Hardware Miyamoto on future hardware after Wii U

[RevPokemon]

Yet, Nintendo only has a good foothold in its home country. They are even getting beaten by Sony in China now. The last Nintendo needs is to become "Americanized", as the charming and quirky nature is what makes Nintendo unique. Giving up on that they'd be better off just giving up entirely. Just like Sony has the catchphrase "this is for the players".

I'd rather have a drastically different Nintendo then no Nintendo

 

[shinkodachi]

Square Enix has proven they can make games sell on a Nintendo platform, just look at Bravely Default (or Dragon Quest if we're accounting non-Western releases). And yet Nintendo struggles to make the same developers make games for the Wii U.

Nintendo was lucky Capcom deemed the PS3 too hard to develop for and chose to go with the Wii for Monster Hunter 3. I don't know how true that statement is however, since Ni no Kuni was originally a DS game and Level-5 decided to port it to the PS3, selling over a million copies at that. Food for thought since both Capcom and Level-5 are known supporters of Nintendo hardware.

 

[aofelix]

Nintendo changing their image would be the worst decision ever.

Please see: Sega.




Sony are in huge debt at the moment. The PS3 failed last generation because of how much they lost in the first few years. The PS4 now is booming but the first party titles will need to start coming soon. The XBOX one as far as I know has never really turned a profit for MS and from this gen, we can see MS kinda want the XBOX one to become a media hub rather than for games.

All Nintendo need is third party support. If they can't get that next generation, investing in 10 studios to try and compete with huge mammoths like Square Enix and EA games would be futile.

 

[aofelix]

Square Enix has proven they can make games sell on a Nintendo platform, just look at Bravely Default (or Dragon Quest if we're accounting non-Western releases). And yet Nintendo struggles to make the same developers make games for the Wii U.

Nintendo was lucky Capcom deemed the PS3 too hard to develop for and chose to go with the Wii for Monster Hunter 3. I don't know how true that statement is however, since Ni no Kuni was originally a DS game and Level-5 decided to port it to the PS3, selling over a million copies at that. Food for thought since both Capcom and Level-5 are known supporters of Nintendo hardware.

The truth in developing and developers is... they go where the money is. And the money is where the install base is. Lots of people owned a Wii at the start of the generation, so they released their title there. No ones a fan of anyone.. they're only fan of where they can sell the most copies. Its why Bravely default is on the 3DS and not the Vita.

The reason NNK went to PS3 was probably because the PS3 by that time had done well in sales (it was near the end of the gen), Sony paid them some money and developing for the PS3 in 720p was probably much nicer than developing for the severely underpowered wii.

 

[RevPokemon]

Square Enix has proven they can make games sell on a Nintendo platform, just look at Bravely Default (or Dragon Quest if we're accounting non-Western releases). And yet Nintendo struggles to make the same developers make games for the Wii U.

Nintendo was lucky Capcom deemed the PS3 too hard to develop for and chose to go with the Wii for Monster Hunter 3. I don't know how true that statement is however, since Ni no Kuni was originally a DS game and Level-5 decided to port it to the PS3, selling over a million copies at that. Food for thought since both Capcom and Level-5 are known supporters of Nintendo hardware.

Depends wayfoward, capcom, platnium and level 5 are supports but Nintendo has more non supporters and that hurts.

 

[shinkodachi]

Depends wayfoward, capcom, platnium and level 5 are supports but Nintendo has more non supporters and that hurts.

I didn't know Scalebound was coming to Wii U...

Nintendo also isn't known to be in the habit of shopping for exclusives. The best they can come up with is Lego City Undercover.

 

[RevPokemon]

I didn't know Scalebound was coming to Wii U...

Nintendo also isn't known to be in the habit of shopping for exclusives. The best they can come up with is Lego City Undercover.

That game is great tho (4 or 5 play through each 40+ hours) and the Wii had a few nice exclusive/best version games but still that is less on Wii u.

 

[grossaffe]

Let me clarify what I mean with Nintendo catching up in the past: it has thus far taken Nintendo a full console generation to implement a feature that others have had before them. Some examples...

(5th gen) Cartridge (Nintendo 64) vs. optical media (PlayStation)
(6th gen) Virtually non-existent online (GameCube) vs. full-fledged online (Xbox Live)
(7th gen) Standard definition (Wii) vs. high definition (PlayStation 3 / Xbox 360)
(8th gen) PowerPC arch (Wii U) vs. x86 arch (PlayStation 4 / Xbox One)
(9th gen) ...?
All of these features have been important to the development of consoles. My concern is with that last point of the Wii U still using a PowerPC architecture similar to the GameCube and Wii. Essentially (and this is very much to simplify my statement) the Wii U is a Wii times three as in the number of processor cores, and the Wii is internally a GameCube with higher clock frequency. It's therefore very unlikely that Nintendo will follow up with yet again the same architecture in their next console. I know that there are more variables at play, but for the purpose of my statement these are the facts.

So what comes next for Nintendo? The one big problem that Nintendo has faced this generation with the Wii U is the lack of 3rd party support. No matter how much time and effort Nintendo will put into polishing their first party titles for the Wii U, not having a big enough library of games will only hurt them going forward. Nintendo will definitely want to make a more developer friendly console, catering to everyone from indies (a strong dependence today already) to AAA studios (the big names making the stuff that sells like hot cakes no matter the quality).

Since development on x86 is much cheaper as it foregoes the need for dedicated development kits and enables better portability between PC and console hardware, x86 is the de facto architecture moving forward. Will Nintendo use x86 in their next console? I'd say it's very possible.

Nintendo didn't trail behind when it came to optical media, but made a conscious decision to stick with cartridges for the time being due to load times. Hell, the Playstation was basically the result of Nintendo looking to make a CD add-on for the SNES.
PPC vs. x86... well there's nothing special about x86. As a matter of fact, ever since I started learning about computer architecture, I've come to rather dislike the x86 (long before the Xbone and PS4 were even rumors). It's based on the antiquated CISC concept, but realizing that CISC is a bad idea, now have a RISC implementation of a CISC architecture. It makes sense to keep x86 in PCs because if you were to move away from it you suddenly lose all legacy support (hence why the Intel Itanium series failed when they tried to move past x86), but for game consoles that aren't already tied to it, I don't see the benefit. As for difficulty porting code because of different Instruction Set Architecture, I don't imagine it's a big deal these days as programming is done in APIs made by the console developers, not in assembly.

Also, saying that the Wii U is 3 Wiis or that the Wii is a Gamecube with a high clock frequency is like saying that a PC with a Core i7 is just 4 PCs with Pentium 4 processors, and that PCs with Pentium 4 processors are just PCs with fast 8086 processors.

And whoever said Nintendo should dump Miyamoto and those like him, that's the worst idea I've ever heard. Those people are the very core of Nintendo's identity. Jettisoning them to try to be more carbon-copies of the other companies in the market would just leave the market a more bland taste. If I didn't want Miyamotoesque things, I would have a PS4.

 

[shinkodachi]

That game is great tho (4 or 5 play through each 40+ hours) and the Wii had a few nice exclusive/best version games but still that is less on Wii u.

None of those games are good enough to get on any top lists, though. Here's the top 40 charts for UK (all platforms): http://www.chart-track.co.uk/index.jsp?c=p/software/uk/latest/index_test.jsp&ct=110015.

The first three top games are:
1. FIFA 15
2. Call of Duty Advanced Warfare
3. Grand Theft Auto V

The first Nintendo title in the list is on spot 15:
Super Smash Bros.

Further down on spots 23 and 24 are:
Pokémon Omega Ruby
Pokémon Alpha Sapphire

Then further down on spots 34 and 35 we have:
Tomodachi Life
Mario Kart 8

I'll be honest with you, the only surprising stat here is Tomodachi Life barely making it onto the top 40 (again, this is for the UK alone). It's disappointing to see only guaranteed high-selling Nintendo franchises (Mario Kart, Pokémon, Smash Bros.) making the list. For other countries and regions I'm sure the stats are similar. The news is even more depressing once you discount 3DS games and count only two Wii U games.

 

[RevPokemon]

Nintendo didn't trail behind when it came to optical media, but made a conscious decision to stick with cartridges for the time being due to load times. Hell, the Playstation was basically the result of Nintendo looking to make a CD add-on for the SNES.
PPC vs. x86... well there's nothing special about x86. As a matter of fact, ever since I started learning about computer architecture, I've come to rather dislike the x86 (long before the Xbone and PS4 were even rumors). It's based on the antiquated CISC concept, but realizing that CISC is a bad idea, now have a RISC implementation of a CISC architecture. It makes sense to keep x86 in PCs because if you were to move away from it you suddenly lose all legacy support (hence why the Intel Itanium series failed when they tried to move past x86), but for game consoles that aren't already tied to it, I don't see the benefit. As for difficulty porting code because of different Instruction Set Architecture, I don't imagine it's a big deal these days as programming is done in APIs made by the console developers, not in assembly.

Also, saying that the Wii U is 3 Wiis or that the Wii is a Gamecube with a high clock frequency is like saying that a PC with a Core i7 is just 4 PCs with Pentium 4 processors, and that PCs with Pentium 4 processors are just PCs with fast 8086 processors.

And whoever said Nintendo should dump Miyamoto and those like him, that's the worst idea I've ever heard. Those people are the very core of Nintendo's identity. Jettisoning them to try to be more carbon-copies of the other companies in the market would just leave the market a more bland taste. If I didn't want Miyamotoesque things, I would have a PS4.

I said the thing about miyamoto and people like him and I do believe they are part of the problem as they have been resisting change forever and they need to go. Their are plenty better younger people who would be better for the current gaming market.

 

[RevPokemon]

None of those games are good enough to get on any top lists, though. Here's the top 40 charts for UK (all platforms): http://www.chart-track.co.uk/index.jsp?c=p/software/uk/latest/index_test.jsp&ct=110015.

The first three top games are:
1. FIFA 15
2. Call of Duty Advanced Warfare
3. Grand Theft Auto V

The first Nintendo title in the list is on spot 15:
Super Smash Bros.

Further down on spots 23 and 24 are:
Pokémon Omega Ruby
Pokémon Alpha Sapphire

Then further down on spots 34 and 35 we have:
Tomodachi Life
Mario Kart 8

I'll be honest with you, the only surprising stat here is Tomodachi Life barely making it onto the top 40 (again, this is for the UK alone). It's disappointing to see only guaranteed high-selling Nintendo franchises (Mario Kart, Pokémon, Smash Bros.) making the list. For other countries and regions I'm sure the stats are similar. The news is even more depressing once you discount 3DS games and count only two Wii U games.

I was reffering to quality of some of the good orginal Wii games like no more heroes and NBA jam.

 

[grossaffe]

I said the thing about miyamoto and people like him and I do believe they are part of the problem as they have been resisting change forever and they need to go. Their are plenty better younger people who would be better for the current gaming market.

I know why you said what you did, I just completely oppose it.

 

[RevPokemon]

I know why you said what you did, I just completely oppose it.

Yeah it cool.

Personly despite my statement I would be very sad to see them go, it would be like the end of old yeller when they shoot the dog.

 

[grossaffe]

Yeah it cool.

Personly despite my statement I would be very sad to see them go, it would be like the end of old yeller when they shoot the dog.

I've actually never seen Old Yeller.

 

[RevPokemon]

I've actually never seen Old Yeller.

My god the ending is sad. If you watch the ending and don't cry then you have no soul

 

[shinkodachi]

Nintendo didn't trail behind when it came to optical media, but made a conscious decision to stick with cartridges for the time being due to load times. Hell, the Playstation was basically the result of Nintendo looking to make a CD add-on for the SNES.

Ultimately that decision, in hindsight, was not a good decision. The market and the general population reacts to add-ons in a vastly different manner than to the product itself, see Sega/Mega CD and 32X for an example of failures clad as add-ons. It's only good Nintendo didn't release it. But instead when the PlayStation was released, it soared.

It makes sense to keep x86 in PCs because if you were to move away from it you suddenly lose all legacy support (hence why the Intel Itanium series failed when they tried to move past x86)

x86 prevailed because it was the better architecture being able to handle almost anything you throw at it. It's why we haven't used DEC Alphas in a long time and why Apple transitioned to Intel from PowerPC in 2006.

for game consoles that aren't already tied to it, I don't see the benefit

Since development on x86 is much cheaper as it foregoes the need for dedicated development kits and enables better portability between PC and console hardware, x86 is the de facto architecture moving forward.

As for difficulty porting code because of different Instruction Set Architecture, I don't imagine it's a big deal these days as programming is done in APIs made by the console developers, not in assembly.

If you truly have started learning about computer architecture you should know high level code is not optimal. E.g. games on the Wii ran on the bare metal, it's more than possible a lot of low level optimization is part of game development.

a PC with a Core i7 is just 4 PCs with Pentium 4 processors, and that PCs with Pentium 4 processors are just PCs with fast 8086 processors.

And that's completely true.

 

[grossaffe]

Ultimately that decision, in hindsight, was not a good decision. The market and the general population reacts to add-ons in a vastly different manner than to the product itself, see Sega/Mega CD and 32X for an example of failures clad as add-ons. It's only good Nintendo didn't release it. But instead when the PlayStation was released, it soared.

My point was that they weren't "behind the times" as much as they felt that optical media still had some ways to go before it was ideal. Sitting around looking at loading screens is not very entertaining.

x86 prevailed because it was the better architecture being able to handle almost anything you throw at it. It's why we haven't used DEC Alphas in a long time and why Apple transitioned to Intel from PowerPC in 2006.

x86 had already gotten itself to the top of the PC chain. Once you gain market dominance, the positive feedback loop of support will keep you on top even if your product isn't the best. Apple transitioned to x86 not because x86 was a better architecture, but because x86 had market dominance and they finally threw in the towel to go with the widely used architecture that more people work with. Much like Direct3D wasn't better than openGL, but it gained prominence when Microsoft spread their FUD campaign with their new OS saying that OpenGL would have to run on top of Direct3D and that as a result Direct3D would be faster. Once they did that and got developers to jump ship to Direct3D, they stayed on board even though OpenGL was the better API and offered functionality not yet supported by Direct3D. Positive feedback loop strikes again!

If you truly have started learning about computer architecture you should know high level code is not optimal. E.g. games on the Wii ran on the bare metal, it's more than possible a lot of low level optimization is part of game development.
And that's completely true.

The Wii was running on those IOSes, but this generation's consoles are running on full-blown operating systems. You see a lot less bare-metal programming in that type of environment. Yes, you'll have developers who know the hardware really well who will get more out of it by optimizing code that way, but multiplats will still require different optimization for different consoles because they've got different memory hierarchies, operating systems, and APIs. The best use of hardware will always come from a developer that works specifically with that hardware and not from someone developing multiplat titles.

 

[RdJcz]

The portability problem, I'm not so sure is a significant problem, as most modern games are programmed in high level compiled languages like C variants or maybe Java, as in the case of Notch's digging simulator. There would only be a real problem if the developer is (stupid enough to be) relying heavily on asm code "optimizations". And if you have ever tried to code asm on a Power architecture, you know exactly what I am talking about.

It thus becomes more of a programming library issue. If library X is unavailable on the system, or has some quirk, it may force a partial rewrite at the very least. This is enough to cause at least some developers to say 'enough' and give up on porting their game to the system. Is there even a JDK for the Wii U? That could be why there is no "Diggy Diggy Hole U". (Not that I care. The game has been unbalanced since version 1.0, IMO)

So I'm thinking the real problem between N and 3rd party developers lies more with their programming tools and/or some financial issue(s) moreso than the choice of CPU.

Here a few reasons I can think of why they went with Power. The complexity of the Power architecture that makes it a headache to write working machine code for also makes it harder to hack. That and it isn't what a software "reverse engineer" is used to. 99% of the software crackers out there won't touch RISC with a ten foot pole. Even if they implemented some custom instructions, if the thing is basically an x86, it doesn't pose much of an obstacle to hackers.

The other thing is that it seriously slows down and complicates emulation. They do not want people emulating their games on PCs and (shudder) other consoles. So yeah, they probably weighed the cost and decided it is worth the expense of going to Power if it will put off the wave of emulation and soft mods.

 

[aofelix]

It doesn't take a genius to realise the Wii U is underpowered.

To optimize, downgrade and strip down features... then to have to factor in motion controls of the gamepad... for a small as hell install base.. its just not worth the hassle or money. Thats the bottom line.

Also to whoever said the N64 was more powerful than the PS1... in theory maybe.. in practice the cartridges held them back. CDs got video, superior audio and ultimately much higher storage capacities. Developers like an easy life with the platform to really soar. Nintendo in the past few years haven't offered them that. Also when Nintendo have sometimes gone for third party support and paid them lots of money (See: Resident Evil Gamecube), fans haven't bought them.

 

[Scoobos]

Pah! Underpowered? Underpowered for what exactly?

I think the gaming industry has done a number on a lot of gamers to be frank, there's big money in video chips and marketing and somehow, people are rating games like forza and destiny , due to looks. Mario kart and bayonetta 2 look beautiful but more īmportantly play well.

I have an xbox one and Wii-U and easily spend more time on the Wii-U , the games are simply better imo. Best mario of the series, best mario kart, best pikmin , it's been an amazing console.

Things might change when more games come out, but for me the wii-u doesn't need power to produce games.

All 1080p at 60fps too right? Which xbox one game does that well?