Topic: What hardware innovation do you want to see in Nintendo's next home console?

Since Miyamoto confirmed that Nintendo is working on new hardware, what sort of ideas would you like to see?

Personally, I've been thinking it may be interesting to integrate a small multitouch screen into a Wii Remote-esque controller. Combine that with new haptic feedback technology, and they could bring a next gen immersive experience.

If you are someone who just wants to see Nintendo make a powerhouse machine with a traditional controller and PC-esque architechture, or just follow what Sony and Microsoft are doing, that's fine, you are entitled to your opinion. Just note that this topic isn't targeted at you, so don't talk about it here. It's for discussion among people who DO want hardware innovations.

I don't really care how Nintendo innovates the next console.... as long as it doesn't scare away 3rd parties In my opinion, the perfect Nintendo console has Nintendo's charm AND 3rd party games. So how can they innovate the next console? I'm sure they'll think of something but I hope they are talking to 3rd parties almost the entire time during development of the next console. This is what I personally want.

No Disc Drive. Time to move away from physical media.

Hm. Well innovations can be pretty tricky to predict, so it's hard to say what they could do next. I can't really think of anything that would be a notably fresh idea, but maybe since they're working on account based gameplay they could work more on features that play off multiple games.

That's not really an innovation though because it's not a new idea. It's just phasing out an old one.

Just make a system to bring back third parties! Oh wait what am i saying?They'll never come back, even if they did for this new console they'll just leave the next day.

I'm all for the Fusion concept. Could be the answer to a lot of Nintendo's problems.

http://www.techradar.com/news/gaming/consoles/nintendo-fusion...

That's not going to happen until the industry figures out how to make it people's preferred means of purchase.

Right now digital accounts for a really slim percentage of full priced games, and it makes sense why. In movies and music the reasons you would go digital are:
-Increased portability
-Easier to access
-Faster to access
-Additional options (free streaming w/ ads, subscriptions, rental, etc.)

For home console games, only one of these things is true for most people.
Portability-Nope. Because digital games are stored on a harddrive on a home console that tends to stay in one spot, they are actually harder to move and transport than just a disc case
Faster to access-Nope, if you live in a major city or suburb, you probably have someone who sells games within 15 minutes of where you live. Compare that to an hour or more to download a game.
Additional options- PSNow is on the right track, but it's no where near where it needs to be.

Add to that the additional problems that plague all digital media:
-Inability to resell
-Inability to return
-High cost relative to used
-General feeling of no physical product owned.

I'd say we have a long way to go until we see a system with no disc drive. A company doing this would risk losing a number of retail sales, the form by which most purchases are made.

There's plenty of people who prefer physical over digital. I don't see why one should be eliminated, why can't both be included?

This too. Digital isn't to the point where it can comfortably replace physical games. I imagine that won't happen for at least another 10-20 years, if ever (depending on how technology progresses and whether or not developers are willing to keep the used game market).

The future definitely looks like it's going to be in a merged home and portable platform, although I'm not sure it will happen immediately. Probably by 10th gen though.

I think as long as brick and mortar stores still exist, physical games will exist in some form as well. Imagine what would happen if, let's say, Nintendo and Microsoft decided to do away with all their physical games; consequently stores would only be stocking PS games, and guess what the general market will see and buy whenever they enter a store. A physical presence in gaming is still very important, and I don't see it changing in the coming decade.

No thank you. I like to actually OWN my games physically. I enjoy displaying them on my shelf and collecting them, as do many others. As soon as gaming becomes digital only, I will definitely not be buying as many games as I used to. I actually LIKE to trade and buy used games, plus collecting old games from older systems. I LOVED Shovel Knight this year, but I would have loved it even more if I actually physically owned it. Same thing with Earthbound, which was also an amazing experience. I really would rather have the cartridge. Plus digital only would put a lot of nice mom-and-pop retro games stores out of business.

Integration between handheld and console Nintendo have flirted with this over the years maybe something like the fusion idea or maybe just making a strong connection. The next handheld being able to function as a controller would be good. Cross buy is an essential for indies. I'd like to see a traditional primary controller and yeah the powerhouse graphics to give people the shock like when they saw Mario 64for the first time. VR could be a possibility but only if Nintendo put there twist on it and make it unique compared to other offerings but most of all I'd like to see a console that monitors your body like pulse etc and adapts gameplay based on it experience with QoL might make this possible.

Definitely. Or if there must be physical a 3DS style cartridge. (They can make them big enough and cheap enough.)

They are silent and perform as well as a download.

I think the reverse is true. Once you go digital and especially if the prices reflect that fact it's much, much easier to get a collection of games. You don't have to hunt down a copy of the game and games tend to not go out of print. I mean in the last month or so on Steam I've grabbed GTA:Vice City, Darksiders 2, Just Cause 2, Deus Ex:HR and Burnout Paradise all for under $5. If digital wasn't a thing not only would I have to hunt these games down but odds are I'd pay more because they'd be hard to find, I'd also not be paying the developer because it'd be used and I wouldn't be buying as many because as much as I'm happy I got those games they're not games I would have bothered to "hunt down". With just a click? Why not!

I personally hate the used market. If I'm going to pay for content I'd much rather be actually paying the people who made it rather than some chain who churns through this stuff. I love the fact that Nintendo has a digital store front for this very reason. If it's a year down the road and I can't get the game new I'll wait for a digital sale before I'll even consider used.

Then they'll have to adapt to the changing market. That's just how capitalism is, you either prepare yourself for a changing market or you fail. It's enough of a joke when governments come in and protect dying industries I don't think it's at all reasonable to expect a private company to do that. As it is the publishers and developers still need a retail presence but don't think for a second that it'll always be like that.

Yeah, this is one thing they need to implement ASAP, especially if they intend on keeping the Gamepad for future generations. It's not going to be very fun playing multiplayer games that use the Gamepad (most notably, Splatoon) if you can only use one.

I'm still not understanding how the QoL is a big gaming innovation. How does monitoring heart rate or sleep patterns lead to new game ideas?

Too bad that the console developers love nickel and diming the consumer that this never happens. And honestly, I'm not sure it ever will.

The reason why the used market is still a thing is for two reasons:

1. Digital games are still more expensive than used games
2. Digital games can't be returned or resold. Once you buy them, you're stuck with them.

Until they address these things the digital market isn't going to catch on.

If the used market went away prices for new games would go down it's as simple as that. Put it this way, if you buy a game new for lets say $60? The developer maybe gets $30 of that. Then you play it and a few months later trade it in so someone else can buy it for $30. The developer gets $0 from that second sale. If the used market didn't exist? You want the game anyway so you still pay that $60 and for arguments sake lets say the developer gets the same $30. Then a few months down the road the price is cut to $35 in a sale, they move less than used would but instead of $0 the dev getting another $20 for every unit sold. Even years down the road they could still be getting a couple of dollars per sale.

And it's actually even better than that for developers and publishers because the margins are smaller. The sooner physical sales are a thing of the past the sooner game prices will come down. Because they have come down on PC, even at launch PC versions of the same game are regularly a good $10 cheaper. Despite all the posturing I doubt that anyone would complain that loudly about the fact that they can't "trade in" their games for pennies if they're actually paying less overall. It's just a better system all round.

As for the sharing stuff? That's already happening. Valve and Apple already have family sharing options and Sony has that feature where your friends can drop in on your game even if they don't own it. Digital can be much, much more flexible than physical ever could be. There's no reason why someone couldn't build a digital store that would let you revoke your licence for a bit of store credit. Infact I wouldn't be at all surprised if it's not already a thing. Don't think it won't happen, it's very much in everyone's interest to cut the retail side of the business out of the equation.

I think they should leave innovation for priphials and just have the base console be as powerful as the PS5 and the Xbox Tree Sixty. Nintendo needs to be competitive, if not, their console sales will just keep going down.

As for innovation, they should make a VR headset similar to what's in Sword Art Online.

Not everyone has good internet connection to be able to download games. Nintendo is not going to say, "Screw everyone who doesn't have good internet connection."

Ah but see, that's part of the problem. They shouldn't be charging you $60 in the first place for something that's worth $30, there's no reason to other than to inflate profits. So it should be $35 from the get go, go down in price after a year or two, and offer a refund. But considering how much they love cutting corners and nickel and diming the consumer nowadays, I highly doubt they're going to go that far anytime soon.

I disagree with this. While companies have gone excessive and ridiculous with this...frequently that 60 dollars is at least somewhat needed nowadays. I mean, making a good looking HD title that's fun while also giving people their money's worth is pretty expensive even for even the most conservative companies. In an ideal world where DLC was universally done well and worth buying, I'd maybe agree with this logic but...eh...

I like Nintendo's increasingly varied price points or what Microsoft did with Killer Instinct (or any actually not greedy f2p game like Path of Exile or whatever). Not every game should cost the same, there should be variety, both for how much the game is worth and for reasonable ideas for making the game a success.

I think Steam is a great example of what can happen with a digital only market.