Thank you for this post.

I know alot of people & nintendo fans say graphics dont matter.... but a 100$ consol that turned out to be weaker than the Wii U is would be a bummer I feel.

Nintendos next consol needs to be made on 16nm FinFETs and be atleast as strong as the XB1 when it releases.

I dont think a lot of nintendo fans would be happy about that and would lose interrests. Nintendo would also lose game royalties and they would have to pay those themselfs for the other two, with the exception of the PC.

There are some problems there though. We already had some similar things in the and none of them worked out.

Sega came with the 32X, NEC with the TurbographX (base Model was the CoregraphX). Both failed for the same reason: The extended model could also run the games of the base model but not vice-versa. Thus the base model had a much bigger Install base and everyone produced games for them, as that one was more viable to bring profits. It's also why the Commodore Amiga failed (apart from piracy, every game was copied by the shitton and then some): While later models had vastly expanded capacities, everyone was still programming for a basic Amiga 500.

You can bring both side by side, but that confuses the consumers even more than Nintendo did by naming the Wii U so close to it's predecessor. Also goes for the games themselves: If they have different sections (and thus different boxes) in videogame stores, it will confuse the consumers even further; If they don't and use the same support, well, it will still confuse the users since those with the smaller model ain't sure it works on his model while those of the extended model are not sure to get anything more or different than the base model.

Oh, and you meant probably 3 TFLOPS processing power, not processor. Most of the processing power is delivered by the graphics chip, not the CPU.

The 3 Teraflops model also comes with an additional problem right now: It's actually too powerful. And thus produces too much heat for such a small case a console uses (RROD, anyone?). We will have to wait until 14/16nm processes are widespread enough with good yield rates to reduce the TDP to affordable levels for a console (which is ~170W max, Wii U is at 45W, but in an even smaller casing), but also for other technical advances in instructions both for CPU and GPU. Which all means such a model wouldn't come out before holyday 2017 at the earliest, with 2018 or even 2019 being much more realistic. Oh, and the price would be higher than 349$ for that one, that's for sure. Even more with Nintendo, who doesn't like to sell hardware at a loss.

It would be mocked by the "hardcore" Shooter/Sports/Racing/Action demographic of 13-35 year old males that probably won't buy a Nintendo console regardless but that's not really who Nintendo would be chasing with such a device. It's more likely they would put themselves up against devices like Apple TV/Roku/Fire TV and aim for kids, females, families which are demographics that PS/XB don't cater to nearly as much as teen/adult males.

Affordable doesn't mean crappy, the DS and Wii were mocked in chatroom and yet they've managed to sell 250m units combined.

That's the whole point of "don't market it as a competitor of PS and XB but market it as an addition or an alternative". If you're trying to convince people you have the next Ps4, you fail and end up in the bargain bin then you'll end up being percieved as crappy. If you propose yourself as something different even a 99$ prince could be reasoneble depending on what you offer. (then again, I'll repeat myself, 99$ is taking it to the extreme)

@ freebs2

The DS was well done and definitely a hardware improvement over the gameboy advance sp. The wii however was popular due to its fad, not through having good games, although wii sports was critical in pushing the fad. This is evident in the fact that the wii lagged behind in sales last gen. Meanwhile the ps3 has caught up to 4/5 of wii sales and is actually still alive

The business model that makes sense for Nintendo is that which allows them to have profit out of the gate. An underpowered, cheap console makes sense.

As for me, my interest in Nintendo is very little, apart from when a Nintendo console, for some unexpected turn of events, falls on my hands as the DS recently did.

That is a very simplified way to see things. The Wii lasted shorter but had phenomenal sales because it was a demand pull kind of innovation (motion control in order to make accessible games). Demand pull products are physiologically prone to have a great start but last shorter, X360 and Ps3 were a tecnological push kind of innovation (High definition as a new standard fo visual fidelity). When you make a tecnological push product it's natural to have a slow start but getting momentum in the long run.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_push

Also we could argue, Ps3/360 were still doing good in 2013 because they were still making games for it, while Nintendo guiltily dropped Wii support after 2010 in favour of the new systems (3DS and WiiU). As I noted in the OP, Just Dance 2015 (released 6 months ago) has still sold 1.72m on a consoles that was basically dead 4 years ago.

Hmmmm, that's a very cool way of looking at things.

Well, going off of that a NintendOUYA console only sets itself up for failure. Having completely inferior tech than the competition and similar specs to a smartphone renders it obsolete from a technological push standpoint.

That leaves the demand pull. It seems that the most distinct feature of a $100 nintendo console is the ability to play nintendo games. But at that point, you may as well get a bundled 2ds or 3ds (this point is also hurting the wii u). Sure you can't plug that into a tv, but you can play on the go. And at this point, the 3ds already plays many of the wii u games

mario kart 7 (mario kart 8)

smash bros 3ds (smash bros wii u)

mario 3d land (mario 3d world)

lego city chase begins (lego city undercover)

rayman origins (rayman legends)

monster hunter tri (monster hunter 4)

new super mario bros 2 (new super mario bros U)

the list goes on ... Therefore there is no demand pull. Honestly making a PS4tendo seems to be the only reasonable option in the future. As long as it is done right, it seems to be the safest way of gaining momentum and revenue

To make clear. Demand pull does mean you design an innovation in order to meet an expresseed (or unexpressed) customer need, the innovation is driven by watching the market. Tecnological push does mean you design a tecnological innovation, and then you try later to convince the market your innovation is usefull (create a new need).

Well you've actually nailed one part of the problem here. 3DS is killing off WiiU sales, beacuse right now the only reason to own a Nintendo console is to play Nintendo games and 3DS right now is a much more convient way to access those games for the average joe. If ever, this further proves a part of the market wants Nintendo games but there's no need for a Ps4tendo.