Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Nintendo might be a disadvantage with development next generation

rajendra82 said:

What you said makes absolutely no sense at all.  While Nintendo did listen to the in house software design teams in the past (notably during the N64 design period) to make the hardware cater specifically to the in-house software, during this generation, they held back a Gamecube Zelda game and added motion controls on top and released a tech demo game as a pack in.  There was little content on Wii at first that really used motion controls well, and there is not a whole lot more today.  In fact Nintendo adding Wii Motion Plus so that the developer complaints are addressed is one of the few signs I see, where the hardware is starting to cater to the software.

Design on the XBox360 on the other hand seems to have been very developer centric and allowing the hardware to truly allow the software to be coded in a very efficient manner.  If you think of Blu-Ray movies as software as well, then PS3 was also designed to cater quite a bit more to its software library than the Wii was to its. 

If Nintendo was truly only interested in software business like you say, they would be ones selling the Wii at a loss (at say $99) and then pumping out tons of software at $50 a pop, one big release after another each month.  The reality is the exact opposite of that.

I don't think you understand what the difference between a Hardware centric, software centric or service centric approach to development is ... None of the companies follow these approaches in a pure sense, but they all focus on one more than the others.

Sony followed a hardware centric approach with the PS3 because hardware technology was the primary motivating factor in how the hardware was going to be designed. They choose a CPU that had a lot of theoritical processing power, but was not well suited to any existing game engine architecture; and they choose a disc drive which had disc capacity that was far beyond the current requirements of any game. The though process behind the development of the system was "software technology will catch up to the hardware we provide" which is (certainly) not a software centric approach.

Microsoft followed a much more service centric approach with a heavy focus on producing services for developers and consumers. The XBox 360 has attracted a lot of third party developers because the tools to produce XBox 360 games are far superior to anything available for other consoles, it has tons of documentation, and Microsoft has built a lot of great libraries for developers to use. At the same time, it is obvious that the user experience of the XBox 360 was designed around XBox Live.

Its obvious that Nintendo is following a much more software centric approach because they don't waste any money on hardware or services beyond what they require to produce games.

 



Around the Network

i don't think that will be a big problem for nintendo. honestley the biggest problem I see right now is Nintendo needing to keep their loyal customers and getting more core gamers to buy games for their systems, the Wii specifically. thats the biggest problem for this gen and the next gen.

i think they'll do good developing HD games.



Probably the easiest way for them to go HD is to license Microsofts Xbox 360.

Its a simple architecture with a well developed toolset so they don't have to go through the pains of multicore architecture development.

Take one Xbox 360 architecture, stick the name Nintendo on it, call it a day and or If they want to give it a bit of a spruce up, they just have to increase the ram to say 1gb using 4 high density GDDR chips running at 900-1000mhz and perhaps update the CPU a little and tack on another core which will help them run their UI a little better.



Tease.

rajendra82 said:
shams said:
I think Ninty will have an *advantage* - as the "code upgrade" path from Wii to WiiHD is pretty obvious.

What will a PS4 or XBOXNEXT game look like? How hard will it be to make something that looks *significantly* better than a 360/PS3 game? Very, very, VERY hard. They played the "high-res" card this generation.

Ninty gets to play it next generation.

We have all seen GPUs and CPUs for PC evolve quite significantly over the past few years.  PC GPUs and CPUs today are far more advanced than what is in the consoles.  How hard is it to have a system with an eight core processor, a DirectX10 GPU, a few GB of fast RAM, and a big hard drive.  Couple it with a fast Blue Ray Drive and voila, NextBox 720.

Yes, the technology has advanced, but how much better are the games going to look?  That is the real question.  Games look so good right now that the next step up is going to be photorealism, and I just don't see that happening next gen.

Nintendo will likely be making the biggest leap forward next gen, while Microsoft and Sony do everything they can to keep their hardware costs down.



NNID: theRepublic -- Steam ID: theRepublic

Now Playing
3DS - Currently Gaming Like It's 2011 - The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3D
PC - Currently Gaming Like It's 2012 - Borderlands 2
Mobile - The Simpson's Tapped Out and Yugioh Duel Links

SmokedHostage said:

Warning: The following series of statements are not meant to offend people, cause flame wars, be the target of hate or cause general discomfort to the mind, body and soul. I have to been forewarned.

I honestly see Nintendo in a pinch for developing games next generation. The problem is, Nintendo has little/no experience with developing HD software. Sony and Microsoft, along with most third parties, do. This may lead several games to take well over 2 or 3 years to finish or possibly cancellings. The hopeful side of me believes that they will transition fairly fast but the slightly more realistic side of me says otherwise. Also with the lack of third party support, this might lead to something very risky. I hope they don't "Leave luck to heaven." <-- Yes that was very corny.

Thoughts?

 

I agree. They also have a hard enough time with getting their games to support widescreen. Mario Party and Wario both use borders. Kind of strange this day and age.... But then again. They could get away with releasing something inbetween. They have been doing well without being on the cutting edge for many of their releases this gen.



Around the Network
Squilliam said:
Probably the easiest way for them to go HD is to license Microsofts Xbox 360.

Its a simple architecture with a well developed toolset so they don't have to go through the pains of multicore architecture development.

Take one Xbox 360 architecture, stick the name Nintendo on it, call it a day and or If they want to give it a bit of a spruce up, they just have to increase the ram to say 1gb using 4 high density GDDR chips running at 900-1000mhz and perhaps update the CPU a little and tack on another core which will help them run their UI a little better.

 

I personally don't see the advantage of this approach ...

By licencing the XBox 360 Nintendo would get hardware which was not compatible with previous systems, they don't own the hardware, has expensive licencing, and is low processing power. They would be better off spending their money to get IBM and ATI to develop a console using bleeding edge technology in 2009 (assuming a 2011/2012 release date), and to licence and enhance the Unreal 3 engine as a standard toolset to go along with their system.



Err this thread made me lol. Whats the difference between HD games and non HD games ? Higher res textures. So all they have to do is make a Mario Kart that looks a bit better than the Wii version. Not so hard right ?



 

Just a thought though.

Nintendo might be inundated with current Hi-Def games next console cycle.

Meaning that the Wii gets PS2, PSP, GC ports...

hence...

Wii HD will get 360/PS3 ports.



nintendo will do much better next gen than thbis gen



 nintendo fanboy, but the good kind

proud soldier of nintopia

 

HappySqurriel said:
Squilliam said:
Probably the easiest way for them to go HD is to license Microsofts Xbox 360.

Its a simple architecture with a well developed toolset so they don't have to go through the pains of multicore architecture development.

Take one Xbox 360 architecture, stick the name Nintendo on it, call it a day and or If they want to give it a bit of a spruce up, they just have to increase the ram to say 1gb using 4 high density GDDR chips running at 900-1000mhz and perhaps update the CPU a little and tack on another core which will help them run their UI a little better.

 

I personally don't see the advantage of this approach ...

By licencing the XBox 360 Nintendo would get hardware which was not compatible with previous systems, they don't own the hardware, has expensive licencing, and is low processing power. They would be better off spending their money to get IBM and ATI to develop a console using bleeding edge technology in 2009 (assuming a 2011/2012 release date), and to licence and enhance the Unreal 3 engine as a standard toolset to go along with their system.

They would have to expend a lot of resources on both the hardware and the software. Why not use something which already works?

Its not like they can keep the current GPU for another generation anyway and the processor in the 360 is in the PowerPC lineage as well.

 



Tease.