Recommended Posts

  • Replies 107
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hoo boy. Lots of quoting-work up ahead.

Of course not, but it's their primary one. The GameBoy had 2 colours, puke and dark puke, and it destroyed handhelds with exponentially more power through the strength of software alone. Nintendo has had horribly shitty third party relations since the N64 era, which is the exact time they stopped being the industry standard. They can come out with a system that is nothing but 87 PS3's worth of power, but it's not going to amount to a hill of beans if no one wants to deal with the people putting it out.

I'm not saying that power=sales, or power=quality. I am saying that power is an important factor when the gap is this huge. A huge reason that 3rd parties don't make great Wii games is because the Wii is severely limited, and it won't allow them to do all they want with their game. The primary section of modern game development is already way past the Wii.

You said it yourself, why would you want the same exact games you can already get on two other systems? Do you think that this new system is going to be such a graphical leap (if even such a leap still exists) that it's going to be able to cultivate the next wave of first person shooters? There's a reason Nintendo went for a completely different segment of the gaming community, and it wasn't because of power restrictions, it's because those people already have a systems to play Call of Duty on.

Running with that logic, how much of a leap in power from the PS3 would this new system be? I'd say somewhere around the gap between the PS2 and the X-Box. Conversely, what are they going to do when Sony and Microsoft come out with their next generation of systems two years later, which will naturally be more powerful than this Nintendo console? Kill it off and release another to play catch up?

That's assuming that the next generation of Sony and Microsoft consoles are only two years away. Secondly, there's no reason they can't still innovate with new technologies. But the Wii certainly isn't the innovative thing it was supposed to be in 2006. Whether you're looking at innovation in graphical power or control design, Nintendo's still lacking.

I can take the $200-300 financial hit.

Congrats. Most people can't.

Bullshit. "Most people" (and by that I mean the consumers that video games are generally targeted at) are the same people that spend $200 every two years on a new iPod or phone, per individual family member.

A new console every 5-6 years is entirely acceptable.

Here's the deal: I own a Wii. I play most everything that's considered great on it. Yeah, it's got some amazing games. But it's still terribly limited in what it can do. Yes, I can play Super Mario Galaxy til the end of time. But I wish I could do more with the Wii. I wish it were possible to make a Zelda game that wasn't entirely built inside of relatively small sectioned-off areas. I'd like a more expansive and detailed Metroid game. And if it all didn't look like crap on anything better than a standard-def TV, that'd be nice too.

There's definitely the concern that the nextBox or the PS4 will leapfrog the Wii successor and start the problem over again, but I think that's still a very uncertain and speculative idea. And in the meantime, the Wii is still suffering while Nintendo is constantly losing momentum that they can't ever regain on the same console.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...What kind of reality do you live in?!

Gamers in the mid teens to mid twenties (which is the primary demographic that consoles are aimed at) make, if they're seriously lucky in this economy, 20k a year, on average, maybe closer to 40k if they're really lucky to land a decent enough job once they're out of college. Factor in rent, bills, paying off those student loans, and oh yeah, trying to eat, and if you're lucky, you have enough discretionary income to MAYBE go out to eat/the movies/a cheap concert every once in a while. Now add in that MAYBE half of that demographic has rich enough parents that they can pay for that sort of thing for anything outside of a holiday/birthday (hint: most of them don't!), and that's still not a very accurate picture of the gamer demographic.

Congratulations, you know maybe the top 2% of income that falls in that demographic, apparently. Lucky you. When I qualify for an iPhone upgrade in two years, I'll be lucky enough that it's free by then. My Mac is coming up on four, maybe five years old.

The rest of us can't afford it.

Now, on your other points.

-You realize that you're essentially arguing what we were pointing out to you earlier on at this point, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to step in to the money debate, the most quoted survey on the industry states the median age of a console gamer is about 30. So I agree with Knightwing, that yes, 'most' gamers can afford a new console every 5-6 years. But I'll admit not knowing what most is. Is it over 50%, 80%, or something else?

And no-one says you have to buy the new console on release. I always buy mine 18months or more later, when they are cheaper. And if they manage it like Sony with the PS2 - PS3 transition, it won't matter as much either.

On the whole though, I agree with Dubs that the Wii's hardware isn't Nintendo's main problem. Trying to compete with MS and Sony is a fools errand, they should stay on the path they are on a differentiate themselves, they just need to support the system with continued innovation. I've had more fun playing NBA Jam over any game in the past couple of years. Even Arkham Asylum, it was the gameplay and puzzles more than the graphics that I enjoyed.

I would definitely take the Wii Fit to the next level, maybe offering an online gym with personal trainer. Really play up that active participation side of the console. Sure the others are doing it, but with so many people having the Wii Fit (over 20 million sold worldwide) it's a massive opportunity to build on. Serious gamers won't like that reasoning, but there is no reason they can't be the family friendly, kids play, lounge room entertainment device. They were that in the 80's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today in Japan, Nintendo confirmed the upcoming release of the Wii's successor. The still-unnamed console will be revealed at this year's E3 gaming expo in Los Angeles in June.

The new console will go on sale in 2012, said Nintendo in an official statement.

Sales of this new system have not been included in the financial forecasts announced today for the fiscal term ending March 2012, which suggests that the new console might not be out before the April 2012 calendar year.

This console, believed to be code-named "Project Cafe", is rumored to be a powerful machine, boasting bigger and badder specifications than either the Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3.

The Wii successor is also suspected of using a novel controller interface which marries a traditional d-pad-and-buttons scheme with a large touch-screen input.

The console will debut this June at the E3 gaming expo in Los Angeles, complete with playable demo versions of the machine. According to Nintendo, there will also be more details shared at that time.


Also some new info:

-Tentative release date of June 2012.

-Controller screen resolution of 800x500.

-Can play games, watch movies, and more without turning on the TV by just streaming them to the controllers. Can stream to multiple controllers at once.

-Each controller acts a terminal, with the console doing all of the calculations to reduce latency, controller cost, and bandwidth requirements.


In order to stream that much info lag free the controllers are going to have to be wired aren't they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Wii was great, as it was the first console to have motion controls, and was most importantly, half the price of it's competition. So, I'm likely going to wait a long damn time before I get the next Nintendo console, as it has been months since I last played my Wii, and don't see the need for the next few years to pay around £300 for the next super console.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no way Bluetooth can handle the video, the game information, and the traffic going both ways in real time.

Wi-Fi definitely can; they might be going with that instead. It'd probably be pretty easy, considering how the Wii already has a similar interface with the DS.

With Wi-Fi you've got major battery issues. Either way, I see the controllers themselves being really expensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Either way, I see the controllers themselves being really expensive.

That's what I was just thinking. I mean, the average current-gen controller costs about $10 to make, and sells for $50. So it'd be possible for them to spend $30-$40 on manufacturing these new controllers and sell them for $60, but I doubt it'll be that cheap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...
  • 4 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.