Support NeoGAF

[Great Puma]

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

I listed Nintendo's past innovations to illustrate the fact that the company has a long, mostly successful history of introducing new ideas. Some of those features were bigger hits than others, and a couple were duds, but gaming has benefited from them greatly on the whole. Why should Nintendo stop trying new things now?

 

[Lebon14]

I think this could be referring to cross platform development between console and handheld. Taking your games with you anywhere and then finishing them on your console could change things up.

Best bet so far, imo.

 

[Chmpocalypse]

I have not been as excited for a Nintendo system since before the GameCube. I really hope they're gonna pull out something amazing. But the more he says stuff like this, the more worried I become that we're looking at yet another gimmick and yet another generation without third-party support. Please, prove me wrong, Iwata-san....

Will third parties ever come back, though? They don't sell well on Nintendo systems, the company doesn't give a fuck about supporting third parties, and Nintendo's most diehard fans tend to look down their nose at non-Nintendo games. I don't see anything to support their return.

 

[Vinci]

Best bet so far, imo.

I actually like that idea as well, particularly since it would help Nintendo deal with the droughts likely to occur on any future platform. All of their design teams on one device rather than split across console and handheld? That could be pretty impactful.

 

[Great Puma]

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?

Personally, I think going to developers is pointless. I don't think there's anything Nintendo can do -- anything it can put into its next system -- to bring third-parties back to the table in any significant way. Not counting the mass-market "fad" games that companies like Ubisoft turned into hits on Wii, the more-traditional multi-platform titles have been drying up since the end of the Super NES over 15 years ago. A whole generation of gamers has grown up in a world in which Nintendo systems aren't known for having first-person shooters or even sports games. It's a chicken-and-egg problem now: the people who stuck with Nintendo did so to play Nintendo games, and they won't support most non-Nintendo stuff to any significant degree. And because third-parties can't find a foothold, the people who left Nintendo over the years aren't tempted to come back. So realistically, Nintendo has to go it alone. I mean, people talked about how Nintendo needed to get publishers back on board with the GameCube, and then Wii, and then Wii U -- it just ain't happening. Maybe if Microsoft sells Xbox and Sony folds...

And you're assuming that the new feature(s) of the NX will be bad, when the point I like to make is that, historically, Nintendo's new ideas hit more than they miss. The best possible result is a system that is great at playing Nintendo games the way we love to experience them, but with a cool extra something you can't get anywhere else. I think the odds of Nintendo succeeding in that are at least as likely as Nintendo failing.

 

[protomouse]

Gimmick ahoy!

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

Serendipitous? Man, the lengths some people go to downplay how incredibly well-executed the Wii was. A novel concept, a killer app, an appropriate price, instantly recognizable branding, and razor sharp marketing. Nintendo didn't haphazardly stumble upon all these things.

This right here:

is some Apple iPod level shit.

 

[Jorok Goldblade]

As for a console, I guess the main worry with "trying another gimmick" is that this is going to further torpedo third party support compared to a more traditional successor. I think that shipped may have already sailed though. Nintendo has screwed up third party support one too many times, I don't think suddenly making a console more like Microsoft and Sony are going to say, get Grand Theft Auto on a Nintendo console.

The Wii U pretty much finished it off. The only things they have left to lose on the third party front are Sonic and shovelware.

 

[Chmpocalypse]

And the Wii U is great!

Wait, what was the problem again?

That outside of the Nintendo fan niche the public is wholly disinterested in it.

 

[Chmpocalypse]

I just don't understand why people get excited over Nintendo hardware, be it handheld or home console. You all drink Nintendo's kool-aid about it having some kind of revolutionary feature that will change gaming as we know it, but it turns out it's expensive hardware for how underpowered it is because of the "revolutionary" gimmick they're trying to sell you on. 3rd parties don't make games for it and even first party games don't utilize the gimmick in any interesting way.

After the revolutionary DS with the amazing inventory screen on the bottom, or the Wii with the amazing waggle-fest controller, or the 3DS with the useless 3D, or the WiiU with the amazing tablet controller, you're getting excited about the NX?

Weird.

Imagine how great the 3DS could have been if it was packing Vita-level hardware with a slick 5" qHD screen? Imagine playing first party games on that beast. Instead you have two tiny low-res screens but it costs the same, if not more, than a Vita, because of the pseudo-3D effect. And don't say the Vita is too big when the most successful iteration of the 3DS as of late is the XL.

Holy shit, this post nails it.

 

[Chmpocalypse]

The Wii did revolutionize gaming.

For like five minutes, then everyone moved on.

 

[jwhit28]

Personally, I think going to developers is pointless. I don't think there's anything Nintendo can do -- anything it can put into its next system -- to bring third-parties back to the table in any significant way. Not counting the mass-market "fad" games that companies like Ubisoft turned into hits on Wii, the more-traditional multi-platform titles have been drying up since the end of the Super NES over 15 years ago. A whole generation of gamers has grown up in a world in which Nintendo systems aren't known for having first-person shooters or even sports games. It's a chicken-and-egg problem now: the people who stuck with Nintendo did so to play Nintendo games, and they won't support most non-Nintendo stuff to any significant degree. And because third-parties can't find a foothold, the people who left Nintendo over the years aren't tempted to come back. So realistically, Nintendo has to go it alone. I mean, people talked about how Nintendo needed to get publishers back on board with the GameCube, and then Wii, and then Wii U -- it just ain't happening. Maybe if Microsoft sells Xbox and Sony folds...

And you're assuming that the new feature(s) of the NX will be bad, when the point I like to make is that, historically, Nintendo's new ideas hit more than they miss. The best possible result is a system that is great at playing Nintendo games the way we love to experience them, but with a cool extra something you can't get anywhere else. I think the odds of Nintendo succeeding in that are at least as likely as Nintendo failing.

I'm talking about internally at Nintendo. Nintendo's own developers can't find a simple way to make the Wii U gamepad appealing, but now they are stuck with it. Although Nintendo games are still reviewing really well, they have an anchor attached to them called the Wii U with a focus on hardware nobody has a breakout idea for. I don't think the Pokemon, or Nintendog moment is going to happen on Wii U.

 

[Coolwhip]

At how many consoles sold does it make sense for Nintendo to not make a console and just release games on PS/Xbox/PC?

 

[Chmpocalypse]

We've come to a day and age where every current system is powerful.

We need better games, not better tech.

Now if the Wii U produced N64 graphics today, you'd have a point.

More power is always welcome but games nowadays don't look shitty and won't look shitty 10 years from now.

You know it's not just about graphics, right?

 

[Great Puma]

After the revolutionary DS with the amazing inventory screen on the bottom, or the Wii with the amazing waggle-fest controller, or the 3DS with the useless 3D, or the WiiU with the amazing tablet controller, you're getting excited about the NX?

With the exception of Wii U, every system you just mentioned was a success. If Nintendo's goal was to interest a lot of people and make lots of money, then mission accomplished. I'll grant you that motion controls didn't always work well, but I personally enjoyed the touchscreen on the DS (even when it only offered a handy Metroidvania map), and I really enjoy stereoscopic 3D. As much as some of these features tend to get hated on, there are plenty of people out there who enjoy them, which is partly why those systems were hits.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

At how many consoles sold does it make sense for Nintendo to not make a console and just release games on PS/Xbox/PC?

Iwata said back during the GC days that if they are only going to sell 20 million consoles per generation then theres no point in being in the hardware market (and keep in mind, games were alot cheaper to make then, and they didnt have to invest a ton of money into Online/OS/U.I/ the way they do nowadays).

So i would imagine he's wanting 50+ million at least (sold for a profit, not a loss like the Wii U) and with a nice attach ratio.

With that being said, they wouldn't go third party unless they had absolutely no other choice (even though i think they would be an absolute juggernaut if they partnered with Playstation).

 

[pelicansurf]

Goggle-less VR. It just streams the game right to your brain. Boom, son.

 

[StevieP]

For like five minutes, then everyone moved on.

The ideas executed during the wii/Ds generation are still heavily used today. Except not as heavily with the small niche that's still buying and doing their primary gaming on consoles.

 

[Clefargle]

I just don't understand why people get excited over Nintendo hardware, be it handheld or home console. You all drink Nintendo's kool-aid about it having some kind of revolutionary feature that will change gaming as we know it, but it turns out it's expensive hardware for how underpowered it is because of the "revolutionary" gimmick they're trying to sell you on. 3rd parties don't make games for it and even first party games don't utilize the gimmick in any interesting way.

After the revolutionary DS with the amazing inventory screen on the bottom, or the Wii with the amazing waggle-fest controller, or the 3DS with the useless 3D, or the WiiU with the amazing tablet controller, you're getting excited about the NX?

Weird.

Imagine how great the 3DS could have been if it was packing Vita-level hardware with a slick 5" qHD screen? Imagine playing first party games on that beast. Instead you have two tiny low-res screens but it costs the same, if not more, than a Vita, because of the pseudo-3D effect. And don't say the Vita is too big when the most successful iteration of the 3DS as of late is the XL.

Try this junior

Desalinate a bit

 

[Scum]

We meet again, StevieP.

 

[EVIL]

Try this junior

Lol, no need to be a prick

 

[Sterok]

You know, I'm pretty sure the DS was by far the most important and influential console of the 7th generation. You know, since it only helped pioneer touch screen gaming that's used in the most popular devices out there these days. Even if you really, really hate motion controls, their contributions in touchscreens are impossible to ignore.

 

[sfried]

The solution to Nintendo's woes isn't simple.

If only half of GAF realized this...

But yeah, all I can expect right now is the unexpected.

 

[MarkusRJR]

Try this junior

Desalinate a bit

What a dick response to a decent post. He makes some decent points there and you just brush him off with a 'lol junior' response. Embarrassing. Makes this community seem like GameFAQs or something.

 

[10k]

I just don't understand why people get excited over Nintendo hardware, be it handheld or home console. You all drink Nintendo's kool-aid about it having some kind of revolutionary feature that will change gaming as we know it, but it turns out it's expensive hardware for how underpowered it is because of the "revolutionary" gimmick they're trying to sell you on. 3rd parties don't make games for it and even first party games don't utilize the gimmick in any interesting way.

After the revolutionary DS with the amazing inventory screen on the bottom, or the Wii with the amazing waggle-fest controller, or the 3DS with the useless 3D, or the WiiU with the amazing tablet controller, you're getting excited about the NX?

Weird.

Imagine how great the 3DS could have been if it was packing Vita-level hardware with a slick 5" qHD screen? Imagine playing first party games on that beast. Instead you have two tiny low-res screens but it costs the same, if not more, than a Vita, because of the pseudo-3D effect. And don't say the Vita is too big when the most successful iteration of the 3DS as of late is the XL.

Perhaps you don't understand how someone can like something you don't? Maybe there are gamers out there that like the software Nintendo outputs and don't care much for power?

 

[maquiladora]

Try this junior

Desalinate a bit

Cringing at this response.

 

[Great Puma]

I'm talking about internally at Nintendo. Nintendo's own developers can't find a simple way to make the Wii U gamepad appealing, but now they are stuck with it. Although Nintendo games are still reviewing really well, they have an anchor attached to them called the Wii U with a focus on hardware nobody has a breakout idea for. I don't think the Pokemon, or Nintendog moment is going to happen on Wii U.

It's clear the Wii U will go down as a commercial failure, but I wonder if the lion's share of that blame is really the Wii U controller. Don't get me wrong, Nintendo definitely hasn't blown people away with the Gamepad, but does it really prevent people from enjoying a standard, traditional gaming experience? I suppose the best argument against the Gamepad is that, theoretically, the cost of including it could've been funneled into better tech specs. Everybody likes great graphics, but I'm not sure even that would've done the trick...

 

[Sandfox]

Serendipitous? Man, the lengths some people go to downplay how incredibly well-executed the Wii was. A novel concept, a killer app, an appropriate price, instantly recognizable branding, and razor sharp marketing. Nintendo didn't haphazardly stumble upon all these things.

This right here:

is some Apple iPod level shit.

Pretty much.

 

[Sandfox]

What a dick response to a decent post. He makes some decent points there and you just brush him off with a 'lol junior' response. Embarrassing. Makes this community seem like GameFAQs or something.

The "kool-aid" thing in the original post kinda makes me want to just brush it off too tbqh.

 

[timetokill]

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.

The Wii U Gamepad was made in response to a problem -- the isolation of family members when using media. Iwata referenced it and the book "Alone Together" (iirc) when discussing the Gamepad. They saw a problem in how the console was perceived in the living room space, and how someone playing a game monopolized the TV and sent the rest of the family packing, that it had become an "either/or" problem for families. Additionally, Nintendo saw that touchscreen gaming was becoming more and more popular, so how could they translate that to the console space?

Now, maybe the Gamepad didn't completely solve those particular issues, but they are clearly addressing problems.

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!"

...

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?

The duplication of the game to the Gamepad is part of the innovation in of itself. It doesn't have to change the game -- the concept was built around allowing people in many cases to play the game off their television, freeing it up for other people to use in the same room. In that light what you're saying makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Beyond that, some of my best Nintendo experiences with the Wii U have been playing Nintendoland or Wii Party U with my friends and family using asymmetrical gameplay methods, or playing Pikmin 3 using the touch and second screen capabilities of the Gamepad. It's been playing NES Remix or Mario Kart 8 on the Gamepad while my family is watching a TV show in the same room. It's been creating stages on the Gamepad in Smash Bros U. Moving management and UI off the screen in Wind Waker HD to the GamePad (also excellent in the DS/3DS versions of Zelda games). It's drawing little pictures in Miiverse on a lark.

The idea that they're not "using" the Gamepad is frankly utter nonsense.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

"However, if you only expand upon existing hardware, it's dull," Iwata said. "In some shape or form, we're always thinking about how we want to surprise players as well as our desire to change each person's video gaming life."

Different time, same excuses. Iwata keeps bringing this bullshit over and over and it's a major reason why Nintendo is in their current situation with Wii U. Probably he'll make the same mistake that alienated both developers and gamers alike to withdraw from Nintendo consoles, sacrifice hardware power and features over the excuse of "innovation" and "uniqueness". Even if they manage to repeat the lightning in a bottle/blue ocean strategy from Wii, it'll probably be short-term (as Wii was) and won't bring back third-parties with such direction, despite Wii's groundbreaking sales, it didn't managed to convince third-parties to go innovation over performance. This works for handhelds and mobile, but not for home consoles. Iwata needs to be in touch on how this market really works. If he's trying to repeat Wii/Wii U approach once again, they'll have a hard time to appeal to the market.

 

[RM8]

The "kool-aid" thing in the original post kinda makes me want to just bush it off too tbqh.

That and the fact that he already decided we think a cool new feature in an individual system will revolutionize gaming. Then he says 3DS should have been more like Vita.

 

[DarkConfidant]

Should be interesting. It's Nintendo. No matter how underwhelmed I may have been with previous offerings, their games have never been bad, and the games are what matter most.

Spoiler

I do, however, dream of a day where Nintendo goes software only.

 

[SuperLeviathan]

The Wii U Gamepad was made in response to a problem -- the isolation of family members when using media. Iwata referenced it and the book "Alone Together" (iirc) when discussing the Gamepad. They saw a problem in how the console was perceived in the living room space, and how someone playing a game monopolized the TV and sent the rest of the family packing, that it had become an "either/or" problem for families. Additionally, Nintendo saw that touchscreen gaming was becoming more and more popular, so how could they translate that to the console space?

Now, maybe the Gamepad didn't completely solve those particular issues, but they are clearly addressing problems.

One thing I brought up with the N64 Rumble Pack and the GC Wavebird was that these were options. Their respective systems were perfectly usable without them. The Gamepad simply isn't that indispensable for most of the Wii U library, and there's no separating it from the console because the whole OS infrastructure is built around it. That's what people are referring to when they bring up gimmicks.

 

[Jaymageck]

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.

The "Disruptive enough" comment is interesting.

Hardware innovations are successful when they inspire talented developers to do interesting and engaging things. So, the Wii had some innovative internal projects quite early (Wii Sports being a good example) and encouraged a diverse amount of experimentation. The DS was the same actually.

The Wii U is essentially a home console version of the DS where you can move the second screen. Right away it sat in this uncomfortable zone where it was only marginally different and not in a way that anyone really "wanted". Like, touch and motion inputs are intuitive "imagine if I could swing my sword myself", "imagine if I could touch the game world". The Wii U doesn't intuitively feel like that and I think that was obvious to developers early on. There was no flood of creativity for the console, more that developers had to "find ways" to use it rather than just unleash the ideas they had.

Some people might say that part of the problem with the Wii U is that publishers are more risk averse now due to rising development costs. That's true, but are there a queue of top developers on kickstarter asking for funds for amazing Wii U project ideas they have? If there is, I haven't seen the news on here (and I've been lurking for like 4 years).

Any new system they make I think will face similar issues to the Wii U if it offers the same problem - new experiences for the sake of forcing new experiences. Not necessarily because those inputs are bad (I don't think the Wii U's core concept is bad necessarily), but because if their ideas aren't inspiring, then they're not going to gather momentum and support.

I really hope whatever this ends up being, new home console or not, this inspires some kind of creativity from the dev community, something that taps into a latent desire of some sort. Otherwise, I hope they have a solid mobile plan...

 

[Mr.Gingerlicious]

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

You are right, in that the immediate impact isn't there, the future will tell if anyone wants to learn something from their "experimenting".

But lets be real, obviously Sony (and to a lesser extent Microsoft) have been on a similar wave-length in regards to Nintendo's path with controllers/interactivity. For example, Dualshock 4 (touch pad, headphone/mic port), Vita + Smartphone Remote Play, Microsoft's Smartglass. Sure, we can argue "chicken and the egg" here, but obviously trying out "gimmicks" in this vain was on everyone's agenda, but Nintendo decided to go all-in.

 

[Chmpocalypse]

It means "gimmick" should be a banned word when talking Nintendo by and large much of what's called "gimmick" is actually innovation...

But let's continue to give it a shitty label.

Innovations have to be accepted and used to be thought of as such. Hence, the gamepad is not an innovation, just a failed attempt to innovate.

 

[The Abominable Snowman]

Though I typically dislike Nintendo's actual consoles (IMO, after the SNES they felt comfortable having the WORST HW. PS2 and Xbox especially had far too many legs up on the GC for it to have released after all of them, and we all know about the Wii and Wii U) I am always excited for Nintendo games.

IMO, the key to being a competitor would be them not trying to shape the market but find what they can do to appeal to all ends of the market. Don't try to replace our tablets with weird controller hybrids but maybe release an app that we can use to remote play and use our phones and tablets as second screens and controllers. Basically do what Sony tried to do with Remote Play and Microsoft tried with SmartGlass but actually pull it off.

In addition, they need a competent online/third party strategy

I say they make a "Steam Machine" with their own locked down version of Linux that not only has exclusive access to a Nintendo store and various Linux apps (not all, of course) but also Steam. Partner with Valve on maybe even integrating the storefronts and being able to play those 1000 Steam Linux games.

Of course, they'd likely have to throw away BC, which I'd be happy if they did. Maybe offer a PSP->PSVita style emulation via digital distribution. Nintendo fans like me have no problem buying their favorite games again and again.

 

[Munkybhai]

The "Disruptive enough" comment is interesting.

Hardware innovations are successful when they inspire talented developers to do interesting and engaging things. So, the Wii had some innovative internal projects quite early (Wii Sports being a good example) and encouraged a diverse amount of experimentation. The DS was the same actually.

The Wii U is essentially a home console version of the DS where you can move the second screen. Right away it sat in this uncomfortable zone where it was only marginally different and not in a way that anyone really "wanted". Like, touch and motion inputs are intuitive "imagine if I could swing my sword myself", "imagine if I could touch the game world". The Wii U doesn't intuitively feel like that and I think that was obvious to developers early on. There was no flood of creativity for the console, more that developers had to "find ways" to use it rather than just unleash the ideas they had.

Some people might say that part of the problem with the Wii U is that publishers are more risk averse now due to rising development costs. That's true, but are there a queue of top developers on kickstarter asking for funds for amazing Wii U project ideas they have? If there is, I haven't seen the news on here (and I've been lurking for like 4 years).

Any new system they make I think will face similar issues to the Wii U if it offers the same problem - new experiences for the sake of forcing new experiences. Not necessarily because those inputs are bad (I don't think the Wii U's core concept is bad necessarily), but because if their ideas aren't inspiring, then they're not going to gather momentum and support.

I really hope whatever this ends up being, new home console or not, this inspires some kind of creativity from the dev community, something that taps into a latent desire of some sort. Otherwise, I hope they have a solid mobile plan...

There are a few games that seem to be from developers who are enthusiastic about the Wii U, like Affordable Space Adventures and Hex Heroes, but you're right, they are few and far between. I find that a shame. If Nintendo took some of the mini games on Nintendo Land and made them online capable (like the ghost game or the candy game) I would be on that all day.

 

[Nanashrew]

Though I typically dislike Nintendo's actual consoles (IMO, after the SNES they felt comfortable having the WORST HW. PS2 and Xbox especially had far too many legs up on the GC for it to have released after all of them, and we all know about the Wii and Wii U) I am always excited for Nintendo games.

IMO, the key to being a competitor would be them not trying to shape the market but find what they can do to appeal to all ends of the market. Don't try to replace our tablets with weird controller hybrids but maybe release an app that we can use to remote play and use our phones and tablets as second screens and controllers. Basically do what Sony tried to do with Remote Play and Microsoft tried with SmartGlass but actually pull it off.

In addition, they need a competent online/third party strategy

I say they make a "Steam Machine" with their own locked down version of Linux that not only has exclusive access to a Nintendo store and various Linux apps (not all, of course) but also Steam. Partner with Valve on maybe even integrating the storefronts and being able to play those 1000 Steam Linux games.

Of course, they'd likely have to throw away BC, which I'd be happy if they did. Maybe offer a PSP->PSVita style emulation via digital distribution. Nintendo fans like me have no problem buying their favorite games again and again.

I wouldn't say the Gamecube was bad. Xbox had problems of ever reaching its full potential because it was severely bottlenecked. And while the Gamecube did not have some of the cool shader stuff the Xbox had, it was able to keep up relatively well with how incredibly efficient it was.

In terms of scale from weakest to strongest it's Dreamcast > PS2 > GC > Xbox.

I also remember a time when Mikami actually hated the PS2 and said it was difficult to develop for. Sony's business savvy is more or less what helps them in the end to get developers on their system even if it's a pain to work with.

 

[atbigelow]

Wii U may not have set the gaming world on fire, but its GamePad streaming idea definitely set the stage for such things as NVIDIA's Shield and Steam's In-Home Streaming. Nintendo can't always be the ones to perfect the ideas, and even then the PC equivalents have their own issues that don't stack up to Nintendo's solution. Of course there are trade-offs with each.

Nintendo is right in that just spec bumps aren't innovative. I've updated my PC over the years, rebuilt it, etc. and it's played games better and better, but not in new ways. It's all a combination of how you use that processing power with the inputs. Even Nintendo's own games couldn't be where they are without the Wii U's processing power. They couldn't do a 4-player, 60 FPS Super Mario 3D World.

I just hope whatever road they are going down, it's compatible with what people want to build with and play on. You'll need as low friction as possible environment for devs; that's where I'm concerned these days.

 

[Pociask]

Serendipitous? Man, the lengths some people go to downplay how incredibly well-executed the Wii was. A novel concept, a killer app, an appropriate price, instantly recognizable branding, and razor sharp marketing. Nintendo didn't haphazardly stumble upon all these things.

This right here:

is some Apple iPod level shit.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't that have been put together by Reggie and Cammie? Folks on video game forums can dump on them, but NoA knew how to move product. What the hell happened? Put to the side the quality of the Wii U itself - remember how terrible the dub step what u will play next campaign was? It's hard to believe that came from the same company that brought out "Wii would like to play."

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

For like five minutes, then everyone moved on.

You sound mad. Especially since in that 5 minutes it managed to sell more than the PS3/360...

 

[Chmpocalypse]

Innovation is simply adding something new. Contrary is tradition so analogue sticks are now more a tradition for FPS. Wii remote was innovation, you may didn't enjoy it but it was.

That's not what innovation is.

 

[inner-G]

The whole controller is a screen and we got rid of the second screen.

 

[Munkybhai]

Edit: double post

 

[Hubble]

After the Wii and Wii U and its horrible online infrastructure and hardware, I am nervous about Iwata leading on the NX. He seems antiquidated in the console space relying on gimmicks instead of competing.

 

[The Abominable Snowman]

I wouldn't say the Gamecube was bad. Xbox had problems of ever reaching its full potential because it was severely bottlenecked. And while the Gamecube did not have some of the cool shader stuff the Xbox had, it was able to keep up relatively well with how incredibly efficient it was.

In terms of scale from weakest to strongest it's Dreamcast > PS2 > GC > Xbox.

I also remember a time when Mikami actually hated the PS2 and said it was difficult to develop for. Sony's business savvy is more or less what helps them in the end to get developers on their system even if it's a pain to work with.

GC had 1.5GB discs and no decent on-the-fly FMV compression in hardware which forced many games to cancel GC ports. That's a far bigger handicap than shaders or slow RAM pools.

 

[Gbpackers31]

The Wii U Gamepad was made in response to a problem -- the isolation of family members when using media. Iwata referenced it and the book "Alone Together" (iirc) when discussing the Gamepad. They saw a problem in how the console was perceived in the living room space, and how someone playing a game monopolized the TV and sent the rest of the family packing, that it had become an "either/or" problem for families. Additionally, Nintendo saw that touchscreen gaming was becoming more and more popular, so how could they translate that to the console space?

Now, maybe the Gamepad didn't completely solve those particular issues, but they are clearly addressing problems.
.

Is that even a problem anymore that would justify the costs of the controller? Back in 2010, BusinessWeek put out the study stating that the average American household has nearly 3 TVs, and that number would have surely risen by the time the Wii U released. Frankly, it's superfluous (not only just in the number of TVs, but also the fact that many already have smartphones and tablets that can replicate various functions of the gamepad better), further worsened by the lack of cohesive vision behind the system.

I'm already more optimistic on the NX because it sounds like Nintendo has identified and is targeting at least one problem of theirs relating to accounts, and hopefully, cross-play through the unification of their devices. We'll see about hardware changes, but they shouldn't try to be different if they can't make improvements or fix any problems in a convenient manner. The Wii U Pro controller is a good example of that.

 

[Chmpocalypse]

I applaud Nintendo's second attempt at q "unique" console experience. Seriously, gaf, if Nintendo were to make a similar console to Xbox or PS4, I bet they'd be in the same or worse boat they are with te Wii U. Marketing 101, GAF states you have to have something alluring or different to differwntiate from there competitors. They got that right with the Wii U, but unfortunatley the name Wii U, hurt the brand and of course the tablet didn't catch on. You can be gimmicky and make money, but can't ve gimmickky for the sake of product differentation and ignore market research on consumers. Being innovative has always been Nintendo's trademark throughout their existence. Its this belief that Iwata is counting on that Nintendo will keep on trucking along. Now with amiibo's selling like crazy and being mobile, Nintendo has created revenue streams in other areas that are not "console" related.

The masses have spoken. The Wii U is in no way shape or form alluring, and fooling themselves into pretending it is won't help Nintendo.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

I applaud Nintendo's second attempt at q "unique" console experience. Seriously, gaf, if Nintendo were to make a similar console to Xbox or PS4, I bet they'd be in the same or worse boat they are with te Wii U. Marketing 101, GAF states you have to have something alluring or different to differwntiate from there competitors. They got that right with the Wii U, but unfortunatley the name Wii U, hurt the brand and of course the tablet didn't catch on. You can be gimmicky and make money, but can't ve gimmickky for the sake of product differentation and ignore market research on consumers. Being innovative has always been Nintendo's trademark throughout their existence. Its this belief that Iwata is counting on that Nintendo will keep on trucking along. Now with amiibo's selling like crazy and being mobile, Nintendo has created revenue streams in other areas that are not "console" related.

If Nintendo made a similar console to Xbox and PS4, you can bet third-parties wouldn't have abandoned it the way they did with Wii U. Same thing goes with Wii, a major complaint from many third-parties and a reason to not port their PS3/360 games was it's underpowered hardware, despite some exceptions like COD games. I don't get why people believe this nonsense that Nintendo needs to remain "unique" and can't/shouldn't compete against Sony/Microsoft. This direction didn't help them when Wii was falling apart and PS3/360 got cheaper and more accessable and way less Wii U that didn't got a chance since the start. Persisting on this will seal Nintendo's downfall and irrelevance on the home console market. Even Microsoft is abandoning this direction as Kinect didn't managed to push XONE numbers.