Topic: Dedicated Nintendo Hardware, the NX, in Development, New Membership Service Also in the Works

[broodwars]

I still don't understand why everyone wants Nintendo to have just ONE console, instead of one portable and one home.

Because Nintendo has proven over the years that they're not capable of supporting a console & handheld at the same time, and they refuse to expand their operations to be able to do so, especially when it comes to making titles for the Western markets.  Since they can't handle putting out software on 2 devices and since Japan refuses to support console gaming, Nintendo might as well put out a hybrid.

If touchscreens are gimmicks then what does that make the DS, Vita, and smartphones/tablets?

Handhelds, which have a completely different set of requirements than console experiences do. Nintendo put out the Wii U hoping to fool the handheld-only Japanese audience into buying it just because it looked like a handheld. Obviously, that didn't work out very well.

[Ian Sane]

I use gimmick in the sense that the controller is the selling feature, like with the Wii.  With the Wii and Wii U it's a trade-off.  You the consumer miss out on any of the benefits the competition's superior hardware provides but instead get the benefits of unique controller features.  Controller vs. specs.

I don't want that.  The videogame market during the Wii U's lifetime has not wanted that.  If the NX is the same thing it will fail.  Nintendo makes the best first party games of anyone.  The only real difference between Sony and MS is their first party exclusives.  Ironically that's a scenario where Nintendo would do really well with and yet for some idiotic reason they completely avoid that.  Nope, it's Nintendo's goofy controller and their first party games vs. Sony and Microsoft's first party games and 99% of all other console videogames being made.  It's always Nintendo vs. everyone else and no company does well in that comparison.  The whole strategy is stupid and really arrogant.  Make something normal, try to get the third parties back, and then it's Mario and Zelda vs. Uncharted and Halo.  That's a way more favourable comparison.

[marvel_moviefan_2012]

I use gimmick in the sense that the controller is the selling feature, like with the Wii.  With the Wii and Wii U it's a trade-off.  You the consumer miss out on any of the benefits the competition's superior hardware provides but instead get the benefits of unique controller features.  Controller vs. specs.

I don't want that.  The videogame market during the Wii U's lifetime has not wanted that.  If the NX is the same thing it will fail.  Nintendo makes the best first party games of anyone.  The only real difference between Sony and MS is their first party exclusives.  Ironically that's a scenario where Nintendo would do really well with and yet for some idiotic reason they completely avoid that.  Nope, it's Nintendo's goofy controller and their first party games vs. Sony and Microsoft's first party games and 99% of all other console videogames being made.  It's always Nintendo vs. everyone else and no company does well in that comparison.  The whole strategy is stupid and really arrogant.  Make something normal, try to get the third parties back, and then it's Mario and Zelda vs. Uncharted and Halo.  That's a way more favourable comparison.

Normally I agree with Ian because yeah I want that too. BUT in all fairness Nintendo did not lose 3rd parties because they gimped their hardware, that problem goes all the way back to the NES/Famicom days. As a company nothing has changed. They honestly think their hardware exists exclusively to serve their purpose. I am starting to wonder if that was their plan all along, to prove they could carry a system single handedly and say piss off to everyone else. All the companies they were competing with both hardware and software wise are pretty much gone these days. Some how they do weird things and still manage to make enough money to stick around.

[Mop it up]

Nintendo's talked before about using smart phone stuff to try and entice people to check out their games and systems, so it isn't a surprise to see them moving forward with that idea. It's of no interest to me of course, but it could be a good move for their business.

As for the whole NX thing, I don't think I like the sound of it, but it's also very vague. There's a lot of details missing so I'll just have to wait and see where that goes.

[Adrock]

Nintendo is never getting consistent third party support ever again. We all should have accepted a long time ago. The only reason Nintendo ever had third party support during the NES and SNES years was due to having a near-monopoly. I'm baffled that Nintendo got away with all of the anti-competitive **** it pulled. Nintendo told third parties how many games they could release, and that certain games couldn't be released on non-Nintendo hardware. It's really easy keeping all that support when you're preventing competitors from getting a foot in the door. Eventually, Nintendo did just that by making a series of poor choices.

The only way Nintendo gets more than an occasional bone from third parties is to start paying for support which is a terrible business model. There's a reason why Microsoft hasn't made any money on Xbox. It's the same reason why Nintendo is now worth more than entirety of Sony. I would love better third party support, but I'm not going to pretend like I don't know what's going on. The problem in this industry is that no one is meeting in the middle. Third parties want hardware manufacturers to pay them, partially in an effort to soften the blow for their terrible decisions. And they're still failing. This is not sustainable. It's easy as consumers to cover our eyes and pretend it isn't our problem, but it is. We're all just playing limbo wondering who's going to fall first.

[Ian Sane]

Nintendo is never getting consistent third party support ever again. We all should have accepted a long time ago.

Not an excuse to not try.  The only time since the N64 I feel Nintendo didn't completely sabotage third party support with idiotic hardware restrictions was the Gamecube and oddly enough the third party started to actually improve that gen (and they still partially sabotaged it with their idiotic rejection of online gaming).  Nintendo makes no legitimate effort to attract third party support so they never do.  And I don't mean buying support, I mean just simply offering a platform where third parties don't have to jump through hoops or compromise their games or make exclusives because multi-platform releases are technologically impossible.  Nintendo does not make any legitimate effort to improve the situation.  Hopeless?  Bullshit.  That's a self-fulfilling prophecy.  Let them make a real effort, watch it fail, and then we can talk about it being hopeless.

[Nile Boogie Returns]

Now that I've had my coffee, let me expound upon what I'm sure this is.

• NX is clearly that cross platform idea that has been in the works since 2012 if not earlier.
• I'm expecting a "Chromcast-esq" dongle and docking station for home use.
• Nintendo will create an android based tablet that uses the aforementioned dongle and dock
• VR is "the next big thing" so Nintendo won't do that but "4k AR" is likely.
• Specs wise on par with PS4 now as it would 5 year old tech by then.
• Pro Controller Compatible since perfection can't be surpassed.
• Wii U ain't dead...but damn if Zelda U is somehow delayed to 2016...
• Funky Wii U and 3DS compatibility. IE has ads game slot on tablet Gamepad is bottom screen.
• EA will pledge "godlike" support, will  port Mass Effect 2 and Madden 2015 then vanish.
• We will all buy it and complain that its not "Nintendo enough"
• $399.95 Launches Spring 2017 ( Nov.18th 2017 )
• Amiibo Next. Has "AR" aspect built it. Prints Money, Gets Bitches

Fairly grounded expectations of what will surly be praised as groundbreaking and underwhelming average by the same websites within a 12month span.

[Shaymin]

I sense a lot of people that are going to be sorely disappointed when NX releases.

[Adrock]

Not an excuse to not try.  The only time since the N64 I feel Nintendo didn't completely sabotage third party support with idiotic hardware restrictions was the Gamecube and oddly enough the third party started to actually improve that gen (and they still partially sabotaged it with their idiotic rejection of online gaming).  Nintendo makes no legitimate effort to attract third party support so they never do.  And I don't mean buying support, I mean just simply offering a platform where third parties don't have to jump through hoops or compromise their games or make exclusives because multi-platform releases are technologically impossible.  Nintendo does not make any legitimate effort to improve the situation.  Hopeless?  Bullshit.  That's a self-fulfilling prophecy.  Let them make a real effort, watch it fail, and then we can talk about it being hopeless.

Nintendo has tried many things. They didn't work, at least not enough to be sustainable. One thing it hasn't tried is continually throwing money at third parties which again, is a terrible business model. It sets a bad precedent, and I don't blame Nintendo for balking at it. The easy answer to the support problem is that Nintendo is going to have to play the same game as Sony and Microsoft except the game is rigged.

There's plenty Nintendo can do to improve its chances of getting better support, but it only improves its chances. There are no guarantees. Throwing money at things and people doesn't solve the problem; it perpetuates the problem. Developers are always going to want more powerful specs. Publishers are always going to want money upfront to offset losses. The line has to be drawn somewhere. There has to be some middle ground where everyone can benefit. And communication is key. Nintendo has to stop developing hardware behind a curtain. Nintendo dropped a key piece of information today albeit vaguely even by its standards. Whatever this "new concept" is, third parties better know what it is... a year ago.

Third parties are going to have to play ball too. They can't just take and take and take. Companies keep restructuring and/or going bankrupt because they aren't learning. They're overspending and overvaluing their properties then Sony and/or Microsoft bails them out for a while with payments. In the long run, how does that benefit anyone?

[NeoStar9X]

This was certainly interesting news to wake up to today.


If Nintendo has to do mobile games then this is certainly the way I would want them to do it. Not porting games, and I'm glad they were very clear about that, but only making new games with the goal of pushing people toward their own hardware. Games that are clearly made for mobile and with them not trying to shoehorn a console or 3DS game.


The NX is interesting. I think we can kind of guess what we're getting with mobile direction. Not a Pokemon RPG for example but more things like Pokemon Shuffle, maybe card games or even PokePark style games that generate interest for the RPGs on the 3DS or it's successor. At least that's what I imagine the goal is. With the NX we don't know if it will replace the Wii U or 3DS or both or if it could be a catch all code name for both a new home console and new portable connected by the same OS. I hope it's the later one as I do want to seperate devices still.

[StrawHousePig]

Man, I don't even know what all this NX stuff is. But I do know that 'partnering' with a third party is bad juju for users. I got a bad feeling about that one.

Really, all I want is for the GameBoy to make a triumphant return as a handheld VC that runs *emulation* for GB/C, GBA, NES, SNES, N64, and GCN. And don't even stop people from running ROMs not bought from the whatever version of an online store they'll have. No porting, just offloading a game straight from the source. How many great games will never be (re)released now because they have to be ported? Much too many.

A thing like that would sell through the stratosphere and would be a valid platform for several years.

Is that too much to ask?

[tendoboy1984]

Nintendo has always created their hardware to serve their purpose. They use their hardware to play their software. They are exactly like Apple in that sense, software/hardware integration.

[Fatty The Hutt]

Going mobile could be a fine additional stream for Nintendo content. I've been playing a little Pokey-Mans Shuffle on the 3DS and wishing it were available as an Android App. I'd like it better. I could see a Mario endless jump-runner as a fun time-waster. These don't threaten me in the least. I'll buy them. And I will continue to buy Nintendo consoles and dedicated handhelds (or hybrid systems if that comes along which seems likely from the NX announcement). There's room in my life for all this stuff. It's fine and if it makes Nintendo gobs of money, great.

I could even see some of the more "mainline" games having a perfectly serviceable mobile version. I think the Mario RPGs (Paper Mario, Mario and Luigi or just a new Super Mario RPG) would work just fine on mobile. I can see their button-press to enhance combat or defence during battles working perfectly well as a tap on a mobile device touch-screen, especially as those screens are typically more tap-receptive than DS or WiiU touchscreens. Now, if I could get a meaty Mario RPG and pay a bit extra so it becomes cross-buy on my devices of choice, and I can continue to play the same save file across all those devices? That's Gold, Jerry. Gold.

Or if I could get a Smash Trophy Bank app on mobile, where I can look at and read about all my Smash Bros. Trophies while waiting in line, instead of having to boot up the game for that? I'd love that. When I boot up the game, it's usually because I want to play it, not read about trophies. But I still want to do that eventually.

The upcoming Mario Puzzles and Dragons thing should go mobile. I would like that.

How about a Missile Command clone where the waves of descending missiles are Metroids and it has background music from the series? Again, as a fun time-waster, I'd definitely buy.

There's a ton of ideas that would work well for mobile. And, as it is Nintendo, I'm sure they'll put the strangest, quirkiest twists on the products that we never saw coming but which will be utterly charming. Count me in.

Now, I am sure you are going to make the argument that developing for mobile would eat up development band-width that could/should be dedicated to "real" game development for Nintendo-dedicated gaming hardware. Well, I just don't buy it. Sorry. I don't have anything concrete with which to argue the point other than the fact that Nintendo doesn't usually steal developer time from dedicated games to do side projects. They partner up or they outsource. Or they re-position teams to do new stuff after they've finished with a particular project because they need to keep them working anyway and the type of just-finished project doesn't need or warrant an additional installment right away.

[tendoboy1984]

Nintendo has made quick mobile-style games before. Brain Age, Yoshi Touch N Go, the minigames in Super Mario 64 DS, all those would be perfect on mobile devices.

[broodwars]

Nintendo has made quick mobile-style games before. Brain Age, Yoshi Touch N Go, the minigames in Super Mario 64 DS, all those would be perfect on mobile devices.

Frankly, Kirby & the Rainbow Curse is already a mobile game. It even has the shitty controls that make it a perfect mobile game, so maybe they'll make a spinoff of it for mobile.

[Nile Boogie Returns]

Didn't Nintendo invent the shitty mobile game "feel the Magic" and all the like.  I thought Touch screen gaming on was for the most part a Nintendo thing?

[Ian Sane]

Wait, so Nintendo's shitty touchscreen games can get moved to mobile where I can pretend they don't exist?  Hey, that sounds pretty good.  If they could have clear separation between casual nonsense and the good stuff then there is less need to shoehorn in dumb gimmicks into their dedicated videogame systems.  If the mobile offerings are for the casuals then they don't have to compromise the console for that audience at all.  Console for the core, mobile for the casual.  Hell, that's how the market is right now.  I figure Nintendo will try to find some middle-ground product but that's the Wii U and it didn't work.

[Soren]

That's not what's going to happen though. Nintendo will make their next piece of hardware with Nintendo in mind and every element of their business (with the exception of QoL, maybe) will interact with each other. If 3rd parties aren't going to work on Nintendo games because Japanese devs are switching to mobile and Western devs are apathetic then they're leveraging mobile and QoL to help offset the loss of profits from 3rd parties.

If you want to paint a doomsday scenario around this then you can say Nintendo is bracing for a sea change in core game development in a different way than Sony or Microsoft. Those 2 want to be the all everything in your living room because their video game division can't be just 100% about games either.

The health of Nintendo's core game business is better served by establishing a healthy, profitable mobile and QoL division rather than by moneyhatting third party software support (and by that I mean catering much of their hardware development to third parties that already have trouble developing for 2 consoles, much less 3).

[marvel_moviefan_2012]

That's not what's going to happen though. Nintendo will make their next piece of hardware with Nintendo in mind and every element of their business (with the exception of QoL, maybe) will interact with each other. If 3rd parties aren't going to work on Nintendo games because Japanese devs are switching to mobile and Western devs are apathetic then they're leveraging mobile and QoL to help offset the loss of profits from 3rd parties.

If you want to paint a doomsday scenario around this then you can say Nintendo is bracing for a sea change in core game development in a different way than Sony or Microsoft. Those 2 want to be the all everything in your living room because their video game division can't be just 100% about games either.

The health of Nintendo's core game business is better served by establishing a healthy, profitable mobile and QoL division rather than by moneyhatting third party software support (and by that I mean catering much of their hardware development to third parties that already have trouble developing for 2 consoles, much less 3).

All fine for Nintendo and their investors, but as a gamer I don't a give a **** what their profit margins are all I care about is do they make games I want to play. If this means more money to make games and translates into a good synergy between their divisions leading to a larger base and subsequently more games then I am all for it. If this turns out to be a bunch of garbage mobile games taking the spotlight away from real games count me out. Wii U was a hard enough sell and 3DS is not even on my radar.


I have not made up my mind if this is a good thing or a bad thing yet. Like Ian said I would be okay if they shoveled all their touch crap onto mobile platforms and then left the dedicate gaming machines to focus on dedicated games I would be happy, but doing that limits your audience and further gimps the hardware making it an even harder sell to the casuals whose numbers are required to sustain the current model.

I have only ever purchased two games on my phone, both garbage, both sequels to established games and both were over priced at $5.

I want NX to be a successful return to Nintendo doing what they do best. If that means using mobile stuff as a way to leverage their IP in a manner that keeps them profitable and relevant than okay by me. I don't give a **** if 3rd parties come back I have a PS4 I don't need watered down ports on Wii U and I won't buy them on NX either.

[Ian Sane]

The health of Nintendo's core game business is better served by establishing a healthy, profitable mobile and QoL division rather than by moneyhatting third party software support (and by that I mean catering much of their hardware development to third parties that already have trouble developing for 2 consoles, much less 3).

Yes, because Nintendo will just remain profitable forever and ever with like six games released a year because they have no third party support.  I think the Wii U firmly establishes that having terrible third party support will affect their bottom line.  People don't want game systems with no games.  If they don't make some effort to fix the third party problem then it's just the Wii U again and how great is that working out for Nintendo?  If they're not going to try to solve the problem why the hell even bother with a new console?  If "no third party support" is such a sound business model then they might as well just stick with the Wii U.  Nintendo doesn't make **** for a profit if they don't release a product people want to buy and you need games to make such a product and therefore need third party support.

[Adrock]

I think Wii U firmly established that a company can't reasonably think it can be successful when it gets just about everything wrong. That includes third party support, but Wii U took a year and a half to be a decent console. It was a struggle even for Nintendo fans. You seem stuck on third party support. Jebus, man, Nintendo didn't even have first party games...

[Soren]

Yes, because Nintendo will just remain profitable forever and ever with like six games released a year because they have no third party support.  I think the Wii U firmly establishes that having terrible third party support will affect their bottom line.

A streamlined OS and consolidated development teams mean Nintendo will be able to, in theory, support itself with enough releases in a calendar year should third party support cease entirely (including Skylanders, Disney, Just Dance, LEGO games). Hardware specs that don't follow a graphical arms race means they can release a console that doesn't sell at a loss at launch. Also see Adrock's post.

People don't want game systems with no games.

People don't buy Nintendo consoles to play third party games.

If "no third party support" is such a sound business model then they might as well just stick with the Wii U. 

That's silly. Of course Nintendo should try and improve their relationship with 3rd parties. What they shouldn't do is hand over the keys to their next hardware design and pray they think it's good enough for them to come back. 

[broodwars]

People don't buy Nintendo consoles to play third party games.

Judging by the Wii U's abysmal sales these past few years, they clearly don't buy them to play Nintendo's 1st party games anymore, either. Point is, Nintendo can't be the isolationist company they've been since the N64 years, where they tell 3rd parties to piss off (sometimes publicly, in the case of Square and Yamauchi) if they don't dance to Nintendo's tune.

That's silly. Of course Nintendo should try and improve their relationship with 3rd parties. What they shouldn't do is hand over the keys to their next hardware design and pray they think it's good enough for them to come back. 

I really can't disagree with this enough. 3rd parties have been very vocal about the fact that Sony worked with them in the design of the PS4, and not only does the platform have arguably the best 3rd party support of any platform right now, but it also is currently outselling any previous PlayStation platform at this point in their life cycles, even the beloved PS2.  And mind you, those sales are despite Sony's own 1st party PS4 titles so far being fairly lackluster, with 3rd parties & indies carrying the lion's share of the load.

People may not buy consoles for 3rd party titles, but they play a definite role in filling gaps in 1st party software schedules; filling in gaps in 1st party genre coverage; & keeping people interested in your platform.  And designing your hardware around proprietary bullshit only leads to good 3rd party support if you have a massive success like the Wii or PS2, where the platform is so popular the 3rd parties have to support it. Otherwise, you get 3rd party support when you design hardware & software support that gives 3rd parties what they need to succeed.

But hey, I'm sure it's a good thing that Axiom Verge and countless other 3rd party titles aren't coming to the Wii U because Nintendo just doesn't give a **** about 3rd parties.

[marvel_moviefan_2012]

Not an excuse to not try.  The only time since the N64 I feel Nintendo didn't completely sabotage third party support with idiotic hardware restrictions was the Gamecube

God how can you be so damn think, Game Cube was probably even more restrictive to what 3rd parties were doing than Wii was. Not being able to play DVD's, forget the movies for a moment, that alone made developers have to intentionally make cuts to their games especially in the latter years. There were games that couldn't be done on Game Cube because the content would not fit on a tiny disc and the market was not accepting multidisc games any more. PS2 supposedly won all those "casuals" by playing DVD movies, to some degree I think that is true but you cannot attribute playing DVD movies to PS2 success and then not mention it as one MAJOR reason why Game Cube failed. Weather it mattered to YOU or ME or anyone here, there is overwhelming evidence that many people were in fact turned off by that major featuring lacking from the GameCube so much that despite having far fewer, and often inferior games, the Xbox managed to beat Nintendo in nearly every turn.


Game Cube lacked proper online something Dreamcast was doing at the time. There are COUNTLESS examples where a game on PS2/Xbox had online and as a result was either not released on Game Cube or had the online removed making it an inferior purchase. The Game Cube was NOT developer friendly. IF Game Cube had been exactly as released same games, same price point, same connectivity and the only difference was proper online and full DVD support including movie play back and STILL bombed then yes you might have an argument but Game Cube was butchered compared to its competition and the BIG AAA games that were pushing sales of the other two were mostly lacking on Game Cube as a result. Hell it was missing many of the major sports games right off the bat. Game Cube is one of my all time favorite machines and despite ME loving it for the games, there is now way to deny that those major flaws had an impact on sales. Unless you live in a bubble where Nintendo can do no wrong, which you claim is not the case yet you continue to pretend Game Cube was ACTUALLY on par with its competition when it was not at all.

Graphically sure but specs are more than graphics and at a time when online and multi media cut scenes were all the rage NOT having the ability to play 60% or more of the hits of the day certainly held it back.