Do Nintendo now exist outside console generations?

[Retro_Link]

Nintendo have seemingly been transitioning this way for a while, choosing to do their own thing with their consoles - giving less and less regard to what their [perhaps once] competitors are doing, and when they are doing it.

 

Coming off the back of the Gamecube/PS3/Xbox, the playing field was level... but since choosing to release an SD console with the Wii, the definition of console 'generations' became blurred. Was it about specs anymore? Should the Wii be grouped in with the PS3/360? Fans perhaps desperately grasped at such - so as to not feel Nintendo were slipping out of the loop.

 

I think it's fair to say the video game industry at large found it a stretch to class the Wii U in the same 'generation' bracket as the PS4 and XB1. Whilst it was Nintendo's next console iteration, not only did it come out significantly before the PS4 and XB1, but it struggled to share the same library of games.

 

Now Nintendo is doing something very different again and in a sense, to me it feels like they are almost operating outside the realm of 'gaming consoles' [as we know them] as much as they are 'generations'. Nintendo has carved potentially a very different space in the market for itself. In so, they have distanced themselves even further from Sony and Microsoft - both in terms of what they are releasing, now as much as when.

 

And to me, that's an exciting prospect.

[liger05]

Nintendo have seemingly been transitioning this way for a while, choosing to do their own thing with their consoles - giving less and less regard to what their [perhaps once] competitors are doing, and when they are doing it.

 

Coming off the back of the Gamecube/PS3/Xbox, the playing field was level... but since choosing to release an SD console with the Wii, the definition of console 'generations' became blurred. Was it about specs anymore? Should the Wii be grouped in with the PS3/360? Fans perhaps desperately grasped at such - so as to not feel Nintendo were slipping out of the loop.

 

I think it's fair to say the video game industry at large found it a stretch to class the Wii U in the same 'generation' bracket as the PS4 and XB1. Whilst it was Nintendo's next console iteration, not only did it come out significantly before the PS4 and XB1, but it struggled to share the same library of games.

 

Now Nintendo is doing something very different again and in a sense, to me it feels like they are almost operating outside the realm of 'gaming consoles' [as we know them] as much as they are 'generations'. Nintendo has carved potentially a very different space in the market for itself. In so, they have distanced themselves even further from Sony and Microsoft - both in terms of what they are releasing, now as much as when.

 

And to me, that's an exciting prospect.

 

I don't think so. Surely if we want the same games Sony and MS hardware receives it is among the same generations.

 

While Nintendo won't necessarily release the same products as they do they are still one of the three major hardware players so don't think we can say they operate alone on another sphere.

[Sheikah]

Nintendo have moved entirely into the handheld domain so no longer really share the same generations with the other home consoles. I doubt Sony and Microsoft are bothered about Nintendo now - Nintendo aren't going to produce a machine that will compete with theirs on specs so they know they'll keep their userbase and third party devs.

[Serebii]

Possibly, yes. However, you also have to consider that Sony and Microsoft will also be releasing refreshes to their devices within a year either way of the Switch's release. So while Nintendo has gone with a new device, the others have released new iterations of sorts, just with full backwards/forwards compatibility. As such, even if they have, it doesn't matter as much.

 

Nintendo have moved entirely into the handheld domain so no longer really share the same generations with the other home consoles. I doubt Sony and Microsoft are bothered about Nintendo now - Nintendo aren't going to produce a machine that will compete with theirs on specs so they know they'll keep their userbase and third party devs.

 

I still find this concept fascinating, because historically the weakest console in each generation has been the best selling and most successful until this generation

[Sheikah]

I still find this concept fascinating, because historically the weakest console in each generation has been the best selling and most successful until this generation

 

Yeah but not because it was the weakest, rather in spite of it.

[dazzybee]

MS and Sony won't quite have the same attitude Shiekah thinks by not caring about Nintendo, if the Switch becomes a monster seller then they'll care a hell of a lot. Also, doesn't matter if it's the same specs, it's about what machine are people going to play their games on. It's the same when people say Nintendo are in the same battle as mobile phones with the 3DS/handhelds; they're even further removed, but ultimately fighting for peoples time!

 

As for the question, well Nintendo see this as Gen 7 as they put it on the T Shirts in the video! So I'm going to agree with them - I personally don't think generations has ever been about specs, more about the time they were released. Nintendo say this is gen 7, then this is gen 7!

[Dcubed]

Kinda, I guess? In a sense you could say that they are because they operate without a large concern given to their competitors; they march to the beat of their own drum.

 

But at the same time, you can't really argue that their release timeframe doesn't line up with their competitors; and that is what generations are afterall, a line of descendants.

 

Hell even the Switch kinda fits in with the PS4 Pro/Scorpio in terms of timing, but that brings about another question; is the concept of console "generations" even valid anymore? With iterative consoles now being a thing (thanks smartphones!) we're never gonna see these kinds of generational transitions again.

 

In a sense, the Switch will probably be Nintendo's last console (given that Iwata wanted to follow the iPhone/iPad model of hardware development with "NX"), just like how the PS4/Xbone will basically carry on forever now; so in that sense, the answer is no. They're existing in the same generational sense as their competitors.

[Sheikah]

MS and Sony won't quite have the same attitude Shiekah thinks by not caring about Nintendo, if the Switch becomes a monster seller then they'll care a hell of a lot. Also, doesn't matter if it's the same specs, it's about what machine are people going to play their games on. It's the same when people say Nintendo are in the same battle as mobile phones with the 3DS/handhelds; they're even further removed, but ultimately fighting for peoples time!

 

Um, I'm not sure you've noticed but the PS4 is itself a monster as a result of doing exactly what it has been doing...so why not just carry on doing it? Sony and Microsoft have already locked in to upping their specs anyway with Pro/Scorpio home consoles.

 

I suppose you could say Sony/MS might release a similar product as an extra device to complement their successful home consoles, but that seems rather superfluous. Why have a home console and a handheld/home console. Sorry, I just can't see them having much interest in this. It's just totally in the opposite direction of what these companies are all about. It's not like a Wii Remote clone that you can cheaply invent for your console to jump onto a craze...it's the console itself.

 

I also think that after the Vita, Sony know they can't compete on the handheld front, and Microsoft have never seemed interested in this area, so I can't see them wanting to copy this, even though I'm sure it will sell.

 

Also regarding specs... specs are absolutely vital to the console; without parity, and especially if you're the underdog, you can kiss those cross-platform releases goodbye. Publishers will go where the audience is and where it's easy for them to port their games. That's exactly what we saw on the Wii U.

Edited October 26, 2016 by Sheikah

[dazzybee]

Um, I'm not sure you've noticed but the PS4 is itself a monster as a result of doing exactly what it has been doing...so why not just carry on doing it? Sony and Microsoft have already locked in to upping their specs anyway with Pro/Scorpio home consoles.

 

I suppose you could say Sony/MS might release a similar product as an extra device to complement their successful home consoles, but that seems rather superfluous. Why have a home console and a handheld/home console. Sorry, I just can't see them having much interest in this. It's just totally in the opposite direction of what these companies are all about. It's not like a Wii Remote clone that you can cheaply invent for your console to jump onto a craze...it's the console itself.

 

I also think that after the Vita, Sony know they can't compete on the handheld front, and Microsoft have never seemed interested in this area, so I can't see them wanting to copy this, even though I'm sure it will sell.

 

Also regarding specs... specs are absolutely vital to the console, without parity, and especially if you're the underdog, you can kiss those cross platform releases goodbye. That's exactly what we saw on the Wii U.

 

I think maybe I misunderstood you, I agree that they probably won't have much interest inc opting the idea of Switch, but I meant they would and should care about it as a competing device of peoples time and money.

 

Though you never know, if it is a huge success, in a couple of years Sony/MS could easily release a hybrid PS4/XB1, you never know, doubt it, but maybe.

[Dcubed]

Though you never know, if it is a huge success, in a couple of years Sony/MS could easily release a hybrid PS4/XB1, you never know, doubt it, but maybe.

 

In a sense, aren't Microsoft doing exactly that with the Xbox Play Anywhere programme?

 

It might not be an all in one device like with the Switch, but the principle isn't a million miles off. It's the same game across all of your Windows/Xbox devices - cross buy/cross save and all; hell you could actually play them on a Surface Tablet if you wanted to!

[Ronnie]

Yeah but not because it was the weakest, rather in spite of it.

 

Not always.

 

The Gameboy was the weakest and therefore had the best battery life and so won that gen.

 

The Wii was the weakest and therefore cheapest and had a clever gimmick that took the world by storm.

 

The 3DS is weaker than the Vita and games are easier to develop for them as a result. End result, the Vita barely gets any AAA games and the 3DS gets loads.

 

Other times power had nothing to do with that console winning a gen.

 

The PS2 was the weakest of that gen but it had a DVD player at a time when that was the big new thing and so sold a ton.

 

So it's not always a case of a console winning a gen "in spite" of being weakest.

[Sheikah]

I'd have to disagree with each and every one of your examples, given that every single one thrived for a specific reason, and that reason was not it being a weaker system. In some cases that weakness may have led to it being cheaper (e.g. Wii) which no doubt helped it shift units, but that by no means was the reason it was so successful. Again, success in spite of weakness.

 

This generation shows that people don't just want a weak, cheap console. Time and time again we see people go to the console that suits their needs - the Wii had a cool new and exciting technology, the PS2 had a DVD drive and many exclusive games, and the PS4 somewhat astoundingly was a system that seemed to be basically what people wanted...in contrast to the other systems.

 

My comment to Serebii was basically to say that the console being weaker should have no predictive power in determining success. It's all about whether the console does what enough people want.

Edited October 27, 2016 by Sheikah

[dazzybee]

But power does effect price, which is a huge factor in people buying it even lots of people on here are saying it has to be a certain price for that to work, so the power of the console will affect that.

 

And I would say part of the Wiis success WAS because it was weaker, and thus crazy cheap enough that anyone and everyone could afford one.

 

I think the gameboy example is absolutely fair too.

 

it's not like people WANT a weaker console, but the fact it is weaker has helped its success.

 

Maybe the NES Classic will be the first console where people do want a weaker powered console specifically

[Ronnie]

This generation shows that people don't just want a weak, cheap console.

 

So one solitary generation where the most powerful console has won proves that people don't want a weak cheap console, as opposed to pretty much every other generation where the weakest console has won. Great logic there

 

Wild theory, but maybe a console's appeal has nothing to do with power, but the other factors that surround it.

[Rummy]

Yeah but not because it was the weakest, rather in spite of it.

 

Wild theory, but maybe a console's appeal has nothing to do with power, but the other factors that surround it.

 

So I'm just gonna leave that here in the middle of an argument that pretty much looks to me that you're actually 'arguing' the same point

[Kav]

Nintendo definitely exist outside the typical console generations now with the switch to Switch.

 

1. It's a "home console" which is in all actuality a handheld.

2. They say themselves how they're not competing with Sony/Microsoft.

3. When they announced it, they didn't announce it as "the next generation of gaming consoles" they announced it as "the next generation of Nintendo home consoles".

 

They're no longer interested in this generational competition, they were defeated in that, so they'll just do their own thing.

Edited October 27, 2016 by Kav

[Ronnie]

They're no longer interested in this generational competition, they were defeated in that, so they'll just do their own thing.

 

They weren't defeated in the Wii era when they did their own thing.

[Retro_Link]

I think they were outsold by the other two consoles come the end of the generation though right?

[Ronnie]

I think they were outsold by the other two consoles come the end of the generation though right?

 

PS3 84 million, 360 84 million, Wii 102 million. It doesn't matter, I don't want this to devolve into an argument, my point is they abandoned the traditional generation cycle a long time ago, not just when they were "defeated" in this current gen.

[Kav]

PS3 84 million, 360 84 million, Wii 102 million. It doesn't matter, I don't want this to devolve into an argument, my point is they abandoned the traditional generation cycle a long time ago, not just when they were "defeated" in this current gen.

 

They were still a part of that generation Ronnie. It was a dedicated home console and released at the same time of the others.

 

I listed more than what you just quoted me on saying!

[Retro_Link]

PS3 84 million, 360 84 million, Wii 102 million. It doesn't matter, I don't want this to devolve into an argument, my point is they abandoned the traditional generation cycle a long time ago, not just when they were "defeated" in this current gen.

Oh no, I was just curious.

 

For me, Nintendo are carving their own space. In creating a functioning hybrid, it's like a brand new consumer device.

 

Incremental consoles may see console generations draw to an end anyway, but they're still an unproven concept depending on whether the market accepts them.

[Ronnie]

They were still a part of that generation Ronnie. It was a dedicated home console and released at the same time of the others.

 

I listed more than what you just quoted me on saying!

 

You said "They're no longer interested in this generational competition, they were defeated in that, so they'll just do their own thing." as if because they were defeated in one generation they'll move to doing their own thing because of it. My point is they did their own thing with the Wii (cheap, motion based console in standard definition) and the Wii U (one gen behind in terms of power, two screen gaming), and therefore started a long time ago. It's not a recent thing just because the Wii U didn't sell.

[Kav]

@Ronnie, I said more than just the above, take the whole post into context.

 

I don't think it's just because of one failure. I think it's also because of the failure of the Gamecube as well as the fact that the complete failure of the WiiU was off the back of their most successful home console in the Wii. The manner of its failure is more than it just being considered a failure itself.

Nintendo said the WiiU would be considered a success if it sold 50 million units... they were embarrassingly short!

Their him console market has been shrinking since the beginning, with the exception of the Wii.

 

I think they looked at that and at the most successful business, the handheld market, saw how that was shrinking too in the face of mobile gaming, and they thought to consolidate their two businesses in hope to share each of their consumer bases as well as trying to bring in more sales with the hybrid pitch.

 

But the console is a handheld, that's straightforward enough to see, so along with all the above and my previous post, I say they're stepping out of the typical home console generational race and doing their own thing.

[Retro_Link]

Really it's a portable home console. For many it may well just stay docked - or at least not leave the house.

 

However, in the hands of the Japanese market and those outside of Japan who spend a long time commuting, then it becomes a handheld device.

[dazzybee]

But it clearly isn't as straightforward as you think because I don't know anyone who agrees with you It's a hyrbrid. In fact, with it being 3 hours of battery and playing typically home console games it's easily argued it's a home console that can be taken away. Even nintendo think that. All those games shown were home console games.

 

But it's both. That's the beauty and genius of it, and as long as we see both types of games then it will be incredible!