Guess I'll wait until E3.
Good to hear they won't leave the Wii to die a gruesome death.

This is an insightful post from a poster on another forum:

I think that the goal of the Wii was to act as an entry level platform, not necessarily a "bridge" platform. The next console, whatever it is, will, I think, be aimed to "bridge the gap" so to speak. Nintendo could achieve this by actively marketing to both the "core" gamers and the "Wii" gamers, where "'Wii' gamers" are the new gamers that have already bought into the Wii.

If they market aggressively to both camps, provide a plethora of solid games, as well as a few "casual" titles, and a few "bridge" titles, then I think Nintendo can reap the rewards of triumph over both sides.

In my honest opinion, I think Nintendo was actively keeping itself distanced from the "hardcore" camp. They had two real audiences to draw in with the Wii, it seems to me, the Nintendo loyalists, and the "new gamers." They were in a fairly safe position, I think. If they failed to draw in the "new gamers," then they could easily fall back on the loyalists and still rake in the dough. And let's be honest, Nintendo would have had to screw up REALLY badly to lose the majority of their fans.

As the Wii came to life, and the response from the "new gamers" was heard, I think Nintendo decided to divide up it's resources, targeting their new audience, as well as their core audience. I don't think they really cared about the the "hard-core" this generation, simply because they didn't need them, and furthermore, in a bid to entice the masses, they needed to appear very accessible, something not easily done when also trying to promote your product as "the console for 'REAL' gamers."

But now, Nintendo has acquired this market, they still have most of their loyalists, and they can move on. I think the next step for Nintendo is to convert the "new gamers" into Nintendo loyalists. These are impressionable gamers, though. They know what is being offered on the other platforms, and I think Nintendo recognizes that it might be enticing to some of them. In other words, a great number of them could probably look at the PS3 and Move or the 360 and Kinect as their next step up in gaming. To counteract that, Nintendo will have to provide similar experiences to what can be found on those competing devices, as well as unique experiences that can only be found on theirs.

In doing this, I think Nintendo will win over a lot of people who aren't already predisposed to hate them (for those their is no cure, methinks). It should also mean a much stronger platform with greater game quality and diversity for Nintendo fans.

TL;DR Version

This generation for Nintendo was targeted specifically to draw in the new gamers, and with this market sufficiently enticed, Nintendo will work on converting them to faithful Nintendo fanatics/core gamers. They will do this by equalizing the difference between themselves and the competition, and then adding some unique Nintendo flair to it.

[i]Keep in mind that this is just speculation. (Although it does sound very reasonable)

Cool. That will probably attract more people to the game if it's true.

Welcome.

From the comments we heard some guy say on an interview a couple of days ago, it seems that Nintendo will have a basic online system with friend lists, messaging, game invites and such things while giving third parties freedom to add their own online system for their games.

Companies like Ubisoft, EA and Activision would love this since they are pushing their own online systems already and won't have to depend on the console manufucturers rules or share profits with them.

The smaller devs who don't have an online system or can't develop  one can just use the basic system set up on the console.

It's basically like what PC does.

As for Nintendo leaving third parties to look after their own online, I really don't think that will be the case. They've gone on record previous to E3 saying that they wanted to create a really solid and focused online experience for everyone, and that they were hiring third party developers to build their infrastructural for them.

... What I have come to feel lately is that the idea of saying, 'we are going to create this style of online structure and that we would like you, the developers, to fit into the online structure that we are creating' is perhaps already out-of-date.

"So, for example with the question of VoIP, I think then what we would like to do is work with them on how to enable them to do that. But, what we're not going to do is to consider as prerequisite conditions that every game includes features like that because obviously there are some developers who may not want to do that.

My link

Iwata himself recently said it.

The console will have its own online system but 3rd parties will be given freedom to incorporate their online system along that in their games. Kinda like the way PC does it.

Lol. Wow...
I just noticed this thread.
Thanks guys.

PArty!!! PPPPPPAAARRRTTTTTAAAYYYYY!!!!!

No authority to tell us what to do guys! We can do what we want! We are free!!!

WWHOOO!!! PARTY!!!!

*Goes Wild*

Sound hasn't been a factor in gaming for a long time now.

We reached the 'good enough' a long time ago.

It's up to the person to get some good speakers if they want really high quality sound.

Hey. Welcome.

Pika23 in the hizzouse! Whoop! Whoop!

Welcome.