Slashdot Mirror
Wii 2 Unlikely For 2011, Maybe In 2012
An anonymous reader writes "As discussed on Slashdot earlier this year, the lack of a next-generation Wii may be hurting Nintendo. That doesn't seem to concern the company's US chief, Reggie Fils-Aime, who said this week that a Wii 2 might not appear until 2012. He wants to sell a few million more consoles before a successor is launched. So, no Wii 2 for 2010 or 2011 — meanwhile, the PS3 and Xbox consoles get motion control support and other content enhancements. What does that mean for the success of Nintendo's gaming console business? Has the innovator been out-innovated due to a sluggish product roadmap?"
means no new consoles. Duh. When things pick up THEN I'd expect a new console.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
The Wii only started losing steam this past year, and they still sell boatloads of them every month. Granted, it's a much smaller boat than it was before, but they are still moving units. Even though the current generation of consoles are starting to directly impact the potential complexity of games, they still have a bit of life left in them...Wii included. Here's to hoping that Nintendo focuses more on the hardware this time. Don't get me wrong, there have been some amazing games released for the Wii (Muramasa: The Demon Blade being one of the better ones), but I'd like to see more emphasis on gaming prowess rather than a focus on the "general" market.
Not that I expect that to happen; Nintendo is a business, after all...
Living With a Nerd
That's what they really meant to say. Or actually, "I know the Wii was interesting but now out-of-date, but don't lose your loyalty to Nintendo."
I am officially gone from
Ok. Great. Now, how about a few more words, because the one doesn't really help much.
Nintendo has been raking in a metric buttload of cash off of the Wii.
Remember the fact that the Wii *hardware* made a profit from day 1, while the PS3 and the 360 sold at a loss for many many years.
What have they been doing with all that cash? R&D of course. Do you actually think Nintendo is just sitting around on their hands? They are not stupid.
In all likelihood they are just laughing their butts off at Sony and Microsoft pushing over themselves playing catch-up, meanwhile sitting on some revolutionary new console that will be surprise announced in the summer to come out next Xmas.
Motion gaming sucks. Mod up if you agree, down if you disagree.
If you find this post offensive, don't read it! THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING! I am what I am because of how apes behave.
Erm, that depends. If "out-innovated" means "finally caught up to with motion-control designs" (albeit ones that either look stupid or probably require much bigger rooms, like the PS2 EyeToy used to) then yes. If "out-innovated" keeps its old definition of "now have a smaller share of original features that they implemented first and are seen as lacking because of it" then I wouldn't be so sure.
nintendo should go roman and call it the wiiii
Unless they can come up with something very new, and very original, and something that's a lot better than just an incremental improvement to their current system, I don't think they are going to be a serious competitor in the industry after the next generation of consoles has run its course.
What makes it even worse is that Nintendo is probably going to have to depend heavily on backward compatibility in their next generation console, which limits the directions they can take with it.
This, I think, is it for them. I think they might be down and out for the count.
I remember when Atari was king of the consoles with the 2600... but they didn't innovate quickly enough as competitors came out either.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
... another rumor of Nintendo's impending collapse. Just because the two main competitors - neither of whom have matched the Wii sales numbers with their latest consoles - have released motion controls, is not enough to claim that Nintendo will be gone next week. Neither the PS3 nor the XBox 360 controls have been out long enough to have any sense of how often they will be implemented in upcoming games.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
No. The Wii's motion controls were evolutionary, not revolutionary. There was no innovation in the first place, just good marketing. Same with the ipod: not the first portable mp3 player by a long stretch, but the first with widespread marketing of the SHINY NEW THING.
Right now the Kinect is $200 and the PS3 Motion is $100 plus $70/controller according to Amazon. So just to add motion control to the 360, you have to shell out what you would for a new Wii. You can get a Wii used from Gamestop with a decent warranty for $120. And browsing the Kinect games, they look like the same stuff available on the Wii: some Sonic knock-offs, the EA exercise stuff, Deca Sports... Unless the Kinect and Motion can put out some must-have titles, people who don't already own a 360 or PS3 will likely opt for the Wii.
Why would they bother? Microsoft and Sony are skipping a new generation of consol in favor of adding motion control to existing systems. Even with a year's delay,Nintendo will beat Microsoft and Sony to the next generation console. They still have good motion control and can draw from the Wii as well as Kinect for a new generation. Nintendo is in excellent shape.
The Wii's game catalogue will look a whole lot better now that both the 360 and PS3 have their very own shovelware minigame motion system platform to lower the overall quality of their software releases.
The Wii's motion controls were evolutionary, not revolutionary.
Nintendo obviously believed the motion controls were revolutionary - the Wii codename was revolution. Look inside the battery compartment of the Wiimote and you'll still see the code RVL-003.
In any case, it did revolutionise gaming input in a tangible way and brought a whole new demographic into gaming as a result.
It isn't just innovation but value for money too
Here in the UK the Wii is poor value for money.
There is a small selection of games (compared to PS3 & xbox 360) and generally poorer quality than other console versions. Also it appears less Wii games make it to budget then other consoles too.
We own a Wii and only my son plays it now because the only decent games for it are the LEGO series.
Expensive controllers too:
PS3 motion controller = £30
Wii motionplus & wiimote = £50
I've gone back to playing games on my PC - we are planning to sell our Wii and buy a different console which will give us more choice and a wider range of games.
Nintendo has been in business for a lot longer than almost any company you can name (1889!) and have seen off some enormous rivals several times (Sega, Atari, etc.).
Nintendo make profit on almost everything they release.
Nintendo make big releases every now and again, stringing them on with life support in the form of games that turn out to become famous in their own right.
When Nintendo do plop down a new console it's invariably innovative and top-of-its-game (not necessarily the best hardware, but definitely better in gaming terms).
Nintendo is an inventor. They toil away in their little sheds for years in complete secrecy until one day they walk out, plop something into a business person's hands and blow everyone away. Then while the market are still reeling from that, they just wander quietly back into their shed and aren't seen for another few years when they rinse and repeat.
Precisely BECAUSE they aren't saying "Oh, no, our competitors have something new, we have to copy it in our own way and get back into the game" is why they are able to do what they do. They don't really care about Kinect, or anything else - they have money enough to last a decade, and that gives them a decade to make something even more spectacular without having to worry about the day-to-day running of the businesses. Wiis are still being sold but they have enough to go back into their shed and devote the next few years to R&D and playtesting which the other rivals *cannot*. They will have their own ideas, which might work (Wii) or might flop (VirtualBoy) but will be away from the conventional elements of the time that are competing in the market. And when they deliver their next invention, people will give them millions and, because of using their brains and not just throwing expensive hardware at a problem, they will invariably make profit on every unit sold.
It's also true that they decide what they want in the next, say, Mario game. They decide what they want to be able to do. Then they build a console around that, not the other way around.
You can try to make Nintendo look foolish and show how "you know better" if you want, but invariably you will end up with egg on your face. Nintendo know their market better than anyone - they almost single-handedly invented it. Leave them be. The "Wii 2" (which it will almost certainly NEVER be named) will be to the Wii what the Wii was to the Gamecube, or the Gamecube to the N64, or the N64 to the SNES, or the SNES to the NES, or the equivalent trail in the handheld markets. It will take years to arrive - you'll have just about forgotten about your Wii and Nintendo will be absent from the market for a year or so - and then it'll blow your socks off. After a few months people will complain that it doesn't do X or Y or that it's "outdated" or "underpowered" while Nintendo will have another decade's research money under their belt and be working on the next one.
Nintendo know what they are doing. Sod Wii 2. I want whatever the next stage is - which will be more advanced gameplay-wise than anything on the market in the next few years.
Had they called their current console "Wi" instead of "Wii" they could have just tacked that single 'i' for the 2.0 version instead of adding an entire '2' and thus rising the length of the console's name to 4 characters.
Just think of the money they could have saved in marketing by saving all that ink, commercial time, reusing old characters and such.
Not to mention all that accumulated saving down the road with Wii3 (Wiii) and Wii4 (WiW).
They must be kicking themselves in the ass right now for being so shortsighted.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
I disagree.
As far as Move goes, I don't see that as out-innovating the Wii. From my point of view, the PS3 is several years more advanced than the Wii (in both the base hardware and the motion control hardware), they've had years more of research to benefit from (both their own research and what others in the industry and academia have researched and demonstrated), they have the benefit several years of sitting back and learning from the Wii's mistakes and shortcomings, and with all of that benefit they've managed to brute force a solutions that is only slightly more capable than the Wii, and looks stupid and inelegant in the process.
As far as Kinect goes, I have a lot of respect for what they've done there. Rather than just tracking the position of some sex-toy-looking orbs, it actually analyzes the scene to extract skeletal structure information from the players movement. It's quite technologically advanced. Very impressive in the way it operates and the capabilities it provides. Yet the one thing that REALLY bugs me about it is that it is a purely controller-less design. Being able to play controller-less is pretty cool, but a lot of games will suffer or be impractical without buttons to press. Using an existing controller 2-handed kind of defeats the purpose of Kinect's advanced capabilities, the existing 360 controllers aren't conducive to single-hand use, and releasing a future add-on-controller-for-the-add-on-kinect is just completely out of the question.
So no, I don't really feel that the Wii has been out-innovated much. Move is pretty pathetic and uninspired considering how much later it came than the Wii, and Kinect is really impressive and innovative in ways but has a fatal flaw. I think it will take until the next generation before someone truly outdoes the Wii (when they can combine the Kinect's sensor technology with the Wii/Move controller system)
It's still the best selling console of 2010 worldwide. Last week put it between the xbox 360 and PS3 in sales. I'd love to be failing this well. Yes, we know it lacks power and the oomph of the motion controller is not that big anymore. But there's no xbox 720, PS4 or whatever announced yet either. Nintendo don't want to show their hand so early that Microsoft and Sony can copy it for their launches. Either they have to wait for another console rematch, or they have to play for a "helf-generation" console that surpasses the xbox and ps3, not just is on par with them. And I don't think Nintendo is ready to fight for the performance crown.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Analysts are looking as far ahead as 2014 for XBox Kinnect. Sony has also said that there's 10 years of life in PS3. So if Nintendo comes with a new concept that is as groundbreaking as Wii (in terms of tech and/or marketing) in 2012 then they sure as hell haven't been outpaced by either Microsoft or Sony.
Nintendo have been making boatloads of money with the Wii while Microsoft and Sony barely break even right now. Microsoft have not recouped the expenses, they are just breaking even. Its a long time before they have a profit gain from the whole escapade.
The problem for Nintendo is that much of the interesting stuff arent ready yet like real 3D instead of those 1950s glasses we have rediscovered. Real time rendering are also not availiable yet. Sensory feedback is very hard and expensive if you go beyond buzzing and rumbling.
The best they can accomplish is a hardware upgrade and better accuracy of the controller unless they come up with something really new. I suspect they want to upgrade out of cycle with regards to both Microsoft and Sony and take them with their pants down especially if they just do a hardware upgrade. The current release forecast of 2012 makes me wonder if they have something new and exciting in store after all. Sadly i cant imagine what it could ever be, but then again i could never in my life imagine the Wii Controller or the huge marketshare of the Wii.
HTTP/1.1 400
There have been 'improvements' on what Nintendo did - but I wouldn't really call yet another motion sensor an 'innovation'. (Think how many MSFT 'innovations' you just yawned at, as they were things that existed elsewhere long ago).
Nintendo innovated the console market by bringing those controllers.
It was Sony/Microsoft who jumped on it later - to claw back marketshare lost to Nintendo.
In much the same way - in the phone world, the iPhone was the innovation. There is virtually no new phone that doesn't just try and piggy back on the path paved by the iPhone. Even if there are Android phones that have more CPU power, cheaper, ... They weren't the innovators. Someone else (at Apple) had the big idea on how to revolutionize the market, all the others came years later - then touting other features.
Take it - the fact that Android was multitasking before the iPhone wasn't as much of an 'innovation', as the iPhone itself was to any phone preceeding it.
The über-powerful PS3 or XBox 360 primarily introduced newer hardware - something that was expected to happen - everyone does it.
The Wii brought something new, something unexpected to the market - hence THEY were the innovators, and even if they aren't on the forefront now - those that are are 'optimisers' at best, but not innovators, not pioneers, not people trying something NEW.
I think you meant to say, "Oui".
I distinctly remember the GBC having better hardware than the GB but maybe I'm mistake. In anycase the "next-gen" nintendo console will be released when it makes sense to release it, and then Microsoft and Sony will have to bring something new out, whether its just more exppansions for the PS3/360. I have always been a Nintendo fan and I think they're doing more than fine, even if it is 2 years until the next console they release. On a side note I bought my Wii not for the cutting edge graphics (ha-ha) or the amazing games, but for the virtual console and amazing backwards compatability that at least Sony completely missed out.
the Wii was cool but the problem is that it's processing power is the slowest of the bunch. i've read that MS had to gimp Kinect a little because it requires a lot of CPU power. Nintendo is going to have come up with something else or put some processing power in their next console.
2009: Wii
In what country? Wii didn't come out in Hong Kong and China until 2009, but it was out three years earlier in most of the western industrialized world. I couldn't tell from your Homepage or Journal because you haven't provided any. I just checked your posting history, and comments such as this, this, and this that you're at least familiar with the U.S. market.
I distinctly remember the GBC having better hardware than the GB but maybe I'm mistake.
Not really:
That's evolutionary, not revolutionary. Are you sure you aren't thinking of the jump from GBC to GBA, which was arguably bigger than the jump from NES to Super NES?
I have always been a Nintendo fan
Nintendo lost me when it rejected Bob's Game, sued anyone and everyone in the DS flash card business, and released Wii Menu 4.2 and 4.3, rather than copying Microsoft's XNA Creators Club like Apple did.
More than one word: Not really. Sony is busy working on a slightly better version of what the Wii came out with years ago, and Microsoft's Kinect (although it has some pretty cool applications outside of gaming) is targeting a demographic that the Wii has pretty much saturated over the past few years. In the mean time, Nintendo has quietly brought out a 3D hand-held that does not require special glasses to play on.
The way I see it, Nintendo is just hedging their bets on being the first to heavily embrace the 3D market, I would not be surprised if the Wii 2 came out with 3D support at all, and once again, Sony and Microsoft will have to play catchup (assuming 3D takes off).
This post may or may not contain cancer causing materials.
Has the innovator been out-innovated due to a sluggish product roadmap?
Counterpoint:
No.
Nintendo pretty much has a different market segment of casual gamers. Younger kids who are into the franchise (Pokemon, Mario, etc. and other exclusives are all over the elementary schools... never heard anyone there ever mention Halo or even Final Fantasy). Kids don't care about system specs... hell, they won't even watch TV if it's not a cartoon, so I surmise they actually expect the cartoony "8-bit look" as a sign that a game is actually "for them".
Finally, the hardcore gamers will have a Wii anyway just for the heck of it.
Nintendo can milk this cow, the Wii teat, for a while longer. Then once publishers actually start releasing interesting games for the PS3 and Kinect motion controls, they can come out with the next big thing out of cycle.
I surmise it would be some kind of augmented reality thing, so they can sell more cheap widgets with each game, that the kids will bring to school and lose and have to be replaced.
The original Kinect did its processing in hardware, IIRC. I believe that they cut that out due to the cost of it all. Check out the Open Kinect group on Google Groups; there's a good bit of information to be found, and more in the IRC chatroom.
SSC
Anyone who's been a gamer for a while should know that Nintendo has always been like this; they HATE developing new consoles. They have to be dragged kicking and screaming by their competitors. I think it's an outgrowth of their two consoles that pretty much monopolized the market for several years, the NES and the Game Boy, which were great for them; didn't have to budget R&D, just had to sit back and collect the licensing fees. In fact, I forget which console it was (this was back a few years), but I remember seeing actual Nintendo advertisements before one of their consoles coming out claiming that for this new console they had focused on gameplay, and it would be around for years, and pleading with gamers not to focus on graphics or power. It was one of the strangest ads I've ever seen.
A coupla things come to mind here. First, this infographic shows as of May, the Wii is monstrously successful. It's been profitable from day one. Nintendo did just release their first six-month net loss in seven years and are predicting falling revenues as Wii sales stall but they've been stockpiling cash for years. So while they do have an issue to address there I think they've got a handle on it.
Second, and more importantly, mobile gaming is where the industry is heading. And guess who has a commanding lead in that market space? That's right, Nintendo. They sell more mobile/handheld gaming devices than anybody else in the world. The only current competition they even have is Apple as more and more people want to play games on their iPhones and to a lesser extent the Android platform (but while that benefits Google it doesn't make them so much of a direct competitor to Nintendo as Apple is). Yes, I've played around with a PSP and think they're okay but the market is not going for them and Sony has no clue what the mobile market wants.
Anyway, does Nintendo need to not rest on its laurels and drop the price of the Wii or take some kind of action to reinvigorate the product line? Yes. Will they? Most likely. Will it work? Probably...but no way to be certain.
And do they need to get a more capable game console on the market soon? I think so. But I also think it's BS that they're not planning on that already. The Wii was available to purchase in the US exactly 4 years ago today. The GameCube 5 yrs before that. The Nintendo 64 was 5 yrs before that. The SNES was a little over 5 yrs before that.
I'd be surprised if there's not a Wii 2 or whatever by the 2011 Christmas shopping season. But even if there's not, I'd be hard pressed to say Nintendo's down for the count. They've been around longer than any other game company. And they're surprisingly well managed.
The five-year-rule is a long-standing tradition for console generations going back to the Atari days (even through several recessions and the console "collapse" of 1982). Both the 360 and PS3 are starting to show their age at this point (especially the 360, which doesn't even have a blu-ray drive), with no new console generation on the horizon. The 360 is now 5 years old and the PS3 is 4, and neither has even announced a new console generation. I'm tired of my console dropping further and further behind PC's, while all MS and Sony want to do is release lame Wii knockoff controllers. I'm tired of consoles that aren't powerful enough to handle MMO's, require multiple disc swaps to support the latest games, and slow to a crawl with modern high res textures.
Screw Nintendo, and screw Move and Kinect. Give me a new console generation!
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
how about a few more words
Red
Climb
Prestige
Speaker
Picture
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
I honestly think that the Wii is just fine. Its targeted at casual gamers, whereas 360 seems to be the young gamer crowd and PS3 seems to be the more hardcore gamers. By giving the Wii time on the market they're just going to build up an immense game library. I do think Kinect may throw a wrench in nintendo's machine though. The kinect is the first peripheral I've ever seen that has made game-o-phobes interested in playing. My girlfriends mother for example, was given a wii. She got frustrated when she kept losing track of where the cursor was pointed in the main menu (relatively trivial for us tech folks, downright frustrating and off-putting for some others). So it sat there. However she's looking at getting a Kinect/360 bundle now because "I don't have to worry about figuring out how to use a stupid controller, I think I can figure out where my body is." It kind of opened my eyes a little about the potential Kinect has. I just hope it doesn't turn into another Sega-CD/32x sort of device. Anyways, tangent aside, I don't think Nintendo is going anywhere. They've survived all of their other competitors, even when they've had more powerful technology. They've got more wisdom than MS and Sony combined at running successful gaming platforms (unless you count Basic!).
And you would get this..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zX2smM87r14
Nintendo successor to the DS, called the 3DS, is scheduled for release at the end of February in Japan at a price tag around $300. I would assume they would launch in the US and Europe in the following months. They would be stupid to try to put two devices (hand held and console) on the market around the same time. This is especially true when they will both cost $300+.
My guess is that they would not release their next console for a minimum of 2 years after the 3DS.
They aren't too excited about rushing a product to sale for a couple of reasons
The main reason is...they don't NEED to. The Wii is still the number one seller out there, and has universal appeal. The PS3 is the elite blue ray graphics console, and the 360 is the FPS console. Both have their niches. The Wii won't be in trouble because everyone, from 8 year olds to grandmas in assisted living centers, can and does play the Wii. Yeah, the "gamer" niche isn't there, but really, that market isn't that big in comparison. Plus, you still have to shell out $500-$600 for a DECENT 360 or PS3 with motion control, whereas you get a Wii for half the price, complete with access to all Nintendo's proprietary games.
The second reason also goes to the PS3 and, especially, the 360. When the PS3 came out, it was priced way out of reach, and manufacturing wasn't yet up to par with mass production for a good price. They lost money. The 360 was made by Microsoft. In other words, like their OS's, it was buggy as hell and had its own version of the BSoD(red ring, anyone?) The Wii? smooth release, no major issues, priced for volume, and fun for a broad audience. I guarantee that, when the Wii 2 or whatever it is called comes out, the same will be true.
Nintendo has been in this business for decades. They know what works, and they listen to what works, not a bunch of flamers looking for the next big shiny.
Doesn't the PS3 support 3D right now?
So, no Wii 2 for 2010 or 2011 -- meanwhile, the PS3 and Xbox consoles get motion control support and other content enhancements. ...motion control add-ons that cost hundreds and don't support current games. Thus, they will get minimal support from users and developers. Remember, the most successful add-on of all time was the Sega CD, which only sold 500,000 units. Microsoft and Sony would probably be thrilled to get even half that in this economy.
While people have fun on the physical Wii games, PlayStation and Xbox owners are enjoying the option of HD playback, IP TV, music, video recording, social networking and even Foxtel.
Besides Netflix, the online video offerings available are a pretty bad deal. Hey Sony-do you seriously think I'm going to pay $7 to rent a $15 DVD? And the side effect of all these is that the interface becomes increasingly cluttered with ads for video. The Xbox 360 dashboard has more ads than the freaking mall, and they seriously detract from actually playing video. I myself have gone through constant frustration with Time Warner, ESPN, and MS all pointing fingers at each other instead of getting ESPN3.com to actually work on my 360.
Nintendo is an innovative company, but in the modern converged world of gaming and entertainment devices consumers will begin to demand more and more from their console.
Actually, the success of the Wii proves the exact opposite. Sony and MS poured billions into making stuff like Playstation Home that have met with collective yawns from their customers. More importantly, neither of the HD consoles seems to be able to last 2 years without overheating-so many of the sales from the PS3 and 360 are actually repeat buyers.
The only thing Nintendo really needs to do is make their console more online-friendly. Most people don't care about HD, but they would like to be able to play Animal Crossing with their friends without having to type in the Microsoft Office 2007 product key.
(-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
No, Microsoft and Sony beat Nintendo to the next-generation console while Nintendo released an updated GameCube. Wii is to GameCube as Game Boy Color is to Game Boy or PSP-3000 is to PSP-1000: much the same hardware with higher clock speed, more RAM, and some new I/O.
Exactly, Nintendo just stopped playing the next-gen game. Rather than trying to beat Sony and Microsoft by being better they decided to be different and work the casual gaming market. It seems like Microsoft and Sony are the ones playing catch-up with Nintendo with the Kinect and Move respectively.
They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
hm, what about using some simple LED light that would act as a button for Kinect? but, I think Kinect is too complex and it probably 'slows down' CPU due to processing. and lag is probably unavoidable.
"Has the innovator been out-innovated due to a sluggish product roadmap?"
Umm, in case you didn't notice, the 3DS is Nintendo's next big innovation. The next Wii will follow after that. Nintendo doesn't just throw a bunch of shit against the wall and sees what sticks, like Sony does. They make a concentrated effort and focus.
I anticipated this would happen from the start. Even back at the release of the Wii the limited power of the hardware and the standard definition graphics was a sore point. The novelty of the controllers, however generally beat back those concerns, at least initially. But then it also become apparent that while the Wiimote is great with some games with many others it hinders gameplay. And things were worse when cross-platform games where significantly scaled back for the Wii.
So I anticipated that Nintendo would follow a shorter lifespan for the Wii, replacing it with a more powerful version. This model is similar to what Nintendo has done with the DS, moving from the original to the DS Lite, then the DSi, and now there's the 3DS.
Of course, the irony here is a selling point for the Wii was it's lower cost. But it's looking like over the lifespan of an Xbox360 or PS3 you're faced with purchasing two different Nintendo consoles and possibly no backwards compatibility.
I would guess that Nintendo is wrestling with what the Wii 2 should be. Should it simply be a more powerful Wii or a completely revamped system, more powerful or more featured than Sony's and Microsoft's consoles. An upgraded Wii would mean quicker to market and a lower cost, but it would also only put them at parity with the competition. A few years later Sony and Microsoft will inevitably be announcing new consoles.
Of course, at this point what can they really offer beyond better graphics and maybe more precise motion control? I'm guessing the shift might be towards a more complete home entertaining/computing experience. An alternative to both something like Apple TV and a netbook.
A cheap and familiar Wii is both good for Nintendo and good for developers
A cheap Wii with a very similar-to-the-Gamecube development kit means profits for Nintendo in development and manufacturing, and it means cheap and fast development process for Wii developers. If developers have a console to experiment on (thanks to low cost), they try new things and make lots of Wii games. This not only makes Nintendo money from the games produced, but makes both Nintendo and the companies money from the increased audience due to the new and innovative games. It helps reinvigorate the gaming industry and takes Nintendo and the companies with it.
At least, so goes the theory behind the Wii. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, or something like that.
"Today the Wii’s biggest drawback is its diminutive hardware specs and options. There’s no high-definition playback and no significant built-in storage," This is what they were saying at launch, and it never made a difference. I still don't care that I can't play blu-ray discs, I don't have any, but I can play all the old gamecube games that the kids still love, and the Wii just has too many killer games. People laughed when the new controllers were announced back when it was called Revolution and look what has happened. I'm not concerned at all, just wondering how they're going to change things next. (hell, I remember thinking the DS was a bizzare idea that wouldn't catch on)
fak3r.com
This is the same exact article that's been coming out since well before the Wii was released. Underpowered systems are definitely doomed. Without an update they're screwed. The Wii has relegated to the scrap heap by articles like this for 4 years now, the author really, really wants graphic quality to be the main determinant of game console sales, and the article is another sad attempt to prove that personal belief but is contradicted by reality. Hardcore gamers might care a lot, but most people don't give a shit about HD. As long as it's fun, it could have the graphics quality of an Atari 2600. Graphics quality might be #1 on your list of requirements, but it's around #4 or #5 for most people.
Here's the sales from release to end of September, 2010
Wii - 75.9 million
360 - 44.6 million
PS3 - 41.6 million
Until it gets passed up in sales, or at least these figures get kinda close, these articles are completely pointless. It's not dead, it's not close to being dead, and although the 360 is now selling faster than the Wii, at current rates it would take over 100 years to surpass the Wii. The Wii has outsold the original NES, and it's still flying off the shelves, not as fast as it once did, but still a lot faster than the PS3, and, unlike Sony & MS, Nintendo makes a profit on each one.
As a side note, i would think 360 sales figures are a somewhat bullshit way to estimate the number of users, since many of those are out-of-warranty red ring of death repurchases, garnering 2 or 3 sales for just one customer.
This sentence no verb.
For the next Wii I'd really like to see:
proper 1080p HD gfx - imagine how good SMG would look, for example, or SMBW in glorious 1080p. Sonic Unleashed has some impressive gfx engine as well. Even Gutiar hero looks better on 360 than Wii, and that's just stupid shapes moving on a screen.
Surround sound
More memory I'm running out of game save space.
A better multiplayer setup The friend code thing is retarded.
Facility to link up Wii locally for fullscreen LAN game action
Probably some other things I can't remember just now.
Ahh yes with HD then hopefully the power to use as a slick media playback device with nice remote would be a possibilty as well.
"8-bit look"
Whatever its flaws, the Wii doesnt really have an 8-bit look (and I say this as a guy who has several 8-bit systems close by).
Wankel
Rotary
Engine
I drank what? -- Socrates
Uh, why so complex?
Even with Kinect you can use a regular controller. Existing technology that works, and both work simultaneously. Less lag, less specialized equipment required (you already have a controller).
That's the thing with Kinect - it's not just for motion games, but it can be used to enhance non-motion games as well. Move can't do this as you need the glowing ball. Wii can do it as well, but in a limited fashion.
Examples:
1) You're playing your FPS and hiding behind a wall. How about physically leaning over to peer around it?
2) You're playing an arcade flight sim - your physical movements may alter the movements of the ship on screen - perhaps you're trying to avoid that missile coming at you and you instinctively lean in the opposite direction. Won't it be neat if the game actually responded to that?
3) Ditto platformers - who hasn't raised their controller or tilted it in an attempt to possibly influence the results of a jump or to squeeze into a hard to reach area? Again, won't it be neat if the game would respond?
This is its potential - besides motion games, it can also be used to enhance regular controller-based games.
About the biggest issue with Kinect I've seen is the store demos. People are used to moving their arms, but not their legs or their whole body, and a lot of games take advantage of leg movement and whole body movement.
Of course they will say it's not going to happen until 2012. Why would they want to jeopardize any sales they might otherwise get this year and early next? If they announce that Wii 2 is coming in 2011, then fewer people will buy Wii 1 this year and early next. And any case, if sales are way off for Nintendo this holiday, you can bet they will fast track the Wii 2.
--- What?
This needs to be modded up, and then sent to all the major players in Xbox 360 development. (including Microsoft) I hope that companies take advantage of this in the future, so we're not doomed to just rail games...
I wonder if there could be a swordfighting game that goes beyond Kinect's core functionality to include a sword with a d-stick and a couple buttons, reading both the sword and the user's skeleton to make an advanced swordfighting adventure...
Charisma is the measure of someone's ability to lie with a straight face.
Nintendo released an updated GameCube. Wii is [...] much the same hardware with higher clock speed, more RAM, and some new I/O.
Try playing one.
I own a Wii. The graphics are slightly above those of the GameCube, as would be expected from some more RAM and 50% faster clock. The console itself is evolutionary; the only new hardware on the console itself consists of a built-in 512 MB NAND flash, a different AV connector supporting a more widely available component cable, a USB controller, and a Bluetooth receiver connected to the USB controller. I have read that the Bluetooth receiver and the remote were originally going to be a GameCube accessory, much like Kinect and PS Move, until Nintendo decided to turn it into part of a new console.
http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/score/metascore/all/wii?sort=desc
Apparently a lot of people disagree with you.
Bye!
Nintendo can milk this cow, the Wii teat, for a while longer.
So that's why it's white! I wondered.
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
I fail to see how it matters. I linked to an article I wrote that was directly related to the discussion at hand. How is that any different than copying and pasting the 712 word opinion? I don't run a single advert on there, so it's not like I financially benefit from it...
Living With a Nerd
Could you also explain why that is a problem? Remember that it doesn't do HD, which makes it require less processing power for that part.
Apples and oranges. The Kinect is a very different beast from the Wiimote. One is a camera that is supposed to allow a game to identify human movement, while the other is a motion sensor. I'd think analysing images would be much more CPU-intensive than motion information.
It's ridiculous that a game console manufacturer has to change their architecture and graphics card brand in order to be considered "next-gen" instead of just an upgrade.
Wrong.
Temper. Please consider Layne's Law of Debate: everything becomes about how to define a word.
Nintendo made it part of the system. Kinect is an add-on.
Then one can treat the Wii as a bundle of an OC'd GameCube and a Wii Remote, just as stores have already started to sell bundles of the Xbox 360 S and Kinect. By this time next year, I predict that this bundle and the PS3+EyeToy+Move bundle will be displayed prominently on shelves. But I'll grant you that Nintendo got the bundle out first.
Then there are those like me that could be considered "hardcore", but aren't interested in the types of games that the PS3 and the Xbox 360 get. I'm not interested in games like Call of Duty, Street Fighter IV, or Mass Effect. That's why I own only a Wii out of the three current consoles.
Iwata's and Miyamoto's compensation packages only look "tiny" when compared to the inflated insanity going on in the US.
I'm happy to grant that greed is part of the human condition, but it is worth pointing out that different cultures inculcate different balances of the basic human traits. Greed certainly happens in Japan, but not anywhere like on the scale seen in the US. Frankly, why would anyone really need $10 mil in annual pay? Such high remuneration actually seems obscene. One percent of that would be more than ample.
By way of international comparison, have a look at the PDF linked here. Relevant portion from page 6 quoted below. I can vouch for the indicated pay for the average full-time worker over the age of 25; I make just slightly more than this as a highly-trained professional with over a decade of experience, in a job paying roughly the industry average.
The CEO pay rate among American public companies is outrageous. They are receiving astronomical amounts of money compared to the average American worker. Meanwhile, the average full-time worker over the age of 25 struggles to get by on a mere $683 a week, an increase of less that one percent over the last year (Chattman 2005). Compared to the pay rate of an average CEO, the average full-time worker would have to work in the upwards of 385 years to make what a CEO receives in one year. During the 1980s the pay gap between CEO and ordinary factory workers grew from 42 times to almost 85 times (Byrne 1991). In 2004 CEOs in the United States made over 475 times as much as the average worker. Compared to the pay ratio between US CEOs and US average workers, other countries ratios between the two are significantly lower, as indicated in the chart below.
Country ----- Ratio of CEO pay to
------------- average worker pay
Japan ------------ 11:1
Germany ---------- 12:1
France ----------- 15:1
Italy ------------ 20:1
Canada ----------- 20:1
South Africa ----- 21:1
Britain ---------- 22:1
Hong Kong -------- 41:1
Mexico ----------- 47:1
Venezuela -------- 50:1
United States --- 475:1
I leave it as an exercise for the reader to as to whether the US's exorbitant executive pay multiple might act as a drain on the economy.
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
It's ridiculous that a game console manufacturer has to change their architecture and graphics card brand in order to be considered "next-gen" instead of just an upgrade.
As I understand it, the change in architecture arises once the game console manufacturer and its licensed developers have discovered a serious bottleneck in the existing architecture. For example, the N64 had serious bottlenecks that the GameCube resolved. If the new console could push four times as many polygons, far more complex shaders, and far bigger worlds, all using a faster-clocked version of the same architecture, that'd be an upgrade. But the changes from Game Boy to Game Boy Color and from GameCube to Wii are far more modest: some more RAM and a CPU that's 1.5 to 2 times as fast.
There's more to the Wii than just a CPU upgrade and more RAM. The video chipset has been greatly improved. The motherboard is entirely new. etc.
That doesn't mean it's not an upgrade, but to pass it off as insignificant or just an overclocked GameCube is ignorant.
The video chipset has been greatly improved.
I stand corrected. Hollywood has more TEVs than Flipper. Are there any other video improvements that you can talk about?
The motherboard is entirely new.
As was the motherboard in the NES-101.
I still have a Wii. Got it launch day. Still love it. Still buying new games for it.
My PS3 has been collecting dust for over a year. I've never gotten a 360.
Nintendo got it right the first time. I am not buying hardware, I'm buying games. Hardware is something I put up with so I can play games. I don't need a higher resolution display, or a faster CPU, to play games. I just need people who are willing to put in the time and effort to develop an interesting game to play.
In short, I don't think the lack of a "Wii 2" is hurting them. The motion sensing afterthoughts tacked onto the PS3 and 360 are unlikely to ever come anywhere close to the market penetration the Wii has, so who cares? When Sony and MS release new consoles that come with motion sensing out of the box, built to work with it from day 1, then they'll have real, credible, direct competition. But even then, as long as they view "casual" games as something you put second-string developers on so you can focus on making the best shooters, they're still not getting it.
Sure, some day Nintendo will release a new console, but I'm not expecting them to hurry it up. 5 years is not a very long time for a console life cycle, historically, and it's a pretty short time for a console that's doing well. Come on, think this through. The PS2 released at $300, and got multiple price cuts during its lifetime. The Wii released at $250, and has gotten... one. I doubt the Wii will go away before getting down to $100, which I'd guess would take a couple more years.
Basically, there's no need. The Wii isn't trying to compete on graphics quality to begin with, so who cares if its graphics aren't as impressive as the PS3's? Not the people buying the Wii to play video games, that's for sure.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
Just sticking more processing power into the next console won't sell it, the Wii has plenty of great games that are system sellers and don't need more processing power. Current Wii owners would not be convinced of the need to upgrade to a Wii HD because the games the Wii offers aren't going to be significantly improved by additional processing power.
Also a fun fact is that Wii games usually aim for a framerate of 60 while "HD" games often render at lower resolutions than 1280x720 just to achieve 30 frames per second.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
The new part of the Wii wasn't the hardware, it was the software. Games never had as broad an appeal before. If Nintendo had only made Gamecube-like games with added motion controls the Wii would have failed, it's the combination of new audience games (Wii Sports and the games that followed) and lapsed audience games (better Mario Kart, New Super Mario Bros) that boosted the Wii to where it ended up. Same with the DS, it was the software strategy, not the hardware, that made that thing the most popular system.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Yes but the 3DS offers a cheaper and more elegant solution. 3D on the PS3 is still a niche thing because you need a new TV for it.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
But he was talking about the Wii 2, which presumably will not have an integrated display.
Nintendo is releasing the DSi 3D next year, and people say they aren't innovating? I think they're smart. A new console, a new gameboy, a new console, a new gameboy. So we're always buying a new Nintendo thing but we don't feel overtapped, or like we have to choose between which to get.
A.
So "next-generation" means "prettier graphics"? Heh. As you can see from Microsoft and Sony's new products, it was the Wii that was one generation ahead of the other ones. The two other consoles went all out with amazing graphics. Nintendo realized that that was a dead, end and moved one generation ahead.
Clever signature text goes here.
It seems that you forgot to mention the revolutionary controller. There's more to a console than HD graphics, you know.
I think you will find that children are only a tiny part of Nintendo's customer base. The Wii is being enjoyed by mostly adults (25+).
Clever signature text goes here.
The Motion Plus is being built into the standard Wii Remote, and the old Wii Remote is being taken off the market. The new Wii Remote Plus will be the same price as a Wii Remote is today, IIRC.
Clever signature text goes here.
So "next-generation" means "prettier graphics"?
As for the console, it does. Wii was essentially a current-gen console with a next-gen controller; 360 and PS3 were next-gen consoles with current-gen controllers. Kinect and Move add the next-gen controller, but Nintendo has announced no plans to make the next-gen console.
Nonsense. Most of Nintendo's customers are 25+.
Newsflash: Most people don't care about system specs! Only a handful of hardcore crybabies do.
What on earth are you talking about? Are you saying that they shouldn't try to make people buy their console? I really don't understand where you are coming from. You sound like a whiny little kid.
Move and Kinect will fail.
Clever signature text goes here.
Of course it won't. There's no demand, hardly any 3D TVs out there, etc. Nintendo even said they wouldn't do it.
Clever signature text goes here.
Except, of course, they completely redesigned it to make it smaller, and use only 30% the amount of power the GameCube used.
The slim PS2 wasn't considered next-gen when it came out. Nor was the Game Boy Pocket compared to the original Game Boy or the DS Lite compared to the original DS.
Who gives a crap about "more objects"?
Anyone who has compared Touhou Project shmups (where even the bullets shoot bullets) to NES-era shmups.
Kinect is just an add-on for the 360. If they had released a new console with Kinect as the control method, we might be talking.
Does the Xbox 360 S + Kinect sensor bundle count as "a new console"? True, it can also play games with traditional controls, just as Wii can play GameCube games and those Wii games that support GameCube controllers (e.g. Brawl, Mario Kart).
But Kinect is already a failure
Google News kinect failure doesn't turn up much. Can you cite further sources?