@Peek-a-boo: Tell him not to make up some news from his armpits. We should wait until next year to find out. Until then, don't post something about a person who works in somewhere knows everything that happens in the present and the future.
But this guy is right the vast majority of the time. I doubt his 'armpits' did the talking, seeing as he is a very well known insider!
To be fair, they are wrong at times. They did say that a Metroid was coming to the Wii U in 2016, and we know that's not true.
Plus, "not competing with the likes of PS$ on a power level" would still technically be true if it were designed to compete with the PS5 and XB4.
Who is to say that a new Metroid game may happen in 2016 though, what with the NX (possibly) being released next year?
I very, very much doubt that Nintendo will 'compete' with the PlayStation 5 and Xbox 'something-something' when they are four or five years off therefore you are technically saying that Nintendo are going to build a console - or some kind of format - that is comparable to or better than any of the high-end computers you can buy today!
And typing 'PS$' makes you come across as a bit childish by the way, unless you accidentally pressed the shift button whilst typing the number four. Apologies if so.
@Peek-a-boo: Oops. Yeah, that was a typo. Also, I don't believe that the XB1 and PS4 will be around for that long. The PS3/360 lasted for far longer than any other generation. The PS4 and XB1 are outdated tech - eventually developers will demand new consoles when they get sick of the limitations imposed by the current systems. Then again, they seem to have a hard time letting go of the PS3 and 360
I don't doubt that it will be supported for a little while longer, but until some more solid info comes to light about the NX, it would appear that, as of now, the Wii U will be on it's way out and the NX will be taking over it's space in the home console market.
Ah well. I was kind of hoping the Wii U would have a little bit longer life. Here's hoping the last year or so of support gives us more quality titles like Splatoon, Smash Bros., Pikmin 3, and Bayonetta 2.
I own a PS1, GBA, GBA SP, Wii (GCN), 360, 3DS, PC (Laptop), Wii U, and PS4.
I used to own a GBC, PS2, and DS Lite
@IceClimbers: Sorry for the 'childish' comment; talk about jumping to conclusions!
I actually genuinely believe that the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One will be around until late 2019, early 2020 which means that both consoles shall have a fairly considerable and noteworthy shelf life of a shy over six years. I look at games like Uncharted 4 and Ratchet and Clank on the PS4 and think that there is no rush at all from developers and fans alike in wishing for new home consoles.
They are both only twenty months old remember, whilst the Wii U is passing its thirty two months milestone soon. This new generation feels like it has just started.
I wouldn't mind if the NX is a bit of an underpowered handheld that, when plugged into a TV, can play the same games at 720 or so. As long as they don't stop making the console games that're actually worth caring about. Also, they probs need to keep the price under $300. Nintendo has always done well with the more affordable systems ('more affordable' by rich first world standards.)
I really don't care about the specs, because as a gamer, those are actually entirely irrelevant to me. Meaningless numbers that speak of abstract limitations to what devs can and cannot do. We've reached a point where there's very little gameplay-wise that devs can't work out on the Wii U. It's not a matter of working it out, these days. It's this stigma of "gotta be bigger, gotta be better." Sometimes it seems like they don't even know what exactly it is they plan to make bigger and better. The specs are important to the devs, but as far as Nintendo consoles are concerned, I really only care about what Nintendo is making, because I know I can't get that stuff on a more powerful and cheaper system. And at the end of the day, I know that Nintendo will make the specs that will allow them to make what they're gonna make on that system run just the way they want it to. And you know what? That's alright. What does it matter to me if it's 8 GB or 1 GB? How does that hurt my experience playing the console? It doesn't! I'm going to enjoy it just the same either way because the games developed with that console in mind will be designed intending to run well with that console's specs. Not the specs it could've had. It seems to me that people get so blinded by the numbers that they forget to ask why those numbers mean anything to them, in the first place.
@UGXwolf: You're right that people obsess about it a bit much but they are still important. Even the PS4 isn't quite there for specs IMO. Not for 1080p. So I'd argue that not aiming to at least match what the PS4 is doing for a home console? It would be a mistake. Because a home console with that trivial an upgrade? I don't see the point in upgrading my Wii U for that. You don't launch an entirely new platform without explaining why that content couldn't exist on the previous platform.
@skywake: My immediate thought would be new hardware that takes advantage of gameplay opportunities the previous system couldn't have had unless they took back every system and sent out new ones with it built in. Of course, as you're likely aware, I don't know much of the tech stuff behind it. All I know is that as long as Nintendo is making a system that can do what the previous one couldn't, but they'd been wanting to do, I will likely enjoy it as much as I have the previous three systems. (Not before that, because I was a kid who wasn't constantly grounded before the Gamecube came out and I obviously had a lot more time to play those games.)
In response to UGX Wolf, if I buy a television that outputs 1080p, I would much prefer a game to use the very best resolution that my television can display; some Wii U games looks pretty rough on my television (720p games) and there are a couple of Xbox One games that are 900p or below that has a bit of a smeary blur due to the lower resolution.
In comparison, almost every game on my PlayStation 4 is 1080p and looks brilliant, both in terms of image quality (IQ) and utilising/using every single pixel and surface area that my television can output.
I am not one to get involved in these kind of numbers, but they ARE somewhat important and in an ideal world, I would like all of my games to be 1080p to make the most out of everybody's television. Yes, you have 4K televisions too however, they are nowhere near as common (yet).
To summarise, good games can be better games if the resolution and frame rate are just as good.
@Peek-a-boo: One thing I noticed with the PS4 though is that some games have suffered in framerate in order to achieve 1080p. Neither system has consistently done both native 1080p and 60 fps locked.
If I were to choose between framerate and resolution though, I'd go with the framerate every time. Not even necessarily 60 fps either - it just needs to be consistent, so either locked at 30 fps or locked at 60 fps. An inconsistent framerate actually affects gameplay.
@IceClimbers: I'd choose frame rate every single time too! I was just making my own observation based on what UGX Wolf was saying in regards to 'numbers does not matter', that's all. If I have a 1080p television, I would like my games to make the most of that output/resolution, if it is indeed possible.
As for those games that can comfortably hit 1080p on the PlayStation 4, they are mostly 30fps (whether they are locked or unlocked); there are only a couple of 1080p and 60fps games available on said console anyway so, I don't go expecting 1080p and 60fps games all too often.
@UGXwolf: All I'm saying is that I don't see the point of releasing new hardware if it's not going to be somewhat of a graphical leap. As I've said in another thread if someone was to do precisely what the PS4 did but in late 2016? Same price-point, same form factor and so on. It'd be able to run most games the PS4 can but at 60fps rather than 30fps. Would that be a worthwhile upgrade from the Wii U? Yes, probably.
Plus there's the matter of cost. They could get a decent jump on the PS4 and launch at around $400US. They could match the specs if they launch at somewhere closer to $300US. And it'd be a nice efficient little package to boot. But aiming low again, lower than they did with the Wii U even? On paper lower than the Wii relatively speaking. Yes they could make a console for around $200US and have it available sometime around 2016/17. But why? They already have that piece of hardware, it's called the Wii U.
All I'm saying is that I don't see the point of releasing new hardware if it's not going to be somewhat of a graphical leap
Because money. Because hardware sales. Because software sales. Because licensing fees.
But why? They already have that piece of hardware, it's called the Wii U.
Deus Ex Machina isn't coming out on Wii U. It's not going to sell much more, the brand was just too troubled to reach greater success.
A handheld that can be plugged into your TV? A single Nintendo platform? Cost effective at that? That sounds like a better fit for Nintendo and many consumers to me. If Nintendo can pull that off it'll be a success, trade winds aside. The only factor remaining would be third party support and how that'll shake out.
Also, let's not be reductive; this is art. Twilight Princess, Tales of Symphonia, and even Code Geass; they're all fantastic and all hover somewhere around 480p, in the era of the analogue TV, no less (the latter only even exists on dvd.) Though there are countless more, that's all the proof you need to realize that it's the content; the gameplay, the story, the composition, etc, that's all that matters. The art, not the specs, makes all of the difference.
I only brought up 720p because that's a reasonable benchmark to meet while remaining cost effective.
@Haru17: All I'm saying is that if they can't capture third parties with the Wii U then there's no way they'll capture them with a similar spec machine released two years from now. You're throwing the Wii U in the bin "because" but haven't explained how this new theoretical platform would be better. Other than the fact that it wouldn't be the Wii U. If it's on-par with the PS4 even a couple of years from now? That would go a fair way to explaining why people should be interested in that platform.
Everyone has it in their heads that the PS4 is an insurmountable standard. It's not. In two years it'll be down-right average for a new platform. The idea that they wouldn't even get close to that with a new home console? Forget branding, you're giving third parties a reason to ignore the platform before it's even out!
Some playlists: Top All Time Songs, Top Last Year
"Don't stir the pot" is a nice way of saying "they're too dumb to reason with"
Other than the fact that it wouldn't be the Wii U.
That's a pretty fair advantage in marketing terms.
If it's on-par with the PS4 even a couple of years from now? That would go a fair way to explaining why people should be interested in that platform.
What will explain it, as has always explained it, is games. If Nintendo can't produce the games to justify a single piece of hardware, console and handheld, then they just don't have the resources to be a platform holder anymore. I hope they can and know that they can at least try. Having every current Nintendo game on one convenient, inexpensive platform? That, if properly marketed, will convince a lot of people, lapsed gamers and newcomers alike.
Everyone has it in their heads that the PS4 is an insurmountable standard. It's not.
It's not, but it is an expensive one. Most core gamers already have a PS4 or Xbox One, so that general niche is covered. Nintendo just can't rely on their parties, they've run out of reliable connections for the most part. They have to found and justify that platform first on Nintendo games, a lot of Nintendo games. After a very solid launch and first few years Nintendo can focus on other things, profiting from long tail sales of their games and licensing fees. Those third parties will only be attracted if development is convenient enough and if the install base has become sufficiently sizable and engaged.
Other than the fact that it wouldn't be the Wii U.
That's a pretty fair advantage in marketing terms.
It's a huge disadvantage in terms of lacking an established install base and library. I know people are in love with this theory that the Wii U's problems are purely about marketing and branding. But it's a pretty weak theory. I can't see them having much success with a system that doesn't advance the specs to be at least in the ballpark of the PS4.
What will explain it, as has always explained it, is games. If Nintendo can't produce the games to justify a single piece of hardware, console and handheld, then they just don't have the resources to be a platform holder anymore. I hope they can and know that they can at least try. Having every current Nintendo game on one convenient, inexpensive platform? That, if properly marketed, will convince a lot of people, lapsed gamers and newcomers alike.
You're basically outlining their strategy with the Wii U. How well has it worked thus far? I mean I agree with the idea of a unified platform moving forward (not one piece of hardware mind you) but they need to also advance the spec. Without them advancing the spec they might aswell just keep doing what they have been doing with the Wii U. This idea of yours is a good way to release a successor for the 3DS but it won't do anything to move them forward in the home-console space.
It's not, but it is an expensive one. Most core gamers already have a PS4 or Xbox One, so that general niche is covered. Nintendo just can't rely on their parties, they've run out of reliable connections for the most part. They have to found and justify that platform first on Nintendo games, a lot of Nintendo games. After a very solid launch and first few years Nintendo can focus on other things, profiting from long tail sales of their games and licensing fees. Those third parties will only be attracted if development is convenient enough and if the install base has become sufficiently sizable and engaged.
But it's not an expensive one. That's my point. This thing, whatever it is, won't come out until at least November 2016. That much is clear. There's also a good chance that it'll come out sometime in 2017. By 2017 mark my words there will be murmurs about the PS5 floating around, that's the platform they will be competing against. I'm not saying that they need to release a piece of massively high-end hardware. They won't get very far trying to sell two generation old hardware.
The Wii was about on-par with the original XBox. The Wii U is quite a bit better than the 360. All I'm saying is if they are to release a new home console it needs to be at least on-par with the PS4. And by the time it comes out such a spec will be just as cheap as their previous home-consoles were. That as well as a decent hook in terms of content? That'll get them moving. Selling basically a re-branded Wii U minus the existing library? The thing would be DOA.
Forums
Topic: Wii U is safe from the NX!? Seems to be true
Posts 381 to 400 of 582
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.