I don't have a 3DS and don't plan on getting one, but I still couldn't help, but shake my noggin with the announcement of 3DS XL.
I know that my brother-in-law and Amateria both have a 3DS so I guess this is geared towards them more than anyone.
Do you feel burned at all? Would you have picked the XL over the stock version had you had the choice? What about the still no inclusion (yet can still be bought as an extra!) of a 2nd circle pad?
I mean it's a no brainer that handhelds get bumps in certain areas like battery life, sleeker design, brighter screens, but this just seems like a little too much to me as a consumer.
Let me explain:
The PSP had 4 different iterations: PSP 1000, PSP 2000, PSP 3000 and PSPGo. The 2 after the original were better battery life, skinnier design and brighter screens. The 4th was a craptastic digital only version that sucked massive ass.
The DS had, if I remember correctly, 4 different iterations: DS, DS Lite, DSi and DS XL. All of which were pretty drastically different than the other: inclusion of cameras and different software.
I guess, as a consumer, it feels a bit more of a backhand with such changes to the hardware. Where if you don't upgrade to the new version, you're left behind with the outdated version with not only different and worse specs, but also entirely different features.
With the PSP models they all did the exact same things, but did them more efficiently. With the DS you were actually left out if you didn't upgrade.
Just seems like a crappy way to treat your customers that's being repeated with the 3DS, but I guess as long as people keep paying for them (as with Nintendo they inexplicably always do) then Nintendo has no reason to change.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
As somebody who bought a DS Lite 4 years ago and enjoys it for what it is, I can say that all of the updates for these handheld consoles are a bit ridiculous. Did a Nintendo DS really need a camera added to it? I don't know.
ReplyDeleteI would honestly rather see lots of cool new games for the existing hardware than for a company to try to release an updated console every 12 months.
It's GREAT for people who don't purchase consoles right away, since they can wait and get a souped-up version, but what happens to those who bought the thing at launch? It's like these companies are saying, "Thanks, BUT now here's an even BETTER version that you can get. ......You're gonna get the new one, right?"
Some companies seem to have such a loyal following that I almost find it disgusting how people will just automatically buy their "new" product, NO MATTER WHAT it is or how much it costs. Nintendo and Apple come to mind first here as some of the most blindly loyal fans. I don't think it can be argued that both companies make a good product, but they (and their fans) have been getting on my nerves lately.
Let me be clear that I fully expect a new PSVita in the next year or so. One that has a better battery life, possibly better and louder speaker placement and a (somehow) more amazing screen.
ReplyDeleteI would and will be pissed as hell if they release one that has a feature that mine doesn't.
Hmm, I get what you're saying, but it seems that better battery life, better speakers and a better screen would also qualify as "features" to me.
ReplyDeleteI guess we'll just have to disagree on the definition of features as I look at them as benefits.
ReplyDeleteI expect, as should all, that if you're an early adopter there is a chance that you'll get burned, but it should be expected.
If all the DS iterations were just simple enhancements of the existing features or hardware then that's fine. Maybe a better camera or better speakers or a brighter screen or better battery life. Not the inclusion of a whole new way to interact with the system.
I think of the original 360 that launched without HDMI. As frustrating as that was for me (until my system RROD and I got one with HDMI) I was able to keep my frustration in check because at the launch of the 360 HDMI was just a baby and wasn't a proven way to connect to your TV.
Microsoft made the adjustment to it's hardware in order to keep with the market. That's understandable.
Had Microsoft put out a completely different model that offered HDMI while the base model didn't then....they'd just have to go fuck themselves in my book.
Fuck themselves in my book. You read it right.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interresting topic and one that i have actually been putting some thought into lately. To answer your first question, no i dont feel burned because of the xl and i still would have purchased the version i did.
ReplyDeleteNintendo was smart to not include a second analog stick because if the had it would have made the xl a superior system in terms of playability and the consumers would have been pissed. This way its not a true remake or redesign, just a bigger screen for those who have a hard time playing the 3ds.
I also dont have a problem with the dsi having new functionality when it was released because its not like nintendo waited a year after the ds original came out and released it, they saw that their competitor (the psp) was making use of a digital store and decided to combat that by launching one of their own. Over all the games being released for the ds were still the same and the only dsi exclusives were on the online stores so i dont really think people who didnt adapt missed out on much.
The points about HDMI and the original 360 really hit the nail on the head for me, but why shouldn't Nintendo be given the same benefit of the doubt?
ReplyDeleteDon't get me wrong, I think Nintendo is probably one of the worst companies out there for doing things like this. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me 19 times..." I'm not so sure who should shoulder the blame at this point, or if there is even blame to shoulder. Big N has a long history with handheld devices and making "substancial" changes to th hardware throughout it's lifespan. Sometimes a better screen, sometimes battery differences, sometimes color (remember when that was a "feature"?)... but all of those changes made sense. The way that those consoles developed and their evolutionary design made sense with the money, the public needs/demands, etc. If it wasn't cost effective to make a color unit, then it wasn't done. If the public need didn't outweigh the cost effectiveness of any single feature, then it was put on the back burner.
I actually didn't think the 3DS XL was possible. Having used the 3D on the regular one, and recognizing the specific placement of my eyes to make it work, my theory was that you would have to hold your head farther back from the screen for the same effect, not unlike moving farther away from the TV as inchage goes up to maintain the same visual relationship between the viewer and the picture. And knowing what Nintendo did with the DSi/DSiXL, there is little to no chance that the resolution on that screen was going to be increased...
I guess at this point, the thing that frustrates me, and it's probably one of the things that makes this so darn irritating to 3N3MY is how predictable the pattern has gotten. It's really hard for me to objectively look at Nintendo's credibility when I (and other idiot customers) can guess what the next model is going to be called.
Amateria: I think you're right that it is the frequency that really irks me. Again, I don't own one so I really don't even have a soap box to stand on, but I guess it's the principle that bothers me so much.
ReplyDeleteI agree that some things can require change, but still feel that the HDMI inclusion on the 360 is the best example of that.
Remember GameBoy Advance? The original? With no backlight?! Some games were literally rendered unplayable unless you were in an extremely well lit room. Later Nintendo release the GameBoy Advance SP.
I just can't help but feel that some of these things are either purposefully left out to cut costs (as Nintendo has been known to do: Wii and Wii U specs anyone?). The no backlight on the original GameBoy Advance is a great example and it could be argued that the inclusion of only 1 circle pad on the 3DS is another.
It just seems like it's taking advantage of your customer base, but like you said, "Fool me 19 times...."
Nintendo handheld timeline:
ReplyDeleteGBA-2001
GBA SP-2002
DS-2004
GBA Micro-2005
DS Lite-2006
DSi-2009
DSi XL-2010
Looking at this timeline it appears that nintendo is getting better about their releases. The gba to gbasp jump was pretty bad because it came put only a year later but the ds to ds lite took 2 years and didnt really add anything new. The dsi did add new features but did so 3 years after the release of the lite and 5 years after the initial release of the original console so i have no problem with this upgraded system getting an online store and exclusive downloadable games that couldnt be played on the earlier ds models.
I know it sucks having a new model come out every so many years because we like to think that as early adopters we should be entitled to everything that later iterations have but lets face it nintendo is only interrested in the bottom line and if people will buy it they will make it. I for one am one of those people who upgrades with each new iteration of a consol and i usually do this by selling my older system to pay for a portion of the new system so i like having new iterations every 2 years or so. I agree though that there comes a point when they are released too quickly and the gba sp is a perfect example of this; however, i do think nintendo is getting better.
Lies. All LIES! NINTENDO IZ THA DEVIL!
ReplyDeleteI once had a nice, shiny, cobalt blue Nintendo DS Lite. It was stolen from my suitcase by a TSA agent, I'm sure. (I mean, once they've done it, what can you do?) Why wasn't it in my carry-on, being played on the plane? I really don't remember. So we bought a used pink DS Lite. I like the DS Lite because it has the "feature" of being able to play all of the old GBA games, which the DSi's couldn't do. Dumb. 3DSxl is too soon and too unnecessary.
ReplyDelete