Topic: Nintendo NX

The hardware being non-competitive will hurt. But having unique control schemes really won't hurt on their own. For the most part, the Wii U can support typical control schemes just fine. Nintendo just needs to do a better job of reaching out to 3rd parties and advertising them on the system.

I will be honestly surprised if Nintendo got third party for their next console.Very surprised, the only dev i can think that might come back is Ubisoft.

Activision may like it too, at least with Skylanders

IDK that they would, considering that Nintendo's started competing with Skylanders.

I think it's a bit naive to assume that a new piece of hardware would fix all their third party problems. And if that's the only reason why they should do it then they should wait a bit longer. Third parties are skipping the Wii U for more reasons than just the power and architecture because if it was just that then they would have stopped making games for the 360 and PS3 already.

Either way Nintendo is going to have a tough time getting them back on board, especially the big western publishers.

Are you implying that apples compete with oranges because they are both fruits?

I think their best option is to not think about the next platform as a way to "save the Wii U". They should instead look at it as a whole new platform and time the launch to give it the best possible chance of being noticed. Long enough down the road that people who have picked up the PS4 will look at it something to potentially upgrade to rather than just a second box.

And I reckon they might have a window. When the PS4/XBOne start to slow down a bit in a couple of years Nintendo can come out with a technically more powerful box before they do. And I have no doubt in my mind that those two will no doubt try to jump to 4K before cheap hardware is capable enough and before good enough internet infrastucture is widespread enough for it to be possible for most people to even stream it. Take for example this graph.....

From the top in Australian dollars right now for JUST the GPUs....
980 SLI -> $1660
R9 295x2 -> $1000AU
Titan X -> $1500AU
980 -> $830AU
R9 290X -> $530AU

I'd argue that even PCs aren't quite ready for 4K given that graph and the costs. But either way, in three to four years they should be able to squish something like a 290x into a console. As you can see that would still be a pretty average experience for 4K but you know they'll push for it because 4K sounds impressive. If Nintendo however does a Wii on them, says 4K isn't quite there yet, goes for a decent value in ~2018 and targets 1080p? They'll be able to come out with a box that does 1080p, solid 60fps all the time with details cranked like nothing else. If third parties run away from that? Well that'll probably happen, but their games, the first party ones? They'll look and run beautifully.

.... but after they release the NX which will be a portable

They're not apples and oranges. They're both toys to life lines that unlock content in game, that's a pretty specific product category.

I hardly consider them "direct competition"

Activision as stereotypical profits first might. Than again they have no problem partnering up with Microsoft over call of duty when Halo is coming out.

If anything Skylanders have a natural home on Nintendo's devices. It's kinda like saying that third parties aren't going to put their shooters on XBox because they don't want to have to compete with Halo. If anything people who are fans of Halo are into shooters MORE than people who gravitated towards other platforms.

Multimillion dollar corporations tend not to be fickle toddlers. They see when reaching across the aisle has more benefits than costs. That's why you still see Microsoft Office for Mac and Google Maps for iPhone.

Yeah it was a reverse sensor bar / wiimote thing. Basically made the tv a window where you'd look through. It sure is a fun concept, though with the "new exciting ways to play" concept iwata keeps touting, I'm hoping it's a whole lot more than that

I think 1080p 60fps is going to be pretty easy for Nintendo to do on $200 hardware (not considering cost of input device) in 2017 for the kind of games they make. While not a particularly resource-exhausting game, Smash already does it. On the NX, assuming it's a Wii U successor, it really should be standard for every 1st party game.

But I don't think they should pull a Wii and limit their hardware to that. 4K is definitely not within reach for consoles this generation or next, but I think 2560x1440 support is fair. I'm sure Ubisoft would love to make a 1440p 30fps Assassin's Creed game in 2017.

Personally I'd love to see Nintendo frustrate the hell out of them by forcing them to "compromise" and "only" deliver 1080p 60fps.

Well, I'm sure it would frustrate Ubisoft if they were held to a standard of their games performing as well as they looked in scripted pre-rendered CG sequences used for marketing purposes. It's all they can do to make sure the Windows taskbar doesn't show up at the bottom of the screen at E3.

[quote=renaryuugufan92]

Back in the Ps1, Ps2 and Wii era sure you may have been correct but now the market has changed and the Ps4 sure seems to have proven that people will buy a system over pure hardware hype than the games funny i own the 2 least selling consoles this gen, U and Xbone but i still acknowlege their issues. Making under-powered hardware a third time ina row for controller gimmicks won't be the answer, neither will staying in the past as most people who argue against me seem to want.... Time to modernize while providing the fun experiences they are known for, or just go all mobile.

@renaryuugufan92
I think there's a bit of a difference this gen compared to previous ones. But I don't think it's fair to assume that what we have now is the new normal. Going back, in the PS2 era console gaming was still firmly in the standard def era and the PS2 got a jump on everyone else by offering a DVD player. They offered a DVD player at a point when that was a huge deal, the jump from VHS to DVD was massive. So people naturally didn't care about horsepower. They got the one with the DVD player.

Last gen the PS3 and 360 did a half-jump, they tried to aim for HD gaming before they had hardware that was really ready for it. I personally remember in 2005 walking into a gaming store, seeing the 360 running on a HD set and thinking it looked like garbage. Because I was used to standard def monitors smoothing all that stuff out. You've gotta remember that when the Wii launched in 2006 a minority of people had HD sets. A quick google search reveals that in 2008 23% of households had a HD set, in 2013 it was 75%. Hell, my parents brought a new set in 2005 because the old one broke and they got a CRT. So in context the Wii was a good standard def machine, it launched when HD wasn't really mainstream yet AND it captured the attention of people who weren't gamers. Naturally the Wii won.

Now with this gen thing are different. Most people jumped on the HD bandwagon around 2010-ish, so late in that last generation people were getting PS3s and 360s for cheap just to have something HD to run on their sets. And, frankly, those machines weren't quite capable of HD and I think everyone knew this. Which is why when the Wii U launches with nothing to capture a wider audience and a gaming community who think it's only as powerful as a 360? People wait because they've been waiting for a PROPER HD machine for years, the Wii U clearly wasn't it. Then Microsoft makes a horrible first impression with the XBOne and the PS4 does a Steven Bradbury.

So I'm speculating for next gen things will be a bit different. I don't think people will jump onto 4K as quickly as the TV companies seem to want, it's a big deal but it's not as big as the jump to HD was. And as much as I love the idea of 4K I'm not sure the average consumer cares that much about 4K content. But no doubt Sony and Microsoft will try to go for it anyways because it's a great marketing bullet point. Nintendo can take a decent gamble by going for solid 1080p at a cheaper price. Also by the time next-gen starts the average gamer would have had a Sony and Microsoft machine, we know gamers aren't that loyal. Odds are people will want new games and new content.

I mean, lets not pretend that Sony and Microsoft are playing the long-term game perfectly here......

So I guess Nintendo's still going to be behind again? Not surprising at all, but I don't think a lot of gamers are going to be happy to hear that. It would be funny to see the push for 4K blow up in Microsoft and Sony's face though.