Nintendo GOing Forward.

[Shifty Geezer]

Where do you get the (frankly quacky) idea that Nintendo doesn't want 3rd party support?

Don't confuse 'don't want to have' with 'wanting to not have'. Nintendo don't actively want 3rd parties on their console - they don't court them, they don't provide the services or tools that third parties want. From the early interest in Wii U from third parties, pretty much all of it has been dropped and Nintendo don't care. They aren't doing anything to get 3rd party support back. Ergo, they don't want it. If they get it, if they get license fees, great, but it's not something they are going to pursue.

they make money on the games sold on their platforms, and if customers are going to buy CoD/Madden, it's better for Nintendo if they do it on Nintendo's platform.

That logic is exactly applicable to Wii and Wii U, but Nintendo still released under-powered machines. Why didn't they put more power into Wii and Wii U so people wanting to play COD and Madden et al in HD (160 million ish going by PS360 numbers) could get a Nintendo console? Nintendo have low-balled everyone's expectations twice in the console space, and similarly in the handheld space although that is at least justified by battery-life. Low power hardware is Nintendo's modus operandi. A belief they'll put in reasonable specs in their next machine is a view that contradicts existing patterns, plus one that contradicts the sentiment of having a hardware platform that's supported in mobile too. Plus you're talking about 16-14nm parts where Nintendo can't be sure they'll be available. Designing a system now, they have to factor in it might be at 20nm when released. Sony were bitten by that with 65nm and it cost them dearly. Given Nintendo's cautious nature, it seems unlikely they'll gamble on a latest-greatest lithography and squeeze in more power. Instead, they'll choose moderate power at 20 nm and process shrink to get lower production costs and more profit margins if they continue their current patterns of behaviour.

 

[Syferz]

Don't confuse 'don't want to have' with 'wanting to not have'. Nintendo don't actively want 3rd parties on their console - they don't court them, they don't provide the services or tools that third parties want. From the early interest in Wii U from third parties, pretty much all of it has been dropped and Nintendo don't care. They aren't doing anything to get 3rd party support back. Ergo, they don't want it. If they get it, if they get license fees, great, but it's not something they are going to pursue.

That logic is exactly applicable to Wii and Wii U, but Nintendo still released under-powered machines. Why didn't they put more power into Wii and Wii U so people wanting to play COD and Madden et al in HD (160 million ish going by PS360 numbers) could get a Nintendo console? Nintendo have low-balled everyone's expectations twice in the console space, and similarly in the handheld space although that is at least justified by battery-life. Low power hardware is Nintendo's modus operandi. A belief they'll put in reasonable specs in their next machine is a view that contradicts existing patterns, plus one that contradicts the sentiment of having a hardware platform that's supported in mobile too. Plus you're talking about 16-14nm parts where Nintendo can't be sure they'll be available. Designing a system now, they have to factor in it might be at 20nm when released. Sony were bitten by that with 65nm and it cost them dearly. Given Nintendo's cautious nature, it seems unlikely they'll gamble on a latest-greatest lithography and squeeze in more power. Instead, they'll choose moderate power at 20 nm and process shrink to get lower production costs and more profit margins if they continue their current patterns of behaviour.

20nm last I checked is going to be underdeveloped and 16nm chips are already taped out, Nintendo built gamecube and wii on the latest nodes at the time and wii u's older nodes is more about their partnership with NEC (forget the new name atm)

Nintendo has already changed their target market away from casuals, they might keep the wiimotes relevant but they are making core games to their many franchises, I don't even remember the last "wii" title unless it is wii party u, in which case they didn't release one at all this year and haven't announced one for next year.

Nintendo released the Wii U in hopes to capture a market that they have now walked away from, why would they keep the same strategy? We can talk about the "history" that 2 consoles make, but I think it is far more relevant to look at Nintendo themselves, they are unpredictable. Especially when they chase a different market than previously. The funny thing is that we are calling a 20cu apu from AMD powerful for 2017, it is a joke heck I even mentioned a 16cu part, why go for lower performance than their competition if the difference between these two parts is likely less than $10 in 2017, it is likely less than $20 right now.

As for the person who asked for jaguar is junk comment, it is a relative comment, I'm a PC gamer, we buy Intel CPUs because AMD CPUs need a major overclock to even get close to competing, and then you factor in jaguar at a ridiculously low clock of 1.6ghz? For consoles that are trying to realize a next generation leap in processing power to expand GREATLY on the scope of prior games and then we see that last Gen consoles are keeping up mostly fine with these new consoles with developers now commenting that the cpu is a bottleneck? We remember Kameo right? How it tried to expand on prior ai numbers, heck it will be simple enough to compare car density in Gtav across all ports soon, that will show just how underpowered jaguar is if you are afraid of benchmarks that show clear performance advantage to puma which is the same architecture with power consumption improvements allowing for higher clocks at similar power envelopes. If you don't think jaguar is going to keep looking older, you haven't been paying attention to the mobile cpu market.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The funny thing is that we are calling a 20cu apu from AMD powerful for 2017, it is a joke heck I even mentioned a 16cu part, why go for lower performance than their competition if the difference between these two parts is likely less than $10 in 2017, it is likely less than $20 right now.

Why spend $10 more on a piece of hardware than you need to? You still haven't answered my question what a more powerful machine will get Nintendo. If they want to impress with specs, they need to go all in and create a powerful machine. But that would be an in-between machine, betwixt generations. It won't be supported fully by 3rd parties for the previous mentioned reasons, coupled with devs not wanting to commit to a new generation before they're ready. If they're not going to go all-in to attract the hardcore gamer, then they want the cheapest machine possible to reach their intended audience.

 

[Syferz]

Why spend $10 more on a piece of hardware than you need to? You still haven't answered my question what a more powerful machine will get Nintendo. If they want to impress with specs, they need to go all in and create a powerful machine. But that would be an in-between machine, betwixt generations. It won't be supported fully by 3rd parties for the previous mentioned reasons, coupled with devs not wanting to commit to a new generation before they're ready. If they're not going to go all-in to attract the hardcore gamer, then they want the cheapest machine possible to reach their intended audience.

I keep answering your question, they will do it to be the most powerful console on the market for a year or two, putting ps4 games at 60fps and 1080p can be a draw for gamers and Nintendo can charge gamers accordingly. Like I mentioned before, they will have to be at a higher price than their handheld, they can't put out two form factors at the same price and the handheld is going to cost a good amount to make. Releasing the handheld at 199 leaves room to drop the price in time for a revision, meaning the console is going to have to cost 299 anyways, and that will give Nintendo plenty of room for a console that does the above no problem. I mean is your point really "Nintendo could release with less power and save money" because that can always be said, heck they could just release the Wii u as a handheld and have the perfect answer to their single platform. Nintendo has shown interest in a graphical leap, Miyamoto just last week said the next Mario is reserved for their next console so they can show a graphic leap over 3d world. Heck it is silly to even have this argument because the bar is invisible, a next Gen amd gpu with 12 cu clocked at 1ghz along with a much better cpu is still probably going to exceed the ps4. I'm basing that on the fact that weaker desktop gpus seem to out perform the ps4 on pc with plenty of latency and overhead.

Btw I don't mean to sound grouchy, sorry if I'm coming off as confrontational, I just read this illogical bias that comes from the idea that Nintendo will always release weaker hardware than any poster can mention. It isnt more correct to be pessimistic, and I really don't buy into the narrative that Nintendo won't release hardware matching/exceeding ps4, the fact is that PS4 is below expectations, developers were expecting multiple Tera flops, remember epic proclaiming that UE4's engine would require 2+ Tflops, sounds great until no next Gen console even has that.

 

[function]

By 2017, the number of people who would switch platforms to have marginally enhanced PS4Bone games will be roughly zero. Trying to convert owners late in the generation for minimal gains with expensive hardware is not a good plan.

Unique, compelling experiences and handheld <->homeheld synergy is a much better plan. Nintendo need the right hardware, not necessarily fast hardware.

 

[Syferz]

By 2017, the number of people who would switch platforms to have marginally enhanced PS4Bone games will be roughly zero. Trying to convert owners late in the generation for minimal gains with expensive hardware is not a good plan.

Unique, compelling experiences and handheld <->homeheld synergy is a much better plan. Nintendo need the right hardware, not necessarily fast hardware.

That is the plan, no one should be calling ps4 fast hardware in 2017. A simple 4cu handheld and 16cu console is going to be easy to streamline development, especially because I doubt Nintendo will waste any of its budget on an hd screen for their handheld, we will be lucky to get 540p and honestly that excites me because it means more horsepower. If anyone thinks 2tflops is fast when talking about 2017, I have to imagine their surprise when they realize that is what we will be seeing in entry level gpus. We are talking 2 die shrinks and the mobile market having 1tf+ I don't see how this is "fast hardware" it is moderate for a low power system, again ps4 is 120w not 200+ like ps3.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I keep answering your question, they will do it to be the most powerful console on the market for a year or two, putting ps4 games at 60fps and 1080p can be a draw for gamers and Nintendo can charge gamers accordingly.

As Function points out, the core gamer will already own a PS4/XB1/PC and not care for the marginal improvement Mii&U will offer, or they'll buy the cheaper box that plays the games. But also, why do you think those games will come to Nintendo's new machine? Why are devs going to port GTAVI and everything else to the Mii&U? Nintendo's tools suck and their services are pretty sucky and the audience will be a small percentage of the current-gen audience.

Like I mentioned before, they will have to be at a higher price than their handheld, they can't put out two form factors at the same price and the handheld is going to cost a good amount to make. Releasing the handheld at 199 leaves room to drop the price in time for a revision, meaning the console is going to have to cost 299 anyways, and that will give Nintendo plenty of room for a console that does the above no problem.

Or, they release a cheaper machine with far larger profit margins. The people who'll buy a new Nintendo machine for Nintendo's games won't care if it's 12 CUs or 20 CUs, and being 20 CUs won't win over any core gamers (especially if the core games don't come to the machine). Ergo, target 12 CUs.

I mean is your point really "Nintendo could release with less power and save money" because that can always be said, heck they could just release the Wii u as a handheld and have the perfect answer to their single platform.

Maybe they will! It's actually too high a power draw.

Btw I don't mean to sound grouchy, sorry if I'm coming off as confrontational, I just read this illogical bias that comes from the idea that Nintendo will always release weaker hardware than any poster can mention. It isnt more correct to be pessimistic, and I really don't buy into the narrative that Nintendo won't release hardware matching/exceeding ps4, the fact is that PS4 is below expectations

It has nothing to do with bias or pessimism and everything to do with the business sense of Nintendo making money. If releasing more powerful hardware can generate more profit than weaker hardware, then it makes sense. With Nintendo's current philosphies, I see no reason to think a more powerful machine will generate more profit. They'll reduce profit margins and not increase install base and software sales/license fees enough to compensate. There's only really one justification for a more powerful machine, and that's to go high power, a monster machine, and be compatible with next-gen. The core gamers will be interested in getting the Mii&U knowing it'll still play the future titles and getting next-gen early. But that'd be a hell of a risk that'd probably back-fire. It'd require expensive hardware and devs still probably won't target it. Nintendo seem more interested in an alternative path, with health and handheld interests which don't require the most powerful hardware.

, developers were expecting multiple Tera flops, remember epic proclaiming that UE4's engine would require 2+ Tflops, sounds great until no next Gen console even has that.

Not sure what that has to do with anything. UE4 is available on mobile. In fact, the low performance of PS4 and XB1 points to a general change in the console space.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

...and 16cu console is going to be easy to streamline development...If anyone thinks 2tflops is fast when talking about 2017.

You're changing your tune there. You said...

Performance being beyond PS4 is pretty easy to guess at isn't it?

Looking for comparable performance to PS4 is in line with some of ours upper expectations, similar to Wii U. Beyond PS4, enough that anyone can see the difference, is highly unlikely for the aforementioned reasons - higher costs for no benefits and probable lack of 3rd party support

 

[Goodtwin]

By 2017, the number of people who would switch platforms to have marginally enhanced PS4Bone games will be roughly zero. Trying to convert owners late in the generation for minimal gains with expensive hardware is not a good plan.

Unique, compelling experiences and handheld <->homeheld synergy is a much better plan. Nintendo need the right hardware, not necessarily fast hardware.

I mostly agree with you here, but even in 2011 and 2012, there were a lot of 360's and PS3's sold, so if Nintendo could bring hardware to market that not only surpasses PS4 in performance, but also beat it in price, then they could potentially move a respectable amount of hardware. Im thinking $199 console in 2016 with a couple of marquee Nintendo first party titles released at launch. Not sure that this would work, but it would give a good indication if a Nintendo box that is on par with the competition is desirable in todays market.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Launching a console at $199 is going to make it pretty weak. Are XB1 or PS4 likely to be any cheaper?

Not sure that this would work, but it would give a good indication if a Nintendo box that is on par with the competition is desirable in todays market.

It will be desirable to Nintendo's enthusiast audience. Fans of Mario will get Nintendo's latest box to play Mario with even better visuals, same as any brand fan with an interest in the first-party exclusives. I highly doubt it'll be more desirable to the wider gaming audience than PS4 and XB1 though. These consoles will be similarly priced, probably similarly performing (Nintendo would have to have something pretty special to improve performance at the same price-point, although they may get lucky with some tech. Although even then, nothing to make them stand head-and-shoulders above the competition), yet have far better game libraries including shared games from friends and second hand disks and old budget games, plus significant communities encouraging peers to get the same machine. Then there's the questionable situation regards third party support on a Nintendo console. Placed side-by-side, a $199 MiiTuu and a $199 PS4, which is going to offer more to the non-Nintendo fan? I'd say PS4. Thus it doesn't behoove Nintendo to go head-to-head with the competition. Either trump them with an expensive monster machine to usher in the next-gen, or side-step them with some fabulous must-have feature, or focus on the niche. If Nintendo can maintain their handheld audience and produce a console that all those handhelds owners will want, they'll do alright another round, although there's the question about the long-term health of the handheld market...

 

[BRiT]

@Goodtwin , @Shifty Geezer
And then there is Nintendo's utter failure in the online experience that will completely dissuade any PS360/XB1/PS4 gamer to switch over to a Nintendo only experience. Hardware is less than a third of Nintendo's real problems.

 

[Goodtwin]

Nintendo is definitely behind with their online features. The features that they do have are good, they are simply missing some features that any PlayStation or Xbox gamer will feel should be standard these days. I think the idea of Nintendo's next console is to have a much broader appeal than just the hardcore Nintendo gamer. I think most people agree, that simply offering a me to product isn't likely to be anymore successful than the Wii U, or best case scenario, the Gamecube. So moving forward, how do you appeal to a bigger market. Copying Sony and Microsoft isn't likely to work.

 

[Cjail]

So moving forward, how do you appeal to a bigger market. Copying Sony and Microsoft isn't likely to work.

You give people/customers what they want...or at least try.

 

[Goodtwin]

You give people/customers what they want...or at least try.

So you think they were trying to appeal to a small group of people with the Wii U? When you first saw the Wii, did you think it was going to set the world on fire? Its a pretty vague statement to make, "give the customer what they want", seeing as how the product that people often desire, is the one they don't know they want yet.

I personally think they should just go with a hybrid system that is the successor for both the 3DS and the Wii U. In 2016, even mobile components should be outperforming Wii U by a respectable margin, so work with AMD for a new APU, and then use the streaming technology from the Wii U to stream it to the TV. Its almost as if the Wii U was a step towards this goal, but time will tell.

 

[BRiT]

So moving forward, how do you appeal to a bigger market. Copying Sony and Microsoft isn't likely to work.

That would absolutely bring them up to par immediately. So why shouldn't Nintendo copy Sony/MS online features when they are what the gaming consumers are used to having available as an absolute minimum?

 

[Goodtwin]

That would absolutely bring them up to par immediately. So why shouldn't Nintendo copy Sony/MS online features when they are what the gaming consumers are used to having available as an absolute minimum?

Like @Shifty Geezer said, what's the real incentive for all those PlayStation or Xbox gamers to consider the next Nintendo console if its simply the same thing? There has to be a significant incentive. Nintendo games alone only sell so much hardware, as the Wii U seems to prove. I don't see all those Assassins Creed and COD fans flocking to a Nintendo console. Like I said before, if Nintendo can beat them significantly in price, then perhaps that would be a big enough incentive, especially when you consider how important price is to late adopters. Nintendo would be releasing mid generation, either they jump out of the gate with true next gen hardware, outperforming the X1 and PS4 by a significant margin, or shoot for budget hardware and come in at $199. Just matching the competition wont do it, your trying to beat them at their own game. Nintendo needs some sort of angle, and there is no clear cut solution to their dilemma.

 

[BRiT]

Like @Shifty Geezer said, what's the real incentive for all those PlayStation or Xbox gamers to consider the next Nintendo console if its simply the same thing?

At least it's the same thing; That is a positive, not a negative! That takes online functionality out of the consumer value equation.

EDIT: To be clear, I'm talking about the online software experience. I am not talking about the hardware or games. Right now Nintendo is a huge negative due to their utter failure in online experience. They have to at least get even in order to be considered by any gamer.

 

[Cjail]

Its a pretty vague statement to make, "give the customer what they want", seeing as how the product that people often desire, is the one they don't know they want yet.

So should Nity make a rainbow powered console, something customers don't know they want yet, or make a true next-gen console with third party titles and competent online service, which is what customers want?!

 

[McHuj]

Instead of financing the development of $399 console, I think money would be better spent on a $199 console and more first party (world wide) studios and maybe even third party (from small studios) exclusives. More varied content with the quality of Nintendo's first party line-up would probably sway more consumers than a "me too" system.

 

[orangpelupa]

yups, more studios to make "Story driven" games on nintendo platform will be awesome. Yeah zelda is story driven game but i keep feeling dejavu every time i play it.