Whatever they call the new Star Fox game... great.  Assault 2 would be fine with me (though to be honest I'd prefer not to have a name that suggested a fresh approach).

Story line is not really a problem for a game directed by a Japanese developer... mega man was always reinventing itself by retelling the story with a completely different scenario and plot arc, but using the same universe.  Personally, I thought this was brilliant (even though it often confused me as a kid)... a new story for a new generation, but always referencing familiar characters, themes, and fan-beloved elements.

Lovin' the prequel idea...

Also, just watched the 3DS footage video from StarFox3D on the nintendo3dsblog, and it got me pretty stoked... hopefully it will be well enough received that it will encourage Nintendo to push for a new entry in the franchise!

I also think (a la multiplayer from 64) that on-foot missions could work... there is no real reason that they couldn't.  It all depends on presentation, and something unique and compelling about that aspect of the game.  There should be a kind of fun that you can have on foot that is totally unique to that mode of play - a control or gameplay dynamic that makes those missions more than just a break of pace.

Yeah, star fox 64 was the last great console star fox game, and it was entirely vehicle based. I could do without on foot missions. A return to the arwing is what the series needs to give it a shot in the arm.

Man, I'm just glad there's some fan interest in the series... tbh, I didn't play assault or adventures. the one in my mind is 64, and I just like the series in general.

I'm agreeing that it's time... the original SNES Star Fox was always billed as a technological powerhouse for the hardcore gamer.  The amusing-but-telling tag line was "why go to the next level, when you could go centuries beyond?" - a jab at SEGA's "welcome to the next level" slogan - and the unique take on 3D gaming was really striking (and felt revolutionary) at the time.

Point being, Star Fox was made as a showcase for a system's capabilities... it was made for mind-bending presentational feats.  The 64 version may not have felt so revolutionary, but it still wowed gamers of its time with its cinematic flair (of rare depth for Nintendo at that time) and its epic action set-pieces.

What better way could there be to introduce gamers to the nascent possibilities inherent to the new hardware than to blow them away with a spectacular, fast-paced adventure with mind-blowing visuals, epically-captivating and imaginative alien environments, and the kind of immersive control experience that could only be available on the WiiU?

Surprisingly, I am NOT as tired of this kind of earnest plea from gamers as I am from Ninty fanboys pretending that they don't know what people mean by "hardcore", and then insulting them or insinuating that they are immature for pointing out the obvious fact that the majority of people who spend money on and play games enthusiastically (in the US, at least) are FAR more excited about Xbox360 games than they are about Wii games.

COME ON... everyone knows that when someone says "hardcore gamer" they mean "gamer that likes the games that it is currently fashionable to like" - games like Call of Duty. And for whatever reason, these really are the games that people want, and the games that they will pay for. There is nothing inherently WRONG with liking Call of Duty - just like there is nothing inherently immature about preferring a beautiful, rich aesthetic experience to... well, what the Wii offers.

Now, if someone comes out and says "Skyward Sword is a terrible game, and its graphics suck... I much prefer Modern Warfare 3 because its graphics are better" then please go ahead and school them for their obvious inability to appreciate artistic styling and depth of play experience. Otherwise... can we please be charitable to the intention of the poster?

See, the thing with these kinds of topics is that the damn console hasn't even been released yet and people are saying either WiiU blows because of it's specs or WiiU rocks because of it's specs, when the actual spec report hasn't even been released yet either. We won't truly know until the WiiU comes out, and even then, we still have to wait another year or so before PS4 and 720 get their chance in the spotlight. I can actually speculate on what the system would BE like, but most of you guys are already on the bandwagon and saying statements like "WiiU DEFINITELY will trample Sony and Microsoft" without even experiencing the actual consoles yet. This is why debates like these are pointless and ends up going nowhere.

QFT... while my GUESSES are certainly more in Desert Punk's realm, at the end of the day they are only guesses and nothing more... and it's healthy for me to remember that.  All the logic and analysis of factual possibility in the world (or all the wishful thinking and selective quoatation of 'sources' in the world, for that matter) will not arrive at any kind of cartesian certainty about the WiiU's specs.  For all we know, Nintendo could still decide to sell us a $600 console with a totally different enclosure design, which would feasibly allow them to include some high-end hardware (for a console)...

Now... for Nin_Stream's comments... I agree that Red Steel 2 and MadWorld both suited the Wii's abilities very well (as did Okami, WiiSports and a handful of others), which is why I mentioned the Skyward Sword example in the vain hope that readers would take the time to try to hear what I was saying before going into beast mode.  Sure, the AI in MadWorld stinks and Red Steel 2 has some pretty severe frame-rate issues, but the cell-shaded look worked very well for the Wii, and I wish more developers had gone in that direction.

My original point was not that developers can't work within limitations... they've been doing that since the very beginning!  My point was that there are many, many types of games out there with many different graphical styles, and a system hoping to achieve widespread acceptance should aim to create the kind of hardware that will support these games and these graphical styles.  I repeat, there is nothing INHERENTLY wrong with liking Call of Duty.  I personally do not enjoy it... but that doesn't mean there's something wrong with it.  Some of the COD games have an engaging storyline in campaign and a fast-paced, tightly-built multiplayer component that competitive players really, really enjoy.

Here's the deal.  I only ever owned Nintendo systems until I left for college (NES through N64), and I bought EVERY system (handhelds included).  My brother bought a GameCube when I was at college, and I came home and played that on weekends too.  I never got into Halo during the college days, even though it was all the rage, because I still preferred Smash Bros. when it came to competitive multiplayer fun, and I was loyal to the big N.

But it was the Xbox360 that brought me back to gaming after my college days were done (with no peer influence, as none of my adult friends play games).  It was Gears of War that filled me with the same awe and wonder at where games could take you - narratively and experientially - that I hadn't experienced since Mario64.  Aesthetic complexity is a valid component of enjoyment in interactive media, as is the compelling mechanics of hitting cover hard and laying down suppresive fire so that your brother (who is playing with you cooperatively) can flank a hardened enemy position.  Man, stuff like this is why we play games, just as much as the endearing characters, deep exploration, and head-scratching puzzles in a game like Zelda are why we play games.  Have you ever just stared at some of the buildings in the first GoW game, as the dust swept across the ruined landscape and sun filtered through the cracks in the windows?  The point is that you can like both (or even just one) without villifying the other.

If Nintendo is trying to draw in a large variety of gamers, it needs to pay attention to what a large variety of gamers want, and to provide a system that will accomodate them.  That is all I'm saying.

As long as it includes user names, friends list, voice chat, a messaging system and all that other good stuff I'll be fine with it. It'd be cool if Nintendo could take some tips from Steam and have instantly changable display names, community groups etc. as well.

Yeah, see, this is what actually makes me WANT a pay service. I agree that Nintendo will most likely NOT charge for a unified online service... but what this leaves open (and what some of Ninty's own comments and the comments from EA have seemed to indicate) is that the online play component will be fragmented into a plethora of individual services on a company-by-company basis, some charging and some not. In Japan, Monster Hunter Tri has its own subscription fee for online play, and other games have fees of their own... it's the 'friend code' headache all over again, but this time one that potentially involves me subscribing to a different service every time I want to play a new game online... and if I have to pay $5-10 USD to get a robust, intuitive, unified online experience, so be it.

No i dont think they will charge.

With that being said i find it to be rather annoying that everybody wants nintendo to have a better online service then xbox live and psn yet they arent willing to pay.

this. people are used to receiving robust social networking services for free, and I get the feeling of not quite being certain about what Xbox is actually selling you with the Live service... but really, a clean, intuitive interface that brings all gaming and media services together under one gamer ID? It's a valuable service to me, at least.

Crysis 3 use's DX11(microsoft).NINTENDO is not going to pay for anything Microsoft

the game doesn't REQUIRE the use of DX11, it is simply built to take advantage of the features afforded by DX11 on PC.  It also gets a lot of performance out of GL-based APIs such as that on the PS3 (though I admit that the porting wasn't as good for that platform)... and it COULD be built to get significantly MORE performance out of the WiiU's hardware than out of the other two consoles, one would presume (either by using APIs provided in Nintendo's dev kits or by writing their own hardware coding).

bottom line, crytek LIKES to build games that push the limits... .  wiiU won't give them this opportunity to push into undiscovered territory when compared to the horizons offered by PC development, and it won't YET (unlike xbox/ps) fulfill the other possible business motivation of assured profits to offset the cost of porting.  if it won't push them (what they want), and they can't even be sure that it will bring in money (what they and their publishers need)... then what is their motivation to make it happen?

yeah, none of the info on these links is new, and it's STILL just rumor and speculation! this disparity between reports is really starting to wear my nerves thin... especially as my personality is disposed to believe the doom-and-gloom "not-even-as-powerful-as-the-current-gen" reports over the rainbows and unicorns reports of a mega-machine that will soar confidently into the next generation of technology.

When nintendo says "specs dont matter, enjoy the game" its a turn off for many hard core gamers, because we know what good specs do and thats what we want. (Its because the knowledge hard core gamers have, from pc mostly... its not just a fetish to see good specs.. because hard core gamers, know very well, what does what.. inside the machine )  

lol... yeah, as a loyal apologist for Nintendo since the NES days (where is your hedgehog now, you smug, smug SEGA kids from my childhood!!!) I have had ample opportunity to appreciate the irony of my posture toward the company.  On the one hand, it feels somewhat awkward being told by a company what you want ("no Mikey, you want to play with this now... that thing that you think you want really doesn't matter at all")... but on the other hand, the people have crafted some of the most compelling, enjoyable, and beloved IPs of all time, and there's something to their idea that the experience is built of far more than visual complexity.

I do agree with you when you say that their attitude will not win back the so-called "hardcore" gamer (and I like your distinction between hardcore and enthusiast... it is quite a useful distinction).  The people that they lost are not the mindless trend-followers that they are so often painted to be (as much as I would love to indulge in the vindication afforded by that caricature) - they are consumers, with money, who know what they want, and they will spend money on what they want.  They are interested in a certain aesthetic, and a certain kind of horizon of wonder that is afforded by cutting-edge technology, and I don't really think that they will be persuaded that what they actually want is solid play mechanics within a fresh and robust approach to interactivity in games... no matter how compelling the experience might really turn out to be.

lol... flc, you crack me up.

On the topic-side of things... I guess consoles are kind of in a tight spot right now with where to shoot, spec-wise.  They just CAN'T make something on par with high-end PCs, because consumers won't pay that much for a console, and they can't cheap out on the specs because people have seen games running on high-end PCs and tend to expect similar experiences...

On the other hand, the functional gap really is not that big right now.  Yes, Crysis 2 really does look astounding on a gaming PC with all the settings cranked to 11... but the difference between that and the Xbox360 version of the game is still not as big as the difference between, say, Black Ops on Xbox360 and Black Ops on Wii.  Whatever Microsoft and Sony manage to squeeze out for their next generation, it will certainly not represent a challenge for 3rd party ports to the WiiU.  The real question, as has been said, is whether or not the lost fanbase even cares about Nintendo any more...

Actually, it's a pretty cool idea. Like the DCL distribution in City Folk, but it could be like an ARG and there are QR codes on posters advertising the game and things.

I agree that this kind of content delivery would be very cool... maybe the potential exists for it to get a bit gimmicky, but it doesn't have to be.  What Dementis describes would add a lot to the game.

I would just really love to see them go MMO with this franchise.  It seems like Animal Crossing was MADE for social interaction, and a persistent online world with the Animal Crossing flavor would definitely become an online hub for gamers like myself - a place to display my style, hang out and chat with friends, collect and trade items/designs with friends, etc.  They could still keep privacy in place (Nintendo-style) by allowing access restriction levels via user menus, depending on your personal privacy preferences.

Is it certain that WiiU will not play DVDs or BluRay? I am one of those crazy people that do kinda care about this, if only because I like to keep the number of devices I have to keep connected down to a minimum.

Well, Nintendo and Google already do work together (on the ES operating system, at least), so it's not so farfetched a rumor as it might seem... still, it's my understanding that the controller itself only streams content (not generates it), so I don't think that the "tablet" itself will run an OS.

I would personally love to see Nintendo team up with a marketplace like Android to provide media content... that would mean a lot more content with a lot less burden on Nintendo!

ok, ok, everyone... it's clear that Nintendo isn't saying that their console will be "underpowered" by telling fans to focus on games rather than specs...

but seriously, who can deny that this kind of statement pushes certain kinds of very predictable response buttons in people's heads? Is Nintendo really ignorant of the fact that people are GOING to hear "underpowered" when you tell them not to think about specs?

I just think that it is a very disappointing angle to take with consumers... I mean, they point blank admitted that what "a lot of people like" (dissecting specs) doesn't really matter to them, and that kind of statement can be disheartening to consumers already suffering from trust issues with a company due to its perceived willingness to ignore them.

Nintendo's track record with hardware has included a great number of significant lost opportunities due to the decisions that they have made, and I think that people have a right to be nervous about this...

Give me some insane speed, some mind-bending tracks, and some killer music and I am SO THERE!!!

Sony/Nintendo IP trading system..yep.that's what we need. Nintendo gets to build a LBP, GOW and Resistance..Sony gets to build a Mario, Zelda and Kirby....

My brain almost crashed trying to contemplate this idea... it'll never, ever happen, but it's a fun thought experiment. I don't know that the relevant studios would exactly know what to do with the genres, though...

For example, imagine a Zelda where you can travel between different times.

Man, the number of good possibilities like this is just staggering... X-ray glasses for Bond, Thermal Scopes for FPS, time or dimensional warp sight for supernatural/sci-fi games and thrillers (like that new Amy game, where the same space keeps shifting between the real world and the parallel hell dimension)... one doesn't know where to begin.

Of course, like others have said, it REALLY all depends on the games that developers actually make. Ideas are great, but until they put some sort of wonder-developer's-kit into each of our hands and tell us to go to town making our own games, we needs some solid 3rd party interest and some green lights from major publishers.

Also, I agree that the system itself is not perfect. It would generate a LOT of confidence from the market to see some announcements made about price point, about hard-and-fast hardware specs, etc. It would also restore a lot of confidence from the die-hard fan base to see Nintendo listen to some of the criticisms about the controller (i.e. lack of analog triggers), even if they seem petty to some. A few loud and happy fanatics go a LONG way in today's guerrilla marketing scene (at least if Nintendo genuinely cares about the so-called "hardcore" market).

I think Jikayaki's (very valid) point is that a console version of Monster Hunter simply WILL NOT sell as well as a portable version, even though it costs more to make... at least as long as the franchise remains mainly a Japanese affair.

For reference, Monster Hunter Tri has sold roughly 1 million copies in Japan (the US numbers are rather abysmally low in comparison).

Monster Hunter Portable 3rd, for the PSP, was released the very next year and has sold more than 4.5 million copies to date (and is still going relatively strong).

Console versions just don't make business sense to Capcom...

MH shouldnt have a difficulty setting, that would be ridiculous.

I could not agree more with this statement... Monster Hunter KILLED me with its difficulty at various points along the way, but that's what is so fun about it.  Once you accomplish one seemingly impossible task, you feel like the ultimate bad-a for a while... then you get to move on to the next seemingly impossible task.  This is a huge part of what kept my interest, and kept me committed to the game for 600+ hours to date.  There is plenty to do in the game when you are "stuck" at a particularly difficult monster.

I would be really excited about this (I'm a HUGE fan of Tri, as it was literally the only Wii game to accumulate a somewhat shocking 500 hours of play time)... but I'm not sure how likely it will be to see the light of day on WiiU.  

Tri always had a very strong, dedicated online presence on the Wii, but compared to the franchise's typical audience (PSP and PS2, mostly in Japan) the numbers were abysmally low (the PSP Monster Hunter game following Tri went multi-platinum on day one in Asian markets)!

HD Monster Hunter seems like a no-brainer to me.  I think it would look awesome, and they could get rid of some of the annoying parts of the game (like the lack of realistic monster interactivity/ecosystem awareness) and add tons of weapons, locations, and new monsters.  To make such a game, however, they would have to pretty much ignore their demographics data, which suggests that the people who are really going to buy their game mostly play old, clunky handhelds!

wow, this would be an interesting turn, indeed... I'm not inclined to believe it, as most of the "interviews" with "developers" that have been "leaked" (I put all of this in scare quotes in an attempt to acknowledge what everyone is constantly pointing out about the lack of any real method of confirmation) have referred to DirectX10 support only... but it would sure be nice.

i have a hard time seeing Nintendo spring for a powerful gpu... i just do. the solid, quality, efficient ones are too expensive, and the alternatives are all too risky, inefficient, etc. As you pointed out, Nintendo's hardware has been nothing if not reliable.

Wasnt direct X for Microsoft only?

well, technically DirectX is just a set of APIs that allow software to communicate with hardware... but yes, it was developed specifically by Microsoft for Microsoft, and is proprietary. To my knowledge, Xbox/360 is the only console to actually use a version of DirectX. Sony and Nintendo have their own libraries, optimised specifically to suite their graphics cards (and OS). When people (well, me at least) talk about a console "supporting DirectX11", they are probably talking about the set of features supported by that version of Direct3D (the graphics API in the DirectX suite)... things like tesselation, multithread rendering, and some advanced blending modes.

Some of these features are really revolutionary, but they depend upon the GPU being able to receive certain kinds of programmable instructions...

I just hope that Nintendo's GPU is better than what we're being told!

Is ID Tech5 that good? I've looked up some screenshots of Rage and while it looks quite amazing for a current gen game (dat clouds! http://media.teamxbo.../1250708202.jpg and some nice rocks/shadows http://www.pcgamesha...90325093927.jpg ) I don't think it could compare with what UE 4 is likely to be. UE 3.5 impressed me more than IDT5.

I have to kind of agree that Rage doesn't look that good on a purely aesthetic level, but I might have to just blame the art resources for that. stewox (and may others on these forums) are most likely admiring the engine on the level of programming and software development, I suppose... and of course the effects made possible using the engine itself are rather astounding.

thanks for sharing the Carmack video, stewox... hadn't seen that, or had forgotten about it. I wonder, though, how may 3rd party developers are really going to bother developing "assembly-level" code specific to the WiiU hardware in order to fully utilize its power (or even write custom shaders to take advantage of the GPU's specific architecture)... it seems like even big studios have tended to balk at the process and give a "the-platform-doesn't-have-those-features" shrug. and i get it... they're running a business and have to think about costs involved. But in all honesty, do you believe that we will see a lot of developers focus on the WiiU in this way?