Software is what will determine Nintendo NX's Future NOT HARDWARE!

Well that's great if you have the market all to yourself. It's called adding value to your platform. Modern consoles are multi media devices not simply game devices.

Who's demanding a Blu-Ray player in their console when majority of users are watching movies through Netflix, Amazon Prime, iTunes, Roku, and Popcorn Time? Not me, nor my family. It's all just an extra bonus and in order for MS and Sony to justify the high price tag. It's all impulsive features.

Obviously time will tell if that is true. Speaking for myself I plan on getting the neo...

1. 4k blu-ray player

2. Improved graphics

3. great price a 4k blu-ray player cost 400 and a ps4 cost 350 but the neo is only 400 to 500 tops.

Well have fun

AMD's stock price is higher with incoming gaming SoCs leaks.

PS4 NEO leaks went beyond gaming forums.

There is a supply and demand of ps4. By the time NX hits shelves... again there is going to be little demand for it and publishers will have little interest in it, leading another wii u scenario. If it don't get games, it won't get demand, if it don't get demand, it don't games... it's a cyclical issue.

It's also an issue created by being off beat with M$/Sony. People/developers/publishers are already invested in ps4/xone gen. Upgraders will likely choose one of those systems due to them having a larger catalog of games. Ps4 release didn't see this problem. When it released wii u was basically dead already.

In order for nintendo to penetrate the market it's got a monumental task ahead of itself. Again where will nintendo get the developers for their system? How will it keep them?

You're terrible at putting you're comments into a particular context. This statement alone doesn't mean anything in relation to what we are talking about.

Well let's look at Nintendo's wii u price 300 and the x1's price 300. I don't know about you but you would think the wii u missing all of the features would be much cheaper. I have a blu-ray collection and I use my console as a bu-ray player as I am sure millions of console gamers do. Obviously blu-ray is going to give you the best picture vs a streaming service like standard netflix (unless you use the 4k plan).

Not to mention the extra's on blu-ray can't be found on again netflix. The audio quality on netflix also can't match blu-ray. I am not picking on netflix here I enjoy the service on my cell phone/car/laptop when I am away from my home theater.

Software is half of the equation, fact of the matter is if the hardware isn't up to snuff developers are not going to want to work with it.

Developers follow where the demand is

That's such a vague and non-descriptive statement.

The Wii U doesn't have third party support because frankly developers don't want to put in the leg work anymore to build a completely custom game around a last generation hardware package whereas for everything else it's just one version with platform tweaks. The Wii was all the hype and successful because of the gimmick it introduced to the masses, developers wanted in on it and it was a one off, that's not going to happen again.

If the NX hardware isn't in the realm of capabilities of the PlayStation 4 or Xbox One, developers are going to recoil just like they did with the Wii U and ignore it, hardware entirely determines the fate of the NX this time around.

Developers didn't want to develop on the Wii U because Demand wasn't there after its unveil.

There are 3 main factors

1. software

2. hardware

3. purchase price

End users are not stupid e.g. iPhone and Samsung Galaxy series usually has top specs for it's generation.

Because after 8 years it was just another Xbox 360/ PlayStation 3...

People wanted new hardware, not iteration of what already existed and was about to be replaced.

"Did you really just say having RE4 "helped" the GameCube and the "Mature" audience? Last I checked, that game sold much better on the PlayStation 2."

As I said, RE4 was a timed exclusive, but I bet it sold some Gamecube consoles initially when nobody knew it was going to get ported to the PS2.

And of course RE4 sold better on the PS2 as that console had a massive install base by the time RE4 got ported to it.

"You haven't seen the media target GTA?."

Yes, back in the PS2 era, not during the Read Dead Redemption, Max Payne 3 and GTA V era.

"Really? Did you? Because I recall you saying something completely else in regards to the fate of Mario many threads back."

Please find me this quote where I said they should kill off Mario for good. I said they should take a break from Mario and focus on newer IP.

Wii lasted six years; the usual for any console. Period.

lolvita

Uh, people knew about the PlayStation 2 version of RE4 before that game even came out for the GameCube. Hell, I remember X-Play saying something like that in a viewer mail segment and mentioning it after a review for Battalion Wars when they mention then recently released quality GameCube games.

Selective reading much? I'm pretty sure I mentioned Fox News, who DID cover Rockstar's games (namely GTA V)

If I can get through the faulty forum search, I'll find it.

"Uh, people knew about the PlayStation 2 version of RE4 before that game even came out for the GameCube."

Yeah, you did because you kept up to date with gaming news. The average gamer doesn't.

"Selective reading much? I'm pretty sure I mentioned Fox News,"

Eww, why would I waste my time watching Fox news? You're god damn right I have selective reading as I avoid Fox News like the plague as should every other sane person.

"If I can get through the faulty forum search, I'll find it."

I seriously doubt I said that Nintendo should kill off Mario permanently.

Go check in metacritic the releases of Wii each year and try again , or if you are in denial to do so let me know to link you and try again. You messing with the wrong dude. Wii , six years ? Hahaha ...

You mean it wasnt in a serious life support / Dead because of 1 game each year worth playing while it was collecting DUST for the rest of the year when at the same time both PS3/X360 were having huge amount of games to play with ? Ok , it wasnt dead , it was with one foot in the graveyard.

As for LolVita , lol indeed , even if it has DOUBLE the amount of games Wii U has. If you are again in denial about this let me know , ill google for you.

Well, you know... that and the fact that Blu-Ray discs are a fantastic storage medium for video games, and are pretty durable compared to older kinds of disc media. Being able to play video Blu-Rays is just a nice bonus that makes sense for a console once you have a Blu-Ray disc drive in there.

Even though, the Wii U has the storage equal to a Blu-ray. Disc storage hasn't been a problem with them since AFTER the GameCube, where developers hated the mini-disc almost as bad as cartridges.

It's being able to watch physical movies that's not important.

Your OP had a list of consoles and the one thing running through them was that in each case it had vastly better technology than the last generation bar the gimmicky wii.

In each generation, the gamers console of choice has been an improvement in technology over the last. If it was only about the games we would still be playing on Atari. We're not. We buy new hardware specifically for better possibilities, otherwise there is no point.

Better graphics, bigger, more realistic worlds, more enemies on screen. They matter. Nintendo convinced themselves that it didn't matter, and brought out the wii u, and look what happened. People want a console that is better than what they have. That's a fact.

Yeah.........like the WiiU.......??lol

Then the NX is already doomed.

Kimishima is going to do his best to get that 3rd party support to the NX!!!

https://twitter.com/kimishimadaboss

That's so wrong... When both are important, you don't simply choose one of the two. You give em both and THEN print money. One of the two is like gameplay vs graphics. You need both for the game to be great

Hardware is what will determine software, it needs to sustain itself as a competitive option even to ps5 and so forth, that is because if games can't run on it, it won't have games, that's why the wii u failed, it needs hardware to get 3rd party support, which is the important part at this stage with nintendo, so no, hardware is more important.

Unless third party support isn't very relevant to Nintendo.

If they drop the royalty fees, the NX versions of multiplatform titles would become twice as profitable to a dev/pub. As a result, all 3rd party games without exception would prioritize their NX version in an attempt to only sell NX copies. Given that a sale of another copy would in effect mean they missed out.

Yes, Nintendo would not profit directly from any of the 3rd party sales which is unheard of in the console industry. But it would allow for complete market domination and hit Sony/MS in a way that their gaming branches can not recover from now that they have squandered their exclusivity. That allows for an entirely different way for Nintendo to earn their millions.

Nobody is going to pay for two or three online fees when the Nintendo console has all the best versions of games and then some. If Nintendo makes their online fee quite expensive, therefore price the console a little lower (hardware at a loss), to maximize market coverage, they could make a ton of money. An absolute shitload of money through their online fee. Way more than 3rd party royalties would ever get them. Of course the very weird thing about it would be that Nintendo essentially baits in a ton of competition to their first party titles that make Nintendo a lot more money than any 3rd party titles. But I reason that tripling the size of your audience is probably only going to result in more first party sales even with all the third party support.

That is the only way I can see 3rd party being relevant to Nintendo. Leveraged in a way to get rid of the competition's income, and to draw in every gamer because it eliminates virtually any reason to own a different console than the NX in a way that sabotages Sony/MS's current way of securing temporary exclusivity. Sony and MS would be forced to throw away third party income and focus on first party exclusives, a position they cannot take effectively.

Like I said many times, MS and Sony are hitting a dead end and their positions are weakening. Nintendo is still in a stronger position even if their sales are low. I don't think Nintendo is going to do this, but they are a force to be reckoned with that can deal some killer blows when we least expect it.

"If Nintendo forgoes any sort of profit and take a whole generation of only net loss, they will be fine."

That's pretty much what you just said, if they aren't taking royalties, then there is literally no point to sell the console since royalties is literally WHERE console manufacturers GET money. Also no it wouldn't be market dominance, it'd get a few more games but most games would be on all 3 consoles, the only difference is that nintendo would go bankrupt.

"best version", they can't HAVE the best version if the console can't handle it. When a developer puts their game on all 3 platforms (Which is what would happen), they won't reduce their game on other consoles just to make it stand up on the nx above them.

The fact of the matter is that you think you have this very clever way of dealing with nintendo's issues, but you just suggested corporate suicide, nintendo would cease to exist, if you're going into the business field, make sure you erase these bad ideas from your brain and relearn actual strategies.

PS4 squandered their exclusivity? Pretty sure there are over 25 quality exclusives coming to ps4 this year alone. But yeah, your plan would fail hard. They wouldn't be forced to throw away 3rd party income either, nintendo would die and the other two would floruish. Nx NEEDS to be powerful + your'e taking away more profit than they'd gain. Sony is not at a dead end, they're kicking ass.

But seriously, you have no idea what you're talking about.

It is relevant, it's why they're failing now.

I still watch and actively buy blu-rays, but I never watch them on a gaming console anymore. But I did for about a year on the PS3, just as I did for awhile on my PS2. The PS2 was my first DVD player. The PS3 was my fist blu-ray player. That being said, the PS3 was the #1 device for Netflix - so even the streaming features were clearly important to people (not sure how those stats measure up on PS4).

If the PS4 offers an UHD player, as it very well might, that would be a huge bonus to me - an actual reason to upgrade. The PS4K could follow the pattern of being my first UHD player, just as the PS2 and PS3 before it. I would probably check out a few movies in 4K/UHD since I already have an HDR capable 4K TV.

That's not the goal of a business, though. And many gamers, many of their customers, would just end up rejecting their market domination anyway, flocking instead to the PC or to other consoles, and developers would in turn respond to that, making games for other platforms to sell to those gamers. The Console Market World Domination Plot you suggest is flimsy at best, even if you ignore the fact that Nintendo has no reason to want to drive all competition out of the market wholesale--it wouldn't eliminate competition, it would simply open the door for other companies to attempt to compete.

So you're saying an online fee and extra first party sales wouldn't easily surpass whatever they get in royalties now? That seems very unlikely to me.

Royalties are what... $7 per copy? Sold about 1 copy per user per year. It just seems unlikely to me that through a $60 per year online fee they'd make less money than from their royalties. But maybe I'm overestimating the return on that stuff. I know you need servers, maintenance, security, all that stuff. But it would also bump digital sales which is a huge money maker. I find that hard to believe but maybe that's the case I'm not an expert.

I don't think you realize how important those royalties are to pubs. They make about as much on a copy as the royalties themselves and waiving royalties has been commonly used as the incentive for console exclusivity. If a publisher is releasing a multiplat game and they know that if they sell a copy on a Nintendo platform instead of a Sony platform they will see twice the return, you bet they make sure that the Nintendo version is the one they sell most of.

But either way what I wanted to say with that post is that if Nintendo wouldn't be able to do something like that, then what's the point in looking at 3rd party at all? I don't think they'd be able to get 3rd party on board without doing something crazy. I'm not convinced that 3rd party would treat them equally if they just made a plain ordinary console. And I don't believe that MS and Sony would just look at their marketshare potentially dropping to a third console manufacturer without doing anything about it. I think they would each secure third party deals left and right, and Nintendo can't keep that up.

The industry should go away from online fees in general. Also both of those won't surpass royalties, they'll pale in comparison, you're too optismistic and you're too devoted to your faulty plan.

"only 280m"

Um....... that's a lot

"14 mill wii u owners pay 60 per year"

They won't pay for online, only a fraction of users have playstation nplus and xbox gold. Also no one pays 60 for a year, more like 40ish.

Also people won't automatically jump on the nx with that strategy as well, you shot nintendo in the foot in your strategy to appease the developers, if the hardware isn't as good you'll still get a worse version, also there are enough exclusives on ps4 anyway where it's not like everyone will quit ps4 for nx.

Developers will release on all platforms still, nx being slightly cheaper doesn't make them go "let's forsake all those ps4 sales"

Also they can't control sales, they will sell their best product they can do all the consoles and get the most profit on equal sales for nx, that's literally the only benefit, and it only benefits the developer.

Getting rid of royalties hurts nintendo and only helps developers.

Dude I edit my posts like ten times I can't believe you typed that so quickly.
Anyway I like how you defend your stance.

Basically, you believe Sony has good exclusives. I don't think their exclusives would matter much at all, that they have taken a plunge compared to the past. I don't think we'll ever agree on that.
You believe royalties matter to Nintendo. I think that money can easily be gotten, twice, through an online fee. I mean, we both don't have numbers on that. So I guess we won't agree on that either.
And you believe that if a publisher can make twice the money on one platform that they can or will not do anything with that information, and I think they would. There is always a lead platform. But maybe that wouldn't really matter, it's all very conjectural so who knows.

We're not going to convince each other at all. It was just a wacky idea I threw out there and I wanted to see if people would hammer it down but if there are too many unknowns, is it still fun to see what happens to it? Dunno. It didn't feel like fun.

Ditto.

Based on that logic, why is the Wii U so ridiculously overpriced? As a consumer, if I'm looking at two electronic devices that a nearly similar in price, I'm going with the device that has more features and support.

@FireEmblem_Man: what makes you think it wont?