Slashdot Mirror
Nintendo To Debut Next-Gen Console At E3 2005
An anonymous reader writes "According to Reuters, Nintendo has indicated it will debut its next-generation console at next May's E3, as part of financial results in which the company showed net profit of 70 billion yen ($625 million) - this figure still 'fell by half in the past business year, hurt by disappointing sales of its GameCube console and currency losses, but [Nintendo] predicted earnings would bounce back this year.' The company also indicated 'target shipments of 3.5 million 'DS' machines', with Nintendo's Yoshihiro Mori saying: 'In order to have the DS out by Christmas, we plan to start production late summer or early fall and boost production every month.'"
If they don't debut them at E3 2005, you're looking at 2007 when the next-gen consoles come out.
This is news?
Does anyone know whether or not the PSP will be here for Christmas? Seems like an enormous missed opprotunity if they don't. How many christmas season observing people are there in Japan NEway?
Go Gusties
It's funny to think about how many years it takes from the start of the development to the debut of the machine... I think this one has started quite early, before the GC launch probably, if you compare it to GBA SP, who had a glued-up prototype a month after the GBA was released! :O
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Also - if it's so close, why would they put out Zelda for the "dying" GameCube platform? Wouldn't it make sense to hold off and make it a killer launch title for the N5?
-Joshua
I wonder if Nintendo intends to make it's next-gen console backwards compatible with the GameCube. AFAIK, Microsoft and Sony intend on making their next-gen consoles backwards compabitle with the Xbox and PS2 (respectively). I also think Nintendo needs to move away from the mini-disc and develop a console that supports DVD both for games and movie and watching. Oh, and lets not forget supporting more online content. I'm trying to remember why I bought my Gamecube...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Kinda funny that I read about the next gen Nintendo console the day after I finally get around to buying a GameCube ;)
Seriously though, I don't think that everything that the company does is "kiddy" or "cartoony". Obviously some titles such as Pokemon, etc are geared towards the younger crowd, you also have the other side of the spectrum with Resident Evil 4 and the like that are almost definitely not "kiddy".
whether or not something looks cartoony or realistic shouldn't matter. The main thing regarding the quality of the game should be whether or not you are having fun playing it. I spent a good 2-3 hours last night playing the "kiddy, cartoony" Zelda: The Wind Waker, and I was having a blast doing it. That's the only thing that matters to me.
As for the Dreamcast, it launched a year+ early. It wasn't a "next-gen" system so much as a system inbetween generations. It was launched TOO early. If the DC had been released 3-6 months before the PS2, I bet it would have done better. I think it would have still died due to other factors, but it would have done better than it did.
And this is what Nintendo is trying to do. They want to launch about 6 months before the PS3. They will get a head start, but won't be seen as an inbetween generation.
As for the games, they did a decent job with the GBA launch, a good job with the GC launch. We've learned that more good games at launch means a better system, so the companies understand that. The PSP is supposed to launch with a bunch of games, not that "here is 3, and few care about the other two" that the N64 saw. Few games hurt Nintendo in the N64 days, I think they've learned their lesson. I also think that $150 or $200 would be a perfect price point to launch at, especially with Sony probably going near $250 or $300 with the PS3.
That's my take anyways.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
Generally speaking, in the past the announcement of the next gen product coincides with the current product hitting it's stride with the most high quality games.
Obligatory Penny Arcade link
It's almost a given that the first 24 months or so a console is out, most of the games suck, hard. Certainly their are a gem or two in the manure pile, but it takes about 2.5 years for a strong selection of high quality games to be available. By that time you can buy the console for around 1/2 the original cost, and get those few early good games on the cheap.
Don't forget what happened to the Genesis. Sold fairly well when it was the only 16-bit console on the market, but made a big crater when the superior SNES came out.
Rob
The above is a test.
heh, had me wonderin up till there. =)
Good attempt at being subtle, and it seems to be working so far. Of course, it's only been twenty minutes since you posted, and this isn't a front-page article.
if Nintendo can launch a next gen console that is backwards compatible with the GC, then I think they'll be in great shape. I don't know what their plans regarding compatibility are, but maintaining it is definitely a good thing (e.g., phenomenal PS2 sales).
As for developers and a slew of games, they haven't been doing half-bad in this department. In the past couple of years, they've made deals with some of the bigger names and franchises (getting some Final Fantasy, some Resident Evil, Metal Gear Solid), so developers definitely are seeing potential in the big N. Getting to market first with a new console and an exclusive or 2 from a big name (say a Mario game plus an established 3rd party franchise) would really push Nintendo along...
And finally the price, if I'm recalling correctly, Nintendo almost always has the cheapest hardware, both on launch (weren't PS2 and Xbox ~250-300 while GC was closer to 200?) and throughtout the sales cycle, so there's not much worry there.
Oh, BTW, sorry for giving you away, hambonewilkins. (But how subtle do you have to be to get a Troll mod instead of a Flamebait mod, anyway?)
Those are all sequels... not a bad thing for a good game. Just not what I call original. Good games come from two places:
;)
-Original innovation brought on by the will to be creative. This is usually not motivated by money.
-Sequel to something that was already good. Don't break something that already works. Improving on it is always a good thing (tm) though. This is largely driven by money as brand naming becomes a huge part. Do you think Nintendo would have renamed and branded Super Mario Bros 2 if the first did not do as well?
I am glad to say that Nintendo does have a head and they use it. I trust them mostly... they have lost some of my faith in the past (controller design is one...) but they stay on top of the ball in a business that is anything but smooth.
Sony: Hmm... hard to say. I've enjoy my PS2 a lot. I don't want a fight over hardware quality or cost. They do have some good development houses behind them... so you can dis sony but there are still some AWSOME games... that all said: I don't mind them but I will probably have to wait on the PSP because of price. I have to pay tuition... and boy does that become huge really fast.
MS: The Redmond army is here and they are going to take you out! Even if it means that you may have some fun in the process. There are good things that XBOX offers that the others don't. Like an online service that is unified. Harddrive for content. Built in NIC. You buy an XBOX and all you need next is a game. Not so true for the other consoles out there. (Assuming you have electricity, hands, and a TV). BUT!!! from what I've seen in the past history of this giant: Markets are taken then sucked dry once they dominate. Take for instance the Office market. MS Office costs a soul and a half now days just for one seat! Back in the day they had to worry about price and quality. They had a good offering over their competitors for quite some time. Now that is not so true but what can the world do now. I fear something similar might happen to games (XNA anyone?). I don't mind them competing but I am NOT going to see the day when they dominate the market and any sane gamer should feel the same way. For now I will play the occasional Halo when I can.
As you can see, consoles are as twisted as any political discussion you can come up with. Any of my points above could probably be argued. But I am one of those people who like to voice an opinion on things
From the article:
1. "For the past business year, the video game maker said group net profit totaled 33.2 billion yen versus a profit of 67.3 billion yen in 2002/03."
2. "Nintendo also suffered a one-time currency loss of 68 billion yen after reassessing the value of its dollar-denominated assets."
Looks like the currency loss is driving the reduced profits.
But not always. ;)
Satoru Iwata has expressed his intention of making the next Nintendo Console Backwards compatible with the GC. It shouldn't be such an issue, given that it will use a somewhat similar architecture (PowerPC + ATI video again)
PS3 will probably be BC. As for Xbox2, since it will use a radically different architecture, it wouldn't be possible to make it BC, unless some impressive emulation is throwed in.
... in at least 7 years. The last one I owned was a Super Nintendo. I'm hoping for a Gameboy as soon as it comes out, i'm a customer again!
Jonathanjk.com
You must have been 12 back then. Genesis did middling business at best until Mortal Kombat came out for both systems, but was censored on the SNES. THAT sold a ton of Genesises. Genesi. Sega systems.
Go to hell you worthless fanboy.
Genesis did middling business at best until Mortal Kombat came out for both systems, but was censored on the SNES. THAT sold a ton of Genesises.
Well, I wanted to be polite about it (since Sega fanboys tend to deny that the system was anything less than very successful before the SNES came out), but yeah, that's basically what happened. Genesis sold mediocrely before SNES and not much at all afterward except for the blip on the radar labeled "Mortal Kombat."
Rob (I was actually much younger than 12 when the Genesis first came out)
Nintendo was late out with the N64, and they got burned. They were late with the Gamecube, and they got burned. On the other hand, they'd gotten the NES and SNES out before anything comparable, and dominated. It may not be the only cause, but Nintendo is at a serious disadvantage - the PS3 looks to have two generations worth of backwards-compatible game library built up behind it on top of the new PS3 releases, while the best Nintendo can do is the Gamecube library, which wasn't as good. They need to get whatever toehold they can, or they're going to be stuck on the sidelines yet again. Getting their console out first won't guarantee them the top post, but it's one less failure to overcome.
As for the Dreamcast, it launched a year+ early. It wasn't a "next-gen" system so much as a system inbetween generations. It was launched TOO early. If the DC had been released 3-6 months before the PS2, I bet it would have done better. I think it would have still died due to other factors, but it would have done better than it did.
Dreamcast sold decent numbers of machines. It was a moderately successful system on the relative level of the Xbox at the time of its demise.
Some say it failed due to lack of marketing, but I remember a highly aggressive marketing campaign. Others attribute it to losses from piracy, but the software sales were healthy and indeed Sega transitioned into a software-only company, which would not be the measures you might expect a company decimated by software piracy to take.
Dreamcast was not a failure like the Saturn. If Sega had been financially healthy it would have survived. But it was launched when Sega was in the red, and a moderate success was not enough. In a lot of real ways, the Saturn was the reason for the failure of the Dreamcast.
Small correction: The SNES actually WAS late to its generation, coming after the [very popular] Sega Genesis. It did eventually beat the Genesis but only after Sega completely lost all sense of direction, which loss led to SegaCD, 32x and finally the Saturn.
Only 50 weeks away!
Glog!
No...
BC is an Xbox exclusive.
No reason to lie.
They key is to launch after the competitors announce their products, but before they release their products. More people didn't buy a Dreamcast, because nobody was sure what the PS2 would bring to the table.
Around Mortal Kombat's release Sega held something like 55% of the American videogame market. Hardly a "blip on the radar", and not even close to mediocrety. And Sonic 1 was the real first big system seller for the Genesis.
There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the proportion. -- Francis Bacon
Back your numbers.
I think you bring up a good point. I have never really cared about graphics, only whether a game is fun. As far as Zelda, while it is generally agreed by long-term Zelda fans (which I suspect you aren't given that you just purchased your GCN, but I could be wrong) that Ocarina of Time is the best in the series, Wind Waker is not a bad game. I say this even though I really don't like the cel-shading graphical approach.
Anyway, now that you have a GameCube, you should look into some of the other high quality exclusive titles that are available. Metroid Prime is among the best titles of any game this generation, and there's also the likes of Eternal Darkness, Mario Kart: Double Dash, and many others.
And don't forget Beyond Good and Evil. This underappreciated game is available for all 3 consoles, and is only $20. I highly recommend it to anyone that plays video games, and even people that don't.
Intelligent responses welcome, flames will be met with marshmallows.
Also - if it's so close, why would they put out Zelda for the "dying" GameCube platform? Wouldn't it make sense to hold off and make it a killer launch title for the N5?
great, give them ideas why don't you. while they're at it, they could take metroid prime 2, resident evil 4, star fox, and save them for the N5 launch as well.
MORTAR COMBAT!
I largely agree - Iam not sure if the DC was too early - it may have been too late. If the PS2 was no where on the radar more people may have jumped on the DC.
In my opinion the DC was pretty much on par with the PS2. But the hype of the PS2 killed the DC before it even launched. I remember a bunch of coworkers went to check out the DC - one of the high res cut scenes \ movies from Sonic was playing and this guy say "The PS2 will have graphics this good for normal game play..." People thought the PS2 was going to be so good they held off on the DC and waited for a PS2.
Hey moron,
For the parent, BC = Backward Compatible
I haven't been a avid console gamer since the release of the N64. After that there seemed to be an explosion of consoles and with that the major software companies got too thinned out and game selection went down with it. I don't believe a gamer should have to have three gaming consoles just to play the best games out there. Lately you see more software companies generating their games for all three of the major consoles (Xbox, PS, NES), but by having just one console you still miss out on some of the best games out there. I miss the old days where if you had a SNES you had the ability to play 90% of the best games. With that said, the console companies really need to work something out with software to pull me away from PC gaming, especially since consoles still cannot come close to the flexibility that PCs bring. In the end, it seems the consoles are trying more and more to be like PCs.
I couldn't think of anything witty to say, so...you're stuck with this.