PS4: What Sony Should and Shouldn't Do

donniebaseball23 writes "As a follow-up to his piece on Xbox 720, veteran games journalist Chris Morris has put together some thoughtful advice on what Sony needs to do (and needs to avoid) to ensure that the next generation PlayStation is a success. In particular, Morris notes that Sony must 'look beyond games' to create a fully fledged entertainment hub: 'Nintendo has been pretty adamant that it has little interest in content beyond games. Microsoft seems to be rushing to embrace the set top box world. Sony, though, seems a bit confused about what it wants.'"

Comments

Future of Nintendo

[bonch]

Does anyone else have a nagging feeling that Nintendo is doomed in the next console cycle? The Wii U didn't grab the same attention that the original Wii did, and Nintendo is being attacked on two fronts--the hardcore market with the PS3 and Xbox 360, and casual gaming with the iPhone. Nintendo always had handheld sales to fall back on, but sales of the 3DS have been underwhelming, forcing an early price drop. It seems like Nintendo backed itself into a corner with the Wii, tying the company too intimately with the casual gaming market, whose gamers are fickle and prone to jump onto the next big thing, which turned out to be the iPhone.

Yes, yes, I realize people have been declaring Nintendo to be doomed since the Nintendo 64, but just because they survived previous eras doesn't mean they will survive the next one. Nintendo's stock price jumped after a rumor that Pokemon was coming to the iPhone, which turned out to be untrue. It just seems more than ever that it makes little sense for Nintendo not to become a software developer, since that is what they are most famous for in spite of their trend-setting controllers. Yet despite the novelty of the Wii remote, I still prefer the Dual Shock.

I love Nintendo's classics, but their refusal to embrace online play on the same level of their competitors as well as their reliance on nostalgia titles is frustrating. Sadly, I haven't turned on my Wii in so long that I can't even remember the last time. I think the last game I played on it was was Castlevania: Rondo of Blood, an old PC-Engine game, and only because it's Wii-exclusive.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[walshy007]

Yet despite the novelty of the Wii remote, I still prefer the Dual Shock.

Which quite ironically, is pretty much just a snes pad with one extra l/r button with a knee jerk reaction to the n64's analog stick.

Personally I find the gamecube controller to be the most ergonomic of all controllers presently released that are typical gaming controllers. I admit it takes a bit of getting used to but as adament of a snes fan as I am it does just feel more comfortable once you are used to the layout.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[Liam Pomfret]

Sales of the 3DS underwhelming? At the initial price point, before its flagship titles had been launched, sure. At the current price point, with those flagship Mario titles now released, the 3DS is absolutely *flogging* the opposition. By the beginning of December, the 3DS had already passed the 1st year sales of the original DS. What's more, the 3DS has sold more in its first 9 months than the *Wii* did in its first 9 months. The idea that the 3DS is doomed is preposterous. The way you're painting things with the "war on two fronts", and Nintendo being able to "fall back on" handheld sales, you make it seem as if Nintendo lost the home console war to the PS3 and XBox360. Just in case you missed it with the howling of "hardcore gamers" and fanboys, the Wii thoroughly flogged them. Seriously, Nintendo is in no danger at this point. I'm not saying Nintendo's done everything perfect, there's plenty of things they could have done a lot better. But their financials aren't really an issue. Nintendo made a loss, and people are making a big issue out of it, but it's really a red herring. Hell, a huge reason (if not the main reason) for that loss was the strong yen, not the sales performance of the 3DS.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[bonch]

Just in case you missed it with the howling of "hardcore gamers" and fanboys, the Wii thoroughly flogged them.

The Wii's sales began to significantly drop several years ago. Last May, sales were down 38% year-over-year and fell to record lows in Japan. Before you claim that its due to lifespan, the PS2 is still selling like hotcakes. 3DS sales rose 260% after the price drop but were still less than the DS's sales in the comparable time period a year prior (which shows you just how much of a flop the 3DS was at release). And the 3DS's battery life is still absurdly short.

I just have to disagree that Nintendo is "in no danger," especially after the lackluster reception the Wii U received, but if there's any company whose failure I'm willing to be wrong about, it's Nintendo.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[blahplusplus]

"Does anyone else have a nagging feeling that Nintendo is doomed in the next console cycle?"

Problem with nintendo is game quality. They used to be 'must have' but beginning with the cube they put out real stinkers like Starfox adventures and assault. Totally ruined one of their KEY franchises by listening to stupid miyamoto over the starfox developer (you can google it). Metroid prime 3 was nothing to write home about and Twilight princess and Skyward sword can't keep up with other action games like God of war, devil may cry.

Nintendo's game development culture is stagnating under the reigns of developers who don't really get gaming and are doing 'the same old thing'. I knew nintendo lost it once I saw what they did to starfox and definitely when twilight princess was released with huge quality problems all over the map.

Nintendo isn't learning from other games that have 'done it better' and they desperately need to do it. They used to be a 'gamers' game company now they are just stuck in doing the same things they've always done.

Nintendo sadly is not intelligent enough as a company, they keep making dumb ass mistakes. The 64 with the cartridges, the lack of games and stupid 1.5GB mini-discs instead of DVD's (making porting more costly/hard for 3rd party game companies), then the lack of hardware power with the Wii which ensured no easy way to run multi-platform games. (pure idiocy).

As far as I'm concerned Nintendo is run by idiots at this point, and the Wii was a one hit home-run which will not be repeated again if they don't fucking hardware power + software support up. The Wii suffered again from lack of software that core gamers want, that's not a good thing to have as a game company.

At this point Nintendo should seriously think about multi-platforming it's games instead of trying to lock them down and make money on hardware. Gaming audiences now game on multi-platforms and the end is nigh for locked in hardware if you want to squeeze as much money as possible out of your software. Just look at all the big software companies - always releasing games on as many platforms as possible. Nintendo can't just keep it's software on it's own machines and hope to compete it needs software developer on the inside that makes games for other platforms because it's leaving money on the table for competitors.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[AngryDeuce]

Sadly, I haven't turned on my Wii in so long that I can't even remember the last time.

Ditto. I bought my Wii a week or so after launch and had a blast playing with it for about 6 months or so, then it just got boring. Looking back on it, I think it was just the novelty of the controls that kept me interested in it even for that short amount of time. Outside of a handful of Wii exclusives (Zelda, Mario Galaxy) there was really nothing to pique my interest and keep it piqued...

Such a shame...I grew up on the NES, SNES, and original Gameboy, but they've really slipped a lot since the N64 days. Maybe I just crave more mature content than Nintendo is willing to provide? How many M rated games did they even have in the Gamecube and Wii generations? A handful?

Re:Future of Nintendo

[Azuaron]

Does anyone else have a nagging feeling that Nintendo is doomed in the next console cycle? The Wii U didn't grab the same attention that the original Wii did...

Haha. I remember just before the original Wii came out. The "attention" it garnered was "what's wrong with its name?" and everyone predicted it would bomb. I expect to be saying that same sentence a couple years after the Wii U comes out with very little modification.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[Azuaron]

You apparently haven't looked at hotcake sales for the past decade. You can't move hotcakes. You say you've got some hotcakes for sale, and people are like, "I want ice cream cake!" And then you have to explain that you mean pancakes. But now they just want ice cream cake, or frosted cake, and all you have is syrup-drenched flapjacks.

It's a sad life being a hotcake salesman, let me tell you.

All joking aside, citing current PS2 sales is hardly relevant, since the PS3 doesn't have the same kind of record: Nintendo's current generation has beaten the pants of the current generations of Microsoft and Sony, and the Wii U's reception has been similar to that of the Wii months before its release.

Pretty much, it's impossible to say how well the Wii U is going to sell, and I definitely wouldn't short Nintendo's stock quite yet. They're scrappy, scrappy fighters with a rabid fanbase that has absorbed what was left of Sega's rabid fanbase. That's a lot of rabid.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[JonySuede]

What do you have against the Genesis or the Saturn
or do you have a problem with Sonic.... wannna fight .....
Mouth rabidly foaming

Re:Future of Nintendo

[pak9rabid]

Which quite ironically, is pretty much just a snes pad with one extra l/r button with a knee jerk reaction to the n64's analog stick.

Interestingly enough, the PS controllers look like that because before Sony released the PSX, they were working with Nintendo to create a CD-ROM addon for the SNES (much like the Sega CD for the Genesis). Near the end of the project's completion, Nintendo decided to abandon the idea, when infuriated the president of Sony. Not too long afterwards, Sony came out with the PlayStation to rival Nintendo.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[Kjella]

Somehow I don't see either Apple, Sony nor Microsoft really threatening the core audience of Nintendo, it's still the console I'd buy for a kid where Super Mario Galaxy is an age-appropriate game. Backed themselves into a corner? I'd say the Wii was a huge unnatural success in markets Nintendo would never usually reach, hell it still has a lead of 30 million units sold on both the PS3 and XBox360 (95 vs 60 vs 65). If I'm trying to think age brackets I'd guess 30 vs 60 vs 60 would be more what I'm thinking. I don't think they'll make another monster hit like that, the controller was something extremely unique and innovative in 2006 to get people off their chairs and into action but with Kinect and motion analyzing cameras that market is pretty saturated and you can't expect them to pull off something like that in each generation.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[mjwx]

Does anyone else have a nagging feeling that Nintendo is doomed in the next console cycle?

Nope.

Out of all three console manufacturers, Nintendo is in the least peril. First from the Billions the Wii made, next from the strategy Nintendo is following.

Nintendo understands that consoles are casual. They always were and will continue to be for casual gamers. The most casual console of the last three generations ended up being the victors.

I love Nintendo's classics, but their refusal to embrace online play on the same level of their competitors as well as their reliance on nostalgia titles is frustrating.

This is the opposite of most peoples experience with Nintendo. Most console owners dont want to play online competitively, they play for 4 maybe 5 hours per week so they simply want a machine that starts quickly and is easy to use as well as having games which are simple and fun to play.

Of all the console manufacturers, the one I'd be worried about is Sony. Sony cant afford another loss leader like the PS3, in five years the PS3 hasn't become profitable, let alone made it into the black. It took 3 years for them to stop selling the each unit at a loss. However this is not the problem. Nintendo has shown that consoles are casual, yet I doubt Sony has learned this, they still seem intent on chasing a more dedicated gamer which simply doesn't exist in sufficient numbers on the console. A PS4 with the financials of the PS3 will probably sink the entire PlayStation division given the utter failures of the Playstation Phone, Playstation Portable and PS Vita.

Microsoft will probably release an overpowered casual console, remaining decidedly indecisive but openly willing to chase the casual dollars. If MS is good at anything it's following the leader.

As for the Wii U, yep, it may be evolutionary rather then revolutionary but at least Nintendo is trying new things. It probably wont be the smashing success that the Wii was but unlike Sony and Microsoft, Nintendo can afford for the Wii U to be lacklustre although I highly doubt it will be. It probably wont sell like the Wii did, but it will still do well.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[mjwx]

The Wii's sales began to significantly drop several years ago. Last May, sales were down 38% year-over-year and fell to record lows in Japan.

Nice attempt to frame the argument.

But the Wii has sold a lot more consoles then Sony and Microsoft. Also remember that Sony had to significantly redesign it's console to stop it haemorrhaging money and Microsoft has also redesigned it's console as well as various versions (Arcade, Elite).

Wii, 1 production model: 90 million sold.
Xbox360, 4 production models: 66 million sold.
PS3, 2 production models: 55 million sold.

Telling me that sales of the Wii has dropped is simply saying they aren't selling as phenomenally well as they were when it was released, the same thing happened with the Xbox360. This simply indicates it's reached it's saturation point, not an indication of product failure. A slow down in sales after 5 years is normal. The PS3 on the other hand did not experience the majority of its sales after it's redesign.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[Anonymous Coward]

3DS isn't being sold for a loss, despite Nintendo's claims. BoM is $10 higher than original DSPhat. Not coincidentally 3DS is being sold for exactly $10 more than the original DSPhat. Nintendo was hoping to achieve Apple margins on their hardware, but they're just not good enough to do that. The 3DS is rather ugly, requires a "circlepad" peripheral that makes it look even worse, has terrible battery life, a difficult to use parallax screen, and lacks much of the functionality or power of modern devices.

Nintendo however is still #1 at creating wondrously enjoyable games. Credit Miyamoto for creating a lasting culture and environment that doesn't require his presence on every team exactly the same way Steve Jobs did. I was getting sick of hearing about how stupid Flash games on buttonless mobile phones was going to "destroy handheld gaming consoles", despite ballooning sales year after year. I'm glad Nintendo has shut people up.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[walshy007]

The reason they abandoned it was because after looking at the fine print all game related profits where the media used was a cd would be going to sony... the profit from games was nintendo's bread and butter income.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[LordLimecat]

Does anyone else have a nagging feeling that Nintendo is doomed in the next console cycle?

No, because Nintendo has received cynicism every new console generation since the N64, and last I checked the Wii mopped the floor with the Xbox and PS3 for about 4 straight years, and followed it up by annihilating the PSP in sales with their DS.

And if I recall correctly, this was the Wii which was panned prior to its release for its bad graphics, stupid name, and awkward controllers, which turned out to be some of the reasons that everyone loved the thing.

So no, any speculation about how Nintendo is dying will be unconvincing until the numbers are actually out.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[_KiTA_]

Does anyone else have a nagging feeling that Nintendo is doomed in the next console cycle? The Wii U didn't grab the same attention that the original Wii did, and Nintendo is being attacked on two fronts--the hardcore market with the PS3 and Xbox 360, and casual gaming with the iPhone. Nintendo always had handheld sales to fall back on, but sales of the 3DS have been underwhelming, forcing an early price drop. It seems like Nintendo backed itself into a corner with the Wii, tying the company too intimately with the casual gaming market, whose gamers are fickle and prone to jump onto the next big thing, which turned out to be the iPhone.

Er, someone already corrected you about the 3DS comment, but I feel the urge to point out that the WIiU's graphics look amazing.

Here's the nightmare scenario for Microsoft and Sony, and why both of them tried to retrofit motion controls into their console:

The big joke of the last 3 generations is that Nintendo has put together under-performing hardware. You simply can't run the same amount of processing power on a Wii, Gamecube, etc as you could with comparable consoles. What they do have this generation is something the other two cannot compete with them over -- motion controls.

Now, the problem facing Sony and Microsoft is that Nintendo can now afford to put out a console with good graphics capability and keep the console very affordable. As any PC gamer knows, game graphics aren't getting any better. A sub $100 card is enough to run video games at a very respectable resolution and quality. You can bump up the AA, the filtering, the resolution by buying a bigger card, but all things considered, we've hit a plateau. What's more, the games aren't even using these advanced cards to their fullest -- and they can't. It's just too expensive to make games with these ultra quality graphics.

The WiiU will be able to play PC ported games. It will be able to feature match Microsoft and Sony, AND has features they cannot match -- high quality, 3rd generation Motion Controls and an integrated tablet for a second viewport and touch screen gaming.

So here's the question that the next generation is going to have to answer -- if the WiiU can play the same games as the PS3 / PS4 / XBox 360 / XBox Next, and can play the WiiU exclusive games... Why in the world would you ever buy the more expensive PS4/XBox Next?

Re:Future of Nintendo

[sunspot42]

I've had similar thoughts about the Wii U. Brings them to relative hardware parity with the current Sony and MS boxen. Will beat their rivals next-gen systems to market by at least a couple of years. May not move a zillion units, but should be profitable and keep Nintendo in the game.

Sony and Microsoft have bigger problems to contend with, too. For starters, developing a next-gen console that can blow the Wii U away will likely cost $5-$10 billion a piece. That's a ton of cash to sink into a very crowded space where success is certainly not assured.

Beyond the hardware there's an even bigger chicken and egg problem Sony and MS would face with a new platform. Developing games that fully exploit such a monster will tax the resources of all but the very largest developers. Will developers be willing to invest ungodly sums developing new games for bleeding edge platforms that - at least initially - will sport miniscule userbases? We're talking sinking maybe $100 million into building a single title that you can only sell to - at most - a couple million users (at least for a year or two). I just don't see how you can get the economics to work for a new console anytime in the near future. And without a library of games, why spend $300 or whatever on a new console? Hardcore gamers alone just can't support a platform by themselves - not with development costs reaching into the stratosphere - so you have to bring a bunch of casual gamers onboard fairly quickly. I just don't see that happening.

Especially not with Apple muscling its way into the gaming business with the iPhone, iPad and - soon, it would appear - their own TV. Yeah, I'm sure their devices won't have anywhere near the hardware specs of the PS4 or whatever, but it's hard to compete with a platform that's dead simple to use and where the games sell for $5 or less and you can play them anywhere you want. And if Apple has any luck as a "console" in the living room, you can bet Google will be right behind them with Android. How do you compete with free?

I wouldn't be surprised to see hardcore gaming migrate back to the PC. And if you do start to see that happening, it's game over for the consoles.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[SrLnclt]

Your link is blacked out today you insensitive clod!

Re:Future of Nintendo

[phantomfive]

Twilight princess and Skyward sword can't keep up with other action games like God of war, devil may cry.

Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword aren't action games, they are puzzle games with some fighting thrown in. And at that, they are amazing. You don't like them, which isn't the same as them not being good, as you should know.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[rylin]

You there, pimple faced 360 fan in the corner.
Yes, you with your ADHD and twitchy thumbs.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/wii/the-legend-of-zelda-twilight-princess

http://www.metacritic.com/game/wii/the-legend-of-zelda-skyward-sword

OMG THEY'RE FLOPPING!

These are adventure games, not heave heavy hardcore action games.
Take them for what they are, and they're easily best in their class.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[Khyber]

"Yes, yes, I realize people have been declaring Nintendo to be doomed since the Nintendo 64, but just because they survived previous eras doesn't mean they will survive the next one."

Considering Nintendo's LONG history, dating back to 1889, I don't think you're anywhere close to reality. History tends to repeat itself and Nintendo has yet to prove that wrong.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[caitsith01]

the WIiU's graphics look amazing.

You haven't seen a PC game in the last 5 years, I take it? Those graphics look pretty average, and I'm very confident the PS4 and next Xbox will be vastly better.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[DarwinSurvivor]

That's what noscript is for.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[DrXym]

It's not just about number of consoles sold but attach rate and other factors. Nintendo slapped a substantial markup on their console and didn't do enough to encourage 3rd parties. People weren't buying enough games (not surprising the amount of shovelware the platform enjoys) and so when sales dropped so did profits. And Nintendo has been notoriously awful on the online side of things so it couldn't profit there either from online subscriptions, movie rentals, full price games, DLC etc.

So yeah it sold more and a great many of those consoles are now gathering dust and Nintendo isn't making any money from them. I suspect the same will happen with the Wii U when that turns up but to a lesser extent. Big up front sales, 3rd party disinterest, shovelware, consumer apathy, and decline.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[Xest]

The problem is I don't think it's as simple as simple sales rates anymore, with this gen introducing services and other content too, the number of units shifted is a pretty pointless measure of success for a company and acts as little more than a number for fanboys to have a little circle jerk over.

There's a pretty fair argument that the additional profit from games (higher price point, higher attach rate) for the other two consoles, as well as the income from downloadable game addons, downloadable movies, music, avatars, and all that cruft, and profits from addons (Move/Kinect) as well as service subscriptions themselves (i.e. XBox Live) that Sony and Microsoft have probably actually made more profit than Nintendo despite the lower units sold for Microsoft and Sony's consoles.

The units sold only matters if you can monetise those units, and Nintendo has out and out failed to do so. Microsoft and Sony have in contrast had solid, and fairly succesful plans.

I don't even like Sony in the slightest, so it pains me somewhat to offer somewhat of a defence for them, but the fact is whilst Nintendo had the potential to be far and away the winner in terms of profits this console round due to their large install base, they completely failed to take advantage of that, and that, coupled with the early failure of the 3DS (even if it's picking up now) is why Nintendo has struggled financially, the Yen is certainly going to be part the problem, but not to the extent they're claiming. I like Microsoft a bit more, but recognise they still have a long way to go in terms of ethics in some areas.

It takes more than just shipping a succesful console to have a profitable games console division or business, you need to be able to shift games, and nowadays, many other types of content and subscriptions with it to boot.

I'd like to see Nintendo thrive, because IMO they're the most ethical of the console manufacturers, and so deserve to based on that, but time and time again they throw their growth away. This is fundamentally the difference between them, and say, Apple over the last few years, Nintendo has all the good will that Apple has (or at least had) and the strong massively loyal fanbase to boot, but whilst Apple has had a handful of failures too, Apple has been far more consistent in it's successes, whilst Nintendo has been painfully inconsistent. They need to maintain the kind of momentum they had when they released the Wii, but instead they keep letting it slip away time and time again. Because I do like Nintendo and think that from a moral point of view they deserve to do well, because they are fairly ethical, it genuinely does pain me to see them keep doing this. It's what I imagine having a daughter, who dates the odd brilliant guy with a phd, and high paying job, that really thinks the world of them, only to keep dumping them for countless douchebags in between must be like- you still love them, but it isn't going to stop you shaking your head in despair and having a go at them when they're being so fucking stupid.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[SimonTheSoundMan]

At least 3 PS3 models, 1st generation that supported PS2 titles, the other 1st gen that didn't, and then the slim model.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[Spad]

PC Game graphics have mostly plateaued *due* to the 360 and PS3; almost everything has to have a console version these days so there's little to no incentive to make the PC version look any better than the consoles can manage.

You only have to look at some of the PC games that *have* gone the extra mile (Witcher 2, Crysis 2 DX11, Deus Ex HR, etc) to see how much better gaming graphics can be when they're not limited by 7 year old console hardware.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[Vectormatic]

a rabid fanbase that has absorbed what was left of Sega's rabid fanbase. That's a lot of rabid.

I dont know, most of Sega's fanbase was absorbed by microsoft i think. The original xbox had a shitload of games derived from saturn/dreamcast classics, built by those same teams. I know that the dreamcast (in 2002, after its demise), was my gateway drug into the world of xbox gaming, well after i got a gamecube.

And i think that save for the die-hard zelda fanboys, nintendo has managed to alienate a good portion of its traditional fanbase with the Wii, a huge portion of the wii's succes is down to its appeal to casual gamers and there is a significant risk that most of those people are bored with their wii and wont bother with the wii-u.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[jitterman]

... Mobile gaming and Indie gaming will take its place.

I'm not entirely sure why this prediction gets made so often. I disagree, based on my personal experience. I have a PC, a Wii, an iPhone and an X360, and use them in that order (with the PC by far being the frontrunner). For my nine-year-old son you can reverse that list, and add the DSi in as second to the XBox. In neither case does the phone (nor the DSi) take precedence over all other items, nor do either of the mobiles entirely displace any of the non-mobiles.

I certainly enjoy mobile gaming, but it's the five-minute diversion factor that I use it for, whereas the PC and consoles are my five-hours-straight-gaming go-tos. The two fill different needs for me.

As to indie gaming - as long as it's superb in some manner ("To the Moon" comes to mind) that's fine. But if it's just shunning major titles to be a digital rebel, well, meh.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[tudsworth]

The Circle Pad Pro, as Nintendo have taken to calling it, is by no means required. Certain games (Ace Combat, Resident Evil Revelations, Metal Gear, Monster Hunter and many others I'm too lazy to name) use it as a second analogue stick (optional camera controls, basically), but none of them -require- it. In fact, I play Monster Hunter on my Japanese 3DS without the Circle Pad Pro; and it works just fine.
On top of this, none of the games announced to have support for the peripheral actually -require- it, yet. That might change over the next year or so, but until then, the Circle Pad Pro is far from a required add-on.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[Miamicanes]

> The big joke of the last 3 generations is that Nintendo has put together under-performing hardware

You're overlooking the 400-ton elephant wearing a pink tutu standing over in the corner -- 1080i60. As much as we'd like for it to be true, native 1080pAnything is far from universal. You'd be horrified if you saw the architectural mess inside most mass-market sub-$400 LCD TV controller ASICs -- it makes the parallelport-semi-SCSI-kludged-to-USB trainwreck that evolved with scanners look downright elegant by comparison.

The raw panels themselves can do 24p, 30p, and 60p without drama, but the brain-damaged controllers driving them were value-engineered to just kludge anything besides 720p60 the same way they always have -- they bob it (ie, they treat 1920x1080 16:9 interlaced video as 1920x540 16:9 progressive video, then resample it to 1366x768).

When presented with 1080p24, instead of just natively showing it at 24fps, they stupidly apply 3:2 pulldown to emulate 1080i60 and pass it to the same braindamaged controller. I've seen cheap LCD TVs that somehow managed to end up with weave artifacts out of 1080p30 source. And today's Walmart crap is the semi-high-end from 5 years ago.

Put another way, it's going to be at least another 10 years before you can confidently throw out 1080p60 video and expect butter-smooth artifact-free rendering on the TVs in most living rooms. With current TVs out "in the wild", modes like 1080p24 and 1080p30, let alone 1080p60, are too inconsistently-implemented to risk depending on... and true 1080i60 looks like crap on anything besides a 240hz set that uses oversampling to emulate interlace fade. So we get the least common denominator -- 1080p30 pretending to be 1080i60, that 10-20% of TVs still manage to screw up and butcher.

Of course, 720p60 works well on just about everything. Unfortunately, 720p60 isn't sexy enough for the marketing department. So instead of getting judder-free butter-smooth 1280x720 60fps video without glitches, and with enough filtering to be almost indistinguishable from real-life, we end up with 1080i60 video that looks like crap.

That's the sad truth. 720p60 isn't good enough for the marketing department, 1080i60 rendered AS 1080i60 looks like crap on most TVs. 1080p60 is a fantasy in 94% of the homes in America, 1080p24 is badly-implemented in at least a quarter of the TVs out there, and 5-10% somehow manage to even screw up 1080p30 encoded as fake 1080i60.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[scot4875]

The Gamecube was far more powerful than the PS2. Not that it matters, but please stop repeating this myth that came from Sony releasing inflated, theoretical "polygon rendering" numbers of 75 million (unlit, untextured, single-pixel, pre-transformed triangle strips) compared to Nintendo's conservative 10-12 million lighted, multi-textured, anti-aliased polygons that would be used in a real-world situation. It was on roughly equal footing with the original XBox, and in many ways was a much more efficient platform tailored for games, whereas the XBox was just a bunch of slightly more powerful generic PC hardware stuffed in a box.

Even if you don't believe the numbers, just look at the games. Gamecube games looked great, while PS2 games looked like washed out, jaggy messes. Metroid Prime and Resident Evil 4 were gorgeous games on the 'Cube, and Capcom even had to pre-render several scenes when they backported RE4 to the PS2 because it just didn't have the muscle to do it.

--Jeremy

Re:Future of Nintendo

[Miamicanes]

Oh... just to add... in case anybody is wondering why interlacing is a NEW problem, it's because old videogames and home computers tricked TVs into scanning EVERY field as if it were an "odd" field, instead of scanning odd fields, then even fields. That's why they had black scanline artifacts between every other row of pixels. In effect, they tricked CRT TVs into pseudo-progressive 60fps mode by scanning the same field over and over again & leaving the even field's scanlines dark, instead of alternating between the odd and even fields (refreshing each 30 times per second).

There's a bigger problem lurking with "true" HD video -- 50 & 60 fps isn't fast enough to climb out of the "Uncanny Valley". It turns out, the white papers written back in the 80s and 90s were biased by the physical behavior of film and CRT displays, and made lots of assumptions that fall apart when you're talking about an inherently progressive display like a LCD, and source video that's basically rendered to digital film of infinite sensitivity one frame of infinitely-short duration at a time. It turns out, motion blur encodes a hell of a lot of extra visual information into each frame that naive attempts to apply Nyquist to synthetic video content fail to appreciate.

The PC videocard industry and gaming industry started to become painfully aware of the problem about 10 years ago, and they're still working on it. The current band-aid is to simulate motion-blur... but motion blur itself becomes visually-tedious after a while.

Between glasses-free 3D and refresh rates fast enough to make motion-blur unnecessary, there's still plenty of room for future advancement in videogame and TV technology. We have a long, long way to go before you'll be able to dress up a monitor like a fake window & feel like you're looking outside at a real scene... made longer by the fact that the advancements needed to take videogames to this level go WAY beyond what mass-market consumers are likely to care about, much less demand, for TV-watching purposes. This means the quantum leap that occurred over the past 10 years is more of a fluke than anything, and isn't likely to be sustainable in the long run.

At some point, the cost burden is going to shift from mass-market consumers subsidizing the technology through billions of general TV sales back to mere millions of high-end gamers driving the market for outrageously expensive (compared to what you'd pay for even an *expensive* TV at Wal Mart) cutting-edge hardware. Think: the gigantic cost leap seen today when you go from 1920x1080 to any higher res (like 2560x1920), but even worse.

Re:Future of Nintendo

[Miamicanes]

Actually, I made a slight typo. I've seen cheap LCD TVs that, given synthetic 30fps 1920x1080 content presented to the TV *as* genuine 1080p30 via HDMI, will *still* produce weave artifacts, because internally one part of the TV's own LCD controller pipeline is kludging it to fake 1080i60.

In fact, it gets even worse. My parents have a 19" LCD TV from Wal Mart in their kitchen whose video pipeline appears to be crudely weaving 1080p30 into 1080i60, then brutally bobbing it down to 1920x540 before resizing it to 1366x768 (as opposed to just resizing each frame from 1920x1080 down to 1366x768). It's almost as if the ASICs were designed by somebody who understood 1080i60 well, then handed off to summer interns who "kind of" understood 720p60, but had no real concept of what the other video modes actually were, and who just crudely stapled everything else on top of the chips' 1080i60 support.

It should be modular.

[Kenja]

It should be modular and have upgrade slots following ISO standard interfaces. Perhaps give the option of one or many Intel or AMD cpus and have different graphic options from both NVidia and ATI. Oh, and upgradeable storage & memory.

Re:It should be modular.

[Xeranar]

Simple reasons for why PCs can't compete with consoles (and I am a firm PC gamer):

Price - The cost of manufacturing the mainboards of all three of the consoles is somewhere around 150-250 USD, thus they only need a power supply and a DVD drive to function beyond that. A PC requires a motherboard, CPU, video card, and independent memory not to mention a hard drive. All of that even at the cheapest level is around 200 USD and still lacks an OS.

OS - Consoles run a scaled down consistent OS that usually shuts down when the game runs or minimalizes to a point that only a shell is on. The PC will keep multiple programs open and running in the background eating into performance. This is where the console looks great compared to PCs because they can't truly get bogged down at the OS level.

Development costs: AAA titles are about the same but less than top-tier titles cost less on the console and can sell far more by just being available. The PC goes from AAA to AAA in the market, with little room for lesser than's. So development has shifted towards consoles where the money is and the profit flows in.

All and all both articles show that the console market is maturing and until smartphones become so powerful that a baseline is set for them to compete it looks like consoles will be with us for at least another 1-3 generations.

Re:It should be modular.

[artor3]

Price is true, and the scaled down OS is true for the first couple years after the consoles release (after which the increasing power of modern PCs overwhelms the benefits of a leaner OS).

But development costs? The advantage is clearly with the PC. Sure, it might be cheaper to target one platform, but you have to pay Microsoft or Sony for the privilege of being on their console. There's a reason why many AAA PC games are still $50, while AAA console games are uniformly $60. And for indie games. the market on Steam is absolutely booming, so I don't know where you got this notion that AAA titles are the only ones that can make it on PC.

Re:It should be modular.

[msauve]

Whoosh.

Re:It should be modular.

[Xeranar]

The top 4 selling games for the Xbox 360 outsold all but 1 PC title ever. Wii sold 7 titles more than any PC title ever. PS2 sold 1 and PS3 has sold none more than any PC title ever. (For Reference the best selling PC game of All-time I could find was Sims 3 at 16M copies ) I'm being fair here but the market seems to have spoken that just in current consoles they have PC sales beat hand down. PC gaming is really a mixture of AAA game houses like Blizzard, EA, and Ubisoft and much smaller start-ups. It has few middle-sized designers producing for it because they can't afford to invest without a substantial guarantee of return. Consoles offer that. It's why I point out development cost, when you're getting down to indie games where you need less than 25-50 people to develop one of reasonable quality PCs really shine, but they have a huge gap in size and that's where consoles are bread and butter winners because a good ship for a Wii game is a million units while a good ship for a PC game is 100,000. It's a different set of logistics all together.

As for pricing, 60 bucks is being squeezed out of console players because the distribution system is controlled by a handful of players. Since department stores and discount stores are largely out of it (barring Wal-Mart) gamers get their games in physical locations from less than 3-4 outlets in a given location. They've monopolized the system and have justified the increase in price for profit. PC games are even more limited physically but tend to have a greater expanse online and with the intro of Steam and other competing systems it keeps the price in check.

As for the main point: Unified architecture means a designer has a target. If a game runs smoothly on a PC with ultra-high-end equipment that's wonderful, how does it play on a 4 year old rig with an AMD Dual-core Athlon II and a x800 video card? They don't have to prepare for multiple dynamics within a video card or CPU or even operating system variances. They simply have to write a game that will be using a PowerPC chip and an ATI or Nvidia custom video chip with a certain amount of Ram. It's the real advantage consoles have and its why every time they fiddle around with a power upgrade option it causes an uproar because usually it's expensive and it means leaving a relatively large portion of users behind. Think of the Sega CD or 32X. They were both perfect examples of upgrading the existing system with new technology and ultimately both failed because they were held back by older architecture and price. The speed we're seeing now though shouldn't be an issue to offer backwards compatibility through emulation for everything though so the need to be "upgradable" is really a limited concept.

Re:It should be modular.

[hedwards]

Precisely, often times you really need to use the hardware that the title screen shows otherwise it won't work right. I remember an article awhile back where they did some analysis of poor performance on, IIRC it was AMD GPUs, and they found that what was going on was that the hardware didn't deal well with tessellations and water, but that the developers had put water everywhere even when it couldn't be seen because it was under ground and included tessellations on surfaces even when there was no reason to do so. Had the devs bothered to do any optimization at all, the game should have run just fine on those cards, but they didn't and performance sucked as a result.

Or...

[betterunixthanunix]

Knowing Sony, it will come with a module that lets them remotely disable pieces of hardware.

Rule #1:

[MoldySpore]

Don't advertise features that you may later remove completely

While I was not one of the ones who missed the OtherOS feature, for some it was a huge deal. I would hope the uproar over losing this option will teach Sony not to include and make light of large feature sets that they wind up removing later, after the fact. Regardless of what that feature may or may not be, I don't think it is cool to remove stuff that originally came with the system. I don't think anyone wants to see features disappear from a piece of hardware they own just because they want to stay up to date with the latest firmware/updates, and that doesn't just go for PS4 either.

Re:Rule #1:

[freman]

Too late, it doesn't matter if the PS4 literally was required to live* I wouldn't buy it because I was one that does miss the OtherOS feature and did pay a premium ($750ish) to get a console (my first since the sega megadrive (genesis for some) with the feature.

Sony have burned some customers forever - I'll never be back and even try avoid them in other enterprises (seen many sony pictures lately?)

* feature pending removal.

Re:Rule #1:

[JoeMerchant]

I think PS4 will need to be a total "reinvention" of the device - first thing they need to do is look at all the people who didn't buy PS3s and figure out how to appeal to them. Anybody who did buy a PS3 (myself included) is likely pissed off enough with them to avoid the PS4 at any price. I don't care to think about the hours I sunk into "OtherOS" getting it setup and working, or the hours I have spent waiting 10+ minutes for an "update" that's blocking me from accessing the features I've already bought, paid for, and was happily using the day before.

I bought the PS3 for the "cheap" BluRay drive, I thought I wanted the media center features, but a WDTV does that better for less money, I thought I wanted the games, and I do have 2 or 3 that at least somebody in the family likes once in awhile, but nothing new for a long time. The first generation was power hungry and mine had horribly LOUD fans, it died with the YLOD, after awhile we bought a slim to get access to the games and BluRay drive again, the slim's drive broke after a very short time, so we're just using the games on the hard drive and Netflix watch it now.

For me, console game machines are dead. Maybe I wasn't the target market, I had never owned a console gaming machine before, I always opted for the general purpose computer instead, starting with the Atari 800.

Two words: backward compatibility

[SuhlScroll]

I don't care what kind of hardware or architecture they adopt, but the damn thing better well play all my PS3 games which I have spent A LOT of money on. It was bad enough going to the XBOX 360 and finding out not all my titles were compatible ... there's enough horsepower in the hardware today to at least guarantee that older titles can run in some emulation mode, even in a different hardware family.

Re:Two words: backward compatibility

[Junta]

I would add to that restore PS2 compatibility.

If they stick to a Cell design, they could almost certainly do it. If they deviate (seems likely, IBM and Toshiba are pretty well out of the game, though a process shrunk Cell 2 may still provide some boost, but even that design is already years old) that's going to be nearly impossible. Cross-arch emulation around the same generation is nearly impossible to do right.

Re:Two words: backward compatibility

[jonwil]

UltraHLE simulated the N64 hardware by looking for specific known functions for graphics rendering and stuff and patching them to call directly to vaguely compatible x86 versions of those functions.

Re:Two words: backward compatibility

[deek]

The PS3 cell has 24 cores? You'll have to explain that one to me. I thought the PS3 had 1 PPU (with two cores), and 7 SPUs . That should be the equivalent of 9 cores, shouldn't it?

Re:Two words: backward compatibility

[JDeane]

Ummm no, just no on so many levels....

The PS3 has 1 Cell Broadband Engine with is a single CPU based on the PPC CPU, and 7 SPU's the 8th SPU is disabled at manufacture to increase yields. They run a tests on the chip, notice one SPU is bad, isolate it then disable it. If all of them are good they disable one.

Only 6 SPU's are usable to programs as the 7th SPU is reserved for the OS's Hypervisor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PS3_Hardware

(To access Wikipedia just refresh the page when you see the SOPA thing and hit stop before the redirect.)

Shouldn't Do Obviously

[A12m0v]

Never release another console for $599. How can posters here forget the real problem the PS3 had, especially at launch?

Re:Shouldn't Do Obviously

[mollymoo]

The PS3 does 3D already.

keyboard and mouse

[ThorGod]

Include a way to hook up a keyboard and mouse, out of the box.

Re:keyboard and mouse

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

You mean like two USB ports located conveniently on the front?

Customer Service

[Anonymous Coward]

Sony should remember it is there to provide customers with what they want and are willing to pay for, rather than there to wage war on them.

How about better warranties? Honest warranties.

[VinylRecords]

Sony Corp. (SNE)â(TM)s Kazuo Hirai said the PlayStation 3 console will have a 10-year lifespan, suggesting the 5-year-old video-game player wonâ(TM)t be replaced soon.

How is it that Kaz Hirai says that Sony will be supporting the PS3 as a ten year device but they only allowed the consumers to purchase one year warranties when the system launched? If they truly believed that people would be playing the PS3 for another ten years they why is there no warranty that covers at least ten years of use? If I purchase a game system that is going to be supported with ten years of software then why is SONY not confident that the hardware will hold up for ten years and they'll only give out a warranty that covers one or two years at most?

Of course the reason why is obvious. Launch models are not built to last. The differences between launch models and slim models are numerous. I purchased five launch PS3s, the hardware backwards compatible models, and they all died within three years. The cost of replacing just one out of warranty PS3? Over $200 per unit through Sony customer support. When Sony is not even confident in the ten year life expectancy of a launch product it was rather aggravating when I read from the president that they saw the consoles as "ten year" products.

And honestly the hardware failures that I had with launch PS3s were basically pleasant experiences compared to the constant nightmares I had with 360 units suffering the RROD. MS sent me two refurbished launch 360s and those both red ringed within a week. It was another few weeks before people started to realize that something was very wrong with 360 hardware.

If MS and SONY are building these devices for 7-10 year cycles then allow us to purchase warranties to cover the devices during those years. Or at least lower the price of a repair. I cannot possibly see how it is respectful to a consumer to demand $200 to fix a defective unit on top of the $500-$600 that it cost at retail to initially purchase the device.

Re:How about better warranties? Honest warranties.

[Hadlock]

You're buying a piece of consumer electronics. It's not ruggedized military hardware, despite what the commercials might lead you to believe. It doesn't even have a real metal case, for goodness sake.
 
2 years is generous for bleeding edge technology. You can't even get a 10 year factory warranty from asian car makers. Just buy a 10 year warranty through a third party. The cost of a 10 year warranty for a $600 console would probably cost you $400.
 
If you wanted a launch PS3 with 10-year durable components, you should have expected to pay $1200 or more, to be honest. You get what you pay for.
 
  Cheap. Quality. Durable. Pick any two.

Re:How about better warranties? Honest warranties.

[xero314]

You can buy ten years of warranty on a PS3 (at least in the USA, can't speak for others). The first year comes free with the purchase of the console. The second year has a variable cost depending on when you buy it and you don't need to purchase it until you are concerned about the life of the console or the console actually breaks. If you purchase it before it breaks, the cost is exactly the same as the current console cost minus the current trade in value. This is often about $100. If you wait until it break, then it's the same as the current cost of a new console. Both options extend your warranty for one year, and you can repeat this process as long as you would like. My warranty has so far cost around $150 to keep my console running for 4 years, with no sign on costing more before the PS4 is released. Mind you my PS2 warranty cost me nothing beyond the original cost and that was a launch system that is still running to this day.

Oh, and if you actually buy extended warranties on electronics you are make a poor economic decision. People would not sell extended warranties if it was not profitable for them to do so. No one sells an extended warranty that is in your favor.

Be fair to their g-d customers

[forgottenusername]

1) Allow all discs to play on ps4 - at least ps2+ps3. People don't want to spend a ton of money on a new console & invalidate all their past purchases which are still quite playable, or jack around with changing out consoles all the time. It's a hassle to unplug/replug for most people.

2) Quit removing features because of your paranoia - the OtherOS debacle should have gotten some people fired. Either leave it in there or never put it in there.

3) Fix your fuggin security for reals. From what I've heard from my friends who work at Sony, they've just patched up a few weak spots that were vulnerable but their overall model is totally lacking. It's prevented me from re-upping subscription to a few games (like Vanguard) just because I don't want to trust them with their CC info.

More of a general sony point but still.

4) Allow for more mods / customization. I briefly used ps3 as HTPC but it's so limited in the formats it supports, ways of mounting to media etc it's just more of a hassle than its worth. I ended up going with xbmc on a PC.

5) Motion control is the future. Get better at it. The ps3 move is questionable; crappy titles, camera is a hassle in non-optimal light situations etc. For instance, Fight Night: Lights Out is a really good game, but it's totally ruined by subpar headtracking even in optimal light situations.

A few minor points;

- USB controllers should charge from pretty much any USB power source. My ps3 controllers are super picky for some reason.

- Use standardized friggin power button. It's incredibly ridiculous that you have to push the PS button on a controller to power the unit on, or push the button in the front. Used to drive me crazy when I drove it with harmony remote

Re:Be fair to their g-d customers

[Darkness404]

I agree with all points except for number 5. Motion control simply is not the future. There is no way for it not to be gimmicky. Even in games like Skyward Sword which made good use of motion controls the game still felt like they were tacked on. There really aren't any games out there that give motion controls justice. At the end of the day, I don't want to flail my arms around.

Sony needs to make it a priority to eliminate loading times. They were acceptable back in 1994 when the PS1 first was released, but not today. There is no way I can be immersed in a game and remain immersed if I hit a loading screen. They are simply unacceptable in 2012. We live in a world where 32 GB of data can fit in an area smaller than a fingernail and is affordable. Where the average HDD of a new computer holds more storage than all of my previous computers combined. Surely there has to be some way to finally eliminate loading times, and the sooner the better. Few advancements in technology would have such a quick net positive for a console than a console and games with no load times.

How about the company not being a giant douche.

[Dr Max]

How about not suing the customers, and allowing an other OS to be installed for the life of the product not just the first 6 months.

Don't bother with Sony

[Brain-Fu]

Sony released audio CDs that put rootkits on consumer's PCs, without informing them. After being sued for this, they did it again. They also failed their due diligence on security, causing their entire client base to have private data stolen. Combine this with their habit of selling features and then subsequently removing those very features, and I don't understand why *anybody* buys products form Sony.

I will never trust Sony again.

Make it easy for devs

[AHuxley]

1. Less cpu numbers but faster - Todays developers can only just get 2 cores working on average for non video/math problems - no need to add lots of unused cores.
2. Better gpu - fast, no hardware bottlenecks to save a few cents. Get as much bright moving images from the math skills of developers up on the display within the 1080p range.
3. Embrace Linux - if some person makes their generations Tetris, Myst/HyperCard, bird game - the PR glow is a net positive - give the game away with every unit shipped/sold game and be nice to the team/person who used your product to show it to the world. Support them.
4. Make it not hard to code with your product after buying into the system - make it easy to make great looking games early on.
5. Don't turn stuff off via the magic of networking.
6. Education - with cheap open hardware products allowing people to build basic kits, projects and learn about hardware, software - why not allow impressionable young minds do the same with add on devices while looking at the word SONY for the length of the lesson a few times every week. Give free software to the teachers and help them with lesson plans after they buy in big.
Let them buy 'homework' hardware and make family, friends and siblings look at the word SONY over weekends and holidays for hours.
7. More education - target universities with open code and deep hardware options. With the extra hardware and software your brand with win over a smart new generation - for free. The extra quality/speed of SONY based gpu/cpu robotics let that .edu WIN big at robot 'games'
Crush the teams that show up with buggy code after reverse engineering children's toys.
8. Secure your networks.

Re:Make it easy for devs

[bfree]

3. Embrace Linux - if some person makes their generations Tetris, Myst/HyperCard, bird game - the PR glow is a net positive - give the game away with every unit shipped/sold game and be nice to the team/person who used your product to show it to the world. Support them.

I think they would have to do something like make a >$100m donation to the FSF and put >$10b in some sort of FSF approved escrow before that strategy will get them anywhere. If they announced Linux support on the PS4 I would imagine that any positive noises would be drowned out by a million people crying out something along the lines of "fool me once ... you won't fool me again".

If they try this, I hope that the first journalist who is in the presence of a Sony representative making any claims about Linux support has a copy of the email from Sony around the time of the Slim release which proclaimed

SCE is committed to continue the support for previously sold models that have the "Install Other OS" feature and that this feature will not be disabled in future firmware releases

That mail was sent 40 days before they announced they were disabling OtherOS or 42 days before Sony Fools Day when they actually released the "update" to do so. I'd hope the journalist would simply ask "you do know today isn't April 1st right?" unless of course it is, in which case they can just crack up laughing and promise "to write a great piece about how Sony has a sense of humour and won't be allowing any other OS on their consoles after learning their lesson when they lied to their customers the last time".

Re:Make it easy for devs

[shentino]

Makes you wonder why that mass email never made it into court during the class action lawsuit.

Lets fix things since 1994...

[Darkness404]

Here are a few things that I'd like fixed:

Get rid of load times. If I'm playing a game where I'm supposed to be immersed in it, a loading screen just kills the idea that you are part of the game. This isn't 1994 anymore.

Get rid of region locking on everything. Including digital downloads. There's no reason why I shouldn't be able to enjoy a game even if it isn't translated into my language or "localized". Similarly, there should be some way to gift digital downloads seamlessly between regions.

Stop removing features. Updates are supposed to /add/ features, not remove them.

Seamless emulation between consoles. Not having proper PS2 emulation I'm sure is a contributing factor to why the PS3 finished in third. When the PS2 basically defined the previous generation, it isn't a great idea to decide to make your next generation console compatible with it.

Better build quality. No red ring of death, yellow light of death, or an overheating GPU like the Wii.

Couple of suggestions

[tompaulco]

I have a couple of suggestions:
1. Don't EOL the dual shock controller. I don't mind if other people like using the wand type controller, but I find it extremely difficult to control the game with wand type controllers.
2. Make games backwards compatible. They advertised that PS3 would be able to play PS2 games, but it doesn't. The PS4 should be able to play previous PS games.
3. Make games that you don't have to download extra cost items to play.
4. Makes games that have a rich single player experience and don't require you to have to play online with other people.

Re:Nintendo profits have been down for years

[Belial6]

Because as great as an android phones and tablets are, they are crappy for 99% of the games out there. Phones and tablets are pretty much only replacements for hand held consoles for the people that wouldn't have bought a hand held console anyway. Maybe when Android has gamepad support built in (I believe that is ics) AND tablet, phone and software developers start supporting it heavily, then maybe it would be a replacement. Today it is not.

There are plenty of good games on the Wii. At least as many as on other platforms. For Christmas, we got an Xbox 360 + Kinect. We hooked it up, appreciated how much fun it was for about a 1/2 hour, and then spent the next 3 hours playing Fortune Street on the Wii.

It is hard to say what will happen with the next generation of systems. A faster Wii with HDMI and 1080p would make up for any deficiencies that the Wii is currently showing, and depending on how fast, it could easily surpass the 360 and PS3. When Sony and MS come out with their next consoles, the public may be in the same position that they were in with the current systems. An inexpensive system with lots of fun games, or an expensive system that may look a little prettier, but doesn't have anything special to offer.

720 is a bad name

[locopuyo]

"720" reaks of inferiority when everything is in 1080p, It was named "Xbox 360" because Xbox 2 sounded inferior to Playstation 3. The same will go for the next Xbox. They will not call it Xbox 3 and they will not call it Xbox 720. I'm thinking either Xbox 1080 or Xbox 3D. Probably not Xbox 420.

Re:Disagree.

[Zeroedout]

It works fine if you set it up correctly:

1. Make sure you're not too far away, play with the distances.
2. If the sensor bar is above your tv or below, make sure the right option is set in the options menu of the Wii OS.
3. Make sure the sensor bar is dead centre.

Note that excessively bright lights can interfere, so try different things out that work for you. I had to move my couch closer to the TV as it's regular position wouldn't give me accuracy I desire.

Re:Disagree.

[joetainment]

I second that. Wii works great for FPS games. Even if it's not as good as a mouse and keyboard, it's better than analog sticks, (since you can instantly point to where you want without overshooting) and it's *way* more fun. There's something about holding and pointing the Wiimote, as if it is a gun, that makes the experience far more gratifying. It made Golden Eye fantastic. Also, I've replayed Quake and Doom on the Wii Homebrew channel, and I've had much more fun than I did playing them the first time on PC.

Obviously it's very subjective and personal, but if you haven't tried it, it's definitely worth a shot.

Re:Nintendo profits have been down for years

[Anonymous Coward]

Are there any good games for the Wii? I own one but have probably spent less than 4 hours playing on it.

Not sure if trolling, but let me list a few;
The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword
Metroid Prime Trilogy
Metroid: Other M
Super Mario Galaxy 1 and 2
Zack & Wiki: Quest for Barbaros' Treasure
Rayman Origins
WarioWare: Smooth Moves
All the Mario Parties
Resident Evil 4
Donkey Kong Country Returns
Goldeneye 007
Kirbys Return to Dreamland
Madworld
Muramasa: The Demon Blade
New Super Mario Bros
No More Heroes 1/2

And that's only the stuff I could think off the the top of my head.

Nintendo, ethics, and chicken and egg cases

[tepples]

I'd like to see Nintendo thrive, because IMO they're the most ethical of the console manufacturers

Ethical including discriminating against startups and home-based family businesses? (source) How is a new video game development company supposed to become established in the video game industry in the first place? At least Microsoft has Xbox Live Indie Games, whose barrier to entry isn't any higher than, say, iOS development.

Re:Nintendo, ethics, and chicken and egg cases

[tlhIngan]

Ethical including discriminating against startups and home-based family businesses? (source) How is a new video game development company supposed to become established in the video game industry in the first place? At least Microsoft has Xbox Live Indie Games, whose barrier to entry isn't any higher than, say, iOS development.

Newsflash - if you want to sell a game on Xbox360 or PS3, you have to agree to terms very similar to that! (Wii SDK is cheaper at $5000 or so, while PS3 and Xbox360 is over $10,000, each.). Console development ain't cheap.

As for "new game companies" - most are started by veterans in the industry - turnover is huge, and most only stay for a year or two before leaving for another company. So there's a lot of inbreeding.

The only thing Microsoft has is it's the only console manufacturer offering (limited) homebrew development (Xbox Live Indie Arcade). Sony used too, then got scared away (i.e., OtherOS). And yes, they're limited.

Newbies wanting to "break in" have to cut their teeth first. Primary way in the past is via the PC (where indie gaming is huge, and big game companies are slowly departing). Get out a good game and you'd be approached. Do it near the end of a cycle and you can be lavished with all sorts of incentives as maufacturers want to get a wide range of launch games in.

These days, you still have the very popular PC option. But you also have the iOS option (and Apple's policies are far more lenient than Sony, Microsoft OR Nintendo's - the approval process for the console is far more arbitrary, harsh and secretive (you rarely hear of rejected games)). Android's a possibility as well.

Have you played iOS games?

[SuperKendall]

The problem with the iOS option is that an iOS device has no buttons other than Quit (or Quit, Back, and Menu on Android), and attempting to simulate buttons (e.g. Jump or Fire) with the touch screen results in frustration when the player can't tell where on the on-screen virtual buttons his thumbs are located.

That is simply not at all true, from a number of angles.

First, it's important that game CONTROL buttons be fairly huge in area so that it doesn't matter if your fingers or thumb shifts slightly. But buttons that don't matter to gameplay, like Quit or Menu can be out of the way and easy to press on demand. It's still true that a touchscreen display has an infinite number of buttons - not one.

Also, you are totally underestimating how much control value you can get from a touchscreen. Consider the game Infinity Blade, hugely popular on the iPad - there you have block, dodge left/right, and something like six possible attacks all issued from gestures and on-screen controls. That game is not frustrating at all, but simply fun to play - because just like game maker take into account what buttons can or should do, good game developers working with a touch screen adapt for that interface with controls that make sense.

Re:Simulating buttons with a touch screen

[scot4875]

Tepples, if you really want to get into game development, just do it. Nothing is stopping you. Nintendo isn't stopping you. Microsoft isn't stopping you. Inability to have 4-player simultaneous play on a singe PC isn't stopping you. Being unable to simulate buttons with a touch screen isn't stopping you. These are all excuses.

Just do it. Put a link to what you've done in your sig and people will check it out. If you're any good, somebody will notice and you'll make some money at it. But quit with the whining about restrictions about what you can and can't do on platform X. Pick a platform and find a way to do something interesting given the limitations of the platform.

--Jeremy

Most important

[fyngyrz]

Microsoft and Sony need to keep in mind I've spent a lot of money on media for the older systems; compatibility makes me buy, lack of it makes me look at the other system. So of course I have an original PS3, which is highly compatible with the PS2. I eventually bought a 360, but it was literally years after release (and I'm still pissed it won't run Mechassault... and I *still* have an original XBox hooked up so I can play those games.)

If they don't care about the money I've invested already... then I don't really care about their new hotness. It's really just that simple. It's not like I don't have other things to do, or other choices I can make. My lady and I just had an interesting conversation about all the cool stuff that competes for our attention these days. No big loss if the 720 or ps4 or whatever doesn't get to join the clamor.