I could really care less about extra features or amg super graphics. I buy systems for games not for all the extra crap they cram in there "adding value". News flash its not added value to those who could give two shits about it. As long as they keep it at a decent price and put out those great games based on having fun way of thinking or the Nintendo charm I do not care what else they do.

They would have to fall over themselves and break their own nose to make a console cheaply which has less performance than the PS3. The 32nm process yields between 800M and 1B transistors per 100mm^2 and they would find it difficult to go under 80mm^2 due to the I/O requirements which means that any console they release would pretty much automatically have more transistors than the PS3 whether they want that many or not along with improvements in efficiency yielded by improvements in technology and design.

Covering your ears to 10 years of technological progress doesn't make sense either when considering the next generation of consoles. I see where you're coming from and I can give you some good answers. Nintendo didn't feel the cost vs benefit of going high definition was worth it for the current round of consoles and they can certainly retain the features which make the Wii a strong platform for them with a next generation Wii successor.

The question of how much Nintendo software would cost to create would still centre around how they approach development. Art assets which have to be physically created are expensive, these are your typical models and textures and Nintendo doesn't have a style which relies on creating realistic worlds and environments so this would not change. They could not avoid an increase in costs whatever they do but they can limit how much a transition to a next generation of software would cost them whilst vastly improved toolsets ought to help as well.

Where hardware is concerned there is only one piece of technology which could be implemented in a console which hasn't this generation to reduce costs and speed development/prototyping and this is the X86 series of processor. As software becomes more complicated the time it takes to compile for out of order processors like the current IBM power range increases and the X86 range has some of the best/fastest compilers in the business as far as I am aware.

I don't know if Nintendo will or not. I agree that with the Wii we've seen differentiation weed its way back into console design as a positive thing (whereas if you look at PS3 and 360, or at last generation, you see any deviation from the "standard" by a given party severely frowned upon, like all the complaints about Microsoft using non-standard hard-drives, or GameCube's mini discs, or PS3's GPU), but it'll be very tempting to Nintendo to finally have a console that could exist in today's "multiplat everything" world, where they wouldn't have to fight tooth and nail to get big-name games to come to their platform at all (though then there's the fight to make them exclusive)

Though Nintendo is in the unique position that they could set the standard for next generation, depending on when they release the hardware. So there is merit to what you're saying.

Thank you Squilliam for actually making sense!

I firmly believe that the Wii is more powerful than we realize, and it's in an unconventional way that we do not yet know about.

I agree reducing development costs will be a key for the next system so that games won't cost an arm and a leg. It would suck if Nintendo had to spend $20 million on the next Fire Emblem and it wouldn't break 500K.

I am completely ignorant of computer programming and computer science, but why does HD cost so much more than SD? If it is simply a matter of resolution, isn't it possible that better software algorithms and motion capture techniques could help reduce the cost of future game development?

For example, couldn't it be possible to make a simple animation and have an advanced software program fill in many of the holes based on sophisticated/intelligent algorithms?

I was intrigued by the new motion capture technology in LA Noire which directly feeds motion capture into computer animations with no computer programmers in between. This seems like a step in the right direction.

It seems to me that the future of game developing is going to rely far more on software advances than hardware advances. How much do you think that software can be advanced to reduce the costs on these massive HD games being produced?

predictions for next gen

Nintendo will make there next system more powerful then the ps3, development will be cheaper by then... and more interesting features and possibly add HD (2080P) i invented that res lol

i don't think Sony will upgrade there console power as much as they did with the ps3 considering its to expensive for devs and its costing Sony billions.. they will add new features but fuck knows what Sony will come up with, probably a new move playback like blu-ray but more better lol

Microsoft will upgrade there console to be the most power that gen and they most likely Innovate new things with the online and they will add blu-ray just for shits and giggles lol

It's created the textures, character models and environments.  Years ago, you could have one or two guys doing all the art work (Adrian Carmack did most of the artwork for Doom by himself).  Now you need a team of dozens of artists and modellers.

forget polygons man.