RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
So many people keep saying that Nintendo needs to release a console way more powerful than XB1/PS4 but I disagree for the following reasons:
1) Let's say just throw it out there and assume NX is 3-4X faster than PS4/XB1. Would that matter? No. The reason it wouldn't matter is that by the time the NX releases in 2016, XB1/PS4 will have an install base of at least 50 million units. The NX will be a new kid on the block. Why would 3rd party developers spend extra effort to take advantage of much more powerful Nintendo hardware when there will be so few NX owners in the first 2-3 years of the console's life? After all, even hardware 3-4X more powerful isn't just going to sell the console when "most of your friends have XB1/PS4 or both and console games like playing with their friends." It also means the NX will have to contend with by then a huge library of games to choose from among XB1/PS4 consoles. More powerful hardware also has to go hand-in-hand with Nintendo actually getting more 3rd party support, which in itself is doubtful given the track record of Nintendo's 3rd party support since N64. If they can't secure a lot of 3rd parties, what's the point of all that extra horsepower? This is because Nintendo itself isn't the type of company that spends hundred million dollars making the most gorgeous game and honestly I doubt their team even has the technical ability to do so. We wouldn't suddenly see the next Zelda, Mario, F-Zero game blow the doors off Uncharted 4, Rise of the Tomb Raider, Gran Turismo 7 because Nintendo isn't a firm that knows how to make the best looking 1st party games either. In simplest terms, given how underpowered the Wii U is, even a GPU at XB1 level is more than enough for Nintendo's game designers to make much better looking games. They don't need the power of the Nano or 980Ti in there.
2) Adding a GPU far more powerful than XB1/PS4 would mean a more expensive console since Nintendo is reluctant to lose $ on hardware. By end of 2016, it's possible there will be even more price cuts on PS4/XB1. Nintendo cannot afford to launch a $450-500 console with 3-4X the power of PS4 when by 2016 it'll be easy to pick up XB1/PS4 for $299. This is another reason going with a powerful Nintendo GPU is too risky.
Another way to look at it is this -- if the next Nintendo console is much more powerful than the existing consoles, by the time we would start to see some games taking advantage of that hardware, it'll be 2-3 years and by 2018-2019 we could be looking at XB2/PS5 which could be 6-8X more powerful than XB1/PS4 and again trounce the 2016 Nintendo console.
For that reason, Nintendo needs to focus on offering something unique or focus on low price. The strategy of a powerful Nintendo console would have been far more successful if they launched it in 2013 but not mid-cycle in the generation.
I would honestly be surprised if the next Nintendo console is actually more powerful than the PS4.
1) Let's say just throw it out there and assume NX is 3-4X faster than PS4/XB1. Would that matter? No. The reason it wouldn't matter is that by the time the NX releases in 2016, XB1/PS4 will have an install base of at least 50 million units. The NX will be a new kid on the block. Why would 3rd party developers spend extra effort to take advantage of much more powerful Nintendo hardware when there will be so few NX owners in the first 2-3 years of the console's life? After all, even hardware 3-4X more powerful isn't just going to sell the console when "most of your friends have XB1/PS4 or both and console games like playing with their friends." It also means the NX will have to contend with by then a huge library of games to choose from among XB1/PS4 consoles. More powerful hardware also has to go hand-in-hand with Nintendo actually getting more 3rd party support, which in itself is doubtful given the track record of Nintendo's 3rd party support since N64. If they can't secure a lot of 3rd parties, what's the point of all that extra horsepower? This is because Nintendo itself isn't the type of company that spends hundred million dollars making the most gorgeous game and honestly I doubt their team even has the technical ability to do so. We wouldn't suddenly see the next Zelda, Mario, F-Zero game blow the doors off Uncharted 4, Rise of the Tomb Raider, Gran Turismo 7 because Nintendo isn't a firm that knows how to make the best looking 1st party games either. In simplest terms, given how underpowered the Wii U is, even a GPU at XB1 level is more than enough for Nintendo's game designers to make much better looking games. They don't need the power of the Nano or 980Ti in there.
2) Adding a GPU far more powerful than XB1/PS4 would mean a more expensive console since Nintendo is reluctant to lose $ on hardware. By end of 2016, it's possible there will be even more price cuts on PS4/XB1. Nintendo cannot afford to launch a $450-500 console with 3-4X the power of PS4 when by 2016 it'll be easy to pick up XB1/PS4 for $299. This is another reason going with a powerful Nintendo GPU is too risky.
Another way to look at it is this -- if the next Nintendo console is much more powerful than the existing consoles, by the time we would start to see some games taking advantage of that hardware, it'll be 2-3 years and by 2018-2019 we could be looking at XB2/PS5 which could be 6-8X more powerful than XB1/PS4 and again trounce the 2016 Nintendo console.
For that reason, Nintendo needs to focus on offering something unique or focus on low price. The strategy of a powerful Nintendo console would have been far more successful if they launched it in 2013 but not mid-cycle in the generation.
I would honestly be surprised if the next Nintendo console is actually more powerful than the PS4.
Last edited by a moderator: