Support NeoGAF

[Xplainin]

It was sad that Nintendo went the Wii route when they did. Prior they really gave Sega and Sony some REAL competition in the hardware stakes. N64 was worthy of the PS1 and Saturn, and the Gamecube was a very good price of kit, and ran rings around the PS2 with graphics.

I wonder if there is any chance Nintendo decide to play with the big boys again and put out a console the equal of PS5 and XSX.
While people have obviously enjoyed the games Nintendo have put out in the last couple of gens, but just imagine the experiences we have missed out on by Nintendo not following the Gamecube with another high performing console. Imagine a Mario with XOX power behind it. Or Super Metroid. Or Zelda.

Surely the thought has gone through Nintendos heads to get the band back together.

 

[lastmessiah]

No. The budget of a Call of Duty game is larger than the GDP of Japan. They just can’t afford to.

 

[Codes 208]

Probably not, and at this point I’ve grown fine with it. Say what you want about the switch but I found more hours played into just BotW, Mario odyssey, Mario kart and smash bros than most ps4/XBO games this gen.

 

[Birdo]

It's funny. I was playing some N64 games last night and I thought to myself the same question.

Nintendo haven't had the most powerful console since the 90's.

I really can't see them doing it ever again. Even as far back as the Game Boy, they have had more success with lower-spec consoles. It keeps both hardware and dev costs down.

 

[Yoshi]

The Switch was pretty premium though? Launched at 350€ and had extremely strong mobile hardware at the time.

 

[The_Mike]

I wish they made a non handheld switch. I know I can playy switch on the TV, but man it somehow feels weird in my head.

 

[Xplainin]

Probably not, and at this point I’ve grown fine with it. Say what you want about the switch but I found more hours played into just BotW, Mario odyssey, Mario kart and smash bros than most ps4/XBO games this gen.

But could you imagine Mario or Zelda on the PS5 or XSX? Sad to think these experiences will never happen.

 

[JordanN]

Nintendo doesn't even making the most technically driven games on their own hardware.

Like when Wii U launched, the best graphical showcase was Assassins Creed and Need for Speed.
On Gamecube it was Rogue Squadron by Factor 5.
On 3DS, Capcom was the one who pushed the system to the max.

Their best looking Switch games could possibly be outdone by the best PS3/360 games.

 

[Codes 208]

But could you imagine Mario or Zelda on the PS5 or XSX? Sad to think these experiences will never happen.

I really don’t care

Wanting a decent resolution and frame rate is fine and I can agree, but graphics =/=how fun a game is.

I can’t defend the sorry state of pokemon for example, but that’s less of an issuewith the switch and the cutting corners on gamefreak’s part.

 

[splattered]

I don't want Nintendo to strive for "The most powerful" console but at LEAST make one that is close to on par with competing systems.. it would really help their 3rd party support and give that extra shine to their graphics that already have great art direction. Would love to see it.

 

[synchronicity]

Nintendo is about software, not hardware. (And that's fine with me.)

 

[UltimaKilo]

As long as the model is working and the company is profitable, why would they? If Microsoft got out of the console business, it’s possible.

 

[JordanN]

It's funny. I was playing some N64 games last night and I thought to myself the same question.

Nintendo haven't had the most powerful console since the 90's.

I really can't see them doing it ever again. Even as far back as the Game Boy, they have had more success with lower-spec consoles. It keeps both hardware and dev costs down.

Not even in the 90s was this true.

SNES CPU was slower than the Genesis.
N64 had really low polygon counts and was bottlenecked on memory.

Also, look at when they launched those systems. It was years later when the competition was already out. They did this to cut costs as opposed to actually making something super powerful.

 

[Birdo]

Not even in the 90s was this true.

SNES CPU was slower than the Genesis.
N64 had really low polygon counts and was bottlenecked on memory.

The SNES could display more colours than the Genesis, and the N64 could push FAR more polygons than the PSX. Both were the superior hardware at time of release.

 

[Codes 208]

Not even in the 90s was this true.

SNES CPU was slower than the Genesis.
N64 had really low polygon counts and was bottlenecked on memory.

Also, look at when they launched those systems. It was years later when the competition was already out. They did this to cut costs as opposed to actually making something super powerful.

Snes was inferior on the cpu per, but iirc the genesis’ sound chip led to its own issues and its color palette was far more restrictive (which is visible when comparing a game like lion king)

 

[JordanN]

The SNES could display more colours than the Genesis,

After launching 2 years after the Genesis.
And the Neo Geo launched in the same year and blew both systems away.

and the N64 could push FAR more polygons than the PSX. Both were the superior hardware at time of release.

Square Enix confirmed the N64 couldn't handle Final Fantasy 7.

 

[deriks]

Nope, and just because their idea of not doing this was better in the long run

Let's think about it a little:
- PS360 were consoles that their companies lost money for a while, also, they got losses with fixes and shit - remember that the PS3 Slim has basically no extras and the 360 got a really newer design because the old thing was poorly designed. Nintendo launched the Wii with so much profit, also their games sold like bananas and the cost to make was way below the competition
- Wii U was a little loss for Nintendo, but getting a second game for the console got profit from them. PS4 and Xbox also were losses, even thou much less than their predecessors
- Switch was sold with profit from the start
- PS5 and Series X we don't know, but with the SSD stuff and whatever, chances are that they will also come with a loss
- Switch 2? Probably we will wait a few more years, and will be really just a Switch 2, because the hybrid idea is the new shit and will have not that much of changes

 

[Birdo]

Square Enix confirmed the N64 couldn't handle Final Fantasy 7.

Only due to limited storage space of carts.

The N64 was absolutely the most powerful console of that gen. It wasn't even close.

 

[FStubbs]

After launching 2 years after the Genesis.
And the Neo Geo launched in the same year and blew both systems away.


Square Enix confirmed the N64 couldn't handle Final Fantasy 7.

Square Enix hated Nintendo during that time, and the reason the N64 couldn't handle FF7 was the cart size. From a pure power standpoint, it should be obvious the N64 could handle FF7 if it could handle Majora's Mask.

 

[Spukc]

i think after playing xenoblade chronicles "remastered" i am beginning to see cracks in nintendo's power

 

[sn0man]

It's funny. I was playing some N64 games last night and I thought to myself the same question.

Nintendo haven't had the most powerful console since the 90's.

I really can't see them doing it ever again. Even as far back as the Game Boy, they have had more success with lower-spec consoles. It keeps both hardware and dev costs down.

You’re probably onto something there. Nintendo can control development cycle time and developer knowledge by being .5–1.5 generations behind the competition. They can basically let Sony, PC, Xbox developers invest heavily on figuring out how to do rendering of 4K high quality assets now and then in like 2024 release a modest console with something like Xbox 1 X power or even PS4Pro on some optimized (maybe handheld capable) system

I wish they made a non handheld switch. I know I can playy switch on the TV, but man it somehow feels weird in my head.

Sort of not the point of the thread so I’ll keep it short but a Switch Stream would be a digital only home console for $100. They’d sell a ton and really make inroads into a lot of homes. I love physical games so it would be no use to me but I could see it being successful.

As long as the model is working and the company is profitable, why would they? If Microsoft got out of the console business, it’s possible.

You hit the corner case on the head. If MS just left to focus on PC and there was a power vacuum or a company got popular that had a middling box. Nintendo might consider innovating on power to fight to be 2nd most powerful. Think a new SEGA or somebody. If SEGA came back and had a smaller budget and released something with more power than a Switch but way less than PS5, that might draw Nintendo into trying to make something really powerful.

 

[JordanN]

Only due to limited storage space of carts.

The N64 was absolutely the most powerful console of that gen. It wasn't even close.

Square Enix hated Nintendo during that time, and the reason the N64 couldn't handle FF7 was the cart size. From a pure power standpoint, it should be obvious the N64 could handle FF7 if it could handle Majora's Mask.

It wasn't the cart, the system was fundamentally weaker than PS1.

Final Fantasy 7: An oral history

An inside look at the creation and fallout of Square's industry-defining role-playing game, as told by those who were there.

www.polygon.com

You don’t? But you designed him! [Laughs] Anyway, we made a 2,000-count polygon version of Behemoth for the Nintendo 64, but when we rendered and animated it, the framerate was way too low. To properly display Behemoth with that technology, we needed 2,000 polygons, but it was a little too much for the hardware. That was part of the problem with choosing Nintendo.

Naughty Dog also confirmed the same thing. N64 couldn't handle the same geometry as Crash Bandicoot.

Making Crash Bandicoot – part 6

Not only did we need to finish our E3 demo, but we needed a real name for the game — Willie the Wombat wasn’t going to cut it. Now, in the Naughty Dog office proper we knew he was a Ban…

all-things-andy-gavin.com

Of course he had consciously made the decision to forgo the complex worlds Crash contained. The N64 had prettier polygons, but less of them to offer. Crash Bandicoot could not be made on the N64. Of course Mario 64 couldn’t be done on the PlayStation either. The PlayStation sucked at big polygons, specifically scissoring them without warping textures. Mario 64 relied on big polygons.

 

[Genx3]

No
Why would Nintendo sell you a cutting edge box for cheap when people are more than willing to lap up the low end tech?

Both times Nintendo went with dated tech Nintendo had great success. The Wii and Switch both were selling you low end (even for a console) hardware.
The Switch in particular is a repackaged Nvidia Shield portable. The difference is you get to pay the Nintendo Premium for the Switch. Its powered by the same hw.

 

[HerjansEagleFeeder]

God I hope not. They're incompetent beyond belief when it comes to everything that should come along with a "premium console", eg online services, security, account management etc. Even the idiots at Sony do a much better job at it than them.

 

[MrS]

The door will never be closed but it's unlikely. They are the masters of handheld gaming.

 

[Birdo]

It wasn't the cart, the system was fundamentally weaker than PS1.

Have I woken up in an alternate timeline?

The N64 ran circles around the PSX hardware.

 

[geordiemp]

As long as the fanbase is willing to pay full price why should Nintendo do anything different ?

Its good business, good margins.

 

[Genx3]

Not even in the 90s was this true.

SNES CPU was slower than the Genesis.
N64 had really low polygon counts and was bottlenecked on memory.

Also, look at when they launched those systems. It was years later when the competition was already out. They did this to cut costs as opposed to actually making something super powerful.

The Genesis had a faster CPU than the SNES but that is where any advantage for the Genesis ends.

The SNES was capable of much better Graphics than the Genesis, far more Special effects, far better colors, etc.
The SNES also brought us the first 6 button controller.
Nintendo was at the Top of their game when they launched the SNES and the hw aside from the slow CPU was the best in the console business.

 

[JordanN]

Have I woken up in an alternate timeline?

The N64 ran circles around the PSX hardware.

The architecture was a nightmare. Even Nintendo admitted they made a lot of mistakes instead of designing a well balanced system.

Watch the video. Literally the saying "powerful on paper" but developers were locked out from ever using it.

 

[Genx3]

It wasn't the cart, the system was fundamentally weaker than PS1.

Final Fantasy 7: An oral history

An inside look at the creation and fallout of Square's industry-defining role-playing game, as told by those who were there.

www.polygon.com

Naughty Dog also confirmed the same thing. N64 couldn't handle the same geometry as Crash Bandicoot.

Making Crash Bandicoot – part 6

Not only did we need to finish our E3 demo, but we needed a real name for the game — Willie the Wombat wasn’t going to cut it. Now, in the Naughty Dog office proper we knew he was a Ban…

all-things-andy-gavin.com

The N64 was significantly better hw wise than PS1.
The N64 had correct perspectives on polygons and way better texture filtering.
N64 image quality was miles and miles ahead of the PS1.
The only advantage PS1 had over the N64 was CD Rom storage.
Storage capacity for CD roms allowed more variation on level design than cartridges limited storage at the time.

 

[Birdo]

developers were locked out from ever using it.

I'm sorry but I'm not buying this lol.

EVERY multiplat game ran and looked better on N64.

Look at the Playstation version of SF Rush

 

[Ceallach]

Why would they? There is no reason for them to.

 

[Dr.D00p]

As long as people keep throwing money at them for garbage level hardware what incentive do they have to spend money developing something decent....

 

[Xenon]

No. In a weird way Nintendo's lack of powerful hardware has shaped their IP's designs. It focused their efforts on art style to make their character appealing. This has made being at the bleading edge of hardware unnecessary.

 

[Genx3]

The architecture was a nightmare. Even Nintendo admitted they made a lot of mistakes instead of designing a well balanced system.

Watch the video. Literally the saying "powerful on paper" but developers were locked out from ever using it.

Sure the N64 had a bunch of bottlenecks but when the game was designed around these bottlenecks the games looked a lot better than anything on PS1.

Games like Wave Race, Mario 64 and Zelda OOT were never matched by PS1 titles and were either launch games or in Zelda's case an early gen game.
Later in the Gen Jet Force Gemini, Banjo Kazooie and Conker's Bad Fur Day were still untouched.

 

[Vawn]

No. The budget of a Call of Duty game is larger than the GDP of Japan. They just can’t afford to.

I don't know where to start...

 

[JordanN]

I'm sorry but I'm not buying this lol.

EVERY multiplat game ran and looked better on N64.

Look at the Playstation version of SF Rush

Hobbyists have been able to rip the games and confirm it for themselves.

Here's Wipeout on Playstation 1

And Wipeout on N64

 

[Beer Baelly]

This was their last premium product

 

[Coolwhhip]

I hope so. Depends on the success of Switch 2 I guess. I just wish they gave the option. Why not release a 500 dollar Switch pro?

 

[Sleepwalker]

No, they found their niche with the switch. They have more success giving gamers a system to accompany their ps/xbox rather than competing with them.

 

[Fbh]

Doubt it.
Their most successful consoles in the last 20+ years have all gone for unique designs instead of power, and I honestly think they are doing better for going that route instead of being a third (or fourth if you count PC) option focusing on power.

Not to mention that their software must be more profitable than that of Ms and Sony combined. Their most popular games sell insanely well for years at full price with production values that must cost a fraction of your average first party AAA game like TLOU2

 

[nush]

EVERY multiplat game ran and looked better on N64.

Dial back the hyperbole.

 

[Birdo]

Hobbyists have been able to rip the games and confirm it for themselves.

Here's Wipeout on Playstation 1

And Wipeout on N64

More polygons don't mean anything when the console can't even use perspective correct texturing.

 

[Megatron]

This was their last premium product

The DS lite was an awesome system, but no. Power-wise it was outclassed by the psp.

 

[Birdo]

Dial back the hyperbole.

Prove me wrong.

 

[nowhat]

More polygons don't mean anything when the console can't even use perspective correct texturing.

The goalposts, them keep moving. Yes, N64 was better in some aspects. But PSX absolutely could push more polygons, which is what you claimed before for N64.

 

[zelhawks37]

For now, I think Nintendo has found their sweet spot of releasing 'easy to develop for' consoles that can also be handhelds. As long as the sales keep coming and their games are top notch, there's no reason to go all in on the hardware like Sony and Microsoft.

That said, there are hardware features that shouldn't be missing on a console released in 2017 like... messaging.

 

[nush]

Prove me wrong.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

Make a poll

 

[Ghalheart]

It's hard to say at this point, honestly.

I don't think Nintendo is going back to embracing "weird" hardware choices like the Wii U or 3DS (i.e. 3D slider), instead leaning towards more conventional gimmicks like the original DS and the Switch. The Switch, however, is a unique case because it's not following the "success" of the Wii U, but as a responsive to the Wii U's dismal sales and lack of third-party support.

If the Wii U was as successful as Nintendo originally hoped, I think they would've ponied up more cash to make their next console more powerful than what we have now for the Switch - but I don't think we would've had the Switch as it is today.