Majin-Tenshinhan said:
Avinash_Tyagi said:
WereKitten said:
Avinash_Tyagi said:
Big difference though, 3D is much less profitable and much more time consuming, a 2D zelda would not be as time consuming, hence why you'd still keep it around, yes having multiple products is great, but when you can switch your multiple products to lower costs and time consumption, then why wouldn't you.
|
You missed the point, even glossing over the ridiculous statement that "3D is much less profitable".
Even if the latest 2D Mario goes to be more profitable than the latest 3D Mario, it might very well be that a 2D Mario game +a 3D Mario game brings more profit than two 2D Mario games. There's such thing as saturation of a sub-market, that's what offer differentiation is about.
|
Nope, you missed the point the problem with that is it took 3-4 years man time to make a 2D and 3D Mario, basically in that time you could make 3-4 2D games, so its not more profitable than making 2D, and who says they have to all be the same title? You could make other games and net a greater profit without oversaturation
|
Diversity. Different products. Nintendo can't make the same games all the time and expect them to sell. There's a reason so many people go back and play OoT after all these years, it's because contrary to what some people claim, Twilight Princess and Ocarina of Time aren't the same things. They are different games that are both great in their own right. Even moreso when it comes to 2D and 3D. If Nintendo only had 2D Mario, 2D Zelda (If you still believe this would sell more than 3D Zelda you must seriously be high) and 2D Metroid, they would be releasing pretty much the same thing over and over and people. Don't get me wrong, 2D is great. But it is limited.
Nintendo have already accomplished most of the stuff you can do with 2D, which is probably one of the reasons NSMBWii has multiplayer. With 3D, there are still lots of stuff to explore. Nintendo care about sales in the long run. If they went with your fourth grade tactic they'd get great sales for maybe 3 years and then everything would go to hell. But Nintendo are businessmen. They make sure that people associate the name "Nintendo" with "Quality" no matter what game they see it on.
Same as an actor. Sure, Christian Bale could play Batman and only Batman, but then he would be typecast. Rather than going "Oh, Christian Bale, he's that guy who plays Batman", people rather go "Oh, Christian Bale, I love him, he's great in so many movies".
I honestly wish I would've gotten through to you with my first damn post because it is really unbelievably simple and I have no idea why you fail to grasp it.
|
I already addressed diversity, multiple 2D games of different titles is greater diversity than 1 3D game, and more profitable, maybe you should read before replying.
I already addressed 2D vs. 3D zelda sales, see my post on that.
If 2D is so limited, then why did 2D sell so well for 2 gens on consoles and longer on handhelds?
Yeah which is why Gameboy and DS went to hell, because they were so limited, oh wait.
Predictions:Sales of Wii Fit will surpass the combined sales of the Grand Theft Auto franchiseLifetime sales of Wii will surpass the combined sales of the entire Playstation family of consoles by 12/31/2015 Wii hardware sales will surpass the total hardware sales of the PS2 by 12/31/2010 Wii will have 50% marketshare or more by the end of 2008 (I was wrong!! It was a little over 48% only)Wii will surpass 45 Million in lifetime sales by the end of 2008 (I was wrong!! Nintendo Financials showed it fell slightly short of 45 million shipped by end of 2008)Wii will surpass 80 Million in lifetime sales by the end of 2009 (I was wrong!! Wii didn't even get to 70 Million)
