By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - "When do you think we will see the first next-gen console?" -wtf?-

How is it abandoning their new audience if games are still being made that can run on both systems? And since when is a preemtive business strategy wrong? I suppose in your hockey game you would tell your starters not to score. They are ahead afterall.



"You can never jump away from Conclusions. Getting back is not so easy. That's why we're so terribly crowded here."

Canby - The Phantom Tollbooth

Around the Network
HappySqurriel said:

Maybe I’m slow, but I don’t understand why anyone would think that Nintendo would release a "Wii HD" unless it was just a Wii system with a built in scaler.

Why would Nintendo choose to (A) dramatically increase their software development costs, (B) hurt their hardware profitability, injure their image with fans (by having a short lived product), and (C) sacrifice further sales of what will become their most popular home console ever when they're not being pressured by anyone? This would be a lot like a hockey team that was up 3 to 1 after their first period sending all of their best players home so they can show off the talent of their rookies ... Its a losing strategy that only a moron would use.

I bolded the assumptions that, frankly, are just plain wrong.

(A) Making a HD and SD version of a game on what is effectively the same platform is trivial.  There is no dramatic increase in dev costs.  The SD/HD difference is often the only point of contention that reviewers have with Wii cross-platform titles, over their HD counterparts.  More importantly, if game developers saw the Wii as a contemporary to the HD consoles, rather than the PS2, cross-platform games might actually start with the Wii HD as a basis for game design.

(B) Selling 100% BC Wii HDs to the HD crowd, and still making Wii SDs for the SD crowd would not hurt Nintendo in the slightest.  Quite the opposite, in fact -- it would expand the audience, and cause many Wii SDs to be repurchased as Wii HDs.  Remember, upgrading isn't a requirement, if Nintendo says every game must also support the SD console.

(C) See (B).

 

The "Wii HD" really would just be a "scaled" Wii, after all.  A faster GPU and more texture memory would really be the only prereq -- it doesn't need to have more base memory or a faster CPU at all.  A HDD, better textures, and 720p output would appeal to a very large crowd, though, I believe.  Ask yourself if you would purchase a Wii, say in two years time, that cost the same, or slightly more than the current Wii, but had a built-in HDD, upscaling hardware, more texture memory, and a faster GPU, along with 720p output support -- say it upscales any Wii game, and any future Wii games can make use of the additional texture memory if they so desire (there's certainly room on the DVD).

 



Groucho said:
HappySqurriel said:

Maybe I’m slow, but I don’t understand why anyone would think that Nintendo would release a "Wii HD" unless it was just a Wii system with a built in scaler.

Why would Nintendo choose to (A) dramatically increase their software development costs, (B) hurt their hardware profitability, injure their image with fans (by having a short lived product), and (C) sacrifice further sales of what will become their most popular home console ever when they're not being pressured by anyone? This would be a lot like a hockey team that was up 3 to 1 after their first period sending all of their best players home so they can show off the talent of their rookies ... Its a losing strategy that only a moron would use.

I bolded the assumptions that, frankly, are just plain wrong.

(A) Making a HD and SD version of a game on what is effectively the same platform is trivial.  There is no dramatic increase in dev costs.  The SD/HD difference is often the only point of contention that reviewers have with Wii cross-platform titles, over their HD counterparts.  More importantly, if game developers saw the Wii as a contemporary to the HD consoles, rather than the PS2, cross-platform games might actually start with the Wii HD as a basis for game design.

(B) Selling 100% BC Wii HDs to the HD crowd, and still making Wii SDs for the SD crowd would not hurt Nintendo in the slightest.  Quite the opposite, in fact -- it would expand the audience, and cause many Wii SDs to be repurchased as Wii HDs.  Remember, upgrading isn't a requirement, if Nintendo says every game must also support the SD console.

(C) See (B).

 

The "Wii HD" really would just be a "scaled" Wii, after all.  A faster GPU and more texture memory would really be the only prereq -- it doesn't need to have more base memory or a faster CPU at all.  A HDD, better textures, and 720p output would appeal to a very large crowd, though, I believe.  Ask yourself if you would purchase a Wii, say in two years time, that cost the same, or slightly more than the current Wii, but had a built-in HDD, upscaling hardware, more texture memory, and a faster GPU, along with 720p output support -- say it upscales any Wii game, and any future Wii games can make use of the additional texture memory if they so desire (there's certainly room on the DVD).

 

What would WiiHD change from developers point of view? Well, answer is absolutely nothing. They would still have to make games for WiiSD as main platform so every limitation remains the same. This would be the same as adding upscaling chip to PS2 and claiming it would make graphics as good as in HD consoles. Those with Wii HD would only see upscaled SD and nothing more. Anyway, HD crowd is actually a small audience so there isn't any rush for Wii HD.

 



Groucho said:
HappySqurriel said:

Maybe I’m slow, but I don’t understand why anyone would think that Nintendo would release a "Wii HD" unless it was just a Wii system with a built in scaler.

Why would Nintendo choose to (A) dramatically increase their software development costs, (B) hurt their hardware profitability, injure their image with fans (by having a short lived product), and (C) sacrifice further sales of what will become their most popular home console ever when they're not being pressured by anyone? This would be a lot like a hockey team that was up 3 to 1 after their first period sending all of their best players home so they can show off the talent of their rookies ... Its a losing strategy that only a moron would use.

I bolded the assumptions that, frankly, are just plain wrong.

(A) Making a HD and SD version of a game on what is effectively the same platform is trivial.  There is no dramatic increase in dev costs.  The SD/HD difference is often the only point of contention that reviewers have with Wii cross-platform titles, over their HD counterparts.  More importantly, if game developers saw the Wii as a contemporary to the HD consoles, rather than the PS2, cross-platform games might actually start with the Wii HD as a basis for game design.

(B) Selling 100% BC Wii HDs to the HD crowd, and still making Wii SDs for the SD crowd would not hurt Nintendo in the slightest.  Quite the opposite, in fact -- it would expand the audience, and cause many Wii SDs to be repurchased as Wii HDs.  Remember, upgrading isn't a requirement, if Nintendo says every game must also support the SD console.

(C) See (B).

 

The "Wii HD" really would just be a "scaled" Wii, after all.  A faster GPU and more texture memory would really be the only prereq -- it doesn't need to have more base memory or a faster CPU at all.  A HDD, better textures, and 720p output would appeal to a very large crowd, though, I believe.  Ask yourself if you would purchase a Wii, say in two years time, that cost the same, or slightly more than the current Wii, but had a built-in HDD, upscaling hardware, more texture memory, and a faster GPU, along with 720p output support -- say it upscales any Wii game, and any future Wii games can make use of the additional texture memory if they so desire (there's certainly room on the DVD).

 

Thank you.

 



"You can never jump away from Conclusions. Getting back is not so easy. That's why we're so terribly crowded here."

Canby - The Phantom Tollbooth

Squilliam said:
Most people here didn't buy their console in the first year so I don't see what the problem is. Just because something is released doesn't mean you have to buy it straight away.

 

 Well, Nintendo and Microsoft did both totally axe their last-gen machines when the Wii and X360 launched. 

 

Frankly, I don't want to even hear anything until 2011 at the soonest.  I'd rather not have a new generation until late 2012 at the soonest.  I'd much rather wait until 2013 or even 2014.  The millions and millions of dollars lost in the transition to this generation showed that the industry wasn't ready to move on this time, and I think that they should all play it safe next time.  Frankly, all three consoles are selling pretty well--especially the "under powered" Wii and DS.  They're building massive new fanbases.  No doubt Nintendo and MS will surpass previous generations by leaps and bounds.  MS will likely topple original Xbox sales by the time the holidays are done, if not a little bit after.  They only need to sell one and a half million more to do it.  Nintendo has already out-sold the GameCube and N64.

One of the many reasons the PS3 did so poorly so early on is that they spent 6 years building a massive installed userbase, and many of those people bought a PS2 only a couple years ago and weren't ready to move on.  I think the industry as a whole needs to wait.  Actually exhaust all options with the current machines for once.  There hasn't been a completely tapped console since the PS1.  I'd like to see every possibility exhausted out of the Wii, Xbox360, and Playstation 3 before we move on to yet another generation.  All three machines have secrets in store for us to see and developers to discover.  Far more than ever before.  I want nearly a year of "everything's been done already" before a new generation comes out.  Then we'll know we're ready. 



Around the Network

Maybe Apple will come out with one in 2009! IDK ?



sly69saldana said:
Maybe Apple will come out with one in 2009! IDK ?

 

 Apple patented a Wiimote-like device, you know.  Search IGN's Wii channel.



Resident_Hazard said:
Squilliam said:
Most people here didn't buy their console in the first year so I don't see what the problem is. Just because something is released doesn't mean you have to buy it straight away.

 

 Well, Nintendo and Microsoft did both totally axe their last-gen machines when the Wii and X360 launched. 

 

Frankly, I don't want to even hear anything until 2011 at the soonest.  I'd rather not have a new generation until late 2012 at the soonest.  I'd much rather wait until 2013 or even 2014.  The millions and millions of dollars lost in the transition to this generation showed that the industry wasn't ready to move on this time, and I think that they should all play it safe next time.  Frankly, all three consoles are selling pretty well--especially the "under powered" Wii and DS.  They're building massive new fanbases.  No doubt Nintendo and MS will surpass previous generations by leaps and bounds.  MS will likely topple original Xbox sales by the time the holidays are done, if not a little bit after.  They only need to sell one and a half million more to do it.  Nintendo has already out-sold the GameCube and N64.

One of the many reasons the PS3 did so poorly so early on is that they spent 6 years building a massive installed userbase, and many of those people bought a PS2 only a couple years ago and weren't ready to move on.  I think the industry as a whole needs to wait.  Actually exhaust all options with the current machines for once.  There hasn't been a completely tapped console since the PS1.  I'd like to see every possibility exhausted out of the Wii, Xbox360, and Playstation 3 before we move on to yet another generation.  All three machines have secrets in store for us to see and developers to discover.  Far more than ever before.  I want nearly a year of "everything's been done already" before a new generation comes out.  Then we'll know we're ready. 

Three years is a long long time in the computer business. 6 years is practically a generation in human terms. Playing it safe won't net the consumer new experiences any faster and I would personally hate to wait that long knowing the possibilities in User-interface which await the next generation. Both of the HD-twins are powerful enough to last for a very long time and they will find markets for software emerging in different areas of the world as development and human economic conditions improve the world over.

Theres no reason for anyone to stop producing games for the current consoles even when a new generation rolls around. I don't think there will be a drop off in high end games targetting these systems for at least another couple of years. Well not unless there is a console produced in the next generation which wins over the hearts and minds of consumers quickly and then you could say the market is expanding again.

The days of eking every last drop of power out of a console are over. There aren't enough of the old school coders left who are both willing and able to make the plunge to really eke that power out. Most coding is done just calling functions which have been written by other people, the % of code which is actually custom made for a console is dropping and next generation there will be even less. Its up to the tools developers themselves not the game developers to really work on the algorythems that will improve performance. The game developers will just make a function call and if it works better with the new SDK, GREAT!

 

 



Tease.

2011 or 2012. MS wants to push profits this time around.



It's just that simple.

I voted 2011 because it will be the the 5th year of this gen and I think companies like to update their consoles. ;)

I have some better reasons behind why I voted 2011 but I'm just not very good at explaining what my mind thinks. ^^'

You don't need to buy a console straight away... Wait for at least a year so some games comes out and have some choice. Plus, this gen is packed with so many games to play... I'll need more time! Dunno where you people find time to play that much!