Could Nintendo's next home console entice the early adopters/graphic whores?

[WCP]

Think about how long it's been since the last home gaming console was released. This November, it will be a full 5 years since any home console has launched. Think about that fact for a moment. In the history of video games, when is the last time there has been a 5 year period with ZERO new console introductions? The longest drought between console releases that I'm aware of, is just under 4 years. Between the arrival of the GameCube on November 18th, 2001, to the launch of the Xbox 360 on November 16th, 2005. Just a couple days short of a full 4 years.


It's highly likely that Nintendo will launch the next home console. Most predict a November 2012 launch. Some think Nintendo could shock the gaming world with a e3 2011 announcement and a worldwide launch THIS November (doubtful) Still, whether it's coming in 2012 or this November, Nintendo will be first out the gate.

Certainly, Nintendo hasn't been interested in high-end hardware technology since the days of "Project Reality" with Silicon Graphics. Still, by default, the followup to the Wii should naturally benefit from the advances in CPU's and GPU's since 2004/2005, the years in which the 360 and PS3 designs were locked into place. The Wii HD (for lack of a better name), should easily have 4 times as much ram as the 360/PS3, and the GPU should be well beyond the GPU's in the 360 and PS3. For the first time since 1996, Nintendo will be the technological leader for a brief window of time. If it's a 2012 launch, Nintendo should have a 1 year advantage. If Nintendo could somehow shock the world, and get it out this November, they would have a 2 year advantage.

By default, the next Nintendo system is going to be the highest end home console platform. Surely, Nintendo will have a Mario game, or a Donkey Kong game, or something special to launch along with the system. Also, Nintendo will be well aware of the fact that the last go round, they didn't have the best developers in the world working on their system, mostly for technological reasons. Now, development teams like Rockstar North, Bioware, Epic, Dice, Insomniac, etc, etc, will be developing games for Nintendo's next console. I think the early adopters/console graphic whores, would love to jump on Nintendo's bandwagon if they could take them to a better visual level.

[udisi]

while the timing may suggest a new console, I don't see it yet. I wouldn't doubt that Nintendo is working on a new console, but I think it's launch will be determined by the competition. Right now, the wii is doing just fine for them. They've just released the 3ds. I don't think Nintendo needs to risk a new console until either Microsoft or Sony announce a new system. Nintendo is happy just soaking up profits on it's less powered wii.

I don't think Nintendo will go the high power route. They make money without the risk of an expensive, high powered machine. Sony and Microsoft lose money on system sales, Nintendo does not. The wii proved, they could lead the market with less under the hood. I'd look at Nintendo coming up with the next gimmick or next innovation in gaming. That's not to say they couldn't be working on a high powered system, but I just don't see the motivation for them, seeing as they are perfectly happy and profitable with their current business model.

[joshnickerson]

Will the next Nintendo home system be HD? Most likely.

Will it be a energy sucking power house pumping out mind-blowing realistic graphics years ahead of its competitors? Probably not.

Will it still be tons of fun to play? Definately yes.

[Swamperon]

Nintendo will in no doubt be the first to launch an 8th generation console. Presumably followed closely by Microsoft. 2011 is all about the 3DS. 2012 will see the 'Wii HD', at least announced and shown, if not released.

It will be in HD. It will be more powerful than the 360/PS3 but still be considered at most equal to the other 8th Generation consoles. Motion control will be retained and expanded/improved upon.

And it will be very fun to play. Mario, Metroid, Zelda especially and Super Smash Bros in HD are sure to attract many people.

Before that though we've got Skyward Sword and supposedly Pikmin 3 to play. :)

Just thinking... given how little we've seen/heard of Pikmin 3, I could see it being bumped to a Wii HD launch game.

[NEOFREAK9189]

the nintendo wii system sucks
the wii just is a game cube 1.5
I hope Nintendo make HD system for Hard Core Gamers

[Kyle15]

I can't believe it's been 5 years already! Things were just starting to get good too.



the nintendo wii system sucks
the wii just is a game cube 1.5
I hope Nintendo make HD system for Hard Core Gamers

Your farts sustain me.

[Enigmus]

the nintendo wii system sucks
the wii just is a game cube 1.5
I hope Nintendo make HD system for Hard Core Gamers

By this, do you mean the middle schoolers on Xbox Live? LOL

[IronBuddha]

Will the next Nintendo home system be HD? Most likely.

Will it be a energy sucking power house pumping out mind-blowing realistic graphics years ahead of its competitors? Probably not.

Will it still be tons of fun to play? Definately yes.

This.


By this, do you mean the middle schoolers on Xbox Live? LOL

And this.

[kupomogli]

the nintendo wii system sucks
the wii just is a game cube 1.5

This.


I hope Nintendo make HD system for Hard Core Gamers


By this, do you mean the middle schoolers on Xbox Live?

And this. We don't need a third system with 99% of the releases being FPS.

[Icarus Moonsight]

It could, but I doubt that it will because that was their goal. It's expensive to draw those people and they are arguably more fickle in support than the customer dynamic of the infrequent, non-hobby level game player. What entices the graphic whores scares away many more types of potential users. Someone will serve them, but I don't think Nintendo ever has really, and they have more to lose than gain if they change that approach, especially now. Gamecube was the most 'hardcore' system they ever put out... Catch the pattern yet?

[Leo_A]

while the timing may suggest a new console, I don't see it yet. I wouldn't doubt that Nintendo is working on a new console, but I think it's launch will be determined by the competition. Right now, the wii is doing just fine for them.

Have you been following things like sales and paying attention to what's under development for the Wii?

It's basically where the DS was a year ago. Development is declining, interest is declining, and sales are typically down each month.

They just reached such a high peak that the downward turn for the Wii is going to be a long one with many months of healthy system sales. But I think all the signs indicate Nintendo and consumers are just about ready for a replacement (Personally, I'm betting on an announcement in the spring of 2012 with a Fall release in mind).

Take a look at Nintendo developed projects we have to look forward to in 2011. Granted there should be a few surprises we're not aware of (Such as hopefully some sort of release to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the Zelda franchise that they've hinted about), but their slate was never so thin at this point in the year in years past.

The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword
Kirby's Dreamland
Fatal Frame 2 Remake (Sadly, it's all but certain we won't get that one)
Rhythm Heaven (Seems likely to be another Japanese exclusive after the DS title underperformed)
Pandora no Tou: Kimi no Moto e Kaerumade (No clue, but my money is on it staying in Japan)
Mario Sports Mix (Nintendo published, not even developed in-house)
The Last Story (Nintendo published, expected to be Japanese exclusive)

Sorry, but I think just looking at their slate of releases says it all. We're in the Wii's last year of being Nintendo's flagship console. They're clearly in the midst of WiiHD development unless they have an awful lot of projects to unveil in the coming weeks (Such as at E3) that are due later this year and the early portions of 2012.

You could see the same thing happening to DS development by them well before the 3DS was even officially announced.

[Dobie]

Will the next Nintendo home system be HD? Most likely.

Will it be a energy sucking power house pumping out mind-blowing realistic graphics years ahead of its competitors? Probably not.

Will it still be tons of fun to play? Definately yes.

Nailed it.

[joedick]

I can't imagine anything will come out soon. Most of Nintendo's studios are either finishing up or still working on 3DS games. They're not going to have anything ready to show just yet. Maybe the system'll come out Q4 2012, but I think anybody expecting an announcement at e3 will be disappointed.

[theclaw]

Maybe, maybe not. Look how the DS was in 2008. Nintendo had what for a holiday slate, Kirby Super Star Ultra? About it... They didn't even manage to get Fire Emblem out by xmas in the states unlike Europe.

[rlemmon]

I saw a vid were regi F. (prez. on Nintendo usa) said the 3 ds will be Nintendos focus for the next year. I think x mas of 2012 is looking like the time will see it. Nintendo is always working on the next console as soon as the current one is released there's no way they don't have the wii 2 gearing up for a huge launch. There just being very quite about it as always.

[WCP]

Will it be a energy sucking power house pumping out mind-blowing realistic graphics years ahead of its competitors? Probably not.




Basically, the main jist of what I was trying to say, is that Nintendo will "accidentally" be the technological leader, simply by default. Just because they will be the first out the box with a new console. I agree with everybody else in thinking it will be November 2012 (one month before the world ends :) ) , but still, that gives them a full year advantage over the 3rd Xbox machine. During this year, they will be the only game in town, if somebody is looking for the next-level experience.

Nintendo isn't going to design a technological powerhouse, but by the simple fact of it not having a 5 year old architecture , the Wii HD should go beyond what we are currently getting with the 360 and PS3. If you simply consider the limited amount of ram that developers have to work with on the 360 and PS3, the extra ram in the Wii HD is going to be a god-send to developers. It wouldn't make any sense for Nintendo's console not to have at the very least 4 times the ram of the 360. Ram is cheap enough now that this wouldn't be an issue. The GPU in the Wii HD isn't going to be anywhere near as good as the one in the Xbox 3 or PS4, but by the sake of it being 5 years more current technology than the GPU's in the 360/PS3, it will automatically benefit from that. I'd be shocked if it didn't have a couple of launch games that are going to be big-time technological powerhouses in comparison to the 360 and PS3 games coming in November 2012. Even though I'm sure Microsoft and Sony will have some bangers that holiday.

I'm sure Nintendo would love to return to the days of the SNES in terms of having 3rd party games that sell huge numbers. Back in the SNES days, Nintendo made huge amounts of money from selling their own games, but they were also the platform on which the 3rd party games usually sold the most. That's quite a bit of extra revenue that Nintendo has missed out on in recent years. Games like Modern Warfare and NBA 2K11 and Bulletstorm, etc, etc, sell very well on the 360 and PS3, but the developers don't seriously consider making a Wii version, but with a "relatively" powerful Wii HD on the market, it wouldn't make sense for those games to not appear on that console, and to run at a much higher resolution, with a better framerate and higher rez textures. For the most part, the 360 and PS3 have 720p games running at 30 frames per second. A legit next-gen console should be capable of running games in legit 1080p at 30 fps. It could also have 1080p games that run at 60 fps.

I think early adopters and graphic whores would be all over this console if it happens, which I fully expect it to. Nintendo could potentially sell 2 to 3 million units worldwide in the fall of 2012 if they have enough supply, and can get the price in at about $299.99 .

[Leo_A]

They'd have to pack in a classic controller as part of the standard console bundle if they want to be as friendly as possible to 3rd parties.

Still having to shoehorn motion control into their biggest releases in 2012 if the WiiHD only shipped with motion controls could be enough to still keep 3rd parties away.

I think Nintendo would be best served providing both options right out of the box next time around. I suspect that is going to be Microsoft and Sony's strategy.

[Gameguy]

Won't the next one be 3D compatible with 3D TVs? Since they're going with 3D for handhelds they'll probably do the same thing with home consoles too.

[G-Boobie]

Basically, the main jist of what I was trying to say, is that Nintendo will "accidently" be the technological leader, simply be default.

I doubt it. Nintendo likes to make a big, fat profit on their hardware: Microsoft and Sony lose money on their hardware and make it up in licensing fees and royalties. DLC and downloadable titles too, starting this generation.

Consider that the 3DS just came out. Consider that it's not powerful enough to run the Unreal Engine, whereas my MP3 player and phone have no problems at all with it. What that means is that, yet again, Nintendo has started a four or five year hardware cycle with technology that's already obsolete: consider where smart phones and tablets are going to be in a year or two. The 3DS might have a revision down the line, mostly for cost and design issues, but it'll remain the same hardware. I have no doubt that the Wii successor will be HD capable and have some of the same online capabilities of the 360 and PS3, but since Sony JUST started making a profit on the PS3 and Microsoft is barely making a profit on the 360 hardware, I can't see Nintendo going that route. It'll be good enough, and that's it.

Here's the thing, though: who gives a shit? I played the hell out of my DS, and I've had some great experiences on the Wii. Graphics and "hard core games" don't make a console or handheld a successful platform. Games do that, and I suspect that the Nintendo games for the 3DS and successor to the Wii will continue in that tradition.

[WanganRunner]

Honestly, the 3DS is powerful ENOUGH.

It's an eensy little screen, and huge increases in graphical horsepower hit up against an exaggerated law of diminishing returns on such hardware.

The NGP will look better, but not as big a divide as the PSP had over the DS, IMO.

I can't believe the Wii has been out for five years, I feel like I "missed it", as there are so many titles I haven't gotten to play yet.

If I've learend anything from watching Nintendo since the launch of the original DS, it's that we have no idea what we can expect out of them in regards to hardware. Everyone wants to assume that it's going to be "Wii HD", and it might be, but we can't say that in any confidence.

[WCP]

They'd have to pack in a classic controller as part of the standard console bundle if they want to be as friendly as possible to 3rd parties.

Still having to shoehorn motion control into their biggest releases in 2012 if the WiiHD only shipped with motion controls could be enough to still keep 3rd parties away.

I think Nintendo would be best served providing both options right out of the box next time around. I suspect that is going to be Microsoft and Sony's strategy.


This is a very good point actually. Would Nintendo be willing to include a standard type, dual thumbstick controller as a pack-in with every system? Will they also include a Wii-mote like wand with every single system?

I think it's safe to assume that while the Wii was WILDLY successful because of the newness of the Wii-mote gimmick, they have to know that some of their games would play much better with a standard dual-thumbstick controller. But there no denying that adding one into every system they make will add a cost to the overall package that could take a bit away from the tech side.

I don't think there is any chance that Nintendo comes in at more than $299.99. They won't go above $299.99, I just can't see it. So, if $299.99 was the price, and you have to bundle two controllers in the box, then that is going to cut into the technological ambitions a bit. Still, regardless, the huge bump in ram will be significant.

But yeah, you make a good point. All 3 companies really need to pack both controllers into the box. The 32X, Sega CD and N64 Expansion pack have proved that add-on's, while initially quite interesting, just don't work in the long run. Developers want to sell to the entire console base, not a fraction-offed portion of it.

[Leo_A]

Won't the next one be 3D compatible with 3D TVs? Since they're going with 3D for handhelds they'll probably do the same thing with home consoles too.

They've publically said in recent days that 3D support was unlikely for Nintendo's next generation console.

"Glasses-free is a big deal," Fils-Aime said. "We've not said publicly what the next thing for us will be in the home console space, but based on what we've learned on 3D, likely, that won't be it."

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6306378.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=newstop&tag=newstop%3Btitle%3B19

[Nature Boy]

Personally I don't know how the big N can start hawking another console if it's just a Wii with HD graphics. The reason the Wii blew up is that it enticed non-gamers into buying it. They can't count on those same gamers going "oooh - Wii Sports in HD" and plunking down their coin all over again. They need a new hook or they'll get crushed like they did in the N64/Gamecube eras (in terms of console sales that is - not profitability or anything, you know, actually important)

[WCP]

Personally I don't know how the big N can start hawking another console if it's just a Wii with HD graphics. The reason the Wii blew up is that it enticed non-gamers into buying it. They can't count on those same gamers going "oooh - Wii Sports in HD" and plunking down their coin all over again. They need a new hook or they'll get crushed like they did in the N64/Gamecube eras (in terms of console sales that is - not profitability or anything, you know, actually important)


Here's the thing though, I honestly think that if Nintendo plays their cards right, they could get all the hardcore early adopters jumping on their bandwagon, and that first movers advantage could be really important. I think the timing is absolutely perfect for Nintendo, especially if they shock the gaming world at e3 and announce a new console for this November. I doubt that will happen, instead we'll likely need to wait another year, but regardless, Nintendo is going to launch by themselves. Microsoft will stick with the 360 for 1 more year, and Sony will most likely stick with the PS3 for a couple more years.

This leaves a HUGE opening for a new system for the early adopter console type gamer. The console gamer that just doesn't want to mess with the whole PC thing, just wants a straight up gaming console, but is seriously jonesing for some new hardware. Remember the launch of the Xbox 360 in November of 2005? We really didn't need Next-Gen hardware at that time, but the 360 came out anyways, and was pretty much a runaway success. The same thing could happen with a new Nintendo console.

Nintendo isn't going to be all about high-end technology with this console, but it doesn't really matter. By default, it will be years more advanced than the 360 and PS3 at least in the areas of Ram and GPU tech. Which game developer right now, has been the most vocal about wanting new gaming consoles? Epic Games. Iwata needs to get Mark Rein on the phone immediately and hand deliver Epic a development kit. Get them trying to port Unreal 4 to the Wii 2. All they need is one absolute showcase game, like the original Gears of War for 360, and I guarantee you the console graphic whores will be all over it.

[Rev. Link]

Nintendo isn't going to be all about high-end technology with this console, but it doesn't really matter. By default, it will be years more advanced than the 360 and PS3 at least in the areas of Ram and GPU tech. Which game developer right now, has been the most vocal about wanting new gaming consoles? Epic Games. Iwata needs to get Mark Rein on the phone immediately and hand deliver Epic a development kit. Get them trying to port Unreal 4 to the Wii 2. All they need is one absolute showcase game, like the original Gears of War for 360, and I guarantee you the console graphic whores will be all over it.

Yes, but there's the flaw in your argument. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Nintendo's next system was just about equal in power to the 360 or PS3.

For almost 5 years now, Nintendo has repeatedly stated that it isn't trying to compete with Sony and Microsoft. They're letting those companies go for the high end, power system demographic. Nintendo is too dead set on being different, even to their own detriment, to try and turn that around now and come out with a powerhouse system and attract companies like Epic.

I'd love to see it happen, but I just don't think it will.

[Leo_A]

He's not suggesting Nintendo is going to develop a powerhouse to directly compete on technology with Sony and Microsoft in the next console generation.

He's suggesting, that by default due to half a decade advancement in technology, that the Wii's successor could quite possibly be significantly more powerful than the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 even if Nintendo is crafting a budget friendly console that is going to be sold for a profit from day 1.

And if it's on the market for a decent amount of time before the competition enters the next generation console war, they might attract many people that are looking for cutting edge graphics since it will probably be the most powerful console on the market until Sony and Microsoft enter the fray at what most people think will be a later time.

Not much different then the situation the 3DS is in right now. It appears to be a good bit more powerful than the PSP even though Nintendo didn't design it to directly tackle Sony's next handheld on horsepower alone.

[Rev. Link]

He's not suggesting Nintendo is going to develop a powerhouse to directly compete on technology with Sony and Microsoft in the next console generation.

He's suggesting, that by default due to half a decade advancement in technology, that the Wii's successor could quite possibly be significantly more powerful than the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 even if Nintendo is crafting a budget friendly console that is going to be sold for a profit from day 1.

And if it's on the market for a decent amount of time before the competition enters the next generation console war, they might attract many people that are looking for cutting edge graphics since it will probably be the most powerful console on the market until Sony and Microsoft enter the fray at what most people think will be a later time.

Not much different then the situation the 3DS is in right now. It appears to be a good bit more powerful than the PSP even though Nintendo didn't design it to directly tackle Sony's next handheld on horsepower alone.

I understand what he's saying completely. What I'm saying is that I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo went out of their way to make their next machine less powerful than it should be. The 360 was out for a whole year before the Wii, so by the arguments going on here that means that by default the Wii should be at least as powerful as the 360, but it's not. Nintendo made it much less powerful in order to save money.

Who's to say they won't do exactly the same thing this time around? Just because they'll be first out of the gate doesn't make any difference. They could easily decide to make a system that's just barely an upgrade over the Wii, one that winds up being about equal to the 360 and PS3, and run with it. They don't care one bit about attracting graphics whores. Nintendo is like the Chicago Cubs of video games. They know that it doesn't matter what kind of product they put out, 'cuz their fans are so crazy they'll keep paying for it no matter what.

And let's be honest about something else, while we're at it. Graphics whores aren't going to care about Nintendo. Ever. Most of them are kids who grew up on PSX, or PS2 even at this point, who can't get past the "Nintendo is for kids, lol" attitude. Even if Nintendo did come out with a console that was significantly more powerful than 360 and PS3, and even if they did manage to get some killer 3rd party games on it, all those graphics whore kiddies would just say, "I'm waiting for the PS4 or next Xbox."

It's exactly what happened to the Dreamcast, and we saw what that did to Sega. Nintendo knows it. They're not stupid. They're going to build their next system as absolutely cheaply as they can get away with. For better or for worse.

[WCP]

What I'm saying is that I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo went out of their way to make their next machine less powerful than it should be. The 360 was out for a whole year before the Wii, so by the arguments going on here that means that by default the Wii should be at least as powerful as the 360, but it's not.

There are two problems with that analogy:

1. This isn't a single year difference in technology. The 360/PS3 tech is from 2004/2005. We are in the year 2011 now.

2. The Wii wasn't new technology even in 2006 when it launched. It was simply a shrunk GameCube with a new interface and Wi-Fi built in. (and a couple of extras)




They could easily decide to make a system that's just barely an upgrade over the Wii, one that winds up being about equal to the 360 and PS3, and run with it. They don't care one bit about attracting graphics whores.

It's certainly possible, that Nintendo could decide to bring out a system that would simply get them to the same level of the 360 and PS3. However, even in that scenario, with how cheap ram is, their system should EASILY have quadruple the amount of ram, if not more. The fact that the 360 and PS3 are both stuck in the mud with 512mb of ram, is a pretty huge factor. Also, it would actually be kinda difficult for Nintendo to go to ATI and demand them to scrap everything they've learned in the last 7 years, and put the same GPU that's in the 360, into the Wii 2. In spite of Nintendo's lack of interest in technology, the GPU will be significantly more advanced than what we have in the 360 and PS3. It should have all the advanced shader technology that even bargain basement GPU's get nowadays.



Nintendo is like the Chicago Cubs of video games. They know that it doesn't matter what kind of product they put out, 'cuz their fans are so crazy they'll keep paying for it no matter what.

I won't disagree with this at all. They have their loyalists in the palm of their hand, and always will.




And let's be honest about something else, while we're at it. Graphics whores aren't going to care about Nintendo. Ever. Most of them are kids who grew up on PSX, or PS2 even at this point, who can't get past the "Nintendo is for kids, lol" attitude. Even if Nintendo did come out with a console that was significantly more powerful than 360 and PS3, and even if they did manage to get some killer 3rd party games on it, all those graphics whore kiddies would just say, "I'm waiting for the PS4 or next Xbox."

Now, here is where I beg to differ. Remember these graphic whores that you're talking about... these guys that grew up with PSX and PS2..... Don't you think they are a bit perplexed by this abnormally long console cycle? Graphic whores are just that.... Graphics whores. They want things to look PURDY. Now, admittedly, many of these graphic whores have already given up waiting around for this 10 year cycle to come to a close, and instead they decided to build a gaming PC. But.... There are graphics whores out there, that haven't played PC games in a very long, long time, and they aren't really interested in dealing with drivers and patches and editing config files, etc, etc. These graphic whores would LOVE anything even remotely next-gen, even if it's coming from the Disney-like Nintendo. When they see Mario running around in 1080p at 60 frames per second, they will be converted to the dark side, so to speak. (or I guess, the light side, lol)




It's exactly what happened to the Dreamcast, and we saw what that did to Sega. Nintendo knows it. They're not stupid. They're going to build their next system as absolutely cheaply as they can get away with. For better or for worse.

I'm sure they will build in cheaply, but at the same time, they haven't made a "new" console in over 10 years, if you know what I mean. Even as cheaply as they will design it, by default it's going to have significantly improved capabilities. Think of their next-console as the equivalent to the N64. The N64 wasn't lightyears beyond the Playstation or Saturn, but it still was technologically superior, and early adopters were all over the N64 playing Shadows of the Empire and Turok.

[Leo_A]

I understand what he's saying completely. What I'm saying is that I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo went out of their way to make their next machine less powerful than it should be. The 360 was out for a whole year before the Wii, so by the arguments going on here that means that by default the Wii should be at least as powerful as the 360, but it's not.

You clearly didn't understand what he was saying completely.

The Xbox 360 didn't even come close to being sold at a profit when it launched. Why do you think the Wii should've suddenly been able to profitably out perform the Xbox 360 just a few months later at a fraction of the MSRP?

Time marches on quickly. What was cutting edge back when the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 launched can be done very cheaply in 2011. It isn't out of the realm of possibility that Nintendo, in their quest to market a next generation console that is affordable yet still be sold at a profit from day 1, that they could launch with something that significantly outperforms two consoles that launched many years before. Of course, it also could just be on par with what is currently on the market (Or perhaps a bit weaker, even). We're just talking about realistic possibilities after all.

It isn't rocket science. Technology marches on, it isn't static like you seem to think it is. It doesn't cost a fortune to outperform current platforms in 2011, so a system more powerful than the current generation competition doesn't seem to necessarily contradict with Nintendo's philosophy that pure horsepower isn't critical in the home console space.

[duffmanth]

I don't think there will be any new consoles released this year. As for next year, I'm pretty confident that Nintendo will be launching a new console that will have long over due HD capabilities. They're gonna have to release something that can compete with the 360 and PS3 in terms of technology, and something that can also compete with MS and Sony's next systems. Although the Wii is still doing OK, it's been on a slow decline for a while now, there's next to no AAA games coming for it, and they can't rely on motion sensing alone to sell their consoles anymore.

[duffmanth]

Here's the thing though, I honestly think that if Nintendo plays their cards right, they could get all the hardcore early adopters jumping on their bandwagon, and that first movers advantage could be really important. I think the timing is absolutely perfect for Nintendo, especially if they shock the gaming world at e3 and announce a new console for this November. I doubt that will happen, instead we'll likely need to wait another year, but regardless, Nintendo is going to launch by themselves. Microsoft will stick with the 360 for 1 more year, and Sony will most likely stick with the PS3 for a couple more years.

This leaves a HUGE opening for a new system for the early adopter console type gamer. The console gamer that just doesn't want to mess with the whole PC thing, just wants a straight up gaming console, but is seriously jonesing for some new hardware. Remember the launch of the Xbox 360 in November of 2005? We really didn't need Next-Gen hardware at that time, but the 360 came out anyways, and was pretty much a runaway success. The same thing could happen with a new Nintendo console.

Nintendo isn't going to be all about high-end technology with this console, but it doesn't really matter. By default, it will be years more advanced than the 360 and PS3 at least in the areas of Ram and GPU tech. Which game developer right now, has been the most vocal about wanting new gaming consoles? Epic Games. Iwata needs to get Mark Rein on the phone immediately and hand deliver Epic a development kit. Get them trying to port Unreal 4 to the Wii 2. All they need is one absolute showcase game, like the original Gears of War for 360, and I guarantee you the console graphic whores will be all over it.

If Nintendo were to release a new console this year, I don't think it would be "years" ahead of the competition? I think it's almost certain that MS will have a new console out by late 2012, so Nintendo would only have a year on it assuming they were to release something this year? I also think the next Nintendo console will produce cutting edge visuals, they can't come out with another console that has Gamecube/Wii graphics.

[WanganRunner]

Even if Nintendo did come out with a console that was significantly more powerful than 360 and PS3, and even if they did manage to get some killer 3rd party games on it, all those graphics whore kiddies would just say, "I'm waiting for the PS4 or next Xbox."

It's exactly what happened to the Dreamcast, and we saw what that did to Sega. Nintendo knows it. They're not stupid. They're going to build their next system as absolutely cheaply as they can get away with. For better or for worse.

^^
This is absolutely right. Nintendo is not going to willingly pull a Dreamcast.

[WCP]

If Nintendo were to release a new console this year, I don't think it would be "years" ahead of the competition? I think it's almost certain that MS will have a new console out by late 2012, so Nintendo would only have a year on it assuming they were to release something this year? .


Well, it's all speculation at this point, but here is my theory:


Microsoft isn't in any rush to bring out a new console. While, technically, they are in 2nd or 3rd place in this console war, depending on what you believe, they still command more of the Top 10 Games Sold list every single month. Things are going well for them right now. This is when they are starting to actually make a little bit of money on the whole Xbox thing. So, I just don't think there is a ton of incentive for them to "rock the boat" so to speak, with a new console introduction anytime soon.

However.... They aren't going to just sit idly by, and watch Nintendo (or Sony), screw things up for them. If Nintendo were to launch a Wii 2 this year, and it was a well designed machine with decent power, I think MS would be forced to fast track their next system for November 2012.

Still, I think a Wii 2 this year is unlikely. As much as things are starting to slip a little bit for Nintendo in terms of their stock price and whatnot, I just don't think they will be so pro-active as to already have a console ready to go for this November. I think 2012 is pretty much a done deal for them.

So, the question then goes to this... Will November 2012 see both a Wii 2 and a Xbox 720 (for lack of a better moniker) ? I doubt it. I think Nintendo will have 1 year all to themselves, regardless if it's this year or next. Now, if Nintendo somehow doesn't release a Wii 2 by 2012, then all bets are off. We will definitely see multiple new console launches in 2013 if we haven't seen anything prior.

[retro junkie]

I think that Nintendo will focus on the 3DS this year and into 2012. And it is time for Nintendo to go through one of their cycles with the Wii. Offer different color Wiis, various packages which would include multiple Wiimotes, game pack-ins, and the biggest incentive of all, a price cut. I think probably the next step is a Wii for $159.00. Maybe a big game release or two. This will clean out that excess inventory and stall for time. I say no new Wii until at least 2013, if then. I think you'll see Sony or Microsoft make the first move. Nintendo doesn't care about the other guys. They have shown that with the Wii. The Wii has a totally different end user than the other two systems.

But I think that a 10 year cycle for hardware would be good for a change. Developers would have to dig deep into their creative juices to make a game that would pull in the gamer and sell systems. A game that would have to center around the gameplay. A 10 year cycle gives us time to get over the graphics thrill bubble.

But I think that is a bit unrealistic in thinking that they will stick to a 10 year cycle. It is all about selling game systems. When they stop selling, then we hype it up and introduce the new.

[The 1 2 P]

While I do think Nintendo will be the first to launch a new system I don't think it will be much more powerful then the current 360 or PS3. But this of course would be by choice. Nintendo knows that they need to keep being innovative if they want to stay ahead of the other two companies.

As for graphics, I would rather have a great story over great graphics and Nintendo would rather make fun games instead of realistic graphics so I doubt their next system will be very alluring to...what did you call them, graphic whores? The Wii successor will still get scooped up by early adopters and Nintendo fanboys the same way the the next Sony and Microsoft system will get picked up(by early adopters). But I don't think either company is in a rush and Nintendo certainly doesn't want to lose any momentum for the 3DS by announcing a new console too soon. Thats what happened when the 3DS was announced before the XL was launched.

[WCP]

I say no new Wii until at least 2013, if then. I think you'll see Sony or Microsoft make the first move. .



Nintendo is a publicly traded company. They have stock.

Here is a chart of their stock for the last 5 years, since the intro of the Wii:

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=NTDOY.PK+Interactive#symbol=ntdoy.pk;ran ge=5y;compare=;indicator=volume;charttype=area;cro sshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=;


You can see by the chart that Nintendo was on top of the world in fall of 2007. Nintendo's stock also did amazingly well in May, June and July of 2008. Early 2009 was pretty good, but after that Nintendo's stock price has taken a real hit, and has been quite flat. It's currently at a 52 week low of $30.10. It's highest point in the last year has been $42.95. Nintendo hit a high of $76.87 in late October of 1997.

The 3DS is selling.......... OK. Probably below Nintendo's expectations. The only way Nintendo is going to get a jump in the stock price is if the 3DS starts to really get on fire, or if the Wii all of a sudden has a late burst of sales, or some amazing new game comes out that sells in the bucketloads. Right now, things aren't looking so hot for Nintendo. I don't think we'll see a system this year, but they are going to have to do something in the near term to save their stock price (in regards to stock price). I'm expecting a pretty legit price drop for the Wii at e3, which will spike sales a little bit, but I think the Wii had it's last big Xmas last year. This xmas will be disappointing, and it will be obvious to Nintendo to bring out a new console in 2012. IMHO

[Press_Start]

You can see by the chart that Nintendo was on top of the world in fall of 2007. Nintendo's stock also did amazingly well in May, June and July of 2008. Early 2009 was pretty good, but after that Nintendo's stock price has taken a real hit, and has been quite flat. It's currently at a 52 week low of $30.10. It's highest point in the last year has been $42.95. Nintendo hit a high of $76.87 in late October of 1997.

Well, facing the aftermath of an earthquake, bracing for tsunami, nuclear fallout, emotion scarring, making breakfast, doing the laundry, fix the car, mow the lawn, put on my makeup, get my nails done, neutur the dog.....WHAT F*&KIN' MORE DO YA WANT FROM ME?!

Signed,
Nintendo.



The 3DS is selling.......... OK. Probably below Nintendo's expectations. The only way Nintendo is going to get a jump in the stock price is if the 3DS starts to really get on fire, or if the Wii all of a sudden has a late burst of sales, or some amazing new game comes out that sells in the bucketloads. Right now, things aren't looking so hot for Nintendo. I don't think we'll see a system this year, but they are going to have to do something in the near term to save their stock price (in regards to stock price). I'm expecting a pretty legit price drop for the Wii at e3, which will spike sales a little bit, but I think the Wii had it's last big Xmas last year. This xmas will be disappointing, and it will be obvious to Nintendo to bring out a new console in 2012. IMHO

You're not seeing the bigger picture. Nintendo's learning their lesson from the Wii. The shortage of the hot-selling product cause them to miss out a good chunk of potential revenue for 2 holiday seasons despite the fame. This time they're snowballing for a massive 3DS Xmas money parade come winter 2011 with a bigger saturation for better returns than the Wii....in theory. I bet ya this year at E3 they'll be a whole slew of major 3DS titles plus the slight mention of their next home console. (I'm hoping they call it Super Wii.) ;)

As for the topic at hand, if there's anything we learned in the last decade already, it's:

Better graphics =/= Better Games

I'm sorry but it's true. Look at Sonic, Suikoden, Banjo-Kazooie, Crash Bandicoot, Megaman X7, Vectorman.....hell Final Fantasy! The stampeding elephant that shreds, stomps, and kills the "graphix myth" a thousand lifetimes over. Sony and MS bit off more processing power than they could chew that they broke away from the 5-year cycle cause costs for a next-gen would be astronomical to put it conservatively, not to mention price hikes for games to compensate in a grueling economy were in now.

Nintendo learned their lesson. They know a game's visuals isn't worth Yoshi eggs without a solid, fun and innovative gameplay premise to support it. They pride themselves on that mantra and that's why they've remained ahead of the pack for multiple generations. Whatever the GPU power of the next console, be it stronger or weaker to PS360, it's definitely not the first thing on Iwata's and Miyamoto's mind

[fishsandwich]

I'm sorry but it's true. Look at Sonic, Suikoden, Banjo-Kazooie, Crash Bandicoot, Megaman X7, Vectorman.....hell Final Fantasy! The stampeding elephant that shreds, stomps, and kills the "graphix myth" a thousand lifetimes over.

Wait... what?


Please explain these particular games in regards to context.



?

[WanganRunner]

Thought this was interesting.

http://wiimedia.ign.com/wii/image/article/113/1135489/everything-we-know-about-wii-2-20101208003120426.jpg

[kupomogli]

They pride themselves on that mantra and that's why they've remained ahead of the pack for multiple generations.

Remaining ahead of the pack means first. They certainly weren't first with both the N64 and Gamecube.

If the Wii 2 is released with bc with the Wii and Gamecube, then I'll gladly pick it up sooner rather than later. Hopefully Wii games are still online compatible as well.

[Leo_A]

Well, facing the aftermath of an earthquake, bracing for tsunami, nuclear fallout...

You do realize all that has just been going on over the past few weeks, don't you? Hard to see why it's relevant when discussing the drop in Nintendo's stock price over the past several years.


You're not seeing the bigger picture.

He's the one looking at a indicator of Nintendo's success (Their stock price, in this case). And he's shown you how it has dropped significantly over the past several years.

Clearly, the original DS and the Wii are gradually losing steam and it's clearly reflected in their financials and the value of their stock. It was the turn for the DS to be replaced this year, and I bet it's going to be the Wii's turn next year since they can't really avoid replacing it much longer.

I think this will likely be the last Christmas season where the Wii is Nintendo's flagship gaming console.

[gum_drops]

I see the next wii being about on par with the current consoles. Nintendo will likely want to keep the system inexpensive and "small". There is only so much you can fit into a small game box without running into heat issues. Honestly, the touted jump to HD will probably be enough for the Nintendo base, it will not have to surpass the 360 or PS3 in terms of graphical power to sell a ton systems.

Knowing Nintendo they are probably less concerned about maxing the graphical capability and more about the unique selling point of the console. I have no idea what it will be, an improved motion sensor set-up likely, but I bet they have something else up their sleeve.

[Enigmus]

If the Wii 2 is released with bc with the Wii and Gamecube, then I'll gladly pick it up sooner rather than later. Hopefully Wii games are still online compatible as well.

If the hardware on Wii 2 (I prefer calling it "Wiivolution" for the time being) is advanced enough, there may be no GCN compatibility unless they either make their own emulator or licence out Dolphin and convert its' code, not to mention that people possibly would ignore the B/C altogether due to its' age. Technology truly marches on, sadly.

[Press_Start]

Please explain these particular games in regards to context.


Compare Sonic 1,2,3, & Knuckles to Sonic Heroes, Sonic PS360, Secret Rings, Black Knight, & Unleashed, or....

Compare Final Fantasy I-IX to FF X, X-2, & XII,

Compare Banjo-Kazooie to B-K Nuts & Bolts,

Compare Suikoden I&II to III, IV, V & Tactics,

Compare Parasite Eve to 3rd Birthday....

If you can honestly and objectively say for any of these that the latter is better than the former, then I got a bridge in Brooklyn that I want sell ya. ;)


You do realize all that has just been going on over the past few weeks, don't you? Hard to see why it's relevant when discussing the drop in Nintendo's stock price over the past several years.


Cause everybody in Japan is hurting right now.

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2011/03/14/japanese-gaming-stocks-plummet-in-quake-aftermath.aspx

http://pink-sheets.info/2011/04/earnings/most-japan-stocks-drop-after-earthquake-fast-retailing-jumps.html/

It's like getting called off by your disingenuous boss as "a lazy bum" after being shot 3 times.



He's the one looking at a indicator of Nintendo's success (Their stock price, in this case). And he's shown you how it has dropped significantly over the past several years.


I betcha looking back at pre-Wii numbers, Nintendo was doomed to fail, right?

But....stock price as an indicator of success? :bullshit: :bullshit: :bullshit:

[Leo_A]

What do you think the price of a share of stock reflects? The number of letters in their corporate name? It's directly tied with the value of the company, it's current financial performance, and what people think is going to happen with it in the future. It's directly tied with the success of a company.

And of course everyone is hurting in Japan right now. But he wasn't just talking about the past month, which you can't seem to understand.

And Nintendo doomed to failure before the Wii? They were still doing very well financially thanks to years of major success with handheld gaming and the DS was pulling in record numbers for Nintendo at the time. But they weren't performing spectacularly in the home console space. Sales were down, 3rd party support was weak, two generations of Nintendo consoles had been all but dead before being replaced, and Nintendo themselves came out and said that if the GameCube's replacement didn't perform better, they were leaving the console business. If the GameCube hadn't been sold at a profit from day 1 and their own 1st party development hadn't been successful, it would've been a disaster of a console.

But their place was never threatened. Their financials were in good shape and they were dominating handheld gaming even as their success in the world of consoles was diminishing.

So no, they weren't doomed for failure.


If the hardware on Wii 2 (I prefer calling it "Wiivolution" for the time being) is advanced enough, there may be no GCN compatibility unless they either make their own emulator or licence out Dolphin and convert its' code, not to mention that people possibly would ignore the B/C altogether due to its' age. Technology truly marches on, sadly.

If IBM creates the CPU and ATI creates the GPU (Which I believe is confirmed or at least strongly rumored), there is an excellent possibility that the Wii HD will still be compatible with GameCube and Wii code.

[WanganRunner]

I don't really care if the thing is backwardly compatible to GCN. I have three GCN's, a Wii, and a Panasonic Q. If I want to play Gamecube games, I think I'm safely covered.

Even Wii backward compatibility is sort of optional for me. I mean, I DO own a Wii....

I'm not sure when B/C became so incredibly important.



You know, you guys, and people on Assembler, and people in the press. I'm mad at all of you. I'd just gotten my 3DS, happy as a clam, reading every launch review, anticipating games, etc. Perfectly content.

Not now, NOW I'm all convinced that Nintendo is going to ZOMG MEGATON at E3 and I can't think about anything else.

Anyone remember Thursdayton?



http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b366/coolnerd16/THURSDAYTON.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v177/gmcube/thurd.gif

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b366/coolnerd16/IBELIEVE.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v163/rperez/Daytona.jpg

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y227/mildewproduction/Revolution.jpg

[Icarus Moonsight]

What do you think the price of a share of stock reflects?

Honestly, that depends. Price divided among how many shares? The immediate per share figure doesn't tell you anything by itself. That's like trying to express velocity as 800ft v 600ft and claiming the first is faster, but it could be that the whole story is 800ft/minute v 600ft/second. If the stock price was double years ago, but the total share volume is triple now, that's growth. Sometimes a lower buy-in is desirable, also splits.

I don't know where the particulars fall in this case, I'm just stating that the per share price is fairly meaningless on it's own.

[Rob2600]

What do you think the price of a share of stock reflects? ... It's directly tied with the success of a company.

That isn't always the case. Microsoft's revenue and profits are exponentially higher than Apple's, yet Apple's stocks are valued higher.

The stock market is a game that doesn't necessarily reflect reality.



the per share price is fairly meaningless on it's own.

Exactly. Icarus beat me to it.

[WanganRunner]

That isn't always the case. Microsoft's revenue and profits are exponentially higher than Apple's, yet Apple's stocks are valued higher.

The stock market is a game that doesn't necessarily reflect reality.

It's not so much that it doesn't reflect reality, it just isn't limited to CURRENT reality.

Share prices are a function both of current performance and expected future growth. Apple is viewed as having more room to grow than Microsoft does, at least by securities analysts.

This is why P/E ratios for small software firms are so much higher than in, say, textiles.

[Leo_A]

That isn't always the case. Microsoft's revenue and profits are exponentially higher than Apple's, yet Apple's stocks are valued higher.

The stock market is a game that doesn't necessarily reflect reality.

Stock prices are a reflection of a lot more information than just revenue and profits.


Price divided among how many shares?

What bearing does that or the rest of your post have on the subject (I'm not even sure what you're getting at when you start talking about dividing the price of a share of stock by the number of shares, it's a meaningless number)? We're talking about the price of 1 share of stock and the downward trend of that price over the past couple of years. Nothing more, nothing less.

As I already stated and WanganRunner supported me on, stock price reflects the percieved value of a firm (its current assets, its current financial performance, and its projected performance in the future).

That's all I ever said and I'm shocked anyone could contest that. Despite what Press Start wants to claim, the price of a share of a stock is a good indicator of how a company is performing since it reflects what the market percieves its value to be. And if we see a downward spiral in that valuation, it isn't a large leap to suggest that they're going to be doing something to turn it around (i.e., releasing new hardware).

Nintendo is a corporation whose task is to maximize its value for their shareholders. That means they can't stand idle as their stock price falls.

[Nature Boy]

If Nintendo were to launch a Wii 2 this year, and it was a well designed machine with decent power, I think MS would be forced to fast track their next system for November 2012.

I disagree totally and here's why: the Xbox gamer isn't an xbox gamer *just* because it was more powerful than the Wii (although that certainly helps). The xbox gamer is an xbox gamer because of games like Halo.

Nintendo can release a machine that puts xbox graphics to shame, but if they want the xbox gamer, they need the *games*

Nintendo's own games are brilliant in their own right, but they're not Halo. Or Fallout 3. Or Left 4 Dead. That's the stuff an xbox gamer wants. The graphics are important but the content is also important. Dark and gritty over cute and cuddly.

MS just released the Kinect to get the casual market. If Wii 2 comes out next year, MS just has to focus on Kinect software. They can keep their hardcore audience by releasing something like Halo Reach 2

[Rickstilwell1]

I think I know why a lot of people think the next Nintendo console will be like the Wii. Nintendo consoles so far tend to innovate the control scheme in 2's.

NES introduced the D-Pad. SNES graphically enhanced the same thing the NES was doing

N64 introduced this particular form of analog stick. Gamecube graphically enchanced games from that era.

Wii brought motion sensing into the controller. So maybe people are right. The next step is usually to just enhance the graphics and add other small improvements.

The generation after that will probably see the next form of innovation whatever that may be.

[Icarus Moonsight]

Again... Stock price has little to do with the soundness of a business, on it's own. Offering stock is a means of a business to acquire capital investment, nothing more, nothing less. Profit is the indicator of a healthy business (as long as it's reporting and dealings are honest - see Enron for details), not it's stock price (Enron had a high stock price up to the point if fell apart). It does reflect how valued the public offered shares are among investors and traders (yet *gasp* they make mistakes in value judgments!), but for a business of Nintendo's size, that is only a small part of the whole picture.

If you are so certain about their decline, why don't you try throwing down a short against Nintendo and see what happens? It's going down right? Every analyst recommendation I can find places ADR between Hold and Strong Buy. I've yet to see one Sell recommendation, moderate or strong. Seems that many investors think it's doing fine... Makes sense to me, because if I were interested in stock at all, I'd be buying in on a dip. Seems to be right where Nintendo is at right now. A sound and historically performing company with a dipped buy-in cost. But, I don't trust this 'market', at least not enough to put any money down. Too riddled with bullshit.

[Press_Start]

again... Stock price has little to do with the soundness of a business, on it's own. Offering stock is a means of a business to acquire capital investment, nothing more, nothing less. Profit is the indicator of a healthy business (as long as it's reporting and dealings are honest - see enron for details), not it's stock price (enron had a high stock price up to the point if fell apart). It does reflect how valued the public offered shares are among investors and traders (yet *gasp* they make mistakes in value judgments!), but for a business of nintendo's size, that is only a small part of the whole picture....

...but, i don't trust this 'market', at least not enough to put any money down. Too riddled with bullshit.


the stock market is a game that doesn't necessarily reflect reality.

QFT!!!

Now I want to add a little excerpt I found that might answer the OP's question and a few others nicely:


Well, Nintendo is a company that makes and sells games to make a profit, so we feel that we should continue to make the market expand rather than shrink. Our company president certainly feels that should be policy. To do that, there may be times that we have to take a loss when we make a new product without following the pack...to create projects that will alleviate some of the problems in the industry. To try to keep breaking new ground...(laughs)....A bit pretentious perhaps, but we think we have that sort of responsibility.

-Gamepro Magazine, March '98, Issue 114, pg. 55

[WCP]

I disagree totally and here's why: the Xbox gamer isn't an xbox gamer *just* because it was more powerful than the Wii (although that certainly helps). The xbox gamer is an xbox gamer because of games like Halo.

Nintendo can release a machine that puts xbox graphics to shame, but if they want the xbox gamer, they need the *games*

Nintendo's own games are brilliant in their own right, but they're not Halo. Or Fallout 3. Or Left 4 Dead. That's the stuff an xbox gamer wants. The graphics are important but the content is also important. Dark and gritty over cute and cuddly.

You mentioned Fallout 3 and Left 4 Dead. If Nintendo has a next-gen system they are getting ready for Fall 2012, you can bess believe that they will be getting development kits to Bethesda and Valve. Why wouldn't Bethesda port a version of Skyrim onto the Super Wii ? They could have it running in 1080p at 60fps. Same thing with Valve. When it comes time for Half-Life 3, why wouldn't it also be on Super Wii, considering that it would make an easy port, and would run even smoother than the 360/PS3 versions, plus it would look alot better running at a native 1080p.

I think you underestimate how quickly 3rd party companies would be willing to jump onto a new machine. I'm guessing alot of the best development studios are getting just a little bit restless with not having some new hardware to tax. They are probably looking forward to see their grand visions displayed in a more convincing way. The Super Wii could provide that opportunity, by default, a full year before a Xbox 3 or PS4 .




MS just released the Kinect to get the casual market. If Wii 2 comes out next year, MS just has to focus on Kinect software. They can keep their hardcore audience by releasing something like Halo Reach 2


Microsoft's bread and butter audience, are the people that play Call of Duty, Halo, Battlefield, Gears, Bulletstorm, etc, etc. These are the same early adopter, graphic lover types that bought a 360 in the Fall of 2005. Don't underestimate the early adopter from a standpoint of switching allegiances. They will go to whoever is bringing the noise so to speak. In my original post, I said that Iwata should be hand delivering Epic Games a dev. kit, and I think something like this would actually happen. Ok, maybe not Iwata, but Reggie Fils-Amie will deliver it. Nintendo has to know that they could scoop up those same early adopters that gave the 360 such a huge lift in late 2005 early 2006. The early adopters (people like me), are restless by now, and we want something new and exciting, something much more exciting than motion gaming. We want some new hardware that is capable of taking that immersion feeling to a whole new level. Microsoft has to be well aware of this, and they will surely fast-track their 720 with a Super Wii launch.

[Leo_A]

I'm well aware of what stock price reflects, I have my MBA.

Did you see anywhere where I stated they're performing poorly? Their stock price had slipped over the past two years, mostly due to declining sales of the Wii and DS and projections for even further drastic drops in the future for both platforms. That's why the rumors of a Wii price drop hit today and why I'm all but certain Nintendo is going to release a new console in 2012.

That's all I ever stated.

[Icarus Moonsight]

I don't doubt any of that. With the drawn correlation being (my paraphrasing to follow) that Nintendo is reading investor driven signals from the performance of their stock, I have no issue with that. Clarity achieved. :)

[Swamperon]

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2011/04/14/new-nintendo-console-at-e3.aspx

Not entirely related to the topic but just one the many rumours that are now going around.

Oddly I actually really like the name 'Nintendo HD'. Obviously it won't be called that but it does have a certain ring to it.

EDIT: Official E3 twitter have talked about it http://twitter.com/#!/e3expo/status/58610927314018304

'Course they could just be doing pre-E3 hype and know nothing but interesting none the less, and factor in the supposed price cut in May.

2nd EDIT: http://uk.wii.ign.com/articles/116/1161875p1.html Even more! Apparently we're getting a pre-announcement of some sort this month, with a reveal at E3. Time to play the waiting game I guess.

[joshnickerson]

Not gonna happen. These news sites have been pulling the "Wii HD to be announced this e3!" schtick since 2007. I forsee another "M3GAT0N!!!111" event here...

[Leo_A]

Not gonna happen. These news sites have been pulling the "Wii HD to be announced this e3!" schtick since 2007. I forsee another "M3GAT0N!!!111" event here...

I never saw any rumors of a WiiHD from the press until now.

[WCP]

Hmm. Interesting. Rumors are swirling pretty heavily now. Nintendo's presser is on June 6th I believe. The thing is, everybody is talking about a Fall 2012 announcement, and I just wonder if Nintendo will want to do that, from a standpoint of affecting their current Wii sales this year. Why buy a regular Wii (even at $150), if a Super Wii is just around the corner?

Sure, I know that most console companies will talk about their next console more than a year away from it, but they normally don't give very concrete info about it. It's more like just discussing some of the possibilities for the new console. I'm still holding out a tiny bit of hope for a launch this November. I know it's super doubtful, but ya never know...

[Greg2600]

Nintendo, 5 years late to the party.

[Cobra Commander]

Kotaku says it'll be more powerful than the PS3 and 360. (http://kotaku.com/#%215792197/the-blindingly-obvious-improvements-we-want-in-wii-2) Really?

[heybtbm]

Kotaku says it'll be more powerful than the PS3 and 360. (http://kotaku.com/#%215792197/the-blindingly-obvious-improvements-we-want-in-wii-2) Really?

Think "Dreamcast".

Prettier than the PS and N64 at launch, but woefully inadequate when compared to the PS2/Gamecube/Xbox. Kind of an in-between generation...a bridge between the two. Unlike the Dreamcast, the Wii 2 probably isn't going to die an early death. It'll rake in the billions like everything else Nintendo does.

I can't wait to see this thing. HD Mario, Zelda, etc...very cool. Just keep the nauseating, unwanted, and ultimately unused 3D bullshit to a minimum, please.

[WanganRunner]

IGN doesn't tend to post up stuff like this unless they're reasonably sure it's true.

At least not something this specific.



This "screen on the controller" idea seems goofy and expensive, but who knows.

[WCP]

This "screen on the controller" idea seems goofy and expensive, but who knows.

Yeah, I was reading somewhere that the screen could be 6 inches, which just seems crazy. It would be like if the Samsung Galaxy Tab was the controller. Just way too damn big, imo. The Samsung Galaxy is a 7 inch screen right? If this is 6 inches, plus has some buttons and a d-pad, then it has to be at least as big as a Samsung Galaxy. Seems kinda crazy to me, but I can totally understand why Nintendo would want to come out with something unique like that. Basically, the way they are looking at it, is that they still want everybody that bought a Wii to buy one of these, and they know that it needs to have a special gimmick to become a runaway hit like the Wii did.

Nintendo is a victim of their own success. After climbing the top of the mountain, investors want to see nothing less than that top of the mountain again. The pressure is on Nintendo to knock it out of the park again, and I must say it's going to be a difficult task for them. They need another miracle gimmick that works. I think what they thinking, is that people love their ipads, and this is going to be like a mini-ipad that they will use to control games. It will allow them to do touch sensitive games, while using their big TV screen. It's also going to have buttons, a D-pad and Wii-mote sensing with no need for a sensor bar, or something like that. I think it's also going to have a camera on the controller, allowing for augmented reality to be used.

My problem is.... where are the dual thumbsticks ? Where is the rumble ? (have a hard time believing it will have rumble if it's going to have a screen built into it) Why is Nintendo allergic to the idea of dual-thumbsticks?

[Tupin]

I heard that it was going to have dual thumbsticks. Hopefully they aren't right next to each other.

[Rickstilwell1]

That controller is starting to sound like a PSP2 swallowed a Wiimote...

[Swamperon]

I really doubt a 6 inch screen in the controller, especially a HD one as some places are touting.

I don't even really see the point... it didn't work out great for the Dreamcast (Though I did love the feature) and will force the price of controllers up, and Nintendo is all about gaming together in the living room these days.

Of course it could always come with two controllers by default. An advanced version of the GC controller and then also a motion controller as well.

[Icarus Moonsight]

Sounds like an update to the VMU - All grown up...

http://gearmedia.ign.com/gear/image/article/116/1162204/how-could-the-wii-2-controller-work-20110415053115064-000.jpg

It's a mock-up, of course.

[heybtbm]

This screen on the controller business reminds me of the GBA/Gamecube link cable. Never really understood the point...not to mention how uncomfortable it was to hold.

I'd like to give Nintendo the benefit of the doubt...but then again look at the 3DS and it's "you must hold it just perfect" 3D effects. I can totally see them releasing the main controller as a hand-cramp-inducing rectangle with virtual touch screen buttons. Even Sony was completely invested in and set to release the "Bat-a-rang" controller up until the last minute when they chickened out. Huge, successful companies do stupid things all the time. Especially when they see themselves as the elite innovators of their particular business.

[Greg2600]

Sounds like an update to the VMU - All grown up...

http://gearmedia.ign.com/gear/image/article/116/1162204/how-could-the-wii-2-controller-work-20110415053115064-000.jpg

It's a mock-up, of course.Can't wait to see the price tag on that.

[NayusDante]

So for the recent batch of rumors regarding the hardware...

I like the controller. As long as it has as many buttons as an SNES pad and at least one analog stick, I'll be happy. Right analog can be replaced by touch screen, and FPS would aim with gyro sensors or something else. NGP-like rear touch pad would work too. I'm also anticipating the ability to use a DS or 3DS as a controller, because that's what this thing sounds like. You can make the controller more expensive like this if the consumer already has something they can use while they save up for one.

The supposed hardware specs, though, aren't substantial. Three-core IBM PPC chip and an AMD R700. That's right, it's the equivalent of an overclocked 360. The PS3 showed us that more cores isn't always better, so I understand sticking with three cores, but I was expecting at least four. This thing is going to have to run at over 3ghz to be a "Dreamcast" step forward. As for the GPU, it's equivalent to a Radeon 4800 or so. I just replaced my trusty 4850, which has been my favorite card since the GeForce 4, but it's definitely an aging card. To put it in perspective, the 360 is something like a Radeon 3800, or maybe even one series older, I can't remember. PS3 RSX is based on the nVidia 7800, and that's about the same.

How much RAM were they saying? 512? Phones have more than that. RAM is cheap, give us 16gb and cache a whole Blu-Ray ISO.

For what Nintendo does, however, this would be a nice console. Their games are really stylized and heck, they could get by with gourad shading if they tried. There's an old saying about how "Japanese devs don't know how to use pixel shaders," and that describes Nintendo's strategy pretty well. Their strength is the content, not the effects. If they went forward with the rumor specs, they'd have at the very least, another GameCube or N64 in terms of success. No danger of Sega-level failure whatsoever.

[Zap!]

I'm so excited for this I created a Facebook Page (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Nintendo-Project-Caf%C3%A9/180554935329564) for it. :)

[WCP]

The supposed hardware specs, though, aren't substantial. Three-core IBM PPC chip and an AMD R700. That's right, it's the equivalent of an overclocked 360. The PS3 showed us that more cores isn't always better, so I understand sticking with three cores, but I was expecting at least four. This thing is going to have to run at over 3ghz to be a "Dreamcast" step forward. As for the GPU, it's equivalent to a Radeon 4800 or so. I just replaced my trusty 4850, which has been my favorite card since the GeForce 4, but it's definitely an aging card. To put it in perspective, the 360 is something like a Radeon 3800, or maybe even one series older, I can't remember. PS3 RSX is based on the nVidia 7800, and that's about the same.

How much RAM were they saying? 512? Phones have more than that. RAM is cheap, give us 16gb and cache a whole Blu-Ray ISO.
.


Yeah, the GPU is disappointing. Nintendo must really be saving a ton of money with going with such an old GPU. I wasn't expecting a state of the art GPU, but I was hoping for something that is at least the equivalent of a 5770 or so.

As for the ram, the 360 and PS3 both have 512, and I thought that 4 gigs was an ABSOLUTE given. But who knows.... I think the CPU will be decent enough.