Topic: The WiiU debacle: Is Nintendo or publishers to blame.

[Adrock]

The best thing Nintendo has done is support indie developers. With Wii U's major third party community being a damn ghost town, there's an entire untapped market of Nintendo fans eager for new games. That lack of competiton from major publishers should draw even more indie developers to Wii U as long as Nintendo encourages them.

First, can Microsoft cut the price of the XBone to $399.99 to match the price of the PS4 and still make a profit?

Microsoft is likely not making a profit at $499 (nor Sony at $399). The price of One and PS4 is a lot closer when you consider that One comes with Kinect and PS4 doesn't come with PS Eye. Microsoft is banking on Kinect to be a difference maker and it can be for many people though others, like myself, really don't want a camera facing their living space 24/7.

Secondly, if there is a fift dollar price difference between the PS4 and Wii U then this must imply that the PS4 is not that much more advanced than the Wii U and thus is easier to port between the two systems?

There is, but it's no where near Wii and PS3. Porting should be possible due to scalability, but third parties are going to have to work for it... and they probably won't. Insano brought up before that Nintendo should port Unreal Engine 4 to Wii U themselves since Epic won't. That would be worth the trouble. If it's a barrier for developers, make it not one.

I swear, I post so infrequently on this board because all it is, is Nintendo doom and gloom.

Then contribute. Create new topics, foster different discussions

[ShyGuy]

Here's what I think: we saw HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars worth of game costs on display at the conferences over the last couple days. I don't think that a large portion of these publishers are going to make their money back since they are putting so much cash into development. Do you really think a dozen shooters and half a dozen racing games are all going to sell millions and millions apiece?
2014-2015 will probably be a blood bath of studio closures and cut backs.

[Adrock]

That's why supporting indie developers is in Nintendo's best interest. Those developers are bringing game ideas to the table that the major publishers would never dream of looking at and they're doing so for a fraction of the budget these shooters and racers have. If Nintendo helps these developers out when they're first starting out, they'll likely always support Nintendo in the long run even if they bring their games over to competing platforms. And that's what we want. It's not about exclusives since those are mostly first party these days; it's about getting everything else that other consoles get.

[Evan_B]

Here's what I think: we saw HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars worth of game costs on display at the conferences over the last couple days. I don't think that a large portion of these publishers are going to make their money back since they are putting so much cash into development. Do you really think a dozen shooters and half a dozen racing games are all going to sell millions and millions apiece?
2014-2015 will probably be a blood bath of studio closures and cut backs.

Yeah. I'm sure people will choose their favorites and whatnot, but right now, the shooter is on its way out, and I think the multiplayer RPG experience is what many developers are attempting to push. But with the way things have gone these two years prior, things are certainly looking a bit sticky for these developers that think they can shove the same **** down gamers' throats.

Or not. I mean, there are people out there who seem genuinely excited to get an xBox One.

[Ian Sane]

I think EA has been very unprofessional and I don't really think the Wii U has truly been given a fair shot.  But I ultimately blame Nintendo for completely ignoring where the industry is at.

Last gen the industry wanted to make multiplatform games and Nintendo fucked that all up by releasing glorified last gen hardware that would prohibit ports of PC/PS3/X360 releases.  Well they just DID IT AGAIN.  The Wii U is glorified last gen hardware that will prohibit ports of PC/PS4/XB1 releases.  "Well they could share development with the PS360."  Those are OLD ASS systems on their way out.  No third party considers those consoles to be their future.  So they're going to learn the ins and outs of the Wii U so they include multiplatform releases for the year or so that it actually works into the plans?  No.  No sane company would bother putting the time and money into that.  Some of them did a token effort and the Wii U didn't sell so hot at launch so they gave up because it was never going to be a longterm relationship anyway.  They don't want to have to make Wii U exclusive games and they cannot include the Wii U in multiplatform development.  It is of no use to them.

It is also worth nothing that these third parties make core games for core gamers.  Nintendo's casual image on the Wii effectively scared that audience away.  Third parties therefore assume that the very audience for their games will not buy a Nintendo console so it is pointless to support it.

Last gen Nintendo basically told the historical videogame market to take a hike.  "We don't need you core gamers or third parties because we've got the casual buck."  Now the fad is over for the casuals and Nintendo is asking us core gamers and third parties to come back and no one wants to come on board until Nintendo shows that things will be different this time.  We're ALL being cautious and the system is selling like **** because we're all so afraid of being the first to jump in the pool.  No core gamers wants to buy a casual console and no third party wants to release core games on a casual console and lose money.

[Adrock]

No sane company would develop a game that's still considered a failure even after selling over five million copies. Wait, they do that. Seems like no third party has a goddamn clue what they're doing.

Nintendo is right around where consoles should have been if Sony and Microsoft didn't leapfrog into the HD era. It sucks for Nintendo now, but it's absurd to expect a company to take a major loss just to be competitive in hardware. For someone who keeps bringing up the good ol' days of the SNES, you keep ignoring that this is not how anyone used to do things 20 years ago. Once the industry started that trend, all these companies started going out of business. Is Nintendo the crazy one here?

I'm not convinced third parties are struggling with PS3/360 level hardware. Only Nintendo needed to launch a new console. It's obvious Microsoft is moving to One so they can try to **** consumers in the ass.

[nickmitch]

Forgive me if anyone already said this, but: How can you say The Wii U's state is Publishers' fault? The success of the system isn't their responsibility. It's clearly Nintendo's fault. They didn't launch the system with the "it" game, they didn't sell that enough hardware, it's all on Nintendo.

Did EA act like an ass? Yes. But then again, the opportunity cost to spite Nintendo isn't enough to make EA swallow their pride, so again that's on Nintendo. Was the Rayman delay complete douchebaggery? Sure. Would it have "saved" the system? Probably not.  Nintendo counted on others to keep the releases steady when they were already proven unreliable. So, bad on Nintendo.

[the asylum]

Now that it's abundantly clear that the casual crowd and their money isn't carrying over from the Wii, think we'll finally get a console that will have competitive hardware power with the other two next gen? The controller gimmick only got the Wii so far. Yeah, it made a lot of money, but is was awash in shovelware. Big studios wouldn't even consider it.

The best way to get a company's attention is with their bottom lines. Hopefully Nintendo's "Saturn" won't lead to their "Dreamcast."

[Agent-X-]

I've been convinced that the Wii U will be fine. I bought it because I've been confident that it would at least be as good as the GameCube--I figure the GameCube was the bottoming out point.


Now I'm not so confident anymore. I have been disenchanted with Nintendo since year 2 of the Nintendo Wii, but I've been patient with them because of games like Skyward Sword and Brawl. It had to have been about four years ago when Nintendo began selling us this notion that the casual gaming community was going to be their area of concentration and that we hardcore gamers would continue to be served the same great quality content just without all the buzz and hype. Then we began to see an increasing number of products coming out of Nintendo that held virtually no appeal to the core audience of Nintendo fans. Meanwhile, the bulk of third party support shifted to shovelware titles that more closely fit with Nintendo's concentration.


Now that it is evident that the casual audience is not picking up the Wii U, we are seeing third party publishers cut support. Today's news that Ubisoft is scaling back support for the console isn't so much a nail in the coffin because it is an effect rather than a cause. What bit of support is slated for the Wii U going into 2014 had better remain concrete in the release schedule or even Nintendo may have too much of a challenge getting their core audience to buy the console.


No one has ever bought Nintendo on the sole basis that only Nintendo published software would be available to them. I have loved the Mario, Zelda, and Donkey Kong games since the 80's, and I wouldn't buy a Wii U knowing that only Nintendo is backing the system. The fear and the cold hard reality is that Nintendo may, eventually, have to decide how much money to sink into their own products with such a limited install base.


One further thought is this: When do we start to seriously consider the 3DS as a competitor to the Wii U? Not only is it a fully viable Nintendo platform, but it also competes for the same development resources. It's not like the handheld simply plays mid-90's quality games like the GBA/DS. The time, energy, and money going into that platform is likely the biggest reason Nintendo didn't give the Wii U a proper launch.

[Khushrenada]

One thing that occured to me and I forgot to ask about it was how about Rock Band.

It was mentioned earlier in this thread how people often buy two consoles, Nintendo and one of the other two, and will usually buy a third party game on one of the other consoles rather than Nintendo's to get more of the benefits out of it.

But I was curious as to how Rock Band did on sales because that was a game with wide appeal for everyone and was actually ported across all platforms but there's no denying that it was easier to use on PS3 or XBox 360 especially when it cam to downloading more songs and increasing one's music library playlist.

In the end, how did that series break down? Would anyone have some pretty accurate numbers on that?

[ShyGuy]

I figured it out. CONSUMERS ARE TO BLAME.

Donkey Kong Country Returns sold over 4 million. Prime 3 sold over 1.5 million

Super Mario 3D Land sold over 8 million edit: Mario Galaxy 2 sold over 10 million, so I guess the point doesn't apply here.

Wii Party sold almost 9 million

Mario Kart Wii sold about 30 FREAKING MILLION. Fzero GX sold I think around 400k.

[Ian Sane]

The thing is that the Wii U sales really are terrible and have been since day one and are worse than a typical new console.  When third parties are saying it isn't selling well enough, they're not wrong.  This isn't some outright lie, it really is not selling well.

How would PS360 multiplatform games ever sell on the Wii U anyway?  So we got Batman at launch.  That's nice but it was already on the other systems that have been out for YEARS and that the target audience of the game already owns.  Only someone who was solely a Wii owner last gen would have any reason to buy a Wii U to play Batman.  But perhaps people would buy the Wii U for an exclusive and then buy some multiplatform titles.  Whose responsibility was it to have system selling exclusives?  Nintendo.  If their own first party games sold the Wii U then those multiplatform third party games would have had a better chance to sell.

Nintendo is trying to sell a system on a very small amount of games that don't really sell the Wii U as a new generation (it should be seen as beyond the PS360; not as a contemporary and thus something that will obsolete within a year) and the new games they've announced don't even really push the expensive controller that drives the price up of the whole package and is supposedly the whole reason to buy this thing in the first place.  I don't have any confidence in that plan as a consumer and I sure as hell wouldn't invest money into that as a publisher.

[Razorkid]

The PS4 and Xbox One have zero install base, are more expensive than WiiU, and require a lot of things in order to fully take advantage of the systems services (DRM, Multiplayer pay walls, etc.)


Is it Nintendo's job to fund every 3rd party (not exclusive, but) multiplatform game? That's unfeasible from a business sense and silly as the other platforms aren't shelling out money just to get the same game made on their system.  I don't get it.  Why is Nintendo responsible for getting publishers to make games for a system that will be guaranteed to have an install base of at least tens of millions because of Nintendo's franchises alone?  Why is Nintendo blamed when they have a capable system that can ported to? Outside of last gen, their hasn't been a generation where ports weren't done because the system couldn't handle it.


The rise of development costs last gen killed the 3rd party exclusive and it is generally expected that a game from any third party not co-funded or published by one of the big 3 will be released on at least 2-3 competing platforms. Why is Nintendo being ignored?


I'm not worried because the WiiU is looking more and more like the 3DS as time goes by. The first party games are arriving which will spur sales. 3rd party support will be closely behind. And I think the people who think that the PS4 and Xbox One are gonna fly off the shelves past this holiday are gonna be in for a rude awakening (3rd party publishers especially).

[smallsharkbigbite]

Is it Nintendo's job to fund every 3rd party (not exclusive, but) multiplatform game? That's unfeasible from a business sense and silly as the other platforms aren't shelling out money just to get the same game made on their system.  I don't get it.  Why is Nintendo responsible for getting publishers to make games for a system that will be guaranteed to have an install base of at least tens of millions because of Nintendo's franchises alone?

Nintendo doesn't have a userbase of tens of millions now. Most games have a shelf life of 6 months to a year. That is the period that publishers are going to use to see if they are recovering their cost. Also, the wii was a unique experience. Gamecube had all the Mario/Nintendo games and sold poorly. There is concern that Nintendo games alone won't make wii u a good seller.

Nobody is remotely saying that Nintendo fund every third party game. But at the same time they have to be realistic that it's not an easy system to make money on right now because the install base is low and there aren't the tools available to make quick programming and allow quick ports.

I guess what makes too much sense to me is to get ea back on board. I'd tell them they can make Madden 25 and FIFA 14 license free if they bring Battlefield 4 and Mass Effect to the Wii U.

Madden is huge in America. There are people that just play sport games in the US. They were considered casual gamers before the Wii changed that meaning. And dare I say, a 2nd Wii U Madden might be the superior version as the launch versions on the ps4/xbox1 arelikely to have some issues . I know people here aren't that big on Madden, but I think having the best version could be a system seller.

Fifa's the same as Madden, but you replace US with Europe/Japan.

Then by getting Battlefield and Mass Effect you've gotten ea to port the frostbite engine and develop tools to make porting easier in the future.

It is a win win and won't have to be replicated until the next system. These games don't compete with Nintendo games and they wouldn't cost much if anything to get.

I feel this is the summary. Ea supported Nintendo in a big way at launch. They lost money. They wanted Nintendo to work with them and help them find their market. Nintendo in typical fashion says that's not our problem, we don't need you and then they slam the door. Sure ea has since acted like a child, but it's long overdue that Nintendo give someone in America some power to work with western developers and stop pretending like they are just going to come back on their own.

[Razorkid]

Is it Nintendo's job to fund every 3rd party (not exclusive, but) multiplatform game? That's unfeasible from a business sense and silly as the other platforms aren't shelling out money just to get the same game made on their system.  I don't get it.  Why is Nintendo responsible for getting publishers to make games for a system that will be guaranteed to have an install base of at least tens of millions because of Nintendo's franchises alone?

Nintendo doesn't have a userbase of tens of millions now. Most games have a shelf life of 6 months to a year. That is the period that publishers are going to use to see if they are recovering their cost. Also, the wii was a unique experience. Gamecube had all the Mario/Nintendo games and sold poorly. There is concern that Nintendo games alone won't make wii u a good seller.

Nobody is remotely saying that Nintendo fund every third party game. But at the same time they have to be realistic that it's not an easy system to make money on right now because the install base is low and there aren't the tools available to make quick programming and allow quick ports.

I guess what makes too much sense to me is to get ea back on board. I'd tell them they can make Madden 25 and FIFA 14 license free if they bring Battlefield 4 and Mass Effect to the Wii U.

Madden is huge in America. There are people that just play sport games in the US. They were considered casual gamers before the Wii changed that meaning. And dare I say, a 2nd Wii U Madden might be the superior version as the launch versions on the ps4/xbox1 arelikely to have some issues . I know people here aren't that big on Madden, but I think having the best version could be a system seller.

Fifa's the same as Madden, but you replace US with Europe/Japan.

Then by getting Battlefield and Mass Effect you've gotten ea to port the frostbite engine and develop tools to make porting easier in the future.

It is a win win and won't have to be replicated until the next system. These games don't compete with Nintendo games and they wouldn't cost much if anything to get.

I feel this is the summary. Ea supported Nintendo in a big way at launch. They lost money. They wanted Nintendo to work with them and help them find their market. Nintendo in typical fashion says that's not our problem, we don't need you and then they slam the door. Sure ea has since acted like a child, but it's long overdue that Nintendo give someone in America some power to work with western developers and stop pretending like they are just going to come back on their own.

I agree that WiiU doesn't have a user base of tens of millions now, but off the strength of Nintendo's own franchises, such a number will be obtained within a reasonable time frame. That still doesn't explain why 2 brand new consoles with, again, zero userbase gets better support than WiiU based off that argument.


EA put out a 4 games for the WiiU - 2 ports of their sports franchise that did nothing to push the system or it's features and a port of the last game in an RPG trilogy that came out 7 months earlier for $60 while simultaneously releasing the entire trilogy in one package on inferior competing hardware for the same price. Then, 4 quiet months later, we get a (superior) port of a racing game that came out 6 months ago on competing systems upon the WiiU's release.  That doesn't say to me they tried. That says they made token support by making shoddy games or releasing also rans half a year later and expecting gamers to gobble it up  like starved paupers.  The Wii era EA tried and failed sometimes, but was very successful most of the time. They immediately brought new ip ideas to take advantage of the controller and never failed to port their most popular franchises when feasible (crappy spin-offs notwithstanding). The WiiU era EA has done nothing to make a WiiU owner, let alone a non-owner to want to buy the games they have made for WiiU thus far.  I agree that they are needed, especially here in the west, but they get no sympathy from me.  Garbage in, garbage out.


I do agree with you that NOA needs to be given some free reign to court western 3rd party developers and publishers.  Whether they like it or not, ignoring western developers in this day and age on consoles is a guarantee that you will not be as successful as your competitors worldwide.  I still think its silly for Nintendo to bank roll every 3rd party multiplatform game, but I do think they should be more willing to make deals with certain ones, or at least with certain big big games.

[smallsharkbigbite]

I agree that WiiU doesn't have a user base of tens of millions now, but off the strength of Nintendo's own franchises, such a number will be obtained within a reasonable time frame. That still doesn't explain why 2 brand new consoles with, again, zero userbase gets better support than WiiU based off that argument.

EA put out a 4 games for the WiiU -

Most analysts disagree with you on Wii U sales.  Wii Sports/Wii Fit captivated the market and made the Wii a large commercial success.  Nintendoland hasn't captivated the market and most analysts have the Wii U pegged as a Gamecube with worse third party support.  According to Wikipedia, the Gamecube sold 22 million units over it's life.  Did it not have Nintendo's franchises to get it to tens of millions of units in a reasonable time?  Maybe Wii U will make a comeback with price drops and better games, but the Wii U is selling scary bad right now and has lost a significant amount of third party support. 

I'm not going to get into a big argument about EA because it's been hashed before.  $60 ports are the price of buying a new console.  Mass Effect was probably the best Wii U game at launch (at least according to Metacritic) and having NFS, Madden, and Fifa on par with other consoles was great support to me.  Could EA have done more?  Yeah, they could of but that's not really EA's style.  Preferences vary, but I thought this was much better support than EA gave the Wii at the end of its life.  I think Ian sums it well.  EA support is be expected and may not be a system seller.  But the lack of EA games is a big deal, especially to single console owners.  They are the biggest publisher and they do make good games.  I know many here don't like their games, but they sell boatloats so they clearly have fans. 

[Razorkid]

I would argue that the gaming audience (especially for Nintendo consoles) is several times larger than it was over 10 years ago during the GameCube's life cycle. I'm not saying everyone who bought the Wii will pick up a WiiU, just that they were exposed to Nintendo franchises and some of that awareness and interest will bleed over to the new console. I can't forsee the WiiU selling that little over its life span.

I agre that the WiiU need third parties like EA to bring a variety of experiences to the console that Nintendo simply does not do. I love EA games and own quite a few from last generation across different platforms. My argument was that they put in very little effort for the launch of a new console and then expected their games to sell like gangbusters. I don't care if some people experienced those ports for the first time on WiiU, I would garner that a lot of people had an opportunity to experience it elsewhere long before the system came out. I get the console isn't flying off the shelves, but I don't know. It's disingenuous to blame a console for the lack of sales for games you put little effort in. If they were so good, they would sell to more people, especially when every piece of software stands out at the beginning.

I'm really, really curious to see how the new consoles will sell post holiday season. I really don't believe we are gonna see hardware numbers like we did last gen. I'm not trying to project the WiiU's sales on the other two, but I believe it's gonna take even longer for these systems (including WiiU) to hit critical mass.

[Evan_B]

I seriously fail to see why third parties continue to support platforms that cause them to lose money and even go bankrupt, but then I realize why, and I understand Nintendo's viewpoint.

The gamer population may be bigger now than it was back around the GameCube, but the reason high budget games don't make profit is because gaming is STILL a niche market- and in order to support this concept that it is widely accessible and an integral part of home entertainment, the big three have marketed their consoles as 'entertainment devices' rather than gaming consoles. That's the only way they'll survive in the market- as augmented home entertainment devices.

Gamers in general, and even members of this board, feel that they are entitled to great experiences and high-budget games, but this mindset is directly opposite to the sort of market that the gaming industry needs in order to thrive. Well, maybe not the 'great experiences' thing, but certainly the high budget stuff. This 'PS4 is a high end PC' bullshit is exactly what it sounds like- fluff. Marketing mumbo jumbo. All of the next-gen console are no great leap in comparison to the last generation. This is because the last generation was stupid and unproductive for just about everyone.

The truth is, Nintendo just has the biggest battle to fight, since they screwed themselves over the most last generation. The reason the Wii U isn't selling is because Nintendo hasn't marketed it well at all, and the way they need to market it as a core audience machine- because the casual sell is a great way to make money but it ultimately proves futile in the long run.

Third parties aren't developing for Wii U because they're busy blowing their load on the other next-gen consoles- but when they don't sell either, they'll return once Nintendo has a stronger install base- which it will, because it's six months ahea of everyone else. Nintendo needs Bayonetta, X, and other mature IPs to push their system- that's what they need to push to prove they have a core console- fortunately, they have a device that can help them get back in touch with the core- Miiverse. If they see what their user base wants, maybe they'll get the friggin' message and understand what they need to sell a core console. That's their goal- even if the Wii U sells modestly, they'll have ideas of what they need to develop and push. Because if they continue to push high-budget development like Sony and Microsoft did, they'll screw themselves over just like they did.

What they need to do is push mature titles and promote their close relationship with the consumer- Miiverse, Nintendo Directs, the like. That is the point- they are in touch with the small group of people that call themselves gamers, because that's the group who will consistently buy consoles and boycott ridiculous ideas like the xBox One. Okay, I'm done.

[Kytim89]

It might be a good idea for Nintendo to ask the fans directly through Miiverse what third party games they want on the Wii U and then use their "cash on hand" to get those games onto the system even if they have to devote some of their own resources to do it.

[NWR_insanolord]

That would be a terrible idea. By the time we know about a game it's too late to get a day-and-date Wii U release, and without that the sales will be terrible. If Nintendo's going to buy support, which I don't think they should do as it's a slippery slope that could put them in an even worse situation, they can't rely on the fans to decide what they're going to do.

[broodwars]

Only Nintendo fans could view the death of an entire industry as a positive thing. Sure, I harp on Nintendo for the Wii U's failure, but that's because I want them to become proactive for ****ing once and actually ADAPT to the needs of their audience and the fact that it's not 1985 anymore.  But some of you would "see our entire industry burn if Nintendo could be king of the ashes", to steal a line from Varys of Game of Thrones.

Nintendo could have made moves when they designed the Wii U and marketed it at launch to entice more and better 3rd party development. They chose not to, and now they have to deal with the consequences. And I hate to break it to you folks, but if the major players in this industry went under, everyone would transition to PC or mobile development on iOS LONG before they lined-up under Nintendo. The conventional view would be that dedicated gaming platforms are no longer viable. Even major players like Square-Enix right now are looking at shifting towards major iOS development. So by all means, wish for every other company to go bankrupt trying to cater to a gaming market that's not you. If you get your wish, this hobby is dead, so I hope you're happy with that.

[Kytim89]

Only Nintendo fans could view the death of an entire industry as a positive thing. Sure, I harp on Nintendo for the Wii U's failure, but that's because I want them to become proactive for ****ing once and actually ADAPT to the needs of their audience and the fact that it's not 1985 anymore.  But some of you would "see our entire industry burn if Nintendo could be king of the ashes", to steal a line from Varys of Game of Thrones.

Nintendo could have made moves when they designed the Wii U and marketed it at launch to entice more and better 3rd party development. They chose not to, and now they have to deal with the consequences. And I hate to break it to you folks, but if the major players in this industry went under, everyone would transition to PC or mobile development on iOS LONG before they lined-up under Nintendo. The conventional view would be that dedicated gaming platforms are no longer viable. Even major players like Square-Enix right now are looking at shifting towards major iOS development. So by all means, wish for every other company to go bankrupt trying to cater to a gaming market that's not you. If you get your wish, this hobby is dead, so I hope you're happy with that.

I believe you are delusional in the sense that you think that a Nintendo loyalist such as me want the entire gaming industry to burn for not supporting Nintendo. This is not the case for me. What has happened in the last ten years is that development costs have skyrocket to epic proportions. This is not helped by the graphical leap that Sony and Microsoft created back in 2006. Granted that Nintendo does have asinine way the fact that they choose a cheaper route for their gaming empire shows responsibility.

[Evan_B]

I'd rather see the industry crash and burn because of the pants-on-head retarded way the industry has handled itself than see it go any further- which is even more pants on head retarded.

And it's not 'relying', insano, it's 'listening to fan feedback'. No smart business would wait on hand and knee for their customers- that wasn't what I was implying, at all.

[Adrock]

I'm pretty sure insano was responding to kytim.

It's obvious Nintendo is using Miiverse for feedback. If enough people ask for Third Party Game X or Third Party Series Y, it shows some demand and Nintendo is culling those responses. It will be to late to get a simultaneous release with other platforms, but it does give them a target. They can try to work with that third party for the next installment.

[MagicCow64]

Eh, I think the crash is happening no matter what, and while it might produce some upside for Nintendo, it still wouldn't leave them as anything other than the last living outlet of an obsolete system.

Film projection is dying out rapidly. I don't think this is a good thing, but it's happening anyway.