This is why Nintendo will probably win the console war

[ChiefReginod]

It's really simple. Once hardware reaches a point that there's no significant difference in power between Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft consoles, Nintendo will win by default because of their more popular franchises + a level third-party playing field.

Who knows when this will happen, but I'm convinced that it's the only possible outcome. Diminishing returns are already a thing and only getting worse with each console generation. I don't think it will be that much longer. A few more console gens maybe. I'm not really a Nintendo fan, by the way. This is just the way I see it. I even wonder if this has been Nintendo's long-term plan for the past few decades.

Your thoughts?

 

[Xzi]

As anal as everybody is being over the MS-ActiBlizz merger, there's no chance we're ever left with just one major player in the console space. And as successful as Nintendo has been this generation, you never know when the next Wii U is gonna pop up and nearly bankrupt them all over again. By my estimation, Xbox is the likeliest console to eventually fold and shift to a focus on software development only, but Nintendo is a close second.

 

[rcpd]

By my estimation, Xbox is the likeliest console to eventually fold and shift to a focus on software development only, but Nintendo is a close second.

I don't see this happening anytime soon with Nintendo. They're already the most protective of their IP of the big 3. No way in my lifetime do they allow their IP to play on anything but their own platform. They're certainly not about to let Mario on the Playstation 8 because "thats the only console left". They barely have mobile presence, and lets face it... The games are not great compared to the software Nintendo is known for putting out on their own platform.

They'll probably be the last console maker, staunchly refusing to budge on their IP copyright stance.

 

[Kioku]

I don't see this happening anytime soon with Nintendo. They're already the most protective of their IP of the big 3. No way in my lifetime do they allow their IP to play on anything but their own platform. They're certainly not about to let Mario on the Playstation 8 because "thats the only console left". They barely have mobile presence, and lets face it... The games are not great compared to the software Nintendo is known for putting out on their own platform.

They'll probably be the last console maker, staunchly refusing to budge on their IP copyright stance.

Sony will easily outlast Nintendo in the hardware space. Sonys stranglehold on that market shows no signs of letting up soon. Nintendo shows the signs of complacency and those signs are only getting worse each year. Eventually people will walk away from their IPs because they don’t know how to create and maintain a social space.

 

[rcpd]

Sony will easily outlast Nintendo in the hardware space. Sonys stranglehold on that market shows no signs of letting up soon. Nintendo shows the signs of complacency and those signs are only getting worse each year. Eventually people will walk away from their IPs because they don’t know how to create and maintain a social space.

Perhaps. That's also an option. They complacently run themselves out of business. My point was that I don't see Nintendo letting their IP on other platforms, preferring to let it die with them if it comes down to it.

 

[Xzi]

I don't see this happening anytime soon with Nintendo. They're already the most protective of their IP of the big 3.

The irony of that is that their games have been the easiest to emulate, and their hardware the easiest to exploit, for decades. Their IPs would be far more secure as multiplat titles with Denuvo.

My point was that I don't see Nintendo letting their IP on other platforms, preferring to let it die with them if it comes down to it.

There's no business on Earth that operates with sentimentality as its main guiding principle. If the option is profit or no profit, they'll take the former every time.

 

[Paralel]

I don't see the market ever shrinking back down to a duopoly again, with the exception that it becomes a dying market.

I also don't see the market expanding beyond the "Big 3". The last entry point was when the xbox arrived, and that still required Microsoft burning funds like it was monopoly money. At this point the barrier to entry would be just too great, with no perceptible benefit, and absolutely no guarantee of ever being profitable. I would say the current dominant players in this field are locked in a death struggle for the foreseeable future.

The best entry into the established market was Sony with the Playstation. They happened to enter at a moment when both the other major players essentially crapped the bed. One produced a console that was essentially a turd sandwich. The other produced a console that was so hobbled by storage constraints that it would be impossible for it to be useful for the concepts that many 3rd party studios had in mind.

The only event that supersedes Sony's entry into the market in the modern era was Nintendo essentially single handedly bringing about the second revolution of the video game console market. Without the introduction and success of the NES, there essentially was no video game console market, as the situation after the great video game crash of 1983 left the initial revolution of the video game market dead in the water.

 

[RAHelllord]

As anal as everybody is being over the MS-ActiBlizz merger, there's no chance we're ever left with just one major player in the console space. And as successful as Nintendo has been this generation, you never know when the next Wii U is gonna pop up and nearly bankrupt them all over again. By my estimation, Xbox is the likeliest console to eventually fold and shift to a focus on software development only, but Nintendo is a close second.

Nintendo was nowhere near close to bankruptcy from the Wii U, they didn't even lose money on it.
They made actual profit off the product but it was a very paltry one compared to their other consoles, far behind all projections. But still they didn't lose any money.
They also have a ridiculous amount of cash in the bank that would allow them to rather easily survive multiple such fiascos back to back without too much issue beyond their pride getting hurt.

I don't think there will ever be a "winner", simply because there's nothing to win. The market for entertainment isn't one that is easy to corner by just one company, people have different preferences towards flavors and the two big players Sony and Nintendo are serving different customers for the most part. Just as pan cakes and waffles will have no "winner" it'll be the same there.

On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if the handheld PC market will elbow its way into the console market more significantly if the steam deck actually manages to continue selling well. It's basically what Microsoft should have done from the very start with the Xbox, make a PC that's optimized for gaming only with an interface that a baby could use and all the creature comforts of steam. No hassle, just plug and play.
Microsoft could have been a much more relevant player in the console gaming market if they had done that, but maybe they'll adjust course now that Valve had to show them how it's done.

 

[Kioku]

Nintendo was nowhere near close to bankruptcy from the Wii U, they didn't even lose money on it.
They made actual profit off the product but it was a very paltry one compared to their other consoles, far behind all projections. But still they didn't lose any money.
They also have a ridiculous amount of cash in the bank that would allow them to rather easily survive multiple such fiascos back to back without too much issue beyond their pride getting hurt.

I don't think there will ever be a "winner", simply because there's nothing to win. The market for entertainment isn't one that is easy to corner by just one company, people have different preferences towards flavors and the two big players Sony and Nintendo are serving different customers for the most part. Just as pan cakes and waffles will have no "winner" it'll be the same there.

On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if the handheld PC market will elbow its way into the console market more significantly if the steam deck actually manages to continue selling well. It's basically what Microsoft should have done from the very start with the Xbox, make a PC that's optimized for gaming only with an interface that a baby could use and all the creature comforts of steam. No hassle, just plug and play.
Microsoft could have been a much more relevant player in the console gaming market if they had done that, but maybe they'll adjust course now that Valve had to show them how it's done.

They definitely did lose money on the WiiU, it wasn’t selling…. you can’t gain profit on something that doesn’t sell…

Never mind the fact that Iwata willingly took a 50% pay cut because the console was doing so poorly…

 

[Xzi]

Nintendo was nowhere near close to bankruptcy from the Wii U, they didn't even lose money on it.
They made actual profit off the product but it was a very paltry one compared to their other consoles, far behind all projections. But still they didn't lose any money.
They also have a ridiculous amount of cash in the bank that would allow them to rather easily survive multiple such fiascos back to back without too much issue beyond their pride getting hurt.

"Survival" is one thing, but a change in business strategy is always high priority after any sort of failure, and I'm honestly not sure if Nintendo would've kept making consoles if Switch had flopped just as hard as Wii U. Bringing their first-party titles to all other platforms has the potential to generate three to four times the profit they see from software right now. Surely someone within the company would have the sense to understand that, but again only in this hypothetical where they're backed into a corner.

I don't think there will ever be a "winner", simply because there's nothing to win. The market for entertainment isn't one that is easy to corner by just one company, people have different preferences towards flavors and the two big players Sony and Nintendo are serving different customers for the most part. Just as pan cakes and waffles will have no "winner" it'll be the same there.

PC has already "won" in the sense that it has access to all of the content from all of the platforms out of the box, including native games dating back to the DOS days. In the sense of a more simplified/living room experience, however, it's true the console space is never going to have a clear winner-take-all scenario. If one of the big three does eventually bow out, I imagine they would be replaced by a new player sooner or later. Hopefully it isn't Facebook or some shit lmao.

On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if the handheld PC market will elbow its way into the console market more significantly if the steam deck actually manages to continue selling well. It's basically what Microsoft should have done from the very start with the Xbox, make a PC that's optimized for gaming only with an interface that a baby could use and all the creature comforts of steam. No hassle, just plug and play.
Microsoft could have been a much more relevant player in the console gaming market if they had done that, but maybe they'll adjust course now that Valve had to show them how it's done.

Yeah that market definitely still has room to expand, and Microsoft would be a welcome entrant as long as their pricing is competitive. Phil Spencer mentioned both Ally and Deck in his recent interview, so they're actively aware of the audience there.

 

[godreborn]

sorry for the long paragraph. it;''s my opinion btw, so please don't attack me for it.

what I will say about Nintendo is that at least they went five years with the wiiu. the instant Sony knew the vita was a failure was like in the first year, and they dropped it almost immediately. it makes you wonder if they'd do that with a console, something you spent $500 on. it would probably never happen, because sony doesn't try to reinvent the wheel like Nintendo, but NIntendo has always been behind in terms of power, so games have to be cloud serviced, run worse, or simply can't be ported to. I think that's what hurts NIntendo the most. I think I remember seeing the top 10 best selling games for the switch, and every single one of them was Nintendo made. I think a lot of developers don't put much effort into switch ports, because they know they're going to run bad or at least worse than xbox or playstation. imo, Nintendo just needs to become another third party, drop the systems thing entirely. they try to be creative, which is why I think the successor to the switch has been postponed. they've been trying to bridge the gap with portable and console, which they've done, so where do they go from there? they already have tried touch screen and motion controls, but there are many who do not like either. they just want games to be normal or at least played like you normally would.

 

[RAHelllord]

They definitely did lose money on the WiiU, it wasn’t selling…. you can’t gain profit on something that doesn’t sell…

Never mind the fact that Iwata willingly took a 50% pay cut because the console was doing so poorly…

They only had a loss in the first quarter of the launch year, after that they were always in the black. Iwata took the pay cut because it performed abysmally compared to expected sales, but it still had plenty of sales once they dropped the price a bit reworked their ads.

They sold 13.56 million consoles total, absolutely making a profit both from the console itself and then all the sales of surrounding software and accessories. But do keep in mind they wanted to sell more than 50m at the very least, which is why it was a failure in their eyes, and the eyes of everyone else.

PC has already "won" in the sense that it has access to all of the content from all of the platforms out of the box, including native games dating back to the DOS days. In the sense of a more simplified/living room experience, however, it's true the console space is never going to have a clear winner-take-all scenario. If one of the big three does eventually bow out, I imagine they would be replaced by a new player sooner or later. Hopefully it isn't Facebook or some shit lmao.

The problem, for most gamers, is that PC doesn't offer a convenient and easy way to experience any of the content that isn't on Steam or a similar digital store. The native DOS support is terrible and can't handle many of the hardware differences between machines from back then and today. Many early 3D titles from the '95 also just don't work right. Emulation has many graphical and audio errors that will annoy people, plus most often the interface and setup procedures are a mess.

PC gaming is the project car of the video game scene, it's cool when it works but you better enjoy tinkering the moment your "project" is more complex than slapping on new tires and changing the oil.

Windows 11 is already an attempt to make it easier to use for normies, particularly when compared to how easy android or iOS are compared to windows 10, but it's still a long way until it actually becomes as easy to understand and use as modern consoles.
Regular people just want their emails, browsers, YouTube, and games in a single box at home. And Microsoft is finally starting to cater to that majority more.
I just hope that in the future they don't fuck things up for power users, but I would also certainly appreciate if more old PC games were as simple to set up properly on windows as it is to hook up an old console again.

 

[Xzi]

The problem, for most gamers, is that PC doesn't offer a convenient and easy way to experience any of the content that isn't on Steam or a similar digital store.

It's literally the only gaming system that allows for that, pick up a console from any of the big three and you are 100% locked into their ecosystem unless you hack it. "Easy" is relative, but I don't think most people have a lot of issues installing a program from the internet and launching it directly from its shortcut.

Many early 3D titles from the '95 also just don't work right. Emulation has many graphical and audio errors that will annoy people, plus most often the interface and setup procedures are a mess.

Early 3D games are generally a mess even when working properly, heh. The emulation scene for any system past a certain age is sure to be pretty comprehensive though, and most issues can be fixed with just a couple settings tweaks. DOSBox in particular is supremely easy to use.

Regular people just want their emails, browsers, YouTube, and games in a single box at home. And Microsoft is finally starting to cater to that majority more.

That's precisely the reason that portable gaming PCs are suddenly a threat to the console market: just about anybody can slap a simplistic user-friendly UI on top of a full fat desktop OS. It creates a scenario in which not everybody who buys the devices will use them to their full potential, but that potential is still there for intermediate/advanced users to unlock. Walled gardens just don't stand a chance in the long run.

 

[Flame]

Once hardware reaches a point that there's no significant difference in power between Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft

When will this happen? I mean, from the day we were able to make fire from just sticks and move heavy stuff with wheels, humans have relied on inventions, technology to stay ahead of the competition?

How do you know what tech is around the corner?

I mean, this is more likely scenario the day Nintendo a gets 4K with 120fps console, Sony and Microsoft will reveal they console where you enter the Matrix,

 

[TomSwitch]

Base on how Nintendo have been behaving with respect to HW it is reasonable to expect Sony and Microsoft to continue to lead in HW specification. I do believe the gap is going to matter less in the next generation.

Concerning whether Switch HW is good enough I think not yet and maybe soon they can make one that do.

 

[CMDreamer]

Just like it happened with Sega becoming a pure software brand. in order of how I see things coming: Microsoft (xbox) < Sony (playstation) < Nintendo (it doesn't need a specific console because most of them are top sellers and have the best games out there).

 

[TomSwitch]

Just like it happened with Sega becoming a pure software brand. in order of how I see things coming: Microsoft (xbox) < Sony (playstation) < Nintendo (it doesn't need a specific console because most of them are top sellers and have the best games out there).

You forgot to mention Apple who is going in the opposite direction and it is not hard to understand why.
Total control and domination.

Becoming a pure software brand is for the losers.

Nintendo won't even let go of the game cartridge.

Nintendo also owns you game save and they won't let you have it on another console, not unless you pay. It used to be your save die with your game cartridge so a big thank you to Nintendo for the option to pay for it.

 

[godreborn]

You forgot to mention Apple who is going in the opposite direction and it is not hard to understand why.
Total control and domination.

Becoming a pure software brand is for the losers.

Nintendo won't even let go of the game cartridge.

Nintendo also owns you game save and they won't let you have it on another console, not unless you pay. It used to be your save die with your game cartridge so a big thank you to Nintendo for the option to pay for it.

well, you shouldn't have to pay for that convenience. with xbox, cloud saving is free.

 

[TomSwitch]

well, you shouldn't have to pay for that convenience. with xbox, cloud saving is free.

That is what total domination let you do and having that game save is much more than a convenience for many people, that is a very big value well worth the subscription fee for online, you can have it free on other platform don't mean anything to Nintendo

Total domination also means no price war. Means nothing that the other guy's price is zero.

I get same free game for free with Epic and with Sony you are fooling yourself thinking that you get it free when you have already paid for it with your subscription fee. You pay no matter whether you like the "free" game or not.

 

[Hassal]

Wasn't the reason Nintendo entering the console market making low powered devices? This was true ever since they launched that Game & Watch. However, with how technology is moving fast they are sliding on pretty thin ice.