• 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.
  • Furukawa Speaks! We discuss the announcement of the Nintendo Switch Successor and our June Direct Predictions on the new episode of the Famiboards Discussion Club! Check it out here!

Discussion Nintendo should make a powerful console.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trying to steal some of your competition's customers is just part of business.
Or how reading comprehension works:
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.
Unless abandoning the clientele you've spent innumerable resources building up in exchange for something with absolutely no guarantee is your idea of sound business strategy.
 
I actually think it's hilarious. Starting to feel like a Monthy Python sketch, or something.
when op said "I don't give evidence because I think it's simple logic" I realized we're all getting punk'd and it's actually hilarious

like there's no way OP isn't being satirical at this point
 
"Nintendo should make a powerful console" - the greatest thread in the history of Famiboards, locked by a moderator after 12,239 pages of middling debate
 
Nintendo can't keep catering to their base with Mario and Zelda forever. The fact that every Nintendo console has sold less than the previous one with the exception of the Wii and Switch prove that. Eventually, those fans will get older and their tastes will change toward more mature games. Having CoD and GTA might help Nintendo get an older audience.
 
Nintendo can't keep catering to their base with Mario and Zelda forever. The fact that every Nintendo console has sold less than the previous one with the exception of the Wii and Switch prove that. Eventually, those fans will get older and their tastes will change toward more mature games. Having CoD and GTA might help Nintendo get an older audience.
This line of thinking is just so outdated. The Switch disproved the notion that Nintendo's IP isn't enough. Look at how bafflingly well first-party software is selling.

Nintendo's current course is fine, even if it's frustrating to people like us
 
I don't give evidence because I think it's simple logic.
You've not presented this simple logic, at least not anything sound.
Putting aside evidence and argumentation, there hasn't been a logical throughline.
This isn't how logic works, and this isn't how argumentation works.

Try to pull any of this in the next paper -- of any sort -- you have to write.
It's bold, so it's guaranteed to pay off. After all, "fortune favors the bold."

<Citation Needed>

<Citation also Needed>
<Citation Needed>, The Thread

The Nintendo Switch is as or more powerful than the Xbox 360 and PS3. Why haven't third parties ported every possible 360/PS3 game to Switch to capitalize on the system's popularity?
They just don't want to?

There's really no reason NOT to, given how popular the Switch is.
This is the answer to your thread. You stumbled across it yourself. It's right there.

it's been explained at length and taken too much of people's time.
But there it is, if you'll bother to see it.

It's just simple logic.
 
So as Nintendo fans we are used to paying premium prices for gaming, right? In my case I justify this by the first-party games' reliably superior art direction and game craft, plus their established trend of enduring value. I'm definitely on the connoisseur end of the gaming spectrum and I'm sure a lot of others who choose Nintendo are too. If we are willing to pay more for all these points of excellence, why not do the same for audiovisual standards (which a more powerful console will be able to achieve without compromising as is the case with the Switch)?
 
So as Nintendo fans we are used to paying premium prices for gaming, right? In my case I justify this by the first-party games' reliably superior art direction and game craft, plus their established trend of enduring value. I'm definitely on the connoisseur end of the gaming spectrum and I'm sure a lot of others who choose Nintendo are too. If we are willing to pay more for all these points of excellence, why not do the same for audiovisual standards (which a more powerful console will be able to achieve without compromising as is the case with the Switch)?

Because a console without portability and with a high price point will lose the whole Japanese market. I'm not sure Nintendo are willing to do that, just so a few players will be able to play those really "mature" games, like Madden and GTA.
 
Nintendo can't keep catering to their base with Mario and Zelda forever. The fact that every Nintendo console has sold less than the previous one with the exception of the Wii and Switch prove that. Eventually, those fans will get older and their tastes will change toward more mature games. Having CoD and GTA might help Nintendo get an older audience.
I’m 99% sure I have at least 3 GTA games on my Switch already. Call of Duty is the weird outlier but I’m pretty happy with the selection of shooters I have on my Switch. Also the whole Mario and Zelda argument has been a weird one people have been making for years and the reason I call it weird is because Mario and Zelda sell insanely well, just like the Switch, which is also selling insanely well.
 
0
So as Nintendo fans we are used to paying premium prices for gaming, right? In my case I justify this by the first-party games' reliably superior art direction and game craft, plus their established trend of enduring value. I'm definitely on the connoisseur end of the gaming spectrum and I'm sure a lot of others who choose Nintendo are too. If we are willing to pay more for all these points of excellence, why not do the same for audiovisual standards (which a more powerful console will be able to achieve without compromising as is the case with the Switch)?
People aren’t arguing that bad graphics are good. The points being made, and continuously being ignored by the OP are:
A. The fact that the Switch was about as good as a portable system could be at that price point and with that battery life in 2017.
B. That more powerful hardware is likely already in development anyway, so the point is kind of moot to begin with.
C. The assertion that Nintendo would have better third party support if they built this theoretically better console, despite the fact that the Switch has the best third party support seen on a Nintendo system since the DS on portable or SNES at home
D. That power is being argued as the only factor in third party support, and that any evidence to the contrary in prior generations is dismissed due to other factors.
E. The dismissal of Nintendo’s entire current business strategy for the desire of a stronger home console, ignoring the Switch is already demonstrably one of the most successful consoles of all time.
 
This line of thinking is just so outdated. The Switch disproved the notion that Nintendo's IP isn't enough. Look at how bafflingly well first-party software is selling.

Nintendo's current course is fine, even if it's frustrating to people like us
People are buying much more games than before. If strong first party lineup and limited third party brought Switch to 108 million sold in just 5 years, it can easily break records with full third party support (assuming it's marketed so). Switch's potential is massive, it can approach 170m sold with right library.
 
0
Nintendo can't keep catering to their base with Mario and Zelda forever. The fact that every Nintendo console has sold less than the previous one with the exception of the Wii and Switch prove that. Eventually, those fans will get older and their tastes will change toward more mature games. Having CoD and GTA might help Nintendo get an older audience.

Have you seen the breakdown of the average Nintendo player as even reported by Nintendo? It’s adults, followed by kids.

They market towards everyone. The whole family. But most active players are… adults.

Throwing in curse words, a sex scene, and bleak color filter and violence does not equal mature. Nothing against TLOU, but the only planet that is a mature grown up game is if you either haven’t played any games before 2010. I liked the first game a whole lot, but it was the definition of what a GameFaqs poster in 2002 defined as “mature” as he posted his run on sentence fan fiction. Or the second game. Yeah we are adults here! Look! Sex! Hardcore, man!

If Nintendo games are for babies, then I guess I’m a big baby!
 
Adding another comment to the chain probably won't help but this has to be a bit, surely? OP is borderline trolling at this point.
Their last post definitely seems like it. Older audience, lol. There are more people who go from COD to Mario than the reverse.
 
I think it's unfair to discount OP's argument wholesale. The reasoning that a more competitive system that gets more games would do better is natural in isolation.

Let me ask you this, OP. If Nintendo made the Super Nintendo 2, or what have you, how much of the demographic you describe choose it over an Xbox or PlayStation?
 
Man, I don't think I've seen the "every Nintendo console has sold worse than the one before it" pulled out since like 2016/2017 when people were using it "prove" with "common sense" that the Switch would be an unmitigated disaster and Nintendo would go 3rd party.

It's always been nonsense anyway, since it completely ignores that Nintendo's customer base just migrated to handhelds. Wii U/3DS was the only generation where their audience actually shrank. Kinda makes it funnier to be used here since Nintendo's customers migrating away from their consoles towards their handheld alternatives flies in the face of the whole "Nintendo should make a powerful console to increase sales" comedy routine.

It's true that Nintendo can't rely on Mario and Zelda forever though. Luckily they thought of that 25 years ago and never stopped investing in new IP.
 
This thread is possibly the funniest one on Famiboards. I'm glad we're finally catching up to the trend in the other place of "baffling bad take just gets roasted for several pages"
 
I’m going to disagree while at the same time wishing in my heart that NINTENDO would make a PS5/XSX power console. My mind is blown thinking about BOTW in 4K with RT etc.

But, they went with Switch which is a really cool “gimmick” that obviously came at the cost of power due to also being handheld. At this point I hope they stay the course and iterate on Switch, delivering an upgraded model with DLSS and power maybe like PS4 Pro. Having that fidelity handheld will be another kind blown moment for me.

I also don’t think Nintendo will ever chase the power game again. They went their own way with Wii and since then they’ve had us all swimming in their blue ocean lol.
 
Nintendo can't keep catering to their base with Mario and Zelda forever. The fact that every Nintendo console has sold less than the previous one with the exception of the Wii and Switch prove that. Eventually, those fans will get older and their tastes will change toward more mature games. Having CoD and GTA might help Nintendo get an older audience.
I'm almost 20 years old and I love Animal Crossing, Pokemon, and Mario. When will my tastes grow more mature? Asking for a friend.
 
Nintendo can't keep catering to their base with Mario and Zelda forever. The fact that every Nintendo console has sold less than the previous one with the exception of the Wii and Switch prove that. Eventually, those fans will get older and their tastes will change toward more mature games. Having CoD and GTA might help Nintendo get an older audience.
You're right.

Nintendo should buy the rights to Shadow the Hedgehog to bolster their mature games lineup.
 
Nintendo can't keep catering to their base with Mario and Zelda forever. The fact that every Nintendo console has sold less than the previous one with the exception of the Wii and Switch prove that. Eventually, those fans will get older and their tastes will change toward more mature games. Having CoD and GTA might help Nintendo get an older audience.
That’s only true if there’s somehow a finite amount of kids interested in games, and not new kids discovering them every day, plus adult fans retaining an interest. It’s like saying that Disney need to watch out for their fans growing out of cartoons, Star Wars and superheroes, and start making gritty crime dramas and slasher films, when lifelong adult fans of all of their stuff are the ones that turn up on day 1, and bring their kids with them.
 
OP insists Nintendo could get more games aimed at adults with more powerful hardware, but, last time I checked, Top 30 game Hentai Uni is only on the Switch, skipping both PlayStation and XBox.
 
I think it's unfair to discount OP's argument wholesale. The reasoning that a more competitive system that gets more games would do better is natural in isolation.

Let me ask you this, OP. If Nintendo made the Super Nintendo 2, or what have you, how much of the demographic you describe choose it over an Xbox or PlayStation?
Probably not many?
 
To play fair to the OP, I’ll say this.

Would a more powerful console be cool? Of course! No one here denies that.

But, only if they can deliver it at the price, form factor, and battery efficiency of the Switch.

Even IF they release a 399 Switch, it would be wise to have an entry level model on release, like say, a Lite at native 720p rock solid.
 
Let's say Nintendo (or Nintendo's hardware engineering team, etc.) takes the suggestion "should make a powerful console" at face value.

Ok. Two paths:

(a) Make a stationary box with similar hardware specs to PS5 and Series X. It's a dedicated home console priced $400 - $500. Cool, but Nintendo isn't going to abandon their portable line. I can guarantee they won't. So they're back to supporting a home console and dedicated handheld, the handheld in this case being... the Switch. So if Nintendo's 'portable' and 'home' development teams are unified, are these two boxes going to play the same games?

In one scenario, Nintendo makes a home console while continuing to supporting the current Switch, and they share the same library. In that case, how powerful can the dedicated console be, if the games being ported to it also have to work on the Switch? The Switch is still doing well and Nintendo will not abandon it to shift resources to an unproven dedicated home console. So Nintendo's games will not push the home console to its limits. That's fine - there can still be third-party exclusives that skip the base Switch. That's sweet but is this third-party support worth the investment of engineering this dedicated device? And how big is the audience they expect to capture, considering the Switch is portable, cheaper, and also plays Nintendo games and many third-party games on a television?

... or are they going to have entirely different architectures? So now Nintendo is back to having to develop for multiple platforms, except now it's multiple HD platforms. Can't see this happening so I'll discount this possibility.

Or... will Nintendo release both a more powerful Switch, and an even more powerful dedicated home console with similar architecture that plays the same games at higher fidelity? If there's a more powerful Switch then why spend any R&D on the dedicated home console, especially when the former is a proven and successful concept and can be used as a home console? That's the catch... if out of thin air, Nintendo produces a Switch Home that is as powerful as a PS5 and has third-party support, of course I'd buy it, but in reality it'd be a huge investment that IMO is better spent on a more powerful Switch with DLSS.

That would lead into the second path which is:

(b) Make a more powerful Switch, only, while continuing to support the base Switch and its variants

... which we kind of know they're doing already. Even if you choose to ignore the Nvidia leak, it's a safe assumption. If you're worried about sufficient power for third-party ports, the Series S exists. It obviously can't be as powerful as that, but I think it can get within striking distance. Note: these opinions are based on what I've listened to and read about that leak.
 
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"?
Kids and more "casual" gamers who are not going to buy a $500 box to play Animal Crossing, Pokémon and Ring Fit are an important audience for Nintendo, whereas MS and Sony mainly target the "young male" demographic.
 
What, we're just allowed to gang up and mock people on this forum now?

Good, this thread's premise is very silly, lol. Nintendo are in the best spot they could possibly be in right now; trying to fight Sony and Microsoft in a battle of raw specs won't do them any good. It didn't work out for N64 or GameCube (and that comes down to other factors too of course, but you just know even if they made a more powerful stationary console after Switch it'd still use carts, limiting third-party support anyway).

Just wait for the Drake SoC Switch to launch if you're dying for Nintendo to have more power to work with.
 
So the proposition is that Nintendo should give up a niche in which they've sold over 100 million systems in under 5 years, and surrender the portable market from which they are benefitting enormously, in order to make an expensive and less profitable piece of hardware with much higher development costs, so that they can directly compete with deeply entrenched opponents vastly bigger than them and who can easily out-spend them, all in order to cater to a vocal minority of forum users who want more eye candy?

This would be one of the worst moves Nintendo could possibly make.
 
What makes Nintendo's handhelds well-made and thought-out compared to their consoles?
You just really need to look at the Wii to see the same things that Nintendo’s handhelds had to succeed
  • Coherent software strategy that has a vision behind it that wasn’t throwing darts at a board of “mature” or “cartoony”
  • Hardware design that was unified for a specific look. While it still had a unique controller it fit the system aesthetics which wasn’t completely wacky looking. Looking at GC here in particular.
  • From a marketing perspective they knew who they were going after & how to sell to them. This is something that was disjointed with N64/GC.
The follow up in the WiiU completely fumbled every aspect of the above to the point that it probably would have be better to scrap & start fresh then correct the mistakes of that console. Which is something they did with the Switch. They have largely been on point with the above aspects with the system.
 
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.
100 million people have bought a Switch. I think the amount of people who are tired of Nintendo games is small.
 
Also, if more power and more third party games means more sales, how does the OP reconcile the fact that the Switch is about to outsell the PS4?
 
Also, if more power and more third party games means more sales, how does the OP reconcile the fact that the Switch is about to outsell the PS4?
Evidently having Madden and CoD doesn’t mean you’ll sell more, after all.

So… uh… given this, why do you know a beefier Nintendo console would do better.
Seriously hilarious that OP has apparently missed the point of that inquiry.
 
Nintendo can't keep catering to their base with Mario and Zelda forever. The fact that every Nintendo console has sold less than the previous one with the exception of the Wii and Switch prove that. Eventually, those fans will get older and their tastes will change toward more mature games. Having CoD and GTA might help Nintendo get an older audience.
Yes, they can. MCU proves if you have a winning formula, you can just continue it indefinitely. Star Wars also shows that some fans will revolt if you try to give them anything different. Personally, as a fortysomething that grew up on Mario and Zelda games on NES and have owned four Nintendo consoles (NES, SNES, Wii and Switch), I still like some of the same types of games I liked 30+ years ago. I've recently gotten into the Fire Emblem series too. Some tastes have also expanded but I still love Mario. Breath of the Wild is still in my Top 5 favorite Switch games. You should really give that a try, definitely more fun than an Assassin's Creed game (I should know, I've played two). The thing you should understand, OP, is that Nintendo makes ganes for everyone: they aren't bound to THE Demographic (18-35 men).

I'm almost 20 years old and I love Animal Crossing, Pokemon, and Mario. When will my tastes grow more mature? Asking for a friend.

I haven't played Pokemon yet but that looks like a lot of fun (needs a Hard Mode though). My sister has loved Animal Crossing since City Folk, but New Horizons is my first one I've actually played alongside her. As someone who's 41, your tastes may change but the core of what you like doesn't really change much. As Yui Hirasawa said in K-On!: "Fun things are fun".
 
Yes, they can. MCU proves if you have a winning formula, you can just continue it indefinitely. Star Wars also shows that some fans will revolt if you try to give them anything different. Personally, as a fortysomething that grew up on Mario and Zelda games on NES and have owned four Nintendo consoles (NES, SNES, Wii and Switch), I still like some of the same types of games I liked 30+ years ago. I've recently gotten into the Fire Emblem series too. Some tastes have also expanded but I still love Mario. Breath of the Wild is still in my Top 5 favorite Switch games. You should really give that a try, definitely more fun than an Assassin's Creed game (I should know, I've played two). The thing you should understand, OP, is that Nintendo makes ganes for everyone: they aren't bound to THE Demographic (18-35 men).



I haven't played Pokemon yet but that looks like a lot of fun (needs a Hard Mode though). My sister has loved Animal Crossing since City Folk, but New Horizons is my first one I've actually played alongside her. As someone who's 41, your tastes may change but the core of what you like doesn't really change much. As Yui Hirasawa said in K-On!: "Fun things are fun".
This. I still like many of the same games I loved as a kid, and not just from Nintendo either. My tastes have expanded, but often into stuff that just wasn’t available then- I wouldn’t say Monster Hunter is any more grown-up than Zelda when they both share the same sense of fun and ridiculous fantasy. I still check out Mario, Zelda, Megaman and Castlevania games (well, more games inspired by the latter these days…) the same way as I did in the early 90s, and there’s a reason a huge amount of indies take notes from all of them. All the games following the structure of Zelda or Mario or Metroid or whatever are doing so not because it’s for kids. It’s because it’s a good game design template.

The idea that Zelda (or a ton of other games like Mario Kart or Animal Crossing) are for kids and that kids grow out of them is funny when it really isn’t those that younger gamers in particular obsess over these days and they are all more popular than ever on the Switch, a console clearly marketed as being flexible enough to be aimed at everyone, and convenient enough to fit into anyone’s day. Those games just aren’t all aimed almost exclusively at 18-35 year old men, which somehow became this weird barometer for ‘maturity’. Which is hilarious when such insecurity around the need for games about fantasy combat to be very grown-up, creating that demographic as aspirational, was exploited for marketing to boys in the 1990s.
 
Last edited:
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.

Actually you diddnt cover GameCube, every 3rd party game could be released on GameCube if devs wanted that, MiniDVD format didnt stop them,
same couldnt be said for N64.

Why Nintendo console wouldnt have exactly same 3rd party support even its basically clone of MS/Sony consoles?
Simple because devs know that main reason why people buying Nintendo hardware is to play Nintendo games, and they know that their games cant have even similar populairty or sales compared to Nintendo games, on other hand you have plenty of people that are buying Sony/MS console just to play GTA, CoD, Fifa, NBA...and that dont even care about Sony/MS 1st party games.


Saying that, most powerful and expensive Nintendo console would mean more multiplatform games (but again not on same level like MS/Sony consoles have), but that in same time would mean less sales for Nintendo hardware because they would compete directly with Sony/MS,
and reason why Switch is popular is because its different and its not competing directly with Sony/MS.
 
0
Nintendo was struggling from SD to HD heavily and we complained about the low output. Asking for a more powerful hardware would mean going from HD to AAA HD with even longer development times. That on top with the diminishing returns of the power race. I'm happy with the graphics of games like Luigi's Mansion 3 etc. I want them to focus on gameplay. That game do you see on PS5/XSX that's not already on the former platforms? It doesn't get better if it looks nicer.
 
If a Nintendo console had CoD and GTA, the people who dismiss Nintendo as "for kids" might change their minds and buy it.

This sound like Nintendo needs to change "for kids" image (that not accurate in any case), and like Switch is not fastest selling console of all time currently.

The fact that every Nintendo console has sold less than the previous one with the exception of the Wii and Switch prove that. Eventually, those fans will get older and their tastes will change toward more mature games. Having CoD and GTA might help Nintendo get an older audience.

I would say they are doing pretty well, in last 3 generation they had one 100m+ seller and one what it seems at least 130m+ seller console, both are breaking record sales consoles for Nintendo.

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.

Simple logic is also if you making console that appeal to same audience as Sony and Microsoft means you have very tough competition because you compete against consoles that actually owns that kind of audience, It would basically be uphill battle for Nintendo in that case.
 
0
Status
Not open for further replies.


Back
Top Bottom