Fact: Nintendo to release HD console + controllers with built-in screen late 2012

[Refreshment]

Yeah. That's not gonna be achieved with a camera tracking the fingers, unless the camera is slap-bang in the middle of the screen! Or if it can be angled inwards. But I don't see the value of that, and my expectation is that, if the controller has a camera, it'll be a basic player-watching webcam, for things like face-tracking.

What sort of wireless technology will be used to transmit video to and from the controllers?

For the uses you suggest for the camera a stationary one ala PSeye or kinect works better i think. Plus it could save cost to Nintendo and the consumer cause you are not packing 1 camera per controller like with the Wii.

The value of doing something like in the youtube video would be direct pointing without looking at the touch screen while also allowing ample touch interactions like poke, drag, swipe, etc. But you do make sense, doing the finger tracking that close with a camera could be problematic. There are screens that track finger position with IR beams for example.

If sending the video to the touch screen is possible the WHDI standard seems to fit the bill. Sends uncompressed video independent of line of sight. The touch screen wouldn't transmit video, it just acts a receiver, the inputs made to the screen will travel in the same radio standards the controller use.

Asus Wicast claims uncompressed 1080p @ 60HZ with <1 ms lag, and the transmitters/receivers are usb powered.

Edit: Additional Explanation. The paddle being controlled with the hand hovering over the Ezpad would be the reticule on your TV. When located at the point of the TV screen the interaction is wanted, the user poke or drags the finger on the touch screen. So in a sense you are preserving the touch screens typical interactions while retaining pointing capabilities without direct line of sight for the touch screen.

If used as a trackpad, then the only interaction you could execute with the touch is moving the reticule.

 

[joker454]

This is an Xbox540

Sure seems like it, but that's totally cool. The current boxes are so old it's hard to take them seriously anymore, they just look ancient. Normally I wouldn't care since I'd just play everything on pc, but pirates have assured that some games like RDR, etc, never make it to pc. So if Nintendo provides an easy to port to Xbox540 then I'll ditch my current ancient consoles and flock back to Nintendo.

All a big if though, I still have a hard time associating Nintendo with "graphics" and "core gamer" anymore. Plus some of the rumors seem a bit odd. Ati 4 series cards as a base? I don't totally get that. Also that the cpu's will be higher clocked than the 360's. Both of those scream "heat" in my mind, so something doesn't quite jive.

 

[RobertR1]

The ps360 shlouldnt be hard to pass graphically at this point. It wouldnt exactly require a monumental effort from nintendo. The distance they pull away will determine the longevity for hardcore gamers when the ps360 replacements roll in.

 

[Gitaroo]

I am curious how they are going to do BC, or if the system is going to have BC at all. Is tev hard to emulate? I am guessing it will play software at their native res then upscale if it does have bc.

 

[Teasy]

R700 GPU could be a wide range, tells us little.

I find it odd they're touting an X360 like triple core with increased clock speeds. Clocks ramp heat exponentially and 3.2 ghz is already fast. What are they aiming for 4ghz??

My guess is if that parts true at all, it's more like 3.6ghz, a small bump enabled by mature manufacturing.

I really need the RAM figure, more than anything else it gives you a range of the system's power.

The triple core CPU points to it not being a great jump over PS360, though.

360's CPU was hot at 3.2ghz on 90nm, but process technology has come along way since then. Would 4Ghz plus really be such a problem on a 32nm or even 22nm process?

Not that I think the Stream CPU will be a higher clocked version of the same CPU as 360 anyway, I don't think IGN are saying that either.

Also yeah I'd be very interested to know how much RAM is in there.

 

[Squilliam]

All a big if though, I still have a hard time associating Nintendo with "graphics" and "core gamer" anymore. Plus some of the rumors seem a bit odd. Ati 4 series cards as a base? I don't totally get that. Also that the cpu's will be higher clocked than the 360's. Both of those scream "heat" in my mind, so something doesn't quite jive.

It is new enough to be effective and old enough to be cost effective which seems to suit their style of choosing 'withered technology'. I don't think they like choosing technology which is still in it's infancy so DX11 like the Cell processor is out as much of the gains from that type of technology is too far into the future to be relevant to them in design decisions for a console to be produced now, whereas DX10.1 as a feature set is very stable and well understood so it won't take long to get up to speed with what is a very familiar architecture and very familiar development paradigms.

 

[ninelven]

IBM has been hitting some pretty impressive clocks lately, though I'm sure Nintendo will play it safe (quadcore would have been nice). Still have a few concerns/questions:

1) 512MB Vram (I expect 1GB, but...)

2) How much are these controllers with screens going to cost (and how many come with the console)?

3) What is the battery/power situation going to be like in these controllers?

 

[Xenus]

Obviously Nintendo won't be Dreamcasted in the sense they won't just give up and stop building the thing part way through the gen but they are really playing a dangerous game. If they release this year with a slightly improved X360 with another unique controller I'm not sure Sony or MS respond right away. They move forward their plans as a 3 year jump might be a perceived threat but they are also dangerously to far out only to throw off the gen cycle where Microsoft and Sony come with something much more powerful then they release something comparable a few years later again? Then they are off sync which could be what they really want going forward but the consumer probably isn't going to be happy with one console noticeably on a different release schedule then the rest when trying to decide what to buy.

 

[Squilliam]

Why would Nintendo releasing a new console not be a problem for the old 5-6-7 year old consoles of Microsoft and Sony and yet Sony and Microsoft releasing a new console suddenly becomes a major problem for a Nintendo console which is only a few years old? Personally I would think it would be more a problem for Microsoft and Sony in this scenario rather than a negative for Nintendo especially given the fact Nintendo can hedge their bets on the ever decreasing return on investment additional performance gives consoles as we move into the future and as process improvements slow down.

 

[Xenus]

It would be a problem if and it's a big if Ninendo doesn't show it's a sufficient upgrade from PS3/X360. Not many would upgrade from the present consoles to play a marginally better version of a multi-platform game and those that would tend to have the income to make the jump the time the next new better thing comes out. In this scenario obviously Nintendo's base will go with it but will the causal crowd that they got with the Wii go for it? This also depends on price of entry of course. So if this plays out Nintendo gets slightly better versions of 3rd party games but nothing significant enough to entice those already with a PS3/X36 over other then their first party games. This of course is also making the assumption that anyone who wanted Nintendo first party games already had a Wii and there wasn't a significant number that boyvcotted due to the relative graphics. So let's say Nintendo launches with a slightly better system at a slightly higher price. What impetis is there for Microsoft or Sony to do anything but maybe cut their price? Meanwhile let's say 2 yeas later the PS4/X720 are released which provide a true generational leap in graphics capabilities. You don't see any danger in this gambit by Nintendo?

 

[Squilliam]

You're basing this off two assumptions though..

1. That the NES 6 won't show much of an improvement over the current consoles after around 6 years which quite frankly is quite hard to swallow at this point unless you've seen something conclusive like some sort of supporting evidence. It may be the case but I can't say it would be wise to assume at this point that they will do another Wii in terms of performance relative to this generation.

2. That the next generation consoles from the other two will show major improvements when at this point with struggling 3rd party developers the industry is budget limited as much as the hardware is being limited by thermal/cost considerations as well as the reality of physics that each process improvement gets harder as each transistor gets smaller and the transistor budgets don't grow as much as they have in the past because the price per transistor isn't getting better at nearly the same rate as the chips are shrinking. Case in point -> AMD skipping 32nm for many of their GPUs for cost reasons before that node was cancelled.

Nintendo can make the same stuff we see today look significantly better because basic technical improvements are sitting there waiting for the performance to use them. If Sony/Microsoft come along with significantly better technology then the games industry will need even more significantly better assets to take advantage of it.

 

[Xenus]

1. Is what is rumored though I'd take a huge grain of salt with that.

2. If Sony/MS's target really is 2014 will be true hardware wise. Software wise some things require less effort and tweaking somethings more. If this gen is anything to go by though that improvement will cost a good amount of money on balance. However it is unknown how much of that jump in costs is due to resolution jump and therefore a one time investment till the next major resolution jump. This is all dependent on the tools available though and how PC like the architecture is. Ie an exotic arch as much was tech geeks like myself love them in the fashion of the PS2 or cell would be much more expensive to pull off the similar style stuff as a more PC like arch say the X360. Unless there is a radical shift making certain things easier ie possible G.I or ray tracing but I don't see that happening in 2025 let alone 2014.

 

[Tchock]

Outside of the tech talk, imo Nintendo's lack of effort in creating/coaxing any notable content ecosystem *AND* online infrastructure is going to bite them hard if they try to make this way too upmarket.

 

[Rangers]

Why would Nintendo releasing a new console not be a problem for the old 5-6-7 year old consoles of Microsoft and Sony and yet Sony and Microsoft releasing a new console suddenly becomes a major problem for a Nintendo console which is only a few years old? Personally I would think it would be more a problem for Microsoft and Sony in this scenario rather than a negative for Nintendo especially given the fact Nintendo can hedge their bets on the ever decreasing return on investment additional performance gives consoles as we move into the future and as process improvements slow down.

Well, for one because the PS3 and 360 can become dirt cheap soon. Again by the time this Wii2 gains any traction, 360 core can be 149 or less, again with fully mature, great graphics games like Gears 3 on it, and a huge library. While Wii2 according to IGN will be 349 or 399. Similar for PS3, it can be 199 by then.

The main thing though is that, who says it isnt a problem? Given time "Stream" probably will be a problem for PS3/360, depending on how much more power it has. But it's one thing to be a problem in year 6-7, even 8 of a console, with a successor likely looming anyway, quite another in year 2...

 

[Squilliam]

Well, for one because the PS3 and 360 can become dirt cheap soon. Again by the time this Wii2 gains any traction, 360 core can be 149 or less, again with fully mature, great graphics games like Gears 3 on it, and a huge library. While Wii2 according to IGN will be 349 or 399. Similar for PS3, it can be 199 by then.

I would expect that Nintendo would expect to be competitive with or without a price cut from Sony/Microsoft otherwise why would they try to release a new system? They must think they have something in the bag *aside* from performance if they're going to come out with news of their next system.

 

[Squilliam]

2. If Sony/MS's target really is 2014 will be true hardware wise... Unless there is a radical shift making certain things easier ie possible G.I or ray tracing but I don't see that happening in 2025 let alone 2014.

Consoles are behind the technology curve now and developers probably could make use of additional features and performance but the question is how far will that curve move over the next 3-5 years beyond the release of the NES 6?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Outside of the tech talk, imo Nintendo's lack of effort in creating/coaxing any notable content ecosystem *AND* online infrastructure is going to bite them hard if they try to make this way too upmarket.

That's a good point. I don't think the Core gamer is going to go with fancier graphics alone if the online isn't there, and so far Nintendo's online has been a total disaster, and they haven't talked at all about a new service (anyone remember the MarioNET rumours pre-Wii?). In fact they ahven't talked about anything, which is cutting it close for a laucnh this year, but I guess E3 can come in earnest. Nintendo like to play their cards clsoe to their chest.

Still, so far it sounds a very odd move, such that I wonder if this new machine is seen as Wii's replacement or complimentary? Nintendo will continue to produce Wii for casuals, dropping the price to keep sales up as long as possible. NES6 will then try and woo core gamers away from their PS360's, just as Kinect and Move are trying to woo the casuals away from Wii. We could end up with an interesting switch-around where Wii gamers migrate to the improved experiences of Kinect+Move, while core gamers migrate to the improved experience of NES6!

 

[wsippel]

Assuming the latest IGN reports are correct, and the system will be between $350 and $400, the size of a first generation Xbox360, and use a CPU clocked higher than 3.2GHz, what exactly does that tell us? The thing would be very expensive for a Nintendo console (prior to Wii, they managed to achieve parity with their competitors at a much lower price, while still making profit), and you only need such a huge case if you have some massive cooling going on. Also, aren't the only two current IBM CPUs designed to achieve such clock speeds PowerXCell and POWER7?

 

[MarkoIt]

BTW, Tri-core from IBM doesn't tell us what architecture they are using. If they are using a Tri-Core Power6, OoO, running at 32nm and running @4Ghz, it would be considerably faster than Xbox360's processor.

 

[dobwal]

It would be a problem if and it's a big if Ninendo doesn't show it's a sufficient upgrade from PS3/X360

?

And Wii was considered a sufficient upgrade over the visuals produced by the Xbox, GC and PS2?

Why would Nintendo use a strategy that it publically abandoned last gen while still producing the highest selling Nintendo console of all time? If the new Nintendo console is able to outperform current gen consoles, it will be because it can do so easily without costly hardware.

Nintendo has learned you don't need the "hardcore performance" crowd to obtain dominant position in the marketplace. I don't know why we as gamers still cling to such assertion even though there is plenty of evidence that contradicts such beliefs.

The one thing that Nintendo must do is give its console plenty of first party titles that will resonate with mainstream gamers. Its the area that Nintendo has been lacking of late and has detrimentally affected the sales of the Wii over the last year.