| iasta said: As stated, to be dominant, need to have some incentive to get more people buy in. And in 5 years, i don't think so. Why? Because the wii is held by Nintendo alone, they can't count on 3rd party support to pump appealing software for the next five years. and Nintendo won't have the resources to support it this long, they already have to support the DS, Wii and 3DS, in few years (2011 or 2012) they will have to support also the Super Wii... They already have trouble to avoid software gap with 2 machines (Wii and DS) how could they do better when they have to support 4 machines ? Also i had Lol for the people stating the super wii will be less powerful than the Ps3. Sure, Nintendo used to do underpowered console compare to Sony: the ps1 and ps2 were so powerful compare to the N64 and Gamecube... For the super wii, Nintendo will likely take off the shelf componant (maybe custom a little) so could get powerful console (more than the ps3) in 2011, 2012 for not so expensive. Last, for people says, why need more, we have already HD... Are the current console plays most of their games in full HD at 60fps? No, not one full HD games at this refresh rate are really rare, even more rare if you don't count the small XBLA/PSN games. So there still room and use for power improvement, even more with the push in 3D that will need much more power to deliver full HD graphics at 2 x 60fps. |
The GC was quite a bit more powerful than the PS2, I also think the N64 was marginally more powerful than the PS1 (I know the N64 could do texture filtering, while PS1 couldn't). The NES and Wii are the two Nintendo home consoles which are weaker than the competition.
I entirely agree with the rest of your post though
