Nintendo's Iwata Says Old Console Cycle Dead

1up is reporting on comments from Nintendo CEO Satoru Iwata, who has offered up the opinion that the four-year console cycle is a thing of the past. Instead, he says, companies should look to iterate on their hardware when an opportunity presents itself. "Launches should depend on when it can signify a major shift in entertainment, or when they have done everything possible with the current hardware. He also says that scheduling the successor to current hardware on a 4-year life cycle without paying attention to changes in the market 'appears to be too inflexible an approach to us.' This isn't to say that the company doesn't have eyes on the future. 'We need to forecast what the future will be like with the expected evolution of new technologies which are available at any given time, and try to identify the so-called 'sweet spot' of technology over the next few years,' he said."

Comments

Shown Already?

[AlphaDrake]

I believe this has been proven already.

Nintendo has had the habit of short console-lives if you start with the NES (Yes, consoles do predate it, but this is a simplified view.) It was released in 1983, overtaken by the Super Nintendo in 1990 (Lasting 7 years). Next was the N64 in 1996 (making the Super Nintendo last 6 years), next was the Gamecube in 2001 (N64 life span: 5 years). And finally the Wii in 2006 (Gcube life: 5 years).

However if you look at Sony, the original playstation was released in 1994, not overtaken by the PS2 untill 2000 (6 year life). And then by the PS3 in 2007 (7 year life).

Arguably, Sony has/had the majority market with the Playstation 2, I believe part of its popularity was the fact that it became so cheap, with no changes, that anybody could have one, and play games together. Something PC gaming lacks if you do not keep your pc up to date.

And you must also take into consideration, games can only get as realistic as real life. It's one thing to go from Super Mario Brothers on the NES to Crysis, but Crysis to real life won't be that big of a jump. And when graphics/physics/AI get as good as real life, there is no major drive for a new console for "next-gen" games, they won't be able to get any better (gameplay aside for this arguement). It is also taking us longer to increase realism, thus the life of consoles will be extended (if you can understand my ramblings).

Re:Shown Already?

[Walpurgiss]

Makes sense; as we closer approach realistic graphics and physics, the demand for hardware advances in those areas will decrease because there is less room to grow. Squeaky wheel gets the grease, and once hardware is able to render reality realistically, there's no need to improve it until some other facet of ultra-realism is discovered to implement.

Re:Shown Already?

[Bert64]

Microsoft's console life is considerably less, the xbox was replaced by the 360 fairly quickly, and there are virtually no new xbox titles coming out. I still see titles for the PS2 coming out all the time tho.

An old PC is also very cheap (if not free), but you won't be able to play modern games on it, can still be fun for older games. There are still new games being made for the PS2 but they lack the graphical detail of PS3 titles.

Re:Shown Already?

[twistedsymphony]

I see your point... though I feel compelled to tell you that the PS3 was launched in 2006... it was 3 days prior to the Wii release IIRC.

Re:Shown Already?

[feepness]

Squeaky wheel gets the grease, and once hardware is able to render reality realistically, there's no need to improve it until some other facet of ultra-realism is discovered to implement. The problem is that we've moved from NTSC to 1080 HD the number of pixels has risen by several times. So it's not just displaying realistic stuff, it's displaying it on 6 or 7 times the screen area at 60 fps that is the challenge.

Re:Shown Already?

[J-1000]

the original playstation was released in 1994, not overtaken by the PS2 untill 2000 (6 year life). And then by the PS3 in 2007 (7 year life).

I find this rather interesting. Seven years of technological advancement, and THAT (PS3) is all we get? The same exact games with shellacked graphics?

I have nothing against the PS3, but it seems we are nearing some sort of graphical barrier here.

Re:Shown Already?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know about you, but I'd call the PS2->PS3 transition graphically comparable to the PS1->PS2 transition. It's no 2D->3D transition, but not everything can be.

Re:Shown Already?

[LoverOfJoy]

And finally the Wii in 2006 (Gcube life: 5 years).

And then by the PS3 in 2007 (7 year life).

Just a small correction, but PS3 was launched before the wii in 2006, not 2007.

Re:Shown Already?

[timeOday]

Higher resolution is just more of the same. Moore's law solves that almost automatically.

Re:Shown Already?

[Anonymous Coward]

games can only get as realistic as real life.

You're assuming that "realism" is a hard line that can never be crossed. But if that's the case, why do movie directors constantly spend money on special effects, instead of just filming stuff happening in real life?

It's one thing to go from Super Mario Brothers on the NES to Crysis, but Crysis to real life won't be that big of a jump.

You think so? I don't. I remember thinking exactly the same thing about Doom - whoa man, this is real proper 3D and all, how can games ever get more realistic than this? And yet today it looks crazily primitive.

You wait; 14 years from now, you'll look back at Crysis and wonder how you ever thought it looked remotely realistic.

Re:Shown Already?

[bartoku]

Nintendo has had the habit of short console-lives....However if you look at Sony...

I will conjecture that the Nintendo's console release time frames were forced by competition.
The SNES release was fairly delayed (the NES was doing fine and SMB3 was hugely anticipated) and finally came out to trump the Genesis' success.
The N64 was late to the game, the PlayStation had a huge jump on it.
Again the Gamecube was late, being trumped by the PS2.
Finally the Wii was a year behind the 360 but finally matched Sony, in terms of release, for the first time in three console generations.
Nintendo would have loved to draw out the life of its existing consoles but could not afford not to compete with new tech.

Sony on the other hand was able to draw out the PS1 and PS2 lifespans because their was no competition.
The Saturn was beat from the drawing board. The N64s lack of optical drive gimped it, and the PS1 was too established.
The Dreamcast got beat by DVD-ROM drive. The Gamecube and xbox were to little to late, again the PS2 was too established.
Without the 360 or HD-DVD we probably would not have seen the PS3 until this X-Mas.

It is cheaper to sell old tech and never develop new stuff as long as it is selling. Especially when the money is being made in software and lost on hardware.

Nintendo has changed that, they are now making a profit off the hardware. They were smart enough to own their last chip architecture and make the second generation easily backwards compatible. Now they can have the best of both worlds: an established existing library and a perpetual hardware base. While Sony put all their R&D into the the new cell and blu-ray tech today hoping for a 10 year payout, Nintendo can slowly and cheaply up their hardware over time. In two years or so Nintendo can turn around and put out a new console, just as or more powerful than the PS3 but with the full library support of the Gamecube and Wii. The programmers will not have to learn a new and difficult architecture like with the PS2 and PS3, the development tools will just be given a small upgrade. Microsoft realized this as well, that is why the 360 is not an Intel processor. Of course Nintendo could not compete as Microsoft could in R&D, they are slipping in with the novelty of the wiiMote, first party games, and easy development.

The big question is will the console community accept incremental upgrades the way the PC market does?
I think they will, they will bitch and moan, but the sheeple will buy it.

If Nintendo is smart about it they will release the Wiii but have developers make their games for both the Wii and the Wiii. You stick the disc in your Wii and you get 480p, you stick it in the Wiii and you get 720p or 1080p. Same game. They could even have games out for the Wii with the Wiii on the way and say buy it now and play it in HD later! Of course better graphics are not the only aspect, better AI and physics needs some horse power, but even better, play your Wii game tomorrow in the Wiii with better AI and better physics. It would take a little more programming on the developers part but less than supporting different PC hardware. Adds a little more replay value to the game (not exactly a money maker) but it eliminates this console generation chicken (system) before the egg (software) problem. The PS3 promised this a little with upscaling your PS2 games, but Sony did not play it well they screwed it up and it cost them to much because they needed to support two hardware architectures.

And you must also take into consideration, games can only get as realistic as real life. It's one thing to go from Super Mario Brothers on the NES to Crysis, but Crysis to real life won't be that big of a jump. And when graphics/physics/AI get as good as real life, there is no major drive for a new console for "next-gen" games, they won't be able to get any better (gameplay aside for this arguement). It is also taking us longer to increase realism, th

Re:Shown Already?

[Anonymous Coward]

As others have pointed out, the PS3 was released in 2006, so both the PS1 and PS2 had 6-year "lives".

The average of the Nintendo examples you give is 5.75 years.

You are trying to draw a distinction here?

Re:Shown Already?

[UnknownSoldier]

> games can only get as realistic as real life.

And that is a good thing???

As a game dev, we stay AWAY from realism,
- graphics wise because it is more important to have a unique style / look. When every game has the photorealistic look, it becomes much harder for your game to stand out.
- gameplay wise because for the most part it is NOT fun.

IF we are going for realism, we end up with simulators. While those can be fun, the majority of people do not find them "fun".

Shooters tend to push the visual realism, because it makes sense in that context. Guitar Hero is a hell of a lot of fun, realistic render or not.

--
Why do people complain about realism in games, but not movies?

Re:Shown Already?

[Nazlfrag]

Indeed, in most ways it is better to present an alternate reality than attempting to emulate it. Realism can suck the life out of games, and imposes constraints not inherent in the medium. Something like Katamari Damacy shows what you can achieve by leaving reality behind. It is akin to a documentary vs. a dramatisation - even though the documentary strives for 100% accuracy a fictionalised dramatisation tells a better story and is more appealing and engrossing for most people.

Re:Shown Already?

[aichpvee]

You've got some facts wrong, and have missed any actual understanding of the release schedules in question to make your point that Sony is somehow furthering longer life-cycles for their consoles while Nintendo is pushing the life-cycle down. The fact is that both are on a 5 year cycle and that the only console maker to shorten this time frame, that is still in the game, is microsoft. But even there I believe, despite hating microsoft with a passion, that this is merely an anomaly due to the stumbling of their initial console and if they remain in the business they will settle into a 5 year cycle as well.

First, some facts on Nintendo: Famicom was released in 1983, in Japan. The NES, a retooled Famicom, was not released until 1985, and then only in limited release in the United States. The wide release of the NES did not come until 1986 and included the United States as well as the Canada and the PAL regions.

The Super Famicom was released in 1990, again in Japan. The Super NES, again a refactoring of the Japanese model, was released in North America in 1991 and the PAL regions in 1992.

The Nintendo 64 was released in Japan and North America in 1996, and the PAL regions in 1997. GameCube followed in 2001 with the PAL releases in 2002. Wii hit basically all regions in 2006.

What you are seeing here is the convergence towards a staggered global release separated by months rather than years, perhaps towards an eventual simultaneous world-wide release at some point in the future?

Second, some facts on Sony: Playstation was released in 1994, in Japan. Everyone else got it in 1995. Playstation 2 released basically everywhere in 2000. Playstation 3, despite your claims to the contrary, released world-wide in 2006, not 2007.

Again you see a convergence toward a tighter release schedule world-wide. Just as with Nintendo's releases they are normalizing on the North American release, adjusting the Japanese and PAL releases as necessary. This has been less apparent with Sony because a) they have released fewer consoles, and b) they were pushing a closer world-wide release from the start.

To sum it up:

NES: 1985/1986, SNES: 1991 (+5/6), N64: 1996 (+5), GameCube: 2001 (+5), Wii: 2006 (+5)
Playstation: 1995, Playstation2: 2000 (+5), Playstation3: 2006 (+5)

Kind of agree that we may be seeing a longer console life-cycle this time around, but not exactly with your reasoning. But I've written way too much already so I'll just have to agree to agree on the points that I agree with.

Here's some reading to get you started. You might also check out Game Over by David Sheff. It's a pretty entertaining read and will give you some decent insight into the release schedules of the early Nintendo consoles.

Nintendo Entertainment System
Super Nintendo Entertainment System
Nintendo 64
Wii
Playstation
Playstation 2
Playstation 3

Re:Shown Already?

[neverhadachoice]

You wait; 14 years from now, you'll look back at Crysis and wonder how you ever thought it looked remotely realistic.

The first time I saw the Crysis DX10 ultra detail screenshot I thought it was a photo. It took a closer inspection and looking at the URL to realise what it was. If you honestly saw Doom and wondered how games could get more realistic, you have problems.

Re:Shown Already?

[NeMon'ess]

The GP is saying the PS3 overtook the PS2 this year. Though that's debatable. Also the PS2 didn't overtake the PS1 until 2001, given the huge shortages in 2000.

Re:Shown Already?

[Calinous]

Being now at 1920 by 1080 pixels of resolution, and supposedly 60Hz refresh rate. Do we need anything more for consoles?
When (if ever) will the next revolution in resolution come? I think not in the next 20 years, or maybe 30 years. After all, enough is enough

Re:Shown Already?

[dintech]

The reason games will come out for the PS2 for some time is the global installed base. It's huge. Old PC hardware is dropped for various reasons outside of gaming so there is no point supporting it. The original xbox was not as successful as the ps2 so that explains some of that...

Re:Shown Already?

[feepness]

Thing is, we're not there yet...

I have an 8800GTX... plunked down just under $500 for it a couple months ago. I get around 40-50 FPS on BioShock at 1920x1080.

True, we're close, but we've got another few years before we have 1920x1080x60hz maxxed out.

After that, you're right...

Re:Shown Already?

[SenorCitizen]

The PS2 is still in production, they're even coming up with a cost-reduced model like they had earlier with the PSone. In contrast, the first Xbox is dead. Completely. There aren't even any MS controllers around for it, which is annoying as hell, as gamepads aren't forever and the third party products just suck. Another case of MS forcing customers to upgrade, if you ask me...

Re:Shown Already?

[LKM]

Something to consider: You're sitting ~50cm away from your screen. You're sitting several meters away from your TV. TVs need lower resolution than consoles; you won't be able to see ultra-high resolutions on PCs.

Re:Shown Already?

[LKM]

I don't know about you, but I'd call the PS2->PS3 transition graphically comparable to the PS1->PS2 transition. It's no 2D->3D transition, but not everything can be.

I think you should dig up your PS1 and look at how attrocious the games looked. There's a reason the PS1 had so many fighters like Tekken: It hardly had the power to push enough polygons for more than two characters and some small surroundings. The graphics were blocky, no anti-aliasing, and texture rendering was simply broken (look at the texture of stuff that leaves the screen in games like Coolboarders).

The PS2 made just about any kind of 3D game possible. The PS3 gave us HD and better physics.

There's really no question that the jump from the PS1 to the PS2 was quite a bit bigger than from the PS2 to the PS3.

Re:Shown Already?

[Bert64]

How long before the 360 is killed off in the same way?
I like the idea that if i buy a PS3 today, when the PS4 comes out in 6-7 years there will still be games being produced for the PS3...

Re:Shown Already?

[FlopEJoe]

in 6-7 years there will still be games being produced for the PS3...

So that's when they plan to come out with PS3 games? (I kid, I kid!)

Re:Shown Already?

[vertinox]

I have nothing against the PS3, but it seems we are nearing some sort of graphical barrier here.

From my understanding, no game uses more than 30% of the PS3s processing power at this point. Of course it might be that the PS3 is hard to program for multi-core, but the potential is there for exponentially better looking games.

Re:Shown Already?

[jZnat]

This is why 1080p TV displays are so huge while computer displays capable of 1080p are much smaller in comparison.

Re:Shown Already?

[JCSoRocks]

Bigger pixels. That's why old big screen TVs look like junk. The pixels are just blown up to some huge size. Yes, I know, sometimes there are up-sampling technologies and such, but for the most part, TV's just have huge pixels in comparison to a good LCD monitor.

Re:Shown Already?

[PhoenixOne]

What sort of exponent are we talking about? And do you think the mass market will care?

All the games I've played on the XBox360 and PS3 I've never once said "This would be so much better if they just improved the graphics." I own a 1080p HDTV and work in the industry and, to me, the graphics look great. Could they look "more real"? Sure. But (IMHO) they don't need to.

Re:Shown Already?

[vertinox]

Acording to Arstechnia, the co-president of Naughtydog claims that Uncharted only uses 30% of the cells capabilties and the game looks pretty awesome.
Source: http://arstechnica.com/journals/thumbs.ars/2007/10/30/getting-technical-with-naughty-dog-co-president-christophe-balestra
Also video interview:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/21306.html

Of course it still seems like an arbitrary number, but I think the PS3 has a long way before it maxes out. (Its still too expensive though)

Re:Shown Already?

[jasonmicron]

This is why 1080p TV displays are so huge while computer displays capable of 1080p are much smaller in comparison.

Apples and oranges. My 50" plasma TV might be able to display 1080p but it is limited to a larger pixel size and thus can only display up to 1680x1050 (or whatever it is). My 24" monitor supports 1080p and a much higher resolution. 30" monitors can display 1080p & 2580x1600 pixels (or whatever it is). More pixels = a bigger playground for developers which = a cleaner picture.

Real life runs at, what, 6800x4800? I think that was decided long ago.

Re:Shown Already?

[raindog2]

The PS3 was released in 2006, not 2007, and the reason this last generation was shorter for Nintendo was that they were extremely late to the party last time and needed to launch earlier in order to compete.

But the dominant player in any generation usually gets an extra year or more out of their consoles; that's just the way it works and that's why you see Nintendo's product cycle shrinking with each generation up until now. Of course whoever's in last place is going to release a console in 4 or 5 years while the market leader stretches it out further. You replace a floundering console, not a successful one.

What Iwata is really doing is boasting about Nintendo's dominance at the moment.

Re:Shown Already?

[PhoenixOne]

Yes, but my point is that even with (random numbers here) three or thirty times the shaders, polygons, pixels, whatever I'm not sure if most people will notice. If they do notice, will they really care?

Now I'm not a neo-luddite, I love the potential power of the Cell and would love to get my hands on Intel's massive multi-core monsters that are coming soon, but improving graphic quality has hit the point of diminishing returns.

Re:Shown Already?

[Crazy Taco]

True for graphics... but I think Nintendo has just jumpstarted the next trend, which focuses on trying to actually get inside your games. The wiimote is just the first iteration of what will probably become fully immersive virtual reality. Consoles like the 360 and PS3 are very close graphics wise to photo-realism, but as soon as they get there gamers are going to want to be actually holding the tank controls themselves. Holodecks, here we come!

So in other words...

[Turken]

Iwata is admitting that the Wii isn't as powerful as it should be, so we shouldn't be surprised when the next Nintendo console gets released "early".

Re:So in other words...

[Mattintosh]

I noticed an intriguing possibility over a year ago when I pointed out to my gamer friends that the Wii was full of drop-in components. They won't release a new console. They'll "speed-bump" the Wii.

Faster CPU? Drop in a 750 FX in place of the 750 CX (or some of those Freescale knockoffs). Better graphics? I'm sure a pin-compatible version of a better GPU can be made, or simply add a driver shim to the firmware and put in a completely different GPU. Needs more on-board flash memory? Add some. None of these are things that require a radical redesign of the entire system to accomodate. In fact, they've already done it once, going from Gamecube to Wii. The worst thing they'd have to deal with is a slight redrawing of the circuit board for a new GPU pinout or making space in the Wii form-factor for a larger heatsink. If they're careful, neither of those will be necessary.

The revised Wii will come in a box with a different color border (blue instead of white, for instance), will be marked with "Wii 2.0", will play all Wii (1.0) and Gamecube games as usual, and will be the new requirement for playing "Wii 2.0" games. Games will have the same color-coded borders as the minimum required Wii version needed to play them. Game devs will have to target the lowest hardware they can get away with using, but other than that, there will be few headaches. You don't need anything more powerful than a Wii 1.0 to play Bejeweled 12, but you'll need a Wii 3.0 to play Resident Evil 7.

Hey, it could happen.

Re:So in other words...

[Knuckles]

Iwata is admitting that the Wii isn't as powerful as it should be

There is no "admitting". He is just repeating what he has said all along: that it makes no sense to deck out a game console with HD and all kinds of gadgets when the end result costs $600. That, and that Nintendo cannot (and actually has no intention to) subsidize such a system in the way that Microsoft (and Sony to a smaller extent) can and is willing to do.

That is, Nintendo will release a next-generation system when the technological advances allow a significant jump in gameplay improvement at a ca. $249 price point. Makes sense to me.

Re:So in other words...

[LWATCDR]

Funny but I was thinking that it meant.
Why have a long development cycle followed by a high introductory price when you can have a reasonable price and a constant evolution?
The Wii is plenty powerful enough right now. Most people don't have 1080P HDTVs or even HDTVs. The games on Wii are fun and selling well. The Wii is selling well.
The Wii is 100% compatible with the GC so you can play all your GC games on the Wii.
So if in two or three years we have the WiiHD for $225 will I feel ripped off? Not really since it will still be cheaper then buying a PS3 right now.
Like the PS2 it will take a few years for developers to get a grip on the PS3's programming model.
So in two years when the WiiHD comes out odds are that will have more power then the PS3. Play all the Wii and GC games. And cost about the same as the PS3.
Nintendo will not need to recover massive development costs and can include an HDDVD or BlueRay drive "which will be cheap and we will know who if anyone won the format war", HDTVs will be super common, Moore's law will have kicked in for a generation or two, it will have full backwards compatibility, and will have a very familiar programing model. AKA a bigger and faster Wii. In other words just like the PC.
I think Nintendo thinks that a 7 year live cycle for a game console is dumb.

Re:So in other words...

[rkanodia]

Game devs will have to target the lowest hardware they can get away with using

In other words, either the additional capability goes to waste, or the market is fragmented around those with the upgraded version and not. This is quite possibly the worst idea that Nintendo could possibly have. There is a reason that nobody does 'SegaCD' crap anymore.

Re:So in other words...

[644bd346996]

PC games can handle a fairly broad range of hardware capabilities without squandering the extra power on the high-end machines. There's no reason that can't also be done to a lesser extent on consoles. There's nothing outlandish about the idea of Nintendo releasing an HD-capable Wii a few years from now, and game devs writing games that run on both versions.

Re:So in other words...

[king-manic]

I noticed an intriguing possibility over a year ago when I pointed out to my gamer friends that the Wii was full of drop-in components. They won't release a new console. They'll "speed-bump" the Wii.

Faster CPU? Drop in a 750 FX in place of the 750 CX (or some of those Freescale knockoffs). Better graphics? I'm sure a pin-compatible version of a better GPU can be made, or simply add a driver shim to the firmware and put in a completely different GPU. Needs more on-board flash memory? Add some. None of these are things that require a radical redesign of the entire system to accomodate. In fact, they've already done it once, going from Gamecube to Wii. The worst thing they'd have to deal with is a slight redrawing of the circuit board for a new GPU pinout or making space in the Wii form-factor for a larger heatsink. If they're careful, neither of those will be necessary. Thats not a good idea. Changing core specs serve only to fragment your audience. Changing other things is great. A SP is a sexier GBA, a DS is something different. Perhaps some over clocking to stabilize from rates but it may result in a break in compatibility and having new games being unable to run on old systems.

A better idea is do their Model 1.0 is fun but ugly, model 2.0 is sexy but otherwise the same.

Re:So in other words...

[tieTYT]

I'd mod you up if i had points. I think that we'll see the next Nintendo console before we see the next PS/XBOX.

On a side note, can anyone tell me what's in the pipeline for the Wii when it comes to great games to look forward to? I know there's going to be mario galaxy, smash bros, and probably another mario cart in the works, but other than that, I really don't know what there is to look forward to on this system.

For XBOX and/or PS3, this is what I have to look forward to:
Resident Evil 5, Final Fantasy 13, Devil May Cry, Grand Theft Auto, Grand Turismo (sp?), Assassin's Creed, Uncharted (I'm iffy on this one, it may be monotonous), Soul Calibur 4, Tekken 6, Street Fighter 4 (there's no info on this, but based on the controls of the previous games, i figure it can't even work on the Wii), Metal Gear Solid 4, and the list goes on and on.

I am not trying to flame/troll here, I'm just trying to get information (and FWIW, I only own a Wii). I remember reading an article about game companies scrambling to make games for the Wii when they realized how well it was selling. What ever happened with that? What games are they going to make?

Re:So in other words...

[AuMatar]

Except that they won't want to- the idea of a game console, rather than a PC, is a set piece of hardware to code to. They'll either ignore extra capabilities, or program to require those. And consumers don't want it either- the appeal of consoles is not to have to worry about upgrading, specs, etc.

If you want a fully expandable, upgradable gaming platform one already exists- the PC.

Re:So in other words...

[AuMatar]

There is another Mario Kart due this spring. Wii Fit is likely to be a sleeper Brain Age like hit. There's the virtual console, which releases fun old games every week. Personally I've had more fun playing old games on the VC than I did on any PS2 game I ever played.

As for your xbox/ps3 list- I see one game thats a rental. The rest would likely sit unopened if you gave them to me. Fighters- been there, done that, never need to play one again. Should-have-stopped-at-6 Fantasy 13. Yet another racing game. At least the Nintendo games, while possibly fewer, have original aspects to them due to the controller. Nothing on your list is likely to.

Re:So in other words...

[644bd346996]

I see no reason why the gaming market must contain only the extremes: perfectly uniform consoles and infinitely many permutations of PC hardware. The example I gave, of improved hardware enabling higher resolutions, seems quite reasonable to me. It really isn't hard to modify a game engine to run at a different resolution, or to run at different resolutions on different hardware. Nintendo could offer several different speed grades of Wii without making it at all hard for games to scale completely across the lineup. It also wouldn't seem to be hard to market. There would be "HD capable" games and "HD capable" consoles, but with full compatibility with the non-HD counterparts. There wouldn't have to be any hassling with upgradability or expandability.

Do you have any justification for your assertion that anything less than perfect homogeneity in the console market would fail?

Re:So in other words...

[DeepHurtn!]

Considering the Wii is dominating the console market, what exactly is this "should" you talk about? What gives you the right to declare that?

Re:So in other words...

[AuMatar]

Yes- the fact that it would take money and effort, and the fact that no other attempt at it has worked in the history of consoles. There's just no benefit to it, and a lot of drawbacks. Spell out a single benefit to the developer for now having this resolution scaling architecture, with all the requisite issues (requirements for more RAM, more CPU power, and one hell of a lot more testing). All that to provide a slightly better (for some values of better) experience to a fraction of the market (since original Wii would have a larger share). There simply are none. You either end up ignoring the HD, or going full bore HD only and fragmenting the marketplace, which Nintendo would avoid at all costs. Of course I don't see too many picking the second path, as all the graphics whores bought xbox360s or ps3s.

Also note that on all of their previous v2 consoles, they have had appearance changes like backlighting and cutting down size/weight, not spec changes.

Re:So in other words...

[ToasterMonkey]

That's because PCs haven't added any new basic capabilities worth using in games. A high-end machine is just faster, more memory, etc. Where did all the PC gamepads and joysticks go? How is rumble support on PCs going? Surround sound anyone? How many titles support these? Consider things the PC has had for years before consoles, where are the PC (excluding Mac) games that use a webcam? Eye of judgement could have been done probably a decade ago for PCs. You had webcams, the internet connectivity was prevalent, bam, print some game pieces on your ink jet and play live battle chess... I wish. To be fair, the camera is just an accessory for the PS too, but my point is, only the most basic features of a PC system are used, regardless of what's available, and the same goes for consoles. Consoles have more base features, because they are specialized computers. Start targeting a generic console platform, and all you end up with is a mediocre upgrade to the PC game platform. Thanks Microsoft!

The biggest innovation in years for PC gaming was Arrow Keys -> WASD. Ok, joking, there have been things like LAN/Internet gaming, teamspeak (or was the SOCOM headset first?), script-ability, mods, customization, etc.
The thing is, as console->PC ports get more common, the PC loses it edge and things like mods/scripting/customization go out the window. What I'm saying is that the PC being so diverse is a bad thing for gaming, hence game consoles, and you'd better hope new games continue using it's unique aspects. But, I bet a lot of you just can't WAIT until games start use^H^H^Hdepending on Live for Windows. *gagwithspoon*

Re:So in other words...

[tieTYT]

To each his/her own. That wasn't the point of my question. My question is: What expected big hits does nintendo have in the pipeline? If Smash/Kart/Wii Fit/VC games is all the system has to look forward to, that's not very promising compared to the other two.

Fighters- been there, done that, never need to play one again. Should-have-stopped-at-6 Fantasy 13. Yet another racing game. At least the Nintendo games, while possibly fewer, have original aspects to them due to the controller.

Well like I said, to each his/her own. Personally I find these comments a little hypocritical considering they've got 13 Zelda games, at least 9 Mario games I can think of, 7 Mario Karts, at least 7 metroids. Not to mention that the VC is literally a rehash of old games. Personally, I don't care if there are 50 Zelda games, I'll still play #51 if it's fun. But overall, this comment is the pot calling the kettle black.

Re:So in other words...

[Anonymous Coward]

Mark my words, Wii-Fit will NOT be a sleeper hit, it is going to be more like the second coming.

Its going to be insane once gyms and fitness clubs get hold of it. It is going to expand the Wii user base by millions if Nintendo are shrewd with the way they market it. Once it hits the mainstream, watch out.......

Re:So in other words...

[sanosuke76]

Conference calls on phones within the same office building, pre-dated the SOCOM headset AND teamspeak. :)

I do believe, though, that surround sound is as standard in PC games now as it is on consoles. That having been said, I don't think it was very popular before the PS2 started doing it. I think Armored Core 3 was the first one to support surround sound on the PS2, but I could be wrong.

Re:So in other words...

[644bd346996]

You seem to have missed my major point: it isn't hard to make a game engine run at different resolutions. It doesn't make memory requirements exorbitant. Hell, even DOOM can render to a dozen different screen sizes. With a console like the Wii using OpenGL, it is pretty much trivial for the game developers to enable higher resolutions when running on the more powerful device. It certainly doesn't approach double the effort. After all, it isn't like the resolution is hard-coded with assembly language. Even N64 games were written in C. And practically every 3d engine already includes a level-of-detail scaling system to use for rendering distant objects. It's been well established that 3d graphics is one of the most trivially scalable computing tasks, and you have yet to offer any reason why that can't apply to consoles.

And while is may not be such a good idea for Nintendo right now, the situation will probably be very different two years from now. Certainly when the HD-DVD/Blu-ray thing gets settled, Nintendo will have incentive to release a compatible, HD-capable Wii. But even now, Nintendo is preparing to release a new revision of the Wii that supports DVD playback. Would anybody be surprised if it included a faster GPU with better decoding features? Or if they added 802.11n support next year?

The days are long gone where games magically break if the clock speed of the CPU is too fast or too slow. Nobody in their right mind complains that their quad-core gaming rig is wasted on Half-life 2 just because the engine also runs on the original Xbox.

Re:So in other words...

[porcupine8]

New games are still being made for the Gameboy Advance, three years after the introduction of the DS. And a year ago, GBAs were still selling better than PSPs (although GBA sales numbers are now down much lower). Nintendo hasn't done a bad job of supporting both a more-powered and a less-powered handheld system for a couple of years at least, though it looks like the GBA is starting its final descent.

Re:So in other words...

[Anonymous Coward]

wow, you are one seriously delusional fanboy

Re:So in other words...

[LKM]

If you mean to imply that the opposite of what you just wrote is what Iwata actually said, then yes, you're right.

Re:So in other words...

[LKM]

I'd mod you up if i had points. I think that we'll see the next Nintendo console before we see the next PS/XBOX.

History has shown that the winner always launches the next gen last. The Wii might very well survive both the PS3 and the 360.

On a side note, can anyone tell me what's in the pipeline for the Wii when it comes to great games to look forward to? I know there's going to be mario galaxy, smash bros, and probably another mario cart in the works, but other than that, I really don't know what there is to look forward to on this system.

Zack & Wiki, Battalion Wars 2, Resident Evil: Umbrelly Chronicles, Wii Fit, Monster Hunter 3, a few FF and DQ spin-offs, Black & White, Spore, Geometry Wars Galaxies, ... Just off the top of my head. I'm not going to go through the whole list of stuff that interests me. THere are sites tracking that (for euro releases, check out http://www.n-europe.com/releases.php.

And yes, a Mario Kart is coming.

I own all three current-gen consoles. Right now, the Wii release list is the most exciting for my taste.

Re:So in other words...

[LKM]

That may very well be, but he's probably still right about Wii Fit.

Re:So in other words...

[tieTYT]

thanks for the info. That's great that spore is coming out for the Wii. Obviously, I hadn't heard of those other ones but now I can look into it.

Re:So in other words...

[TuringTest]

and the fact that no other attempt at it has worked in the history of consoles. Except for the backward compatibility of GameBoy, Playstation 1/2/3, GameCube/Wii, etc?

Re:So in other words...

[Gravatron]

Actualy, nintendo knows they make the most money by skipping out on power and only doing the bare minumum to get by. Look at the gameboys for example. Most are underpowered considering what they could offer, and cut features to save money. The Ds is the only exception, but even it was just a N64 with some of the Game.com's abilities. On the console front, they do the same thing. The wii is the home console version of a DS. Nintendo only did enough with the hardware to get by, selling the console based off a controller and hype. The wii2 will be more of the same. It's not about giving you any kind of experience, it's about Nintendo making money on units sold by shorting you on power, same as always.

Re:So in other words...

[Anonymous Coward]

Doom still looks like shit no matter what resolution you put it at. The artwork needs to be done for HD, and that is more expensive and time consuming. And you need to make sure when you scale it down it still looks as good as if you had done the art for standard definition. Then you put in the fact that all of the work you put in to the high definition graphics will be seen by just a fraction of the market, so why bother?

Re:So in other words...

[Knuckles]

Or might it be that more CPU cycles does not equate more gameplay fun? The horror!

Re:So in other words...

[Andy Dodd]

Two words:

Gameboy Color. Nintendo has done this sort of thing before, with quite a bit of success.

Re:So in other words...

[rkanodia]

And games are still getting released for the PS2, but neither the PS2 nor the GBA are seeing nearly as many releases as they did when they were the top-tier technology. More to the point, how many games can run on the GBA but also take advantage of additional features on the DS?

Backwards compatibility is a fine thing, but it's used to make the transition from an obsolete platform less painful. Taking a new, healthy platform and arbitrarily declaring it to be the second-class citizen of the family is a way to confuse and alienate your userbase.

Re:So in other words...

[rkanodia]

'A few years from now' would make the Wii four years old. I agree that it would not be unreasonable to release 'WiiHD' at that point - but it would have to be a replacement device with backwards compatibility, not a coexisting product line.

this could mean one of two things for us...

[ByOhTek]

the consumer. Remember - as a consumer, it's your job to buy stuff, you are not a customer and the company owes you nothing except to take your money! Gotta love modern economy.

*ahem*

Translation 1: New hardware should be more frequet, milk them for all they are worth by making them buy more systems and software.

Translation 2: New hardware should be less frequent - it's coming out too often now, and it's really making the customers turn away from consoles.

I wonder which translation he is using?

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[Rog7]

Translation 1: New hardware should be more frequet, milk them for all they are worth by making them buy more systems and software.

Translation 2: New hardware should be less frequent - it's coming out too often now, and it's really making the customers turn away from consoles. I think you've got it backwards.

The cynic view while appropriate for Slashdot, doesn't always apply. Yes Nintendo is in the business of making money, but they are also in the business of entertaining people and guess which chicken lays the egg? You're assuming that Iwata's comments are just aimed at a way to take your money, but he's talking about product cycles following the demand of the consumer, so it's the other way around.

Consumers clearly want to spend their money on Nintendo's product and Nintendo in return is trying to fulfil their wishes for product.

And the comment about customers turning away from consoles?!? Haven't you noticed the trend has been a wee bit the other way around lately.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[Seekerofknowledge]

I read his statement as "we know that the Wii's graphics will look absolutely dated vs the 360's and PS3's in 2 years or so", and that they want to prepare everyone for releasing a new set of hardware earlier than everyone else, out of cycle.

Now I say that as a person who bought a Wii for the gameplay and not the graphics, and I don't really have a problem with that. In a few years we'll get a deal similar with the Wii, updated graphics power for a lower cost than everyone else by using smaller and cheaper versions of yesterdays's technology. Something like a Wii2, which is a Wii with better graphics (but not amazing) and backwards compatibility for 250 dollars. I'd buy it.

I really think this has to be the case because as much money they are making with the DS, I don't think it would make sense to release a new portable and fragment that market.

Or.... Maybe take all of what I said about the Wii and apply it to the DS. Maybe a more powerful DS-like portable, but with backwards compatibility, which wouldn't fragment the DS market as much. I could see Nintendo eyeing that strategy now in preparation for the slowdown of the DS in the future.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[provigilman]

Parent has it right... Iwata isn't talking about shortening the life cycle, he's talking about how we can't stick to a rigid "x years on market, then replace" business model. That's one of the things that turned me away from Game Boy. Everytime one of them got cheap enough or had enough games that I thought about buying it, a new one came out. I didn't want to be constantly updating a handheld gaming system that would be used just for trips and things, so I didn't get one.

The same applies with the current gen. The 360 has been out for 2 years, the PS3 and Wii for 1. Imagine if we had a whole new console generation in 3 years. Would you want to shell out potentially a thousand dollars when that rolls around? Probably not...especially if there isn't a big leap in the tech.

Why do you think that PS2 is still selling? It's bigger brother is just more powerful, but other than Blu-Ray, hasn't added a whole lot of functionality. Granted, Home should help, but it should have launched with that like the 360 with the new and improved Live. The consoles needs to switch to a dev cycle where they launch when they're ready. Otherwise we're going to get a point where someone starts designing the "next-next-gen" title while the current "next-gen" console is just launching.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[Chuck Chunder]

I read his statement as "we know that the Wii's graphics will look absolutely dated vs the 360's and PS3's in 2 years or so",

You didn't read his statement at all. He was talking about the DS for a start.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[SetupWeasel]

You are wrong. Why would Nintendo bail on the the most popular handheld and home console this generation?

I think that he is mostly talking about not updating the DS. The DS would be "due" for the introduction of its successor next year for a 2009 launch. I don't see that happening.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[Anonymous Coward]

That's one of the things that turned me away from Game Boy. Everytime one of them got cheap enough or had enough games that I thought about buying it, a new one came out. I didn't want to be constantly updating a handheld gaming system that would be used just for trips and things, so I didn't get one.

You are aware that each iteration of the Game Boy hardware was compatible with the last, right? You can (and I do) play a copy of Tetris that came with the Spinach Green-screened Game Boy in 1989 on your Game Boy Advance SP with no problems. The DS is another matter, but it still retains the ability to play Game Boy Advance games and ditched all the rest of the legacy support, which I imagine only impacts those of us that hang on to their games forever.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[king-manic]

I read his statement as "we know that the Wii's graphics will look absolutely dated vs the 360's and PS3's in 2 years or so", and that they want to prepare everyone for releasing a new set of hardware earlier than everyone else, out of cycle. In two years? It's already pretty dated. Compare any multi platform game. They just banked on enough people not caring or too new to video games to know better. Some of the graphics like RE4 or Zelda actually hurt my eyes on an HD set if I haven't slept enough. I hear Metroid does it better, but I'm still not certain if the Wii heralds the end to gaming as I enjoy it or will be the next mainstream platform.

So far the games are either retreats with "waggle" replacing "button mash", or "tedious mini games" collections. I enjoy the extra speed the Wii mote gives when aiming but despise the "waggle" that is mandatory to get a license.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[provigilman]

You know, I almost said something about, but didn't want to be too verbose. Yes, I am aware of the back compat of the Game Boys, but that doesn't change the fact that new hardware was constantly coming out with all new peripherals and some of the same limitations (seeing the screen in the dark being one that took them awhile to nail down).

That's part of my point though. Why spend $700 on a new PS3 when they're still releasing games on PS2 that look fairly decent? Alternatively, if the next-gen is just going to be a bigger, faster more expensive version of the current gen without a whole lot of new functionality, why upgrade? You can just wait for the next-next-gen where they'll make a console that's even bigger and represents an even bigger leap. Go from something like the GameCube to the Wii though that actually changes how you play the games and now you've got yourself some customers.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[WilliamSChips]

Try PC gaming. It gave up on gimmicks years ago.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[seebs]

The "waggle" is a myth; good games don't have any "waggle" replacing button mash, they have slick and well-integrated controls.

"Waggle" is just something you see in shovelware, and has nothing to do with the console.

I dunno. I just don't get all the complaints about the graphics; I was running my Wii on a 1080p set and it looked livable to me. As sharp as the PS3? No. But then, my playstation gaming these days consists of FF12. Graphics can go do anatomically improbable things; I want games that are fun to play.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[king-manic]

The shovel ware exceeds the quality ware as always but even the quality ware (RE 4, Zelda, Rayman, Warioware) had "shake vigorously" where it used to say "mash buttons".

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[seebs]

Makes no difference to me. The difference is, the good games have good controls that aren't just substituting one action for another. They may have some pointless "shake this" actions, but they also make excellent use of the Wiimote.

If you haven't tried Zack & Wiki, you're missing out.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[ByOhTek]

If it ends up as translation #2, I won't mind, but you are nuts if you think people want to shell out the money.

People don't want. People shell out the money (often grudgingly) because they want what it gives them. If next year the Wii2 comes out with much more graphical power, and UberUltimateGameX comes out then that I really want to play, yeah I *might* buy a Wii2, and that game. It doesn't mean I want to spend that money on a Wii2, I really don't, but if the game is worth it, I might be convinced to do so.

So, no, people don't want to spend the money, they want to get the product. The difference may seem overly subtle to you, but it does make a difference in the hapiness of the consumer, and the effectiveness of different marketing strategies.

In the case of a shorter, making a larger number of products that cost a lot, and offer less in return for each (i.e. fewer games for a given console), while having a similar price (it is unlikely they'll offer a newer/faster console for a lower price than it's predecessor), is not, in general, what people want.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[ookaze]

In two years? It's already pretty dated. Compare any multi platform game. Exactly, and it sells like hotcakes. So this argument is stupid at best, and only shows fear and insecurity from those spouting it.

They just banked on enough people not caring or too new to video games to know better. That's partly false actually. They banked on the fact that most people don't see the difference with HD (nearly your "not caring"), and that in a game, art direction is far more important than higher resolutions to display beautiful graphics.
Besides, I do care to put some HD content on my HDTV set (partly why I bought a PS3) and yet, I bought a Wii first, the PS3 being only recent.
I actually bought the HDTV set after the Wii, to replace my old SDTV and have a better picture for the Wii. The Wii actually looks amazing and far better on the HDTV.

Some of the graphics like RE4 or Zelda actually hurt my eyes on an HD set if I haven't slept enough. I hear Metroid does it better, but I'm still not certain if the Wii heralds the end to gaming as I enjoy it or will be the next mainstream platform. Your set must be a pretty bad one, or be pretty badly calibrated, and I bet it's a flat panel LCD too, as these are the worst for SD content.
I've yet to see someone complain on any Wii game (480p, so through component) I put on my HD (1080p) display.
It's even worse than that: people actually marvel at how well done is a game like Mario Party 8 is and enjoy it a lot, and not a single one marveled at Heavenly Sword playing on the same set (HDMI, 1080p).
Because contrary to yours, my HDTV set actually renders SD subjectively better (blacks are worst of course, but everything else is better) than my old SDTV one. The Wii graphics look crisp and sharp on it.

So far the games are either retreats with "waggle" replacing "button mash", or "tedious mini games" collections. I enjoy the extra speed the Wii mote gives when aiming but despise the "waggle" that is mandatory to get a license. A lot of games, like Fire Emblem, prove you wrong, but I guess I shouldn't feed your troll.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[ookaze]

I read his statement as "we know that the Wii's graphics will look absolutely dated vs the 360's and PS3's in 2 years or so", and that they want to prepare everyone for releasing a new set of hardware earlier than everyone else, out of cycle. That's a nonsense wishful thinking from hardcore gamers, which doesn't make any business sense at all, and Nintendo has lots of business sense.
But I guess this delusion won't disappear until it's proven wrong (happens to be wrong).

Now I say that as a person who bought a Wii for the gameplay and not the graphics, and I don't really have a problem with that. I'll never understand hardcore gamers, but I think that's reciprocal.
As for myself and most casuals, they bought the Wii for the games, and nothing else.

I really think this has to be the case because as much money they are making with the DS, I don't think it would make sense to release a new portable and fragment that market. It doesn't make sense with the Wii either, as it's in the exact same situation.
Prepare to live with the DS and Wii for many years to come.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[king-manic]

Exactly, and it sells like hotcakes. So this argument is stupid at best, and only shows fear and insecurity from those spouting it. The wii has the lowest attach rate of the three systems. Generally it's hardware is moving like hot cakes but it's software is languishing on shelves. Everything except a few first party gems. All multi-platform games sell better in absolute numbers on the 360 in the US.

The Wii actually looks amazing and far better on the HDTV. Definitely depends on the game. I prefer RE4 on the SD TV for the free anti-aliasing.

I've yet to see someone complain on any Wii game (480p, so through component) I put on my HD (1080p) display. Didn't I just complain about it? Using the component cables at 480p Zelda and RE4 are ugly pixelated messes. After playing RE4 for 30 min the three people in the room with me and i were physically ill. My complaints aren't uncommon.

The wii isn't the be all and end all. It does somethings well (great party machine) does other poorly (solo gaming a bit spotty). With good art direction it can look good (Mario Party) but it has it's limits. The Virtual console is especially galling since it's machine specific, what ever you spend on it dies with the machine. There have been a lot more wii fanboys now and I was actually much more into them before I got one. After playing it for some time the novelty wore off for me.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[ookaze]

The wii has the lowest attach rate of the three systems. Generally it's hardware is moving like hot cakes but it's software is languishing on shelves. Everything except a few first party gems. All multi-platform games sell better in absolute numbers on the 360 in the US. All the lines of defense in one nice paragraph. All flawed.
First, the attach rate you talk about doesn't take into account Wii Sports, so it's actually 1 point higher, and no longer the lowest. Then, using attach rate to talk about software sales is just plain nonsense. The sales numbers are what are important to game editors, not attach rate. They care about what they sell, not about how much games the hardware maker sell for each console. Besides, attach rate is typically high at the start of a console life, because mostly hardcore gamers buy it. Then it normally goes down as more casual players buy the console, and they buy less games. The Wii is atypical in the sense that it attracted lots of casual gamers right away, thus the very good but not amazing attach rate less than 1 year after launch.
Of course, Wii detractors are quick to forget to count Wii Sports in the attach rate, no need to search why that is.
Then, the only games that "languish on shelves" are crappy 3rd party shovelwares for the Wii that no one would buy on any console. It's mostly apparent in the cross-platform titles, that are always destroyed on the Wii. You would think they would "suffer" only a graphics downgrade, but no, it's worse most of the time.
Finally, I hope the 360 sells more software than the Wii in the USA, given that it was released 1 year earlier and has a huge lead in market share there.

Definitely depends on the game. I prefer RE4 on the SD TV for the free anti-aliasing. Definitely depends on the set. The only games where I notice some hints of aliasing on my HDTV set are PS2 games like FFXII (even through the PS3 upscaling and antialiasing). Not one of my Gamecube game looks aliased on my set, from Skies of Arcadia to Metroid Prime to Tales of Symphonia. Again, the worst HDTV sets regarding aliasing SD content are LCD. And I guessed well that the problem was aliasing.

Didn't I just complain about it? Using the component cables at 480p Zelda and RE4 are ugly pixelated messes. After playing RE4 for 30 min the three people in the room with me and i were physically ill. My complaints aren't uncommon. You complained, but I was talking of people without an agenda, normal people, causals if you like.
So I guessed well: you have a LCD set. These are the common flaws of bad LCD sets, though most are bad. A tiny few don't suffer from mosquito, motion dithering, ... There's never been anything like that on my HDTV set, but I've heard it described a lot, and have seen it a lot in stores, which use LCD. What's worse, is that I even saw that with games from XBox 360. Perhaps they were connected through composite, I don't know, but LCD sets are really the worst.
So basically, you're blaming the console when the real problem is your TV set.

The wii isn't the be all and end all. It does somethings well (great party machine) does other poorly (solo gaming a bit spotty). It actually does solo gaming perfectly well.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[king-manic]

Finally, I hope the 360 sells more software than the Wii in the USA, given that it was released 1 year earlier and has a huge lead in market share there. The 1 year lead is fair comment but the market share is neck and neck, if you take the entire market as a whole. They are also NPD number which include wii play and I think wii sports. Not 100% sure.

Definitely depends on the set. The only games where I notice some hints of aliasing on my HDTV set are PS2 games like FFXII (even through the PS3 upscaling and antialiasing). Not one of my Gamecube game looks aliased on my set, from Skies of Arcadia to Metroid Prime to Tales of Symphonia. Again, the worst HDTV sets regarding aliasing SD content are LCD. And I guessed well that the problem was aliasing. Sharp Aquos LC-42D62U 42" LCD HDTV,
PS3 look great(HDMI). 360 looks great(HDMI). Ps2 and GC is jagged but acceptable(Component/Composite). Wii(Component) is better then the PS2 and GC but not by that much. I am aware LCD's often dither but the Aquos is the subjectively the best of the bunch. On the Sony rear projection 50" (1080i) I have upstairs it's the exact same. A friends Sony Plasma 50" is the same as well. I don't think it's the LCD. This is subjective off course.

You complained, but I was talking of people without an agenda, normal people, causals if you like. I'd be interested to know what you think my agenda is? I think I have replied reasonably without acting either as a fanboy of another system or as a unfair critic.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[ookaze]

The 1 year lead is fair comment but the market share is neck and neck, if you take the entire market as a whole. They are also NPD number which include wii play and I think wii sports. Not 100% sure. Some facts :
- NPD numbers DO NOT include Wii Sports, but strangely enough, they include bundles for other consoles
- The Wii has the lead in worldwide sales, yes, it has passed the XBox 360 lead in less than a year, despite the 1 year lead
- The Wii has at least 2 M less sales than XBox 360 in the USA, which is far from being negligeable. The XB360 still has the most marketshare in the USA, and it better, as it is it's sole good market, with the UK

Sharp Aquos LC-42D62U 42" LCD HDTV See, I guessed right. These are the worst set for viewing SD content. SD content have more natural, movie like image, while LCD display are very sharp and unnatural image, which some people prefer, but still, it's different from movie feel and general SD content.
The Sony plasma is an old display with very bad logic unit (at most HD Ready to boot, as IIRC they don't do plasma anymore), and it's strange for your Sony RP, as if it's 1080i, that means it's analog (ad not a full HD set either), so it shouldn't have any special treatment to do, and should look better than on a SDTV.
Again, even the current best LCD still have the numerous flaws going with the technology, that even the 120 Hz sets can't remove, while inducing others.
And seeing a pixel mess is not subjective at all: if you see it, I guess it's there. It shouldn't happen, HD displays with good logic units and well calibrated should look better than a SDTV.
I've heard a lot of these horror stories, especially related to the Wii, but the fact is that it never happened at my home. Every SD content just looks better than on my old SDTV.

I'd be interested to know what you think my agenda is? I think I have replied reasonably without acting either as a fanboy of another system or as a unfair critic. I meant that you know about console games, HD, SD, ... I'm talking about people that just don't know even which console is what. For these people, a game like Mario Party 8 actually looks better than Heavenly Sword.
And no, their jaw doesn't drop when seeing it. Mine neither BTW.
Fortunately, I didn't buy the PS3 for the graphics (or I wouldn't play mostly PS2 games on it for now).

Re:this could mean one of two things for us...

[king-manic]

Some facts :
- NPD numbers DO NOT include Wii Sports, but strangely enough, they include bundles for other consoles
- The Wii has the lead in worldwide sales, yes, it has passed the XBox 360 lead in less than a year, despite the 1 year lead
- The Wii has at least 2 M less sales than XBox 360 in the USA, which is far from being negligeable. The XB360 still has the most marketshare in the USA, and it better, as it is it's sole good market, with the UK The wii sports eclusion would likely be due to the non-optional nature of the bundle where as the Motorstorm bundle PS3 is not the only version available. They do include wiiplay despite most buying it for the controller bundled rather then the game. The attach rate is per unit so a 2m lead wouldn't skew that. The 360 doesn't do well outside of the US. it's got sub PS2 sales figures in japan and is outsold 6:1 there by the PS3 and 10:1 by the wii. Even in Canada it appears neck and neck with the ps3. Halo 3 might have changed that.

See, I guessed right. These are the worst set for viewing SD content. SD content have more natural, movie like image, while LCD display are very sharp and unnatural image, which some people prefer, but still, it's different from movie feel and general SD content.
The Sony plasma is an old display with very bad logic unit (at most HD Ready to boot, as IIRC they don't do plasma anymore), and it's strange for your Sony RP, as if it's 1080i, that means it's analog (ad not a full HD set either), so it shouldn't have any special treatment to do, and should look better than on a SDTV.
Again, even the current best LCD still have the numerous flaws going with the technology, that even the 120 Hz sets can't remove, while inducing others.
And seeing a pixel mess is not subjective at all: if you see it, I guess it's there. It shouldn't happen, HD displays with good logic units and well calibrated should look better than a SDTV.
I've heard a lot of these horror stories, especially related to the Wii, but the fact is that it never happened at my home. Every SD content just looks better than on my old SDTV. The problem is the LCD HDTV's are the most popular on the market. The Sharp Aqous was one of the best when I bought mine. Not sure of any brands that are better.

I meant that you know about console games, HD, SD, ... I'm talking about people that just don't know even which console is what. For these people, a game like Mario Party 8 actually looks better than Heavenly Sword.
And no, their jaw doesn't drop when seeing it. Mine neither BTW.
Fortunately, I didn't buy the PS3 for the graphics (or I wouldn't play mostly PS2 games on it for now). Try Ratchet and Clank. It's pretty and insanely fun. Probably the only must get Ps3 title so far.

This sounds reasonable

[CrazyJim1]

Personally, I didn't like any of the systems of this generation. PS3 was too expensive, and doesn't have a lot of games. Xbox360 dies on you. I'm not the type that would like the Wiimote controller.

Unless a MMOG or competitive game(besides Halo3, FPS were meant for the mouse) comes out on console, I'll just stick with PC gaming.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[_xeno_]

Xbox360 dies on you.

The Wii can too. That's when I knew Nintendo really was going to be a player in this generation, when I had to ship my Wii back for replacement under warranty.

(OK, it didn't actually die, but it did start showing a lot of graphical corruption. I can't say exactly what's wrong, but the warranty repair indicated that the "main board" had to be replaced.)

Re:This sounds reasonable

[chammy]

Epic is bringing UT3 to the PS3 in a very interesting way. You can use a keyboard and mouse, as well as install the game to the internal harddrive. It should have free cross-platform play as well. Of course I'll play it on my PC (I don't have the kind of job that lets me drop ~$500 on a console), but it's still great to see such a feature-packed release on console.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[plague3106]

Any of the consoles can die; you miss the point. The point is that the 360 seems to have a bad habit of dying many times for a large number of people. Wiis die too, but the vast majority are just fine.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[Prien715]

No offense, but your argument against this gen is crap.

PS3 was too expensive, and doesn't have a lot of games
PS2's launch library was crap initially too. The PS3's price is coming down.

Xbox360 dies on you
So did the PSX's laser, for those of us who remember. Later, the hardware got better.

I'm not the type that would like the Wiimote controller [my emphasis]
As in a human being?;) At least try it before you decide you don't like it. I didn't think I would like sashimi either, but it is yummy.

Now, if you'd wanted to MS's pay-for-multiplayer system or the lack of any coherent system on Wii/PS3, that's one thing. But you dislike two systems based on incidental qualities, won't even try the 3rd, and throw up your hands and say that's it?

Re:This sounds reasonable

[_xeno_]

Based on a Google search I made when I first noticed the problem, it's occurred for quite a few people. Not enough for Nintendo to have a FAQ entry for it, but enough that they didn't even ask any questions when I requested a warranty replacement online.

The other big difference, of course, is that the Wii dies while under warranty, while the Xbox 360 waits until just after the warranty period to give up.

That and the Wii remains playable even with the graphical corruption. Although it did really mess up the scan visor in Metroid Prime 3, apparently it uses the graphics memory to decide what "type" of thing is being scanned, and prior to getting it replaced I'd get all these random "scan targets" as I moved the Wiimote around.

Plus I was mainly intending it as a joke. It always seems that the most popular consoles have this tendency to die shortly after their warranty ends. So if the Wii starts toasting itself, it obviously has a very bright future! It worked for the PS2, after all.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[Anonymous Coward]

The PSX didn't "die" on you in nearly the numbers we're seeing in the 360. Sorry.. I've got two launch PSX's that work... and I have a launch PS2 that works. anecdotal? Sure.. as much as the blanket comparison between the 360/PSX.

I have neither launch console from the 360 or the original XBox. Of _ALL_ the consoles I've owned... the _ONLY_ ones that ever failed on me were from Microsoft... coincidence? Who knows?

That being said... yes, consoles have failures... but to compare the PSX to the 360 is REALLY squinting...

Re:This sounds reasonable

[Donniedarkness]

FYI: I use the classic controller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wii_Classic_Controller#Classic_Controller) for most of my Wii games.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[nhaines]

Actually, Nintendo rarely asks questions when you send in a unit for warranty repair. I can imagine you might be charged if you sent in a perfectly working unit, but Nintendo Consumer Service is probably the most friendly, helpful team I've ever seen over the last 20 years I've had Nintendo products.

When the Nintendo DS first came out, there was a small number of units with dead pixels. Nintendo's advice was "Play the system and see if it bothers you. We want you to have an enjoyable gaming experience, so if you decide you don't like it, call us up and we'll replace it at no charge." They were 3-day-shipping units, you'd drop your old DS into the box and slap the included postage-paid return label and out it went again, totally free.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[king-manic]

The Wii can too. That's when I knew Nintendo really was going to be a player in this generation, when I had to ship my Wii back for replacement under warranty. My first one had a defective drive, I opted for an exchange instead of a 3 week warranty replacement and lost $20 on the virtual console store stuff. Nintendo told me to fuck myself too when I inquired about a credit or refund (within 24h of the actual purchase). I will never buy anything from Wii shopping again. Xbox live is also a pain, I've been attempting to remove my Credit card from my friends Xbox after I bought him an expansion without him registering another card. No luck yet. I hear tech support may do it but seriously, why the hell don't they provide an option to remove a CC? So for my money the PSN network has actually been the best experience of the 3. I can transfer my games between machines, i can remove a CC. Odd, Sony not screwing something up.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[Shados]

As a sidenote (and I did have that problem with my Wii too), it is mostly limited to the first few batches of Wiis, so that problem technically "doesn't exist" anymore. Its also, on a susceptible Wii, predictable, as the way to make it happen is basically always the same.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[king-manic]

Xbox360 dies on you
So did the PSX's laser, for those of us who remember. Later, the hardware got better. Not nearly to the same degree. It's like comparing the WWII wartime atrocities record of Japan vs Canada.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[DeepHurtn!]

Oh, c'mon, the PS3 price complaints are legitimate. Sure, its price is coming down -- after a year -- but it's still more expensive than many people feel comfortable spending on a gaming console, and probably will be for quite a while, at which it may be just too late for Sony to really turn things around (no install base, no games!).

Re:This sounds reasonable

[_xeno_]

Remember when you activated the Shop Channel and they made you read through the agreement and it said that, if you need to replace the unit, you must replace it through Nintendo if you want to keep your Wii Shop points and downloads? And they made you agree to that several times, and pointed it out several times?

Well - they meant it. If you wanted to keep your Wii Shop points and downloads, you needed to send the unit back to Nintendo. As a plus, they also copy all your settings and save data over to the new unit.

You do have to re-download all your Wii Shop purchases, but you don't have to re-buy them if you go through Nintendo.

I really can't fault Nintendo for your failure to read their terms and conditions. You did agree to them, since you can't use the Wii Shop channel without reading them and agreeing to them.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[Anonymous Coward]

That's funny, I went through 3 PSXs, and 4 PS2s, while my original XBox and Launch 360 still work.

Oh yeah. Anecdotes aren't data. Funny, that.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[provigilman]

Well, as a counter-example, I still have my original XBox and I still lug it to Halo:CE parties once a month and it works great. I also have a 360 that, while not launch, was still one of the early builds. Both work perfectly.

My PS2 on the other hand was a launch version and it won't play a LOT of DVD's that came out past, say, 2004 or 2005. It also has this tendancy to get disc read errors for no reason and so when I actually want to play a game I have to boot, and reboot, and reboot, and reboot, etc... Sometimes I go through like 10 cycles of this and just give and go play my 360. Then the next day, without touching anything or even removing the game disc, it works fine.

Anecdotal evidence isn't worth a lot because everyone's experience is different.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[king-manic]

I really can't fault Nintendo for your failure to read their terms and conditions. You did agree to them, since you can't use the Wii Shop channel without reading them and agreeing to them. I declare I will hence forth not buy from the online shop due to the "go fuck yourself" more so then the actual $20. I did read it, I asked if an exception could be made as it was withing 24h, I could associated my credit card again and i had recipes of everything (the same mynintendo.com ID was associated with both). The Customer service person sent me a reply stating games were non transferable, with some condescending remarks like yours and a link back to the terms. In turn I vowed never to buy from them and evangelize my point of view.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[IKnwThePiecesFt]

Isn't the 40GB model $399? The same price that the 360 was a year after launch? I think price has become a moot point now.

And for my anti-fanboy credit I own a 360 and Wii but no PS3.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[Anonymous Coward]

PS3 was too expensive, and doesn't have a lot of games
PS2's launch library was crap initially too. The PS3's price is coming down.

This isn't launch time for the PS3 - this is year later, and the games list still sucks. There are maybe 1-3 games I'd consider getting. Not worth the up-front $400.00, and that's with the drop.


Xbox360 dies on you
So did the PSX's laser, for those of us who remember. Later, the hardware got better.

Not in the same levels.


I'm not the type that would like the Wiimote controller [my emphasis]
As in a human being?;) At least try it before you decide you don't like it. I didn't think I would like sashimi either, but it is yummy.


Amazingly enough, yes, wii sports etc are not universally enjoyed. I can say that much from trying it and being rather disappointed considering the hype. As to the original poster, if you had the slightest bit of empathy, you'd realize that people do, in fact, have a better idea of what entertains them than you.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[7Prime]

No, it's $499. Everyone likes to fudge $100 this way or that, but the models are basically $500 and $600

Re:This sounds reasonable

[Nazlfrag]

You're telling me a giant corporation didn't make an exception to their policies for you... well colour me shocked. Obviously you forgot to tell them how you were a unique and special snowflake, and that they must bend to your will because you were too impatient to get your replacement from them.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[_xeno_]

Nope, it really is $399 for the low-end model now. (It even comes with a Blu-Ray movie, which says something about the PS3's game library...)

The $399 model is a 40GB model, which I presume doesn't include hardware backwards compatibility.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[Lunzo]

I thought the customer was always right. If they had refunded it chances are the GP would buy from them again and would generate other business for them by telling friends about his good experience dealing with them.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[Emetophobe]

No, it's $499. Everyone likes to fudge $100 this way or that, but the models are basically $500 and $600

Oh really? $399 Canadian for a 40GB PS3 (with a bundled copy of Spiderman 3 on Blu-ray).

Re:This sounds reasonable

[king-manic]

You're telling me a giant corporation didn't make an exception to their policies for you... well colour me shocked. Obviously you forgot to tell them how you were a unique and special snowflake, and that they must bend to your will because you were too impatient to get your replacement from them. What an interesting comment. So original and insightful....

Warranty repair: Are often refurbished parts. They diminish the average life cycle of the console. So if I sent it for repair odds are I will get the same machine with a refurbed optical driving. Considering the wii was in my possession for less then a day before the drive gave out I didn't want that particular one back (likely damaged in shipping vs manufacturing defect) nor did I want a sort of used refurb (used, I bought mine new). Thus I opted to exchange which is part of the policy from the seller.

Wii Virtual console: I realized that Nintendo would not help transfer or credit even in reasonable circumstances. I am aware as a former customer care agent for a major Telecom that the "policy" is flexible. They were unable to accommodate me and also I realized anything I bought for the wii dies with it. Thus any purchase is only valid for the lifetime of the machine. Thus there is no guarantee that anything i purchase for it from wii shopping will persist past the 1 year warranty. Paid repairs + shipping and billing may exceed the cost of the console when it gives out.

Conclusion: Condescending staff + no reasonable expectation of persistence = Nintendo losing 1 online customer.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[KDR_11k]

From what I read it doesn't even support software BC.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[LKM]

Based on a Google search I made when I first noticed the problem, it's occurred for quite a few people

Did Nintendo write off over a billion dollars for broken Wiis?

I know a bunch of people with Wiis. Not one problem. Different story with 360s.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[sacherjj]

But with the falling dollar, that is $499 US, right?

Re:This sounds reasonable

[7Prime]

No, well it's like $402 or something. The Canadians just passed us like, 2 weeks ago.

Re:This sounds reasonable

[geekoid]

I have a PS2 early launch, and it works fine everyday. That includes it getting left on all night by my son.

Moore's Law?

[Zironic]

Isn't computer tech fairly predictable making an even cycle very comfy?

Re:Moore's Law?

[provigilman]

Moore's law is based on changes in the size and cost of transistors on the chip. We're a bit beyond that now... As such, his "law" isn't nearly as applicable and technology cycles aren't nearly as predictable.

Plus, that's part of the point. Do we really need a console that's twice as fast for the same cost but doesn't bring anything new to the table? Wouldn't it be better to say, wait 6 years and get a console that's marginally faster than the one that would've come out at the 4 year mark but adds a *ton* of new functionality to the way we play games?

Another aspect is...

[Bullfish]

How many consoles does the average gamer now own? In the past when they had one or none, a new console would have been more attractive. Now, with saturation being what it is... you can keep on playing the older systems until there is something about the new system that compels you to buy it. If you have no high def TV for example, there isn't a lot to recommend either the PS3 or 360 over their predecessors. A killer exclusive might help (ala Halo 3), but that depends on the individual. It's all relative really, but I expect the adoption rates to get slower and slower.

Re:Another aspect is...

[cromar]

I am aware I am not representative, but I still play my SMS, NES, and SNES as my main consoles. There're still games I never got to play when I was young, and, by Jove, I just can't get enough of those 2D platformers... Mario Bros. 3 for life :)

Re:Another aspect is...

[Anonymous Coward]

No you don't. Just because you have them hooked up to your 20" in your parents basement doesn't mean shit.

Re:Another aspect is...

[cromar]

No, actually I have them hooked up to my 10 in. mini-TV in the living room of my cheap rental. Insecure much?

In between generations

[xarien]

I wonder how people will feel when they have to pony up another $250+ when Nintendo releases the follow up to the WII in 2-3 years in order to compete with PS3. At that point, I'm betting quite a few Sony fans will be comparing cumulative prices. It shouldn't be too many years before PS3's blu-ray drive will seem like a brilliant idea as the average game grows to be much too large to be contained on a single media. To catch up at that point would mean new hardware and the associated cost.

Re:In between generations

[Nitage]

But games don't need bluray NOW. By the time they do, the drives will cost $30 not $300.

Re:In between generations

[plague3106]

Compete with the PS3? You mean the system that is overwhelmingly easy to find, and mostly sitting on shelves? Sorry, I think the PS3 is the one that needs to compete, and I'm not sure its ever going to go anywhere.

Certainly BR is a non-issue for most; I suspect many that would like HD movies are waiting until there's a clear winner. I really don't care if the PS3 can play BR if HD-DVD comes out on top.

The PS3 is just all around too iffy at the moment to even consider touching it.

Re:In between generations

[xarien]

In terms of Blu-Ray, we just couldn't have made Uncharted without it; with Uncharted we have almost filled it (91 percent). We're also using the hard drive to pre-cache data from the Blu-Ray disc. That allows us to stream up to 12 streams for sound, load level data super fast and more importantly to stream textures constantly to guarantee high-res quality on the screen. Like it or not, HD sets are growing year after year and the Wii just isn't cut out to be HD entertainment.

Re:In between generations

[Turken]

Well, if Nintendo can put out a new console two years from now that is just as good as a PS3 is today and still sell it for only $250, I would think that they were making a pretty smart business move. Iwata was talking about how Nintendo aims to hit the technology "sweet spot" with each release. Currently, Sony has overshot the sweet spot by putting too much into the ps3 to create a console with lots of potential, because they can't sell it very well because people either don't want to drop $500 at once on a console, or don't yet have a high-def television to justify the graphical horsepower (or they can't afford both the PS3 and the TV to play it on). However, in two years HDTVs will most likely be cheap and plentiful. So...

option 1 = pay $250 now for interesting games my current TV, and $750 later ($500 for a good TV, $250 for a WiiWii) for interesting games in HD.
option 2 = pay $1500 now ($1000 for a good TV, and $500 for a good PS3) for a handful of HD games that look really nice, but just aren't that interesting (because shiny games are expensive to make, and thus to profit must cater to the lowest common denominator)

And, maybe once Nintendo gets around to releasing the WiiWii, the dust will have settled on the whole blu-ray/hd-dvd mess, and they can use whichever drive becomes the standard for other high-def media.

Re:In between generations

[plague3106]

HD set sales may be growing, but its going to be a LONG time before they are standard in homes. I have a 32" set from 2001, and no reason to replace it, and a 27" set purchased only a few years ago, again, no reason to replace it.

Besides, you act as if games are only going to be fun if they can be viewed in HD. I think people have spoken, and they'd rather have a standard-D console than an HD one. The Wiis graphics are good enough, what I really want is games that are fun.

Re:In between generations

[xarien]

After owning an HD set, it's very very difficult to watch SD anything on it. When I first heard my wife say, "why isn't this in HD," I knew the "what's the big deal about HD" crowd is going to die off pretty quickly. "Fun" being such an subjective word, can be defined in many ways. Who says better visuals and sound are not part of this equation? Yes, gameplay counts as a huge part of the overall equation, but to snuff visuals and sound as being unimportant is simply turning a blind eye.

Re:In between generations

[Chuck Chunder]

At that point, I'm betting quite a few Sony fans will be comparing cumulative prices

And I'm betting they still won't be happy at what they find. Personally I think the Wii will have more than 2 or 3 more years, I think they'll come in when HD really is widespread and HD capable hardware costs closer to commodity levels.

The next Nintendo console will certainly be interesting though, they will certainly have to pull something out of the hat to gain traction against already entrenched 360s and PS3.

Re:In between generations

[Chuck Chunder]

Like it or not, HD sets are growing year after year and the Wii just isn't cut out to be HD entertainment.

I like it (because I want one). But they are a long way from universal and a lot of consoles are used on a households second television which is even more unlikely to be HD.

The PS3's bid to be a "media center" is necessary because they need it to be in the loungeroom to find an HD tv, however a lot of traditional console use is in bedrooms, studys etc where HD won't be found in any significant volume for years to come.

SD isn't going anywhere soon.

Re:In between generations

[xarien]

From http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/17/best-buy-kicks-analog-tvs-to-the-curb/

Best Buy is saying sayonara to analog TVs by announcing that it has pulled all analog sets from its shelves, which marks the first time a big box retailer of this magnitude has publicly announced an exit from the analog TV biz. Of course, this decision now enables the firm to shamelessly proclaim that any television purchased within the confines of its brick and mortar walls will work in the all-digital future -- and for those not willing to pick up a new set, it also stated that it will be participating in the NTIA DTV Converter Box Coupon Program starting early next year. At first glance, the announcement sounds like much needed progress towards getting folks ready for the 2009 switchover, but for moms and pops scouting a 13-inch analog CRT on the cheap for that garage / playroom, it looks like you'll be "forced" to check out one with a digital tuner... or an LCD. As if you needed another excuse, right? Where will the SD crowd go when stores stop selling them?

Re:In between generations

[edwdig]

Remember, digital does not imply HD. You can transmit HD over analogue and SD over digital.

Re:In between generations

[Chuck Chunder]

1) Analog is not the same as SD. Digital is not the same as high definition.

2) TV's have a long life span, 10-15 years is very common. Stores aren't selling Analog televisions doesn't change the fact that there are enormous numbers of them already out there that will continue to exist and be used for a long time yet.

Indeed the analog switch off may mean there are more such TV's used with consoles.
People who do decide to buy a better digital TV aren't necessarily going to just throw away their old one, they may decide to use it as a monitor for their console! As all current gen consoles work with analogue inputs why not?

Re:In between generations

[sanosuke76]

Goodwill stores, classified ads in the paper, etc. Plenty of SDTV's are being given away at this point. Now, high-quality CRTs are quite tough to get ahold of. But if you never cared about HD, at this point you could probably coast by on freebie TV's for the next 20-30 years.

Re:In between generations

[xarien]

1) Yes, they are not equal, however, in today's market, they are congruent. When was the last time you walked into Best Buy and saw a digital sd set? 2) TVs used to have a life span on 10-15 years. Any time there is a jump in technology, it will greatly shorten the life span of said product for that generation.

Re:In between generations

[7Prime]

Ya know, I call bullshit. I keep hearing this arguement, and I just haven't felt that yet. I got a 360 and have been playing games like Bioshock, Gears of War, and Blue Dragon. The other day, I played a trial version of Mario Galaxy at Gamestop, which happened to be using my same exact HD Samsung TV, and I was blown away by the graphics. I half expected to be revolted, because of what all these HD freaks are saying, and I could bearily tell the difference. Seriously, having played Metroid Prime 3 and Bioshock back to back, I was kinda dissapointed that HD didn't really make me go "wow" like everyone is saying (not that Bioshock's graphics are anything short of amazing, but so are MP3s). I think the "wow" is more an unconcious reaction to having spent 2x as much on something that isn't really noticably all that superior.

I love my new 360, but if anything, it's re-enforced my support for the Wii as a truely next-gen system. They don't really feel the night-and-day generation different, the way I thought I would. The PS2 is painful to play on now, I'll admit, but the Wii does what it does extremely well, if not better than what the other systems try to do.

Re:In between generations

[plague3106]

After owning an HD set, it's very very difficult to watch SD anything on it.

There lies your problem; owning the HD set. Now that you have it, you think it worthwhile. It may even be that it really is a big step up. However, given that my sets now are all working perfectly, I'm reluctant to simply throw them away because HD is now here. Why throw away something that works very well for me? Its not like upgrading a computer, where I can make use of the older parts as a testing station or a low power server. The TV necessarily must be thrown out (or given away or what have you). Given that HD tech STILL has not settled down, I'm even less inclined to make the investment. I can't get the same size screen for the same price as what I spent six years ago.

I'm not even saying its not a big deal. Honestly though, ALL of the HD sets I've seen look magnitudes WORSE than my SD set. And this is at BB, the cable company, etc. I noticed a HUGE jump in picture quality in fact just by switching from crapcast, which over compressed the hell out of everything, to my city's cable provider, which doesn't seem to compress anything (yay for IPTV!). However, as blown away as I might be by HD, I can't drop a few thousand to replace what I already have. There are LOTS of people in this position, I'm willing to bet.

"Fun" being such an subjective word, can be defined in many ways. Who says better visuals and sound are not part of this equation?

Its been a long time since I was playing with Artari and NES graphics. At this point though, my Wii have excellent graphics on my existing hardware. It looks quite good. Sound is not a factor for me; I already have a real 5.1 system (which I'd rather spend money on upgrading the speakers than a new TV).

Yes, gameplay counts as a huge part of the overall equation, but to snuff visuals and sound as being unimportant is simply turning a blind eye.

I didn't say they were unimportant; I said the Wiis graphics are good enough (quite good, actually) that graphics isn't as a major part of the equation as it used to be. Yes, graphics matter.. just that we reaching diminishing returns on graphics hardware at the moment. Until we get true lifelike picture quality (Star Trek holodeck perhaps?), what we have now seems to be fine for years to come at least.

Re:In between generations

[xarien]

Admittedly, many of Wii's games do look quite good. However, this is largely due to the fact that they are cartoonish in nature. When dealing with realistic graphics, you will begin to notice the difference. What it really boils down to is the amount of money a given individual has to spend for entertainment. Being one of the more blessed individuals in the world, I and many others can afford to throw around a few grand every year or two for upgrading entertainment systems, game consoles, computers, etc. When money isn't that large of a factor, picking up a true HD entertainment system is quite a boon. Now what I really need is some extra time.

Re:In between generations

[Chuck Chunder]

Yes, they are not equal, however, in today's market, they are congruent.

No they are not, because a vast number of people will choose merely to get a digital receiver for use with their analogue TV when the analogue switch off happens.

"Todays market" for televisions is not the same as "todays market" for consoles. There is a big lag between HDTV's being available (even favoured) and them being a dominant proportion of deployed TVs.

A recent Nielsen study puts ~30% of US households as having an HDTV. That's not bad but it's going to be years before it's a majority of households, let alone a majority of in-service televisions. (Interestingly the survey also says there's only 13.7% of US households have an HDTV and a HDTV capable tuner, so there's an awful lot of people who've bought HDTV capable televisions who aren't bothered about getting HD content).

Re:In between generations

[TempeTerra]

maybe once Nintendo gets around to releasing the WiiWii...

Offtopic here, but I can't help thinking that the Wii+1 should be known as the counter-revolution, at least while it's in development ;)

Re:In between generations

[KDR_11k]

You make it sound like resolution is the crucial step in entertainment. As PC users we all know the difference between 640x480 and 1280x960 and IMO it's not big enough to propel one console above another. More resolution is important for small things like text and icons, especially on a computer but console games are played from a greater distance, when you use text that requires HD to be readable the average user isn't able to read it even with HD simply because it's too far away. The Wii could use HD for things like the browser or the news channel but in the end those are just silly gimmicks, not main features of the console.

As for eye hurting graphics, I'd rather see a refresh rate of 72Hz instead of more resolution at the same old flickery 50-60Hz.

Re:In between generations

[KDR_11k]

The next Nintendo console will certainly be interesting though, they will certainly have to pull something out of the hat to gain traction against already entrenched 360s and PS3.

PS3 and 360 entrenched? In what way?

Re:In between generations

[LKM]

Like it or not, HD sets are growing year after year and the Wii just isn't cut out to be HD entertainment. Wii games look just fine on my HDTV. As good as PS3 or 360 games? No. But not bad enough that it's any kind of issue.

Re:In between generations

[Chuck Chunder]

In that they will be available at a reasonable price with a big back catalogue.

At the moment the Wii has both price and innovation in it's favour. If Nintendo does release an HD console in X years and the 360/PS3 are still being sold then the "Wii 2" likely won't have a price advantage.

Re:In between generations

[flitty]

If you really feel that games NEED TEH BLU-RAYZ, You should do yourself a favor and buy THE ORANGE BOX, which will give you up to 20-40 hours+ of story/gameplay (depending on how fast you want to go), 3 original games, and it all fits on a single dvd. This, as opposed to Heavenly Sword, which is a 6 (!) hour blu-ray game, and the developers cried about "the disc is going to burst it's so full!"

Re:In between generations

[ookaze]

I own a HD set too. After reading the nonsense you spout out, I conclude that:
- your HD set is really really bad (and must be a LCD, which are the worst for SD content)
- your wife is unusually knowledgeable about all this HD thing, and so, not representative at all of the general population
- visuals and sound are not unimportant, nobody ever said that apart from trolls. They are secondary to gameplay. Secondary, which is not the same as Unimportant

Re:In between generations

[ookaze]

Well, if Nintendo can put out a new console two years from now that is just as good as a PS3 is today and still sell it for only $250, I would think that they were making a pretty smart business move. It doesn't make sense business wise and won't happen, as the Wii isn't even 1 year old.
And Nintendo isn't trying to outdo the two others technology wise, I thought it was obvious.
I understand better now how MS felt about FOSS, not understanding it. This is the same situation here: people (hardcore gamers I think, or technology aware people) have a very hard time understanding what Nintendo is doing, despite them explaining it several times.
Nintendo isn't trying to make a powerhouse, they're trying to sell fun games and the consoles that go with them.
They're not drooling at the red ocean, but bathing in the blue one.

Re:In between generations

[plague3106]

Well then you must realize that your point about the people not upgrading to HD will quickly grow smaller is not valid, and that there will be many SD sets around for some time to come. You're not in a majority.

Re:In between generations

[KDR_11k]

Do you think they'd be insane enough to do that? They know it's stupid to forfeit your userbase and start anew like that. Why would they release a Wii HD before the 360 or PS3 are about to be EOLed? It's not like the Wii will stop selling over a triviality like HD.

Re:In between generations

[Chuck Chunder]

I think it depends on the lifetime of the other consoles. If they have 10+ years left in them (and I think the PS3 does at least, hell it's got another 1 or 2 years before it even get's started properly!) then I wouldn't be surprised to see the Wii's successor come out before then.

Re:In between generations

[KDR_11k]

I don't think either competitor has 10+ years lifetime. Everyone claims that at the beginning of their console's lifetime but usually there's no reason to keep the console around after the next one appears (unless you take #1, the PS2 still gets shelf space while the XBox and Gamecube disappeared almost instantly) as developer support migrates quickly and it's a bad idea to sit there with an old console when your competitors are coming out with new ones because yours gets viewed as outdated and everyone expects you to EOL it soon.

The PS3 may have 1-2 years until it becomes viable but that doesn't mean Sony won't have to kill it off when the next XBox comes out, simply to keep up with the times. Currently their platform may have advantages over the XBox but by then all the tech in the PS3 will have become cheaper than dirt and new tech is available that the XBox can capitalize on. Unless the PS3 grabs the #1 spot there won't be anyone around to make games for it at that time either.

Re:In between generations

[Anonymous Coward]

I play my Wii on a 52 inch high def LCD screen. It's really fun - and my wife will even play it with me once in a while. When my 60 year old dad comes over we play golph on it.

When PS3 copies the wiimote and cost 200 then I'll pick on up and have the better graphics. Until then... my HD tv will just have to deal with some standard def graphics.

Let's hope the traditional console cycle is dead

[ProppaT]

I think that the most important reason why the old console cycle needs to die is to let programmers/software catch up with the hardware. Sure, you put enough people on a project and you can crank out a PS3 game in enough time; however, if the game is a flop, it could be a disaster for the studio. On the other hand a developer could put out a game on a console that takes less time and money to develop for (such as the Wii and handhelds) and there's not as much risk involved with taking chances. In Nintendo case they're actually encouraging studios to start and take chances. Years down the road when the road has been paved for super high end graphic consoles and software has caught up to the point where it's affordable to actually make the jump.

After all, the real race over the years, weather people want to own up to it or not, has been a software race rather than a hardware race. It hasn't so much been about what the hardware so much as what developers can squeeze out of it.

Nintendo, imho, is basically telling developers "Look, you know all those development tools you spent years tweaking for the Gamecube? Well, here's your chance to actually use all of them. BTW, here's our tools while you're at it." It's feasible that the programming team could actually create the frame of the game while the actual details are still being developed. It's definitely a shift in the industry that we haven't seen since the days of 2d gaming. It's the reason why portable gaming has been so healthy over the years. I'm personally excited about the doors this might open for the industry and I definitely hope that Nintendo in fact does ignore the console cycle until consumers demand they need more power.

what do these have in common?

[night_flyer]

DRAM Makers Suffer Due to Lackluster Vista Adoption, The Dying PC Market, and this story?

People arent adopting as fast as tech is pumping out. People dont like to change for change sake. As the popular saying goes, if it ain't broke, why fix it?

Re:what do these have in common?

[dEnY_cOnFoRmItY]

I always liked the saying "if it ain't broke, fix it 'till it is" myself

Intelligence is still a Hard Problem(tm)

[tepples]

And when graphics/physics/AI get as good as real life Citation needed that this will happen within the next four generations, especially the intelligence part. Specifically, will the NPCs in Animal Crossing IX be able to say more than about four weeks worth of scripted conversations? Or will they be able to understand the letters I send them more than simply scanning for the presence or absence of predefined keywords?

Re:Intelligence is still a Hard Problem(tm)

[Toonol]

You're right, but I think the grandparent post was wrong in linking graphics/physics/AI together. Graphics quality depends greatly on hardware, while the sad AI in current games is primarily a software issue.

I know that some designers have claimed that the increased power of the PS3 and 360 allow better AI, but I don't buy it. I think AI is written up to the level of barely adequate, and then all further resources (both hardware and human) are put towards graphics.

So, yes, I agree we're decades away from a really good computer AI that allows creative responses to your actions. But I don't think that it's strictly a question of console power. It's a question of priorities. Once we stop caring about increasingly incremental improvements in graphics, developers will begin working on other parts of the experience.

Re:Intelligence is still a Hard Problem(tm)

[xarien]

Actually, the field AI would greatly benefit once we can move to quantum computing or biological computing. The parallelism available would essentially allow a developer to enable a fully functioning and unique neural network for each artificial entity.

Re:Intelligence is still a Hard Problem(tm)

[CaseM]

You are correct. As someone else has said, if we were able to do AI well, we'd be doing it already, just slowly. We don't have the algorithms, yet, even if such a thing were to exist. As it is, we don't have even a remote grasp of simulating intelligence, let alone doing it authentically.

Well done for completely missing the point

[Chuck Chunder]

Firstly he's talking about the DS and more generally he's saying there's no point in rushing to the next generation until you've run out of ideas on the current generation. He's not talking about "power", rather capabilities, thereby suggesting that we should see new devices when they have something fundamentally new to offer, not just more power.

Re:Well done for completely missing the point

[Chuck Chunder]

So not only don't you read the article, you don't even read my second sentance?

Seriously dude, why are you commenting if all you have to tell us about is what you are imagining Iwata is thinking about when he said some stuff you haven't actually read?

Why not just shut the fuck up?

Re:Well done for completely missing the point

[boobavon]

Are you not telling us what you imagine the above poster is saying? Hmmm...

Re:Well done for completely missing the point

[Chris Burke]

No, because they actually read the post they replied to, and it is clear he got the gist correct (i.e. that they were speculating on something on the meaning of something they haven't even read).

Nice try though.

Now, Wii wait. But this winter, Wii brawl.

[tepples]

Here's your competitive console game: Super Smash Bros. Brawl for Wii uses the controller in a more or less traditional fashion. You can hold the Wii Remote sideways like you do for NES games on Virtual Console, or you can use Remote + Nunchuk, or you can use the GameCube pad or Classic Controller. It wouldn't work well on a typical PC running Windows because most PCs running Windows aren't connected to monitors large enough to fit four people around them.

kkrieger

[tepples]

It shouldn't be too many years before PS3's blu-ray drive will seem like a brilliant idea as the average game grows to be much too large to be contained on a single media. I see this excuse being dragged out over and over. There exist more space-efficient methods for production of meshes and textures, some of which fit an entire Xbox-caliber first-person shooter into 96 KiB. Google kkrieger.

Re:kkrieger

[xarien]

I love when people use that tech demo as an argument. What is the point of a 96k game when the RAM foot print is nearing 300 MB? What about the cycles used to generate textures on the fly instead of being used for AI and physics? Talk about pot / kettle in terms of old arguments.

Re:kkrieger

[tepples]

What is the point of a 96k game when the RAM foot print is nearing 300 MB? The Xbox 360 console's RAM is well over 300 MB.

What about the cycles used to generate textures on the fly instead of being used for AI and physics? Generate textures during the opening cut scene and cache them to the hard disk if you must. The point is that they do not have to take up space on the optical disc. And I was using .kkrieger as an example of one extreme, implying the existence of a happy medium between the procedural extreme of .kkrieger and the "MegaTexture" extreme of id Tech 4.1.

Re:kkrieger

[xarien]

1) The size of the textures do not go away. This was the point I was making in the first place. To utilize so much RAM simply to have an alternative storage medium for textures is unfathomable, which is why kkrieger will always be just a tech demo. RAM is used for other calculations as well you know. 2) Caching textures to disk would require a mandatory disk drive in every machine. Again, the argument holds no water with both xbox and wii.

Re:kkrieger

[tepples]

Caching textures to disk would require a mandatory disk drive in every machine. Again, the argument holds no water with both xbox and wii. In limited-memory environments such as Wii and Xbox 360 Core, generate the textures at half resolution. On Wii, you get away with it because nobody can tell the difference at 640x480. On Xbox 360 Core, you get away with it because degraded (but still playable) performance is expected.

Re:kkrieger

[xarien]

So your solution is "let's make it not as good." On top of that, can you just imagine all the **** hitting the fan when xbox core owners find out a particular game runs worse on it compared to the premium/elite? I mean just look at how many people Sony have pissed off by cutting backwards compatibility out of their low end line (and that's WITH advance notice).

Re:kkrieger

[tepples]

So your solution is "let's make it not as good." The solution is "let's make it as good as we can, not use the lack of space on a DVD-9 as a cop-out."

On top of that, can you just imagine all the **** hitting the fan when xbox core owners find out every game runs worse on it compared to the premium/elite? Fixed, as far as I can tell.

Re:kkrieger

[xarien]

On top of that, can you just imagine all the **** hitting the fan when xbox core owners find out every game runs worse on it compared to the premium/elite? Fixed, as far as I can tell. That seems to be a unique opinion as no one I know personally nor any media outlets have proclaimed such nonsense.

Re:kkrieger

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't understand this much do you?

Do you honestly think that Halo 3 loads textures from the DVD in the middle of a level?

Current-gen games have all textures in memory already for the level or area you are on, otherwise it would be an utter shambles trying to get a stable framerate.

Stop with your fucking strawman arguments.

Re:kkrieger

[xarien]

You don't understand this much do you? Do you honestly think that Halo 3 loads textures from the DVD in the middle of a level? Current-gen games have all textures in memory already for the level or area you are on, otherwise it would be an utter shambles trying to get a stable framerate. Stop with your fucking strawman arguments. Actually, I believe you are the one misunderstood. What you are mentioning is nothing more than caching. Cache can be applied at the hard disk level, ram level, cache level, etc. As long as there is storage, it can be used as a caching medium. What having a disk drive does is allow the caching of the optical drive to disk drive during down times on the bus. This allows the cached data to enter memory that much faster when it's needed. This is why seamless worlds require a hard disk. Optical drives are not fast enough to sustain the load. This will be even more apparent as we move towards more solid state media.

Re:kkrieger

[Anonymous Coward]

kkrieger style meshes would never work on a production game. Consumers don't want 20 minute load times.

None of the 30+ repliers so far have RTFA

[Anonymous Coward]

*sigh*... karma-whoring is ruining slashdot.

Re:None of the 30+ repliers so far have RTFA

[Anonymous Coward]

I would RTFA... if only it wasn't blocked from work. So what are we all missing from the article anyway? Looks like some interesting conversation regardless.

?Translation? Watch the HDTV Transition

[nweaver]

One possible translation: Watch the HDTV Transition...

Sony and Microsoft leaped ahead, probably ahead of the game, on the output resolution. Its too good (read "costs too much") for what is currently out there.

Nintendo did not. They went cheap and new UI, which has proven to be a win.

But I'd bet that Nintendo really is eyeing the HDTV transition for "Wii 2.0". They are probably taking a page from Apple and keeping it as stealthy as possible (why hurt sales on the Wii 1.0?), and waiting until 42" HDTVs become common (probably after this christmas) before releasing a performance and graphics bump designed to take advantage of the new output resolution.

Re:?Translation? Watch the HDTV Transition

[Toonol]

I think you're spot on, although I think the sweet spot for HD transition is probably not this Christmas, but a year from now. There's still a lot of people that don't care enough about picture quality to pay close to a thousand dollars for it. I won't bother with it until it gets down to at least sub $500, and I'm comfortably middle-class.

Re:?Translation? Watch the HDTV Transition

[AuMatar]

Most people aren't going to bother with it until their current TV breaks. Its not worth the money to replace it for a minor quality improvement. Don't expect HD to be a majority of the marketshare until 2010 at the earliest, possibly later.

Re:?Translation? Watch the HDTV Transition

[jmorris42]

> Most people aren't going to bother with it until their current TV breaks.

That is part of it, part is availability of content.

If somebody dropped a 1080p TV on my doorstep with a bow on it I'd only be using it to watch SD content. To get HD programming would require more than doubling my cable bill and losing the ability to use my current MythTV setup. With a really over the top outdoor antenna I could pick up ONE signal reliably and perhaps three at night. Or I could go with DirectTV's HD offering or Dish's.... At a substantial premium in monthly cost and loss of MythTV. My movie collection is in DVD format and I have no plans to buy either HD-DVD (Local Walmart just did a promo on a player for $99 so price isn't the issue) or BluRay because of the format war craziness combined with the more effective DRM.

And if want to play games I have a PC with better specs than any of the consoles.

So I see no value in HDTV and won't for years. Eventually the falling prices on LCD panels will bring HD TV sets below the prices of this last generation of tube based SD sets and might even rival them in picture quality by then, but again that is years away and my 32" JVC is still working now.

Re:?Translation? Watch the HDTV Transition

[Lonewolf666]

That would make sense, and I have indeed wondered to whom Sony and Microsoft want to sell the HD resolution of their current consoles.

HDTVs are not that commonplace yet among the people I know (in Germany). Heck, one of them has brought me his defective CRT TV in the hope that I find the problem and can fix it cheaply, because he finds it difficult to spare the money for a similar TV.

Re:?Translation? Watch the HDTV Transition

[VendingMenace]

Actually, I have a slightly different take on the HDTV thing...

Consider this: What do most people complain about when a new console comes out? The lack of launch titles. You hear this kind of whining all the time. The obvious solution to this discontent is to launch a console with about a dozen solid games for people to choose from. However, the development time of the console rules this out, because why make something and then just sit on it while other people make games for it. Wouldn't you rather just launch it and sell the few units you can up front? And of course this is what ends up happening.

However, with the XBOX360 and the PS3, things are a bit different. There is no real crunch to get one unless you have a HDTV, which most people do not have. So, the real "launch" is not until the majority of people have an HDTV. But by that point there will be sever games out for each console and they will look much more attractive to those that have just bought an HDTV. In effect, they will have a new consoles with many many games to choose from.

Now, I am not saying that Microsoft or sony did this consciously, but it is interesting that by jumping the tech gun so much they have essentially eliminated the major problem with a console launch -- at least for the majority of the population. It is an interesting way to buffer up the library of a console before the "real" launch and have the early adopters at least partially foot the "developement" bill.

Just my two cents

Yes they do

[Tony]

Yes, they do. UT3 developers have stated that the Xbox 360 game will have less content and less-detailed textures compared to the PS3, specifically because it takes up more than can fit on a DVD.

Games *do* need BluRay now. That's the primary reason I feel the PS3 has the long-term edge.

Re:Yes they do

[xarien]

Furthermore, the fact that every model of the ps3 has a disk drive allows data caching in every game, thus minimizing load times.

Re:Yes they do

[Donniedarkness]

Or maybe the UT3 developers are not good at writing efficient code?

Re:Yes they do

[xarien]

Since when has creating textures and models become code?

Re:Yes they do

[Anonymous Coward]

Or maybe the UT3 developers are not good at writing efficient code?

Yeah ... those people have no idea how to make a good XBox 360 game like Gears of War or something. /sarcasm

They've already proved their chops this generation.

If they have to tone down the best they could do because of hardware limitations on the 360, then accept it.

It doesn't mean the game will suck, or not be good, it just means the game will not "Be all it could have been."

The 360 hardware, much like the Wii, was designed to play "at current levels." That's great for a year or two, but without refreshing the tech, it can get limiting.

Thats one of the things Sony did right. Including a HD as 'standard' (not sure why MS backpedaled from this), including BluRay for extra optical disk space, using Cell. All of those things provide more resources so the system has room to grow.

I'm not sure that the 360 has much growing space left, and the Wii definitely does not. (not saying both aren't very popular, just not sure how much more beyond what they've shown they can do)

Re:Yes they do

[brkello]

They could always put it on multiple discs. Some people really object to that, but I don't mind.

Re:Yes they do

[sanosuke76]

Or, they could have made hard drives standard and told their developers, "If you need more storage, then you load the extra discs onto the hard drive before the game - you do not force disc-swapping other than during installation; the first disc is only a key."

Although, it would create gamer outcry due to length installs AND having to reload games if they wipe 'em out to reclaim HD space - especially with them not using off-the-shelf HD's like the PS3. But, it's another way they could've gone.

Re:Yes they do

[Yosho]

Code actually takes up a very small amount of disk space. The vast majority of the data on any given game disc is textures, models, and movies, and you can only compress those so much before the drop in quality is very noticeable.

Re:Yes they do

[KDR_11k]

I don't think Sony did it right. They decided to use cutting edge tech that cost way too much, costing them the lead. They decided this tech is better for the future but forgot it's not ready for the NOW leading to huge manufacturing costs, a retail price much higher than what the market will bear and not leaving them in a position to take advantage of all that tech they added in.

Growing for consoles rarely comes from untapped system resources and more increased efficiency in their use. Generally, if you have untapped system resources in a console something has gone wrong. The resources are there, they shouldn't cost extra to use so there's no reason you can't use all of them NOW. Using them properly is something different of course.

The arguments I've seen about the PS3's growth basically suggest the design of the PS3 is so unwieldy noone really knows how to use it. That's a flaw, not a feature!

Same expereince

[SuperKendall]

After owning an HD set, it's very very difficult to watch SD anything on it. When I first heard my wife say, "why isn't this in HD," I knew the "what's the big deal about HD" crowd is going to die off pretty quickly.

I had the same thing happen with my SO. After a while of watching HD programs, we were watching an SD show and she asked "why is this so blurry".

It's not that long before a large majority of the population has HD sets, especially the percentage of the population that buys video games and movies.

Re:Same expereince

[Anonymous Coward]

The blurry-ness is due to your HD not being able to up-scale images nicely - its nothing to do with SD.

I bet you wish now you had got a better set, instead of jumping on the me-too band wagon you stupid toss-wad.

4 years?

[Anonymous Coward]

i thought it was more like 5 or 6.

Wii 2

[rlp]

My expectation is that Nintendo will 'refresh' the Wii in a year or so by increasing the CPU / Graphical processing power (taking advantage of Moore's Law), adding a HDMI interface, and DVD video playback support. DVD player capability has already been announced for the Japanese market (combining two home gadgets) but doesn't really matter elsewhere. Adding support for higher-res display format (and up-sampling) will negate the graphical advantage of Sony / MS. Bottom line -- Nintendo already has a big winner, time to run-up the score.

Re:Wii 2

[VGPowerlord]

Changing the CPU or graphics ability on a shipping console is a colosally bad idea. The entire idea of a console is that you have a fixed set of hardware that run games in roughly the same way. Oh, you may have HDMI here or have the game installed to disk there, but the processing power remains the same.

Re:Wii 2

[tomstdenis]

Um, it's entirely possible to clock the cpu/gpu power. That and most games are not dead set on cpu clock cycles but instead vertical refresh or timers.

So it's possible that many games would run just fine provider the timers interrupted at the same interval.

But even if the games didn't, there isn't a reason they couldn't divide the clock down to "Wii 1.0" speeds.

Tom

Re:Wii 2

[ichigo 2.0]

That's not the point. The point is that it's, well, pointless. All games would still have to be designed for the lesser cpu/gpu power of Wii 1.0, so what advantage would owning a more powerful Wii 2.0 give? Otherwise there'd also have to be Wii 2.0 games, at which point the 2.0 would pretty much be an entirely new console.

Re:Wii 2

[VGPowerlord]

Precisely.

Nintendo has garnered a lot of goodwill. Goodwill is easily lost, though. Telling people that the 20+ million Will Consoles sold within the first two years won't play the latest Zelda/Mario game? *zap* gone.

Re:Wii 2

[tomstdenis]

Well it will take time before a new process can cost the same as the current anyways.

So 4-6 [whatever] years down the road when they're using 65nm or 45nm parts, Wii 2.0 could come out with twice the clock/memory and be backwards compatible with Wii 1.0.

I agree that if they updated every six months they'd lose a lot of customers, but if they never update they will lose a lot of customers.

Tom

Re:Wii 2

[geekoid]

"but if they never update they will lose a lot of customers."

Not if good games keeps coming out.
It's about the games.

It's an interesting time. Right now, the previous 15 years of 'rules' about gaming systems seems to be ending.
You do not need a computer every 18 months to play the latest games. Hardware is vastly more powerful then is needed by any game right now. My computer is over two years old, there isn't a game out that it can't play well.

In 1998, if you computer was two years old, anything you played would be a slide show, at best.

Re:Wii 2

[tomstdenis]

I agree that more flash != better game. Sadly people will notice the lack of HD in the Wii, they will notice the lack of 5.1 sound, etc, etc.

Eventually Nintendo will up the ante with better AV. not that I think that makes any better games.

Shitty games make bad games. Like the GT racer I got for the wii [forgot the whole name it's that bad]. It drives like a shopping cart, and the graphics are actually a lot worse than I expected (so much so that the cars are ugly to look at). I'd rather play Test Drive 3 (IBM PC, VGA) than this game ... Actually even excite truck has an element of bad steering (though I like the game just the same). I think they should put an on screen indicator to show how much steering is being used, because often the mote gets into a "dead zone" (e.g. if you tilt it the wrong way) where steering seems to not work.

Anyways, people will annoy them enough to get an upgrade later down the road. It's not like it's outside their MO, the DS is a supped up GBA for all intents and purposes.

This discussion needs reference to the 32X

[Kris_J]

You can't really talk about how good an idea this is, or not, without referencing the Sega 32X.

• 1988: Genesis/ Mega Drive
• 1992: Sega CD / Mega CD
• 1994: 32X

The Mega CD and 32X were a pair of incremental upgrades to the popular Mega Drive system. They allowed Sega to hook into the capacity of the CD storage, then into the upcoming 3D movement. They were, however, typically considered failures. Much like movie sequels, the market for each new product is a sub-set of the purchasers of the previous. Because of this, games developers were reluctant to invest in the production of titles that had diminishing markets and the library of games suffered.

Re:This discussion needs reference to the 32X

[NeutronCowboy]

Thank you. Anyone arguing that Nintendo will/should release a Wii 2.0 within a year to increase CPU power, memory or offer HDMI needs to be reminded of the 32X. A complete and utter failure which many people - both gaming mags and gamers - thought initially brilliant.

Re:This discussion needs reference to the 32X

[MBGMorden]

Yep. And all in all, the 32x/CD WAS a good technical idea. It took the old Genesis platform almost up to the level of the next-gen systems of the time. The Sega CD has an additional processor of the same type used by the Genesis, giving you parallel processing capabilities just on the CD addon. The 32x also added two addtional 32-bit processors, and from my understanding IF a programmer so wished, with the whole Genesis/CD/32x system assembled, they could access all 4 processors. Difficult to program, but gives a lot of options.

The end result though, was that they were indeed marketing to a very limited segment. I think if Sega would have released the planned Sega Neptune console (which was a Genesis, Sega CD, and Sega 32x all recombined into a single console), it might have faired better. I mean hell the Sony Playstation in it's earliest stages was intended to be a CD addon to the SNES system, but after being cancelled by Nintendo, Sony fleshed it out into it's own seperate system, and it sold in mass quantities. On the bright side, when the Sega CD and 32x hit the clearance shelves, there were some good deals to be had. I think back then I got the Sega CD for around $40 and the 32x for about $30, along with a large number of clearanced games.

Nintendo isn't immune to addons though. Anybody remember the old N64 RAM expansions needed to play a few games? (Notably Zelda: Majora's Mask).

Blurry = bad scaling

[Tetsujin]

The blurry-ness is due to your HD not being able to up-scale images nicely - its nothing to do with SD.

I bet you wish now you had got a better set, instead of jumping on the me-too band wagon you stupid toss-wad. Uh, yeah... Everybody knows that the good HD sets can on-the-fly fabricate data not present in the original signal to adjust for the native screen resolution. 480i properly scaled to 720p is every bit as good as an HDTV signal. (I don't even know why they bother manufacturing high-resolution video cameras... Just to make people feel bad about owning "legacy" televisions, I bet...) If you scale a low-resolution image up to a higher resolution and get something blurry, then your scaling algorithm is defective.

If you've seen standard TV signals on an HDTV you'll know this is also how they fill a 16x9 frame with a 4x3 image... The TV recognizes that there's not enough picture to fill the frame, and so it extrapolates using the 4x3 image as source data to determine what the pixel values for the rest of the frame ought to be... Basically all you have to do is take a Fourier transform of your source pixel row, and then inverse-Fourier it to generate the missing data for that row...

More seriously...
I, too, had the same experience. I had a regular TV and wasn't going to upgrade for a long time - until I got an HDTV as a gift...
The difference in picture quality is huge. It's a total drag when a TV channel isn't available in HD. It's not like it's unwatchable but it just doesn't measure up either.
Same goes for the Wii. I'm glad they at least have progressive scan and widescreen (but not on Mario Party, the slackers!) but now that I've got an HDTV I can really see why people want HD gaming, too... I feel like the current standard is 720p, and it's kind of a drag that the Wii won't do that. It's behind the curve, technologically speaking.

Re:Blurry = bad scaling

[WilliamSChips]

If you've seen standard TV signals on an HDTV you'll know this is also how they fill a 16x9 frame with a 4x3 image... The TV recognizes that there's not enough picture to fill the frame, and so it extrapolates using the 4x3 image as source data to determine what the pixel values for the rest of the frame ought to be... Basically all you have to do is take a Fourier transform of your source pixel row, and then inverse-Fourier it to generate the missing data for that row... Are you kidding me? That doesn't work with real-world objects. What most sets do is letterbox things. Most people just won't notice the letterbox, it mentally disappears after a while.

Re:Blurry = bad scaling

[xarien]

You missed the sarcasm train.

PS3?

[TheThiefMaster]

Are you saying the PS3 have overtaken the PS2 or the original Playstation in 2007?

Because if it's the former, I have some news for you: the PS2 is still outselling the PS3.

Mario == Mussolini

[Dogtanian]

Xbox360 dies on you So did the PSX's laser, for those of us who remember. Later, the hardware got better. Not nearly to the same degree. It's like comparing the WWII wartime atrocities record of Japan vs Canada. Dear, oh dear.

Dear, oh dear, oh dear. I know it's a change from stupid car analogies, but did you really just decide that this was the most appropriate example to use in this case?!

I was going to complain that you didn't even properly Godwin it, but I'm sure that if we follow your reasoning, then it can be implied that Shigeru Miyamoto is Adolf Hitler or something. ;-)

makes sense for handhelds

[brkello]

Which is what he is talking about. They can release updates to the system that offer something new to the consumer. Making it thinner, support color, adding ports. The thing that stays the same is that they all can run the same games on different hardware. This makes a lot of sense for handhelds, but I don't think it is a great idea if applied to consoles unless he is talking about minor things like updating little things such as the hard drive. When you think of new releases of consoles, it generally is a significant difference. They might support backward compatibility or not, but it generally is going to be different to develop for because of completely redesigned hardware. If you release it too early, the software companies won't have enough time to catch up and take full advantage of the system. The longer the lifecycle, the more profitable the hardware becomes. As long as your system isn't considered irrelevant (like the Gamecube and Xbox are...PS2 still is going strong oddly), then I agree that change should happen when you have some new innovation that will be important. So I would hope that means longer life cycles. I think Nintendo proved that with the Wii. But I could be wrong and it may just be that they stayed so cheap while Sony and MS decided to do the typical move to state of the art hardware. People criticize them for this and laud Nintendo...ironically, this has been the model that Nintendo has been doing since it first started.

I don't know.. here's my take on his comments

[gmezero]

Look, I think this is a statement that is being made to frame expectations on a DS sequal, and handle potential attacks on the Wii as well.

As you can see here I have been tracking the release cycles of all of the Nintendo platforms, and Nintendo has some pretty strong behavioral trends built up over the last 30 years.

Historically, a new console is release every 5 years and a new hand-held ever 10 years, with experimental platforms and incremental upgrades in-between (Virtual Boy, DS).

If the DS becomes the new "handheld" line as many expected but Nintendo has denied then it's in for a 10 year life cycle. Note that they still have not identified the DS as an upgrade/replacement for the GBA line which still commands some sales (GB Micro, etc...), so they're going to be careful not to cannibalize any remaining sales in that market.

Also, it's only a matter of time before Microsoft or Sony takes a direct attack on the Wii as literally being beefed up GameCube hardware in as a marketing attack since it has taken off so well. Unfortunately for them the Wii is strong with every other demographic of consumer, and if this does happen, I don't see it getting them far outside the gaming press.

You've got to step back and take a look at the big picture of what is said and the greater context of other statements and general behavior.

Granted Nintendo is slowly making changes structurally since Iwata took over as would be expected, but this is also a company that has been in business for over a hundred years, so they're internal culture and business strategies are clearly working for them to some degree.

Also, I think the Wii has yet to hit it's stride yet in development exploitation of it's features. Given that it's really lost a year of ground here, it could be that Nintendo is actively assessing the idea of letting the hardware dev cycle slip by a year or two with the Wii. Additionally, they're probably also trying to assess how to expand DS sales at the critical 6 year mark when normally they would be issuing a mid-level system improvement that doesn't effect platform compatibility (eg, GameBoy Color).

Oh well, I'm just rambling, it's all good.

Re:I don't know.. here's my take on his comments

[Grave]

Uhm.. actually, the GBA has been discontinued, and most retailers are either no longer carrying or will soon stop carrying GBA games. I believe Nintendo announced not long ago that the DS was their primary handheld platform now, and the developers all seem to have decided that for themselves over a year ago anyway. The Game Boy Micro did not, as I understand, sell very well at all in the US compared with the GBA SP. In Japan this may not have been the case, though. Any future handheld platform will almost certainly maintain DS compatibility and (hopefully) GBA compatibility as well, since that opens up a truly incredible library of old games.

The Wii is going to be really hard to follow up. Yes, the next console from Nintendo will have better graphics and sound and so on, but what improvements can they make to the motion-sensing functionality? If it's just a Wii with more power, it probably will not see the sort of sales performance that the Wii currently has, since many folks will not want to upgrade.

Re:I don't know.. here's my take on his comments

[gmezero]

You know something else came up that I forgot to add into that, apparently word has it that Nintendo is looking to add HD to the Wii within two years, which could also be what is getting referenced here.

Re:I don't know.. here's my take on his comments

[Anonymous Coward]

What will they call the sequel to the Wii?

The Wii Too.

Re:I don't know.. here's my take on his comments

[Anonymous Coward]

No the Wii Wii

Re:I don't know.. here's my take on his comments

[LBt1st]

hehe where's my mod points when I need em?

Re:I don't know.. here's my take on his comments

[SetupWeasel]

If by "word" you mean "Patcher" and by "has it" you mean "stuffed a floating, nuclear, space penis into his cavern of ego."

Re:I don't know.. here's my take on his comments

[PhoenixOne]

Microsoft and Sony have already attacked the Wii as being a beefed up GameCube. But it didn't help them much, in fact it kind of backfired.

Most Slashdot readers know that the PS3 and XBox360 represent huge jumps in raw hardware performance but, in most people's eyes, they are just beefed up versions of their parents. They work the same, they just have better graphics (at 2-5 times the cost).

The Wii looks and acts totally differently then the GameCube. It's not just beefed up, its all new.

Re:I don't know.. here's my take on his comments

[Count Fecal]

Also, it's only a matter of time before Microsoft or Sony takes a direct attack on the Wii as literally being beefed up GameCube hardware in as a marketing attack since it has taken off so well.

Isn't the new PC I just bought to play Crysis literally beefed up PC hardware that I used to play Doom 15 years ago?
I don't understand your point.

Re:Let's hope the traditional console cycle is dea

[Rod Beauvex]

I've always wondered why Nintendo didn't just make a faster NES with better graphics and sound. That way, the devs knew the architecture, but now had better visuals and sound.

Re:Let's hope the traditional console cycle is dea

[mh101]

I think that the most important reason why the old console cycle needs to die is to let programmers/software catch up with the hardware. I agree. I remember the first time I fired up Final Fantasy XII. I was blown away by how good it looked compared to the other PS2 games I've played. It wasn't until the end of the PS2's life cycle that developers were finally able to use the hardware to its fullest.

But then again, it doesn't say much for the PS2 as a development platform if it took developers that long to figure out how to get the most from it.

The future of console development

[kornkid606]

And when graphics/physics/AI get as good as real life, there is no major drive for a new console for "next-gen" games, they won't be able to get any better

I disagree. You are making the assumption that the entire future of console development rests on graphics/physics/AI and this, in my opinion, is false. Even when we get to the point where games look, react, and think realistically, they will never begin to approximate reality until the interface changes. In my opinion, the future for game development needs to lie not in the in-game, but in the out-of-game, and by this I mean I/O, the way we as players fundamentally interact with the software.

It is my belief that no matter how good graphics/physics/AI get in games, if we are still interacting with them in the same ways we are today, then they will be no better than what they are today. Seeing a realistic character in Crysis is cool, but what is more realistic, seeing an approximation of a 3D person on a 2D surface or seeing them as if they were standing right in front of you? You need to feel how it feels to run through underbrush and you need to react and emote like your character would react and emote in the game. Only when we as players can interface with the game on a level that is indistinguishable from reality will the drive for "next-gen" end. And even then, as time progresses, the interface can be done better, smaller, and cheaper, so there will always be a new system until the interface becomes so common-place that is integrated into our everyday lives.

Now, do I know any of this to be true? No, of course not. But, in my mind, the future of gaming is in hardware ann specifically, player interface and I/O. The industry faces the choice of evolution or stagnation because, a decade from now, if we are still interacting with games in the same way, looking at a 2d surface and giving simple input, then video games are dead. At that point you aren't creating new experiences, you are grave-robbing basically, re-hashing old gold into new shit. You can see it even now when you walk into any software store. Tell me how many unique experiences do you see on those walls. Now tell me how many clones of old, successful games you see. If that ratio doesn't scare the shit out of you, then I don't know what to tell you.

In my opinion, the peak of video games is the holodeck fro Star Trek. That is the ideal and that is where we need to start moving toward... in my mind at least.

Nintendo logic is less predictable

[Moraelin]

Well, Nintendo has been historically a company known to twist logic in less predictable ways.

E.g., back when the Playstation had more games coming out per year than the N64 had over its whole life, Yamauchi was giving interviews saying that it's Sony who will go bankrupt by releasing that many games.

E.g., back when people complained that whole genres, e.g., RPGs, had gone missing from the N64 for years, Yamauchi gave an insulting interview in which he called RPG players, "depressed gamers who like to sit alone in their dark rooms and play slow games."

E.g., when Nintendo had to justify why the GameCube has less horsepower than everyone else (without even having some gimmick like the wiimote to make up for it) _and_ lacks any kind of media playback capabilities, Nintendo just gave a flurry of interviews that somehow that's what will allow them to offer a better gaming experience. See, you'll have better games and a better experience with it _because_ it's underpowered and lacks a DVD player. Illogical as that may sound.

Etc.

Basically, historically the Nintendo way was to take whatever they felt like doing, or were able to do, and proclaim it some Holy Truth of the industry. It's not Nintendo who has a problem, it's everyone else, including the customers, who don't know what they're doing and what they want. They've been the worst example of someone who has no problem telling you a different lie than yesterday, if it better suits whatever they're justifying today.

Even Nintendo's ideas of milking a market have been... weird at times. E.g., in N64 times again, the whole freaking Europe market was used as an experiment in deliberately releasing only half the games, and trying to strong-arm the retailers into not importing the rest. Someone at Nintendo genuinely thought that having only a handful of games, and everyone buying the same games and seeing the same games on the shelves again and again, would make more money. (And while I'll admit that many EU releases were delayed by others too, read that paragraph again: it wasn't because of translation costs or whatever, it was a deliberate experiment in building brand-awareness for just a few games with a minimum of paying for shelf space.)

Now admittedly, Iwata isn't Yamauchi. I know. But, you know, Yamauchi picked Iwata as his successor. We're talking the same Yamauchi who got all his relatives fired from the company so noone could challenge his absolute rule. It makes me at least, skeptical than his chosen heir to the throne would think radically differently. I also notice that Iwata was the head of Nintendo's Corporate Planning Division during Yamauchi's hardline imperialist years, so I'm guessing he can't have had that radically different a vision.

At any rate, I'm betting that, in the tradition of Nintendo, there's no telling what he _really_ means. It could also mean

- "people are still buying the DS, so why bother designing the next one?" or

- "our engineers screwed up and the prototype of the next console doesn't work, so let's pretend that we actually like it that way" or

- "Wii sales are plummeting in Japan and soon even the 360 will overtake us, so we need the next console out _now_, cycles be damned" or

- "we'll pull the same stunt as in N64 times and make you buy a hardware upgrade for a console, instead of going with the cycle of releasing a new console"

Or probably something else that noone would have guessed.

Re:Nintendo logic is less predictable

[hkmwbz]

the GameCube has less horsepower than everyone else

Huh? The GameCube was as powerful as everyone else, if not more.

historically the Nintendo way was to take whatever they felt like doing, or were able to do, and proclaim it some Holy Truth of the industry

Sounds like Microsoft and Sony...

It makes me at least, skeptical than his chosen heir to the throne would think radically differently.

It's odd, then, that under Iwata, Nintendo has only experienced major successes. DS was Iwata's first system as head of Nintendo, wasn't it?

Re:Nintendo logic is less predictable

[Moraelin]

Sounds like Microsoft and Sony...

To some extent. Sony and MS have at least refrained from outright insulting their customers, devs, etc. The "old" Nintendo was a lot more hardline. Often they didn't even bother with some palatable sophistry, they just went ahead and told a heartfelt "fuck you" to, say, RPG gamers when they didn't have RPGs. So I found it a proportionally more distasteful.

Well, at least until recently. Sony's recent interviews regarding the PS3 sure seemed... well, maybe not always exactly as hardline, but they more than made up in surrealism.

Still, you know, I never thought "everyone does it" to be a blanket excuse. It wasn't an excuse even in kindergarten. If little Johnny was hitting the other kids, it wasn't considered an excuse to start doing the same.

You're right that MS and Sony aren't "good", but that just means I'll take their PR with a grain of salt too. If everyone lies, then I'll just won't take anyone's PR announcements and interviews as gospel.

It's odd, then, that under Iwata, Nintendo has only experienced major successes. DS was Iwata's first system as head of Nintendo, wasn't it?

In regards to what they produce, maybe. In regards to PR, which is what I meant, I'll wait and see. He certainly is more diplomatic, but I'll wait and see if he's also more honest. They're entirely different domains, you know.

As for only successes, depends on how you define success. The Wii sales are already plummeting in Japan, and it's not too far ahead of the 360 and PS3 at the moment, as I was saying. And I seriously mean it. It's not as much declining, it's taking a nose dive. The Wiimote gimmick sure didn't hold Japan's attention for long.

Even skipping over that there's no telling how long until the USA follows, they tend to be especially fond and territorial about the Japanese market. Partially for pragmatic reasons too. Not only there's good money to be made there, but it's also key to keeping the Japanese developers. And some of those are already openly worried by those plummeting sales.

So, yes, I can easily see him spewing stuff about how the concept of cycles is obsolete. Because if that trend isn't reversed fast, they'll need to release a Wii 2 real fast. So I can just see them hedging their bets and starting talking about how cycles are obsolete early. That way when they scramble to replace the Wii already it will look like it was just what they were thinking all along.

Re:Nintendo logic is less predictable

[hkmwbz]

Sony and MS have at least refrained from outright insulting their customers, devs, etc.

Um, no. Kutaragi spewed out nonsense that rivaled Yamauchi! And Iwata has not done that.

In regards to PR, which is what I meant, I'll wait and see.

Um, Nintendo has won several awards for their Wii marketing.

The Wii sales are already plummeting in Japan

Um, no. They went down for a while, along with other consoles. They are now picking up again. This is normal just before the holiday season. And remember, Wii hadn't had any recent killer games until SMG was released the other day.

It's not as much declining, it's taking a nose dive. The Wiimote gimmick sure didn't hold Japan's attention for long.

The "gimmick" is selling far better than other consoles. If you have to comfort yourself with the fact that Wii doesn't outsell the others by that much, then that speaks volumes about the "gimmick" you are being so hateful about.

So, yes, I can easily see him spewing stuff about how the concept of cycles is obsolete. Because if that trend isn't reversed fast, they'll need to release a Wii 2 real fast. So I can just see them hedging their bets and starting talking about how cycles are obsolete early. That way when they scramble to replace the Wii already it will look like it was just what they were thinking all along.

I have no idea what you are trying to say here. If console cycles, as in just releasing new hardware to release it, are over, then Nintendo can wait with their next console until they deem it necessary. For example, when there is real demand for HD support, Nintendo can launch a HD ready console. Iwata also pointed out that they always work on hardware, so they are unlikely to scramble for anything since they keep working on hardware projects that aren't released unless there is a need for it.

Re:Nintendo logic is less predictable

[Moraelin]

Um, Nintendo has won several awards for their Wii marketing.

Which is still not what I meant. Kudos to them, but it can just as well mean that they lie better.

Um, no. They went down for a while, along with other consoles. They are now picking up again. This is normal just before the holiday season. And remember, Wii hadn't had any recent killer games until SMG was released the other day.

Have a look at this graph lemming. In just 4 months, the sales dropped to a quarter. In a period where those other consoles were slowly gaining groud, so don't give me stupid texts about being normal: if it were normal for everyone, you'd see the same dip for the other two.

So, while it still ahead, if you don't see a problem with that... well, I see no point in arguing any further.

The "gimmick" is selling far better than other consoles. If you have to comfort yourself with the fact that Wii doesn't outsell the others by that much, then that speaks volumes about the "gimmick" you are being so hateful about.

And if you need to think anyone who doesn't worship your idol must be hateful and getting some weird joy out of that nose dive, it speaks volumes about you. Believe it or not, lemming, some of us just couldn't care less either way. I'm just looking at that graph as it is, not through wishful thinking goggles.

And the way it looks, it says they have a problem. Objectively. If nothing else because, even if I'm wrong with the extrapolation, others saw the graph too and did the same extrapolation. Some devs are already talking about jumping ship if that continues. There's even been at least one story even on Slashdot about a Japanese publisher saying just that in an interview.

Can't blame them. With game development taking years, you have to plan years ahead. So if sales dropped to a quarter in a mere 3 months, you just have to ask yourself where they'll be next year. At any rate, that's what makes it a problem: that others saw the same graph and asked themselves just that.

Yes, they probably need a killer app. But equally if Iwata has a brain (and I'll assume he does, until proven wrong) he probably is already making contingency plans. You don't get to be a successful director of corporate planning if you don't. Fanboys may be content to paint it all rose-coloured and think that just blind faith in the Master will solve anything, but CEOs and directors of corporate planning have to react to market trends, plan and have a plan B (and maybe C and D), just in case. Those who don't... well, as they say, "People don't plan to fail, they fail to plan."

It's that simple.

And I wouldn't be too surprised if one of the contingency plans thrown around the office is to not stick to the cycle, and release a successor early. Which would then have to be gradually instilled to the press. And this announcement _might_ be just that.

But I guess it just doesn't fit the whole "us vs them" fanboy mentality, does it? You just have to imagine that everyone who doesn't worship your idle, is some sort of 60's super-villain hating all that's good and pure, don't you?

I swear some people should have had 4 paws and a tail, the way their mind works like a dog's...

Re:Nintendo logic is less predictable

[hkmwbz]

In just 4 months, the sales dropped to a quarter. In a period where those other consoles were slowly gaining groud

You conveniently ignore the fact that PS3 sales are dropping too, according to that graph.

if it were normal for everyone, you'd see the same dip for the other two.

And indeed, PS3 sales are going down as well. 360 is next to irrelevant in Japan.

Yes, they probably need a killer app.

Such as the holiday season, when sales will pick up again. Or Super Mario Galaxy. Or Wii Fit. Or... The list goes on.

And I wouldn't be too surprised if one of the contingency plans thrown around the office is to not stick to the cycle, and release a successor early.

I guess you didn't hear about things like Wii Fit, Wii Music, etc.

I swear some people should have had 4 paws and a tail, the way their mind works like a dog's...

It would seem that you are looking in the mirror again.

Successfull Console Lives Longer

[LKM]

What you've shown is that in each generation, the winning console lasts the longest. Usually, the losers are forced to make a move cutting their losses, eventually also forcing the previous generation's winner to launch their next-gen attempt.

• Nintendo didn't launch the SNES until Sega's Genesis/Megadrive became a major force
• Nintendo didn't launch the N64 until Sony's Playstation became a major force
• Sony didn't launch the PS2 until Sega's Dreamcast started to gain ground
• Sony didn't launch the PS3 until the Xbox 360 had sold almost 10 million systems

This generation, it looks like Nintendo is winnig. Even though they have the weakest console from a pure speed standpoint, I expect the Wii to last longer than the PS3, should sales not change considerably in the next year or two. Should Microsoft choose to remain in the console market, and should the 360 remain at around double the market share of the PS3, I see no reason for them to move ahead with the nxt gen.

Sony, on the other hand, is in a bad spot. They're losing money on the PS3, they're not gaining market share, and third-party devs aren't exactly confident in the PS3 anymore. Despite having the strongest hardware, they may be forced to cut their losses and start the next generation early. If the PS3 doesn't start to gain major ground against the 360, and if Sony finds that in two or three years they can create a successor that costs them substantially less to produce, and has obvious better graphics than the 360, they will do it.

Re:Successfull Console Lives Longer

[Gravatron]

Actualy, the ps3 wasn't in response to the 360. Sony got screwed by hardware shortages that forced a launch delay. They started talking about the ps3, however, years before the 360 was annouced. On the other hand, the 360 was a direct response to the success of the ps2 over the Xbox. Thats why MS cut the release cycle so short, they hoped to beat the ps3 to market, fearful that it woudl be another ps2.

Re:Successfull Console Lives Longer

[LKM]

Actualy, the ps3 wasn't in response to the 360. Sony got screwed by hardware shortages that forced a launch delay. They started talking about the ps3, however, years before the 360 was annouced.

Of course they started working on it years ago. But if you really think it was Sony's plan to release a console at 600 bucks, you're delusional. If Sony had had the option, they would have waited another year, until Bluray drives became cheaper and the Cell chip had matured somewhat, and then launched the console at 400 bucks. If you remember, they originally planned to have no GPU in the PS3; however, when Sony was forced to launch, the Cell wasn't ready, so they had add the RSX at the last minute, which explains the somewhat confused hardware design.

No, Sony's hand was forced by Microsoft. Sony tried to delay the PS3 as long as possible, but they just couldn't let Microsoft get to 10'000'000 without giving them at least some competition.

On the other hand, the 360 was a direct response to the success of the ps2 over the Xbox. Thats why MS cut the release cycle so short, they hoped to beat the ps3 to market, fearful that it woudl be another ps2.

Exactly. And they did beat the PS3 to market, thus forcing Sony to make its move early.

Re:Successfull Console Lives Longer

[trdrstv]

Actualy, the ps3 wasn't in response to the 360. Sony got screwed by hardware shortages that forced a launch delay.

Right, that's why they had all this great software just waiting for the hardware to hit market. Oh wait...

On the other hand, the 360 was a direct response to the success of the ps2 over the Xbox. Thats why MS cut the release cycle so short, they hoped to beat the ps3 to market, fearful that it woudl be another ps2.

Yup and it worked out for MS. Is there any reason to believe that Sony wasn't planning on the PS2 having a longer life? Their previous year reaks of being forced to market earlier than they wanted. If MS launched in 2006/ 2007 like they "were supposed to" based on traditional cycles, Sony would have been competitive with a Christmas 2007 launch and would have had enough of the pieces ready. Unfortunately, if they announced a 2007 launch with MS launching in 2005 they would have lost even more traction. They arrived over-priced and ill prepared, but at least they arrived with something...

The PSP does that

[LKM]

Newer PSP models have twice the RAM of older models. Games who want to make use of the additional RAM have to check for it. The N64 did a similar thing with memory expansion.

I will say that I doubt Nintendo will do this with the Wii, but I will also say that there have been a few cases where it worked. If Nintendo does it right, this might be a viable upgrade path for the Wii.

What is he trying to imply...?

[The Faywood Assassin]

...that hardware upgrades will happen more frequently? So if I buy Wii console version 1.0, that I could possibly buy a Wii game that won't work unless I purchase Wii console version 3.5?

I'm not very confident about where this is going.

I know that consoles routinely go through hardware changes and upgrades, but they all maintain a base level of compatibility. If that compatibility is going away, will we have to be buying consoles more frequently?

Beny

Would be a good idea.

[WWWWolf]

Actually, I'd say it'd be better to just throttle the hardware arms-race in general - I've been saying that for a long time. The PC game system requirements are getting more and more ridiculous even when I've not seen that many groundbreaking new things that improve playability. If we need tons of new iron just to up the game experience... well, yawn.

I believe that Nintendo can stay viable for a long time, even if they aren't keeping up latest-and-greatest. I'm still playing GBA games (okay, on a DS =) and absolutely don't feel a tiny little bit silly - the platform certainly worked for its purpose... I'm sure Wii will enjoy similar longevity with a little bit of luck.

Re:Would be a good idea.

[geekoid]

What? what game has a requirement today that couldn't have been reached 2 years ago? None

Short Life cycles? Sega does what Nintendon't.

[trdrstv]

Nintendo has had the habit of short console-lives if you start with the NES (Yes, consoles do predate it, but this is a simplified view.) It was released in 1983, overtaken by the Super Nintendo in 1990 (Lasting 7 years). Next was the N64 in 1996 (making the Super Nintendo last 6 years), next was the Gamecube in 2001 (N64 life span: 5 years). And finally the Wii in 2006 (Gcube life: 5 years).

However if you look at Sony, the original playstation was released in 1994, not overtaken by the PS2 untill 2000 (6 year life). And then by the PS3 in 2007 (7 year life).

First off I need to correct something. The Playstation was released in 1994. The PS2 was released in 2000. The PS3 was released in 2006. So Sony's sticking to a 6 year console cycle.

I don't get what you are referring to by "overtaking". If, by "overtaking" you mean selling more units (either hardware or software) the PS3 still hasn't overtaken the PS2 in new purchases, either way you cut it.

If you want to Talk "Short Life Cycles" Sega would be the shortest. The Master System was released in 1986, then (only 2 years later) the Genesis was released in 1988. The Genesis enjoyed a LOOooooooong Cycle (by comparison) of 6 years when they launched the Saturn in 1994, and then the Dreamcast in 1998.

I believe part of its popularity was the fact that it became so cheap, with no changes, that anybody could have one, and play games together.

Isn't that the basic console vs. PC argument in a nutshell?

Re:Let's hope the traditional console cycle is dea

[madprof]

This wasn't workable because architectures had to change for there to be significant differences between console revisions.

Not until we get real-time raytracing.

[argent]

Let's keep the arms race up long enough that we get real-time raytracing for arbitrary geometry at a reasonable price.

That way we can do reasonable quality VR without having to spend thousands of man-hours fine-tuning every goddamn detail, prebaking textures, oversimplifying scenes to suit the limitations of conventional rasterization, ...