Quantcast
Nintendo's Evolution from Gamecube to Switch (...was pre-mediated imho)

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Nintendo's Evolution from Gamecube to Switch (...was pre-mediated imho)

Tagged games:

hunter_alien said:
bdbdbd said:

It's more like the industry is moving away from TV. Even if you'd think stuff like Chromecast would be a move towards hybrid, it is still using the device that you stream from as an interface, making the "hybrid" approach rather useless.

If you look at the market currently, it looks like Sony is in a rather dire position considering the future, as Sony seems to be only one still locked into a TV. MS has UWP, so you technically can play all the UWP games on all Windows devices, Nintendo has Switch (and 3DS, though I don't think 3DS will be important anymore in the future) that don't require a TV, then there are all the Android devices.

Then again, didn't Kaz take the direction to make "Playstation" a service (not different than Steam) a few years back.

Really? I always imagined that PS+ and PSN are a 2-pillar aproach that Sony might capitalize on going forward. IMO when it comes to gaming they are pretty well set in thatr regards. As soon as they have the pricing figured out they should be golden in the age of the post-TV livingroom.

I think Kaz agrees you here. The problem is, that in the future the competition is between the different marketplaces on the same device(s). Console manufacturing is lucrative business because of the third party royalties when you succeed, but nothing really guarantees the publishers would be interested in publishing games on Sony's service, as you have other services already to compete with. Or maybe this would be the best thing ever to happen to Playstation and Sony makes more profit than ever with it. Or maybe Sony pulls out PS3,5 similar hybrid to Switch and has a runaway success. In any case, it looks like the dumbed down PC plugged to your TV is slowly coming to an end. 



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

Around the Network
Mandalore76 said:

I know that many like to view Nintendo as a company that chases trends and casuals and has an inconsistent hit or miss success rate with hardware.  Until the launch of the Switch, the success of the Wii was written off as a fluke or aberration sandwiched between the failures of the Gamecube and the Wii U.  I have a different take on this however.  I believe that the Nintendo Switch is a device that Nintendo as a corporation has been working towards going back to the Gamecube era.  It all started with Nintendo's push for "connectivity" of devices and the GBA Link Cable that connected Nintendo's Gameboy Advance handheld to Nintendo's Gamecube home console.

           

This allowed for innovative gameplay ideas utilizing the Gameboy Advance as a 2nd screen for the Gamecube console.  In my opinion, the best utilization of this was done with "Pac-Man Vs." which was developed by Nintendo and published by Namco to bundled into Namco's releases of "Pac-Man World 2", "I Ninja", and "R: Racing Evolution".  The Gameplay of "Pac-Man Vs." consists of 3 players controlling the Ghosts using Gamecube controllers plugged into the Gamecube's first 3 controller ports, while 1 player played as Pac-Man through the Gameboy Advance connected to the Gamecube's 4th controller port via the Link Cable.  (Both the N64 and Gamecube had 4 controller ports built in, and did not require an adapter to be purchased separately for local multiplayer as opposed to other systems of the day)  The 3 Ghost players could see the small surrounding area of their positions on the TV screen (expandable by eating fruit) as they hunt for Pac-Man.  Meanwhile, the Pac-Man player would see the entire maze on the Gamecube screen.  The Ghost players would have to verbally co-ordinate their search of the maze in an effort to trap Pac-Man, while Pac-Man had the advantage of knowing where all the Ghosts were in an effort to remain elusive.  It was an incredibly fun game and completely unique idea for the time.  I had all of the necessary components (Gamecube, Gameboy Advance, the Link Cable, and a copy of "Pac-Man Vs." that came with my purchase of "R: Racing Evolution"), and some of the people who would come over my house would specifically request that I hook everything up for play, or if I could bring over to attach to their Gamecube at home.

   

Unfortunately, "Pac-Man Vs." released late in 2003.  Two years after the release of the Gamecube, and by this point production had already been temporarily halted due to a surplus of unsold stock resulting in a price cut to $99.99.  The PS2 was wildly successful by contrast, and so this flew under many people's radar.  At this time, Nintendo was also beginning to dabble with motion technology.  The original idea was to release motion sensing controllers for the Gamecube.  However, due to the Gamecube's sagging sales, Nintendo executives feared that if released as a peripheral, the motion controllers would likewise fly under gamer's radar similar to the Link Cable.  The decision was made to instead build a new console around the controllers, thereby putting them directly into the hands of every new Nintendo console purchaser.  And thus, the Nintendo Wii was born as the successor to the Gamecube.

https://web.archive.org/web/20081207185136/http://uk.wii.ign.com/mail/2006-01-26.html

The Wii was an instant hit as millions embraced the phenomenon of it's pack-in game "Wii Sports" that allowed you to really feel like you were engaging in what your character was doing on screen from physically throwing punches in boxing, swinging and pitching in baseball, swinging a tennis racket, to actually bowling as well.  Nintendo's decision to build a new console around the Wii-motes, rather than release them as a peripheral to the failing Gamecube was an incredibly wise business move.  It propelled Nintendo to the winner of a console generation for the first time since the SNES.  As huge a phenomenon as the Wii was, however, it was a standard definition console, and hugely underpowered when compared to its HD competitors the PS3 and Xbox 360.  As the years wore on, this became more and more evident while many 3rd Parties dumped uninspired motion control cash-in shovelware.  Nintendo executives were keenly aware that they had to release a new HD console onto the market in order to bring back higher tier 3rd party games and the hardcore console gamer.  Thus, the Wii U began development.  The Wii U's Gamepad, with 2nd screen functionality is immediately reminiscent of the Gameboy Advance's connectivity with the Gamecube through the Link Cable.

 

It is interesting to note, however, that having a screen on a controller was also in the Nintendo mindset during the development of the Nintendo Wii.  One of the original design ideas for the Wii-mote featured both an analog stick and a touchscreen.  Nintendo ended up scrapping this idea, because they believed the Wii-mote should be a simple in design as possible, so that non-gamers would be able to pick it up and not be overwhelmed by a numerous configuration of button inputs.  Another carry over from the Wii into the Wii U Gamepad, was the fact that Nintendo desired an off-tv place to convey messages to the gamer more complex than the Wii's flashing blue-light disk tray.  This was something that was not cost effective in the Wii's cycle, but by the time of the Wii U, the idea had evolved into a full-fledged touchscreen.

https://www.nintendo.co.uk/Iwata-Asks/Iwata-Asks-E3-2011-Special-Edition-Wii-U/E3-2011-Special-Edition-Wii-U/2-The-Other-Screen/2-The-Other-Screen-205212.html

In my opinion, the Wii U finally combined the Gameboy Advance and Gamecube into a single cohesive system.  The concept was brilliant.  However, the execution didn't quite nail it.  When first announced, it was conveyed that you could take the Gamepad and continue gaming off-screen anywhere in your house.  In reality, the Wi-Fi communication between Gamepad and Wii U console was actually rather limited.  Walls, floors, and ceilings all interrupt communications.  I've been able to take my Gamepad into the basement and use Netflix or You Tube while working out on my treadmill, but that's if the Gamepad remains perfectly stationary, and therefore would not be practical if playing an actual game.  But, I believe this was just another step in Nintendo's evolutionary cycle.  Nintendo always knew where they wanted to go.  It was just a matter of when they could actually achieve it.  Just like a touchscreen controller was not yet cost-effective/practical for the Wii, Nintendo's dream of a Console/Handheld functionality for the Wii U Gamepad was not yet ready to be achieved either.  The Nintendo Switch, on the other hand, is that perfect marriage.

With the Nintendo Switch, you can console game on your tv.  And when it is time to go out, you can remove the Switch from its dock and seamlessly continue anywhere you want without restriction.  The Switch is proof of concept of the Gameboy Advance connected to the Gamecube via link cable finally delivered into your hands in one package with a unified library.  This becomes even more evident when you consider the fact that "Pac-Man Vs." has even made it's return.

Some consider the Wii a gimmick/fad that allowed Nintendo to "accidentally" recover from the failure of the Gamecube.  A fad that soon wore out and led into Nintendo failing again with the Wii U as they presumably chased another technology craze with tablet gaming.  As the Wii U failed, these people then assume that Nintendo had to rush into develop their newest gimmick, handheld console gaming.  I counter this hypothesis with one of my own.  Nintendo has by design incrementally leading themselves down the path towards the success of the Switch all along ever since the days of the Gamecube. 

  

There were bumps and hiccups along the way.  And a need to be as cost-effective as possible necessitated that they drive for the long end game rather than produce a prohibitively expensive device much sooner.  But, I still believe that the Nintendo Switch was the dream device Nintendo had been planning all along.  Not, something they stumbled onto out of desperation.  Rather than the Switch being a stop-gap console to replace a dying Wii U.  I think the Wii U was the stop gap console meant to bring in some sales in the interim period between the dying Wii and the actual readiness of a Switch launch.  This is why the Wii U never received the massive price-cuts that other systems normally get to increase sales or liquidate inventory.  The Wii U may have been a swing and a miss in the grand scheme of console sales, but it was also a taste of what was to come, and laid the necessary groundwork for its successor.

Please feel free to agree or disagree and share your thoughts.

Man, this was an amazing read!!
Can ia make a video about it?? 
It trully deserves to be exposed. 
For real, Congratulations!!



Chorlin said:

Man, this was an amazing read!!
Can ia make a video about it?? 
It trully deserves to be exposed. 
For real, Congratulations!!

The basic idea in the post is wrong; it makes Switch an hardware issue, when in fact Switch is resolving Nintendo's problem with software output. It is amazing how Nintendo execs shove it straight into people's faces and they still don't get it. Also the Wii's concept was to lower the cost of software development. Ever since the flop that was N64, Nintendo's been attempting to make game development as cheap as possible (sans Wii U).



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

It is interesting... maybe they have vision and great ideas...

Gamecube/Switch is the vision

Wii was the great idea

They stick to their vision (in the end) but cannot not release great idea



Switch!!!

There's much truth with this post. Of course you can see some long term vision in all the products Nintendo has released over these years, but I don't agree every element was pre-meditated.

Of course I believe Nintendo had been looking to make a console that works both as an handheld and as an home system for a long time. As rightfully stated by the OP Gamecube a Gameboy connectivity and even the Gameboy player are a proof of that.
I also strongly believe the WiiU was internally an attempt to test waters for an hybrid console to come while counting on the Wii brand popularity to sustain it, only Nintendo overestimated it by a long shot.

In fact on the WiiU you could see for the first time home console games built on the foundations of portable games, like Mario 3D World based on 3D Land foundations and Mario Kart 8 which is basically an evolution of Mario Kart 7. Super Smash Bros was basically built form the gorund-up to work both on a home consoles and on an handheld.

On the other hand the Wii and DS didn't go directly into that direction, although they pursued the long term goal of lowering the expectation on graphics while focusing the player attention on other elements of the game experience.

Imo the only time when Nintendo used a real "gimmick" to catch the attention of players, is when they decided to sell the DS successor on the concept of stereoscopic 3D, while going quite against their own vision of the Wii and DS. 



Around the Network
Chorlin said:

 

Man, this was an amazing read!!
Can ia make a video about it?? 
It trully deserves to be exposed. 

For real, Congratulations!!

Sure, knock yourself out.  If you do make a video, let me know when it gets posted.  I'd enjoy giving it a watch.  Have you made other gaming videos?



bdbdbd said:
Chorlin said:

Man, this was an amazing read!!
Can ia make a video about it?? 
It trully deserves to be exposed. 
For real, Congratulations!!

The basic idea in the post is wrong; it makes Switch an hardware issue, when in fact Switch is resolving Nintendo's problem with software output. It is amazing how Nintendo execs shove it straight into people's faces and they still don't get it. Also the Wii's concept was to lower the cost of software development. Ever since the flop that was N64, Nintendo's been attempting to make game development as cheap as possible (sans Wii U).

Actually, making cost effective hardware has always been on Nintendo's mind.  Gunpei Yokoi's philosophy of "lateral thinking with withered technology" is proof of this.  "The Nintendo way of adapting technology is not to look for the state of the art but to utilize mature technology that can be mass-produced cheaply."  The monochrome Gameboy released in 1989 is a perfect example of that philosophy at work and predates any notion of Nintendo trying to lower costs only after the N64.



Mandalore76 said:
bdbdbd said:

The basic idea in the post is wrong; it makes Switch an hardware issue, when in fact Switch is resolving Nintendo's problem with software output. It is amazing how Nintendo execs shove it straight into people's faces and they still don't get it. Also the Wii's concept was to lower the cost of software development. Ever since the flop that was N64, Nintendo's been attempting to make game development as cheap as possible (sans Wii U).

Actually, making cost effective hardware has always been on Nintendo's mind.  Gunpei Yokoi's philosophy of "lateral thinking with withered technology" is proof of this.  "The Nintendo way of adapting technology is not to look for the state of the art but to utilize mature technology that can be mass-produced cheaply."  The monochrome Gameboy released in 1989 is a perfect example of that philosophy at work and predates any notion of Nintendo trying to lower costs only after the N64.

The difference is, that in the "2D era", when developing games wasn't expensive, the cost of hardware was relatively much larger concern than it is in the "3D era", where biggest problem is the resources needed for developing a game. It would make much more sense to have separete home and handheld consoles, if you could make enough games for them. 



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

freebs2 said:

There's much truth with this post. Of course you can see some long term vision in all the products Nintendo has released over these years, but I don't agree every element was pre-meditated.

Of course I believe Nintendo had been looking to make a console that works both as an handheld and as an home system for a long time. As rightfully stated by the OP Gamecube a Gameboy connectivity and even the Gameboy player are a proof of that.
I also strongly believe the WiiU was internally an attempt to test waters for an hybrid console to come while counting on the Wii brand popularity to sustain it, only Nintendo overestimated it by a long shot.

In fact on the WiiU you could see for the first time home console games built on the foundations of portable games, like Mario 3D World based on 3D Land foundations and Mario Kart 8 which is basically an evolution of Mario Kart 7. Super Smash Bros was basically built form the gorund-up to work both on a home consoles and on an handheld.

On the other hand the Wii and DS didn't go directly into that direction, although they pursued the long term goal of lowering the expectation on graphics while focusing the player attention on other elements of the game experience.

Imo the only time when Nintendo used a real "gimmick" to catch the attention of players, is when they decided to sell the DS successor on the concept of stereoscopic 3D, while going quite against their own vision of the Wii and DS. 

Yeah.  The huge sales #'s of the Wii tempted them too much to incorporate the name into it's successor.

As for the 3DS, I actually created a thread recently that addresses this.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=234115



Saved.