What if Nintendo had followed Microsoft and Sony with its successor?

I've always wondered if things would be any different had Nintendo chosen to pump out a near identical system to the Xbox 360 and PS3 in terms of capabilities, with no innovation features.

I kind of get the impression that they could have made that work just as well actually. Obviously it wouldn't quite as popular as the Wii because it wouldn't be able to reach out to new audiences. But I can quite easily see the existing gaming industry getting pretty hyped up about beefed up, HD Metroid, Mario, Zelda and so on. As long as they kept the system sleek and in the same sort of price bracket as the 360, I genuinely think they could be emulating the same sort of success they are now with the Wii.

In some ways too, I wonder if that might have been a better option to take. Don't get me wrong I think the Wii is fantastic, but if Nintendo had followed the trend I'm sure they'd have a much better third party showing with cross platform games. I also feel they wouldn't suffer so much rejection and isolation from certain developers. I know largely the Wii has great third party support now, but hey...

Further more, how many of Nintendo's up and coming games really need the unique capabilities of the Wii? Mario Galaxy could easily be mapped back to a pad, Metroid Corruption whilst perfect on the Wii-mote is already proven using a traditional control scheme, Smash Bros Brawl? Mario Kart? I don't need to even go there.

The other problem I can foresee is where Nintendo take it from the Wii, when Sony and Microsoft are showing off their next powerhouse systems what do Nintendo do? People will surely be expecting another unique take on how to play games, but Nintendo have previously have stated how they had

They would have lost

What if the sky was green instead of blue?

Oni-Ninja said:
What if the sky was green instead of blue?

Then you wouldnt be asking that question

Good post, and I agree with some of your comments. I wonder myself also about this very thing. My standpoint is simple and was so even before it's release. I for one knew it would be a considerably weaker machine than the rest, and I was still content with that fact. Nintendo's successus have always derived from the most important factor- software, quality games, not solely technology, .

When I saw the Wii for the first time I imediately saw that it envoked the spirit of the NES in it's visual design, that must clearly have been a intention of Nintendo. If the Wii is supported by Nintendo and third parties in the same way that console was Wii owners should be very happy.

On the games issue people should remain patient, little windows are opening giving us a peek at what is achievable. The vast majority of games we have seen now cannot, and should not be considerd Wii's first generation titles, the games that will come out in the first half of next year should imo. By then, all the quality third party companies will be showing us things you and I had no idea about, and some will also be puzzled by the fact they released crap this year.

The Wii is capable of so much more, and time that will show. Their are certainly issues/problems that Nintendo will face two years down the line though. As software progresses elsewhere Nintendo will have to rely heavily on the unique abilities of the Wii moreso, they will have to continue to create innovative software that is distinct and that pushes the Wii to the very limits of it's abilities.

Within the coming years games elsewhere will be very physics rich and border on photorealism, and that will be too much for the Wii to complete with, with it's relatively weak CPU. Nintendo games have never really been about creating realism so it should not matter too much in not having a better graphical out put than it does, but, if they can impliment HD output with future games and a firmware update, so be it, it will certainly help their cause.

Nintendo will never be restricted by something they see as trivial in the grand scheme of things. Nintendo imbue magic and charm in games that the others fail to do so often. Nintendo fans should sit tight and wait on the quality that will inevitably show. You ARE going to see many games that you will wish were on the Wii, but it's simply not going to happen, so have the sense to get one of the other consoles also if you can, but know in doing so that you also have a fantastic console in the Wii also that will give you something that only Nintendo can give.

My last point would have to be that Nintendo have put themselves in a great position by producing significently weaker and cheaper consoles that sell very well, that I think opens the option for them to jump frog the opposition in the NEXT generation or when they see fit. If Nintendo can make sure that the Wii is as successful as the PS2 was, then that really does make that very a viable possiblity. The Nintendo Wii had to be made the way you see it now, there was no way they could have embarked on something similar to Microsoft and Sony after the GC and the risk factor. If they had the funds and were not hinderd by the elevated risk factor involved, I can only speculate that they would have also created a fantastic high powerd machine also, but also one that was distinct from the other two still.

I am happy with mine, and I know I will be so much happier soon enough. {LS]

<9 million or so sales so far in only eight months, this market dictates the software, more competition will equate to more quality in future.>

( Edited on 22.07.2007 14:40 by Linkyshinks )

What would happen if we blew up the moon?

Do-able, but Nintendo would have to put themselves out alot.
Paying for this exclusive, paying for that exclusive.

The hardware would have to be the best, no if's or but's like there was between the GC and Xbox.

They would have to market the fuck out of it also.

Further more, how many of Nintendo’s up and coming games really need the unique capabilities of the Wii? Mario Galaxy could easily be mapped back to a pad, Metroid Corruption whilst perfect on the Wii-mote is already proven using a traditional control scheme, Smash Bros Brawl? Mario Kart? I don’t need to even go there.

But that's when these games lose what makes them different in the first place. Many people are hyped because of the controls and how they will effect them, and this is what does and is going to make it stand out. This is also a great oppertuniy for Nintendo's franchises to get a kick up the arse much like 3D did on the N64 - wanna know why Mario 64 and OOT are considired such classics? 3D was brand new, a new toy for Nintendo to play with in their games. It helped them to introduce new things, new gameplay aspects and the like which are still staples of the games today, allowed them to "innovate" and do all sorts of things and include many different aspects that hadn't been seen in games before. It gave their franchises a sense being brand new again, allowed them to do so much more, and the Wii has potential to do the same if used right. People complain about Sunshine and Zelda, MP2, etc, but notice how most of the complaints come to the games that came after the intial move to 3D. It seems obvious the the initial move and momentum from that carried these games into classic status. Everything the wii controls bring allows them to do a similar thing all over again, new toys to play with, new ways to experiment, even for 3rd parties, something that they haven't really had the oppertunity to try for a generation, despite their efforts.

If Nintendo had taken the traditional route, they would still be considered the "also ran" company, as what has been happening since the N64. They wouldn't be as succesful as they are now, games like MP3 and SMG wouldn't have the same allure without the Wii controls. While MP3 and others are proven, that's not the point - the controls are meant to be different. Arguably shooting has been improved in MP3, and SMG isn't quite that easy to cross back over (pointer functionality, possibly other things), SSBB we still don't have much of an idea about (it was hinted in the control schemes update that it might use something). HD is no substitute for the kind of attention and other things that the controls bring and have already brought either.

Quite simply, they wouldn't be as succesful, They'd probably be pretty ignored for the most part by 3rd parties who are now taking notice (Hell, even EA are at least trying) entirely because of their new approach.

( Edited on 22.07.2007 14:39 by Modplan Man )

Nah, just look at the Nintendo 64 and the GC. From Nintendo's perspective, they made the right decision. Also, if they had released a "Gamecube 360" kinda console they would have been expected to provide an online service comparable to the 360's and PS3's, which they probably wouldn't have done.

CuRoi said:
What would happen if we blew up the moon?

Cheese on toast.

Well going after Sony and Microsoft's market was kind of what the Gamecube did... I think Nintendo's console this generation would do even worse. But Nintendo were right to do something different, as the step from last generation to this one would not be nearly as significant a change as the step from N64-era to Gamecube-era was. Extra power alone no longer makes a significant difference - that is the truth.

I think if nintendo had just done what sony and microsoft had done they would be in the same boat as they were in with GC, they made the right choice but i do wish they had just added some more power to the Wii so that it could handle the big games on other consoles (UT3 or COD4 for example) just with SD instead of HD.

CuRoi said:
What would happen if we blew up the moon?

According to new scientist the world would end.

Z said:
They would have lost

I agree. The GameCube was more powerful than the PS2 and possibly near the Xbox. It had Zelda, Metroid Prime, Star Fox, and tons of others to "help" it, but not even those were enough to save it. What's making the Wii (and even the DS) wildly successful is the differences compared to the competition, and how the control for Nintendo's systems look so much more appealing than Microsoft's or Sony's, whose control is aged after decades of the same thing.

So, no, I'd have to say that this would probably be Nintendo's last foray into the console wars if they decided to copy Sony and Microsoft.

I don't really care what it would have been like, I'm just glad they did what they did.

Who knows Nintendo probally would have been in the postion sega is in loosing money and only being able to develope games.

I think they made the right choice by doing this. the way they were headed wasn't working for them,, this is.

Bottom line, Microsoft is a faggot company for going to far with the video game industry by inventing Xbox, then stealing Sonic from Nintendo, sharing it with Sony, and NOT putting it on Gamcube or the Wii.

Plus, its not Giant Bowser, ITS GIGA BOWSER!!!! If you don't know what I'm talking about, check Soundworks's level bar.

( Edited on 25.07.2007 04:45 by pso12lover )

pso12lover said:
Bottom line, Microsoft is a faggot company for going to far with the video game industry by inventing Xbox, then stealing Sonic from Nintendo, sharing it with Sony, and NOT putting it on Gamcube or the Wii.Plus, its not Giant Bowser, ITS GIGA BOWSER!!!! If you dont know what Im talking about, check Soundworkss level bar.( Edited on 25.07.2007 04:45 by pso12lover )

Whoa, calm down. Also, although I'm not a Microsoft fan, I'm hoping they'll influence Nintendo to upgrade their online system the next time around. Too few games are online, and the ones that are have limitations. I'm afraid of what might happen to Brawl, though I'm fairly confident that HAL can pull it off, even if some minor adjustments must be made. As long as most stages, items, etc. can be used, and there can be 4-player battles, it'll easily beat any multiplayer 360 game.