Nintendo 3DS business future *spawn
- Thread starter Kaotik
- Start date
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Just like Wii? Or DS/DSlite/DSi?
As I said before, different times, different market conditions.
During its lifetime , the 3DS will have to compete with PSP2, Android Gaming, iOS gaming, Symbian gaming, MeeGo gaming, WebOS gaming, WP7 gaming (Xbox Live supported) and Bada gaming.
Touchscreen is already standardized, 3D screen could be standardized within a year from its launch. Gaming controls could be solved with a standardized add-in bluetooth controller of some sort, or something like this..
They might have to make the war through content alone, eventually.
Its position as a mobile gaming device isn't more confortable in 2011 than the original DS was in 2004, that's for sure.
Just like Wii wasn't supposed to have snowmans chance in hell against the competition due "last gen or even worse hardware"? I just don't see it being that much different.
While I'm android user myself, Androids problem is the fact that there's so many different configurations starting from CPU speed, RAM size to screen size and resolution etc
While I'm android user myself, Androids problem is the fact that there's so many different configurations starting from CPU speed, RAM size to screen size and resolution etc
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
More importantly, since when did ios/android games came even close to being competition for handheld games? Mobile games are to pass time, handheld games are to have fun. Big difference if you ask me. Besides that people buy the platform for a whole different reason etc but we already had that discussion 3 times I think and I don't feel like repeating myself again.
Basically ~200 euro handhelds are a totally different market than 400+ smarthphones that you need for even half decent games not counting all the other reasons.
Basically ~200 euro handhelds are a totally different market than 400+ smarthphones that you need for even half decent games not counting all the other reasons.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Since they started to generate a substantial amount of profit.
3DS will be far closer in graphics quality to anything else on the market than DS ever was to PSP (the best 3DS titles already look significantly better then anything ever produced on PSP and these aren't even first gen yet). Not that any of this matters of course, DS obviously didn't succeed because of graphics quality, because at the end of the day graphics quality isn't the main selling point for handhelds. That won't change just because there's now more competition (not that I actually consider Andoid/IOS devices to be competition at the moment).
By the way Arwin/ToTTenTranz, I'd be interested to see these Iphone 3GS games that wipe the floor with the best 3DS games we've seen so far. Even the game being mentioning, Ridge Racer, looks far better on 3DS then on the Iphone.
By the way Arwin/ToTTenTranz, I'd be interested to see these Iphone 3GS games that wipe the floor with the best 3DS games we've seen so far. Even the game being mentioning, Ridge Racer, looks far better on 3DS then on the Iphone.
Last edited by a moderator:
You have numbers for that?
I think he must be referring to Angry Birds, but that's a phenomenom, not a standard.
PSP2 is a no-show so far, so 3DS has a vital lead over it just like the rest of those things. A company starting behind can suffer from a headstart (like Dreamcast vs PS2, for instance) but the leading company releasing first is just an even bigger win for them. With all those other cell phone competitors you're basically illustrating a good point that the market is pretty segmented.
That aside, regardless of what many here are saying about phones becoming the handheld gaming platform of choice, the types of genres supported will still be pretty different. Also consider that Nintendo first and second party games were by far the best selling on DS, and those games will never be on phones. All of the hardware choices in the world won't give people Mario and Pokemon.
So you're liable to continue to see big console companies mainly only port things to phones because the net profit is too low to throw huge development costs at. The indie releases will still thrive, but there's no reason to believe it won't be much bigger on 3DS than it was on DSi, in the same way it hit pretty big on the consoles this generation.
And I totally disagree about 3DS looking underpowered.. if anything, I see it as much, much more competitive graphically than DS was (and way ahead of PSP, regardless of what people say). There's a reason so many developers have been praising it. It might not support the incredibly detailed textures the few high end iOS games do, nor the pipeline flexibility, but it has better per-pixel lighting and other special effects than anything we've seen on phones.
I absolutely don't see this happening. Touchscreens are standard because they're the de facto primary interface of choice, thanks to iPhone. 3D is not an interface, it doesn't replace anything, it's just an extra and one that doesn't add enough to the primary things people use smartphones for (generally not playing games, believe it or not). It doesn't really help that the best selling games are 2D. There's just no way I can see a huge majority of phones adopting this, as would be necessary for it to say, become required by Android. Apple could push it if they wanted to, but the kicker is that it comes as resolution costs, which would currently be detrimental to one of Apple's strongest features.
And how is it that these have still not caught on? Anyway, add-ons will never get games made for them.
You forgot price and target demographic. The fact that smartphones require lengthy data contracts means that parents won't buy them for their 10 year olds as eagerly as they will 3DS.
On the other hand, in 2004 we didn't have reason to believe Sony absolutely couldn't steal handhelds from Nintendo, but now..
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
People, stop being so hard-headed and turning every single word of my posts into a drama. Geez.
1 - In 2004 there was no exploding market for smartphone gaming, in March 2011 there is.
2 - I didn't cast a spell that makes the 3DS a failure, I didn't bet all my life savings that it would fail either.
3 - I only said it could fail because it may not adapt to the current market demands, mainly due to the weak hardware. The exact same formula may not work for the second decade ot 2000.
Splash news, everyone: not all Nintendo game consoles were a huge success.
BTW, 3D screens should become standardized in smartphones as soon as 3D cameras become standardized as well. Do I see this happening in 2012? Totally.
1 - In 2004 there was no exploding market for smartphone gaming, in March 2011 there is.
2 - I didn't cast a spell that makes the 3DS a failure, I didn't bet all my life savings that it would fail either.
3 - I only said it could fail because it may not adapt to the current market demands, mainly due to the weak hardware. The exact same formula may not work for the second decade ot 2000.
Splash news, everyone: not all Nintendo game consoles were a huge success.
BTW, 3D screens should become standardized in smartphones as soon as 3D cameras become standardized as well. Do I see this happening in 2012? Totally.
Last edited by a moderator:
First of all, Nintendo is a Japanese company, and there already was a huge market for smartphone gaming in Japan many years ago (iMode, FOMA and such). This is nothing new for Nintendo. And it's an odd comparison anyway, once you notice that pretty much any high profile handheld title still generates more revenue in its opening week than even the most successful mobile games in their entire lifetime.
Also, people play handheld games instead of mobile games because they are real games, not cheap timewasters. If that's all you want, you'll be just fine with an iDevice. But that's not Nintendo's market, just like high profile games aren't Apple's market. Sure, you can get, say, Madden, for both. But they are not the same game. They're not even developed by the same company. The same is true for pretty much all games by big publishers. There are a few exceptions, like Chinatown Wars, but honestly: This game wouldn't even exist if it wasn't developed for DS, initially. People also like to mention Chaos Rings as a high profile iPhone game, but compared to SQEX' DS offerings, it's not all that high profile anymore. Infinity Blade, Dead Space, Rage - all great iPhone games, but they wouldn't stand a chance on a dedicated handheld gaming device.
And last, but not least: 3D touchscreens don't work all that well. Sure, it's possible to combine a 3D screen and a touchscreen, but the result is far less than the sum of it's parts. Scratches, dust particles and fingerprints destroy the 3D effect, not to mention the fact that seeing something in 3D but touching it in 2D feels weird.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
And you think it would be somehow fair to compare the 3DS to a phone that'll be 2 years-old when the Nintendo handheld comes out?
My whole point never referred 2010 games. I mentioned several times that my concern about the 3DS' longevity would be endangered somewhere in 2012 (Q3/Q4), where 3D screens could become standard in mid-end smartphones, and AAA game development could turn up in some mobile OSs.
Supposed future development is what I'm talking about. Not a couple of old iPhone games like angry birds and fruit ninja. Of course those weren't menacing enough for a Final Fantasy title in DS/PSP.
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
Could. Could. Could. If you would have put it that way from the beginning it would have been much more clearer because now it seemed you put it as a fact or atleast a very strong opinion
Yes, it could happen. The world could also really come to a end in 2012. But it probably wont. The sames goes for mobile vs handheld games.
Besides history proving time and time again gfx are not the most important factor in handheld games there are also some things that wont change but will have a large impact on handheld gaming.
1. If you buy a handheld you know that it will get games for 6 years. Gaming on your smartphone means that if you want to play the latest games you will have to buy a new high end model every 2 years or less and on mid/low range models you wont even be able to play games after a while or not really at all.
2. Price. Even if a budget smartphone (250 euros) would be good enough to play all games for 2 years (which it wont be) even than over a 6 year period you will be spending atleast 3 times as much on hardware. You could argue well you need a phone anyway so its not all gaming related costs though but its still there. Fine if you want such a phone, but what about kids or people who don't want such a phone?
3. Games. Every handheld sold is a machine a dev/pubs know they will sell games on. This doesnt go for smartphones. Also the type of games people will want to play on a smartphone is likely different from a what a handheld gamer wants.
Basically it just are 2 different platforms that demand 2 different things.
I buy smartphones myself, I play games on them, but I will never ever prefer them over a handheld. When I play games on my phone its to pass some time. I don't actually go sit on the couch thinking im gonna beat the Radiant highscore. This is different from when I play on my DS. I play on my DS to actually have fun. I think it works that way for a lot of people.
See, that's the thing: Typical 3DS budgets range from $500k to $10M, and the games are developed by B to AAA teams. That's not even remotely comparable to what is currently on iDevices, and there are no signs that this will change anytime soon. The few exception are either side projects (Chaos Rings), ports from dedicated devices (Chinatown Wars), or glorified marketing material (Infinity Blade).
One thing is visible: Quite a few former DS shovelware developers switch to iPhone, while big publishers found new, higher end teams to handle 3DS development, usually assembled from former console teams (Ubisoft Montreal), or they simply reassign former console teams (EA Salt Lake). That seems to be the trend, and it makes perfect sense. People are willing to spend $40 on handheld games, but they obviously have much, much higher expectations as well. To satisfy those expectations, you (usually) need considerable budgets and talent. People won't spend as much on smartphones, but they don't expect much either, so some clone Gameloft farted out in a week in one of their Shanghai sweatshops is just fine. And I honestly don't think publishers even want to change that model. It has nothing to do with tech specs or 3D touchscreens.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Tell that to the people who bought a Game Gear, a Virtual Boy, a Zodiac, a Gizmondo or a GP32.
Or Gameboy Color, which was replaced by Gameboy Advance 2 years after its release.
Hum? Do I have to buy a high-end PC to play games every 2 years?
AFAIK, a mid-end PC will let you play any game for 3-4 years, at least. You'll just have to lower the quality settings down.
It happens all the same with many smartphone games right now, in case you didn't know.
Only time will tell what'll be the "fashion" of 2012-2013.
The "type of games people will want to play on a smartphone" depends on the available types of games people have available on a smartphone. To assume that smartphone games will "never" go past a "time-wasting" kind of game is like someone in the 70's claiming PONG is the one and only game an arcade will ever have.
"Never ever"?
Well, good luck with the 13th century mentality. Doesn't really fit with 2011 but hey, I respect your decision nonetheless.
I'll just go with the flow, whatever that'll be.
Last edited by a moderator:
Change is coming to the world. Sometimes change is what sets them free.
Considering the ports usually come years later and don't really work...
I obviously meant the PSP2 when I said change was coming
It should be much easier to port from that to smartphones than it was with the PSP1. In a way, that justifies Nintendo's decision to use a GPU with an unusual architecture and API (not that I expect it to be a huge barrier, but still noteworthy).
