Forums

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

Posts 41 to 60 of 87

skywake

shaneoh wrote:

Yes, however the difference is that PCs aren't a single platform, they're countless configurations based on hardware, OS and peripherals.

It's a moot point. On the digital side of things there are effectively only a handful of store fronts and the only one that really matters is Steam. The fact that I can buy a game on Steam and have it work on different operating systems and hardware configurations doesn't make any difference. If Nintendo opened up their eShop so that VC purchases and the like moved from 3DS to Wii U would we suddenly be talking about how much the eShop is now a completely different thing? Of course not. You find a platform, you build a library on it. Doesn't matter whether it's physical, digital, platform agnostic or not.

And people are saying that if it was digital only there'd be a monopoly. These platforms already have a monopoly within their own platform, they still have to compete with other platforms. If there's a cross-platform game and it's significantly more expensive on one platform? People won't buy the game on that platform

iKhan wrote:

I've been buying used for a very long time, and have been very satisfied. I don't know what you mean by "it's not user friendly". Why should a digital good be done the other way though? Shouldn't the end user have the ability to resell a product that they purchase? I know I'd be pretty damn upset if I couldn't sell my computer or my phone.

Then don't churn through your stuff so fast and I've already said that there's no way they could ever do this for physical goods. If they could infinitely produce cameras and phones then I would be making the same point but because there is actual energy involved in making every single unit it's completely different. Plus I've already explained the way that "used games" could work on a digital store. Family sharing is already a thing on some of the biggest platforms, cross play is also a thing and I don't know whether it's actually a thing but "trading in" a digital game should technically be possible. Again my problem with the used market is that the people who made the content don't get jack from the second user on.

iKhan wrote:

I don't see a problem with Amiibo at all. In fact, I was going to buy some Shulk Amiibo just to resell and make some money. People like to demonize scalpers, but in reality they just sell a product at market price.

If the intent is to get the product to the consumer at the lowest possible price things like this don't help on either count. If the game was unpopular it'll be hard to find and therefore people who did want it won't be able to find it. If the game was popular and rare then the price will go up and be well above what it should be. And again, even with games that are neither the fact that people trade in their games so quickly means that the used option is always there. So people will buy it. That cuts into the amount of return that a publisher can make will therefore impact on the price they need to charge and whether or not they make more games like it.

Edited on by skywake

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"

shaneoh

skywake wrote:

shaneoh wrote:

Yes, however the difference is that PCs aren't a single platform, they're countless configurations based on hardware, OS and peripherals.

It's a moot point. On the digital side of things there are effectively only a handful of store fronts and the only one that really matters is Steam. The fact that I can buy a game on Steam and have it work on different operating systems and hardware configurations doesn't make any difference. If Nintendo opened up their eShop so that VC purchases and the like moved from 3DS to Wii U would we suddenly be talking about how much the eShop is now a completely different thing? Of course not. You find a platform, you build a library on it. Doesn't matter whether it's physical, digital, platform agnostic or not.

You're just talking about VC, games like Mario 3D world, Smash 4, and all the 3rd party titles would not be available on the next console, you'd be transferring all the old stuff, none of the new. It is a huge difference to the Steam method, Steam you take EVERYTHING

Edited on by shaneoh

The Greatest love story ever, Rosie Love (part 33 done)
The collective noun for a group of lunatics is a forum. A forum of lunatics.
I'm belligerent, you were warned.

skywake

shaneoh wrote:

You're just talking about VC, games like Mario 3D world, Smash 4, and all the 3rd party titles would not be available on the next console, you'd be transferring all the old stuff, none of the new.

It literally makes no difference in terms of the point I was making.

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"

shaneoh

iKhan wrote:

I don't see a problem with Amiibo at all. In fact, I was going to buy some Shulk Amiibo just to resell and make some money. People like to demonize scalpers, but in reality they just sell a product at market price.

Market price is what the retail stores are selling it for, the scalpers are artificially inflating the price, it's profiteering.

The Greatest love story ever, Rosie Love (part 33 done)
The collective noun for a group of lunatics is a forum. A forum of lunatics.
I'm belligerent, you were warned.

iKhan

shaneoh wrote:

iKhan wrote:

I don't see a problem with Amiibo at all. In fact, I was going to buy some Shulk Amiibo just to resell and make some money. People like to demonize scalpers, but in reality they just sell a product at market price.

Market price is what the retail stores are selling it for, the scalpers are artificially inflating the price, it's profiteering.

No. Market price is where the supply and demand curves meet. Because the number of Amiibo available is small, and the demand is high, the market price is high. It's not unfair at all, particularly considering that the scalper didn't just get the Amiibo from the store by sheer luck. It, at the very least, required some degree of foresight, and the effort of trying to lock down a certain number at retail price.

Retailers are selling it at the MSRP, a very different value set by the creator of the product. Nintendo's MSRP isn't necessarily at the market price, because it takes the interests of Nintendo as a company into account. Nintendo wants to make all lines of Amiibo seem equal, and they do intend to consistently sell through certain amiibo like Mario and Link, so it makes sense for them to push for a similar $12.99 across the board even for Shulk and Marth.

Edited on by iKhan

Currently Playing: Steamworld Heist, The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, Tales of Graces F

iKhan

DiscoGentleman wrote:

I'd like to see the next console be a true, 2-in-1 of portable and console gaming. Frankly, it's what they should've done with the 3DS & Wii U. That, or they need to make it babytown frolics SIMPLE to port the next handheld's games to the next console.

And for the hell of it, I need an app-esque thing to play my 3DS on the big screen. I just needs it.

I'd be fine with it as long as it is optional. There really isn't a need to force every buyer of the system to have the portable and console sides of the system. Not many games will be able to take unique advantage of that, and including both will dramatically raise the price.

It would be a lot better to just see the new handheld and the new console to be compatible, such that you could take your console games on the go.

Currently Playing: Steamworld Heist, The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, Tales of Graces F

CaviarMeths

Console owners are pretty much the last consumers in the entertainment marketplace who prefer owning a physical collection.

It probably won't happen next gen, at least not with Nintendo, but Gen 10 will be all digital. Count on it. Just getting that out of the way.

Edited on by CaviarMeths

So Anakin kneels before Monster Mash and pledges his loyalty to the graveyard smash.

SKTTR

A Wii U to take outside.
A merge of 3DS and Wii U basically. One console to be truly both handheld and home console.
Benefits: Having all games on one console.

On a hardware side: Best would be a 1080p 3D touchscreen on the GamePad.
Longer battery life.

Next step into the future: No region locking. (Just like Miiverse is available for all NNID users in all regions, all region exclusive games need to be available for purchase as well.)

That's it. At the moment I'm still quite happy with the Wii U so I don't have many ideas what to do better. I just enjoy this generation that will at least go on for another 3 years.

Switch fc: 6705-1518-0990

skywake

@SpookyMeths
The difference is with movies and music there are good reasons to not go digital. When you think about it with physical media the big advantages are the lack of storage/bandwidth limitations and the ability to move your copy around if you want. For games neither of those things matter that much because you generally have a large enough HDD, you can't stream it so the biggest problem is waiting for it to finish downloading and you're locked to only one platform anyways. For music and movies it's nice to have a copy of your favourites that are at the highest quality, available on every device and don't require an active internet connection. For games they can be as restrictive as they want and the only thing anyone will ever lose is the ability to trade the game in.

I use Spotify a lot but I still buy CDs of my favourite stuffs because I like the flexibility of the media. I like the fact that I can rip them at whatever quality I want and have them on my phone available to play even when I'm low on data or have crap reception. I still buy BluRays because they do everything I want them to do at the highest quality they'll sell it for and on a large number of devices, especially if I again rip a copy to the NAS. For games? Digital or Physical, doesn't make any difference at all. I'll usually just go for whatever's cheapest but if it's hard to find in-store or if it's something I'll want to play daily? Digital is the better option.

Edited on by skywake

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"

iKhan

skywake wrote:

@SpookyMeths
The difference is with movies and music there are good reasons to not go digital. When you think about it with physical media the big advantages are the lack of storage/bandwidth limitations and the ability to move your copy around if you want. For games neither of those things matter that much because you generally have a large enough HDD, you can't stream it so the biggest problem is waiting for it to finish downloading and you're locked to only one platform anyways. For music and movies it's nice to have a copy of your favourites that are at the highest quality, available on every device and don't require an active internet connection. For games they can be as restrictive as they want and the only thing anyone will ever lose is the ability to trade the game in.

I use Spotify a lot but I still buy CDs of my favourite stuffs because I like the flexibility of the media. I like the fact that I can rip them at whatever quality I want and have them on my phone available to play even when I'm low on data or have crap reception. I still buy BluRays because they do everything I want them to do at the highest quality they'll sell it for and on a large number of devices, especially if I again rip a copy to the NAS. For games? Digital or Physical, doesn't make any difference at all. I'll usually just go for whatever's cheapest but if it's hard to find in-store or if it's something I'll want to play daily? Digital is the better option.

But you can move your copy around with digital music and movies. That was a major draw if the iPod. Heck, nowadays with the cloud, it's MORE convenient to transport. That's actually a downside with digital console games, since you can't move them without moving the system. I can't lend a game to a friend, take it to someone else's place to play, or any other form of portability (handheld games are different, and digital is actually more portable)

Waiting to finish downloading is a big deal. A music file takes a few minutes, and I can buy a la carte. A game takes an hour or more and it's all or none. At that point, it's probably faster to just drive to the store. Beyond that there are streaming options, which keep getting better, and rental options, which are nice for a lower cost.

Games currently have none of those perks. PSNow is overpriced as all hell and game rental is restricted to physical.

I'm not saying that physical movies and music are bad, I buy them myself from time to time, but they are certainly less attractive than physical games are to a lot of people.

Edited on by iKhan

Currently Playing: Steamworld Heist, The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, Tales of Graces F

DefHalan

With this fusion idea floating around what if it is slightly different than what we are expecting? What if Nintendo leaves the home console market and just has a portable system? The portable system has been their most successful market recently and the cheaper dev cost allows for more risks and easier support drom Nintendo. They could sell a usb/hdmi type device to allow streaming to the TV and possible exclusive features/games with it.

Just an idea

People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...

3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan

CM30

I don't think they should make JUST a handheld system. That seems like a recipe for disaster, especially given how quite a few types of games have to be designed differently for different styles of play. Do we really want them to only make 'portable' Mario games with short levels and easy difficulty levels and stuff rather than more open world ones like in the past? Because that's the kind of thing I see happening if Nintendo has a portable system as their only console. We'll just games tailored to the Japanese commuter experience rather than the home console sit round the TV one.

But as for hardware innovations... I don't want any. I want Nintendo to go a generation or two where they don't try to be the 'gimmick company' and just make a standard home console with a standard handheld with standard Nintendo games from their standard franchises. Like a revival of the NES/SNES era of console and game design.

Try out Gaming Reinvented, my new gaming forum and website!
Also, if you're a Wario series fan, check out Wario Forums today! Your only place for Wario series discussion!
My 3DS Friend Code: 4983-5165-4...

Twitter:

Bolt_Strike

CM30 wrote:

But as for hardware innovations... I don't want any. I want Nintendo to go a generation or two where they don't try to be the 'gimmick company' and just make a standard home console with a standard handheld with standard Nintendo games from their standard franchises. Like a revival of the NES/SNES era of console and game design.

I don't think they're going to stop innovating, they like making creative games and hardware.

Bolt_Strike

Switch Friend Code: SW-5621-4055-5722 | 3DS Friend Code: 4725-8075-8961 | Nintendo Network ID: Bolt_Strike

iKhan

DefHalan wrote:

With this fusion idea floating around what if it is slightly different than what we are expecting? What if Nintendo leaves the home console market and just has a portable system? The portable system has been their most successful market recently and the cheaper dev cost allows for more risks and easier support drom Nintendo. They could sell a usb/hdmi type device to allow streaming to the TV and possible exclusive features/games with it.

Just an idea

Doubtful. While the 3DS is doing okay, the market size is steadily shrinking. Putting all their eggs in that basket is very risky.

But what I fail to understand is why everyone wants this to be one integrated system. What benefit does doing that bring over simply just making separate handhelds and consoles that can interact? The integrated system would either be exorbitantly priced, or severely underpowered. And there isn't much of a reason to go that route anyway, as there is nothing about the feature that would necessitate making it mandatory.

Currently Playing: Steamworld Heist, The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, Tales of Graces F

CaviarMeths

Dropping consoles would be a dangerous move for Nintendo. No company should feel good about dropping a product line and falling back on a single pillar. What if that pillar fails? They'd have nothing left to float the company.

Nintendo needs to diversify, not narrow. Hence, QoL.

I think the Fusion idea could be a great one though, as long as it's marketed and sold as two separate products. Even if there's 100% overlap in software, it needs to be marketed as two different things. Nintendo wouldn't be able to convince everyone to buy the full package, but they could convince a lot of people to buy either piece by itself. Core fans will want to buy both for the full experience.

It would work similarly to PS4 and Vita, if they had the same games and all of them were Cross Buy and Cross Save (or maybe even just the same core games with exclusive features to both, like Smash 3DS and Smash U). And then when you got in the same room with the "PS4" piece, the "Vita" would become a second screen tablet controller for the "PS4," like the Gamepad is to the Wii U.

Edited on by CaviarMeths

So Anakin kneels before Monster Mash and pledges his loyalty to the graveyard smash.

Ralek85

I feel hard pressed to point out how Nintendo gaming got any more enjoyable thanks to either motion controls or second-screen tech. That's not to say that I didn't enjoy WiiSports/Resort/Play on occassion, or .... well, maybe the second-screen functionality in e.g. ZombiU or occasionally off-tv play. Unfortunately, while this "innovations" were at the core of the respective systems they did very little for me and the games I played and enjoyed most beyond that.
Overall I think Nintendo should consider at least one generation, meaning the next, to go without all that stuff and focus on powerful, easy-to-work-with, accessible and affordable hardware to do, what they do best ... make great games. Most hardware innovations that make sense are small things like changes to a controller for the better and so on, seldomely they are truely revolutionary and almost never are they enough to build a system around. The Wii might be best and probably only example for that strategy to succeed, and most likely this was more due to external circumstances than anything else.
I really hope Nintendo stops trying to chase the "next big thing"/ Wii moment ....
What they should do is play catch-up with all the innovations that happened meanwhile. Where is cross-buy/play/save, gamesharing, cloudsaving, party-chat and so on? That is the stuff I want on a Nintendo system, stuff that actual matters because it makes the system way more versatile and convenient to use. Those were "innovations" that were not disruptive but evolutionary to the simple cause of having fun playing games.
Nintendo should focus on their online infastructure, their OS, and their interface, as well as integration of their respective platforms into one ecosystem (take a page from Sony here pretty please). Aside from that stick to specs of the competition.

PS:
In fact I think some of those "innovations" made the actual games worse, there are plenty of games with forced integration of either "wiggle" controls or 2nd-screen function/gyro that would have worked at least as good if not better with traditional controls. Same could be said for Kinect, 3D in general (although I love it for animated movies and stuff like Gravity, but that is a different story^^), Sixaxis, the whole DS4 touchpad thingy ... at this point I feel almost relived if a game works with the controller and that's just it.

Switch: 3355-6459-9982 | 3DS: 2809-7989-1816 | NNID: Ralek85

kkslider5552000

Ralek85 wrote:

I feel hard pressed to point out how Nintendo gaming got any more enjoyable thanks to either motion controls or second-screen tech.

...oh boy

ahem

first of all, several sports games beyond Wii U (read: any that put in the effort) properly showcased how much of an improvement motion controls were. But beyond that were the most frequently high quality use of it, the pointer controls. Certain puzzle games (especially the masterpiece World of Goo) were helped tremendously by this and would be so much worse without it. And any shooter or shooter-like game just have far better controls with it than even the best console FPS of the past could make up, the only thing that can rival keyboard and mouse. Also, because of Nintendo's focus on it, they did make a decent chunk of motion controlled games that were of good quality, the most obvious being Skyward Sword, which would've been a drastically different game without them and just way more boring. Otherwise the game would've been a worse Twilight Princess instead of anything interesting in terms of game mechanics. But even some of Nintendo's attempts at it became "justified by novelty". Meaning that sometimes devs would put motion controls that weren't as good as normal controls, but they weren't so bad that you couldn't forgive it because it was interesting. I do hope motion controls come back when they've heavily advanced the tech, it still has too much potential to be a fad.

Second screen is actually something way easier to get something quality out of. Basically any game where you want local multiplayer but don't want people looking at the other screen is immediately improved by it. Not to mention the fascinating things you can do with 2 different ways to play a game. Rayman Legends ideas for making you and other players unique to each other but invaluable partners in a game was an incredibly compelling experience, and one I want to see more of. And just any positive change from touch screen and dual screen that was used on DS (which tbh is way easier to make something of high quality with) is very welcome, especially not having to go to a menu all the time for certain times. Honestly I'm disappointed it's not been advertised more as a parent and kid co-op console, as the parents use the touch screen to help a kid out in an otherwise single player game or use item and map management to make the kid's experience simpler and quicker is awesome and is something I almost feel Nintendo hasn't realized they actually created. Unfortunately, almost no one is doing things with it. Which is...so odd. Because with stuff like Fibbage getting success, other people are doing this fine.

Non-binary, demiguy, making LPs, still alive

Megaman Legends 2 Let's Play!:
LeT's PlAy MEGAMAN LEGENDS 2 < Link to LP

kyuubikid213

Ralek85 wrote:

I feel hard pressed to point out how Nintendo gaming got any more enjoyable thanks to either motion controls or second-screen tech.

Well, on the most basic level (to me)...
MOTION CONTROLS
See kkslider's post.

SECOND SCREEN
I actually love the second screen. I'm not even talking about the neat/cool features like in Lego City, Zombi U, or Nintendo Land. I mean just the quick menu navigation from Arkham City...the map screen in Assassin's Creed...Two screens for multiplayer in Call of Duty...and even off-TV play. I like my 360, but it almost physically pains me to go back to it knowing I won't have a larger map always on hand, that I'll have to pause the game more often to get a certain item... They're small things, but significant. I won't lie, if these aren't in the next Nintendo console, I will miss them.

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

I'm on YouTube.

I promise to not derail threads. Request from theblackdragon

I pro...

3DS Friend Code: 4639-9073-1731 | Nintendo Network ID: kyuubikid213

iKhan

Ralek85 wrote:

Overall I think Nintendo should consider at least one generation, meaning the next, to go without all that stuff and focus on powerful, easy-to-work-with, accessible and affordable hardware to do, what they do best ... make great games. Most hardware innovations that make sense are small things like changes to a controller for the better and so on, seldomely they are truely revolutionary and almost never are they enough to build a system around. The Wii might be best and probably only example for that strategy to succeed, and most likely this was more due to external circumstances than anything else.
I really hope Nintendo stops trying to chase the "next big thing"/ Wii moment ....
What they should do is play catch-up with all the innovations that happened meanwhile. Where is cross-buy/play/save, gamesharing, cloudsaving, party-chat and so on? That is the stuff I want on a Nintendo system, stuff that actual matters because it makes the system way more versatile and convenient to use. Those were "innovations" that were not disruptive but evolutionary to the simple cause of having fun playing games.
Nintendo should focus on their online infastructure, their OS, and their interface, as well as integration of their respective platforms into one ecosystem (take a page from Sony here pretty please). Aside from that stick to specs of the competition.

PS
In fact I think some of those "innovations" made the actual games worse, there are plenty of games with forced integration of either "wiggle" controls or 2nd-screen function/gyro that would have worked at least as good if not better with traditional controls. Same could be said for Kinect, 3D in general (although I love it for animated movies and stuff like Gravity, but that is a different story^^), Sixaxis, the whole DS4 touchpad thingy ... at this point I feel almost relived if a game works with the controller and that's just it.

What's the point of doing that though? There are already 2 consoles in the market that do what you described. What's the point if Nintendo making another? In fact, if they did that, they might as well just go 3rd party, since they aren't really contributing anything by making a console.

Anyway, I'm hard pressed to think of a game on Wii that wasnt improved in some way by motion controls. Even in something like Twilight Princess, motion controls added a sense of immersion, as YOU were now swinging the sword. 2nd Screen is another story.

Currently Playing: Steamworld Heist, The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, Tales of Graces F

skywake

iKhan wrote:

But you can move your copy around with digital music and movies. That was a major draw if the iPod. Heck, nowadays with the cloud, it's MORE convenient to transport. That's actually a downside with digital console games, since you can't move them without moving the system. I can't lend a game to a friend, take it to someone else's place to play, or any other form of portability (handheld games are different, and digital is actually more portable)

Waiting to finish downloading is a big deal. A music file takes a few minutes, and I can buy a la carte. A game takes an hour or more and it's all or none. At that point, it's probably faster to just drive to the store. Beyond that there are streaming options, which keep getting better, and rental options, which are nice for a lower cost

Well lets just spell it out then shall we? With music the three main options I have are iTunes, Spotify or CD. If I'm at home and have the subscription running Spotify wins, it's 320kbps with a massive library and it runs on my PC, phone and my Sonos gear. If I'm not at home or I've let my subscription run out? Then data becomes an issue, I get ads on my laptop, shuffle on my phone and it won't work on my Sonos. Then there's iTunes which is better than it used to be but AAC doesn't work on everything which is the main sticking point for me. Plus it's actually often cheaper to get the CD anyway and because of Spotify I'll only ever buy things really like. Google Play is the better option there because it's in the format I want but even then CDs still do the job just as well. Why not pay about the same and often even less and get a CD, some album art and a 320kbps MP3 I can play on anything?

With movies it's an even easier choice. Every movie purchase has ridiculous amounts of DRM, if you want to play them you have to either strip the DRM from it or buy into that ecosystem. The best digital store I've found is iTunes but even then you're paying more for something that will only playback on Apple devices. A Blu-Ray I can just throw in a Blu-Ray player and often they'll bundle the thing with a DVD and a digital copy from iTunes. Even if the Blu-Ray is just a Blu-Ray I can play the thing on the TVs that I want at full 1080p, I can't ask for much more than that really. Arguably I've brought into the "Blu-Ray ecosystem" but it's a pretty well supported format so it wasn't that hard to end up with multiple players.

With games there are none of those issues unless your intent is to pass it on to someone else once you're done. Something which is also restricted with digital movies anyway. I'm not interested in the grey market at all though so for me that's not at all a deal-breaker. There is no drop in quality and if anything games tend to run better than they do on disk. The whole "I have to buy into ____'s ecosystem for it to work on multiple devices" thing that exists with movies is a thing and is arguably worse but it has always been a thing and it's also a thing with the disks. You can't run your CoD disk for 360 on your PC or PS4 so the fact that you can't digitally either isn't a deal breaker. All I usually want from a game is to be able to play it through on the device it was built for once, maybe twice, maybe daily if it's that sort of game. Digital doesn't restrict my ability to do that at all.

edit: oh and FYI, the music that I actually own is 100% on CD but with all of them also as 320kbps Mp3s. The music I listen to is 70:30 streaming vs owned. My movies are split between Blu-Ray and DVD with around half of them also ripped to my NAS. My games are 100% digital on PC and around 50:50 on Wii U and 3DS.

Edited on by skywake

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"

This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.