padib said:
I think we're close to agreeing. Take the topic of cost. In it you mention that tablets upgrade every two years and hence a portable console can't keep up with quick technology. The unified API solves that issue because it would allow Nintendo to release upgrades to its handhelds or any other device at any increment they desire. It frees them from the 4-5 year lock it was stuck to before. So we actually agree here. The only question that remains is if people will be willing to upgrade. I'm not sure if they will, but one thing is sure is that if people want to play Nintendo games, they will have much more ways to jump onboard. Therefore what will matter for Nintendo in the future won't be hardware sales, but software sales. Even if one device sold less than another, they will be looking at how many copies one game sold across all the devices. As for the U, its cost was hicked due to an artificial need: the gamepad. It hicked the price barrier for the system. With the new API, Nintendo need not force a gamepad on its users anymore. It solves that problem too. If you need me to explain this let me know, but a good example is Smash, and the update to the WiiU's OS that allows one to control most of the screens with the Wiimote as well. As for content. Well, you and I agree that streaming is not a comparable solution to the unified API. The unified API does not involve latency, and in it you are owner of your software and need not be bound to an internet connection. There are many cons to streaming I personally am not a fan. This unified API is different if you disagree explain why. Also, same content across all devices is old hat, but is a serious issue for Nintendo. They have mentioned repeatedly their struggle with pumping out games for a given platform, thus needing to halt production for games on the other. The unified platform allows them to solve this problem. Not just between the portables and home consoles, but between a predecessor hh and a successor hh as well as for the home consoles. Regarding library When I said volume, I was assuming a worst case scenario: that Nintendo would be the only developer on the system. In that sense, by increased volume I meant increased quality volume. In other words, instead of devloping two mario karts, they might have one mario kart and one other game of the same quality. As for New IPs, Nintendo has released a few important ones. Perhaps Zorgs is better with lists but I'll try my hand at it: - Wii Sports - Nintendogs - Brain Age - Rhythm Heaven - Pandora's Tower - Wii Play - Wii Fit - Art Academy - Pushmo - Steel Driver And then there are those they purchased, like W101, Bayonetta, Xenoblade, and more I can't think of. Some of these are not big hits, but that doesn't matter because at the very least it demonstrates Nintendo's ability to create new franchises. Others were huge sellers at one time or another. As for Japanese games, I agree that they have been on the decline, but like I said Nintendo has been able to ward that off, and were the biggest publisher last gen and are a huge publisher this gen. Nintendo is not your typical japanese publisher. Neither is Sony. Basically it's my understanding that the unified api will lead to more new IPs and bigger, richer worlds for Nintendo's existing IPs. |
- API is software. It does not matter about a unified api if the hardware is obsolete. Performance increases due to improvements in efficiency are always very limited compared to new hardware. The hardware can not change and that is the limiting factor. This is why short product cycles trumplong ones.
As for paying for upgrades? Not a chance. For some reason, the gaming market appears to be a poor market - they complain at a state-of-the-art console coming out for $499 whic will last for 4-5 years, but these same people merrily pay $1000+ over two or less years for a phone. It makes little sense, but most gamers don't like spending money.
But unified content means people can get away with buying less hardware. That does not really bode well for any company.
Unfied platform will mean that more time can go into a game....but it will be capped by the lowest performing platform, making extra time redundant.
Besides Wii Fit and Wii Sport (which are Wii specific), the other games are poor - compare them to new IPs found in the 7th gen. In short, most gamers have not heard of those games on that list, nor do they appeal to most gamers. Now how many gamers know about Uncharted, GoW etc? Nintnedos new IPs are very poor perfoming, especially when you consider units sold on the platform size. This is always going to be a problem for Nintendo unless they learn to help 3rd party devs and expand their player base beyond hardcore fans.
