Hmm could be a thing.

I kind of presumed the "make more platforms" wasn't meant so literally and is in reference to incorporating mobile into the mix. Say the next zelda feautures a mini game, you'll be able to play it on your phone and earn rupee's/same with handheld. Stuff earned in pokemon shuffle on mobile will contribute towards your progression in Pokemon Z etc.

I do think we're approaching the point where multiple console hardware configurations can work and is demanded

Regarding the first point unless games are CPU or physics dependant graphics are easily scalable. I think a lot of Nintendo's games are far heavier on GPU then they are CPU.

The second point would be for the core gamers+third party. The first variant of the system will would try to appeal to the casual/family market. The Second to the more hardcore gamers and the graphics would be scalable the same way we compare and contrast X1 releases against PC on ultra settings. My gut feeling is that most of Nintendo's actual fans will get the 3TF system and the lower end one will die worst then the Wii U because we have no idea whether this casual/family audience exist and are still interested in Nintendo. Running at 1080p, 60fps says nothing about graphics so there will certainly be a visible different in all titles if nintendo wishes it. Texture quality, tesselation, DOP, AA, particle effects/simulations, Lighting.... It may be subtle in games like MarioKart but the difference in third party and core games like Zelda would be immediate.


What I would say is that the upper end core variant would need to push at least 6TF for it to really catch on and be a long term investment releasing n late 2017 as opposed to another stop gap system. By time of its releases manufacturers will be using 16-20nm chipsets, so there should be a easily achievable power leap over new gen.

I think Nintendo will just launch with the handheld and console in the beginning, but the basis for moving to a unified architecture and API/OS will let them release evolved hardware every few years.

The handheld should be around Wii U spec level 400GFlop, but with more PC like Architecture, probably use a mobile varient of AMD's Zen SMT core, perhaps 2 cores, with 4 threads overall, 2GBs of HBM at around 50GB/s, standard 32GBs of in-built SSD storage. RRP: $149.

Handheld can handle all of the same games as the home console, but they run at low settings, 720P 60FPS, while the home console is a 1080p 60FPS scaled up design, running games on ultra settings.

The home console could be an 8 Core Zen CPU, with 10X the GPU performance, running games on the equivalent of ultra settings at 1080p 60FPS, high AA, AF at high levels for big screen viewing. Cost could be $349, come with a Bluray Drive, 1TB HDD with 128MBs of onboard cache for fast access of data.

At least 8GBs of HBM running at around 300GB/s.

Both systems would release in holiday 2017.

As far as we know, there is NO variant and NX is a single hardware, with 99% chances of being a portable.

What delay? We're litterally on track for 2017 based on how the Wii was announced, revealed, and launch during the Gamecube era and how the Wii-U was during the Wii era.

He also said that they wanted to change the way Nintendo sells HW.
Introducing an upgrade every 2/3 years before the next big jump, could be that.

We could see a handheld + home console releasing in the same year and being replaced by better models 2/3 years after. Or just having a second choice side by side, in stores.

Nintendo already does something like this with the handhelds, but it could take it a bit further.
It would also allow Nintendo to better compete with Sony and MS. For exemple, imagine if Nintendo had done this with Wii U in 2014 or even this year. It would better compete in terms of power and public perception of the console.
And with Nintendo most likely releasing it's new console sooner than the competition, it's a good defense!

It's basically trnasforming your software (OS and games) into the actual platform, instead of locking it to HW.

The next ps/xbox are not expected to have 15 teraflops, not with the lower jump from 7th gen. Perhaps that's the max you could expect from a 9th gen console. And 3rd parties don't care about enough power to make ports, since they already have it an don't port anyway.

for $249 in 2017, a wii u successor would have 5-7 teraflops and 24gb of ram.

7th to 8th jump was 8x-10x, depending on who you ask (google for links). By 2018/19 10nm node would be more than mature, and some may even argue that MSony might wait a bit longer for 7nm node...so yes, they are quite expected to have that much...I'd even say at least.

As for 3rd parties and power - if you have all 3 systems that have the same architecture, 2 of them in the same ballpark, and for 3rd all they have to do is lower resolution and few settings (which is what I and some others are suggesting), then yes, they will make ports, because they would be very easy to make.

Current situation is far from that, it is always combination of 2 factors, user base and power, and lot of devs have said that, but we've been over this a million times on this site, so forgive me for having no intent of beating that dead horse again...I've been doing that couple of years ago with certain user, by the name of Zero999, of which your...let's say...style of posting reminds me quite a bit. ;)

Not even close. Wii U, x1 and ps4 jump from the 7th gen are 3x, 6x and 9x respectively.

"As for 3rd parties and power - if you have all 3 systems that have the same architecture, 2 of them in the same ballpark, and for 3rd all they have to do is lower resolution and few settings (which is what I and some others are suggesting), then yes, they will make ports, because they would be very easy to make."

The ps4 and x1 aren't exactly in the same ballpark unless you think the wii u is in the same ballpark as x1. But 3rd parties already have what you mentioned. they could lower resolution and a few things for wii u but they don't.