Revolution, or SPIN?

[DefragMyHead]

I always here Nintendo saying something to the tune of "we are not competing in the hardware race, we are taking gaming in a new direction...it's about the games, the hardware is secondary." And no doubt nintendo does do some pretty revoultionary things (on a sidenote, they totally should have kept that name), and they have some very talented in-house game designers. but it occurred to me that maybe the reason they are so adamently downplaying the importance of hardware is because they simply do not have the financial resources to compete on the same plane with sony and microsoft? the fate of the company literally rests upon the success of this console and it would be less than prudent to say, "we have second-rate technology here guys." besides if all the neat things they're doing this gyroscoptic? controller and whatnot actually pans out, couldn't sony and microsoft simply, with some revisions, copy that model and incorporate it into their more powerful machines? Basically, if nintendo's "gimmick" works, cant the Big Boys just copy it more-or-less? Conversely, if hardware does turn out to be of preeminent importance nintendo is screwed. what do you guys think?

 

[Lynch Hung]

If nintendo wanted to make a powerful system they could - easy - they aren't short on funds at all...

They are doing it to change what's becoming a very boring trend (where graphics are the only selling point of a game)

 

[mrscientific13]

If nintendo wanted to make a powerful system they could - easy - they aren't short on funds at all...

They are doing it to change what's becoming a very boring trend (where graphics are the only selling point of a game)

Here Here. Nintendo is actually the only company that doesn't lose money on their consoles. Microsoft loses money on each 360 and I believe Sony will be. And Sony has already tried to copy the nintendo controler but didn't upgrade, rather downgraded it. Nintendo will likely have the technology to themselves for a while. Microsoft and Sony are too stupid to take advantage of it, besides, it would take years of R&D to develop the technology as Nintendo isn't just going to release how they did it to Sony and Microsoft. No, I don't see either Sony or Microsoft doing anything like Nintendo.

 

[DefragMyHead]

You make a good point about the profitability of the actual consoles. I know Microsoft was always selling the Xbox at a loss last generation. As far as the PS3 is concerned, I think if Sony is selling a console for $600(US) and still losing money someone needs to be canned, cuz there were clearly some heinous logistical errors made in the planning of the console if thats the case. On a personal note, as a casual gamer...someone who plays games that appeals to him when they appeal to him...some who plays games for recreation, not as a lifestyle...I think Id choose hardware over innovation, especially if that innovation isn't REVOLUTIONARY. Im not saying Nintendo might not have a few tricks up its sleeve, Im just saying it better do better than pull a bunny out of its hat if it wants to attract the mainstream MAJORITY. The problem with Nintendo is, in my opinion, is that it is a company run by gamers geared toward 'gamers,' but I think theyre failing to realize that the vast majority of people who buy consoles are not "gamers." No doubt there are those that will be truly intrigued by Nintendo's innovations, but I dont think that will result in windfall profits. Basically, from an average joe point of view Nintendo rocks since they totally march to their own corporate beat...but unfortunately, I think their unique...innovative...whatever corporate strategy hurts them financially, since the majority of gamers really dont care about what theyre doing. And that sucks cuz I remember playing my NES as a little boy and thinking NINTENDO was video games.

 

[Lynch Hung]

The Wii will do well, looks at how much attention it got at E3 and look at all the positive hype. Kudos to them.

 

[DefragMyHead]

You sound like a fanboy, but time will tell whether or not youre right.

 

[Lynch Hung]

Yeah i'm a big nintendo fan, but no not a fanboy - i don't bag on other systems.....yeah we'll see what happens.

 

[aaronkupen]

Well first off, nintendo definately has the money to compete with other systems. Look at gamecube, it actually had better hardware in it than the playstation 2.

Secondly, I think the concept of Nintendo being more focused towards games will help it out greatly this generation. At least I hope so, it seems that playstation 3 and xbox360 seemed more focused on the community or video/ sound playing or whatever. Personally, I don't care about that. I just want to play games on my console, I would just go on my computer if I really wanted to do that.

 

[C0nstant1ne]

nintendo always puts there games towards the earlier age group

 

[faek]

The problem with Nintendo is, in my opinion, is that it is a company run by gamers geared toward 'gamers,' but I think theyre failing to realize that the vast majority of people who buy consoles are not "gamers."

That's exactly what nintendo ISN'T doing. They're providing entertainment that's geared at pleasing any kind of person that likes having fun, not just typical FPS, RPG, adventure, etc gamers. That's the basis behind their innovative strategy, reaching people on levels of "fun", instead of stereotyped genres that don't appeal to everybody. Nintendo's consumer demographics span such a young to mature range partly because of this. They're creating more and more games enjoyable to anybody, especially those not interested in the typical gaming genres. Gamers typically flock to XBOX [360] and PS2 for the reasons you mentioned, not Nintendo.