hoala said:
So a ARM based handheld and "apple tv" like gaming device is the same as the wii and wii u? okay.
And that weak console sold almost as much as all other 5 combined.
As a console, yes. As a handheld, no. Like already discussed multiple times the ps4 is in terms of a portable device a bit more powerfull as Nvidia GTX 960m. Notebooks with that GPU costs starting at 600-700$. And that GPU still needs a big battery (normal battery life is like 1,5 hrs), a fence, ad is relativly big. So your thinking Nintendo can achieve more power then 700$ notebooks on an smaller device with longer battery power and without fences and sell it for half the priece of that notebooks is nothing but ridiculous. |
Wii and Wii U both had low power, relative to the competition as a trend in their designs, Kimishima stated outright Nintendo aren't doing that with the NX.
Arm hasn't been mentioned by Nintendo as a processor they're considering, they have never been interested in using an Arm processor in their home consoles, they do however have a relations with AMD, dating back to the Gamecube.
As for your comment about Wii selling that much, it had the motion controller gimmick, to entice people that weren't traditional gamers to play on a console, a handheld and console device linked by the same library doesn't entice a non-traditional audience of people to game, especially when they use their mobile phones for this.
The 3rd party market consists of significantly more potential customers than Wii had, even now that PS4 and XB1 have clocked up 60 million+ units in sales combined, the console gaming market consists of over 200 million potential console gamers that could buy a device, adding the dedicated gaming handheld market to this gets that number pretty close to 300 million.
Point here is that the audience that bought Wii are largely inconsistant customers within the console space, however the audience that buys consoles and dedicated gaming handhelds have been here for the last 3 generations, so it would make way more sense to target the market that is more likely to buy either a dedicated gaming handheld or console.
A part of your theory is the console portion, which would be comparable to Wii or Wii U because of how weak both would still be compared to PS4 and XB1, let alone any future console generation.
Notebooks aren't a relevant example of a device built using the economics of technology available to a dedicated gaming platform holder. RRP prices for a device like that don't reflect what a console ends up costing, the very fact that you use this example as some kind of proof shows you don't really get that Notebook device creators wants to make the most money they can, while maintaining sales of their various Notebook models.
Notebooks or any device in the PC market aren't supported by streams of revenue and profit created by video games software, DLC additions or any other potential merchandise, peripherals etc.
I already pointed exactly how chip prices work out for AMD, how they would add a profit margin and shipment costs, how other components work out cost wise for Nintendo and how a device could end up being that price.
A notebook with PS4 level specs is no example of a devide made by the dedicated gaming platform creator business model, so therefore your point about notebook costs is entirely moot.
I also dealt with the fact that battery tech, with greater longevity than your example exists and just by going to Amazon and searching for dedicated batteries meant for recharging mobile devices we can see that end consumer prices of these devices, with enough power to charge a laptop multiple times over are very cheap. under £30 for a 20,000mah unit, some units with 10,000 mah are under £15, even retail for £10. That price not only includes the cost of the actual power cell, but packaging and shipping costs, profits made by both the device maker and the retailer.
You're still yet to answer the question of "what do you mean by a fence", instead you repeatedly ignore the question and don't even bother to deal with it, even when asked by myself and Potato.
Both Wii and Wii U were weak technologically, they took the approach by Nintendo of low performance hardware to release cheap, this is exactly the core premise your insisting that your theory of NX would be based on. Cheap to sell to many, but the audience for that market aren't interested in Nintendo any more, they have their mobile phones and tablet devices which cater for their needs in this area.
The dedicated gaming device audience is Nintendo's market and the entire point of continuing to create hardware for this purpose. That very audience are mainly made up of people that buy 3rd party games or the console gamers and still want a dedicated gaming handheld.
The customers that are still yet to move on from PS3 and Xbox 360 would be a large part of that gaming audience, these are the audience Nintendo must be targeting with NX and those people will demand hardware performance in the ball park of at least XB1 and PS4, maybe more, otherwise there's little reason to buy another console.
This Wii U level device you've invented doesn't fill that need, that market is catered to with a modern tablet or mobile phone, especially in 2017.
If you reply again, arguing please actually deal with each of my points, rathe than ignore the major ones that you're still yet to actually deal with.
