Another Analyst Suggests Wii 1.5 On the Way

[Mr Puggsly]

Viper1 said:

 

1. My point is that if they wanted a Kinect like expereince, they would have simply used the camera they developed.  You said MS took the Kinect hardware and poured tons of reousrces in to make it work.  Why in the world would Nintendo want to license out some other camera then pump in millions to make it work when they use their own camera, pum in millions and make it work?   So my point is if Nintendo wanted a Kinect like expereince, they would have donw it with thei rown camera...hence why passing on Kinect makes sense.

2. Yes, confrimed to be just 2 players and you must stand at all times.  Capable doesn't mean it is a valid product.  The Jaws of Life are a very capable product, doesn't mean it makes for a valid video game product.

3. The Vitality Sensor and Balance Board are niche peripherals and they understand that.  Why can't you understnad that so too is Kinect?

4. First off,  the difference between Hiroshi Yamauchi and Saturo Iwata is what has established Nintendo as the market dominating entity it is at the moment.  Under Iwata, they've done exactly as you just said.  However, my point was in regards to believing in their judgement over yours.

 

And one final point, how much more product segregation do you want?  Confuse the market redundant input methods, thin out development resources with multiple products to support, clutter retail space and screw with marketing.  Not to foget the extra $150 needed.  You obviously dont't understand marketing, game development, retail shelf allocation and consumer spending if you think it was a bad idea for Nintendo to pass on Kinect.

1. You seem to think Nintendo's camera was just as capable as the Kinect. But its not, it was just a webcam. And MS didn't just license the hardware, they own it.

2. Perhaps the 2 active players is true. Which is fine, most Eyetoy games for example only support one player. And you would need a lot of space for the camera to see 4 people without bumping into each other. I'm confused by the stitting thing. I mean the Kinect can track full motion like dropping to your knees and lying on the floor. But it can't be used at all sitting down? Seems odd.

3. The balance board and vitality sensor are incredibly limited with type of software they can be used in. Unless they crowbar it in. The Kinect has far more potential. That's all I'm saying.

4. Well Nintendo will be fine without Kinect technology. But they could have also made it something big. I think it was a missed opportunity.

This part... "Confuse the market redundant input methods, thin out development resources with multiple products to support, clutter retail space and screw with marketing." Isn't that exactly what Nintendo did? I mean the nunchuck, Wiimotion, Balance Board, and now the vitality sensor? You also need to buy more than one of each for multiplayer. The Kinect is cheaper than buying all of that. And its gonna get more software support than most of those devices.