• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Nintendo shares plunge 6% by Monday close after trading as low as -18%

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ganondolf

Member
Ask yourself why there are two analog sticks? No controller out there had two analogs, OR two D-pads. Few PS1 games even did anything with the second stick outside of ape escape and flight sims.

the dual sticks was sony improving on the design, they saw that you would need one stick to move the character and one to move the camera.

a lot of consoles in the past had addon controllers for niche games like the arcade pads and flight sim but the small anlog and rumble were design features from the n64 and was added to the ps1 pad when soy saw the competition had something better then they did. they did the same with the move after taking the piss out of the wii controller for a year or 2.
 
Wikipedia also says the flight stick was announced/displayed in 1995, and released in 1996. Both of these analog controllers would have had to have been in development long before 1995, and Namco's Negcon (also analog) was on shelves in 1995.
Can this insane derailment and ramblong be ended? I have no idea what either of you are trying to prove.

Analog controls naturally sprang from the 32bit generation and the 3d games in it! Nintendo put all its focus on its main title using analog controls in a revolutionary way, but Sony and Sega also had analog controller designs, as peripherals later in their console's life.
 

ascii42

Member
The dual analog was a scaled down version of that stick, and had a compatibility mode that directly emulated the flightstick for games that supported it. That's a hell of an indicator that Sony intended the dual analog to be a cheaper, more portable alternative of the flight stick.

I had a third party controller that could emulate the flightstick. Vigilante 8 was the only game I had I remember supporting it. In the controller settings menu, it would display a rendering of the flightstick if the controller was set to that. I remember that because it was the first time I'd ever heard of the thing.
 
The intent of your quote is obvious, backpedaling aside. "Primary" and "nearly" is just as inaccurate, and just as wrong. Keep up the good work.

The intent of my post can only be discerned from the words I wrote, which I've just assisted you in understanding. I'm not sure how doing this constitutes backpedaling (perhaps another term you're only feigning comprehension of?). In any case, I suppose this flow of logic follows nicely with what you've previously established. You can say it's just as inaccurate, but as far as I'm concerned you've said nothing here that adequately supports that.

You're now completely disregarding the meat of my argument, despite my requests for you to address it, for the sake of convenience. Not really much else I can say if you're going to delve into semantics instead of dealing with the topic of debate. In any case, have a good day.
 
Can this insane derailment and ramblong be ended? I have no idea what either of you are trying to prove.

Analog controls naturally sprang from the 32bit generation and the 3d games in it! Nintendo put all its focus on its main title using analog controls in a revolutionary way, but Sony and Sega also had analog controller designs, as peripherals later in their console's life.

If you scroll up, you'll see this was exactly my point, you beat me by a couple of seconds.

NONE of the companies that were using analog controls are genius innovators that got the idea out of thin air. No one is "shamelessly copying" from anyone else after seeing a photo somewhere.

Analog controls were introduced and perfected in generation 2. However, analog controls are relatively expensive next to simple digital pads. There was simply no point to incorporate them until the switch to 3D made it necessary. At that point, Sony, Sega, Nintendo, Namco, etc all began putting different interpretations of analog controls into use as they saw fit.

This is all iterative, building off of what came before in small increments. NO ONE is an innovator re: analog controls, unless you're going back to 1980.

I had a third party controller that could emulate the flightstick. Vigilante 8 was the only game I remember supporting it. In the controller settings menu, it would display a rendering of the flightstick if the controller was set to that. I remember that because it was the first time I'd ever heard of the thing.

Wiki lists a dozen or two games, mostly flight sims (ace combat) and mech combat games. Those games would be bigger in japan, I imagine- but why on earth did Vigilante 8 support it?
 

Ganondolf

Member
Wikipedia also says the flight stick was announced/displayed in 1995, and released in 1996. Both of these analog controllers would have had to have been in development long before 1995, and Namco's Negcon (also analog) was on shelves in 1995.

And you're missing the point entirely. NEITHER ONE "had the idea first." The analog technology used in the flight stick, the negcon, and the N64 are almost identical to the analog tech used in the Vectrex in the early 1980s. Everyone was building on tech that had already existed and worked for games years before. The limitations of 2D just didn't make it necessary until the 3D jump.

I agree that the tec was available before as was the rumble (it is just a small motor). but in the end sony would have never released the dualshock or a pad with anolg sticks of the n64 did not have them. its like smartphones would still be like windows mobile and old palm if the iPhone did npot come out and change things. you could argue the tec was around and you could argue that touchscreens were around but its not the same thing. Nintendo made the tec relevant in the game console space and sony copied it to stay relevant with the competition (Nintendo).
 
wow have we finally reached the apex of nintendo doom threads that we naturally seek new conversation in the debate of analog stick innovation?
 
I agree that the tec was available before as was the rumble (it is just a small motor). but in the end sony would have never released the dualshock or a pad with anolg sticks of the n64 did not have them. its like smartphones would still be like windows mobile and old palm if the iPhone did npot come out and change things. you could argue the tec was around and you could argue that touchscreens were around but its not the same thing. Nintendo made the tec relevant in the game console space and sony copied it to stay relevant with the competition (Nintendo).

I've already demonstrated as well as I could that analog was an inevitability. Third parties were already pushing for it and releasing their own controllers, and sony had their own implementation in the works prior to the n64. It deserves no credit here- and no one is using the N64's single analog implementation, either. Everything is using the dualshock model now. Again- iterative improvements.

As of this post, I'm done discussing it- better things to do.
 
Yeah, this thread will be locked soon if this goes on.

Look, neither side is going to change each other's minds, no matter how many angry paragraphs are written. Just drop the controller crap.
 
If you scroll up, you'll see this was exactly my point, you beat me by a couple of seconds.

NONE of the companies that were using analog controls are genius innovators that got the idea out of thin air. No one is "shamelessly copying" from anyone else after seeing a photo somewhere.

Analog controls were introduced and perfected in generation 2. However, analog controls are relatively expensive next to simple digital pads. There was simply no point to incorporate them until the switch to 3D made it necessary. At that point, Sony, Sega, Nintendo, Namco, etc all began putting different interpretations of analog controls into use as they saw fit.

This is all iterative, building off of what came before in small increments. NO ONE is an innovator re: analog controls, unless you're going back to 1980.



Wiki lists a dozen or two games, mostly flight sims (ace combat) and mech combat games. Those games would be bigger in japan, I imagine- but why on earth did Vigilante 8 support it?

Good lord. After all this, you're still using the term "innovation" incorrectly. Perhaps there is no hope for humanity.

For anyone just catching up, here's PBS compactly differentiating the terms "Innovation", and "Invention" that seems to be escaping Manmademan despite my persistence:

http://www.pbs.org/idealab/2012/03/the-difference-between-invention-and-innovation086/

Innovation is concerned with integration, not invention. Nintendo's use of the analogue in conjuncture with 3D graphics, high end performance, and 4-player input on a game console was INNOVATIVE. Improving on the use of old technology in a way that would drastically effect the market and change the way a massive number of consumers played videogames.


OK. Really stopping now.
 

tronic307

Member
Yeah, I think Nintendo still see the value in offering robust console experiences like 3D Mario, Zelda, etc. And their dev teams have put alot of work into learning how to utilize AMD GPUs. Mobile GPUs work quite differently, afaik, and use a tiling approach to rendering.

A third pillar could happen next year, but I see it as a tablet or small single-screen handheld offered at a low price, with decent battery life, and retaining 3DS BC.
You won't even be able to play Super Mario Bros. on a Nintablet. It would be an outlet for cheap touch games because that's where the casuals went.
 

jcm

Member
Can anyone explain to me, where I can buy Nintendo stock? Asked myself that for years and just found websites that seem like scam. And with all these discussions this question regarding where to buy came back in my mind ^^

Any information would be appreciated :)

You can buy the actual shares using an account with etrade or fidelity. You'll have to pay a straight commission and a foreign exchange commission. The price per share is about $135, and you have to buy a minumum of 100 shares, so the minimum investment is in the neighborhood of $14K right now.

If you just want a little you'd need to buy the ADR, which you should be able to purchase OTC using any brokerage account. Then you could just get 10 ADR shares to play with, for about $150.

It's nothing I'd recommend anyone doing unless you're just having fun, using money you don't need. It's nothing you'd want to put your retirement savings in. Save that for the index funds or vanguard target funds.
 
Look of the performance of Nintendo home consoles after the SNES, EXCEPT THE Wii, was a distant 2nd or 3rd place behind the competition, if it was for the lightening in the bottle of the Wii, which captured non gamers, Nintendo would have been done after the Wii.

As a Wii U owner I just hope I can get 4 years out of this thing
 

Ganondolf

Member
Look of the performance of Nintendo home consoles after the SNES, EXCEPT THE Wii, was a distant 2nd or 3rd place behind the competition, if it was for the lightening in the bottle of the Wii, which captured non gamers, Nintendo would have been done after the Wii.

As a Wii U owner I just hope I can get 4 years out of this thing

I expect Nintendo will let it run for at least 4 years if not 5 (from launch). even if they wanted to bring out a new console realistically they could not do it for 2 years at best. I expect a large price drop very soon. your probably looking at the gamecube situation which was good as far as game support from Nintendo
 

Snakeyes

Member
The risk with this approach is that they essentially end up with what Sony has with the Vita and Vita TV. I don't think there is any desire for a Vita TV type of device in a world where ps4 and xb1 exist. So essentially it's no different than going handheld only.
Or like what Apple has going on with the iPod Touch/iPhone/iPad Mini/iPad Air/Soon-to-be iPad Pro/Mac App Store (to an extent). There are so many flaws with the Vita's library and concept (still love mine though) that you can't really use the Vita TV as an example of why the approach wouldn't work. I mean, its main selling point is upscaling a library of gimped console ports, multiplat indies and niche Japanese games on a TV. Aside from basic controller support, nothing really sets it apart from the handheld iteration. And the only market where it's been released prefers to play games on handhelds anyway. No wonder it hasn't been setting the charts on fire.

The top-of-the-line device of this hypothetical Nintendo family could be in the same ballpark as the PS5 and Nextbox. Tegra K1 is based on the same architecture as the GTX 780 Ti and UE4 runs on both, so it's not unreasonable to think that a similar setup from Nvidia or another vendor would be available for Nintendo's next handheld and console offerings. The only difference from a technical standpoint would be in the graphical settings. Because the architecture would be fairly standard across the board, developers would choose a lead configuration for their projects and scale up or down from there, just like they do on PC today. So in theory, those looking for a high-end console experience would simply buy the corresponding hardware, which would run games like a proper next-gen system. Of course, this would require Nintendo to patch up their brand image and third party support, but that's pretty much a necessity for any of their platforms going forward.

Here's an example of how a "Nintendo family" lineup could look like;

Handheld 1 ($89 - 119): Entry-level device. Lower resolution screen, plays games on the lowest settings. Cheapest point of entry into the Nintendo ecosystem. Often advertised alongside Nintendo's most accessible IPs (2D Mario, Pokemon, Animal Crossing).

Handheld 2 ($179 - 249): High-end portable device. High PPI display, sleek design. May or may not include Android and/or LTE capability. Aimed at tech enthusiasts looking to get the best portable gaming experience. Initially produced in more limited quantities to gauge market interest. Advertised with series like Fire Emblem and Monster Hunter.

Console 1 ($129 - $179): Aimed at casual gamers, families and is also a suitable option for core gamers looking for the cheapest way to play Nintendo exclusives on the big screen. Comes bundled with a next-gen Wii Remote or some other innovation. Traditional controller sold separately. Advertised with expanded audience titles and stuff like Mario Kart.

Console 2 (>$350): Is more or less in direct competition with the PS5 and Nextbox. Plays games at a similar graphical fidelity. Bundled with a premium traditional controller and may or may not feature TV/DVR functionality. Advertised with the big guns; Zelda, Metroid, games like X and other core-oriented IPs.

All of these systems would play the same games (though some would work better on certain platforms) and cloud saves would keep everything synced across all your Nintendo devices. As I said before, making this work would require a massive effort from Nintendo on their branding, marketing, relationship with third party publishers and online infrastructure. But it's hard to deny that the idea has a lot of potential if executed properly.
 

jroc74

Phone reception is more important to me than human rights
The best thing for the industry would be that Nintendo figures out how to recover. Not sure why anyone would want stuff like this.

Hell the impact of Sega leaving the console business is still felt today. Never mind the fall of one of the biggest video game companies of all time. Every failure made by a pubslisher or developer is felt through the industry. More failures equal less risks and less variety in the industry. Nintendo collapsing would be one massive, massive failure

As much as I liked my Sega consoles.....its loss is not still felt today. Not by us consumers. Maybe the first few years it was felt but not now. Sony, MS...even that period where everybody and their grandmother was making a console...someone was gonna take their place.

Sonic lived on, Phantasy Star lived on....cant remember too many other exclusives at that time. Even tho Nintendo is still here...Metal Gear, Final Fantasy survived without Nintendo... Even with Nintendo still here they are mostly known for platformers, family games and anime type RPG, JRPG. One could argue there is already less variety with Sony and MS. Isnt really hurting them too much.

Many of us have to remember.....the console could be a cardboard box....its the games we like so much. The features of the consoles are like icing on the cake. PC gamers could tell you this....they could build a plain jane looking PC with lil to no features as long as it ran the games they wanna play.

Failures = less risk...if that was the case we wouldnt have had a Wii and its motion controls, or Nintendo sticking to their guns with cartridges or their mini disc format of Game Cubes. All 3 were risks...only one paid off. Nintendo just guessed wrong on a few fronts, thats all. Sad considering they were the granddaddies in the game console arena. If anything failure could mean less of a risk for some companies because they would have no grand expectations. And even with the Wii and motion controls....Sony and MS were going in that direction...the Wii might have just jumped started their direction. MS was working on Kinect type stuff for the movie Minority Report.

Apple failed massively with the Apple Newton and Bandai Pippin...one a PDA, one a gaming console. Now they are considered one of the leaders in mobile phones, tablets and mobile gaming. Apple also almost failed massively with home computers. Apple might be more known now for the iPhone and iPad than OS X, laptops, desktops. Sometimes you have to reinvent yourself to survive, take risks. You will see some posts saying panic mode Nintendo is the best Nintendo. There might be some truth to that.
 

vinnygambini

Why are strippers at the U.N. bad when they're great at strip clubs???
An educated guess, Nintendo shares will most likely decline during Japanese trade Tuesday as clarifications have been made in regards to business structure as some quotes were taken out of context. Iwata:

The spread of smart devices does not spell the end of game consoles. It’s not that simple. It doesn’t mean that we should put Mario on smartphones

It will not abandon its console-centered business contrary to popular reports. Development of F2P games will most likely be at the forefront during the Investors meeting on the 30th.
 

Mpl90

Two copies sold? That's not a bomb guys, stop trolling!!!
An educated guess, Nintendo shares will most likely decline during Japanese trade Tuesday as clarifications have been made in regards to business structure as some quotes were taken out of context. Iwata:



It will not abandon its console-centered business contrary to popular reports.

Even in the original statements, he just said they were looking to use mobile as a tool for their "game-player business" (game-player = consoles), and there was already his stance on Mario on mobile, so...people that don't read enough? :p
 

vinnygambini

Why are strippers at the U.N. bad when they're great at strip clubs???
Even in the original statements, he just said they were looking to use mobile as a tool for their "game-player business" (game-player = consoles), and there was already his stance on Mario on mobile, so...people that don't read enough? :p

Various publications reported the opposite, an example would be the following:

Marketwatch - Nintendo president says he won’t resign, hints at move to mobile

“We are thinking about a new business structure” that could incorporate gaming on smartphones, Iwata said at the news conference, according to media reports.

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/2014/01/17/nintendo-president-says-he-wont-resign-hints-at-move-to-mobile/

Clarifications were made today via the WallStreet Journal and many other outlets. There could be a slight shake-up.
 

AzaK

Member
I think one of the bigger problems people aren't talking enough about is exactly when would be the right time for Nintendo to release a new console?

I already have my personal idea for what their new direction should be for their next console, but when do they release it?

If they do a short life cycle for Wii U (4 years? They can't go earlier than that) that leaves them launching the successor in 2016. Which is probably the prime of the PS4 and Xbone. Does it make sense to launch a new console 2 or even 3 years before the competition?

If they do a standard life cycle for Wii U (5-6 years), that brings them closer to PS5/Xbtwo launch, for sure... but man, I can't imagine having to endure the Wii U for another 4 or 5 years at this point. I don't know what notable software they can possibly have in 2016, let alone 2017 or 2018.

what I'm trying to say is... Nintendo is kinda fucked in this regard. Grind it out, or mercy kill it in 2 years just when PS4/Xbone are hitting their stride?

Anyone have any ideas? lol

Yup, it's a god damned hard one to figure out that's for sure. There's a few options I can see (Just like you).

1) Kill it early, and I mean in the next year ish. Attempt to get onto the HD2 generation like PS4/XBO

2) Wait for 4 years, kill it and come out mid gen of the other two with a similar system.

3) Wait 6-7 years and come out closer to when the PS5/XBT might* be coming with tech of that level.

4) Bail out of the console business and kill Wii U at their leisure

5) Don't give a shit and make something truly unique again so you're not "competing" and come out when you feel like it. Maybe in another 2-3 years.



1 - Too much money lost on R&D. Terrible, terrible goodwill with consumers. And quite frankly impossible to do in such a short time frame without half-arsing it.

2 - This is a very risky one as it puts them in a position similar to Wii U. They don't want to find themselves releasing a similar system when there are two incumbents with massive install bases. For this to work they'd have to really get third parties on board so that when it launched, it started getting ALL the games. However, what happens 2-3 years later when PS5/XBO come out. Does Wii U 2 support die? They'd have to future proof to some degree but again that is costly and the tech might not be there (For a good price)

3 - Again, similar to 2, but at least in lockstep with tech. They'd have to basically bleed money to get third parties on board though as they have a lot to prove. However, this I think is doable for them if they have great supporting services and have a common platform amongst all their devices - i.e. a fully realised ecosystem. They would also have to some how get profitable.

4 - And lose what has been a profitable revenue stream for most of the last 25+ years? Unlikely I think.

5 - Try and make something that people want and have never seen before. Something that's interesting and different and gets them excited like the Wii.

6 - Change the game by moving to company with more devices and/or released more regularly (Yearly or biennially) or going Steam Machine in the sense of upgradable PC like systems.

As much as I don't want it, I think 5 really seems like the one Nintendo would go for. They are terrified of competing with Sony and MS and in reality they have done so much damage to their relations with third parties and core gamers, winning them back would likely seem to them to be both difficult, and costly.

If however, they wanted stop being trumped constantly by all these new devices and at the same time be different to Sony and MS, #6 *might* work. They'd have to get so much aligned right for the package to come together and I'm not sure they have the balls to do it but I can envision something like this working for them.

They could change how they market their brand. No longer so much the "fun for family" even though their games still would be, but play up their heritage. Giving their franchises the limelight and hype they deserve with their own yearly events. Talking up "Nintendo" and leveraging their rich history of videogames and making people proud to own Nintendo stuff. Be bold and proud of what they have then iterate more regularly on the hardware. Figure out some way to train people to be used to the idea of going out and buying Nintendo's new VR headset, or enhanced storage, GPU or hell, even a whole console upgrade but ensure all games can play on older versions (to a certain point). It's all about expectations and training your customers just as Apple did then not fucking them over. The slow upgraders can take their time but the keen bastards like us can get into it more regularly.

I know I sound insane and there are so many possible things that can go wrong and holes that'd need filling, but I'm trying to think crazy here because whatever Nintendo have been doing is not working and they need something that gets them out of this shithole but still maintains their core value of uniqueness. Personally I would LOVE it. Assuming they started getting third parties again and built themselves a great ecosystem, I would have no problem upgrading my consoles or part thereof more regularly - say every 2 years instead of 6 - at the right value of course.

I'll head back to my padded cell now.
 

Tarsul

Member
Various publications reported the opposite, an example would be the following:

Marketwatch - Nintendo president says he won’t resign, hints at move to mobile



http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/2014/01/17/nintendo-president-says-he-wont-resign-hints-at-move-to-mobile/

Clarifications were made today via the WallStreet Journal and many other outlets. There could be a slight shake-up.

would you mind posting the "correction" articles? Can't find them.

If I understand you correctly the investors thought until the markets closed on monday that Nintendo hinted at mobile games but now there are articles that say that this was a misunderstanding, right?
So this would mean that on tuesday the stock could decline again, right?

Just to understand how all these investors act... I knew exactly what Iwata meant by his remarks (because he said the same thing like a year ago) but that others would misunderstand these sentences is absolutely understandable.

Because I find it oddly interesting that the markets closed only 6% down; their must be some believe left in Nintendo that is not shared by many gamers.
 

AzaK

Member
Francis shares his views on recent events, enjoy :p:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_1yUMPStaA

That guy is a master. Brightens my day every time I watch him.

would you mind posting the "correction" articles? Can't find them.

If I understand you correctly the investors thought until the markets closed on monday that Nintendo hinted at mobile games but now there are articles that say that this was a misunderstanding, right?
So this would mean that on tuesday the stock could decline again, right?

Just to understand how all these investors act... I knew exactly what Iwata meant by his remarks (because he said the same thing like a year ago) but that others would misunderstand these sentences is absolutely understandable.

Because I find it oddly interesting that the markets closed only 6% down; their must be some believe left in Nintendo that is not shared by many gamers.

Well whether people think they will go into mobile games or not, there's going to be some sort of big moves required by Nintendo. No point in everyone selling when in a couple of weeks we'll know more.
 

Mononoke

Banned
I Just hope Nintendo stick with Wii u for at least 2 more years.

Pretty sure they will ride it out like the GameCube. It should last a typical console cycle for Nintendo. That doesn't mean they aren't moving forward and making their next strategy. They will certainly be doing that.
 

Mpl90

Two copies sold? That's not a bomb guys, stop trolling!!!
Various publications reported the opposite, an example would be the following:

Marketwatch - Nintendo president says he won’t resign, hints at move to mobile



http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/2014/01/17/nintendo-president-says-he-wont-resign-hints-at-move-to-mobile/

Clarifications were made today via the WallStreet Journal and many other outlets. There could be a slight shake-up.

Eh, as always, there will be people "strangely" misunderstanding statements of Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft. It's something that happens too often with Nintendo, but oh well...
Still, we all know big changes are coming, and on 30th we should know a part of those (mid-term news). Thanks also to tehrik posts, I'm expecting some free to play news like you are.
 

vinnygambini

Why are strippers at the U.N. bad when they're great at strip clubs???
would you mind posting the "correction" articles? Can't find them.

If I understand you correctly the investors thought until the markets closed on monday that Nintendo hinted at mobile games but now there are articles that say that this was a misunderstanding, right?
So this would mean that on tuesday the stock could decline again, right?

Just to understand how all these investors act... I knew exactly what Iwata meant by his remarks (because he said the same thing like a year ago) but that others would misunderstand these sentences is absolutely understandable.

Because I find it oddly interesting that the markets closed only 6% down; their must be some believe left in Nintendo that is not shared by many gamers.

Friday - Marketwatch

Nintendo president says he won’t resign, hints at move to mobile

Quote:
“We are thinking about a new business structure” that could incorporate gaming on smartphones, Iwata said at the news conference, according to media reports.

Monday - Wall Street Journal

Nintendo’s Woes Don’t Mean Game Over For Its Consoles

“The spread of smart devices does not spell the end of game consoles. It’s not that simple,” President Satoru Iwata said at a news conference Friday. The key is to figure out a way to use smartphones to make people aware of Nintendo’s games, and encourage them to try out the console version of the games, Mr. Iwata said.

The narrative is quite different. One implies that Nintendo, through it's new business structure, will venture into smartphone gaming. Conversely, the other claims that Nintendo will be using smartphones as a marketing tool to sell their products, hardware and software.
 

MadOdorMachine

No additional functions
Or like what Apple has going on with the iPod Touch/iPhone/iPad Mini/iPad Air/Soon-to-be iPad Pro/Mac App Store (to an extent). There are so many flaws with the Vita's library and concept (still love mine though) that you can't really use the Vita TV as an example of why the approach wouldn't work. I mean, its main selling point is upscaling a library of gimped console ports, multiplat indies and niche Japanese games on a TV. Aside from basic controller support, nothing really sets it apart from the handheld iteration. And the only market where it's been released prefers to play games on handhelds anyway. No wonder it hasn't been setting the charts on fire.

The top-of-the-line device of this hypothetical Nintendo family could be in the same ballpark as the PS5 and Nextbox. Tegra K1 is based on the same architecture as the GTX 780 Ti and UE4 runs on both, so it's not unreasonable to think that a similar setup Nvidia or another vendor would be available for Nintendo's next handheld and console offerings. The only difference from a technical standpoint would be in the graphical settings. Because the architecture would be fairly standard across the board, developers would choose a lead configuration for their projects and scale up or down from there, just like they do on PC today. So in theory, those looking for a high-end console experience would simply buy the corresponding hardware, which would run games like a proper next-gen system. Of course, this would require Nintendo to patch up their brand image and third party support, but that's pretty much a necessity for any of their platforms going forward.

Here's an example of how a "Nintendo family" lineup could look like;

Handheld 1 ($89 - 119): Entry-level device. Lower resolution screen, plays games on the lowest settings. Cheapest point of entry into the Nintendo ecosystem. Often advertised alongside Nintendo's most accessible IPs (2D Mario, Pokemon, Animal Crossing).

Handheld 2 ($179 - 249): High-end portable device. High PPI display, sleek design. May or may not include Android and/or LTE capability. Aimed at tech enthusiasts looking to get the best portable gaming experience. Initially produced in more limited quantities to gauge market interest. Advertised with series like Fire Emblem and Monster Hunter.

Console 1 ($129 - $179): Aimed at casual gamers, families and is also a suitable option for core gamers looking for the cheapest way to play Nintendo exclusives on the big screen. Comes bundled with a next-gen Wii Remote or some other innovation. Traditional controller sold separately. Advertised with expanded audience titles and stuff like Mario Kart.

Console 2 (>$350): Is more or less in direct competition with the PS5 and Nextbox. Plays games at a similar graphical fidelity. Bundled with a premium traditional controller and may or may not feature TV/DVR functionality. Advertised with the big guns; Zelda, Metroid, games like X and other core-oriented IPs.

All of these systems would play the same games (though some would work better on certain platforms) and cloud saves would keep everything synced across all your Nintendo devices. As I said before, making this work would require a massive effort from Nintendo on their branding, marketing, relationship with third party publishers and online infrastructure. But it's hard to deny that the idea has a lot of potential if executed properly.

Finally someone put this in a very well, articulated post! A few things I would add are that theoretically, you could use a handheld in conjunction with the console in the same manner you use the gamepad on Wii U or stream MP content w/DS/3DS. In other words, one game (ex. Mario Kart) can be do local multiplayer across multiple devices at the same time like you can on DS/3DS. Another example would be asymmetrical multiplayer (NSMBU) where a completely different type of gameplay could be added into the mix if someone had a handheld and console. Also, as far as gamesaves go, cloud saves would be nice and should be included, but there's no reason the devices shouldn't be able to perform updates with each other locally. In other words, an internet connection wouldn't be a requirement for transferring saves from one device to another. A proper account system would be ideal as well as the option for physical media. One last feature that is paramount is the architecture itself. If Nintendo did this right, all of these games would be backwards compatible on future systems. That means they don't have to constantly port their back catalog each time they come out with a new system which in theory should increase their sales.
 
You won't even be able to play Super Mario Bros. on a Nintablet. It would be an outlet for cheap touch games because that's where the casuals went.

I'm not talking about an Android device. They've got their own OS in the works for their next generation of systems. I'm referring to a proper continuation of their portable line.
 
"The key is to figure out a way to use smartphones to make people aware of Nintendo's games, and encourage them to try out the console version of the games, Mr. Iwata said."

The way the revised articles are phrased, it sounds as if there may be some type of cellphone version of Nintendo's games to encourage players to check out the console/premium version. Since it still suggested putting some type of game on cellphones, the stocks may not be negatively affected as much.

Or like what Apple has going on with the iPod Touch/iPhone/iPad Mini/iPad Air/Soon-to-be iPad Pro/Mac App Store (to an extent). There are so many flaws with the Vita's library and concept (still love mine though) that you can't really use the Vita TV as an example of why the approach wouldn't work. I mean, its main selling point is upscaling a library of gimped console ports, multiplat indies and niche Japanese games on a TV. Aside from basic controller support, nothing really sets it apart from the handheld iteration. And the only market where it's been released prefers to play games on handhelds anyway. No wonder it hasn't been setting the charts on fire.

The top-of-the-line device of this hypothetical Nintendo family could be in the same ballpark as the PS5 and Nextbox. Tegra K1 is based on the same architecture as the GTX 780 Ti and UE4 runs on both, so it's not unreasonable to think that a similar setup Nvidia or another vendor would be available for Nintendo's next handheld and console offerings. The only difference from a technical standpoint would be in the graphical settings. Because the architecture would be fairly standard across the board, developers would choose a lead configuration for their projects and scale up or down from there, just like they do on PC today. So in theory, those looking for a high-end console experience would simply buy the corresponding hardware, which would run games like a proper next-gen system. Of course, this would require Nintendo to patch up their brand image and third party support, but that's pretty much a necessity for any of their platforms going forward.

Here's an example of how a "Nintendo family" lineup could look like;

Handheld 1 ($89 - 119): Entry-level device. Lower resolution screen, plays games on the lowest settings. Cheapest point of entry into the Nintendo ecosystem. Often advertised alongside Nintendo's most accessible IPs (2D Mario, Pokemon, Animal Crossing).

Handheld 2 ($179 - 249): High-end portable device. High PPI display, sleek design. May or may not include Android and/or LTE capability. Aimed at tech enthusiasts looking to get the best portable gaming experience. Initially produced in more limited quantities to gauge market interest. Advertised with series like Fire Emblem and Monster Hunter.

Console 1 ($129 - $179): Aimed at casual gamers, families and is also a suitable option for core gamers looking for the cheapest way to play Nintendo exclusives on the big screen. Comes bundled with a next-gen Wii Remote or some other innovation. Traditional controller sold separately. Advertised with expanded audience titles and stuff like Mario Kart.

Console 2 (>$350): Is more or less in direct competition with the PS5 and Nextbox. Plays games at a similar graphical fidelity. Bundled with a premium traditional controller and may or may not feature TV/DVR functionality. Advertised with the big guns; Zelda, Metroid, games like X and other core-oriented IPs.

All of these systems would play the same games (though some would work better on certain platforms) and cloud saves would keep everything synced across all your Nintendo devices. As I said before, making this work would require a massive effort from Nintendo on their branding, marketing, relationship with third party publishers and online infrastructure. But it's hard to deny that the idea has a lot of potential if executed properly.

Very good post. Though, I have doubts that Nintendo would be interested in Tegra again. They already turned that down with the 3DS. Either way, I'm excited about these possibilities since we know that Nintendo is already unifying their software teams and would want their future portable and consoles to be able to play the same game.
Finally someone put this in a very well, articulated post! A few things I would add are that theoretically, you could use a handheld in conjunction with the console in the same manner you use the gamepad on Wii U or stream MP content w/DS/3DS. In other words, one game (ex. Mario Kart) can be do local multiplayer across multiple devices at the same time like you can on DS/3DS. Another example would be asymmetrical multiplayer (NSMBU) where a completely different type of gameplay could be added into the mix if someone had a handheld and console. Also, as far as gamesaves go, cloud saves would be nice and should be included, but there's no reason the devices shouldn't be able to perform updates with each other locally. In other words, an internet connection wouldn't be a requirement for transferring saves from one device to another. A proper account system would be ideal as well as the option for physical media. One last feature that is paramount is the architecture itself. If Nintendo did this right, all of these games would be backwards compatible on future systems. That means they don't have to constantly port their back catalog each time they come out with a new system which in theory should increase their sales.
Yeah, I can see something like that working if Nintendo wants to go that route.
 

numble

Member
That would be awesome. Nintendo could expand and do Disney and Marvel games in house. Disney could leverage the Nintendo IP alongside their other stuff. Real life NintendoLand?

This is my new favourite outcome for Nintendo.
Disney will just license the big games out, like they did after acquiring Lucasarts. They'll use the IP for entertainment, maybe some IP will go into their lucrative mobile games unit. I don't see them focusing resources on big console games that are high risk.
 

Log4Girlz

Member
The Voodoo 5 wasn't released until Summer of 2000- AFTER the launch of the PS2.

And IIRC PCs aren't floating video cards. What kind of CPU would a PC have been running in march of 2000? What kind of RAM? How much overhead did windows need?

There were no PC games on the market that outperformed launch PS2 games, and even DC games like Soul Calibur were turning heads. "Serious sam" above looks awful, frankly.

The way I see it the Gamecube was not underpowdered, it featured enough power to be competitive in its generation. It simply released a little later. Its like the PS3. I don't consider it underpowered because the Xbox 360 came out a year before it, or that they could have used that year to include a gig of RAM or made other changes. If the PS3 were substantially less powerful than the Xbox 360, then yeah I would consider it underpowered.
 

BlackJace

Member
The way I see it the Gamecube was not underpowdered, it featured enough power to be competitive in its generation. It simply released a little later. Its like the PS3. I don't consider it underpowered because the Xbox 360 came out a year before it, or that they could have used that year to include a gig of RAM or made other changes. If the PS3 were substantially less powerful than the Xbox 360, then yeah I would consider it underpowered.

But did it have the right spices?
 
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
Is this the Nintendoomed thread of the day?

Seeing it posted on a Japanese blog that Nintendo made the front page of the Sankei Shimbun today.

KEQrPKy.jpg

Choice lines include:
"Nintendo Shock"
"Wii U Ignored by Gamers Overseas"
"Failure to utilize online features"
"Specs that are a generation behind" -- "on the same level as PS3"

The article concludes:

The PS4 will be released in Japan on the 22nd of next month. It won't be easy for Nintendo to reverse the tide of "PS4 for gamers, smartphones for casuals."
 

royalan

Member
Is this the Nintendoomed thread of the day?

Seeing it posted on a Japanese blog that Nintendo made the front page of the Sankei Shimbun today.



Choice lines include:
"Nintendo Shock"
"Wii U Ignored by Gamers Overseas"
"Failure to utilize online features"
"Specs that are a generation behind" -- "on the same level as PS3"

The article concludes:

If that last quote is accurate, then Nintendo is REALLY up shit creek.

This entire time, "Nintendo is a Japanese company" has been the one excuse for Nintendo to cling to in regards to the Wii U not being well-received abroad. But Nintendo's performance in Japan hasn't been all that hot, either.

If PS4 flies off the shelves even in Japan. Nintendo truly won't have a single excuse left.
 
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
If that last quote is accurate, then Nintendo is REALLY up shit creek.

This entire time, "Nintendo is a Japanese company" has been the one excuse for Nintendo to cling to in regards to the Wii U not being well-received abroad. But Nintendo's performance in Japan hasn't been all that hot, either.

If PS4 flies off the shelves even in Japan. Nintendo truly won't have a single excuse left.

Assuming they get stock, I'm almost certain that the PS4 will be ahead of the Wii U in Japan within half a year.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom