zorg1000 said:
A 2016 release would give Wii U 4 years, not 3. It's not likely trying to compete directly with PS4 so that consoles success would really have little to no bearing on how successful a Nintendo console would do. I agree with u on option 1 & 2, no need to make it as powerful or more powerful than PS4. I think option 3 is what they will and should go for along with a unified platform where all or most games are compatible between the console and handheld. The reason why not to simply stick with Wii U is because it's expensive due to the outdated components and they can't support 2 distinct platforms at once, especially since the 3DS successor will take more time/resources than 3DS so how are they supposed to give adequate support to Wii U at the same time? I say release a handheld and console with the same architecture, operating system, online infrastructure, account system, rewards program, that share a library that has allows for cross-buy/play/save. Have the console be a slight boost over Wii U, similar to the jump from GameCube to Wii, basically faster CPU and more RAM, with the handheld version being a device that can run the same games at a lower resolution. |
Of course it's trying to compete with the x1 and ps4. If not, then why don't they release their games on ps4, x1, pc, etc? Obviously because they see those platforms as competition in thevideogame space.
Do i need to explain why this idea of a hybrid console is absolutely pathetic? I explained it before quite in detail in another thread and it's quite tiring making a long response from a cellphone in an airport lol
Basically you would be stuck with neither a good console nor cheap handheld. If you want to play your console games on a handheld there's something you should check. Ps4+ps vita. See if it makes sense to think about hybrid again







