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

It's the same idea, it's just fully portable this time instead of semi-portable,

Lol "semi-portable". The Wii U was just about as portable as a fridge.

I couldn't even take the gamepad 15 feet away from the console without losing signal.



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

zorg1000 said:

Considering he's an Etrian Odyssey fan, I would say he doesn't care too much about sales when picking games.

You could have pointed out that I have a Xenoblade avatar.



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

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

Yeah, I think they should. Innovation just so you can say "I'm innovating" just feels meh. The switch "innovation" has yet to prove itself and whether it can bring truly unique experiences...like milking cows.



"Trick shot? The trick is NOT to get shot." - Lucian

Around the Network
RolStoppable said:
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.

Asymetric gameplay was used by how many games on the Wii U really? Like 3? Even EAD didn't really even try this feature much. The main feature really was the ability to switch from TV to off-TV using the tablet pad. 

"Switch" is even the freaking first word in the Wii U unveiling trailer, lol:

https://youtu.be/qhlDHeCT-Q8?t=2m2s

SWITCH from TV to the New Controller

Nintendo knew the Japanese market was going portable only and Wii U was their attempt to hedge against that, the technology at the time only allowed for semi-portability. Switch is just the Wii U concept reversed, instead of a "dummy controller", the hardware is now in the controller and the "console" is now a "dummy dock". 



KLXVER said:
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.

Yeah the D-pad, shoulder buttons and analog stick were just useless gimmicks that died fast...

Correction - the analog stick was done by Dempa first. Similarly d-pad was done by several companies before Nintendo though one was circular to allow for 16 directions.



No. I have a PC for graphics.



RolStoppable said:
Switch is a traditional console as traditionally consoles are ever-evolving pieces of hardware, just like their original inspirations of the arcades. New methods for control inputs have been the norm, thus the tradition.

What PlayStation and Xbox do, sticking to the same things over generations, that's following the path of PCs, not the path of traditional consoles. You look at the successful console makers of the past (Atari, Nintendo, Sega) and their consoles went through innovative changes each generation. That's the traditional console model.

What the article should be really asking then is if Nintendo should make a dumbed down PC. The answer is an obvious no, because sales data points towards success when Nintendo strays away from the path of PlayStation and Xbox.

I don't agree with that. The SNES was iterative. It was a more powerful, more advanced NES, with improved controller input. The N64 was the same, wih the addition of a true analog stick. The gamecube was a further enhancement of that concept. It's only with the Wii that Nintendo tried to break away from the mold. And it managed to win its bet. The Wii U was a conceptual mistake. It had the right ideas, but the execution was a disaster. And now we have the Switch, which is what the Wii U should have been in the first place. Among all of their home consoles, only the last 3 may align with your assessment that Nintendo differentiates itself from Sony and Miscrosoft's iterative methods.

But PlayStation and XBox also align with what you call "ever-evolving pieces of hardware". The PS4 allows for gaming experiences that weren't possible before it, like the PSVR. The Xbox 360 and XBox One also had Kinect which provided something unique when it comes to motion controls. Then you have to factor in the actual user experience allowed by those console's UI, which indeed appear as being PC-lite, but also more user-friendly then them, which is something that has always been an objective for home consoles. Point in case: the Famicon wasn't given such a name for no reason. For as long as consoles have existed, they've always been "dumbed down PCs". And Nintendo's consoles are no different. The question is why would you consider this to be a bad thing?

As I once told you in the past, I think you don't give enough credit where credit is due and are quick to unfairly dismiss Sony and MS. 




Soundwave said:

Nintendo knew the Japanese market was going portable only and Wii U was their attempt to hedge against that, the technology at the time only allowed for semi-portability. Switch is just the Wii U concept reversed, instead of a "dummy controller", the hardware is now in the controller and the "console" is now a "dummy dock". 

Yeah, I was amazed when I saw some Japanese Switch commercials earlier today and noticed that they barely show any signs of the console being a hybrid. It's just shown in handheld mode for 98% of the time.