Support NeoGAF

[Nocturno999]

Go as crazy as you want but make decent hardware and controller.
Gimmick should be sold separately or in another bundle like R.O.B.

 

[EndlessFloydian]

Go as crazy as you want but make decent hardware and controller.
Gimmick should be sold separately or in another bundle like R.O.B.

Precisely my thoughts.

 

[Entryhazard]

Ehhh, the SNES

The SNES introduced shoulder buttons.
Also the Mode 7 brought some cool tricks that opened possibilities like actual tracks for racing games (F-Zero)
Also Starfox was the first Polygonal game (on console at least)

N64

The analog stick alone was a great addition that made 3D games actually playable. Also the C buttos in order to control the camera in the geme were almost unprecedented. Those two ideas were then refined in the double analog that is regarded as the holy standard of controllers.

and (to a certain extent) the Gamecube.

That was admittedly an extremely traditional console without new features compared to the predecessors.

 

[phanphare]

Ehhh, the SNES, N64, and (to a certain extent) the Gamecube, don't really jive with that line of thought. This "we must innovate!" mentality is pretty recent in the overall life of Nintendo video games. Before they would innovate now and then, when a cool unique idea came to them. Their older systems were very traditional, but they'd experiment with add-ons. Now they're focused on creating something "unique" at every chance.

actually only the GCN supports your claim. the SNES and N64 were definitely innovative with their control schemes.

edit: beaten and I ain't even mad ;p

 

[Oddduck]

That was admittedly an extremely traditional console without new features compared to the predecessors.

actually only the GCN supports your claim. the SNES and N64 were definitely innovative with their control schemes.

One thing people overlook is the GameCube's connectivity with the GBA. It was when Nintendo started taking dual screen gameplay seriously (if you don't count Game & Watch).
Since then, DS/3DS now use dual screen gameplay, and PS4/PS Vita have interactivity with each other.

And of course, the Wii U now has dual screen gameplay.

 

[DeaviL]

Go as crazy as you want but make decent hardware and controller.
Gimmick should be sold separately or in another bundle like R.O.B.

That's an automatic failure, it should always be included in the base package.

 

[King_Moc]

The analog stick alone was a great addition that made 3D games actually playable. Also the C buttos in order to control the camera in the geme were almost unprecedented. Those two ideas were then refined in the double analog that is regarded as the holy standard of controllers..

The rumble pack as well. That's another thing that Sony nicked pretty much straight away, necessitating the second overhaul of the PS1 controller.

Edit: ah, it was for control schemes. Still i thought it was neat for stuff like the stone of agony in OOT.

 

[Shikamaru Ninja]

That's an automatic failure, it should always be included in the base package.

Wii Fit vehemently disagrees with you.

 

[Somnid]

Wii Fit vehemently disagrees with you.

I beleive Wii Fit was a product of Wii which did in fact embrace it's own gimmick by not only bundling it but making it the default. I don't think Wii Fit would have survived in a vacuum.

 

[jonezer4]

Ehhh, the SNES, N64, and (to a certain extent) the Gamecube, don't really jive with that line of thought. This "we must innovate!" mentality is pretty recent in the overall life of Nintendo video games. Before they would innovate now and then, when a cool unique idea came to them. Their older systems were very traditional, but they'd experiment with add-ons. Now they're focused on creating something "unique" at every chance.

But I think before, there was so much headroom to gain in graphics. that the graphics could be considered sufficient "innovation" for those gens. Across the board, the leap from one gen to another was dramatic in those earlier years. In the latter gens, there is certainly diminishing returns in graphics, and hence, it does make sense, and there is more of an incentive, to focus on innovation elsewhere.

 

[Entryhazard]

One thing people overlook is the GameCube's connectivity with the GBA. It was when Nintendo started taking dual screen gameplay seriously (if you don't count Game & Watch).
Since then, DS/3DS now use dual screen gameplay, and PS4/PS Vita have interactivity with each other.

And of course, the Wii U now has dual screen gameplay.

True that, but given the impracticability of requiring a dedicated cable that almost no one was selling made the GC/GBA connectivity extremely underused, with only a handful of games making use of it and for some side features (there were just an handful of exceptions like Four Swords Adventures and Crystal Chronicles Co-Op).

It's a shame that now that the wireless is the default that idea is no longere employed, with Wii-DS connectivity relegated to trading some Pokémons and Wii U-3DS nowhere to be seen aside using the portable as a controller in Smash 4. To me it's like they saw the idea failed but didn't get WHY it failed and now it's severely ignored.

The Gamepad offered the opportunity to retread some concepts but they shied away again. WW HD was a great opportunity to integrate the tingle Tuner and actually use it and instead they ditched it for shitty miiverse support when they could have done both at least.

 

[Rocky]

The SNES introduced shoulder buttons.
Also the Mode 7 brought some cool tricks that opened possibilities like actual tracks for racing games (F-Zero)
Also Starfox was the first Polygonal game (on console at least)

The analog stick alone was a great addition that made 3D games actually playable. Also the C buttos in order to control the camera in the geme were almost unprecedented. Those two ideas were then refined in the double analog that is regarded as the holy standard of controllers.

That was admittedly an extremely traditional console without new features compared to the predecessors.

Too bad the N64 stick was actually digital and NOT analog:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_stick#History

Initially announced for release on April 21, 1996, Nintendo released their Nintendo 64 controller on June 24, 1996 in Japan.[12] The new controller included a thumb-operated control stick which, while a digital stick[13] (the stick operated on the same principles as a mechanical computer mouse), still allowed for varying levels of movement and near-360-degree control, translating into far more precise movements than were possible with a D-pad.

 

[optimiss]

Go as crazy as you want but make decent hardware and controller.
Gimmick should be sold separately or in another bundle like R.O.B.

I disagree. Since the only company that really makes good games for Nintendo systems is Nintendo, then let them go wild. You don't have to worry about cross compatibility. Making a peripheral optional is a death knell and extrapolating from R.O.B. it will end up with three games total.

Whatever the unique selling point is it needs to be tightly integrated into the overall experience. They need to do a much better job than they have with the Wii U which rarely amounts to more than off-screen play. Say what you want about Wii, it was a well thought out and tightly integrated experience where almost every game took advantage of the unique control scheme.

 

[SuperLeviathan]

Why are we conflating stuff like Mode 7 and the analogue stick with the Gamepad and the 3DS' 3D?

Mode 7 and the stick allowed developers to take gameplay in directions that wouldn't have been technologically possible before. They opened gameplay possibilities up.

With the Gamepad and 3D, the actual gameplay hasn't changed at all. Those are just accoutrements that don't really affect how you play the game, and that's why so many of the implementations of those in games feel so token. That was my point.

I don't need cutting edge technology from the next Nintendo platforms. I just don't ever want to see anything like the Ice Climbers being cut from Smash happen again.

 

[Fine Ham Abounds]

It's funny how much my opinions have changed over the last couple of years and how mellow I feel about all of this. I'm actually really hyped to see whatever dumbass thing they come up with.

I think the only way they could piss me off is if I have to play everything on a watch or something

 

[Entryhazard]

Too bad the N64 stick was actually digital and NOT analog:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_stick#History

Oh lol, at least what I meant (360° movement) still applies

 

[Orniletter]

Too bad the N64 stick was actually digital and NOT analog:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_stick#History

Thats irrelevant to the point he was trying to convey.

 

[LocalE]

Great, more gimmicks for the sake of being different.

They're the only ones who will be hurting at the end of the day with these misguided attempts to "stand out".

That may be true. As a game fan, I probly will be happy with the great games they will most likely put out for whatever their console is.

People wanna miss out on those games because of their idiosyncratic hardware design, not my loss, really.

 

[EatinOlives]

No, but dismissing difference and wanting things to be the same as everything else is a bit sad. It shows the desire for a homogenisation of the industry. I personally enjoyed the idea that the three consoles were to be different from each other. It made the industry interesting, but now Xbox One and PS4 games are largely interchangeable, barring a few exclusives, there's little reason to have one over the other except specs so what's the point?

I'd push for risky experiments to find new stuff over a generic console any day

Risky hardware experimentation is not the reason why I enjoy Nintendo titles. Right now my favorite current-gen console by far is the WiiU, and that's entirely because of the games. I use a Pro Controller on Mario Kart 8, Bayo 1/2, Tropical Freeze, Smash 4, and most recently Mario 3D World which I had the very nice pleasure of playing these past couple of weeks. Very, very strong titles with very good execution at a rock solid 60 FPS with beautiful clean graphic art styles. I try to not touch the Gamepad unless I absolutely have to (like 3DW's Captain Toad levels) because I find it clunky and uncomfortable for my hands. I enjoy the WiiU and its library DESPITE the different-for-sake-of-being-different hardware, not because of it.

I reject the idea that just because the hardware is similar that the console experience must necessarily be similar as well. My personal experience with playing all my WiiU games on a controller whenever possible still gives a completely different playing experience as to when I'm playing on my PS4, and that's because of the library and OS functionality that both the PS4 and WiiU differ on.

Maybe Nintendo is hoping to catch lightning in a bottle again with the Wii, but that's absolutely not what gets me interested in their consoles. I'm in for the games, and incidentally Nintendo's own best games are perfectly playable and, in my opinion, most enjoyable with a traditional controller. I have zero interest in a superficial hardware innovation that Nintendo themselves will end up not using anyway a couple of years down the road.

 

[timetokill]

Ehhh, the SNES, N64, and (to a certain extent) the Gamecube, don't really jive with that line of thought. This "we must innovate!" mentality is pretty recent in the overall life of Nintendo video games. Before they would innovate now and then, when a cool unique idea came to them. Their older systems were very traditional, but they'd experiment with add-ons. Now they're focused on creating something "unique" at every chance.

Allow me to quote myself:

The D-Pad was a gimmick. Now nearly every controller has one.

The Legend of Zelda on NES was the first console title to have a battery for game saves, another gimmick.

Star Fox had a gimmicky Super FX chip on it for gimmicky 3D graphics.

The SNES pad had introduced the shoulder button gimmick that nearly every controller has now.

The N64 controller had the analog stick, a gimmick now found on nearly every controller. It had a trigger button too!

The N64 had Rumble Paks, introducing a force-feedback gimmick into the controller, which nearly every controller has nowadays, despite Sony's protests about it being a "last gen feature."

The N64 had expansion pak slots, another hardware gimmick that allowed games like Majora's Mask to be made or to improve other games like Perfect Dark.

The GameCube had that weird analog trigger gimmick, remember that? It clicked when you pressed it all the way! Oh, and it had Wavebird controllers and their "wireless controller" gimmick. I wonder what happened to wireless controllers since then.

Then you have the Wii and its motion control gimmick. But I'm sure glad their competitors didn't all make motion controls available on their platforms! Who would do such a silly thing?

And I'm not even talking about their handhelds! Do we really need COLOR game boys? Or touch screens? Who even uses touch screens these days? Don't even get me started on Streetpass.

NONE OF THESE THINGS HAVE IMPROVED GAMES, EVER.

what's next from this stupid industry? Oculus Rift with it's VR gimmick? what a joke! it even has motion control built in! how stupid is that?

 

[Linkstrikesback]

Go as crazy as you want but make decent hardware and controller.
Gimmick should be sold separately or in another bundle like R.O.B.

Any gimmick that isn't packaged in is almost guarenteed dead on arrival. For example how many games used the wii motion plus?

 

[jwhit28]

I don't understand why Nintendo wants to continually tie themselves to one huge gamble every generation. Iwata says they failed to create software that shows what makes the gamepad great in an immediate and easily understandable fashion. 3D was deemed non-essential for the 3DS a while ago. The company was barely able to get Smash Bros on the 3DS and Xenoblade would have been impossible without the performance upgrade on New 3DS. At what point does it become Nintendo's hardware choices failing to allow the developers to show off what makes their games great in an immediate and easily understandable fashion? By Iwata's own bragging it seems Nintendo games are still cream of the crop critically. So what is the weak link here?

 

[Great Puma]

Allow me to quote myself:

Well put! Personally, I'm tired of seeing everyone toss around the word "gimmick." You know what would bomb? Nintendo trying to make a PS4. Anyone who thinks a Nintendo-branded "standard" console would magically bring back third parties and dudebros is delusional. Nintendo will always swing for the fences and either bomb hard or change the industry -- they can't survive sitting still. And anyway, we've got two "standard" console makers already -- why would we need another one?

 

[EatinOlives]

Well put! Personally, I'm tired of seeing everyone toss around the word "gimmick." You know what would bomb? Nintendo trying to make a PS4. Anyone who thinks a Nintendo-branded "standard" console would magically bring back third parties and dudebros is delusional. Nintendo will always swing for the fences and either bomb hard or change the industry -- they can't survive sitting still. And anyway, we've got two "standard" console makers already -- why would we need another one?

I don't know why this is the go-to defense. "We don't want another PS4!" That's great, you won't get "another PS4". The WiiU is surviving on fantastic first-party titles alone, titles that you can play using the Pro Controller with pretty much every one.

Just because Nintendo goes for a traditional console won't automatically make their unique first party software cease. Their software, easily the most important thing about Nintendo, will remain largely the same. The console experiences will not be magically identical with MS's/Sony's just because they don't have a hardware gimmick attached to them.

 

[Gambit1977]

It could simply be a handheld with VR headset...
But it's Nintendo so that would massively defy their family oriented gaming. Not sure what I expect at all but it's always an exciting time before a Nintendo announcement. I remember the first time we saw the wiimotes, the red one in particular.

 

[Hermii]

How about empowering NoA more, Iwata? You don't know shit about the N. America market or Europe for that matter, so put video game knowledgeable people in place that do know these territories (i.e., not former Pizza Hut salesmen) and let them have a say.

Eric for president!

 

[SuperLeviathan]

Allow me to quote myself:

Almost every last innovation you mentioned had some kind of meaningful impact on the gameplay. To wit

• The D-Pad allowed for more precise control than the old Atari-style joysticks provided
• The battery save (and its precursor, the password save) allowed for longer, more expansive games that didn't have to be completed in a single sitting.
• The shoulder buttons allowed for more actions to be mapped. Fighting games like Street Fighter would've been unplayable without them.
• Polygons allowed for models that could move around in three dimensions, this goes hand in hand with the analog stick in making 3D games like Mario 64 and the like possible.
• I don't know why the Expansion pack is a gimmick, but it did enhance games like Majora's Mask by giving the console more RAM to work with.
• Controller Pack; I got nothing, but I would distinguish between optional addons that are sold separately vs. irremovable features built into the console/handheld itself.
• Triggers in the shoulder buttons; again, more precision in the controls
• Again, I don't see how the Wavebird is a gimmick; it's convenient, but you still use it the exact same way as a normal controller. And again, it's optional.
• The Wii games that use motion controls use them in a way that wouldn't be possible with other controls. THAT's an innovation. See my Mario Kart example. Ditto with the DS,
• The Game Boy Color; you can do more with a full palette of colors than with a few shades of green/gray. That's a fact.

Does the Gamepad achieve anything comparable to these? It's a regular controller with a moderately large touchscreen and pseudo-portability.

 

[jwhit28]

Well put! Personally, I'm tired of seeing everyone toss around the word "gimmick." You know what would bomb? Nintendo trying to make a PS4. Anyone who thinks a Nintendo-branded "standard" console would magically bring back third parties and dudebros is delusional. Nintendo will always swing for the fences and either bomb hard or change the industry -- they can't survive sitting still. And anyway, we've got two "standard" console makers already -- why would we need another one?

I'd argue that of the 3 current gen consoles, the Wii U is the most like it's predecessor. Nintendo Land, the game that is supposed to make the gamepad standout, requires 4 Wii remotes to enjoy with friends. The 3DS is the same idea as a DSi with 3D, and eventually they got rid of the 3D.

The 3DS and the Wii U were dull and the hardware failed to excite people. Yet the 3DS can turn out million sellers like crazy and both systems still have games that are received greatly by critics. So why not make the games the star of the show? Instead of a generation of software developers trying to show off unique hardware in the best fashion, what about going to developers and asking what they need in a piece of hardware to truly showoff the game ideas they have?

 

[Boy Wander]

I'd argue that of the 3 current gen consoles, the Wii U is the most like it's predecessor. Nintendo Land, the game that is supposed to make the gamepad standout, requires 4 Wii remotes to enjoy with friends. The 3DS is the same idea as a DSi with 3D, and eventually they got rid of the 3D.

The 3DS and the Wii U were dull and the hardware failed to excite people. Yet the 3DS can turn out million sellers like crazy and both systems still have games that are received greatly by critics. So why not make the games the star of the show? Instead of a generation of software developers trying to show off unique hardware in the best fashion, what about going to developers and asking what they need in a piece of hardware to truly showoff the game ideas they have?

You can argue that but I don't think you're right. Both PS4 and Xbox are basically mid-range PCs in a box. You can't get much more vanilla and dull than that. I don't see much in the way of revolution in either and in fact some of the features vaunted in the reveals either took an age to come out, were gimped, both, or haven't even been launched yet, almost 18 months later.

 

[phanphare]

I'd argue that of the 3 current gen consoles, the Wii U is the most like it's predecessor. Nintendo Land, the game that is supposed to make the gamepad standout, requires 4 Wii remotes to enjoy with friends. The 3DS is the same idea as a DSi with 3D, and eventually they got rid of the 3D.

The 3DS and the Wii U were dull and the hardware failed to excite people. Yet the 3DS can turn out million sellers like crazy and both systems still have games that are received greatly by critics. So why not make the games the star of the show? Instead of a generation of software developers trying to show off unique hardware in the best fashion, what about going to developers and asking what they need in a piece of hardware to truly showoff the game ideas they have?

you crazy man. the Wii U is an HD console, the Wii was not. the Wii U has a radically different input device than the Wii. the Wii U allows for 480p/60fps lag free streaming. what's your case for how the PS4 and X1 are different from their predecessors?

"and eventually got rid of the 3D."

and then brought it back for an upgraded hardware SKU that improves the 3D with face tracking

the talking heads said it best, "facts just twist the truth around". your points paint a narrative that doesn't exist in reality.

 

[jwhit28]

you crazy man. the Wii U is an HD console, the Wii was not. the Wii U has a radically different input device than the Wii. the Wii U allows for 480p/60fps lag free streaming. what's your case for how the PS4 and X1 are different from their predecessors?

"and eventually got rid of the 3D."

and then brought it back for an upgraded hardware SKU that improves the 3D with face tracking

the talking heads said it best, "facts just twist the truth around". your points paint a narrative that doesn't exist in reality.

I don't see how the input device for Wii U is radically different when it has the same buttons as a Classic Controller Pro and most multiplayer games are fine being played with a Wii remote. Wouldn't HD just be a "dull" expansion of existing hardware? The touchscreen/dual screen idea is something they have been using since 2004. The XB1 focus on Kinect and multimedia was a much wider departure from the 360 release than Wii U was to Wii. The PS4 being designed from the bottom up with the focus on the developer and keeping a low price is a HUGE departure from how they approached the PS3.

 

[Mitsurugi]

What I'd like NX to be/have:

Software-based unique selling point (to keep the console from being gimped)

Fall 2017 Launch (so I have time to enjoy my recently purchased Wii U)

250-300$ price tag (if higher, appreciable justifications or selling points)

PS4-level or better graphics (I dunno what Nintendo would do with 2 TFLOPS, but I'd like to find out)

Matte Pro Controller included (so I can save myself 50 bucks)

Off-TV play via 4DS (540p or better res so I can make out distant objects in MK9)

Support for internal 2.5 inch hard drives/ssds

 

[phanphare]

I don't see how the input device for Wii U is radically different when it has the same buttons as a Classic Controller Pro and most multiplayer games are fine being played with a Wii remote. Wouldn't HD just be a "dull" expansion of existing hardware? The touchscreen/dual screen idea is something they have been using since 2004. The XB1 focus on Kinect and multimedia was a much wider departure from the 360 release than Wii U was to Wii. The PS4 being designed from the bottom up with the focus on the developer and keeping a low price is a HUGE departure from how they approached the PS3.

well I'll just say we view history through a very different lens and leave it at that

 

[Great Puma]

I don't know why this is the go-to defense. "We don't want another PS4!" That's great, you won't get "another PS4". The WiiU is surviving on fantastic first-party titles alone, titles that you can play using the Pro Controller with pretty much every one.

Just because Nintendo goes for a traditional console won't automatically make their unique first party software cease. Their software, easily the most important thing about Nintendo, will remain largely the same. The console experiences will not be magically identical with MS's/Sony's just because they don't have a hardware gimmick attached to them.

You're right, I'd still buy a standard console from Nintendo to play first-party games, but I'm a diehard, lifelong Nintendo fan, and our numbers have been dwindling. I do think Nintendo can pull in more people than just the true believers by doing something fresh and unique. And what about new users, the next generation of potential Nintendo fans? Will Nintendo lose kids if they have to charge as much as the other guys for comparable tech?

Setting aside the Wii U Gamepad for a moment, I don't know how anyone can look at Nintendo's past successes and suggest it'd be wisest for them to not innovate. The directional pad, shoulder buttons, four face buttons, analog stick, Rumble Pak, Mode 7 graphics, motion control, touch screen, dual screens, glasses-free 3D -- if Nintendo had simply made the "expected" console at any previous point in its history, think of what would've been lost!

But I get that people are afraid Nintendo will try something that doesn't prove popular, that gets in the way of playing games in ways we already know we enjoy, like motion controls sometimes did. But for every Wii Remote or Virtual Boy, there's a lot more of the good stuff.

 

[jwhit28]

well I'll just say we view history through a very different lens and leave it at that

Agree. I would still rather have a 3DS and a Wii U over Vita/XB1/PS4. I just hope Nintendo reassess what their strengths are.

 

[4Tran]

I don't understand why Nintendo wants to continually tie themselves to one huge gamble every generation. Iwata says they failed to create software that shows what makes the gamepad great in an immediate and easily understandable fashion. 3D was deemed non-essential for the 3DS a while ago. The company was barely able to get Smash Bros on the 3DS and Xenoblade would have been impossible without the performance upgrade on New 3DS. At what point does it become Nintendo's hardware choices failing to allow the developers to show off what makes their games great in an immediate and easily understandable fashion? By Iwata's own bragging it seems Nintendo games are still cream of the crop critically. So what is the weak link here?

Nintendo builds its hardware to serve their own software needs. These needs do not coincide with modern gaming hardware and infrastructure trends, so Nintendo gets left out of the loop. If they want to get back into the game, they will have to bite the bullet and embrace all of these modern technologies, but they're apparently unwilling to do that.

 

[SuperLeviathan]

Setting aside the Wii U Gamepad for a moment, I don't know how anyone can look at Nintendo's past successes and suggest it'd be wisest for them to not innovate. The directional pad, shoulder buttons, four face buttons, analog stick, Rumble Pak, Mode 7 graphics, motion control, touch screen, dual screens, glasses-free 3D -- if Nintendo had simply made the "expected" console at any previous point in its history, think of what would've been lost!

Why do we keep lumping every novel thing added to a console together, as if they're created equally or were embraced equally?

 

[timetokill]

Almost every last innovation you mentioned had some kind of meaningful impact on the gameplay. To wit

• The D-Pad allowed for more precise control than the old Atari-style joysticks provided
• The battery save (and its precursor, the password save) allowed for longer, more expansive games that didn't have to be completed in a single sitting.
• The shoulder buttons allowed for more actions to be mapped. Fighting games like Street Fighter would've been unplayable without them.
• Polygons allowed for models that could move around in three dimensions, this goes hand in hand with the analog stick in making 3D games like Mario 64 and the like possible.
• I don't know why the Expansion pack is a gimmick, but it did enhance games like Majora's Mask by giving the console more RAM to work with.
• Controller Pack; I got nothing, but I would distinguish between optional addons that are sold separately vs. irremovable features built into the console/handheld itself.
• Triggers in the shoulder buttons; again, more precision in the controls
• Again, I don't see how the Wavebird is a gimmick; it's convenient, but you still use it the exact same way as a normal controller. And again, it's optional.
• The Wii games that use motion controls use them in a way that wouldn't be possible with other controls. THAT's an innovation. See my Mario Kart example. Ditto with the DS,
• The Game Boy Color; you can do more with a full palette of colors than with a few shades of green/gray. That's a fact.

Does the Gamepad achieve anything comparable to these? It's a regular controller with a moderately large touchscreen and pseudo-portability.

The GamePad allows for off-screen play (a convenience), multi-screen play (which can be used creatively much in the same way as the DS), touch-screen play (not previously possible on a console), asymmetrical gameplay (as seen in many Nintendoland/Wii Party U games), another way of aiming versus the control sticks (gyroscopic aiming makes it very easy to shoot things). Is it as good as some of their past gimmicks? Perhaps not, and it's certainly failed to capture the imagination of the public. But that happens sometimes. Nintendo has a long history of these types of successes and failures.

But I think you kind of missed my point. Nintendo has always utilized gimmicks to provide new experiences, and oftentimes they're so successful that people stop seeing them as "gimmicks" because they are adopted by the entire industry. Asking for "no gimmicks" is a ridiculously conservative stance that comes across as old man yelling at cloud. "Damn kids these days!"

 

[Sterok]

The Wii at its core was designed to make gaming simpler and have broader appeal than the standard buttons and sticks did. That's why Wii Sports was such a good game. It was simple and easy to understand, but still fun. In contrast, the gamepad is an even more complex controller than the standard ones we're used to. It's got all the regular buttons and sticks, a second screen that acts as a touchscreen, gyro controls, and a microphone. Look at Nintendo Land. For a game meant to show off the console's features, it does a lot. It shows off every aspect of the gamepad from asymmetrical gameplay to gyro aiming to more. It was complex. It was very good, but it lacked the beautiful simplicity and broad appeal that Wii Sports had. Which is why the Wii U is Wii U. Nintendo went in the opposite direction that the Wii went, and it bit them in the butt.

We very much want innovation from Nintendo's hardware. Frequently that leads to games that can't be properly enjoyed with anything else. Wii Sports, Mario Galaxy, and Skyward Sword could not be made the way they were without the Wii Remote and Nunchuck, one of the greatest controllers of all time. And it's not like they abandoned traditional controls in any way. They still made games like Fire Emblem, Super Smash Bros, and Xenoblade that were meant to be enjoyed with a more standard controller, though of course you could use the Wiimote in those cases as well. For the most part they built their games on a case by case basis on what controller was best for it. Maybe not always, but usually. They never abandoned traditional gaming. They expanded what gaming could do beyond what we were comfortable with. That's what they need to do for the next home console if they want a chance to find success.

 

[Gbpackers31]

The GamePad allows for off-screen play (a convenience), multi-screen play (which can be used creatively much in the same way as the DS), touch-screen play (not previously possible on a console), asymmetrical gameplay (as seen in many Nintendoland/Wii Party U games), another way of aiming versus the control sticks (gyroscopic aiming makes it very easy to shoot things). Is it as good as some of their past gimmicks? Perhaps not, and it's certainly failed to capture the imagination of the public. But that happens sometimes. Nintendo has a long history of these types of successes and failures.

But I think you kind of missed my point. Nintendo has always utilized gimmicks to provide new experiences, and oftentimes they're so successful that people stop seeing them as "gimmicks" because they are adopted by the entire industry. Asking for "no gimmicks" is a ridiculously conservative stance that comes across as old man yelling at cloud. "Damn kids these days!"

What they really need to focus on is solving problems. All those past 'gimmicks' were solutions to fundamental problems in gaming, and most, if not all, did so inexpensively without ruining any prior experience. What is the Wii U really trying to solve that is worth the high costs of the gamepad and entire design of the system (as well as the possible ruined immersion and low accessibility of the touchscreen controller)? I don't see any of those 'benefits' to be game-changers, and thus, I see the Wii U as Nintendo trying to be different for the sake of being different. And to me, that's completely missing the point of innovation.

 

[EatinOlives]

You're right, I'd still buy a standard console from Nintendo to play first-party games, but I'm a diehard, lifelong Nintendo fan, and our numbers have been dwindling. I do think Nintendo can pull in more people than just the true believers by doing something fresh and unique. And what about new users, the next generation of potential Nintendo fans? Will Nintendo lose kids if they have to charge as much as the other guys for comparable tech?

Setting aside the Wii U Gamepad for a moment, I don't know how anyone can look at Nintendo's past successes and suggest it'd be wisest for them to not innovate. The directional pad, shoulder buttons, four face buttons, analog stick, Rumble Pak, Mode 7 graphics, motion control, touch screen, dual screens, glasses-free 3D -- if Nintendo had simply made the "expected" console at any previous point in its history, think of what would've been lost!

But I get that people are afraid Nintendo will try something that doesn't prove popular, that gets in the way of playing games in ways we already know we enjoy, like motion controls sometimes did. But for every Wii Remote or Virtual Boy, there's a lot more of the good stuff.

I feel like Nintendo has innovated on hardware in two different ways: either they have a reason to innovate or they don't. The control stick was an innovation necessary to map 3D movement and its additional granularity of input into a device that could still be operated with just one thumb like before.

On the other hand, the Gamepad very much feels like it was developed for the sole purpose of Nintendo being able to point at it and say "look how different we are!"

When Nintendo does the former, it advances the industry and opens up new possibilities for their own games. When they do the latter, it's pointless at best and actively harms their own games at worst. Iwata's statement regarding the NX makes it feel like it's the latter. All he says is he thinks hardware staying the same is "dull", he makes no mention of a new problem or limitation of current gaming that they want to advance. In other worse, he wants another solution in search of a problem. That's not a compelling reason to develop novelty hardware.

The GamePad allows for off-screen play (a convenience), multi-screen play (which can be used creatively much in the same way as the DS), touch-screen play (not previously possible on a console), asymmetrical gameplay (as seen in many Nintendoland/Wii Party U games), another way of aiming versus the control sticks (gyroscopic aiming makes it very easy to shoot things). Is it as good as some of their past gimmicks? Perhaps not, and it's certainly failed to capture the imagination of the public. But that happens sometimes. Nintendo has a long history of these types of successes and failures.

But I think you kind of missed my point. Nintendo has always utilized gimmicks to provide new experiences, and oftentimes they're so successful that people stop seeing them as "gimmicks" because they are adopted by the entire industry. Asking for "no gimmicks" is a ridiculously conservative stance that comes across as old man yelling at cloud. "Damn kids these days!"

Nintendo themselves have barely done anything at all with these novelties afforded by the Gamepad. The vast majority of the time the game's output to the TV is duplicated in the Gamepad screen, and that's the entirety of that game's Gamepad use. Nearly all of Nintendo's biggest titles, from Smash 4 to MK8 to 3D World, either use these elements very sparingly or don't use it at all.

Nintendo themselves are largely uninterested with honing in on the very features they sold the WiiU with, given how little (if at all) they appear on their own high-profile games. So who's being "ridiculously conservative", by your own logic?

Easily their best console experiences this generation have used "no gimmicks", so I have no clue where you get the idea that people who don't want them are the ones at fault and yelling at clouds. It's Nintendo who's providing these very good experiences using traditional controls, so shouldn't you be mad with them right now?

 

[lyrick]

I like the OPs Fox News worthy omission of the quantifier "Only"

There is quite a difference between:

Expanding on existing hardware is dull

and

Only expanding on existing hardware is dull

It's almost like one helps further the thinking that a company ONLY works on gimmicks, while the other upgrades their hardware then focuses on a differentiating factor, beyond the hardware bump.

 

[Lumyst]

These are solid points, but it's entirely possible to make less technically advanced games on top end hardware. However, by reducing your console's specs, you're automatically ceding the AAA games and more importantly the audiences those games cater to. Without that audience, who else can Nintendo rely on? The same Nintendo fans who managed to buy Wii Us in near-disastrous numbers?

What interested me a lot was how the Xbox 360 and PS3 outsold the WiiU for some months in 2013. That could mean that price sensitive gamers, the ones who were willing to buy the consoles when they were cheaper, saw the 360 and PS3 ecosystems as more entertaining than Nintendo's. If Nintendo chooses not to compete for the early adopter kind of core gamer, but instead wants the value conscious gamers and casual gamers, then I agree they do need to compete at least in terms of making their platform as entertaining as the Xbox and PS platforms. I think EA said that the WiiU felt like a box that wasn't connected.

Nintendo should regret the most that the Wii and DS weren't as focused on online connectivity as the PS and Xbox (and later, mobile) because that may have been a factor in consumers finding other platforms more entertaining. I wish Wii and DS had online storefronts capable of full retail titles, because that would have revealed the breadth of content that people may have overlooked due to preconceptions that there was nothing suitable to them on those platforms. I myself overlooked many games due to what I heard about the Wii and so I did not proactively try to inform myself about what was in the console's library. Nintendo could have addressed those criticisms by showcasing software directly to users, instead of hoping they somehow discover it through other means. (They're doing it with the WiiU though, we even get automatic notifications on the gamepad when a game releases, haha). But now it is too late for those games to have built audiences that could have helped retain customers in the Nintendo ecosystem.

I'm glad Nintendo is partnering with DeNA now in order to address that connectivity issue, but it should be Nintendo's huge regret that they did not retain a connection with their 200 million customers of the Wii and DS in order to retain them. The NX sounds like it will be part of Nintendo's plan to attract the customers they connect with through mobile so I think those are the customers that Nintendo most wants to profit off of with the NX. They shouldn't think that they aren't competing against MS and Sony though to get those people, especially in the PS4 and XB1's later years, as there's games such as Minecraft that show that one can make a phenomenon-level game without showing up on Nintendo's platforms.

 

[Chmpocalypse]

Lock if old.

http://kotaku.com/what-to-expect-nintendos-new-hardware-a-surprise-prob-1693052456



Here's the original article in Japanese: http://business.nikkeibp.co.jp/article/topics/20150320/278995/?P=1

Gimmick ahoy!

Will it be more like the serendipitously successful wiimote? Or the poorly-designed unappealing gamepad?

 

[balgajo]

They applied the same mentality to the Wii and DS and look where that got them.

You can't just dismiss the mentality when it didn't work once.

The problem that this time it will be more difficult for them to attract casual consumers. And if the hardware is not powerful enough to run third-party software most of hardcore gamers will give a shit. In the end they will have us, Nintendo fans, and people who buy more than one home console per generation.
I'm yet to know a friend who have a Wii U and nothing more. But I know a lot of people who only have a PS4 and that's enough for them.

I think that if the gimmick was optional they could focus on designing a hardware on par with Microsoft and Sony, strong enough to appeal everyone. Balance board for example sold a lot and yet they didn't force it's features in every game. Repeating the exaclty same thought they do at Wii/Wii U generation wouldn't be wise. They have one very good experience and another very bad one.

 

[Somnid]

Why do we keep lumping every novel thing added to a console together, as if they're created equally or were embraced equally?

There seems to be general confusion with strategy scope. There's the 100 foot view which looks at what any particular innovation is, how the market reacts and what it does for success. You either win or lose this based on how well you read the market and just as often how lucky you got. This would be the Wii strategy or the Wii U strategy. What thing to you try to sell and how can you pivot to make the most of it over the lifetime? There's another much higher view that says continually innovating and creating new things creates a successful business. This isn't about any particular technology. All companies have highs and lows, you win some and you lose some. The point is that if you aren't playing because you are afraid to lose then you also can't win. Eventually though, if you put it off, you will be forced to try and hope it's not to late and this time will likely not be on your own terms and failure will be the end of you. This high level is the Nintendo business strategy Iwata speaks to.

 

[Chindogg]

Does the Gamepad achieve anything comparable to these? It's a regular controller with a moderately large touchscreen and pseudo-portability.

I'd argue that asymmetric multiplayer is a huge innovation done pretty right with the GamePad.

 

[jwhit28]

Nintendo builds its hardware to serve their own software needs. These needs do not coincide with modern gaming hardware and infrastructure trends, so Nintendo gets left out of the loop. If they want to get back into the game, they will have to bite the bullet and embrace all of these modern technologies, but they're apparently unwilling to do that.

I'm not saying I want Nintendo to just make a PS4 and slap Nintendo on it. I'm saying their recent choice in hardware quirks just aren't worth it and it doesn't seem like their own developers have any ideas to make them seem worth it. I don't think the PS4 hardware is anything to crow about. I think the way they went about the design, with their software partners request in mind is what is special about the PS4. If Nintendo's developers and closest 3rd party partners have the same needs as what developers requested in PS4, great. If not oh well.

 

[Great Puma]

I feel like Nintendo has innovated on hardware in two different ways: either they have a reason to innovate or they don't. The control stick was an innovation necessary to map 3D movement and its additional granularity of input into a device that could still be operated with just one thumb like before.

On the other hand, the Gamepad very much feels like it was developed for the sole purpose of Nintendo being able to point at it and say "look how different we are!"

When Nintendo does the former, it advances the industry and opens up new possibilities for their own games. When they do the latter, it's pointless at best and actively harms their own games at worst. Iwata's statement regarding the NX makes it feel like it's the latter. All he says is he thinks hardware staying the same is "dull", he makes no mention of a new problem or limitation of current gaming that they want to advance. In other worse, he wants another solution in search of a problem. That's not a compelling reason to develop novelty hardware.

You're extrapolating quite a lot from the little Iwata has said on the matter so far.

I wouldn't say that the Gamepad was an altogether bad idea -- it certainly doesn't hurt the experience of Nintendo's games like motion control sometimes did. At best there's a good use for the touch screen, and at worst you just ignore it. Ironically, I think the problem here is that it wasn't disruptive enough.

I agree with your thoughts on the two types of necessary/unecessary innovations, but the processes behind their development may not have been all that different. It's just that sometimes an idea wins out and bears fruit for years to come, and sometimes it doesn't catch on. Something like the analog stick was clearly incorporated with key, substantial gameplay in mind, but also, Nintendo eventually justified the touch screen/dual screens of the DS after seemingly having no idea what to do with those features at launch. Hopefully Nintendo learned its lesson after acknowledging its failure to justify the Gamepad with killer apps right out of the gate.

 

[Vinci]

They should have applied this philosophy to the Wii U after seeing it succeed with the Wii.

If it were so easy to do, everyone would do it. Nintendo is extremely talented, but you're asking them to disrupt the video game industry time after time, again and again? That's next to impossible. No one company is that talented. Is it possible they finally came up with the right idea? Yes. But we'll have to see what they have in mind before predicting any potential success in achieving what they did with the Wii again.

EDIT: Disruption is as much about timing as it is the innovation driving it. Nintendo didn't have it with the Wii U. It's that simple. It's not a button they can turn on and off.