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

Forums - Nintendo - Do you think that Nintendo should continue hanging on to Gunpei Yokoi's philosophy?

 

(?)

Yes. 37 48.68%
 
No. 27 35.53%
 
I don't know...the results! 12 15.79%
 
Total:76

They should hire Don Mattrick.



Sigs are dumb. And so are you!

Around the Network
Ka-pi96 said:
binary solo said:
It's a moot point because game streaming is going to become mainstream sooner than a lot of people think, and when that happens everyone will be going for cheapest tech possible to do the job, not cutting edge. Today's PS4 and Xb one are more powerful than you need to be able to stream 1080p 60fps games of any style and complexity. OTOH game streaming is the very essence of withered technology with lateral thinking.

I think it's the other way around. Game streaming will become mainstream a lot later than people think.

When was the last time technology came on a lot slower than people thought?



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

Ka-pi96 said:

3D?

That's a great example.

3D still hasn't had a fast adoption. I know very few people who have a 3D TV, let alone use it if they do have it. A lot of people with 3DS' (myself included) actually turn off the 3D.

I'd have to agree with you that I think game streaming becoming the norm is a long ways down the road.

One significant problem I see is internet connections. When I already experience lag on occasion in a multiplayer atmosphere, I can't imagine how stressful it would be to have lag issues in a critical moment of a game.



Money can't buy happiness. Just video games, which make me happy.

Ka-pi96 said:
binary solo said:
Ka-pi96 said:
binary solo said:
It's a moot point because game streaming is going to become mainstream sooner than a lot of people think, and when that happens everyone will be going for cheapest tech possible to do the job, not cutting edge. Today's PS4 and Xb one are more powerful than you need to be able to stream 1080p 60fps games of any style and complexity. OTOH game streaming is the very essence of withered technology with lateral thinking.

I think it's the other way around. Game streaming will become mainstream a lot later than people think.

When was the last time technology came on a lot slower than people thought?

3D?

3D is an interesting case, it went through fads of popularity, but I think the filming and  projection technology was what held it back. Once digital filming and projectors came along and got wide market penetration in cinemas 3D came along very quickly and looks to now be a permanent feature; much to my dislike. The digital side of things went from zero to complete dominance in about 10 years from 2000. Digital 3D got started in 2006 and became pretty much the rage in 2009 with Avatar. So from the digital perspective it came on pretty damn fast.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

Wow. Posts I actually agree with.

High power graphics have produced a business model which isn't sustainable. Most AAA developers now spend so much money on graphics and marketing that the games themselves are starting to suffer. And consumers now expect graphics to get better with time; your game marketed with pretty visuals HAS to sell well in its initial shipment or it will not sell at all.

Minecraft really should have been a warning shot to most developers that their graphics and power focused marketing machines are breaking down. Most gamers are interested in gameplay and word of mouth more than the pretty graphics E3 is designed to push. The AAA market will go to pieces soon because it's just too expensive and risky to develop for it. My guess is when this console cycle is almost finished the seams will really start to come undone.

So using older tech is fine. It just looks like you're crazy when you're the only sane person in the room.



Around the Network
Mnementh said:
Well, naturally people here are concenttrating on the 'withered technology' part. Gamers often think 3 more polygons make the experience so much better. But that is not that important, especially for a console. Zoombael is right, even PS4 and X1 use withered technology. The Gamecube was so much more powerful than the PS2, still it was withered technology. That helped that the Gamecube was robust, was cheap to produce (and in such profitable) and was good to program for.

A console that is not using withered technology will not work. Think you use cutting edge technology: some parts will be rare, as they are hard to produce. It will lead to production issues, demand cannot be fulfilled. It will lead to high heat output, that makes ventilation loud and the chips more prone to failure. And as the technology is not good understood, programming will be harder and therefore software will be expensive to produce and will be slow coming. That console would be a desaster. And what for? A year later the technology will be no longer cutting edge, but a console should last 6 years.

So it is clear that withered technology is a must have for gaming consoles.

But what about lateral thinking? Let's think about cars for a moment. At the beginning cars were evolving a lot. Car makers experimented with forms and ways to steer. But today most things have settled. Cars look more or less alike from the outside. They are all steered similarly. Only things changing nowadays are some optical features to follow trends, security technology and entertainment technology. No need to change anything, but cars as they are today are pretty much at an optimum.

If we project that to gaming consoles it looks similar. The way games are controlled are similar for some time now. You have a controller with two sticks, some face buttons, some shoulder buttons. Controls for many game genres are more or less fixed since many years. No need to introduce something radical new, as the way it is is already well working.

So my conclusion is: Withered technology is something to stick with. but as the time for the biggest innovations in gaming is over, lateral thinking can be relaxed. Not that something should be suppressed, like move controls as the Wii had. But as classical controls are evolved to be good, new ways should be additional options.

You make a lot of good points.  But what happens when everyone has basically the same graphical technology?  I feel we have already hit the point of diminishing returns.  Each coming generation is going to be harder to distinguish itself just on looks alone.

Isn't that the point where lateral thinking becomes most important?  That becomes the best way to set yourself apart from the rest of the competition.



Switch Code: SW-7377-9189-3397 -- Nintendo Network ID: theRepublic -- Steam ID: theRepublic

Now Playing
Switch - Super Mario Maker 2 (2019)
3DS - Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney (Trilogy) (2005/2014)
Mobile - Yugioh Duel Links (2017)
Mobile - Super Mario Run (2017)
PC - Deep Rock Galactic (2020)
PC - Command & Conquer Remastered Collection (1995/1996/2020)

Ka-pi96 said:
Nope, they should change to be more like Sony and Microsoft ASAP!


^This

 

This is one of the main reasons why they're failing right now. The Wii U is so far behind other current gen consoles it's saddening. I don't even get why people are constantly asking for ports of games like The Witcher 3 like it can run on the Wii U. Nintendo themselves has dug their own grave with the stupid mentality of 'doing what ever they want because they can and it's been working for year'.



Well, it worked in the past and its still working for the 3ds so maybe. The issue with the wiiu is that the whole console itself is expensive to make but the performance doesn't justify the cost so in a way, they have gone out of that formula indirectly. Cause the wiiu costed almost as much as a ps4 during launch (and they were only breaking even I think) but the hardware is well under the ps4. A lot of the cost came from the gamepad so if u look at the cost of the wiiu, the system is expensive to make even if the performance doesn't justify the cost. So with the wiiu, u have "expensive hardware" priced at an "expensive" price point that doesn't justify the cost for many people and hence why the console is doomed. So again, maybe if they do it correctly



                  

PC Specs: CPU: 7800X3D || GPU: Strix 4090 || RAM: 32GB DDR5 6000 || Main SSD: WD 2TB SN850

Nintendo shouldn't hang on to any philosophy that involves them making their own hardware.



Mnementh said:


If we project that to gaming consoles it looks similar. The way games are controlled are similar for some time now. You have a controller with two sticks, some face buttons, some shoulder buttons. Controls for many game genres are more or less fixed since many years. No need to introduce something radical new, as the way it is is already well working.

So my conclusion is: Withered technology is something to stick with. but as the time for the biggest innovations in gaming is over, lateral thinking can be relaxed. Not that something should be suppressed, like move controls as the Wii had. But as classical controls are evolved to be good, new ways should be additional options.

I could not disagree more. The modern dual analogue controller is a clunky workaround that's intimidating to newcomers. It takes time and practice to get used to it. There is a LOT of room for improvement there, no matter how set in its way The Industry may have become. I see controls as the area with far and away the most room for improvement.