Nintendo DX GPU?

[MisterLilBig]

Also, 3DS hasn't exactly failed. I can only imagine that you've comparing it to phones and think that the next handheld should have a 1440p screen or something...

I meant in other ways than money. As an example, the New 3DS should had been the first 3DS. And not having a power supply on package. The ergonomics aren't that improved towards fighting games, and overall, small face buttons...etc And I would not put more than 720p on a handheld.

I'm just saying that they'd be insane to think that their console could sell 20 million units in its first year.

And I agree.

How does that make any sense? What's the point of a sub-$199 home console? What kind of gamers would that attract? Casuals again? Can you imagine the level of gimped hardware Nintendo would bring if they priced the home console at $179-199?

Hmm, you do know that the casual Nintendo console is the one that made Nintendo a bunch of $$$, right? It can be casuals or core, it does not matter. What matters is the Input and the Output, and for some weird reason that "becomes" the SoC...It's a Gaming Console, an Entertainment Console, it's for fun and enjoyment. First off, Nintendo does not need to be anywhere near PS4, that's just stupid. Nintendo needs to be smart. If you can only say x86 because it's "powerful" or "they have it", that's just bad in every level, that's all the reason for it, really? oh gosh...just shoot Nintendo then, it's easier and less painful.

Are you kidding? 3DS sold 55M units and made hundreds of millions of dollars for Nintendo

And your logic above, that does not contradict your comment...? Anyways, like I replyed to someone above, I did not mean a market failure. You know, it's like the Wii, in some ways.

What you are saying goes counter against Sony already executing what I outlined at E3 2013 and releasing the console in the same year.

My bad for not specifying, on that moment, that it would be, in my view, released for the holidays 2016.

Sony already proved that you don't need 12-18 months lead time between E3 and retail launch for your console to sell well.

Many reasons why that happened. Make sure to keep those in mind. For instance, the X1 was the only console pushing for the future of gaming and it is the console with the controller with the most features. And stupid people afraid of console change decided that it was best to cry and get a bland console with a controller with less features than the PS3.

So there you go, the "best" current console is a worse console than the one before it just with better hardware.

Where are you guys pulling these theories from?

Well since you said "guys". If you look at your numbers and actually see that the Floating and Personal screen surpass the Entertainment screen. Which again proves my points of what Nintendo should be doing. Not only that, look at the growth. It would be beyond stupid if Nintendo doesn't do something extremely similar to what I said for the NX.

 

[poofyhairguy]

They could just drop the price of the Wii U with Mario Kart 8 to $199

Aka what they should have done months ago.

 

[Techhog]

Aka what they should have done months ago.

It's easy to say that as a consumer, but for them it would likely just put them in the red. And no, they can't just switch the controller and be done with it.

 

[MisterLilBig]

And no, they can't just switch the controller and be done with it.

That's the first thing they should had done. Like MS did with Kinect. That would had been an instant $120 cost reduction to the system. Probably more like $80-$100, because they should ship with a controller.

 

[NTMBK]

That's the first thing they should had done. Like MS did with Kinect. That would had been an instant $120 cost reduction to the system. Probably more like $80-$100, because they should ship with a controller.

And it would also make a decent chunk of their software library not work any more.

 

[Techhog]

That's the first thing they should had done. Like MS did with Kinect. That would had been an instant $120 cost reduction to the system. Probably more like $80-$100, because they should ship with a controller.

The controller is far more deeply integrated into the system and games than Kinect was, to the point that removing the controller would only work if the interface and the majority of the games for it (from both them and third-parties) were patched, since the interface won't work without it and many games won't even start without it connected (and even then many games would just be unable to be patched). It's not as simple as many of you think. It's it an optional accessory in its current form like Kinect was.

 

[MisterLilBig]

And it would also make a decent chunk of their software library not work any more.

If that's true, then Nintendo is more of a failure than I thought.

The controller is far more deeply integrated into the system and games than Kinect was, to the point that removing the controller would only work if the interface and the majority of the games for it (from both them and third-parties) were patched, since the interface won't work without it and many games won't even start without it connected (and even then many games would just be unable to be patched). It's not as simple as many of you think. It's it an optional accessory in its current form like Kinect was.

I personally haven't checked if a bad GamePad would ruin the whole Wii U, I returned mine, but then again, it's not like you can find those around alone...but really, If they made it completely dependent then Nintendo is run by incompetent developers/designers/managers/presidents.

I would expect such simple design considerations from an amateur.

And yet, if it's as bad as you guys believe, I think they should had taken the Software Development hit for it, and as a "Thank You for the support" also provide all NES games for free, and even more things. Because I would rather take a hit than continue a downward spiral to oblivion.

The Wii U for a non Wii customer ends up being more expensive than a X1 or PS4. Or extremely close. To enjoy the Wii U to it's fullest, you need the Wii U nunchukwhatever controller. And that was when the X1 and PS4 released. Now it should be about the same still.

The NX can have the most incredible GPU/CPU and whatever, but if it is such a catastrophic design failure as the Wii U, then it will end up in an worse position than it. But I hope they learned from there attitude already.

 

[poofyhairguy]

It's easy to say that as a consumer, but for them it would likely just put them in the red. And no, they can't just switch the controller and be done with it.

Then they should have planned it different. A console that can't drop in price significantly this late in its life is fail. At the same part of the Gamecube's life I bought it and Mario Kart for $150.

Whoever came up with the Wii U controller should be fired and shamed out of the gaming business.

 

[monstercameron]

How silly would we all feel if the NX was a cellphone.

 

[Techhog]

If that's true, then Nintendo is more of a failure than I thought.



I personally haven't checked if a bad GamePad would ruin the whole Wii U, I returned mine, but then again, it's not like you can find those around alone...but really, If they made it completely dependent then Nintendo is run by incompetent developers/designers/managers/presidents.

I would expect such simple design considerations from an amateur.

And yet, if it's as bad as you guys believe, I think they should had taken the Software Development hit for it, and as a "Thank You for the support" also provide all NES games for free, and even more things. Because I would rather take a hit than continue a downward spiral to oblivion.

The Wii U for a non Wii customer ends up being more expensive than a X1 or PS4. Or extremely close. To enjoy the Wii U to it's fullest, you need the Wii U nunchukwhatever controller. And that was when the X1 and PS4 released. Now it should be about the same still.

The NX can have the most incredible GPU/CPU and whatever, but if it is such a catastrophic design failure as the Wii U, then it will end up in an worse position than it. But I hope they learned from there attitude already.

Then they should have planned it different. A console that can't drop in price significantly this late in its life is fail. At the same part of the Gamecube's life I bought it and Mario Kart for $150.

Whoever came up with the Wii U controller should be fired and shamed out of the gaming business.

"I don't like this thing, so it sucks and the people who came up with it are idiots."

If they had made it optional, it wouldn't have been used much at all and Wii U would have lost its only unique feature. Their logic was that a unique control method would sell the console, and would only work if it was the primary control method. They also got cocky due to Wii, so they expected to reduce the BOM via volume of sales. Planning ahead wouldn't have helped since the issue is games requiring it, not the console itself. They basically would have had to require every game to also support the Pro controller, which would have completely eliminated the point of the Gamepad in the first place. At least there's the option of getting a factory refurbished unit for $200.

Also, good luck getting Miyamoto shamed out of the gaming business...

 

[dragantoe]

How silly would we all feel if the NX was a cellphone.

An amd apu cellphone might be pretty good though

 

[Techhog]

How silly would we all feel if the NX was a cellphone.

We'll never the answer to this.

 

[MisterLilBig]

If they had made it optional, it wouldn't have been used much at all

If they would had made it secretly optional your reason falls on it's face.

and Wii U would have lost its only unique feature.

Oh gosh...the "unique feature" is part of its massive failure! And Nintendo has many "unique features", they should had focused on that, instead of being so unique that they couldn't handle it. If Nintendo would had made the best choices, the Wii U would had been easier for them than Sony and MS had to deal with with the PS3 and X360. The Wii U is Nintendo's first HD console, that's a challenge in of itself.

Planning ahead wouldn't have helped

Erm...of course it would had. Planning ahead always helps. I'm about to have a baby, you think I wouldn't "plan ahead" and prepare myself for it?

They basically would have had to require every game to also support the Pro controller, which would have completely eliminated the point of the Gamepad in the first place.

And they should had. The Gamepad is a failure. The moment I saw the Wii U presented I knew that it was gonna fail, I told every one around me that it was gonna fail(and have done the same since the PS2 era, predict stuff and accurately happening). The Gamepad has nothing special and it has many limitations, expensive as heck and can you even use two yet? Nintendo tried to bit more than it could chew and made even more horrible decisions, it was so obvious.

At least there's the option of getting a factory refurbished unit for $200.

Not sure I have seen that, I'll look around next time I'm at the mall. But, that don't change the fact of what it is.

Also, good luck getting Miyamoto shamed out of the gaming business...

I'm pointing out facts, not dealing with fanboyism. Miyamoto has been a great contributor to the Industry, but him and the whole of Nintendo have been underwhelming in the past years. (Not talking about $$$.)

 

[Techhog]

No, the refurb Wii U is on Nintendo's website. Just Google "Wii U refurbished."

Also, a lot of people said that Wii would fail due to its controller too. And are you seriously calling me a fanboy for saying that it would be dumb to fire Miyamoto over this? Geeze. Should everyone who makes a mistake be fired and shamed on the spot then? I really hope you remember that next time you screw up at work...

Important note: I'm not defending the controller itself. My point is that the decision to use the controller had to be all or nothing, and making it an essentially optional accessory would have just been a waste of R&D.

 

[MisterLilBig]

No, the refurb Wii U is on Nintendo's website. Just Google "Wii U refurbished."

Oh...well, sounds like another bad decision.

Also, a lot of people said that Wii would fail due to its controller too.

I wasn't one of them. I knew it was gonna outsell the 360 and PS3, and I knew it was not gonna get much "hardcore" use.

And are you seriously calling me a fanboy for saying that it would be dumb to fire Miyamoto over this?

No. I made a statement. And you did say "shamed". And yes, I think decisions as bad as those should be "punishable".

Should everyone who makes a mistake be fired and shamed on the spot then?

This isn't about one person. A group. A company failure. Some should get fired and some should get moved and really, most need new fresh people with fresh thinking and way less greed and over assumptions of the actual value of the IP. This gen could have really been Nintendos "last chance". That's why I seriously think that Nintendo should be doing something extremely similar with the NX that I mentioned. People need to understand that the Wii made them money, not fans!

My point is that the decision to use the controller had to be all or nothing, and making it an essentially optional accessory would have just been a waste of R&D.

And I'm saying that if you believe that and that if they actually did that, Nintendo did one incredibly stupid thing. They didn't need to. It could had been made optional. Like a feature. As a design. Not to customers. So if it was a bad idea they could pull the plug on it.

Because personally, I think Nintendo is being Nintendo and just being adamant about not wanting to look bad about that decision of having a "unique controller".

 

[Techhog]

Oh...well, sounds like another bad decision.



I wasn't one of them. I knew it was gonna outsell the 360 and PS3, and I knew it was not gonna get much "hardcore" use.



No. I made a statement. And you did say "shamed". And yes, I think decisions as bad as those should be "punishable".



This isn't about one person. A group. A company failure. Some should get fired and some should get moved and really, most need new fresh people with fresh thinking and way less greed and over assumptions of the actual value of the IP. This gen could have really been Nintendos "last chance". That's why I seriously think that Nintendo should be doing something extremely similar with the NX that I mentioned. People need to understand that the Wii made them money, not fans!



And I'm saying that if you believe that and that if they actually did that, Nintendo did one incredibly stupid thing. They didn't need to. It could had been made optional. Like a feature. As a design. Not to customers. So if it was a bad idea they could pull the plug on it.

Because personally, I think Nintendo is being Nintendo and just being adamant about not wanting to look bad about that decision of having a "unique controller".

How is selling refurbished units another bad decision? Would you prefer that the repackage them and sell them as new? I don't understand your logic here.

Optional control methods end up being underutilized, and due to how the Wii U works and their goals for things such as streaming to the controller. If they were going to make it completely optional and tell devs that they can't make games that depend on it, there's no point to them making the controller in the first place because it would not be used very much. How many games use the Kinect or the Move? Also, again, your logic could be applied to the Wii and the DS for that matter. If they design everything like that as optional to play it safe, why not just play it completely safe and just either make a powerful console or a cheap console? Oh right, because GameCube was power and cheap, yet still sold badly.

Also, the entire board of directors bares responsibility, so of course they're not all going to fire themselves and put some random people in charge. Also, the controller is probably the least of the reasons it flopped. The price, the marketing, the name and the lack of third-party support were astronomically bigger factors. A more differentiating name and a faster CPU to make porting from last gen easier along with a better marketing campaign would have increased sales significantly. The controller has an effect on the price, but even that isn't the main reason the price hasn't dropped. They know that dropping the price now won't increase sales enough to offset the loss of revenue, so they're just coasting along at the current price as they prepare to move on. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost

So, with NX, they're going to want to focus on the name (remember that NX is just a codename), the marketing, how they can put out enough of their own games quickly enough, the price, and third-party support, in that order. That's why making a powerful console is risky; it makes third-party support the first priority, and if they do that and it doesn't work out, they end up exactly where they are now while you're stuck scratching your head. That's not to say that third-party support isn't important, but that making the console's success dependent entirely on that is no better than what they ended up doing with the Wii U's controller. It benefits them more to go with something weaker and cheaper and make indies their main form of third-party support while they're able to pump out games due to sharing resources and games between the NX console and NX handheld.

 

[MisterLilBig]

How is selling refurbished units another bad decision? Would you prefer that the repackage them and sell them as new? I don't understand your logic here.

It's just on the Nintendo website.

Optional control methods end up being underutilized

A problem that the Wii U has had from the start and makes the purchase as expensive or more than the competition. The Wii U brings games that people can't even play unless they buy more hardware.(!)

If they were going to make it completely optional and tell devs that they can't make games that depend on it, there's no point to them making the controller in the first place because it would not be used very much.

You do know that Nintendo can make it a requirement, right? It's the way you are saying things that makes it sound bad. Nintendo could have and still can make it so that games for the system needs to support 2 forms of input to provide the "same" experience.

How many games use the Kinect or the Move?

Not many, and I don't see how this would relate. Nintendo is not MS or Sony. If MS or Sony announce smartphone apps, you think their stock would rise by 80%?? That happened with Nintendo.

If they design everything like that as optional to play it safe, why not just play it completely safe and just either make a powerful console or a cheap console?

I prefer "optional" to "stupid". And to answer better, if I remember my research, Nintendo has been loosing fans since the N64, and the Wii was just a bubble full of money and no fan growth. Taking all the risks, and on a badly designed product and a company who wished not to improve upon itself, took more than it can chew. Yes, they should had played it safe. Because this time the risks where higher. Nintendo does not need a "powerful console".

Also, the controller is probably the least of the reasons it flopped. The price, the marketing, the name and the lack of third-party support were astronomically bigger factors.

...least? "The price", the controller internals + screen is $80+! And more developer/design work. To put things into a more serious perspective, the controller internals costs the same as the Wii U consoles internals. Not. A. Joke.(Not including HD) And I know the controller isn't everything, but it is a nice big chunk of it all.

third-party support

I think indies are more important than the usual third-party support, Ubisoft, EA, etc. And Nintendo has been late with that because they never cared. Unity3d is usable towards the Wii U and New Nintendo 3DS. (Since...just a few months ago. And still probably in beta.)


On the topic of Nintendo, no one seems to talk much about the Personal Computer point in Nintendo's slides! I would think that would had sparked a huge conversation.

 

[Techhog]

Refurbished Wii Us aren't just on their site, but it's up to retailers to set a price for any used or refurb units they have. They keep them on their own site to avoid undercutting new units majorly and so that they get a 100% cut of the sale, which allows them to keep the price low and even provide a full warranty. You really thin that you understand business better than you actually do...

Out os the reasons I listed, price was probably the second least important if not the the least important. These are the same guys who sold (and technically underpriced) an overclocked 2001 GameCube with a new controller for $250 in 2006. If Wii U had the marketing and the games it needed to sell, it would have sold significantly better even with the same price and hardware. The reason the price hasn't been cut is because Nintendo realized that cutting the price by 33% isn't going to increase sales by 33%, so it would not be a profitable move. That said, they also recognize now that the controller was too expensive and they won't take that kind of risk again.

And speaking of risks, playing it safe is an automatic failure. If Nintendo can't find a way to make their hardware stand out, the trend will continue. Wii U's sales are following the same trend that Nintendo was falling into since the SNES, though maybe slightly worse. With a standard controller, Wii U likely would not have sold much better, even at half the price. If they want to play it safe, they might as well drop out of the hardware business, sell a bunch of studios and IPs, and focus mainly on mobile games.

Also, they're not talking about PC games; they're talking about moving into this century by having an account system and store that can be accessed in a browser.

 

[MisterLilBig]

Refurbished Wii Us aren't just on their site, but it's up to retailers to set a price for any used or refurb units they have. They keep them on their own site to avoid undercutting new units majorly and so that they get a 100% cut of the sale, which allows them to keep the price low and even provide a full warranty.

I did see the good deal(price + warranty), but I expect it being pretty unheard of since it is not much marketed.

If Wii U had the marketing and the games it needed to sell, it would have sold significantly better even with the same price and hardware.

I don't think so. Marketing would had helped a bit, maybe(because the Wii U was a horrible design, not like the Wii), but the games? To get quicker to where they are now, I think. Has a super fan not gotten a reason to get a Wii U yet? Mario bundles, Zelda bundles, Splatoon bundles, etc...I thought the Wii U would do similar to the GameCube, but NX has been talked and that surely causes a slowdown from people that know of it.

And speaking of risks, playing it safe is an automatic failure.

Have you met the PS4? That is the least risky console ever...ever...it even took out features and started charging for online multiplayer and it sells like hotcakes.

If Nintendo can't find a way to make their hardware stand out, the trend will continue.

They will not have hardware that "stands out" if they play the MS and Sony game.

With a standard controller, Wii U likely would not have sold much better, even at half the price. If they want to play it safe, they might as well drop out of the hardware business, sell a bunch of studios and IPs, and focus mainly on mobile games.

The moment Nintendo drop prices on the Wii U the consoles sold increased by like 300%. So, price is a factor. And you really think the controller sold the console? At first, maybe, by the marketing and the fun marketing of Zombie U, but really, in a world of touch gaming, they would a gimped limited touchscreen be any interesting than any other method of input? The gamepad failed, it did not deliver good on anything. It breaks immersion on most games...it's like playing one game on two separate DS's.

I do expect Nintendo to become the next Sega if the NX does not do well. And there isn't anything wrong with that. But I expect it coming from shame of failure instead of from huge loss of money.

Also, they're not talking about PC games; they're talking about moving into this century by having an account system and store that can be accessed in a browser.

Hmm, if it's just that then it's not as exciting. I wonder if the "apps" will run on the browser also. Considering they have their own tech for that, I would hope and expect that they would use it and take advantage of it.

 

[Mondozei]

Nintendo NX is not the next Wii or Wii U, Nintendo pres says


As obvious as the title is, it does seem to indicate a more significant shift away from the past. So no iteration, is basically what he is saying.

But does that necessarily indicate a much stronger GPU/CPU performance or is it a significant shift in form factor?

I would be readily disappointed if Nintendo once again chose the path of gimped hardware in favor of gimmicks.

 

[dragantoe]

"I can assure you we’re not building the next version of Wii or Wii U," Kimishima said

That's interesting, maybe he means this time there won't be a gimmick. I'm not a fan of the idea of having another handheld, but I see the market for it.

 

[Red Hawk]

Whoever came up with the Wii U controller should be fired and shamed out of the gaming business.

You mean this guy?

Yeah, no. So the guy had one idea that didn't pan out well. Doesn't compare to the mountain of success and influence he's had on the industry. It'd be like killing the golden goose after it lays just one rotten egg.

 

[lamedude]

They had no problem kicking Gunpei Yokoi to curb when then Virtual Boy flopped.

 

[Techhog]

They had no problem kicking Gunpei Yokoi to curb when then Virtual Boy flopped.

He left of his own accord.

 

[tenks]

The NX is not coming out for purchase until 2017. It's not a 2016 product.

cough, cough.


March 2017 released, confirmed.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/04/27/nintendo-nx-will-launch-in-march-2017