While solid and reliable information on Nintendo's future hardware plans can be tough to come by, some interesting news is being reported in Japan on a partnership that's close to confirmation between Nintendo and technology company Sharp. Sources are reporting that the two companies are near to finalising a deal for the supply of advanced liquid crystal displays for future Nintendo hardware.
Intriguingly, this "Free-Form Display" allows flexibility in design as a result of a bendable bezel, allowing for a variety of potential applications. Naturally some are suggesting it could suit Nintendo's next portable hardware, while it could also be incorporated in Nintendo's Quality of Life (QOL) range, which is set to begin with a sleep sensor in 2016. Sharp has reportedly brought forward plans by a year to begin mass production in early 2016, with Nintendo set to be the first major client for the screens. The same sources are also suggesting that Nintendo's plans and designs are considering the incorporation of a hole in the centre of the screen.
Not only are credible sources reporting these details, but there's plenty of logic to the revelations. Sharp provided the screen technology for the 3DS, and the timing of production in 2016 matches a sensible timeline; with the 'New Nintendo 3DS' to take the brand through 2015, the following year could be ripe for a new generation of portable hardware, five years after the 3DS began. It'd be a shortened generation, but considering the challenges of the market wouldn't be particularly surprising; on these timelines hardware in 2017 could also make sense. The links to QOL are also logical.
With Nintendo likely keen to produce bold innovation in future hardware after the somewhat iterative 3DS, meanwhile — and the dabbling of dual screen gameplay with Wii U — this technology would certainly fit the bill. A flexible screen form factor could raise all sorts of interesting possibilities.
What do you think of this news, and how could this screen technology be used in Nintendo hardware? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
[source japantimes.co.jp]
Comments 125
This looks really cool, hopefully the next system with have 720p- 1080p screens
i dont see anything flexible or bending in the above picture
Yes, the the "Nintendo 4Dee's" is coming!
I've been wondering for years when it would become practical price wise for companies to make these, cool that its coming along.
I'd love to see a Nintendo HDS with a bendable screen
A hole in the centre of the screen?!? Sounds weird
Sharp is one of the best company known for its superior LCD screens. I have aquos tv , and it's simply beautiful. I can't wait to see how Nintendo will use those screen.
@Damo
Maybe it's for Nintendo's upcoming Smartphone? I heard the new iPhone bends. It could be Nintendo's answer to the iPhone!
The nintendo polo
That sounds really cool! Though if it is going to have a hole in the centre, it sounds like it's definitely going to be used on the sleep monitor. With the centre being the sensor & the screen around it I guess. Bendable screens? The possibilities are awesome!
This is about different shapes than square right, not flexibility?
I would say If production were to commence in 2016, we wouldn't see the console until earliest 2017. Also why would 2016 be ripe for a new handheld? the DS was released in 2004, then the 3ds in 2011, that's almost 7 years before Nintendo introduced a new console. 5 years seems incredibly short for a Nintendo Handheld, and with the New 3DS out in a few months time (here's hoping) a resurgence will soon be upon us, that will lead us well into 2016 and then some (especially if Nintendo keeps up with the Awesome 3DS library).
There has never been a reason to have portables live and die by the same cycles as home consoles. Sure Nintendo is no doubt working on their next portable, and making it ready before its due, but I see no reason to cut the 3DS's life so short.
I realize that we're in a new era, that mobile gaming is a thing, and that phones and tablets are increasing in power at an alarming rate, but until the portable reaches its max capacity, don't force a new one upon us. We've seen that better hardware doesn't fare better here (eg.Vita), so no reason to rush.
I'm still waiting for Nintendo to make a system that utilizes "head tracking," which was possible back on the Wii. That is the future of gaming, IMO.
That's pretty cool, does this mean the next handheld will have a HD screen?
It's always exciting times when rumours of new Nintendo hardware begin to surface!
That's what I love about the company - you never know what they're going to do next.
@sketchturner the New 3DS does head tracking to stabilize the 3D effect. Presumably it could be used for other purposes as well.
Anyway, this is definitely intriguing news, but I suspect we are a long way from learning much more about it. I'm sticking to my prediction that we will see a more unified home console/handheld platform next time around. Maybe a smaller unit will pop out of a future gamepad-type controller/dock and become a portable handheld? Seems farfetched.
Perhaps more likely the concept of holes in the screen will be to allow for software/touch inputs to surround the hardware buttons and display dynamic information about the inputs. Sort of like, imagine if the whole gamepad face were a screen, but with the same hardware buttons popping out of the screen. It would be oddly like the touch inputs on a lot of iOS games (in that they partially obscure the view of the screen), but without the squishiness of all software buttons. This could be a play to get mobile game developers to port their games over to the Nintendo product more easily.
Of course, I am just wildly speculating, but that's the best part of news like this.
@iroxursox I think the Gamepad is 720p
@XFsWorld
Unfortunately, it's not. It's 16:9 standard def: 854x480.
Wow, internet, I'm disappointed! I expected a lot more immaturity to come from the idea of a screen with a hole in the middle!
I'm starting to wonder how they'll use it. I mean, once you put a hole somewhere, or bend the screen, or put a joystick in a weird place, it's there forever, and every game has to use it no matter what. Maybe this could be used in conjunction with the interchangeable buttons patent they have, where the user can replace joysticks with D-pads with ABXY easily. Maybe you can replace buttons in the middle if the screen with... part of the screen! Then, it doesn't have to be in the way all the time!
I'll put no particular stock in this technology reveal. Nintendo was also working on a holographic disk medium previously, and nothing came of that, either. For reference, a Blu-Ray disk can hold 50GB, but a holographic versatile disk (HVD) was theorized to hold 1TB. Then again, I think it's time for the industry to not only move towards a unified console future, but away from optical disk technology, as SD cards and similar technology is quickly leaving it in the dust.
Interesting to say the least, and I expect we'll know about the successor to the 3DS over 2016, but I'm very skeptical about this QoL "platform," which often makes me wonder if the disinterest and laziness Nintendo has towards the Wii U is related to them thinking the QoL will lead to a different corporate direction for the company.
I hope whatever Nintendo does next, hardware-wise, is to form a merger with Sony platforms where Nintendo handles the handheld and Sony makes the console.
next year (mid 2015) a company will start producing a tiny holographic projector that will fit in any portable device. wouldnt it be awesome if the hole in the center was for a hologram to be projected above an hd screen. i think the company is called Ostendo Technologies. i hope they use it in their next handheld. cause im sure it will be in phones or someones handheld within a year from now. i hope its nintendo that partners with them or uses their projector. i cant wait to play holographic games!!!
@Nicolai
I didn't even consider that. My thought was more along the lines of "yeah, because that's what I want in the middle of my gaming. A big hole."
yes I can bend the boss to death when my skill fails!
I think Nintendo is already missing the boat. This could be for a vr headset... I don't know why Nintendo doesn't just rework the gamepad to be a vr headset. It already can display and track movements, the mine cart levels in capt Toad is already basically what I'm saying. Add in the wii remote and chuck controls and Nintendo has a vr console. How can someone at Nintendo not thought of this?
@6ch6ris6 It's not for flexibility, look at the bottom corners of the LCD in the picture and you'll see how part of it is "missing", also 2 other semi-circles in the bottom, this means the LCD can be any form, not just a rectangle/square like we are used to them now.
Exciting! I like the @3dcaleb's idea of an interactive small on a handheld. Let the time show what are they planning. I'm also quite excited about this QoL project. Now, in the world of rush, this could be really useful
@arojilla that picture is just an example of the technology. the screen in the pic above is obviosly for a display in a car. the holes are for temperature adjustment dials and vents.
As long as the resolution for the next handheld console is 720p or 1080p, especially if they go with 5 inch screens next (which I think is the perfect size for portable consoles after owning a Shield and a Vita). 1080p would most likely be overkill though considering you really don't need that many pixels packed into such a small screen. It would just draw more processing power for no good reason and kill the battery even faster. Considering Nintendo will most likely use a pretty weak SoC by, say, 2017's standards and use a relatively small battery as well, a 720p on 5 inch screen would be perfect (if Nintendo expects to sell this console for $200 or less while still making a profit, we have to expect 2013-level mobile hardware. It'll probably be equivalent to the Shield Portable, or worse depending on what trade offs they're making. Perhaps we COULD get lucky and they'll use second-half 2014 silicon instead).
Even the guys at Dragonbox are using a 5 inch 720p screen for their Pyra handheld, which is a far more advanced gaming handheld than any other (in terms of functionality).
So that's the answer to removing hardware buttons?
Holes?
I'm curious about it but I don't think Nintendo is going to give up on 3DS and Wii U too soon. They'd be stupid to do such a thing like that and also the fact that they'd need to convince consumers to purchase it after they just bought the new 3DS.
Some say the DSi only lasted a year but that's because the DSi didn't really do much and so that's the reason it ended too soon. Same goes for GB Micro as well.
@3dcaleb ??? I know it's just an example.
Everything sounds good except the hole in the screen. I mean obviously I have no idea what it would be for but I can't really think of a good reason to do that.
@Donutman Good lord, I hope they never do that.
I've yet to be convinced of VR's viability in the long run, since reports of nausea after just a few minutes are rampant in the game indistry regarding Oculus and Project Morpheus.
I'll bet it's for QoL, as I don't see the next handheld coming that soon. These days it's something of a miracle to still be able to get your consoles in the hands of the consumers, so every time they make a new one they're going to have to start driving that install base all over again. Continuing to support the 3DS for as long as possible is the wisest choice.
Whatever the case, Nintendo doesn't need its next system to have yet another piece of tech attached to it that drives up the price.
@arojilla haha, oops i misread your reply. mybad.
@ricklongo I tried VR like 15 years ago at Disney world, and it was just me walking around shooting targets with a ball shooter. let me decide if I cant handle it. its like sea sickness. I personally am waiting on getting a new pc or "next gen" console until the vr thing gets worked out. I just think Nintendo has all the parts right in front of them, just they dont see it.
@AVahne
Given the rapid advances of technology, I don't think 1080 would be out of the question for a portable system. My girlfriend's phone does that easily, and 4K televisions--$25,000 just a couple years ago--are now falling well into the "affordable" $4,000 range. We're reaching a technological level where adding more pixels to our displays is relatively simple and affordable.
Nintendo has spent two generations sitting behind the curve, technologically. I think it's extremely unwise to do that again, especially with quickly advancing processing and display technology in phones, televisions, and computers.
They need to be the tech industry innovators again--like they were with the SNES, N64, and GameCube, but market it smarter, as the N64 and GameCube's potential was held back by other ridiculous decisions (cartridges, small disks, limited online options, etc).
@RoomB31 Well, the GameBoy Colour was introduced in 1998, the GameBoy Advance in 2001, and the Nintendo DS in 2004. Whilst the DS might have been the handheld console for 7 years, the GBC and GBA only lasted 3 years. The original GameBoy on the other hand, lasted for about 9 years. The handheld market is less predictable when it comes to the duration of a generation. Nintendo has almost a monopoly on this market, if they want to end the current generation and start a new one, they can.
Eventually Nintendo will somehow get sued because of this. lol
Nothing that affects me, I'm done with gaming from the next generation onward, anyway.
@Quorthon Resolution is meaningless, as long as developers have the ideas to make a game good. Technological advances only made developers lazier, so I can't say there's much proper logic to the high-res demand in the first place.
@Donutman
What you're describing is essentially some kind of peripheral that incorporates and requires the GamePad, and that would be very expensive and risky, especially on a console that is already not living up to promises and expectations, and selling well below what was planned and hoped.
Such an expensive peripheral introduced halfway through the lifecycle of a console--especially a failing console--would be a devastating prospect and likely further damage Nintendo's standing with developers and consumers.
What's important now is for Nintendo to work extra hard getting some exclusive 3rd party games (like Bayonetta 2 and Devil's Third, and even the Sonic games, etc), redouble their efforts defining the Wii U as a unique and valuable system (to buddy up next to a PS4 or XBO), super-charging the eShop, and removing games that damage the image of the service. They need to build confidence with consumers and developers and ensure that the Wii U doesn't tarnish whatever comes next.
They need to avoid doing what Sega did prior to the Dreamcast--a decade of excessive hardware, bad decisions, wonky peripherals, and lost third party support.
I know a lot of you (general use), for frequently fascinatingly absurd reasoning, hate 3rd party games and support, but the fact remains, if Nintendo can't start rebuilding those relationships, they will never return to any former glory nor will they forge any new glory. Which means they will not appeal to average consumers, regular gamers, or new audiences, and their revenue drops, and their options for the future diminish. Just because some of you brainlessly hate third parties does not mean Nintendo can survive without them. Sega couldn't, Atari couldn't, and Nintendo is falling far behind without them. They may be able to survive on the fringes without 3rd parties for a while, but they cannot thrive or grow.
And they shouldn't spend resources they don't have on a gimmicky VR peripheral for the GamePad. Now is not the time. Maybe for the next generation--maybe--but it's too late now. Too much damage has been done, and there are already too many others that have consumer attention on this front.
In order to pursue a somewhat coherent strategy and to ensure backwards capability as far as possibility, it would certainly not be surprising, if Nintendo makes once again THE SCREEN the innovative feature of the new hardware. Admittedly, in contrast to the glorious days of the DS, the focus on screen-related innovation with the 3DS and WiiU was not really that successful, but this does not need to be a bad omen for the future. Firstly, an handheld will need a screen anyway, so it's certainly not a bad idea to pursue innovation in an element that is obligatory (in contrast to the second screen of the WiiU), also because it has become almost impossible to introduce something entirely new (like the touchscreen of the DS or the motion controls of the Wii). Furthermore, with other companies having taken the lead as regards virtual reality, both visual and in terms of moving controls, it seems unlikely that Nintendo would make those domains the focus of their expected innovations.
@Octane
I don't think Nintendo has much in the way of a monopoly in handheld gaming. Don't forget phones, which is where most of these third parties have (perhaps foolishly) decided to take their handheld gaming.
The 3DS is doing fairly well, but it's still got loads of problems. The DS library and even the GBA library largely put the 3DS to shame. If it wasn't for the eShop, the system would have almost nothing to play, and it's third party support is almost as bad as the Wii U.
@Octane
One could/might/should argue the GBC is no different from the DSi, or the New 3DS, an extension of a generation rather than a whole new one.
and Nintendo will do what they want, but this is all still speculation, they will not however, cut the lifecycle of a product in its prime.
@Kaze_Memaryu
Resolution is meaningless? Have you not seen the rest of the industry at all? Arguments are everywhere about the importance of resolution. Even Nintendo cares about it, which is why they worked to ensure that Smash Bros Wii U is 1080 and 60fps.
They may not matter to you, but to the average consumer, they very much do matter--especially those in the tech industry (note: where video games fit), resolution is frequently a hot topic and a major talking point.
Also, saying that "technological advances make developers lazier" is just an awful blanket statement that can be cut to ribbons with any amount of information on the gaming industry. It's an unfair, untrue, and unwarranted thing to say. A lot of advances have made games easier to develop, such as the Unreal Engine. But that doesn't mean anyone is lazier. Publishers may foolishly rush out unfinished products (like EA and Battlefield 4), but that doesn't mean developers are just lazier all of a sudden. There will always be some bad apples in the bunch, but, well, you should know the analogy already.
How about the bendable screen allows to make a curved screen like those new TV sets. It can be flattened out for a widescreen view or scrunched up when flipped out to allow for more immersion
@Quorthon
One rotten apple soils the bushel. Unfortunately EA is a really big apple that people can't take their eyes off of
@Quorthon I understand what you are saying, but remember, a lot of todays 3rd parties only became as big as they are by being on Nintendo consoles. Capcom comes to mind. but then Nintendo has new 3rd party devs like renegade kid or shinren to fill the gaps left ubisoft and ea etc...
a side note, I have made a point to support each big ea/ubisoft game that has released including buying watch dogs on launch day. my wii u is by far my most used gaming for last 2 years.
@JasonAnArgoNOT64
Yes, and EA's games rate higher than Nintendo's. EA is an easy target for the uninformed. They also publish Mass Effect and Dragon Age, and the ever-popular Need for Speed franchise, among others.
http://www.metacritic.com/feature/game-publisher-rankings-for-2013-releases
Yes, EA has released some stinkers over the years, but so has Nintendo. Don't act like Nintendo is somehow superior or incapable of similar failures. Not only are they capable of them, they've done them.
This could prove to be interesting. There are so many possibilities that bendable screens offer!
@Quorthon
why thank you
And for twisting my words
@Donutman
Unfortunately, just because a company made their mark with Nintendo in the past, it's irrelevant now. Nintendo fans like to think of companies like Capcom and Konami and the like as Nintendo devs, largely out of nostalgia, but Capcom's biggest years came after the NES and titles like Resident Evil helped turn them into one of the most recognizable in the industry. It's sad to see them leave Nintendo, but they have to go where they'll get support and revenue.
I've also been a big supporter of 3rd parties all of my Nintendo systems--which these days makes us a minority on the Nintendo console gaming front. Companies like Renegade Kid and Shinen are nice, but they aren't exclusive and they aren't the guys developing the major AAA releases. I hope they get enough support to grow to that level, and was disappointed to see Cult County get ignored at Kickstarter (I backed it). I hope one of these guys--WayForward, Shinen, Renegade Kid, etc, are able to one day develop some major new franchise.
@Quorthon
now you make want to eat an entire supermarket because that statement causing depression in me. Watch as your words cause me to swallow up an entire Walmart
@Quorthon
But I digress, many developers make bad games. But EA takes less flak for making rushed titles from dudebros
@JasonAnArgoNOT64
I worked with what you gave me. An overly cynical, yet predictable comment about EA. Everybody's favorite whipping boy, particularly by those who are uninformed about the company.
They have some serious problems, but also deliver some of the best games.
And EA takes less flak? This is a company that has repeatedly been voted one of the worst companies in the US by angry nerds who don't know a thing about the world outside of their game controller. EA gets more flak, often unwarranted. And yet, they still have a library of highly rated titles that people look forward to every year.
@Quorthon
Tell me why they were voted worst company many years in a row.
Do not call me a cynic. I've been trying to deal with that problem for years. Last thing I need is for someone to tell me 5 years of work was in vain.
@Quorthon
whatever, looks like you're a bully trying to get this thread off topic.
I still standby the thought that this new screen should be able to curve around your face for more immersion
@JasonAnArgoNOT64
The last time EA was targeted was laid largely on the Mass Effect 3 ending and Sim City's broken launch. EA has actually been repeatedly shown to actually be a great company to work for, they champion LGBT rights, and have strong revenues.
They're also absolutely massive, which means there are more places within the company for individual teams to make bad decisions, like the Dungeon Keeper update. I think it was Dungeon Keeper.
When it comes to actual corporations, EA is not stealing from your pockets, ripping off taxpayers, or adding to overall economic woes. There were actual companies that added to those problems, but EA was targeted instead because fanboys.
So I did some research, and the "free form" screens does NOT mean that you can bend the screen. It instead means the screen is not limited by the rectangular shape you see in tvs, phones, and most everything else. It also makes it so the screen doesn't require that rim around it that overlaps the glass, as the video shoots through the screen or something. In any case, my guess it could be for an interesting display shape (probably not the primary screen of a gaming console) and could be really cool if it were say, a minor screen for hud that could constantly display time, battery life, internet connection, volume, ect. Most likely I see this technology going to a thinner screen for a console or as a weird shaped screen for their QOL program.
Sounds great as long as the next home nintendo console has a 1tb HDD i will be happy. Fingers crossed it plays wii u games as well.
@Quorthon awww. But I like Nintendo's home consoles!
@Quorthon I don't really consider mobile phones as handheld consoles, just as I don't consider a PC a home console. The only other handheld console on the market is the PS Vita. I agree that the upcoming mobile market has affected the handheld market, but I don't consider them the same thing for reasons stated above.
@RoomB31 The GameBoy Color, with over 400 original (exclusive) games? I don't think that's just an extension anymore. For the same reason, the GBA can be seen as a extension of the GB as well. I think most people can agree that the original GameBoy is a fourth generation console, whereas the GBC is a fifth generation console.
@Danny429
Yeah, so do I, but I don't buy them just to play Mario and Zelda. I think it may be time for Nintendo to form a pact with Sony. I'd prefer them not to go third party, but they may have to.
Nintendo 0,5ds !!!
@Octane
I don't consider mobile phones handheld consoles either, but the thing is, they are seen as competing for a similar market as the 3DS and Vita, and much of the third party support that would normally be on the 3DS and Vita has gone to the phones. Like half a dozen Final Fantasy ports. Capcom, Square-Enix, and EA all have huge mobile divisions--and very little on the 3DS or Vita.
Also, exclusive games or not, I'm afraid the GBC was just an extension of the original Game Boy. They used the same processor and hardware. It's just that the Color had, you know, color. You are right that it had over 400 games (472 according to MobyGames), which is way more than I thought it had.
@Donutman
it could be a virtual reality headset of a virtual reality headset with a controller for a handheld
with a bendable screen you can make a very good vr headset and the can make very great games for it and it will most likely use a controller like the Wii classic controller and it will not be backwards compatible but the games could be cart. or disk format but it would be a very small disk
@Quorthon I agree, but I was more talking about the durations of handheld consoles. For home consoles the story is different; Nintendo, MS, and Sony release their consoles roughly around the same time. For the handheld market, Nintendo is really the only one to decide when the generation ends.
@Octane
That's a valid point. Probably because they're (Nintendo) the most visible maker of a portable game system. Unless something magical like a merger or contract occurs between Nintendo and Sony, I don't think Sony will continue with their portable systems after the Vita.
I've seen bendable screens on youtube 2 years ago. They would roll them up like a fruit roll up with no loss in picture quality. Awesome if Nintendo plans to use these type of screens. My guess it's for their new unannounced handheld system and home console.
"The same sources are also suggesting that Nintendo's plans and designs are considering the incorporation of a hole in the centre of the screen."
haha what? This sounds like an April Fools' joke.
@Spectra_Twilight
I looked at half, and argue that GBC is not a full gen, but do agree that GBA was short lived.
@Octane
if we're counting, the GBC did have over 400 games, but a good 160 of them we compatible with the GB, so 1/3 of its library was still able to work on the original. So more a new gen than a next gen, my guess is to carefully wean ppl off the GB without upsetting the install base. the GBA in this case is the Anomaly, one could also argue that the DS was rushed to market, if that were the belief than the GBA's life wouldn't seem so short, since the majority didn't jump to the DS till the DSlite came out '06.
@Quorthon maybe Nintendo and Sony could work together on a console. Combining Sony's tech and Nintendo's innovation would provide for an incredible console.
@XFsWorld I wish!
Maybe it's for QoL products after all. Project a mouth around a hole in the middle of the screen. Or whatever floats your boat.
@Danny429
Yes it would, and in this day and age, it might be the smartest business move these two companies could make. Nintendo's strength on the portable side remains practically undisputed. Each of Sony's consoles have outsold every Nintendo console, except the PS3, which has outsold everything except the Wii. Maybe not the NES, but it's damn close.
It may be what's necessary to force the industry toward a unified future.
@Quorthon 480p? Wow. What is the Vita? 320p?
Either it's a new gameboy (or portable) idea, or I'm a loudmouth shnook.
Sharp! They have the best screens!
@6ch6ris6 that's because it's a photo? A static image? Wouldn't it have to be a video to portray the motion of flexing and bending?
Just a thought
I'm sure some fine Japanese company will come up with a creative use for a bendable screen with a hole in it...
@XFsWorld
No. The Vita is a higher resolution. 960x544. It's about halfway between the standard def of the GamePad and low-end HD (720).
The Vita has arguably the most beautiful displays of a handheld game system ever made. It's bright, it's clear, it's crisp. Sony knows how to impress on this front, and they showed it. The original OLED screens are also very noticeably superior to the GamePad screen. Not sure about the regular LED screens on the later version of the Vita, but with a higher resolution and higher ppi, I'm sure it still looks better.
The Vita is not held back by it's processing and visual hardware, it's held back by other issues. The sticks don't click, the memory cards are expensive and small, only one set of L&R buttons, too few exclusives, etc. As a stand-alone piece of gaming, it's pretty much amazing.
@Quorthon Oh wow, cool. The only problem I have with my Vita is the L & R buttons tho.
Nintendo truly are the innovators.
My two cents:
If this would go towards QoL, then a hole in the middle could make sense to be able to mount the display on top of something like an an extension/arm on a hospital bed or some other medical device. If it would be for "regular" gaming use, it could be a place to insert a touch screen pad (not sure if this LCD screen is also a touch screen, but apparently not) or button controls (remember, nowhere does it mention the shape of the hole so it could also be a square or a rectangle) or, if it is meant to be used in the GamePad v2 then it could also be an option to be able to mount it onto another contraption to make it into a steering wheel, sniper visor or whatever else you can think of.
It's always nice to fantasize about things like this, but in the end Nintendo will probably still surprise us all, like they always do. For better or for worse...
The hole surrounded by a touch screen could be used as a way to plug to stick different accessories. Let's say one thing measured blood pressure, you stick the thing on in the spot and the surrounding screen tells you information
I wouldn't be surprised if it is revealed that this will be used for both the QOL and a new handheld, with the hole in screen design being for the QOL Nintendo are planning. It could easily be that next year both are announced.
Nintendo like to do a 2 year announcement of their consoles (first year revealing and second showing it off), so this may be a 2016/2017 release.
@XFsWorld
Interesting. I'm actually a big fan of their L & R buttons due to the solid click of them. But I thought the ones on the PSP were a bit better. I'm used to a solid click to shoulder buttons--it feels right to me. The L & R buttons on the 3DS aren't bad, but I prefer the solid nature of the PSP and Vita buttons. They just feel more durable to me.
I thought the shoulder buttons on the DS were mushy. Also, they broke on my first DS Lite. I only dropped it directly onto concrete, like, half a dozen times!
With this freeform LCD technology, its not too hard to see where this is going.
The front face of the WiiU gamepad or 3DS handheld could be made from a complete screen, with real buttons and controls poking through it.
For some reason my mind immediately jumped to "how could this be used in an arcade cabinet?" but I think this has something to do with QoL.
Remember this, folks! The first article relating to the next Nintendo portable!
@Quorthon You misunderstand me. I'm not saying "nobody cares about high resolution", it's more that barely any game has gameplay that relies on it. Looking good is one thing, but that doesn't have an impact on gameplay.
The issue I was pointing at is that most big companies lose their sense of creativity by focusing far too much on graphics (even Nintendo is guilty of this), and nowadays, the creativity in games seems to lie within indies, who cannot afford to really make much of a platforms power.
Also, developers getting lazier is pretty much from a technical standpoint. Before, developers had to be crafty about everything, especially coding, since space was heavily limited. But now, there's an ever-increasing amount of games where developers simply leave unfinished stuff and "junk code" within the game, which is a waste of space. And the same applies to most modern games being unable to achieve 60fps despite not being much better than their possible predecessors. And sacrificing frames for graphics IS definitely lazy.
@Kaze_Memaryu Completely agreed or, as they would say in your neck of the woods: völlig einverstanden...
Nintendo B3NDS or Nintendo Bend DS
"bend the screen upwards, put your wii mote into the hole in the center of the screen and shake!"
finally a true sequel to mario can be made!
@Quorthon Yeah they seem to be unresponsive some times when playing shooters.
@Kaze_Memaryu
It's kind of a non-sequitur to say that looking good doesn't impact gameplay, as it really shouldn't. I have Atari 2600 games that are still fun because of the gameplay, and they look like crap.
Graphics are indeed a major focus these days--which makes sense. Our abilities in graphics have never been so limitless. We're living in the future, man!
But I don't think that makes developers lazier, and I think it's unfair to say so. The problem, I think, lies more with the cost of game development, the limited market (arguably due in large part to there not being a unified platform basis and having these pointless dedicated consoles, it's time to outgrow this concept), the relatively small audience, and the like.
I'll boil it down to this: Games cost a fortune to make, and despite great sales, the market is still far too small--games don't have the reach that movies or television do, so any number of TV shows or terrible movies will easily find over a million viewers, but even many of the best games struggle to find this same number. But as technology continues to advance, development costs skyrocket.
I have a line I've used several times before (mostly over at GameInformer before I stopped actively posting there): We have Hollywood budgets, but not Hollywood audiences.
This, ultimately, impacts creativity and drives an industry towards more remakes, more sequels, more annual franchises, and more overly similar games in order to appeal to the lowest common denominator and to stack the odds in favor of success. We're in an industry where new ideas are almost frowned upon, and the major AAA studios are less likely to take risks on more unusual and creative concepts and ideas.
Bulletstorm is one of my favorite games of the last generation because the gameplay was so unique and exhilarating. But, it was perhaps "too different," and was noted to not have been profitable. That's a huge bummer. How did that game not make back it's money?
I do agree with you that most creativity is coming from the indie side--and that's because they don't have the corporate overhead or the massive expenditures--their costs aren't as high, so they can take more risks.
I don't think it's fair to call developers lazy when publishers are holding the checkbooks, and telling them to make the game to appeal to a wider audience. And I don't think it's right to blame a focus on graphics as those artists work their asses off.
The problem is economic, and I hate to say it, but the problem is also us. The gamers. When we support sameness over and over again in droves, then major developers and publishers are forced to work toward that to make ends meet. And this is an industry-wide problem, and one Nintendo is very clearly a part of. Look at how Nintendo fans grossly ignored news about Splatoon and Codename STEAM during the last Direct. All they could talk about was seeing Majora's Mask being crammed onto a fifth platform.
It's no wonder Nintendo churns out so many games every year with Mario on the cover. It's no wonder Nintendo has, since 1998, turned Zelda into an annual franchise (only three years without a major Zelda release since then, and some of those years actually had two) no different from Assassin's Creed or Call of Duty or Madden. The difference is that some of these major Zelda releases are just remakes being sold for full price again.
It's sickening to me, as I constantly champion new concepts and ideas and creative new IPs. Fanboys of all ilk will him and haw and try to make excuses "but, but this Zelda has 50% new items!" "This Zelda has just Gannondorf, and not pig-Ganon!" It's still a game company delivering to a lowest common denominator because they need/want to make easy money, and aren't willing to take risks on something new. It's still some hero boy that (surprise!) is Link going on an adventure and meets a girl who (surprise!) is Zelda who is then kidnapped by (surprise!) Ganondorf. This formula permeates the Zelda franchise. It's repetitive, it's predictable, and it's formulaic.
And Nintendo is going to continue to churn out easy, predictable, formulaic Zelda experiences for the exact same reason Activision is going to keep churning out Call of Dutys and Ubisoft is going to keep chugging away with Assassin's Creeds and Microsoft is going to keep up annual Halo titles. Because it's an easy way to make money because these are all sure things.
I had my time with Majora's Mask. It was wonderful, beautiful, haunting, and exemplary. I loved it because it was different. And indeed, it was the most hated Zelda title for a long time. I wonder how many begging for this port even realize how drastically different it really is. But it wasn't the same old crap at the time. It was daring and new.
Now, with annualized Zeldas, Majora's Mask being available on N64, GameCube, Wii, Wii U, and now 3DS. It's just the same old crap again. Nintendo appealing to their lowest common denominator in the easiest possible way.
And gamers will buy it in droves, ignore Splatoon and Codename STEAM, thus ensuring that we never see those potentially great franchises from ever becoming anything better and that's why we can't have nice things.
A bit of a rant, I know. I did partially misunderstand you before (sorry about that), but I do think it's wrong to call developers lazy because of graphics technology. It's not their fault. It's publishers unwilling to spend the money on risks, because the public doesn't want anything different. They want the same old thing over and over. That's why I won't get another Kingdoms of Amalur, Eternal Darkness, or Bulletstorm. Though, I am ecstatic to see that somehow, against all odds, there is another Xenoblade Chronicles. I will not be missing that, because I think it'll be the last we see of that franchise after this.
Curioser and curioser...
@TheRealThanos
Thats a really good point, especially having buttons in the middle of the screen. Its possible that they have a smartphone-like design in mind, with actual buttons in place of virtual controls.
There are rumors of another x86/ARM device being made by AMD, so its also possible Nintendo has something to do with that. They use ATI/AMD for their GPUs, so its certainly possible they could take that partnership a step further.
OLED with no 3D effect for the next handheld plz!
Sorry, I did not understand, exactly what does that screen/thing do?
Thanks
@Zombie_Barioth Yeah, after I wrote that comment and let it sink in, it actually started to make some sense and sound plausible, especially if you consider all the humdrum about Nintendo on mobile technology and such, but we'll just have to wait and see what these quirky people over at Nintendo are going to come up with in the end. I'm pretty sure it'll be fun...
@MIDP The technology allows for screens to not have the standard required form, which is mostly rectangular or square. It can be round, a triangle or even a totally strange form like a cross or whatever.
And to add to that, now other parts of the device that this technology is used in, can also be used as a screen surface, such as with the upcoming Samsung Galaxy Note Edge, where the sides of the phone are also part of the screen:
http://www.engadget.com/2014/09/03/samsung-galaxy-note-edge-hands-on/
How it could work:
http://www.techradar.com/news/phone-and-communications/mobile-phones/samsung-patent-reveals-how-its-curved-3-sided-phone-could-work-1200840#null
The free form technology mentioned in this article is NOT to be confused with a flexible screen:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexible_display
What it does allow for, is to manufacture screens in many different forms, and with displays on the sides and there are even some concepts being made up with screens all around, so you could also have a display (or part of a display) on the back of a phone/handheld device. And because of the free form possibility, both screens could have a different form, like for example in a phone the backside could have a small circle displaying a clock.
Most important though, and a thing that some people trying to be funny are completely missing, is that the shape of the screen can only be set during the manufacturing process, so it's NOT bendable afterwards.
Hope that makes things clear for you.
@TheRealThanos
With the point that the screen is not bendable after manufactering, that would seem to hint at use within the QOL platform rather than an actual game console. I doubt there'd be much value in making a new game system with some bizarre new screen.
@Quorthon That could very well be the case and I also looked at both options in one of my previous comments. (#88) And the picture in the article is also a dead giveaway that the screen is not bendable after manufacturing: of what use would that be in a car dashboard? But you could imagine a screen similar to that of the Galaxy Note Edge on a handheld quite easily and the hole could be used for the things I mentioned in comment #88. Of course all of this is still a rumor and although the sources are supposed to be reputable, nothing is confirmed as of yet so maybe there won't be a hole in the screen at all. And looking at the dashboard picture the holes could also be on the edge of the screen.
By the way: even though I fully agree with @Kaze_Memaryu you did make some good points in your last comment to him as well, and taking both these into account, the truth will probably be somewhere in the middle. I actually re-read your comment after first breezing through it thinking you were just being obnoxious and just continued to disagree or wanted to force your opinion, but then I saw some of my favorite games at the end of your comment (Kingdoms of Amalur, Eternal Darkness, Bulletstorm) and I decided to really read what you had to say this time and it does make sense for the largest part. (although in general you can come across as a bit harsh sometimes)
My personal view of things is slightly different: even though publishers (and to some extent consumers) decide what kinds of games need to be made, it is still up to the programmers to make sure that the final product is as good as it can be, and considering how many bugs/glitches large games contain nowadays that is certainly not the case. And when @Kaze_Memaryu mentioned junk files, Watch Dogs came to mind immediately. That game not only still contains the E3 texture files, there's also left over audio and other data in it. None of it necessary and even though they left out the higher res textures in the final product, the game is still under-performing.
I also agree with his point about creativity being lost, and to me that's also because of the hardware: contrary to Nintendo, who design hardware around the games they want to create (doesn't always work out, I know) the others just offer a humongous container that has so much room that most games don't even use it. You just throw in your program without much optimization if any (heck it's x86 architecture so it's almost a PC in a box) and the bugs are ironed out after selling the product, because people think getting day one patches is normal nowadays.
In the older generations of consoles people did indeed have to be more creative to get more out of it and to get the hardware to do what they were aiming for. Beautiful graphics are fine and all, but you do need good gameplay and a story to go with it, and not an interactive movie interrupted by a quick time fest or something similar. Or a game that looks nice but has elements that control like a brick (the cars in Watch Dogs for example)
It's like comparing a sniper with a guy with a machine gun: one has to be very precise to get a result and the other just shoots and shoots, knowing he will eventually hit something anyway. One of the end results is pretty messy, though. To bring that back to programming we can replace messy with buggy/glitchy...
As for Zelda being a yearly product that is also somewhat debatable: I just look at the home console games, not the portable versions because there are more series that have portable games as well as home console versions. I also don't count re-edits.
So, taking that into consideration and starting from the N64, there's just these games up till now: Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, Wind Waker, Twilight Princess, Skyward Sword, and as an exception to the re-edits I'll add Wind Waker HD because it was a new game to some people owning a Wii U that had never played it on the GameCube. That's just six large Zelda games in total since the 21st of november 1998 (the release date Ocarina of Time). Compare that to say, Call of Duty, and you'll find that they have released a total of 14 games in the main series since 2003, once again not taking into account the re-edits (and expansion packs) for each of them.
So, if you do the math, then that's roughly one Zelda game every two and a half years (2.6 to be exact), compared to one Call of Duty game almost every 10 months (0.78 years to be exact). And the fact that the players and (to some extent) the story is known in Zelda games, is a given. Miyamoto has once said that maybe Link and the others are simply actors in a play, the stage changing each time, but the characters remaining more or less the same. And it is also what is expected, otherwise they would have to change the name of the game, so a Zelda is always going to be in it.
And as for Link: I do not know if you know where that name comes from, but just in case: his name is to be taken literally, so he is a link to connect the player to the game world. That's also why he doesn't have a voice. Both are supposed to make it easier for the player to identify himself/herself with the hero. That may of course result in various degrees of success, depending on the ability of persons to immerse themselves into a story or game world or not. Some people can identify themselves with almost any character they play, and others need a little help.
Oh, and rest assured that I will buy project STEAM and Splatoon and will certainly motivate other Nintendo gamers that I know to do the same. They are indeed interesting franchises and deserve all the love they can get from us gamers.
@TheRealThanos
Thanks, appreciated!
@MIDP You're very welcome.
@TheRealThanos
Pertaining to the Zelda annualization, I try to keep it simple like a good scientific hypothesis.
The annualization of Zelda uses only the following standards:
1. Is it a Zelda game? (I.E., does it feature Link as a protagonist?)
2. Is it published by Nintendo?
3. Is it a retail release sold for a retail price?
Platform doesn't matter as I think it's highly unfair to exclude the Nintendo portables as it diminishes their importance and quality, and it also smacks of a kind of special pleading. Note: Simple ports a la the Virtual Console are not counted.
Since 1998, here are the following major Zelda releases:
1998 - Ocarina of Time
1998 - Link's Awakening DX
1999 - Picross NP Vol 5 (I do not count this as it is technically a Zelda-themed Picross game, and only released in Japan).
2000 - Majora's Mask
2001 - Oracle of Seasons
2001 - Oracle of Ages
2002 - Wind Waker
2002 - A Link to the Past/Four Swords
2003 - Collector's Edition
2004 - Minish Cap
2005 - Four Swords Adventures
2006 - Twilight Princess
2007 - Phantom Hourglass
2007 - Link's Crossbow Training (this is a debatable addition as it is not a typical Zelda adventure. Disagreeing with this one is perfectly understandable).
2009 - Spirit Tracks
2011 - Skyward Sword
2011 - Ocarina of Time 3D
2013 - A Link Between Worlds
2012 - Wind Waker HD
2014 - Hyrule Warriors
2015 - Majora's Mask 3D
2015/2016 - Zelda U
The other problem with dismissing the DS or 3DS games is that now we are diminishing Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask, and we have to remove them from the standard. It's too many special rules and it just befuddles everything. I keep it simple, as well it should be. If I was counting all Call of Duty games, I'd include the travesty that launched with the Vita. If I was counting Assassin's Creed games, I'd include the two DS exclusives and the Vita exclusive.
Excluding the portables is cherry-picking, and no, the remakes and upgrades cannot be ignored as they are developed and sold as full retail games. Nintendo has even claimed that Majora's Mask 3D has, for some reason, been in development for 3 years. That obviously needs to be counted as those are major resources employed for a long time.
The point is, regardless of portable or console, Nintendo ensures that there is a major retail Zelda game annually, and this cannot be argued without a bunch of special pleading or cherry-picking. I don't mean to sound condescending (and I hope I don't, though I know it tends to occur naturally in me), but this cannot be ignored unless one is actively trying to find a way around it. Zelda is an annual franchise, and in years where it is missed, say 2008 and 2010, they are made up for with years like 2011 and 2013 and potentially 2015, which feature more than one major release.
Zelda is churned out as frequently as Call of Duty or Assassin's Creed, just not on an equally predictable timetable (not all Zelda releases are in the fall).
Since 1998, only 1999, 2008, and 2010 have not seen a major retail Zelda release. 2001, 2002, 2004, 2007, 2011, 2013, and potentially 2015 have all featured two games or more if you count the 4 Swords Anniversary for the DSi (which I did not). That is an average of more than one Zelda game per year.
I just wanted to cover this while I had the time. If I can, I'll return to address the rest of your comment. A good formula does not require a bunch of caveats or special rules, which is what I see when someone dismisses the portable games. I would never dismiss the portable games--Link's Awakening was my favorite of the franchise for years, and was arguably the first with a truly emotional ending.
It is also dismissing the importance and value of the portable systems as a whole, and I think that's just damn unfair. The 3DS is an outstanding system, and it's games deserve to be counted.
I'm not stating this as a negative about Nintendo, only showing that indeed, they have a pretty clear goal of delivering another full-priced retail Zelda game at least once a year, regardless of platform. I understand why they do it, but it's happening, and has been since 1998. No special rules.
@Quorthon I never cherry pick or special plead, at least not intentionally. Therefore no caveats or underlying meaning to what I say. I mean to say or write exactly that what is displayed in my comments. (I have to admit that, especially with larger walls of text, I do edit a lot because I feel some things I say, or rather how I say them, could be interpreted differently, and I want to prevent that as much as possible, but obviously you can never completely prevent that. Case in point: me misjudging you)
The reason I consciously chose to leave out the portables is because of the series you mentioned in comparison to Zelda (COD, Assassin's Creed, Halo etc) because not all of these have portable siblings, so it's only fair to only compare their main games on home consoles. I also didn't count the portables in the number of COD games, so the comparison was fair in that aspect.
And some of the Zelda games you mentioned aren't full blown Zelda adventures, but you already added those side notes here and there.
So, taking into account all of the numbers in the way that you intended them, does indeed show there's a yearly Zelda game across the various platforms, but the score is still in favor of Zelda: not counting the examples you yourself called debatable they've released 20 Zelda titles since 1998, and 24 COD titles since 2003, so more titles in a shorter time span whichever way you look at it. Personally, I also wouldn't consider the Zelda Collector's Edition to fit that list, since that wasn't available in retail. I myself got it from the Stars Catalog and I'm on the fence about Hyrule Warriors, since it's not a true Zelda game but a Dynasty Warriors game with Zelda wallpaper. And we also shouldn't count games that haven't been released yet, so disregarding Zelda U the total amount of Zelda games now comes to 17.
But even with that number I stand corrected because it's still a yearly release. And in retrospect, maybe I also shouldn't have taken COD as an example because I don't think it's even in the same league as Zelda, quality or story wise. And COD lovers might use the skewed argument that because COD games are released by two studios every other year they're "not really" yearly and make something nice of that to further the argument...
@TheRealThanos
Good sir, I was never going for a competition about who is worse/releases more/etc concerning Zelda vs Call of Duty. The entire point was to illustrate that, as far as annual game franchises are concerned, Zelda is one of them--to join Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed, Halo, etc.
You have highlighted an issue with my hypothesis, however. It still allows too much wiggle room for unnecessary personal interpretations. Hyrule Warriors is a Zelda game, but it is also a Dynasty Warriors game.
As such, the hypothesis needs a smoothing. This isn't to "make my point" by the way, but to further simplify.
1. Is it a retail release?
2. Does it take place in the Legend of Zelda franchise or universe?
3. Is it published by Nintendo?
Again, the entire point, sans needing to spell out the simplification, was merely to illustrate that the Zelda franchise is an annual franchise--a franchise that Nintendo adamantly works to maintain with a noticeable (retail) presence and release at least once a year. At the end of the day, the simplest criteria was only ever "is it a game in the Zelda franchise or universe?" This would literally include everything except the Picross game, and that also means Virtual Console games and smaller re-releases (original Zelda on GBA, the Ambassador games, etc).
It doesn't matter if there are more Zelda releases or Call of Duty releases, and we could always get extra nitpicky and include different editions--special editions, limited editions, player's choice, etc. if we wanted to go overboard.
Is it Nintendo's goal to release a Zelda game (franchise or in-universe) to retail and for full price every year? The answer to that is yes. The rest is semantics.
There's nothing necessarily bad about this, but Nintendo fans really hate the realization that this is the case--especially when compared to Call of Duty. Odd given that the only criteria for comparison is "there's another one at retail every year."
By the way, to keep up with ever-increasing cost and demand, Activision now has Call of Duty farmed out to three studios: Sledgehammer, Infinity Ward, and Treyarch. Sledgehammer apparently set a new standard this year. I haven't played it yet. As a gamer, I like the idea of the more dedicated development. As an indie dev, I shudder at the thought of spending three years making one game, then starting over on another one immediately after.
@TheRealThanos
To address your earlier point, new hardware definitely creates a kind of laziness, but it's still in creativity--let's see what we can get away with, kind of laziness. This is why games on powerful new hardware (shocker) tend not to run at the resolution or frames per second that we'd all think they should. It's because that new power is used rather lazily and has to do with how games are ported. This kind of thing occurs with generational changes.
My girlfriend, for example, bought Dragon Age Inquisition for the X360 (she's a huge fan of that franchise), and very soon after, bought an Xbox One and Dragon Age Inquisition for that. It helped that MS had unbeatable deals over the Black Friday weekend, but she got fed up with the shockingly bad graphics of the X360 version. In my hypothesis, they made the game for next-gen hardware, and then just lazily scaled everything back for X360 and PS3, rather than optimizing for the hardware.
Yes, this is lazy, but it's also not necessarily the fault of developers. We, as a culture of gamers need to get over blaming developers for everything, especially in big AAA studios. When it comes to some indie games, where it's the indie dev talking directly to the audience, blame can easily fall to the developer.
AAA studios are just far too complicated to lay blame on hardware or programmers or artists or whatever. They have bosses. Lots of bosses. And they strictly control the budgets, direction, input, and every aspect of the company. Besides being a budding indie dev, two of us on the team were also Activision employees as testers at one time. It's fascinating, even from such a simple underling position, to see just how wrong gamers are when they make blanket judgments about the industry or developers.
There is no easy place to point the finger of blame. Can new hardware make a developer lazy? Sure. But so can a lot of things--having a license they don't care about, doing thankless work, or being forced into apparent laziness by bosses who want specific results in specific deadlines. Are some developers lazy or crappy? I'm sure many of you have seen me call out one very specific developer for laziness and cynicism on this very site. This week, even. Yes, it happens.
We're all partially right with some of these things, about why developers or companies or publishers or games fail or succeed--but we are completely wrong if we ever think there is some kind of magic bullet explanation, or we just try to whittle it down to "developers are lazy" or "powerful hardware makes them lazy" or "they don't care" or (and this is popular among Nintendo fans specifically), "they're out to screw over this console."
I wasn't lazy when I worked 72-hour weeks at Activision. I'm not lazy as a struggling indie dev who works a day job, then goes home and tries to fit development into my free time and keep my team organized and morale up when we have major issues or set-backs.
Think about your job for a second. Would you like it if someone out there did your job poorly and everyone outside of it just made a blanket statement that everyone doing your job is lazy or some kind of good-for-nothing? People these days like easy solutions and someone to blame. It's never quite so easy as that. But by all means, if a developer is piling shovelware on you and telling you that you deserve it because you bought it before--call him on his BS. Just don't assume the rest are like that one sourpuss.
@Quorthon I know, which Is why I already said that I stand corrected. I never feel too big to admit that somebody else besides me could actually be right.
It's probably my eternal handicap of wanting to elaborate WAY too much that prompted you to make another elaborate comment in return.
In short: we're in agreement, there was a little bit of discussion but in the end, no harm done.
And we even like the same games! Up til now I haven't been able to find many people that like Kingdoms of Amalur or Bulletstorm. And Eternal Darkness also seems to be somewhat of an acquired taste, even amongst Nintendo fans and/or GameCube owners.
@TheRealThanos
By the way, I am aware that I can come off rather harsh. I suggest that people do not take it personally. I do my best to avoid anything resembling a personal attack (except to question some people if they get really bad), and to address ideas and not the people who make them.
I've been on the internet a long time. My patience for people is not one of my strong suits.
So by all means, don't take anything personally.
@TheRealThanos
Oh, and I absolutely adored Kingdoms of Amalur and was so upset that they had such incompetent management where their finances were concerned. I stopped playing Skyrim for Amalur, and never looked back. I actually ordered the collector's edition (not the one with the statue) from their site before launch, so I have a bit of a rarity.
Bulletstorm was just insane fun. The action, the intensity, the over-the-top nature. It was packaged adrenaline and it had my attention within seconds. Last generation (with the X360) was when I rediscovered my enjoyment of FPS gaming as the genre had opened up so wide and expanded into so many great ideas.
If it's some kind of obvious break from the norm, it has my attention. And Splatoon looks to be right up my alley.
@Quorthon No worries man, I wasn't offended by any of it.
Also, to me it wasn't really a competition of sorts, more a bit of a difference of opinion, albeit somewhat erroneous on my part.
As for comment #114: that's not all for me, although I did throw myself into that discussion, but it started with @Kaze_Memaryu.
I also wasn't trying to insult or generalize, and like I said I wasn't insulted by any of your comments as well. The you coming across a bit harsh was no more than an observation based on several comments of yours across several articles.
Me, I like a discussion with some intelligent content and you are well able to provide just that, so I actually want to thank you.
By the way: if I were you, I wouldn't be too insulted if someone mentions something bad about developers/programmers or makes blanket statements. Take me for example: I'm 44 years old and I've been a sales & marketing professional for more than 14 years now, mainly in IT and/or related markets, so I have done some game related work.
As a Nintendo fan and observer of all the marketing-related criticism aimed at them, I could also say that there's some generalization going on there as well but I'll be damned if I let it get to me. I've got better things to do with my time and energy.
One last thing and totally off topic: as a developer yourself, I would be very interested to know what your thoughts are on what the hell was done in those extra six months to release the Wii U version of Watch Dogs and all the discussions surrounding that.
@Quorthon Ah, don't sweat it, I'm ranting about my kinda narrow viewpoint, as well. I just thought for a bit we were talking past each other. ^_^"'
Well, I still took some knowledge from your opinion to bear in mind, so I'd say this definitely worked as a quick discussion!
@TheRealThanos Haha, you're really elaborate, man! But I like that, don't get me wrong - and I think you're pretty much right. The middle-ground between me and Quorthon is probably very close.
Just forgive me I'm giving you a more general answer. ^_^"'
@TheRealThanos
Ah hell, with you and @Kaze_Memaryu, this has arguably been one or the more valuable conversations I've had on this site. I've been a fan of Nintendo since I was a kid, but to be blunt, I've grown tired of much of the fanboyism surrounding the company, so I never took offense to your comment about my harshness, as a part of that stems from my limited patience with internet buffoonery in general, and fanboyism specifically.
So I must apologize if I strayed a little close to assuming this was going to turn into another tired "oh here's another fanboy unwilling to admit reality" conversation. I didn't exactly think it was going that way, but but have gotten used to putting up the defenses as it were.
It's great to have an actual conversation on here.
Per your comment on the Watch Dogs delay (I bought the Wii U version, but haven't had time to play it yet), I think Ubisoft had simply run out of confidence on the Wii U and gambled that delaying until sales had increased a bit was a smarter ploy. They said they yanked people from the Wii U team to finish the other versions on a game that was already hellishly delayed. They may have considered scrapping it, but ultimately put it out to save face with Nintendo fans to some degree, knowing they were likely to lose money on it.
Personally, we've been stuck in lotcheck for two months. There's so many things that can muck up development. I once heard a commentary on filmmaking that so many things can go wrong to sink a project that it's almost a miracle that any movie gets made at all. I feel the same way about game development, and we've had half a dozen people cycle into our team only to leave having contributed almost nothing. And one of those guys was a huge bummer.
@Quorthon Granted, downplaying graphics is often seen from Nintendo fanboys (since Nintendo isn't on par in that aspect anymore), so I can understand the assumption. (╯_╰”)
Also, it really sucks to hear your game being involved with these kinds of issues - I can't stand when smaller dev teams have to deal with this kind of stress!
@Kaze_Memaryu
Well, as one of the guys on our team said, "we're playing with the big boys now" and there are standards to meet and occasionally arbitrary rules to follow for publication on a console. We have everything handled now, but there is some anxiety when the game isn't in your hands and you're waiting to hear if it's approved or not.
The Android market had no such oversight, but then, getting noticed in there is nearly impossible.
Per the people who have joined and left, we're doing this in our free time as it's a shared dream (we have a pretty strong team now), and finding people willing to work for no money towards a shared goal is extremely challenging. All we lack now is artists--I'm really the only one, and I don't think I'm very good. We also don't have any women on the team, which I view as a major weakness.
@Quorthon Funny bit I have to share with you first: I was a bit tired when I logged on and in taking a quick look at your comment I thought it said "Ah to hell with you and @Kaze_Memaryu". Luckily I recovered quickly and saw I misread that....
So, with that out of the way, here's my actual response:
No need for apologies, it was quite an interesting conversation. Between you and this nice guy that I'm going to address in a minute I'm almost getting a "Christmassy" vibe what with all the decency and kindness going on. A rare thing on the open sewer that is called the internet. (by the way, I have to give credit to an acquaintance of mine who came up with that phrase, but I do like to use it because it definitely has some truth to it)
As far as Watch Dogs is confirmed, that is more or less along the lines of what I was thinking myself, so they were truly talking out of the other end when explaining to the media that they would use the extra time to fully utilize the capabilities of the GamePad. From a customer/gamer point of view it's almost infuriating that all they have come up with is a map, the most basic of functions you could use the GamePad for. I really don't blame the dev team because they probably just did as they were told or were given only so much time and space to get it done.
Still, it would have been nice to have another truly exceptional example of why third party games can actually be good on Wii U instead of something half baked. They (my "evil" marketing colleagues) spun the BS tale afterwards, knowing full well that it won't sell and therefore they almost feel justified to not put in the full effort(?) or something. And of course it opens the door to being able to step away from the Wii U altogether because this game will "obviously" show why third party games don't sell on Nintendo's console.
That's both a terrible waste and a self fulfilling prophecy that even a blind man could see happening. And I had the same issues with the Wii U version of Mass Effect, or rather with the timing of it's release, because the game itself is rather solid and actually makes good use of the GamePad.
But what idiot colleague of mine decided it was a good decision to sell that at full price around the same time that other platforms got the full trilogy for practically the same amount of money? But I digress, we're completely off topic now...
As for having good for nothing people in your team, I can share some stories with you on that: I once trained a team of five newly recruited sales reps and only one has survived. Some where good but just not quite good enough to make it, but some of them truly didn't have a clue what they were doing and that made me question the capabilities of the guy in our company that is responsible for hiring "new sales talents"... Oh, well...
By the way: if you still use your Xbox360 you're welcome to join me in a game or a private chat, which would also work if you have an Xbox One. The tag is in my NLife profile, but it'll be no surprise...
@Kaze_Memaryu Yeah, that's a thing with fanboys with blinders on, but if you look at it objectively, that may also stem from Nintendo themselves nearly always showing others how it's done where showing what's possible on their hardware is concerned and they do come up with some truly marvelous results, on the Wii U as well. And to me the differences (besides the art style) aren't all that big. It only shows in the more ambitious third party titles, but I do think that given time and actually optimizing instead of doing nearly nothing for six months should yield good results, even on Wii U.
And I do believe you yourself also mentioned something about the importance of graphics being overrated in a previous comment (#96) so that is also something that people without blinders use in discussions. For me it's a bit of both: ideally, you should have a good looking game with great controls and an interesting and compelling storyline where applicable (since some types of games really don't need a story) but in defense of lesser graphics: I'd rather have a game looking less nice but with the story and gameplay still intact than a beautiful game with lousy controls and a bad or next to no storyline.
And that is also why I agreed with your initial comment that started this whole discussion where you went into the topic of why developers seemed to be more creative in the golden age of console gaming. And no worries about your answer. After all the giant walls of text it was just fine by me. Me, I just came up with another wall of text, which is what you get when you're an elaborate person like me and want to reply to two people in one comment...
@TheRealThanos
Ubisoft did a great job on the Wii U for over a year, and then they lost confidence in the console, and I can't say I completely blame them, but that they didn't make money on Zombi U, which supposedly sold around 700,000 would seem to be a budget problem on their end (it was a completely different game at one point). The company is very erratic lately, and the Assassin's Creed Unity debacle and mixed public response to Watch_Dogs would seem to indicate that the company may need to reorganize somewhat to prevent those issues from becoming negative trends. Despite the delay of Rayman Legends--most likely related to the idiotic parity clause for Microsoft--it is still one of the best games on the Wii U and my son and I have poured hours into it. The rhythm levels were a pure blast.
Unfortunately, I'm almost never on my X360 these days, but if I remember, I'll add you. I switched sides and went with the PS4 for my non-Nintendo primary this generation. But my girlfriend bought an Xbox One, so we have all the current-gen hardware now. She has Live, I have PSN+, but she keeps wanting to get me Live Gold again so we can do something online.
Thanks to the Wii U, we grew to understand why Call of Duty is so popular, and are disappointed to not have Advanced Warfare on the U so we can play it together online for free. I never really played CoD until I was experimenting with new flavors after I bought the Wii U. I always forget which part is the one you search for on Wii U, but it's either ResidentProber or Ab-Duk'Tor.
@ThomasWhitehead Hey, the next Nintendo Portable arriving in 2016 is not shortened lifespan. It arrived in 2010 in Japan, so as most of Ninty's hardware releases, this would be probably 6 years after the original 3DS. It would then launch in the west by around march 2017, this would also put it 6 years after the original 3DS here in the west. The timing is right, and since Sharp Screens are so beautiful i'm interested to see what Ninty and them have in table for the next portable. HD is a safe bet.
@Quorthon A small tip:
Are you aware of all the free games that come with an Xbox Live subscription? It's called "Games with Gold" and you can either find it on the Xbox website or on the dashboard of your Xbox 360 and Xbox One. It's two free games for each console each month, so it's always worth it to check it out every other week to see if they offer something that you would like to have. The titles on offer vary from the older retail titles for Xbox 360 to Live Arcade titles for both consoles:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/games-with-gold?xr=shellnav
Unfortunately I don't have a Wii U (or any of the other two consoles) yet, due to personal circumstances that are "slightly" more important than buying a games console. But in the end I will get one. I did already buy some games for it, so I'll be ready to start playing straight out of the box once I have the console.
No pressure on Xbox 360 gaming, just add me whenever and I'll see the message. If you decide to stick with the Xbox One instead we obviously can't play a game together, but we can still communicate through Xbox Live messaging.
@TheRealThanos
I'm aware of the Games With Gold, as MS started doing it to step up competition with Sony's PSN+ games freebies--and I have PSN+. My girlfriend has Live Gold, so she had stuff to play day one on the Xbox One.
I barely have time for the games I have. Actually, I don't have time for the games I have. I've downloaded several PSN+ games that I haven't even turned on yet. One of these days...
@Quorthon I know the feeling: you should see the stack of Xbox360 games that I have here still wrapped in foil...
No time to play them, or not enough time, but I still bought them because they might become unavailable at some point and there are some games or series that you definitely have to own on certain consoles.
That's also the reason that I'm already buying Wii U games, so as not to miss out on these games once I own the console.
I've got the whole Dragon Age series as well, barely played for an hour.
I figured you already knew about Games with Gold, but since a surprising number of Xbox owners in my own circle of friends and family wasn't aware, I sort of made a habit out of pointing it out to people. Better safe than sorry, right?
@TheRealThanos
I can see forgetting to download month to month (I completely forgot to download Tomb Raider when it was one of the PSN+ freebies), but it surprises me whenever there's someone who isn't aware of the "free" games service at all.
The Dragon Age franchise became the de facto favorite of my girlfriend over the last generation, but I haven't played any of them. She's more swords-and-sorcerers and I'm more spaceships-and-aliens, with the general exception of Kingdoms of Amalur. I spent far more time with Mass Effect, Bioshock, Fallout, and Xenoblade Chronicles.
Unfortunately, for the first 6 months or so of Games with Gold, I had to roll my eyes because Microsoft gave out such obvious titles--and we already owned pretty much all of them. Ahh, Halo 3. Good one, Microsoft. No one's played that one before 2012. They've gotten a lot better since then.
@Quorthon That makes two of us being surprised. Although to be honest, most Xboxes around here are either controlled by parents who don't know what's what or they just don't seem to care that much. I picked up SSX yesterday for the 360. It was on my list but I never got around to buying it, so now I got it for free. And it makes for an appropriate game for the holiday season...
As for the games on offer in general: I stepped into the Xbox360 train a little late myself, so I was always "one COD behind" most of my friends and I missed out on some titles completely. Since it was my first Xbox, I've also collected quite a number of Xbox originals that are compatible with the Xbox 360. But you're right: they have indeed improved and to be fair to Microsoft a lot of the Arcade titles that they put in the mix are also quite enjoyable and most people may not even have bought these otherwise.
Also, some of the games on offer for the Xbox One seem pretty decent too. I wouldn't be able to tell obviously, since I haven't got the console. I have already "purchased" all the games for it up til now though, since I figured out you can do that even if you haven't got an Xbox One because the free game offers are simply related to having an Xbox Live Gold account.
I have no idea how long this free game campaign is going to last, but for me it means that I'm setting myself up for a humongous backlog of games to play once I finally own an Xbox One. Which will be AFTER I've bought a Wii U...
I'm with you on the spaceships-and-aliens and Kingdoms of Amalur, but we already concluded that last one previously. I can agree on the other games as well: I have all of them. Xenoblade even with the special red Classic Controller.
Tap here to load 125 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...