You probably have a point, they will probably still be around for a good long time, even if they end up in a two-bit market space 10 or 15 years down the line. They're sitting on tons of cash, and can literally afford to allow their market to whittle away until it some day stabilizes, bouyed solely or mostly by those loyal to their particular quality of product. Apple is a good example of a company with a very limited install-base that chugs along, although they're in a market much more tolerant of specialization and have a professional market within that to cater to which is even more stable by nature. More over, I'm fully aware Nintendo is making hordes of money, and are certainly more profitable with their current products than Microsoft is with theirs, for all their broad appeal. Hell, what's a bit frustrating in a way as far as I'm concerned, is that they continue to profit at all under their current marketing scheme and overall strategy, albeit no where near the levels they once did as far as set-top consoles are concerned. And probably no where near the levels it >could< be under only a slightly different approach. One that would not diminish the hardcore element of their market in the least, and only expand it. As of today Nintendo has made a series of mistakes with the Gamecube, less severe perhaps than the previous generation, that has needlessly stifled its potential performance. I don't believe this sort of bs that says Nintendo can not compete against what Sony and Microsoft has or offers, particularly in this generation, and especially when developers themselves have expressed frustration over Nintendo's overly conservative or down right counter-intuitive attitude/approach in certain regards.
I say that even though I fully believe in the viability of an all gaming platform. No one is saying Nintendo is poised to take dominance in the market again or at least in the next-generation, because it's fairly clear that's not what they're about at this point, and it would be foolish for them to start throwing around cash to that end, just to bite off more than they could chew. But if Nintendo ends up with an even smaller install-base next generation, or even the same relatively speaking.. something they obviously would not want... why would you then turn around and do things to exacerbate that possible circumstance as a company? Or why would you fail to do the things that are conceivably within your financial/logistical limits to prevent or reverse it? You wouldn't, you'd do everything in your power to pull back on that proverbial stick and reclaim not just marketshare but mindshare above all else, so that when you tell your investors of your sales expectations, you actually meet them instead of missing them by a large and largely frowned-upon margin. Nothing about Nintendo's basic policies or philosophies should necessarily hold them back from achieving an extraordinarily solid #2 position which they today lack but could have easily attained. They could've then leveraged that in the generation after to even more profitable ends. The idea that they should continue a strategy that's being wrecked by laws of diminishing returns as evidenced by Gamecubes performance woes, is ludicrous.
Then there's how they keep talking about broadening their audience, having broader appeal, making games easier to pick up. I'm sorry, that does not sound like a company that desires to be relegated into a wholely niche market. That sounds like a company that wants to reinvigorate the market, bring in fresh blood and more of it than the other guys, expand the market in their own way and not necessarily by hopping on some consumer electronics or personal computing trend. A loyal established audience is not something you simply herd people into, you build upon it and gradually that foundation strengthens. To say that, they should keep on making and marketing purpley consoles with purse-like form factor, is simply ridiculous. A cool toy is a cool toy is a cool toy, Gameboy still retains a lot of that element in the eyes of the mainstream (SP helped that immensely), and Gamecube hardly had any to begin with as far as I'm concerned. That Nintendo should favor making something come off more silly than cool just cus their 'hardcore' fans wouldn't mind it or would blindly accept it or whatever the reason, is bs. It's also bs to continue that miserable plan of action on the basis that 'the others' would just find something else to ridicule, that's far too childish logic on which to drive business decisions, even if it is in a market involving children. The only ones who would do such a thing are the blind 'hardcore' on the other side of the fence anyway, they're the minority, the true masses would not react that way in face of a generally appealing >and< quality product that's competitive.
Plenty of the 'hardcore' Nintendo fans rabidly defend purple as a great choice for the consoles debut, but that still doesn't change the fact black and even more so platinum marketed many times better and exhibited far superior yield ratios. That's money in their pocket, with nothing but a tweak to what they originally set out to do. Was it an affront to the hardcore? No, their appeal to their most loyal fan-base doesn't faulter, only strengthens in the end. That's really the uber point right there, there is tons Nintendo can do to carve out a sizeable market from themselves, larger than what they currently have, and still more than satisfy their 'hardcore' following. Why wouldn't I want to see the company that provides me specific games I love succeed to their clearly perceivable potential? That just means more money for them, probably more games for me, and probably better games to boot. There is nothing no where that says broader appeal equates to screwing over your fan-base, unless they're elitest bastards who don't want their neighbor to have or enjoy their toy for no real reason.
Finally returning to the subject of the thread, sort of... is it really so hard to wait 2 months out from launch for a Pokemon title? Is it really so difficult to see the benefit to marketing in that small delay and the fundamental justifications behind it? You'd have plenty of other titles Nintendo is known for released prior under this proposed approach. I'd personally want more people hooked in by the time a popular/quality albeit kid friendly title rolls around, just to have more people to perhaps talk about it with, more people to play with or against, or just have the facilitation of dragging those uninitiated into playing since they already have the machine. This specific approach me and some others have suggested may not be necessarily what does the job, it's just a suggestion based on current information, but the reasoning behind it is sound if not the details of the suggestion itself. The reasoning is the much larger issue at hand. I apologize, but why Nintendo should drop everything they reasonably >could< do, easily by almost all accounts, just to satiate a relatively small number of consumers who perhaps just can't see past their own interests, is beyond me.
Topic: N5 Launch Games List! (Read 18295 times)
