Analysts optimistic about Wii ; THQ talk about Wii costs

How in the hell can the Wiimote not be high tech?

 

Compared to stuff like those Radica TV games, the Wii is still fairly powerful. In some ways, it harkens back to the old days of consoles, when in many ways they couldn't hold a candle to PCs, yet were still considered impressive.

 

Is it high tech? Wiimote like positional controllers have been around for awhile. 3D mice, hell even the PowerGlove. Wiimote is an evolutionary successor, probably better precision and lighterweight, but it's not particularly bleeding edge.

I think you may end up seeing a PS3 position tech using the HD eyetoy. They'll make you wear special patterned colored gloves or something, and dedicate some CPU power to image processing to detect had position. The technology has already been proven, in fact, it's good enough to even detect finger orientation, as visual recognizers for American Sign Language have been demonstated in AR research.

 

Next generation CPU/GPU's are evolutionary successors, doesn't stop them being high tech.

BTW the PowerGlove only allowed 2D movement, not full 3D like the Rev controller.

 

Funny how some analyst's reports are met will walls of "Oh, you mean 'anal-ysts'? *snort*" and "Analysts are always wrong." and "I'd love to be an analyst: you guess and never have to be right." It's funny in juxtaposition with this thread. Out of curiosity, were any analysts bullish about the Gamecube's chances prior to E3 2001?

 

Well Nintendo does have billions in the bank so they could have spent billions to develop chips like the Cell, maybe even buy a fab or two.

But they choose not to, probably because they're interested in carving a profitable niche and then using handhelds to drive volume.

Maybe they think a unique controller will do for the Wii what a novel control scheme did for the DS.

Of course the other way to look at the success of the DS is that a big competitor has carved a sizeable share where formerly, Nintendo had all handhelds to itself.

 

Ok, you are either contradicting yourself, or implying both Sony and MS will lose money this gen. If Nintendo could compete financially and create a powerfull console, sign up exclusives and everything, and still come back making a sizeable ammount of money and maybe even gain back a good chunk of the market they´d do it.

Going the wii way is more of a sign that they can´t do that, IMO.

 

MS probably will lose money, they lost massive amounts last gen, Sony are in an extremely dominante position so they probably won't. There's no contradiction going on here, just some confusion about what I've said it seems. I didn't say that Nintendo could produce a cutting edge console, make back marketshare and a sizeable amount of money (maybe they could, maybe they couldn't who knows..). I said that, contrary to the opinion of the analyst quoted in the first post, Nintendo quite obviously have the money and available technology to go the cutting edge graphics route if they chose too. They have the money to risk if they wanted to risk it (over $8 billion in cash). They aren't doing so because they feel it would be the wrong choice.

 

gambling billions would translate into massive losses if not successful..
i guess their shareholders wouldn't agree to such a risky business plan.

whereas microsoft can loose billions on xbox while doing huge benefits, thanks to the OS and office suite obscene margins.. xbox has more to do with serving microsoft strategy than being a profit center.

 

Why? If you can spend lots to make money, or spend less to make the same amount of money, which would you do? DS is cheaper tech than PSP, cheaper to produce, but is making Ninty for money for them than PSP is making for Sony (AFAIK). Spending on making a high-tech, expensive piece of hardware that you know is compeiting with two other strong rivals, or spending on an 'entry level, cheap, affordable, different gaming platform, are the options, and Ninty chose the latter it seems. That makes business sense to me. Approach the market from a different angle rather than a straight slog with your rivals and give yourself an easy life (if the gamble pays off).

 

Every analyst was saying that either the XBox or GC would die off long before the generation ended. They were all on the same page that the market couldn't support three consoles. Most of the posters on these boards agreed with them. There were a few of us who had things figured right(within a few percentage points)- the analysts were not even close. Most of the analysts were standing behind the GC being Nintendo's last set top console before they moved to third party status and there was talk about whether or not Sony or MS would end up landing their titles. So you could say that there was no hype from the analysts prior to last gens beginning- it got even worse when the full launch plan was put out and we saw what they had to offer. This is different.

 

I really think Wii may be the console with the most installed base in the first two years if they can create enough of them.

If they create more than MS and Sony can produce they will sell. I don't see any deterent for it, not even the graphics when it boils down to it the games will have good enough graphics, and great gameplay. Add online and virtual console and you have a huge winner.

At first my thoughts were PS3, Xbox 360 and Wii as highest install base, in the end it may turn out to be true. But I believe the Wii will be second or very close to second with virtually no difference.

#1 45% installed base
#2 30% installed base
#3 25% installed base

Right now to tell the truth with the high price point of PS3 I don't know who will win. If the PS3 was $400 and $500 it would definitely be #1. If I'm rethinking which console I will buy first and I'm an avid Sony fan, I can only imagine what others who aren't complete Sony supporters feel.

I think Wii may end up being second due to price and the games and wii-mote. MS did the best thing by launching early, otherwise they would be underdogs this time around, in my opinion.

I would like to add though, that the PS3 and the Xbox 360 and the Wii will sell more than their predecessors due to growing the market.

Speng.

 

But in a way, the GameCube was Nintendo's last set-top console, because IMHO, the Wii is simply a tweaked Cube with a new controller. It appears the GameCube will simply have a 10 year long life.

 

Yeah and Wii will be Nintendo's last console too right?

 

Nope, they can just overclock the GC again and sell it retro like Coleco/Intellivision and Atari sell nostalgia platforms today.

I think instead, they'll pull a PSP and try to put a GC into a portable with some gyro tech.

 

I think Nintendo's next console wil be a hybrid portable/home console using VR goggles and an upgraded Wii control scheme. It wil have a home docking station that houses much processing power when playing at home. When on the go it will detach with a fraction of the processing power housed in the portable pack module.

 

Not that its important, considering I doubt very much that Wii is simply an overclocked GC to start with and the fact that I think your just fishing at the moment Demo .. But since its relivant to your post I might as well post it here. In Iwata's latest interview he said that Nintendo expect HDTV to be the standard in 5 years so they will definitely support HD resolutions with the succesor to Wii.

Good, I might actually have an HDTV in 5 years

 

Well, I think they are still hurting from the Virtua Boy, so no VR goggles. Plus, VR goggles require alot more GPU power to render the scene twice at 2x the refresh rate.