Support NeoGAF

[prateeko]

Nintendo: new trademark applications in Europe (Virtual Boy, Polarium)
Is it too early to hype?

This is truly amazing

 

[LeleSocho]

This is the worst idea I've heard so far.

How that is a bad idea? Look at how many people cry for the lost TV out fromf the PSP and how many people modify their DS/3DS to do so.

 

[Dreamwriter]

How that is a bad idea? Look at how many people cry for the lost TV out fromf the PSP and how many people modify their DS/3DS to do so.

The fact that it needs to support 4k out, not HD out. Let Nintendo jump on the new standard on time for once, rather than years too late.

 

[Trago]

NintendOS home console incoming. Although the handheld should be released first.

 

[Somnid]

The fact that it needs to support 4k out, not HD out. Let Nintendo jump on the new standard on time for once, rather than years too late.

Let's be real, next-gen consoles are going to struggle badly with 4K. 1080p60 is a good target with a stretch goal of 1080p60 3D/48-bit color.

 

[Scum]

That's seems to be exactly what they plan to do, actually. They also want more devices, not less.

As it should be. Having the n3DS & n3DS XL launch at the same time is good to see.

 

[OmegaSmash]

New home console before a new handheld?

 

[TheMoon]

Let's be real, next-gen consoles are going to struggle badly with 4K. 1080p60 is a good target with a stretch goal of 1080p60 3D/48-bit color.

It would be nice if 1080p would actually finally become the standard resolution with the third "HD" generation lol. I just laugh at people suggesting/hoping for 4k res next gen. Ridiculous thought.

 

[Zeyphersan]

NintendOS home console incoming. Although the handheld should be released first.

Even if that's not the official name, that's the name

 

[Stealth50]

I hope they keep it as gimmick-less as possible and come up with a good name. But knowing Nintendo it'll probably have plenty of gimmicks and be named something like this:

 

[blu]

I do not think a switch to x86 would be unsustainable and a last resort method, especially for a home console.

Well, let's see:

• price/performance: multiple vendors of an open-ecosystem architecture vs two vendors (unless you think Via could be a factor?) of a closed-ecosystem architecture. Whatever prices Intel or AMD could offer today on their Silvermonts and Jaguars, that will be irrelevant in two years when Qualcomm, Samsung, NV, Broadcom, etc, etc, and last but not least, AMD themselves, will be offering competent v8 SoCs. Heck, nintendo could just license the IPs and go with their own SoC.
• power/performance: again, multiple vendors of a very power/performant architecture (case in point: A8, but soon many others), vs Intel, who still manage by by being the traditional fab leader. You could argue GloFo could produce some good 16nm x86 AMD designs in 2016, now that IBM has provided them with the tech foundation. But that means GloFo could just as well produce some amazing 16nm ARM AMD design, no?

Portable console could use a reduced version of that design or use an ARM core for the CPU, not trivial to get the same software stack on both, but not impossible either as AMD makes heterogeneous designs a point of pride (Apple does not have a problem either... see the iOS Simulator for everything but GPU benchmarking, but the GPU is using a reference rasterizer AFAIK). It can work and it would have its software ecosystem benefits.

I'm not arguing a x86 nintendo console would be doable per se. We're discussing the business case here.

 

[Wenger'sBakedBaguettes]

I hope they keep it as gimmick-less as possible and come up with a good name. But knowing Nintendo it'll probably have plenty of gimmicks and be named something like this:

That's just horrible :lol

 

[Dreamwriter]

It would be nice if 1080p would actually finally become the standard resolution with the third "HD" generation lol. I just laugh at people suggesting/hoping for 4k res next gen. Ridiculous thought.

4k works just fine on pc these days without going super expensive, I play a few games at 4k/30hz. Why would a next-gen console due out in 3 years not be capable of doing the same?

 

[TheMoon]

I hope they keep it as gimmick-less as possible and come up with a good name. But knowing Nintendo it'll probably have plenty of gimmicks and be named something like this:
]

If their next gimmick is as amazing as the Wii Remote and the GamePad then please give me more "gimmicks!"

4k works just fine on pc these days without going super expensive, I play a few games at 4k/30hz. Why would a next-gen console due out in 3 years not be able to do the same?

What has your PC to do with it? Just look at the Resolutiongate insanity every time a new AAA multiplatform game comes out.

 

[Guerrillas in the Mist]

the "low power" part has me worried already.

Because the Jaguar cores in both the current-gen consoles scream of "high performance"?

 

[krizzx]

I hope they keep it as gimmick-less as possible and come up with a good name. But knowing Nintendo it'll probably have plenty of gimmicks and be named something like this:

You do know what the definition of gimmick is right?

gim·mick
ˈɡimik/
noun
noun: gimmick; plural noun: gimmicks

a trick or device intended to attract attention, publicity, or business.

High specs are a gimmick. An illuminated controller is a gimmick. Free games if you "pay for a subscription"(still makes no sense to me) is a gimmick. Hyped games are a gimmick. Cross buy, is a gimmick. Remastering is a gimmick.

Anything that is meant to attract customers is a gimmick. Nintendo is actually using the least gimmicks. That is why their sells aren't that great at the moment. They need to use more with their next system.

 

[Stealth50]

You do know what the definition of gimmick is right?

I didn't mean to stir up any debate regarding the positives or negatives of gimmicks. Perhaps "gimmick" is the wrong word, but I just wanted to express that I would prefer if they focus on a standard-controller-oriented experience.

 

[vids]

If we do get a Super Wii I just imagine A deep southern "Sooie"/"SuuuuEEEee" pig call to replace the siren WiiUwiiuwiiu

 

[krizzx]

I didn't mean to stir up any debate regarding the positives or negatives of gimmicks. Perhaps "gimmick" is the wrong word, but I just wanted to express that I would prefer if they focus on a standard-controller-oriented experience.

So we can have 3 of the exact same 3?

 

[Cyd0nia]

Let's face it. Architecture and power isn't the problem at all. Even if Nintendo had the easiest and most powerful console on the market, they wouldn't get 3rd party on board. The problem is something else. And I'd say that that bridge burned a long ago.

I think it's just the software buying habits of the consoles' owners that's most important-- The guts of the machine doesn't matter so much as whether the publishers can make lots of money off of the audience. The WiiU got ports of core games from some publishers, even an exclusive M-rated game from Ubisoft that showcased the gamepad, so if those made money for the publishers, they'd have continued supporting the WiiU. Those publishers wouldn't have taken those risks at launch if "bridges were burned" so I think the matter of what the audience buys is the main problem.

A little from column A and a little from column B IMO.

I think publishers are above "burning bridges": even the likes of EA. If they believe that a manufacturer is buying in to a common vision, or offering them something they can exploit, and if they believe in the manufacturers ability to sell, they'll get their games licensed and continue to develop for them. It's that simple.

The problem for Nintendo is that they do not exist in a bubble. The Wii U is probably the most feature-packed and interesting console that Nintendo have ever developed, I bet there are tonnes of individual developers and artists who actually love the thing and want to see it do well.

It's Nintendo's history, prior form and the buying habits of their userbase that have the publishing houses feeling sketchy. Despite a wealth of evidence and sales successes, it's like they don't know how to sell to Nintendo's audience. When Nintendo gave them a casual audience with the Wii, there were some publishers who 'got it' and jumped on board with the likes of Just Dance etc. But in a normal gaming environment - they just don't know how to do it. Personally? I think its partly Nintendo's fault but also partly the publishers' fault. Again and again, they fail to recognise what the Nintendo audience finds interesting and fun. In my opinion, they should start by listening to what Nintendo say themselves. They say it in all of their investor relations material, and in every interview: they want to surprise and please people.

In 1995/6, with the market interjection of big media companies like Sony, there has been a schism in gaming - whereby narrative, story-based games and bombastic action games have flooded the market, driven the market and sold consoles. Influential, storied-franchises like Metal Gear Solid, Resident Evil and Tomb Raider were born in the PlayStation era of gaming. Naturally, powerful media boxes that emphasise the sound and presentation of these games are more suited to the bleeding edge of that kind of content. When Microsoft joined the party and gave the world a successor to SegaNet (Xbox Live), online services began to gain more and more influence too - and this again, is an area that Nintendo has not traditionally dabbled in. Even now, while I would personally consider it an area that Nintendo has recently innovated in and shown great promise, their competitors benefit from all the wealth and experience of developers and publishers who have produced online content on PC for decades.

For N64, Gamecube and Wii, Nintendo have played catchup on all fronts. They have kept themselves afloat with a sound (and beautiful) philosophy of crafting everything they do around charm and fun. It works for them, but it doesn't work for their third party partners, who have grown accustomed to selling certain kinds of content. When it HAS been attractive to third parties, there has still been a wealth of bad-PR, and other roadblocks in the way. Purely due to bad planning really - hardware limitations, storage limitations etc.

I think to tackle Software buying habits, you have to tackle the content, and the nature of the software itself. Tackle the question: is this actually marketable to a Nintendo audience? If not, can that audience be changed over time? Is there anything Nintendo can do to help me?

Sony and Microsoft consoles play home to high-quality, gameplay-mechanic-focussed games every bit as much as Nintendo consoles, but in their eco-systems, third party games do not have to compete with Nintendo games. When a person walks in to Gamestop, they do understand that Uncharted is a Sony exclusive. They will understand that Forza and Halo are Microsoft exclusives. Only the hardest of the hardcore will appreciate the difference between a Naughty Dog and Sony Bend version of Uncharted. Only a few will know which Halo games came from Bungee, Ensemble Studios or 343 Industries. When a Nintendo console owner walks in to a store, they probably don't know the exact development teams involved either. But the distinctive Nintendo logo is like a seal of quality in and of itself. Their characters and brands are so friendly to all ages, and so powerful, that games sitting alongside them struggle for attention. They have been making console games since the 1980s, so their hardcore fans include a contingent who have been around just as long. Some of them are so old that they are rearing their own children on the Nintendo brand. Is it so radical to think that these people have been buying Nintendo consoles alongside PlayStations and Xboxes for the last 15-20 years because Nintendo actually offers something different? And if that is the case, what sense was there in the first place of trying to sell them the exact same games that are available elsewhere?

I don't believe there has EVER been a sound logic in throwing Watch_Dogs, Call of Duty, or FIFA on Nintendo consoles and expecting automatic sales. Dedicated versions with dedicated features might work, but late, feature-deficient versions? Historically, Star Wars, Disney, Sonic the Hedgehog, Rayman, arcade games, puzzlers, platformers and art games have all done well. That is the kind of thing that Nintendo and others have cultivated an audience for, so I'm often puzzled to not see more of that kind of activity. The recently revealed Rogue Squadron game for Wii would have been an incredibly easy sell, but for some reason (LucasArts?) it never materialised.

I might be projecting here, but I also suspect Nintendo fans are more market savvy than publishers give credit for. They are open to offerings on other consoles. Publishers might suspect they don't really know how to exploit the Nintendo audience properly, but maybe they already are - on other consoles! EA, Activision and others have certainly sold me games on 360/PS3 and Xbone that I would have otherwise bought on Nintendo consoles. Some fans just KNOW when a Nintendo version ISN'T the version to get.


The current trajectory of the Wii U probably leads a lot of people to err on the side of pessimism, but some of the things they have attempted - Miiverse, TVii, etc. - show a Nintendo wanting to embrace positive, unique, online services and change. Their more open development environment is resulting in a lot of indie content (good and bad). Maybe having a situation in which there are no mainline-AAA games bombing on the console might actually be a good thing. In the absence of huge failure stories on a struggling console, maybe we will be able to zone in on what DOES sell as opposed to what doesn't.

I personally feel like their fallout with EA has been hugely detrimental to the Wii U. The absence of EA games has been like a black-hole that has been sucking in other publishers. It may owe a lot to a difference in vision - we can also observe EAs relationship with Sony is a lot different to their current relationship with Microsoft (EA Access). I would love to know what truly happened between Nintendo and EA.

EA is still the biggest power-player in town, especially thanks to their partnership with Disney. If Nintendo want to succeed in creating a good environment for big third parties next time around, I think they need to extend an olive branch and acquiesce somewhat with EA. Following that, Disney and Warner Bros are hugely influential players who are both big enough (outside of videogames) that they do not need to curry favour with the console manufacturers. If there are interesting new deals and Western exclusive deals to be done, I would suggest they should try and do them there. Ubisoft and Activision seem Nintendo-friendly to me. They want to continue to do business, they just need to see the receipts so to speak.

So yeah, I'm not feeling doom and gloom at all. Building a new architecture that finally severs itself from the Gamecube/Gekko/Flipper lineage is the perfect time to renew what a Nintendo console is, and what a Nintendo console means. Its the perfect time to re-establish relationships and try to come up with some kind of new Nintendo revolution.

 

[indigo-cyclops]

NintendOS home console incoming. Although the handheld should be released first.

NintenDOS would be awesome!

 

[Stealth50]

So we can have 3 of the exact same 3?

I wouldn't mind that. In my ideal world there would only be one platform where everyone published their games. Then there could of course be add-ons like motion-control, VR, tablet-play etc. for those who prefer that.

 

[krizzx]

The name "Wii" shoudl not be in any part of their next consoles name. That was really unlike Nintendo.

All of their systems were always substantially different after the SNES. 64/Gamecube/Wii

Having the name Wii in the system I believe is one of the 3 biggest problems that affect the Wii U.

Though, I don't know why people are so insistence on going on about the console. This is most likely a handheld. They always release in that order. Handheld, console, handheld, console.

I wouldn't mind that. In my ideal world there would only be one platform where everyone published their games. Then there could of course be add-ons like motion-control, VR, tablet-play etc. for those who prefer that.

That's what the PC is for.

Doing that on a console would defeat the entire purpose of consoles.

 

[Instro]

How that is a bad idea? Look at how many people cry for the lost TV out fromf the PSP and how many people modify their DS/3DS to do so.

Why would anyone want those games on their big screen unless they are rendered at 720p and above? That sounds dreadfully ugly.

 

[Alex_Mexico]

I feel so out of touch.

What does "SoC" mean???

 

[Mariolee]

Drop the Wii name.

Keep the U.

Add a 2.

Gold.

 

[shouamabane]

Am I right in thinking that low power and SoC goes along with the idea of merging handheld and console?

 

[cyberheater]

I'm sure if Nintendo works hard enough with a talented enough team they could develop a next gen system with underpowered fisher price parts like they did with the WiiU.

 

[Lemonte]

I feel so out of touch.

What does "SoC" mean???

You didn't even bother to read first sentence in the OP?

 

[ClearData]

Just call Cerny. He's a consultant and can be hired by anyone.

 

[sörine]

They should drop both the Wii and DS brands honestly. The next console and handheld (and whatever other hardware might turn up) should feature a new shared branding.

 

[Eolz]

Am I right in thinking that low power and SoC goes along with the idea of merging handheld and console?

Not necessarily. Could happen obviously, but could work for other things (BC, WiiU-like architecture, lower power-consumption for a regular architecture, etc). Iwata said there wouldn't be a merged device for the next generation anyway, who knows for the next one, they always change their minds depending on the market evolution (as they should).

I'm sure if Nintendo works hard enough with a talented enough team they could develop a next gen system with underpowered fisher price parts like they did with the WiiU.

Here's that answer you were looking for.

 

[-tetsuo-]

Wii W

 

[ReyVGM]

The posts in this thread make me pray that Nintendo drops Wii from their next console name.

It terrifies me that for the second time Nintendo sticks with the same console name for two generations, and it's the horrible Wii name.
Hopefully they use a better name next time.

 

[robotrock]

I hope they keep it as gimmick-less as possible and come up with a good name. But knowing Nintendo it'll probably have plenty of gimmicks and be named something like this:

Dude I love how silly this is man. The 3 being the W, showing the fact it is the third Wii console directly in the marketing.

New Wii will most likely be called "New Wii"

 

[wsippel]

NintendOS home console incoming. Although the handheld should be released first.

Their research operating system was called Nintendo Experimental System, or NES. After Google took over the project, the name was changed to just ES.

I'm not making this up, by the way. ES is a real thing. It's open source, and the lead engineer left Nintendo to join Google at some point, and took the project with him. I believe parts of ES were integrated in Android. If true, Nintendo essentially co-created one of their biggest competitors.

 

[StevieP]

I'm sure if Nintendo works hard enough with a talented enough team they could develop a next gen system with underpowered fisher price parts like they did with the WiiU.

Fisher price parts are sturdy. The ps4 feels like it would break if I looked at it funny

 

[SalvaPot]

A little from column A and a little from column B IMO.

I think publishers are above "burning bridges": even the likes of EA. If they believe that a manufacturer is buying in to a common vision, or offering them something they can exploit, and if they believe in the manufacturers ability to sell, they'll get their games licensed and continue to develop for them. It's that simple.

The problem for Nintendo is that they do not exist in a bubble. The Wii U is probably the most feature-packed and interesting console that Nintendo have ever developed, I bet there are tonnes of individual developers and artists who actually love the thing and want to see it do well.

It's Nintendo's history, prior form and the buying habits of their userbase that have the publishing houses feeling sketchy. Despite a wealth of evidence and sales successes, it's like they don't know how to sell to Nintendo's audience. When Nintendo gave them a casual audience with the Wii, there were some publishers who 'got it' and jumped on board with the likes of Just Dance etc. But in a normal gaming environment - they just don't know how to do it. Personally? I think its partly Nintendo's fault but also partly the publishers' fault. Again and again, they fail to recognise what the Nintendo audience finds interesting and fun. In my opinion, they should start by listening to what Nintendo say themselves. They say it in all of their investor relations material, and in every interview: they want to surprise and please people.

In 1995/6, with the market interjection of big media companies like Sony, there has been a schism in gaming - whereby narrative, story-based games and bombastic action games have flooded the market, driven the market and sold consoles. Influential, storied-franchises like Metal Gear Solid, Resident Evil and Tomb Raider were born in the PlayStation era of gaming. Naturally, powerful media boxes that emphasise the sound and presentation of these games are more suited to the bleeding edge of that kind of content. When Microsoft joined the party and gave the world a successor to SegaNet (Xbox Live), online services began to gain more and more influence too - and this again, is an area that Nintendo has not traditionally dabbled in. Even now, while I would personally consider it an area that Nintendo has recently innovated in and shown great promise, their competitors benefit from all the wealth and experience of developers and publishers who have produced online content on PC for decades.

For N64, Gamecube and Wii, Nintendo have played catchup on all fronts. They have kept themselves afloat with a sound (and beautiful) philosophy of crafting everything they do around charm and fun. It works for them, but it doesn't work for their third party partners, who have grown accustomed to selling certain kinds of content. When it HAS been attractive to third parties, there has still been a wealth of bad-PR, and other roadblocks in the way. Purely due to bad planning really - hardware limitations, storage limitations etc.

I think to tackle Software buying habits, you have to tackle the content, and the nature of the software itself. Tackle the question: is this actually marketable to a Nintendo audience? If not, can that audience be changed over time? Is there anything Nintendo can do to help me?

Sony and Microsoft consoles play home to high-quality, gameplay-mechanic-focussed games every bit as much as Nintendo consoles, but in their eco-systems, third party games do not have to compete with Nintendo games. When a person walks in to Gamestop, they do understand that Uncharted is a Sony exclusive. They will understand that Forza and Halo are Microsoft exclusives. Only the hardest of the hardcore will appreciate the difference between a Naughty Dog and Sony Bend version of Uncharted. Only a few will know which Halo games came from Bungee, Ensemble Studios or 343 Industries. When a Nintendo console owner walks in to a store, they probably don't know the exact development teams involved either. But the distinctive Nintendo logo is like a seal of quality in and of itself. Their characters and brands are so friendly to all ages, and so powerful, that games sitting alongside them struggle for attention. They have been making console games since the 1980s, so their hardcore fans include a contingent who have been around just as long. Some of them are so old that they are rearing their own children on the Nintendo brand. Is it so radical to think that these people have been buying Nintendo consoles alongside PlayStations and Xboxes for the last 15-20 years because Nintendo actually offers something different? And if that is the case, what sense was there in the first place of trying to sell them the exact same games that are available elsewhere?

I don't believe there has EVER been a sound logic in throwing Watch_Dogs, Call of Duty, or FIFA on Nintendo consoles and expecting automatic sales. Dedicated versions with dedicated features might work, but late, feature-deficient versions? Historically, Star Wars, Disney, Sonic the Hedgehog, Rayman, arcade games, puzzlers, platformers and art games have all done well. That is the kind of thing that Nintendo and others have cultivated an audience for, so I'm often puzzled to not see more of that kind of activity. The recently revealed Rogue Squadron game for Wii would have been an incredibly easy sell, but for some reason (LucasArts?) it never materialised.

I might be projecting here, but I also suspect Nintendo fans are more market savvy than publishers give credit for. They are open to offerings on other consoles. Publishers might suspect they don't really know how to exploit the Nintendo audience properly, but maybe they already are - on other consoles! EA, Activision and others have certainly sold me games on 360/PS3 and Xbone that I would have otherwise bought on Nintendo consoles. Some fans just KNOW when a Nintendo version ISN'T the version to get.


The current trajectory of the Wii U probably leads a lot of people to err on the side of pessimism, but some of the things they have attempted - Miiverse, TVii, etc. - show a Nintendo wanting to embrace positive, unique, online services and change. Their more open development environment is resulting in a lot of indie content (good and bad). Maybe having a situation in which there are no mainline-AAA games bombing on the console might actually be a good thing. In the absence of huge failure stories on a struggling console, maybe we will be able to zone in on what DOES sell as opposed to what doesn't.

I personally feel like their fallout with EA has been hugely detrimental to the Wii U. The absence of EA games has been like a black-hole that has been sucking in other publishers. It may owe a lot to a difference in vision - we can also observe EAs relationship with Sony is a lot different to their current relationship with Microsoft (EA Access). I would love to know what truly happened between Nintendo and EA.

EA is still the biggest power-player in town, especially thanks to their partnership with Disney. If Nintendo want to succeed in creating a good environment for big third parties next time around, I think they need to extend an olive branch and acquiesce somewhat with EA. Following that, Disney and Warner Bros are hugely influential players who are both big enough (outside of videogames) that they do not need to curry favour with the console manufacturers. If there are interesting new deals and Western exclusive deals to be done, I would suggest they should try and do them there. Ubisoft and Activision seem Nintendo-friendly to me. They want to continue to do business, they just need to see the receipts so to speak.

So yeah, I'm not feeling doom and gloom at all. Building a new architecture that finally severs itself from the Gamecube/Gekko/Flipper lineage is the perfect time to renew what a Nintendo console is, and what a Nintendo console means. Its the perfect time to re-establish relationships and try to come up with some kind of new Nintendo revolution.

This post deserves its own thread, great write up.

I'll add that, while EA missing is huge in terms of the sports franchises that are expected in every respectable Console (And this is a fact), I still have hope that some other developer tries to fill the void that its here, kinda like Sega did when EA dropped support on its consoles.

 

[Tregard]

I hope this one is just called "The Nintendo"

 

[SwiftDeath]

Probably been discussed to death as I'm lttp but I don't believe the Wii U is a SoC approach right? So this would suggest Nintendo is moving towards Sony and MS's approach likely of x86 and a APU.

Wonder what that means for backwards compatibility then

 

[wsippel]

Just call Cerny. He's a consultant and can be hired by anyone.

Nintendo already has a lead architect. Sudha Sudharsanan, joined the company in 2011. Former Director of Engineering at Nvidia.

 

[Lux R7]

Nintendo GameTube

 

[sfried]

Quick, somebody hire one of the boys/girls from beyond3d forums. That way they can "trick" Nintendo into getting something that is more powerful than what the execs have expected, while still checking those boxes on what the comapny wants.

 

[StevieP]

Probably been discussed to death as I'm lttp but I don't believe the Wii U is a SoC approach right? So this would suggest Nintendo is moving towards Sony and MS's approach likely of x86 and a APU.

Wonder what that means for backwards compatibility then

Wii u is an mcm, and bc relies entirely of which direction they take their chips. Soc doesn't necessarily mean x86

 

[sora87]

They better keep supporting the Wii U for a few more years yet. Ditch that soon and it'll create a lot of ill-will between them and the install base they have left.

 

[Zeyphersan]

Nintendo already has a lead architect. Sudha Sudharsanan, joined the company in 2011. Former Director of Engineering at Nvidia.

That's quite a grab, actually

 

[Tempesta di Fuoco]

I'm sure if Nintendo works hard enough with a talented enough team they could develop a next gen system with underpowered fisher price parts like they did with the WiiU.

Hey look, the resident Nintendo Troll.

Anyways, while I do love the idea of a high powered Nintendo console, not even Sony and Microsoft can make anything decent looking at runs at perfect 1080p and 60fps, so I prefer their scaled back approach. The games may not be as "technically" good looking, but they are vastly more appealing looking.

 

[Fiktion]

Probably been discussed to death as I'm lttp but I don't believe the Wii U is a SoC approach right? So this would suggest Nintendo is moving towards Sony and MS's approach likely of x86 and a APU.

Wonder what that means for backwards compatibility then

I bet that their next handheld and their next console will not be backwards compatible.

The New 3DS might even get some continued support.

 

[SalvaPot]

Nintendo GameTube

The Super Nintendo Enterteinment CubeU 64 Boy.

 

[Trago]

Their research operating system was called Nintendo Experimental System, or NES. After Google took over the project, the name was changed to just ES.

I'm not making this up, by the way. ES is a real thing. It's open source, and the lead engineer left Nintendo to join Google at some point, and took the project with him. I believe parts of ES were integrated in Android. If true, Nintendo essentially co-created one of their biggest competitors.

I...didn't know that.

We know Nintendo is making their own OS now, so maybe they will borrow from Android. I'm a little worried about the potential for a million hardware SKU's like Android.