DAY ONE!...if I have the money...

I can't see SSB being SSB with a whole bunch of Street Fighter Characters in it.

3rd party Characters like Mega Man and such are more suited for the franchise and most of the chars should be from the Nintendo Universe.

Too many 3rd party characters would ruin the game's atmosphere (or whatever) in my opinion.

Oh. OK.

Nintendo obviously want to beat Sony at their own game.

Just kidding. It's just a pre-order price.

Yes, but Metroid is Nintendo's franchise.  

Publishing a game does not make it your IP.

The point is an IP doesn't have to be developed by a first party studio for it to belong to you.
If you have the rights for the IP it is yours but you can still have other studios (2nd or 3rd party) develop the games for you.

Pandora's Tower was developed by Ganbarion.  Not Nintendo.  Unless a game is developed by a group in Nintendo or one of their first-party developers (Monolith Soft, Retro, Brownie Brown, Intelligent Systems, Project Sora, ND Cube and Hal laboratory) then it can't be considered a Nintendo IP.

That's not really true.

Metroid Other M for example wasn't developed inside Nintendo. That doesn't mean it's not a Nintendo IP.

Nintendo can co-develop/publish IPs with devs outside their company.

I'm pretty sure XenoBlade is a Nintendo IP. I'm not sure about last Story but it might be too.

There's Disaster: Day of Crisis but that game needs to be rebooted to be worthwhile.

Then there's Pandora's Tower.

It would be nice if Nintendo bought a couple of small, talented devs or created one or two new ones.


Regardless of the "Nintendo rehashes old IPs all the time" argument you hear so often, they always make new IPS every generation. Even on their handhelds.

I don't think next gen will be any different. We just have to see what we get.

Yeah, this seems to be a big gap in Nintendo's franchise library... I'm not personally into the hack n slash genre, but I think it would be good for the system to have a solid entry or two for both genres.  I LOVE sandbox games, and have also noticed a conspicuous lack of true open world games on the Wii.  I think that big Nintendo fans would really eat up a good open world game.

Isn't that Pandora game hack N slash?

I'm thinking F-Zero, StarFox or Kid Icarus.
But who really knows...

I've got Children of Mana, too, and it wasn't really fun from my point of view. It's OK the first time you play it, but it has almost zero replay value.

I think that Okami is one of those games that can't get enough attention. It's on par with Zelda, maybe even better, and yet it isn't even nearly as well-known. All Hail Okami! (Does someone know Code Geass?)

Better than Zelda!? :evil:
I'll pretend you never wrote that.

Except that's what modern games run at. The Wii U is 6 years later and its power should reflect that.

Except that's what modern games run at. The Wii U is 6 years later and its power should reflect that.

Games built FOR the Wii-U will run at 1080P such as first party and 3rd party exclusives.
But since MS and Sony will be launching after Wii U, their consoles will be more powerful than Wii U (though a smaller gap than this gen).

So games built for 720 or PS4 and ported to the Wii-U will have to be down-scaled for Wii-U since it won't handle the exact same things those consoles can. You know, kinda like games that can run on PC this gen are down-scaled  so they can run on PS360?

Why does no one seem to understand what I'm saying?

sorry but wiiu runs on 1080p not 720

I know Wii-U supports 1080P...

I said by mid-gen games built for PS4 and 720, which will be more powerful than Wii U, will be made to run in 720p so that they run better on Wii U.

Wii will most surely be closer to the 720 and PS4 than the Wii is to the current 360 and PS3.

The problem with the Wii is it's ~DX7 GPU didn't have programmable shaders and it didn't have a multi-core CPU which made it extremely hard to scale games down to the system. Next gen though, all the systems will have multi-core CPUs and it'll more than likely come down to WiiU having a DX10.1 GPU while the PS4/720 will end up with a DX11 GPU. We'll have to wait until all the systems are out to see how big of a gap there is between the WiiU and the 720/PS4.

So really in the end, the Wii U should be able to receive better port support. By mid generation (next gen) games running on PS4 and 720 boxes at 1080p and 60FPS can get downscaled to 720p@30fps for wiiu. How good the support is depends on how good a job Nintendo does catering third parties and how well Wii U sells before PS4/720 are released and after.

The gap next gen will be more similar to PS2-GC-Xbox than Wii-360-PS3.

I have no doubt Wii U will get next gen ports since the industry has become so multiplat-dependent. What i'm worried about is how well will devs take advantage of the Wii U tablet. That thing has so much damn potential for gaming it would be an outright shame if it isn't taken as much advantage of as possible.

I'm optimistic that it'll end well though because the tablet isn't a completely new controller like Wii-remote was. It's a familiar dual analog with a screen and other enhancements.

If what you fear is the games becoming all realistic, there's nothing to fear! They'll just look better and bigger, that's all.

Too easy to be misused if you ask me.

I apologize if I was incorrect on the potential power differential between the current systems (360 and PS3) and Cafe. I am in no way whatsoever an expert on computer or graphical tech and just went by what I've seen most media outlets reporting which is that the core components of Cafe are "similar" to the build of the 360 but "a bit more powerful" and "slightly more powerful than the PS3". On a side note, if it really does have 512MB of ram won't that limit just how much more graphical detail is capable on the machine regardless on the GPU? 512 is what the 360 and PS3 are already using, it seems like it should be higher but that's just me. Although it is possible it could be more since the reports do usually say "at least 512mb of RAM", either way while as I've stated before I doubt we'll see Microsoft or Sony packing 8GB of ram in the next systems as some developers requested I do expect at least 2GB, wouldn't the difference between 2GB and 512MB (or even as high as 1GB if Cafe was to have that much) be considerable as far as potential capabilities go? (legitimate question)

I'm no expert on tech either. I just know a few things here and there. =p

Yeah. 512 MB RAM would be extremely crippling for the machine but if Nintendo is trying to cater to 3rd parties like the rumours say, they'll put at least 1 GB to 1.5 GB in it hopefully.

Either way, it's my understanding that Sony with the PS4 will continue using the Cell processor by simply improving it with modifications, reports of which I've seen stating that the capabilities of the enhancements expected should double the raw power of the processor. So the real question I guess is how does the supposed components in Cafe compare to what would be the result of doubling the capabilities of Cell. The answer to which I can completely admit I have absolutely no idea on and am actually quite curious if anyone else here knows more on that kind of stuff. It's also my understanding that strictly utilizing GDDR3 RAM in the PS4 as rumored instead of the PS3's current combination of GDDR3 and XDR will also cut production costs and increase performance, though again that's just what I've heard others speculate, I do not know what kind of actual effects that has on performance.

Yeah, Sony will most likely continue with the Cell. Devs are more familiar with it now, so it won't be as hard to develop for next gen.

The rumoured tech in Cafe would be more than double the cell's so we can expect much more than double the increase in power from Sony .

Also, I don't think Sony will use GDDR3 RAM. More like GDDR5.

Another question I'd have is doesn't utilizing an improved (modified) Cell processor for the PS4 allow Sony to save a ton of money on development? It's well known that over $600 Million was spent on development of Cell (although Sony did not bare the burden of the costs alone as it was a joint development project) and if using an improved Cell processor would save a lot of money in the R&D phase of the console, couldn't that allow them a higher budget for the GPU and other areas? I'd like to clarify these are not expectations but rather actual questions, I truly have no idea about that kind of stuff, it just seems like using a modified Cell would be very cheap compared to what they spent actually developing the cell and if that's the case it would make sense that they could reallocate some of those funds to improving other areas of the tech (or researching new innovations). Also, wouldn't using an enhanced version of the current Cell processor also keep production costs down considerably allowing for additional improvements and advancements while still keeping the target price in a respectable range?

I'm sure since they're not developing a new architecture like last time, that should save them a ton of money in R&D.

Since we're discussing the PS4, Sony execs have recently officially confirmed funds are currently being spent towards it's development (not that we didn't already know that but it's confirmation nonetheless)

Yeah. Next gen will be upon us before we know it.

It seems you want a noticeable increase in PS4's power. If NGP is anything to go by, Sony will be packing some powerful tech in PS4 even if they're more Conservative than PS3. They don't have a disk format to bring up expenses this time, so that means more money for the actual console.

"Sony and MS's consoles are going to be more powerful since they will come out after Cafe, but the gap will be small and all 3 consoles will be able to share ports unlike this generation."

That's one area where I have to disagree, I don't even view Cafe is truly ushering in the next generation of consoles because of the fact that according to most reports it's barely superior in power than the PS3...which to me makes it Nintendo's offering of a console finally worthy of the current generation whereas the Wii is more comparable to the systems of the previous generation just attaching motion controls. If Cafe truly is barely beyond the level of the PS3 that would mean that for the gap between the PS4/720 and Cafe to be minimal than Sony and Microsoft would have to make minimal advances to the power of their consoles...something I just don't see happening.

Oh really? Rumours say Nintendo is using an ATI 4850/4870 and a 3-core IBM CPU. That would make it much more powerful than PS3. So I don't know what you are talking about. There is NO feasible tech MS and Sony can use to blow away that tech especially when they'll be looking to launch at least a year after Cafe so it doesn't get two or more years on the market by itself.

If Cafe is barely more powerful than systems that were released 5 and 6 years ago than it shows that Nintendo obviously did not attempt to capitalize on advances in technological capabilities, something that Microsoft and Sony are both well known for doing and I just don't see any way that they don't do so for the 2014 consoles.

Maybe MS is well known for powerful tech, although this is only their second generation.

But Sony has never had the most powerful console in any of their previous gens. Both N64 and GC (plus XBox) were more powerful than PS1 and PS2.

This is Sony's first gen being the most powerful and it didn't end as well for them as the last ones.

Do I think they'll ignore Cafe? No, however...using the userbase as an example isn't the best way to go here. Look at the userbase of the Wii yet it can't be denied that 3rd party developers HAVE largely ignored the Wii in favor of the PS3 and the 360 and your kidding yourself if you believe that the 360 and PS3 having far superior power than the Wii isn't part of the reason for that.

It certainly isn't anything to do with ease of development for the consoles because it's well known that the PS3 is by far the most complex console to develop for yet the PS3 still has vastly superior 3rd party support (including exclusives) than the Wii.

The Xbox 360 was the base console for building games (due to the architecture) before porting to PS3. PS3 was similar in power to 360 so it was easier to port to it than Wii. Plus the combined userbase of the 360 and PS3 are more than Wii's alone.

The Wii's architecture was out-dated and almost required building the game from ground-up for it. That's why devs didn't port to it. It was too much of a hassle.

Nintendo is said to be using an easy-to-port to architecture, so Cafe won't be facing that problem. The architecture will similar to the one used for PC games and the 360, so ports will be easy.

why does the PS3, the most expensive system to develop for have a line up of 3rd party exclusives superior to that of the cheaper to develop for Wii? Your obviously overestimating the effect of development costs on a companies decision on what console to make AAA titles for.

Erm...3rd party exclusives are paid for by Sony. Devs get money to build those games. Nintendo doesn't really money-hat with 3rd parties for exclusives. They rely on their first party.

The reason is the exact same reason behind your statement that Cafe's touchscreen will lead to games the other consoles won't have. The AAA titles on the 360 and PS3 can't be on the Wii, the system simply doesn't have the power to support them. So who's to say the same won't happen again? With Cafe being barely above this generations most powerful console it would be easy for Microsoft and Sony to create consoles much more powerful than Cafe for a 2014 launch. If it happens we could once again see the power differential force developers into a position where games on the consoles from Microsoft and Sony could not be done on Cafe.

It won't happen again because, like I said before, Nintendo is using a familiar architecture and there won't be an HD gap nor a huge power gap between the consoles like this gen.

Games on 360 and PS3 CAN be put on Wii. It's just that it requires ALOT of scaling down and rebuilding from the ground-up. That's just too much of a hassle for third parties and not worth the investment.

And even the touchscreen may not make as much of a difference as your stating, it COULD but there is no guarantee. How many quality titles were exclusive to the Wii because of the motion control innovation? Did it ensure the PS3 and 360 couldn't get some of the biggest games of the generation? In fact the exact opposite occured, 3rd party developers focused on developing AAA titles that took advantage of the raw power of the 360 and PS3 instead of focusing on titles that took advantage of the innovation of the Wii.

The motion controls did make a difference. That's why Wii is highest selling console this gen and why the others brought out their own motion hardware.

Nintendo didn't make motion controls to get 3rd parties. They made it to get the new audience.

Kinect was indeed a "me too" product because if it wasn't for the Wii Microsoft would have never developed and released it.

And I don't know where you got the idea that Move didn't sell well from because Move was a MASSIVE success for Sony, they couldn't even keep up with demand for the first 5 months after release and has sold over 8 million units so far, certainly behind Kinect which has sold over 10 million but still not bad for a product that "offered nothing new" (when in fact it was the first and STILL the only product in console gaming to offer true 1:1 motion capture).

Kinect was not as much of a 'me too' product as Move was. Move was too similar to Wii-mote while Kinect differentiated itself.

Kinect also moved hardware for MS, and a good number of software. Move didn't do much of that for PS3.

I think when Nintendo launches, Sony's and MS' hands will be forced and they will launch the following year. Nintendo won't do just a simple upgrade. I'm betting they will make a considerable power jump, have an attractive online system and the system's 'hook' will attract lots of people.

Even if Sony and MS were to wait until 2014 and leap frog the new console's power, it would still be inline for ports because Sony and MS know how high development costs have gotten. Launching really really powerful hardware could triple (or more) development costs which could potentially put Ninty's new console in a PS2-like (or 360-like) position where ports are built for it and ported to the others because costs are cheaper and the architecture is more familiar.

Not to mention for them to make a power jump so huge that it puts the new console in a Wii-like position it would probably require using parts that would have over heating problems unless they make them in boxes as huge as PC towers and launch at really expensive prices .

Either way, I'm expecting powerful, but more conservative consoles from MS and Sony next gen. I don't think either are willing to take as much loss as they did this generation, especially Sony.

Sony and MS can't leapfrog Cafe in a way that would make the gap Wii-to-360-like without expensive hardware that overheats and sucks up alot of electricity so I'll say the gap will be small and won't matter much.

rob_shadows

In terms of power: PS2 < GC < XBox.The gap was small so the differences in graphics weren't huge.

It's like how the differences between PS3 and 360 games are small graphically although PS3 is a bit more powerful. Xbox and GC exclusives looked just a bit better than PS2's .


And we're not going to get any consoles over $450 next gen. They might not even pass the $400 mark.

Sony and MS's consoles are going to be more powerful since they will come out after Cafe, but the gap will be small and all 3 consoles will be able to share ports unlike this generation.

Sony and MS lost alot of money this gen. Sony even threw away their profits from PS1 and PS2 generations. They're not going to release a big, hot super expensive console next gen and neither are MS.

Doom.

The fool.

Classic fanboy post. Yeah, of course you'de say that Nintendo's the one inovating and the other companies are somehow incapable of inovating too.

Nintendo is by far the most innovative of the three, so nothing to get upset about.

Nothing important.

Was going to make a 'Wii 2 Announced' April's Fool thread , but then I remembered we need this site to be a reliable source for information... :cry: