Nintendo couldn't care less if you play it after you buy it: you've already bought it, and they've already made their money.
False. If you keep playing it that means you're (most likely) buying more games and accessories, which means more money for Nintendo.
The question is why did it take Nintendo almost 8 years to come out with something that barely improved the original? And still paled in comparison to the Game Gears graphics and color scheme, not to mention the stereo sound. Was
Maybe because making something like the Game Gear pre-2001 (GBA's release) wouldn't have been feasible without making it a brick, a battery hog, and expensive. Nintendo is more about being practical and staying on the cheap side of things than being #1 technologically.
Man, now I want to dig out my Game Gear. I had some good times on that bad boy.
EDIT: The GG was technologically superior, but the Gameboy had a wider appeal. That's why it succeeded more. Think about WoW: it's low-end enough to run on pretty much every computer in existence, so you capture a very wide audience with it. A game with higher system requirements means a narrower market. Nintendo seeks to capture a very large market with their products. It's a simple strategy and it works very well.
I hate beating a dead horse, but if Nintendo is so focused on the bottom line, why would they come out with the Virtual Boy? Aside from the arcade variety no one else that I know of even ventured into the VR helmet/goggles realm. Was there someone new at the helm or were they trying to push something that eventually failed, I'm intrigued?
I hate beating a dead horse, but if Nintendo is so focused on the bottom line, why would they come out with the Virtual Boy? Aside from the arcade variety no one else that I know of even ventured into the VR helmet/goggles realm. Was there someone new at the helm or were they trying to push something that eventually failed, I'm intrigued?
Nintendo's best sellers are all gimmick systems.
NES - The first cartridge system affordable enough to bring the arcade home. GB - Portable! SNES - Insane graphics for the generation. N64 - First 64-bit system, four players without a multitap, native 3D cellshader engine. GC - No real gimmick... No real success... DS - Touchscreen, microphone, dual screens. Wii - The Wiimote.
See a trend?
EDIT: Forgot the point -_-. The VB was a gimmick that was too much, too soon. The 90s weren't ready for VR, technologically or sociologically.
Touchscreen, mic, and dual screens are all sort of gimmicks. I mean, sure, some games use them well, but overall it's just a gimmick. I could see mics and potentially touch screens being used in the future, but probably not dual screens.
Wiimote is a total gimmick, too. I can't see it being used that much, if at all, in the future.
And yes, IMO, the biggest difference between a gimmick and a technological advancement is whether or not it gets used again in the future.
I wouldn't necessarily call those gimmicks. They all seem like more technological advancements rather than gimmicks.
That's fair. In retrospect, gimmick wasn't a good choice of word. Nnitendo's success relates to how they introduce 'different' advancements. The PS3 has raised the bar on graphics, XBLA has raised the bar on content delivery, and the Wii has raised the bar on grabbing demographics. This is where they know their stuff; by advancing in unexpeced directions, Nintendo keeps their systems fresh in the public eye.
Comments
EDIT: The GG was technologically superior, but the Gameboy had a wider appeal. That's why it succeeded more. Think about WoW: it's low-end enough to run on pretty much every computer in existence, so you capture a very wide audience with it. A game with higher system requirements means a narrower market. Nintendo seeks to capture a very large market with their products. It's a simple strategy and it works very well.
NES - The first cartridge system affordable enough to bring the arcade home.
GB - Portable!
SNES - Insane graphics for the generation.
N64 - First 64-bit system, four players without a multitap, native 3D cellshader engine.
GC - No real gimmick... No real success...
DS - Touchscreen, microphone, dual screens.
Wii - The Wiimote.
See a trend?
EDIT: Forgot the point -_-. The VB was a gimmick that was too much, too soon. The 90s weren't ready for VR, technologically or sociologically.
Wiimote is a total gimmick, too. I can't see it being used that much, if at all, in the future.
And yes, IMO, the biggest difference between a gimmick and a technological advancement is whether or not it gets used again in the future.