Wait so is Nintendo comprimising power for uniqueness or whats going on here. I hope to god that Nintendo makes a powerful console and then adds its unique technology to it.

What disappoints me is that while Nintendo is experimenting with new features that hopefully enhance the gameplay experience they ignore a huge feature that people are already asking for: online gaming. They are letting their business mentality cloud their vision. If they would just allow the public to run game servers they would instantly be one step ahead of Microsoft and Sony and they would minimize the necessary financial commitment in the process.

Quote

---

"Please understand, I am not saying that technology is unimportant. I understand that technology is important. But if we are just focusing on technology and investing in an IT manufacturing plant to come up with higher performance processing , we will not succeed."

---

Quote

---

Originally posted by: jasongst
What disappoints me is that while Nintendo is experimenting with new features that hopefully enhance the gameplay experience they ignore a huge feature that people are already asking for: online gaming. They are letting their business mentality cloud their vision.

---

The interview is more of the same, but it sounds like the DS is only one of the new ways Nintendo plans to revolutionize the industry. I say it's great! The industry needs a good shakeup!

I'm just glad that he realizes that technology is important.

I have a feeling that years from now people are going to say one of two things: "Iwata killed Nintendo" or "Iwata saved Nintendo." The guy is on a completely different plane than the rest of the industry and I don't think any of us can accurately predict what's going to happen with him in charge. Judging by what he's said he plans on taking some HUGE risks.

Like the rest you I'm glad he said they shouldn't focus on "just" technology. That sounds like they are going to focus on improving the performance of the next machine while also innovating. It's very important that the next machine can match the other consoles in hardware. Innovating is great but they need a safety net. The N5 (I like that name better than GCNext) has to also be able to play the types of games that people like now. That means the specs have to match the other consoles and that means the controller has to be very adaptable for all types of games. If they make a purely "gimmick" console it better be the f*cking holodeck or it will bomb. No matter how great of an idea they come up with it won't take off overnight and they'll need "traditional" games to ease people in.

I am a little worried though since Nintendo has been the console maker who cried wolf lately. They've talked of innovation a lot and have delivered gimmicks like the e-Reader instead. If this new type of gaming they plan on introducing is as LAME as most of the other "new" stuff they've tried no one will care. They have to truly have something that's unique and worthwhile to play with.

Nintendo really should do the smart thing and stuff some more gigahertz into the next machine just to shut the ignorant people up. It wouldn't be that expensive and could work as damage control...

You know, there really is nothing wrong with going the direction of technological super-beast, but at the same time implementing all the same innvotive ideas they have in store.
But they're looking for ways to save money for themselves AND developers, so either way, Nintendo i splaying it smart.

I personally wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo came up with the most powerful console, took the modest route and said 'Oh, this isn't THAT advanced is it?' then look at the competitors and said 'oh, thats all they came up with? oh ok'. how freaking funny would that be hahahah

By focusing on software what they're really saying is, "It'll take you 15 hours to get past the 1st dungen in the next Zelda game. That is if your really good." But really I think that Iwata is not concerned with the PSP at all and Game spy sort of reasured him on that with the whole Gamegear etc. crap. And I think that they should make regular discs instead of mini discs that way they'll be loads more space and DVD/CD funtions will be usable.

If Ninty can find a way to anti-pirate regular DVDs, I guarantee you they would switch over to them...

My question is, will the next generation of systems actually impress people with their technology? For all of the previous generations of gaming consoles, there was a clear difference in power between one generation and the next. A below average looking GameCube game is still clearly better looking than the prettiest Nintendo 64 game, and an average Nintendo 64 game is still "better" looking (or at least more 3 dimensional) than the prettiest Super NES game...etc. etc. I question whether or not the leap in graphics in this generation will match that.

I've seen one tech demo posted on IGN, Dark Sector. I watched it, and I don't think the game is clearly better looking than Resident Evil 4 or Halo 2 or Ninja Gaiden. I admit the game is obviously really early, and when I see it in person instead of on a tiny video I'll notice the little differences, but I honestly don't think most average consumers will be able to tell the difference.

I still hope Nintendo basically matches or beats the technology coming from Sony and Microsoft, because it will be necessary to impress people when they ask how it compares to the other systems in terms of power. But ultimately, when people actually see the games, they won't be able to tell the difference.

Quote

---

I personally wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo came up with the most powerful console, took the modest route and said 'Oh, this isn't THAT advanced is it?' then look at the competitors and said 'oh, thats all they came up with? oh ok'. how freaking funny would that be hahahah

---

Quote

---

That's almost what Nintendo did this generation- the Gamecube is at least as powerful as the XBox and perhaps even more powerful, yet they seriously lowballed their own specs.

---

Quote

---

not just a beefed-up version of GameCube, but something that will be easy to program. In the long run, that will make game development on our new system more profitable."

---

Quote

---

Hmm... Let's put it this way: As far as visuals, the 'Box is capbable of higher poly counts. Now we all can see the difference. However, its been said that the 'Cube can do better lighting effects(Or they can do more with texturing, something to that effect, I'm not a techie...). A prime example of its is Soul Calibur 2; most reviews when comparing the versions had that while the 'Box version is capable of higher resolutions, the 'Cube cersion was better lighting effects. Now that's just the visuals.

---

Remember, it's not how powerful a system is, but how the developers use it... ^_^

"That's almost what Nintendo did this generation- the Gamecube is at least as powerful as the XBox and perhaps even more powerful, yet they seriously lowballed their own specs."

Did they ever. So much so that it probably hurt them. A lot of people, including developers, didn't catch on to Nintendo's modesty and there's still a misconception among the public that the Cube has the weakest hardware. Next time they should just brag. It's not like blatantly lying about their hardware's abilities hurt Sony. Modesty doesn't create hype.

"Remember, it's not how powerful a system is, but how the developers use it... ^_^"

Yeah and most developers are lazy hacks who will never bother to make full use of hardware. So the best bet is to give them a fair bit of raw power in the hardware so they don't have to be talented to get great graphics. The really talented developers are going to get good stuff out of ANY hardware. So it's best for Nintendo to not assume everyone is as talented as they are. If they think they've included more than enough RAM, they should add more.

Let's NOT get into the graphical discussion, cuz I haven't seen one objective, comprehensive, VALID review/comparison yet.

Quote

---

Heh, I also loved how he's taken to calling the GCNext the "GCN"- mass confusion ensues stateside.

---

Who needs DVDs? I want to see them go back to the cartridge-based system. They're apparently putting impressively large amounts of data into a small form factor card for the DS, that same technology should be able to scale up without adding too much cost. A 1.5 GB cartridge beats a 6 GB disc any day of the week in my book, I want fewer moving parts and no load times.

I agree 100% with Iwata. Spending a lot of time on powerful hardware is just silly, because any idiot with a hundred billion dollars to piss away can slap a commodity PC into a green box and call it "the world's most powerful console". The hardware should enable the enhancements, it shouldn't BE the enhancements.

"They've talked of innovation a lot and have delivered gimmicks like the e-Reader instead."

Definition time!

gim*mick

1. A device employed to cheat, deceive, or trick, especially a mechanism for the secret and dishonest control of gambling apparatus.
2. An innovative or unusual mechanical contrivance; a gadget.
3. An innovative stratagem or scheme employed especially to promote a project: an advertising gimmick.
4. A significant feature that is obscured, misrepresented, or not readily evident; a catch.
5. A small object whose name does not come readily to mind.

And since the E-reader doesn't exactly allow you to cheat at gambling, #1 doesn't count. I'm so glad that somebody likes the E-reader and thinks it clever and innovatite. I do. It's a cool gimmick.

"Who needs DVDs? I want to see them go back to the cartridge-based system."

I do. The N64's cartridge system was one of its downfalls.

1) more space, 2) cheaper, 3) more freedom.

The N64 had a downfall? Seems like a console that was both profitable for the company and produced so many of the greatest titles of all time is not that bad a thing to try to duplicate.

Reasons for a cartridge:

1. No Load Times
2. No Scratched Discs
3. No disc drive motors burning out, no lenses getting scratched
4. Battery Backup
5. In-cartridge peripherals (SuperFX chip)

Quote

---

Originally posted by: Kyosho

3) more freedom.

---

"I want to see them go back to the cartridge-based system."

Yeah that sounds super. I can't wait to go back to paying $80 Canadian for new games and having virtually non-existant third party support and super sh!tty sound. WHEE!

You can talk about how the N64 was profitable and had some of the best games ever made for it but that doesn't change the fact that there were maybe four games a year released on it that were worth playing. I like cartridges but the cons far outweigh the pros. Having cheaper games and more games to choose from is more important to me. Plus the whole "scratching" issue doesn't matter to me because I'm not a big dumbass who treats his games like crap.

However I do think that a console that could play both cartridges and optical discs would be pretty cool. That way developers could decide which format would suit their game better. However this would require both formats to be supported out of the box with no add-ons.

jasonditz,

because of the limitations of cartridges, I feel developers will be dissatisfied more so by the cons than the pros, and therefore we get the crop of developers leaving (again). Sure N64 had some of the greatest games of all time, but aside from Nintendo, how many companies are still producing quality games for Nintendo from the N64 era?

I think Iwata should definitely make the N5 backwards compatible. It's the one thing that will definitely catch dissatisfied Gamecube owner's eyes. It would be nice if the disc held more data so we dont have to disc swap.

Quote

---

Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"I want to see them go back to the cartridge-based system."

Yeah that sounds super. I can't wait to go back to paying $80 Canadian for new games and having virtually non-existant third party support and super sh!tty sound. WHEE!

---

Quote

---

You can talk about how the N64 was profitable and had some of the best games ever made for it but that doesn't change the fact that there were maybe four games a year released on it that were worth playing. I like cartridges but the cons far outweigh the pros. Having cheaper games and more games to choose from is more important to me. Plus the whole "scratching" issue doesn't matter to me because I'm not a big dumbass who treats his games like crap.

---

Quote

---

However I do think that a console that could play both cartridges and optical discs would be pretty cool. That way developers could decide which format would suit their game better. However this would require both formats to be supported out of the box with no add-ons.

---

Quote

---

Originally posted by: Kyosho
jasonditz,

because of the limitations of cartridges, I feel developers will be dissatisfied more so by the cons than the pros, and therefore we get the crop of developers leaving (again). Sure N64 had some of the greatest games of all time, but aside from Nintendo, how many companies are still producing quality games for Nintendo from the N64 era?

---

Quote

---

I think Iwata should definitely make the N5 backwards compatible. It's the one thing that will definitely catch dissatisfied Gamecube owner's eyes. It would be nice if the disc held more data so we dont have to disc swap.

---

"Can we really blame the media format for lack of third party support? Nintendo switched to optical discs like you guys all wanted this generation, where are all the great third party titles? The reason many third parties don't like Nintendo's system is because they are flat out scared of competing with superior first party titles. That's not going away no matter what media format you choose"

I look at it more from this point of view:

I am a vendor selling popsicles on the street. Then another vendor selling cream covered popsicles for the same or less price. All the kids start buying from him. Now, I decide to switch to cream covered popsicles and charge the same as the other vendor. Now, do you think those kids are going to be coming back to me just because I switched over?

"Why not make it backwards compatible with one of Nintendo's better selling past consoles? Is there any reason we couldn't, eg., offer SNES backwards compatiblity instead? There's no law saying backwards compatibility has to look at the immediately previous generation. "

Because cartridges are a done medium for a home console system. It's pointless to offer SNES compatibility because you can fit god knows how many games onto one GC disc and exactly how many people out there still can find all their games. Also, i'm willing to bet the format of the SNES carts vs N64 carts differ too much so there would be no uniform way of uniting the two into one system. But the fact is this: Business practice has never skipped the previous generation in favor of the generations before that. Does going back to hi-fi over CDs sound good to you? How about 8mm over DVD? or wait... 5.25" floppies over CD?

FYI, the last i saw when good N64 games were actively selling at BB, they were selling between 59.99-69.99 MSRP.

Quote

---

Originally posted by: Kyosho
"Can we really blame the media format for lack of third party support? Nintendo switched to optical discs like you guys all wanted this generation, where are all the great third party titles? The reason many third parties don't like Nintendo's system is because they are flat out scared of competing with superior first party titles. That's not going away no matter what media format you choose"

I look at it more from this point of view:

I am a vendor selling popsicles on the street. Then another vendor selling cream covered popsicles for the same or less price. All the kids start buying from him. Now, I decide to switch to cream covered popsicles and charge the same as the other vendor. Now, do you think those kids are going to be coming back to me just because I switched over?

---

Quote

---

"Why not make it backwards compatible with one of Nintendo's better selling past consoles? Is there any reason we couldn't, eg., offer SNES backwards compatiblity instead? There's no law saying backwards compatibility has to look at the immediately previous generation. "

Because cartridges are a done medium for a home console system. It's pointless to offer SNES compatibility because you can fit god knows how many games onto one GC disc and exactly how many people out there still can find all their games. Also, i'm willing to bet the format of the SNES carts vs N64 carts differ too much so there would be no uniform way of uniting the two into one system. But the fact is this: Business practice has never skipped the previous generation in favor of the generations before that. Does going back to hi-fi over CDs sound good to you? How about 8mm over DVD? or wait... 5.25" floppies over CD?

---

Quote

---

FYI, the last i saw when good N64 games were actively selling at BB, they were selling between 59.99-69.99 MSRP.

---

"On the other hand, you might drive away your loyal customers who didn't want creme in the first place. "

Cartridges drove away developers hence drove away customers. At the same time, the cons of carts also drove away customers (e.g. $$$)

"What currency is that in?..."

US. I am not talking about the cost of N64 titles NOW. I am talking about when they were actually making games for it. How do I know? Because I had the N64 since the day Mario 64 came out and sold for 59.99-69.99 at Kay Bee's.

I'm gonna stop replying to your messages after this. It's a pretty moot point you have here. Nothing past or preset supports any of your claims.

I doubt there was much of a price increase of cartridges over disks here, but that's because console games are overpriced anyway. 33% more than PC games isn't peanuts.

"33% more than PC games isn't peanuts. "

$50 for a game that lasts 10 hours is peanuts in comparison to every other form of entertainment.
Get over it.

60 Euros compared to 35-45 Euros is a difference and I have doubts that console games offer proportionally more gameplay.

You pay $20 for a 2 hour movie- comparitively that would be $100 for a 10 hour game. No one complains about that, though- hell, $20 is a good price for a movie.

Mouse,

exactly!

I was at the Redwings- Nashville hockey game a few days back and the 2 tickets cost me over $200 US for 3.25 hours, worth every penny IMO. So $50 for a game is very reasonable. In fact I think games are too cheap for the costs incurred making them.

Some were more than $50 and others were less. The average is maybe $55. Anyone wanna try some rough math?

Quote

---

Originally posted by: Kyosho
"On the other hand, you might drive away your loyal customers who didn't want creme in the first place. "

Cartridges drove away developers hence drove away customers. At the same time, the cons of carts also drove away customers (e.g. $$$)

---

Quote

---

"What currency is that in?..."

US. I am not talking about the cost of N64 titles NOW. I am talking about when they were actually making games for it. How do I know? Because I had the N64 since the day Mario 64 came out and sold for 59.99-69.99 at Kay Bee's.

---

I payed ~50$ for a 200 hour game (Baldur's Gate 2) and ~75$ for a five hour game (P.N.03) (extreme examples, but valid nonetheless). That's the problem. I don't care about movies or any other form of media (books beat 'em all, BTW), I care about the pricing difference between PC and console games.

Fun fact: Mafia and Unreal II are 60 Euros on the XBox and 10 Euros on the PC...

Actually I take that back, I did pay $60 for DK64, but that came with the memory expansion addon.

oh well, I dont live in Europe, so I really could care less.

"If that was true we'd expect the Gamecube to have a bigger market share than the N64... "

Again, you're not and never taking into consideration any past situations that might have affected the current situation.

Back when the N64 came out, Fry's, Best Buy, Toys R Us, The Good Guys, and KBs were the primary places to buy games because those places were the cheapest compared to generic stores. It just so happened that I bought Mario 64 @ KBs which at that time ALL the stores priced it between 59.99-69.99. I already did the price search. I live in SoCal so perhaps it may be cheaper in your area because of less demand.

Based on the broadest definition of the word "entertainment", then 50$ is peanuts compared to other things. But some people such as myself value certain entertainment over others ignoring costs. For example, I'd pay 80$ to go see a 3 hour DMB concert than to pay 50$ for the latest RPG.

Quote

---

Originally posted by: Kyosho
"If that was true we'd expect the Gamecube to have a bigger market share than the N64... "

Again, you're not and never taking into consideration any past situations that might have affected the current situation.

---

Quote

---

Back when the N64 came out, Fry's, Best Buy, Toys R Us, The Good Guys, and KBs were the primary places to buy games because those places were the cheapest compared to generic stores. It just so happened that I bought Mario 64 @ KBs which at that time ALL the stores priced it between 59.99-69.99. I already did the price search. I live in SoCal so perhaps it may be cheaper in your area because of less demand.

---

Quote

---

Based on the broadest definition of the word "entertainment", then 50$ is peanuts compared to other things. But some people such as myself value certain entertainment over others ignoring costs. For example, I'd pay 80$ to go see a 3 hour DMB concert than to pay 50$ for the latest RPG.

---

Quote

---

Originally posted by: thecubedcanuck
"33% more than PC games isn't peanuts. "

$50 for a game that lasts 10 hours is peanuts in comparison to every other form of entertainment.
Get over it.

---

you guys are ignoring one of the cheapest ways to enjoy all of these forms of entertainment....BLOCKBUSTER!... ive rented countless games and saved hundreds if not thousands of dollars (ive easily rented 40-50 games saving me a good 2 thousand dollars) taking out these 5-10 hour long games and beat them and move on...buying games like wario world is a complete waste of money as is any game you spend only 10 hours on, so rent even if you have to rent it a couple of times....however its still important to purchase some games like ea sports games and the good old first party zelda/mario type games which i often play and replay.... and dont get me started on used games....oh man...

"What about books?"

I read very very fast

ignoring blockbuster...the other way aropund..in the n64 gen i could get any n64 game i wanted no problem. Now I just ignore blockbuster because they have a shitty selection of games and they purposely jip gc.

Quote

---

"What about books?"

I read very very fast

---