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.<\/p>\n
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.<\/p>\n
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<\/u> console.<\/p>\n
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.<\/p>\n
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.<\/p>\n
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.<\/p>\n
The Revolution will be good for Nintendo. That’s about it.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
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 … Continue reading