How will be the Wii successor?
- Thread starter ken_masters
- Start date
- Status
The assumption being of course that MS and Sony will continue to lose money and that Nintendo will be able to sell games the way Sony and MS can.
I dont know that the "hardcore" model has been proven a failure yet this generation. I think 360 could break out of it pretty soon. For example, this past month was the first in a long time where combined PS3/360 sales surpassed Wii sales (NPD). For another example, 360 is doing better than Xbox 1 at the same point, so would MS consider it a failure? I guess, if you look at the 360 as being in the PS2's old position, yeah it's a failure, but to MS, it's not a failure, it's trending better, and should easily be more profitable, than Xbox 1. Wii sales haven't affected 360, seemingly.
Software is another biggie, it still seems games sell best on 360, not Wii, especially third party games. Look at Madden, 900k on 360, 337k on PS3, 130k or whatever on Wii. Even if 360 is getting trounced by Wii in hardware sales..what if in a couple years on it's still dominating software sales due to the Wii's highly casual audience? And that's not even to mention, PS3 and 360 are the ones with far more important price drops ahead of them. Wii sales have also suddenly drastically slackened in Japan for whatever reason. 26,000 this week. Just around double PS3, where it is normaly 6-1 over PS3. And supposedly, Wii is not supply constrained in Japan at the same time. Sure, that will turn around for the holidays most likely, but it could be the first signs of a fad playing out as well. What will spring 2008 look like? Or how about the fact, 360 did 26k and Wii 34k in Canada August NPD? Sure, the wii is supposedly supply constrained, but I look at the fact hey, whatever the situation, 360 wasn't that far away from outselling Wii in Canada by itself. We could see that again in the USA this month due to Halo 3. I know vgchartz numbers dont have a lot of credibility, but they have "Americas" 360 sales only a bit less than Wii sales last week, which seems reasonable to me due to Halo 3.
If 360 and or PS3 end up selling "healthily" and selling more software in general than the Wii, I dont know that MS/Sony will deem them a "failure" at all.
All in all, I think it's way too early to say about this generation just yet.
I dont think MS knows what to do but go hi-tech..they've spoken about the fact Nintendo could do the Wii because it fits so well with the IP that Nintendo has. MS knows they dont have the IP stable to pull something like that off, imo.
It seems to me like, if you're going to go with a "traditional" console with a traditional, "hardcore" controller, then it being at or near the highest tech of the time is just accepted to go hand in hand with that, and I dont see that changing. What allowed Nintendo to dodge that imo, was going so non-traditional with the controller, but I dont see MS nor Sony having the cojones to do that, especially if (more likely in MS case) their consoles end up highly profitable anyway. In other words IF MS or Sony go low tech, then in my mind that will necessarily mean they have also adapted some "non-traditional" control method to couple with it.
And I doubt that either Sony or MS wants the other one to get a leg up..so they will push each other to higher tech. If Sony was to say "eh, we wont go that hi-tech", then that could just be an opening for the other guy. And vice versa.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sony might scale it back a bit, but why would Microsoft? The 360 is still successful, and Wii is slowing down as third parties simply are not interested in making games for a 5-year-old hardware. Further, 360 games continue to occupy the top 10 on the charts. Complete disinterest from third parties will mean that Nintendo will have to sustain Wii all by itself with non-games, Mario sports, and minigame collections, meaning that its success won't last as gamers realize that buying a Wii means having a library of eight decent games to choose from. The vast majority of the game software industry is supported by 360, not Wii, and there's no reason to kill the goose that's laying them the golden egg and shift all their resources to a console that can't even shift 250K units of Madden.
You are making a lot of assumptions from one single market, the complete picture is a little more complex.
No, I'm looking at the simple fact that despite huge sales, both E3 and TGS have come and gone, and all the major traditional titles have been announced for PS3 or 360. Wii's getting more minigame collections and party games.
(I had to condense your post!
)You're misunderstanding me though; when I say they might scale back on the console expense, I don't mean that they're going to switch from targeting the 'hardcore' gamer vs the casual gamer. They'll still target the same market, they'll still have the same development support... it's just that the silicon budgets of the consoles might be reduced relative to what they were this generation.
I have no doubt that MS will end this generation with a profitable XBox business, but I do doubt whether it will have been a profitable gen overall. Coupled with the ~$5B losses from last gen, and that's a long road to recover on. I mean, that would equate to a figure roughly equal to about the entirety of the profits from PS1 and PS2's heyday. And obviously for Sony this gen, they're going to feel the price has cost them in more ways than one.
I'm talking about 'hardcore' consoles, but I'm talking Super Nintendo/Genesis levels of (relative) silicon ambition. Madden will still be made. The graphics will still be "good." But will Kaz/Stringer pursue Kutaragi-esque levels of ambition? I just don't see it. And right now I don't see MS looking to create any sort of reference super-console either; they'll go for something they feel is competitive and/or slightly better.
Now, if I'm wrong on one, I'm wrong on both - if even one goes for the same level of complexity, I have no doubt the other will follow, which ultimately is what we on this site want. But the 'success' of the 360 has to be put in context; it's not successful because it has Xenos, 512MB of RAM, or any of that... it's 'successful' - and hardcore - for a number of other reasons. I don't think there's anything inherent to high-budget silicon expenditures that MS is naturally fond of.
@Fearsome: I'm not quite understanding what the 3rd party game industry has to with this tangent, why MS would lose them, or how anyone's saying the new XBox would be Wii-like in scope. We/I am just talking about a time in the industry before half-a-billion R&D budgets every gen and large die sizes. That doesn't mean Wii's frozen-in-time levels of technology, again it just means more along the lines of Nintendo --> Super Nintendo --> N64; using mainstream easily (and cheaply) fabbed silicon for the times.
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
I agree with you but couldnt this also be because devs put some much money in getting ready for HD consoles? given that x360 software sells good I dont think they want to trow that effort away and maybe wont do big wii games untill they are sure it can earn them alot of cash. Though if you look at the release list for the last few months of the year you do see that there are getting more ''real'' games for the wii. Another problem ofcourse is the lack of effort they put in alot of wii games. You cant expect to sell alot if you release only junk and thats a problem because they do spend alot of effort on the ps3 and x360 games so ofcourse they will sell alot better but if you put effort in Wii games im sure they will also sell.
Fair enough, but you were refering to the sales figures of Madden, which may not be that relevant everywhere and to everyone.
Judging from the Japanese sales charts, the Wii titles are doing pretty well, from those charts the 360 seems to be a big failure. I think that one of the reasons of few new Wii anbouncements is that the success of the Wii has taken quite a few developers by surprise and the coming Wii titles are still early in development.
Why should only Nintendo be able to create popular games for the Wii? The graphics will still be better than the graphics of the PS2 and PS2 games still make the top charts.
Remember the Wii is currently the cheapest console and will be king of the low end, current gen market for some time.
"Major traditional titles" may also not be all and everything to everyone, just look at the DS and the PSP, they offer pretty different experiences and they have no problem living side by side. They have different implementations of the "major traditional titles" and people seem to be happy with that.
@Carl B. I don´t really agree that the N64 used main stream silicon at the time, but I agree that it was efficiently cost reduced.
Last edited by a moderator:
There's no proof of that, while at the same time XB360 has had really lacklustre sales this past year. If you're going to draw big conclusion from little data, it's more like XB360 is grinding to a halt as Wii marches to its own beat - though the truth is not so extreme.
The Wii2 will come with a spandex body suit called the PowerSuit. You'll need to wear two power gloves, stand on the wii fit board, and wear a VR helmet. It will come with a small club to protect yourself from all the people that will try to kick your ass for looking stupid.
Some things to keep in mind:
The strategy that worked for the Wii was using existing well utilized technology - not necissarily "old" technology. If they release the Wii Next (or whatever they call it) in 6 years, it is very likely that the power will be similar to that we see in 3 years on PC graphics cards and such. I would expect it to be more powerful than both the PS3 and the XBox 360 are currently just because of advances in technology. However, at release I still think people will consider it to be somewhat "old" technology.
Sony is actually in a very good position to do what Nintendo did this generation and still put out a monster of a machine next generation. They are paying the upfront cost for the learning curve for Cell type processors now. The Cell processor itself is designed such that adding more SPUs does not seem to be that difficult in theory too me (I may be wrong on that, someone else who knows more about it can let me know if I am). The ability to scale the Cell up to a next gen "super chip" by using the same basic architecture but increasing the number of PPUs and SPUs and adding things like double precision allows for a huge boost in overall power. The old joke of Nintendo "slapping two game cubes together and adding a fancy controller" could hold very true for Sony's future strategy. Slap two, three, four, or more PS3s together via the Cell chip and add bells and whistles.
Microsoft isn't in a bad spot either, but they aren't necissarily in as good a place as Sony is. With multi-core cpus becoming more and more common, their multiple cpu platform could be made more powerful by using either single multi-core cpus or multiple multi-core cpus. Still a learning curve, but once again it is being done already for hardware being released now.
All in all though, I think you will see a push towards more realistic physics and more involved gameplay then the current push towards better and more realistic graphics from all 3 consoles. I also think that means the next gen strategies will all seem a lot more like Nintendo's current gen strategy.
The strategy that worked for the Wii was using existing well utilized technology - not necissarily "old" technology. If they release the Wii Next (or whatever they call it) in 6 years, it is very likely that the power will be similar to that we see in 3 years on PC graphics cards and such. I would expect it to be more powerful than both the PS3 and the XBox 360 are currently just because of advances in technology. However, at release I still think people will consider it to be somewhat "old" technology.
Sony is actually in a very good position to do what Nintendo did this generation and still put out a monster of a machine next generation. They are paying the upfront cost for the learning curve for Cell type processors now. The Cell processor itself is designed such that adding more SPUs does not seem to be that difficult in theory too me (I may be wrong on that, someone else who knows more about it can let me know if I am). The ability to scale the Cell up to a next gen "super chip" by using the same basic architecture but increasing the number of PPUs and SPUs and adding things like double precision allows for a huge boost in overall power. The old joke of Nintendo "slapping two game cubes together and adding a fancy controller" could hold very true for Sony's future strategy. Slap two, three, four, or more PS3s together via the Cell chip and add bells and whistles.
Microsoft isn't in a bad spot either, but they aren't necissarily in as good a place as Sony is. With multi-core cpus becoming more and more common, their multiple cpu platform could be made more powerful by using either single multi-core cpus or multiple multi-core cpus. Still a learning curve, but once again it is being done already for hardware being released now.
All in all though, I think you will see a push towards more realistic physics and more involved gameplay then the current push towards better and more realistic graphics from all 3 consoles. I also think that means the next gen strategies will all seem a lot more like Nintendo's current gen strategy.
The situation you describe though, "more of the same," isn't even Nintendo's strategy... their strategy this gen was just, "the same." Remember we're talking silicon budgets here, and Nintendo truly did not expand it by much. Obviously a generationally scaled system on the part of both MS and Sony should be the least of what we hope for, not just boosted clocks.
I think Nintendo made a hardware decision with the Wii to lower the hardware cost as much as possible to make it feasible to do fairly well with limited market share. They were basically ensuring that the Wii would be a profitable venture even in a distant third place.
The motion sensing aspect was added to give a new perspective to gameplay and offer something useful and engaging that would seperate the Wii enough from its competitors to sway consumers even with a major disadvantage in visual performance.
However, with the Wii taking over the market and becoming the marketshare leader this generation, Nintendo will be in much better position to bump up the power a bit to combat the next gen xbox and PS with similar abilities.
Motion sensing is not something that you can advance as fast as graphics. It not like you going to see motion sensing body suits, you can only go so far as diminishing returns will show up a lot faster when it comes to motion sensing technology versus graphics technology.
I expect a return to similar performing devices from all three manufacturers that are all offered with in a narrow price bracket that will compete like before on software and brand popularity.
The motion sensing aspect was added to give a new perspective to gameplay and offer something useful and engaging that would seperate the Wii enough from its competitors to sway consumers even with a major disadvantage in visual performance.
However, with the Wii taking over the market and becoming the marketshare leader this generation, Nintendo will be in much better position to bump up the power a bit to combat the next gen xbox and PS with similar abilities.
Motion sensing is not something that you can advance as fast as graphics. It not like you going to see motion sensing body suits, you can only go so far as diminishing returns will show up a lot faster when it comes to motion sensing technology versus graphics technology.
I expect a return to similar performing devices from all three manufacturers that are all offered with in a narrow price bracket that will compete like before on software and brand popularity.
I'm not sure... even last gen - in fact every gen - Nintendo has the cash to make things happen. It could be them with wholly-owned fabs lines and cutting edge consoles as easily as not - all they lack is the internal engineering expertise, if even that. But these guys have billions in liquid assets. I agree that the Wii hardware seems to have been a bit of an advance hedge on their part to ensure profitability, but I don't see them ever going back to vying for the tech crown. I think they just rather sit pretty with high margins.
Not to say that I don't think WiiHD will be a significant leap in abilities from the present console, but I don't think it will be in PS4's and 720's weight class.
Not to say that I don't think WiiHD will be a significant leap in abilities from the present console, but I don't think it will be in PS4's and 720's weight class.
Im not saying Nintendo is going to pour money into a Wii version of the PS3, but the gap between visual will be greatly reduced. Motion sensing is not going to be as great of diffentiator next generation as MS and Sony is bound to include similar abilities in their consoles.
MS and Sony will also not ignore the advantage that the $250 price point gave the Wii, so I expect them to be more sensitive to component cost and try to mimick the GC, a machine which had visual abilities comparable to xbox but cheaper to produce then the PS2.
I agree with you there; or at least I hope.
Yeah the GameCube is an ideal machine, but part of it's advantages were due to the edge releasing later gave it in the silicon department relative to PS2. If we assume an identical launch date for Xbox and PS next gen, I think the question then becomes, what exactly are we expecting, both relative to each other, and relative to the Nintendo? I'm here 'worried' that their strategy will indeed reflect a much more sensitive approach towards system costs. Not worried from a business standpoint, just worried from a technophile's standpoint. And... yeah.
how significant will that difference be thought? We are at a stage where diminishing results are starting to kick in rather quick.
The leap in technology from now to 4-5 years in the future will be big. The difference in graphics is starting to diminish rather quickly. For every generation the perception of graphical differences is getting smaller and smaller.
The jump from N64\PS1 to PS2\Xbox was big. The jump from PS2\Xbox was far from as big in the eyes of most consumers. And this trend will only continue, and it will not scale linearly.
- Status
