Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Nintendo's Iwata Says Old Console Cycle Dead

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the wiimote-through-the-heart dept.

Wii 245

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

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Shown Already? (5, Insightful)

AlphaDrake (1104357) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246251)

I believe this has been proven already.

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

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

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

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

Re:Shown Already? (2, Interesting)

Walpurgiss (723989) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246353)

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

Re:Shown Already? (2, Insightful)

feepness (543479) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247139)

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

Re:Shown Already? (3, Interesting)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246533)

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

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

Intelligence is still a Hard Problem(tm) (2, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246583)

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

Re:Intelligence is still a Hard Problem(tm) (1)

Toonol (1057698) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247027)

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

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

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

Re:Intelligence is still a Hard Problem(tm) (1)

xarien (1073084) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247449)

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

Re:Shown Already? (1)

twistedsymphony (956982) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246623)

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

Re:Shown Already? (1)

J-1000 (869558) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247477)

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

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

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

Re:Shown Already? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21247699)

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

Re:Shown Already? (1)

LoverOfJoy (820058) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247905)

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

And then by the PS3 in 2007 (7 year life).
Just a small correction, but PS3 was launched before the wii in 2006, not 2007.

PS3? (1)

TheThiefMaster (992038) | more than 6 years ago | (#21248113)

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

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

So in other words... (0, Offtopic)

Turken (139591) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246269)

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

Well done for completely missing the point (4, Insightful)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246603)

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

Re:Well done for completely missing the point (-1, Redundant)

Turken (139591) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246971)

Okay. I'll admit, I didn't read the article (blocked by filter at work). But I would still be very surprised if Iwata wasn't thinking about both the DS and the Wii when making the comments.

Re:Well done for completely missing the point (3, Insightful)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247305)

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

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

Why not just shut the fuck up?

Re:So in other words... (1, Interesting)

Mattintosh (758112) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246659)

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

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

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

Hey, it could happen.

Re:So in other words... (3, Insightful)

rkanodia (211354) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246759)

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

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

Re:So in other words... (1)

644bd346996 (1012333) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247073)

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

Re:So in other words... (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247485)

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

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

Re:So in other words... (1)

644bd346996 (1012333) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247761)

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

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

Re:So in other words... (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247999)

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

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

Re:So in other words... (1)

ToasterMonkey (467067) | more than 6 years ago | (#21248125)

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

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

Re:So in other words... (1)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247333)

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

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

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

Re:So in other words... (3, Insightful)

Knuckles (8964) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246679)

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

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

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

Re:So in other words... (2, Interesting)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246749)

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

Re:So in other words... (1)

tieTYT (989034) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247421)

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

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

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

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

Re:So in other words... (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247585)

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

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

Re:So in other words... (1)

DeepHurtn! (773713) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247853)

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

this could mean one of two things for us... (2, Interesting)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246275)

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

*ahem*

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

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

I wonder which translation he is using?

Re:this could mean one of two things for us... (1)

Rog7 (182880) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246531)

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

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

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

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

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

Re:this could mean one of two things for us... (1)

provigilman (1044114) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246695)

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

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

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

Re:this could mean one of two things for us... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21247423)

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


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

Re:this could mean one of two things for us... (1)

provigilman (1044114) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247511)

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

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

Re:this could mean one of two things for us... (2, Interesting)

Seekerofknowledge (134616) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246681)

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

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

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

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

Re:this could mean one of two things for us... (1)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246945)

I read his statement as "we know that the Wii's graphics will look absolutely dated vs the 360's and PS3's in 2 years or so",
You didn't read his statement at all. He was talking about the DS [aussie-nintendo.com] for a start.

Re:this could mean one of two things for us... (2, Interesting)

SetupWeasel (54062) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246965)

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

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

Re:this could mean one of two things for us... (2, Insightful)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247455)

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

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

This sounds reasonable (1, Insightful)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246291)

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

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

Re:This sounds reasonable (1)

_xeno_ (155264) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246443)

Xbox360 dies on you.

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

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

Re:This sounds reasonable (1)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246547)

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

Re:This sounds reasonable (1)

_xeno_ (155264) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246725)

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

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

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

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

Re:This sounds reasonable (1)

nhaines (622289) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247261)

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

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

Re:This sounds reasonable (1)

Shados (741919) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247533)

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

Re:This sounds reasonable (1)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247529)

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

Re:This sounds reasonable (2, Informative)

_xeno_ (155264) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247941)

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

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

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

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

Re:This sounds reasonable (1)

chammy (1096007) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246467)

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

Re:This sounds reasonable (4, Insightful)

Prien715 (251944) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246563)

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

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

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

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

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

Re:This sounds reasonable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21246813)

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

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

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

Re:This sounds reasonable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21247995)

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

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

Re:This sounds reasonable (2, Interesting)

provigilman (1044114) | more than 6 years ago | (#21248033)

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

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

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

Re:This sounds reasonable (0, Flamebait)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247597)

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

Re:This sounds reasonable (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21247735)

Mod parent down for being a fuck-tard.

Re:This sounds reasonable (1)

DeepHurtn! (773713) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247893)

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

Now, Wii wait. But this winter, Wii brawl. (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246649)

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

Re:This sounds reasonable (1)

Donniedarkness (895066) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247075)

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

Moore's Law? (1)

Zironic (1112127) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246301)

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

Re:Moore's Law? (1)

provigilman (1044114) | more than 6 years ago | (#21248079)

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

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

Another aspect is... (2, Insightful)

Bullfish (858648) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246367)

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

Re:Another aspect is... (1)

cromar (1103585) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246645)

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

Re:Another aspect is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21246825)

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

In between generations (1)

xarien (1073084) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246481)

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

Re:In between generations (0, Troll)

Nitage (1010087) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246599)

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

Yes they do (2, Informative)

Tony (765) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246933)

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

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

Re:Yes they do (1)

xarien (1073084) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246991)

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

Re:Yes they do (1)

Donniedarkness (895066) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247403)

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

Re:Yes they do (1)

xarien (1073084) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247487)

Since when has creating textures and models become code?

Re:Yes they do (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21247527)

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


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

They've already proved their chops this generation.

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

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

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

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

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

Re:Yes they do (1)

brkello (642429) | more than 6 years ago | (#21248173)

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

Re:In between generations (1, Insightful)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246619)

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

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

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

Re:In between generations (3, Insightful)

xarien (1073084) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246703)

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

Re:In between generations (1)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246849)

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

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

Re:In between generations (3, Insightful)

xarien (1073084) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246921)

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

Same expereince (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247251)

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

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

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

Re:Same expereince (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21247821)

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

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

Blurry = bad scaling (1)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 6 years ago | (#21248089)

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

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

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

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

Re:In between generations (1)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247233)

Like it or not, HD sets are growing year after year and the Wii just isn't cut out to be HD entertainment.
I like it (because I want one). But they are a long way from universal and a lot of consoles are used on a households second television which is even more unlikely to be HD.

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

SD isn't going anywhere soon.

Re:In between generations (1)

xarien (1073084) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247401)

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

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

Re:In between generations (1)

edwdig (47888) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247863)

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

kkrieger (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246675)

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

Re:kkrieger (1)

xarien (1073084) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246793)

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

Re:kkrieger (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246979)

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

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

Re:kkrieger (1)

xarien (1073084) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247067)

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

Re:kkrieger (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247179)

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

Re:kkrieger (1)

xarien (1073084) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247253)

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

Re:kkrieger (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247479)

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

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

Re:kkrieger (1)

xarien (1073084) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247505)

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

Re:kkrieger (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21247923)

You don't understand this much do you?

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

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

Stop with your fucking strawman arguments.

Re:In between generations (2, Insightful)

Turken (139591) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246829)

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

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

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

Re:In between generations (1)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247135)

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

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

Let's hope the traditional console cycle is dead (4, Interesting)

ProppaT (557551) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246511)


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

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

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

what do these have in common? (4, Insightful)

night_flyer (453866) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246577)

DRAM Makers Suffer Due to Lackluster Vista Adoption [slashdot.org] , The Dying PC Market [slashdot.org] , and this story?

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

None of the 30+ repliers so far have RTFA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21246757)

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

Re:None of the 30+ repliers so far have RTFA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21246925)

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

?Translation? Watch the HDTV Transition (2, Insightful)

nweaver (113078) | more than 6 years ago | (#21246855)

One possible translation: Watch the HDTV Transition...

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

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

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

Re:?Translation? Watch the HDTV Transition (1)

Toonol (1057698) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247203)

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

Re:?Translation? Watch the HDTV Transition (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247639)

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

4 years? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21247281)

i thought it was more like 5 or 6.

Wii 2 (1)

rlp (11898) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247601)

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

This discussion needs reference to the 32X (2, Insightful)

Kris_J (10111) | more than 6 years ago | (#21247637)

You can't really talk about how good an idea this is, or not, without referencing the Sega 32X.
  • 1988: Genesis/ Mega Drive
  • 1992: Sega CD / Mega CD
  • 1994: 32X
The Mega CD and 32X were a pair of incremental upgrades to the popular Mega Drive system. They allowed Sega to hook into the capacity of the CD storage, then into the upcoming 3D movement. They were, however, typically considered failures. Much like movie sequels, the market for each new product is a sub-set of the purchasers of the previous. Because of this, games developers were reluctant to invest in the production of titles that had diminishing markets and the library of games suffered.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?