Why do people think that Nintendo could go or should go third-party?

[KungKras]

Vodacixi said:

KungKras said:

Netty said:
Their games are awesome but their consoles (hardware & software platform) are not.

I don't think Nintendo should go third party, but I would like to see them be more competitive in the creation of their platforms and to be more aggressive in marketing them. It's frustrating to see them curled up in a little ball while they get ignored by the gaming public.

As someone majoring in embedded systems design. Nintendo hardware is pretty damn amazing. Especially the SNES and Gamecube. But the MIPS-based N64 is really interesting as well.

A bit off topic, but here's something I've always been wondering: was the difference between PS1 and N64 THAT big as some people say?

As for the OP, Nintendo has some games that a lot of people want. But not all of these people has a Nintendo system. So, they want Nintendo to go third party to gain access to their games. I can't blame them: Metroid, Zelda and a lot more are not something to joke about.

I think it's very important that Nintendo keep making consoles. They are always unique, with its bad and good things. But if we loose Nintendo systems, we'll only have two almost identical systems (funcition and software wise). And that's pretty bad.

Technically, the N64 graphics chip and processor run circles around the PS1. (33MHz vs 94MHz) N64 games usually have some fewer polygons than PS1 games but you can tell that the hardware is more modern because the polygons aren't jittery and the draw distance is much higher. Shading can be much more advanced on N64 as well.It has twice the RAM of the PS1 as well. One thing to mention as well is that N64 isn't using fewer polygons because of hardware limitations. You can run it in a mode that pushes out more polygons than PS1, but you would get the same jitter and aliasing issues.