56 replies to this topic

[Mahmoodinho98]

 I wont  because If that happens , the next console will just be a PC which will be stupid .further more, It will not be backwards compatible with current Wii U games.

 What do you think ? do you support switching to X86 or not?

[BrosBeforeGardenTools]

Am I allowed to post how dumb it is to buy a console based on architecture?

[Mewbot]

Yes.

 

Da hell kinda difference would it make? Nintendo games will still be amazing.

[Mahmoodinho98]

Am I allowed to post how dumb it is to buy a console based on architecture?

Its not dumb, I didn't get an xbox one untill mid 2014 because all my 154 xbox 360 games wont work with the new system. compared to my wii u and xbox 360

[DéliopT]

I'm not sure that the next console will have backwards compatibility. Not only because there's still the risk of selling less than GC but also because in terms of retail games, the 2 libraries just don't compare.

A GC user would naturally carry a lot of GC games to the Wii, at the end of GC's life, but given that Wii U's support is so low, i don't think it would justify raising the costs of the HW.

 

Iwata already said that they plan to use an architecture similar to Wii U's. If that is possible or not with a x86 architecture, i have no idea.
But whatever architecture they decide to use, it won't matter for 3rd party relationships.
When Nintendo had a better architecture with the GC, in comparison with the PS2, it still didn't get them the best of the best 3rd party games.

 

Developers will always go where the market for their games is.
If Nintendo decides that they need more genres like racers, shooters, adventure games, etc. - all those games/genres that gamers love to pay - then gamers will come and that will show developers have a market for them to make money on.

[Mewbot]

I didn't get an xbox one untill mid 2014

Oh damn, you waited a full 7 months. Look out, you're obviously very passionate about being able to play old games.

 

Seriously, 7 months? I still haven't got an Xbox One or a PS4 and backwards compatibility is the least of my concerns.

[Kokirii]

I will buy the next Nintendo console 

[Mahmoodinho98]

I'm not sure that the next console will have backwards compatibility. Not only because there's still the risk of selling less than GC but also because in terms of retail games, the 2 libraries just don't compare.

A GC user would naturally carry a lot of GC games to the Wii, at the end of GC's life, but given that Wii U's support is so low, i don't think it would justify raising the costs of the HW.

 

Iwata already said that they plan to use an architecture similar to Wii U's. If that is possible or not with a x86 architecture, i have no idea.
But whatever architecture they decide to use, it won't matter for 3rd party relationships.
When Nintendo had a better architecture with the GC, in comparison with the PS2, it still didn't get them the best of the best 3rd party games.

 

Developers will always go where the market for their games is.
If Nintendo decides that they need more genres like racers, shooters, adventure games, etc. - all those games/genres that gamers love to pay - then gamers will come and that will show developers have a market for them to make money on.

If what you said is true then they are going to use RISC architecture which means that they are not going to use x86. 

[3Dude]

I still own all my old systems. I dont think nintendo would ever go cisc, but if they do, bc wouldnt be a concern for me.

[Raiden]

Nintendo is all about efficient design so they won't go X86.

Edited by Strider Hiryu, 23 December 2014 - 08:44 AM.

[Hank Hill]

 

Buying a console for its architecture rather than its games is like buying a chocolate bar solely for the purpose of looking at it once in awhile.

[DéliopT]

I really have no idea. I'm a zero at tech stuff.

If what you said is true then they are going to use RISC architecture which means that they are not going to use x86. 

 

I know that people think that the two new chips AMD (ARM and x86) is making, one at least, is for Nintendo. What would you say given Iwata's words?
He said this: "...it will become important for us to accurately take advantage of what we have done with the Wii U architecture. It of course does not mean that we are going to use exactly the same architecture as Wii U, but we are going to create a system that can absorb the Wii U architecture adequately."

Edited by DéliopT, 23 December 2014 - 09:01 AM.

[3Dude]

I really have no idea. I'm a zero at tech stuff.

If what you said is true then they are going to use RISC architecture which means that they are not going to use x86. 

 
I know that people think that the two new chips AMD (ARM and x86) is making, one at least, is for Nintendo. What would you say given Iwata's words?
He said this: "...it will become important for us to accurately take advantage of what we have done with the Wii U architecture. It of course does not mean that we are going to use exactly the same architecture as Wii U, but we are going to create a system that can absorb the Wii U architecture adequately."

Given only the choice between those 2, I would say arm without a doubt.

I think we havent seen the end of that Nintendo ppc 750 line personally. Before Wii U I would be worried about it, but the custom job in espresso is actually impressive for what it is, and up to the task at hand (unlike 3ds's bottle necking cpu being remedied with new 3ds)

A smaller node, higher clock, more cores (less than 8 though for sure) and customizations like continuing to upgrade edram, more agressive OoO, and maybe maaaaaybe even some kind of vector floating point unit would be more than enough for Nintendo to be Nintendo next gen.

[grahamf]

I highly doubt it will be x86. It will be backwards compatible with the Wii U and therefore it will use an IBM cpu with it's AMD GPU.

[DéliopT]

Given only the choice between those 2, I would say arm without a doubt.

I think we havent seen the end of that Nintendo ppc 750 line personally. Before Wii U I would be worried about it, but the custom job in espresso is actually impressive for what it is, and up to the task at hand (unlike 3ds's bottle necking cpu being remedied with new 3ds)

A smaller node, higher clock, more cores (less than 8 though for sure) and customizations like continuing to upgrade edram, more agressive OoO, and maybe maaaaaybe even some kind of vector floating point unit would be more than enough for Nintendo to be Nintendo next gen.

 

So, for people who barely understood what you just said - people like me  - in comparison to a PS4 or Xb 1, that would mean what? Small, medium or big difference?

 

Just out of curiosity, if Nintendo wanted to streamline their production and just optimize their games to run on a Wii U like handheld and that kinda console you mentioned, could that happen?

[Chrop]

What even is this thread?!?

Of course i'm not going to buy it, who in the right mind would buy a console if it's just another PC, Why should I buy that when I can just go on PC and play games that aren't made by Nintendo and miss out on a bunch of games I would have enjoyed, screw Nintendo for doing something so stupid! Ama cry and play some Battle Stars Royal.

[3Dude]

So, for people who barely understood what you just said - people like me  - in comparison to a PS4 or Xb 1, that would mean what? Small, medium or big difference?

 

Just out of curiosity, if Nintendo wanted to streamline their production and just optimize their games to run on a Wii U like handheld and that kinda console you mentioned, could that happen?

 

Well, I was only talking about the ppc cpu, so a lot of that equation would be dependant on what GPU Nintendo decided to pair it with.

 

A wii u handheld could be tough, although the ppc 750 is a low power drawing processor for a plugged in system, it certainly isn't a sub-watt processor the likes of ARM products that go into mobile devices. It would depend on how low that power draw can get on that shrunken node per core, and at what clock speeds.

 

When Nintendo says architecture im not so sure they are talking about direct hardware architecture like using the same cpu processors for the handheld and consoles, but more a runtime architecture that can run the same code across both systems, which are stocked with similar api's and other run time libraries.

 

A unified development architecture, not necessarily the same hardware architecture.

 

This way, All next ds games could effortlessly run on wii next, easily upped in resolution and with sharper textures, better lighting, and better effects, and select wii next games would run on ds next systems with simple downscaling options. Obviously, the bigger, most impressive wii next games will be too much for a battery sipping portable, but big names that are simple enough cpu wise, like mario kart, party and smash, will be easy to have a portable version built to be downscale ready at the flip of a switch (Or the system flag of a boot). Even activating platform specific content for each game, all made by the same team during the same development cycle.

 

Making a game for ds next and wii next will be exactly the same code wise. Just one will be more powerful than another. No need for specialized wii u teams, and specialized 3ds teams, who excel on one platform but are inexperienced on the other. 

 

This would be a huge boost in resource effeciency, and greatly aid Nintendo in increasing the speed of content creation while mantaining quality. It will directly address game shortages Nintendo faces Whether or not 3rd parties decide to stop being Nintendo phobic.

 

To answer your Nintendos next console question, I think it will likely be a little more powerful than ps4/xbone, its next ds will likely be around as, or a little more powerful than the vita, although the resolution may not be as high as the vita's.

[Mahmoodinho98]

Well, I was only talking about the ppc cpu, so a lot of that equation would be dependant on what GPU Nintendo decided to pair it with.

 

A wii u handheld could be tough, although the ppc 750 is a low power drawing processor for a plugged in system, it certainly isn't a sub-watt processor the likes of ARM products that go into mobile devices. It would depend on how low that power draw can get on that shrunken node per core, and at what clock speeds.

 

When Nintendo says architecture im not so sure they are talking about direct hardware architecture like using the same cpu processors for the handheld and consoles, but more a runtime architecture that can run the same code across both systems, which are stocked with similar api's and other run time libraries.

 

A unified development architecture, not necessarily the same hardware architecture.

 

This way, All next ds games could effortlessly run on wii next, easily upped in resolution and with sharper textures, better lighting, and better effects, and select wii next games would run on ds next systems with simple downscaling options. Obviously, the bigger, most impressive wii next games will be too much for a battery sipping portable, but big names that are simple enough cpu wise, like mario kart, party and smash, will be easy to have a portable version built to be downscale ready at the flip of a switch (Or the system flag of a boot). Even activating platform specific content for each game, all made by the same team during the same development cycle.

 

Making a game for ds next and wii next will be exactly the same code wise. Just one will be more powerful than another. No need for specialized wii u teams, and specialized 3ds teams, who excel on one platform but are inexperienced on the other. 

 

This would be a huge boost in resource effeciency, and greatly aid Nintendo in increasing the speed of content creation while mantaining quality. It will directly address game shortages Nintendo faces Whether or not 3rd parties decide to stop being Nintendo phobic.

 

To answer your Nintendos next console question, I think it will likely be a little more powerful than ps4/xbone, its next ds will likely be around as, or a little more powerful than the vita, although the resolution may not be as high as the vita's.

If it is going to be the same development architecture then that is great  but wouldn't diffrent hardware architectures cause a problem interms of backwards compatability?

 

I think if nintendo would switch to a new architecture then it should be ARM (as you said) ARM means a more power efficient  system. it also means that it will be much easier to port small games like those on android  and ios . Having both the next ds and the next wii run arm means that games can be ported easily and we might finally have console games running on handheld.

[3Dude]

If it is going to be the same development architecture then that is great  but wouldn't diffrent hardware architectures cause a problem interms of backwards compatability?

 

I think if nintendo would switch to a new architecture then it should be ARM (as you said) ARM means a more power efficient  system. it also means that it will be much easier to port small games like those on android  and ios . Having both the next ds and the next wii run arm means that games can be ported easily and we might finally have console games running on handheld.

 

A development architecture is not the same thing as hardware architecture. ppc IS the current hardware architecture for Nintendo's systems since gamecube, so retaining ppc would mean technical backwards compatability back to gamecube.

 

As if right now, the 3ds, and wii u have vastly different development environments, they are completely different environments to program and create games in. It would be like having to use two different languages for each console. People who have mastered 3ds development know nothing about wii u development and visa versa. Having a unified development architecture just mens they will be using the same 'language' for both systems.

 

Putting Nintendo games on android and ios is idiotic and company destroying. The android/ios and now even steam audience has completely devauled gaming, to the point they wont even spend 5 bucks on a brilliant game. Not only would Nintendo completely devalue its own hardware by releasing its content on phones instead of or along side Nintendo hardware, but they would make a fraction of the money with even millions of 'sales' that they would with couple thousand k of 40-60 dollar games.

[Scumbag]

Agree with most of this especially if Sony/MS go the cloud route.

 

If it is going to be the same development architecture then that is great  but wouldn't diffrent hardware architectures cause a problem interms of backwards compatability?

 

I think if nintendo would switch to a new architecture then it should be ARM (as you said) ARM means a more power efficient  system. it also means that it will be much easier to port small games like those on android  and ios . Having both the next ds and the next wii run arm means that games can be ported easily and we might finally have console games running on handheld.