Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech

[Shifty Geezer]

Nothing says that one extra year or a bit more would allow Ms or Sony to crush Nintendo system perf in a way that perceived to mass market.

Also time is less of an issue than budget constraints. Any console can eclipse the performance of its rivals if it takes the same hardware but multiplies it by four. However, the cost would be prohibitive. The issue becomes one of balancing different targets, and in those cases Nintendo has typically sided with the cheaper side rather than the more expensive, more powerful side. It's possible that Nintendo would choose to throw away a lot of this gen's profits on loss-leading hardware of insane specs that MS and Sony just can't afford to compete with until equivalent costs are pushed down over time and they can launch a performance-comparable box 2 years after Wii2, at which point they'll have no HW advantages and Wii2 would have the next gen sewn up. Implausible, but possible.

 

[brain_stew]

. A "Many slow threads" philosophy..

You call them slow threads but they should still be a lot faster than what we got this generation. Bobcat would provide a pretty decent increase in general single threaded performance compared to the PS3/360 if clocked at ~2ghz or higher, which should be easy enough at 28nm considering 40nm netbook parts are said to be1.5ghz and they're clocked conservatively due to the tight TDP constraints.

Imho I don't even think Nintendo will gun to put out a performant Wii2 in 2011 if their competitors are gunning for 2012-2013. As much as they potentially could do something powerful "enough" for a Ninty console and the next gimmick they try to push, they have no reason to try to force a new generation until MS & Sony are ready to upgrade their boxes too...

Actually they do. Three years of continually declining hardware sales and a complete evaporation of third party licensing fees means that we'll see the Wii's successor soon enough. Nintendo's investors don't care what Sony or Microsoft are doing, only that Nintendo's core business is expanding and that is going to require new home console hardware at this point.

The NDS was actually in a much better position than the Wii is now when the 3DS was announced, higher hardware sales as an absolute figure and only 1 full year of declining hardware sales with not nearly as sharp a tail off in third party support and no viable competitor in sight. Problem is, that business wasn't expanding and for Nintendo a company that relies heavily on gaming hardware sales, that isn't good enough.

The signs are all there, first party Wii development has been curtailed back an incredible amount and most upcoming Wii software isn't even developed inhouse. Those developers have to be working on something and with plenty of 3DS titles announced (only one or two of which are developed in house though) its pretty easy to follow that Wii 2 software projects are already underway. It doesn't matter if third parties don't start their Wii 2 projects until later on, as all they have to do is port to a familiar architecture and add a few bells and whistles (which are likely already being developed for a PC version anyway), they don't need to create a bunch of new games from the ground up.

 

[Dregun]

I'm not a buisness man so I can say this.."the Wii was a mistake", for all intents and purposes it represents corporate america to a "T"! Release a product with the sole goal in mind of making insane amount of profit from percieved value when in actuality the consumer is overpaying for a mediocre product.

I'm not saying the Wii needed to be the 360 or the PS3, what I am saying is it needed to be more then an Xbox 1.2. The Wii (although dominated) had the ability to outright destroy MS and Sony but because the hardware was so incredibly lackluster it couldn't move past the gimick/grandma stage and go full blown PS2 x 2 level.

Nintendo should be smart about the next console they make and move away slightly from "all profit right away" in making a console that is completely profitable from the start to a console that breaks even or just a smidge more from the start. They need to release a console that is close enough to the performance of PS4 & the Nextbox so that games could be ported with only very minor downgrades. If the design of the console follows the same multicore/multithreaded as the other 2 consoles but just lags slightly behind in terms of raw power then it insures ports could be brought to the console easier.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I'm not saying the Wii needed to be the 360 or the PS3, what I am saying is it needed to be more then an Xbox 1.2. The Wii (although dominated) had the ability to outright destroy MS and Sony...

I don't think that's true. Wii isn't good enough for hardcore gamers, the people who bought in PS360. Also Nintendo doesn't have the 1st party library and doesn't attract the 3rd party interest that MS and Sony do, such that even with better specs, it's questionable whether Wii would provide an experience that the current PS360 owners would have bought into.

 

[kagemaru]

Microsoft have invested too much into Kinnect to launch a new console any time soon. If Kinnect flops and fails to drive hardware sales, it'll be hard enough to justify a successor to sharehoders in 2013 let alone 2011. Microsoft have been talking about postponing the Xbox 3 until a ~2015 timeperiod lately, not bringing its launch forward to 2011.

I think you're mistaken on a couple things here. You think the next xbox isn't in development? The next system has already been green-lit and will be released regardless if Kinect flops and fails to drive hardware. Development of a new system is not something you can just sit on and throw together at the last minute (something MS learned with the first xbox). The success of the 360 is enough justification to the shareholders for it's successor.

Also MS hasn't been talking about delaying the Xbox 3 until 2015, they have only mentioned supporting the 360 until 2015. That doesn't stop them from releasing the next xbox in 2012/2013 and supporting both for 3 years, much like what Sony has done with PS1 -> PS2 -> PS3. Use the profits from the last gen to help support the losses for the next gen. Good strategy IMO

Sony have lost to much money on the PS3 to ditch it any time soon, they'll milk that thing as much as they can before any successor is launched and anyway, Sony's hardware sales are on the increase and they've got the most "future proofed" hardware.

Yeah it's true that Sony has lost a lot with the ps3 and they need time to recoup that cost. However, sony could be forced to launch earlier than they wish if MS and Nintendo jump on the next gen.

Also what point is being "future proofed" (always hated that term) when better and faster hardware is out as well?

I just don't see how its feasible for Sony or Microsoft to launch a console earlier than late 2012, they're just not setup or ready for it yet, 2013 definitely seems the most likely. Its why Nintendo are in a perfect spot to launch their console in 2011, they'll have 2 years as the tech leader with the best console version of 95% of third party output even if they're very conservative with their hardware upgrade.

If they can continue to attract the casual crowd that they won over with the Wii (and with their software output, they definitely will), its a nice spot to be in. Software that covers all market segments, the best technology, the best first party output, the strongest brand, the best version of all third part releases and sub $300 hardware that they don't have to take a bath on.

If it wasn't for the lack of any rumors, leaks, or news on development of next gen games I would be convinced that MS and Sony were launching their next systems in 2012. I agree 2013 seems most likely, but that doesn't doesn't guarantee any type of long term success for Nintendo if they launch in 2011.

The casuals will be a hard sell since faster tech alone won't be enough to win them over. And outside of the hardcore gamers who buy every console every generation, I wonder how many people would stick with the Wii-HD knowing that better hardware is a couple years down the line.

Nintendo has to be careful how they handle the next gen or they risk experiencing what Sega went through with the Dreamcast. Most powerful hardware for a brief time, just for development support to drop off once more capable and better supported hardware hits the streets. The only difference here is that Nintendo isn't close to being bankrupt so they can support a flagging system.

 

[liolio]

If it wasn't for the lack of any rumors, leaks, or news on development of next gen games I would be convinced that MS and Sony were launching their next systems in 2012. I agree 2013 seems most likely, but that doesn't doesn't guarantee any type of long term success for Nintendo if they launch in 2011.

It's not a guarantee and I don't think that both Ms and Sony would let Nintendo a two years head start. I feel like the hardcore community is already ripe for an upgrade. In two years Nintendo could easily sell +20 millions units to this market segment alone. The 360 scored ~10millions in one year. Actually depending on pricing it could be more as if the price gap is not much vs say a PS3 new buyers may give up on their purchase to buy a "newer" product. The other way around it could put put on competitors pricing.

The casuals will be a hard sell since faster tech alone won't be enough to win them over. And outside of the hardcore gamers who buy every console every generation, I wonder how many people would stick with the Wii-HD knowing that better hardware is a couple years down the line.

Indeed, it's not even clear that the kind of casual Nintendo managed to hit with the Wii are willing to buy a new video games related products in the future.

Nintendo has to be careful how they handle the next gen or they risk experiencing what Sega went through with the Dreamcast. Most powerful hardware for a brief time, just for development support to drop off once more capable and better supported hardware hits the streets. The only difference here is that Nintendo isn't close to being bankrupt so they can support a flagging system.

I don't agree Sega financial situation is the only reason behind the dreamcast failure. Nintendo has to be careful for sure. It's big business they will consider everything depending on which market they are after, their "usual" market only or they also want "casual' or hardcore or try address every one needs. I'm not sure success will be built upon technical merit / performances of competing systems.
We're discussing the possibility of Nintendo launching first because they are the one in the best situation to do so. Catching your competitors with theirs pants down is nice. Anyway I'm not sure that Nintendo is in the situation to address more or less the needs of every console gamers. It's not hardware related. I think Nintendo is badly lagging when it comes to the online platform. Nintendo can't built a proper on-line platform in one year or a bit more.
I read talk about Sony and Valve, actually if Nintendo were to address every gamers they should be the one wanting to land a deal with Valve/Steam.

 

[brain_stew]

Let say they put out a console in 2011 that's just a bit better than the PS360. So when the PS4 and NeXtbox release in 2013 with radically different archetecture and oodles of computing power over the Wii2, then Nintendo will simply be in the exact same position they are in now. By releasing 2 yrs earlier than the rest with a box barely different in power from the current console powerhouses/)

I don't think that's the case at all for several reasons:

Nintendo will be going with a modern DX11 GPU this time around. Developers are very familiar with that architecture and the PS4 and Xbox 3 won't be using something with radically different capabilities, their chips will just be faster. That means all that shader code developed for them machines can be pretty much ported "as is" and just ran at lower precision. Drop from 1080p to 720p, ditch stereo3D support, use fewer MSAA/AF samples, compute motion blur and lighting at lower precision and use lower resolution shadow maps, that sort of thing. Developers already do all this stuff in order to support low end PCs and its not particularly time consuming work, most of it is just tweaking a few variables.

Assets are already created at the multi million polygon level and there's simply no cash available to increase the quality of source assets by an order of magnitude again. If the Wii's GPU is NI based then it'll be able to make a very good approximation of those source assets due to its fantastic tessellation performance. Even if its not, those source assets aren't going to be created at much higher quality than they are now purely because the economics won't allow it. So maybe the Wii version runs those assets at a slightly lower LOD, it ditches the tesselation support and uses a lower resolution normal map, what matters is that developers are able to work with the same surce assets and shader pipeline and that they don't have to create brand new assets from scratch in order to support the Wii 2. Slight tweaks like less precise skin shaders, lower resolution normal maps and less aggressive tessellation will work just fine. You can already see this sort of approach happening with the 3DS and Iphone. Capcom have built a rendition of RE working from assets in RE4 and Epic are porting UE3 while maintaining the same art pipeline and allowing developers to ork with the same source art.

We won't see a huge monumental leap from the PS4 and Xbox 3. The era of selling console hardware is over, no current console or handheld is sold at a loss and investors have cottoned on to the fact that its a broken business model in this day and age. We won't be seeing any consoles with an $800 BOM anymore and we won't see any billion dollar investments in new CPU architectures either. Sony and Microsoft will have to work within the same restraints as Nintendo and buy their chips from the same partners and it'll all have to come to less than their $400 initial retail price. 2 years simply doesn't allow for an order of magnitude increase over the Wii 2 when you have to work in tight restraints like that. It'll be a significant leap for sure, but not something which requires a defferent technology paradigm to take advantage of compared to the Wii 2.

After 28nm, there's the very real possability that process shrinks may begin to slow down, Microsoft and Sony have to bear that in mind as they need to design a console that can eventually be sold in the $150 range.

 

[brain_stew]

The "casual market" will buy a Wii 2 for the same reason they bought a NDS and Wii; Nintendo's first party output. Third parties are pretty much clueless when it comes to targeting any market segment outside of their trusted "hardcore shooter fan" niche and employed a ridiculous scatterbrain approach on the Wii which was met with very limited success. Nintendo on the other hand knows exactly how to hit that segment with laser precision and the launch of new hardware isn't going to change that fact.

If those gamers want to continue to play the software they desire they'll have no choice other than to buy the Wii's successor because you can be sure Nintendo will drop support for the Wii like a rock (they pretty much have already). Throughout the Wii's lifespan Nintendo have been able to deliver key titles to drive hardware sales when it matters, they've not been able to sustain it indefinitely due to the lack of third party support but by getting competitive technologically they win back all that third party support pretty much by default especially if they go with an X86 CPU and DX11 AMD GPU as it looks like they will.

I read talk about Sony and Valve, actually if Nintendo were to address every gamers they should be the one wanting to land a deal with Valve/Steam.

Well Valve have already shown they're happy to work with the console manufacturers (they're porting Steamworks to the PS3), so it wouldn't be a bad move to investigate getting that infrastructure ported over. I'm not sure Nintendo would be all that likely to relinquish some control of their platform like that but there's several ways a deal like that could be worked out. If all it does is allow third party publishers the option to use Valve's well established APIs and infrastructure then that could be enough.

I still think nintendo are capable of doing it on their own though. So many companies offer a viable online platform these days that I feel there's proof enough that its not a particularly difficult problem to solve. The PSN came a long, long way in a very short time once Sony finally got serious about online gaming. It'll be offered free as well, so it doesn't have to match the quality of Live anyway, just so long as its easy for third party developers to take advantage of. I don't think all the extra fluff that comes with Xbox Live is what draws people to the service.

 

[liolio]

The "casual market" will buy a Wii 2 for the same reason they bought a NDS and Wii; Nintendo's first party output. Third parties are pretty much clueless when it comes to targeting any market segment outside of their trusted "hardcore shooter fan" niche and employed a ridiculous scatterbrain approach on the Wii which was met with very limited success. Nintendo on the other hand knows exactly how to hit that segment with laser precision and the launch of new hardware isn't going to change that fact.

If those gamers want to continue to play the software they desire they'll have no choice other than to buy the Wii's successor because you can be sure Nintendo will drop support for the Wii like a rock (they pretty much have already). Throughout the Wii's lifespan Nintendo have been able to deliver key titles to drive hardware sales when it matters, they've not been able to sustain it indefinitely due to the lack of third party support but by getting competitive technologically they win back all that third party support pretty much by default especially if they go with an X86 CPU and DX11 AMD GPU as it looks like they will.

That's the point, putting out the Nintendo usuals (which doesn't amount to that much if gamecube were any clue), how much of this "gamers" (if they really are gamers) care about upcoming video games products?

 

[kagemaru]

brain_stew - Who is to say that there won't be a leap from the Wii2 to the PS4/Xbox3??

If Nintendo does go with a DX11 GPU and 1GB of memory, Sony and MS can go with a DX12 GPU and 4GBs of memory, that's a pretty big gap IMO.

Also I doubt soccer mom, grandpa, or little Erica who mostly only play Wii sports or Wii-fit are going to care to buy into the Wii 2 unless Nintendo develops some new kind of hook for them to latch on to.

Basically the way I see it, Nintendo will have the hardest time next generation and to overcome some of their issues, they will have to change how they handle things. Mostly 3rd party relations and online capabilities.

 

[liolio]

brain_stew - Who is to say that there won't be a leap from the Wii2 to the PS4/Xbox3??

If Nintendo does go with a DX11 GPU and 1GB of memory, Sony and MS can go with a DX12 GPU and 4GBs of memory, that's a pretty big gap IMO.

Also I doubt soccer mom, grandpa, or little Erica who mostly only play Wii sports or Wii-fit are going to care to buy into the Wii 2 unless Nintendo develops some new kind of hook for them to latch on to.

Basically the way I see it, Nintendo will have the hardest time next generation and to overcome some of their issues, they will have to change how they handle things. Mostly 3rd party relations and online capabilities.

That's a big assumption and it's only yours imho. Even with two extra years that would resume in quiet a difference in cost. As Shifty said at any given time one can spends four time the silicon budget and claims on perfs advantage.
Point is it will cost money. Those systems would come late and come with a significant premium.

honestly if Nintendo launches something in 2011 that have acceptable performances not vs the 360 or PS3 but vs contemporary PC part, it would borderline crazy for Ms and Sony to let them the market for two years.

Anyway the complete lack of rumors let me think that Nintendo won't launch a new system in 2011. Launching during the first semester of 2012 could be a clever move depending the market they are after tho.

 

[kagemaru]

That's a big assumption and it's only yours imho. Even with two extra years that would resume in quiet a difference in cost. As Shifty said at any given time one can spends four time the silicon budget and claims on perfs advantage.
Point is it will cost money. Those systems would come late and come with a significant premium.

honestly if Nintendo launches something in 2011 that have acceptable performances not vs the 360 or PS3 but vs contemporary PC part, it would borderline crazy for Ms and Sony to let them the market for two years.

Anyway the complete lack of rumors let me think that Nintendo won't launch a new system in 2011. Launching during the first semester of 2012 could be a clever move depending the market they are after tho.

It wasn't so much of an assumption as it was supposed to be an example how even if Nintendo releases a console with a good jump over the ps3/360, there's still a chance that MS and Sony could release consoles with a noticeable gap in power to Nintendo's offering.

I'm right there with you though. Between the lack of news on development of the system or it's games, I don't see any system launching next year. Even if Nintendo were to launch early, I agree that it would be stupid for MS or Sony to let them have the market for too long.

 

[liolio]

It wasn't so much of an assumption as it was supposed to be an example how even if Nintendo releases a console with a good jump over the ps3/360, there's still a chance that MS and Sony could release consoles with a noticeable gap in power to Nintendo's offering.

I'm right there with you though. Between the lack of news on development of the system or it's games, I don't see any system launching next year. Even if Nintendo were to launch early, I agree that it would be stupid for MS or Sony to let them have the market for too long.

Fair enough

In regard to perf as I don't expect Sony or mS to move away for the 32bit adressing, actually even with some underpowered vs the competition Nintendo could future proof the system (or as I don't like that saying either "competition proof" the system ) by packing 2GB of ram with the system thus making sure that the same assets will be used on their system but also on the upcoming ones.

 

[Mobius1aic]

Nintendo sells the Wii for $199 currently. What PC components would that be equal too? Pentium 2? Geforce 3? You see Nintendo is not interested in any realistic pricing at all.



The CPU is $100 and the GPU is $100. This will be selling wholesale for $280 or less, so for that you need a motherboard, hard drive (there goes your $80 for those two items) profit, power cables, controller, assembly, shipping, motion control stuff?. It's a tight fit to put it kindly.


And what would be the point again? Getting blown away in 2-3 years when MS and Sony are ready? Or do you think this would just have Wii control again? If it did, why would any third parties support it when they dont support the Wii, and when you're talking 3-5 year development cycles, you know MS and Sony are going to have better hardware anyway by the time your game is done?

Basically you need to look at any Wii successor as a total system imo. Are you proposing it be a simple normal console with no motion control (obviously not)? If not, what gimmick are you proposing?

Not to say there isn't one out there I havent thought of. I didn't see the 3DS coming.

I'm just saying that the tech exists now to pummel the 360 and PS3 for a price that could be sub $300 and still be profitable. It was just an example. Things will only be cheaper a year or two from now. Anyone know the cost for GDDR5 modules right now? I mentioned 1 GB earlier, but Ninty will be best with 2 GB if they want to release withing a year or two. I think my truly ideal system (within reason) would be a quad core or dual core Fusion APU of some kind, 2 GB GDDR5, and a Juniper-ish GPU. The SDK would be fully ATi...*ahem* AMD STREAM optimized to use the GPU or possible APU based system to make the most of what it's capable of. Nintendo could instantly outclass what MS and Sony have to offer as far as power goes, and provide a system with the ultimate flexibility for more than just gaming, like the other two systems currently have. However, Nintendo will still needs the proper software and interface to really make the system fly.

While the current Wii controller is good, I think an integrated camera into the sensor bar would be good for a Kinect like interface and media capability. However I would implore Ninty to go third party for the technology for something cheaper that would work in a manner with USB quality cameras as opposed to MS's very high level solution. I already mentioned the channel interface isn't bad, and could be built upon to be made much faster in actual speed/loading as well as ease of use in getting around to different areas.

 

[Teasy]

Did I miss something? Why is BC no longer an issue?

The tech gap between wii and current level hardware is large enough where they shouldn't have a problem emulating it so I don't see why they would choose not to.

You've misunderstood me, I didn't say backwards compatibility wasn't something Nintendo would be doing, I said its not an issue with regards to what hardware they go with this time. With Wii Nintendo had two options to ensure backwards compatibility, an expensive system around the power of 360/PS3 or an upgraded GC. They were never going to go with the cutting edge hardware which left them with one option. This time its not something they need to think about, even a cheap system could emulate Wii.

 

[Svensk Viking]

Regarding the talk about BC, is it likely that the next-gen systems are powerful enough to emulate PS3/360?

 

[brain_stew]

Regarding the talk about BC, is it likely that the next-gen systems are powerful enough to emulate PS3/360?

Through pure software emulation? Not likely if they go with a completely new architecture. Emulating all those threads and keeping them in sync sound like a complete nightmare. They'll have to be designed with BC in mind if they want to offer it imo.

Software BC should suffice for Nintendo's successor.

You've misunderstood me, I didn't say backwards compatibility wasn't something Nintendo would be doing, I said its not an issue with regards to what hardware they go with this time. With Wii Nintendo had two options to ensure backwards compatibility, an expensive system around the power of 360/PS3 or an upgraded GC. They were never going to go with the cutting edge hardware which left them with one option. This time its not something they need to think about, even a cheap system could emulate Wii.

Yeah, this is precisely the point I was trying to make when I said that BC woes won't have a major impact on Nintendo's choice of silicon like it did this generation.


Edit:

Now that ARM have an architecture that can scale upto 16 2.5ghz cores (A15) does it become a potential candidate for Nintendo's next console? It should compete well in terms of power and area efficiency and is something they're used to (their handhelds are all ARM based). I'd like to see what a home console based on multicore ARM plus a multicore PowerVR series 6 GPU (assuming its ever announced!) could look like.

 

[Teasy]

Nintendo would not even be able to put forth a box with more power than PS3/360. PS3 and 360 are just barely profitable now, at 299/(299/199, lets call it 249). Plus those consoles are still large, still hot.

Nintendo has no stomach at all for hardware losses or even break even now imo.

Nintendo is becoming more like Apple, more of their profits come from hardware than software I suspect. Especially in the DS case. So reducing their hardware profitability would strike hard at their core. In order to get a box more powerful (let alone significantly so) than PS3, at 249 or less, with good profitability (and still way less than Wii) not happening.

I forsee a pretty grim future for Nintendo in consoles quite frankly, the Wii itself is in some doldrums (selling 15k/week in Japan, faltering in USA), and I dont see a good path forward for Nintendo (3D will be done better by Sony and MS, and motion will be done better by Kinect, so what gimmick is left next gen for Nintendo?). OTOH I think the 3DS will be a smash.

That would be a good point if it was 2011 right now and Nintendo's only option for making a system more powerful then 360/PS3 was to use 360/PS3 hardware. Technology moves on, are you telling me that in 2011 they couldn't create a system that's cheaper to build then either of those two yet still a bit faster and cooler?

I doubt they'll go significantly faster then those two systems though, I'm expecting something around the same power or a bit faster.

By the way, did you predict Wii and its success before it was announced?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Regarding the talk about BC, is it likely that the next-gen systems are powerful enough to emulate PS3/360?

No more than this gen was able to emulate last gen!

 

[Kasersky]

No more than this gen was able to emulate last gen!

I thought the reason that ms strictly enforces the use of their apis is that the next generation console can emulate 360 games. tho it wouldnt really be emulation at that point.