As expected Nintendo has hosted its annual general meeting for shareholders, consisting of a presentation that largely reflects the (previously released) annual financial results for the last year and then a Q & A session. Nintendo typically avoids major announcements in this meeting as it's not formally open to the media, but sometimes interesting insights do emerge on the company's current strategies.
Twitter and NeoGAF regular Cheesemeister3k translated tweets by shareholder NStyles, who was sharing some of what was said in the Q & A, particularly. Many of the answers were variations of details we've heard before with a few fresh snippets, though Shigeru Miyamoto's comments around Virtual Reality certainly caught our eye. Based on the translations he further affirms what we already knew - that Nintendo is looking into VR - but then outlined key areas that are integral to Nintendo's goals of making the technology more suitable for its audience.
You can see these comments below.
VR is likely to be a dominant topic over the coming years, with the current range of headsets and options sure to be revised and adjusted to target mainstream audiences.
What do you think of Miyamoto-san's key criteria for Nintendo to move forward with VR?
Virtual Boy 2 confirmed!
They would be stupid to sit by and wait even if it doesn't catch on at least they won't fall too far behind if it does.
I think that, in general, it's time for Miyamoto to take a back seat at the company. For the betterment of everyone involved honestly. His last... hell I dunno, decade of decisions and influences have been off base to say the least.
What Nintendo needs is not their own version of VR. They need fresh ideas from young minds.
VR is an expensive fad, it's not going to catch on
What was Miyamoto expecting? If they have been researching VR for a while, and he already has expectations, is he saying that they have something without saying it? Surely they at least must have access to internal prototypes and such even of they are not completely involved.
Agree, and like he says long term play is a major issue.
Personally, I'm not currently interested in VR. However, it is a technology that both Sony and Microsoft are actively pursuing. For Nintendo's viability sake, they should get on board. If not, it could be a similar situation to online gaming; An advancement in gaming that Nintendo was late to embrace, adding to the perception that the company is behind the current state of the industry.
@Spoony_Tech Do you not understand that there is not that many games for the expensive peripheral right now? Do you want Nintendo to make a poor marketing decision? Those on PC can usually afford a $500/$800 peripheral, but the majority of PS4 owners? Not going to happen. You need a good IP that makes a good game to force you into buying one...that then splits video gamers by another barrier which is anti-consumer. Do you want people suffering because they don't have an expensive item that hasn't had it's value tested yet?
VR is still expensive. The cheapest one is PlayStation VR, which costs around $400, which is basically a PS4+$50. Plus, I've read that some people who are experiencing the VR get motion sickness, so the technology is not for everyone. I'd say we should wait a bit until it's affordable.
For those interested in discussing the Merits of VR, not going to link but on Tomshardware's Witcher 3 giveaway they challenged users to discuss the merits of VR. There are a lot of good views over there.
I've tried VR and I find it interesting but after 30 minutes I feel like I'm microwaving my eyeballs so I never felt like I would want it for games. If they find a way to mitigate that it could be compelling.
@Azooooz You also have to buy the Move controllers separately
I bet if they do we would see Mario Party VR :3
I think they might try again with something more in the direction of AR instead of VR, or maybe a mix of the two, if that is even possible.
It would be completely new, though...
AR is the future (for me, at least). Technology Just needs to catch up to expectations.
As much as i complain about Nintendo's decisions lately, they're right here, VR is expensive and the complaints about headaches and nausea make it a tough sell to parents...
Say, how much are we still talking about the last revolution in gaming, motion controls? Essentially none? For that matter, what happened the last times you sold consoles based on a hardware gimmick that didn't catch on? Your lowest selling consoles in the Wii U and Virtual Boy? Funny how that works out.
VR is expensive, it's a fad, and I think it's suicide to chase it now or in the near future. Sony and Microsoft have a habit of having playthings and pet projects (see: PS Eye, Zune, PS TV, Games for Windows Live, Playstation Move, Kinect, PS Vita, Windows Phone, PS Mobile, SmartGlass, Kin, and a million other short-lived bits of software and hardware) and because they print money with other ventures (Word, electronics, etc.), they can take risks on things that otherwise might be considered a fad or gimmick, and their failure won't make or break them. Nintendo, with gaming as their only form of support, simply cannot.
If you're going to try to avoid competing on raw tech specs and claim you're seeking out a "blue ocean," well, VR is the exact opposite of that. Just.... don't. Not anytime in the next 10 years, anyway. Even then, however, personally, I will remain equally disinterested then (if not more so) than I am now in VR.
VR need to be have a mass audience to be affordable and to actually have publishers design specific games for it. It just began. Maybe in 4 years it will meet this requirements, or maybe by the next generation console. I do not think Nintendo should waste resources trying to implement it.
I have no interest in VR, mostly because I know it will make me motion sick. They need to find a way to minimize that before I'll even consider it.
It is also very expensive. If you want the best experience there is right now, you would need to go with the Vive...which is $800 (the Rift is cheaper at $600, but I wouldn't buy anything from Facebook. They've already talked publicly about how they want to integrate ads into the thing). And that's on top of the cost of a top of the line computer with the latest tech because anything else will not be powerful enough to run the games properly. So we're talking...maybe between $3,000 to $6,000 just to have a peripheral that doesn't even have any major games yet.
@Allspice Not that much! haha. I "invested" $1300 in my computer, including monitor and sound card. IT still to much though just use VR, specially if if does not have that many games.
Ugh. Not you too Nintendo! Sigh. So long as this doesn't take over normal gaming I'm ok but VR is going to push me out of gaming way sooner than I expected to exit.
I really can't see VR taking off, much like 3D it'll be for a niche market. I think PC gaming will have the highest attach rate
@gatorboi352 so what if NX is a smash hit? Should he still step asside?
Thinking of the types of games that would benefit from VR the market doesn't seem all that large. There is a market for VR, but with the number of competitors jumping in, all of them can't survive. I'm interested in watching the market, but there is nothing yet that is very compelling.
VR is not healthy for long play sessions for it to ever be a mainstream product, why do people not understand this?
@MarioPhD "Say, how much are we still talking about the last revolution in gaming, motion controls? Essentially none? For that matter, what happened the last times you sold consoles based on a hardware gimmick that didn't catch on? Your lowest selling consoles in the Wii U and Virtual Boy? Funny how that works out."
I agree that VR is probably not the right move, but your introduction is wrongheaded. We don't talk much about innovations that catch on because they become standard. We're not talking about motion controls because they are completely mainstream, used by innumerable phone games and even a number of controller-based console games (for gyro-aiming and such). We talked about it when it was new and weird, but now it's boring and standard. The same is even more true of touch screen gaming. I think you've developed an unusable distinction between what is a "gimmick" and what is an "innovation."
Nevertheless, totally in agreement that VR is nowhere near where it needs to be to go mainstream. Although interestingly, without motion control becoming mainstream, VR would never have come to the fore in the way it has lately.
Yeah, I don't see VR becoming mainstream for a while. You can't use it for too long without getting sick, it's expensive, only specific types of games can use it...yeah, it still has quite a way to go before it can become mainstream.
@jcgonzmo What are it's specs? Just curious what you can get for $1,300 now. It's probably better than mine and mine cost almost $2,000 when it was new.
@gatorboi352 it's already happening. He just became a fellow. My bet is he will end up becoming a creative consultant for non game ventures like movies.
He's spot on. I love the fact that longer play sessions are important for them. That is very reassuring for me.
VR is going to have it's uses, Google has made sure of that with pushing Cardboard and coming up with neat concepts for it like virtual field trips. That said I have to agree that it's just a fad, at least as far as gaming goes. At least with Cardboard it uses something most people already own (a smartphone) and literally some cuts of cardboard. When it comes to gaming level VR it's costly and still trying to figure itself out.
Been following Easy Allies coverage of E3 and based on what Michael Huber said about the RE7 demo in VR the tech is just not quite there yet. While others had a bit more optimistic take on it his comments about pixelation and the limited depth of field do have me a bit concerned for long play sessions. I think VR is the future and the first step to "holodeck" technology that we all want someday, but I think Nintendo playing it safe and letting Sony, Google, HTC, Facebook and others take maiden voyage on this one is going to be the safer bet in the long run.
If VR is a fad then Nintendo loses nothing, if VR is a true gamechanger Nintendo gains everything as they can produce one at cheaper costs/licences a deal with an already popular product and have no bad taste in the consumers mouths from earlier models. This strategy is win, win.
Any technology that represents either a possible trend, or definitive trend, should be treated with high regard from a business standpoint. If the possibility is there that it's "the next big thing", then R&D should be done just in case Nintendo needs to act on it. It would be foolish to not at least have an iron in the fire, even if it doesn't take off big.
For my safety, no VR for me. That's quite enough. I'm happy to enjoy the game by traditional and safe way. No need to experience VR or whatever its name.
@Madder128 It has its uses outside of gaming. It might be a fad now, but I see it having practical applications in the long run
Of course Nintendo is going to experiment with VR, it doesn't mean that anything will or will not come of it though.
@Arctic_Nights it's those outside uses that, IMO, have the most uses and valuable application. I really see VR gaming as a niche thing.
@MeloMan Nintendo is a company that is always researching new technology. They were experimenting with 3D tech as early as the Gamecube and that materialised as the 3DS. I feel Nintendo is looking into VR and may have a prototype of their own just do not want to show it off or release anything concrete till they see where the market is going on this one. If PSVR tanks and the Oculus does not start gaining momentum then Nintendo does not really lose anything. If VR takes off than Nintendo can release theirs at a cheaper price point because they will have access to more modern tech and better production methods that will cut that cost down.
I've played VR and am not at all impressed.
@Captain_Gonru Yeah, I can imagine. It certainly had quite a few of my family members in stitches as well, even my aunt, who tried the fishing game. She already started laughing when the coffee table turned into a liquid pool.
I think Nintendo could do great with VR if they can do it cheaply and make it affordable. However, that could be hard to pull off and I'm not convinced that the technology is here yet for affordable VR.
The usual Nintendo trend. They jumped onto discs much later then others, online gaming, internal storage along with downloadable games, the current unified account system/crossbuy issue, HD Gaming, it's no surprise to me Nintendo don't want to rush into what could be a fad as well as not wanting to drive the cost up to making their consoles. .
Your post is confusing; you initially state (correctly) how Nintendo is typically behind the curve on many standards that are in place in the industry and have been features on competing systems for some time.
But then you end it with "it's no surprise to me Nintendo don't want to rush into what could be a fad."
@gatorboi352 Totally agree. My guess is that Nintendo's whole commitment/delusion to saying that it's a "toy company" and not a video game company comes primarily from him. That's the mentality that gives us wacky gimmicks that my ass is tired of.
@Li_Bae I think you're right, and recently Iwata adopted that mentality right along with him to the Nth degree. Loved Iwata as a person, not so much as the top guy in charge. He took Nintendo into a very divisive direction with his approach the last 10+ years before his passing.
I welcome our new VR overlords. Virtual Boy 2. With you know, actual VR!
@earthboundlink I think I may have phrased that poorly; we don't necessarily talk about innovations after they become standard (nobody in a first-world country under the age of 40 is likely to be impressed by what a smartphone can do nowadays due to their ubiquity). I do think, however, the tenor of the conversation has shifted wildly, however, when it is a point of discussion, like Star Fox Zero. I think Star Fox Zero shows the public disdain for motion controls in the modern era. I like them in the game, and think it makes the game fun and interesting, but man.... the general public has been positively venomous towards motion controls. We also saw this with the Kinect going from essential to the Xbox One, to a worthless peripheral.
I also do think it's important to do new and interesting things with hardware, and the term "gimmick" is one I primarily use derisively, since some folks do indeed use it to only mean "unique selling point that I don't like." I do fear that VR could simply be a gimmick, or simply be seen as one (at least for gaming applications), but I don't think everything hardware does is necessarily a gimmick. I'm 100% with you on that, as it's important to draw lines between them, but I was being a bit intentionally cheeky by phrasing it that way. It seems like once something falls out of favor, most people simply dismiss it as a "gimmick," and that's my intended use, but as something of a parody.
I'd love to see Nintendo come up with something truly revolutionary with their new hardware, but I expect that no matter what it is, it'll be labeled by many "core" gamers as a "gimmick" regardless. Here's hoping that it's not!
Out of all the VR Nintendo game ideas, why is it that I have never seen anyone mention to potentail of a VR Metroid Prime game?
Miyamoto's right. Affordability is a big issue for me. I could never justify paying £600+ just for a cool add on.
@Madder128 it will catch on when the price is right!
I completely agree with Miyamoto's take on VR. With the current technology out there VR just isn't something that can be used for more than short periods without making most people nauseous, and it's still very expensive to make said nausea generators. VR is definitely something that Nintendo should avoid until the technology improves and doesn't cause nausea in the majority of its users, and I think Sony will be learning that lesson as well when PSVR launches later this year.
Even when Miyamoto says something eminently sensible, people still use that an an opportunity to demonstrate how out of touch he is and how he needs to be got rid of.
There's nothing particularly objectionable about "we're looking into VR, but we have some legitimate concerns with it in its current state". I mean, what major video games company wouldn't at least be "looking into" one of the biggest developments in video games technology in years? It'd be incredibly naive.
Not that I'm a huge VR fanboy. In fact, I tried it, and while it was very effective, I can't say I particularly enjoyed the experience. I found it rather unsettling and uncomfortable, to be honest.
But it is going to reshape gaming (and other fields such as medicine/aviation/etc.) to some degree, so it'd be foolish to overlook it. But equally foolish for Nintendo to dive in headfirst right now.
@Mr_Zurkon "Of course Nintendo is going to experiment with VR, it doesn't mean that anything will or will not come of it though."
They'd be foolish not to research it even if they do nothing, I can't personally see them bringing out something that puts people in isolation.
@Maxz "Even when Miyamoto says something eminently sensible people still use that an an opportunity to demonstrate how out of date he is an how he needs to be got rid of."
That's the party line around here sadly...
@Maxz "Even when Miyamoto says something eminently sensible, people still use that an an opportunity to demonstrate how out of touch he is and how he needs to be got rid of."
Because Star Fox Zero is still fresh in our minds.
@Captain_Gonru Agreed on all counts. In the case of Mario AR, I would fear for some furniture pieces, though...
Imagine the number of potential law suits... (which Nintendo will most likely win anyways, but still)
I'm excited for Nintendo too do VR.
Metroid Prime 4 confirmed!
@gatorboi352 Unless it's Pikmin, the only series he does work on so far where I haven't seen many complaints, if anything it's an improvement on the series, the only game series where I found the Wii Remote useful and among the few Gamepad enhanced games I very much admire, especially with Multitasking. Like most are saying, at least if they get into VR now and they find out it is a fad, at least they would have known early, not focus on production as much as it would be proven to not work for them and not be hurt much as a result. I'm just going to see how things progress with it, but I'm not much of a fan of the concept of VR. Big Pikmin fan though, so I'm confident Pikmin 4 will be an excellent game, just a shame it's underrated as a series.
@gatorboi352 It's fresh in my mind too. I thought it was pretty good to be honest.
But however you feel about that, it's got nothing to do with this. And what he's said here is pretty unobjectionable: "VR was a hot topic at E3, we're looking into it, but there are a number of solid reasons why it's not right for Nintendo right now".
Fair enough, really. Apart from the odd person hoping for a VR Metroid Prime, I should think most people are happy enough to accept that as Nintendo's current line.
I'm worried that if VR becomes mainstream, Nintendo will be way behind the competition when they release their own VR system...
VR is really a lot of bother for what it is, both for devs and for the user. Along all the drawbacks of modern VR sets already stated above, I would like to point out how cumbersome it is to set-up the Vive as an example.
If you want to use it while sitting down, you are kind of killing the main purpose of most VR experiences, freedom of movement and immersion. If you want to stand and move around, you'll need over 10m² of entirely empty space. That's a lot. And believe me, you will move a lot without even realizing it.
You will also need a place where to put the 2 beacons. They are extremely sensitive and won't allow any modification of the environment around them. For the price of the set, you would think they would include tripods and/or battery-powered beacons. Nope! Have fun with all the power strips and cable extensions if you don't happen to have the plugs in the right position in your room.
Then you have to recalibrate the head set and both controllers. If you thought it was boring to put the Wiimote down for 3s to recalibrate the gyro, you are not "VR ready"
This is way more work than required by any form of traditional gaming. I bet a lot of people who purchase VR headsets do not even know all this. And they will probably stop using it after the excitement of novelty has worn off.
@Captain_Gonru Would actually be kind of fun to see home videos of that...
But on to more interesting things, and something that a lot of people are overlooking. Not saying it is set in stone and it certainly hints at some interesting things so I've got to put this out there.
I was kind of distracted by some other stuff after reacting to your comment, and I also had some other things to do, but parts of what has been said by Miyamoto kept going round in my head, especially the bit where he says "we have the core tech".
Now, that could mean a couple of things: it could either mean that they have some basic VR device in development, so the core tech of it is in their possession, OR... (and this is what popped into my mind) the NX truly is a powerful system and hence it has the "core tech" to support VR functionalities.
What this means in numbers, is that the NX must be a console hitting at least 4 Teraflops, putting it nearly on par with the PS4 NEO (4.1TFlops).
How I came to this conclusion is not all too complicated, but is quite a lengthy bit of text, so please bear with me:
Phil Spencer said that the Xbox Scorpio is 5 times more powerful than the original Xbox One at 6 Teraflops and will offer both native 4K gaming and a solid VR experience. According to reputable sources (scroll down to below the video and read the part starting with "What does Sony intend") you need at least 4 times the power of the original PS4 to be able to offer native 4K gaming and a rock solid VR experience.
Now, the PS4 NEO will "only" be able to achieve 4.1 TFlops, and since you need a minimum of 4 Teraflops to be able to offer native 4K gaming, and a heavier CPU is also important for a solid VR experience, chances are that besides VR, the PS4 NEO will only offer 4K media playback and perhaps some 4K upscaling, but no 4K gaming, which is where the Scorpio comes in, with almost 2 Teraflops more to spend on this.
Now, how does all this tie in to Nintendo's NX? Well, since all these requirements count for both 4K gaming and VR capabilities, if having the tech means that the console can support VR, then it must be similar to the NEO, since that is aimed at VR/power users. Supposedly the standard PS4 will also be capable of supporting it, but the superior performance will obviously on PS4 NEO.
Even if you absolutely and positively HATE VR gaming, it is still very, VERY good news that the NX will quite possibly be powerful enough to accommodate the technology, so even if you don't want to use VR goggles with your NX, you may very well at least have a more than competent machine in your possession.
Now mull that over for a bit and allow it to settle...
Well, what do you know:
My mentor always used to say that there is no such thing as coincidence, but this is kind of weird, albeit in a nice way...
If Nintendo is to market its own VR set, then it will simply have to be better than others. Otherwise, nobody will care about it. Possible functions I can think off are:
1. Making a wireless headset. The battery would probably be too heavy for your head, so you would need to attach it somewhere (to your belt?). The main difficulty would be to stream HQ audio and video at high framerate, this will probably be tricky.
The thing is that, the wire of existing headsets is extremely annoying. And dangerous. I'm actually surprised we haven't heard yet of anyone killing themselves by tripping on the wire and hitting their head on something. Over all, the wire is a real limitation. It gets in your way all the time and makes moving around more difficult. Exactly the opposite of what we want here.
2. The fact we are making VR headsets that do not allow for eye tracking is beyond me. Being able to tell where the player is looking would offers a lot of interaction options in games. NPC could know your are looking at them, for example. Seriously, even the DSi can do it, why isn't it included already?
3. This might sound silly, but I would like a headset that also allows for the use of another sense, smell. If we are talking about immersion, then I also want to be able to feel the environment around me, include its odors. The tech has been there for ages. It's now of never if we want to create a user base big enough to make the feature popular.
4. After experimenting with VR and having several different people test it in front of me (I'll be honest, I did play a few tricks while they were blind and defenseless ), it became obvious that there was a serious limitation to existing products. You cannot see your feet!
No wonder so many people have issues with balancing! You are portrayed in-game as a floating ghost, that's extremely disturbing! The first company to bring on the market a set with another pair of controllers meant to be strapped to your legs will win the game. As simple as that.
5. The MOST IMPORTANT ONE. It needs to be officially compatible with PCs. This would create a potential user-base of several millions people even before the NX launches. Either thatn or they have to support a 3rd party product like Vive. At this point, you would have to be crazy to purchase Sony's VR set, it barely has any games for it and Sony can kill it the moment they realize it isn't profitable.
If you expect Nintendo to create their own VR headset, then you need to hope for something different from what is already available. Otherwise, it is guaranteed to fail.
Slot the NX handheld into a Samsung gear VR style goggledock. dot tracking LEDs around your room. wiimotes as controllers. Job done.
Advanced mode: Give the handheld a couple of high-quality cameras at eye-distance apart, and more processing power. You now have an AR capable device.
I give it 3-5 years until the tech is up to the standards they'd feel happy with that would be cheap enough. 200 for the handheld and an extra 50-60 for the goggledock/tracking dots/pack-in game, sold separately. If that's a success, then the sleeker, all-in-one, goggles-only version will follow.
As long as VR devices still have wires, they won't be sufficiently safe for much other than stationary games like Elite: Dangerous or Turret Tower, or stationery "games" like the Vive's 3D doodle pad thing.
VR can go one of two ways. It's either a super expensive fad, or it somehow becomes miraculously affordable for the average gamer AND gets a must-have game and really takes off.
I think it will be a fad. Just ask the Kinect, which was once touted as "the fastest selling consumer electronic" to ever exist!
Anyone else remember when DVD players cost $1000 and up in 1997? I personally hope that Nintendo takes their sweet time waiting until the VR experience is refined and affordable.. There isn't a single game that I have seen for VR that makes me want it yet, but I don't necessarily think it will go away really fast (...but it might).
Wait..."we want parents to feel at ease?" Wow children with VR strapped to their heads? While it might just be Mario and Kirby...I do wonder what this kind of immersion will do to the growing mind. Especially considering they're going for long gaming sessions. But it looks like I'm the only one who was a bit shocked by this. My 5 yr old (video game obsessed) nephew will be happy to hear his however.
@gatorboi352 How is that even remotely relevant to this article? Miyamoto: "We are researching VR. We want a product that is affordable and doesn't suck when played for long periods."
gatorboi: "Miyamoto needs to step down! Nintendo needs new ideas!"
You're like a broken record. You say the same things over and over, regardless of whether or not they actually make sense as a response to a given article.
@Captain_Gonru Well, it is indeed AND/AND, so 4 TFlops is definitely the minimum requirement to accommodate native 4K gaming, but it will also guarantee a superior VR experience.
Sony themselves have already stated that none of their VR related software may go below a rock solid 60fps and 1080p, and that is indeed the primary goal of the NEO, so yeah, 4 should be the number we will start theorizing with.
But realistically, I'm not expecting it to be much higher than that, though for a Nintendo console 4Tflops would be VERY nice and it will put it right in the ball park with the other two revised models and back into the game.
I'm curious to see what excuses third party developers will then still be able to come up with, UNLESS it is a 4TFlop console with yet another alien architecture, compared to the other two, but by now I'm truly expecting no less than x86 or compatible, since they are looking for people that have experience with modern game engines such as Unreal Engine 4 and such, so that does strongly suggest x86, even though most if not all of these engines can be scaled to fit other platforms.
If all this is true, then I will also accept the growing and continued praise of the hardware by third parties as genuine, and more positive feedback on that keeps coming out of the woodworks, so who knows? Still at least two more months to go before the curtain will be (partially?) lifted... pffff...
@Captain_Gonru And to add to that, the statements made in the article already more or less confirm that NX is NOT going to offer a VR experience, but the important thing that I wanted to take from that is that because they are looking into it and have the core tech to support it, then the console must at least also be powerful enough to support it, if they would for example want to add VR at a later stage, as an add-on or luxury package or whatever.
Either that or maybe some solution like the SCD's, but that seems too convoluted so I'm gonna go with a base unit that is powerful enough to support the tech in case they would wish to implement it later on without having to change the innards of the system.
If Nintendo decides to get involved then at least they won't be reckless about it. Safety is a key concern with vr. Either way, personally from past experiences with the Virtual Boy, I'm not buying anyone's vr. I simply have no desire to be nauseous..
Not really interested in VR, but I won't knock it till I try it. I know the PS4 will be getting it soon so we'll see how that goes. I always wanted to try the Virtual Boy back in the day but never did.
I'm still not convinced over VR. The technology is interesting and I have considered a Vive but the technology is still in it's infancy and not exactly affordable. Nintendo are right to hold back and not jump in.
VR headsets are not ok for kids to use.
Not another Virtual Boy, please.
@gatorboi352 Is researching into a new technology not opening up opportunities for young minds in the first place?
Specifying "Long play sessions are an issue. We want to release something.....that can be played for long periods, carries value, and is affordable. We want parents to feel at ease."
I mean what if yonger developers at Nintendo DO have a good idea for VR that covers all this criteria compared to the competition diving in head first? Nintendo don't need their own version of the current VR...probably, but it'd be more out of touch to act like it's not worth researching.
I might not have agreed with his ideas and opinions over the years but I stand by what he said on the topic of VR. Miyamoto wants a VR that fulfills the criterias that would make me embrace it too. As it is now, it causes nausea and headaches to a large portion of the audience, including me. I already feel bad after half an hour of 3D on the 3DS, let alone having it full on in my face. The VR experience of here and now, I can't experience them for long, so all I'd be able to enjoy out of it is mini-games, not incredible fully immersive adventures. Such problems need to be addressed in a way that will not make the price of the thing go through the roof. Not only is the current VR tech not fully realised yet for the aforementioned health reasons, but they're selling it to you at a premium. So Nintendo are the ones who've got it wrong with their stance? I'd say it's the opposite. And that's coming from someone who basically always disagreed with Miyamoto since Wii Music and "Mario Galaxy 2 doesn't need a story".
VR is just a different market, and as an affordable expansion it could fill a niche.
They want a game that is safe? F-ZERO VR.
It does what I think are the 5 most important things in VR:
1. you can sit down in a seat / on a sofa and it would feel realistic and you wouldn't bump into anything. (make free room around you still, do you remember the icons popping up in Wii Sports, with images of the Wiimote hitting a vase, or open windows to suggest a pause?).
2. obviously playing in first person/cockpit view, that's just VR's greatest effect.
3. one Grand Prix lasts only 20-30 minutes, that seems like a good but not too long thrill
4. It would really show off VR! Not just in graphics, gameplay, speed, framerate and controls, but also in immersion and by guiding the player, by feeding you the crazy stuff in bits: You know they will design it well, saving the loopings and tunnels and screws and big jumps and minefields for later courses and then going all out in the King Cup and Joker Cup. F-Zero VR could be amazing!
5. VR is a core gamer product before its wave can splash over to the casual market. And F-Zero is a core game.
It's also a racing game that everyone understands so that's another good entry point.
And it's a futuristic game just like the VR is a futuristic thing for many people. Marketed well it's going to be huge!
Splatoon, Star Fox, Metroid Prime, and more Nintendo games could also work very well in VR. If such an extension is coming to the next Nintendo home console I'm definately going to check it out.
@Captain_Gonru Either way, I'm now quite confident that they will come out with a pretty decent system, and not just because of the wall of text containing my latest brainfart that I sent you earlier...
Parents will never feel safe with their kids using VR headset, they can't see what their kids are watching.
I think the system will be pretty weak. The first time I saw VR a Pentium 3 was cutting edge. I don't know what the frames per second it was running or the resolution, but both eyes saw the same thing. The specs thrown out are based on minimum requirements.
The rift gives 1200p per eye at 90 frames a second. This requires a ton of horsepower. The Scorpio is expected to be significantly more powerful than the xbox one and potentially cost $600+ because of the power to run the rift.
PS4.5 is going about it differently. They are shooting for 1080p at 60 frames. This obviously requires much less power and the PS4 Neo is expected to arrive at $400. Likewise most reviews indicate a quality descrepancy with the PS4 experience being a little worse with lower smoothness and jaggies popping up.
I guess what I'm trying to say is the Wii U could do some sort of VR now with it's power. You just might not like the experience compared to the power the competitors. Nintendo (if they go this route) will likely be the budget VR provid er and come to the market with the cheapest system I.E. lowest spec/quality. So you can't look at competitor specs and expect Nintendo to match.
This isn't even getting into the very Nintendo idea of using an expansion port to add to th he original hardware for those people that want a VR experience.
I'm always amazed that people put Nintendo innovations in such high regard and disregard other innovations in the market.
I personally am interested in VR. I think the practical applications are obvious in the same way that the benefits in motion control are obvious. RE 7 looked awesome. Yes, there were many complaints about motion sickness and I'm not going to be an early adopter of any VR system. But I think the industry will have opportunities to work out some of the issues that are there now.
I mean they've been working on it for 30 years. Even if sales initially are weak, I expect a 2nd/3rd/4th round of these machines. I think it's longevity shows that it's not just going to go away and I think the benefits are just too obvious to give up on the concept. But who really knows when the features/cost will reach a mainstream level. It might not be during the NX lifetime.
@cleveland124 Depends on what you consider weak. If the NX will be more or less on par with the NEO, then I certainly wouldn't consider it weak, since it would be almost 2 times more powerful than the PS4, and almost 2.5 times more powerful than the Xbox One.
Of course lots of people are now also calling these two consoles weak, especially in light of the improved versions that will arrive next year, but I think that for a console, the current Xbox and Playstation are doing just fine and offer a range of great games and experiences.
So, taking that into account, I think that we can be more than satisfied with a console that will be around the 4 TFlop range.
What really annoys me though, is the fact that this is nowadays what enjoying video games is predominantly about, apparently: numbers and figures. And to such an extent, that even I myself am starting to use these numbers to prove if something is either good or bad, and I never used to care about that stuff at all, as long as the console gave me the games I wanted and made me have a lot of fun, either by myself or with friends.
I wish we could do away with all that but if I had to choose one factor, then it would probably be frame rate, since that is one thing that I do think has a lot of impact on games, so that is something I can certainly agree with.
As for VR, I personally like it (had some experiences with the Oculus Rift which were quite entertaining) and I would welcome any effort of Nintendo to put that technology to use, but if Nintendo doesn't have anything VR related planned for the NX (just yet) then I also wouldn't mind, but the fact that they ARE looking into it and seem to have some related tech in-house gives rise to the idea that the NX is indeed a capable machine if it needs to be able to offer a solid VR experience somewhere later down the line when Nintendo does think it is a good time to implement it.
They appear to be focusing on the health risk part of it (much like they usually do) but besides that, they also want to offer a solid experience and that can only be done with a capable system.
And then there is also still the whole concept of the SCD's, that could also add more horsepower to the base unit. It certainly isn't a fact that these will be coming in some way, shape or form, but it is interesting to see that the SCD patent is the only one that has been cleared for completion, which means that Nintendo can now start finalizing the design and implement it if they wish to do so.
I guess I don't see it even remotely possible that the NX is in the 4 terraflops range. I think Nintendo is going to drop the Gamepad and come to the market with a sub original PS4 power plant. Nintendo just doesn't do cutting edge tech anymore. Rumors have been both ways but Nintendo deflected questions about power at E3 which I don't find encouraging. PS4 Neo has a rumoured $400 price point. But it's not all about component cost. Sony usually launches hardware at a loss. And Sony has a bigger consumer base right now to spread their fixed costs over. I think if Nintendo made the NX to Neo power they would want to price it in the $500-600 range to be comfortable with the margins. And with their family focus it would just be silly to be the highest price or to have slightly worse power than the Neo but priced the same as the Neo. So I think there will be a bigger gap and they'll shoot for $300 launch.
I don't get the thinking of current gen being more about power than previous gens. The whole Genesis marketing campaign was built around blast processing. Remember come into the 16 bit era. The 32 bit area. The 64 but area. Cross platform game comparisons have been around forever. Having said that, I do think VR is making power important again. From what I've read there is a noticeable quality improvement with the Vive/Rift from the budget PSVR. And Nintendo's solution will likely be worse than all of those.
I thought Miyamoto said that VR isolates people, defeating the purpose of gaming being a social activity when played with others? The technology isn't there yet for a see through clear lens visor with all sorts of neat sci fi tricks... So maybe he's referring to an AR device, as many others here have said. But I doubt it would look like the current VR devices, and the AR functionality of the 3DS and Vita never took off. So that kind of seems like a dead end, unless he figured something out to make it work. I guess we'll know that soon enough...
As others here have said, though, if the NX is just another VR device, I'm not getting it. It costs at least $1000 to set up an entry level VR interface, twice that for a mid level interface, and thrice that for a high end interface. Nintendo is not aiming for such a high price range, and the less expensive VR options are going to be too gimped to provide an optimal experience.
@ThanosReXXX The "numbers and figures" requirement for enjoying new games has existed since the 90's. It seems like a lot of people have forgotten about the graphics and performance wars of the 5th console generation. Some people lament the current situation, but it's nothing new. It's really just the outcome of 20+ years of specs competition, with Nintendo consistently losing against the competion on pure specs playing fields since the N64, even with higher base specs.
So Nintendo started doing something different to compete again, and now people pridefully boast that only gameplay matters. Well, eventually, without the tech to run it, that gameplay can't change or improve...
@cleveland124 I can understand some skepticism but not the "when Nintendo is going to do it, it'll probably be bad/the worst" handle, because that is based on nothing. And "doesn't do cutting edge tech anymore" is not quite true, since they have actually NEVER done cutting edge. Their thing was always lateral thinking based on using existing tech to create new gaming experiences with. The fact that some consoles happened to be more powerful than the competition, certainly hasn't helped them in that department...
But since the NX is supposed to be a complete departure from the whole Wii/Wii U family, I'm pretty confident that I'm not far from the truth, which I base upon a whole lot more than just Nintendo's statement on VR.
The power statement by Reggie means absolutely nothing, so you can't take anything from that. It has become somewhat of a rinse and repeat answer that Reggie will give every time he gets a chance to do so.
And no offense, but you come up with some numbers but not nearly enough to support your reasoning. IT Sales & Marketing is my profession and I know exactly what the cost of components is, but what I see most people on here using is consumer prices, and obviously, if you want to look at what a console manufacturer has to pay for their components, you have to take into account purchasing prices and bulk amount units, so gfx cards for example, will only cost a company that will buy millions of them half or even less of what we have to pay for it in stores. (which would for example make the purchasing price of large amounts of a $200 gfx card only $80 - $90).
Sony's NEO will reportedly not be sold at a loss, I don't know about Nintendo, but considering their current position, they might change their tune and will actually do the opposite to get more NX consoles into people's homes.
As for the whole power/numbers issue and it always having been a thing (also in reply to PlywoodStick) They existed, sure, but mostly in hollow, non-existing terms (blast-processing for example was a lie and never even real) and nowadays the amount of specs over fun/gameplay discussions are totally out of proportion and the importance of it has exponentially grown until it is nearly all we talk about. I'd rather talk about or look at all the games that this power is going to give me.
Luckily, the companies themselves still get this and they show us games, but the "fans" only talk about their console being the fastest, strongest, etcetera instead of just shutting the hell up and start enjoying the games they have.
Back then with Sega and Nintendo it was more about what mascot we should be rooting for (or shouldn't want to be caught with) and how many "tough" and/or cool games we had, because Sega had all the sports games, Mortal Kombat WITH blood and so on. Or maybe it was different in the US compared to Europe, because over here it was exactly like that. And Sega fans did say "tough" instead of hardcore, a term that only really first started to catch on in Europe during the GameCube era.
And as for VR: The most important thing about that, as I already said before, is that for them to be able to support it the hardware needs to be capable enough, so whether or not they decide to use it straight away or later, the hardware can't be changed after the fact, (unless the SCD's will really become a thing) so the basic needs will HAVE to be in the box already.
And even if Nintendo's VR is the cheapest, then they will still need something more powerful than the original PS4, since I'm also pretty confident that with Sony's new demands on VR titles, they aren't going to target existing PS4 users for their PSVR campaign.
I'm sure it will work to some extent, but the hardware is actually too weak to support a steady frame rate and decent resolutions in VR, so they will probably launch some campaign that tells you that the NEO is the best way to experience PSVR.
What happened to you lately? If I remember correctly, you used to be WAY more positive up until recently, and we also agreed a lot, but now you regularly seem to be more negative or sour, as the last part of your comment shows.
"And no offense, but you come up with some numbers but not nearly enough to support your reasoning. IT Sales & Marketing is my profession and I know exactly what the cost of components is"
I actually specifically said excluding component cost. But who needs comprehensive reading anyways.
Why are you always so condescending to people? We know they lost alot of money on the Wii U initially at $350/300. It's not exactly going out on a limb saying it's going to be hard for them to bring 4x or 5x the power of the Wii U which is approximately the power of the Neo for the same price. If you know the exact costs of the NX/Wii U, the margins Nintendo needs, the overhead that gets applied to each machine then bring that info to the table. Not just trust me. If you don't know those, then you are just arm chair quarterbacking like the rest of us and trying to get in a pissing match over who's smarter.
"it'll probably be bad/the worst" handle, because that is based on nothing."
It's based on the last 15 years. Nintendo hasn't competed with it's competitors on power since the Gamecube. I'm obviously talking about worse power, not necessarily worse console. Why do you think they all of sudden care about power when they haven't in the past?
"But since the NX is supposed to be a complete departure from the whole Wii/Wii U family, I'm pretty confident that I'm not far from the truth, which I base upon a whole lot more than just Nintendo's statement on VR."
You believe Nintendo here but not Reggie saying that the NX will focus on innovation again not power? I'm sure Nintendo would like to move away from the Wii brand failure, but their approach seems the exact same as the last two cycles. I've seen nothing to indicate that the NX will compete again on power. Just that it'll be different the Wii U. Which is actually 100% true just by releasing something new. I mean there are gauranteed to be similarities to the Wii U.
"They existed, sure, but mostly in hollow, non-existing terms (blast-processing for example was a lie and never even real) "
As a sales guy, I'm surprised you would say that. An implied difference is greater than an actual difference as far as the market is concerned. I mean I would never argue Nintendo is kiddie, I think it's stupid actually. But Sega/Sony's marketing did exactly that, it pushed Nintendo as the kids console and it worked. That became the perception and it was extremely damaging to Nintendo. Blast processing is actuallly the CPU core of the Genesis had a higher MHZ than the Snes. It's funny again, the SNES was a more modern machine that was technically stronger, but the Genesis had that one thing and they marketed the crap out of it. And that's the system wars, perception of the best system.
"Nintendo, but considering their current position, they might change their tune and will actually do the opposite to get more NX consoles into people's homes."
Not according to their president. http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/05/02/nintendo-wont-sell-nx-at-a-loss
"And as for VR: The most important thing about that, as I already said before, is that for them to be able to support it the hardware needs to be capable enough, so whether or not they decide to use it straight away or later, the hardware can't be changed after the fact, (unless the SCD's will really become a thing) so the basic needs will HAVE to be in the box already."
Fundamentally, I disagree with this for 2 reasons.
1. Nintendo is always looking for things. There is no confirmation of NX using VR and Nintendo seems behind at looking at it. It could very well be the next console will have it, or they never release a VR console.
2. There are no VR standards. Galaxy S6 is way weaker than the current PS4 and it does VR https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVX7iruysrM The PS4 Neo isn't a minimum to do VR as you think. It's simply Sony's self applied minimum. Nintendo could do some sort of VR on the Wii U if they were inclined. It just might not be very good. According to this, the Galaxy S6 is actually weaker than the Wii U by a good bit http://cdn.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/l5suwdz.jpg
@cleveland124 "I actually specifically said excluding component cost. But who needs comprehensive reading anyways."
Actually no: you said "but it's not ALL about component cost" so that to me doesn't say that it is completely excluded. It did seem you were implying that it does matter, albeit partially. And I specifically started that part of my comment with "no offense" (which I honestly meant) to prevent any negative discussion.
But thanks for the unnecessary sneer. Oh, well...
"Why are you always so condescending to people?"
Well, I can't help how other people interpret my text, but I'm really not. I simply always go by what I know or what I have recently learned, and where possible try to stay as close to the facts as possible. If that comes across as condescending, then honestly, that's not my problem since I know that it is not, or never will be my intention.
As for the whole cost thing, and I am going to put myself out there, so hope you can respond in an adult manner instead of using anymore insults or sneers:
I do not know the costs of Wii U components, other than what has been published (like the GamePad costing around $100) but the numbers I gave are coming from my assumption that Nintendo will indeed be using an x86 architecture/AMD components and these numbers are readily available.
Besides that, the example I gave was just that: an example. I just took a $200 gfx card to show you the difference between consumer cost, purchasing cost and bulk cost. I could have said any other number, but a round number is obviously easier for making the comparison.
I could also have forgone the prices and just tell you the percentages if that would have made more sense to you.
And if you believe me or not: again, not my problem. I don't care either way. I have no desire to lie or make more of myself on some online forum or game site. I'm 46yo and have been an IT related Sales & Marketing professional (business to business) for over 15 years. I used to sell hardware from Compaq/HP (just about anything from printers to heavy workstations and server parks) and I have also done antivirus suites, network security & gateways like Juniper Networks & WatchGuard, VMWare, Google apps for business and as of March this year I've started my own little company.
"Why do you think they all of sudden care about power when they haven't in the past?"
I don't think that they all of a sudden care, but I do think that they will have to get with the times now. To remain locked up in their blue ocean, would probably mean an even bigger step backwards hardware-wise compared to the competition and the market at large so to me, that would be utter lunacy. Therefore I do believe that they will go along to some degree, but will still give their own unique twist on it. So, to be clear: not specifically to compete on power, but simply to be able to sustain the "NX" brand (since apparently it is going to be an ecosystem/architecture and not just a single device) for generations to come, and archaic chip sets or considerably weaker ones simply aren't going to achieve that.
And there actually is more than enough info that points to EXACTLY that idea, if you take the time and know where to look. And a reasonable amount of all these hints have also been published here: several articles on AMD, Macronix and so on, and the rest can be subtracted from the investor meeting reports, and independent business analysis
As for Reggie's statement: like I already said, he always says things like that because he doesn't seem to want to go there, so he just throws in his standard reply "it's not about power" trope to steer the conversation. I just don't put as much weight to that as so many (too many) others seem to do.
Last week we had that statement, and now this statement from Miyamoto, and all that the masses can come up with is "well, between what Reggie and he said, there's surely only one conclusion to make and that is that they haven't learned anything and the NX is going to be yet another weak, underpowered and gimmicky console". That to me is both presumptuous and completely baffling.
As previously mentioned, I don't take what Reggie said all too seriously, since it is just media speak and probably more intended to divert from further questions so that he is once again in control of the conversation. It actually is a trick that we (sales people) also use on the phone when trying to persuade people to buy what we offer.
And what Miyamoto said is pretty clear to me: they have the tech in-house, so either it is a bare bones VR add-on that they aren't yet satisfied with, or the foundation to support the tech is in the NX. That's what I think because these seem to be the two most logical options.
I'm not asking or telling people to agree with me, since it is my opinion and my feelings, but I think it would be nice for a change, especially for the younger people, to not always jump to conclusions so fast and be so angry all the time. But perhaps that is too much to ask...
And Blast Processing really was predominantly a marketing phrase as explained by the person who actually came up with it:
And I know that Nintendo said that they won't sell at a loss, but all I said was that they might change their stance on that, depending on the market and on how fast they want to get the system in people's homes.
Look at what Kimishima said about it:
It seems to me that his decision is not set in stone, so it might change, or not. Just saying it could, is all.
As for your comments on VR:
Completely agreed on your first point, also because I never said that they would actually be making some VR device. But the tech could very well be inside the console already, just in case. Remember the never used stereoscopic 3D tech in the GameCube?
Not saying that Nintendo always does the smart thing, but it would be rather sensible to not have to add the tech after the fact...
As for your second point: partially agreed, but there really are VR standards, on PC and console anyways. Just look at the minimal requirements of the Oculus Rift. Sure, you could buy one for your every day average home PC, but it won't give you a very good experience and programs and games will probably run anything but smoothly. And Sony more than likely set these minimum requirements to prevent such issues, which is also why I said that they will more than likely make that part of their marketing campaign as to why you would need a PS4 NEO to have the ultimate PSVR experience.
I also think that portable/smart device VR is somewhat of a different beast, so I wouldn't put these in the same segment entirely, other than the fact that (obviously) it's both VR.
In closing, I hope that if we continue this discussion, that we can do so in a more lighthearted manner. You'll just gonna have to take my word for it that I'm really not as much of a jerk as you seem to think from reading my comments, and I always welcome a good discussion with people that actually have a brain in their head, so hope that's clear now. Cheers.
"gatorboi: "Miyamoto needs to step down! Nintendo needs new ideas!""
It's true though.
You mad brah, it's ok, I was once like you as well.
@cleveland124 Have to correct myself a bit here...
There actually IS a more specific reason why I took a $200 gfx card as an example: because of the whole rumored price range of the upcoming AMD Polaris series of gfx cards.
These are going to be affordable, yet powerful cards and it is VERY likely that all three consoles are going to use either Polaris or something similar to it, keeping costs low while still offering more than enough horsepower for making great games.
Also on topic, and taking into account recent changes at Nintendo, like Scott Moffit leaving the company, is this video:
I'm curious to know what you think of his point of view.
And here's a video from another guy, theorizing on a "best case scenario" for the NX, also talking about games, whereas the first video is only about the company and the hardware.
I think that both videos are at the very least trying to formulate an honest idea and opinion, with a realistic mindset, so neither of them are going into sensationalist fanboy theories. (and there certainly are some deranged Nintendiots out there, especially on YouTube... )
But obviously, this is just my personal opinion, so feel free to disagree.
The Vive, the Rift, and the PSVR all create their own standards on what they feel is acceptable. The Rift came to market requiring 1440p per eye at 90 FPS. Obvoiusly that takes alot of horsepower and is the basis for their required specs. The Galaxy S6 splits 1080p per eye and I don't believe has a FPS requirement. Obviously Nintendo or somebody will probably come to the market with a budget system that is between the S6 and PSVR solutions. It won't be as good as the others, but may have a better chance penetrating the market if the price is right.
There is a range of possibilities with the NX. If Nintendo's changed, great. I don't really buy they changed though. Iwata certainly oversaw much of the NX development and he died so it's not like his vision was rejected. They promoted from within, I don't think they could redesign a whole system in a year. So a guy got fired. Combining software teams makes alot of sense. Not enough proof to me that Nintendo has changed it's direction. I hope they do. We are 9 months for launch and that's really the only thing that can change my opinion at this point.
Console teardowns exist so if you are trying to build it back, they are a great place to start. Here's the 3 year old PS4 chart. Seems more relevant than the Wii U as, the Wii U is both older, and you expect Nintendo to up to the power. http://electronics360.globalspec.com/article/3781/exclusive-video-teardown-sony-close-to-breakeven-on-ps4
Now the PS4 is 3 years old. You can buy better components for the price, which is important if you are trying to get to VR compatibility so i wouldn't expect to get these things for alot cheaper. If you replace the disc drive with SD cards, you at best break even. Yeah, the $28 Blu Ray drive goes away and in it's place a $3 SD card reader. But... your games now cost $7 to produce instead of $2. So a Tie ratio of 5 (which should be a minimum) comes to the $25 difference.
Other considerations assumptions.
#1 Nintendo is coming to the market at $400. I think they'll go lower, but we have to have a budget of what's reasonable.
#2 Retailer takes a cut of $25 per machine. Leaving $375 in net for Nintendo.
#3 Nintendo wants to break even up front and hope that lower manufacturing costs drive profitability over time.
#4 Non-component cost. I'm estimating $50 per machine. This is very contingent on the sales of the NX. I.E. If Nintendo spent $100 million on advertising the Wii U and they sold 10 million units, the advertising expense was $10/machine. Now had the Wii U sold 100 million like the Wii then it is $1/machine. Big difference. From a different teardown, the Wii U Basic cost $228 to produce and we know they lost money initially selling it at $300. So reality was the Building costs, warranty, SG&A costs, Research/Develop, other business costs ended up being >$72/machine for the Wii U (probably much higher than that offset by 3DS gains). So this assumes that the NX can recover some market that the Wii U could not.
All the companies use custom CPU/GPU chips now. The Wii U was this way as was the PS4. The original PS4 CPU/GPU was estimated at $100. I'm not sure what the custom part of the CPU costs. I don't think it's reasonable to assume that we can use a $80 GPU and a $20 CPU. Maybe you think differently, but I'd think you'd have to find an offset to use the Polaris. Polaris also appears to have some initial power issues. We'll see how that works out, but I won't ding em for it here.
$400 Base Price
-$25 Retailer Cut
$20 for additional power
So right now I need to cut $76/machine to be able to sell at $400. $126/machine to keep the $350 price and I don't really believe there is any opportunity to go higher as the PS4 at $400 will prevent Nintendo from going higher. So where do we cut? How do we keep the NX strong enough for VR and still affordable? Maybe you think differently, but I feel I've actually been generous by assuming the NX will sell at least 2-3 times the Wii U.
@ThanosReXXX I do still agree with you most of the time, even if it doesn't seem like it. As for lately... I guess it's... a stark increase in critical responses to things that don't quite live up to ways I remember from the past? Maybe it's a rose tinted glasses thing.
I haven't really noticed that negative aspect so much, because I do actually enjoy writing out my comments, trying to find different perspectives on the issues. I'm still a bit sad about Syrek24 going berserk and leaving (again). The topics pertaining to things like the whole Tokyo Mirage Sessions blow up here on Monday do wear against me a bit, though. I also feel like there's an increase in negative and bombastic types of content on NL compared to when I first started lurking around 6 years ago. So I feel a strange sense of trying to rationalize in my mind what's going on, and somehow that seems to come out sounding more negative than in the past.
My tastes have also been changing. Up until the 8th gen, I was a diehard Nintendo fan, but now, I'm more of a retro Nintendo fan and PC gamer. Rayman Legends was the last game I put a lot of effort into on the Wii U. I've been on a SNES binge recently, playing games I never got to play back in the day, like Live a Live and Seiken Densetsu 3. So I guess I've felt disconnected from the current goings on in the gaming industry, compared to past generations.
Finally, I feel like I've become more cynical after starting to pay more attention to politics. It's fun to pay attention to in the context of a fictional story of a game, but it ranges from interesting/galvanizing to disheartening/mind boggling in the real world. So that's had a sort of residual effect on my psyche compared to back when I paid little or no attention to the goings on of the world.
It's getting overly long, so I'll end it there. #NintendoRealLife
I would also classify myself more currently as a PC/Retro gamer. So far this round, I just have a Wii U/Steam to rely on. I also get tagged as negative. I don't really feel I am though. I think Nintendo still makes great games (most of the time). I haven't been impressed by their hardware and I feel they make questionable business decisions.
This isn't to say I dislike Nintendo. I still "root" for them to do well/even win. But while I'm not dissapointed I bought a Wii U, I'm dissapointed in the paths they've taken and don't know if I'm going to get an NX. Okay, I probably will, but not initially. To me, them making 1 change, or getting someone new involved doesn't really signal a change in their path to me. And yeah, okay they've made more than 1 change, but the only thing that will convince me they are changing is if they either 1. say it or 2. do it.
Okay, the say it thing is more in regards to power. They have been saying 3rd parties are important forever but not putting in the work to get them. Just tell me power is important. Tell me you want to put that power to work on first party games. Tell me it's going to allow you to put things in games that you weren't able to before. Yes, Zelda looks amazing. But could it be better? Probably.
The do it thing is self explained. I feel I've been let down too many times by the direction of Nintendo. So if they bring a powerful machine, if they get third parties onboard, if they don't have droughts, then I'll know they get it.
@cleveland124 @PlywoodStick Hi guys, sorry for the delayed reply: I had some less pleasant private matters to take care of, and on top of that I had to do the quarterly income tax report for my company, so I've been more busy with bad stuff than I would have liked...
Anyway, to give some quick replies and close up the topic, I'll begin with you, @cleveland124:
I'm going to try to not create another wall of text, although I can't make any promises once I'm on a roll...
Of course VR suppliers are creating their own standards, but you can see that at least on PC, there are definitive minimum specs and standards to guarantee a good experience, and apparently both Sony and Microsoft want to go that route too, otherwise they wouldn't have mentioned it in combination with their new upcoming console versions.
I didn't actually mean that Nintendo has changed it's perspective, just saying it is a good possibility because of Kimishima now leading them. But it is true that internally, a lot has changed: handheld and console divisions joined in one location, teams redistributed accordingly, of course a change in management because of the unfortunate passing of mr. Iwata and other changes such as people leaving. Don't know how major these effects are, honestly speaking, but I'd imagine that any company undergoing such changes will operate differently to some extent.
I do agree on your assessment that they are still on Iwata's course, so Kimishima's true hand will only start being visible probably some time after the release or reveal of the NX, but he is guiding the whole process, and he is enough of an experienced manager to not just blindly follow the path of his predecessor, so to some extent he is probably already influencing some bits and pieces here and there.
Redesigning a console, or any piece of hardware for that matter, is entirely possible, provided that the core idea remains the same and it doesn't have to be rebuilt from scratch, so a change in CPU/GPU or even an API can be done in the time frame of 9 to 12 months. Not saying that it's easy, but it can be done.
I've seen it first hand with a change in controller/driver hardware for HP Blade servers, for which we had the marketing campaign all but ready, complete with spec sheets and such to be mailed to clients and shops, and then they upped the specs to trump the competition and we had to redo all that stuff. A bit stressful, yet still kind of fun at the same time. (I perform better under pressure)
As for the cost of cartridges vs disc-based media:
from what I've understood, these costs can vary from $2 - $5 a piece, prices for bulk obviously being different once again, making the price hardly more expensive than a Blu-ray that goes for anywhere between 30 cents to $1 a piece, depending on single, dual or triple layer. (back in 2012, the purchasing cost was still around $1.50 an empty single layer disc, even when ordering bulk quantities, and nowadays these are still relatively expensive for consumers too)
The big difference is that like you said, there won't have to be a drive in the console, other than some spring loaded cartridge slot costing next to nothing vs a $20 Blu-ray type drive (I say "type" since Nintendo would probably use another proprietary disc again).
Other costs you mentioned aren't even that far fetched, but it indeed hinges on other factors such as marketing budget, short term and long term strategies and profit forecasts. If for example the marketing budget they are going to spend is big or bigger than with previous consoles (which could actually happen considering the hill/mountain they have to climb this time in winning over the customer again) then they would obviously have to make that count in numbers of consoles sold to see some ROI (Return On Investment).
I do believe they are using Foxconn again, and besides the apparently abysmal employee circumstances there, they can produce a whole lot of components in a short period of time and against very competitive prices, so that might be where the "not selling NX at a loss" might be based upon.
I remember some article citing costs for manufacturing 3DS handhelds was somewhere around a $100, so they definitely know how to turn that into profit and make it sell, even if it doesn't always goes entirely as planned, as the struggles with the 3DS also showed. And of course with the Wii U, which probably cost at least double that of a 3DS to manufacture.
As for Polaris having issues: maybe the initial releases, which aren't quite out of the beta phase yet, since they aren't commercially available yet, but even having incomplete builds won't have to be an issue. Specs of these components and their effects on the rest of the hardware will probably have been benchmarked on PC's already, so they could use these as guidelines and start the development cycles, and then simply port and optimize later on when the hardware is finalized.
If they are truly using something like Polaris, like a custom Polaris-based chipset, then I would estimate that the latest period that these could be integrated into the final hardware design, would be around now, which would still give games already in development a decent optimization/porting window of around a half year, taking into account that manufacturing and distribution will have to start two to three months prior to release of the console, if that is still March 2017.
Anyways, this tech allows for a $200 gfx card to yield the same results as a regular gfx card that costs almost twice as much as that, so it is possible to make a decently priced and powered console. And like you said: the tech inside the other consoles is already several years old, so even if they take the exact same chipsets, they would have newer versions of those for a lower price than the older ones, and these would also perform better.
But I guess we'll find out soon enough, although I don't think from Nintendo themselves, since they never release specs, so we'll have to await a Digital Foundry or Anandtech teardown of the hardware as soon as they can get their hands on one.
Until then, it still is somewhat of an exciting time albeit also slightly frustrating because of the lack of some actual info from the company itself....
@PlywoodStick Thanks for the elaborate reply, does clear things up, for sure.
I feel you on the whole current/last gen thing, I also haven't been persuaded to jump in yet, although in my case it is also a money thing because of me having to invest that elsewhere.
I've actually also been gaming a bit more on my PC, although that isn't a really powerful one by any means; average at best, but it can run most of the last gen multi-plat games that were also on Xbox360/PS3, and besides that I'm more into RTS games and such on PC, so it is more than enough for me.
I'll leave the worrying over politics up to others, besides voting there isn't a whole hell of a lot we can do, so we'll see what happens whether we want it or not. I've got more pressing matters to concern myself with.
Anyways, gentlemen, it's getting late over here, but if either of you wish to find me again, I'll be here daily again, now that all of my chores have been finished for the moment.
I'll leave you both with this interesting rumor that is currently all the rage on the Reddit forums.
Take it with some salt, but if true, it could actually be interesting and it is definitely a new way to play, provided they can make the original design work for multiple players. You'll understand once you've watched these videos here:
Although the quality of the clips is low, you should watch them full screen for maximum effect, and even in low resolution, the effect is clearly noticeable.
I actually kinda liked it, and it certainly is something different. Just imagine it being used in existing franchises...
And you can even test it out for yourself, since the program can be downloaded from the developer's site to install on your own PC. All you need to do then is pair some Wiimotes via bluetooth and you're ready to go...
Well, that's it from me for now. It is quite late over here, so I'm off.
Have a good night/day you two.
Tap here to load 97 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...