Nintendo Is Right About VR, Wrong About NX Horsepower

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
One day, presumably in the far off future, Nintendo will realize that increased horsepower actually allows for more engrossing experiences and better content—but it may be too late…

“For us, it’s not about specs, it’s not about teraflops, it’s not about the horsepower of a particular system. For us, it’s about the content…We’re focused on bringing our best entertainment to both the Wii U as well as the NX in the future. So for us, whatever Microsoft and Sony are doing in terms of talking about new systems, that’s for them to fight out in that red ocean.” Ah. While I appreciate their stance on avoiding VR, I can’t get behind the idea that ignoring horsepower in favor of “content” is still a solid strategy, given what we’ve seen with Nintendo’s last two console generations.
 
Maybe it's their software development holding them back on releasing a more capable console. I'd imagine their development cycles will only get much longer if they have to make brand new engines with all the latest graphical bells and whistles so they are just evolving it slowly on the hardware side.
 
While I've outgrown the Nintendo world. I will admit of all companies I honestly believe their worst games are some companies opus. Nintendo truly does deliver when it comes to game play

The reason I'm not a horsepower person for consoles is because if anyone does argue horsepower horsepower horsepower on a console....a freaking pc outright destroys it. I love what consoles bring but I embrace unique and fun game play more.
 
Sonicks said:
Maybe it's their software development holding them back on releasing a more capable console. I'd imagine their development cycles will only get much longer if they have to make brand new engines with all the latest graphical bells and whistles so they are just evolving it slowly on the hardware side.
Click to expand...

Never thought of it that way. I always felt like Nintendo products and close developers actually really made what they do have shine. This is old stuff I'm talking about but I remember in the GameCube days just how awesome metroid prime and res evil looked despite being on the least powerful system of the bunch. God I remember being in a cave in metroid and shooting your Canon and you see samus face. It was really cool.
 
For me, a console is only as good as its game lineup. Game content is what pushes a console, not horsepower. Yes horsepower allows you to do more amazing things, but if your games aren't making use of that horsepower to do those amazing things, then it's going to flop. If your game lineup is basically Pong or Tetris in HD, it doesn't matter how powerful the console is, because your game lineup doesn't demonstrate what your console is capable of offering.
 
Megalith said:
One day, presumably in the far off future, Nintendo will realize that increased horsepower actually allows for more engrossing experiences and better content—but it may be too late…
Click to expand...

Nintendo consistently makes highly engrossing, addictive games, without the latest and greatest horsepower.

If better specs means better content, why are the current gen consoles worse than the previous?
 
But then why release new hardware at all? Why are they even bothering with the NX? If you're going to offer new, upgraded hardware, then it's difficult to make the argument that the specs of that hardware aren't relevant (unless you're trying to deflect criticism of their relative inadequacy).
 
I grew up loving Nintendo, but I also grew out of consoles after the PS2 because I discovered how awesome PC gaming is. It would be awesome if they would release something akin to Super Mario 64, The Legend of Zelda OoT, Goldeneye, or some of the other Rare Studio games.. hell if they could pen a deal for a one time Final Fantasy game that's much like the older FF games from the SNES with current graphics I'd be in line to buy their next console.

Sony and Microsoft are so set on the specs war that they fail to realize 2/3 of the library of games available for their consoles blow. Lack of game play, piss poor programming, bug ridden, lack luster (by console standards) graphics. I couldn't get into the XB360 or PS3 at the time because the platform specific games didn't appeal to me, and the most of the games I played through one time and never felt the urge to come back or I opted for the PC version of most of the AAA titles like Skyrim and Fallout.

This is where Nintendo differed from those two, they make games that you could play through more than once and still find enjoyment out of it. At the end of the day I don't care if Nintendo doesn't release a system with 4k capabilities, as long as the game is fun and I feel I got my money's worth I'm far more than happy. I was never really into the graphics war when it came to console gaming. I have a computer with access to close to 200 games if I so choose to install every one of them. If I'm playing a console I want to be able to sit down and enjoy myself, eye candy is only an added bonus for me.
 
Would be great if Nintendo released games for PS4/X1, and controllers maybe.
old SNES/nes would sell on App store/Play store, heck I'd buy Super Mario for $5 on iOS. the Toilet woulæd be occupied for days.. :D
 
OK nintendo, do content - on PC xbox and PS. they'll have the horsepower you bring the content, everyones happy.

We really don't need more wiis
 
Ducman69 said:
Exactly.

You suck at making hardware.

You can't compete.

Stop trying.

Just develop games for the PC, Xbox, and Playstation.
Click to expand...

This is where I have to disagree with you, we'll from the average consumer standpoint. A good example is comparing the iPhone to any number of Android phones out there. Sure, on paper Android has Apple beat in capabilities, but the iPhone works and provides a great user experience that is the reason it's number 1 in terms of customer satisfaction. I don't use an iPhone, but the people whom I know that do love their phone. Sure, Android phones can do just about anything, and most handsets within the past two years have the raw horsepower to beat the iPhone but the iPhone has unprecedented developer support, it doesn't have fragmentation so you're guaranteed a good experience out of the box, and it is exceptionally good at what it is designed to do.

Much like Nintendo, they may lack in the hardware department compared to Sony and MS, but the games they release are top notch, provide enjoyment for everyone, and provide replay ability on most of their games that you'd be hard pressed to find on the competing consoles. What gives them the leg up is they design the games around their hardware which in turn allows them to program their games properly, unlike studios like Bethesda or Rockstar whom code for multiple platforms and more often than not release bug riddled games that aren't working 100% out of the box, unlike Nintendo games that work from the day you install them without much hiccups or anything that could be considered game breaking.
 
I just can't imagine the thought of Nintendo getting knocked out like hardware biz like Sega.
 
Nintendo is much like HTC in the sense that compared to Sony and Microsoft they lack in the marketing department. MS and Sony are the Apple and Samsung of the console world in terms of brand recognition and marketing.

The Nintendo Wii was a phenomenal console that not only was affordable, but provided a user experience that MS and Sony couldn't match, plus it was released with some solid titles that i still play like Wii Sports, and early on it was insanely popular, selling out everywhere.. but then MS and Sony put their marketing machine to work and use their market value to win customers over.

To me the Wii was probably one of, if not the most unique console I ever played. Unlike sitting there on the couch with controller in the hand controlling the experience, you had to be involved using more than just your hands, and honestly probably helped pave the way (or at least get the notion out there) for VR to become more of a reality for consumers.
 
Here's an example of how you don't need great hardware to create a great, immersive game: World of Warcraft.

It uses a core graphics engine from 2004 that's been updated to takensure more advantage of graphics power, but not to the point to where you need an expensive setup to enjoy the game to its fullest.

From my posts it would seem like Ime the type that comes off as if it's not broken don't fix it.. I do enjoy the advancement in hardware and prefer to have powerful hardware and such, but I'm also the type that doesn't ignore a good user experience just because the hardware powering it isn't up to snuff.

A good experience is a good experience, regardless of if it takes a $4k computer or a $200-$400 console to provide it. Sure a $4k computer can provide graphics that those consoles will never ever match, and to some that creates immersion. I do enjoy great graphics but not at the expense of game play. I'm a hardware person as I own two of the latest Android phones because I do love new hardware, but at the end of the day the user experience matters to me the most above all specs, hardware, and such since performance on Android hasn't been an huge issue for awhile with flagship phones. I could have been set with my Note 4, but I wanted the S6, then the S7 came out and I took back my S6, and I would have been fine with my S7E but I opted to also get an HTC 10 because I found the user experience for me to be better than the S7E with the same set of hardware.

Anyways back on topic, people need to appreciate Nintendo for what they try to do (great games, unique experience), not bash them for what they're not doing (super duper specs capable of pushing super duper graphics). I'm not a Nintendo fan boy by any stretch, if all three systems had nothing but awesome games that were fun and had replay replayability and unique experiences I'd probably go with Sony, but as it stands now I'll stick to my PC and if I get a console it would be a Nintendo based console only because it's something different than a controller/mouse and KB and historically Nintendo games have always been enjoyable.
 
trentchau said:
Never thought of it that way. I always felt like Nintendo products and close developers actually really made what they do have shine. This is old stuff I'm talking about but I remember in the GameCube days just how awesome metroid prime and res evil looked despite being on the least powerful system of the bunch. God I remember being in a cave in metroid and shooting your Canon and you see samus face. It was really cool.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure the gamecube was considered more powerful than a ps2, with "programmable shaders" being one of the things the xbox could do over it.

People seem to forget that up to the release of the wii, and lesser extent wii-u, Nintedo made consoles that was very comparable and competitive performance/spec wise to fellow same gen hardware.

Basically I wonder in lot of ways the opposite, if the hardware is holding back their games atleast graphically. Super Mario Galaxy was a fun game, but imagine what It could look like on hardware similar to ps3/x360. The new Zelda game looks artistically solid, graphically a little lacking. They sure do a lot with a little. Nintendo knows their market and audience, and doesn't exactly want to grow out of it. I also think they didn't or don't want to get in the raw cost of developing and pushing a powerful system.

Maybe its because I'm older and tastes in games have changed a bit to games for made for older games than kids, but I do miss the edgy Nintendo of late snes and N64 era. I will say super Mario games and F-zero seems to still get my engine revving.
 
Last edited:
trentchau said:
Never thought of it that way. I always felt like Nintendo products and close developers actually really made what they do have shine. This is old stuff I'm talking about but I remember in the GameCube days just how awesome metroid prime and res evil looked despite being on the least powerful system of the bunch. God I remember being in a cave in metroid and shooting your Canon and you see samus face. It was really cool.
Click to expand...

Gamecube was not the weakest power system of that generation, it was more powerful than the PS2.
 
Look like I stand corrected on the strength. Didn't realize the ps2 was amd weak.

But the GameCube wasn't a powerhouse either it seems.
 
Power isn't their problem it's that they lack 3rd party development, made worse given that they are still on PowerPC platform while the others have moved to x86 that plus instance of use of their "new" tech for games has been off putting to developers who just want to lazy port games
 
JamesfromDFW said:
Proprietary discs didn't help it with a 1.4GB capacity...
Click to expand...

Aye. Indeed. Still makes me chuckle though to think that games that consumed years of my life can now on a piece of device smaller than one of my ass hairs. Games like chrono trigger are 8 megs and accounted for 1 year of a group of people's life. It's crazy.
 
One thing that I really like about Nintendo is that even if their hardware isn't as powerful as their competition, they do actually care about frame rates.
Most 1st party games run at 60 (but not Zelda for some unfathomable reason) and as a result, Nintendo games generally feel better than other console exclusives.
 
"Hardware doesnt matter"
Proceeds to build faster more powerful system

I played some WiiU Mario and Mario Kart and found them to be pretty fun. Based upon Nintendo's statements I dont see why they are upgrading systems at all. The WiiU seems to have enough horsepower to render the kind of worlds Nintendo is interested in designing. Heck even Carmack himself said that the current crop of gaming engines available for Xbone/PS4/PC are "good enough", that there is no real incentive to develop an Unreal Engine 5 or Cryengine 4. Current hardware and software have enough features to deliver any game world we seek to create. There are no more sacrifices necessary to produce a vivid environment with all of the features necessary to tell a compelling story or make a fun game.

With previous generations there was always something more to offer with new game engines and hardware. Physics, draw distance, destructible environments, dynamic day/night, simultaneous characters on screen, etc etc etc. Each year something new was done that you couldnt do the year before. But now it's all done, there's nothing we cant do. Going photo-realistic or improving physics interactions are all just icing on the cake, they wont actually change the experience. If Nintendo is mostly satisfied with what technology can offer to do to their games then thats great.
 
The "Nintendo Problem" is collapsing all around that company.
  • They care about arbitrary thermal limits that are asinine and restricts capability
  • The third party problem wouldn't be completely solved by going into the 3-6 TFLOP range. Those titles just don't do well on the platform (COD, BF, Witcher, GTA, DA:I, etc.)
  • Third parties don't like Nintendos support, they are treated like bastard children with little technical support, high royalties, and other nonsense
  • Their first party development studios were not ready for HD and left devastated by long development times
  • Their online infrastructure is ancient pre 2000 level
  • They have lost market share continuously since the NES with the exception of Wii
  • They started branching out to other mediums 2 years ago (TV, Movies, Toys to Life, Health, Phone Apps, etc.) to try and diversify their business because it was obvious they needed to do something.
I could list another 20 issues with Nintendo, but from what we know so far their only solution is to unify their OS development (which is good), but everything has/will not be addressed. I feel it in my balls, they just won't tackle any of the significant issues almost everyone always brings up. They have billions in the bank, the amount they would have to invest to fix all of those issues would be over a billion or more. Nintendo won't do that, it's too much of an investment that probably wouldn't pay off anyway.

That's why you have them talking about the Blue Ocean nonsense again. They are going to try and catch lighting in a bottle and I'll tell you right now that won't happen. There is no 599 PS3 this time. There will be a 55-60 million install base PS4 that costs 299 or even 249.
 
If Nintendo had billions to throw down the drain in hardware subsidizing costs like Sony / Microsoft have done with every console release, then I would fault them for not going 100% fast as possible.
 
next-Jin said:
The "Nintendo Problem" is collapsing all around that company.
  • The third party problem wouldn't be completely solved by going into the 3-6 TFLOP range. Those titles just don't do well on the platform (COD, BF, Witcher, GTA, DA:I, etc.)
  • Third parties don't like Nintendos support, they are treated like bastard children with little technical support, high royalties, and other nonsense
  • Their online infrastructure is ancient pre 2000 level
  • They have lost market share continuously since the NES with the exception of Wii
I could list another 20 issues with Nintendo, but from what we know so far their only solution is to unify their OS development (which is good), but everything has/will not be addressed. I feel it in my balls, they just won't tackle any of the significant issues almost everyone always brings up. They have billions in the bank, the amount they would have to invest to fix all of those issues would be over a billion or more. Nintendo won't do that, it's too much of an investment that probably wouldn't pay off anyway.

That's why you have them talking about the Blue Ocean nonsense again. They are going to try and catch lighting in a bottle and I'll tell you right now that won't happen. There is no 599 PS3 this time. There will be a 55-60 million install base PS4 that costs 299 or even 249.
Click to expand...


These points seem to happen because as the gaming market increased and grew in age range, Nintendo did not jump on the expanded market and kept only targeting the kids/family friendly market. If they had attracted the older and broader market then third party would fare better. You target the hardcore gamers and/or older gamers, the younger kids see their older bros/sis playing and they want to play it too.
 
gsilver said:
One thing that I really like about Nintendo is that even if their hardware isn't as powerful as their competition, they do actually care about frame rates.
Most 1st party games run at 60 (but not Zelda for some unfathomable reason) and as a result, Nintendo games generally feel better than other console exclusives.
Click to expand...
Which is mindboggling. how can a shitty spec'd system like the Wii U, push out more 1st party 1080p 60fps than the more powerful competition?
 
Zohar78 said:
These points seem to happen because as the gaming market increased and grew in age range, Nintendo did not jump on the expanded market and kept only targeting the kids/family friendly market. If they had attracted the older and broader market then third party would fare better. You target the hardcore gamers and/or older gamers, the younger kids see their older bros/sis playing and they want to play it too.
Click to expand...

I think the on thing nintendo still does that the other consoles doesn't, is same room multiplayer. Outside of beat em ups, that is essentially gone from the vast majority of the MS and Sony catalogs. I finally caved to buying a console with the PS3, and none of the console like multiplayer was there anymore. It was all just tying up the TV with what amounted to a shitty single user computer.
 
raz-0 said:
I think the on thing nintendo still does that the other consoles doesn't, is same room multiplayer. Outside of beat em ups, that is essentially gone from the vast majority of the MS and Sony catalogs. I finally caved to buying a console with the PS3, and none of the console like multiplayer was there anymore. It was all just tying up the TV with what amounted to a shitty single user computer.
Click to expand...

True but as has been shown, the market doesn't care about children focused same room multiplayer. They continued to focus on that ignoring their online portion and it had killed them.
 
I like Nintendo consoles. The PC is definitely much more powerful, and Sony & Microsoft seem to know this and are building consoles based on PC architecture. Nintendo is still going with a console style way of doing things. Less powerful, sure. But, it does what they need it to do for the games they create. I've yet to find anyone that doesn't like Nintendo (first party) games. Or at least they can admit that Nintendo makes excellent games, even if they don't play them. Mario, Metroid, Zelda, Mario Kart, Pokemon, Donkey Kong... Nintendo makes some damn good games. Their hardware does those games very well.

Although - Seeing Zelda games rebuilt in the Unreal Engine is pretty nice (YouTube).

Nintendo is still making consoles. Sony & Microsoft are making PC clones (modified, of course... not off the shelf parts or retail available parts).
 
nysmo said:
it's all done, there's nothing we cant do. Going photo-realistic or improving physics interactions are all just icing on the cake, they wont actually change the experience
Click to expand...
Maybe for the next 5, 10, or 20 years we'll be satisfied, but we're already hearing groans from people about various bottlenecks...

For example, I think physics and AI have a long ways to go still and when they get better it may start to make more sense to go with voxel/"atom" based solutions and retire the current 3d-wireframe/2d-texture method. Let's not forget current transistor-style computing is not some end-game and for more performance power we will move away from that. These things will certainly warrant new game engines, don't you think?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top