• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Nintendo's new platform codename: "Project NX"

Status
Not open for further replies.

4Tran

Member
Nintendo almost single handedly saved the videogame industry from its first crash.

Questions:

Is there another crash coming?
Will Nintendo be able to survive?
Will Nintendo be able to survive AND save the industry?
Is the NX, as the NES, the platform that will allow videogames to weather this crash?

I remain optimistic.
Overall, the video game industry has never been in better shape. Nowadays there are more devices than ever capable of playing games, and games have been able to reach audiences that would have been impossible ten years ago.

But this overall statement includes all gaming segments including mobile and PC. I'm going to assume that these questions are about dedicated gaming hardware like consoles and handhelds. When discussing that part of the market, we look at is as three distinct segments: dedicated handhelds, home consoles and Nintendo home consoles. Of these, the dedicated handhelds are crashing due to people seeing smartphones and tablets as superior substitutes. This decline may be slow, but it is inevitable and there's nothing Nintendo can do about it until dedicated handhelds fall to their natural equilibrium level. It's possible that the equilibrium level might end up being too small to sustain the segment

It's a similar story with Nintendo home consoles. There's a perceptible decline there as the Wii went from a 100M user base to the Wii U's less than 15M user base. Nintendo has more control over what happens in this segment, but the boat is tilting in the wrong direction and it's going to be very hard to right.

The other home consoles, the Xbone and PS4, are in a much better shape. While there's a possibility that they may not sell as well as their predecessors and that software sales will be weaker, there are no signs of a crash for them.

So really, what weaknesses exist in the dedicated gaming industry apply mostly to Nintendo, and the ones they're going to be saving are themselves. I feel that a lot of Nintendo's problems stem from their business philosophy and that they haven't done much to address them. And so I think it's safer to be pessimistic about their prospects. At the very least, it's pretty clear that the challenges laid before Nintendo are monumental and they're going to have to be more clever than they've ever been to overcome them.
 

Neoxon

Junior Member
I genuinely think that the NX Platform will be the last platform that Nintendo will ever make, & not for the reason that some may think. I honestly believe that Nintendo will just continually bring out hardware refreshes of their consoles & handhelds every 2-3 years while retaining all of the software that came before them.
 

Scum

Junior Member
Best thing for Nintendo will be forward compatibility. I really hope that 'Project NX' is a software platform akin to Steam/iOS/Android - NintendOS.
 

Neoxon

Junior Member
If it is like iPhones/iPads how often do we expect revisions? Every 1.5 years like the DSs or more?
Probably every 2-3 years. While handhelds can lend themselves better towards 1 year revisions, consoles are just too expensive to justify such a quick refresh.
 

Pif

Banned
What are the chances of NX being the first home console to support 4k?

Would be quite a splash for Nintendo to pump out hardware capable of it and leave behind the image of "cheap hardware" even if it is ARM based.
 
What are the chances of NX being the first home console to support 4k?

Would be quite a splash for Nintendo to pump out hardware capable of it and leave behind the image of "cheap hardware" even if it is ARM based.
Not likely. Wouldn't have much use anyways, at least the first NX console.
Probably every 2-3 years. While handhelds can lend themselves better towards 1 year revisions, consoles are just too expensive to justify such a quick refresh.
Sounds about right. Handhelds might stick to the 1.5 year tradition since revisions even if it's just the form factor keep the sales up.
 

Trago

Member
I genuinely think that the NX Platform will be the last platform that Nintendo will ever make, & not for the reason that some may think. I honestly believe that Nintendo will just continually bring out hardware refreshes of their consoles & handhelds every 2-3 years while retaining all of the software that came before them.

So, like iOS and Android? Sign me up. I'd rather have a Nintendo ecosystem than console generations.
 

Neoxon

Junior Member
What are the chances of NX being the first home console to support 4k?

Would be quite a splash for Nintendo to pump out hardware capable of it and leave behind the image of "cheap hardware" even if it is ARM based.
Too soon for that. Maybe with the NX Console 2 (assuming my theory of an iPhone-esque upgrade schedule for the NX Consoles & NX Handhelds comes to be), but definitely not with the first wave of NX hardware.

So, like iOS and Android? Sign me up. I'd rather have a Nintendo ecosystem than console generations.
Not a new console & a new handheld every year, obviously, but yeah.
 

Neoxon

Junior Member
But there is already cheap chinese phones with 4k capabilities. Is it so expensive that couldn't be an option for a 250$ arm based home console?
You also have to consider the (likely) NX Handheld. You can't have too big of a gap between the two, even if the NX Handheld ends up being around the Wii U's power level. And even then, it would be expensive as all hell, even if Nintendo goes for cartridges instead of a disc drive for the NX Console. Plus you have to factor in the lack of 4K TVs in homes at the moment.
 
But there is already cheap chinese phones with 4k capabilities. Is it so expensive that couldn't be an option for a 250$ arm based home console?
Few 4K TVs out. Would require quite a bit of power taking away from other aspects, not worth it yet. Future NX devices could aim for that, tho, depending on how the market is with those TVs
 

Trago

Member
I think 4 year hardware refreshes would be appropriate if the pricing is right. $400 every 4 years will not work, but $200-250? Or maybe even $300? I'd be down, especially if our software is readily accessible. This is basically what I've wanted for all the consoles.
 

Neoxon

Junior Member
I think 4 year hardware refreshes would be appropriate if the pricing is right. $400 every 4 years will not work, but $200-250? Or maybe even $300? I'd be down, especially if our software is readily accessible. This is basically what I've wanted for all the consoles.
That's a bit too late, to be honest. With 2-3 years, Nintendo can at least have the next wave of NX hardware ready to go up against the PS5 & Next Xbox (& use the games that are already on the NX Platform as leverage).
 

Trago

Member
That's a bit too late, to be honest. With 2-3 years, Nintendo can at least have the next wave of NX hardware ready to go up against the PS5 & Next Xbox (& use the games that are already on the NX Platform as leverage).

It all comes down to price then.
 

Pif

Banned
What do you guys have against yearly hardware refreshments?

Fruit companies do it all the time and people go bananas about little to no novelties apart of the firmware upgrade, which doesn't bring many improvements either most of the time.

It's great, in my opinion. Keeps people on the hook wanting to know what's next while other companies have nothing substancial to talk about in comparison.
 

Neoxon

Junior Member
What do you guys have against yearly hardware refreshments?

Fruit companies do it all the time and people go bananas about little to no novelties apart of the firmware upgrade, which doesn't bring many improvements either most of the time.

It's great, in my opinion. Keeps people on the hook wanting to know what's next while other companies have nothing substancial to talk about in comparison.
It's because of the price of these systems for us & making games on these systems for the developers. It'd be difficult to constantly have to keep up with hardware refreshes that occur once a year while working on games that take 2-3 years to finish.
 

nubbe

Member
Nintendo kinda crashed themselves...
They went from the most successful platforms in history, to their worst selling platforms

and they manage to paddle even with this poor to average performance.

By having the NNID be the central platform for consumer interaction, they never need to reset their user base like they did without an account system.

Primarily have games and applications on NX.
extended interaction on smart devices, like Street Pass is a perfect game to have on every possible device.

NNID has the potential to be on a billion hardware devices.
ynJcaXS.png
 

GamerJM

Banned
I think anything less than four year console refreshes is a bad idea. Maybe they can get away with three year. But consoles are expensive, and it would just make development on large projects complicated since they'd have to constantly move platforms, even if the platform's architecture isn't any different.

It's also something I hope they don't do because I collect game consoles and won't be "upgrading," my old platforms to new ones, I'll be keeping the old ones instead, so buying a new console and handheld every two years will be expensive.
 

Hip Hop

Member
So, what will NX be considered as far as generations go?

Will it still be considered part of the 8th generation, or 9th?


It's in a weird spot.

Sure, I'm thinking it will release 4 years after the Wii U, but it is still somewhat soon to be 9th already.
 

Trago

Member
So, what will NX be considered as far as generations go?

Will it still be considered part of the 8th generation, or 9th?


It's in a weird spot.

Sure, I'm thinking it will release 4 years after the Wii U, but it is still somewhat soon to be 9th already.

To be honest, the idea of console generations is becoming dated. Software ecosystems should have replaced consoles years ago, but Microsoft with Windows 10, and Nintendo hopefully with NX will move on from that.
 
I genuinely think that the NX Platform will be the last platform that Nintendo will ever make, & not for the reason that some may think. I honestly believe that Nintendo will just continually bring out hardware refreshes of their consoles & handhelds every 2-3 years while retaining all of the software that came before them.

Anything can happen, but I'm not really sure I understand why this would be advantageous for Nintendo.
 

Roo

Member
Don't be hypocrite. I'm surprised that it actually bothered you because you usually made shitload of assumptions on some topics, like no second representative from same third party company, etc in Smash threads. You kept echoing that excuse so much until the karma finally bit you with Ryu.

There are more but I wouldn't get into it. I really appreciative the fact how passionate you are with the subjects. Just lighten up and enjoy the speculation. Let not acting like obnoxious Mr. Know-It-All about anything.

Not many people would follow this thread like we did due to the fact that we don't know ver much about it.

B.. but they need to support the GCN adapter for Smash!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Just imagine the outcry of the 10 people who bought it!!!!!!!!!
 

Isayas

Banned
Nintendo almost single handedly saved the videogame industry from its first crash.

Questions:

Is there another crash coming?
Will Nintendo be able to survive?
Will Nintendo be able to survive AND save the industry?
Is the NX, as the NES, the platform that will allow videogames to weather this crash?

I remain optimistic.

No,you are wrong. It saved the NA console market. In Japan and Eu they were just fine. Stop spreading these lies.
 
Just to clarify, I don't think having a unified platform is a bad idea, but clearly, home/handheld dedicated gaming consoles are as disposable/replaceable as phones. There's a reason why phone release new hardware ever year, and it's because practically every phone owner updates every year or 3. So there's always a fresh supply of buyers for the new iteration.

Mind you, this was noted in the suggestion that they only refresh every 2-3 years, but I just don't really see how that works all that well. It's great for backward compatibility with older stuff, but what are devs even targeting. You only have to look at things like the N64 RAM upgrade or the Game Boy Color refresh or the New 3DS to see what adoption rates are on partial upgrades. So it seems like at some point there's going to have to be the REAL upgrade that they'd expect people to adopt. I guess that would be at the five to six year mark?

You're basically right back into traditional console dev cycles.
 

KingBroly

Banned
Anything can happen, but I'm not really sure I understand why this would be advantageous for Nintendo.

Well...they wouldn't have to restart software development every time they turn around. One would assume that with stronger hardware you'd just get better results on the game, and presumably later on from there, the ability to play said games on the handheld NX revisions. You have to apply the iOS model to consoles/handhelds and ask 'how is this advantageous?'

Simply put, you're not developing multiple SKU's, so you don't need as much effort to get multiple versions of a game out. Secondly, if a third party wants a game on the NX handheld, there's no real disadvantage to putting it on NX console as well, so presumably the game has a higher chance of selling better in territories where certain SKU's are stronger. This is why when I look at Square's support, I think to myself 'they want to put their big named Console JRPG's on NX so they can transition it to handhelds in Japan, where it can sell more' while maintaining that Console audience overseas, assuming they come out for NX at all. The reverse, presumably, can happen for Western Devs who want higher sales over there but know the Console market is a non-entity in Japan.
 

4Tran

Member
Anything can happen, but I'm not really sure I understand why this would be advantageous for Nintendo.
That model works for cellphones because cellphones can sell with high margins. Margins in gaming hardware are historically either very low or even negative. The only way to get those high margins in Nintendo hardware would be to severely overprice it. It seems like a pretty terrible idea for them as a platform holder, and it seems even worse for consumers and developers.
 
Well...they wouldn't have to restart software development every time they turn around. One would assume that with stronger hardware you'd just get better results on the game, and presumably later on from there, the ability to play said games on the handheld NX revisions. You have to apply the iOS model to consoles/handhelds and ask 'how is this advantageous?'

Simply put, you're not developing multiple SKU's, so you don't need as much effort to get multiple versions of a game out. Secondly, if a third party wants a game on the NX handheld, there's no real disadvantage to putting it on NX console as well, so presumably the game has a higher chance of selling better in territories where certain SKU's are stronger. This is why when I look at Square's support, I think to myself 'they want to put their big named Console JRPG's on NX so they can transition it to handhelds in Japan, where it can sell more' while maintaining that Console audience overseas, assuming they come out for NX at all. The reverse, presumably, can happen for Western Devs who want higher sales over there but know the Console market is a non-entity in Japan.

To be clear, I wasn't asking about why having the portable and the home console sharing a platform would be advantageous in as much as I was asking why having NX refreshes every 2-3 years would make sense for them.
 

Trago

Member
Just to clarify, I don't think having a unified platform is a bad idea, but clearly, home/handheld dedicated gaming consoles are as disposable/replaceable as phones. There's a reason why phone release new hardware ever year, and it's because practically every phone owner updates every year or 3. So there's always a fresh supply of buyers for the new iteration.

Mind you, this was noted in the suggestion that they only refresh every 2-3 years, but I just don't really see how that works all that well. It's great for backward compatibility with older stuff, but what are devs even targeting. You only have to look at things like the N64 RAM upgrade or the Game Boy Color refresh or the New 3DS to see what adoption rates are on partial upgrades. So it seems like at some point there's going to have to be the REAL upgrade that they'd expect people to adopt. I guess that would be at the five to six year mark?

You're basically right back into traditional console dev cycles.

But with backwards compatibility being an advantage, the transition would probably be faster. I think part of the reason people are willing to upgrade their phones often is because their content doesn't go anywhere. Unfortunately, consoles don't have that, yet. I see the whole unified platform thing as a step in the right direction, but the timing of upgrades and refreshes is definitely an issue.
 
That model works for cellphones because cellphones can sell with high margins. Margins in gaming hardware are historically either very low or even negative. The only way to get those high margins in Nintendo hardware would be to severely overprice it. It seems like a pretty terrible idea for them as a platform holder, and it seems even worse for consumers and developers.

Right. There's high margins coupled with the fact that there's a mass market for that product. But dedicated gaming hardware? Even when past gaming hardware was soaring, the only sort of hardware refresh you ever saw was things like the Slim redesigns. You never saw the PS 2.5 or the Xbox 360.5, and you're not going to see the PS4.5. And I think the reason is just that there's not enough demand for hardware refreshes in this sector. Not that nobody ever thought about iterative upgrades. Nintendo themselves have done this in the past, as I noted before. The current New 3DS is an example.
 
But with backwards compatibility being an advantage, the transition would probably be faster. I think part of the reason people are willing to upgrade their phones often is because their content doesn't go anywhere. Unfortunately, consoles don't have that, yet. I see the whole unified platform thing as a step in the right direction, but the timing of upgrades and refreshes is definitely an issue.

Consoles have traditionally had that prior to this gen.
 
Right. There's high margins coupled with the fact that there's a mass market for that product. But dedicated gaming hardware? Even when past gaming hardware was soaring, the only sort of hardware refresh you ever saw was things like the Slim redesigns. You never saw the PS 2.5 or the Xbox 360.5, and you're not going to see the PS4.5. And I think the reason is just that there's not enough demand for hardware refreshes in this sector. Not that nobody ever thought about iterative upgrades. Nintendo themselves have done this in the past, as I noted before. The current New 3DS is an example.

It seems that they're in a position now where they can release yearly hardware in some fashion, whether it be a slim console or an XL handheld and then, a few years after the original hardware launch, release a new 3DS-style iteration. With NX, I can see them gaining more flexibility in hardware. For example, that patent mentions that one version of the console may have an optical drive while one may be equipped with a HDD. I'd expect those types of variant SKUs rather than products being differentiated by horsepower. The latter starts getting messy with incompatibilities and, unless they decide to gimp all their systems, they still can't take afford to give up low-level hardware access for major titles.
 

blu

Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
I get the feeling we'll be seeing the last AMD console next year.
 

Oregano

Member
I get the feeling we'll be seeing the last AMD console next year.

I haven't completely been paying attention but isn't ATI being spun back out? I imagine Nintendo could stick with them if so.

Of course AMD's dire health certainly adds some uncertainty to what I was expecting about NX.
 

LewieP

Member
People asking for more regular hardware revisions, what do you want to see from them?

If it's just increased specs, are you expecting games to require upgrading, or simply to be somewhat enhanced to take advantage if being played on upgraded hardware?

Down the line I can see them doing a handheld that adds 3D capability, or a larger higher resolution screen, or a home console that adds 4k support, but I can't see them requiring a hardware upgrade to access new games in a timeframe shorter than what we are used to for a console lifecycle.

Adding models with additional ancillary features, or hardware refinements with no impact on game capabilities, is a separate issue I suppose.
 

blu

Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
I haven't completely been paying attention but isn't ATI being spun back out? I imagine Nintendo could stick with them if so.
ATI will likely be spun back out, but I can't imagine that leaving them (ATI) in a top financial shape for the first few years.
 

Oregano

Member
ATI will likely be spun back out, but I can't imagine that leaving them (ATI) in a top financial shape for the first few years.

Very true but considering the history of ATI & Nintendo's relationship they could prefer to maintain that partnership going forward.
 
What do you guys have against yearly hardware refreshments?

Fruit companies do it all the time and people go bananas about little to no novelties apart of the firmware upgrade, which doesn't bring many improvements either most of the time.

It's great, in my opinion. Keeps people on the hook wanting to know what's next while other companies have nothing substancial to talk about in comparison.
Mobile has the benefit of contracts, gaming systems don't. I think every other year for the 3DS with new 3DS style enhancements would be ok. 2016 launch with the revision on holiday 2018
The console maybe every 3 years. But then the question of development comes in. Should a company work on the new system or focus on the first. When will we see games take more advantage of the second?
People asking for more regular hardware revisions, what do you want to see from them?

If it's just increased specs, are you expecting games to require upgrading, or simply to be somewhat enhanced to take advantage if being played on upgraded hardware?

Down the line I can see them doing a handheld that adds 3D capability, or a larger higher resolution screen, or a home console that adds 4k support, but I can't see them requiring a hardware upgrade to access new games in a timeframe shorter than what we are used to for a console lifecycle.

Adding models with additional ancillary features, or hardware refinements with no impact on game capabilities, is a separate issue I suppose.
I think the new 3DS is a good example of what I'd like. Snappier OS, nicer form factor, revised control scheme, etc. on the console, improving the controller would be always welcome. Better battery life with a better form factor. Imagine the first PS3 controller with the revision.
 

GDGF

Soothsayer
Didn't see this anywhere, but apparently Famitsu interviewed Ishihara (Pokémon Company), and he mentions that he wants Pokémon Bank and Global Link on future platforms such as the NX. This seems like further evidence that the NX term is used for both home consoles and handhelds, considering the core Pokémon series is always on the latter.

This is kind of big, is it not?

It could mean that:

1) NX is indeed a console AND handheld.

OR

2) The Pokemon Company is open to putting a mainline title on a home console (do the spinoffs use Pokemon Bank or the Global Link in any way?).

OR

3) Both :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom