Definitely looking forward towards what else this new platform can do. Interested to hear more in the future for sure.

Nintendo's new direction makes me cry, but my tears gonna be hitting Pokemon on my Note 3.

JK i Kid i Kid.

Nvidia has been ahead for a while, since they started focusing on efficiency, with Kepler, this is what the numbers prove.

As it stands they have the most efficient architecture and they're also coming with new architecture with Pascal Next Year.

WTH are you talking about? AMDs current cards are their current cards, they aren't 2 years old, they're less than a year old, they've had tweaks to the Chip design and both systems are 28nm, yet NVidia's cards use less power to perform better, you really have no argument for this, it is a fact.

Looking at 3 year old comparisons is pointless, because it's not the current state of things.

Nintendo will likely use AMD anyway, so they'll get whatever is most fitting for them. I doubt they'll use the best performing AMD stuff, because they want to release at the most cost effective price for them. Considering they weren't interested in use 28nm for Wii U, when the option was available to too them and that was the most efficient process they could have used even back in 2012.

What's wrong with that?  The PS4 is selling not just because it has the most games (It does), but because it has the best hardware.  What is wrong with that?

Granted, maybe each individual company had a larger profit margin back then, like Materia-Blade said. But the business as a whole is making A LOT more money. And why don't you go ahead and adress all my other rebuttals? Gaming is more respected now, we have far more genres now, we have story driven games now, more choices. From a costumer stand point EVERYTHING is better now. Except for certain DLC-practices, glitch-fests and things like that.... But the industry is thriving on a whole new level compared to the Nintendo dominated days.

I would disagree. We have games trying so hard to be movies that they fail as games, or releasing so buggy that they need patches just to function as advertised. Graphics and story have supplanted gameplay much of the time, content is hidden behind paywalls, social local multiplayer has been largely replaced by anti-social online multiplayer, etc.

If you ask me, gaming in the 4th gen was better than gaming today.

And maybe they have a point. Just look at Tekken tag Tour 2 on Wii U; perhaps the best version of that game, sold horribly. Resident Evil 4 for GC; 1.7m compared to 3.6m on PS2 (granted, PS2 had a far larger instalbase). RE4 didn't sell badly at all, don't get me wrong, but Capcom apparently wasn't too happy with the results. Or just look at Rayman Legends on Wii U... The PS4 version, released a year after the Wii U version, have sold better!

I'll say this though, 3rd parties have themselves to blame for a lot of their abysmal sales on Nintendo systems. They're not really trying all that hard lots of the time, and lots of Wii U ports have been quite late compared to when other systems got the games. Of course they can't expect good sales!

All of this kind of ties in with gamers trust with Nintendo. EVERYONE knows Nintendo delivers great game experiences. Everyone knows Nintendo makes good games. BUT, they're not making games for everyone. And that's the problem. Lots and lots of gamers see Nintendo games as "kiddie" (and they're wrong, mind you) and will not therefore buy Nintendo systems. This is an image Nintendo has had since the SNES days, and that only got amplified with the GC and Wii. And that's kind of what I meant with "gamers trust"; gamers can't depend/trust on Nintendo to deliver "their kind of game", something aking to Halo/Uncharted/Forza/The Last of Us.

If Nintendo wants 3rd party support and "general" gamers, they need to create the right enviroment for them. They need to create something that catches gamers eyes, something a bit more "dark" and forboding, something "mature" - and not just ONE of those games, but several. This will create an incentive for gamers to pick up a Nintendo console AND luring 3rd parties back to Nintendo since Nintendo themselves have created an eco system where 3rd party games can thrive, by creating similar experiences to get gamers to buy their console. BUT, the console need to be on par with the competition, or else people will get their 3rd party games on other consoles since they look and run better there.

Who are you to say that story driven games with long cut scenes are worst than any other games? 6m people bought and played Metal Gear Solid 4, which features A LOT of loooong cut scenes. Uncharted 1-3 have all sold more 4m each and have loads of cut scenes. I admit, these aren't my cup of tea - give me Super Mario (platformer) any day! But, they are trying new things. They are trying to find a way for games to tell compelling stories. The best example of a story driven game, imo, is The Walking Dead. Nearly made me cry when I played that last episode in Season 1. Nintendo have NEVER come close to make me cry. Choices are GREAT. If you wanna play a game where 90% of the game is cut scenes, then why not? Why is that such a bad thing? It's not like you CAN'T play Mario or Zelda just because these kind of games exist.

I'm with you 100% that games shouldn't be riddled with so many bugs as they are today. They shouldn't need 10gb of patches to be playable. But what incentive does publishers have to stop all of this when people pre-order games? The publishers KNOWS they're gonna sell a shit ton of games. We vote with our vaulets. I NEVER buy buggy games, or if I do it's years later at a discount price with all the bugs fixed.

And I don't see the problem with online multiplayer. If people wanna compete with each other across the globe, then why not? I prefer local co-op myslef, I NEVER play online against other players. The only time I've done so is Mario Kart Wii, and even then I payed together with some one in the same room. And Hearthstone and LoL. Those I play as well.... But having online co-op doesn't mean YOU can't enjoy your local co-op. Vote with your vaulet.

So the 5th and 6th gen wasn't as good? Super Mario 64, Zelda OoT, FF VII, Halo, Gran Turismo wasn't any good then?

Options are GOOD. Have lots of options are GOOD. All YOU have to do is play the games YOU like and let others choose what they wanna play for themselves.

No, they can't do whatever they want with NX. We7They don't know yet if mobile gaming is gonna be successful, or HOW successful it's gonna be. Most mobile games don't make an impact what so ever. I think it's very likely Nintendo will find some success there, but how big is yet to early to tell. That means that they can't get all wacky and crazy just yet. IF mobile gaming fails they'll NEED a steady income from dedicated game devices. And you don't achive that be being wacky. Not any more.

I think that if mobile gaming takes off, and brings in a steady stream of cash year in and year out, we might see something wacky for the 10th gen of consoles from Nintendo. THEN the pressure is off.

Who is anyone to say? It's called an opinion.

Local multiplayer has decreased these past two gens compared to prior ones. That's the problem; new inferior types of games are displacing the good ones.

And yes, the 5th and 6th gens were worse than the 4th. In fact, I'll go one step further and say that the 6th gen was rather sucky overall.