I'll say this again, the point is not to get people to purchase multiple sets of hardware, the point is to get more people to buy A piece of hardware.

Yes and no in my opinion.

Look at iPhones and iPads, people buy both. They both can pretty much do the same, run the same apps. The iPad is just bigger, like an TV screen. The iPhone more portable.

Whateves, let's just agree to disagree then.

That's a good question actually.

The console should go a little more upmarket in that case and be able to run some high end third party games that the portable won't be able to handle.

Beyond that though, I don't think it's even a choice so much. If you want a PS3-style portable and a PS4-style console, developing for both is not feasible because development costs are so much higher, it'd basically be like asking Nintendo to make two consoles. Even Sony/MS would buckle and break trying to support two systems like that, no chance in hell Nintendo "never met a delay I didn't like" would be able to satisfactorily support two systems.

Look at the 3DS and Wii U as is ... you have angry people on both sides right now saying they're not getting enough content. It will get worse as time goes on, the whole Nintendo console-handheld dynamic was never designed for such development requirements, it was all fine and dandy when portable games were just small little things that could be knocked out by a group of 10-15 people if need be. That's impossible now. Realistically a PS3/360 level Mario Kart would require basically the same staff as the PS4-XB1 version.

You can't just treat the portable like some kid-brother second thought anymore either. The portable is where the majority of Nintendo fans are and have been for several generations now running. So if the portable has the technology, then it deserves its own Mario Kart, 3D Mario, 2D Mario, 2D Zelda, yes now even 3D Zelda, Animal Crossing, etc. etc. etc. Something has to give.

Nintendo can't survive forever with their content split in half the way it is, while there are potential downsides to unifying there are also practical reasons why its needed now.

I've never really argued against the idea of 2 platforms with similar development environments and some shared games, I'm just against the idea of 2 platforms with close specs and a completely shared library. I understand that Nintendo's not gonna be able to support 2 platforms at once in the current scheme of things. The 3DS and WiiU have completely different architectures and development environments, and that's the main problem IMO. By having a unified development environment, they could overcome that and increase game output, but we can't really pretend that an NX with barely any 3rd party support could survive, we've seen what happened with the WiiU. The NX console needs to be a good speced machine, with decent marketting (Nintendo now has the chance to at least shed their kiddy image a little bit since they're dropping the Wii brand), it needs to be easy to develop for so 3rd parties could profit even from initially low sales (which would increase if a steady 3rd party output remains), and with a unified architecture with a later released handheld, indies could port with ridiculous ease and some shared games (or even more shared "base" games like a 3D Mario or Mario Kart), I think it could be a sweet deal.

I think the consumer has overwhelmingly chosen not to buy both systems anyway. Most people don't *want* to have to buy two systems (thus paying like $500) just to play Nintendo games.

At some point Nintendo just needs to accept that and they probably have I think. The 3DS has 50 million owners, at best 13 million chose to buy a Wii U. Even with the GBA, 60 million GBA owners chose not to buy a GameCube. People don't like buying two pieces of hardware to get the same franchises.

Nintendo should just accept that, trying to force people to buy two hardware components in today's day and age is very hard. Just have a unified platform and let people buy the hardware that works for their life style, you can't dictate to people like it's 1989 anymore, people have too much choice and are too well informed these days.

Bottom line too is most money is made from *software* sales too, the hardware has always been sold at razor thin margins ... so who gives a crap if person X/Y/Z buys two systems or one, the point is to sell games not to get their allegiance in being a "real" hardcore Nintendo fan or something.

It’s actually redundant to talk about NX being what you think it will be, because nothing hints at that being the case.

Wii was the only small jump in performance compared to a previous generation of Nintendo console. NES started Nintendo off having decent specs, then SNES was a big jump, N64 did the same, then Gamecube, Wii was only like 50% more powerful than Gamecube, but Wii U was like 30X more powerful than the Wii.

The trend for Nintendo is for them to have a big jump in capabilities compared their previous generation of console.

So 5 generations of Nintendo hardware have had good specs compared to the current competition and only one generation, the Wii was weak compared to other consoles on the market at the same time.

There’s only a 16.66% chance that Nintendo will do what you’re saying.

There’s an 83.33% chance that Nintendo will do what I’m talking about.

I’ll repeat again as well that Kimishima has outright stated that Nintendo are not making another Wii or Wii U, they’re going to move away from the kind of system that those 2 platforms were. Given Nintendo’s history of making more capable systems and Kimishima’s comments everything is pointing to NX being much more powerful than you think it will be.

You didn’t give a single source that hinted at what you’re saying being the case. Being a 2 in 1 device doesn’t mean the hardware will be weak, in fact Kimishima’s own statements and Nintendo’s history point to the exact opposite being the case.

I already showed how the core specs required to make a device this powerful in a handheld are way cheaper than you think they are.

Laptops are not an example of a console maker’s product, so the end price to a customer can’t be compared with Laptop devices.

Nintendo makes money from games, DLC and amiibos. Hardware profit margins are negligible and the cost of components are actually much cheaper for Nintendo or any platform creator in the dedicated gaming hardware market, because these companies buy in way bigger bulk, using one die, not a bunch of different ones.

I already pointed out that battery life wouldn’t be short, because light weight, cheap battery tech, with big storage is cheap.

Fences are your own invention, unless you’re talking about TDP, which I’ve already taken into consideration.

This is a non-existent issue when Indie devs can make huge games like No Man’s Sky, WiLD, etc or gorgeous visual showpieces like Everybody’s Gone To The Rapture and Hellblade, with tiny development teams.

The delays of Wii U games are likely down to the platform being abandoned by Nintendo and moving titles to NX.

This is not an issue now, especially when assets can be used on multiple releases like common objects games share like grass, rocks, bricks etc.

Hell Mario’s model can be used in multiple games, no need to make more than one version of him, just make a base one and tweak the asset to be used in a tonne of games.

The same can also happen with other Nintendo characters and environments.

You clearly don’t understand how game development works.

I’ve already dealt with the issue of Nintendo making a profit, the specs I used in example could easily result in a profitable end product if Nintendo released the handheld at $250, hell an XB1 level handheld would be very appealing if people can buy a device that capable, which would actually have a decent amount of exclusives, XB1 has a big problem in that area compared to PS4.

You’re ignoring inflation, past consoles are actually comparable to today’s prices, because the dollar or whatever unit of measure goes up over time it actually just looks bigger than it really is.

TBH though if PS4 and XB1 can sell as well as they have, at the prices they launched at there’s simply no proof that a Nintendo releasing a decent spec machine at a competitive price would result in a negative level of sales for them.

Going weaker on hardware just diminishes Nintendo’s value as a creator of dedicated gaming hardware. Your idea would actually have a huge negative effect on their public image among the very audience they should be targeting.

Wii U can only produce pretty graphics compared to 7^th gen consoles, the difference compared to PS4 and XB1 are huge, in favour of those consoles.

Cartoony games aren’t the only style of art and as I pointed out more capable hardware enables developers to do more things, like add in decent physics, weather, while also adding better visuals and IQ tech, all things Nintendo need.

It makes zero sense for Nintendo to release hardware that cannot do anything more than Wii U is capable or just allow Wii U level games to run at 1080p, with 60FPS. This isn’t something that is going to appeal to more people outside of the Nintendo core and there would be no point in existing Wii U owners being sold a machine that can only really add the benefit of taking those Wii U games on the move.

The point of a new generation is to allow developers to do more things and also do the old things even better than before, something that Wii U level tech at 1080p wouldn’t really do. Staying at 720p, just maybe boosting some slightly improved visuals over what Wii U could do wouldn’t be a marketable thing, it would just be an idea that would be strutted out to die within seconds of Kimishima or Reggie talking about it.

Face it dude there’s zero chance this is going to happen.

As for your other reply to me, google NX handheld, the patent is mentioned in a bunch of articles.

I don’t know why you’d find my comments about the price and how costs of the division of a wafer break down funny, it’s basic math and outright fact, just because your own theories make no logical sense there’s no reason to mock others.

When were 3D World and MK8 delayed or how did they release without their full content? And Splatoon was release without it's full content because that was their strategy and not development issues since that content was already in the disc. Yes Nintendo had problem with HD development earlier in this gen cycle but not as much as your are saying

Excellent points.

If indie developers can churn out big titles, with good graphics and features then I'm sure Nintendo will be fine.

Sony and Microsoft take time to make their big AAA titles, so it's not exactly like things are more difficult for Nintendo than everyone else. If you have issues making modern titles, then train your staff better and hier new talent, evolve your software to better serve you in the future and enable you to do more than you could before. Every platform holder has to go through a learning process, not just Nintendo.

If handheld and console game development has merged then gaps in software releases will be way smaller than they were on the Wii U. Even if you need to port to the degree of moving between architectures it's not going to be like developing a whole new version of a game to run on a handheld and a console.

Just because something is difficult, that doesn't mean you limit yourselves by keeping the same weak hardware, god if Nintendo stayed with some Wii U level tech for the next 5-6 years they're going to be more than a single generation behind, especially when PS5 and the Next Xbox release in like 2019-2020 or if both companies do decide to go with an evolving hardware business model.

I'm sure Nintendo devs want to be able to do more, hell the reasons for delaying Zelda on Wii U alone prove that must be the case. This has to mean more powerful hardware is coming.

...propably Nintendos last chance to get me to buy the first nintendo console since SNES.