I've been ignoring most NX stuff, because it comes across as gossip. But reading this.... I'm kind of hyped for the thing. I love my Wii U, and although I haven't used it 9 months... I'll get back to it. NX will probably release in 2017, 5 years for Wii U, and six for 3DS.
fatslob-:O said:
Thinking on the long term is nice however you want to capitalize on the present. Thinking too far ahead can have some significant impacts like Sony aggressively pushing blu-ray and cell processor technology. That costed Sony on a commercial and technical front in a negative manner. Sony was right about blu-ray technology but at the wrong time however they were dead wrong about the industry adopting the programming model for the cell processor and that had some severe impact thoughout their 7th generation. Similarily Nintendo was pushing glass-free 3D technology and look how it costed them ... If anything making a product for the future is short sighted so if one prediction doesn't come true a console manufacturer will come to regret it making that decision ... @Bold That is not true with chips today. If anything cost reduction won't come for quite a while so what you put out today will likely cost the same to manufacture in 3 years time ... Apple can afford to advance on new transistor technology when their selling new iPhones for $600 but the same cannot be said for Nintendo and their often cost effective handheld devices ... |
New transistor tech is probably more risky for companies like Apple because they have much higher order volumes to hit. No offence to Nintendo, but they're in the kiddie pool by comparison (so is Sony). But Apple needs to hit monstrous volume for a new iPad or iPhone, but they still use not even new, but modern transitior tech.
If Sony didn't use 28nm on the PS4 and instead opted for the more mature 40nm or something ... they would likely be losing the console war right now because the XBox One would likely be more powerful. There's something to be said for being in step with technology.
Some times you can be so risk averse that basically you cripple any chance you have of being competetive.
I think Nintendo needs to wake up as well about what is actually "affordable tech". You know why a big reason is that a lot of parents/kids aren't biting on a dirt cheap 2DS? Because it's not actually that cheap. Sure the hardware is dirt cheap, but people aren't stupid, they know the games cost $30, versus an iPod Touch which may cost $199.99, but has a far better screen quality, does far more things than just play games, and has $1/free games.
Guess which one is winning out? If Nintendo wants to charge $30 for portable games in the world of 2015 and beyond, I think they need to understand that people are absolutely right to expect more. They cannot continue to use the same formula they did in the 1980s and think that should work 100% today. Too much has changed.
I don't agree that just slapping together a cheap piece of plastic and calling it a day will bring Nintendo success even in the handheld business anymore. Consumers are more savvy than that today, if you're going to bring something, you better bring something that impresses.
| Soundwave said: New transistor tech is probably more risky for companies like Apple because they have much higher order volumes to hit. No offence to Nintendo, but they're in the kiddie pool by comparison (so is Sony). But Apple needs to hit monstrous volume for a new iPad or iPhone, but they still use not even new, but modern transitior tech. If Sony didn't use 28nm on the PS4 and instead opted for the more mature 40nm or something ... they would likely be losing the console war right now because the XBox One would likely be more powerful. There's something to be said for being in step with technology. Some times you can be so risk averse that basically you cripple any chance you have of being competetive. I think Nintendo needs to wake up as well about what is actually "affordable tech". You know why a big reason is that a lot of parents/kids aren't biting on a dirt cheap 2DS? Because it's not actually that cheap. Sure the hardware is dirt cheap, but people aren't stupid, they know the games cost $30, versus an iPod Touch which may cost $199.99, but has a far better screen quality, does far more things than just play games, and has $1/free games. Guess which one is winning out? If Nintendo wants to charge $30 for portable games in the world of 2015 and beyond, I think they need to understand that people are absolutely right to expect more. They cannot continue to use the same formula they did in the 1980s and think that should work 100% today. Too much has changed. I don't agree that just slapping together a cheap piece of plastic and calling it a day will bring Nintendo success even in the handheld business anymore. Consumers are more savvy than that today, if you're going to bring something, you better bring something that impresses. |
New transistor tech is the most riskiest for the IDM (TSMC, Samsung, Intel and etc), not the chip designer or their customers because they have to pay for the operation expenses and the R&D costs. Aside from Intel been the leader of moore's law and Samsung only recently transitioning to 14nm, I'd say that Apple is using fairly new transistor tech ...
It did make sense to use 28nm at the time instead of 40nm because of transistor cost scaling benefits but it doesn't make much sense to do the same for 20nm or 14 nm transistors today because transistor cost is INCREASING due to multiple patterning. In otherwords if you ported that very same chip design on a 28nm transistor to a 20nm or 14nm transistor, it actually costs more to produce!
Some risk or gambling is good but adopting new transistor technology does not make much sense in Nintendo's case when they don't have any competitors on the handheld front and I doubt that phones are actual competitors to Nintendo's handheld lines ...
The selling point of gaming portables aren't features but better controls and higher quality games. That is where smartphones CAN'T compete and even if developers stop pushing shovelware there's still the issue of non-standard controller peripherals too ...
Nintendo doesn't have to compete with smartphones and it doesn't have to be that way either. The vita tried to get as feature loaded as phones and look how that turned out for Sony. Not much has changed, what has changed are the quality of Nintendo games and if there is quality software on the system consumers will buy it regardless ...
Thread reported, it's not a fact but another speculations, hope OP change the title. I have just wasting my time reading the same gossip over and over. The real infos is not here yet, please mod be concerned.
Moderated for back seat moderation - Tachikoma
Wyrdness said:
This why the lost hardware units are not as important as someone buying software, you already answered your own question earlier with an example of Pokemon having an impact. |
Not true, Nintendo made profit on every hardware from day 1 expect for Wii U on launch and expect 3DS after that big and fast price cut, Wii U become profitable after year-year and half and 3DS probably after year. Wii U is first Nintendo console on that they lose money on launch.
Software make more profit for Nintendo, because you have at least 5 sold games on one sold console, but Nintendo is making huge profit on hardware too, not just on hardware alone, on hardware accessories too. Just how many Wii Remotes are sold this and last gen, ten of millions, official price for Wii Remote is $50 and manufacture cost for Wii Remote is around $15, and you have more hardware accessories like Nunchuk, wheels, cables, bags...hardware is bringing to Nintendo big chunk of money and that's one of reasons why Nintendo never considering living hardware business.
Great article! That's exactly what I've been saying all along and evidence points to this scenario.
As for power, Moore's Law indicates the following numbers:
Handheld: Quad-Core CPU clocked at 1 GHz, 1GB RAM
Console: Eight-Core CPU clocked at 1.8 GHz, 8GB RAM
Moore's Law points to a home console that's exactly PS4 / X1 level performance. Even doing the math for the GPU points to a card sitting snuggly between PS4 and X1 in power. I looked at past Nintendo consoles and handhelds and besides the Wii, every single console has followed Moore's Law. Nintendo does *not* ignore improvements in technology. They merely follow their own trajectory. It's highly unlikely NX will only be twice as powerful as the Wii U.
As for "gimmicks", I expect a return to Motion Control for the home console. The Wiimote 2 will feature sensors (heartbeat, etc.) and maybe something else. The handheld I expect to be a slide-open mechanic like the PSP Go but with a second screen: You can use the handheld smartphone style (vertically, with one hand), use it horizontally and slide it open to get access to the buttons and sticks. Simple as a smartphone, as complex as a handheld.
| JNK said: NX will flop if its like that. The only way NX could be sucsessfull is to make a new wii, aimed at casuals people. All "real gamers" wont get the NX, they will get Ps4/Xbox one (or may have them already and wait for ps5/xboxwhatever). Why should i buy NX to play multiplattform games like Call of Duty and co if all my friends already own a Ps4? So we cant play together? Nintendo will always just make the "secondary system". No chance it could compete with PS/Xbox. If Nintendo really wants to make a console for the hardcore gamers, they wouldnt let the wii u die that hard. They would cut the priece, pay third party for games and co. Pretty much do, what Sony does with Ps3. If you had an failed console, people wont "thrust" you on your next system. First make all people on your last system satisfied, then make a new one. People werent satisfied with the Wii, so they didnt got the Wii U. People wernt satisfied with Wii U, so they wont get NX. I read so many people saying: "If NX flops nintendo will just make a new console again in 2 years, no thanks". And thats right. Playstation and Xbox do get ~8 years software support. Nintendo consoles get 3-4 years 3 good games per year. Also the handheld/console thing is just not possible as a reasonable pricepoint. Modern smartphones are already super expensive, and their chips are far from beein able to compete with PS4/Xbox One. The new Nvidia Android Tv box (Nvidia Shield) is on a similar powerlevel as the wii u, and its huge and need a power supply. Also how should x86-CPUs + mobile gpus work in a mobile system? To compete with Ps4 power level you need a mobile core i3/5 and a gtx 960m. Such a system will be incredible expensive and need a BIIIG battery. Even Gaming laptops have 1-2 hours battery life. It will get hot and need a fence. The new Steamboy is using a new jaguar apu, maybe NX will use the same. But it will never reach PS4-perfomance levels. Expect a little better wii u (no third party support) |
-I think with NX Nintendo is aiming new Wii not Wii U, they again aiming for afordible console with mass apeling things in Wii U failed.
-Handheld/Console thing is possible in reasonable price point, Steamboy have price point of $299 and with that price they probably have very good profit. Nintendo can easily make little weaker hardware that can stream games wirelessly to the TV with smaller profit or without profit at around $250 price point.
-Steamboy with Jaguar cpu will play PC games in 720p, so similar or weaker cpu could easily handle 3rd party PS4 games in 720p or smaller resolution. SteamBoy isnt incredibly expensive we dont know what battery have, but Nintendo device will be allmost certan be cheaper than $300. Gaming laptops have very big screens and very strong hardware with high resolutions, so you can't expect strong battery life.
-SteamBoy will play PC games in 720p, so easily could play PS4 3rd party games in 720p, we all know that console game requires much less power than PC games. That leads us to that Nintendo handheld/console device with little weaker cpecs than SteamBoy could easily play PS4 ports (minus some effects) in 720p or lower resolution.
JEMC said:
I'm not an analyst, but I could also say the same two statements that "NeoGaf Matt" said by using common sense: 1-If NX replaces WiiU it has to be more powerful to make it attractive to Wii U owners. Who would make a console that's weaker than the console it is replacing? And who will buy such a thing? 2-720p is the best middle of the ground solution for Nintendo. As you said on another thread, HD screens probably cost the same or are even cheaper than lower resolution screens just because the market has moved forward and there's little demand for sub-HD screens but a lot of demand for HD ones. Also, you need lower spec'd hardware to run games at 720p than at 1080p. Therefore, 720p is the best solution for Nintendo. Note: The interesting part of what you posted is that he said "screen", not "screens", and that means no DS/3DS compatibility. Just saying. I won't go into a debate with you on specs, because it's all speculation, or what kind of console or consoles NX ends up been. I'll only say that there's no way in hell that Nintendo launches a portable console at $250, at least not if the 20 million units in its first year is true. |
In case that @Soundwave mentioned, itins simple portable, its something between home and handheld console, home and handheld in one device, portable that can stream games wirelessly to the TV, that definitely would worth around $250 price point.
fatslob-:O said:
@Bold I wonder what the power consumption is on that thing ... |
Well we already have SteamBoy with pretty solid specs that will play PC games in 720p, but we still dont know about battery, Nintendo device could easily have little weaker specs.
| Soundwave said:
My suspicion is while there will be multiple form factors, there will only be one primarily form factor that has the majority of sales, and I think that likely could be the portable version which is able to stream games to the TV. I think that is central to the "novelty" of the NX line ... it's a handheld that can double as a home console at the snap of a finger. |
| Soundwave said: There's a poster named Matt on NeoGaf, who apparently has a flawless track record for having inside info, but he posts very rarely and doesn't really boast about his claims. NX Portable - Main SKU, 300-350 GFLOP-ish AMD + ARM system on chip (14nm?). Better than Wii U graphics at 4-6 hour battery life, cheap but nice looking screen (720p, custom shape?). No dual screen, has some kind of new control input that changes the gameplay experience. Nintendo OS but can run Android apps that Nintendo has to approve and gets a cut of. Can stream games wirelessly to the TV, so it's "revolutionary" also for the fact that it's a portable and TV console all in one package. $250. NX Mini-Console - Optional device for people who are primarily play at home and want full 1080P resolution graphics and perhaps better graphics. Plays the same games as NX Portable. Same type of chip as the portable, just scaled up by 2x-4x (700 GFLOP-1.4 TFLOP depending on how far Nintendo wants to go) with more RAM. Fairly cheap to mass produce. |
| Soundwave said: A fairly powerful handheld (Wii U++ level visuals) that can also double as a wireless home console that can wirelessly send a video signal to the TV (the reverse of the Wii U) I think would do quite well for Nintendo possibly. Add in a new type of control input as a bonus, and you have something that's fairly unique to the marketplace and well worth even $250 (especially if Nintendo is bringing big guns like Zelda NX and Mario NX to the launch window). |
I completely agree with you about what NX will probably be.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
