New Nintendo Console Debuting At E3 This June, Launching In 2012 Update: New Details

[reallyscrued]

Its not like I'm pulling these specs out of my ass, there's precedent for fairly easily categorized console generations, comparable to PCs of its time. I'm not trying to make a semantic argument. You generally have a ~5 year technological leap between the "true" generations, and the resulting consoles tend to be very similarly capable. You'll always have the outliers that dont seem to fall in line like the jaguar and dreamcast, and they always seem to inevitably fail. Nintendo with the wii was almost unprecendented because its far more in common with the last generation than the current.

Its been almost 5 years since the 360 - if it cant soundly trounce 2005 level tech, how can anyone consider it the next generation? Its just a very late entry to the current generation, even if its the most powerful of the bunch. It might even end up somewhere in the middle dreamcast style. And I'm sure nintendo will put out some great first party titles. But for those of us ready for the "real" next generation, this doesnt sound like its going to be it. I'm excited and all, but its not what I really want, I want the real next gen already.

There's where I don't agree with you. Nintendo has their answer to this generation, it's called the Wii. The Stream will be released with HD graphics, a screen in the controller, and it will test your urine for HIV/AIDS if all the crazy ass rumors are true. Either gimmicks or features, it's certainly next gen. I agree with your second point. It'll be like the Dreamcast in where it lies gen wise. DC was not quite PS2/Xbox/GCN but certainly more capable than Saturn/64/PSX. Hopefully that's all it has in common with the Dreamcast.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=427412

- Developer quotes: graphics capabilities "roughly equal to those of the Xbox 360", performance "over the Xbox 360, but just a notch"

You do realize that there are a whole range of GPUs based on R700? If its graphics capabilities are roughly equal to Xbox 360's, then it sure as hell is not using an "HD4800 class GPU" (800 stream processors & 256-bit GDDR5). It's going to be more like a mid-range or low-end R700 variant.



Yes, and if the quote above is true, so will Nintendo Stream (or whatever it's called).

Switching to a newer shader architecture does not automatically imply that it can push more pixels. That depends on other variables, like the number of stream processors, the amount of graphics memory, and the memory bandwidth.

I'm well aware there are many GPUs based on the R700 variant.

It's just that it would be ridiculous for anyone to release a console in 2012 that doesn't fully render games at 1920x1080. I think that would an immediate nail in the coffin for the machine, Nintendo cannot be that stupid.

I've read that quote you've posted and it seems to contradict what came straight from Nintnedo's mouth in random interviews over the years since the Wii has been released; please don't make me cite you all the quotes but they promised full HD gaming and I'm betting they will deliver.

 

[HeXen]

Problem for Nintendo is so many of its consumers already have a lot of money invested in the Wii, The job economy isnt that great and the recent increase in gas prices and food will only get worse. So it takes more than some hardware specs to get people to buy.

Well, it hasn't gotten anywhere since because the consoles haven't really changed. Going to need true next gen hardware for that, and this ain't gonna be it. A new console with true next gen specs will have specs that just seem absolutely absurd compared to the older one, the way the NGP sounds. A true next gen console should have a CPU/GPU comparable to a high end gaming PC the day it's out. So we're talking 4ghz quad, dx12, 8gb ram, some ssd storage, a big HDD and bluray.

Does that sound like something nintendo will make?

that's not all what it takes to make advancements in AI,physics and sound. Most of what i'm talking about basically already exists.

If you recall, Turok 2 for the N64 had A.I. that could hear, see and react. the enemies would run behind a box and shoot....just like they do to this day.
Crysis 2 even does nothing more than just that, even the flanking techniques are very basic. All it adds is calling other enemies which is basically just a simple script, enemies in radius "x" run to "Y" coordinate.

 

[smartpatrol]

It's just that it would be ridiculous for anyone to release a console in 2012 that doesn't fully render games at 1920x1080. I think that would an immediate nail in the coffin for the machine, Nintendo cannot be that stupid.

Yeah, and it was pretty ridiculous in late 2006 to release a console that only does 480p, but Nintendo did it. Many of us thought that was a stupid move too, but it seems to have worked out pretty well for them.

I've read that quote you've posted and it seems to contradict what came straight from Nintnedo's mouth in random interviews over the years since the Wii has been released; please don't make me cite you all the quotes but they promised full HD gaming and I'm betting they will deliver.

I'm going based on the current batch of rumors. Including supposed leaked slides that state "current-gen development costs" and "easy porting from the Xbox 360", as well as the quote I provided before about it being equal to or slightly more powerful than the 360.

I hope these rumors are wrong. I hope Nintendo delivers a system that spanks the PS3 and 360. . . or at least one that can run 360-level games at 1080p 60fps with AA and AF. That in itself would be pretty impressive.

The current rumors, though, do not support it, and that's what I've been saying this whole time.

 

[Tom]

I think the biggest lesson of the Wii is that graphics are not the driving factor in console sales.

Having said that, the jump between 480p and 720p is much more significance between 720p and 1080p. I don't think it's going to matter if the new console does 720p or 1080p.

 

[Ross Ridge]

The current rumors, though, do not support it, and that's what I've been saying this whole time.

While I agree with your premise that the rumours about the new Nintendo console's spec don't necessary support a console that will end up rendering most games at 1080p, the rumours do support this. Explicitly. Over and over they repeat the same thing, this is supposed to be a 1080p console.

On the controller front there another supposedly leaked cell phone camera shot of its basic design posted on on the NeoGAF forums. If that screen is supposed to be 6" diagonally then the whole controller would be about 10" across by my estimation, so something is not adding up.

 

[reallyscrued]

Yeah, and it was pretty ridiculous in late 2006 to release a console that only does 480p, but Nintendo did it.

No it wasn't.

It's just that I don't think anyone could've predicted this console generation would've lasted this long.

 

[smartpatrol]

While I agree with your premise that the rumours about the new Nintendo console's spec don't necessary support a console that will end up rendering most games at 1080p, the rumours do support this. Explicitly. Over and over they repeat the same thing, this is supposed to be a 1080p console.

Yes, it's a 1080p console. So are the 360 and PS3. Sony threw the words "1080p" and "full HD" around CONSTANTLY in their PR for the PS3, and technically they were correct.

PS3 and 360 both output 1080p video signals. Both are capable of rendering at 1920x1080. In practice, most games are rendered at a lower res and then upscaled, but they are still technically outputting 1080p.

What in the world makes you think it will be any different with Nintendo Stream?

 

[shortylickens]

What's wrong with those systems?

Thats what I was wondering.
They certainly werent the fastest of their generations but they had a crapload of fun games.

 

[smartpatrol]

No it wasn't.

It's just that I don't think anyone could've predicted this console generation would've lasted this long.

Yeah it was crazy. Wii came out at a time when HDTV adoption was just taking off and there was a rapidly-growing demand for HD content. GPUs had already been capable of HD resolutions for a long time. And evidently, most 3rd party developers agreed, because they focused virtually all their serious effort on the PS3 and 360.

And, LOTS of people were saying that this console generation would be longer than previous ones. They were saying that before the PS3 and 360 even launched. The only reason people thought Nintendo would go for a shorter release cycle was because the Wii was so pathetically underpowered compared to its competition.

 

[reallyscrued]

PS3 and 360 both output 1080p video signals. Both are capable of rendering at 1920x1080. In practice, most games are rendered at a lower res and then upscaled, but they are still technically outputting 1080p.

What in the world makes you think it will be any different with Nintendo Stream?

Because Nintendo has a track record of sacrificing level geometry and textures for things like that. Every first party Nintendo game runs at 60 fps, from Galaxy to Metroid Prime to SSBB. I wouldn't be surprised if they kept things simple to increase the resolution in their titles.

News: Project Cafe is for sure the codename....which kind of sucks, but whatever.

https://www.warioworld.com/nitro/
https://www.warioworld.com/wii/

Both ask you for credentials.

https://www.warioworld.com/fake/

404.

https://www.warioworld.com/cafe/

Works.

Saw this over at Neogaf.

 

[Ross Ridge]

What in the world makes you think it will be any different with Nintendo Stream?

Like I said, all the rumours that state it will be different.

 

[smartpatrol]

Because Nintendo has a track record of sacrificing level geometry and textures for things like that. Every first party Nintendo game runs at 60 fps, from Galaxy to Metroid Prime to SSBB. I wouldn't be surprised if they kept things simple to increase the resolution in their titles.

So wait. First you say that the Nintendo Stream is a true next-gen system that's more advanced than current-gen systems because it can do 1080p. (Which other consoles can also do, but whatever.)

Now you're saying that Nintendo will sacrifice geometry and textures in order to do 1080p. WOW yeah that sounds like a true next-gen system to me.

Give me a break.

 

[BD2003]

Yes, it's a 1080p console. So are the 360 and PS3. Sony threw the words "1080p" and "full HD" around CONSTANTLY in their PR for the PS3, and technically they were correct.

PS3 and 360 both output 1080p video signals. Both are capable of rendering at 1920x1080. In practice, most games are rendered at a lower res and then upscaled, but they are still technically outputting 1080p.

What in the world makes you think it will be any different with Nintendo Stream?

I would think its different solely on the basis that its 2011, and not 2005/6. 1080p is fairly trivial nowadays. I suspect by the end of the steam's lifecycle, third parties at least will be pulling the same upscaling nonsense to be able to compete on an image quality basis.

Still, the console hasnt been announced so it's all just hearsay. Slightly ahead of xbox 360 but at 1080p could mean a significantly more powerful console. Or it couldnt, and theyre sacrificing to reach 1080p. Or theyre 720p and upscaling. No one knows but nintendo.

The real takeaway is that its going to be in the same general area power wise as the 360/PS3, just as the Wii is far closer to the ps2/gc/xbox than the 360/ps3. Use whatever words you want to describe it if "generation" has too much baggage. Its moderately exciting, its better than nothing, its probably more powerful than anything out there at the moment, but its not what I really wanted to see by 2011.

 

[reallyscrued]

So wait. First you say that the Nintendo Stream is a true next-gen system that's more advanced than current-gen systems because it can do 1080p. (Which other consoles can also do, but whatever.)

Let me break this down for you. The RSX and Xenos (7800GTX and R500+) are architecturally two generations behind AMD's R700. Assuming CPU and RAM capabilities are equal, games will look better on Nintendo's new console. (IGN reports it to be debuting at $300-$400.)

I said Project Cafe would have a leg-up from the competition immediately if they implemented true HD gaming. Looking back at Nintendo's philosophy with frame rates, it's a sound assumption the machine will internally render games at 1920x1080 if it can output that high. (This is all speculation, but everyone is pointing to 1080p so let's say that will be the case.)

Your argument to that is (let me get this right), current offerings from Microsoft and Sony can do that (but don't, to keep up the eye candy.) Therefore, the Cafe is not truly next gen?

Now you're saying that Nintendo will sacrifice geometry and textures in order to do 1080p. WOW yeah that sounds like a true next-gen system to me.

Ok, what the hell are you talking about. I asked you above what you constituted at "true next gen" and you gave no answer. And you keep throwing around that phrase like it actually means something.

 

[smartpatrol]

Let me break this down for you. The RSX and Xenos (7800GTX and R500+) are architecturally two generations behind AMD's R700. Assuming CPU and RAM capabilities are equal, games will look better on Nintendo's new console. (IGN reports it to be debuting at $300-$400.)

I understand it's a newer architecture. That doesn't necessarily imply it's faster. If it's based on say the RV710, then it won't be much faster than the 360.

Your argument to that is (let me get this right), current offerings from Microsoft and Sony can do that (but don't, to keep up the eye candy.) Therefore, the Cafe is not truly next gen?

You just said yourself that you expect Nintendo to tone down the graphics in order to render at 1080p. Is that not saying the exact same thing?

Ok, what the hell are you talking about. I asked you above what you constituted at "true next gen" and you gave no answer. And you keep throwing around that phrase like it actually means something.

I believe you asked someone else, not me. But FWIW, I consider it to be a next-gen console if it's an order of magnitude more powerful than current gen.

If the current rumors are indeed true, and it's on par with the 360, then it's not next-gen. If that part of the rumor is wrong, and Stream is packing an HD4800 like you suggested before, then I sure would consider it next-gen.

 

[reallyscrued]

I understand it's a newer architecture. That doesn't necessarily imply it's faster. If it's based on say the RV710, then it won't be much faster than the 360.



You just said yourself that you expect Nintendo to tone down the graphics in order to render at 1080p. Is that not saying the exact same thing?



I believe you asked someone else, not me. But FWIW, I consider it to be a next-gen console if it's an order of magnitude more powerful than current gen.

If the current rumors are indeed true, and it's on par with the 360, then it's not next-gen. If that part of the rumor is wrong, and Stream is packing an HD4800 like you suggested before, then I sure would consider it next-gen.

Okay, I realize we're arguing semantics now. If the Cafe is not next gen, and thus current gen, what's that make the Wii? Last Gen? If the Wii was last gen, what's that make the Gamecube? It doesn't track.

Seems like MS and Sony are counting on a 8-10 year life cycle, would that make Cafe Gen 9.5? Like I said, we're arguing semantics.

It's next generation in the sense that it is the next offering that Nintendo is bringing to the masses. A Gen 9 Civic is a Gen 9 Civic, regardless of what Toyota is doing.

 

[BD2003]

Okay, I realize we're arguing semantics now. If the Cafe is not next gen, and thus current gen, what's that make the Wii? Last Gen? If the Wii was last gen, what's that make the Gamecube? It doesn't track.

Seems like MS and Sony are counting on a 8-10 year life cycle, would that make Cafe Gen 9.5? Like I said, we're arguing semantics.

It's next generation in the sense that it is the next offering that Nintendo is bringing to the masses. A Gen 9 Civic is a Gen 9 Civic, regardless of what Toyota is doing.

Both Wii and GC are last gen. I think everyone fundamentally gets what that means.

 

[darkewaffle]

It's just that it would be ridiculous for anyone to release a console in 2012 that doesn't fully render games at 1920x1080. I think that would an immediate nail in the coffin for the machine, Nintendo cannot be that stupid.

You know I don't think that's honestly that important. I -still- to this day know very few people who can tell the difference between screen size and resolution and probably even fewer people who have the right kind of console with the right kind of tv and the right kind of cable connecting them for it to make a difference. Sure for most people here it's commonplace, but most people here are a bit south of normal as well

 

[BD2003]

You know I don't think that's honestly that important. I -still- to this day know very few people who can tell the difference between screen size and resolution and probably even fewer people who have the right kind of console with the right kind of tv and the right kind of cable connecting them for it to make a difference. Sure for most people here it's commonplace, but most people here are a bit south of normal as well

Do these people live under a rock or something? I don't know anyone who'd ever consider buying a real game console that doesn't own an HDTV or at least know which cable to use. I do know a few older folks running HDTVs that bought a wii for wii sports and fit that don't really care, but they're not so blind or misinformed that they don't know what an HDTV is and looks like. I also knew a few broke college students on an SDTV cause they can't afford better, but theyd have one if they could.

I'm sure there's plenty of folks out there that don't know or care, but they don't seem to be the target market for this or any console, so it's a moot point. The wii will suit them for years to come if they even care to touch a controller. This console seems to be aimed at the core gamers. Expectations are higher, and the rumors don't make it sound all that impressive. 1080p has to be the baseline in 2011/12. If it isn't, it's an immediate fail.

 

[cantholdanymore]

You know I don't think that's honestly that important. I -still- to this day know very few people who can tell the difference between screen size and resolution and probably even fewer people who have the right kind of console with the right kind of tv and the right kind of cable connecting them for it to make a difference. Sure for most people here it's commonplace, but most people here are a bit south of normal as well

I agree a long as you're talking 720p vs 1080p

 

[purbeast0]

Do these people live under a rock or something? I don't know anyone who'd ever consider buying a real game console that doesn't own an HDTV or at least know which cable to use. I do know a few older folks running HDTVs that bought a wii for wii sports and fit that don't really care, but they're not so blind or misinformed that they don't know what an HDTV is and looks like. I also knew a few broke college students on an SDTV cause they can't afford better, but theyd have one if they could.

I'm sure there's plenty of folks out there that don't know or care, but they don't seem to be the target market for this or any console, so it's a moot point. The wii will suit them for years to come if they even care to touch a controller. This console seems to be aimed at the core gamers. Expectations are higher, and the rumors don't make it sound all that impressive. 1080p has to be the baseline in 2011/12. If it isn't, it's an immediate fail.

you are vastly underestimating the general consumer if you think the majority of people who own consoles also own an HDTV.

i know a BUNCH of people who have 360's or ps3 and they aren't hooked to an HDTV. a few of them are people who just don't want to watse $ on an HDTV right now, and then some of them are kids who have them in their bedroom. my bro in law and younger brother both fall into this category. i also know people who think that "widescreen sd" is HD heh.

 

[BD2003]

you are vastly underestimating the general consumer if you think the majority of people who own consoles also own an HDTV.

i know a BUNCH of people who have 360's or ps3 and they aren't hooked to an HDTV. a few of them are people who just don't want to watse $ on an HDTV right now, and then some of them are kids who have them in their bedroom. my bro in law and younger brother both fall into this category. i also know people who think that "widescreen sd" is HD heh.

I'm pretty sure I got into the exact same discussion a few months ago, maybe even with you. Recent numbers show that the majority of US households have an HDTV now. No solid numbers on overlap between consoles and hdtvs, but I feel like it's a pretty safe assumption that there's a lot of overlap there, I'd feel confident betting a large sum of money that the majority of console owners also own an HDTV.

This isn't 2006 anymore. And if it's coming out in 2011, the stream should be viable till 2016. I would much rather have back the days where console makers aimed high and tried to show you something you've never seen before. And we've got great looking games for that. And now people think they need to aim for the lowest common denominator?

 

[alent1234]

you are vastly underestimating the general consumer if you think the majority of people who own consoles also own an HDTV.

i know a BUNCH of people who have 360's or ps3 and they aren't hooked to an HDTV. a few of them are people who just don't want to watse $ on an HDTV right now, and then some of them are kids who have them in their bedroom. my bro in law and younger brother both fall into this category. i also know people who think that "widescreen sd" is HD heh.

do these people have daily jobs they go to? i had a 26" LCD last year that i planned to keep as my main TV but my son broke it and i bought a 42" panny. but almost every TV sold in the last 6 years or so has been at least 720p. pretty sure most people have HD by now. at least the people who will buy the new console

i bet nintendo is going to dump every connector except for HDMI just to save money on the connectors and licensing fees

 

[akugami]

The Wii and DS both sold phenomenally well, better than anybody expected, but it was primarily based on novelty. The only way Nintendo will repeat that success is by coming up with some new gimmick.

Essentially, the Wii and DS were both gambles that paid off. I am skeptical that they can do it again.

The original NES was a gamble. And Nintendo won big. The original Gameboy was a gamble. And Nintendo won big. Then there is the DS and Wii. So I think we can establish that Nintendo has a pretty damn good idea of how to make a successful console. Yes, there were the lean years during the N64 and Gamecube but it's not like the company wasn't making money.

How well did that work out for them? N64 was dominated by Playstation. Gamecube got completely destroyed by PS2, and was even slightly outsold by the Microsoft Xbox.

Give me a break. Wii didn't sell like hotcakes thanks to Nintendo's great first-party games. It was because the Wii was a hot new gimmick that everybody just had to get.

Ask Microsoft how much money they made off of the Xbox. Hell, even the relatively successful Xbox 360 is probably still in the red if you factor in the money spent from the start of development till now. Obviously Sony was making a pretty penny but they had about over half the market, I believe close to 2/3 so they had to be making fistfuls of money. Nintendo? The only console they've ever made that lost money was the Virtual Boy.

That article focuses on their next console being more powerful than current offerings, but that doesn't mean very much since those consoles are around 5 years old and nearing end of life as well.

It's not Nintendo's goal to get into a hardware race with Sony or Microsoft, they know that's not a battle they'll win as Sony and Microsoft are willing to take losses on their hardware. That strategy paid off with the Wii, they had a significantly less powerful console and still won the console race, so I don't see them shifting gears there.

What do I expect to see from their next console? I expect them to aim for a pricetag of $299 or less. I don't expect to be wowed by the hardware specs like the processor speed or how much RAM it has as again it's not Nintendo's goal to run CoD with the highest framerates out of all the next gen consoles, that's all the hardcore crowd cares about but it's not Nintendo's main focus. What I'll be looking for is what if any they have up their sleeves with regards to the input devices. Will they have something new up their sleeves or will this just be an upgraded Wii?

Having the most powerful console has never won anyone the console wars. The PS1 was not the most powerful of its generation nor was the PS2. The venerable Gameboy has been outclassed (hardware wise) by so many competitors it's ridiculous. The only true competitor has been the PSP and even then one can make the argument that Nintendo's DS has spanked the PSP.


If I had to guess, I'd say the console is going to use dual layer DVD's at best. No Blu-Ray. It will be more powerful than the Xbox 360 and PS3 but not by a whole lot. I'm seeing at minimum the capability to display 720p at 60fps for most games. 1080p at 30fps. Motion controllers is definitely in. A new "gimick" to pull users in. This could be the rumored touch screen controller but who the heck knows.

Honestly, I think this is the right time for Nintendo to release a new console. Traditionally, consoles are released every 5-6 years. It's getting towards that time already. Wii sales are also slowing. While Sony and MS would like the consoles to last another 2-3 years so they can recoup cost and hope to make a profit, Nintendo is under no obligation to give them a helping hand. People like their shinies. As a person buying a new game are you going for the shiny new Nintendo console or the old and tired Xbox 360 and PS3 from 5+ years ago? If Nintendo plays its cards right, Sony and MS will be forced to release a console in 2012/2013. While MS hasn't done too badly with their Xbox 360 Sony is going to be looking at a nice red mark when the final accounting is done for the PS3.

 

[alent1234]

Yeah, and it was pretty ridiculous in late 2006 to release a console that only does 480p, but Nintendo did it. Many of us thought that was a stupid move too, but it seems to have worked out pretty well for them.



I'm going based on the current batch of rumors. Including supposed leaked slides that state "current-gen development costs" and "easy porting from the Xbox 360", as well as the quote I provided before about it being equal to or slightly more powerful than the 360.

I hope these rumors are wrong. I hope Nintendo delivers a system that spanks the PS3 and 360. . . or at least one that can run 360-level games at 1080p 60fps with AA and AF. That in itself would be pretty impressive.

The current rumors, though, do not support it, and that's what I've been saying this whole time.

1080p is not as big a deal as it was in 2006. from the mid 1990's to a few years ago we saw a big jump in supported resolutions on TV's. from broadcast TV to DVD quality to HD and then to 1080p.

the last few years the resolution has remained the same and will do so for years to come. this means that the chips needed for graphics aren't that expensive anymore and don't need to be bleeding edge. cell phones can do 1080p out for movies these days.

few years ago doing 1080p for movies cost you a lot of money with high end blu ray players or expensive GPU's. today integrated graphics will do it easily