Support NeoGAF

[camineet]

Failure might be too strong. But it does bring up an important question: if Sony or MS launches at $250 in 2010/2011, Nintendo can't just stand buy and assume they'll falter. PS1/2 proved you can have a successful last-gen console coexist with a dominant new-gen console. I think they launch no more than a year later to stay competitive. Last 2 times they allowed their competitor to launch more than 1 year ahead, they got romped: by a newcomer and then, the established leader. They can't allow their 2 main competitors to get that big of a jump. Some devs will bite and jump in as well. Screw Sony, competition won't allow unapposed 10 year cycles.

Heh, competition won't allow for even unopposed 7-8 year cycles.

 

[Dash Kappei]

It's going to be called
Wii-fi
(like Wi-Fi, Fi-delity and such)
You heard it here first folks.

Spoiler

LOL

 

[agrajag]

Failure might be too strong. But it does bring up an important question: if Sony or MS launches at $250 in 2010/2011, Nintendo can't just stand buy and assume they'll falter. PS1/2 proved you can have a successful last-gen console coexist with a dominant new-gen console. I think they launch no more than a year later to stay competitive. Last 2 times they allowed their competitor to launch more than 1 year ahead, they got romped: by a newcomer and then, the established leader. They can't allow their 2 main competitors to get that big of a jump. Some devs will bite and jump in as well. Screw Sony, competition won't allow unapposed 10 year cycles.

Microsoft and Sony will try to stretch the current gen as long as possible as well and try to recoup their losses. They won't be rushing a new console to the market either.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

Why can't it just be called Wii HD? It's simple and easy to understand, it's a Wii that runs in HD!

My immediate thought was That's as bad an idea as calling a Game Boy that runs in color a Game Boy Color.

For obvious reasons, that does not work as a counterpoint.

I don't agree it's even a response. It's a calculated move to expand. Pictures and songs, yes but why no video? If you wanted to respond, why only do 2/3rds? Why not respond to the bigger threat to the non-gamer market, IPOD/IPhone? PSP released the biggest game of 2007 and rode momentum to a few hundred thousand in sales above the DS and they really need to respond? We think this response happened in the last 12 months?

It's less the specifics that I think are a response, but more like they'd said to themselves "A new model of PSP launched. While their sales went way up, DS Lite's went way down. We should release another model with some new pull to heat things up for us again."

I don't see why 12 months is a problem, either. Original DS went from announcement to prototype playable form 4 months later to revised final form 6 months later. DS Lite was out 16 months after that.

Why the hell would they segment their market? Why do you think a powerful Gameboy successor hasn't been released yet? Releasing an HD Wii while the Wii is market leader (assuming it will be in 2011, I am betting it still will be) is a failure of Sega-like proportions.

Wouldn't it be worse to wait until Wii is not the market leader to play catch-up? Both too early and too late have negatives.

 

[kame-sennin]

back on topic: I hope Nintendo doesn't give us Wii+ graphics in HD. I know they could easily do that, get away with it, sell tens of millions of systems and probably be #1 again next-gen. However I am hopeful that the "trick" of Wii having last-gen graphics with new paradigm of controls only works once. People are gonna expect good graphics. Nintendo also got away with it because, while 360/PS3 are much more powerful than Wii overall, the graphics difference, while large, is not overwhelming. 360/PS3 graphics are like very improved Xbox1 graphics in HD. It's not like 360/PS3 have CG-quality graphics. The biggest difference with the visual side of 360/PS3 is the HD resolution, not so much the graphics themselves. Am I saying that 360/PS3 don't do better graphics than PS2,GCN,Xbox1,Wii? No, I am not. 360/PS3 do produce better graphics, but not so much so that last-gen graphics including Wii look so incredibly terrible. On the other hand, Wii clearly looks far short of 360/PS3 overall, but again, the majority of that difference is because of HD resolution IMO.

No they won't. The reason why is due to "value innovation" - a cornerstone of Nintendo's stated strategy. Value innovation means changing what consumers want out of a given product. Why doesn't Wii Sports have graphics on par with Super Mario Galaxy? Because Wii sports is meant to alter the consumers expectations. It presents the player with a new metric for fun. Up until the Wii, games with impressive graphics have had high value. Iwata is now trying to turn that around, and has stated as much many times. When he said that graphics had reached a saturation point, he was really referring to what drives consumers to buy games. Judging by the buying habits of most consumers, advanced graphics are not worth the extra cost of the HD consoles. Instead, games like Wii Sports, Wii Fit, and even Mario Kart Wii, are training consumers to find value not in graphics, but in physical interaction and social play. Wii Sports would not be anymore entertaining in HD, but it would suck on dual analog. Pachter predicted a Wii HD update in 2009 to improve video output. Instead, Nintendo is releasing Motion plus in 2009 to improve physical interaction. This is value innovation.

The purpose of this value innovation is to shift the advantage away from Microsoft and Sony - who can always outspend Nintendo on graphics technology - back into Nintendo's favor, where being an integrated hardware and software manufacturer gives them an edge when creating physically immersive games. Putting the emphasis back on graphics or attempting to compete graphically in any way would completely throw away Nintendo's competitive edge. Nintendo will never again have a graphically superior console, lest Sony and Microsoft wholeheartedly embrace Nintendo's strategy.

The only sure thing for me, about the next Nintendo, is that it will be approximatively same size and price than Wii, cause it's now the number one priority for Nintendo.

So it will basically be all they can put in this size/prize range in 2011.

This is probably the most accurate way to guess how powerful the next Nintendo console will be, in whatever year it launches.

There's no reason for Nintendo not to release a new console before 2012. It's not like they're trying to break even or make a profit on the tech they used this time around.

There's plenty of reasons to not launch a new console when you are the market leader. The PS3 has shown us all of them. Brand loyalty is weak in this industry, and thus you can lose your user-base. You can lose your game library advantage if developers don't embrace your new platform - thus decreasing the incentive for consumers to buy your new console. And you risk losing a lot of money on R&D and marketing. Even a conservative company like Nintendo can suffer from an unsuccessful product launch. I imagine they would have posted losses during the Gamecube gen had they not had the GBA.

But the Wii will really have lost any novelty by 2011.

:lol People said the novelty of Wii Sports and "waggle" would wear off, then Nintendo announced Wii Fit. I'm too lazy to dig up the quote from Iwata, but he basically said that the purpose of launching a new console was to provide the consumer with new experiences (as opposed to technological upgrades). Nintendo has shown that as long as they can provide new experiences with a new game (or new game + peripheral, see: Wii Fit, MKWii, AC), they don't need a new console. I believe this will be their strategy going forward.

Heh, competition won't allow for even unopposed 7-8 year cycles.

The competition is irrelevant.

 

[camineet]

Most likely all the next-gen consoles will have been released no later than fall 2012.

I suppose fall 2013 is within the realm of possibility as being the latest date, that would be 7 years for Sony, 8 years for Microsoft, but highly doubt they'll wait that long.

On the other hand, 2010 is too early (would be 5 years for Microsoft, 4 years for Sony).

2011-2012 is the time most people in the industry say they expect. That's what I expect.

 

[camineet]

No they won't. The reason why is due to "value innovation" - a cornerstone of Nintendo's stated strategy. Value innovation means changing what consumers want out of a given product. Why doesn't Wii Sports have graphics on par with Super Mario Galaxy? Because Wii sports is meant to alter the consumers expectations. It presents the player with a new metric for fun. Up until the Wii, games with impressive graphics have had high value. Iwata is now trying to turn that around, and has stated as much many times. When he said that graphics had reached a saturation point, he was really referring to what drives consumers to buy games. Judging by the buying habits of most consumers, advanced graphics are not worth the extra cost of the HD consoles. Instead, games like Wii Sports, Wii Fit, and even Mario Kart Wii, are training consumers to find value not in graphics, but in physical interaction and social play. Wii Sports would not be anymore entertaining in HD, but it would suck on dual analog. Pachter predicted a Wii HD update in 2009 to improve video output. Instead, Nintendo is releasing Motion plus in 2009 to improve physical interaction. This is value innovation.

The purpose of this value innovation is to shift the advantage away from Microsoft and Sony - who can always outspend Nintendo on graphics technology - back into Nintendo's favor, where being an integrated hardware and software manufacturer gives them an edge when creating physically immersive games. Putting the emphasis back on graphics or attempting to compete graphically in any way would completely throw away Nintendo's competitive edge. Nintendo will never again have a graphically superior console, lest Sony and Microsoft wholeheartedly embrace Nintendo's strategy.



This is probably the most accurate way to guess how powerful the next Nintendo console will be, in whatever year it launches.



There's plenty of reasons to not launch a new console when you are the market leader. The PS3 has shown us all of them. Brand loyalty is weak in this industry, and thus you can lose your user-base. You can lose your game library advantage if developers don't embrace your new platform - thus decreasing the incentive for consumers to buy your new console. And you risk losing a lot of money on R&D and marketing. Even a conservative company like Nintendo can suffer from an unsuccessful product launch. I imagine they would have posted losses during the Gamecube gen had they not had the GBA.



:lol People said the novelty of Wii Sports and "waggle" would wear off, then Nintendo announced Wii Fit. I'm too lazy to dig up the quote from Iwata, but he basically said that the purpose of launching a new console was to provide the consumer with new experiences (as opposed to technological upgrades). Nintendo has shown that as long as they can provide new experiences with a new game (or new game + peripheral, see: Wii Fit, MKWii, AC), they don't need a new console. I believe this will be their strategy going forward.




The competition is irrelevant.

I agree with what you're saying for the most part.

If Microsoft & Sony go for the huge leap forward in graphics with XB3,PS4 that the graphics industry will be capable of providing, then Nintendo will not compete with that with their next-gen Wii.

Nintendo will only improve on what Nintendo currently offers as far as graphics.
It will never be the main focus of the next console.

While Sony & Microsoft will be able to choose from GPU chip/tech that's 10-20x stronger than RSX & Xenos in many areas, Nintendo will probably go for, at most, something that's only 2-4x stronger than Xenos & RSX. Such technology is already available in upper midrange to highend cards of 2008. That's the only way for Nintendo get a GameBoy to GBA like leap from Wii to Wii HD. Even Xbox to Xbox 360 didn't do that really, not in actual graphics.

I mean, Nintendo could've gotten away with not improving Wii's hardware over GameCube at all. No 1.5x speed up, no extra 64 MB RAM. So in some sense, there's no point in Nintendo improving graphics at all, ever.

 

[Polari]

Reggie's comment about Nintendo being the most paranoid people in the world is kind of interesting, especially when you consider their recent increase in R&D spending. I don't think they're going to easily revert to the Nintendo that blew it with the Nintendo 64 easily, they're going to be very wary of complacency so really, the next Wii could be almost anything.

It's probably good news for those who like their graphics to resemble something from this decade though. Sony and Microsoft are going to be right up their arse the next cycle as far as innovations that go beyond a simple increase in raw power, so Nintendo's probably going to be required to at least return to the graphics race and reach parity with Sony and Microsoft's next systems (which in all likelihood won't be a whole lot more powerful than their current ones).

 

[Polari]

No they won't. The reason why is due to "value innovation" - a cornerstone of Nintendo's stated strategy. Value innovation means changing what consumers want out of a given product. Why doesn't Wii Sports have graphics on par with Super Mario Galaxy? Because Wii sports is meant to alter the consumers expectations. It presents the player with a new metric for fun. Up until the Wii, games with impressive graphics have had high value. Iwata is now trying to turn that around, and has stated as much many times. When he said that graphics had reached a saturation point, he was really referring to what drives consumers to buy games. Judging by the buying habits of most consumers, advanced graphics are not worth the extra cost of the HD consoles. Instead, games like Wii Sports, Wii Fit, and even Mario Kart Wii, are training consumers to find value not in graphics, but in physical interaction and social play. Wii Sports would not be anymore entertaining in HD, but it would suck on dual analog. Pachter predicted a Wii HD update in 2009 to improve video output. Instead, Nintendo is releasing Motion plus in 2009 to improve physical interaction. This is value innovation.

I agree but on Pachter, I don't think his prediction is threatened by Motion Plus. It would be pretty surprising if Nintendo weren't to release a Wii with better media capabilities (DVD playback etc.), upscaling, more storage and Motion Plus bundled sometime in late 2009 or at some point in 2010. Especially if the DSi sells as well as one might expect.

 

[nightside]

If Microsoft & Sony go for the huge leap forward in graphics with XB3,PS4 that the graphics industry will be capable of providing, then Nintendo will not compete with that with their next-gen Wii.

I'm not sure Microsoft & Sony will go for such a huge leap, I guess both will try to avoid ridiculous high launch prices and ridiculous high failure rates.

 

[camineet]

Reggie's comment about Nintendo being the most paranoid people in the world is kind of interesting, especially when you consider their recent increase in R&D spending. I don't think they're going to easily revert to the Nintendo that blew it with the Nintendo 64 easily, they're going to be very wary of complacency so really, the next Wii could be almost anything.

You're points are good that the next Wii could be almost anything, and, about Nintendo being wary of complacency.

 

[dacuk]

"Analysts" are some of the biggest, most profound douchebags there are.

Get a real job.

Only time a "Wii HD" will get approvement from me is if they stop with the fucking shovelware and make the OMG MOTION CONTROZL completely optional.

Do not worry, you are part of the minority, so they'll do well without you.

 

[camineet]

Some people probably figured that the tech that is going into MotionPlus would be the basis for Wii 2 controls. Now that it's simply obvious that Wii 2 / Wii HD will go beyond MotionPlus gyroscope tech, what would be the next logical step forward? Can Nintendo create another 'revolution' beyond MotionPlus, knowing that the timeframe is early next decade (whether it is 2011 or 2012), at a ~$249 price ?

 

[Kilrogg]

I agree but on Pachter, I don't think his prediction is threatened by Motion Plus. It would be pretty surprising if Nintendo weren't to release a Wii with better media capabilities (DVD playback etc.), upscaling, more storage and Motion Plus bundled sometime in late 2009 or at some point in 2010. Especially if the DSi sells as well as one might expect.

Why would it be surprising, besides the DSi part (which I don't agree with anyway, but I won't elaborate on that before hearing your arguments)?

 

[Neo C.]

Some people probably figured that the tech that is going into MotionPlus would be the basis for Wii 2 controls. Now that it's simply obvious that Wii 2 / Wii HD will go beyond MotionPlus gyroscope tech, what would be the next logical step forward? Can Nintendo create another 'revolution' beyond MotionPlus, knowing that the timeframe is early next decade (whether it is 2011 or 2012), at a ~$249 price ?

Miyamoto said that there's a great possibility of reforming the current controller rather than revolving it again. I think it's reasonable, because most developers are still trying to figure out how to use the controller properly. They need time to max out the possibilities.

I mean, I would be happy, if the new controller would be like Wiimote+MotionPlus+two more buttons. And the new Nunchuck should get MotionPlus Tech too.

 

[poppabk]

I don't know, do you really believe they sunk 10's of millions into the controller?
The controller, just doesn't scream 10's of millions. Isn't it just a few gyroscopes and IR? Not really making a new GPU. The wii just translates movement and 'sees' IR lights. It's the software coding that doing the heavy lifting. Yes, genius but not the same as making a GPU.

The controller is just accelerometers and a camera, but that doesn't mean it was cheap to develop. I am sure there were prototypes with a gyroscopes, ultrasonics, eye toy like optical recognition, different numbers of accelerometers, different types of accelerometers, different shapes, different configurations, versions without IR pointing. And for each of these designs you have to prepare mock software, which is still part of the R&D budget to determine what works and what doesn't.

 

[camineet]

Miyamoto said that there's a great possibility of reforming the current controller rather than revolving it again. I think it's reasonable, because most developers are still trying to figure out how to use the controller properly. They need time to max out the possibilities.

I mean, I would be happy, if the new controller would be like Wiimote+MotionPlus+two more buttons. And the new Nunchuck should get MotionPlus Tech too.

Well I only partly agree with you. I don't think the Wii 2 / Wii HD controller will be as much as a 'revolution' as Wii Remote + Nunchuck was over GCN controller. I think whatever it is, it'll have significantly more capabilities, like going from the NES pad to the SNES pad. More than just a few extra buttons, since more buttons is against the philosophy of Wii. I think a microphone will be built in so voice can be a part of the experience, and a better speaker. I think the Wii 2 / Wii HD nunchuck will have better more sensitive accelerometers, at least as good as the one(s) in the current Wii Remote. Maybe not much beyond that though.

We haven't even seen the limits of what the standard Wii Remote + Nunchuck can do (although everyone is now aware of its limitations) and we still have yet to see what the MotionPlus can do, which is almost a 2nd generation of control for Wii.

 

[camineet]

Andrew Webster at Arstechnica:


"Nintendo has a history of denying hardware rumors that eventually turn out to be true."

I am sure at some point during 2001, 2002, 2003 and upto early 2004, there must have been rumors of what was Wii, that Nintendo denied.

 

[Kilrogg]

The controller is just accelerometers and a camera, but that doesn't mean it was cheap to develop. I am sure there were prototypes with a gyroscopes, ultrasonics, eye toy like optical recognition, different numbers of accelerometers, different types of accelerometers, different shapes, different configurations, versions without IR pointing. And for each of these designs you have to prepare mock software, which is still part of the R&D budget to determine what works and what doesn't.

I'd say it's extremely likely, given that the Wii Wheel itself, which is a mere piece of plastic, had more thant 30 prototypes. It's obvious that designing a controller that comes as standard with a console and has tech in it should require a good amount of money.

 

[ZealousD]

Is it even realistic to expect hardware a generation ahead of the PS3 and 360? I mean, we still have problems with PCs trying to run Crysis at max settings and despite how well Crysis looks, I don't think it's a generational leap. I think we're starting to hit a point of diminishing returns where technology just has to get better and better for noticeable upgrades in visuals. Hell just getting current gen games running at 60fps and 1080p seems like it would require a noticeable increase in hardware.

 

[camineet]

http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Analyst-Predicts-Wii-HD-Imminent-12674.html

"I'm not, however, as convinced as Pachter that simply adding HD output will make a difference in the console's perception amongst the hardcore. Last gen-graphics and mini-games won't be any more appealing just because they're in 720p"

I agree with the bolded part, 100% One of the few, if not only times when someone at some website makes it clear that graphics and resolution are seperate things, instead of just mentioning "HD graphics".

"The speculation surrounding Wii HD seems to indicate that the console will include legitimate upgrades beyond just HD output so Nintendo doesn't seem to be putting all of it's eggs in that basket either."

Nintendo will improve on almost everything with the next-gen Wii. Improvements to control interface and gameplay, mass storage, online experience, graphics, HD display resolution, hopefully audio, 3rd party support, etc.

 

[camineet]

Is it even realistic to expect hardware a generation ahead of the PS3 and 360?

In next-Xbox and PS4, yes, I expect that given that it'll be possible given that highend semiconductors (CPUs, GPUs) today are well beyond 360/PS3 already, and another 3 or 4 years promises to bring yet more advancements, enough to bring in a generational leap beyond 360/PS3, if (IF) Microsoft & Sony are willing to once again spend alot on hardware, are willing to lose a similar amount per box as with the beginning of last-gen and current-gen.

Nintendo, maybe not a full generation beyond 360/PS3 but at least a generation beyond GCN/Wii.

I mean, we still have problems with PCs trying to run Crysis at max settings and despite how well Crysis looks, I don't think it's a generational leap. I think we're starting to hit a point of diminishing returns where technology just has to get better and better for noticeable upgrades in visuals. Hell just getting current gen games running at 60fps and 1080p seems like it would require a noticeable increase in hardware.

I disagree, technology is not yet hitting diminishing returns. Crysis looks a whole generation beyond Doom3. Yes PCs struggle to run it at max settings at 60fps but that's just one game.

Most current console games don't run at 60fps because they run in HD resolutions (most of them are 720p, some 1080p and some lower than 720p), because console GPUs and external memory busses are relatively lacking for the task they have been given.

The technology exists, or will exist to have another generational leap over current consoles. However, hardware costs, game development costs, priorities, game politics and other factors very well might get in the way.


I remain hopeful however, that because next-gen will still use HD resolutions, thus we won't go beyond HD resolution, and because 5-7 years will pass instead of 4-6 years as with last-gen to current-gen, those factors will combine to allow for a major leap in what we see on screen, from at least ONE console next-gen. One of the console providers will go with high-end hardware. I also look at the AMD tech demos this year, (the robot in the street and the scorpion in the glass tank), so I think games can and will look a hell of alot more advanced next gen.

 

[camineet]

BTW it seems Reggie is denying that Wii HD is a product, and if that's the case, he wouldn't really be lying, cause Wii HD is not a product, for now. It's something in development.

I don't think Reggie would deny Nintendo has another console in development.

http://gamer.blorge.com/2008/10/08/nintendo-denies-wii-hd-rumors-pachter-begs-to-differ/

 

[Log4Girlz]

A 2006 GPU with 256 megs of system ram would be a monstrous increase to the Wii's power. I really do hope however that they consider a 2008 mid-range GPU with 1 gig of total system ram, this would put it at a great advantage over the 360 and ps3 and give Nintendo a massive boost in graphics which you know will be touted by media outlets everywhere (free advertising from CNN essentially). Additionally they'll be flooded with ports from this gen as well, guaranteeing a healthy library. Sure whatever MS and Sony will have will be more powerful, but will devs put in the extra cash to insure a massive leap in visuals? I am not so sure.

 

[Grampa Simpson]

There is most definitely work being done on a next generation Nintendo console. Probably several of them. As well as several branches of development for the successor to the wiimote. Eventually they'll decide on a successor console that they like, they'll finish developing it, and when they decide that they want to release it, they'll start getting their internal teams and 2nd (and close 3rd) parties into gear, and decide on some clock speeds, and put together production schedules and all that jazz. They absolutely want to be capable of putting a new console into production for 2011, but that doesn't mean that it will fit in with their business plans.

 

[camineet]

A 2006 GPU with 256 megs of system ram would be a monstrous increase to the Wii's power. I really do hope however that they consider a 2008 mid-range GPU with 1 gig of total system ram, this would put it at a great advantage over the 360 and ps3 and give Nintendo a massive boost in graphics which you know will be touted by media outlets everywhere

If Wii HD had 1 GB of total RAM, no matter how it's divided into system RAM, graphics RAM or unified RAM, that would be pretty damn good compared to 360,PS3. If the GPU was equal to even a midrange GPU from 2008 such as RV770 or GTX 260 (at much lower power consumption) that would be enough to run HD games with better graphics than 360,PS3 and at better framerates.

I'd expect MS & Sony to go for at least 4 GB each in their next-gen systems, and have GPUs that well surpass highend 2008 GPUs. I don't really buy into the idea that Microsoft & Sony will only double the power of their current consoles next gen. Maybe in CPU performance but not as far as graphics. The GPUs of next-gen Sony,MS consoles will almost certainly leap forward alot and I don't expect Nintendo to be 1:1 with that, even though I expect a huge leap from Wii.

On the other hand, Nintendo could do Wii graphics in HD and still be well below 360/PS3 in graphics complexity and features. That would suck IMO but it might not have any bearing on how well Wii HD sells. I don't want it to be that way of course, cause I'm such a graphics whore and even 360/PS3 don't satisify me, but well, we shall see.

 

[Grampa Simpson]

I'd expect MS & Sony to go for at least 4 GB each in their next-gen systems, and have GPUs that well surpass highend 2008 GPUs. I don't really buy into the idea that Microsoft & Sony will only double the power of their current consoles next gen. Maybe in CPU performance but not as far as graphics. The GPUs of next-gen Sony,MS consoles will almost certainly leap forward alot and I don't expect Nintendo to be 1:1 with that, even though I expect a huge leap from Wii.

Why not? I doubt that they'll want to repeat the problems that they've had this generation by trying to sell to the same crowd again when Nintendo seems to have found much greener pastures. It's going to be a balance between interesting hardware features and price to market. If they can't at least match Nintendo on price and interesting features, they don't stand a chance.

 

[camineet]

Why not? I doubt that they'll want to repeat the problems that they've had this generation by trying to sell to the same crowd again when Nintendo seems to have found much greener pastures. It's going to be a balance between interesting hardware features and price to market. If they can't at least match Nintendo on price and interesting features, they don't stand a chance.

What I'm saying is I don't expect Microsoft & Sony to only double the power of their current GPUs. A '2x RSX' or '2x Xenos' would be well less powerful than todays GTX 280 & RV770.
I don't think that's gonna happen, even if XB3, PS4 are somewhat conservative. they're still 3 or 4 years away, I don't think they're gonna "pull a Wii'. in the same way Nintendo did.

 

[camineet]

Forgive & excuse me for repeating myself:

The way I see it, Nintendo shouldn't release a Wii with X360-level or PS3-level graphics because they'll only be far behind again, assuming Sony & Microsoft release consoles that are a generational leap beyond PS3/360.

I think the CPU should be kept seperate from this arguement. I think Nintendo could get away with a CPU that's something in-between the 3-core Xenon and 8/9-core CELL in power.
I think it should still only be dual-core, but each core being very beefy, very capable. That would allow the programming model to be simpler than PS3 and even simpler than 360.

Adding a powerful graphics chip, something that's at least on par with the very highend of today (4870X2), should not be to costly, both in terms of manufacturing, and game development. Developers will just suck up that extra juice. It would be nice to see Nintendo games running at 60 FPS, in 1080p resolution, with lots of anti-aliasing and a better lighting model with realtime graphics that make most people think they're looking at pre-rendered/offline rendered CGI. That will take more graphics horsepower than what 360 and PS3 currently have. It's late 2008 and by late 2011, something like two RV770 GPUs (what 4870X2 is) could be very small, very efficient on a 32nm or 22nm manufacturing process.

I don't think Nintendo is going to offer another total revolution in gameplay / control, just refine what they have with Wii Remote + MotionPlus.


It is the next-next gen (Wii 3) around 2016-2018 where Nintendo could again revolutionize gameplay (perhaps how games are displayed also) and at that time, once again, offer only a small increase in hardware power, like they did from GCN to Wii.

 

[Caesar III]

I think it should still only be dual-core, but each core being very beefy, very capable. That would allow the programming model to be simpler than PS3 and even simpler than 360.

I think sticking with dual core only would bottleneck the new Wii in 2011. The developers are all figuring out how threaded programming works and they source out physics and AI and stuff. And then Ninty comes with dual core only, but they have like 3 or 4 threads? no, thats not that clever. Quadro is the minimum I would think.

 

[Diatribe1974]

Shouldn't be too horribly difficult to do a "significant graphical overhaul" by 2011 over what's currently in the Wii.

 

[AniHawk]

Shouldn't be too horribly difficult to do a "significant graphical overhaul" by 2011 over what's currently in the Wii.

Kudos, you're only 2 weeks late with this comment.

 

[rezuth]

Its going to be called Super Wii, we all know it.

 

[zoukka]

Its going to be called Super Wii, we all know it.

Blah it's Hyper Nintendo I want.


And I don't even care what the next-gen games are going to look like, if they run as badly as the games in this generation. What a joke.

Screenshot wars killed nice graphics.

 

[Gallagher]

Wii 2 with Xbox 360 graphics and a game like Gears of War... iam in!

 

[Myke Greywolf]

Its going to be called Super Wii, we all know it.

DS --> DSi

Wii --> Wiii

It's the only logical choice!

 

[Darkpen]

eh, 3 or so years, too long to continue holding off on getting a Wii.

 

[Squeak]

Wii will have a successor in 2011/2012 just like all the other consoles. I don't see the big news in that. It's just the normal console cycle.
What Nintendo could do in the meantime, is release a Blu-Ray capable redesigned Wii, maybe with extra flash memory. Just like they are doing the luxury version of DS now.
It wouldn't replace the current Wii, but be something for people who want a little more.

 

[Dacvak]

I like to think that the reason the Wii's hardware was so outdated was because of the whole GameCube boner they had in the previous generation. I'm sure with their lack of success of the Purple Lunchbox, they didn't have a great deal of money to spend on manufacturing state-of-the-art processor and graphics chips and had to rely on innovation to sell the Wii. Now that they have more money than God, I'd hope they wouldn't mind pouring some of that fat cash into giving us cutting-edge graphics.

Then again, the fact that the DSi exists pretty much counters that theory.

 

[Vagabundo]

The Wii is only a convenient platform/hub for all the accessories. Upgrading the base unit will not be a priority.

They are releasing mini upgrades every damn year; Wii Board, Wii Motion plus,...

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

I like to think that the reason the Wii's hardware was so outdated was because of the whole GameCube boner they had in the previous generation. I'm sure with their lack of success of the Purple Lunchbox, they didn't have a great deal of money to spend on manufacturing state-of-the-art processor and graphics chips and had to rely on innovation to sell the Wii. Now that they have more money than God, I'd hope they wouldn't mind pouring some of that fat cash into giving us cutting-edge graphics.

Then again, the fact that the DSi exists pretty much counters that theory.

Even in the days of GameCube they were making hundreds of millions of dollars a year. Deciding to cheap it out and continue using already-developed tools and skills by cranking a GameCube up to 11 wasn't something they were forced into, but a choice. It's still probably a decision due to GameCube's lack of success relative to its competitors, but not a money thing. Trying to go the tech-competitive route with GameCube didn't work, there were still two competitors willing to lose a lot more the next time around, so they went their own way and ceded the graphic whores demographic.

 

[Bluemercury]

Even in the days of GameCube they were making hundreds of millions of dollars a year. Deciding to cheap it out and continue using already-developed tools and skills by cranking a GameCube up to 11 wasn't something they were forced into, but a choice. It's still probably a decision due to GameCube's lack of success relative to its competitors, but not a money thing. Trying to go the tech-competitive route with GameCube didn't work, there were still two competitors willing to lose a lot more the next time around, so they went their own way and ceded the graphic whores demographic.

The wiimote was supposed to be released as an acessory for GC...but then they decided it would be released for their next machine.

 

[robor]

So "significant" means they're still gonna be a generation behind the rest?

No. Significant means that their generation is in front of the rest.

 

[Tim the Wiz]

The wiimote was supposed to be released as an acessory for GC...but then they decided it would be released for their next machine.

His point is still relevant. The GameCube was a dying brand. They had to reboot their console segment of the market and their last attempt at going the high tech route failed. So they tested the waters with putting the DS into the handheld market as a "third pillar", ended up succeeding with their fastest selling portable system. In light of this, the decision to introduce a similar, "Blue Ocean"-type system in the console market, was quite easy to take.

 

[Mithos]

DS --> DSi

Wii --> Wiii

It's the only logical choice!

No No No No...

ofc its gonna be:

Wii -> WiiD

 

[Woffls]

WiiHD

Silent H.

2011 sounds right given Wii's current momentum, and even if that does drop, I think they can justify a few quiet months to focus on the launch of the new one. In fact, a sales declination of the Wii in 2010 would be great for Nintendo.

Microsoft will aim for 2011 as well to give enough time for however many trilogies they have to finish off, and they will want to make sure they're not late to the party for obvious reasons. Also they'll want to make sure they're not too early for even more obvious reasons.

Sony... no idea. Try and market upgradability until 2014, or ditch PS3 and jump in early in 2012 when they've realised they're in trouble.

It may have always been Nintendo's intention to go cheap on the hardware, and they will always aim for profit on their hardware, but I think they wont mind taking more of a hit this time around to gain lost ground in certain markets.

 

[MoogPaul]

I would be very surprised if the next-gen consoles all do not contain blu-ray drives, even nintendo's. The main reason why they weren't all used was because at the time there was no clear winner. It's only been a year or so that blu-ray is the definitive next tech of optical drives and the stand alone players are already down to 300 from about 500.

Nintendo was behind in N64 with no optical drive and screwed over a lot of 3rd parties with the small DVDs of the gamecube. I just don't see them falling behind in this area again. It's cost them too much.

 

[Flachmatuch]

Some people probably figured that the tech that is going into MotionPlus would be the basis for Wii 2 controls. Now that it's simply obvious that Wii 2 / Wii HD will go beyond MotionPlus gyroscope tech, what would be the next logical step forward? Can Nintendo create another 'revolution' beyond MotionPlus, knowing that the timeframe is early next decade (whether it is 2011 or 2012), at a ~$249 price ?

Your thinking is completely backwards imo It's not about looking at technology and then trying to make games around it, but having game ideas (because despite what loads of people here think, the Wii sells because of its games) and finding the technology that fits. And in addition to game ideas, it's also about how you integrate games into a normal lifestyle (like TV), and finding technology that supports that. If Nintendo can keep up coming with games like Wii Fit and so on, there's just no need for a new Wii.

 

[Flachmatuch]

I would be very surprised if the next-gen consoles all do not contain blu-ray drives, even nintendo's. The main reason why they weren't all used was because at the time there was no clear winner. It's only been a year or so that blu-ray is the definitive next tech of optical drives and the stand alone players are already down to 300 from about 500.

Nintendo was behind in N64 with no optical drive and screwed over a lot of 3rd parties with the small DVDs of the gamecube. I just don't see them falling behind in this area again. It's cost them too much.

What cost them too much was to compete in the tech race which they deemed pointless But yeah, if it doesn't cost too much for them to make a console that 3rd parties can port their traditional games to, it's probably worth it.

 

[camineet]

Your thinking is completely backwards imo It's not about looking at technology and then trying to make games around it, but having game ideas (because despite what loads of people here think, the Wii sells because of its games) and finding the technology that fits. And in addition to game ideas, it's also about how you integrate games into a normal lifestyle (like TV), and finding technology that supports that. If Nintendo can keep up coming with games like Wii Fit and so on, there's just no need for a new Wii.

I know Nintendo thinks up games first, only then later hardware to make them happen.

But even Nintendo, fixed in its ways, still has to come out with newer hardware, capable of better visuals, better A.I., physics, etc. at some point