It was a year after PS2. It wasn't "late" in the generation unless you count the Dreamcast, and considering its fate, no one does.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Liam Robertson (of Unseen64 fame): "NX is not aiming to compete on a power level"
- Thread starter DownGrader
- Start date
- Status
It was a year after PS2. It wasn't "late" in the generation unless you count the Dreamcast, and considering its fate, no one does.
Always-honest
Banned
Why would i? I'm not saying it's not true. I'm saying you're guessing.
Pokemaniac
Member
I'm not saying you're wrong. What I am saying is that you shouldn't be so sure that you're right. Sure the NX console could end up pretty weak, but, unless you have insider information that says otherwise, there's no reason you should be so sure that that is how things will turn out.
Always-honest
Banned
Ofcourse that not hard. It's also not hard to outpower a XboxOne. But we'll have to wait for their announcements.
Candescence
Member
While having better hardware can make it easier to do some things from a dev standpoint, I agree, there's always the upwards pressure to raise the bar in terms of visual fidelity, which can often make those gains moot. It's a balance that most devs don't really have a choice on, mainly due to publishers.
SolarPowered
Member
It's got loyalty, but not in the sense that people want and expect. A large (I'd say all, but some have at least bought PS4s) portion of the Wii's audience may have left, but the total "core" audience that has traditionally bought into dedicated game consoles may hover somewhere betweem 120-160 million or so. The number grew more and more since the resurgence of gaming with the NES and it more or less peaked during the PS2 era. Even this current era may peak around that number if MS and Sony can each sell 40 and 100 million or so consoles.
Some posters (Terrell for one) have argued that Nintendo needs to begin a long term multigenerational effort to grab some of that dedicated base back and I think that argument is a solid one. Mobile may be growing, but trying to make a play at that unproven and unstable market without even earnestly (I emphasize this because every attempt since the Gamecube has always come with some caveat or fine print) reaching out to the dedicated gaming audience is a mistake imo. It's a proven market that will most likely outlast this AAA arms race being run by the giant publishers. Mobile is here to stay, but Nintendo needs to be smart about catering to the people who have been a part of this industry way before the Wii was even a twinkle in the eyes of it's designers.
The time for an increased production of western oriented Nintendo titles seems to have passed at this point if you ask me. The Wii era should have been one of expansion for Nintendo's software branches (do they even have that presence in Europe?). Nintendo should have hired enough talent in America to make three Retros (ala the EAD Japan teams) and looked for European talent in order to provide for interesting downloadable titles, western oriented games and their own equivalent of driveclub, forza or PGR for the folks who might enjoy Mario Kart but would like to have a more "mature" arcade/sim-like experience.
Unfortunately Nintendo didn't do anything of the sort and the best case software scenario we've got for the NX is to continue holding out for third party ports that are not guaranteed. But I guess mobile games are the next best thing according to speculation on gaf...
There are reasons he could be so sure, even without the machine being out. Two off the top of my head
1) precedent. Nintendo have gone low power/low cost for the last two machines, building off the GameCube architecture. They seem relatively ok with that, making money on each console rather than the usual tactic of making losses which require high sales and software revenue to claw those losses back,mthey can survive on lower hardware sales.
2) the hybrid model. If they are going for a similar architecture across bot ph home and handheld machine(s) then the handheld machine's architecture will be the critical factor influencing the entire range. Handheld = battery = <5W power consumption (probably less for Nintendo). The current market for that leans towards ARM. Even if you add more cores and increase clock speed/TDP for the home machine, you will still be limited in what it is capable of simply from the architecture chosen.
Of course they could still come out and surprise us. This is Nintendo after all, who knows what the elephant will do. But that doesn't mean all speculation is baseless.
Same. Purely because such a technical gulf between the handheld (tablet level tech) and the home console would be difficult - both to engineer,many to make software smoothly for. One of nintendos stated aims is to have this common platform and even if that doesn't mean cross-buy software, it does at least mean architectural similarities allowing developers to work more efficiently on both systems.
It just feels more like a phone level for the handheld, and an android TV type 'faster because not limited due to battery life' for under the TV.
Pokemaniac
Member
I don't think Wii and Wii U are a solid indicator that all future Nintendo hardware will fit into that mold. Wii was successful, but Wii U was not. We don't yet fully know what lessons Nintendo has taken from the Wii U's failure. I think it's safe to say at this point it could go either way.
Also, just because they'll use similar chips between the handheld and console doesn't mean the console can't be powerful. I think some underestimate how powerful ARM can be when it isn't beholden to a battery.
Do you have a benchmark for the most powerful ARM CPUs on the market?
I didn´t fall from a skyscraper either but i don´t need to guess that would kill me.
Bitch Pudding
Member
Raising the bar for mobile gaming with NX maybe a good idea. This is the blue ocean they were looking for and now it seems like they are just about to release the ship into uncharted waters.
That said, they won't be able to compete against Sony and MS anymore.
They'll loose even more market share on, let's call it "traditional gamessphere". By offering just another comparable weak mii-too console, they'll just loose even more market share, no matter what they do.
Now there shouldn't be restrictions on free thoughts for Nintendo. They already opened themselves to new mobile platforms, so, why not releae certain - not all - IPs in that traditional gamessphere on other platforms? F-Zero, Zelda, Metroid, I may asume that those games would sell like crazy on a PS4...
That said, they won't be able to compete against Sony and MS anymore.
They'll loose even more market share on, let's call it "traditional gamessphere". By offering just another comparable weak mii-too console, they'll just loose even more market share, no matter what they do.
Now there shouldn't be restrictions on free thoughts for Nintendo. They already opened themselves to new mobile platforms, so, why not releae certain - not all - IPs in that traditional gamessphere on other platforms? F-Zero, Zelda, Metroid, I may asume that those games would sell like crazy on a PS4...
Makes sense. I expect NX to launch at no more than $200, so it wouldn't make sense to expect it to match the specs of systems much more expensive than it, especially when talking about NX in handheld form.
But I would like to see Wii U level visuals (or better) on the NX handheld. That'd be nice.
EDIT: Reading through the thread a bit more, I'm going to generally agree with this as well:
And to take it one step further, especially regarding that last point, I wouldn't be surprised to see a wider range of price points for games being the new standard. Rather than all NX home console games being $60 and all NX handheld games being $40, I would expect games that do release on both consoles and are the same or essentially the same to be priced the same or similarly, and smaller, lower budget games, regardless of console, might hit retail at $40 or less, while bigger, higher budget games might retail at $60 or more, regardless of which consoles they're releasing for.
In general, with the border between home console and handheld broken down, I expect price points for games to more freely move across that previous border as well; game pricing will all depend on the individual characteristics of each release, regardless of console.
I think this would make the most sense from a perspective of profitability and value.
But I would like to see Wii U level visuals (or better) on the NX handheld. That'd be nice.
EDIT: Reading through the thread a bit more, I'm going to generally agree with this as well:
And to take it one step further, especially regarding that last point, I wouldn't be surprised to see a wider range of price points for games being the new standard. Rather than all NX home console games being $60 and all NX handheld games being $40, I would expect games that do release on both consoles and are the same or essentially the same to be priced the same or similarly, and smaller, lower budget games, regardless of console, might hit retail at $40 or less, while bigger, higher budget games might retail at $60 or more, regardless of which consoles they're releasing for.
In general, with the border between home console and handheld broken down, I expect price points for games to more freely move across that previous border as well; game pricing will all depend on the individual characteristics of each release, regardless of console.
I think this would make the most sense from a perspective of profitability and value.
So what you're saying is that Nintendo should go third party. That's not happening anytime soon.
Bitch Pudding
Member
By definition, the moment they offer games for foreign platforms they are (also) 3rd party.
And I don't see that happening anytime soon as well. But it seems to be the logical result if NX goes down the tube.
And just image your thoughts 25 years ago, when someone had told you that you can play Sonic on a Nintendo System...
And I don't see that happening anytime soon as well. But it seems to be the logical result if NX goes down the tube.
And just image your thoughts 25 years ago, when someone had told you that you can play Sonic on a Nintendo System...
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Who's not third party going by that definition?
What if i told you that nintendo can release atleast 1 game every week on mobile and that would be more profitably?
Or Nintendo could try again. They aren't in any danger of going out of business, this isn't another Sega situation. If this was their 3rd failed console in a row, maybe the situation would be different.
Bitch Pudding
Member
What's your point, because seriously, I don't get it.
I guess you would be wrong if you told me that.
What if I told you Nintendo wants to make full $60 releases.
Bitch Pudding
Member
Yes, according to their financials, it seems like they could. Would Nintendo still be under Iwata's control? Most likely not. And a new CEO would have to deliver new ideas. Releasing just another failure candidate sure won't do the trick.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/halo-spartan-assault/id895875773?mt=8
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/ratchet-clank-btn/id779657007?mt=8
That must mean Halo can go to Playstation and Ratchet is going to Xbox, since Microsoft and Sony are now, "by definition", 3rd party developers, right?
Bitch Pudding
Member
Sooo?
I'm looking forward to the handheld if it goes for >vita power. Recent iPads are technically more capable than vita, but you don't see it in many games for lots of reasons
- battery drain
- memory size restrictions
- screen resolution being much higher
- games being designed to play across a range of iOS devices back to eg 4S limiting how much they push
- production budgets being focused on mobile games.
A handheld with eg iPad Air level tech, but with a lower res screen, larger size for games, games being able to use all of that power, and game budgets to match, could be fantastic.
- battery drain
- memory size restrictions
- screen resolution being much higher
- games being designed to play across a range of iOS devices back to eg 4S limiting how much they push
- production budgets being focused on mobile games.
A handheld with eg iPad Air level tech, but with a lower res screen, larger size for games, games being able to use all of that power, and game budgets to match, could be fantastic.
Pokemaniac
Member
I don't have anything readily available, but I'm pretty sure someone in the Wii U CPU analysis thread showed that higher end ARM CPUs could easily outperform PS4 and Xbone.
Always-honest
Banned
Awesome. 100% accurate comparison. You must be right then.
Continue being awesome.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
I think you are too optimistic. A handheld is likely too be much smaller and cheaper than an iPad air.
You don't need iPad Air level tech for a handheld since its resources are (outside of the minor OS backend) entirely built around gaming (screen is smaller, so less demand from it and PPI is irrelevant past ~300), and so resource allocations are considerably better even if the overall specs will be across-the-board lower.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Not a problem for Nintendo then
? So, it would not hurt he gameplay over graphics publishers that gravitate around Nintendo or Nintendo themselves and it would help third parties which already design high end software for other consoles and PC's aligned to this vision. Sounds like a win win to me .Also, publishers push for a higher and higher bar because of customers and because their own developers want to. Do not kid yourself thinking artists and programmers themselves are not ambitious
.
Bitch Pudding
Member
Mobile gaming a blue ocean?!? It's not 2007 anymore
I'm sorry I made myself unclear here. What I meant is bringing a unified system for mobile gaming into the game, allowing you to play those mobile games also on your TV (maybe even enhanced). For Nintendo, that's a blue ocean. For the rest of the world who know what an Apple TV is, maybe not...
It means that first party developers are now making games for platforms that their benefactors do not own, but they haven't as a result forgone all exclusivity.
Exactly. The money made on the Wii is still in their bank accounts, but that won't last forever, and coasting along on a dwindling user base that will further dwindle without a genuine effort put in isn't sustainable; the longer they do that, the less cash reserves they'll have to be aggressive when they finally realize that they'll be forced to compete for survival alone. Sitting out on the sidelines isn't working.
And betting heavy on mobile is a mistake, since the mobile games business isn't growing proportionately; the money being made is even more consolidated around certain publishers than it is in the dedicated hardware space. Japan's race to mobile is such a farce when you realize that 70-80% of the money being made in that space is all being made by 2 games. 2 GAMES. Big name publishers from the console arena in the mobile arena look like C-tier shovelware developers in terms of their sales potential. Nintendo might fare better, but I doubt they'll fare that much better until the mobile games business stabilizes around more than a handful of marquee titles.
I've long held the belief that part of the reason Nintendo had done what it's done from the Wii on was because they thought they could wait until one of their competitors implodes, thinking that the industry has no place for 3 major players. And they could very well be right. But waiting for one of them to bow out is all but ensuring that Nintendo themselves will be the one that eventually does. Wii U being in terrible condition and the handheld market contracting so that it can't offset the failure is basically proof positive of that.
Oh, you're one of THOSE people, the ones who think that Nintendo has infinite spending cash after the Wii and that it somehow means that they can do whatever they want in perpetuity.
OK, let's wait out an inevitable 3 consecutive failures in the market while their user base shrinks even further, I'm sure the situation will be much better for them by then.
Because they consider it might not be of their best interest or ours? I can guarantee you that nintendo going third party would not be releasing the games you probably want. The F-Zeros and whatever would get along with the Shenmues and other dead Sega games.
Even if they were cornered, which I don't cosider they are, they could get an outsider involved and co-develop a new console before giving up.
Bitch Pudding
Member
I suggested to bring some - not all - IPs also on other platforms. So, again, what has this terminology shoot-out to do with my point?
The thing I don't get about Nintendo and core gamers...who the hell is buying all their recycled nostalgia laden shit? Us core gamers is who. For all the 'core gamers aren't buying Nintendo consoles because they are powerful enough and don't have big hpthird party titles' - nonsense.
Bitch Pudding
Member
Maybe you're right. But I was describing a future where Nintendo doesn't offer a dedicated home console anymore. That doesn't mean they cannot offer games for those. This maybe science-fiction, but on the long run this could be result if their consoles keep on failing / not reaching sales targets of investors.
Your logic is "If Nintendo is releasing any title on to smart phones, that makes them third party developers so they MAY AS WELL go all in."
Everyone else's logic is "That label is dumb, completely changing their business direction because of a label is dumb, and you're not getting Pokemon on your Vita."
Bitch Pudding
Member
No, it's not. My logic is: Nintendo seems to focus on mobile gaming with very own devices that can also be used as a low-power home console substitute. From this point on, Sony and MS dedicated hence more powerful and 3rd party loaded home consoles are not their main competitors anymore. If you don't compete against someone, you can cooperate with them without jeopardizing your own business on grand scale. Hence, releasing games on those MAY become an option at some point. Because it's still a huge market and I asume some IPs, especially those which benefit from strong visuals - would sell quite well on those.
I will, thank you.
Go ahead explain.
They are after low production cost with high profits.Full 60$/40$ releases with wii/ds was exactly that.Not anymore with wii u and definitive better with 3ds but still, it´s not a ds.That is the real reason for unified development keeping production cost low and getting overall better profitability, no droughts between releases are just added bonus.
But how will Nintendo convince consumers to buy their hardware when their software is available elsewhere?
Their future smartphone efforts won't be the traditional games we all know and love.
Insert Disk Two
Member
NOTE: The quote in the title is redacted because character limit.
https://twitter.com/Doctor_Cupcakes/status/617098268674273281
LOL yes he did confirm it is a console (not a handheld). Why would he compare it with a PS4 then?
He said the likes of. What else is there in the dedicated gaming system space? Vita? Lol
I completely agree that Nintendo need to grow their base rather than continually chasing trends with what they would call "surprising" offerings to customers. Nintendo need to focus and expand on their strengths:
1) Huge, Disney-like collection of instantly recognisable characters/franchises
2) Some of the best development teams in the world
3) Hardware closely developed around the needs of their software developers
They have been failing in each of these areas for years now:
1) Falling back on Mario and other existing characters too readily, instead of creating and promoting a wider variety of characters at different target groups (which is sad when Splatoon proves how good they can be at this when they try, on a failed platform). Look at the tide of mascot platformers on Wii U, all of which target almost exactly the same group of customers.
2) They have failed at any meaningful expansion in the West, which is lunacy considering the output of Western developers at all levels in the market over the last 10 years. As you said, they should have 3+ Retro-like studios built up at this point, but instead they did little to nothing, and in the meantime scared off the core of the NST staff during the troubled development of Project HAMMER.
3) The Wii U and 3DS hardware had no enticing mass-market software that made use of their respective hardware choices. Nintendo were saying a year or two into the Wii U's life that they were still developing software to make use of Wii U's hardware, when they should never have released such hardware if they didn't know what to do with it.
Getting out of this situation requires the following:
1) Massively expand 1st party development, especially in the West. Multiple studios internationally with embedded EAD staff.
2) Diversify their genres and characters. They need non-Mario sports games, they need FPS/TPS and open world games, they need to give a more diverse cast of characters the kind of push Mario frequently gets.
3) Promote the shit out of their characters in Disney-like fashion. Amiibo shows a fraction of the pent-up demand for their franchises. That means internationally promoted TV/film, comics/manga, merchandise etc.
4) Make hardware/services in line with what their target customer expects. That means account services that "just work", a well-designed operating system, no user interface/control choices that require detailed explanation, and "buy once, use anywhere" functionality.
All of this should have been blatantly obvious to Nintendo after how the Wii ended, even moreso after Wii U's first year. If Nintendo wants to continue to be a platform holder in any capacity then they need to make serious investments internally to justify their existence as one.
Not a problem for Nintendo then
Also, publishers push for a higher and higher bar because of customers and because their own developers want to. Do not kid yourself thinking artists and programmers themselves are not ambitious
None of this matters to Nintendo's upcoming hardware because AAA 3rd parties will not offer significant support until they know what they're dealing with. The wildly varying sales of Nintendo's recent platforms don't offer any way for AAA publishers to make estimates about how much their games will sell on Nintendo's hardware. They will not take these risks when development costs are so high. If you want to see the hardware requirements for the kind of 3rd party support Nintendo should expect to receive, look at any of the higher-budget Kickstarters. If their system can support those they will have the support of what has functionally replaced A/AA development.
That is the best they can do outside of their existing partnerships until they show that a market for AAA exists on Nintendo hardware, these companies have 10+ years of data suggesting this market doesn't exist in signficant numbers.
Neff
Member
I believe Nintendo's next TV-based console will attempt this.
I do not believe NX is Nintendo's next TV-based console.
Bitch Pudding
Member
Well, I don't think that this is a major concern anymore, now that Nintendo seems to open to other mobile platforms. Besides, I am not talking about good ol Mario, more about certain other IPs which didn't make it on WiiU - or even Wii.
- Status