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

[pc999]

I don't really tend to label myself too much. I just play a lot of different types of games that I like. My tastes are very varied. I would say that I'm certainly an avid gamer,in that I spend a lot of (probably too much) time gaming.
This isn't personal.
I just don't think it's ultimately healthy for a company that wants to appeal to many different types of gamers,to centre so much influence and power in one area.
Even Nintendo acknowledges they need to do better in this respect.
http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2011/05/nintendo_reinforcing_western_development_for_wiis_successor

I also think that variety is very healty so I would like to see them building other kind of games IF they can do it well, if not getting better relations with others companys is the best the can do.

Like you show they are trying, but it would be very cool if they did more stuff like they did with retro, but getting a studio full capable of doing something like MP is probably very hard, money is not enough or MS/S would have lots of quality games, but at least they should try to get some talent exclusive to them.

SO we kind agree in some points .

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Its not that easy...

I don't disagree with anything you said here, but then I wasn't saying otherwise in the first place. Ninzel was suggesting Nintendo need to buy western development talent to produce western core games. I'm saying they don't as long as the games arrive. Getting the games may need money-hatting, commissioning particular 2nd party games, or just creating a better business that appeals more to the EA's and Ubisoft's of this world. Whatever they do though, it is not essential to buy western development teams.

It relates because it shows another huge investment into Japan without any look to the West when throwing around their money. You don't think Nintendo could benefit from more in house development with Western talent that cater to the hardcore market they are supposed to care about now?

As I understand it, it's not really a huge investment in Japan as much as a consolidation of their existing RnD arms. And it's a necessary one when you read this: Nintendo didn't tell their software guys about their hardware! Similar case to Sony. So bringing both arms together is likely important. And also not directly related to appealing to the core market with Wuu. Heck, the centre won't be operational until well after Wuu's release!

You could argue that Nintendo should spend money on western devs, but as I said earlier that's not necessary for success - see MS. You just need the developers on side, which needs a proper business strategy and 3rd party relations, and maybe a bit of money-hatting. This new RnD centre is an action orthogonal to Wuu's success and appeal to core gamers, and doesn't affect what Nintendo can or can't do attracting western games to their platform.

 

[patsu]

According to the article, that Nintendo director knew about WiiU. I suspect what he meant was all the tech decisions and deals were not finalized until the announcement. Even then there are still finer details up in the air now.

The software guys were probably given a safe subset of requirements to make their games in case things change.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Yes, but that's not really a good basis for RnD, having the guys who create software for your platforms not able to contribute directly to the development of new hardware, and vice versa. A lesson Sony has learned and is changing. Makes sense for Nintendo to do the same.

 

[patsu]

The original Wired article interviewed 2 Nintendo devs. Aonuma, the guy working on Skyward Sword, knew and contributed to the WiiU specs. Koizumi knew about the safe specs, but wasn't involved directly. He may be working on something else (say... hypothetically Nintendo online). And perhaps not interested in tech specs or too busy to investigate further.

PS3 situation may be different since it was more like a one man show. It was developed without getting their own devs, especially western devs, involved early enough. The devs came in later (too late) in the process. e.g., the wave background was done by Q Games for Sony. The design team "only" profiled existing game code when designing Cell.

EDIT: I suspect Eurogamer may have jumped to the wrong conclusion. They only focus on Koizumi since it is more story worthy and sensational.

It is not uncommon for large product companies to operate on a need to know basis. It also helps to focus the employees. The entire project will generate thousands of email threads every day. The senior folks can always request for access where necessary. You just need to be proactive but not everyone likes to jump in early.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The original Wired article interviewed 2 Nintendo devs. Aonuma, the guy working on Skyward Sword, knew and contributed to the WiiU specs. Koizumi knew about the safe specs, but wasn't involved directly. He may be working on something else (say... hypothetically Nintendo online). And perhaps not interested in tech specs or too busy to investigate further.

This isn't so much about Wuu but the whole RnD for consoles. Sony found that it's two halves weren't cooperating closely, which was detrimental to the whole platform (although in Sony's case, a monolithic octopus, none of it's appendages had a clue what the others were doing anything prior to Stringer!). Sounds to me like Nintendo is seeing the same problem and doing something about it, for their future developments. None of which has a great deal to do with Wuu.

 

[patsu]

Yes, that would be ideal.

I think Kutaragi and Steve Jobs will bulldoze everyone regardless of the corporate process. For better or worse, they have/had a vision to push. And sometimes, there are mismatch or conflict in agenda for an extended group like Sony.

Nintendo Iwata sounds like a calm and reasonable leader so far. Nintendo is also very focused.

 

[Teasy]

You are assuming that there is final specs/API already.

Anyway with "new architetures" (eg a 7x00 based or a really custom chip) we all have seen many surprises before, so I would expect that besides most would want to see real info before say anything.

I'm not assuming the specification of the system is final (I even said "maybe because the system isn't even final yet"). What I'm talking about is the development kit itself rather then the final system.

I also dont expect them to be aiming high (dont even 3x XB). But Probably a low power/performance but balanced 7x00 would be better than a powerfull 4x00 IMO.

Graphically I think it'll have that kind of performance, that's something a mid range HD4xxx based chip could provide easily.

On the graphics department, that would be relatively "easy" to achieve using something close to a RV770 @ ~500MHz, even without the eDRAM.

On the CPU front, I don't think that's really achievable in a case of that size, or if it's in Nintendo's best interest to reach 3x the performance of Xenos (much less Cell).

That's why I said 2-3x, I think the GPU and memory will probably be around 3 times, with the CPU being nearer the level of Xenos x2.

 

[Kaotik]

Does anyone have a link to the pic which demonstrated the difference between Japanese Garden direct feed and the actual demo on show floor which had better graphics?
I couldn't find it

edit:
nevermind: http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?p=1561765&highlight=floor+shadows#post1561765

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Discussion on Nintendo's corporate strategies removed as OT.

 

[Prophecy2k]

I've been following the discussion for a few pages and i'd just like to say that i reject the premise that nintendo needs to invest in development in the western world. I think that Nintendo out of all Japanese development houses have shown that they know a thing or two about creating games with global appeal.

Even for new IP i expect Nintendo to create games that would appeal to everyone on both sides of the pond, merely because they are and always have been masters of fun & appealing gameplay design.

Like Shifty i believe that so long as WiiU is strong enough to provide third parties with a platform for their big expensive HD games, Ninendo will have that base covered. I don't expect Nintendo's own first parties to even make games with such a hardcore focus and the big budget hollywood production values of the big Sony/MS/3rd Party games.

Nintendo will always play to their strengths, and that is in super imaginitive & fun non-realistic games that appeal to everyone, yet with a quality level that reaches the heights of other big budget games in the industry. Quite frankly i'd even consider that a breadth of fresh air for the industry, as 3rd parties will once again be able to see that there's a market for more family friendly games that don't involve shooting/slicing/stabbing/killing in some form. I wouldn't want Nintendo to water down their more traditional game design sensibilities in the aid of making their games more western (and invariably making them compete directly with Sony/MS/3rd parties). They should continue to play to their own strengths and simply increase the breadth and scope of their own games.

That's what i'd like to see from them

 

[dobwal]

I've been following the discussion for a few pages and i'd just like to say that i reject the premise that nintendo needs to invest in development in the western world... I don't expect Nintendo's own first parties to even make games with such a hardcore focus and the big budget hollywood production values of the big Sony/MS/3rd Party games...I wouldn't want Nintendo to water down their more traditional game design sensibilities in the aid of making their games more western (and invariably making them compete directly with Sony/MS/3rd parties). They should continue to play to their own strengths and simply increase the breadth and scope of their own games.

That's what i'd like to see from them

List of Rare games

Donkey Kong Country-second or third best selling game on the SNES
Donkey Kong Country2
Donkey Kong Country3
Donkey Kong 64
Diddy Kong Racing
GoldenEye (third best selling game on the N64 in fact 3 out the top 10 N64 games dev'd by Rare)
Banjo-Koozie
JetForce Gemini
Conker's Bad Fur Day

List of Retro Studio games

Metroid Prime
Metroid Prime 2: Echoes
Metroid Prime 3: Corruption
Metroid Prime: Trilogy
Donkey Kong Country Returns

Some of the best selling and critically acclaimed games ever to come out on Nintendo consoles have been produced by just two Western devs. I don't see a problem with Nintendo with developing more than just one strong second party relationship at a time with a Western dev. They do it far more often with Japan's devs with less success.

 

[ninzel]

So on the topic of WiiU hardware.
I was watching the DX11 vs DX9 Crytech demo. In some cases the differences seemed obvious.
I was wondering, if the WiiU has a DX11 chip vs what the PS360 have, will that alone mean potentially better looking games, assuming a hypothetical where all else is equal?
Or does a system have to other more powerful components to back up that added functionality to get the most out if it.

 

[Prophecy2k]

List of Rare games

Donkey Kong Country-second or third best selling game on the SNES
Donkey Kong Country2
Donkey Kong Country3
Donkey Kong 64
Diddy Kong Racing
GoldenEye (third best selling game on the N64 in fact 3 out the top 10 N64 games dev'd by Rare)
Banjo-Koozie
JetForce Gemini
Conker's Bad Fur Day

List of Retro Studio games

Metroid Prime
Metroid Prime 2: Echoes
Metroid Prime 3: Corruption
Metroid Prime: Trilogy
Donkey Kong Country Returns

Some of the best selling and critically acclaimed games ever to come out on Nintendo consoles have been produced by just two Western devs. I don't see a problem with Nintendo with developing more than just one strong second party relationship at a time with a Western dev. They do it far more often with Japan's devs with less success.

You misunderstand my post i think. The original argument if i understood it correctly was a criticism against Ninendos recent investment in R&D in Japan. The argument was that if Nintendo wants to appeal to the hardcore with WiiU then they need to invest in western game developement houses to create games designed more towards western tastes. That was the premise i rejected, as for one all hardcore gamers =/= western gamers, as well as the fact that Nintendo's own existing game franchises have more global appeal, are generally as critically acclaimed as the best western titles and they have proven themselves as commecially successful if not moreso than the majority of western made games.

I don't think your post was relevant with regards to the original discussion, as non of the games you posted are games designed to appeal solely to western tastes (or even hardcore, however useless and ambiguous that term is), regardless of who made them. They are all games that have a much broader appeal than the vast majority of modern games designed for the "hardcore" western gamer.

I also wasn't saying that Nintendo didn't need to develop second party relationships with western devs either. Only that they don't need to buy them. Of course it would be in their interest to strike deals with exceptional development partners, but where those partners are based and of what nationality is entirely irrelevant. Being a western dev doesn't automatically make any developer more successful than those based in japan or anywhere else, and so i reject that premise (not saying that's what you were purporting dobwal).

My point was that Nintendo's first party development houses are solid and great at what they do best. If Nintendo as a publisher desires to branch out away from their area of competence and make the super hardcore games with external devs then they don't need to buy them. Those devs don't have to be western also. But Nintendo would also be perfectly fine if they stuck to the games like mario and zelda that they make in house, but just brought them into the modern era through the advancement of technology that they were lacking with the Wii(OG).

Anyhoos, back on topic. I'm intrigued as to whether Nintendo's R&D house investment is more geared towards improving the software development platform for the WiiU, as well as creating various game engine technologies for their first party studios to employ. If so i think that it would shed some light on how far along the development of the new WiiU platform actually is... i.e. not as far as we may have been led to believe by all the Pre-E3 rumours.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

So on the topic of WiiU hardware.
I was watching the DX11 vs DX9 Crytech demo. In some cases the differences seemed obvious.
I was wondering, if the WiiU has a DX11 chip vs what the PS360 have, will that alone mean potentially better looking games, assuming a hypothetical where all else is equal?
Or does a system have to other more powerful components to back up that added functionality to get the most out if it.

AFAIK, it's a bit rare to get better looks for free (meaning, through architectural "features" alone), unless there's a really big difference between feature-sets (i.e. DX7 vs. DX9).
You'll see in benchmarks related to current-gen graphics cards that when you turn on "DX11 mode" or "DX11 features", performance goes down.

Looking at the spec differences between DX9c and DX11, the only ones that could be bringing better looks "for free" would be tesselation (as long as the developers don't exaggerate and turn the tesselator units into bottlenecks, which wouldn't happen in a console anyways) and the new compression algorithms for high-res textures.
But I don't see either of those making the Wii-U's looks a generational leap over the other two consoles.

So to answer your question: yes. The system needs more powerful hardware in order to effectively use the added functionality, at least if you want anything more than a slight difference in visuals.





In a related note, there's a new Reggie interview at Forbes, where he discloses absolutely nothing.

Here's his answer to the online infrastructure:

(...) instead of a situation where a publisher has their own network and wants that to be the predominant platform, and having arguments with platform holders, we’re going to welcome that. We’re going to welcome that from the best and the brightest of the third party publishers.

How about 1st party games? They'll just avoid online activity for those?

 

[dobwal]

You misunderstand my post i think. The original argument if i understood it correctly was a criticism against Ninendos recent investment in R&D in Japan. The argument was that if Nintendo wants to appeal to the hardcore with WiiU then they need to invest in western game developement houses to create games designed more towards western tastes. That was the premise i rejected, as for one all hardcore gamers =/= western gamers, as well as the fact that Nintendo's own existing game franchises have more global appeal, are generally as critically acclaimed as the best western titles and they have proven themselves as commecially successful if not moreso than the majority of western made games.

I don't think your post was relevant with regards to the original discussion, as non of the games you posted are games designed to appeal solely to western tastes (or even hardcore, however useless and ambiguous that term is), regardless of who made them. They are all games that have a much broader appeal than the vast majority of modern games designed for the "hardcore" western gamer.

I also wasn't saying that Nintendo didn't need to develop second party relationships with western devs either. Only that they don't need to buy them. Of course it would be in their interest to strike deals with exceptional development partners, but where those partners are based and of what nationality is entirely irrelevant. Being a western dev doesn't automatically make any developer more successful than those based in japan or anywhere else, and so i reject that premise (not saying that's what you were purporting dobwal).

My point was that Nintendo's first party development houses are solid and great at what they do best. If Nintendo as a publisher desires to branch out away from their area of competence and make the super hardcore games with external devs then they don't need to buy them. Those devs don't have to be western also. But Nintendo would also be perfectly fine if they stuck to the games like mario and zelda that they make in house, but just brought them into the modern era through the advancement of technology that they were lacking with the Wii(OG).

Anyhoos, back on topic. I'm intrigued as to whether Nintendo's R&D house investment is more geared towards improving the software development platform for the WiiU, as well as creating various game engine technologies for their first party studios to employ. If so i think that it would shed some light on how far along the development of the new WiiU platform actually is... i.e. not as far as we may have been led to believe by all the Pre-E3 rumours.

We are not just talking western hardcore gamers, we are talking western core gamers in general. And the reason Im talking, western devs is because Wii already has the other bases well covered. Im not talking buying development teams outright, but funding development and marketing and use similar strategies already done by MS and Sony.

Nationality does tend to matter, is Japan's top selling titles a bunch of western developed games? No. Is the top selling titles outside Nintendo in western countries filled with japanese developed titles? No. The top ten list of the 360 is nothing but western developed games. And outside of GT5, FFXIII and MGS, the vast majority of the PS3 top selling games sold in the US are western developed titles.

Third party multiplats with literally no support are only going to do so much. If I am a western core gamer, do you think Im going to choose Wii-U Fit, Wii-U Sports or Zelda (a once in a generation franchise on consoles) over Gears/Fable/Halo/Forza or GT/UC/Resistance/KZ, which are all exclusive and core based in nature and will see multiple iterations? Who's going to know about notable third party on the Wii-U when MS and Sony will form marketing partnerships with third party pubs and blast gaming commerical with the XB3 and PS4 logos? Do you think that Nintendo is suddenly within a two year time frame suddenly be able to develop core type titles at the level that exists amongst Western devs?

This is an area of weakeness for Nintendo and getting a couple Western style exclusive or exclusive like franchises would be a boost to Nintendo strategy for expansion outside of the casual market. Investing in second party titles would be a great way to accomplish that goal.

 

[joker454]

(...) instead of a situation where a publisher has their own network and wants that to be the predominant platform, and having arguments with platform holders, we’re going to welcome that. We’re going to welcome that from the best and the brightest of the third party publishers.

Ugh, that means it'll be a wild west mess like psn. So much for catering to the hardcore, there's no way they will get 360 players to defect to that. Sounds like irregardless of what they are saying publicly it seems like the controller is their main focus, not the hardcore. Maybe they want to keep the Wii crowd from defecting and grab some Kinect/Move folk as well with something new. Disappointing but unsurprising I guess as there was probably no way they could catch up to XBLive anyways without a partner like say Steam, hence may as well stick with what they are good at and poach whatever casuals they can from 360/Ps3 in the process.

 

[RobertR1]

Ugh, that means it'll be a wild west mess like psn. So much for catering to the hardcore, there's no way they will get 360 players to defect to that. Sounds like irregardless of what they are saying publicly it seems like the controller is their main focus, not the hardcore. Maybe they want to keep the Wii crowd from defecting and grab some Kinect/Move folk as well with something new. Disappointing but unsurprising I guess as there was probably no way they could catch up to XBLive anyways without a partner like say Steam, hence may as well stick with what they are good at and poach whatever casuals they can from 360/Ps3 in the process.

Is it really a shock that Nintendo doesn't have the know how to build a cohesive online infrastructure? The companies that are able to do online well have their roots in software. MS, Google, Apple, Netflix, Amazon, etc...

Nintendo makes hardware and games. That's what they will continue to focus on. They'd be wise to team up with Steam or someone else like that but Nintendo corporate culture seems quite closed off.

 

[function]

Ugh, that means it'll be a wild west mess like psn. So much for catering to the hardcore, there's no way they will get 360 players to defect to that. Sounds like irregardless of what they are saying publicly it seems like the controller is their main focus, not the hardcore. Maybe they want to keep the Wii crowd from defecting and grab some Kinect/Move folk as well with something new. Disappointing but unsurprising I guess as there was probably no way they could catch up to XBLive anyways without a partner like say Steam, hence may as well stick with what they are good at and poach whatever casuals they can from 360/Ps3 in the process.

Maybe Nintendo want to target the hardcore offline gamer who likes Xbox 360 level graphics. [Edit] I should probably have put a after this! [/Edit]

Partying up, background chat, billing, and the user interface for these key online functions needs to be consistent if nothing else. Multiple billing billing and drm accounts are utterly unacceptable IMO. Even the "Cerberus network" thing for the excellent Mass Effect 2 was irritating - even if you disabled it, the lengthy login pause (before you could play) remained to try and coax you into using it.

If as a "core gamer" I want to venture out into the wild west I'll do it on the PC. But stop at Steam. If it's not on Steam I probably won't buy it.

 

[patsu]

The relevant Q&A is here:

Your online services are very different than what your competitors offer. Isn’t something missing, that you can’t offer the sort of experience I can get on Xbox Live?

I don’t think it is an issue for us, and here’s why. We’ve seen what our competitors have done, and we’ve acknowledged that we need to do more online, starting with the launch of our eShop on Nintendo 3DS, and we’re going to continue to build our online capability.For Wii U, we’re going to take that one step further, and what we’re doing is creating a much more flexible system that will allow the best approaches by independent publishers to come to bear. So instead of a situation where a publisher has their own network and wants that to be the predominant platform, and having arguments with platform holders, we’re going to welcome that. We’re going to welcome that from the best and the brightest of the third party publishers.

Would it be reasonable to expect there might be a new or significantly upgraded online presence when the new console comes out?

We’ve said that the Wii U will have an extremely robust online experience. There will be other publishers talking about that as well, and from our perspective, we think it’s much more compelling for that information to come from the publishers than to come from us.

I don't see a conflict.

(1) They didn't say they won't offer their own online system. They simply said they are going to do it slowly and at the same time welcome third party participation. There should be enough memory and power to run a community system parallel to the game. In fact they can use the second screen for that.

(2) Most of the problems with third party systems are because there is no baseline feature set and common quality of service. If Nintendo want to (i.e., if Nintendo customers insist), they can specify a minimal standard. They did talk to the 3rd party developers afterall to look at their plans. In the early PS3 days, Sony and other console developers had to start from scratch.