... What?

I just don't think that amazing tech specs would do it... you couldn't make an affordable console that could approach what PCs are doing atm, even if you wanted to.

Like the recently made statement says, it's got to be the games... but what kind of games? Certainly 3rd party ports with marginally better graphics won't do it (why buy a whole new system so you can play the new Battlefield with a few more particle/lighting effects?).

Is it the HD versions of beloved franchises like Metroid and Zelda? Will that bring people to the big N (or bring them back)?

Is it a new 1st party IP? Some good 1st/2nd party exclusives?

I wonder this in all sincerity, as I often waver in my own resolve to pick the system up at launch. What kind of game would it take to put me in line on day one, happy to fork over my $400 for hardware + game?

At the moment, I think that in the absense of a serious reboot (i.e. full reimagining) of Zelda/Metroid/StarFox, it would take a rather epic new adventure game to capture me hook-line-and-sinker. I really want a fresh and compelling universe (no matter who it comes from) - one that I could only get on Nintendo's console; something as captivating as Uncharted, as addicting as Halo, but as polished and solid as Mario. Ninty has taken the risk before with games like Eternal Darkness... and I think it will take that kind of boldness to attract the gaming enthusiast.

What does everyone else think?

Maybe we will be able to stream other things into the controller...  Like a Blu-Ray player maybe?

I could definitely see this as a possibility.  But Nintendo has, strangely, been known to include mysterious ports that never get used... remember the expansion ports on your SNES and N64 (the ones on the bottom)?  Some of those get used for Japan-only releases (like the Famicom disc-drive)... but this?  I can only assume that it's a way to link the WiiU to another player, or a yet-to-be-named peripheral like a video camera... weird.

I want a diversity of games, because everybody has a different definition of fun. I have fun with Mario to God of War to Zelda to Uncharted.

agreed, and I think this is the hope for me as well. perhaps the true gaming enthusiasts are the ones who have replied consistently that they really just want a fun game from any genre, and I really respect that, too. I think I, personally, tend to be a "mood" gamer who wants the title I'm playing to match a particular theme that i'm currently "in to"... and I think I was wondering where the real pulse is in gaming, and what would bring these dedicated gamers to the new console in droves (because I want to see the new system succeed)

Always nice to hear that Miyamoto-San is cooking up something new... I guess new characters could mean a new franchise, or some new faces in an existing one.

I guess we'll have to see what becomes of it...

While I agree that it seems HIGHLY unlikely that Nintendo will charge for its online service, I can't say that I am particularly happy about this...

XboxLIVE is a great service. It really is... and millions of adopters, "hardcore" and "casual" alike, agree. I'm not saying that I really want Nintendo to do something similar, but I AM afraid that I will end up paying each individual company individual, monthly fees on separate account systems for online functionality in their particular game (which is a nightmare). A few things that Nintendo has said make me think in this direction, and I am REALLY hoping that this doesn't happen (but don't know how it can be avoided, especially being that companies like Ubi are already headed there)...

Agreed. We need more games like Secret of Mana. Those were the days...

If by this you mean co-op games... then I think you're in luck.  There are a WIDE array of great co-op games on the current HD consoles, and I imagine we'll be seeing a steady stream from our beloved big N now that they have the horsepower to pull it off without taxing the processor.

btw... I also LOVE Secret of Mana... most nostalgic gaming experience in my memory... played it with my brother on and on until the save file died.

This franchise seems to be most closely associated in peoples' minds with the HD era - probably because the aesthetic of the Prime trilogy already tended toward this direction (I still think that Corruption looks good, even when compared to HD games)...

But I don't necessarily want another "Prime" (meaning, a first-person shooter/adventure)... I would be all for an entirely different mode of play for the franchise, as long as the core Metroid dynamic of recursive, layered exploration, haunting atmosphere, upgradable abilities, deep alien lore and complex environmental puzzles were all preserved.

Keep the above qualities, keep the realistic, captivating aesthetic, and you've got me sold...

Personally, I think that the 3DS is the perfect delivery vehicle for N64 re-releases (OoT has me stoked)... but if they were to completely refurbish the game (more akin to what MS is doing for the Halo:CE anniversary), I could see an HD version blowing me away. Even more exciting to me, in many ways, would be a re-imagining of the tale, like what Eurocom did with the recent Goldeneye for Wii.

Honestly (and I know this will be unpopular) I think Nintendo needs to cool it with the Zelda franchise for a while (other than these kind of remakes)... I like Zelda as a kind of epoch franchise, giving me a new tale for a new era. I would hate to see it become a serial, faerie sitcom... I think the same thing about Metroid, for now. I say, give me (or rather, give Retro) a new Star Fox... it's been ages for that franchise, and it would be in a great position to milk that HD goodness.

I would be all over a full 3d version of a link to the past, but with OOT and star fox its now time to focus on new things again.

This is where I'm at, too... I have genuine love for the classics, and playing them again really takes me back. But there has been a LOT of remaking lately, and precious little progress into new realms. If a company relies too much on repackaging and re-selling to me games that they've already sold me before, eventually it starts to feel less like a service for the fans and more like a lazy way to make a buck, or even (and I flinch to say this) a lack of good ideas.

Nintendo is actually worrying me... I feel that they might be in the place that Disney got to be in, when Walt got old, endlessly combing over the old man's old ideas, looking for a note or a scrap of paper to turn into a full-length feature. I don't think Miyamoto is there... but I think that everyone could use a Pixar-like infusion of fresh genius - someone with really NEW ideas for a new generation, and an organic vision of future gaming that syncs with where the market's at.

When i say M rated games i just use that as an example for most of the games I like, and i could care less about bieng cool cause everyone told me not a Wii but i bought it cause i loved the smash series and i played smash since i was 3.

Ha! Nice to feel vindicated! In that case, good for you, and you are definitely not alone in either your taste (I like many M-rated games too) or your worries about WiiU. Nintendo has a lot to prove... but I think that they will prove it. It will be HARD for them to mess up. Again, though, if you are falling in love with some exclusives on another system, there's no substitute for games you really like. Go with the system that has the games you like!

Sparrow and dementis make really good points that deserve attention... The hardware worries are a real red herring, and nintendo is really putting their energy where it matters (ai is a great place to focus the extra processing power, IMO)...

Im pretty sure hes talking about increasing the intelligence of AI.

Mostly this, but the former as well (more characters on screen).  Currently, the complexity of AI routines are severely hampered by available processing power.  This doesn't much matter in a game like Zelda, which seems to focus on duels rather than big battles with crowds... but I could see it doing great things for a franchise like Pikmin, where enemies (and player-directed AIs) are required to coordinate with/react to one another.  Big AI breakthroughs are a while down the line... but improved NPC coordination/interaction is an improvement we could see right away with a little more processing oomph in the hands of developers.

Dang, guys... can we refrain from vilifying a person's personal taste, here? I assume that he was just noticing that the particular games that he found to be fun were all rated M. Maybe I'm giving him too much credit, but I'd rather give too much than too little.

As far as the question goes, I agree with the other posters. Nintendo is explicitly uninterested in being "edgy"... "hardcore", yes, but edgy no. However, you will all-but-certainly see CoD games on the new console (and from the early reports, Battlefield and Crysis too)... but I wouldn't hold my breath for stuff like Dante's Inferno, if that's your cup of tea. Watch the news for Dead Space announcements. Supposedly EA's bringing over everything, and if they bring that over, it's a pretty good indication that the door's wide open.

I wouldn't worry about the "50% more powerful" talk, personally. There is a lot of that rubbish going around in PS/Xbox circles. Even if it was just "as powerful" and not more, the fact is that game designers are (and will be for the next three or four years at least) designing games with the current level of console technology in mind.

Watch the video trailers on IGN for Battlefield 3, and compare the PC version to the PS3 version. The PC version is pretty much the cutting edge. If you're not disappointed by the difference, then you have nothing to worry about... in two or three years, when PS and MS put out their new consoles, they will be using that tech *at best*, unless they plan on charging you $1000 for a console.

At the end of the day, what matters is that all the developers say that the WiiU is a very capable, exciting system. The buzz is good from major third parties, and with the new controller and it's possibilities, you can just do cooler stuff with the WiiU than with the other guys. Unless you're desperately in love with inFamous or Gears of War, I think you'll be decently happy sticking with the big N.

Of course, if you really are one of those annoying kids that mostly just worry about how their console makes them look - and you really do just want that one game because it has an M on it, "and it's cool to like blood, don't you know" - then you are already well aware that Nintendo is not "cool", and you already know that you need to run out RIGHT NOW and buy something PS or MS, whether it's fun or not.

Hope that helps.

P.S. There are some well-built games that I do not find fun. People tell me that God of War is fun... I see their arguments for the quality of its design, but I don't like it. Similarly, people tell me that Yoshi's Story is fun. I see their arguments for the quality of its design, but I don't like it. It's true that the M rating doesn't make a game fun... but it's equally true that a game's inherent quality will not make it fun for all people.

The reason I asked is because I've never really seen a problem with AIs being unintelligent. Then again, I've never really played an FPS where I presume those things would be important.

Yeah, but not just FPS (though that would be good... anyone ever played Crysis?).  If you've played an RPG/Adventure like Fable III on the Xbox, you know that any time there are more than a few NPCs on screen, there are severe framerate issues and even some inexcusable rubber-banding.  Fable III doesn't look all that awesome in terms of HD graphics... but the NPC AI in an environment like an RPG town, where each character is reacting to a number of variables regarding your character, his reputation, his current clothing and equipment, his actions, the actions of others, their own jobs and relationships to one another, etc., can get VERY demanding on a processor!

I think he was trying to be as diplomatic as he could with that statement, and you're taking it too hard.
He said wait for e3, which is where he will, along with the rest of us get some actual news about third party support.

agreed... i like to bash on the guy as much as anyone, but they were some of his more moderate statements. 3rd party support really is a key issue with this console's success (as well as a key determiner of how 3rd parties will develop games for the 'next gen'), and i am waiting for e3 with a fair bit of earnestness because of this very issue.

Like the others, I want all the features. But the feature i want most, is download full retail games. If a game cost $40 in the United States, in my country the cost is like $75 - $80 US dollars. So in the eshop the prices will be the same that the prices in the United States. 3DS too Nintendo.

wow, i never really thought about that problem... or realized that that was the case, I guess. I know that I've heard a few gamers on these forums complain about the move to digital distribution, because they don't have reliable high-speed internet in their country. is this largely the case outside of the US, or only in a few specific countries?

Ok... So I know there have been many threads focusing on different aspects of this topic. Still, I want to know what you guys actually want most from the online service. Does it matter if the Miis get customizable clothes? Do you care about DLC, or even about digital distribution of any kind? Do you like the idea of achievments/trophies adding up to a "gamerscore", or is it ruining gaming? Are you a hardcore competitive multiplayer junkie - one who wants to be notified mid-game if friends of yours start playing another game so you can jump in - or do you mostly game solo anyway?

I think the pulse of the average Nintendo gamer might be significantly different from that of the average PS/360 gamer in regard to online functionality... but I don't know for sure... so let me know what you think!!!

Personally, I am dying for a strong friend/profile system. The first thing I check when I turn on my 360 is what my friends are playing, and I almost always jump in to their game (whether cooperative or competitive). I didn't include a "multiplayer gaming" option, because it seems like the variables of what people might mean by this are too complex. I would assume, for instance, that the system would allow players to play games online (duh)... but as for the options regarding connectivity, dedicated servers, centralized billing, etc.... well, I'll leave that up to your comments.

To be honest, I'd pay a fat stack of cash for Xboxlive if the WiiU's online is crap, 13 year olds or no 13 year olds.

Ya, me too... I was really angry, at first, about the idea of paying for online functionality. But I'm remarkably happy, in a way that really surprises me, with my experience on Xbox Live... if a monthly fee is what it takes to make and maintain a truly first-class online hub of connectivity, then Nintendo needs to do it. I will be a big N fan regardless... I just won't use the WiiU to connect with information and with other gamers, and that will definitely cut down on the time that I play it.

As far as "competition" goes, I really do believe that Nintendo's biggest competition is itself at this point. Will the company utilize its influence and its potential, or will they fall back on the security of what has worked before when push comes to shove. They need to be bold and daring - to take some big leaps (which is not really in the history of their corporate culture, strangely enough, though it has been in the culture of many of their designers).

The hardware worries are, I believe, a red herring and a non-starter in terms of prophecies of apocalyptic doom for Nintendo. Until they figure out how to put light on silicon, they're not going to revolutionize processing power in terms of raw potential for gaming... and the prohibitive costs involved with increasingly powerful high-end gaming rigs will effectively keep what increased potential there is out of the reach of console makers (build me a high-end gaming PC for $400 or less, and show me what you are able to come up with) - which, in turn, means that game developers are not going to be making games with a revolutionary increase in visuals (because the consoles can't handle it).

Now, this might mean that console gaming is on its way out (and I've heard such fears expressed)... but that's the topic of another thread.

Man these threads are really starting to chafe me.... Alex and Aaron (above) know what they're talking about, so people need to read their posts and be DONE with the nonsense talk about non-facts and pseudo-figures like the "10% of its potential" and the "50% more powerful" statisto-babble.  People are really running with those figures in completely nonsensical directions and it is not contributing to REAL conversation about the system's ability!

"americanized-militaristic-mindless"? I don't think that's a very descriptive title as far as the behavior sets you are objecting to... it sounds like some political rhetoric is getting mixed up in your otherwise very careful analyses... also, it's kind of offensive to me as an American.

If you mean that the kind of gamers that like games such as CoD are accustomed to rapid killstreaks, twitchy or knee-jerk play mechanics, and simple structures of play, then I could understand what you are saying... but I'm still not sure about which of those elements you find objectionable. Are you saying that you would prefer the Metroid multiplayer to differ from one of these (or similar areas) in terms of mechanics?

Or maybe do you mean the social ettiquette of players on many of these types of games? The swearing, trash-talking, whining, threatening, belittling, and berating of new or inexperienced players? I could also understand that objection... do you want a kinder, more polite and more inclusive "crowd" for social gaming?

I agree that the best use of multiplayer for a Metroid game would be for co-op... I would really like that... though I also get the point about Prime being so successful due to its sense of loneliness and isolation. A versus mode would have to include some of these great ideas about complex maps with world enemies, or interesting objectives and puzzle-solving elements included.

I really don't understand the term "mindless" as it is commonly being used on these forums, and I don't think that it has proved a very helpful term. Many gaming enthusiasts from across the world have been rather devoted to games that feature simple, repetitive processes which demand little higher-order thinking. I find "militaristic" similarly unhelpful, as I doubt that it is being used technically. If we're simply talking about a fascination with the military and/or military operations, then I don't see the problem. Cultures across the world and throughout history have been fascinated with (and even glorified) the military, and many great games (not talking about CoD here) have used this fascination as a foundation. If you find CoD itself to be irreverent toward life, misleading in its politics, or dangerous in its sanitization of violence, then I might see a productive dialogue (and I might agree with you).

I do very much enjoy some open world games (Red Dead Redemption being foremost in my mind)... but I think that it definitely needs to be the right kind of game. I think that a Monster-Hunter-esque dragon-slaying epic in a fantasy setting would really suit Nintendo well, and would make for a great open world game.

I liked some of the suggestions above as well... though many of them seemed more like what I would consider "sandbox" games or even RPGs, rather than open world games. I do think that Nintendo needs a good open world game, in any case... and any new IP would excite me!

Link to the story on WiiUBlog.com
Sure, Nintendo's late to 'the HD party', but, in a certain sense, Sony should have respect for its 'elders'. Nintendo's been part of this business since 1985. Sony came along like ten years later after WORKING with Nintendo in the first place. Welcome to the party? I think that this is honestly the first time Sony can tell Nintendo that about ANYTHING. I love the PlayStation brand, but I have to say that I hate its bigwigs.

Oh man, don't tempt me to go hating on Sony... the 12 steps have been going so well.

Honestly, though, it seems that this interview has been getting pretty universally negative press, as opposed to the interview with Shuhei Yoshida about the PSV, which impressed me with its earnestness, its positive tone, its concerted avoidance of pot shots, etc. Genuine excitement about innovation and possibilities always makes for a better interview than hip-fired, juvenile bravado.

I guess the title of the topic is broad enough to post usage ideas for games... right?

I'm thinking...

- tablet screen for endoscopy in surgery games (or robot/nanoprobes fixing circuitry or spying) while the main screen can keep an eye on vitals...
- LOVE the build management in rts games (or minimap/unit grouping management) idea
- LOVE the persistent sniper-scope idea (oddly enough, this also allows for the most precise aiming possible, given that there would be the sticks for movement and camera as well as the controller positioning for pinpoint aiming on-screen, potentially eliminating the complaints with both bounding boxes and fixed-center dual-stick or mouse aiming... though the whole system of movement together might prove disorienting or overly complicated)
- tablet player controlling a gunning turret on a vehicle, while the main screen player drives/flies
- dashboard for complex simulators, with flipable switches and pushable buttons represented on the tablet screen.

I would LOVE a new, numbered entry in the series... and it certainly wouldn't hurt if they atoned for the betrayal that was FFVII by making it WiiU exclusive (never happen, I know, but I'm still sore about the old PS1 days).

while i somehow doubt that crytek will choose to put a lot of specific love into this title for the wiiu, i would still really like to see it come to the system.  i thoroughly enjoy the franchise (yes, even crysis2).

i could really see crytek doing some work on a ground-up title for wiiu - just seems like something that they would be good at, and interested in doing (especially considering some of the comments that have been made) that really pushes the system's hardware.  no telling when this woud happen, though... so i'd take crysis 3 for now!