Nintendo wont advertise it as an smart-tv-box (like fire tv, appletv and co).

It would also be alot more gaming centered (pretty much like the Nvidia Shield Console, but with tons of nintendo exclusives games).

Its already confirmed not to use android, so it still will be a console. Just a pretty small one with hardware similar to whats in those TV Boxes.

With all the nintendo exclusives games, the box would have a huge advantage over similar competitors and could still have smart tv functionality as well (even ps4/xbox one have that).

Well -1 x -1 = +1 right ? ;)

Vita TV / Vita in general failed because of lack of good exlcusives/handheld games. 

Wii U failed because of high priece just for playing exclusive games.

NX could pretty much negate the negative of both but combine the positive.

None the less people would see it as that, because it's not comparable to a modern console, but significantly weaker. This set-top box idea, along with a weak tablet that can't run games anywhere near comparable to the competition has no sellable factor about it.

Sony and MS are the competition (regardless of what Nintendo may say), not anything else.

It's weak, it can't do anything gaming related that puts it in an attractive position compared to Sony or Microsoft and people already have devices like Shield or these small Smart boxes, this literally has no point. If Nintendo games were appealing by themselves then Wii U would have sold gangbusters, but that didn't happen. If running classic Nintendo games was a selling point then the Virtual Console would have caused Wii U to blow up in sales, but that hasn't happened.

People have been telling you what the negatives of this idea of yours are, it negates none of them, because it's weak technically, it can't even stand on a similar level to XB1 and that's the weaker system compared to PS4, both of which are pretty cheap to make now, hell even the modern 28nm node updates allow for way more chips to be made from a wafer and offer cheap SOCs, that are much more efficient on power consumption compared to XB1 and PS4.

Going with Wii U level hardware will kill NX, even if NX has a handheld that matches Wii U and people could take that on the move, it's not enough and it's certainly not something to base an entirely new platform around, it's the same kind of thing as before, nothing fresh about it, in fact it would just be a stagnant platform, that brings nothing new to the table.

What even gave you the notion that this is what NX is?

Can you please give specific examples of rumors that point to this being what NX is?

The fact Kimishima and co have been saying this is something fresh and reliable sources have actually said the tech in use is way more powerful than Wii U argues against that level of weak hardware being used in NX.

The Iwata comment about making games more like Apps (similar to how Apple games run on anything) points to a more OS centered gaming platform/ecosystem which Nintendo can then release a variety of different devices to cater to different markets points to your idea not being anything like NX.

It's all but confirmed that NX devices are going to be way more capable than beefed up Wii Us, it'll be at least within striking distance of PS4.

Your comparisons between Ratchet & Clank on PS4 and Mario Kart 8 only show how much more capable PS4 is, Ratchet looks like a Pixar movie, MK8 doesn't, while nice, it's not blowing anyone away in the same way R&C is visually and more power allows for way more gameplay possibilities like full weather, dynamic lighting, physics like Uncharted 4, Horizon and Gravity Rush 2, which definitely adds a lot of potential to actual gameplay.

Nintendo trying to limit the processing performance of NX will kill it's appeal, being cheap with old hardware just doesn't appeal to people.

i did already talked about pretty much all that, see my first post in this thread.

I dont think R&C looks much better as Mario Kart (which still is a 60 fps game).

I also dont think gameplay has changed from ps3 to ps4. The ps4 is pretty much still the same gameplay whise with just better graphics (nontheless the gap is alot smaller as between previous generations). 

The wii u sold bad because it was expensive and just played nintendo games. My concept will be cheap, play 2x as much nintendo games. Will work.

A ps4 made by nintendo will fail. We already have ps4/xbox one and even pcs to play that kind of game. A fourth competitor is rudunant. Especially when released mid cycle while ps4 and xbox already sold almost 100mio units combined.

Ps4 owner will "wait for the ps5 that will be more powerfull then NX AGAIN.

Xbox Users same.

None Ps4 owners will get the system they can play online togehter with their friends.

NX failed.

Nintendos president just confirmed that they wont sell NX at a loss. So powerfull hardware will already most likely not happen.

NX will be portable. The 3ds need to get replaced at the latest ist 2017. Handhelds are stil nintendos power and always was, they will not give up that market.#

A portable device with powerfull hardware will be very expensive. Nintendo wont release a 600$ handheld, their handheld always were cheap.

Not much has changed gameplay-wise console-to-console since the rise of 3D games. Most of the games that game out for the Wii U are nicer looking versions of very similar games that came out for the N64.

If your concept is that doable (it isn't), why even bother making a new console at all? Why not find a way to make the Wii U in a much more cost-effective way, to lower the price and make a handheld version of the Wii U that will play digital versions of Wii U games? Why bother with making a new console with a new processor manufacturer to begin with?

Remember handhelds are only Nintendo's bread and butter because Nintendo were made more or less irrelevant (by comparison to their competition) in the home console arena. They were once king and lost their crown. Nintendo was once THE platform for third party games, now Nintendo fans have settled for them being nice to have.

Games gone open world alot more. Games like Skyrim werent available on ps2.

2 reasons. 

1. not possible. Wii U uses PowerPC which cant be just put into a handheld. Also it need 2 screen, again problem for handheld.

2. Image. There was a reason Nintendo released the wii and not just a motion controller for the gamecube.

N64, Gamecube were both system with similar or even better power then their competition. Both didnt managed to sell nearly as many units as the Playstation did.

The Wii was different, less powerfull. It suprasses ps3 and x360 both.

Uhh... Elder Scrolls 3: Morrowind featuring similar open world gameplay came out on the original Xbox. The only reason that wasn't available on the PS2 was because it was a paid exclusive.

1. Why can't a custom PowerPC based chip be put into a handheld? You're acting like ARM processors are magic. As for 2 screens, the DS says hello.

2.  Why wasn't the Wii U what you think the NX should be to begin with? People don't just buy new consoles for fun. I'm sure Nintendo would have been much happier milking the 100+ Wii owners than putting out the Wii U if power wasn't that big of a factor.

So your argument is that in order to sell a lot of consoles, you need to have a less powerful and cheaper console? The PS4 says hello. Not only is it the most powerful, but it's also the most expensive, but still outselling the cheaper and less powerful X1 almost 2 to 1 worldwide.


Also why on earth do you think people would buy a console that is less powerful than it's predecessor?

"Hey look at Mario Kart 9! See how it looks noticably worse than Mario Kart 7, even though it runs on much newer hardware."

I'm sure that would go over like a lead zeppelin.

Morrowind was 1 game. The xbox was way stronger then the original ps2. Games like the last of us wouldnt work either, scince you couldnt display all the emotions and co. 

PowerPCchips need fences. Thats why. They need more energy and produce more heat.Intel just manages to make x86 chips that arnt complete garbage (atom) and wont need a fence (intel core M). And those chips are expensive AF and still not much more powerfull then something like the a9x.

Because in 2012 mobile arm chips wernt as capable.

Mario kart 9 wouldnt look inferior ti mario kart 7. It would look similar (little better, litter worse) then mario kart 8.

Your first post didn't point out any statements from Nintendo that supports this theory, it didn't even highlight any rumors or patents that have come from reliable sources that support this being a possibility.

Ratchet & Clank destroys MK8 visually, regardless of frame rate, there's no Wii U games that come anywhere close to the level of visuals in that game, as I said it's about as close to Pixar level visuals there has ever been in a video game. The level of textures are much better, geometry is much more complex, R&C is beyond MK8 in very single way, by a very big margin.

I gave you examples of where gameplay has improved with more powerful technology. Horizon Zero Dawn is a huge open world game, with advanced physics, weather effects and dynamic lighting transitions from day to night are all in play, at the same time, something that wasn't really possible last gen in the way it's being used this generation. Plus the level of visuals.

Uncharted 4 is enough of an example of what's possible with current generation hardware, if you think more gameplay possibilites can't happen and that we've hit a wall at the 7th generation then you really don't understand the craft of making a video game at all! What that game is doing, all of the factors combined was just not possible on PS3, that is 100% a fact, there is no example of any single video game on last gen consoles doing all of that together.

Wii U sold bad because it had technology that was barely any better than PS3 or XBox 360, at most it was 50% more powerful than either of those and you're talking about Nintendo releasing a new platform based on putting that level of tech into a small set-top box and a handheld and calling it a day, it won't sell.

Nintendo releasing 2X the number of games, compared to Wii U and having only those 2 devices, with that level of tech is going to kill both their handheld and console business in one fail swoop.

If you think I'm talking about Nintendo releasing just a PS4 with Nintendo branding, then you didn't read what I wrote at all.

Go back and read my 1st post in this thread, specifically where I mention a Nintendo OS, what I'm suggesting isn't that limiting and nor do I think it would work for Nintendo to just release a console with PS4 level specs. What I'm mentioning is revolutionary for Nintendo and it's never been done before in the dedicated gaming hardware market.

The fact you think PS4 level technology has to be expensive shows that you haven't got a clue about the pricing of technology, particularly the modern 28nm and 14nm chip technologies from AMD, both of which are energy efficient for the purposes gaming hardware platform creators need.

They're very cost effective, which is the point of them. Hell AMD's own 40CU Polaris GPU tech is targeting a very cheap launch price, the actual chipset for that would only cost 1/3rd of the overall RRP AMD are targeting, that's in a retail level GPU, a customer like Nintendo or any of the other console makers could easily get costs reduced, because of the volume of chips they buy.

The notion that Nintendo would have to charge $600 to turn out a PS4 level handheld in 2017 is extremely false, the notion that such tech is even going to cost half of that is also false, especially when the most expensive component in that box wouldn't even cost $90, that's for a full SOC.

Do some research and actually use proper sources before making replies please.

This concept of yours is baseless, so we're just going round and round with you making claims that make no sense.

Then im sorry for you. The difference are almost none existing. The gap from 6th to 7th gen (or in case of nintendo wii to wii u scince they are 1 gen behind) is 20x as big. See my linked mario kart wii / 8 comparison video for this.

Mario kart 8 destorys mario kart wii in every aspect. Ratchet and Clank doesnt look much better then mario kart 8 in relation. I even put pictures to proove it into this. Ask 20 random people which photo from my OP looks better, you will most likely get 10 who say mario kart and 10 who say ratchet and clank. All the difference you claim to see is most likely placebo.

"I gave you examples of where gameplay has improved with more powerful technology. Horizon Zero Dawn is a huge open world game, with advanced physics, weather effects and dynamic lighting transitions from day to night are all in play, at the same time, something that wasn't really possible last gen in the way it's being used this generation. Plus the level of visuals."

Skyrim, read dead redemption, gta 5, Just cause 2, Far cry 3. Your welcome.

If something like that exists why isnt samsung or any other smartphone manufacture using this in smartphones instead of arm chip?

Why are gaming ultrabooks like the razer blade 14 incredible expensive, get extremly hot and have poor battery life?

Also feel free to give me a source to this.

The difference is enormous, every aspect of the details is well beyond MK8, that screen shot proves that by itself, shows you really don't get this.

Hell looking at character models, environments, everything and comparing them to any Nintendo game, it's not even a close comparison. Obviously you're going to continue denying it, but only the die hard of Nintendo fans would agree with you and they'd all be deluding themselves.

As for your examples, none are doing what Horizon is doing, hell even The Witcher 3 doesn't have advanced physics, weather, along with everything else in it's featureset and it's visuals still don't touch Horizon's.

Uncharted 4 is basically a Summer Action Blockbuster movie, boiled into a game, none of the 7th gen game examples you've given are doing everything that game encompasses, not in it's entirety. Your ignoring fact to suit your unsupported points.

The chips are too big for a smartphone, tablets have a bigger form factor and we're not talking about anything on the level of performance the Razer 14 uses, it packs an I7 and a GTX 970m, that GPU beats out an R9 270x in tests, in a notebook, it's more powerful than the PS4 is.

14nm hasn't even been released yet, hence why it's not in use in a device yet.

The sources are tests between GPU components and specs from AMD on their own website.

LMFAO you're asking for sources, when you haven't even linked a source to prove NX could be what you're claiming it to be. Where's a statement from Nintendo that supports your theory? Where's the leaks from reliable sources that state this is the kind of thing that Nintendo are doing.

How is this a fresh idea, that is something Nintendo would need to keep under wraps from Sony and Microsoft?

This concept of yours isn't appealing at all and your examples of games supposedly not doing anything more complex or improving gameplay are just non existant.