By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - Would it be better for the GAMERS if Nintendo became software only?

 

Would it be better for the customers if Nintendo became a 3rd party?

Yes, then I wouldn't hav... 167 33.67%
 
No, because we need more ... 289 58.27%
 
Yo Mama 40 8.06%
 
Total:496
radiantshadow92 on 07 March 2013
Mr Khan said:
radiantshadow92 said:
yep.

There is nothing about a nintendo wii or WII U that the 360 or ps3 cant already do besides nintendo games. No one buys nintendo hardware for the hardware.

Nobody buys any hardware for the hardware. Video game consoles have a purpose.


Thats not true anymore.



Around the Network
NintendoPie on 07 March 2013
Mr Khan said:

He means that the technical inferiority of Nintendo platforms means that games made for Nintendo platforms could easily be made for technically superior systems, with any special peripherals just brought over as needed, whereas technically superior games cannot exist on Nintendo consoles without sacrifices being made.

It's funny that he would say that then, as I'm pretty sure most people could care less if these technically superior games ever made it to a Nintendo console. We've seen how cruddy that usually turns out.



freebs2 on 07 March 2013
Screamapillar said:
freebs2 said:
spurgeonryan said:
Yes. Just make handhelds. Console business is its own beast these days. Hard to compete.

Will they? And take the chance of missing out on 20-40 million sellers and pocketing all the cash? No.

To be honest I think, in the long term, this is a very likely possibility.

They wouldn't necessairly have to miss 10 million seller multiplayer games, they just have to place a mini-HDMI port and bluetooth (to connect controllers) in their next-gen handled device. If you consider Tegra 3, a one year old tecnology, is already capable of playing this at 720p (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_Ci2temTaA) in 5 years form now I guess mobile graphics will be good enough on TVs for Nintendo standards.

It's never really been about system specs, though.  It's more a careful balance between cost and performance.  Nintendo will always opt for less-sophisticated graphics and focus more on input device and trying to be innovative with game design.  That's what I like about them.  After all...there are a lot of terrible games out there that look fantastic, but it's always the reverse of that which makes good games.  Amazing, high-quality graphics mean nothing without strong gameplay behind them to back it up.

I agree, and that's the reason why I think an Handeld/home hybrid console could be a viable  option for them.



swii26 on 07 March 2013
logic56 said:
swii26 said:
For everyone that is sayin YES... all that means is that you recognize that Nintendo makes good games, so why then do you not support their consoles?


Because they make terrible hardware, especially compared to their competitors

I can buy nintendo land on the PS4, I cannot buy Killzone Shadowfall on the Wii U

I can buy Monster Hunter 4 on Vita, I cannot buy Wipeout 2048 on 3DS

I remember an earlier thread where Nintendo fans were talking about 3rd party support on wii, suggesting that people would buy the mass downgrade of games if only they would make them.......why though? when the better hardware of the competitors come with no sacrifice to the developers( who have ambition) vision. So you can play the next Mario which can be made everywhere else?

 


So your decision is solely based on power? 

To buy another console to support EA, Activsion, 2k, etc... is silly. They have no loyality to hardware. They will stop making games for any console that doesn't sell to their expectations. Its just a bonus to be able to play their games. 

1st party games are what sell consoles. If Sony didn't produce games like Killzone or Wipeout would you still buy their product? 

I have never needed to buy a Playstation because my roomates always had one, but if I decided to, it would be because of their exclusives and the third-party titles would be secondary. 

Nintendo creates its games around its consoles so making games for other systems may effect their creative edge. Look at Sonic for example, the best games were made on Sega hardware. 



Steam/Origin ID: salorider

Nintendo Network ID: salorider

PSN: salorider

3DS Friend Code: 4983-4984-4179

 

Kaizar on 07 March 2013
PlaystaionGamer said:
from a console stand point now. from a portable side the future is very Bleak. The 3DS is doing really well now in Japan but its first year was awful until they almost slashed the price in half! if it was hard to sell a portable this gen can you imagine how hard it will be in 5 years time? The Vita is obviously in the same boat. It would be smart for Sony and Nintendo to move heavily into the Mobile gaming Space. Mario would rival Angry Birds Easily even if Nintendo charged £2.99 a game with micro transactions there games would make more then they will on the 3DS and there is no worry of Hardware costs.

i think it would eb good for the industry and Gamers when the big dogs put there software out of mobiles, but i don't think Nintendo should go multi for Consoles it just doesn't seem right


The Nintendo 3DS at $250 has always sold more better then the PSP & DS & PS Vita & Game Boy & all Home Consoles.

The Nintendo 3DS sold more in its first 1 month then any other system, and same goes for first 6 months & 12 months & 18 months & 2 years.

 

By your logic the PS3 & 360 & PS2 & Wii & Wii U & PS4 & 720 should just move into another product to rival Angry Birds.



Around the Network
Kaizar on 07 March 2013
swii26 said:
logic56 said:
swii26 said:
For everyone that is sayin YES... all that means is that you recognize that Nintendo makes good games, so why then do you not support their consoles?


Because they make terrible hardware, especially compared to their competitors

I can buy nintendo land on the PS4, I cannot buy Killzone Shadowfall on the Wii U

I can buy Monster Hunter 4 on Vita, I cannot buy Wipeout 2048 on 3DS

I remember an earlier thread where Nintendo fans were talking about 3rd party support on wii, suggesting that people would buy the mass downgrade of games if only they would make them.......why though? when the better hardware of the competitors come with no sacrifice to the developers( who have ambition) vision. So you can play the next Mario which can be made everywhere else?

 


So your decision is solely based on power? 

To buy another console to support EA, Activsion, 2k, etc... is silly. They have no loyality to hardware. They will stop making games for any console that doesn't sell to their expectations. Its just a bonus to be able to play their games. 

1st party games are what sell consoles. If Sony didn't produce games like Killzone or Wipeout would you still buy their product? 

I have never needed to buy a Playstation because my roomates always had one, but if I decided to, it would be because of their exclusives and the third-party titles would be secondary. 

Nintendo creates its games around its consoles so making games for other systems may effect their creative edge. Look at Sonic for example, the best games were made on Sega hardware. 

The funny thing is that The vertex performance of the 3DS is 30.6 million triangles per second, and the pixel performance is 1.6 billion pixels per second.
And PS vita only has a vertex performence of 33 million while having only a fraction of the pixel performence as the 3DS, and the PS Vita only has up to 18 shader cores while the 3DS has over 50 shader cores which is more then the 360's 48 shader cores


You can read all about it in the comment section on this link:

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/dmp-pica200-gpu-3ds-dsi,news-7143.html



VGKing on 07 March 2013

Yes. It is a fact that the competing Sony/Microsoft consoles are technically superior to Nintendo ones. If they had Nintendo games on them, I don't see how that would be a bad thing. It would probably increase Nintendo software sales as well.



VGKing on 07 March 2013
Kaizar said:
swii26 said:
logic56 said:
swii26 said:
For everyone that is sayin YES... all that means is that you recognize that Nintendo makes good games, so why then do you not support their consoles?


Because they make terrible hardware, especially compared to their competitors

I can buy nintendo land on the PS4, I cannot buy Killzone Shadowfall on the Wii U

I can buy Monster Hunter 4 on Vita, I cannot buy Wipeout 2048 on 3DS

I remember an earlier thread where Nintendo fans were talking about 3rd party support on wii, suggesting that people would buy the mass downgrade of games if only they would make them.......why though? when the better hardware of the competitors come with no sacrifice to the developers( who have ambition) vision. So you can play the next Mario which can be made everywhere else?

 


So your decision is solely based on power? 

To buy another console to support EA, Activsion, 2k, etc... is silly. They have no loyality to hardware. They will stop making games for any console that doesn't sell to their expectations. Its just a bonus to be able to play their games. 

1st party games are what sell consoles. If Sony didn't produce games like Killzone or Wipeout would you still buy their product? 

I have never needed to buy a Playstation because my roomates always had one, but if I decided to, it would be because of their exclusives and the third-party titles would be secondary. 

Nintendo creates its games around its consoles so making games for other systems may effect their creative edge. Look at Sonic for example, the best games were made on Sega hardware. 

The funny thing is that The vertex performance of the 3DS is 30.6 million triangles per second, and the pixel performance is 1.6 billion pixels per second.
And PS vita only has a vertex performence of 33 million while having only a fraction of the pixel performence as the 3DS, and the PS Vita only has up to 18 shader cores while the 3DS has over 50 shader cores which is more then the 360's 48 shader cores

 


You can read all about it in the comment section on this link:

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/dmp-pica200-gpu-3ds-dsi,news-7143.html

Bullshit.

1. That is one old-ass article. Pre-release 3DS rumors.
2. Vita is technically superior to 3DS in every way.

Here is a more recent and more accuarate comparison.(Spoiler: Vita is technically superior in every single area that is comparable) 
http://mygaming.co.za/news/hardware/29516-nintendo-3ds-versus-sony-ps-vita.html

 

"The PS Vita’s GPU can process 133 million polygons per second, while the 3DS’ graphics chip can only process 15.3 million polygons per second. This is just one aspect of how powerful the respective GPUs are, but it serves as an indication that the PS Vita packs more powerful hardware than the 3DS in terms of raw vertex processing; something one would expect given the 3DS was released over 9 months before the PS Vita’s Japanese launch date."

Funny thing is that even in that article you linked to, there is no Vita spec comparison. I have no idea where you got those ridiculous Vita specs. That coment you pointed out even says that the PSP outperforms the 3DS in terms of vertex performance.

 



Kaizar on 07 March 2013

But the PS Vita is only producing 33 million polygons 24/7.

The Vita doesn't have that many shader cores.

Tha gap isn't enough to choose Hardware over features.

Plus 3D makes graphics look much more crisper looking then HD does. And the PS Vita only has 540p Standard-Definition graphics



NoirSon on 08 March 2013

Anyone that grew up with Sega as a hardware/software manufacturer and saw what became of them when they went sofware only knows the idea of Nintendo doing software only would be horrible.