True, but I do think Nintendo is indeed pulling off the Wii U and 3DS merged into one platform. How well can a Nintendo sell a product that will really be carried by Nintendo, Japanese third parties, and Indies is the question. Also, some people seem to be ignorant to the fact that Nintendo actually has done extremely well with Indies, both the 3DS and Wii U see weekly releases of Indie titles. Even with Wii U dead, there are still Indie titles releasing on a regular basis. Not saying they are great titles, but that's just the truth of that ecosystem. Tons of shovelware with far fewer quality releases. The Switch isn't much bigger than the 3DS XL, go look at sales, fitting in a persons pocket isn't really all that important, the XL models dominate sales. If your in the market for a home console that you want to play COD and Assassins Creed on, then the Playstation and Xbox are the correct product for you. Most consumers can afford more than one piece of gaming hardware if they want to, but odds are most consumers aren't likely to buy something delivering the same type of experience for just a few exclusives. Nintendo obviously has a solid fanbase, the 70+ million consumers who have bought the 3DS or Wii U support that. So the question is if there is a percentage of those 250 million PC/XB1/PS4 users who would be interested in Nintendo games, and not hat they are all on a single platform, are more likely to make the purchase. On top of that, the Switch offers that consumers something the PC/XB1/PS4 do not, the ability to play on the go.
What MS, Sony, Nintendo should be or are doing next
- Thread starter Nesh
- Start date
True, but I do think Nintendo is indeed pulling off the Wii U and 3DS merged into one platform. How well can a Nintendo sell a product that will really be carried by Nintendo, Japanese third parties, and Indies is the question. Also, some people seem to be ignorant to the fact that Nintendo actually has done extremely well with Indies, both the 3DS and Wii U see weekly releases of Indie titles. Even with Wii U dead, there are still Indie titles releasing on a regular basis. Not saying they are great titles, but that's just the truth of that ecosystem. Tons of shovelware with far fewer quality releases. The Switch isn't much bigger than the 3DS XL, go look at sales, fitting in a persons pocket isn't really all that important, the XL models dominate sales. If your in the market for a home console that you want to play COD and Assassins Creed on, then the Playstation and Xbox are the correct product for you. Most consumers can afford more than one piece of gaming hardware if they want to, but odds are most consumers aren't likely to buy something delivering the same type of experience for just a few exclusives. Nintendo obviously has a solid fanbase, the 70+ million consumers who have bought the 3DS or Wii U support that. So the question is if there is a percentage of those 250 million PC/XB1/PS4 users who would be interested in Nintendo games, and not hat they are all on a single platform, are more likely to make the purchase. On top of that, the Switch offers that consumers something the PC/XB1/PS4 do not, the ability to play on the go.
I actually take that as a bad sign. At least, a recognition of the change of Nintendo's fortunes. Back in the NES days, Nintendo brought in a quality seal to ensure no crap on their system, which led to the invention of the AAA nomenclature for games trying to differentiate themselves from the dross. If Nintendo aren't curating their content so strictly, it means they're just wanting content (because they know they need it) but can't command devs provide them with content to their standard.
Really?
That's Nintendo's problem! A new platform gave them an opportunity to not be the 'second console' for those who want to add Nintendo exclusives to their core gaming platforms.
[quote Most consumers can afford more than one piece of gaming hardware if they want to[/quote]But they don't want to. So Nintendo need to offer that type of platform for those gamers if they want to grow their market.
No more than currently buy a 3DS or Wii U. So Nintendo are left only selling to existing fans, which has been a number shrinking for decades. Basically, Nintendo are continuing the current trend. That way leads to Nintendo fizzling out - there's no other outcome if they can't reach a new, larger market. Fortunes can only change if 1) Switch strangely appeals to lots of people wanting a handheld that can also play on TV, or 2) Nintendo release software on platforms with a bigger install base than their hardware.
Last edited by a moderator:
Are you serious? This is the entire Indie market, on PC and Consoles, tons of shovelware with quality software in far fewer numbers. Its not a quality control issue, its just the reality of the Indie marketplace. Nintendo's seal of approval always meant the game would work, not that the game was good.
Yes, that is the gamble Nintendo is running. Nintendo's plan is to more completely support their platform with all of their exclusives, and have the ability to play portably and on the TV. You may not personally like this concept, but I bet you weren't big on the DS or Wii either. Just pointing out that what makes a successful product isn't nearly as obvious as your suggesting.
Yes, the Switch and 3DS XL are similar in size, I didn't say the same size. Neither one fits inside your standard jean pocket. Once its bigger than a phone, it might as well be as big as a tablet, because its not longer fitting inside your pocket.
Last edited:
Yes, because I associate Nintendo with a walled garden where every title is of a minimum quality because Nintendo wouldn't allow anything sub-par as that's part of the Nintendo brand, to my mind at least. Just because everyone else allows tripe on their platforms, I wouldn't expect Nintendo to unless they felt the need to relax their control. It's better to offer 100 games where every one is worth buying rather than 10,000 games where you've a 1% chance of finding a good one. Back in the day Nintendo limited how many games publishers could release to prevent shovelware and tat.
Well im sorry to inform you that Nintendo has followed suite, and just like all other platforms, there is tons of shovelware on their eshop.
Biggest issue that I can see is that while the games may end up looking ok enough on a 6" display....when you put it up on a TV all the compromises made to hit the portable target will be much more glaring...even if it is at 900p or 1080p. It's going basically going to be a nicer looking PS3/Xbox 360 game..
Yeah. Apparently since 2003. So that's one strength to the Nintendo brand that's not there any more. Nintendo are now literally just the games, and perhaps quirky hardware if one likes that sort of thing. All the more reason for Nintendo to just bring their games to other machines. 
Dude, your obviously thirsty for Nintendo software. Time to quit being a cheap ass.[emoji12]
Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
Last edited:
I'm sure the same discussion happened back when Vitas specs were revealed. It's true though, mobile processors are going to shoot for peak performance in short burst, marketing is one reason, but also because that's the type of work loads are typical for mobile hardware. A dedicated gaming platform that must sustain peak performance as long as the player decides to play. Ever binge play a game for 8 hours? I have, and I'm betting Nintendo's testing has the hardware running a bench mark for days straight, just to make sure they never come close to thermal limits.
Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Wii's humongous amount of super crappy shovelware titles says hi.
Absolutely, but I am of the opinion that 90% of consumers still feel like 360/PS3 games look good. Batman Arkham Knight doesn't shit all over the previous games, those games still look nice to this day. Switch was never going to be the device to play third party games with the best graphics, that was never in the cards. You would be surprised how little your average consumer cares, or even understands how versions of multi plat games differ. COD games were selling about 2 million copies per release on Wii, and needless to say, those weren't the prettiest versions. I have a an example for myself, if Madden is on Switch next year I will buy it, but I am not going to buy another console just to play Madden. There are tons of games released on various platforms that sell, but ultimately weren't the reason that consumer purchased their device.
Really? See I would argue when it comes to the latest AAA multiplats graphics/performance of the game definitely do matter. I'm trying to imagine a scenario where enough Switch owners would buy a downgraded (below Xbox One) multiplat in the coming years.
I mean Nintendo games will look great...because of the cartoony art style...but how many people are would choose a game like Battlefield 1 on Switch (could it even run a 64 player multiplayer match?)
Assuming it is even possible from a technical standpoint in my mind the market demand will simply not be there to support AAA multiplats on Switch.
Really? See I would argue when it comes to the latest AAA multiplats graphics/performance of the game definitely do matter. I'm trying to imagine a scenario where enough Switch owners would buy a downgraded (below Xbox One) multiplat in the coming years.
I mean Nintendo games will look great...because of the cartoony art style...but how many people are would choose a game like Battlefield 1 on Switch (could it even run a 64 player multiplayer match?)
Assuming it is even possible from a technical standpoint in my mind the market demand will simply not be there to support AAA multiplats on Switch.
Then more people would game on PC, but they dont. I'm not saying it doesn't matter at all, but if it was at the top of the list why did anyone but an Xbox One? A Wii? A DS or 3DS? I know this is a tech forum, but everyone here needs to be real, we are not your average consumer.
Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
Maybe Nintendo won't outright say it but they don't really care about third-party games, they may be happy as long as they sell 10 million Mario, Zelda and other first party games on the new system.
And honestly, the kind of art they use for those games, they don't need high-fidelity graphics. They're not going to model Mario and other characters with detailed muscle and bone structure or show individual strands of hair swaying in the breeze.
Mario Kart won't feature cars and tracks with billions of polygons and GI lighting like GT or Forza games.
And honestly, the kind of art they use for those games, they don't need high-fidelity graphics. They're not going to model Mario and other characters with detailed muscle and bone structure or show individual strands of hair swaying in the breeze.
Mario Kart won't feature cars and tracks with billions of polygons and GI lighting like GT or Forza games.
but it will be a nicer looking Nintendo game. And nintendo games already looks nice in Wii U.
As Nintendo is messing up its offering especially in its mostly private handheld market, my belief is that Sony may have a shot at handheld.
Imho Sony should leave the PS Vita behind and pick the ball where Nintendo left it with the new 3DS.
Nintendo has its pant down: they have the Switch coming and they introduced recently(ish) the "new" 3DS.
they have to keep it simple and robust while being cheaper and better. They should forego pursuing any of the "usual" geeks wanna have (arbitrarily high resolution or overall specs etc.) anything that it is not dictated by developers needs or actual development costs (again the competing system is the 3DS line).
To maximize the odds of a "handheld renaissance" it is necessary to reach the most likely users: commuters and kids. The device has to be durable and pocket-able. Then you grow from there reaching different segment through various SKU.
Comfortable rounded clam-shell design, slick.
Ergonomic controls that leverage the whole base space: 2/4 side or back butons, 6 face buttons, 1 cross pad, 2 circle pads.
Precise and accident proof resistive touchscreen + stylus.
"Good" low resolution (nHD) 4.5" screen.
Conservative and power efficient SOCs @28nm (x4 A35 + Mali G51 mp2).
512MB of RAM, 1GB of internal storage, comes with a 4GB SD card (user replaceable).
An overall software environment amenable to significantly different hardware configurations.
The system would support local streaming (PS3, PS4 and PS4P) and cloud base Sony offering.
Emulation for some playstation system.
The system would launch and 129.99$ and reach 99$ fast (that is for the base model). It would be called the PS Portable.
The system would compete against the new 3DS and 2DS which are now dated. It would be an incremental jump from the 3DS, a Nintendo like move. It would have no competition as the Switch is a different price bracket I suspect games are to be more expensive on Switch than on the DS line (closer to home console price), we speak of bigger more complex games (higher price for the physical media, development costs, etc.). Being new and affordable people are going to be willing to give it a try. The system would also be the most ergonomic to date (controls are constrained by the second screen on the DS line) and that is imho important. The six face buttons would do marvel for fighting games and lots of 2D games.
As it launches a bigger version would be announced, the PS Tab. It would use a 7" inch higher resolution screen offering the PPI the (new) PSP, the controls would be under the longest side of the screen (as they are on the PSP GO). The system would come with a different SOC to make up for the extra pixel to render. They could further steal from Nintendo book and introduce a 3D effect. Later on AR-VR, etc. (it is about milking a relatively flexible software platform that allows to sustain the development environment which its own set of rules).
Imho Sony should leave the PS Vita behind and pick the ball where Nintendo left it with the new 3DS.
Nintendo has its pant down: they have the Switch coming and they introduced recently(ish) the "new" 3DS.
they have to keep it simple and robust while being cheaper and better. They should forego pursuing any of the "usual" geeks wanna have (arbitrarily high resolution or overall specs etc.) anything that it is not dictated by developers needs or actual development costs (again the competing system is the 3DS line).
To maximize the odds of a "handheld renaissance" it is necessary to reach the most likely users: commuters and kids. The device has to be durable and pocket-able. Then you grow from there reaching different segment through various SKU.
Comfortable rounded clam-shell design, slick.
Ergonomic controls that leverage the whole base space: 2/4 side or back butons, 6 face buttons, 1 cross pad, 2 circle pads.
Precise and accident proof resistive touchscreen + stylus.
"Good" low resolution (nHD) 4.5" screen.
Conservative and power efficient SOCs @28nm (x4 A35 + Mali G51 mp2).
512MB of RAM, 1GB of internal storage, comes with a 4GB SD card (user replaceable).
An overall software environment amenable to significantly different hardware configurations.
The system would support local streaming (PS3, PS4 and PS4P) and cloud base Sony offering.
Emulation for some playstation system.
The system would launch and 129.99$ and reach 99$ fast (that is for the base model). It would be called the PS Portable.
The system would compete against the new 3DS and 2DS which are now dated. It would be an incremental jump from the 3DS, a Nintendo like move. It would have no competition as the Switch is a different price bracket I suspect games are to be more expensive on Switch than on the DS line (closer to home console price), we speak of bigger more complex games (higher price for the physical media, development costs, etc.). Being new and affordable people are going to be willing to give it a try. The system would also be the most ergonomic to date (controls are constrained by the second screen on the DS line) and that is imho important. The six face buttons would do marvel for fighting games and lots of 2D games.
As it launches a bigger version would be announced, the PS Tab. It would use a 7" inch higher resolution screen offering the PPI the (new) PSP, the controls would be under the longest side of the screen (as they are on the PSP GO). The system would come with a different SOC to make up for the extra pixel to render. They could further steal from Nintendo book and introduce a 3D effect. Later on AR-VR, etc. (it is about milking a relatively flexible software platform that allows to sustain the development environment which its own set of rules).
Last edited:
Honestly I'd like to see Microsoft develop a high quality joycon like controller grips that could attach to any mobile phone. Just have the Xbox App on iOS and Android that allows streaming from PC or Xbox to mobile phone. It should be possible and much better than developing dedicated gaming handheld.
Last edited:
What Nintendo accomplished with SMB Run was truly an eye opening experience at least for me. I've been away from Nintendo too long, and what I've seen here with SMB R, is nothing short of remarkable. They've made a vastly complex, addictive, simple yet challenging game, with just a single button press.
That type of game design is honestly difficult to accomplish, but overall, still cheaper/less risky adverse than trying to own the mobile space with hardware.
I think more games like SMB R will be greatly more profitable than any hardware they can push out and license off. With that said, having more power may not be to Nintendo's strengths, and their current direction may actually be correct.
That type of game design is honestly difficult to accomplish, but overall, still cheaper/less risky adverse than trying to own the mobile space with hardware.
I think more games like SMB R will be greatly more profitable than any hardware they can push out and license off. With that said, having more power may not be to Nintendo's strengths, and their current direction may actually be correct.
