Some of my thoughts:
- Abandon Wii brand name as it has lost its value
- Potentially stick with a regular game controller
- potential backwards compatibly with most Wii U software using the new default home console controller and/or support for Wii U Pro CC
(including the same/similar streaming tech the GamePad would need to be compatible with for 100% Wii U BC would just add to the overall cost of the console, so don't support it, especially if the new console doesn't use streaming tech in it any new, significant way, so just resort to a cost-cutting measure and compromise)
- Sticking to GGPU design with marginally more hardware power than Wii U (really, what does Nintendo need 8GB of ram and equivalent hardware power as Xbox One/PS4 for anyway?
Besides, Nintendo is known for prioritizing its own next-gen ideas and goals first and foremost over catering to third party needs, so why would this likely change in the next generation?)
- Free online
- Continued support of local multiplayer (cause Nintenod still loves it and its part of their strategy to get gamers to play together in the same room
- Indie support (which can take advantage of Nintendo's unified architectural strategy to port games between its handheld and home console which leads to easier, cheaper and slightly faster development time and costs)
- Streaming multimedia support (it's less expensive to include in the console's design than compared to a physical drive, right ?)
- cross-platform support (cause it should be done and the benefit of the UA strategy will provide some advantages here too)
- Virtual Console backwards compatibility (Cause we don't want to have to buy the same games again)
- Traditional account system (cause it should have been done in the first place on Wii U)
- No region-locking (Iwata, it's nice that u acknowledge it, but just do it for real next time)
- Must release at least one major classic IP at launch
(Nintendo, you've known for generations how important it is to your dedicated platforms, so make it a priority again to early adopters)
- I don't know if Nintendo would consider bundling a game the console at launch, but Nintendo's support of the unified architectural strategy could make it ideal to take advantage of in this situation by being able to use the development assets of a released or unreleased next-gen dedicated handheld title/project in order to create a game slightly faster and cheaper than if they were to do it without the benefit of the unified architectural strategy. A seemingly small-scale project like Captain Toad or possibly Starfox (what Nintendo did with Wii U) , could be an ideal type of title in terms of scale and cost to include for free with the new home console. Naturally, whatever hardware features Nintendo decides to put into its new home console will have it likely want to try showcasing its capabilities on (like what it did with Wii Sports and Nintendoland).
- Unified architectural strategy serves as one of the ways Nintendo differentiates its hardware, but obviously, it cannot be the only way, it needs some other compelling hook from a consumer angle, presumably one based on a hardware feature ... what that will be, I have no freaking clue. In addition, the UA strategy will of course, help Nintendo with the potential prevention of large software droughts... with or without the support of third parties on the new home console.
- Nintendo should continue to take advantage in supporting DLC with certain titles like it has with Mario Kart 8. This will enable Nintendo to have a fuller software library on an annual basis with short development time of 6 months or less to create and cheaper dev costs due to the reuse of assets. This will add value to the DLC of older games while giving consumers new content to play while they wait for new game releases which obviously take longer to create and release.
- Nintendo should go into the next generation assuming it has the carry the weight of its home console on its own. Third parties have an unreliable track record, and we even some some companies such as EA, abandon Wii U early. Yes, Nintendo will still assume third parties will provide the kind of content they themselves do not make as they always have, so it is unlikely we'll see much of an increase in Nintendo publishing mature software and specific genres like shooters and sports games.
- Price point has to be between $200-$300 range, $250 is sweet spot. Nintendo could sell it at an initial loss for less for a year if possible. Keeping the price low enough would be another contributing factor to make the home console stand out against PS5 and Next Xbox, not to mention PS4 and Xbox One, which could still be benefit from a longer generation of third party multiplatform support for all we know.
- If Nintendo has to carry the weight of its home console on its own, then it will have to rely on 2nd party partnerships again just as it has with Wii U. Perhaps next time, Nintendo will try to publish games that have more mainstream appeal (they had the right idea with Lego City though) because as good as Bayonetta 2 has been made out to be, it clearly didn't sell many copies to existing Wii U owners let alone convince new customers to buy a Wii U.
In my opinion, it is currently unrealistic to expect Nintendo to compete as a direct competitor, and even if they do, knowing Nintendo, it will likely make some naive mistakes and compromises to its hardware design. It faces Nintendo doesn't need a console as powerful as Xbox One let alone PS4. What would they need all that processing power and memory for anyway? As we all know, Nintendo has a habit of prioritizing its own hardware ideas and goals first and foremost above catering to third parties.
