Could someone please explain to me what the hell is wrong with Nintendo?

[hermes]

1) They release a underpowered overpriced console with the worst launch line up ever only one single games worth playing.
2) They discontinue the insanely popular NES classic for no reason.
3) Charge ?35 for ultra street fighter which was ?9 on xbox 360 several years ago.
4) Deliberately under stock their product the Switch.

When did this fall from grace happen and why? please someone explain how the powerhouse that produced the Snes and N64 beasts became the lame ducks they are now...please someone explain?? Do Nintendo want to actually fail because I defy anyone with half a brain to think this isn't done on purpose for some reason? It just seems they dont care anymore relying on releasing the same crap over and over and showing no signs of breathing life into their products.

The fact that there is one game worth playing at launch means it had the strongest launch lineup of any console in years. Switch has one more must-play launch game than the PS4, Xbox One, PS3 or Xbox 360.

I'd argue this... While I will say that BotW is one of the best launch titles in a very long time (Super Mario World takes the cake for the best launch title imo) I will say that the Xbox One had Killer Instinct for free as a launch title. I'd consider it a must play launch title.

Other than that, yeah I'd say launch line ups tend to be pretty weak sauce.

Also, if we are going to count "games worth playing at launch" to titles that are available in the previous generation with only marginal improvements, the Wii had Marvel Ultimate Alliance; the PS2 had Tekken Tag; the PS3 had Call of Duty 3; the PS4 had Battlefield 4, Black Flag, DC Universe Online, Flower and Injustice; the Wii U had Batman Arkham City and Mass Effect 3; and the XBox One had those plus Killer Instict, Ryse and Ground Zero, among many others...

 

[hermes]

3- Nintendo has the idea that sales (as in saling for cheap) negatively affect the value of their properties. To them, the mere idea of Nintendo games in a bargain bin (both literally and figuratively) is akin to an insult. That is, again, rooted on the idea of preventing the situation that drove Atari to near bankruptcy and Atari games to be nearly worthless by not overflowing the market, but they were established in the 80s (when things like online sales, ebay or Internet didn't exist) and hasn't been revised since then. That is why you rarely see sales of (new copies of) old Nintendo games in sites like amazon, or games getting discounted in their digital stores even years after release. That is also why when Nintendo released mobile games, they make it at several times the price of regular mobile games.

Nintendo aren't alone in this. Apple has had the exact same philosophy ever since Steve Jobs became CEO again. iPhones, iPads, Macbooks and iPods are not the kind of things you see on sale very often Tesla also have a similar policy in that Musk places a lot of weight on the idea that everyone must pay the same amount for one of their cars; the people selling them aren't allowed to negotiate and cut deals like most car dealers. You'll also see it with films from Disney, which tend to be consistently expensive on Blu-ray, even when they're years old (that includes their franchises like The Avengers and Star Wars, as well as their western releases of Ghibli films).

In terms of console pricing, I don't think Nintendo can really afford to eat a loss on consoles the way their competitors can. Sony and Microsoft have the infrastructure and expertise needed to make powerful multi-media machines (both on the hardware and software side) and then make money dealing with other companies on services for those machines. Nintendo really just have the games and the consoles, so they need them to make profits.

I think this also kind of leads to them understocking. If they figure out what they need to sell and then stock enough to meet that, they'll be safe. Having them selling out costs less than producing too much stock, and they probably figure most people will buy later anyway when they come back in stock. That said, they've still clearly improved in this regard. The Switch has outsold the Wii on opening weekend and given that they both sold out, that obviously means there was more Switch stock to go around.

I never said they were alone, just alone among gaming hardware (and software) producers. I also found the fake scarcity of Apple products to be rather pathetic.

Also, Nintendo is on a better position to afford it than the others. While it is true they don't have the same raw capital as Microsoft, they are on par with Sony and, most importantly, are the only ones that, since a couple generations ago, were not producing their consoles at a lost. Unlike the competition, every console they sold is a net gain.

 

[Cold Shiny]

Breath of the Wild's critical and commercial success invalidates every argument against the Switch's existence.

What did the PS4 have at launch again? KNACK!!!! THE GREATEST GAM EVAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!


(The PS4s awesome now, I'm just saying that launch lineups mean basically nothing)

 

[Poetic Nova]

Breath of the Wild's critical and commercial success invalidates every argument against the Switch's existence.

What did the PS4 have at launch again? KNACK!!!! THE GREATEST GAM EVAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!


(The PS4s awesome now, I'm just saying that launch lineups mean basically nothing)

It also had Killzone Shadows Fall.

Not the best game (not even the best in the series) but it did show what the PS4 was capable off. Well, until Horizon: Zero Dawn one upped that by the same developers.

 

[TrulyBritish]

I'm not entirely sure the "Sony and Microsoft's systems had shitty launch lineups as well" argument really works outside of comparing the two. Both Sony and Microsoft have the support of nearly every other AAA publisher out there, even if the launch line up is week consumers at least know they just have to wait for the next big release from EA/Ubisoft/WB/whatever or whatever indie stuff gets on those consoles.
I just feel that a weak line up of Nintendo games has a little more impact when that's what mostly supports their system.

You can count on the Switch to have tons of exclusives that no competitor will have.

Why get a PS4 when you have an Xbox One? Why get an Xbox One when you have a PS4? And for you PC elitists, Why buy a console when its better on PC?! (Not my own view)

But Nintendo games? Only on Nintendo...outside of these mobile games that just make you want to play the real versions.

I don't really see how that disproves my point...
Microsoft and Sony's launch titles matter when comparing those too consoles against each other, but that's a different ball park then comparing those consoles line ups against Nintendo. Nintendo consoles thrive on their exclusives, and if that lineup isn't strong you'd think that'd reflect on the console.
I've said before, but if Nintendo somewhat played ball with third party developers they'd have the strongest lineup of all, their own titles and whatever products the other AAA's develop.
If all Sony and Microsoft could offer is "Uh, I guess we have Uncharted or Halo" it'd put them in a weaker position.

 

[Saelune]

I'm not entirely sure the "Sony and Microsoft's systems had shitty launch lineups as well" argument really works outside of comparing the two. Both Sony and Microsoft have the support of nearly every other AAA publisher out there, even if the launch line up is week consumers at least know they just have to wait for the next big release from EA/Ubisoft/WB/whatever or whatever indie stuff gets on those consoles.
I just feel that a weak line up of Nintendo games has a little more impact when that's what mostly supports their system.

You can count on the Switch to have tons of exclusives that no competitor will have.

Why get a PS4 when you have an Xbox One? Why get an Xbox One when you have a PS4? And for you PC elitists, Why buy a console when its better on PC?! (Not my own view)

But Nintendo games? Only on Nintendo...outside of these mobile games that just make you want to play the real versions.

I don't really see how that disproves my point...
Microsoft and Sony's launch titles matter when comparing those too consoles against each other, but that's a different ball park then comparing those consoles line ups against Nintendo. Nintendo consoles thrive on their exclusives, and if that lineup isn't strong you'd think that'd reflect on the console.
I've said before, but if Nintendo somewhat played ball with third party developers they'd have the strongest lineup of all, their own titles and whatever products the other AAA's develop.
If all Sony and Microsoft could offer is "Uh, I guess we have Uncharted or Halo" it'd put them in a weaker position.

A credit Nintendo rarely gets is their tendency to actually do new things. The Wii, the Wii U, and the Switch all have some gimmick to them rather than just being "upgraded" *debatably* versions of the last system. That is also why they tend to lack third party support, cause they either they make it exclusive to use the special features, or it is just a port, often a lesser one too. No one but Nintendo tends to be able to fully utilize Nintendo's console for the sake of the game.

Nintendo offers things no one else can or will, and for what flaws they have, I will continue to admire that aspect about them.

 

[Saelune]

Their new management seems to be, well not too good.

New?

There is nothing *new* about Nintendo's management.

New as in not Satoru Iwata. They literally have a new CEO. Unfortunately, this one isnt a game developer.

 

[TrulyBritish]

A credit Nintendo rarely gets is their tendency to actually do new things. The Wii, the Wii U, and the Switch all have some gimmick to them rather than just being "upgraded" *debatably* versions of the last system. That is also why they tend to lack third party support, cause they either they make it exclusive to use the special features, or it is just a port, often a lesser one too. No one but Nintendo tends to be able to fully utilize Nintendo's console for the sake of the game.

Nintendo offers things no one else can or will, and for what flaws they have, I will continue to admire that aspect about them.

Thing is, I don't consider having a gimmick for the sake of having a gimmick to be an inherent plus. It depends on whether you consider these gimmicks added positively to the industry and, to be honest, I'd be hard pressed to say I think either motion controls or the second screen were really worth it. Interested to see how the whole handheld/console hybrid thing works out though.

 

[Saelune]

A credit Nintendo rarely gets is their tendency to actually do new things. The Wii, the Wii U, and the Switch all have some gimmick to them rather than just being "upgraded" *debatably* versions of the last system. That is also why they tend to lack third party support, cause they either they make it exclusive to use the special features, or it is just a port, often a lesser one too. No one but Nintendo tends to be able to fully utilize Nintendo's console for the sake of the game.

Nintendo offers things no one else can or will, and for what flaws they have, I will continue to admire that aspect about them.

Thing is, I don't consider having a gimmick for the sake of having a gimmick to be an inherent plus. It depends on whether you consider these gimmicks added positively to the industry and, to be honest, I'd be hard pressed to say I think either motion controls or the second screen were really worth it. Interested to see how the whole handheld/console hybrid thing works out though.

The positive is Nintendo's willingness to try new things, to be creative. (Insert crack at Nintendo not being creative cause of repeating the same formulas) They may give us the same old constantly, but then they also give us new, sometimes completely new, sometimes old things in new ways. And their competition is not exactly being super creative and varied themselves.

I do think motion controls and the second screen were worth it. I hope with the Switch, they go further with it, since despite people focusing on the "handheld" aspect of it, it can do what the Wii and Wii U did still. The 3DS meets my handheld needs, and I dont think Nintendo really intends for the Switch to be as mobile as people keep touting.

 

[TrulyBritish]

A credit Nintendo rarely gets is their tendency to actually do new things. The Wii, the Wii U, and the Switch all have some gimmick to them rather than just being "upgraded" *debatably* versions of the last system. That is also why they tend to lack third party support, cause they either they make it exclusive to use the special features, or it is just a port, often a lesser one too. No one but Nintendo tends to be able to fully utilize Nintendo's console for the sake of the game.

Nintendo offers things no one else can or will, and for what flaws they have, I will continue to admire that aspect about them.

Thing is, I don't consider having a gimmick for the sake of having a gimmick to be an inherent plus. It depends on whether you consider these gimmicks added positively to the industry and, to be honest, I'd be hard pressed to say I think either motion controls or the second screen were really worth it. Interested to see how the whole handheld/console hybrid thing works out though.

The positive is Nintendo's willingness to try new things, to be creative. (Insert crack at Nintendo not being creative cause of repeating the same formulas) They may give us the same old constantly, but then they also give us new, sometimes completely new, sometimes old things in new ways. And their competition is not exactly being super creative and varied themselves.

I do think motion controls and the second screen were worth it. I hope with the Switch, they go further with it, since despite people focusing on the "handheld" aspect of it, it can do what the Wii and Wii U did still. The 3DS meets my handheld needs, and I dont think Nintendo really intends for the Switch to be as mobile as people keep touting.

Hmm, well, agree to disagree and all that.

 

[WeepingAngels]

I don't understand people saying 'Switch has Breath of the Wild and that's a great launch title'. Well, Super Mario World wouldn't have sold near as many SNES's if it could also be played, nearly identical on the NES. What if Super Mario 64 could be played just as well on the SNES, would it still have been a great N64 launch title? If your best launch title isn't even an exclusive, that's not good. IMO.

 

[Saelune]

A credit Nintendo rarely gets is their tendency to actually do new things. The Wii, the Wii U, and the Switch all have some gimmick to them rather than just being "upgraded" *debatably* versions of the last system. That is also why they tend to lack third party support, cause they either they make it exclusive to use the special features, or it is just a port, often a lesser one too. No one but Nintendo tends to be able to fully utilize Nintendo's console for the sake of the game.

Nintendo offers things no one else can or will, and for what flaws they have, I will continue to admire that aspect about them.

Thing is, I don't consider having a gimmick for the sake of having a gimmick to be an inherent plus. It depends on whether you consider these gimmicks added positively to the industry and, to be honest, I'd be hard pressed to say I think either motion controls or the second screen were really worth it. Interested to see how the whole handheld/console hybrid thing works out though.

The positive is Nintendo's willingness to try new things, to be creative. (Insert crack at Nintendo not being creative cause of repeating the same formulas) They may give us the same old constantly, but then they also give us new, sometimes completely new, sometimes old things in new ways. And their competition is not exactly being super creative and varied themselves.

I do think motion controls and the second screen were worth it. I hope with the Switch, they go further with it, since despite people focusing on the "handheld" aspect of it, it can do what the Wii and Wii U did still. The 3DS meets my handheld needs, and I dont think Nintendo really intends for the Switch to be as mobile as people keep touting.

Yep. Their creativity is great isn't it? I mean, the Wii U game pad was amazing and helped that system sell buckets, not to mention how AMAZING it was playing Starfox Zero on it amirite?

Lol, seriously though.

You make it easy to disregard your opinion on this.

 

[WeepingAngels]

A credit Nintendo rarely gets is their tendency to actually do new things. The Wii, the Wii U, and the Switch all have some gimmick to them rather than just being "upgraded" *debatably* versions of the last system. That is also why they tend to lack third party support, cause they either they make it exclusive to use the special features, or it is just a port, often a lesser one too. No one but Nintendo tends to be able to fully utilize Nintendo's console for the sake of the game.

Nintendo offers things no one else can or will, and for what flaws they have, I will continue to admire that aspect about them.

Thing is, I don't consider having a gimmick for the sake of having a gimmick to be an inherent plus. It depends on whether you consider these gimmicks added positively to the industry and, to be honest, I'd be hard pressed to say I think either motion controls or the second screen were really worth it. Interested to see how the whole handheld/console hybrid thing works out though.

The positive is Nintendo's willingness to try new things, to be creative. (Insert crack at Nintendo not being creative cause of repeating the same formulas) They may give us the same old constantly, but then they also give us new, sometimes completely new, sometimes old things in new ways. And their competition is not exactly being super creative and varied themselves.

I do think motion controls and the second screen were worth it. I hope with the Switch, they go further with it, since despite people focusing on the "handheld" aspect of it, it can do what the Wii and Wii U did still. The 3DS meets my handheld needs, and I dont think Nintendo really intends for the Switch to be as mobile as people keep touting.

Yep. Their creativity is great isn't it? I mean, the Wii U game pad was amazing and helped that system sell buckets, not to mention how AMAZING it was playing Starfox Zero on it amirite?

Lol, seriously though.

I always thought people would come around to appreciate the Gamepad but since the Switch has launched, the Gamepad bashing has become even worse. It's almost as if people don't want a tablet controller. Oh wait...

 

[Saelune]

A credit Nintendo rarely gets is their tendency to actually do new things. The Wii, the Wii U, and the Switch all have some gimmick to them rather than just being "upgraded" *debatably* versions of the last system. That is also why they tend to lack third party support, cause they either they make it exclusive to use the special features, or it is just a port, often a lesser one too. No one but Nintendo tends to be able to fully utilize Nintendo's console for the sake of the game.

Nintendo offers things no one else can or will, and for what flaws they have, I will continue to admire that aspect about them.

Thing is, I don't consider having a gimmick for the sake of having a gimmick to be an inherent plus. It depends on whether you consider these gimmicks added positively to the industry and, to be honest, I'd be hard pressed to say I think either motion controls or the second screen were really worth it. Interested to see how the whole handheld/console hybrid thing works out though.

The positive is Nintendo's willingness to try new things, to be creative. (Insert crack at Nintendo not being creative cause of repeating the same formulas) They may give us the same old constantly, but then they also give us new, sometimes completely new, sometimes old things in new ways. And their competition is not exactly being super creative and varied themselves.

I do think motion controls and the second screen were worth it. I hope with the Switch, they go further with it, since despite people focusing on the "handheld" aspect of it, it can do what the Wii and Wii U did still. The 3DS meets my handheld needs, and I dont think Nintendo really intends for the Switch to be as mobile as people keep touting.

Yep. Their creativity is great isn't it? I mean, the Wii U game pad was amazing and helped that system sell buckets, not to mention how AMAZING it was playing Starfox Zero on it amirite?

Lol, seriously though.

You make it easy to disregard your opinion on this.

Creativity doesn't really mean anything when it rarely, if ever, catches on. Motion controls failed, Wii U pad failed, Virtual boy failed and they've lost most of their third party trust. So it doesn't really benefit them, does it? Starfox Zero would've been great, but their creativity on how to play it made the game terrible and panned.

What is your definition of "failed"? Cause the Wii was a major success. The Wii U was not Wii levels success, but its not the bomb people make it out to be, and it was a solid system. And virtual boy huh? You mean that thing Nintendo was trying to do 20 years before everyone else?

The motion controls on Starfox Zero were fine. People just threw a fit cause of change, that thing that people criticize Nintendo for -not- doing. Damned if they do, right?

 

[WeepingAngels]

A credit Nintendo rarely gets is their tendency to actually do new things. The Wii, the Wii U, and the Switch all have some gimmick to them rather than just being "upgraded" *debatably* versions of the last system. That is also why they tend to lack third party support, cause they either they make it exclusive to use the special features, or it is just a port, often a lesser one too. No one but Nintendo tends to be able to fully utilize Nintendo's console for the sake of the game.

Nintendo offers things no one else can or will, and for what flaws they have, I will continue to admire that aspect about them.

Thing is, I don't consider having a gimmick for the sake of having a gimmick to be an inherent plus. It depends on whether you consider these gimmicks added positively to the industry and, to be honest, I'd be hard pressed to say I think either motion controls or the second screen were really worth it. Interested to see how the whole handheld/console hybrid thing works out though.

The positive is Nintendo's willingness to try new things, to be creative. (Insert crack at Nintendo not being creative cause of repeating the same formulas) They may give us the same old constantly, but then they also give us new, sometimes completely new, sometimes old things in new ways. And their competition is not exactly being super creative and varied themselves.

I do think motion controls and the second screen were worth it. I hope with the Switch, they go further with it, since despite people focusing on the "handheld" aspect of it, it can do what the Wii and Wii U did still. The 3DS meets my handheld needs, and I dont think Nintendo really intends for the Switch to be as mobile as people keep touting.

Yep. Their creativity is great isn't it? I mean, the Wii U game pad was amazing and helped that system sell buckets, not to mention how AMAZING it was playing Starfox Zero on it amirite?

Lol, seriously though.

You make it easy to disregard your opinion on this.

Creativity doesn't really mean anything when it rarely, if ever, catches on. Motion controls failed, Wii U pad failed, Virtual boy failed and they've lost most of their third party trust. So it doesn't really benefit them, does it? Starfox Zero would've been great, but their creativity on how to play it made the game terrible and panned.

Motion controls failed? If only they showed up on the 3DS, Vita, Gamepad, Kinect, Move, PS4 Controller and the Switch has them too. No doubt I am leaving out many devices but I think I made my point. Motion controls have not failed.

Gamepad sadly failed to catch on and wish it had caught on. Since the DS, I have come to really enjoy the second screen. I can't speak about Virtual Boy, I know nothing about it at all.

The thing with the Kid Icarus game on the 3DS, the Starfox game on the Wii U and even Skyward Sword show the incompetent side of Nintendo that feels they need to force mediocre/bad controls on us to prove that their gimmick is great. It's only great when it is, not when many people can't even play it properly.

 

[Silvanus]

Wii was a freak accident during a time right before mobile gaming took off and captured that market. You can clearly see that the Wii name meant nothing after the original Wii further proving that market was taken by mobile phones.

Something does not have to create a market sustained for multiple generations in order to be a success, and something is not a "freak accident" if it comes about as a direct result of people making the express decision to buy their product.