Nintendo Switch/NX Discussion

Discussion in 'Video Games and Technology' started by Gaastra, Mar 17, 2015.

  1. Dead Metal

    Dead Metal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Posts:
    1,801
    Trophy Points:
    232
    Likes:
    +420
    Ebay:
    Nintendo has to pander towards 3rd Party creators to have a larger library of games and larger appeal to customers.
    The XBox does make money for Microsoft, about half way into the 360's lifetime Microsoft made a huge deal about the XBox brand finaly paying off.
    The reason for that was because Microsoft sunk a huge amount of capital into the original XBox, they were entering a market they had barely any understanding of, and no name for themselves. At the time they started work on it, the market was dominated by Nintendo, Sega and Sony, there were other smaller names, but those three are the big three. Microsoft was not only sinking millions into the machine itself, but marketing, market research, and games. Microsoft went and bought entire gaming studios, some of which with pre-established names, to offer a decent and interesting library of launch titles. On top of that Microsoft then went and invested even more money to give the box something special that nobody else was offering at the time a proper online functionality. Sega had that before right out of the box, but they went under before the XBox debuted. Nintendo tried and failed, and Sony kinda had something for a few select games.
    The XBox established itself as essentially a specialized gaming PC for those who are serious about their gaming.

    And yes, the power of a console is a huge part of why people buy it. Remember the one true console war? It was waged between Nintendo and Sega, Sega pushed out the 16 bit Megadrive during the NES's lifetime and advertised how it was much more powerful than the 8 bit NES. That advertising granted them a pretty hefty market share, which got even bigger once 3rd Party developers started to jump ship and release titles for the Megadrive instead of the NES.
    Nintendo finally realized that they couldn't sit back anymore and released the 16 bit SNES to compete with the Megadrive, and it was much more powerful than the Megadrive. Yet still Sega spouted that the Megadrive was more powerful, because it had "blast processing" which made their games run so much faster than SNES games, in truth that "blast processing" was just a slightly faster processing speed, which the SNES made up for with its hardware anyway.
    That whole thing kicked off the bit war and because Nintendo is too arrogant they've been losing market share ever since.

    They were to arrogant to listen to their 3rd Party developers in the 80s, causing them to join up with Sega, too arrogant to react fast enough to the more powerful Megadrive, lost more market share.
    Too arrogant to jump on the trend of optical media, thus having cartridges for the N64 despite everyone else long using CDs, which meant that games were more expensive to make for publishers and the cartridges didn't have enough memory for the games, or have good audio, means more developers developing for the Playstation.
    GameCube they finally use discs, but instead of CDs or DVDs they use their own proprietary format, which again made it more difficult and expensive for 3rd party developers.
    Then the Wii comes out and it's just a GameCube with motion controls. Now the machine isn't as powerful as the competition, has a proprietary medium for games, and incompatible controls.
    Wii U, made it sound and look like just a new accessory for the previous Wii and while more powerful than the competition, it was released at the time that the competing consoles were already being fazed out to be replaced with much more powerful flashier ones, which were again more powerful than the WiiU.
    Sony and Microsoft listened to developers, the console architecture of both XBone and PS4 are much closer to PCs, making porting games much easier (especially important for PS4, since botht he PS2 and PS3 were hard to develop for making many games look less good than on competing hardware), both use a standard optical medium that is cheap to make to supply their games and have large internal harddrives, while Nintendo tries to convince people that 30GB is more than enough for pro gamers.

    So yes, Nintendo has to step up their game, the next system has to be powerful, it has to be accessible, it has to be marketed properly and it needs games - not a few games, but many games.

    They should ditch the Wii remote and the gamepad as a defining accessory and just include a controller as the main input medium. Make the Gamepad an optional accessory, with a larger battery, and advertise it as something different from the Wii and Wii U.
    Launch it with their maskots and most famous titles, it looks like they are looking at the report of how Zelda is delayed yet again. And advertise the 3DS compatibility.

    Nintendo still has a name in this industry, but they're slowly losing it, that's the entire reason Miitomo even exists, because they're trying to reach out and gain more customers.


    Nintendo not being at E3 this year is no big deal, they've been showing up less and less and started their own more successful event. On top of that E3 is press only these days and turning more and more into a sham barely anyone cares about anymore.
     
  2. Cracka J

    Cracka J toss a coin to your witcher TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2009
    Posts:
    11,656
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    342
    Likes:
    +1,679
    I agree with this statement.

    But those 10-20 other customers already have some type of i(product) that fits their needs. These were the fad gamers that adopted the wii and then left Ninty to burn when steve jobs shat out his next greatest thing. Ninty really wants THEM back?

    Good luck.
     
  3. seali_me

    seali_me RIP January 2018

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2007
    Posts:
    19,845
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +2,358
    Nintendo also said, multiple times, they'll never support mobile gaming...

    Hey, that's ten million downloads disagreeing.

    One thing I know about Nintendo is most of the time they sell console system and have done so well, most of the time. They sell fun innovative systems. They never heavily relied on games themselves and when they did it failed. I'm looking at the Wii U.

    The surprise a lot of people are talking about will be in the NX, the console, as always. Higher graphic capability doesn't necessarily mean more fun.
     
  4. flamepanther

    flamepanther Interested, but not really

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Posts:
    15,154
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +5,397
    Except that it wasn't? That's sort of a big deal in why that was the "one true console war." Instead of just releasing a more powerful system, Nintendo released a less powerful system equipped with more bells and whistles. That "slightly faster processing speed" was only a few Hz, but back then a few Hz made a huge difference. If Nintendo had actually released a faster system in addition to their larger color palette, advanced raster effects, and sample-based music synthesis, there would have been no contest (if price were no issue, anyway).

    Sega's console was like a sleek but no-frills supercar. If Nintendo had shown up with their own supercar, it would've been a simple drag race. But they brought a stretched limousine with a mini bar, a Jacuzzi, and a ball pit in the back. Instead of a race, it became a popularity contest about which was more subjectively enjoyable. Do you wanna go fast, or go in style? Enjoy the rush, or slow down and enjoy the scenery?

    And since multiplatform games had to make huge sacrifices on either system (or be lackluster on both), we got an era where developers and publishers preferred to tailor each of their games to one of the two systems, leaving each console with a very distinctive library that the other couldn't match. That is exactly why the competition was so divisive and intense.

    Nintendo is the only major company still trying to drive that kind of lateral innovation instead of making it a number-crunching dick-waving contest.

    Incidentally, there was a 16-bit console that was more powerful than the Sega Genesis and had graphics and sound capabilities comparable to the SNES: NeoGeo. And it was amazing, but as a home console it priced itself out of the market. Nintendo would have done the same if they'd given the SNES a state of the art CPU in addition to all of its other frills. The console that's best at everything typically loses.

    There are plenty of gamers out there who aren't served well by the AAA cycle, but who also are not "fad gamers". A lot of folks got left in the cold after what Penny Arcade once called "The Suckening". That's a huge part of the resurgent popularity of retro gaming. I'm one of them. Nintendo has a strong appeal for us, not because they're Nintendo, but because they focus on games with a different type of enjoyability. Your avatar suggests you like Azure Striker Gunvolt. Have your needs for that type of game been better met by Nintendo serving their base of diverse gamers, or by Sony and MS serving their base of dudebros and erstwhile PC gamers?

    But just for the sake of argument... Steve Jobs is dead now, and Apple is struggling to maintain the hold over the general public they once had. If Nintendo did want "fad gamers" back, their odds of keeping them are getting better.

    Yeah... and how are you liking Nintendo's offering as a mobile software company so far?
     
  5. seali_me

    seali_me RIP January 2018

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2007
    Posts:
    19,845
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +2,358
    I didn't download that thing. Requires Twitter. That's for kids.

    My purchases have dwindled since PS2 and GameCube days. These "AAA" games contain mostly movies. I want games. Then again that's when I made a comeback and bought everything in sight.

    I wish I kept my consoles and game collection before that. Sigh.
     
  6. flamepanther

    flamepanther Interested, but not really

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Posts:
    15,154
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +5,397
    No, Twitter is optional. But my point is that Nintendo as a software-only company would basically suck.
     
  7. seali_me

    seali_me RIP January 2018

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2007
    Posts:
    19,845
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +2,358
    Like I said, Nintendo heavily relies upon their machine to sell. People may call it gimmicks but it's also what saved and created video game. Can't wait to see what the NX is.

    The glasses and walking peripherals is what I'm hoping for.
     
  8. Cracka J

    Cracka J toss a coin to your witcher TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2009
    Posts:
    11,656
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    342
    Likes:
    +1,679
    Why the snark? I'm not personally attacking anyone posting in here, I'm discussing a game company and their decisions/choices. No need to get panties in a twist.

    But anyway to answer a few questions you addressed:

    Personally I don't think nintendo has innovated since the 16 bit era. That was the height of their gameplay, height of their game art, really the golden age if you were around for it. Could say the same for sega as well. There was just extreme competition back then and it fueled everyone to press harder and release the best product available. I think that era produced so many "special" titles in that time not because of what solely Nintendo did, but the general atmosphere back then. There was a drive to bring the best products to market, and it still is evident in the games from that period.

    So no, I don't hold Nintendo responsible for that era's enjoyability. I think it was a product of the environment back then.

    Gunvolt was developed by inticreates, a 3rd party company not ninty. It was on 3ds, sure. But it was also made available for both microsoft store and steam so not sure what the point being made there is? I'd buy it for whatever it released on, I love inticreates stuff.

    The point about apple is that they continuously release new tech/hardware for the tech hipsters and apple fanboys on almost a yearly basis. There is no way Nintendo is going to ever keep up with that, even if they target those fans. I'm sure they will get a good revenue stream from the mobile apps and microtransactions in the future but the big thing with those fans is cutting edge tech, not toys. Nintendo trying to bait those volatile players in may end up being an even worse scheme than trying to fight Sony and MS head on.
     
  9. flamepanther

    flamepanther Interested, but not really

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Posts:
    15,154
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +5,397
    ByteBack said that for every gamer in Sony and MS' core audience there are 10 or 20 gamers who aren't. I think it's pretty clear that includes some of the folks in this thread, but you immediately equated it to "fad gamers".

    It's not about "back then" or even about how much Nintendo does or does not innovate. The console makers tend to set the tone for what their consoles will be all about, largely by defining the main audience. The types of games being made by Inticreates, WayForward, et. al. still have a higher likelihood of showing up on Nintendo consoles and actually getting attention there, even now. That's an effect of Nintendo's audience not being as hung up on graphics-maxing AAA games, interactive movies, and multiplayer FPS.
     
  10. Cracka J

    Cracka J toss a coin to your witcher TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2009
    Posts:
    11,656
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    342
    Likes:
    +1,679
    You equating me saying "fad gamers" and drawing conclusions that certain posters in this thread fall under that title is your opinion, not mine. I didn't direct that comment at anyone here.

    And yeah the 3ds is a good platform for indie style 2d games to appear on, but there is tons of indie stuff that garners huge popularity on PC (usually first) than trickles to consoles once they know it's a safe bet. In fact most of the stuff I play these days works that way...some are still in waiting periods for their eventual console ports.
     
  11. Liege Prime

    Liege Prime Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2006
    Posts:
    9,861
    News Credits:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    287
    Likes:
    +2,114
    I know people think 3rd party support is what Nintendo needs, but all I really want it Nintendo to really support their own consoles. I want to see new, innovative Mario games which we haven't seen on the WiiU, a new Zelda game, which really didn't happen on the WiiU, a new Metroid game, which we haven't seen on the WiiU.

    It felt like Nintendo made a lot of easy, maybe lazy choices with their own games on the WiiU and it left me as a Nintendo fan in the dust. I don't want to see that with the NX.
     
  12. flamepanther

    flamepanther Interested, but not really

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Posts:
    15,154
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +5,397
    The question is who was ByteBack talking about. Pretty sure it wasn't meant to be "fad gamers." You're the one who made the assumptive jump there. If someone says that lots of people are looking for something other than PS4 and XBO, and you immediately assume that means "fad gamers" then how are others supposed to perceive that assumption?
    PC is indeed the go-to for indie, niche, and small budget games. But we're talking about consoles. PC is a far better source of AAA FPS and RPG games too, and yet the Sony and MS consoles seem to do OK.
     
  13. Liege Prime

    Liege Prime Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2006
    Posts:
    9,861
    News Credits:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    287
    Likes:
    +2,114
    Cracka J, just wanted to say that one of the TFW2005 rules is "Do not attempt to argue or debate with Flamepanther." Stop breaking the rules.
     
  14. Cracka J

    Cracka J toss a coin to your witcher TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2009
    Posts:
    11,656
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    342
    Likes:
    +1,679
    Yup, sure did. That's how I interpreted it in his statement, my opinion on what that statement means, etc.

    But I wasn't derogatorily name calling anyone that in this thread, you made that assumption. If you perceive yourself or someone else here as a fad gamer, that's your deal, not mine.

    fuuuuuuuuuu

    I'm out
     
  15. flamepanther

    flamepanther Interested, but not really

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Posts:
    15,154
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +5,397
    You're also the one interpreting my statements as "snark" when to me I'm just offering an alternate perspective. If you're not responsible for how your statements come off to me, why am I responsible for how mine look to you?
    I didn't say you were name calling anyone. I'm not either. But since you brought up the issue of why someone might get offended, I'm trying to ask this one question: what is the implication of your comment?
    "People who aren't into PS4 and XBO are fad gamers." That's the direct logical implication of how you responded. Even if everyone in the thread is a PS4 fanboy, if someone says "some people don't like PS4" and you say "fad gamers" there's no other way to interpret that. If that's really what you think, then own it. If it's not, then the misunderstanding is on you, not me.
     
  16. Dead Metal

    Dead Metal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Posts:
    1,801
    Trophy Points:
    232
    Likes:
    +420
    Ebay:
    The SNES was more powerful, yes the Megadrive's chip had higher speeds, but the SNES beat it in everything else. The sound processing was more powerful, the graphics processing was more powerful it was literally more powerful in everything. The higher clock speed of the processor (the same that the Neo Geo used, just clocked as high) doesn't really matter when the rest of the system isn't powerful enough to take advantage of it.
    The SNES could show more colours, more sprites, and more layers as well as blasting better music.
    As a result the games looked and sounded better, on top of that it had the ability for cartridges to contain their own support chips to make the games run and look even better should there be any need (like the Super FX chip). The bells and whistles was exactly what made it a better more powerful machine
    The reason the SNES survived and the much better Neo Geo didn't, was mostly down to price and availability, the Neo Geo cost 650 dollars, the SNES about 200, and Nintendo had the better marketing and distribution.

    And higher clock speed does not translate well into better gaming performance, even today.

    My point was that Nintendo delivered a much more powerful and capable machine than their main competitor at the time, while over the last two generations they decided to not do that. The big thing that held the GameCube back was that it did not play DVDs at a time were consoles were bought as entertainment systems that could do more than just play games, and restricted their developers by creating their own proprietary game media. That restriction lead to less games being made for GC, giving the competition an even bigger edge. The PS2's library had a much larger and more varied selection of games than the GameCube had, and even more variety within the different genres. I remember that so well because I had personally bought a GC while my brother owned the PS2 at the time, and while I thought the games on GC looked and ran much better, there were simply more to choose from on the PS2. I could even compare games directly, Shadow the Hedgehog for instance looks and runs much better and smoother on GC than PS2.
     
  17. Cracka J

    Cracka J toss a coin to your witcher TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2009
    Posts:
    11,656
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    342
    Likes:
    +1,679
    I didn't think it needed clarification yet again, but I was specifically referring to the apple based crowd that picked up the wii for a year and dropped it for the next iproduct. Those are the "fad gamers" I was specifically pinpointing as a crowd ninty is potentially trying to win back. I thought I made that clear in my original post and several following posts.

    Not directed at all at people who have supported nintendo or other gaming platforms, which is what you are inferring as the 10-20 other people who don't want a sony or ms system. But continue your crusade brother, more power to you.

    I really hope I don't have to clarify again, cause I'm really bored of this thread now.
     
  18. seali_me

    seali_me RIP January 2018

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2007
    Posts:
    19,845
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +2,358
    The last time Nintendo created something innovative was the Wii and it sold tons and even beat the competition.

    The only console I can't stomach is the Xbox. Too many (annoying) kids on that thing.
     
  19. flamepanther

    flamepanther Interested, but not really

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Posts:
    15,154
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +5,397
    I get what you're saying, but that's like suggesting that a 386 PC with a scanner and printer attached is "more powerful" than a 486 PC without them. Yes, the decked-out 386 would be capable of things the naked 486 couldn't do, but that's not what's normally meant by "more powerful".
    Yes.
    On paper, but harder to support in practice. Theoretically, the SNES can handle 128 sprites at once, while the Genesis will refuse to handle more than 80. But that doesn't mean it handles 128 sprites well. In practice it was uncommon to use as many as 80 sprites, and by the time you got to 128, the SNES would experience slow-down in addition to flicker due to exceeding the pixels-per-line limitation. So the theoretical 128 limit is basically worthless. If you had a SNES and a Genesis rendering 80 32x32 sprites, the Genesis would handle them better (color limitations not withstanding). As a life-long SNES fanboy, it pains me to say that, but it's true.

    As for layers, that's again technically true, on paper. But that's just a matter of how many layers you can define by normal means without any special programming. The NES technically had only one background layer, but games like Ninja Gaiden III proved that you could have multiple parallaxing layers on it anyway. The Sega Genesis technically only had two scrolling background layers, and yet you'd be hard pressed to find a decent Genesis game that only actually used two. Many Genesis games had far more than four layers of scrolling (the SNES's maximum). This was common on the Genesis largely thanks to its speedier CPU.
    I personally agree, but that's subjective. Sample-based music was a big step up IMO, but the way the SPU handled interpolation of those samples is polarizing, much like the extreme blur of the N64's texture filtering. To some people, the interpolated samples sound "farty". And while the Genesis technically had 6 audio channels to the 8 channels on SNES, Sega's Yamaha FM synthesizer could still do things that can't really be replicated on the SNES. When used right, some people like it better. *shrug*
    The downside is that this increased the cost of manufacturing those games, and that cost had to either be passed on to the consumer or cut into the publisher's profits. As a result, this feature was used very sparingly. Additionally, while the SNES' engineers were wise to include special pins for those expansion chips, extra chips weren't unique to the SNES. Even the NES had plenty of expansion chips. The Genesis was capable of using them too, which was how we first got Virtua Racing on that platform... but they chose to focus on 32X instead of using lots of special chips on a per-game basis. On the other hand, because of Sega's faster CPU, a lot of games that required no special hardware on the Genesis would have needed an extra chip for a proper SNES port... which is why so few high-speed games were ported over.
    ...which is more or less what I said. Nintendo held back on their CPU in order to include other features and not increase the price of the console.
    That's a "specifically today" thing, not an "even today" thing. It's a simple matter of diminishing returns. When your clock speeds are being measured in single digit MHz, overclocking by just a few Hz can eliminate slowdowns in a game. 5 MHz versus 7 MHz was a world of difference. Now that CPUs are typically in the upper hundreds or low thousands of MHz, a difference of a couple of MHz is a drop in the bucket, and no longer really perceptible. It absolutely made a difference in the 1990s. Thunderforce IV on SNES isn't even imaginable.
    That's the legend, at least. PS2 definitely inflated its install base by doubling as a cheap DVD player, but by the time the GC rolled along mostly anyone who needed a DVD player had one (even if it was a PS2). It's unlikely Nintendo would have received the same boost Sony did by including a DVD player in their console. Nobody really mentions this as a major factor in the death of the Dreamcast. IMO Nintendo was hurt far more by a hostile gamer culture and being late to the party (but if they hadn't been, then they would have benefited from a DVD player).
    Not that it matters much, but technically they didn't use a proprietary media. GC discs are just mini-DVDs with an encrypted file system. Dreamcast was the console that had a proprietary media format during that generation.
    Again, not really. Certainly not anywhere near how media capacity affected the N64. The vast majority of PS2 games could easily fit on a GameCube mini-DVD, and yet they still didn't get ported over. The real reason for that is that the core demographic for those games mostly didn't have GameCubes. They had PS2s.

    Consider: The original X-BOX fared about as badly as the Gamecube in terms of 3rd party selection... arguably worse. This happened even though it was even more powerful than the GameCube, had an affordable DVD player add-on, and supported full-size DVDs for games. The issue is that Sony had already cornered the market early on. Simple as that.
    I'm with you on that. I had both consoles myself. Unfortunately, looking and running better is simply not a primary factor in winning a console war. Nowadays it's also much harder for consoles to look and perform better than their competition enough that most consumers would even notice the difference. As this continues, graphics and processing power will be increasingly irrelevant to anyone but the "PC Master Race" crowd.
     
  20. seali_me

    seali_me RIP January 2018

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2007
    Posts:
    19,845
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +2,358
    Those slow downs felt more like bullet time back in the day. I still remember Gradius 3, Darius and R-type doing so and it felt good.

    Same as how I hear Fireshark and Thunderforce's wailing guitars on the Megadrive.

    I don't know man those flaws aren't flaws anymore.

    Also why are we going Nintendon't and blast processing all of a sudden?