Nintendo's Next Seems on Track, Despite Reports

KaiEl writes "The Video Game Ombudsman has a breakdown of the myriad reports stemming from a Nihon Keizai Shimbun story (picked up by GameCube Europe) that says Nintendo 'has decided not to release a new video game console to follow its current GameCube for the time being,' and 'will instead diversify games and sell newly developed peripherals mainly for the GameCube.' Despite the existence of some breathless initial stories from IGN and 1UP, this story may already be dead in the water thanks to firm denials by both Nintendo of America and its Japanese parent, Nintendo Co. Ltd. Still, just the intimation that Nintendo may be planning to sit out the next round of the console race will surely have the Internet rumor mill buzzing."

Comments

Where else is there to go?

[dTaylorSingletary]

The Gamecube is the most solid system Nintendo has yet released. Metroid Prime shows off its full capabilities, and I really don't know where they could go from there. What more do people want out of a home console system, besides more games? Why battle a war that is really about shiny things? Think back to the days of NES, the wide-range of game selection available both good and bad (as well as horribly mediocre and superb beyond all belief) -- why not concentrate on the system it has now? I have been nothing but impressed with the capabilities of the Gamecube. I can't imagine a system being more able to provide an entertaining gaming experience, within the current framework of the concept.

Until a true revolution in gaming has arrived, ripe and ready for consumption, what need is there for yet another console? It seems to me that Sony and Microsoft at this point want to release new systems because their current ones are incapable of handling the demands of the games they want to create, or want created for them. I do not see Nintendo yet having this problem with the Gamecube.

It's as if the gaming industry thinks that to remain relevant they have to release a new console every three years. Let the damn things breath. The public needs to be able to take a breath before it can be taken away by a "new gaming experience."

Re:Where else is there to go?

[caitsith01]

"maybe i'm just a playstation snob"

Are you serious? The PS2 controller has got to be one of the worst ever... only eclipsed my MS's monolith.

I just wish Nintendo had stuck closer to the N64 design - now *that* was a controller.

Re:Where else is there to go?

[Rallion]

Irony: Microsoft's Sidewinder series of PC joysticks and gamepads (also includes wheels and headsets) are some of those most comfortable controllers ever. They fit your hand every bit as well as the GameCube controller, except nobody would be able to complain that they're too small.

And instead of following in that tradition, they decided to take inspiration from forest wildlife when it became really important to have a single, great controller design.

Re:Where else is there to go?

[PainKilleR-CE]

On the contrary, it was 6 years. 1985 for the NES, 1991 for the SNES.

And the SNES was late to market, as the Genesis and the TG-16 were both available long before it.

Lifespans

[fwitness]

I completely agree that there is currently no need for a new generation of consoles. The key demographic in the last few years has been the 18-25 (male of course) range that Sony has tapped into. Those "kids" are getting older and are not as impulsive as they used to be despite having more disposable income. Frankly, I'm tired of upgrading my console faster than my PC only to have to wait another year after release for quality games.

All three consoles have plenty of horsepower, are for the most part net-enabled, and developers have created the tools to make excellent games on them. Unless someone can give me an irrefutable reason why the current crop of consoles *can't* do something, I'm sticking with these. Prettier faces and industry buzzwords don't count.