The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Can Nintendo Survive?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/30/2013 Category: Games
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,081 times Debate No: 38319
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




We live in an age where digital media is one of the richest forms of entertainment. One of the most prevalent fields in this sub-sector is without a doubt the video games industry. For the purpose of this debate, it should be considered that the only 3 real competitors within this market at this time are Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft, each backed by their own flagship console (Wii U/3DS, PS3/4 and Xbox/XboxOne respectively). A simple look at the headline titles of each of these systems will tell you that Nintendo is more geared towards families and younger audiences, whilst Sony and Microsoft are more specifically aiming their games at the stereotypical gamers aged between 15-21. The question I pose is this: Can Nintendo retain a place in the market when there is less demand for their titles and consoles than ever?

I would argue that yes, Nintendo still holds it's place within the world's elite gaming industry. However, that is but my opinion, and I am curious to see what others think of this interesting situation.

I look forward to debating someone in what will be my first debate on the website, and hope that I can provide compelling and thought provoking replies to any arguments which counter my own.


First off, sorry for posting the argument this long after accepting it
1: I realise that the Nintendo is more focused on kids games and family fun, but Microsoft is attempting the same thing, and the successfulness of their family console (xbox 1) will either be the last nail into the coffin for Nintendo, at least in the United States and Europe. I believe it will because the family entertainment system design they are going for will sound much more appealing to parents than cartoony kids games.

2: The wii u is the console that contains the most hackers of the 3 by far. This causes serious problems for online game play as you could guess.

3: The novelty of the Wii has worn off. While the PlayStation and xbox versions of motion-based game play are pretty pathetic, they still give the same idea, and they add that game play option to the other perks of having the 2 consoles. The Xbox one will likely finish off the barrier of motion game play between the 2 consoles with the kinect based system that gives controller game play an option. It also brings motion game play to the huge titles that they will have, giving a new spin to halo, forza, and call of duty. Even the touch-screen pad the Wii U has will be trumped by the Xbox One's ability to be used with a downloadable app on any touch screen product.

4: Motion game play is clunky, and has many flaws. This is why it is better to have at least the option of controllers, because if you are using a motion-based controller, and someone bumps into you, then you may have just been screwed over in whatever game you were playing.
Debate Round No. 1


To start with, I just wanted to say that I'm glad anyone actually accepted the debate, so the time you took to respond doesn't bother me!


1- Whilst the Xbox 1 may be aimed primarily at family groups, are families of today really willing to shell out $500 for a console that we still really know so little about? Better yet, we're talking about a console that had to take a huge u-Turn on many of its major ideas, such as the 'always-online' function and the mandatory kinect. Is this a company that we can really trust? What's to stop them from from introducing some other sort of inhibiting feature further down the line? And as far as I'm aware, no family oriented games have been announced for the Xbox one as of yet. The suggestion that this will somehow defeat Nintendo in America is ludicrous.

2 - I would be more inclined to argue that the PS3 has a bigger problem with hackers. If you recall, several years ago there was a large fuss caused following the hacking of thousands of players PSN accounts, which could have been devastating for Sony. I was unaware of any hacking problems with the Wii U, so if you could provide a source, that would be much appreciated.

3 - Whilst the motion based controls was a gimmick, this is no excuse for Sony and Microsoft to charge in with two equally pathetic attempts at making them better. Playstation Move was the most blatant Wii rip off known to man, and failed to sell very well. Whilst kinect may have been rather successful in sales, it didn't take long for the gaming community to realise how awful a product it was. With poor response and even poorer games, it was destined to fail from its release. The wii's controls may be a gimmick, but at least they were successful and useable. In response to the tablet Vs. Gamepad point you made, not every household contains a tablet, whereas if you have a wii U, then you will have a gamepad by default.

4- I would like to point out that in many Wii games, you do have the option to use a standard Wii 'classic controller', provided the game does not have any specific fotion controls.

Thank you for your response, I look forward to your next argument.


counter arguments:

1: First off, they have announced that they have fixed the "always online" problem, and although I am not too sure about this one, I believe that have allowed the kinect to be turned off, and if someone in the comments could clarify that, that would be great. This shows that Microsoft is listening to the complainers, and is adapting what it can to make it better. As for my source of the hacking issue; I discovered it the Rooster Teeth/Achievement hunter pod cast "The Patch". I am not sure which episode, but these guys, if you haven't heard of them, are a highly successful company responsible for some great online videos, and if you haven't already you should really check them out. (;
2: Yes, not all households have a tablet, but if you do, and you get a wii-u, you just payed extra for the tablet that came with it. So now you have 2 expensive tablets that you need instead of one. With the Xbox 1, you can use the tablet that you may already have, and since around 31% of Americans own a tablet, and 57% own a modern gaming system, it is fairly likely that someone that has an xbox 1 will have a tablet.
3: The family aspect of the xbox 1 lies in its diversity. It has full internet access through internet explorer, it has a lot of aspects and games, along with the ps4, that people like and want, and, in browsing a bit, I found this on an article on a Tech Time webpage ( link in the comments ):

"Although Microsoft has positioned the Xbox One"s HDMI pass-through as a way to watch TV from your cable box while playing video games, there"s actually no limit on what kind of signal the console can receive.

During the Tokyo Game Show, Microsoft confirmed that users could even route a PlayStation 4 through the console"s HDMI input. The Xbox One"s "Snap" feature, which lets any two apps side by side, could allow users to play the two systems in split-screen."

This means you can play games while your family watches a TV show, or hook up your old ps or xbox, and play some classics while doing whatever on the xbox 1. This is where the family aspect lies, and it is well worth the 500$ I believe.

4: the xbox has quite a few family games. Titles include Spark, forza 5, fifa 14 and the usual sports games, lego marvel, peggle 2, crimson dragon, powerstar golf, zoo tycoon etc...
New arguments

1 One thing i forgot to mention before was the P.C., a quick rising and widely popular way of playing games because almost all of the United States and other 1st world countries have one. In fact, the only thing that is holding the P.C back from overruning the consoles is the prices of the fast gaming ones. however, that doesn't stop people from being able to buy and download amazing games, catching up on shows, and surfing the web.

2: The Wii U doesn't have many of these cool features; All it has are its mario and zelda titles, and motion gameplay, which I believe will be topped by Microsoft's attempt and having the xbox one revolve around the kinect, just because the xbox one will be far more technologically advanced than the wii u.
Debate Round No. 2


To start with, i would like to thank Con for clarifying his source for the Wii U hacking point that he made. I do watch rooster Teeth, so I'm happy to accept it as valid. In return, I can clarify that the point you made about the amendment of the 'kinect' policy is correct.


1 - Whilst it may be true that they have amended their policy, the fact still stands that they were planning to go ahead with it in the first place. I think its quite obvious that they were out to make as much money as they could with this console. I say this due to several factors that were originally going to be introduced with the release of the Xbox one. These factors are:
- Ban on pre-owned games
- Always online (Pay for Xbox live subscription)
- Kinect requirement

I do understand that these factors have been canceled, but can you honestly look at them and tell me that this wasn't a money grabbing attempt? I don't think nintendo ever have, or ever will, stoop to such a level, which is reason enough to keep faith in them

2 - Only 31% of Americans? That's not exactly a huge number. Telling me that I need a tablet to fully enjoy some of the Xbox one's games would certainly put me off buying those, and wouldn't be going out and buying a tablet just so I could play them. The cost of a Wii U and it's controller is FAR less than the cost of an Xbox one and an additional tablet, so I don't think there is any waste of money there.

3 - The Xbox one may be diverse, but I honestly can't see any modern family sitting contently with their TV in split screen mode. Which of the screens gets the sound? Surely one screen will distract from the other? This is an impractical and quite frankly, a stupid idea.

4 - i think you're confusing family games with games that simply have a child-friendly rating.

5 - I think the PC could easily outstrip every single home console that will ever exist, so its not really worth considering it for this argument.

6 - I'm not sure that I even want to justify you last point with and answer. I would be inclined to agree with the comments in terms of your last post, it does seem to be similar to something that a troll would say.

In spite of this, I thank you for you debate, Con. I hope the voters will understand how weak your overall argument is, and vote Pro.


CircularLogic forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Younglink225 5 years ago
I feel CON is a troll
No votes have been placed for this debate.