74 replies to this topic

[Alex Atkin UK]

i can agree to a certain extent... but at this point anything is possible. someone has to be the graphical leader and guess what???? the developers always flock to the most powerful console.... as long as it has an ease of development. that kind of what messed things up for sony... we all know they have the most powerful console right now but its hard to develop for. that's why you only see their first party developers pushing the console and making the better looking games.

But the Dreamcast was more powerful than everything else at its time and easy to develop for, yet nobody flocked to it.

Even in the early PS2 days the Dreamcast could hold its own graphically, because the PS2 was so awkward the write for it took them years to really push it past what you could do on Dreamcast very easily.

Developers flock to the console they think consumers will buy, plain and simple.

Now the consoles will compete on other things; onlines services, exclusive content and any USP. The Wii U already leads in the first and third of these and is promising a big improvement in the other, so things are looking pretty good right now.

Hang on, are you saying you think the Wii U online services are BETTER than Playstation or Xbox? Because I highly doubt it plus its all guess work right now anyway, as we do not know what it will have at all.

However based on how much they bragged about how brilliant the 3DS would be online and how they under-delivered, I'm not holding my breath.

[Happy Monk]

If Microsoft announced/showed a new console next E3, it will not be a power difference in the same vein as the Wii and 360, more like the PS2 and gamecube. Which I believed was already stated by someone...
There is nothing to be worried about, if you are a member of this forum, chances are you are much more inclined to buy the Wii U than the XBOX 720.

[Alex Atkin UK]

Hehe, nope - if I had to choose between the Wii U and the next Xbox it would be Xbox. However as they won't be releasing anywhere near the same time, I will get both.

At best next E3 Microsoft might announce a new console, at next E3 however Nintendo will be announcing the Wii U launch titles and imminent release.

[PK-Gaming]

im not because im a fan fan both Microsoft and Nintendo and if the power is to high the price will be high.

[Narcidius]

But the Dreamcast was more powerful than everything else at its time and easy to develop for, yet nobody flocked to it.

Too true... the hope for the Nintendo console has never been in its superior power.

It seems that the new system will be adequately powerful, and it is nice to have a system that is relatively up to par with the market... but the real question has always been about the games. Will Nintendo give us some real, quality 1st/2nd party titles (as well as new, exciting IPs), and will they adequately court quality 3rd party developers?

Second to this has to be the concern of the online functionality... Will they develop a substantial community network, and will the social buzz be attractive enough to establish a real, involved community of gamers?

I HAVE to think that the only reason you would choose Xbox over Nintendo if you had to choose would be because of these issues... am I right? Nintendo's hardware has always had impressive quality in terms of reliability and true control innovation (I, for one, would drop my Xbox in a second if there were anything worthwhile to play on my Nintendo systems). This reinforces to me that Nintendo really must put their focus on these areas...

[Aaron Barton]

Have to agree with Narc here. Historically, power doesn't seem to correlate to success at all. There are ALWAYS other variables at play that turn out to be worth more. The N64 was more powerful than the PSX, see how that turned out? And I'm pretty confident that the PS2 was weaker than the GCN. The Game Gear ran circles around the Game Boy...etc. Of course, the winners in those battles won for very good reasons...reasons far aside their processing ability.

Nintendo's biggest problem is that they simply don't throw down with the amazing games like they used to. They built up enormous prestige in excellence in the 90s, and they're whoring it out to this day. Sometimes it's done deliberately, such as when they outsource projects (we were just talking about Star Fox in another thread), and other times their teams really give it their all, but for whatever reason, the game didn't come out as good as it should have (I'm going to get flamed, but Twilight Princess is an example). They do sometimes strike gold, like Mario Galaxy 2. But it's not enough to have a handful of games each generation to carry the torch. There was a time you could walk into a store to buy a game, not knowing what it was going to be, and choosing a Nintendo-made one was almost always a good choice. You could literally judge a Nintendo game by its cover.

Nintendo went from the "quality over quantity" mantra with N64, delaying games over and over that would end up masterpieces, to wanting to cash-in so fast that they can't outsource their own properties fast enough. They have a quality problem, and their control gimmick worked once. They can't pull it off again without delivering the goods, the TRULY amazing games. The problem started with GCN and got worse with Wii, so I have a bad feeling we're either going to see a drastic turnaround in quality...or it'll just slide further. Time will tell.

Too true... the hope for the Nintendo console has never been in its superior power.

It seems that the new system will be adequately powerful, and it is nice to have a system that is relatively up to par with the market... but the real question has always been about the games. Will Nintendo give us some real, quality 1st/2nd party titles (as well as new, exciting IPs), and will they adequately court quality 3rd party developers?

Second to this has to be the concern of the online functionality... Will they develop a substantial community network, and will the social buzz be attractive enough to establish a real, involved community of gamers?

I HAVE to think that the only reason you would choose Xbox over Nintendo if you had to choose would be because of these issues... am I right? Nintendo's hardware has always had impressive quality in terms of reliability and true control innovation (I, for one, would drop my Xbox in a second if there were anything worthwhile to play on my Nintendo systems). This reinforces to me that Nintendo really must put their focus on these areas...

[Feld0]

Have to agree with Narc here. Historically, power doesn't seem to correlate to success at all. There are ALWAYS other variables at play that turn out to be worth more. The N64 was more powerful than the PSX, see how that turned out? And I'm pretty confident that the PS2 was weaker than the GCN. The Game Gear ran circles around the Game Boy...etc. Of course, the winners in those battles won for very good reasons...reasons far aside their processing ability.

Nintendo's biggest problem is that they simply don't throw down with the amazing games like they used to. They built up enormous prestige in excellence in the 90s, and they're whoring it out to this day. Sometimes it's done deliberately, such as when they outsource projects (we were just talking about Star Fox in another thread), and other times their teams really give it their all, but for whatever reason, the game didn't come out as good as it should have (I'm going to get flamed, but Twilight Princess is an example). They do sometimes strike gold, like Mario Galaxy 2. But it's not enough to have a handful of games each generation to carry the torch. There was a time you could walk into a store to buy a game, not knowing what it was going to be, and choosing a Nintendo-made one was almost always a good choice. You could literally judge a Nintendo game by its cover.

Nintendo went from the "quality over quantity" mantra with N64, delaying games over and over that would end up masterpieces, to wanting to cash-in so fast that they can't outsource their own properties fast enough. They have a quality problem, and their control gimmick worked once. They can't pull it off again without delivering the goods, the TRULY amazing games. The problem started with GCN and got worse with Wii, so I have a bad feeling we're either going to see a drastic turnaround in quality...or it'll just slide further. Time will tell.

I do have a good feeling that Nintendo know what they're doing, but I can see where you're coming from with the "quality vs. quantity" thing. They still have what it takes to create amazing masterpieces, but they unexpectedly struck a gold mine with the Wii and the casual market. They probably knew that their competitors would want to get in on that market ASAP, so they started outputting as much "casual crap," if you will, as they could because they knew the Wii wouldn't hold the casual crown forever, and they wanted to build up a good supply of money to put into R&D for the next generation (3DS and Wii U). You can see today that the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, and even smartphones are starting to eat into that market - in many ways, it's become a new red ocean for the industry.

Because the casual market is one that is now simply more difficult to compete in effectively, I do think we very well may see Nintendo return to their older ways of producing fewer games, but possibly better ones. I'd rather they keep the outsourcing to a minimum, or outsource casual-oriented stuff like Wii Sports from now on, because it seems to me like they're wasting their own talent with those games. I think a classic example of an outsourcing that shouldn't have happened (and probably wouldn't have if it wasn't for Nintendo's focus on the causal market) was Yoshi's Island DS. As great as the game turned out, it will never reach the same legendary status that its internally-Nintendo-developed prequel did.

There used to be a time when every other game from Nintendo became a legend. If they play their cards right, we might see that side of Nintendo once again.

[Aaron Barton]

I agree with you that their behavior is a big cash-grab, but I disagree that it's due to some altruistic strategy of building up enough money so that they can make better platforms and games later. People often point out that their competitors do business in many other areas, and as a result are more financially stable and better able to fund development and absorb ventures that tank. While true to an extent, it's simply not true that Nintendo doesn't have a lot of their own money. Nintendo does not need to "save up" each generation to fund the next one, nor is it out of the question for them to take a loss on hardware units (it was important for Wii because nobody buys games for it).

Furthermore, I think it's apparent that Nintendo did not decide to throw quality out the window and spam "casual" games. They did indeed try to fish in the blue ocean, so to speak -but they still brought to bear some megaton games such as Zelda: Twilight Princess and Smash Bros. Brawl, where they clearly spent the time and money to do it. I actually agree with this strategy. Why NOT make games that appeal to all different market segments? The NES had everything from Mario to Final Fantasy to Tetris to Barbie.

As I just finished saying though, the problem is that those megaton games were not nearly as good as they should have been. Zelda, Smash, Metroid were all just a bit too "meh" this gen, and I think they really needed them to be super-strong. As a company I think this was a massive failure for them. Some people may disagree with me of course because opinions on games are subjective.

Skyward Sword is actually a very important game. I've let them slide numerous times, now here's a Zelda game that's been in the works for five years. I think it'll be the perfect indication as to whether they can still throw down if they want to, so if it's not stellar, I probably won't buy a Wii U.

[Hamez]

I don't think Microsoft has enough time to throw something together in one year just like that and throw away Kinect, and Sony has already said that they were not going to take any action against Wii U. There are no worries.

Edited by Hamez, 04 July 2011 - 09:28 AM.

[Tony Bradshaw]

Nah it'll be a couple more years until the next generation consoles from Microsoft and Sony will be revealed, i'm guessing 2014.

[Aaron Barton]

Nah it'll be a couple more years until the next generation consoles from Microsoft and Sony will be revealed, i'm guessing 2014.

2014 seems a little far. I would put an actual launch at 2014-15.

[Alex Atkin UK]

Also, I do not think Kinect is going anywhere. The next Xbox will be fully compatible, hopefully backwards compatible with software too.

[Desert Punk]

It makes perfect sense for Microsoft to announce their next console at E3 2012. Sony did it to Sega with the announcement of the PS2 and it prevented the Dreamcast getting a strong foothold in the market because many people waited for the PS2.

Neither Sony or Microsoft want Nintendo to succeed and so both will plan some sort of spoiler tactics. I think both of them were caught by surprise by the Wii's success. It was very underpowered and I know Microsoft expected it to fail. This time around both Sony and Microsoft will be gunning for the Wii U in every way possible. This is great for consumers like us as it keeps prices very competitive.

If the Wii U is underpowered I don't think Sony or Microsoft will let them get away with it this time around.

Like many though I bought the Wii as I love Nintendo games. I knew it was crap as a console and based on the gamecube being only marginally faster with a bit more memory but wanted to play classic and brilliant Nintendo games on it. To be honest I would have prefered if Nintendo were out of the hardware business like Sega and we could play Nintendo games on more powerful Microsoft/Sony hardware but thats the way it is. If you want to play Nintendo games you buy Nintendo hardware and although the hardware is crap, the games are brilliant.

[hooky]

Also, Nintendo of America( Nintendo's largest Market) basically killed off their Hardcore chances by not localizing Xenoblades, the Last Story, or Pandora's Tower

They could be holding off for the Wii U though... just saying.

[Caius Casshern Sins]

They could be holding off for the Wii U though... just saying.

You may be right especially since they want the wii to still be around; so they could release those games around the time of the wii like pokemon B/W.

[SC7639]

I think there isn't much more graphically that can be done past HD 1080i is the highest resolution that can be displayed at the moment i mean drastically more power than the Wii U would price MS or Sony out of the market.

[Aaron Barton]

I think there isn't much more graphically that can be done past HD 1080i is the highest resolution that can be displayed at the moment i mean drastically more power than the Wii U would price MS or Sony out of the market.

Right now it's 1080p, but in fact res goes far higher that that, just look at a modern PC video card to see what is theoretically possible. However, output resolution is not an indication of graphics fidelity. It's just an indication of how sharp you see those graphics, however good (or bad) they may be. Higher res takes more processing power, but you also need lots of processing for effects (real-time lighting and shadows, etc), to draw all the polygons in the models, to apply better and higher-res textures to those polygons, etc. We haven't nearly plateaued in terms of graphics, and I also don't think that in a few years, systems substantially more powerful than their predecessors from Sony/MS would be THAT expensive. I mean imagine the machine you could have in 2014 for $350. It's absolutely insane what's possible there.

To be honest I would have prefered if Nintendo were out of the hardware business like Sega and we could play Nintendo games on more powerful Microsoft/Sony hardware but thats the way it is. If you want to play Nintendo games you buy Nintendo hardware and although the hardware is crap, the games are brilliant.

Thought that might be good to Sega, yet their games are now atrocious. The essence of that company died; it went through a purchasing and restructuring, and the people who were involved in the classics are long gone. However if you took Nintendo's development teams as they are and just told them to have fun and be merry with Xbox 360s we might be talking.

Another thing I want to note -Nintendo has only been behind in terms of hardware power for ONE generation. From 1985 right up till 2006 they remained competitive with specs. I wouldn't assume they've changed into the "weak" brand suddenly. Wii U may be behind its future competition but of course a system released later will be better. When Wii U is released it will be the most powerful console available and will remain so for a very long while. Hardly the "weak" hardware company if you ask me.

[Jikayaki]

Individuals shouldn't worry too much about how Wii U will compare to Xbox 720 or PS4. If these consoles launch a year after Wii U technical issues would keep them from jumping anymore than fifty percent more powerful than Wii U if indeed the console is about equivalent to a Radeon HD 4850. Even if these consoles launch nearly two years after Wii U it would still be impossible to place Wii U in the same situation as the Wii.

[nintendo3DS]

ok so we all know sony has a big thing against nintendo. i don't think microsoft has the same type of negative energy for nintendo. what I'm worried about is E3 2012. we all know the Wii U console will soon to be launch and nintendo will be showing off launch titles for the Wii U. what has me worried is rumors of the next xbox being reviled at E3 2012. what happens to nintendo if microsoft shows off a console that makes the Wii U look dated before it even releases? what do you guys think?

I don't think Sony or Microsoft will unveil their next console, next E3. The reason for that being, one of the workers at Sony already commented that that they wont be launching the PS4 until a couple years, as the PS3 still has a lifespan. Then Microsoft, it's sales on the Xbox 360 are still good, so like Sony, I wouldn't expect another console for a while.

[Archie96]

I see what you mean. If there is a new Xbox revealed, the chances are that it will be better - however not by a massive amount, nothing big enough to make the Wii U seem dated. Plus the Xbox won't be innovative.