Anyone still think Wii U will "win" "next gen"?

[liolio]

Yeah, I agree...they could just wait 1-2 years and release PS4/X1 equivalent hardware cheaper...maybe close to the PS4 architecture to make porting easier. But then I wonder what the goal audience would be: only people who like the Nintendo exclusives. Everything else can be found on other consoles with probably better online service.

It is a really difficult market imo and Nintendo probably needs more than its exclusives to make another success?!?

People playing online are a profitable niche (and a healthy one by its size I should add) though I would bet lots of gamers don't care for that with their consoles.
Nintendo could get plenty of gamers if they had a better porfolio. Theirs exclusives are great, they more than often don't let aside local MP game that is imo still one of the "core" of the console experience. Imo people that pursue foremost consoles for online gaming are sort of lazy PC gamers / PC gamers sold to console convenience.
For years I've heard that Nintendo does not care for people like me ( or plenty of casually corish players). It is plain BS it is just that Nintendo have bad business plan, do too much penny pinching, doesn't have the best hardware they could have at a given BOM, etc.
The Wii was a great bet, but that is not a business plan, one company can't act as a guy in a casino, ultimately the bank always wins. It is saddening as Nintendo clear as the financial punch to make better.

 

[Melqart]

Nintendo should really consider a strategic business relationship with Apple. Nintendo told their investors last year that future platforms would share a common architecture (such as the OS) regardless of differences in form factor or specs which is what Apple already does with iOS. All the stuff that Nintendo isn't so great at like hardware, OS, online, etc. would be handled by Apple while Nintendo could focus on creating games. You could play on the TV with a controller or on the go with or without a controller (and Nintendo could make controller devices). The Apple TV would be their "console" while the iPad and iPhone would be their handheld. Nintendo just focuses on making games. Full priced and full length games, cheaper mini games, F2P games, legacy titles, etc.

It would be a win for both of them. Apple's devices are huge in Japan and largely the reason console sales have been so poor. Smart devices are what hurt Nintendo the most by grabbing the attention (and wallets) of their primary demographic. It would be suicide for Nintendo to compete with them head on (Nintendo-branded phone, etc) in my opinion.

 

[Grall]

This makes sense in ways that ensures nintendo will NEVER do this. They're too stuck in their stoopid thinking along the ways of a bird in the hand is worth ten in the bush, IE, why share money with someone else if you can keep it all for yourself, even if your market was quite literally ten times bigger (or more!)

In related news, criticism from manufacturers of iOS controllers was recently leveled at apple. Due to strictly enforced specs including mandated sourcing of components from a single overpriced vendor and overly detailed specs, the resulting device becomes expensive and poor. Well, if it's one thing nintendo knows, it's how to design controllers.

But... Like I said, since such a deal would make too much sense it'll never happen.

 

[-tkf-]

My only fear is that Nintendo runs out of money. Because that would force them to do all the stupid shit that everyone including myself is suggesting, turning them into just another Sony, Microsoft, ea, Activision crap run of the mill be like everyone else.

I want them to do there own thing and preferably on their own hardware and be completely free of the current mantra of PROFIT measures how good your games are. I guess it's time to buy that WiiU and ignore the price after all..

 

[dagamer]

My only fear is that Nintendo runs out of money. Because that would force them to do all the stupid shit that everyone including myself is suggesting, turning them into just another Sony, Microsoft, ea, Activision crap run of the mill be like everyone else.

I want them to do there own thing and preferably on their own hardware and be completely free of the current mantra of PROFIT measures how good your games are. I guess it's time to buy that WiiU and ignore the price after all..

Nintendo has $9.4 billion in the bank. They are only projected to lose $336 million this year. At this rate, it would take them ~30 years to go bankrupt. However, the problem that is coming sooner is no 3rd party developer wanting to make games for their consoles. Charging licensing fees is how all game console makers make back the R&D for new consoles and a Nintendo-only box became a very hard to justify. Plus, almost no one would be interested in buying such a box because Nintendo games come way too infrequently for it to succeed. No retailer would stock it either.

 

[Grall]

Nintendo has $9.4 billion in the bank. They are only projected to lose $336 million this year. At this rate, it would take them ~30 years to go bankrupt.

Like you suggest, at THIS rate it may take ~30 years, but the rate risks getting much higher if this pattern continues - and it's certain to do just that right now unless nintendo changes its ways. 3rd party support for wuu is basically dead right now and it will get deader still as time goes on, and a nintendo-only console just isn't very attractive to most consumers. Nintendo risks becoming entirely irrelevant in a few years, why should anyone care about mario + all those other tired, over-exploited mascots if mario + friends is all you can get for your nintendo console?

Nintendo is an extremely conservative company however - the SNES CD-addon, N64 cartridge and 64DD fiascos for example should tell anyone as much even if one ignores recent stumblings.

Nintendo brags about all the franchises they have, but when was the last time they actually invented something new? Even their newer franchises are all old by now - pikmin for example rates as new in nintendo terms and it's like a decade old by now. Most other nintendo franchises are as old as gamer kids' DADS today.

Even with craploads of money in the bank, nintendo is approaching a make-or-break point in their existence and I'm not convinced they've still got what it takes to make it. They've convinced themselves they know all about how to make games and consoles and that their way is the best (they invented the modern console industry originally after all), so why should they change anything?

*Sigh.*

 

[-tkf-]

Like you suggest, at THIS rate it may take ~30 years, but the rate risks getting much higher if this pattern continues - and it's certain to do just that right now unless nintendo changes its ways. 3rd party support for wuu is basically dead right now and it will get deader still as time goes on, and a nintendo-only console just isn't very attractive to most consumers. Nintendo risks becoming entirely irrelevant in a few years, why should anyone care about mario + all those other tired, over-exploited mascots if mario + friends is all you can get for your nintendo console?

Nintendo is an extremely conservative company however - the SNES CD-addon, N64 cartridge and 64DD fiascos for example should tell anyone as much even if one ignores recent stumblings.

Nintendo brags about all the franchises they have, but when was the last time they actually invented something new? Even their newer franchises are all old by now - pikmin for example rates as new in nintendo terms and it's like a decade old by now. Most other nintendo franchises are as old as gamer kids' DADS today.

Even with craploads of money in the bank, nintendo is approaching a make-or-break point in their existence and I'm not convinced they've still got what it takes to make it. They've convinced themselves they know all about how to make games and consoles and that their way is the best (they invented the modern console industry originally after all), so why should they change anything?

*Sigh.*

Conservative how? That they focus on their genre of games? Or that they put out conservative hardware? It has to be the first, because they have been anything but conservative when it comes to their hardware.

I am not convinced they have what it takes to make it, but not because i think there isn't a place in the world for their games. But because they apparently aren't able to produce a console that is cheap enough, and certainly not when compared to Microsoft and Sony. You can buy a PS4 or add $100 more and get a XB1.. Or you can buy a WiiU* or add a $100 more and get a PS4!

*Based on amazon.com prices

 

[RudeCurve]

I'd buy a new Nintendo console if it had comparable performance to X1/PS4 and 3rd party exclusives that I just had to have...like what they did with the RE games on GCN.

 

[liolio]

It's going to be tough for them to change, they nred new blood, may be they have it already somewhere in their US HQ.
I don't expect the Japanese management even if it goes through a refresh to do the right thing. They need to open up, I would be surprised if nobody in the company at large has a clue about what to do. My belief is that till a big company ala Google or Apple makes a big move on gaming ( and if they do I expect neither to going with pricey hardware) they should/could be extremely successful. Nintendo view are imo right about BC though it should not be done in hardware, it is especially true in an age where casual gamers buy a game and expect it to work on all their platform. So they need a proper OS omnipresent across their devices. They need good hardware and that for a cheap price.
No matter its value as gaming device the 3ds can' t be sold at 150$, at that price you can buy slate, for example HP tegra3 power slate 7, and from an hardware the 3ds is a piece of crap in comparison. In the phone real the Moto G is 170$ and again comparison is not OK /one device looks like a pics of sh…
There are 100$ phone that are also significantly better.
Ok the 3ds is older though it was outdated at release, what casual gamers are seeing is that cheap Android devices are way better and can run emulators just fine. Casual is not dumb either, plenty of native games, emulators+ controller, and smartphone functionality: there is no match.
I used to think that 150$ could be the right price for a handheld, now after the moto g and the release of plenty good and cheap 7" tablets, I think they should aim for 100$ and tech allows for nice things at that price.
But foremost is software, stable functional and allowing for BC / forward compatibility.

 

[Billy Idol]

@NPL and Shifty: thanks for pointing out to me that a potential WiiU2 with PS4 specs would not be automatically cheaper, was not clear to me, but your arguments are sound.

@Gerry: yes, I did explain my students, all of them...but I was a bit more polite and didn't call them morons ... they still have to write their Master thesis in my group ;-)

 

[-tkf-]

would a Amd based apu be so expensive?

 

[Blazkowicz]

Why not an nvidia APU. It's low power stuff and the discussion about Nintendo going only after tablet/phone/etc. made me think of that. What's funny is if they want to keep doing the streaming stuff, nvidia has it covered already.

Tegra K1 is close to a Wii U, a Tegra Volta would be a nice improvement, else a Tegra Maxwell with ddr4 or lpddr4, that should be interesting. But it's all incompatible with Wii/Wii U.

 

[liolio]

Speaking of partnership I would think that the best partner Nintendo could hope for would be Amazon.
Amazon devices are more closed, they by pass the playstore.
They need a selling point over other Android based devices.
They have the network infrastructure. More there were rumors about them working on a gaming device. There are also rumors about Google doing so, they need a strong differentiator.
Nintendo would solve the OS issue by using a custom android + proprietary api. Amazon and Nintendo could work in tandem to further customize android and create an Api for non vanilla android games / exclusive.

 

[wco81]

I'd buy a new Nintendo console if it had comparable performance to X1/PS4 and 3rd party exclusives that I just had to have...like what they did with the RE games on GCN.

What kind of exclusives could they secure?

They tried to attract core gamers with some more "hardcore" titles.

Was it Eternal Darkness or something like that?

 

[Blazkowicz]

But Amazon's business model is to destroy and replace retail by selling stuff at cost. Nintendo relies on presence in consumer retail, if only so that parents can walk in and see the stuff on the shelves. Like its two competitors still do, and they all still rely on disc based games too.
There must still be a market of users too who don't want to pay for digital-distribution-only, worry about the connectivity and that their real money they've spent is now locked into virtual games locked into digital accounts and that crap.

The comments about lack of system wide chat and other "advanced" networking features maybe miss too that 7 and 8 year olds will play the games (and fiddle with the interfaces, set up the TV's contrast/brightness and channel input, whatever), so you won't necessarily want to expose them hurling insults, "gay niggers", joking about pedophilia or child porn and sending goatse.jpg as a picture attachement. Facebookesque "social" features are a liability too, I don't know if they could be a legal liability even, I'm not sure that minors belong on social networks. Going on social networks ought to be a thought-out, prepared for affair (if choice is taken to participate at all) not some default stuff just because you wanted to play games like Bomberman or something and the console or software platform is spyware with flashy, giant screen antialiased animations.

 

[-tkf-]

As for partners i would go for the crazy and think Sony, everyone else mentioned is based in the US. And afaik those that ended up screwing Sony, and getting revenge on Nintendo are not there anymore.

Sony gives Nintendo limitless access to the Playstation platform, they basically become one and Nintendo gets a solid hardware platform with all the R&D they could ask for and everything is based in Japan and that culture.

Microsoft on the other hand would be a good bet if they want to destroy Sony

 

[-tkf-]

Why not an nvidia APU.

Because the other consoles uses amd and the idea would be to make it easier for 3rd party developers..

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Speaking of partnership I would think that the best partner Nintendo could hope for would be Amazon.

A quick Google finds an estimate of 45 million Kindle Fires. That's peanuts compared to all Android and/or iOS. Given app prices are still stupidly low, the only way to make a decent go of that market is to sell en masse.

As for partners i would go for the crazy and think Sony, everyone else mentioned is based in the US. And afaik those that ended up screwing Sony, and getting revenge on Nintendo are not there anymore.

I think Sony would be a good fit in that I imagine Sony would afford Nintendo a lot of freedom in creating peripherals and stuff. Sony have shown (excessive!) patience with some of its developers letting them take as long as they please, and Nintendo would need the same lack of pressure to maintain full creative control. However, I think going independent is the most sensible course of action with the highest possible turnover for Nintendo (in the case that they can't make a super hardware hit again).

 

[Blazkowicz]

Because the other consoles uses amd and the idea would be to make it easier for 3rd party developers..

But the APIs would be different anyway. Nintendo would still have to make an OS, APIs, get middleware ported etc.

Regarding the hardware features, in both cases you have D3D 11.x, OpenGL 4.x GPUs with more or less proprietary GPGPU on the side, straightforward CPUs. I can say that in my view there's less difference between Tegra Kepler/Maxwell and XBO/PS4 than between X360 and PS3.

Sure, an AMD APU makes sense to use. I'm reading your above post about Nintendo going with Sony, that can be conceivable.
I was thinking that with nvidia, they get the strong software support right away too (not that I want to sound like a shill) e.g. the stuff can run and stream at low latency industrial CAD and engineering packages if that's what you wanted. You have a choice between Android, real linux, FreeBSD. Linux is fun and nice, you have OpenGL 4.4 (Open CL 2.0 and CUDA if you want it), you piggyback on Valve's effort to bring usable debuggers etc. to the platform, nvidia has an intention to target low or high powered consoles/gaming devices - technically, it's done on current shipping commercial products, the Ouya, Shield and Steamboxen.

 

[liolio]

A quick Google finds an estimate of 45 million Kindle Fires. That's peanuts compared to all Android and/or iOS. Given app prices are still stupidly low, the only way to make a decent go of that market is to sell en masse.

I don't get your point, indeed Kindle are struggling, Amazon used it as a mean to attract costumers to their online shop.
Kindle used to be cheap, thought Google took notice and release pretty awesome tab for cheap. Then there is the side effect of decay PC sales that attracts Asus Acer and the likes that fight for the bottom end devices, Kindle is no longer anything special. That is why an exclusive partnership could seduce them, as long as it attracts people to their store it is a good move, way better than trying to make gaming platform of some kind of their own.
If Kindle were selling gang buster what interest Amazon would have in a deal with another company?