Support NeoGAF

[M3d10n]

The Wii U could be better but it's still the most powerful console on the planet so yeah.

I should note I may be arguing a different definition of "low tech" and hence any possible confusion.

The point is that neither of those were using the latest and mightest tech available at the time, allowing competitors to provide far better hardware in a short timespan.

It's different from the 360 and PS3 situation, for example: the PS3 got released one year later and the 360 could still keep toes with it. This is the definition of "high tech" people are talking about.

Actually Nintendo has not changed that much over the last 30 years.

The focus was always to build an affordable machine for their own software with sufficient hardware power to support Nintendos own vision for gaming. Connect people in front of the tv etc etc. The N64 was the only kinda exception to this rule having a hardware way ahead of it´s time. The cube was again a well designed machine within the limitations of the tech of it´s time.

But at the same time something changed. Iwata and Yamauchi both understood one importand thing: As stated above, Nintendo always build hardware to support their own vision for gaming - but with the introduction of the cube, graphics had reached a level of fidelity which was, for nintendo, decent enough to support their visions. Any better graphics wouldn´t add anything to the gameplay itself. Considering this, the Wii was just the natural way to go for Nintendo. Envision new ways to play and build the hardware for it. There was never such thing as a "change of mind" or something similar.. Iwata himself explained all this at the E3 in 2001:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWSmFjOgyG4&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL

@8:40min

I agree. The N64 was the only instance where they aimed too high. Even then, some decisions were made based to server Nintendo's own needs: the controller and using carts instead of CDs.

The NES, the SNES and the GC were mostly made with what was available and affordable at the time. Heck, the NES and SNES were actually incredibly weak and technical evolution was only possible through extra chips added to the cartridges.

 

[JordanN]

As stated above, Nintendo always build hardware to support their own vision for gaming - but with the introduction of the cube, graphics had reached a level of fidelity which was, for nintendo, decent enough to support their visions. Any better graphics would not add something to the gameplay itself. Considering this, the Wii was just the natural way to go for Nintendo.

This doesn't make sense. So why is there a Wii U if Nintendo doesn't need more than Gamecube power?

 

[TreasureHunterG]

The focus was always to build an affordable machine for their own software with sufficient hardware power to support Nintendos own vision for gaming. Connect people in front of the tv etc etc. The N64 was the only kinda exception to this rule having a hardware way ahead of it´s time. The cube was again a well designed machine within the limitations of the tech of it´s time.

True, but both SNES and GCN had one of the best looking games of their generation. If they made a hardware power to fit their needs, then they made a hardware with enough power to reach the standard tech demands of the time. Something Wii could never do.

 

[Interceptor]

This doesn't make sense. So why is there a Wii U if Nintendo doesn't need more than Gamecube power?

New set of TVs, demand of the customers / 3rd parties, Power for a second display. Watch the video i postet. t´s all there. ^^

@Treasure: Like is said, Nintendo builds hardware to power their own games first. But with the Cube it was enough.. they couldn´t add anyore gameplay wise just with improved graphics.. so they build a hardware to support a diffrerent kind of entertainment - which is always the main goal for nintendo: Offer entertainment, not tech.

 

[Dion Blaster]

This doesn't make sense. So why is there a Wii U if Nintendo doesn't need more than Gamecube power?

So the games look good on modern TVs.

I don't agree with the post you responded to though.

 

[IceCold]

Actually Nintendo has not changed that much over the last 30 years.

The focus was always to build an affordable machine for their own software with sufficient hardware power to support Nintendos own vision for gaming. Connect people in front of the tv etc etc. The N64 was the only kinda exception to this rule having a hardware way ahead of it´s time. The cube was again a well designed machine within the limitations of the tech of it´s time.

But at the same time something changed. Iwata and Yamauchi both understood one importand thing: As stated above, Nintendo always build hardware to support their own vision for gaming - but with the introduction of the cube, graphics had reached a level of fidelity which was, for nintendo, decent enough to support their visions. Any better graphics wouldn´t add anything to the gameplay itself. Considering this, the Wii was just the natural way to go for Nintendo. Envision new ways to play and build the hardware for it. There was never such thing as a "change of mind" or something similar.. Iwata himself explained all this at the E3 in 2001:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWSmFjOgyG4&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL

@8:40min

It´s a pretty mindblowing video from todays perspective. It´s crucial to understand Nintendo as a company.

Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thn-KLhZbeo&list=ULjWSmFjOgyG4

dat Melee intro.

 

[ozfunghi]

This doesn't make sense. So why is there a Wii U if Nintendo doesn't need more than Gamecube power?

For 3rd party support.
For a gamepad with a screen.
To keep selling hardware they usually make a profit on (or do after a short time).

 

[JordanN]

New set of TVs, demand of the customers / 3rd parties, Power for a second display. Watch the video i postet. t´s all there. ^^

Then that's hypocritical since you said:

"graphics had reached a level of fidelity which was, for nintendo, decent enough to support their visions."

Why would they care about tvs, 3rd party demands etc when they already settled Gamecube was the end? Not only that, this is suppose to be their vision, not others.

 

[Xander51]

Then that's hypocritical since you said:

"graphics had reached a level of fidelity which was, for nintendo, decent enough to support their visions."

Why would they care about tvs, 3rd party demands etc when they already settled Gamecube was the end? Not only that, this is suppose to be their vision, not others.

Because they still have to sell games and hardware in a real world market that contains other systems, and new TV technology. They also still want to make money off of third party licensees who are making games for HD systems.

 

[Leflus]

It bothered me with the original Wii. The Wii U? Not so much.
I feel that 360/PS3 levels of graphics is more than enough for Nintendo's first party games.

The third party situation is probably not going to improve that much, but I'll have a Durango or an Orbis for those kinds of games.

 

[abasm]

Nintendo still makes great games. I think it's good that I don't have to pay a ton for their systems.

 

[JordanN]

Because they still have to sell games and hardware in a real world market that contains other systems, and new TV technology. They also still want to make money off of third party licensees who are making games for HD systems.

Then it's erroneous to claim the Gamecube was enough.

 

[The Boat]

Actually Nintendo has not changed that much over the last 30 years.

The focus was always to build an affordable machine for their own software with sufficient hardware power to support Nintendos own vision for gaming. Connect people in front of the tv etc etc. The N64 was the only kinda exception to this rule having a hardware way ahead of it´s time. The cube was again a well designed machine within the limitations of the tech of it´s time.

But at the same time something changed. Iwata and Yamauchi both understood one importand thing: As stated above, Nintendo always build hardware to support their own vision for gaming - but with the introduction of the cube, graphics had reached a level of fidelity which was, for nintendo, decent enough to support their visions. Any better graphics wouldn´t add anything to the gameplay itself. Considering this, the Wii was just the natural way to go for Nintendo. Envision new ways to play and build the hardware for it. There was never such thing as a "change of mind" or something similar.. Iwata himself explained all this at the E3 in 2001:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWSmFjOgyG4&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL

@8:40min

It´s a pretty mindblowing video from todays perspective. It´s crucial to understand Nintendo as a company.

Good post. Most people somehow seem to forget what Nintendo was always about.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

Offer entertainment, not tech.

Before Wii and the Iwata model, Nintendo could manage to deliver both. I could expect entertainment as well cool looking graphics in a Nintendo system. This changed when Wii came out.

 

[Interceptor]

Then that's hypocritical since you said:

"graphics had reached a level of fidelity which was, for nintendo, decent enough to support their visions."

Why would they care about tvs, 3rd party demands etc when they already settled Gamecube was the end? Not only that, this is suppose to be their vision, not others.

Again. New set of televisions. HD becoming the standard around 2009/10. You need more power to deliver a decent looking image to this sets and to support a second screen. Plus Nintendo has learned from the past, they still build machine mainly for themself, but they realised they need 3rd party support (a hardware to support ports). It´s not hypocritical. It´s just the way nintendo operates. Of course you don´t have to agree with them. Neither do i.
It is really impressive to see iwata talk about all this in 2001. Actually his speach was 5 years to early. lol.

@Treasure: You use tech as a synonym for graphics. Nintendo doesn´t

 

[Wishmaster92]

It bothered me with the original Wii. The Wii U? Not so much.
I feel that 360/PS3 levels of graphics is more than enough for Nintendo's first party games.

The third party situation is probably not going to improve that much, but I'll have a Durango or an Orbis for those kinds of games.

Lol, you're saying that now. When you see the new systems graphics at e3 or whenever you will reconsider about first party. But i do respect your opinion.

 

[JordanN]

Again. New set of televisions. HD becoming the standard around 2009/10. You need more power to deliver a decent looking image to this sets and to support a second screen. Plus Nintendo has learned from the past, they still build machine mainly for themself, but they realised they need 3rd party support (a hardware to support ports). It´s not hypocritical. It´s just the way nintendo operates. Of course you don´t have to agree with them. Neither do i.
It is really impressive to see iwata talk about all this in 2001. Actually his speach was 5 years to early. lol.

@Treasure: You use tech as a synonym for graphics. Nintendo doesn´t

You can't say one day "We're not doing more. Gamecube is the limit." and then the next "WE WANT MORE POWER TO LOOK GOOD". That is hypocrisy. It shows they have no trust in their original comment.

 

[Interceptor]

You can't say one day "We're not doing more. Gamecube is the limit." and then the next "WE WANT MORE POWER TO LOOK GOOD". That is hypocrisy.

With 11 years in the difference and the switch from SD to HD you can.

 

[metalslimer]

Before Wii and the Iwata model, Nintendo could manage to deliver both. I could expect entertainment as well cool looking graphics in a Nintendo system. This changed when Wii came out.

This is because before Nintendo could deliver it without the threat of ruining them as a company. The Wii was already the most expensive Nintendo system ever released when it came out while MS and Sony were bleeding money with the PS3/360 at launch. I'm not really technically inclined to know why costs jumped so much, but they apparently did. Nintendo is certainly not a small company, but it's impressive they managed to be competitive this long in the business with companies that completely dwarf them in size and power.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

You use tech as a synonym for graphics. Nintendo doesn´t

Tech and graphics are strongly associated with each other and there's no logic on your comment. Yes, Nintendo make consoles with their own visions in mind first, but their visions before Wii could match other developers visions and wasn't restrictive as they became with Wii.

 

[The Adder]

Started to care some time in the middle of this generation, then realized that there were about 4 games I really liked that were technologically impossible for the Wii, and they worked on my laptop.

 

[lwilliams3]

Then that's hypocritical since you said:

"graphics had reached a level of fidelity which was, for nintendo, decent enough to support their visions."

Why would they care about tvs, 3rd party demands etc when they already settled Gamecube was the end? Not only that, this is suppose to be their vision, not others.

The Wii came out before HDTV was mainstream. Now that HDTV are alot cheaper and popular, Wii games suffers in IQ on alot more TV sets.

Also, Nintendo reached a point when they are ready to makes games that require more power. The Zelda team, for example, probably hit a technical wall if they wanted a more seamless connection between the sky and ground worlds in Skyward Sword.

 

[Leflus]

Lol, you're saying that now. When you see the new systems graphics at e3 or whenever you will reconsider. But i do respect your opinion.

It depends on what types of games Nintendo plan to publish for the Wii U. Super Mario Galaxy looks great even though it was released on inferior hardware. Games like Donkey Kong, Mario and Zelda should look great on the Wii U, even if the competing consoles have vastly superior graphics.

I guess you're right about the possibility of the other next-gen consoles shifting my standards though. E3 is going to be interesting this year.

 

[JordanN]

The Wii came out before HDTV was mainstream. Now that HDTV are alot cheaper and popular, Wii games suffers in IQ on alot more TV sets.

Also, Nintendo reached a point when they are ready to makes games that require more power. The Zelda team, for example, probably hit a technical wall if they wanted a more seamless connection between the sky and ground worlds in Skyward Sword.

All this serves to prove my point. That there was no such thing as Gamecube being good enough. One way or another it was going to be (or already was?) dated.

 

[tenchir]

Powerful hardware isn't the main reason I am a fan of Nintendo.

 

[Interceptor]

Tech and graphics are strongly associated with each other and there's no logic on your comment. Yes, Nintendo make consoles with their own visions in mind first, but their visions before Wii could match other developers visions and wasn't restrictive as they became with Wii.

There is a lot of logic. You are right, before the Wii their visions matched (somehow) with other developers. But then again, with the N64 they expanded the entertainment to 4 players and the expereince to games in 3D. They build the analog stick to support this approach. (and rumble later). With the cube they pushed the graphical fidelity and introduced the wavebird. But even then Iwata and Yamauchi realized that this was not enough.. A predcition which came to reality in the follwing years. So they expanded the entertainment again. This time in front of the TV with motion controls. They knew about hd, but in nintendos mind it was just not there yet. And more important - not affordable enough. Their succes proved them right. With the Wii U they are supporting the standard: HD Television and again they build a hardware to support a new way of gaming. This time with a second screen.

will it be successfull? No one knows. We will see. Perhaps it´s not logical for you, but this is the way Nintendo does its business. And they are pretty consistent in doing so.

 

[Nuklear]

If the Wii U bears a proper Starfox game like the original ones it's fine with me! Nintendo games in HD is all I wanted and the Wii U does that. Now I want some games like F-Zero, Kid Icarus, Rad Racer, etc. that have been neglected!

 

[Vox-Pop]

I wish they were more ambitious. I would love a pokemon game with all the pokemon ever made available. I would even pay extra if they were available in expansion backs.

 

[Übermatik]

A little bit, yeah - after using the SNES, N64 and Gamecube, it was kinda disappointing to see them abandoned the pursue of competitive hardware in favour of other another business model. I love their innovation, but I wish they'd settle on one thing, so thy can work at optimising it/getting the hardware components cheaper so they can ramp up the system capabilities again.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

They knew about hd, but in nintendos mind it was just not there yet. And more important - not affordable enough.

Which was a mistake. This was the reason for many third-parties not support Wii at all. They couldn't manage to do Wii versions of their HD versions because of how hard it was to downgrade a HD game to a SD hardware or because the hardware (and the control) didn't manage to offer the experience they were looking for. Well, even for Nintendo itself, hence some of Nintendo franchises never saw the day of light on the Wii hardware.

 

[Interceptor]

Which was a mistake. This was the reason for many third-parties not support Wii at all. They couldn't manage to do Wii versions of their HD versions because of how hard it was to downgrade a HD game to a SD hardware or because the hardware (and the control) didn't manage to offer the experience they were looking for. Well, even for Nintendo itself, hence some of Nintendo franchises never saw the day of light on the Wii hardware.

Well it was half a mistake. Still enough to kill the king and become the new emperor. 3rd parties could have portet their games just fine. Treyarched proved this quite well. Of course not with the same fidelity but everything else could be there.. I am pretty sure in 50% it was just a nice excuse to not deliver a port. Audience and Nintendo himself are the real keywords here.

 

[Boss Man]

Honestly, I think it's the right route for Nintendo with their kinds of games. What's been disappointing to me about Nintendo is that I'd want them to make up for that tech gap by pushing out a bunch of quality new IPs (since everyone else is developing for the high end) or at least hiring some third parties to do it for them.

I mean, it feels like they're making all of this money off of the systems and not really investing any of it back. So you're a generation behind graphically but you're rocking awesome games that don't really benefit much from high end graphics anyway. That's actually great, it can be a breath of fresh air. It's something different. But give us some more games damn it, especially since we know you can afford it for taking the road you did. The new Yoshi skin on Kirby's Epic Yarn looks great, but where was Yoshi last gen? Does this mean no Kirby games on Wii U? Where was Star Fox on Wii?

The Galaxy games were incredible, but I want more than one or two franchises getting that kind of treatment. If I'm buying a console that's cut off from the rest of what's going on in a given generation then it should be able to compete with what it's missing.

They've definitely carved a nice, isolated niche for themselves and people came happily. But they aren't doing enough to feed them.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

Well it was half a mistake. Still enough to kill the king and become the new emperor. 3rd parties could have portet their games just fine. Treyarched proved this quite well. Of course not with the same fidelity but everything else could be there.. I am pretty sure in 50% it was just a nice excuse to not deliver a port. Audience and Nintendo himself are the real keywords here.

I agree with you. Although Nintendo has it's problems regarding third-party support, there's no way to ignore some thirds has baseless grudges against Nintendo. GameCube comes in mind first regarding this matter. There was a lot of very strange third-party cancellations that were logic insulting. Burnout 3, Lucas Arts games, MK Deception (at the same time of PS2/Xbox, just a very late port later) and Tales of Legendia not coming for GCN considering there was a considerable amount of userbase for it's games on it made no sense at all.

 

[one_kill]

I agree with you. Although Nintendo has it's problems regarding third-party support, there's no way to ignore some thirds has baseless grudges against Nintendo. GameCube comes in mind first regarding this matter. There was a lot of very strange third-party cancellations that were logic insulting. Burnout 3, Lucas Arts games, MK Deception (at the same time of PS2/Xbox, just a very late port later) and Tales of Legendia not coming for GCN considering there was a considerable amount of userbase for it's games on it made no sense at all.

Yamauchi's decisions led to third party support wavering away from Nintendo and into Sony's systems.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

Yamauchi's decisions led to third party support wavering away from Nintendo and into Sony's systems.

He left Nintendo's office in 2002 and the situation had little change.

 

[Terrell]

Tech and graphics are strongly associated with each other and there's no logic on your comment. Yes, Nintendo make consoles with their own visions in mind first, but their visions before Wii could match other developers visions and wasn't restrictive as they became with Wii.

Microsoft, followed by Sony, forced a change in the market. See, before this gen, consoles were NEVER at the cutting edge of technology EVER. EVER.

Giant unfathomable hardware subsidies were not part of the console industry's business model. Sights were aimed lower for a better ROI. The current market conditions were not a natural evolution but a forced change.

The reason that Nintendo isn't keeping pace is because their competitors abruptly CHANGED the pace of the industry in a direction it's never been before, and Nintendo doesn't want any part of that business model.

 

[Lizardus]

The only Nintendo "fans" who are frustrated are people in their who played upto SNES or N64 and then went over to other consoles because they "grew up" and wanted to play "mature" games.

Real Nintendo fans will be fine and always support Nintendo. Low tech didn't deter Wii from having some absolutely fantastic games. Threads like these are nothing but flame baits.

 

[H_Prestige]

Microsoft, followed by Sony, forced a change in the market. See, before this gen, consoles were NEVER at the cutting edge of technology EVER. EVER.

/facepalm

 

[Lizardus]

Microsoft, followed by Sony, forced a change in the market. See, before this gen, consoles were NEVER at the cutting edge of technology EVER. EVER.

Giant unfathomable hardware subsidies were not part of the console industry's business model. Sights were aimed lower for a better ROI. The current market conditions were not a natural evolution but a forced change.

The reason that Nintendo isn't keeping pace is because their competitors abruptly CHANGED the pace of the industry in a direction it's never been before, and Nintendo doesn't want any part of that business model.

nah, bro.

 

[M3d10n]

This doesn't make sense. So why is there a Wii U if Nintendo doesn't need more than Gamecube power?

Miiverse.

 

[RM8]

This doesn't make sense. So why is there a Wii U if Nintendo doesn't need more than Gamecube power?

Nintendo makes a ton of money from hardware. Regardless of power, since Wii was pretty much an overclocked GCN, yet there's no way they could have simply re-launched GCN and get the same success.

 

[Cpt Conifer]

Nintendo still makes great games. I think it's good that I don't have to pay a ton for their systems.

I thought they price gouged to the extreme. $350 + controllers takes it well above $400. Incredibly steep for we're getting. I guess about $150 of that is for the brand logo they etched onto the plastic. Still interested in getting the WiiU someday. I skipped the Wii so the BC would be great for me.

 

[soulassssns]

As a longterm Nintendo fan I do not find them low tech at all.

 

[Boss Man]

Microsoft, followed by Sony, forced a change in the market. See, before this gen, consoles were NEVER at the cutting edge of technology EVER. EVER.

Giant unfathomable hardware subsidies were not part of the console industry's business model. Sights were aimed lower for a better ROI. The current market conditions were not a natural evolution but a forced change.

The reason that Nintendo isn't keeping pace is because their competitors abruptly CHANGED the pace of the industry in a direction it's never been before, and Nintendo doesn't want any part of that business model.

lol

So was Twilight Princess on GCN and Twilight Princess on Wii a "normal" generational leap?

 

[Terrell]

/facepalm

So show me a console prior to Microsoft's intro to the market where it matched the output of PC in that generation.
I dare you.
Of course, if you had just refuted my claim instead of a one-liner, I wouldn't have to ask in the first place.

lol

So was Twilight Princess on GCN and Twilight Princess on Wii a "normal" generational leap?

Since when were quick and dirty ports indicative of generational leaps?
Besides, we'll never know unless we stumble on an alternate universe where MS didn't enter the console market and change its market conditions. For all we know, PS3 could have been much closer in parity to Wii than anyone would care to admit. But now we'll never know what the generation could have looked like.

 

[one_kill]

He left Nintendo's office in 2002 and the situation had little change.

It started with the transition from SNES to N64. The decision to use carts by Yamauchi to inhibit piracy caused third party staples like Square to move to Sony since CDs offered more space. It was the same with the tiny discs for the GC. Moreover, his idea of limiting third party output so that the games released on his console were of quality deterred many.

That reality he established for Nintendo bled into the GC era, and was only made worse by Microsoft's entrance to the scene. Yamauchi left knowing he needed someone who could fix the situation, and he saw that in Iwata. Iwata's entrance may not have been successful (which is comparable to how Obama entered in a weak economy), but he sure as heck turned it around with the Wii and DS.

Don't just use selective historical aspects to support your assumptions.

 

[MrMephistoX]

I did last gen but seeing how everything is HD, the next gen consoles aren't going to match Toy Story, and many Japanese devs played it safe this gen I'm more than willing to give Nintendo a pass this go round.

 

[Trike]

I don't like Iwata because of how he changed the direction of the company. Like Shion said above, it's a very different company under Iwata than what was under Yamauchi, something Iwata's defenders try to deny at all costs. Yes, Yamauchi made a lot of mistakes and everything you said about him is true and I completely agree. Whatever was the motive for Iwata to change the direction, it wasn't good as a long-term strategy for Wii, hence it's premature death.

Super Metroid and OOT being made or not under Iwata is an assumption of mine, you're free to agree or not. That's what I personally believe it would happen based on his business model. Nobody can prove each other right or wrong because, like I said, is an assumption, but I have a point for doing so.



Completely agree.

Dude, you are either a hilarious troll or someone who is blinded by nostalgia. Despite what your childhood may suggest, N64 and Gamecube were not good times for Nintendo. If you think Yamauchi would have done things differently with the Wii if he had known how much money he would be making you would be wrong. If Yamauchi was still involved we would probably have even less third party support, due to the games being on some weird format. Like micro sd cards or some weird shit. That is the man who kept console cartridges alive after they were past the time, and decided that Gamecube discs needed to be that small.

I have never met someone who hated Iwata so much, or revered Yamauchi that much. I get that there is some real respect for him, but he really just was a desperate business man who tried everything to make money after realizing how small the playing card game business was. Until Gunpei Yokoi and Shigeru Miyamoto made him a billionaire.

 

[JordanN]

Nintendo makes a ton of money from hardware. Regardless of power, since Wii was pretty much an overclocked GCN, yet there's no way they could have simply re-launched GCN and get the same success.

Doesn't really answer what I said.

Miiverse.

I would say no.

If Yamauchi was still involved we would probably have even less third party support, due to the games being on some weird format. Like micro sd cards or some weird shit.

There really wasn't much worse he could do. I mean, the Xbox 360 got away with using DVDs, the format war didn't matter as much this gen than it did the past two gens.

 

[Spinluck]

I would be, if it was effecting the quality of their games compared to the competition, but it's not in the slightest.

So no.

Although, the Wii U is a big bump from the Wii.