So, today semi-confirmed rumors came out that Nintendo's supposed to be announcing the successor to the Wii at E3 this year, for release next year. This for instance:
Quote:Nintendo's Wii successor is set to utilise an entirely new controller and will be more powerful than Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, well-placed international industry sources have told CVG.
CVG sources understand Nintendo plans to officially unveil the console, which will feature full HD visuals and graphical capabilities beyond Sony and Microsoft's current hardware, at E3 this June.
Leading games publishers have already been briefed on the new console, we understand, and launch titles from third-party developers are in the works right now.
What's most exciting about the Wii successor however is its all-new controller, which industry sources have indicated is not simply an upgraded Wii Remote, and will even feature a built-in HD screen.
Our sources did not specify whether or not the controller displays will feature any other functionality, such as that of the DS's touch screen, but it's easy to imagine the sort of innovation an extra screen could bring to Wii 2 games.
"Nintendo's plans sound unreal," one source said. "Publishers are already planning launch titles and it's all very exciting.
"The hardware is even more powerful than current HD consoles and backwards compatible with Wii. The controller will be all-new and has a HD screen on it."
We're told Nintendo plans to launch the Wii successor in late 2012, which lines up with earlier reports from other games media.
Asked to comment on today's reports earlier, a Nintendo of America spokesperson issued a straight "no comment".
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/298...2-sources/
Of course, this isn't THAT surprising. I was thinking that Nintendo would probably first talk about their next console this E3, it would make sense. But now there's some confirmation that that may indeed be the case. We'll see though, this is Nintendo so you never know what they're doing for sure...
The big question is whether they intend to compete with the others in terms of system power this time around. Their unique control scheme gambit worked very well, but unless they manage to do it again, all anyone's going to see is a slight upgrade to the Wii compared to big upgrades over the 360.
I'm remembering when Nintendo said no one cares enough about HD gaming or system power enough to be bothered with.. And now all of a sudden they wan't to build a system more powerful then the PS3? I call bullshit on that whole article..
It's good to be skeptical, but to put it in perspective, Nintendo didn't exactly say no one cares about HD. From what I recall at the time Nintendo's position was not enough people had HD TVs to make it worth it. Now the numbers have changed and so Nintendo's position is likely going to match. As for the power of the system, it'd have to be at least as powerful as the 360/PS3 or it'd be a massive let down. More would obviously be preferable, and likely necessary.
One other thing, the internal storage of the next Nintendo system will need a massive upgrade. 512MB on the Wii is absolutely pathetic. Memory cards are better, but still not enough for today's needs. Further, the memory card support on the Wii is pretty shoddy. It took forever just to be able to load games off of it directly, and it's still got second class support since saves are still being stored on internal memory.
Dark Jaguar Wrote:As for the power of the system, it'd have to be at least as powerful as the 360/PS3 or it'd be a massive let down. More would obviously be preferable, and likely necessary.
So when you consider that the Wii was barely more powerful then the game cube and the PS3 at the time had more cores then the Wii had ram.. I predict this next upgrade will be PS2 level on a 64 bit platform.. Ok I'll be generous maybe I single, Intel core I5 thrown in simply because the I7 with turbo boost technology is two awesome for Satoru Iwata :)
[ACTION]We all know that Satoru Iwata hates things that are awesome.. :)[/ACTION]
etoven Wrote:So when you consider that the Wii was barely more powerful then the game cube and the PS3 at the time had more cores then the Wii had ram.. I predict this next upgrade will be PS2 level on a 64 bit platform.. Ok I'll be generous maybe I single, Intel core I5 thrown in simply because the I7 with turbo boost technology is two awesome for Satoru Iwata :)
[ACTION]We all know that Satoru Iwata hates things that are awesome.. :)[/ACTION]
Well it's twice as powerful as the Gamecube in a lot of ways, so it's a bit better than that, but yes not nearly as powerful as the PS3 or 360. What does "more cores than the Wii had RAM" mean? Cores aren't a measure of memory, so I'm not sure that analogy maps in any meaningful way...
PS2 level? The Gamecube was more powerful than the PS2, so are you saying the next system will actually go down in power?
etoven doesn't seem to know that the Gamecube was significantly more powerful than the PS2 is, I assume. Or that the Wii is 1.5-2 times as powerful as the Gamecube, in fact, even if few games show it because developers this generation have been really, really lazy with a lot of their Wii games.
Also, etoven, you forget that before the Wii Nintendo had always released very powerful systems. The NES was by far the most powerful console available when it released in Japan in 1983, it took years for anyone else to catch up. The SNES was the most powerful system for years as well, Neo-Geo excepted. The N64 was clearly the most powerful system of its generation. The Gamecube wasn't quite, but it was close to the Xbox in performance and well ahead of the PS2 and DC. So, in fact the Wii is an abberation, not a longtime trend. If Nintendo's next console returns to being powerful, it would simply be Nintendo getting back to what they had always done before.
And really, if they're going to be releasing a new console, I think it'd have to be HD, which means at minimum 360/PS3 levels of power... and probably beyond that , because both of those systems are older now and if you're only at their level of power, you'll have problems again when the other two release new systems. Maybe they will anyway, but at least by making it powerful they can have more of a chance. I know Nintendo says power isn't the most important thing, and I absolutely agree with that, but it does matter to many people, including most Western developers. That makes a big difference in terms of how much support the system gets; one of the major reasons why the Wii is not selling as well now as it had been is because third parties never gave it a chance because it wasn't as powerful as the PS3 or 360, so they didn't make games for it... so, when first party development slowed down, nothing was there to carry the platform.
It really is important to developers. Part of it is simply porting. It's very hard to port a game designed with higher specifications to a lower system. Even the Genesis suffered due to this, with ports that had reduced colors and poorer sound (though for the most part, instead developers simply made unique games for the Genesis). The other part is, if it's going to control in a classic way, go for the system that lets you have the most freedom. When it comes to game design, the more powerful the system, the more freedom you have to do what you want. If Nintendo doesn't try to make a powerful system this time around, they'll do poorly. Sony and MS have both put out their own motion controls, and in some ways the camera approach is actually better.
Project 'cafe' - a cafe in Europe and Japan is an establishment serving snacks, usually pies and sweets with coffee inside at cozy tables or outside on a patio. The project name creates the feeling of a console that is played indoors and out.
The controllers nature having a 6 inch touch screen display while alsi wireless would suggest a controller that allows the player to take his game on the go so that the controller becomes a handheld gaming system.
Also wanted to add that I totally called this, I am psychic, please make all checks payable to lazyfatbum.
I suppose this would also mean that Nintendo thinks enough people have hd televisions now, strangely enough of all the people I know with 360's or ps3's only one of them uses an hdmi cable. This means out of 100+ people only one is actually playing in full Hd. Does this mean Nintendo's system will ship with an hdni cable? Also to note this is totally a spit in the face to pirates. You won't be able to play an illegally downloaded game on an emulator for wii2 unless you can get the controller to work with the pc.
Having said that, I'm sure it won't take long to break that code.
Also of interest is Nintendo's neener neener approach - ie; look everyone a device that measures your heart rate! *vapor* to cause confusion among its rivals. This could be one such instance. On theory this will be a 300 +dollar system with 80 +dollar controllers. For release during a low economy. During the Wii's 6th year of dominance in the market. Why is Nintendo doing this now? The 3ds isn't even seething yet, and instead of intigratng it in to the console, we get a controller with touch screen on it?
If real, and i also calledthis; *toots own horn* the Wii and wii2 will act as two skis for the market hitting two demographics. The casual get the Wii, the h@rdk0r3 ZING grafixxx1 get the wii2.
If ms and Sony release next gen systems, it will be a marginal graphical increase barely noticeable. So they'll be looking at new tech to make it unique and interesting to consumers. Shits bout to get real.
Quote:Also wanted to add that I totally called this, I am psychic, please make all checks payable to lazyfatbum.
I thought you said that they wouldn't have separate handhelds and consoles next time though, which isn't true. They have the 3DS, and this, separate. It does sound like the Wii 2 will have some kind of portable component though, it's true -- the controller has that big touchscreen on it apparently, and it'll probably be able to do something on its own...
Anyway, the rumors keep coming. System power rumors put it at somewhere above the 360, but maybe not as much above it as a truly next gen console should be. That would be too bad, once the others release new systems that are much more powerful again... supposedly there are more surprises about the design to come, though. Most of the rumors are about the tech (CPU, GPU, RAM) and about that controller... so it'll have a 6" touchscreen, analog sticks, a dpad or something, triggers... buttons hopefully, too? How big IS this thing going to be, anyway, if the rumors are at all accurate...
I did say that but as one possibility, but thinking about It again imagine this controller; a 6 inch screen with full analog sticks and face buttons. That doesn't sound very portable to me, and if it was designed for portability it would be ergonomically retarded to use as a home console controller..... right? But what if the 6inch screen pops out? It would be just like an itouch. No controller parts, just the screen. But how would you play the console version of the game with just that? just confusing.
lazyfatbum Wrote:I did say that but as one possibility, but thinking about It again imagine this controller; a 6 inch screen with full analog sticks and face buttons. That doesn't sound very portable to me, and if it was designed for portability it would be ergonomically retarded to use as a home console controller..... right? But what if the 6inch screen pops out? It would be just like an itouch. No controller parts, just the screen. But how would you play the console version of the game with just that? just confusing.
I can tell you first hand from playing ROMS on my android phone, that using a touch screen as a controller is a real pain in the ass, epically trying to emulate a analog stick and multiple button presses at the same time.. It just doesn't work.. You really loose something with out that tactile feedback, plus you quickly run out of fingers trying to hold the damn thing..
Just keep in mind a lot of this is still rumor mill. The "hardest" stuff is still just that it'll be a new system with HD support. Let's wait until E3 before concluding anything.
I gotta agree with etoven. Touch screens make for terrible standard controllers. I think the only way for it to work would be as a DS style screen in the middle used for specific functions a touch screen can excel at. However, even there it won't work nearly that well for a console. On the DS, both screens are right by each other, you can look at both well enough. On the TV? Moving your head to look up and down all the time would quickly grow tiresome. It worked well enough for Four Sword Adventure, but there are some limits, and there it worked likely because the action moved with you from main screen to GBA screen.
Yeah, just confusing. A touch screen has obvious benefit of being able to add contextual buttons. If it used multi touch, you could zoom in and out and rotate the camera through pinching actions. As separate camera angle is also easily done if the game can actually stream to the screen, perfect for local multiplayer.
But I don't see the big picture. I don't see the wow that's genius pop. It could have a soft keyboard for thumb typing during games online, if the wiihd can do netflix the touchscreen is the obvious place for a chat room, facts about the movie, IMDb info, etc. Tutorials can go there during gameplay and obviously, starfox and metal gear solid would be perfect for it. xD
But what's the big draw? What's the feature that will say Yes, this is exactly what we need in the evolution of gaming.
I see it as a fast menu for switching weapons or gear. But look at established genres such as resident evil, what could go on that touch screen to revolutionize the game play? A map. The inventory screen. Okay, but what about the touch screen displaying a first person view while the tv displays the classic static camera angles? What if you re-did Other M so that her visor view was always accessable through the touch screen so you never have to switch? That's cool, but not mind blowing.
My theory at this point is that we've been purposely fed stray bits of info to create interest and confusion. All the info comes from ign who are in bed with Nintendo pr. If news hits that the controller has a camera just like the wiimote, except its fully functional, I would tell you its an augmented reality setup. But Nintendo has that market with 3ds. There is some other catalyst here we're not privy to, some function or doodad that will make everything click.
I'm holding in my hot little hands a Droid inspire. It's screen is a cheap but HD multitouch screen so its not beyond Nintendo to go this route. The question though still remains as to why.
If the controller had the sensor to measure your heart rate and temperature it still doesn't qualify as reasoning behind a separate screen.
Wuh duh fuh.
I think Nintendo should just drop out of the console hardware market (aside from the handhelds) and do like Sega, Publish games on all systems there is too many consoles as it stands.
As for the "HD" thing, Nintendo had less incentive for it since "Sony" unlike them is primarily in the business of selling consumer electronics and the PS3 was a clever vehicle to win the HD dvd race with their blue-ray players.
There is so much wrong with that post I can't get the bewildering astonishment off my face long enough to post a serious reply.
Give him some slack, I understood everything he said there!
I've pretty much gotten over Nintendo not putting HD support into the Wii, so I'm not all that concerned about that. However there's plenty of need for them to do it this time around, whether they make TVs or not.
At any rate, the real thing I'm not sure I agree with is Nintendo dropping out of making systems. Nintendo jump started the motion control movement, and if they were only making software, they would lose the control they need to make these unique things. Of course that's not all they've made standard, such as analog sticks, force feedback, and the basic d-pad. Nintendo is really good at innovating new control systems. If Nintendo became a 3rd party developer, it would need to be in the right environment where they were allowed free reign to develop whatever controllers they wished and get them adopted by the console makers. Keep in mind that Nintendo is still making the best handheld gaming devices around. iPads may be more powerful and have superior built in software, but they are very awkward as gaming devices, because they're touch screens all by themselves.
What Nintendo is terrible at is embracing online networks. What I think they would benefit from is snagging some developers behind XBox Live and Steam and creating an in-house group from that picked up talent to develop a proper online network for their own systems. They picked up some random MTV personality to LEAD their NOA offices, I think they could pull this off.
Nintendo is by far number one in hardware right now, why should they stop? Hd is necessary given that very few forms of entertainment are even created with less than 720x resolutions, including graphics shades and filters that push details and effects that can't be done at lower resolutions. What does going hd have to do with Sony at all?
A bluray disk is just a high capacity DVD. Nintendo can make their own propriety format.
Nintendo CAN do that, but I don't think they should. High capacity normal DVDs are doing well enough right now. There's still games that sit comfortably in the 5 GB range. If they can reduce the costs of solid state enough, I'd actually advocate returning to cartridges, something like 16 GB being standard size. As I said though, costs would need to be reduced a bit, but Nintendo can make it happen (for one, they wouldn't need to be rewritable except for a small portion for saved data). At best, they could just license Bluray. Why reinvent the wheel? It's much cheaper just to pay the royalties and use what's already there.
That's all assuming the next generation isn't all just online stores anyway, in which case all Nintendo needs to do is provide large capacity storage built into the "Wii 2".
Quote:What does going hd have to do with Sony at all?
lazy, I am responding to early posts on this thread from those dumbfounded about Nintendo's decision to not include HD support, Well all I meant to say was that Nintendo is not in the business of making Tv's and home-theaters so they had fewer incentives to make the Wii go HD.
Its true that Nintendo has always been innovators, I don't see why they couldn't do that by selling 3rd party peripherals and merely collaborate with sony and MS.
You could argue that any of them should just make games instead of hardware. Why Nintendo specifically?
Anyone know the size of 3ds cards?
8 gigs. I can download that in less than a minute. Bluray is 25 gigs single layer right? Okay now I'm going to spend like 20 minutes downloading that, but what game on ps3 actually uses all 25 gigs? Any of them? I'm willing to bet not even close. 360 uses normal dvds and where's the issue there? It works beautiful. Why not go full digital for wii2 I mean seriously, why not.
I still don't se the benefit of streaming a full hd game to a 6 inch screen on a controller that's not a portable gaming system. It is seriously just so I can play a game on the toilet? REALLY? or play on the porch because its a nice day outside?
The only thing that makes sense is a streamlined portable gaming system that acts as a controller for a home console. It's marketing would dictate that its a portable home console, its to play your console game in the go. So the only reason to get a 3ds is for the camera, video, microphone and 3D of course. But why not just use the 3ds as the controller.... Arg it makes no snense DIMMAT
Dark Jaguar Wrote:You could argue that any of them should just make games instead of hardware. Why Nintendo specifically?
MS and Sony have always had lackluster 1st and 2nd party software , They both are dependent on 3rd party developers to carry their machines, While Nintendo's is a notch above most of the prominent third parties when it comes to making games and if anyone could go the Sega route and succeed it would be Nintendo.
To make games for the two companies that are barely producing a combined install base of Nintendo hardware?
Purell is for your hands, sometimes your penis, but do not drink it.
Sega had to go that route specifically because they couldn't retard their way out of a wet paper bag when it came to marketing a console that wasn't the Genesis. This is not a problem which tends to afflict Nintendo these days.
I'd still prefer a single console standard instead of having to spend twelve hundred dollars just to make sure I can play any game I want. This never-ending standards war stunts innovation more than anything else.
Nintendo has nothing to gain by going third-party.
They're also the only of the three companies that consistently makes a profit on hardware.
Welty, I'm right there with you about creating an industry standard each generation, one that updates over time. At most I'd just need to buy a lot of controllers, but I already have to do that so that's still fine.
However, Sega's Japanese marketing for the Saturn was absolutely incredible. Why don't more companies threaten consumers with ridiculously incredible violence if they don't buy their stuff?
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/o3lCF8O2N50" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Newest rumors -- The N6 will have no internal hard drive, but 8GB of internal flash instead; it'll use 25GB discs; in addition to the controller with the screen it'll also work with some form of Wiimote; and a few more things.
http://kotaku.com/#!5797890/nintendos-ne...+drive-era
A Black Falcon Wrote:Newest rumors -- The N6 will have no internal hard drive, but 8GB of internal flash instead; it'll use 25GB discs; in addition to the controller with the screen it'll also work with some form of Wiimote; and a few more things.
http://kotaku.com/#!5797890/nintendos-ne...+drive-era
So for a machine that will supposedly compare with the current PS3, it has a tiny fraction of it's storage, with a game media that can only hold half as much as a double layer blu ray, now offered on the PS3.... And this is supposed to
compete with Sony and Microsoft.. Yea, there off to a great start..
I told you guys Iwata hates things that are awesome.. Wii's make the sales because of their unique gimmick. But that all it is... a gimmick.
I predict this will only take them so far before the Wii goes the way of the Game.com (pronounced game com).. How about a system for the big boys Nintendo!
< Yea read up on that piece of shit.
Quote:Link
It was marketed as a portable device that could play games on the internet.. Yet you where teathered to a serial box --> teathered to a modem which was only 14K --> teathered to another huge fucking thing --> teathered to the wall. Oww, and by internet game play, they ment a ansi terminal (those workstations you might see at autozone or some other car repair shop that are text only and extremly difficult to operate) And your ISP had to make a ISP module for this damn thing which was huge and you had to buy.. No, entering settings would be to easy for this piece of shit..
Internal storage will only be a problem for downloadable games and content [yes, it is way too little] and the disc storage space will only be problem for prerendered cutscenes [don't really see this being a major issue at all].
I guess I just don't get Nintendo... It's like they want to build systems for 13 year old girls...
Every other system on the market uses hard drives for internal storage and has HD graphics it's clearly what gamers want. Yet Nintendo is just now considering HD, and still refused to use a hard drive for storage..
I just don't get it.. Why denounce a good thing?
The one and only reason for such tactics I can think off, is that they wont to keep the prices down and focus on fun games.. But if that is true, honestly how much does putting in a hard drive VS solid state storage add to the price? It dosn't even have to be a good harddrive if it's just going to be used for game saves and downloadable content. Hell, I can pick up a decent hard drive on new egg for around 30 bucks, that will hold half a terrabyte and that's retail, I'm sure they could easily equip the Wii 2 with OEM drives and keep prices manageable.
Clearly Nintendo wan't to build a kiddie system, just look at the titles, Resident Evil is just about the only graphic game in the entire franchise and it's only on the Wii because of corporate maneuvering. Why do they hate progress so much?
How the hard drive is used on the 360 is a gimmick. Uploading your game but still needing the disk in the drive? The largest XBLA game is 2gig this includes downloading original XBox games. Most are 150MB+
The Wii has 512MB, yet i have around 15 games downloaded on the thing. This juggle of compression and emulation allows for tiny game files and a 8Gig internal memory is fine to me. Show me the must have reason for a HDD. Movies? Netflix. Uploading your entire game? Stupid. The Wii2 will, most likely, play Gamecube and Wii titles. Everything else is on small emulation files.
The only factor is original download only software. Is 8Gig (rumored) enough? Shadow Complex was 800MB, while that nearly takes a whole gig from my 8 for a HD game of that size and scope i'd be willing to take the storage hit. Hell, I could download 5 games like Shadow Complex and have room left over for tons of virtual console and plenty of save game space. When i hit the ceiling and run out of room, I just delete something i dont play or move it to an SD card. Ultimately the question is cost, am i willing to juggle a little in order to keep cost down? Are you?