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

[function]

Nintendo aren't even skilled at making Xbox 360 level software yet - their games are technically weak and massively behind schedule. They'd be screwed trying to compete on PS4.

Sega only had to transfer from DC to PS2/Xbox/GC (which they did well, particularly on Xbox and their later PS2 stuff).

Nintendo would be going from first gen PS360 to second gen 4Bone. And the Wuu only has three CPU threads, and one of those runs on a "Master Core" with massively more cache. They're probably still struggling with coarse grain multithreading.

Nintendo's belief they could exist in a technological bubble is going to hurt them for years to come, unless they want to stick to simplistic, cartoonish looking games.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Nintendo can use middleware like everyone else, at least for starters. They'll also be no worse off writing for PS4 than writing for Wii U - they have the same issues with modern hardware on Wii U that they lack the experience in.

 

[betan]

They have been doing hardware "gimmicks" since at least DS. Only wiipad has failed and everyone is once again calling for going software-only or partnering up with another giant company. Really?

I, as someone who has not bought anything Nintendo ever, am looking forward to their next gimmick.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Have you forgotten Virtual Boy? Power Glove? Gimmicks isn't new to N. since DS. DS touch was innovative, as was Wii motion. VB and PG were sucky. The Wuublet could have been good if it was like a classy tablet with controls, but Nintendo's execution was lacking and they don't believe in the concept themselves given the lack of software that uses it effectively. They basically made a console with a portable screen, but which wasn't a portable. During the development and release of Wii U, a lot of us were saying it was a poor design that'd struggle. Regardless of the idea, the execution was pretty obviously lacking.

At the same time as their eclectic mix of hardware, Nintendo have produced stellar software, plenty of which people would like to play but not at the cost of buying a whole extra console to do it.

So why is it such a surprise to see people calling for Nintendo to produce software for/with a hardware partner? We'll lose the weird hardware that's poor value for money, and gain better libraries all round. Nintendo in turn can focus on their strength and dabble in peripherals if that takes their fancy.

I won't say that's the only sane future, but it's certainly a reasonable option with plenty of benefits.

 

[Grall]

Wasn't the Powerglove a Mattel peripheral...?

ROB, however, was 100% nintendo gimmickery. (Pity it never launched in Europe! I so wanted it when I was a lad in the 80s.) Arguably, the Zapper was a gimmick as well one might say.

 

[betan]

Have you forgotten Virtual Boy? Power Glove? Gimmicks isn't new to N. since DS. DS touch was innovative, as was Wii motion. VB and PG were sucky.

Power Glove was optional accessory not even designed by Nintendo and Virtual Boy (which I indeed forgot) supports the idea that Nintendo should be allowed to fail occasionally with its gimmicky hardware, considering the success afterwards.

The Wuublet could have been good if it was like a classy tablet with controls, but Nintendo's execution was lacking and they don't believe in the concept themselves given the lack of software that uses it effectively. They basically made a console with a portable screen, but which wasn't a portable. During the development and release of Wii U, a lot of us were saying it was a poor design that'd struggle. Regardless of the idea, the execution was pretty obviously lacking.

I agree, it was a terrible idea. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be a success with a more modern tablet like hardware either. They tried to mix DS and tablet trend in the wrong consumer space.

At the same time as their eclectic mix of hardware, Nintendo have produced stellar software, plenty of which people would like to play but not at the cost of buying a whole extra console to do it.

So why is it such a surprise to see people calling for Nintendo to produce software for/with a hardware partner? We'll lose the weird hardware that's poor value for money, and gain better libraries all round. Nintendo in turn can focus on their strength and dabble in peripherals if that takes their fancy.

I assume Nintendo -like the biggest company in CE- made majority of its money through hardware and the medium it controls. It would be crazy to give up on that.

Also from a consumer perspective, they are the only ones trying radically new things, and this should be a good thing for me.

Instead of looking for a controlling hardware partner, they should try to do a Sony and communicate with developers around the world while researching their next "gimmick". Going for the second-tier hardware with the right gimmick makes a lot of financial sense. They just need 3rd party developers to get on board.

All of that is still irrelevant though. We shouldn't try to change Nintendo because of one failure, as if it's the end of the world.

 

[Exophase]

Nintendo aren't even skilled at making Xbox 360 level software yet - their games are technically weak and massively behind schedule. They'd be screwed trying to compete on PS4.

They may have been going through a learning curve with Wii U games but a similar level of effort would only yield better looking games on the better systems because they're less resource constrained and aren't imposing such a big paradigm shift. Why would they sell worse this way? I don't think people are going to be less likely to buy a Nintendo game on PS4 or XB1 than they would Wii U just because it looks worse than other PS4 and XB1 games. Besides, Nintendo is good at masking their technical shortcomings with their own graphical style.

The way I see it, there are lots of people who want to play Nintendo games but don't want to have to buy an entire system to do so, and the parts that only that Nintendo system add to the gameplay experience aren't doing enough to sell the game to people who wouldn't otherwise buy it. I think they'd sell extremely well on the other consoles, at least for a while. But that wouldn't be enough to make Nintendo do it.

Sega only had to transfer from DC to PS2/Xbox/GC (which they did well, particularly on Xbox and their later PS2 stuff).

Nintendo would be going from first gen PS360 to second gen 4Bone. And the Wuu only has three CPU threads, and one of those runs on a "Master Core" with massively more cache. They're probably still struggling with coarse grain multithreading.

Nintendo's belief they could exist in a technological bubble is going to hurt them for years to come, unless they want to stick to simplistic, cartoonish looking games.[/QUOTE]

 

[Melqart]

It's not a surprise to see people calling for Nintendo to release their software on other platforms. I would love for this to happen myself. It's just not going to happen anytime soon and certainly not within this current console generation. They're usually among the top console software publishers in terms of units sold every year (I think them and Take Two are almost tied for the top spot last year) and that software is tied to their own hardware.

Going third party would probably reduce their output, spread their teams thin, increase development costs, in addition to having less freedom and paying licensing fees. When Sega did it in 2001, many thought they would become bigger than EA and that never came close to happening. The mostly enthusiast audience do not have a history with Nintendo games either and judging by 360 sales of former Playstation-associated franchises like FF, that can be a big deal.

 

[AlphaWolf]

If Nintendo was going to go software only, why would they need a hardware partner? Multiplatform would certainly offer them access to the largest audience.

 

[RudeCurve]

The VB was a pretty cool piece of kit, it's only problem was it wasn't color and didn't have many games. My nephew had one and I really liked it considering the time period.

ROB was cool too. If Nintendo released an autonomous ROB today with voice/image recognition, self charging dock, remote viewing/home security monitoring, I'd buy one.

I actually like Nintendo hardware when done right like the GCN with exclusive 3rd party games. Other than Metroid series and Zelda I really don't care about the other Nintendo franchises like Donky Kong, Mario, SSB, Pikmin etc.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

If Nintendo was going to go software only, why would they need a hardware partner? Multiplatform would certainly offer them access to the largest audience.

If it's about the biggest audience than we wouldn't have consoles and everybody would be gaming on pc. Obviously there are big advantages to owning a closed platform. If there weren't Sony and MS wouldn't be in the console business. I think it's silly to say Nintendo should go third party. NES, SNES, Wii sold plenty. N64 was kinda meh and GC was bad though they still made money on it. Their handhelds always sold bucketloads. The only real failure is the wuu and it's not hard to understand why it failed (too expensive for the hardware you get).

Nintendo knows how to make good hardware, they've been doing it for over 2 decades, but their current management just doesn't seem to get it.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Nintendo knows how to make good hardware, they've been doing it for over 2 decades, but their current management just doesn't seem to get it.

The definition of 'good hardware' has changed dramatically over those two decades. And in two decades, we're talking 6 devices. NES and SNES were great for 2D consoles. N64 was okay, although it had issues that made it far from a fabulous design, but then all 3D hardware was pretty ropey back then. Still, Sony made an easy to develop for, 3rd party friendly platform which is what took the crown cleanly from Nintendo. GC was also okay, thanks mostly to the ArtX GPU I'd say, but despite being a good little box, Nintendo couldn't compete and just managed to eek out a decent niche selling to their fanbase. Wii was a great idea that went gangbusters, but the hardware design itself was still pretty poor - they could have provided much better specs and a wider appeal. They also failed to get the 3rd parties on board in a big way (principally due to it being last-gen hardware). Wii U is another box was bad from the get-go on paper.

So I don't think Nintendo are well versed in making good hardware, and they are definitely poor at attracting and keeping third parties which is necessary for a healthy all-round gaming machine. They are also crap at online services and don't seem to care to learn. the end result is an expectation from the likes of me that a Nintendo console will be poor VFM in terms of hardware, have ropey services, and won't have many of the games I'd like. If many gamers are the same as myself, they will only buy a Nintendo console for N. franchises, and that's where N. have locked themselves into a niche.

Although they have managed to make good money on their hardware when its worked, N. have mostly been kept afloat by their peerless handhelds (which actually benefited from N.'s poor-specs mentality because it saved battery life!). I don't believe N. will make more money from 25 million buyers of $50 games than they would by getting $20 from $60 games selling to 120+ million console gamers along with $4 a game from 1 billion mobile gamers along with $10 per month from rapid mobile consumable buyers, without even factoring in the savings in not designing and producing their own hardware.

As for your reference to Sony and MS producing closed boxes, neither really likes them and both would rather have a software platform, and both are taking steps in that direction. Console hardware is a pretty poor industry in terms of returns, and it's only the few runaway successes that give it any appeal at all.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

Agreed. Nintendo needs to go third party.