Rate my idea for Nintendo's next console

#51ZeroArcheryPosted 7/23/2014 8:21:33 PM
"Storage: 128 GB SSD

Bankrupt or bust, right?
---
Official President of the NST
'But Neku, I thought you couldn't afford to lose? Give up on yourself, and you give up on the world.' - Joshua
#52iKhanic(Topic Creator)Posted 7/23/2014 9:10:48 PM
Megamushroom666 posted...
iKhanic posted...
Megamushroom666 posted...
5/10, I really think that Nintendo's next platform should be a handheld/console hybrid so any other idea isn't so great IMO.


The problem with that is that adding the hybrid aspect adds NOTHING to gameplay, but dramatically increases the cost. It'll either be incredibly underpowered and indistinguishable from the previous gen gameplay wise, or it will be way too expensive.

My concept tries to find a balance between competitive hardware and innovation.


If the console is once again underpowered compared to PS5, it'll just continue to be shunned by third parties. I don't think a new controller will bring in developers cause they're focused on traditional controls, not motion controls. The Wii U already supports Wiimote+ and no one really cares. Same with PS Move, no one really cares about that anymore.

A hybrid platform will take Nintendo out of the console wars and carve a new market out for them. Cause Nintendo can't match PS or Xbox specs from now on, and there isn't another 'Wiimote' innovation on the horizon. They tried it with the GamePad but it wasn't enough. A dual Wiimote probably won't be enough either.


You are talking like an investor.

Look, it's not that complicated. If you do something different, and it requires a side purchase, it won't be used substantially. Developers want to have the confidence that all system owners will be able to play their game without buying extra hardware. If a system sells well, it has the buttons to support a port, and 3rd party games sell well on the system, developers will port the game over.

If you do include an unique feature, and neither you nor 3rd parties are using it, it's not a sweeping crucifixtion of all unique control schemes. It just means your particular unique feature wasn't useful to developers.

You are assuming there is a significant market for a mid-powered Console-Handheld Hybrid that mostly had 1st party games. I probably wouldn't spend more than $100 on that.
---
"Well, they sure don't make evil immortal sorcerers like they used to." - Klarion the Witch Boy
#53donkeyjackPosted 7/23/2014 9:21:42 PM
7/10 solid.
---
http://imgur.com/Hwg6GCx http://imgur.com/Oag0IWV http://imgur.com/Z612GMZ
http://imgur.com/aljoKDS
#54elheberPosted 7/23/2014 10:03:41 PM
I mean, consoles have their largest install base at the end of their lifecycles. If they turned the console into a portable right at the end, i.e. the 9th gen console becomes the 10th gen portable, customers can become early adopters without fear of lack of developer support.

The Wii U would be such a great handheld.
---
"[Adam Malkovich] was a father figure who Samus looked up to because of his wisdom and understanding." - P_A_N_D_A_M_A_N
3DS: Ulysses | PSN: Riot_Guy
#55Megamushroom666Posted 7/23/2014 10:22:43 PM
iKhanic posted...
You are talking like an investor.

Look, it's not that complicated. If you do something different, and it requires a side purchase, it won't be used substantially. Developers want to have the confidence that all system owners will be able to play their game without buying extra hardware. If a system sells well, it has the buttons to support a port, and 3rd party games sell well on the system, developers will port the game over.

If you do include an unique feature, and neither you nor 3rd parties are using it, it's not a sweeping crucifixtion of all unique control schemes. It just means your particular unique feature wasn't useful to developers.

You are assuming there is a significant market for a mid-powered Console-Handheld Hybrid that mostly had 1st party games. I probably wouldn't spend more than $100 on that.


Well I just don't think a dual Wiimote like in your concept will be any different than what can already be accomplished with current motion controls or dual analog controllers. Nintendo will once again have the underpowered hardware with quirky controller that developers won't care about.

A console/handheld hybrid obviously won't cost $100 or even $200 (the 3DS XL is $200) but at $300 and in a couple more years, it could be possible to have a pretty powerful new platform that combines the best of Nintendo into 1. They won't have to keep competing in the console wars, and they can leverage their huge handheld following.

I'm just saying, a new dual Wiimote controller isn't going to bring back third parties to Nintendo. They're gonna need a whole different strategy than another underpowered console with quirky controller.
---
Snackeroo.com
Carmina Burana: youtu.be/fUiEjLwZbTY
#56iKhanic(Topic Creator)Posted 7/23/2014 10:26:26 PM
Megamushroom666 posted...
iKhanic posted...
You are talking like an investor.

Look, it's not that complicated. If you do something different, and it requires a side purchase, it won't be used substantially. Developers want to have the confidence that all system owners will be able to play their game without buying extra hardware. If a system sells well, it has the buttons to support a port, and 3rd party games sell well on the system, developers will port the game over.

If you do include an unique feature, and neither you nor 3rd parties are using it, it's not a sweeping crucifixtion of all unique control schemes. It just means your particular unique feature wasn't useful to developers.

You are assuming there is a significant market for a mid-powered Console-Handheld Hybrid that mostly had 1st party games. I probably wouldn't spend more than $100 on that.


Well I just don't think a dual Wiimote like in your concept will be any different than what can already be accomplished with current motion controls or dual analog controllers. Nintendo will once again have the underpowered hardware with quirky controller that developers won't care about.

A console/handheld hybrid obviously won't cost $100 or even $200 (the 3DS XL is $200) but at $300 and in a couple more years, it could be possible to have a pretty powerful new platform that combines the best of Nintendo into 1. They won't have to keep competing in the console wars, and they can leverage their huge handheld following.

I'm just saying, a new dual Wiimote controller isn't going to bring back third parties to Nintendo. They're gonna need a whole different strategy than another underpowered console with quirky controller.


The whole idea of the system I brought up was that the system is competitively powerful and had all necessary buttons while also featuring motion. Motion control isn't really that expensive a technology, so it doesn't require a drop in power. The only reason the Nintendo system each gen will probably be underpowered is because Nintendo always tries to go for the lowest price of the generation.

So it would bring back 3rd Parties. I did say to keep PPC for the sake of 1st party, but now that I know it's not possible, it should obviously be X86.
---
"Well, they sure don't make evil immortal sorcerers like they used to." - Klarion the Witch Boy
#57LvthnPosted 7/23/2014 10:43:26 PM
I don't see the purpose of a lot of this.

Sticking with the ethernet dongle, really? Don't be a cheapskate, just build in an ethernet port like the rest of the civilized world.

And what's the SSD for? That's way too small for storing a whole game library and I don't see Nintendo customers spending time managing space, something an SSD requires you to do unless you have a 500GB+ disk. Nor do I see the average Nintendo customer having any great appreciation for the benefits of SSD, or even the average Nintendo game really utilizing those benefits well.

Among the rest of the ideas, why would you really want triple BC? So this is gonna be yet another iteration of the Wii, just stack some new s*** on top of GC, Wii, and Wii U hardware so we can throw in the VC catalogue for the sake of a theoretical "plays it all" Nintendo machine? No thanks, I think we've all gone far enough down that particular road, and if we're wishing for Nintendo to provide awesome VC support, let's wish for them to start doing it today rather than in 2018.

No offense but I completely lost it at the suggesting of a $45/mo subscription. What on earth are you supposed to get for that? That would surely be the most expensive gaming subscription in history, you're talking about over $500 a year. Nothing could even conceivably justify that short of unlimited access to literally everything available on every Nintendo store, first part or third, day of release, and even then virtually nobody will want it because presumably you would still not own any of those games. I don't even see the diehards wasting money on that, they prefer to actually own games and most of them seem to prefer physical. Those who prefer digital will surely have enough sense about them to realize that $540 would get them 200-300 games on Steam, and they'd never finish that backlog in a year's time.
#58iKhanic(Topic Creator)Posted 7/23/2014 10:51:56 PM
Lvthn posted...
I don't see the purpose of a lot of this.

Sticking with the ethernet dongle, really? Don't be a cheapskate, just build in an ethernet port like the rest of the civilized world.

Among the rest of the ideas, why would you really want triple BC? So this is gonna be yet another iteration of the Wii, just stack some new s*** on top of GC, Wii, and Wii U hardware so we can throw in the VC catalogue for the sake of a theoretical "plays it all" Nintendo machine? No thanks, I think we've all gone far enough down that particular road, and if we're wishing for Nintendo to provide awesome VC support, let's wish for them to start doing it today rather than in 2018.


Everything else has been addressed, but I'll go over these two.

Expect Sony and Microsoft to drop the Ethernet port by 2018 as well. Ethernet is dying. Fewer and fewer devices are using it every day. It's not a matter of being cheap, it's a matter of keeping with the times.

Because there isn't much cost to being able to allow a Wii or Wii U game to go into the disk drive and emulate it. I suggested PPC architechture because that is what Nintendo's first party devs have become accustomed to for 3 generations now. Changing it would result in far more game droughts. Eoin pointed out PPC wouldn't be available though, so it's kind of a moot point.

I designed this concept to be realistic with industry progression, but not realistic with what Nintendo would want to do.
---
"Well, they sure don't make evil immortal sorcerers like they used to." - Klarion the Witch Boy
#59Megamushroom666Posted 7/23/2014 10:56:09 PM
iKhanic posted...
Megamushroom666 posted...
iKhanic posted...
You are talking like an investor.

Look, it's not that complicated. If you do something different, and it requires a side purchase, it won't be used substantially. Developers want to have the confidence that all system owners will be able to play their game without buying extra hardware. If a system sells well, it has the buttons to support a port, and 3rd party games sell well on the system, developers will port the game over.

If you do include an unique feature, and neither you nor 3rd parties are using it, it's not a sweeping crucifixtion of all unique control schemes. It just means your particular unique feature wasn't useful to developers.

You are assuming there is a significant market for a mid-powered Console-Handheld Hybrid that mostly had 1st party games. I probably wouldn't spend more than $100 on that.


Well I just don't think a dual Wiimote like in your concept will be any different than what can already be accomplished with current motion controls or dual analog controllers. Nintendo will once again have the underpowered hardware with quirky controller that developers won't care about.

A console/handheld hybrid obviously won't cost $100 or even $200 (the 3DS XL is $200) but at $300 and in a couple more years, it could be possible to have a pretty powerful new platform that combines the best of Nintendo into 1. They won't have to keep competing in the console wars, and they can leverage their huge handheld following.

I'm just saying, a new dual Wiimote controller isn't going to bring back third parties to Nintendo. They're gonna need a whole different strategy than another underpowered console with quirky controller.


The whole idea of the system I brought up was that the system is competitively powerful and had all necessary buttons while also featuring motion. Motion control isn't really that expensive a technology, so it doesn't require a drop in power. The only reason the Nintendo system each gen will probably be underpowered is because Nintendo always tries to go for the lowest price of the generation.

So it would bring back 3rd Parties. I did say to keep PPC for the sake of 1st party, but now that I know it's not possible, it should obviously be X86.


Why would it bring back third parties again? Wii U is already competitively powerful with the same buttons as other consoles and still doesn't get games like GTA5, Mortal Kombat X, AC: Unity, etc. so what about your concept will change things? A dual Wiimote is just more of the same we've already experienced for years. Wiimote + nunchuk is already the greatest controller for FPS IMO yet no one cares.
---
Snackeroo.com
Carmina Burana: youtu.be/fUiEjLwZbTY
#60iKhanic(Topic Creator)Posted 7/23/2014 11:01:52 PM
Megamushroom666 posted...
iKhanic posted...
Megamushroom666 posted...
iKhanic posted...
You are talking like an investor.

Look, it's not that complicated. If you do something different, and it requires a side purchase, it won't be used substantially. Developers want to have the confidence that all system owners will be able to play their game without buying extra hardware. If a system sells well, it has the buttons to support a port, and 3rd party games sell well on the system, developers will port the game over.

If you do include an unique feature, and neither you nor 3rd parties are using it, it's not a sweeping crucifixtion of all unique control schemes. It just means your particular unique feature wasn't useful to developers.

You are assuming there is a significant market for a mid-powered Console-Handheld Hybrid that mostly had 1st party games. I probably wouldn't spend more than $100 on that.


Well I just don't think a dual Wiimote like in your concept will be any different than what can already be accomplished with current motion controls or dual analog controllers. Nintendo will once again have the underpowered hardware with quirky controller that developers won't care about.

A console/handheld hybrid obviously won't cost $100 or even $200 (the 3DS XL is $200) but at $300 and in a couple more years, it could be possible to have a pretty powerful new platform that combines the best of Nintendo into 1. They won't have to keep competing in the console wars, and they can leverage their huge handheld following.

I'm just saying, a new dual Wiimote controller isn't going to bring back third parties to Nintendo. They're gonna need a whole different strategy than another underpowered console with quirky controller.


The whole idea of the system I brought up was that the system is competitively powerful and had all necessary buttons while also featuring motion. Motion control isn't really that expensive a technology, so it doesn't require a drop in power. The only reason the Nintendo system each gen will probably be underpowered is because Nintendo always tries to go for the lowest price of the generation.

So it would bring back 3rd Parties. I did say to keep PPC for the sake of 1st party, but now that I know it's not possible, it should obviously be X86.


Wii U is already competitively powerful


No it's not. It's not as big a gap as the Wii, but it's still pretty damn big. And it's not just that. Pre-Mario Kart 8, the Wii U was looking to sell about 15M units lifetime. For PS360 games, That's not worth the effort of a port, especially when it's a Nintendo system who's exclusive base has a high number of children.
---
"Well, they sure don't make evil immortal sorcerers like they used to." - Klarion the Witch Boy