Soundwave said:
Jay70sgamer said:
Soundwave said:
Jizz_Beard_thePirate said:
Soundwave said:
Well one being a phone for example is a pretty huge difference. Besides the different SKUs being different isn't bad really ... it gives incentive for a person to buy both if they have a large investment in the ecosystem already, a person who normally may only buy a Nintendo handheld may say "well gee, it would be nice to play some of these games on TV at home, maybe I'll pick up the Nintendo Fusion Home version too, it's pretty cheap".
No they can't compete with PS5 (not even sure there will be an XB2) for raw power, but I don't think Nintendo really gives a crap about that anymore. For Nintendo's style, even Wii U level of power suits them just fine, and a Fusion home device honestly could be considerably more powerful than that if they really wanted it to be. I think it could be in the range of 800-900 GFLOPS with 3-4 GB of RAM (for games) and a more modern DX11 style graphical effects. That will result in graphics on screen for Nintendo games that I think most people will be quite happy with, especially if the price point is sub-$200.
They need to leverage their Virtual Console back catalog better though and this system should also be able to rework Wii U titles so it has a lot of software to play from day 1.
Two SKUs isn't a benefit on a company if both SKUs are sluggish. Imagine Wii U/3DS were one product line ... in that case, they would be on pace to sell 100 million units between them for one generation (and games like Mario 3D World would have access to a larger userbase) ... but seperately they weaken Nintendo's case that this was a successful gen for them.
|
Well, if they are exactly the same, I highly doubt there will be enough people buying the console itteration just for the sake of playing the exact same game at home. Just look at the Vita... Most of the games that are playable on it are playable on the ps3 or elsewhere but that doesn't mean people are saying, gee, I can't wait to invest more on Sony's eco system and play these games on the Go... Heck, the only reason the handheld is still selling is cause there are games coming out in Japan...
Also, if its a portable device, how on earth do u expect it to even have dx11 style of graphics with x86, specially if its sub $200 while maintaining great battery life? See, the issue is that with x86 tablets, as of right now, aren't ment for gaming with x86. If you look at the windows tablets for $500-$900, they have a decent cpu with a really terrible GPU and the reason for that is to concerve battery life. The reason why ipads/androids tablets are able to play games while having great battery life is cause they are all arm architecture and adreno gpu which again, third parties don't want...
And sure, having 2 sku's that are sluggish isn't a good thing but all that means is that they have to look at what they have done wrong this generation (3d + gamepad) and fix it in the next generation. Every company makes mistakes but that doesn't mean they should just give up... Microsoft made mistakes with Windows 95, Millennium, Vista, 8, Sony made mistakes with their PCs, TVs and a large list of other things and etc but u don't see them giving up just cause they goofed once a while (Granted Sony shutdown their PCs but thats cause they were failing at it for a super long time)... Imagine if Microsoft stopped making consumer windows after vista and just focused on the Server market, that would be crazy!
|
Tegra K1 has console style graphics in a $300 tablet today, and that's likely heavily marked up. But that can have DX11 style effects already, I never said it had to be on par with a PS4.
I'd say Wii U level graphics with a few added effects is likely, and more than doable IMO by 2016 for $250 or less. Throw in perhaps 1080P + anti-aliasing for the home variant. Mind you Nintendo is not beholden to the same business model most tablet manufacturers are ... they can get away with only making a $5-$10 profit/unit because they make their main money selling games on their handheld, that's different from say ASUS or other tablet manufacturers.
Nintendo's got their asses handed to them pretty handedly by Sony in the console gen for 3/4 tries, and really the one success was an unsustainable fad. They've tried to win the console space multiple times, this isn't them just "giving up" overnight. Their console business has been declining for almost 25 years now with the exception of like a 4 year bump.
It's time to change it up.
|
Your definition of getting their asses handed to them is delusional and short minded no disrespect but how can you have your ass handed to you when every home console and every handheld console except virtual boy has turned a profit every generation every console ...also I might add nintendo has made over 25 billion in profits in the gaming industry where as Sony and Microsoft has lost billions ......my friend winning in business is by making a profit not how many units you sell or some fanboy console war ......true gamers know thatNintendo doesn't have to sell the most consoles or come in first to profit ..it's all about making a profit and nintendo is better than Microsoft and Sony in the video game business when it comes to making a profit ..if you like I can show you a graph of the earnings of all three until 2011 of who profited and loss billions ....just saying ...all I care about is that these companies make great games ..I could care less who sells the most or who comes in first ....
|
Well even the "every console they make is profitable" ... not anymore. They've lost money for 3 straight years despite respectable 3DS sales, which means the Wii U is dragging the company down.
It's not the GameCube era anymore ... they could make good sized profits when development costs for games were much lower. Back then, the average GBA cost penauts to make and Gamecube games had reasonably costs.
Today the average 3DS game probably costs them as much as the average GameCube game, and Wii U games are far more expensive and require higher staff per title.
That and GBA wasn't really challenged by iOS/Android, either. And the early 2000s was also the peak of Pokemon merchandising/movies/etc. that they were raking in $$$$ from.
You can't make money from a 20 million userbase (Wii U is probably not even going to hit 20 mill at this rate), not today, not with the changes in development and other factors (like Nintendo's handheld division not being able to bail them out whenever the console does poorly).
A PS4-PS5 class console with a sub-20 million userbase is going to do nothing but bleed tons of money. That's just not a sustainable business model. What you're championing is basically that Nintendo should raise their development costs each generation, and that somehow having a GameCube sized userbase is good enough to pay that off because it worked 13 years ago with the GameCube. That doesn't really make any sense.
|
