Nintendo is counting on their new controller and low prices for both hardware and software, as the key factors for their next offering, the Revolution console.
As a goal it is laudable, but the part I don’t get is… doesn’t this consumer already have exactly that in the form of a PS2 or XBox? Both have a pretty extensive collection of fantastic games at budget prices. That’s the kind of user that Sony counts on to keep the PS2 alive the next 5 or so years. Microsoft targets them with the Live Arcade.
Gamers who have already enjoyed the top games in the current generation and have suddenly become "price conscious" should be a MUCH smaller demographic – yet they are the only ones that need a low-priced new console.
Creating new forms of playing games… ahem sure, the freeform Revolution controller sounds cool, but I look back at the PS2 and see Eye Toy, Guitar Hero and the lot of dance matresses available. If I wanted to play games with a stylus I could have bought a Palm years ago. Hobbysts and very small indie PC developers are putting out lots of crap, along with many great and original games.
Nintendo’s ideas of low cost, innovation and new forms of gaming really strike a chord with me, and I left Iwata’s GDC keynote desperately rooting for Nintendo, but… I’m sorry, the strategy still doesn’t add up in my head.
I believe they will be finnancially successful, and Nintendo’s games will do well. But as long as the business model remains closed and under tight control, I don’t see the Revolution becoming a really attractive option for most 3rd party developers, much less a market leader again.
The Revolution will be good for Nintendo. That’s about it.