Did you see the Bloomberg interview with Reggie where he starts talking about red vs blue ocean again? It’s something I haven’t noticed in almost a decade. I agree with you that Nintendo executed the Wii blue ocean strategy perfectly. But that was phase one. The end goal was always getting more players to play the games Nintendo wanted to make. (Like Star-Finder Mario.) I think they were disappointed that gamers didn’t follow them across the bridge to the games they wanted to make.
Maybe the Nintendo investors are making them be choose to be profitable rather than act like children doing only what they want? I am very pleased with a lot of what I’ve seen for Breath of the Wild. Playing is believing. But I’m cautiously optimistic.
This seems to be more of a standard response. I’ve got a ton of emails about Reggie’s Blue Ocean line, but all he is saying is that “Nintendo isn’t designing their console around what Microsoft and Sonya re doing.”
Blue Ocean Nintendo isn’t the unusual Nintendo, it is the Red Ocean Nintendo. How did Nintendo get into Red Ocean in the first place? It would have to be during the Super Nintendo, N64, and Gamecube Eras. In those, it appears to have been the influence of Yamauchi’s son of law, the founder of NOA: Arakawa and NOA itself that kept pushing for more competition. Ironically, N64 and Gamecube did best in the United States. The sudden retirement of Arakawa could be Yamauchi pushing out the family from Nintendo to promote the outsider Iwata.
The truth is that only developers care about the hardware of the consoles. Gamers care only about the games. No one cared that the NES was a piece of shit when it launched. They cared only that it had Mario and Zelda. It really is about the games going forward.