• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

Discussion Nintendo should make a powerful console.

Status
Not open for further replies.
CastletonSnob said:
What evidence? Have you not seen the YEARS of people calling for Nintendo to get better third party support? I've seen lots of people say they're tired of buying a Nintendo console just for Nintendo games. If a Nintendo console had third party support on par with Sony and Microsoft, more people would buy it. This isn't quantum physics.
Click to expand...
Switch does get third party support though. Most of my library is third party.
 
CastletonSnob said:
What evidence? Have you not seen the YEARS of people calling for Nintendo to get better third party support? I've seen lots of people say they're tired of buying a Nintendo console just for Nintendo games. If a Nintendo console had third party support on par with Sony and Microsoft, more people would buy it. This isn't quantum physics.
Click to expand...
So just to be clear, are you advocating for there to be a high-end, home console software range AND a portable software range on two different Nintendo platforms then? As it seems unlikely Nintendo would make a device then not put their own games on it too. This idea of two software pipelines on two hardware lines was a big problem that the Switch solved through consolidation into the hybrid console, and it was a bigger problem than people not buying a Nintendo console for CoD etc.
 
Pixelknight said:
So just to be clear, are you advocating for there to be a high-end, home console software range AND a portable software range on two different Nintendo platforms then? As it seems unlikely Nintendo would make a device then not put their own games on it too. This idea of two software pipelines was a big problem that the Switch solved through consolidation into the hybrid console, and it was a bigger problem than people not buying a Nintendo console for CoD etc.
Click to expand...
I'm not even thinking about portables. I'm strictly talking about home consoles.
 
CastletonSnob said:
There are people who buy the latest console JUST for Madden or CoD. Having those games would appeal to those people.
Click to expand...
The vast majority of those people would still play those games on other platforms. Those franchises were present on Nintendo systems in the past, and it didn't really matter much.
 
CastletonSnob said:
What evidence? Have you not seen the YEARS of people calling for Nintendo to get better third party support? I've seen lots of people say they're tired of buying a Nintendo console just for Nintendo games. If a Nintendo console had third party support on par with Sony and Microsoft, more people would buy it. This isn't quantum physics.
Click to expand...
my friend I really suggest you take a course on debate because you'll learn anecdotal evidence (like "haven't you seen people calling for this?" and "I've seen lots of people say") is not just worthless, it actively makes your argument look entirely based in your own delusions. If you can't support your standpoint with hard evidence, actual numbers or provable facts, then having this argument is pointless because you're coming into this conversation convinced you're right and there's no way to change it.

Like it's totally fine to WANT a more powerful Nintendo machine. If you want a Nintendo produced x86 box with Call of Duty and Madden, that's entirely okay. But to make this thread stating they SHOULD, and to argue with people who are telling you why maybe they shouldn't, with statements like "I've seen people ask for it online," comes off as, like I said, delusional.
 
CastletonSnob said:
There are people who buy the latest console JUST for Madden or CoD. Having those games would appeal to those people.
Click to expand...
I mean, sure. But there are tradeoffs. Would making a more powerful console to attempt to capture a portion of the Madden-and-CoD audience be worth Pokémon potentially becoming less accessible and relevant among young people? Or Animal Crossing? Or Mario?

You can't just look at Nintendo making an expensive console and assume that all the changes would be purely additive, that they'd reach 100% of their existing market and then capture some of the Madden-and-CoD market. That's a pipe dream, there's just no reason to assume that would be the case.

Also, the Switch's continued success could lead to Madden and CoD coming to Switch, no higher-powered hardware required. The best thing Nintendo can do to get third party support is sell a hundred million consoles, not make a system that does the exact same thing as the two existing options.
 
CastletonSnob said:
I'm not even thinking about portables. I'm strictly talking about home consoles.
Click to expand...
That’s the problem, Nintendo doesn’t have that luxury of not thinking about portables. You can’t just rule the need to also support a portable line out of what makes sense for Nintendo when it’s their big differentiating factor, their only consistently successful hardware line and associated with Pokemon etc.

I mean, which is it, do you think they should have two hardware/software pipelines in 2022 or one? If it’s the latter, it makes sense that it’s hybrid (able to work as a portable) or portable, not a home console. And the former two require hardware considerations and compromises over battery, size, power, etc.
 
I'm convinced OP is a minor whose parent(s) said something like "I am only going to buy you a Nintendo machine" but OP wants to play COD and GTA so they're trying to work backwards into being able to play them.
 
CastletonSnob said:
What proof is there that if Nintendo made a powerful console on par with Sony and Microsoft's consoles, third parties WOULDN'T put games on it? And what proof is there that more people WOULDN'T buy a Nintendo console that was more powerful and had better third party support? You really think there aren't people who would buy a Nintendo console with Madden, CoD, Assassin's Creed, or GTA?

And don't say the N64 or GameCube, because I've already covered why they didn't get third party support.
Click to expand...
Despite trying to discount it, the GameCube is LITERALLY an example of Nintendo having hardware parity and fewer ports (taking a quick glance none of the NBA 2K games were larger than 1.4gigs for many years after the series stopped shipping on GameCube). The same is true with the Wii-U with yearly sports and FPS titles. Fans of those types of games simple do not seem to buy them on Nintendo hardware, which isn't a shock. If you are a fan of those types of titles you are already invested at this point (or heck in 2001) in the Playstation or Xbox ecosystem and probably prefer online play. Nintendo simply doesn't support the later well and hardware power isn't the big issue there.

Heck the Switch continues the trend, it has sold 100M units and yearly sports releases are missing from EA, Activision, ect. While the Switch isn't power compatible to the PS5 or XSeries, its good with the PS4, X1 lines and those are still being developed for form the big players. This is despite Fortnite and Rocket League showing that GaaS titles can work on the Switch.

You seem to be arguing that Nintendo could build power compatible hardware to the PS5/XSX and offer something "more" to entice entrenched players to move over to Nintendo's potential hardware. What would that something be? Because while Zelda and Mario 4K sound neat enough, I dont see how those titles move other games.

Conversely, the Switch has offered a wildly effectively middle ground that has prompted a series of "impossible" ports because those games seem to sell well enough on the Switch.
 
CastletonSnob said:
I'm not even thinking about portables. I'm strictly talking about home consoles.
Click to expand...

So, are you proposing they exit the portable market? Or are you proposing they release a home console without software support?

Because recent history has shown that they don't have the throughput to support two systems, and that's even before one of those systems is a high-powered 4K machine necessitating even higher production values.
 
Derachi said:
I'm convinced OP is a minor whose parent(s) said something like "I am only going to buy you a Nintendo machine" but OP wants to play COD and GTA so they're trying to work backwards into being able to play them.
Click to expand...

No. The whole point is that Nintendo making a powerful console would get them more third party support, which means more people would buy them.
 
The closest thing feasible without wrecking everything would be a totally non-portable version of a hybrid platform that had a more advanced or faster running version of the SOC in the portable, buuuut 1) That would serve to make the hybrid look less appealing. 2) If it was still one unified software platform, it wouldn't help in getting games that couldn't be ported to the hybrid.
 
0
CastletonSnob said:
No. The whole point is that Nintendo making a powerful console would get them more third party support, which means more people would buy them.
Click to expand...
well to be fair I have about as much evidence for the thing I said about you being a minor whose parent(s) won't buy you an xbox or playstation as you have evidence for what you've said so as far as I'm concerned our statements are on equal footing lmao
 
Gay Bowser said:
I mean, sure. But there are tradeoffs. Would making a more powerful console to attempt to capture a portion of the Madden-and-CoD audience be worth Pokémon potentially becoming less accessible and relevant among young people? Or Animal Crossing? Or Mario?

You can't just look at Nintendo making an expensive console and assume that all the changes would be purely additive, that they'd reach 100% of their existing market and then capture some of the Madden-and-CoD market. That's a pipe dream, there's just no reason to assume that would be the case.

Also, the Switch's continued success could lead to Madden and CoD coming to Switch, no higher-powered hardware required. The best thing Nintendo can do to get third party support is sell a hundred million consoles, not make a system that does the exact same thing as the two existing options.
Click to expand...
Why would Pokemon become less accessible and relevant among young people? How would getting the Madden and CoD audience affect Pokemon at all?

Young people would still buy Pokemon, and older people would buy Madden and CoD. I don't think the Madden and CoD audience care about Pokemon, or vice versa.
 
CastletonSnob said:
What proof is there that if Nintendo made a powerful console on par with Sony and Microsoft's consoles, third parties WOULDN'T put games on it? And what proof is there that more people WOULDN'T buy a Nintendo console that was more powerful and had better third party support? You really think there aren't people who would buy a Nintendo console with Madden, CoD, Assassin's Creed, or GTA?

And don't say the N64 or GameCube, because I've already covered why they didn't get third party support.
Click to expand...
That ain't how this works. You're making the claim that this will happen, and you have to support that. That's burden of proof, for you.

Throwing around unsupported assertions and demanding everyone else do the thinking to counter the point you don't even bother to argue doesn't aid that, nor does it truly avert it.

Like this:
CastletonSnob said:
If Nintendo made a powerful console, they'd get the same third party support as Sony and Microsoft, which means more people would buy the console.
Click to expand...

CastletonSnob said:
What proof is there that if Nintendo made a powerful console on par with Sony and Microsoft's consoles, third parties WOULDN'T put games on it?
Click to expand...

So the concept of different groups having different goals and priorities, approaching different situations differently, based on their own information and assumptions, and how those decisions aren't necessarily always correct, was ever so briefly touched upon here:

Supreme Overlord said:
What do you suppose is propelling the Switch in its console apotheosis, if raw power is the answer to everything?

The thing is, there's absolutely no guarantee of this. Different companies are going to have different goals, seek different audiences, be willing to spend different amounts of money, consider different costs in various forms, and so forth; even then, other console holders will seek to manipulate the course of things and are able to fall back on other sources of revenue to assist in this.

The market has formed different groups over its history, and formed different narratives, all of which will alter how the different companies will approach any given situation.

Even between Microsoft and Sony, third party parity hasn't exactly been a thing, with one getting instances of support the other lacks; even Nintendo, for all its lack of raw power, is receiving support not afforded its competitors.

Power might help in some, or even many, situations, but this power is not some guaranteed panacea to the question of third party support.
Click to expand...

And consider different factors, such as where these parties have already built up ecosystems for these games on other systems.

But then also Tentacle-Tropes offered some excuses and reasons which have been offered in the past:
Tentacle-tropes said:
No they wouldn’t since the goalposts would always be moved.
  • The developer is too small to do a port
  • Why bother when you have PC, PS, & Xbox
  • Console sales are too low
  • Can’t compete with 1st party games
  • Don’t have an audience of the system
  • Online infrastructure
  • Port wasn’t bought enough
  • The machine would compromise our vision/hold it back
  • The controller
  • We’ll get on that as soon as Nintendo pays us
  • Outdated views on Nintendo censorship
  • Something about how only kids can enjoy the system
  • Nintendo systems are only for people to graduate into mature consumers
  • We didn’t think about it at the time
  • Even if we did no one has a clue how to get things to work on the system
I could literally go one. At some point all of these have been used by 3rd parties. Hell a decent chunk of this list has been used just this gen with the Switch with a couple of new ones added.
Click to expand...

It's not that there absolutely couldn't be this support, but you need to show that there will be.

Just stating as much is not admissible as evidence.

CastletonSnob said:
And what proof is there that more people WOULDN'T buy a Nintendo console that was more powerful and had better third party support?
Click to expand...

More people? That's a lot of people, and you're probably pricing a non-insignificant amount of them out with this scheme.

And now you're more directly competing with the other consoles, given the lowered likelihood of people buying this along with another.

That's not considering other reasons people might choose to purchase or not purchase this device.

What proof is there that more people will buy this?

CastletonSnob said:
You really think there aren't people who would buy a Nintendo console with Madden, CoD, Assassin's Creed, or GTA?
Click to expand...
Sure people would buy a Nintendo console that had those. Some might even buy it with them in mind. But what makes you think large droves will switch to this console for those, when they're already used to and invested in the ecosystem elsewhere?

Where's the evidence that this will happen to an extent that will offset any drawbacks? Why should I believe in this proposal?

Where is any of your evidence?

CastletonSnob said:
Nintendo has enough money to lose money for 50 years and still stay in business. They absolutely have enough money to make a powerful console.

Why do Nintendo fans keep making excuses for Nintendo's unwillingness to make a powerful console?
Click to expand...
Maybe they can, but I'm not seeing an argument here to persuade them or anyone that it's a good idea.
 
Nintendo consoles like the Wii and Wii U didn't get third party support because they were weaker than the PS3/360 and PS4/XBone, meaning they couldn't run the same games. If Nintendo made a console on par with Sony and Microsoft's consoles, they'd get the same or at least comparable third party support.

I don't give evidence because I think it's simple logic. Nintendo makes a powerful console that can play the same games as Sony and Microsoft's consoles. This console gets third party support. Getting good third party support means it has more games that appeal to the same audience as Sony and Microsoft.

If a Nintendo console had the great Nintendo games AND the great third party games, there would be NO reason to buy a console from Sony or Microsoft.
 
CastletonSnob said:
Why would Pokemon become less accessible and relevant among young people? How would getting the Madden and CoD audience affect Pokemon at all?
Click to expand...
because the expensive high-powered console wouldn’t be as accessible to children as a $199 switch lite?
 
0
The next Switch can't and won't achieve the power of the Xbox Series X and PS5.

But Microsoft has more than one console this gen - the Series S - that third-parties are still targeting. Not to mention the various third-party games ported to PC, of which there are innumerable hardware configurations weaker than the Series X and PS5.

If the next Switch can get within striking distance of the Series S, along with the benefits of newer architecture, updated middleware and dev tools, etc., then that should be fine.

That way, Nintendo can hit their requirements for form factor, battery life, price while being in the same power ballpark as this generation's consoles. And I believe this is possible depending on how much DLSS and the other GPU features are leveraged.

And of course, as many people brought up, still having the Switch Lite and original Switch hybrids as more affordable and accessible options, as not every game is that demanding.
 
0
CastletonSnob said:
I don't give evidence because I think it's simple logic.
Click to expand...
this is the funniest thing I've ever read on this website and I'm not even remotely joking

CastletonSnob said:
Nintendo makes a powerful console that can play the same games as Sony and Microsoft's consoles. This console gets third party support.
Click to expand...

A does not gurantee B in this regard.

The Wii wasn't powerful but actually had a LOT of third party games.

The PS Vita was more powerful than the 3DS but the 3DS got way more third party support.

like, there's zero correlation between power and third party support. Zero.
 
Derachi said:
this is the funniest thing I've ever read on this website and I'm not even remotely joking



A does not gurantee B in this regard.

The Wii wasn't powerful but actually had a LOT of third party games.

The PS Vita was more powerful than the 3DS but the 3DS got way more third party support.

like, there's zero correlation between power and third party support. Zero.
Click to expand...
Third party games had to be downgraded for the Wii. The Wii version was almost always the worst version.

A bunch of mostly shovelware doesn't count as third party games.
 
CastletonSnob said:
If a Nintendo console had CoD and GTA, the people who dismiss Nintendo as "for kids" might change their minds and buy it.
Click to expand...
If they're not buying Nintendo products because of the kiddie image, then obviously Mario, Pokemon etc aren't draws. So without the kiddie Nintendo games, why buy Nintendo instead of Xbox or PlayStation?

You can win if you say gyro.
 
0
CastletonSnob said:
A bunch of mostly shovelware doesn't count as third party games.
Click to expand...
moving-the-goalposts.gif
 
CastletonSnob said:
No. The whole point is that Nintendo making a powerful console would get them more third party support, which means more people would buy them.
Click to expand...
People not buying hardware isn't a problem. Literally, sales projections of the Switch are going down, not because of lack of demand, but the fact that Nintendo cannot manufacture any more. This has been the case since 2017, and the problems are only getting worse due to covid and the chip shortage. Nintendo doesn't need this super demographic or whatever, the Switch is already on its way to being one of the best selling consoles of all time.

Nintendo doesn't need any more demand, they really are just doing fine.

Just get an Xbox series S if you want to play your high powered 3rd party games. It's cheap, and available. Meanwhile, I still take my Switch basically everywhere, and the portability is massively important as well.
 
CastletonSnob said:
Nintendo consoles like the Wii and Wii U didn't get third party support because they were weaker than the PS3/360 and PS4/XBone, meaning they couldn't run the same games. If Nintendo made a console on par with Sony and Microsoft's consoles, they'd get the same or at least comparable third party support.

I don't give evidence because I think it's simple logic.
Click to expand...
Simple logic isn't always simple. I remembered reading quotes from developers about how PS2 wasn't as easy to work with as Xbox and GameCube, but they'd do whatever was necessary to get access to that big userbase. So I was naively expecting the same to happen for Wii once it became clear it was by far the hardware leader of the generation. Then came Wii U, and hey, Nintendo had the most powerful home console on the planet! Surely they'd get all the stuff Wii had been missing out on and get a real foothold on the new generation. Aaaaand it was a historic failure.
 
0
0
CastletonSnob said:
Nintendo consoles like the Wii and Wii U didn't get third party support because they were weaker than the PS3/360 and PS4/XBone, meaning they couldn't run the same games. If Nintendo made a console on par with Sony and Microsoft's consoles, they'd get the same or at least comparable third party support.
Click to expand...
The Wii U was stronger than the PS360 and didn't get anywhere near the same support those 2 received in 2013~2015.

The Switch is more powerful than the PS360 and some publishers are porting their PS360 catalogue while others are absent.

You keep talking about GTA and COD, but guess what... the latest GTA is from the PS360 era and could run on the Switch but didn't come, while COD might become a MS exclusive once the contract they have with Sony is over.

And even if Nintendo did a PS5 clone and received the support, it wouldn't suddenly convince a lot of people who don't want consoles to buy one. They would just steal a part of Sony and MS userbase. Chances are that neither Sony or Nintendo would sell 100 mi consoles, with smaller profits per unit than they got on PS4 and Switch, regardless of who "wins".

It's not that a Nintendo home console would be a bad product and bomb, the hybrid simply is a much better product for the market reality. And they can't coexist that well: Nintendo can't support 2 HD platforms and even if they share libraries, the home console isn't selling enough individually to get games the hybrid won't.

If your problem is just AAA support though, give it time. With how much scalable engines are becoming and with diminished returns, the number of games which are skipping Nintendo purely due to power constraints will shrink more and more.
 
OP has nailed it, really.
Nintendo should make a console similar in power to the Series X and PS5, in order to not sell that many consoles (because they can't make them), and to sell the ones they can make at a loss, but even then, to sell them at a more expensive price point that will price out a significant portion of their demographic. While at the same time getting rid of the portability that drives much of their success (especially in regions like Japan).
They should do this to woo the gamer that buys every yearly edition of CoD and FIFA and nothing else, thereby generating them a net loss for every console sold.

Hire this man etc.
 
0
Starting to think this is just a wind-up since OP just keeps insisting without any evidence (in fact expressly refusing to provide it) that Nintendo would "sell more consoles" by abandoning all of their current customers to try and steal some of Microsoft and Sony's.

Boo this man.
 
Caviar said:
Starting to think this is just a wind-up since OP just keeps insisting without any evidence (in fact expressly refusing to provide it) that Nintendo would "sell more consoles" by abandoning all of their current customers to try and steal some of Microsoft and Sony's.

Boo this man.
Click to expand...
Trying to steal some of your competition's customers is just part of business.
 
CastletonSnob said:
Why is the affordability of Nintendo's consoles seen as a good thing? Haven't you ever heard the saying, "you get what you pay for"?
Click to expand...
Have you ever heard that "a fool and his money are soon parted"?

I don't think you understand how proverbs and platitudes work.
 
Tentacle-tropes said:
In no particular order:
  1. Software that people want (Animal Crossing, Pokémon, etc)
  2. Consistent software releases compared to their console
  3. Often cheaper
  4. Mostly well made & throughout products compared to their consoles
  5. Able to tap into other audiences which their consoles are spotty on
  6. Outside the PSP no one really could match them in the space
Click to expand...
What makes Nintendo's handhelds well-made and thought-out compared to their consoles?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Back
Top Bottom