@JohnGrey I totally dig your idea for a NintendoRewind real-virtual-console. Nintendo could even release wireless versions of their legacy controllers (sold separately) to pair with the system(which would appease their desire to sell a lot of plastic). But this is Nintendo we're talking about, and that's probably too logical for them to consider
.
Regarding the controllers, I've said as much many times. They could make
so much money on peripheral sales with such a console, as the cost of controllers in good condition is one of the more expensive aspects of retrogaming. Even for something as ubiquitous as the NES-004, it can cost $30 is good condition and $100 - 200 NIB. To have one that met the construction standards of the original, was properly weighted and was BT-enabled without the need for rubbish adapters like the 8bitdo controllers, I would definitely pay $50 - 60. I know that hardcore retro-platform gamers would do the same for an equivalent N64 controller; games like Banjo Kazooie require loads of precisions, especially with the camera system being as wonky as it was back then, and your options are paying through the nose to get a decent genuine controller without a dead analogue or dealing with one of the many, lesser-quality, remakes.
Nintendo will never consider it because, as I've said many times, they don't want to admit their only stock in trade is nostalgia. They do not innovate or evolve, and haven't done for twenty years at least, so they jealously guard their catalogue and dole out just enough to cover costs but never enough to deliver a definitive retro experience. I'm certain that they feel rather like an aging starlet that gets rather tired of signing photographs of herself aged twenty, but they ought to recognise their good fortune: they could be like SEGA and have most people not care about their past work at all. I bought a comparatively rare retail copy of
Sonic the Hedgehog for $25 still in cellophane. Do you imagine that I could find an equivalent condition copy of Super Mario Bros 1 or 3 in the same condition for that cost? Not for one moment.
[doublepost=1492531114][/doublepost]
It being compromised would have had no impact on sales. And as you said - there are messages to hackers. Once the console is sold Nintendo have made the only money they'll see from it, therefore hacking would have no impact on its manufacturing ending.
That's not true at all, Nintendo killed it because they're getting loads of feedback on the Switch to the tune of:
'Zelda is fantastic...but it's rather the only big game to play on the Switch. Other than a few ports from the Wii U on schedule, it's mainly indie games. I would buy a Switch for VC titles but you don't have that for Switch yet. Oh, or I could buy an NES Classic for $60, hack it, and get your entire remaining library for free!'
It's not about the $60 dollars that Nintendo doesn't get from a lost NES Classic sale, it's about the $100+ in lifetime VC sales per account that Nintendo loses on top of the $300 Switch and $70 pro controller that doesn't get sold. As crazy as it is, Nintendo doesn't want nostalgic gamers reliving their childhood, they want customers that are going to
be customers on a forward basis. In recognising, as I have, the brand equity attrition that's continued unabated consistently for 30 years, Nintendo has used everything in the book to secure a long-term audience. The mobile market and Mum and Dad handing down old iPhones and iPads
oliberated their generational, hook-'em-young strategy. Now, they're attempting to completely corner the dedicated handheld market, and Sony is going to let them because they know that's a losing battle of diminishing returns anywise. Nintendo, for all of the feigned excitement and surprise regarding the Switch's 'meteoric launch', know the numbers and far better than I do since they have the complete and unadjusted sales figures: they had a minimum die-hard audience of around 9m that would buy a Nintendo branded abacus if it was put on offer at a $300 price point. But they also know that they have an increasingly fickle broader audience, with diminishing discretionary income, and they aren't willing to let the possibility of a single sale go unconverted because they had a cheaper, more attractive alternative. They would rather use the production cost go to making more Switches and more games.
